Ralph Lauren Corporation

New or substantially reworded (8)

• In April 2025, the U.S. announced significant changes to its trade policies under the authority of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act ("IEEPA"), including widespread tariff increases on imported goods and the potential for additional tariffs and further increases to existing tariffs, and revisions or terminations of existing trade agreements. In response, many countries announced retaliatory tariffs on U.S. exports and other trade restrictions. In February 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court invalidated the IEEPA tariffs previously applied to our imports, after which the current administration announced a new round of tariffs under an alternative U.S. Trade Act authority. In March 2026, the U.S. Court of International Trade issued an order directing U.S. Customs and Border Protection to refund IEEPA tariffs that were previously collected, and in April 2026, U.S. Customs and Border…

• Our use and integration of artificial intelligence across our business presents risks and challenges that could adversely affect our business.

• We are increasingly evaluating and deploying AI technologies, including generative AI and machine learning, across various aspects of our business. Read more

  AI presents evolving risks that may be difficult to predict or mitigate. These risks include heightened data privacy, cybersecurity, and data protection risks, as the use of AI may involve processing sensitive data and, in some cases, sharing data with third-party providers. Such use may increase the risk of unauthorized access to, misuse, or disclosure of confidential information or personal data, introduce system vulnerabilities, and enable more sophisticated fraud and cyber-attacks. Any such event could result in operational disruptions, remediation costs, litigation, regulatory scrutiny, and reputational damage.

• AI tools and systems may be unavailable, fail to perform as intended, or produce inaccurate or misleading outputs, and may be vulnerable to manipulation. Read more

  When incorporated into our business processes, such risks could result in errors, inefficiencies, operational disruptions, or diminished customer experiences, and employees' use of AI tools may not always comply with our policies or controls. Further, we may rely on third-party AI technologies, cloud infrastructure, and data sets that could be subject to outages, security incidents, or changes in pricing or contractual terms, which may result in operational disruptions or the termination of our relationship with the providers of such technologies. AI-related activities also raise intellectual property, confidentiality, and content integrity risks, including potential claims that training data or outputs infringe third-party rights or…

• Our ability to successfully develop and deploy AI depends on attracting, developing, and retaining talent with AI-related skills and expertise. Read more

  Competition for such talent is intense. If we are unable to build and maintain necessary AI capabilities, including such talent, we may not realize anticipated efficiencies or innovation benefits, or we may be competitively disadvantaged relative to peers that more effectively leverage AI. Conversely, investments in AI may not deliver expected returns, particularly in the near term, if adoption is limited or performance does not meet expectations.

• The legal and regulatory environment governing AI is rapidly evolving. Read more

  Emerging laws and regulations in jurisdictions where we operate may impose new obligations, limit the use of AI, or require changes to our products, processes, or controls. Compliance with such requirements could increase costs and expose us to investigations, enforcement actions, fines, or litigation.

• Any perceived or actual failure to use AI responsibly, including with respect to fairness, bias, transparency, or governance, or to meet evolving stakeholder expectations, could harm our brand and reputation, reduce customer trust, negatively impact our workforce, and subject us to increased regulatory scrutiny or litigation, any of which could adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

• Executive actions at the U.S. federal level and legislation in multiple U.S. Read more

  states have sought to restrict or penalize corporate consideration of ESG factors, while jurisdictions in Europe and certain U.S. states have simultaneously expanded ESG-related mandates and disclosure requirements. This increasingly divergent regulatory environment creates operational complexity and legal risk, as actions taken to comply with or advance citizenship and sustainability objectives in one jurisdiction may expose us to criticism, regulatory scrutiny, or potential penalties in another, including limitations on our ability to do business. Any failure to effectively navigate these conflicting requirements, or the perception that we have insufficiently or excessively pursued such initiatives, could adversely affect our reputation, business, financial performance and growth.

No longer in the text (2)

• loyalty, and a reputation for quality, including through digital brand engagement and online and social media presence; Read more

  (iii) developing and producing innovative, high-quality products in sizes, colors, and styles that appeal to consumers of varying demographics; (iv) competitively pricing our products and creating a compelling value proposition for consumers; (v) providing strong and effective marketing support in several diverse demographic markets, including through digital and social media platforms in order to stay better connected to consumers; (vi) establishing relationships with athletes, musicians, influencers, and other celebrities to promote our brands and products; (vii) providing attractive, reliable, secure, and user-friendly digital commerce sites; (viii) adapting to changes in technology, including the successful utilization of data analytics, artificial intelligence,…

• Conversely, in recent years, negative sentiment towards corporate goals and initiatives related to these areas has gained momentum in the U.S., which has been accompanied by the proposal or enactment of policies, legislation, or initiatives by several state legislatures and by the U.S. federal government intended to prohibit or limit consideration of ESG matters by corporations and investors. Additionally, we could also be criticized by stakeholders who share such sentiment for having certain initiatives and goals or for any revisions to such initiatives or goals. We may not be able to meet the increasingly diverging expectations and perspectives on these topics and could be subjected to scrutiny that could adversely affect our reputation, business, financial performance and growth.