CYH US Equity☆

Item 1A. Risk Factors

Our business faces a variety of risks. If any of the events or circumstances described in any of the following risk factors occurs, our business, results of operations or financial condition could be materially and adversely affected, and our actual results may differ materially from those predicted in any forward-looking statements we make in any public disclosures. Additional factors that could affect our business, results of operations and financial condition are discussed elsewhere in this Report (including in “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” in Part II, Item 7 of this Form 10-K). Additional risks or uncertainties not presently known to us, or that we currently deem immaterial, also may adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Summary of Risk Factors

The following is a summary of the risk factors set forth below.

Risks Related to Our Indebtedness

• We may be able to incur substantially more debt.

• Our variable rate indebtedness subjects us to interest rate risk.

Risks Related to the COVID-19 Pandemic

Risks Related to Our Business

• The impact of acquisitions could have a negative effect on our operations.

• The demand for our services can be impacted by factors beyond our control.

• Our labor costs could be adversely affected by various developments.

• Our revenues are somewhat concentrated in a small number of states.

Risks Related to Legal Proceedings

• We are the subject of various legal, regulatory and governmental proceedings.

23

Risks Related to Government Regulation

Risks Related to Impairment

Risks Related to Technology

For a more complete discussion of these risk factors, see below.

Risks Related to Our Indebtedness

Our level of indebtedness could adversely affect our ability to refinance existing indebtedness or raise additional capital to fund our operations, limit our ability to react to changes in the economy or our industry and prevent us from meeting our obligations under the agreements related to our indebtedness.

We have a significant amount of indebtedness, which is more fully described in the Liquidity and Capital Resources section of “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” in Part II, Item 7 of this Form 10-K and Note 6 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included under Part II, Item 8 of this Form 10-K. As of December 31, 2020, we had approximately $11.3 billion aggregate principal amount of secured indebtedness outstanding and approximately $910 million of unsecured indebtedness outstanding, and an additional approximately $529 million of borrowing capacity under the ABL Facility (after taking into account borrowing base limitations and approximately $150 million of outstanding letters of credit).

Our substantial leverage could have important consequences, including the following:

24

Despite current indebtedness levels, we may still be able to incur substantially more debt. This could further exacerbate the risks described in this section.

We and our subsidiaries have the ability to incur substantial additional indebtedness in the future, subject to restrictions contained in the ABL Facility and the indentures governing our outstanding notes. The ABL Facility provides for commitments and borrowings of up to approximately $1.0 billion in the aggregate, none of which was drawn on December 31, 2020 The aggregate amount we may draw under the ABL Facility may not exceed the “borrowing base” (as calculated thereunder) less outstanding letters of credit thereunder, which fluctuates from time to time. As of December 31, 2020, we had an additional approximately $529 million (after taking into account borrowing base limitations and approximately $150 million of outstanding letters of credit) available for borrowing under the ABL Facility. Aside from the ABL Facility, our ability to incur other additional secured debt (other than secured debt used to refinance existing secured debt) is highly limited by certain of the indentures governing our outstanding notes. If additional indebtedness is added to our current debt levels, the related risks that we currently face related to indebtedness as noted in this section could increase.

We may not be able to generate sufficient cash to service all of our indebtedness, and we may be forced to take other actions to satisfy our obligations under our indebtedness, which may not be successful.

Our ability to make scheduled payments on or to refinance our indebtedness depends on our financial and operating performance, which is subject to prevailing economic and competitive conditions and to financial, business, regulatory and other factors beyond our control. We cannot assure you that we will maintain a level of cash flows from operating activities sufficient to permit us to pay the principal, premium, if any, and interest on our indebtedness.

In addition, the borrower under the ABL Facility and issuer of our outstanding notes is a holding company with no direct operations. Its principal assets are the equity interests we hold in our operating subsidiaries. As a result, we are dependent upon dividends and other payments from our subsidiaries to generate the funds necessary to meet our outstanding debt service and other obligations. Our subsidiaries may not generate sufficient cash from operations to enable us to make principal and interest payments on our indebtedness. In addition, any payments of dividends, distributions, loans or advances to us by our subsidiaries could be subject to legal and contractual restrictions.

Our subsidiaries are permitted under the terms of our indebtedness to incur additional indebtedness that may restrict payments from those subsidiaries to us. The agreements governing the current and future indebtedness of our subsidiaries may not permit those subsidiaries to provide us with sufficient cash to fund payments on our indebtedness when due. Our non-guarantor subsidiaries are separate and distinct legal entities, and they have no obligation, contingent or otherwise, to pay amounts due under the terms of our indebtedness or to make any funds available to pay those amounts, whether by dividend, distribution, loan or other payment. If our cash flows and capital resources are insufficient to fund our debt service obligations, we could face substantial liquidity problems and may be forced to reduce or delay capital expenditures, sell assets or operations, seek additional capital or restructure or refinance our indebtedness. Our ability to refinance our indebtedness on favorable terms, or at all, is directly affected by the then current general economic and financial conditions. In addition, our ability to incur additional secured indebtedness (which would generally enable us to achieve better pricing than the incurrence of unsecured indebtedness) depends in part on the value of our assets, which depends, in turn, on the strength of our cash flows and results of operations, and on economic and market conditions and other factors. We may find it necessary or prudent to refinance certain of our outstanding indebtedness, the terms of which may not be favorable to us.

We cannot assure you that we would be able to take any of these actions, that these actions would be successful and permit us to meet our scheduled debt service obligations or that these actions would be permitted under the terms of our existing or future debt agreements, including the ABL Facility and the indentures governing our outstanding notes. For example, the ABL Facility and the indentures governing our outstanding notes restrict our ability to dispose of certain assets and use the proceeds from any dispositions. We may not be able to consummate those dispositions and any proceeds we receive may not be adequate to meet any debt service obligations then due.

We have a substantial amount of indebtedness with certain series of our outstanding notes and other debt scheduled to mature in close proximity to each other.

As further described in the Liquidity and Capital Resources section of “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” in Part II, Item 7 of this Form 10-K and Note 6 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included under Part II, Item 8 of this Form 10-K, we have a substantial amount of indebtedness with certain series of our outstanding notes and other debt scheduled to mature in close proximity to each other. As a result, we may not have sufficient cash to repay all amounts owing under such indebtedness and there can be no assurance that we will have the ability to borrow or otherwise raise the amounts necessary to repay all such amounts. Our ability to refinance our indebtedness on favorable terms, or at all, is dependent on (among other things) conditions in the credit and capital markets which are beyond our control.

25

Restrictive covenants in the agreements governing our indebtedness may adversely affect us.

The ABL Facility and the indentures governing our outstanding notes contain various covenants that limit our ability to take certain actions, including our ability to:

• incur, assume or guarantee additional indebtedness;

• issue redeemable stock and preferred stock;

• repurchase capital stock;

• redeem subordinated debt;

• create liens;

• sell or otherwise dispose of assets, including capital stock of subsidiaries;

• impair security interests;

• merge, consolidate, sell or otherwise dispose of substantially all our assets;

• enter into transactions with affiliates; and

• guarantee certain obligations.

In addition, the ABL Facility contains restrictive covenants and may, in certain circumstances, require us to maintain a specified financial ratio and satisfy other financial condition tests. Our ability to meet these restrictive covenants and financial ratio and tests (if applicable) may be affected by events beyond our control, and we cannot assure you that we will meet those tests.

In addition, our ability to incur additional secured debt (other than (i) secured debt to refinance existing secured debt and (ii) indebtedness incurred under our ABL Facility) is highly limited.

A breach of any of these covenants could result in a default under the ABL Facility and the indentures governing our outstanding notes. Upon the occurrence of an event of default under the ABL Facility or any of the indentures governing our outstanding notes, all amounts outstanding under the applicable indebtedness may become immediately due and payable and all commitments under the ABL Facility to extend further credit may be terminated. If we were unable to repay those amounts, the holders of such indebtedness could, subject to applicable intercreditor agreements, proceed against the collateral granted to them to secure that indebtedness.

Our variable rate indebtedness subjects us to interest rate risk, which could cause our debt service obligations to increase significantly.

Our borrowings under the ABL Facility are at variable rates of interest and expose us to interest rate risk. If interest rates increase, our debt service obligations on the variable rate indebtedness would increase even though the amount borrowed remained the same, and our net income would decrease. As of December 31, 2020, there are no borrowings under the ABL Facility.

In addition, certain of our variable rate indebtedness uses London Interbank Offered Rate, or LIBOR, as a benchmark for establishing the rate of interest and may be hedged with LIBOR-based interest rate derivatives. LIBOR is the subject of national, international and other regulatory guidance and proposals for reform. These reforms and other pressures may cause LIBOR to be replaced with a new benchmark or to perform differently than in the past. The consequences of these developments cannot be entirely predicted, but could include an increase in the cost of our variable rate indebtedness.

If we default on our obligations to pay our indebtedness, we could be in default under the terms of the agreements governing our indebtedness.

If we are unable to generate sufficient cash flow and are otherwise unable to obtain funds necessary to meet required payments of principal, premium, if any, and interest on our indebtedness, or if we otherwise fail to comply with the various covenants, including financial and operating covenants, in the instruments governing our indebtedness, including covenants in the ABL Facility and the indentures governing our outstanding notes, we could be in default under the terms of the agreements governing such indebtedness. In the event of any default, the holders of such indebtedness could elect to declare all the funds borrowed to be immediately due and payable, together with accrued and unpaid interest; the lenders under the ABL Facility could elect to terminate their commitments thereunder, cease making further loans and direct the applicable collateral agents to institute foreclosure proceedings against our assets; and we could be forced into bankruptcy or liquidation. If our operating performance declines, we may in the future need to

26

obtain waivers from the required lenders under the ABL Facility to avoid being in default. If we breach our covenants under the ABL Facility and seek a waiver, we may not be able to obtain a waiver from the required lenders. If this occurs, we would be in default under the ABL Facility, the lenders could exercise their rights, as described above, and we could be forced into bankruptcy or liquidation.

Risks Related to the COVID-19 Pandemic

We expect the COVID-19 pandemic to continue to materially affect our financial performance, and such pandemic may otherwise have material adverse effects on our results of operations, financial condition, and/or our cash flows.

COVID-19 was first identified in Wuhan, China in December 2019, and has spread throughout the world, including across the United States. In January 2020, the Secretary of HHS declared a national public health emergency due to the novel coronavirus. In March 2020, the World Health Organization declared the COVID-19 outbreak a pandemic. In an attempt to contain the spread and impact of COVID-19, authorities throughout the United States and the world have implemented measures such as travel bans and restrictions, quarantines, stay-at-home and shelter-in-place orders, the promotion of social distancing, and limitations on business activity. This pandemic has resulted in a significant economic downturn in the United States and globally, and has also led to significant disruptions and volatility in capital and financial markets. Moreover, while vaccines have been developed and have begun to be distributed in the United States, COVID-19 cases have significantly increased in the United States in recent months compared to earlier levels.

As a provider of healthcare services, we are significantly affected by the public health and economic effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. We have been working with federal, state and local health authorities to respond to COVID-19 cases in the communities we serve and have been taking or supporting measures to try to limit the spread of the virus, protect our employees and mitigate the burden on the healthcare system, including, at times, rescheduling or cancelling elective procedures at our hospitals and other healthcare facilities. In addition, some states have been requiring hospitals to maintain a reserve of personal protective equipment and mandating COVID-19 screening for new patients and certain hospital staff.

Beginning in March 2020, we experienced a substantial reduction in the number of elective surgeries, physician office visits and emergency room volumes at our hospitals and other healthcare facilities due to restrictions on elective procedures, quarantines, stay-at-home and shelter-in-place orders, the promotion of social distancing, as well as general concerns related to the risk of contracting COVID-19 from interacting with the healthcare system. While our patient volumes have recovered in comparison to patient volume levels experienced in March and April 2020 in the immediate aftermath of the pandemic, our patient volumes have not recovered to the pre-COVID-19 levels as the result of the factors noted above.

Although our hospitals have not generally experienced major capacity constraints to date arising from the treatment of COVID-19 patients, there are hospitals in the United States that are located in centers of the COVID-19 outbreak and have been overwhelmed in caring for COVID-19 patients, which has prevented such hospitals from treating all patients who seek care. One or more of our hospitals could be subject to such conditions in the future if a major COVID-19 outbreak occurs in a geographic region where any of our hospitals are located. In addition, some states have been limiting hospital volume by requiring a minimum percentage of vacant beds in case of a surge in COVID-19 patients.

We have incurred, and may continue to incur, certain increased expenses arising from the COVID-19 pandemic, including additional labor, supply chain, capital and other expenditures.

We have been implementing considerable safety measures at our hospitals and healthcare facilities, and we have instituted a work-from-home policy for certain of our corporate and administrative offices. Nevertheless, exposure to COVID-19 patients has increased risks to our physicians, nurses and other medical staff, which may further reduce our operating capacity. All of these developments could result in reduced employee morale, labor unrest, work stoppages or other workforce disruptions.

Broad economic factors resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic, including elevated unemployment and underemployment levels and reduced consumer spending and confidence, have also adversely affected, and may continue to adversely affect, our service mix, revenue mix, payor mix and/or patient volumes, as well as our ability to collect outstanding receivables. Business closures and layoffs in the geographic areas in which we operate have led to increases in the uninsured and underinsured populations, which may continue to adversely affect demand for our services, as well as the ability of patients and other payors to pay for services rendered. Moreover, we have observed deterioration in the collectability of patient accounts receivable for uninsured persons in comparison to pre-pandemic levels which, if sustained, may continue to adversely affect our financial results and require an increased level of working capital. In addition, our financial performance continues to be adversely affected by federal or state laws, regulations, orders, or other governmental or regulatory actions addressing the current COVID-19 pandemic or the U.S. healthcare system, which have resulted in and may continue to result in direct or indirect restrictions with respect to our business. We may also be subject to lawsuits from

27

patients, employees and others exposed to COVID-19 at our facilities. Such actions may involve large demands, as well as substantial defense costs. Our professional and general liability insurance may not cover all claims against us.

Developments related to COVID-19 materially affected our financial performance during 2020. Additionally, although we are not able to fully quantify the impact that the COVID-19 pandemic will have on our future financial results, we expect developments related to COVID-19 to continue to materially affect our financial performance. Moreover, the COVID-19 pandemic may have material adverse effects on our results of operations, financial position, and/or our cash flows, particularly if negative economic and/or public health conditions in the United States continue to deteriorate or persist for a significant period of time. The ultimate impact of the pandemic on our financial results will depend on, among other factors, the duration and severity of the pandemic and negative economic conditions arising from the pandemic, the volume of canceled or rescheduled procedures at our facilities, the volume of COVID-19 patients cared for across our health systems, the timing and availability of effective medical treatments and vaccines, the timing and effectiveness of the ongoing rollout of currently available vaccines, the spread of potentially more contagious and/or virulent forms of the virus and the impact of government actions and administrative regulation on the hospital industry and broader economy, including through existing and any future stimulus efforts. COVID-19 developments continue to evolve quickly, and additional developments may occur which we are unable to predict. Furthermore, the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in, and may continue to result in, significant disruption of global financial markets, which could reduce our ability to access capital and negatively affect our liquidity in the future. Finally, the pandemic could heighten the level of risk in certain of the other risk factors described in this Form 10-K.

There is a high degree of uncertainty regarding the implementation and impact of the CARES Act and other stimulus legislation. There can be no assurance as to the total amount and types of assistance we will recognize or receive or that we will be able to benefit from provisions intended to increase access to resources and ease regulatory burdens for healthcare providers.

The CARES Act is a $2 trillion economic stimulus package that was signed into law on March 27, 2020, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The Paycheck Protection Program and Health Care Enhancement Act, or PPPHCE Act, and the CAA, both expansions of the CARES Act that include additional emergency appropriations, were signed into law on April 24, 2020 and December 27, 2020, respectively. In total, the CARES Act, PPPHCE Act, and the CAA authorize $178 billion in funding to be distributed to hospitals and other healthcare providers through the PHSSEF. These funds are intended to reimburse eligible providers, including public entities and Medicare- and/or Medicaid-enrolled providers and suppliers, lost revenues and incremental expenses attributable to the COVID-19 pandemic. Recipients are not required to repay these funds, provided that they attest to and comply with certain terms and conditions, including limitations on balance billing, not using funds received from the PHSSEF to reimburse expenses or losses that other sources are obligated to reimburse and audit and reporting requirements. HHS has paid or allocated a portion of the total PHSSEF funding, but has not yet announced the precise method by which all future payments from the PHSSEF will be determined or allocated.

The CARES Act also makes other forms of financial assistance available to healthcare providers, including through Medicare and Medicaid payments adjustments and an expansion of the Medicare Accelerated and Advance Payment Program, which makes available accelerated payments of Medicare funds in order to increase cash flow to providers. As noted above, we have received accelerated payments under this program. However, effective October 8, 2020, CMS is no longer accepting new applications from Medicare Part A providers, such as hospitals, for accelerated payments and it has suspended the advance payment program for physicians and other Medicare Part B health care providers.

In addition to financial assistance, the CARES Act and related legislation include provisions intended to increase access to medical supplies and equipment and ease legal and regulatory burdens on healthcare providers. For example, the CARES Act and related legislation suspend the Medicare sequestration payment adjustment from May 1, 2020 through March 31, 2021 (but extend sequestration through 2030), provide for a 20% add-on payment under the hospital inpatient prospective payment system for care provided to patients with COVID-19, expand access to and payment for telehealth services under Medicare, prioritize review of drug applications to help with shortages of emergency drugs, and delay Medicaid disproportionate share hospital reductions.

Due to the recent enactment of the CARES Act and other legislation, there is still a high degree of uncertainty surrounding the implementation of such legislation. In this regard, PHSSEF payments to us are recognized as a reduction to operating costs and expenses only to the extent that we are reasonably assured that the underlying terms and conditions of such payments are met. Moreover, HHS’ interpretation of such underlying terms and conditions continues to evolve, and additional guidance or new and amended interpretations of existing guidance on such underlying terms and conditions may result in our inability to recognize additional PHSSEF payments or may result in the derecognition of amounts previously recognized, which (in any such case) may be material. In addition, to the extent that any unrecognized PHSSEF payments that have been or may be received by us do not qualify for reimbursement based on our future operations, we may be required to return such unrecognized payments to HHS following the end of the COVID-19 pandemic or other future time as may be determined by HHS guidance. Further, we are subject to reporting and audit requirements for funds received and recognized. Failure to comply with reporting requirements or adverse results of audits of amounts received and recognized may require us to return such amounts as may be determined by HHS. Some of the measures

28

allowing for flexibility in delivery of care and various financial supports for health care providers are available only for the duration of the public health emergency, and it is unclear whether or for how long the HHS declaration will be extended. The current declaration expires April 21, 2021. The HHS Secretary may choose to renew the declaration for successive 90-day periods for as long as the emergency continues to exist and may terminate the declaration whenever the Secretary determines that the public health emergency no longer exists. Additionally, the federal government may consider additional stimulus and relief efforts, but we are unable to predict whether any additional stimulus measures will be enacted or their impact. We are unable to assess the extent to which anticipated ongoing negative impacts on us arising from the COVID-19 pandemic will be offset by benefits which we may recognize or receive in the future under the CARES Act and other stimulus legislation or any future stimulus measures. Further, there can be no assurance that the terms of provider relief funding or other programs will not change in ways that affect our funding or eligibility to participate. We continue to assess the potential impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and government responses to the pandemic on our business, results of operations, financial position and cash flows.

Risks Related to Our Business

If we are unable to complete divestitures as we may deem advisable, our results of operations and financial condition could be adversely affected.

Since 2017, we implemented a portfolio rationalization and deleveraging strategy, by divesting hospitals and non-hospital businesses that are attractive to strategic and other buyers. We completed this initiative at the end of 2020. However, we continue to receive interest from potential acquirers for certain of our hospitals, and may, from time to time, consider selling additional hospitals if we consider any such disposition to be in our best interests. Generally, the businesses that we have been divesting are not in one of our strategically beneficial service areas, are less complementary to our business strategy and/or have lower operating margins. In connection with our divestiture initiative, we received offers from strategic buyers to buy certain of our assets. After considering these offers, we have divested, and may continue to divest, hospitals and non-hospital businesses when we find such offers to be attractive and in line with our operating strategy. However, there is no assurance that potential divestitures will be completed or, if they are completed, the aggregate amount of proceeds we will receive, that potential divestitures will be completed within our targeted timeframe, or that potential divestitures will be completed on terms favorable to us. Additionally, the results of operations for these hospitals and non-hospital businesses that we may divest and the potential gains or losses on the sales of those businesses may adversely affect our profitability. Moreover, we may incur asset impairment charges related to potential or completed divestitures that reduce our profitability. In addition, after entering into a definitive agreement, we may be subject to the satisfaction of pre-closing conditions as well as necessary regulatory and governmental approvals, which, if not satisfied or obtained, may prevent us from completing the sale. Divestitures may also involve continued financial exposure related to the divested business, such as through indemnities or retained obligations, that present risk to us.

Any future divestiture activities may present financial, managerial, and operational risks. Those risks include diversion of management attention from improving existing operations; additional restructuring charges and the related impact from separating personnel, renegotiating contracts, and restructuring financial and other systems; adverse effects on existing business relationships with patients and third-party payors; and the potential that the collectability of any patient accounts receivable retained from any divested hospital may be adversely impacted. Any of these factors could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

The impact of past acquisitions, as well as potential future acquisitions, could have a negative effect on our operations.

Our business strategy has historically included growth by acquisitions. However, not-for-profit hospital systems and other for-profit hospital companies generally attempt to acquire the same type of hospitals as we do. Some of the competitors for our acquisitions have greater financial resources than we have. Furthermore, some hospitals are sold through an auction process, which may result in higher purchase prices than we believe are reasonable. Therefore, we may not be able to acquire additional hospitals on terms favorable to us.

In addition, many of the hospitals we have acquired have had lower operating margins than we do and operating losses incurred prior to the time we acquired them. Hospitals acquired in the future may have similar financial performance issues. In the past, we have experienced delays in improving the operating margins or effectively integrating the operations of certain acquired hospitals, including some hospitals acquired in connection with the HMA merger. In the future, if we are unable to improve the operating margins of acquired hospitals, operate them profitably, or effectively integrate their operations, our results of operations and business may be adversely affected.

Moreover, hospitals that we have acquired, or in the future could acquire, may have unknown or contingent liabilities, including liabilities associated with ongoing legal proceedings or for failure to comply with healthcare laws and regulations. Although we generally seek indemnification from sellers covering these matters, we may nevertheless have material liabilities for past activities of acquired hospitals.

29

If we are unable to effectively compete, patients could use other hospitals and healthcare providers, and our business may otherwise be adversely impacted.

The healthcare industry is highly competitive among hospitals and other healthcare providers, such as urgent care centers and other outpatient providers and other industry participants, for patients, affiliations with physicians and acquisitions. Changes in licensure or other regulations and industry consolidation could negatively impact our competitive position. For example, in states with CON or similar prior approval requirements, removal of these requirements could remove barriers to entry and increase competition in our service areas. Our hospitals, our competitors, and other healthcare industry participants are increasingly implementing physician alignment strategies, such as acquiring physician practice groups, employing physicians and participating in ACOs or other clinical integration models. Increasing consolidation within the payor industry, vertical integration efforts involving payors and healthcare providers, and cost-reduction strategies by payors, large employer groups and their affiliates may impact our ability to contract with payors on favorable terms and otherwise affect our competitive position.

The majority of our hospitals are located in generally larger non-urban service areas where we believe we are the sole provider of general acute care health services. As a result, the most significant competition from providers of general acute care services comes from hospitals outside of our primary service areas, typically hospitals in larger urban areas that provide more complex services. Patients in our primary service areas may travel to other hospitals because of physician referrals, payor networks that exclude our providers or the need for services we do not offer, among other reasons. Patients who receive services from these other hospitals may subsequently shift their preferences to those hospitals for the services we provide.

At December 31, 2020, 29 of our hospitals competed with more than one other non-affiliated hospital in their respective primary service areas. In most markets in which we are not the sole provider of general acute care health services, our primary competitor is a municipal or not-for-profit hospital. These hospitals are owned by tax-supported governmental agencies or not-for-profit entities supported by endowments and charitable contributions. These hospitals are exempt from sales, property and income taxes. Such exemptions and support are not available to our hospitals and may provide the tax-supported or not-for-profit entities an advantage in funding general and capital expenditures and offering services more specialized than those available at our hospitals. If our competitors are better able to attract patients with these offerings, we may experience an overall decline in patient volume.

Trends toward transparency and value-based purchasing may have an impact on our competitive position and patient volumes in ways that we are unable to predict. The CMS Care Compare website makes available to the public certain data that hospitals submit in connection with Medicare reimbursement claims, including performance data related to quality measures and patient satisfaction surveys. Further, every hospital must establish and update annually a public, online listing of the hospital’s standard charges for items and services. As of January 2021, hospitals are required to publish additional types of standard charges for all items and services, including discounted cash prices and payor-specific charges, along with a consumer-friendly list of charges for certain “shoppable” services. If any of our hospitals achieve poor results (or results that are lower than our competitors) on the quality measures or on patient satisfaction surveys, or if our standard charges are higher than our competitors, we may attract fewer patients. The No Surprises Act creates additional price transparency requirements beginning January 1, 2022, including requiring providers to send health plans of insured patients and uninsured patients a good faith estimate of the expected charges and diagnostic codes prior to the scheduled date of the service or item. It is unclear how price transparency requirements and similar initiatives will affect consumer behavior, our relationships with payors, or our ability to set and negotiate practices.

We expect these competitive trends to continue. If we are unable to compete effectively with other hospitals and other healthcare providers, patients may seek healthcare services at providers other than our hospitals and affiliated businesses.

We may be adversely affected by consolidation among health insurers and other industry participants.

In recent years, a number of health insurers have merged or increased efforts to consolidate with other non-governmental payors. Insurers are also increasingly pursuing alignment initiatives with healthcare providers. Consolidation within the health insurance industry may result in insurers having increased negotiating leverage and competitive advantages, such as greater access to performance and pricing data. Our ability to negotiate prices and favorable terms with health insurers in certain markets could be affected negatively as a result of this consolidation. Also, the shift toward value-based payment models could be accelerated if larger insurers, including those engaging in consolidation activities, find these models to be financially beneficial. We cannot predict whether we will be able to negotiate favorable terms with payors and otherwise respond effectively to the impact of increased consolidation in the payor industry or vertical integration efforts.

The failure to obtain our medical supplies at favorable prices could cause our operating results to decline.

We have a participation agreement with HealthTrust, a GPO. The current term of this agreement expires in January 2022, with automatic renewal terms of one year unless either party terminates by giving notice of non-renewal. GPOs attempt to obtain favorable pricing on medical supplies with manufacturers and vendors, sometimes by negotiating exclusive supply arrangements in exchange for

30

discounts. To the extent these exclusive supply arrangements are challenged or deemed unenforceable, we could incur higher costs for our medical supplies obtained through HealthTrust. Further, costs of supplies and drugs may continue to increase due to market pressure from pharmaceutical companies and new product releases. The COVID-19 pandemic is causing increased demand for personal protective equipment and other medical supplies, resulting in higher costs and supply shortages. Higher costs could continue to adversely impact our operating results. Also, there can be no assurance that our arrangement with HealthTrust will provide the discounts we expect to achieve.

If reimbursement rates paid by federal or state healthcare programs or commercial payors are reduced, if we are unable to maintain favorable contract terms with payors or comply with our payor contract obligations, if insured individuals move to insurance plans with greater coverage exclusions or narrower networks, or if insurance coverage is otherwise restricted or reduced, our net operating revenues may decline.

In 2020, 37.3% of our net operating revenues, came from the Medicare and Medicaid programs. However, as federal healthcare expenditures continue to increase and state governments continue to face budgetary shortfalls, federal and state governments have made, and continue to make, significant changes in the Medicare and Medicaid programs, including reductions in reimbursement levels. In addition, CMS may implement changes through new or modified demonstration projects authorized pursuant to Medicaid waivers. In January 2020, CMS announced a demonstration project allowing for a block grant funding model. Some of these changes have decreased, or could decrease, the amount of money we receive for our services relating to these programs.

In addition, government and commercial payors as well as other third parties from whom we receive payment for our services attempt to control healthcare costs by, for example, requiring hospitals to discount payments for their services in exchange for exclusive or preferred participation in their benefit plans, restricting coverage through utilization review, reducing coverage of inpatient and emergency room services and shifting care to outpatient settings, requiring prior authorizations, and implementing alternative payment models. The ability of commercial payors to control healthcare costs using these measures may be enhanced by the increasing consolidation of insurance and managed care companies and vertical integration of health insurers with healthcare providers. Limitations on balance billing may also reduce the amount that hospitals and other providers are able to collect for out-of-network services. For example, effective January 1, 2022, the No Surprises Act, will prohibit providers from charging patients an amount beyond the in-network cost sharing amount for services rendered by out-of-network providers, subject to limited exceptions. In addition, price transparency initiatives may impact our ability to obtain or maintain favorable contract terms. For example, hospitals are required by federal regulation to publish online payor-specific negotiated charges and de-identified minimum and maximum charges. Further, beginning in 2022, providers will be required to send an insured patient’s health plans a good faith estimate of expected charges and diagnostic codes prior to when the patient is scheduled to receive an item or service.

In 2020, 62.9% of our net operating revenues came from commercial payors. Our contracts with payors require us to comply with a number of terms related to the provision of services and billing for services. If we are unable to negotiate increased reimbursement rates, maintain existing rates or other favorable contract terms, effectively respond to payor cost controls and reimbursement policies or comply with the terms of our payor contracts, the payments we receive for our services may be reduced. Also, we are increasingly involved in disputes with payors and experience payment denials, both prospectively and retroactively. In addition, individuals have been increasingly enrolling in high-deductible health plans, which tend to have lower reimbursement rates for providers along with higher co-pays and deductibles due from the patient in comparison to traditional health plans. These higher co-pays and deductibles due from patients are subject to increased collection cost and risk. These high-deductible health plans, sometimes referred to as consumer-directed plans, may even exclude our hospitals and employed physicians from coverage.

If we experience growth in self-pay volume and revenues or if we experience continued deterioration in the collectability of patient responsibility accounts, our financial condition or results of operations could be adversely affected.

Our primary collection risks relate to uninsured patients and outstanding patient balances for which the primary insurance payor has paid some but not all of the outstanding balance, with the remaining outstanding balance (generally deductibles and co-payments) owed by the patient. Collections are impacted by the economic ability of patients to pay and the effectiveness of our collection efforts. Significant changes in payor mix, business office operations, economic conditions or trends in federal and state governmental healthcare coverage may affect our collection of accounts receivable and are considered in our estimates of accounts receivable collectability. Moreover, as noted above, we have observed deterioration in the collectability of patient accounts receivable for uninsured patients in comparison to pre-pandemic levels as the result of adverse economic conditions arising from the COVID-19 pandemic, which deterioration, if sustained, may continue to adversely affect our financial results and require an increased level of working capital.

Efforts to repeal or revise the Affordable Care Act have cast considerable uncertainty on the future of the law and its effects on the size of the uninsured population. For example, effective January 1, 2019, Congress eliminated the financial penalty associated with the Affordable Care Act’s mandate that individuals enroll in an insurance plan. In December 2018, as a result of this change, a federal judge in Texas found the individual mandate unconstitutional and determined that the rest of the Affordable Care Act was therefore

31

invalid. In December 2019, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld this decision with respect to the individual mandate, but remanded for further consideration of how this affects the rest of the law. On November 10, 2020, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments, and it remains unclear how or when the Supreme Court will rule. Pending the appeals process, the law remains in place. In addition, the Medicaid program continues to evolve, both as a result of the Affordable Care Act and subsequent legislation and agency initiatives. Changes include the number and identity of states that choose to expand or otherwise modify Medicaid programs and the terms of expansion and other program modifications. Some of these program changes, such as requirements that Medicaid recipients meet certain work requirements, have reduced and may continue to reduce the number of program participants in certain states, although President Biden has issued executive orders directing agencies to re-examine measures that reduce coverage or undermine Medicaid programs, including work requirements. These variables, among others, make it difficult to predict the number of uninsured individuals and what percentage of our total revenue will be comprised of self-pay revenues.

We may be adversely affected by the growth in patient responsibility accounts as a result of increases in the adoption of plan structures, including health savings accounts, narrow networks and tiered networks, which shift greater responsibility for care to individuals through greater exclusions and copayment and deductible amounts. Further, our ability to collect patient responsibility accounts may be limited by statutory, regulatory and investigatory initiatives, including private lawsuits directed at hospital charges and collection practices for uninsured and underinsured patients and regulatory restrictions on charges for out-of-network services. In addition, a further deterioration of economic conditions in the United States could potentially lead to higher levels of uninsured patients, result in higher levels of patients covered by lower paying government programs, result in fiscal uncertainties at both government payors and private insurers and/or limit the economic ability of patients to make payments for which they are responsible. If we experience growth in self-pay volume or continued deterioration in collectability of patient responsibility accounts, our financial condition or results of operations could be adversely affected.

Some of the non-urban communities in which we operate continue to face challenging economic conditions, and the failure of certain employers, or the closure of certain manufacturing and other facilities in our markets, could have a disproportionate impact on our hospitals.

In addition to the impacts arising from the general economic downturn in the United States in 2020 arising from the COVID-19 pandemic as noted above, some of the non-urban communities in which we operate have been facing challenging economic conditions which predate the pandemic, including higher levels of unemployment than other regions of the United States. In addition, the economies in the non-urban communities in which our hospitals primarily operate are often dependent on a small number of large employers, especially manufacturing or similar facilities. These employers often provide income and health insurance for a disproportionately large number of community residents who may depend on our hospitals for care. The failure of one or more large employers, or the closure or substantial reduction in the number of individuals employed at manufacturing or other facilities located in or near many of the non-urban communities in which our hospitals primarily operate, could cause affected employees to move elsewhere for employment or lose insurance coverage that was otherwise available to them. When patients are experiencing personal financial difficulties or have concerns about general economic conditions, they may:

• delay or forgo elective procedures;

• choose to seek care in emergency rooms.

The occurrence of these events may cause a reduction in our revenues and adversely impact our results of operations.

The demand for services provided by our hospitals and affiliated providers can be impacted by factors beyond our control.

Our admissions and adjusted admissions as well as acuity trends may be impacted by factors beyond our control. For example, seasonal fluctuations in the severity of influenza and other critical illnesses, such as COVID-19, unplanned shutdowns or unavailability of our facilities due to weather or other unforeseen events, decreases in trends in high acuity service offerings, changes in competition from other service providers, turnover in physicians affiliated with our hospitals, or changes in medical technology can have an impact on the demand for services at our hospitals and affiliated providers. The impact of these or other factors beyond our control could have an adverse effect on our business, financial position and results of operations.

32

A pandemic, epidemic or outbreak of an infectious disease in the markets in which we operate or that otherwise impacts our facilities could adversely impact our business.

In addition to the adverse impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic discussed above, if another pandemic, epidemic, or outbreak of an infectious disease or other public health crisis were to affect our markets, our business could be adversely affected. Any such crisis could diminish the public trust in healthcare facilities, especially hospitals that fail to accurately or timely diagnose, or that are treating (or have treated) patients affected by contagious diseases. If any of our facilities were involved in treating patients for such a contagious disease, other patients might cancel elective procedures or fail to seek needed care at our facilities. Patient volumes may decline or volumes of uninsured and underinsured patients may increase, depending on the economic circumstances surrounding the pandemic, epidemic, or outbreak. Further, any such pandemic might adversely impact our business by causing a temporary shutdown or diversion of patients, by disrupting or delaying production and delivery of materials and products in the supply chain or by causing staffing shortages in our facilities. Although we have disaster plans in place and operate pursuant to infectious disease protocols, the potential impact, as well as the public’s and government’s response to, of any such pandemic, epidemic or outbreak of an infectious disease with respect to our markets or our facilities is difficult to predict and could adversely impact our business.

Our performance depends on our ability to recruit and retain quality physicians.

The success of our healthcare facilities depends in part on the number and quality of the physicians on the medical staffs of our healthcare facilities, our ability to employ quality physicians, the admitting and utilization practices of employed and independent physicians, maintaining good relations with those physicians and controlling costs related to the employment of physicians. Although we employ some physicians, physicians are often not employees at our healthcare facilities at which they practice. In many of the markets we serve, many physicians have admitting privileges at other healthcare facilities in addition to our healthcare facilities. Such physicians may terminate their affiliation with or employment by our healthcare facilities at any time. In addition, we may face increased challenges in this area as the physician population reaches retirement age, especially if there is a shortage of physicians willing and able to provide comparable services. Moreover, if we are unable to provide adequate support personnel or technologically advanced equipment and facilities that meet the needs of those physicians and their patients, they may be discouraged from referring patients to our facilities, admissions may decrease and our operating performance may decline.

Our labor costs could be adversely affected by competition for staffing, the shortage of experienced nurses and labor union activity.

In addition to our physicians, the operations of our healthcare facilities are dependent on the efforts, abilities and experience of our facility management and medical support personnel, such as nurses, pharmacists and lab technicians. We compete with other healthcare providers in recruiting and retaining qualified facility management and support personnel responsible for the daily operations of our healthcare facilities, including nurses and other non-physician healthcare professionals. In some markets, the availability of nurses and other medical support personnel has been a significant operating issue to healthcare providers. We may be required to continue to enhance wages and benefits to recruit and retain nurses and other medical support personnel or to hire more expensive temporary or contract personnel. In addition, the states in which we operate could adopt mandatory nurse-staffing ratios or could reduce mandatory nurse-staffing ratios already in place. State-mandated nurse-staffing ratios could significantly affect labor costs and have an adverse impact on revenues if we are required to limit admissions in order to meet the required ratios.

Moreover, a newly instituted freeze and review of certain labor regulations, proposed changes to federal labor laws, and other labor-related developments arising from the recent change in presidential administration in the United States could increase the likelihood of employee unionization activity and the ability of employees to unionize. Increased or ongoing labor union activity could also adversely affect our labor costs or otherwise adversely impact us. In addition, when negotiating collective bargaining agreements with unions, whether such agreements are renewals or first contracts, there is the possibility that strikes could occur during the negotiation process, and our continued operation during any strikes could increase our labor costs and otherwise adversely impact us.

If our labor costs continue to increase, we may not be able to raise rates to offset these increased costs. Because a significant percentage of our revenues consists of fixed, prospective payments, our ability to pass along increased labor costs is constrained. In the event we are not entirely effective at recruiting and retaining qualified facility management, nurses and other medical support personnel, or in controlling labor costs, this could have an adverse effect on our results of operations.

The industry trend towards value-based purchasing may negatively impact our revenues.

There is a trend toward value-based purchasing of healthcare services across the healthcare industry among both government and commercial payors. Generally, value-based purchasing initiatives tie payment to the quality and efficiency of care. For example, hospital payments may be negatively impacted by the occurrence of hospital acquired conditions, or HACs. The 25% of hospitals with the worst national risk-adjusted HAC rates for all hospitals in the previous year receive a 1% reduction in their total Medicare payments. Medicare does not reimburse for care related to HACs. In addition, federal funds may not be used under the Medicaid

33

program to reimburse providers for services provided to treat HACs. Hospitals that experience excess readmissions for designated conditions receive reduced payments for all inpatient discharges. HHS also reduces Medicare inpatient hospital payments for all discharges by a required percentage and pools the amount collected from these reductions to fund payments to reward hospitals that meet or exceed certain quality performance standards. Further, Medicare and Medicaid require hospitals to report certain quality data to receive full reimbursement updates.

HHS has focused on tying Medicare payments to quality or value through alternative payment models, which generally aim to make providers attentive to the quality and cost of care they deliver to patients. Examples of alternative payment models include ACOs and bundled payment arrangements. An ACO is a care coordination model intended to produce savings as a result of improved quality and operational efficiency. In bundled payment models, providers receive one payment for services provided to patients for certain medical conditions or episodes of care, accepting accountability for costs and quality of care. Providers may receive supplemental Medicare payments or owe repayments to CMS depending on whether spending exceeds or falls below a specified spending target and whether certain quality standards are met. Currently, participation in Medicare bundled payment programs is voluntary, except for some mandatory programs in selected markets. CMS has required hospitals located in certain geographic areas to participate in a bundled payment program for specified orthopedic procedures, which is scheduled to run through September 30, 2021. CMS is requiring certain hospitals to participate in new mandatory bundled payment initiatives for end-stage renal disease treatment, which began January 1, 2021, and radiation oncology, beginning as early as January 1, 2022. CMS has indicated that it is developing more voluntary and mandatory bundled payment models.

Several of the nation’s largest commercial payors have also expressed an intent to increase reliance on value-based reimbursement arrangements. Further, many large commercial payors require hospitals to report quality data, and several commercial payors do not reimburse hospitals for certain preventable adverse events.

We expect value-based purchasing programs, including programs that condition reimbursement on patient outcome measures, to become more common and to involve a higher percentage of reimbursement amounts. It is unclear whether these and other alternative payment models will successfully coordinate care and reduce costs or whether they will decrease aggregate reimbursement. While we believe we are adapting our business strategies to compete in a value-based reimbursement environment, we are unable at this time to predict how this trend will affect our results of operations. If we perform at a level below the outcomes demonstrated by our competitors, are unable to meet or exceed the quality performance standards under any applicable value-based purchasing program, or otherwise fail to effectively provide or coordinate the efficient delivery of quality healthcare services, our reputation in the industry may be negatively impacted, we may receive reduced reimbursement amounts and we may owe repayments to payors, causing our revenues to decline.

Our revenues are somewhat concentrated in a small number of states which will make us particularly sensitive to regulatory and economic changes in those states.

Our revenues are particularly sensitive to regulatory and economic changes in states in which we generate a significant portion of our revenues, including Indiana, Florida and Texas. Accordingly, any change in the current demographic, economic, competitive, or regulatory conditions in these states could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, or results of operations. Changes to the Medicaid programs in these states could also have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows. The Texas Healthcare Transformation and Quality Improvement Program, or the Texas Waiver Program, which provides funding for uncompensated care and delivery system reform initiatives, is operated under a waiver granted pursuant to Section 1115 of the Social Security Act. In December 2017, CMS approved an extension of this waiver through September 30, 2022. In accordance with this extension, Texas has submitted a plan to CMS for approval that outlines the state’s transition away from funding for its Delivery System Reform Incentive payment program, which currently provides support to hospitals and other providers to reform healthcare delivery systems. We cannot guarantee that revenues recognized from the program will not decrease or predict whether the Texas Waiver Program will be further extended or changed.

34

Risks Related to Legal Proceedings

We are the subject of various legal, regulatory and governmental proceedings that, if resolved unfavorably, could have an adverse effect on us, and we may be subject to other loss contingencies, both known and unknown.

We are a party to various legal, regulatory and governmental proceedings and other related matters. Those proceedings include, among other things, government investigations. In addition, we are and may become subject to other loss contingencies, both known and unknown, which may relate to past, present and future facts, events, circumstances and occurrences. Should an unfavorable outcome occur in connection with our legal, regulatory or governmental proceedings or other loss contingencies, or if we become subject to any such loss contingencies in the future, there could be an adverse impact on our financial position, results of operations and liquidity.

In particular, government investigations, as well as qui tam lawsuits, may lead to significant fines, penalties, damages payments or other sanctions, including exclusion from government healthcare programs. Settlements of lawsuits involving Medicare and Medicaid issues routinely require both monetary payments and corporate integrity agreements, each of which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and/or cash flows.

We could be subject to substantial uninsured liabilities or increased insurance costs as a result of significant legal actions.

Physicians, hospitals and other healthcare providers have become subject to an increasing number of legal actions alleging malpractice, product liability, or related legal theories. Even in states that have imposed caps on damages, litigants are seeking recoveries under new theories of liability that might not be subject to the caps on damages. Many of these actions involve large claims and significant defense costs. To protect us from the cost of these claims, we maintain claims made professional malpractice liability insurance and general liability insurance coverage in excess of those amounts for which we are self-insured. This insurance coverage is in amounts that we believe to be sufficient for our operations; however, our insurance coverage may not continue to be available at a reasonable cost for us to maintain adequate levels of insurance. Additionally, our insurance coverage does not cover all claims against us, such as fines, penalties, or other damage and legal expense payments resulting from qui tam lawsuits. We cannot predict the outcome of current or future legal actions against us or the effect that judgments or settlements in such matters may have on us or on our insurance costs. Additionally, all professional and general liability insurance we purchase is subject to policy limitations. If the aggregate limit of any of our professional and general liability policies is exhausted, in whole or in part, it could deplete or reduce the limits available to pay any other material claims applicable to that policy period. Furthermore, one or more of our insurance carriers could become insolvent and unable to fulfill its or their obligations to defend, pay or reimburse us when those obligations become due. In that case, or if payments of claims exceed our estimates or are not covered by our insurance, it could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

We could be subject to increased monetary penalties and/or other sanctions, including exclusion from federal healthcare programs, if we fail to comply with the terms of our CIA.

On August 4, 2014, we announced that we had entered into a civil settlement with the U.S. Department of Justice, other federal agencies and identified relators that concluded previously announced investigations and litigation related to short stay admissions through emergency departments at certain of our affiliated hospitals. In addition to the amounts paid in the settlement, we executed the CIA with the OIG that has been incorporated into our existing and comprehensive compliance program. On September 25, 2018, the CIA was amended and extended in connection with the settlement of certain qui tam lawsuits related to certain conduct of HMA and its affiliated entities that were initiated and pending, and known to us, before HMA was acquired by merger in January 2014. See our discussion of these matters under the section “Business of Community Health Systems, Inc.” in Part I, Item 1 of this Form 10-K and “Legal Proceedings” in Part II, Item 1 of our Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q for the quarterly periods ended September 30, 2014 and September 30, 2018 for further discussion of the background of these matters and details of the settlements.

Material, uncorrected violations of the CIA could lead to our suspension or disbarment from participation in Medicare, Medicaid and other federal and state healthcare programs and repayment obligations. In addition, we are subject to possible civil penalties for failure to substantially comply with the terms of the CIA, including stipulated penalties ranging between $1,000 to $2,500 per day. We are also subject to a stipulated penalty of $50,000 for each false certification made by us or on our behalf, pursuant to the reporting provisions of the CIA. The CIA increases the amount of information we must provide to the federal government regarding our healthcare practices and our compliance with federal regulations. The reports we provide in connection with the CIA could result in greater scrutiny by regulatory authorities.

35

Risks Related to Government Regulation

We are unable to predict the ultimate impact of health reform initiatives, including the Affordable Care Act, and our business may be adversely affected if the Affordable Care Act is repealed entirely or found to be unconstitutional or if provisions benefitting our operations are significantly modified.

In recent years, the U.S. Congress and certain state legislatures have introduced, considered or passed a large number of proposals and legislation designed to make major changes in the healthcare system, including changes intended to increase access to health insurance.

The Affordable Care Act is the most prominent of these reform efforts. The law expands health insurance coverage through a combination of public program expansion and private sector health insurance reforms, mandates that substantially all U.S. citizens maintain health insurance coverage, reduces Medicare reimbursement to hospitals, and promotes value-based purchasing. Court challenges and efforts by the previous presidential administration and certain members of Congress to repeal or make significant changes to the Affordable Care Act, its implementation and/or its interpretation have cast considerable uncertainty on the future of the law. For example, in June 2018, the Department of Labor issued a final rule expanding availability of association health plans, which are not required to adhere to specific Affordable Care Act coverage mandates. It remains unclear what executive and regulatory actions the Biden administration will implement and propose with respect to the Affordable Care Act and how such actions will impact our business.

Additionally, effective January 2019, the financial penalty for individuals that fail to maintain insurance coverage associated with the individual mandate was eliminated. In December 2018, as a result of this change, a federal judge in Texas found the individual mandate unconstitutional and determined the rest of the Affordable Care Act was therefore invalid. In December 2019, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld this decision with respect to the individual mandate, but remanded for further consideration of how this affects the rest of the law. On January 29, 2020, the Fifth Circuit denied a rehearing en banc. On March 2, 2020, the Supreme Court announced that it would consolidate two cases on the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act. On November 10, 2020, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments, and it remains unclear how or when the Supreme Court will rule. The law remains in place pending the appeals process. The effective elimination of the individual mandate and other changes may impact the number of individuals that elect to obtain public or private health insurance or the scope of such coverage, if purchased.

There is uncertainty regarding whether, when, and how the Affordable Care Act will be further changed, the ultimate outcome of court challenges and how the Affordable Care Act will be interpreted and implemented. Court challenges and changes by Congress or government agencies could eliminate or alter provisions beneficial to us while leaving in place provisions reducing our reimbursement. The repeal or invalidation of or changes to the Affordable Care Act may have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flow, capital resources and/or liquidity.

There is also uncertainty regarding whether other health reform measures will be adopted, what alternative provisions, if any, will be enacted, the timing and implementation of alternative provisions, and the impact of alternative provisions on providers as well as other healthcare industry participants. For example, CMS administrators have indicated that they intend to grant states additional flexibility in the administration of state Medicaid programs, including expanding the scope of waivers under which states may impose different eligibility or enrollment restrictions or otherwise implementing programs that vary from federal standards. CMS administrators have also signaled interest in changing Medicaid payment models, including allowing states to obtain funding through a block grant program and adopting value-based care models. Other health reform initiatives and proposals such as the limitations and prohibitions on surprise billing enacted under the No Surprises Act and price transparency requirements, may impact prices, our competitive position and our relationships with patients, insurers, and ancillary providers (such as anesthesiologists, radiologists, and pathologists). Further, the potential impact on health reform effects from the outcome of the 2020 federal election is unknown, although President Biden has indicated through executive orders that his administration intends to protect and strengthen the Affordable Care Act and Medicaid programs. Members of Congress have proposed measures that would expand government-sponsored coverage, including single-payor proposals, and some states are considering similar measures. Other industry participants, such as private payors and large employer groups and their affiliates, may also introduce financial or delivery system reforms. We are unable to predict the nature and success of such initiatives, but they may have an adverse impact on our business.

If we fail to comply with extensive laws and government regulations, including fraud and abuse laws, we could suffer penalties or be required to make significant changes to our operations.

The healthcare industry is governed by laws and regulations at the federal, state and local government levels. These laws and regulations include standards addressing, among other issues, the adequacy of medical care, equipment, personnel, operating policies and procedures; billing and coding for services; properly handling overpayments; classification of levels of care provided; preparing and filing cost reports; relationships with referral sources and referral recipients; maintenance of adequate records; hospital use; rate-setting; compliance with building codes; environmental protection; privacy and security; interoperability and refraining from

36

information blocking; debt collection; and communications with patients and consumers. Examples of these laws include, but are not limited to, HIPAA, the Stark Law, the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, the FCA, the EMTALA and similar state laws. If we fail to comply with applicable laws and regulations we could suffer civil sanctions and criminal penalties, including the loss of our operating licenses and our ability to participate in the Medicare, Medicaid and other federal and state healthcare programs.

In addition, there are heightened coordinated civil and criminal enforcement efforts by both federal and state government agencies relating to the healthcare industry, including the hospital segment. Enforcement actions have focused on financial arrangements between hospitals and physicians, billing for services without adequately documenting medical necessity and billing for services outside the coverage guidelines for such services. Specific to our hospitals, we have received inquiries and subpoenas from various governmental agencies regarding these and other matters, and we are also subject to various claims and lawsuits relating to such matters. For a further discussion of these matters, see “Legal Proceedings” in Part I, Item 3 of this Form 10-K.

In the future, evolving interpretations or enforcement of these laws and regulations could subject our current practices to allegations of impropriety or illegality or could require us to make changes in our facilities, equipment, personnel, services, capital expenditure programs and operating expenses.

Moreover, HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act, or HITECH, and implementing regulations establish national privacy and security standards for the protection of PHI by health plans, healthcare clearinghouses and certain healthcare providers, referred to as covered entities, and the business associates with whom such covered entities contract for services. HIPAA requires covered entities like us to develop and maintain policies and procedures with respect to the privacy and security of PHI and to adopt administrative, physical and technical safeguards to protect such information. HIPAA also requires covered entities to use standard transaction code sets and standard identifiers when submitting or receiving certain electronic healthcare transactions, including activities associated with the billing and collection of healthcare claims.

Violations of HIPAA may result in significant civil and criminal penalties. A single breach incident can result in violations of multiple standards. HIPAA also authorizes state attorneys general to file suit on behalf of their residents. Courts may award damages, costs and attorneys’ fees related to violations of HIPAA in such cases. Although HIPAA does not create a private right of action allowing individuals to sue in civil court for violations, the laws and regulations have been used as the basis for duty of care in state civil suits such as those for negligence or recklessness in the misuse or breach of PHI. In addition, HIPAA requires the Secretary of HHS to conduct periodic compliance audits of covered entities or business associates. From time to time, we must respond to investigations by OCR with respect to alleged HIPAA violations. We believe our potential liability with respect to such investigations currently pending is not material to our financial position.

HIPAA requires covered entities to notify individuals of any unauthorized acquisition, access, use, or disclosure of their unsecured PHI that compromises the privacy or security of such information, with certain exceptions related to unintentional or inadvertent use or disclosure by employees or authorized individuals. Such notifications must be made without unreasonable delay not to exceed 60 calendar days after discovery of the breach. If a breach affects 500 patients or more, it must be reported to HHS without unreasonable delay, and HHS will post the name of the breaching entity on its public web site. Breaches affecting more than 500 patients in the same state or jurisdiction must also be reported to the media. If a breach involves fewer than 500 people, the covered entity must record it in a log and notify HHS at least annually.

Many states in which we operate also have state laws that protect the privacy and security of PHI and other personal information and regulate the collection, use, retention, disclosure, transfer and other processing as well. These laws may be similar to or even more protective than HIPAA, including requiring breach notifications to be provided within shorter time frames. Where state laws are more protective than HIPAA, we have to comply with their stricter provisions. Not only may some of these state laws impose fines and penalties upon violators, but some may afford private rights of action to individuals who believe their personal information has been misused. The interplay of federal and state laws may be subject to varying interpretations by courts and government agencies, creating complex compliance issues for us and potentially exposing us to additional expense, adverse publicity and liability. We may not remain in compliance with diverse privacy and security requirements in all of the jurisdictions in which we do business, particularly to the extent they are inconsistent, rapidly changing and/or ambiguous and uncertain as to their applicability to our business practices.

In addition to HIPAA, the Federal Trade Act, state consumer protection laws, and privacy laws regulating the collection, use, retention, disclosure, transfer and processing of consumer information, our marketing and patient engagement activities are also subject to communications privacy laws such as the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, or the TCPA. In addition, commercial email messages we send (or that vendors send on our behalf) are regulated under the Controlling the Assault of Non-Solicited Pornography and Marketing Act, or CAN-SPAM. While we strive to adhere to strict policies and procedures that comply with the TCPA and, CAN-SPAM, the Federal Communications Commission, as the agency that implements and enforces the TCPA, and the Federal Trade Commission, which enforces CAN-SPAM, may disagree with our interpretation of these laws, TCPA and subject us to penalties and other consequences for noncompliance. Determination by a court or regulatory agency that our calling, texting or email practices violate the TCPA or CAN-SPAM could subject us to civil penalties and could require us to change some portions of our business.

37

Even an unsuccessful challenge by patients or regulatory authorities of our activities could result in adverse publicity and could require a costly response from and defense by us.

If we fail to comply with these or other applicable laws and regulations, which are subject to change, we could be subject to liabilities, including civil penalties, money damages, the loss of our licenses to operate one or more facilities, exclusion of one or more facilities from participation in the Medicare, Medicaid and other federal and state health care programs, civil lawsuits and criminal penalties. The costs of compliance with, and the other burdens imposed by, these and other laws or regulatory actions may increase our operational costs, result in interruptions or delays in the availability of systems and/or result in a patient volume decline. We may also face audits or investigations by one or more domestic or foreign government agencies relating to our compliance with these regulations. An adverse outcome under any such investigation or audit could result in liability, result in adverse publicity, and adversely affect our business.

If there are delays in regulatory updates by governmental entities to federal and state healthcare programs, we may experience increased volatility in our operating results as such delays may result in a timing difference between when such program revenues are earned and when they become known or estimable for purposes of accounting recognition.

We derive a significant amount of our net operating revenues from governmental healthcare programs, primarily Medicare and Medicaid. The reimbursements due to us from those programs are subject to legislative and regulatory changes that can have a significant impact on our operating results. When delays occur in the implementation of regulations or passage of legislation, there is the potential for material increases or decreases in operating revenues to be recognized in periods subsequent to when such related services were performed, resulting in the potential for an adverse effect on our consolidated financial position and consolidated results of operations.

If our adoption and utilization of electronic health record systems fails to satisfy HHS standards, our consolidated results of operations could be adversely affected, and we may be adversely affected by changing and more burdensome interoperability requirements.

Under HITECH and other laws, eligible hospitals that fail to demonstrate meaningful use of certified EHR technology and have not applied and qualified for a hardship exception are subject to reduced reimbursement from Medicare. Eligible healthcare professionals are also subject to positive or negative payment adjustments based, in part, on their use of EHR technology. Thus, if our hospitals and employed professionals are unable to properly adopt, maintain, and utilize certified EHR systems, we could be subject to penalties and lawsuits that may have an adverse effect on our consolidated financial position and consolidated results of operations.

The federal government is also promoting the efficient exchange of health care information to improve health care. The 21st Century Cures Act and implementing regulations prohibit information blocking by health care providers and certain other entities, which is defined as engaging in activities that are likely to interfere with the access, exchange or use of electronic health information, subject to limited exceptions. Initiatives related to health care technology and interoperability may require changes to our operations, impose new and complex obligations on us, affect our relationships with providers, vendors and other third parties and require investments in infrastructure. We may be subject to penalties or other disincentives or experience reputational damage for failure to comply.

State efforts to regulate the construction, acquisition or expansion of healthcare facilities could limit our ability to build or acquire additional healthcare facilities, renovate our facilities or expand the breadth of services we offer.

Some states in which we operate require a CON or other prior approval for the construction or acquisition of healthcare facilities, capital expenditures exceeding a prescribed amount, changes in bed capacity or services and some other matters. In evaluating a proposal, these states consider the need for additional or expanded healthcare facilities or services. If we are not able to obtain required CONs or other prior approvals, we will not be able to acquire, operate, replace or expand our facilities or expand the breadth of services we offer. Furthermore, if a CON or other prior approval upon which we relied to invest in construction of a replacement or expanded facility were to be lost through an appeal process or revoked, we may not be able to recover the value of our investment.

State efforts to regulate the sale of hospitals operated by municipal or not-for-profit entities could prevent us from acquiring these types of hospitals.

Many states have adopted legislation regarding the sale or other disposition of hospitals operated by municipal or not-for-profit entities. In some states that do not have specific legislation, the attorneys general have demonstrated an interest in these transactions under their general obligation to protect the use of charitable assets. These legislative and administrative efforts focus primarily on the appropriate valuation of the assets divested and the use of the proceeds of the sale by the non-profit seller. While these review and, in some instances, approval processes can add additional time to the closing of a hospital acquisition, we have not had any significant

38

difficulties or delays in completing acquisitions. However, future state actions could delay or even prevent our ability to acquire hospitals once we return to our acquisition strategy.

Risks Related to Impairment

If the fair value of our reporting unit declines, a material non-cash charge to earnings from impairment of our goodwill could result.

At December 31, 2020, we had approximately $4.2 billion of goodwill. We expect to recover the carrying value of this goodwill through our future cash flows. On an ongoing basis, under GAAP, we evaluate, based on the fair value of our reporting unit, whether the carrying value of our goodwill is impaired when events or changes in circumstances indicate that such carrying value may not be recoverable. GAAP requires us to test goodwill for impairment at least annually.

A detailed evaluation of potential impairment indicators was performed as of December 31, 2020, which specifically considered the volatility of the fair market value of our outstanding senior secured and unsecured notes and common stock during the year ended December 31, 2020, as well as declines in patient volumes and net operating revenues resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic. On the basis of available evidence as of December 31, 2020, no impairment indicators were identified.

In addition, our most recent annual goodwill evaluations were performed during the fourth quarter of 2020, with an October 31, 2020 measurement date. While no impairment was indicated in our most recent annual goodwill evaluations as of the October 31, 2020 (or in our 2019 and 2018 goodwill impairment evaluations), we recorded material non-cash impairment charges during 2016 and 2017 which reduced the carrying value of our hospital operations reporting unit to an amount equal to our estimated fair values as of such prior year measurement dates. This increases the risk that future declines in fair value could result in goodwill impairment. The determination of fair value in step one of our goodwill impairment analysis is based on an estimate of fair value for the hospital operations reporting unit utilizing known and estimated inputs at the evaluation date. Some of those inputs include, but are not limited to, the most recent price of our common stock or fair value of our long-term debt, estimates of future revenue and expense growth, estimated market multiples, expected capital expenditures, income tax rates, and costs of invested capital. Future estimates of fair value could be adversely affected if the actual outcome of one or more of these assumptions changes materially in the future, including any decline in our stock price or fair value of our long-term debt, increased volatility of our stock price or the fair value of our long-term debt, lower than expected net operating revenues or patient volumes, higher market interest rates or increased operating costs, including in any such case as the result of conditions related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Such changes impacting the calculation of our fair value could result in a material impairment charge in the future.

A significant decline in operating results or other indicators of impairment at one or more of our facilities could result in a material, non-cash charge to earnings to impair the value of long-lived assets.

Our operations are capital intensive and require significant investment in long-lived assets, such as property, equipment and other long-lived intangible assets, including capitalized internal-use software. If one of our facilities experiences declining operating results or is adversely impacted by one or more of these risk factors, we may not be able to recover the carrying value of those assets through our future operating cash flows. On an ongoing basis, we evaluate whether changes in future undiscounted cash flows reflect an impairment in the fair value of our long-lived assets. Additionally, as we continue to rationalize our portfolio of hospitals, we evaluate whether a hospital or a group of hospitals is impaired based on an analysis of the selling price from a definitive agreement compared to the carrying value of the net assets being sold. If the carrying value of our long-lived assets is impaired, we may incur a material non-cash charge to earnings.

Risks Related to Technology

Our operations could be significantly impacted by interruptions or restrictions in access to our information systems.

Our operations depend heavily on the proper function, availability and security of our information systems, as well as those of our third-party providers, to collect, maintain, process and use sensitive data and other clinical, operational and financial information. Information systems require an ongoing commitment of significant resources to maintain and enhance existing systems and to develop new systems in order to keep pace with continual changes in information technology. We also sometimes rely on third-party providers of financial, clinical, patient accounting and network information services and, as a result, we face operational challenges in maintaining multiple provider platforms and facilitating the interface of such systems with one another. We rely on these third-party providers to have appropriate controls to protect confidential information and other sensitive or regulated data. We do not control the information systems of third-party providers, and in some cases we may have difficulty accessing information archived on third-party systems.

39

Our networks and information systems are also subject to disruption due to events such as a major earthquake, fire, telecommunications failure, power outages, new system implementations, computer viruses, ransomware or other malware, security breaches, cyber-attacks, employee usage errors, acts of war, terrorist or criminal activities or other catastrophic events. If the information systems on which we rely fail or are interrupted or if our access to these systems is limited in the future, it could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

If we fail to comply with our obligations under license or technology agreements with third parties, we may be required to pay damages and we could lose license rights that are critical to our business.

We license certain intellectual property, including technologies and software from third parties, that is important to our business, and in the future we may enter into additional agreements that provide us with licenses to valuable intellectual property or technology. If we fail to comply with any of the obligations under our license agreements, we may be required to pay damages and the licensor may have the right to terminate the license. Termination by the licensor would cause us to lose valuable rights, and could prevent us from selling our solutions and services, or adversely impact our ability to commercialize future solutions and services. Our business would suffer if any current or future licenses terminate, if the licensors fail to abide by the terms of the license agreement, if the licensors fail to enforce licensed intellectual property against infringing third parties, if the licensed intellectual property are found to be invalid or unenforceable, or if we are unable to enter into necessary license agreements on acceptable terms or at all. Any of the foregoing could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

A cyber-attack or security breach could result in the compromise of our facilities, confidential data or critical data systems and give rise to potential harm to patients, remediation and other expenses, expose us to liability under HIPAA, HITECH, privacy and data protection laws and regulations, consumer protection laws, common law or other theories, subject us to litigation and federal and state governmental inquiries, damage our reputation, and otherwise be disruptive to our business.

We rely extensively on computer systems to manage clinical and financial data, communicate with our patients, payors, vendors and other third parties and summarize and analyze operating results. We have made significant investments in technology to protect our systems, equipment and medical devices and information from cybersecurity risks. During the second quarter of 2014, our computer network was the target of an external, criminal cyber-attack in which the attacker successfully copied and transferred certain data outside the Company. This data included certain non-medical patient identification data (such as patient names, addresses, birthdates, telephone numbers and social security numbers) considered protected health information, or PHI, under HIPAA, but did not include patient credit card, medical or clinical information. The remediation efforts in response to the attack have been substantial, including continued development and enhancement of our controls, processes and practices designed to protect our systems, computers, software, data and networks from attack, damage or unauthorized access. In connection with the cyber-attack, we were subject to multiple purported class action lawsuits and government investigations by various State Attorneys General and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office for Civil Rights, or OCR, which resulted in settlement agreements, a corrective action plan, a two-year monitoring period, and additional requirements, including obligations related to our security measures, risk analysis, risk management plan, training, internal reporting, and policies and procedures.

In spite of our security measures, there can be no assurance that we, or our third-party vendors and providers, will not be subject to additional cyber-attacks, ransomware or security breaches in the future. In the definitive agreements we enter into in connection with the divestiture of hospitals, we routinely agree to provide transition services to the buyer, including access to our legacy information systems, for a defined transition period. By providing access to our information systems to non-employees, we may be exposed to cyber-attacks, ransomware or security breaches that originate outside of our internal processes and practices designed to prevent such threats from occurring. In addition, we may be at increased risk because we outsource certain services or functions to, or have systems that interface with, third parties. Some of these third parties may store or have access to our data and may not have effective controls, processes, or practices to protect our information from attack, damage, or unauthorized access. A breach or attack affecting any of these third parties could harm our business.

Cyber-attacks, ransomware or security breaches could impact the integrity, availability or privacy of PHI and other data subject to privacy laws and regulations or disrupt our information technology systems, devices or business, including our ability to provide various healthcare services. For example, medical devices that connect to hospital networks or the internet may be vulnerable to cybersecurity incidents, which may impact patient safety. Additionally, growing cyber-security threats related to the use of ransomware and other malicious software threaten the access and utilization of critical information technology and data. As a result, cybersecurity and the continued development and enhancement of our controls, process and practices designed to protect our information systems from attack, damage or unauthorized access remain a priority for us. Our ability to recover from a ransomware or other cyber-attack is dependent on these practices, including successful backup systems and other recovery procedures. As cyber-threats continue to evolve, we may be required to expend significant additional resources to continue to modify or enhance our protective measures or to investigate and remediate any information security vulnerabilities, but we still might not be able to anticipate or prevent certain attack methods. If we are subject to cyber-attacks or security breaches in the future, this could result in harm to

40

patients; business interruptions and delays; the loss, misappropriation, corruption or unauthorized access of data or inability to access data; litigation and potential liability under privacy, security, breach notification and consumer protection laws or other applicable laws, including HIPAA; reputational damage, federal and state governmental inquiries, civil monetary penalties, settlement agreements, corrective action plans and monitoring requirements, any of which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

41

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments

None

Item 2. Properties

We own our corporate headquarters building located in Franklin, Tennessee. In addition to the headquarters in Franklin, we maintain regional service centers related to our shared services initiatives. Aside from one service center located in Antioch, Tennessee, these service centers are located in the markets in which we operate hospitals.

Most of our hospitals are general care hospitals offering a wide range of inpatient and outpatient medical services. These services generally include general acute care, emergency room, general and specialty surgery, critical care, internal medicine, obstetrics, diagnostic, psychiatric and rehabilitation services. In addition, some of our hospitals provide skilled nursing and home care services based on individual community needs. Two of our hospitals are stand-alone rehabilitation or psychiatric hospitals.

For each of our hospitals owned or leased as of December 31, 2020, the following table shows its location, the date of its acquisition or lease inception and the number of licensed beds:

Alabama

South Baldwin Regional Medical Center Foley 112 June, 2000 Leased

Grandview Medical Center Birmingham 422 July, 2007 Owned

Flowers Hospital Dothan 235 July, 2007 Owned

Medical Center Enterprise Enterprise 131 July, 2007 Owned

Gadsden Regional Medical Center Gadsden 346 July, 2007 Owned

Crestwood Medical Center Huntsville 180 July, 2007 Owned

Alaska

Mat-Su Regional Medical Center Palmer 125 July, 2007 Owned

Arizona

Western Arizona Regional Medical Center Bullhead City 139 July, 2000 Owned

Northwest Medical Center Tucson 300 July, 2007 Owned

Oro Valley Hospital Oro Valley 146 July, 2007 Owned

Northwest Medical Center Sahuarita Sahuarita 18 November, 2020 Owned

Arkansas

Northwest Health System

Northwest Medical Center - Bentonville Bentonville 128 July, 2007 Owned

Northwest Medical Center - Springdale Springdale 222 July, 2007 Owned

Willow Creek Women’s Hospital Johnson 64 July, 2007 Owned

Siloam Springs Regional Hospital Siloam Springs 73 February, 2009 Owned

Medical Center of South Arkansas El Dorado 166 April, 2009 Leased

42

Florida

North Okaloosa Medical Center Crestview 110 March, 1996 Owned

Bayfront Health Brooksville Brooksville 120 January, 2014 Leased

Bayfront Health Port Charlotte Port Charlotte 254 January, 2014 Owned

Bayfront Health Punta Gorda Punta Gorda 208 January, 2014 Owned

Bayfront Health Spring Hill Spring Hill 124 January, 2014 Leased

Lower Keys Medical Center Key West 167 January, 2014 Leased

Physicians Regional Healthcare System - Collier Naples 100 January, 2014 Owned

Santa Rosa Medical Center Milton 129 January, 2014 Leased

Seven Rivers Regional Medical Center Crystal River 128 January, 2014 Owned

Venice Regional Bayfront Health Venice 312 January, 2014 Owned

Georgia

East Georgia Regional Medical Center Statesboro 149 January, 2014 Owned

Indiana

Porter Hospital Valparaiso 301 May, 2007 Owned

Starke Hospital Knox 53 March, 2016 Leased

La Porte Hospital La Porte 227 March, 2016 Owned

Lutheran Health Network

Bluffton Regional Medical Center Bluffton 79 July, 2007 Owned

Dupont Hospital Fort Wayne 131 July, 2007 Owned

Lutheran Hospital Fort Wayne 396 July, 2007 Owned

The Orthopedic Hospital Fort Wayne 39 July, 2007 Owned

Lutheran Rehabilitation Hospital (rehabilitation) Fort Wayne 36 July, 2007 Owned

St. Joseph Hospital Fort Wayne 191 July, 2007 Owned

Dukes Memorial Hospital Peru 25 July, 2007 Owned

Kosciusko Community Hospital Warsaw 72 July, 2007 Owned

Mississippi

Merit Health Wesley Hattiesburg 211 July, 2007 Owned

Merit Health River Region Vicksburg 361 July, 2007 Owned

Merit Health Biloxi Biloxi 153 January, 2014 Leased

Merit Health Central Jackson 319 January, 2014 Leased

Merit Health Rankin Brandon 134 January, 2014 Leased

Merit Health Madison Canton 67 January, 2014 Owned

Merit Health River Oaks Flowood 160 January, 2014 Owned

Merit Health Woman's Hospital Flowood 109 January, 2014 Owned

Merit Health Natchez Natchez 179 October, 2014 Owned

Northwest Mississippi Medical Center Clarksdale 181 June, 2019 Leased

Missouri

Moberly Regional Medical Center Moberly 99 November, 1993 Owned

Northeast Regional Medical Center Kirksville 93 December, 2000 Leased

Poplar Bluff Regional Medical Center Poplar Bluff 410 January, 2014 Owned

New Mexico

Eastern New Mexico Medical Center Roswell 162 April, 1998 Owned

Carlsbad Medical Center Carlsbad 99 July, 2007 Owned

Lea Regional Medical Center Hobbs 84 July, 2007 Owned

Mountain View Regional Medical Center Las Cruces 168 July, 2007 Owned

43

North Carolina

Lake Norman Regional Medical Center Mooresville 123 January, 2014 Owned

Davis Regional Medical Center Statesville 144 January, 2014 Owned

Oklahoma

AllianceHealth Ponca City Ponca City 140 May, 2006 Owned

AllianceHealth Woodward Woodward 87 July, 2007 Leased

AllianceHealth Clinton Clinton 56 January, 2014 Leased

AllianceHealth Madill Madill 25 January, 2014 Leased

AllianceHealth Durant Durant 148 January, 2014 Owned

AllianceHealth Midwest Midwest City 255 January, 2014 Leased

AllianceHealth Seminole Seminole 32 January, 2014 Leased

Pennsylvania

Commonwealth Health Network

Wilkes-Barre General Hospital Wilkes-Barre 412 April, 2009 Owned

First Hospital Wyoming Valley (psychiatric) Wilkes-Barre 149 April, 2009 Owned

Regional Hospital of Scranton Scranton 186 May, 2011 Owned

Tyler Memorial Hospital Tunkhannock 44 May, 2011 Owned

Moses Taylor Hospital Scranton 213 January, 2012 Owned

Tennessee

Tennova Healthcare - Shelbyville Shelbyville 60 July, 2005 Owned

Tennova Healthcare - Cleveland Cleveland 351 October, 2005 Owned

Tennova Healthcare - Clarksville Clarksville 270 July, 2007 Owned

Tennova Healthcare - Harton Tullahoma 135 January, 2014 Owned

Jefferson Memorial Hospital Jefferson City 58 January, 2014 Leased

LaFollette Medical Center LaFollette 66 January, 2014 Leased (2)

Newport Medical Center Newport 130 January, 2014 Owned

North Knoxville Medical Center Powell 116 January, 2014 Owned

Turkey Creek Medical Center Knoxville 111 January, 2014 Owned

Texas

Lake Granbury Medical Center Granbury 73 January, 1997 Leased

Laredo Medical Center Laredo 326 October, 2003 Owned

Navarro Regional Hospital Corsicana 162 July, 2007 Owned

Longview Regional Medical Center Longview 224 July, 2007 Owned

Woodland Heights Medical Center Lufkin 149 July, 2007 Owned

DeTar Healthcare System Victoria 334 July, 2007 Owned

Cedar Park Regional Medical Center Cedar Park 108 December, 2007 Owned

West Virginia

Plateau Medical Center Oak Hill 25 July, 2002 Owned

Greenbrier Valley Medical Center Ronceverte 122 July, 2007 Owned

44

The real property of substantially all of our wholly-owned hospitals is also encumbered by mortgages to support obligations under the ABL facility and outstanding senior secured notes.

The following table lists the hospitals owned by joint venture entities in which we do not have a consolidating ownership interest, along with our percentage ownership interest in the joint venture entity as of December 31, 2020. Information on licensed beds was provided by the majority owner and manager of each joint venture. A subsidiary of HCA is the majority owner of Macon Healthcare LLC.

Joint Venture Facility Name City State Licensed Beds

Macon Healthcare LLC Coliseum Medical Center (38%) Macon GA 310

Macon Healthcare LLC Coliseum Northside Hospital (38%) Macon GA 103

Item 3. Legal Proceedings

From time to time, we receive inquiries or subpoenas from state regulators, state Medicaid Fraud Control units, fiscal intermediaries, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, the Department of Justice and other government entities regarding various Medicare and Medicaid issues. In addition to the matters discussed below, we are currently responding to subpoenas and administrative demands concerning (a) a subpoena related to certain services provided by a formerly-employed physician to Medicaid beneficiaries at one of our New Mexico hospitals, (b) an inquiry regarding certain services performed by one of our affiliated emergency services companies in Pennsylvania, (c) a civil investigative demand related to call coverage services provided by a cardiology group at one of our Tennessee hospitals; (d) a civil investigative demand related to charges for certain emergency department services at our four New Mexico hospitals and (e) a subpoena related to certain critical care procedures performed at one of our Texas hospitals. In addition, we are subject to other claims and lawsuits arising in the ordinary course of our business including lawsuits and claims related to billing practices and the administration of charity care policies at our hospitals. Based on current knowledge, management does not believe that loss contingencies arising from pending legal, regulatory and governmental matters, including the matters described herein, will have a material adverse effect on the consolidated financial position or liquidity of the Company. However, in light of the inherent uncertainties involved in pending legal, regulatory and governmental matters, some of which are beyond our control, and the very large or indeterminate damages sought in some of these matters, an adverse outcome in one or more of these matters could be material to our results of operations or cash flows for any particular reporting period. Settlements of suits involving Medicare and Medicaid issues routinely require both monetary payments as well as corporate integrity agreements. Additionally, qui tam or “whistleblower” actions initiated under the civil False Claims Act may be pending but placed under seal by the court to comply with the False Claims Act’s requirements for filing such suits. In September 2014, the Criminal Division of the United States Department of Justice, or DOJ, announced that all qui tam cases will be shared with their Division to determine if a parallel criminal investigation should be opened. The Criminal Division has also frequently stated an intention to pursue corporations in criminal prosecutions. From time to time, we detect issues of non-compliance with Federal healthcare laws pertaining to claims submission and reimbursement practices and/or financial relationships with physicians. We avail ourselves of various mechanisms to address potential overpayments arising out of these issues, including repayment of claims, rebilling of claims, and participation in voluntary disclosure protocols offered by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and the Office of the Inspector General. Participating in voluntary repayments and voluntary disclosure protocols can have the potential for significant settlement obligations or even enforcement action.

The following legal proceedings are described in detail because, although they may not be required to be disclosed in this Part I, Item 3 under SEC rules, due to the nature of the business of the Company, we believe that the following discussion of these matters may provide useful information to security holders. This discussion does not include claims and lawsuits covered by medical malpractice, general liability or employment practices insurance and risk retention programs, none of which claims or lawsuits would in any event be required to be disclosed in this Part I, Item 3 under SEC rules. Certain of the matters referenced below are also discussed in Note 15 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included under Part II, Item 8 of this Form 10-K.

Shareholder Litigation

Caleb Padilla, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v Community Health Systems, Inc., Wayne T. Smith, Larry Cash, and Thomas J. Aaron. This purported federal securities class action was filed in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee on May 30, 2019. It seeks class certification on behalf of purchasers of our common stock between February 20, 2017 and February 27, 2018 and alleges misleading statements resulted in artificially inflated prices for our common stock. On

45

November 20, 2019, the District Court appointed Arun Bhattacharya and Michael Gaviria as lead plaintiffs in the case. The lead plaintiffs filed a consolidated class complaint on January 21, 2020. The Company filed a motion to dismiss the consolidated class complaint on March 23, 2020. That motion is pending. We believe this matter is without merit and will vigorously defend this case.

PadillaDerivative Litigation. Five purported shareholder derivative cases have been filed in two District Courts relating to the factual allegations in the Padillalitigation; namely, Faisal Hussain v. Wayne T. Smith, et al, filed August 12, 2019 in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware; Roger Trombley v. Wayne T. Smith, et al, filed August 20, 2019 in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee; Susheel Tanjavoor v. Wayne T. Smith, et al., filed August 29, 2019, in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware; Roofers Local No. 149 Pension Fund v. John A. Clerico, et al, filed October 30, 2019, in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware; and Kevin Aronson v. Wayne T. Smith, et al, filed April 29, 2020 in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. All five seek relief derivatively and on behalf of Community Health Systems, Inc. against certain Company officers and directors based on alleged breaches of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, and other acts related to certain Company disclosures in 2017 and 2018 regarding the Company’s adoption of Accounting Standards Update 2014-09, which the Company adopted effective January 1, 2018. The defendants filed a Motion to Stay on October 21, 2020, which is pending.

Other Government Investigations

Florida LIP Program CIDs – On September 14, 2017, our hospital in St. Petersburg, Florida received a CID from the United States Department of Justice for information concerning its historic participation in the Florida Low Income Pool Program. The Low Income Pool Program, or LIP, is a funding pool to support healthcare providers that provide uncompensated care to Florida residents who are uninsured or underinsured. The CID sought documentation related to agreements between the hospital and Pinellas County. On June 13, 2019, an additional ten of our affiliated hospitals in Florida received CIDs related to the same subject matter, along with two CIDs addressed to our affiliated management company and the parent company. We are cooperating fully with this investigation.

Commercial Litigation and Other Lawsuits

Zwick Partners, LP and Aparna Rao, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Quorum Health Corporation, Community Health Systems, Inc., Wayne T. Smith, W. Larry Cash, Thomas D. Miller, and Michael J. Culotta. This purported class action lawsuit previously filed in the United States District Court, Middle District of Tennessee was amended on April 17, 2017 to include Community Health Systems, Inc., Wayne T. Smith and W. Larry Cash as additional defendants. The plaintiffs seek to represent a class of Quorum Health Corporation, or QHC, shareholders and allege that the failure to record a goodwill and long-lived asset impairment charge against QHC at the time of the spin-off of QHC violated federal securities laws. The District Court denied all defendants’ motions to dismiss on April 20, 2018. The plaintiffs moved for class certification. Plaintiffs also amended their complaint on September 14, 2018. We moved to dismiss the additional claims in the plaintiffs’ September 14, 2018 amended complaint and responded to plaintiffs’ class certification motion. On March 29, 2019, the court granted our motion to dismiss the additional claims. The court granted the plaintiffs’ motion for class certification on that same date. On April 12, 2019, we filed a petition for permission to appeal the court’s order granting class certification with the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, which was denied on July 31, 2019. On May 17, 2019, the plaintiffs moved to amend their complaint for a third time to add additional claims, which the District Court denied on August 2, 2019. All parties have now reached a settlement of this case, which was preliminarily approved by the District Court on July 27, 2020. On September 17, 2020, Greenlight Capital requested exclusion from the Class. The defendants have settled with Greenlight Capital, and the District Court granted final approval of the Class settlement on November 30, 2020.

Steadfast Insurance Company, et al v. Community Health Systems, Inc., CHS/Community Health Systems, Inc., CHSPSC, LLC and Pecos Valley of New Mexico, LLC; Community Health Systems, Inc., et al v. Steadfast Insurance Company, et al; Anne Sperling, et al v. Community Insurance Group SPC, Ltd. These cases are filed in the Superior Court for the State of Delaware, the Chancery Court for the State of Delaware, and the First Judicial District Court for the State of New Mexico, respectively, and involve insurance coverage disputes related to a $73 million judgment rendered against Pecos Valley of New Mexico, LLC in Anne Sperling, et al v. Pecos Valley of New Mexico, LLC (“Sperling I”). The first case was brought by Steadfast Insurance Company in Delaware Superior Court seeking a declaration that the Sperling I judgment is not a covered loss as defined by the insurance policies that are the subject of the case. The second case, filed by the Company in Delaware Chancery Court, seeks reformation of the subject policies. The third case (“Sperling II”), filed by the plaintiffs in Sperling I, seeks recovery from Pecos Valley of New Mexico, LLC’s insurers for the judgment awarded the plaintiffs in their separate, previous action against Pecos Valley of New Mexico, LLC. The Steadfast complaint was served on November 30, 2018. On December 13, 2018, Admiral Insurance Company, Endurance Specialty Insurance Ltd, and Illinois Union Insurance Company moved to intervene in the suit as petitioners. The Company has initiated counterclaims against each insurer in that case, including for bad faith against Steadfast. The Company filed the Community Health Systems complaint on January 22, 2020. Sperling II was filed on July 24, 2019. Plaintiffs amended their complaint to add Pecos Valley of New Mexico, LLC as a defendant in that action on May 21, 2020, and Pecos Valley of New Mexico, LLC filed a third party action against certain insurer defendants in the case on July 6, 2020. On November 12, 2020, Pecos Valley and one of its insurers reached a settlement with the plaintiffs in Sperling I, and as a result the Sperling I case was dismissed with prejudice on November 19, 2020. The Steadfast,

46

Community Health Systems, Inc. and Sperling II cases remain pending. Trial in the Steadfast and Community Health Systems, Inc. consolidated cases is set for December 13, 2021. Trial in the Sperling II case is set for January 30, 2022. The Company will vigorously defend and prosecute those cases.

Becky Kirk, Perry Ayoob, and Dawn Karzenoski, as representatives of a class of similarly situated persons, and on behalf of the CHS/Community Health Systems, Inc. Retirement Savings Plan v. Retirement Committee of CHS/Community Health Systems, Inc., John and Jane Does 1-20, Principal Life Insurance Company, Principal Management Corporation, and Principal Global Investors, LLC. This purported class action was filed in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee on August 8, 2019. The plaintiffs seek to represent a class of current and former participants in the CHS/Community Health Systems, Inc. Retirement Savings Plan and allege that the defendants breached their fiduciary duties by offering certain investments in the Plan that were more expensive and/or did not perform as well as other marketplace alternatives. We have reached a tentative, immaterial settlement with the plaintiffs which was preliminarily approved by the District Court on December 8, 2020. The Final Fairness Hearing for the settlement is set for April 12, 2021.

Thomas Mason, MD, Steven Folstad, MD and Mid-Atlantic Emergency Medical Associates, PA v Health Management Associates, LLC f/k/a Health Management Associates, Inc., Mooresville Hospital Management Associates d/b/a Lake Norman Regional Medical Center and Statesville HMA, LLC d/b/a Davis Regional Medical Center, Envision Healthcare Corporation f/k/a Emergency Medical Services Corporation, Emcare Holdings, Inc., Emergency Medical Services, LP. This alleged wrongful retaliation case is filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina. The plaintiffs allege their agreements with the defendants were terminated in retaliation for plaintiffs’ alleged refusal to admit patients unnecessarily to the defendant hospitals or otherwise perform unnecessary diagnostic testing. The allegations of the complaint relate to time periods prior to the hospitals’ affiliation with the Company. The plaintiffs filed a Third Amended Complaint on April 26, 2019. The defendants filed motions to dismiss, which were granted in part and denied in part on September 5, 2019. Trial of this matter is set for January 3, 2022. We believe these claims are without merit and will vigorously defend the case.

Tower Health, f/k/a Reading Health System, et al v CHS/Community Health Systems, Inc., et al. This breach of contract action is pending in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The plaintiffs allege breaches of an asset purchase agreement in connection with the sale of Pottstown Memorial Medical Center. The alleged breaches regard plaintiffs’ contention that the defendants failed to disclose certain conditions related to the physical plant of the hospital, along with various other alleged breaches of the asset purchase agreement. The plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on July 22, 2019. Both parties have filed motions for summary judgment, which are pending. Trial for this matter is set for May 3, 2021. We believe these claims are without merit and will vigorously defend the case.

Qui Tam Matters Where the Government Declined Intervention

U.S. and the State of Mississippi ex rel. W. Blake Vanderlan, M.D. v. Jackson HMA, LLC d/b/a Central Mississippi Medical Center and Merit Health Central. By order filed on August 31, 2017, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi ordered the unsealing of this qui tam suit. The unsealing revealed that on August 31, 2017 the United States had declined to intervene in the allegations that certain alleged EMTALA violations at the hospital resulted in a violation of the False Claims Act. Both the hospital and the United States have filed motions to dismiss the litigation, and on January 5, 2021, the District Court granted the United States’ Motion to Dismiss and ordered all of the plaintiff’s claims dismissed with prejudice save one claim against the hospital for retaliation. The hospital will have an opportunity to file a new motion to dismiss with respect to the remaining claim. We believe the retaliation claim is without merit and will vigorously defend this case.

U.S. ex rel. Maur v. Elie Hage-Korban, M.D., Delta Clinics, PLC d/b/a The Heart and Vascular Center of West Tennessee. Community Health Systems, Inc., Knoxville HMA Holdings, LLC d/b/a/ Tennova Healthcare, Jackson Hospital Corporation d/b/a/ Regional Jackson, and Dyersburg Hospital Company, LLC, d/b/ Dyersburg Regional Medical Center. By order filed on April 30, 2019, the United States District Court for the Western District of Tennessee ordered the unsealing of this qui tam lawsuit. The order revealed that the United States had declined to intervene in the action. The complaint alleges the defendants violated the False Claims Act by submitting claims for payment related to certain cardiac procedures performed by defendant Dr. Elie Hage-Korban at two hospitals formerly affiliated with the Company. Dr. Hage-Korban was not employed by either hospital or their affiliates. The plaintiff amended his complaint on July 24, 2019. We filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on September 30, 2019, which the District Court granted on February 25, 2020. On March 18, 2020, the plaintiff filed a Notice of Appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit of all claims except those related to defendant Community Health Systems, Inc. On December 1, 2020, the Sixth Circuit affirmed the District Court’s dismissal of the complaint.

Management of Significant Legal Proceedings

In accordance with our governance documents, including our Governance Guidelines and the charter of the Audit and Compliance Committee, our management of significant legal proceedings is overseen by the independent members of the Board of Directors and,

47

in particular, the Audit and Compliance Committee. The Audit and Compliance Committee is charged with oversight of compliance, regulatory and litigation matters, and enterprise risk management. Management has been instructed to refer all significant legal proceedings and allegations of financial statement fraud, error, or misstatement to the Audit and Compliance Committee for its oversight and evaluation. Consistent with New York Stock Exchange and Sarbanes-Oxley independence requirements, the Audit and Compliance Committee is comprised entirely of individuals who are independent of our management, and all four members of the Audit and Compliance Committee are “audit committee financial experts” as defined in the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

In addition, the Audit and Compliance Committee and the other independent members of the Board of Directors oversee the functions of the voluntary compliance program, including its auditing and monitoring functions and confidential disclosure program. In recent years, the voluntary compliance program has addressed the potential for a variety of billing errors that might be the subject of audits and payment denials by the CMS Recovery Audit Contractors’ permanent project, including MS-DRG coding, outpatient hospital and physician coding and billing, and medical necessity for services (including a focus on hospital stays of very short duration). Efforts by management, through the voluntary compliance program, to identify and limit risk from these government audits have included significant policy and guidance revisions, training and education, and auditing. The Board of Directors now oversees and reviews periodic reports of our compliance with the Corporate Integrity Agreement, or CIA, that we entered into with the United States Department of Health and Human Services Office of the Inspector General during 2014 and which was amended and extended in September 2018.

Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures

Not applicable.

48

PART II

Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

We completed an initial public offering of our common stock on June 14, 2000. Our common stock began trading on June 9, 2000 and is listed on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol CYH. As of February 15, 2021, there were approximately 189 holders of record of our common stock.

Stock Performance Graph

The following graph sets forth the cumulative return of our common stock during the five year period ended December 31, 2020, as compared to the cumulative return of the Standard & Poor’s 500 Stock Index (S&P 500) and the cumulative return of the Dow Jones Healthcare Index. The graph assumes an initial investment of $100 in our common stock and in each of the foregoing indices and the reinvestment of dividends where applicable. The comparisons in the graph below are based on historical data and are not indicative of, or intended to forecast, future performance of our common stock. The market price of our common stock used to calculate the cumulative return has been adjusted in prior periods for the impact of the April 2016 QHC spin-off and related distribution of QHC common stock to our stockholders.

COMPARISON OF 5 YEAR CUMULATIVE TOTAL RETURN

Among Community Health Systems, Inc., the S&P 500 Index, and the Dow Jones US Health Care Index

49

We are a holding company which operates through our subsidiaries. The ABL Facility and the indentures governing the senior and senior secured notes contain various covenants under which the assets of our subsidiaries are subject to certain restrictions relating to, among other matters, dividends and distributions, as referenced in the paragraph below.

The ABL Facility and the indentures governing each series of our outstanding notes restrict our subsidiaries from, among other matters, paying dividends and making distributions to us, which thereby limits our ability to pay dividends and/or repurchase stock. As of December 31, 2020, under the most restrictive test in these agreements (and subject to certain exceptions), we have approximately $200 million of capacity to pay permitted dividends and/or repurchase shares of stock or make other restricted payments.

The following table contains information about our purchases of common stock during the three months ended December 31, 2020.

Item 6. Selected Financial Data

Reserved.

50

Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

You should read this discussion together with our Consolidated Financial Statements and the accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included elsewhere in this Form 10-K.

Executive Overview

We are one of the largest publicly traded hospital companies in the United States and a leading operator of general acute care hospitals and outpatient facilities in communities across the country. We provide healthcare services through the hospitals that we own and operate and affiliated businesses in generally larger non-urban and selected urban markets throughout the United States. We generate revenues by providing a broad range of general and specialized hospital healthcare services and outpatient services to patients in the communities in which we are located. As of December 31, 2020, we owned or leased 89 hospitals, comprised of 87 general acute care hospitals and two stand-alone rehabilitation or psychiatric hospitals. For the hospitals that we own and operate, we are paid for our services by governmental agencies, private insurers and directly by the patients we serve.

Since 2017, we have implemented a portfolio rationalization and deleveraging strategy by divesting hospitals and non-hospital businesses that are attractive to strategic and other buyers. This portfolio rationalization and deleveraging strategy was completed at the end of 2020, inclusive of definitive agreements with respect to sales of five hospitals entered into in 2020 which have closed or are expected to close in 2021, as noted below. We continue to receive interest from potential acquirers for certain of our hospitals, and may, from time to time, consider selling additional hospitals if we consider any such disposition to be in our best interests.

COVID-19 Pandemic

A novel strain of coronavirus causing the disease known as COVID-19 was first identified in Wuhan, China in December 2019, and has spread throughout the world, including across the United States. In January 2020, the Secretary ofHHS declared a national public health emergency due to the novel coronavirus. In March 2020, the World Health Organization declared the COVID-19 outbreak a pandemic. In an attempt to contain the spread and impact of COVID-19, authorities throughout the United States and the world have implemented measures such as travel bans and restrictions, quarantines, stay-at-home and shelter-in-place orders, the promotion of social distancing, and limitations on business activity. This pandemic has resulted in a significant economic downturn in the United States and globally, and has also led to significant disruptions and volatility in capital and financial markets. Moreover, while vaccines have been developed and have begun to be distributed in the United States, COVID-19 cases have significantly increased in the United States in recent months compared to earlier levels.

As a provider of healthcare services, we are significantly affected by the public health and economic effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. The safety of our patients, physicians, nurses, and employees in the communities in which we serve remains our primary focus. We have been working with federal, state and local health authorities to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic cases in the communities we serve and have been taking or supporting measures to try to limit the spread of the virus, protect our employees and mitigate the burden on the healthcare system, including, at times, rescheduling or cancelling elective procedures at our hospitals and other healthcare facilities. In addition, some states have been requiring hospitals to maintain a reserve of personal protective equipment and mandating COVID-19 screening for new patients and certain hospital staff.

Beginning in March 2020, we experienced a substantial reduction in the number of elective surgeries, physician office visits and emergency room volumes at our hospitals and other healthcare facilities due to restrictions on elective procedures, quarantines, stay-at-home and shelter-in-place orders, the promotion of social distancing, as well as general concerns related to the risk of contracting COVID-19 from interacting with the healthcare system. Some restrictive measures remain in place and, as of the time of this filing, some states and local governments are continuing to impose restrictions due to elevated rates of COVID-19 cases, including in select markets that we serve, which may continue to adversely impact our operating results. In this regard, while volumes have not returned to pre-pandemic levels, they have improved from their lows in the immediate aftermath of the pandemic in March and April 2020.

Our hospitals, medical clinics, medical personnel, and employees have been actively caring for COVID-19 patients. Although we have been implementing considerable safety measures, treatment of COVID-19 patients has associated risks, which may include the manner in which medical personnel perceive and respond to such risks. While our hospitals have not generally experienced major capacity constraints to date arising from the treatment of COVID-19 patients, there are hospitals in the United States that are located in centers of the COVID-19 outbreak and have been overwhelmed in caring for COVID-19 patients, which has prevented such hospitals from treating all patients who seek care. One or more of our hospitals could be subject to such conditions in the future if a major COVID-19 outbreak occurs in a geographic region where any of our hospitals are located. In addition, some states have been limiting hospital volume by requiring a minimum percentage of vacant beds in case of a surge in COVID-19 patients.

We have incurred, and may continue to incur, certain increased expenses arising from the COVID-19 pandemic, including additional labor, supply chain, capital and other expenditures.

51

Broad economic factors resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic, including high unemployment and underemployment levels and reduced consumer spending and confidence, have also adversely affected, and may continue to adversely affect, our service mix, revenue mix, payor mix and/or patient volumes, as well as our ability to collect outstanding receivables. Business closures and layoffs in the geographic areas in which we operate have led to increases in the uninsured and underinsured populations, which may continue to adversely affect demand for our services, as well as the ability of patients and other payors to pay for services rendered. We have observed deterioration in the collectability of patient accounts receivable from uninsured patients compared to pre-pandemic levels which, if sustained, may continue to adversely affect our financial results and require an increased level of working capital.

Developments related to COVID-19 materially affected our financial performance during 2020. Additionally, while we are not able to fully quantify the impact that the COVID-19 pandemic will have on our future financial results, we expect developments related to COVID-19 to continue to materially affect our financial performance. Moreover, the COVID-19 pandemic may otherwise have material adverse effects on our results of operations, financial position, and/or our cash flows,particularly if negative economic and/or public health conditions in the United States continue to deteriorate or persist for a significant period of time. The ultimate impact of the pandemic on our financial results will depend on, among other factors, the duration and severity of the pandemic as well as negative economic conditions arising from the pandemic, the volume of canceled or rescheduled procedures at our facilities, the volume of COVID-19 patients cared for across our health systems, the timing and availability of effective medical treatments and vaccines, the timing and effectiveness of the ongoing rollout of currently available vaccines, the spread of potentially more contagious and/or virulent forms of the virus and the impact of government actions and administrative regulations on the hospital industry and broader economy, including through existing and any future stimulus efforts. Furthermore, the pandemic has resulted in, and may continue to result in, significant disruption of global financial markets, which could reduce our ability to access capital and negatively affect our liquidity in the future. As discussed below under “Legislative Overview”, we have received, and may continue to receive, payments and advances under the CARES Act and the PPPHCE Act, which have been beneficial in partially mitigating impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on our results of operations and financial position to date. Additionally, the federal government may consider additional stimulus and relief efforts such as the recently passed CAA, but we are unable to predict whether any additional stimulus measures will be enacted or their impact, if any. We are unable to assess the extent to which anticipated negative impacts on us arising from the COVID-19 pandemic will ultimately be offset by amounts received, and benefits which we may in the future receive, under the CARES Act, the PPPHCE Act, the CAA, or any future stimulus measures.

Completed Divestiture and Acquisition Activity

During 2020, we completed the divestiture of 13 hospitals, including three which closed effective January 1, 2020 (for these hospitals, we received the net proceeds at a preliminary closing on December 31, 2019). These 13 hospitals represented annual net operating revenues in 2019 of approximately $1.2 billion and, including the net proceeds for the three hospitals that preliminarily closed on December 31, 2019, we received total net proceeds of approximately $845 million in connection with the disposition of these hospitals. In addition, we completed the divestiture of three additional hospitals on January 1, 2021, for which we received net proceeds of approximately $23 million at preliminary closings on December 31, 2020 and completed the divestiture of one additional hospital on February 1, 2020 for which we received immaterial net proceeds. We have also entered into a definitive agreement to sell another hospital which has not yet been completed. The proceeds of this divestiture are not expected to be material.

During 2019, we completed the divestiture of 12 hospitals, including two which closed effective January 1, 2019 (for these hospitals, we received the net proceeds at a preliminary closing on December 31, 2018), but not including the three hospitals noted above which closed on January 1, 2020. These 12 hospitals represented annual net operating revenues in 2018 of approximately $1.1 billion and, excluding the net proceeds for the two hospitals that preliminarily closed on December 31, 2018 and the three hospitals that preliminarily closed on December 31, 2019, we received total net proceeds of approximately $335 million in connection with the disposition of these hospitals.

During 2018, we completed the divestiture of 11 hospitals. These 11 hospitals represented annual net operating revenues in 2017 of approximately $950 million and, including the net proceeds for the two additional hospitals that preliminarily closed on December 31, 2018 noted above, we received total net proceeds of approximately $405 million in connection with the disposition of these hospitals.

52

The following table provides a summary of hospitals that we divested during the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018:

Hospital Buyer City, State Licensed Beds Effective Date

Berwick Hospital Center Fayette Holdings, Inc. Berwick, PA 90 December 1, 2020

Hill Regional Hospital AHRK Holdings, LLC Hillsboro, TX 25 August 1, 2020

Shands Live Oak Regional Medical Center HCA Live Oak, FL 25 May 1, 2020

Shands Starke Regional Medical Center HCA Starke, FL 49 May 1, 2020

AllianceHealth Deaconess INTEGRIS Health Oklahoma City, OK 238 October 1, 2018

Effective September 30, 2020 , one or more affiliates of the Company finalized an agreement to terminate the lease and cease operations of Shands Lake Shore Regional Medical Center (99 licensed beds) in Lake City, Florida, including transferring leased assets back to the landlord, the Lake Shore Hospital Authority. The Company recorded an impairment charge of approximately $3 million during the year ended December 31, 2020 in conjunction with exiting the lease to operate this hospital.

On November 30, 2020, we completed the sale of 50% ownership interest in Merit Health Biloxi (153 licensed beds) and its associated healthcare businesses in Biloxi, Mississippi to Memorial Properties, Inc., an affiliate of Memorial Hospital of Gulfport pursuant to the terms of a definitive agreement which was entered into October 12, 2020. Merit Health Biloxi and its associated healthcare businesses will remain consolidated entities of the Company.

53

In addition to the divestiture of the hospitals noted above which were completed during 2020, 2019 and 2018, we have divested four hospitals during 2021 as summarized below:

In addition to the four hospital divestitures which have been completed during 2021 as noted above, we have entered into a definitive agreement to sell one additional hospital which has not been completed as summarized below:

On December 8, 2020, we entered into a definitive agreement for the sale of substantially all of the assets of AllianceHealth Midwest (255 licensed beds) in Midwest City, Oklahoma, to affiliates of SSM Health Care of Oklahoma, Inc.

There can be no assurance that this potential divestiture subject to definitive agreement will be completed, or if it is completed, the ultimate timing of the completion of this divestiture. In addition, while our portfolio rationalization and delivering strategy was completed at the end of 2020 as noted above, we continue to receive interest from potential acquirers for certain of our hospitals, and may, from time to time, consider selling additional hospitals if we consider any such disposition to be in our best interests.

We expect to use proceeds from divestitures for general corporate purposes and capital expenditures.

During the year ended December 31, 2020, we paid approximately $1 million to acquire the operating assets and related businesses of certain physician practices, clinics and other ancillary businesses that operate within the communities served by our hospitals. We allocated the purchase price to property and equipment, working capital and goodwill.

On September 19, 2019, we completed the sale and leaseback of four medical office buildings for net proceeds of $56 million to Carter Validus Mission Critical REIT II, Inc. The buildings, with a combined total of 285,337 square feet, are located in three states and support a wide array of diagnostic, medical and surgical services in an outpatient setting for the respective nearby hospitals. Based on our assessment of the control transfer principle in these leased buildings, the transaction does not qualify for sale treatment and the related leases have been recorded as financing obligations in long-term debt in the accompanying consolidated balance sheet at December 31, 2019. In addition, on December 18, 2019, we completed the sale and leaseback of one medical office building for net proceeds of approximately $4 million to an affiliate of Catalyst Healthcare Real Estate. The 30,000 square foot building is located in Arkansas and supports a wide array of diagnostic, medical and surgical services in an outpatient setting for the nearby hospital. Based on our assessment of the control transfer principle in this leased building, the transaction does not qualify for sale treatment and the related lease has been recorded as a financing obligation in long-term debt in the accompanying consolidated balance sheet at December 31, 2019.

Overview of Operating Results

Our net operating revenues for the year ended December 31, 2020 decreased $1.4 billion to approximately $11.8 billion compared to approximately $13.2 billion for the year ended December 31, 2019, primarily as a result of developments related to COVID-19 as highlighted above, and hospitals divested during 2019 and 2020. On a same-store basis, net operating revenues for the year ended December 31, 2020 decreased $396 million, also primarily as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic.

We had net income of $607 million during the year ended December 31, 2020, compared to a net loss of $590 million for the year ended December 31, 2019. Net income for the year ended December 31, 2020 included the following:

54

Net loss for the year ended December 31, 2019 included the following:

• an after-tax charge of $42 million for loss from early extinguishment of debt,

Consolidated inpatient admissions for the year ended December 31, 2020, decreased 15.7%, compared to the year ended December 31, 2019, and consolidated adjusted admissions for the year ended December 31, 2020, decreased 19.4%, compared to the year ended December 31, 2019. Same-store inpatient admissions for the year ended December 31, 2020, decreased 8.0%, compared to the year ended December 31, 2019, and same-store adjusted admissions for the year ended December 31, 2020, decreased 12.5%, compared to the year ended December 31, 2019.

Self-pay revenues represented approximately (0.2)% and 1.0% of net operating revenues for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019, respectively. The amount of foregone revenue related to providing charity care services as a percentage of net operating revenues was approximately 8.9% and 4.1% for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019, respectively. Direct and indirect costs incurred in providing charity care services as a percentage of net operating revenues was approximately 1.0% and 0.5% for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019, respectively.

Legislative Overview

The U.S. Congress and certain state legislatures have introduced and passed a large number of proposals and legislation designed to make major changes in the healthcare system, including changes that have impacted access to health insurance. The most prominent of these recent efforts, the Affordable Care Act, affected how healthcare services are covered, delivered and reimbursed. The Affordable Care Act increased health insurance coverage through a combination of public program expansion and private sector health insurance reforms and mandated that substantially all U.S. citizens maintain health insurance. The Affordable Care Act also made a number of changes to Medicare and Medicaid, such as a productivity offset to the Medicare market basket update and reductions to the Medicare and Medicaid DSH payments. However, reductions to DSH payments have been delayed by the CAA through 2023.

55

The future of the Affordable Care Act is uncertain. Since 2016, significant changes have been made to the Affordable Care Act, its implementation, and its interpretation, and certain members of Congress have stated their intent to repeal or make additional significant changes to the law. For example, final rules issued in 2018 expand availability of association health plans and allow the sale of short-term, limited-duration health plans, neither of which are required to cover all of the essential health benefits mandated by the Affordable Care Act. Additionally, effective January 1, 2019, the financial penalty associated with the individual mandate was eliminated as part of the 2017 tax reform legislation. In December 2018, as a result of this change, a federal judge in Texas found the individual mandate unconstitutional and determined the rest of the Affordable Care Act was therefore invalid. In December 2019, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld this decision with respect to the individual mandate, but remanded for further consideration of how this affects the rest of the law. On November 10, 2020, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments regarding this case, and the law remains in place pending the appeals process. The elimination of the individual mandate penalty and other changes may impact the number of individuals that elect to obtain public or private health insurance or the scope of such coverage, if purchased.

Of critical importance to us will be the potential impact of any changes specific to the Medicaid program, including the funding and expansion provisions of the Affordable Care Act or any subsequent legislation or agency initiatives. Historically, the states with the greatest reductions in the number of uninsured adult residents have expanded Medicaid. A number of states have opted out of the Medicaid coverage expansion provisions, but could ultimately decide to expand their programs at a later date. Of the 16 states in which we operated hospitals as of December 31, 2020, nine states have taken action to expand their Medicaid programs. At this time, the other seven states have not, including Florida, Alabama, Tennessee and Texas, where we operated a significant number of hospitals as of December 31, 2020. Some states use, or have applied to use, waivers granted by CMS to implement expansion, impose different eligibility or enrollment restrictions, or otherwise implement programs that vary from federal standards. CMS administrators have indicated that they are increasing state flexibility in the administration of Medicaid programs. For example, CMS has granted a limited number of state applications for waivers that allow a state to condition Medicaid enrollment on work or other community engagement. Several states have similar applications pending.

We believe that the Affordable Care Act has had a positive impact on net operating revenues and income as the result of the expansion of private sector and Medicaid coverage that has occurred. However, other provisions of the Affordable Care Act, such as requirements related to employee health insurance coverage and changes to Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement, have increased our operating costs or adversely impacted the reimbursement we receive. Legislative and executive branch efforts related to healthcare reform could result in increased prices for consumers purchasing health insurance coverage or the sale of insurance plans that contain gaps in coverage, which could destabilize insurance markets and impact the rates of uninsured or underinsured adults. Some current initiatives, requirements and proposals, including those aimed at price transparency and out-of-network charges, may impact prices and the relationships between hospitals and insurers. In addition, members of Congress have proposed measures that would expand government-sponsored coverage, including single-payor models.