COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENT LIABILITIES | COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENT LIABILITIES The Company is involved in various litigation, claims and administrative proceedings, including those related to environmental (including asbestos) and legal matters. In accordance with ASC 450, Contingencies , the Company records accruals for loss contingencies when it is probable that a liability will be incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. These accruals are generally based upon a range of possible outcomes. If no amount within the range is a better estimate than any other, the Company accrues the minimum amount. In addition, these estimates are reviewed periodically and adjusted to reflect additional information when it becomes available. The Company is unable to predict the final outcome of the following matters based on the information currently available, except as otherwise noted. However, the Company does not believe that the resolution of any of these matters will have a material adverse effect upon the Company's competitive position, results of operations, cash flows or financial condition. Environmental Matters The Company’s operations are subject to environmental regulation by various authorities. The Company has accrued for the costs of environmental remediation activities, including but not limited to, investigatory, remediation, operating and maintenance costs and performance guarantees. The most likely cost to be incurred is accrued based on an evaluation of currently available facts with respect to individual sites, including the technology required to remediate, current laws and regulations and prior remediation experience. As of December 31, 2022 and 2021, the outstanding liability for environmental obligations are as follows: (In millions) 2022 2021 Environmental reserves included in Accrued liabilities $ 24 $ 29 Environmental reserves included in Other long-term liabilities 211 191 Total environmental reserves $ 235 $ 220 For sites with multiple responsible parties, the Company considers its likely proportionate share of the anticipated remediation costs and the ability of other parties to fulfill their obligations in establishing a provision for these costs. Accrued environmental liabilities are not reduced by potential insurance reimbursements and are undiscounted. Asbestos Matters The Company has been named as a defendant in lawsuits alleging personal injury as a result of exposure to asbestos allegedly integrated into certain Carrier products or business premises. While the Company has never manufactured asbestos and no longer incorporates it into any currently-manufactured products, certain products that the Company no longer manufactures contained components incorporating asbestos. A substantial majority of these asbestos-related claims have been dismissed without payment or have been covered in full or in part by insurance or other forms of indemnity. Additional cases were litigated and settled without any insurance reimbursement. The amounts involved in asbestos-related claims were not material individually or in the aggregate in any period. The Company's asbestos liabilities and related insurance recoveries are as follows: (In millions) 2022 2021 Asbestos liabilities included in Accrued liabilities $ 16 $ 17 Asbestos liabilities included in Other long-term liabilities 212 220 Total asbestos liabilities $ 228 $ 237 Asbestos-related recoveries included in Other assets, current $ 5 $ 5 Asbestos-related recoveries included in Other assets 90 93 Total asbestos-related recoveries $ 95 $ 98 The amounts recorded for asbestos-related liabilities are based on currently available information and assumptions that the Company believes are reasonable and are made with input from outside actuarial experts. These amounts are undiscounted and exclude the Company's legal fees to defend the asbestos claims, which are expensed as incurred. In addition, the Company has recorded insurance recovery receivables for probable asbestos-related recoveries. UTC Equity Awards Conversion Litigation On August 12, 2020, several former employees of UTC or its subsidiaries filed a putative class action complaint (the "Complaint") in the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut against Raytheon Technologies Corporation, Carrier, Otis, the former members of the UTC Board of Directors and the members of the Carrier and Otis Boards of Directors ( Geraud Darnis, et al. v. Raytheon Technologies Corporation, et al .). The Complaint challenged the method by which UTC equity awards were converted to UTC, Carrier and Otis equity awards following the Separation and the Distribution. Defendants moved to dismiss the Complaint. Plaintiffs amended their Complaint on September 13, 2021 (the "Amended Complaint"). The Amended Complaint, with Raytheon, Carrier and Otis as the only defendants, asserted that the defendants are liable for breach of certain equity compensation plans and for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. The Amended Complaint also sought specific performance. Carrier believes all plaintiffs' claims against the Company are without merit. Defendants moved to dismiss the Amended Complaint. On September 30, 2022, the court dismissed the case against all defendants, with prejudice. Plaintiffs appealed the dismissal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The briefing process is ongoing. Aqueous Film Forming Foam Litigation As of December 31, 2022, the Company and certain of its subsidiaries, including Kidde-Fenwal, Inc. ("KFI"), have been named as defendants in more than 3,150 lawsuits filed by individuals in or removed to the federal courts of the United States alleging that the historic use of Aqueous Film Forming Foam ("AFFF") caused personal injuries and/or property damage. The Company and certain of its subsidiaries, including KFI, have also been named as a defendant in more than 300 lawsuits filed by several U.S. states, municipalities and water utilities in or removed to U.S. federal courts alleging that the historic use of AFFF caused contamination of property and water supplies. In December 2018, the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation transferred and consolidated all AFFF cases pending in the U.S. federal courts against the Company and others to the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina ("MDL Court") for pre-trial proceedings ("MDL Proceedings"). The individual plaintiffs in the MDL Proceedings generally seek damages for alleged personal injuries, medical monitoring, diminution in property value and injunctive relief to remediate alleged contamination of water supplies. The U.S. state, municipal and water utility plaintiffs in the MDL Proceedings generally seek damages and costs related to the remediation of public property and water supplies. AFFF is a firefighting foam, developed beginning in the late 1960s pursuant to U.S. military specification, used to extinguish certain types of hydrocarbon-fueled fires primarily at military bases and airports. AFFF was manufactured by several companies, including National Foam and Angus Fire. UTC subsidiaries first entered the AFFF business with their acquisition of National Foam and Angus Fire in 2005 as part of the acquisition of KFI and Kidde Products Limited ("KPL"). In 2013, KFI and KPL divested the National Foam and Angus Fire businesses to a third party. The Company acquired KFI and KPL as part of its separation from UTC in April 2020. During the eight-year period of its operation by KFI, National Foam manufactured AFFF for sale to government (including the U.S. federal government) and non-government customers in the U.S. at a single facility located in West Chester, Pennsylvania ("Pennsylvania Site"). During the same period, Angus Fire manufactured AFFF for sale outside the United States at a single facility located in Bentham, England. The key components of AFFF that contribute to its fire-extinguishing capabilities are known as fluorosurfactants. Niether the Company nor any of its former or current subsidiaries, including National Foam/Angus Fire and KFI/KPL, respectively, manufactured fluorosurfactants; they instead purchased these substances from unrelated third parties to in turn manufacture AFFF. Plaintiffs in the MDL Proceedings allege that the fluorosurfactants used by various manufacturers in producing AFFF contained, or over time degraded into, compounds known as perflourooctane sulfonate ("PFOS") and/or perflourooctane acid ("PFOA"). Plaintiffs further allege that, as a result of the use of AFFF, PFOS and PFOA were released into the environment and, in some instances, ultimately reached drinking water supplies. Plaintiffs in the MDL Proceedings allege that PFOS and PFOA contamination has resulted from the use of AFFF manufactured using a process known as ECF, and that this process was used exclusively by 3M. They also allege that PFOA contamination has resulted from the use of AFFF manufactured using a different process, known as telomerization, and that this process was used exclusively by the other AFFF manufacturers (including National Foam and Angus Fire). Compounds containing PFOS and PFOA (as well as many other per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances known collectively as "PFAS") have also been used for decades by many third parties in a number of different industries to manufacture firefighters’ protective outerwear, carpets, clothing, fabrics, cookware, food packaging, personal care products, cleaning products, paints, varnishes and other consumer and industrial products. Plaintiffs in the MDL Proceedings have named multiple defendants, including four suppliers of chemicals and raw materials used to manufacture fluorosurfactants, four fluorosurfactant manufacturers, two toll manufacturers of fluorosurfactants and seven current (including National Foam and Angus Fire) and former (including the Company and KFI) AFFF manufacturers. The defendants moved for summary judgment on the government contractor defense, which potentially applies to AFFF sold to or used by the U.S. government. After full briefing and oral argument, on September 16, 2022, the MDL court declined to enter summary judgment for the defendants. The defense, however, remains available at any trial to which it applies. On September 23, 2022, after completion of discovery, the MDL court selected one water provider case, the City of Stuart, FL v. 3M, et al., for a bellwether trial. That trial is tentatively scheduled for June 2023. The MDL court has ordered that the bellwether process for personal injury cases will begin in 2023. The court has not yet outlined details on that process or its timing. Outside of the MDL Proceedings, the Company and other defendants are also party to six lawsuits in U.S. state courts brought by oil refining companies alleging product liability claims related to legacy sales of AFFF and seeking damages for the costs to replace the product and for property damage. In addition, the Company and other defendants are party to two actions related to the Pennsylvania Site in which the plaintiff water utility company seeks remediation costs related to the alleged contamination of the local water supply. The Company and its subsidiaries, including KFI, and other defendants are also party to one action in Arizona state court brought by a firefighter claiming that occupational exposure to AFFF has caused him certain personal injuries. The Company and its subsidiaries, including KFI, believe that they have meritorious defenses to the claims in the MDL Proceedings and the other AFFF lawsuits. Based on its 2013 agreement for the sale of National Foam and Angus Fire, the Company and its subsidiaries, including KFI, are pursuing indemnification against these claims from the purchaser and current owner of National Foam and Angus Fire. The Company and its subsidiaries, including KFI, are also pursuing insurance coverage for these claims. At this time, however, given the numerous factual, scientific and legal issues to be resolved relating to these claims, the Company is unable to assess the probability of liability or to reasonably estimate the damages, if any, to be allocated to the Company and its subsidiaries, including KFI, if one or more plaintiffs were to prevail in these cases. There can be no assurance that any such future exposure will not be material in any period. Income Taxes Under the Tax Matters Agreement relating to the Separation, the Company is responsible to UTC for its share of the TCJA transition tax associated with foreign undistributed earnings as of December 31, 2017. As a result, liabilities of $34 million and $383 million are included within the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheet within Accrued Liabilities and Other Long-Term Liabilities as of December 31, 2022, respectively. This obligation is expected to be settled in annual installments ending in April 2026 with the next installment of $34 million due in 2023. The Company believes that the likelihood of incurring losses materially in excess of this amount is remote. Self-Insurance The Company maintains self-insurance for a number of risks, including but not limited to, workers’ compensation, general liability, automobile liability, property and employee-related healthcare benefits. It has obtained insurance coverage for amounts exceeding individual and aggregate loss limits. The Company accrues for known future claims and incurred but not reported losses. The Company's self-insurance liabilities were as follows: (In millions) 2022 2021 Self-insurance liabilities included in Accrued liabilities $ 139 $ 154 Self-insurance liabilities included in Other long-term liabilities 53 72 Total self-insurance liabilities $ 192 $ 226 The Company incurred expenses related to self-insured risks of $155 million, $155 million and $145 million for the years ended December 31, 2022, 2021 and 2020, respectively. Other Matters The Company has other commitments and contingent liabilities related to legal proceedings, self-insurance programs and matters arising in the ordinary course of business. The Company accrues for contingencies generally based upon a range of possible outcomes. If no amount within the range is a better estimate than any other, the Company accrues the minimum amount. In the ordinary course of business, the Company is also routinely a defendant in, party to or otherwise subject to many pending and threatened legal actions, claims, disputes and proceedings. These matters are often based on alleged violations of contract, product liability, warranty, regulatory, environmental, health and safety, employment, intellectual property, tax and other laws. In some of these proceedings, claims for substantial monetary damages are asserted against the Company and could result in fines, penalties, compensatory or treble damages or non-monetary relief. The Company does not believe that these matters will have a material adverse effect upon its competitive position, results of operations, cash flows or financial condition. |