MOS · Read the filing

Item 1A. Risk Factors.

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

Operational Risks

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

The Covid-19 pandemic continues to impact the global economy and could significantly disrupt our operations, key suppliers or third-party logistics providers, customers and ultimate end-users due to the spread of the virus, shelter in place orders, quarantines or other measures implemented to prevent the spread of the virus. In some instances, the pandemic has impacted our business. As part of government mandates, our Patrocinio operations in Brazil and Miski Mayo operations in Peru were temporarily suspended at the onset of the pandemic, but have since resumed operations. Businesses have been impacted by short-term labor shortages due to illness, transportation issues such as trucking delays and port congestion which are slowing delivery of inputs to facilities and products to end customers.At this time, the Company has only experienced limited adverse financial and operational Covid-19 related conditions.

An increase in severity to our employees, customers, vendors or supply chain or governmental mandates, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and/or results of operations. The extent to which the Covid-19 pandemic impacts our operations and financial results will depend on future developments that are highly uncertain, including new information concerning the severity of the virus and variants and the cost, time and actions taken to contain its impact.

Table of Content

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

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

The most important of these factors are:

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

•quantities of crop nutrients imported and exported;

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

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

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

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

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

Table of Content

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

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

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

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

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

Examples of the types of events that could result in a disruption at one of these facilities include: adverse weather; strikes or other work stoppages; civil unrest; deliberate, malicious acts, including acts of terrorism and armed conflict; political or economic instability; cyberattacks; changes in permitting, financial assurance or certain environmental, health and safety laws or other changes in the regulatory environment in which we operate; legal and regulatory proceedings; our relationships with the other member of Canpotex and the other joint ventures in which we participate and their or our exit from participation in such joint ventures; other changes in our commercial arrangements with unrelated third parties; brine inflows at our Esterhazy, Saskatchewan mine or our other shaft mines; mechanical failure and accidents or other failures occurring in the course of operating activities, including at our gypstacks, clay settling areas and tailing dams; accidents occurring in the course of operating activities; lack of truck, rail, barge or ship transportation; and other factors.

Reduced oil refinery operating rates in the United States could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition or operating results.

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

Important raw materials and energy used in our businesses in the past have been and may in the future be the subject of volatile pricing. Changes in the price of our raw materials have had, and could again have, a material adverse impact on our businesses.

Natural gas, ammonia and sulfur are key raw materials used in the manufacture of phosphate crop nutrient products. Natural gas is used as both a chemical feedstock and a fuel to produce anhydrous ammonia, which is a raw material used in the production of concentrated phosphate products. Natural gas is also a significant energy source used in the potash solution mining process. From time to time, our profitability has been and may in the future be adversely impacted by the price and availability of these raw materials and other energy costs. Because most of our products are commodities, there can be no assurance that we will be able to pass through increased costs to our customers. A significant increase in the price of natural gas, ammonia, sulfur or energy costs that is not recovered through an increase in the price of our related crop nutrients products could have a material adverse impact on our business. In addition, under our long-term CF Ammonia Supply Agreement, we have agreed to purchase approximately 545,000 to 725,000 tonnes of ammonia per year during a term that may extend until December 31, 2032, and at a price to be determined by a formula based on the prevailing price of U.S. natural gas. If the price of natural gas rises or the market price for ammonia falls outside of the range anticipated at execution of this agreement, we may not realize a cost benefit from the natural gas-based pricing over the term of the agreement, or the

Table of Content

cost of our ammonia under the agreement could become a competitive disadvantage. At times, we have paid considerably more for ammonia under the agreement than what we would have paid had we purchased it in the spot market.

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

For 2021, we derived approximately 68% of our net sales from customers located outside of the United States. As a result, we are subject to numerous risks and uncertainties relating to international sales and operations, including:

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

•unexpected changes in regulatory environments;

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

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

•unpredictable tax audit practices of various governments;

•nationalization of properties by foreign governments;

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

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

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

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

•distribute cash generated by our operations outside the United States to our stockholders; or

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

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

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

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

Table of Content

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

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

Additionally, water treatment costs due to high water balances, tend to increase significantly following excess rainfall from hurricanes or other adverse weather. Some of our Florida and Louisiana facilities have had, and others could have, high water levels that have required, or may require, treatment. High water balances in the past at phosphate facilities in Florida also led the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (“FDEP”) to adopt rules requiring phosphate production facilities to meet more stringent process water management objectives for phosphogypsum stack systems. In addition to the FDEP, the USEPA and the LDEQ also have similar requirements for water management objectives as outlined in our RCRC CD’s.

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

Adverse weather may also cause a loss of production and may disrupt our supply chain or adversely affect delivery of our products to our customers. For example, oil refineries that supply sulfur to us may suspend operations as a result of a hurricane, and incoming shipments of ammonia can be delayed, disrupting production at our Florida or Louisiana facilities and delivery of our products. In the second half of 2021, we experienced production impacts related to Hurricane Ida.

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

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

In 2013, we entered into an agreement to form MWSPC, a joint venture in which we hold a 25% interest, to develop a mine and chemical complexes for an estimated $8.0 billion that produces phosphate fertilizers and other downstream products in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The success of MWSPC will depend on, among other matters, the completion of development and full commencement of operations of production facilities in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the future success of current plans for completion of the development and for the operation of MWSPC, including the availability and affordability of necessary resources and materials and access to appropriate infrastructure, and any future changes in those plans, as well as the general economic and political stability of the region.

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

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

Our financial performance is dependent on a reliable and productive work force. A significant portion of our workforce, and that of the joint ventures in which we participate, is covered by collective bargaining agreements with unions. Unsuccessful contract negotiations or adverse labor relations could result in strikes or slowdowns. Any disruption may decrease our

Table of Content

production and sales or impose additional costs to resolve disputes. The risk of adverse labor relations may increase as our profitability increases because labor unions’ expectations and demands generally rise at those times.

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

Over the past century, several potash mines experiencing water inflow problems have flooded. Since December 1985, we have had inflows of salt saturated brine water into our Esterhazy, Saskatchewan K1 and K2 potash mines. Due to an acceleration of brine inflows, on June 4, 2021 the Company announced a closure of our K1 and K2 potash mine shafts eliminating the risk of brine inflows. Our potash mines at Colonsay, Saskatchewan, Carlsbad, New Mexico and our Esterhazy, Saskatchewan K3 mine (though not contiguous with the K1/K2 underground inflow region) are also subject to risks from the inflow of water as a result of our underground shaft mining operations. Though minor inflows are regularly managed, it is possible that significant water inflows could occur which may present risks to our employees and our operations, and which may require us to incur brine management costs, change our mining processes, or abandon our operating mines.

See the “Key Factors that can Affect Results of Operations and Financial Condition” and “Potash Net Sales and Gross Margin” sections of our Management’s Analysis in this Form 10-K report and the Esterhazy closure costs in Note 25 of this report, which sections are incorporated herein by reference, for a discussion of costs, risks and other information relating to the brine inflows.

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

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

•Some of our facilities are subject to potential damage from seismic activity.

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

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

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

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

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

Table of Content

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

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

Regulatory Risks

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

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

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

Our operations, including our mines, are dependent on having the required permits and approvals from governmental authorities. Denial or delay by a government agency in issuing, modifying or renewing any of our permits and approvals or imposition of restrictive or cost prohibitive conditions on us with respect to these permits and approvals may impair our business and operations and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

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

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

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

•Allegations that we have violated environmental, health and safety laws and regulations or that we are responsible for nuisance or other conditions on nearby properties. We are currently involved in proceedings alleging that, or to review whether, we have violated environmental laws in the United States and Brazil.

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

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

The legal and regulatory proceedings to which we are currently or may in the future be subject may, depending on the circumstances, result in monetary damage awards, fines, penalties, other liabilities, injunctions or other court or

Table of Content

administrative rulings that interrupt, impede or otherwise materially affect our business operations or criminal sanctions.

We have included additional information with respect to pending legal and regulatory proceedings in Note 22 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements and in this Form 10-K Report in Part I, Item 3, “Legal Proceedings”.

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

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

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

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

In addition, to the extent restrictions imposed in countries where our competitors operate, such as China, India, former Soviet Union countries or Morocco, are less stringent than in the countries where we operate, our competitors could gain cost or other competitive advantages over us. These effects could be material.

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

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

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

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

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

Various governmental initiatives to limit greenhouse gas emissions are under way or under consideration around the world. These initiatives could restrict our operating activities, require us to make changes in our operating activities that would increase our operating costs, reduce our efficiency or limit our output, require us to make capital improvements to our

Table of Content

facilities, increase our energy, raw material and transportation costs or limit their availability, or otherwise adversely affect our results of operations, liquidity or capital resources, and these effects could be material to us.

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

In May 2017, the United States President announced that the United States would withdraw from the Paris Agreement. On January 20, 2021 the United States rejoined the Paris Agreement, which was effective February 19, 2021. Previously, the U.S. had submitted an NDC aiming to achieve, by 2025, an economy-wide target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 26-28% below its 2005 level. The NDC also aims to use best efforts to reduce emissions by 28%. The U.S. target covers all greenhouse gases that were a part of the 2014 Inventory ofGreenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks. While the extent of the U.S.’s involvement in the Paris Agreement and the status of this NDC is unclear, various legislative or regulatory initiatives relating to greenhouse gases have been adopted or considered by the U.S. Congress, the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) or various states and those initiatives already adopted may be used to implement a U.S. NDC. Additionally, more stringent laws and regulations may be enacted to accomplish the goals set out in the NDC.

Brazil ratified the Paris Agreement on September 21, 2016, committing to an NDC that includes an economy-wide target of 1.3 GtCO2e by 2025 and 1.2 GtCO2e by 2030. In 2020, Brazil submitted a new NDC, which reaffirms the country’s commitment to reducing total net greenhouse gas emissions by 37% in 2025 and by 43% in 2030. The NDC further commits to achieving climate neutrality in 2060. Complete details surrounding Brazil’s plan for achieving the greenhouse gas emissions reductions and climate neutrality are uncertain. The government of Brazil may intervene with new or different policy instruments to meet the goals set out in the 2020 NDC.

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

It is possible that future legislation or regulation addressing climate change, including in response to the Paris Agreement or any new international agreements, could adversely affect our operating activities, energy, raw material and transportation costs, results of operations, liquidity or capital resources, and these effects could be material or adversely impact our competitive advantage. In addition, to the extent climate change restrictions imposed in countries where our competitors operate, such as India, former Soviet Union countries or Morocco, are less stringent than in the United States, Canada or Brazil our competitors could gain cost or other competitive advantages over us.

Future climate change could adversely affect us.

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

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

Mining and processing of potash and phosphate generate residual materials that must be managed both during the operation of the facility and upon facility closure. Potash tailings, consisting primarily of salt and clay, are stored in surface disposal sites. Phosphate residuals from mining are deposited in large tailing dams in Brazil and in clay settling areas and

Table of Content

phosphogypsum stacks in the United States. They are regularly monitored to evaluate structural stability and for leaks. The failure of or a breach at any of ourtailings dams and other impoundments at any of our operations could cause severe property and environmental damage and loss of life, could result in the shut down or idling of our facilities and could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.

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

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

Competitive Risks

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

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

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

Our businesses are affected by fluctuations in market prices for our products, the purchase price of natural gas, ammonia and sulfur consumed in operations, freight and shipping costs, foreign currency exchange rates and interest rates. We periodically enter into derivatives and forward purchase contracts to mitigate some of these risks. However, our strategy may not be successful in minimizing our exposure to these fluctuations. See “Market Risk” in our Management’s Analysis and Note 14 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements that is incorporated by reference in this report in Part II, Item 8.

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

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

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

Table of Content

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

We believe our continued success depends on the collective abilities and efforts of our employees. Like many businesses, a significant number of our employees, including some of our most highly skilled employees with specialized expertise in general corporate matters, potash and phosphates operations, will be approaching retirement age throughout the next decade and beyond. In addition, we compete for a talented workforce with other businesses, particularly within the mining and chemicals industries, in general, and the crop nutrients industry, in particular. Our expansion plans are highly dependent on our ability to attract, retain and train highly qualified and motivated employees who are essential to the success of our ongoing operations as well as to our expansion plans. If we were to be unsuccessful in attracting, retaining and training the employees we require, our ongoing operations and expansion plans could be materially and adversely affected.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Table of Content

producers of crop nutrients enjoy competitive advantages or are willing to accept lower profit levels, the price of our products, our sales volumes and our profits may be adversely affected.

Industry Risks

Future product or technological innovation could affect our business.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Financial Risks

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

Table of Content

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

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

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

Under accounting principles generally accepted in the U.S. (“GAAP”), we review goodwill for impairment on an annual basis or more frequently if events or circumstances indicate that their carrying value may not be recoverable. Other long-lived assets, including property, plant and equipment, are reviewed if events or circumstances indicate that their carrying value may not be recoverable. The process of impairment testing involves a number of judgments and estimates made by management, including the fair values of assets and liabilities, future cash flows, our interpretation of current economic indicators and market conditions, overall economic conditions and our strategic operational plans with regard to our business units. If the judgments and estimates used in our analysis are not realized or change due to external factors, then actual results may not be consistent with these judgments and estimates, and our goodwill and intangible assets may become impaired in future periods. If our goodwill or long-lived assets are determined to be impaired in the future, we may be required to record non-cash charges to earnings during the period in which the impairment is determined, which could be significant and have an adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. We have, in the past, and may in the future, be required to write down the value of our goodwill or other long-lived assets, and such future write downs could be material. See Note 9, Goodwill and Note 25, Mine Closure Costs, in the accompanying consolidated financial statements for further information related to charges incurred in 2019.

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

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

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

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

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

We extend trade credit to our customers in the United States and throughout the world, in some cases for extended periods of time. In Brazil, where there are fewer third-party financing sources available to farmers, we also have several programs under which we guarantee customers’ financing from financial institutions that they use to purchase our products. As our exposure to longer trade credit extends throughout the world and use of guarantees in Brazil increases, we are increasingly exposed to

Table of Content

the risk that some of our customers will not pay us or the amounts we have guaranteed. Additionally, we become increasingly exposed to risk due to weather and crop growing conditions, fluctuations in crop nutrient prices, commodity prices or foreign currencies, and other factors that influence the price, supply and demand for agricultural commodities. Significant defaults by our customers could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

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

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

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments.

None.

Table of Content

Item 2. Properties.

SUMMARY OVERVIEW OF MINING

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

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

Properties

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

Property Locations

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

Table of Content

Figure 2.1: North America Resource and Reserve Location Map

Table of Content

Figure 2.2: South America Resource and Reserve Location Map

Table of Content

Property Overview

Annual Production

Table 2.1 shows the production tonnage and grade for all phosphate properties for 2021, 2020 and 2019.

Table 2.1 Summary of Production - Phosphate Properties

(in millions of tonnes) December 31,

Mine Property Annual Operational Capacity (tonnes)(a)(b) 2021 2020 2019

Phosphate (Grade: P2O5)(c)

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

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

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

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

Table of Content

Table 2.2 shows the production tonnage and grade for the potash properties for 2021, 2020 and 2019.

Table 2.2 Summary of Production - Potash Properties

(in millions of tonnes) December 31,

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

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

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

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

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

(f)Equivalent to hoisted tonnes at a conventional mine. Ore mined for Belle Plaine is a calculated value (KCl concentrate mined by solution divided by the estimated global grade of the deposit). The calculation is based on actual KCl tonnes mined (January 1, 2021- October 31, 2021) and estimates of KCl tonnes mined (November 1, 2021 - December 31, 2021).

(g)The annual operational capacity at Esterhazy increased by 0.7 million tonnes in 2019 reflecting the ramp-up in capacity from the K3 shaft.

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

(i)K-Mag® is a specialty product that we produce at our Carlsbad facility.

Overview

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

Table of Content

Table 2.3: Phosphates Overview

Florida Phosphates

See Florida Phosphates Individual Property Disclosure below.

Peru - Compañía Minera Miski Mayo S.R.L. (“Miski Mayo”)

Location Sechura Province in the Piura Region, Peru

Processing plants and other facilities Beneficiation plant

Table 2.4: North America Potash Overview

Belle Plaine Potash Facility (“Belle Plaine Facility”)

See Belle Plaine Individual Property Disclosure below.

Esterhazy Potash Facility (“Esterhazy Facility”)

See Esterhazy Individual Property Disclosure below.

Colonsay Potash Facility (“Colonsay Facility”)

Location Saskatchewan, Canada

Table of Content

Processing plants and other facilities Mill facility, beneficiation plant

Carlsbad Potash Facility (“Carlsbad Facility”)

Location New Mexico, U.S.

Table of Content

Table 2.5: Brazil Fertilizantes Overview

Location Near Araxá / Patrocínio, Minas Gerais, Brazil

Table of Content

Processing plants and other facilities Two beneficiation plants at Araxá

Complexo Mineroquímico de Cajati (“Cajati”)

Location Near Cajati, São Paulo, Brazil

Table of Content

Processing plants and other facilities Beneficiation plant

Complexo Mineração de Catalão (“CMC”)

Location Near Catalão, Minas Gerais (and Goias), Brazil

Processing plants and other facilities Beneficiation plant

Complexo Mineração de Tapira (“Tapira”)

See the Tapira Individual Property Disclosure below.

Complexo Mineroquímico de Taquari-Vassouras (“Taquari”)

Location Near Rosario de Catete, Sergipe, Brazil

Table of Content

Processing plants and other facilities Beneficiation plant

Table of Content

Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve Estimates

Table 2.6 shows the Mineral Resource tonnage and grade for all properties as of December 31, 2021.

Table 2.6 Summary of Mineral Resources as of December 31, 2021(a)

(in millions of tonnes)

tonnes Grade tonnes Grade tonnes Grade tonnes Grade

Phosphate (Grade: P2O5 )(b)

United States

Peru

Brazil

Potash (Grade: K2O)(j)

Canada

United States

Carlsbad(m) — — — — — — 39.0 6.0

Brazil

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

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

(c)Mineral resource tonnages and grade are reported as a beneficiation plant product (phosphate rock) tonnage and P2O5 grade. The cut-offs used to estimate mineral resources include; minimum beneficiation plant concentrate BPL (27.45%P2O5), minimum pebble BPL (18.30%P2O5, except 22.88%P2O5 for Desoto and Pioneer), maximum pebble magnesium oxide concentration and a maximum clay content cut-off for a logged matrix layer and the composite matrix volume. A Life of Mine (“LOM”) commodity price of US$102.72/tonne of phosphate rock was used to assess prospects for economic extraction but is not used for cut-off purposes.

(d)Mineral resources are presented on the basis of our 75% interest. Cut-off grade of > 8% P2O5 was applied for mineral resources. A breakeven pit shell was developed with costs, grade requirements and a sales price of US$97.6/tonne of phosphate concentrate (2020 price evaluation) to develop the mineral resource pit shell.

Table of Content

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(l)No cut-off grade or value based on commodity price is used to estimate mineral resources as the mining method used at Colonsay or Esterhazy is not grade selective. The potash mineralization is mined on one level by continuous miners following the well-defined and continuous beds of mineralization with relatively consistent grades. The following KCl commodity prices were used to assess prospects for economic extraction for the mineral resources but are not used for cut-off purposes: 2022-$271/tonne, 2023-$231/tonne, 2024-$219/tonne, 2025-$185/tonne, 2026-$188/tonne, and for LOM plan $219/tonne. A US$/CAD$ exchange rate of 1.31 was used to assess prospects for economic extraction for the mineral resources but was not used for cut-off purposes.

(m)A 4% K2O cut-off grade with less than 2% kieserite is used to estimate mineral resources. This is consistent with the definition of mineable potash established by the U.S. Geological Survey. The following K2O commodity prices (US$) were used to assess economic viability for the mineral resources, but were not used for cut-off purposes: 2022- $318/tonne, 2023-$279/tonne, 2024-$261/tonne, 2025-$237/ton, 2026-$242/tonne, and for the 2021 LOM plan $267/tonne.

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

Table of Content

Table 2.7 shows the Mineral Reserve tonnage and grade for all properties as of December 31, 2021.

Table 2.7: Summary of Mineral Reserves as of December 31, 2021(a)

(in millions of tonnes)

tonnes Grade tonnes Grade tonnes Grade

Phosphate (Grade: P2O5)(b)

United States

Peru

Brazil

Potash (Grade: K2O)

Canada

United States

Brazil

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

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

(c)Mineral reserve tonnages and grade are reported as a beneficiation plant product (phosphate rock) tonnage and P2O5 grade. A LOM commodity price of US$102.72/tonne of phosphate rock was used to assess prospects for economic extraction but is not used for cut-off purposes. Cut-off based on productivity factors per site have been applied to estimate mineral reserves. Recoverable Finished Product tonnes vs. Matrix Volume Mined ranges from 9.4-9.9%. Recoverable Finished Product tonnes vs. Total Volume Mined is 2.2%.

(d)Mineral reserves are presented on the basis of our 75% interest. The reference point for cut-off grade and pit optimization analysis is tonnes of concentrate at a price of US$97.60/tonne concentrate (2020 LOM price evaluation). We applied a cut-off grade of > 8% P2O5 mineral reserves. Additionally, we used a phosphate concentrate grade limitation of a minimum P2O5 concentrate grade of 29.5% in the LOM plan.

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

Table of Content

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

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

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

(i)No cut-off grade or value based on commodity price is used to estimate mineral reserves as the mining method used at the Esterhazy or Colonsay Facilities is not grade selective. The potash mineralization is mined on one level by continuous miners following the well-defined and continuous beds of mineralization with relatively consistent grades. Underground mining standards and design criteria are used to constrain mineral reserves within mineable shapes. The following KCl commodity prices were used to assess economic viability for the mineral reserves, but were not used for cut-off purposes, 2022-$271/tonne, 2023-$231/tonne, 2024-$219/tonne, 2025-$185/tonne, 2026-$188/tonne and for the LOM plan $219/tonne. A US$/CAD$ exchange rate of 1.31 was used to assess economic viability for the mineral reserves but was not used for cut-off purposes.

(j)A 4% K2O cut-off grade with less than 2% kieserite is used to estimate mineral resources and mineral reserves. The following K2O commodity prices (US$) were used to assess economic viability for the mineral reserves, but were not used for cut-off purposes: 2022-$318/tonne, 2023-$279/tonne, 2024-$261/tonne, 2025-$237/ton, 2026-$242/tonne, and for the 2021 LOM plan $267/tonne.

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

FLORIDA PHOSPHATES

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

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

The net book value for our Florida phosphate mining facilities and exploration properties is $1.2 billion as of December 31, 2021.

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

Table of Content

Table 2.8: Property Locations

Property Location

Table of Content

Figure 2.3: Location Plan

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

Table 2.9: Property Status and Acreages

Status (Acres)

Florida Phosphate Property Status and Acreages

Fee Simple Mining Agreement Mineral Rights (b) Total

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

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

Governmental permits and approvals for mining are obtained from federal, state and county authorities, including the Environmental Resource Permit (“ERP”) issued by Florida Department of Environmental Protection (“DEP”) and permits

Table of Content

required by Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act. In connection with these permits, we are required to develop a reclamation plan with respect to these areas. The ERP is associated with a Florida DEP-approved reclamation plan that requires “acre for acre and type for type” reclamation to reclaim mined areas. Mitigation may also be required by ERP conditions which may also require conservation easements to provide permanent protection.

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

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

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

Existing Infrastructure

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

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

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

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

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

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

Table of Content

Mining Method

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

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

Processing Recovery Method

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

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

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

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

History and Exploration

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

Table of Content

Table 2.10: History

Date Event/Activity

1888 Phosphate rock first commercially mined along the Peace River.

1981 Beker Phosphate Company opened Wingate.

1985 Wingate was closed after Beker Phosphate Company filed for bankruptcy.

1985 Four Corners started production.

1986 Four Corners is idled due to market conditions.

1988 IMC gained 100% control of Four Corners.

1989 IMC restarted Four Corners.

1990 Wingate is acquired by Nu-Gulf.

1995 CF Industries opened and started production at South Pasture.

1997 IMC acquired Freeport McMoRan’s share of IMC-Agrico.

1998 Wingate is reopened.

1999 Wingate is closed.

2004 Cargill Crop Nutrition acquired and reopened the Wingate Facility.

2004 Mosaic created out of a merger between IMC and Cargill Crop Nutrition.

2005 Wingate is shutdown.

2008 Wingate is reopened.

2018 South Pasture Facility is idled.

2018 Ona (western portion) property is consolidated into Four Corners.

2020 South Fort Meade acquired the Eastern Reserves.

Table of Content

Geology and Mineralization

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

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

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

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

Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve Assumptions and Modifying Factors

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

Table of Content

Table 2.11: Key Assumptions and Modifying Factors:

Parameter Value TRS Section

Average total thickness of the phosphate mineralization 13 to 50 ft. Section 6

Maximum pebble magnesium oxide ("MgO") cut-off volume 0.025 Section 11

Maximum Clay Content 40 to 50% Section 11

Maximum Dragline Mining depth 85 ft. Section 11

Maximum dredge mining depth 109 ft. Section 11

Production Days per Year 365 days Section 11

Mining Method Dredge and dragline mining Section 13

Mineral Resource Impurity Recovery 100% Section 11

Mineral Resource Beneficiation Plant Recovery 100% Section 11

Geotechnical Factors (if any) No concerns. Section 13

Commodity Price $102.72/tonne of phosphate rock. Section 16

Table of Content

Mineral Resource Estimates

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

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

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

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

Additional details regarding the estimation methodology are listed in Section 11 of the 2021 Florida Phosphate Mining TRS filed as an Exhibit to the 10-K Report.

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

Table 2.12: Mineral Resources at the End of the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2021 Based on a LOM Plan Phosphate Rock Price of $102.72 per tonne(a)(b)(c)(d)(f)

(tonnes in millions)

Category Tonnes(e) Grade %P2O5(e) Cut-off Grade Metallurgical Recovery %

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

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

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

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

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

(f)A LOM commodity price of $102.72/tonne of phosphate rock was used to assess prospects for economic extraction but is not used for cut-off purposes.

Table of Content

No mineral resources were reported in 2020, as the Company reported under Industry Guide 7, which did not recognize mineral resources. As a result of the change in reporting to Regulation S-K 1300, the mineral resources are being reported for the first time.

Mineral Reserve Estimates

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

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

Additional details regarding the estimation methodology are listed in Section 12 of the 2021 Florida Phosphate Mining TRS filed as an Exhibit to this 10-K Report.

The mineral reserve estimates are listed in Table 2.13.

Table 2.13: Mineral Reserves at the End of the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2021 Based on a LOM Plan Phosphate Rock Price of $102.72 per tonne(a)(b)(c)(d)(e)

(tonnes in millions)

Category Tonnes Grade%P2O5 Metallurgical Recovery %

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

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

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

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

(e)A commodity price of $102.72/tonne of phosphate rock was used to assess the economic viability of the mineral reserves in the LOM.

Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves Comparison

As of December 31, 2021, we had mineral reserves of 127 million tonnes compared to 515 million in the prior year, resulting in a decrease of 75%. Changes in mineral reserve tonnage from the prior year are the result of mining depletion, small changes to beneficiation plant factors, the change from Industry Guide 7 to S-K 1300, and the reclassification of South Pasture reserves to resources due to the idling of the South Pasture property.

Table of Content

BELLE PLAINE

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

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

In addition, we own 19,284 acres of mineral rights within the Belle Plaine area as shown in Table 2.16 below. All mineral titles owned or leased by us include “subsurface minerals,” which under The Subsurface Mineral Tenure Regulations, 2015 (Saskatchewan) means “all-natural mineral salts of boron, calcium, lithium, magnesium, potassium, sodium, bromine, chlorine, fluorine, iodine, nitrogen, phosphorus and sulfur, and their compounds, occurring more than 197.0 feet (60.0 m) below the surface of the land”. Other commodities (e.g., petroleum and natural gas, coal, etc.) may be included within mineral rights we lease or own but are not specifically sought after when acquired.

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

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

The net book value for Belle Plaine is $0.9 billion as of December 2021.

Table of Content

Figure 2.4: Location Plan

Table 2.14: Mineral Lease

Crown Lease Number Type Area (Ha) E Expiration Date

Table of Content

Table 2.15: Sections and Acreages Owned by the Crown

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

Table 2.16: Sections and Acreages of Mosaic Owned Mineral Rights

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

Table 2.17: Partial Mineral Rights Area

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

Existing Infrastructure

The Belle Plaine Facility has been operating since 1964 and consists of a mining area and a processing plant and has an expected mine life based on mineral reserves of 63 years. The processing plant consists of a refinery and cooling pond. The Belle Plaine Facility has the infrastructure in place to meet the current production goals and LOM plan. The current infrastructure includes major road and highway access; railway support from Canadian National Railway (“CNR”) and

Table of Content

Canadian Pacific Railway (“CPR”); SaskPower-supplied electricity; TransGas-supplied natural gas; and potable and non-potable water supplied from a local fresh water source. We expect the current TMA footprint to support the volume and deposition rates indicated in the 2021 LOM plan.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Mining Method

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

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

Table of Content

The 2021 Belle Plaine LOM plan based on mineral reserves has an expected total mine life of 63 years, ending in 2084 and yielding an estimated total of 166.85 million tonnes of final product KCl.

Processing Recovery Method

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

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

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

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

We expect site production to increase by 2025 to 3.0 million tonnes per year until the year 2066, at which time we expect to stop drilling new cavities and ramp down production to 2084. The site’s ability to produce at a sustained 3.0 million tonnes per year in future years is backed by a Canpotex proving run in 2016/2017, in which the Belle Plaine Facility achieved a production nameplate of 3.9 million tonnes per year. We expect total site processing recovery to average 79% throughout the remaining life of the mine and is dependent on sustained drilling activities. Future projections are modeled with mass and energy balance software to predict the future production and recovery capabilities.

History and Exploration

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

Table 2.18: History

Date Event/Activity

1928 Discovery of evaporites in the sedimentary sequence in Saskatchewan.

Table of Content

1989 Belle Plaine Facility sold to Sullivan & Proops (Vigoro).

1995 IMC purchased Belle Plaine.

2004 Mosaic created out of a merger between IMC and Cargill Crop Nutrition.

2014 Plant upgrades included the adding and commissioning of Compaction #6.

Table of Content

Geology and Mineralization

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

•The Upper Mining Zone consists of beds 38 to 31 of the Patience Lake Member and beds 23 to 21 of the Belle Plaine Member. The Upper Mining Zone is about 90 feet thick.

Table of Content

•The Salt Stringer is a thin bed of salt located between Beds 31 and 23 in the Upper Mining Zone. The Salt Stringer is approximately 10 feet thick.

•The Interzonal Salt is a thick bed of salt located between the Lower and Upper Mining Zones.

•The Marker Bed is a small, very rich potash bed located midway through the Interzonal Salt.

•The Lower Mining Zone consists of beds 13, 12 and 11 of the Esterhazy Member. The Lower Mining Zone is approximately 20 feet thick.

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

Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve Assumption and Modifying Factors

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

Table 2.19: Key Assumptions and Modifying Factors

Parameter Value TRS Section

Tonnage Factor 17.2 cu ft./tonne (2,054 kilograms per cubic meter). Section 11

Average KCl grade from all drilling 30.6% (19.3% K2O) Section 11

Operating Days per Year 365 days Section 13

Mining Method Solution mining from surface installations. Section 13

Production Rate 3.0 million tonnes per year. Section 13

Cut-off No cut-off grade is applied. Section 11, 12

Mining Recovery 22% Section 13

External Dilution None Section 12

Processing Method KCl recovered from brine solution. Section 14

Processing Recovery 79 to 96% Section 14

Deleterious Elements and Impact Trace NaCl and MgCl2 Section 10

Geotechnical Factors (if any) No concerns. Section 13

Hydrological or Hydrogeological Factors (if any) No concerns. Section 13

Exchange Rate (US$/C$) 1.31 Section 6

Table of Content

Mineral Resource Estimates

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

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

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

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

Table 2.20: Mineral Resources as of December 31, 2021 Based on a LOM Plan KCl Price of $219 per tonne(a)(b)(c)(d)

(tonnes in millions)

Category Tonnes Grade %K2O Grade %KCl Cut-off Grade(e) Metallurgical Recovery

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

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

(c)Mineral resources assume solution mining.

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

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

No mineral resources were reported in 2020, as the Company reported under Industry Guide 7, which did not recognize mineral resources. As a result of the change in reporting to S-K 1300, mineral resources are being reported for the first time.

Mineral Reserve Estimates

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

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

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

Table of Content

Table 2.21: Mineral Reserves at the End of the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2021 Based on LOM Plan KCl Price of $219 per tonne(a)(b)(c)(d)(e)(f)

(tonnes in millions)

Category KCl Tonnes Grade %KCl Grade %K2O Metallurgical Recovery %

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

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

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

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

(e)The following KCl commodity prices were used to assess economic viability for the mineral reserves, but were not used for cut-off purposes: 2022-$271/tonne, 2023-$231/tonne, 2024-$219/tonne, 2025-$185/tonne, 2026-$188/tonne, and for the LOM $219/tonne.

(f)A US$/CAD$ exchange rate of 1.31 was used to assess economic viability for the mineral reserves but was not used for cut-off purposes.

Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves Comparison

As of December 31, 2021, our estimated mineral reserves were 668 million tonnes compared to 828 million as of the prior year-end, resulting in a change of 19%. Year-over-year changes are due to mining depletion, re-evaluation of the mining thickness and global grade, a change in the mining recovery and the change from Industry Guide 7 to S-K 1300.

ESTERHAZY

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

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

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

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

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

Table of Content

The net book value for Esterhazy is $3.4 billion as of December 2021.

Figure 2.5: Location Plan

Table of Content

Table 2.22: Mineral Lease

MOS US Equity

MOS · 10-K · period ended 2021-12-31

Item 1A. Risk Factors.

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments.

Item 2. Properties.

MOS US Equity☆

MOS · 10-K · period ended 2021-12-31

Item 1A. Risk Factors.

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments.

Item 2. Properties.

MOS US Equity