As filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 26, 201627, 2019
 
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20549

FORM 10-K
(MARK ONE)
 ýAnnual Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
  For the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 20152018
  or
 oTransition Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
  
For the transition period from                  to                 

Commission File No. 1-6571

Merck & Co., Inc.
2000 Galloping Hill Road
Kenilworth, N. J. 07033
(908) 740-4000
Incorporated in New Jersey 
I.R.S. Employer
Identification No. 22-1918501
Securities Registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
Securities Registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
Title of Each Class 
Name of Each Exchange
on which Registered
Common Stock ($0.50 par value) New York Stock Exchange
1.125% Notes due 2021New York Stock Exchange
0.500% Notes due 2024 New York Stock Exchange
1.875% Notes due 2026 New York Stock Exchange
2.500% Notes due 2034 New York Stock Exchange
1.375% Notes due 2036New York Stock Exchange
Number of shares of Common Stock ($0.50 par value) outstanding as of January 31, 2016: 2,775,258,591.2019: 2,581,220,308.
Aggregate market value of Common Stock ($0.50 par value) held by non-affiliates on June 30, 20152018 based on closing price on June 30, 2015: $160,710,000,000.2018: $161,991,000,000.
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.    Yes  ý      No  o
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.    Yes  o      No  ý
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.    Yes  ý      No  o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).    Yes  ý      No  o
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§ 229.405) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.    o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer”filer,” “smaller reporting company,” and “smaller reporting“emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check One):
Large accelerated filerýAccelerated filero
Non-accelerated fileroSmaller reporting companyo
  (Do not check if a smaller reporting company)        Emerging growth company
If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ☐
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).    Yes  o      No  ý
Documents Incorporated by Reference:
Documents Incorporated by Reference:
Document Part of Form 10-K
Proxy Statement for the Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be held May 24, 2016,
28, 2019, to be filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days after the close of the fiscal year covered by this report
 Part III



Table of Contents
   Page
Item 1.
Item 1A.
 
Item 1B.
Item 2.
Item 3.
Item 4.
 
Item 5.
Item 6.
Item 7.
Item 7A.
Item 8.
 (a)
  
  
 (b)
Item 9.
Item 9A.
 
Item 9B.
Item 10.
Item 11.
Item 12.
Item 13.
Item 14.
Item 15.
Item 16.
 



PART I
 
Item 1.Business.
Merck & Co., Inc. (Merck or the Company) is a global health care company that delivers innovative health solutions through its prescription medicines, vaccines, biologic therapies and animal health products, which it markets directly and through its joint ventures.products. The Company’s operations are principally managed on a products basis and are comprised ofinclude four operating segments, which are the Pharmaceutical, Animal Health, Alliances and Healthcare Services and Alliances segments. The Pharmaceutical segment is the only reportable segment.
The Pharmaceutical segment includes human health pharmaceutical and vaccine products marketed either directly by the Company or through joint ventures.products. Human health pharmaceutical products consist of therapeutic and preventive agents, generally sold by prescription, for the treatment of human disorders. The Company sells these human health pharmaceutical products primarily to drug wholesalers and retailers, hospitals, government agencies and managed health care providers such as health maintenance organizations, pharmacy benefit managers and other institutions. VaccineHuman health vaccine products consist of preventive pediatric, adolescent and adult vaccines, primarily administered at physician offices. The Company sells these human health vaccines primarily to physicians, wholesalers, physician distributors and government entities.
The Company also has animal health operations that discover, develop, manufactureAnimal Health segment discovers, develops, manufactures and marketmarkets animal health products, including vaccines,pharmaceutical and vaccine products, for the prevention, treatment and control of disease in all major livestock and companion animal species, which the Company sells to veterinarians, distributors and animal producers. Merck’s Alliances segment primarily includes results from the Company’s relationship with AstraZeneca LP until the termination of that relationship on June 30, 2014.
The Company’s Healthcare Services segment provides services and solutions that focus on engagement, health analytics and clinical services to improve the value of care delivered to patients. On October 1, 2014,
The Alliances segment primarily includes results from the Company divested its Consumer Care segment that developed, manufacturedCompany’s relationship with AstraZeneca LP related to sales of Nexium and marketed over-the-counter, foot care and sun care products. Prilosec, which concluded in 2018.
The Company was incorporated in New Jersey in 1970.
For financial information and other information about the Company’s segments, see Item 7. “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and Item 8. “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” below.
All product or service marks appearing in type form different from that of the surrounding text are trademarks or service marks owned, licensed to, promoted or distributed by Merck, its subsidiaries or affiliates, except as noted. All other trademarks or services marks are those of their respective owners.
Product Sales
SalesTotal Company sales, including sales of the Company’s top pharmaceutical products, as well as total sales of animal health products, were as follows:
($ in millions)2015 2014 2013
Total Sales$39,498
 $42,237
 $44,033
Pharmaceutical34,782
 36,042
 37,437
Januvia3,863
 3,931
 4,004
Zetia2,526
 2,650
 2,658
Janumet2,151
 2,071
 1,829
Gardasil/Gardasil 9
1,908
 1,738
 1,831
Remicade1,794
 2,372
 2,271
Isentress1,511
 1,673
 1,643
ProQuad/M-M-R II/Varivax
1,505
 1,394
 1,306
Vytorin1,251
 1,516
 1,643
Cubicin1,127
 25
 24
Singulair931
 1,092
 1,196
Animal Health3,324
 3,454
 3,362
Consumer Care(1)
3
 1,547
 1,894
Other Revenues(2)
1,389
 1,194
 1,340
($ in millions)2018 2017 2016
Total Sales$42,294
 $40,122
 $39,807
Pharmaceutical37,689
 35,390
 35,151
Keytruda7,171
 3,809
 1,402
Januvia/Janumet5,914
 5,896
 6,109
Gardasil/Gardasil 9
3,151
 2,308
 2,173
ProQuad/M-M-R II/Varivax
1,798
 1,676
 1,640
Zetia/Vytorin1,355
 2,095
 3,701
Isentress/Isentress HD1,140
 1,204
 1,387
Bridion917
 704
 482
Pneumovax 23
907
 821
 641
NuvaRing902
 761
 777
Simponi893
 819
 766
Animal Health4,212
 3,875
 3,478
Livestock2,630
 2,484
 2,287
Companion Animals1,582
 1,391
 1,191
Other Revenues(1)
393
 857
 1,178
(1) 
On October 1, 2014, the Company divested its Consumer Care segment that developed, manufactured and marketed over-the-counter, foot care and sun care products.
(2)
Other revenues are primarily comprised of Healthcare Services segment revenue, third-party manufacturing sales, and miscellaneous corporate revenues, including revenue hedging activities, and third-party manufacturing sales.activities.

1


Pharmaceutical
The Company’sPharmaceutical segment includes human health pharmaceutical and vaccine products. Human health pharmaceutical products includeconsist of therapeutic and preventive agents, generally sold by prescription, for the treatment of human disorders. Human health vaccine products consist of preventive pediatric, adolescent and adult vaccines, primarily administered at physician offices. Certain of the products within the Company’s franchises are as follows:
Primary Care and Women’s HealthOncology
Cardiovascular:Keytruda Zetia (ezetimibe) (marketed(pembrolizumab), the Company’s anti-PD-1 (programmed death receptor-1) therapy, as Ezetrol in most countries outside the United States); and Vytorin (ezetimibe/simvastatin) (marketed as Inegy outside the United States), cholesterol modifying medicines.
Diabetes: Januvia (sitagliptin) and Janumet (sitagliptin/metformin HCl) for the treatment of type 2 diabetes.
General Medicine and Women’s Health: NuvaRing (etonogestrel/ethinyl estradiol vaginal ring), a vaginal contraceptive product; Implanon (etonogestrel implant), a single-rod subdermal contraceptive implant/Nexplanon (etonogestrel implant), a single, radiopaque, rod-shaped subdermal contraceptive implant; Dulera Inhalation Aerosol (mometasone furoate/formoterol fumarate dihydrate), a combination medicine for the treatment of asthma; and Follistim AQ (follitropin beta injection) (marketed as Puregon in most countries outside the United States), a fertility treatment.
Hospital and Specialty
Hepatitis: Zepatier (elbasvir and grazoprevir), approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in January 2016, for the treatment of adult patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype (GT) 1 or GT4 infection, with or without ribavirin; and PegIntron (peginterferon alpha-2b) and Victrelis (boceprevir), medicines for the treatment of chronic HCV.
HIV: Isentress (raltegravir), an HIV integrase inhibitor for use in combination with other antiretroviral agents for the treatment of HIV-1 infection.
Hospital Acute Care: Cubicin (daptomycin for injection), an I.V. antibiotic for complicated skin and skin structure infections or bacteremia, when caused by designated susceptible organisms; Cancidas (caspofungin acetate), an anti-fungal product; Invanz (ertapenem sodium)monotherapy for the treatment of certain infections; Noxafil (posaconazole) for the prevention of invasive fungal infections; Bridion (sugammadex) Injection, a medication for the reversal of two types of neuromuscular blocking agents used during surgery; and Primaxin (imipenem and cilastatin sodium), an anti-bacterial product.
Immunology: Remicade (infliximab), a treatment for inflammatory diseases, and Simponi (golimumab), a once-monthly subcutaneous treatment for certain inflammatory diseases, which the Company markets in Europe, Russia and Turkey.
Oncology
Keytruda (pembrolizumab) for the treatment of advanced melanoma and metastaticpatients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), melanoma, classical Hodgkin Lymphoma (cHL), urothelial carcinoma, head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma, and microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) or mismatch repair deficient cancer, and in combination with chemotherapy in certain patients whose tumors express PD-L1 with disease progression following other therapies;NSCLC. Keytruda is also used in the United States for monotherapy treatment of certain patients with cervical cancer, primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma (PMBCL), hepatocellular carcinoma, and Merkel cell carcinoma, and in combination with chemotherapy for patients with squamous NSCLC; Emend (aprepitant) for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced and post-operative nausea and vomiting; and Temodar (temozolomide) (marketed as Temodal outside the United States), a treatment for certain types of brain tumors.
Diversified Brands
Respiratory: Singulair (montelukast), a medicine indicated for In addition, the chronic treatmentCompany recognizes alliance revenue related to sales of asthma and the relief of symptoms of allergic rhinitis; Nasonex (mometasone furoate monohydrate)Lynparza (olaparib), an inhaled nasal corticosteroidoral poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor, for the treatmentcertain types of nasal allergy symptoms;ovarian and Clarinex (desloratadine), a non-sedating antihistamine.breast cancer; and Lenvima (lenvatinib) for certain types of thyroid cancer, hepatocellular carcinoma, and in combination for certain patients with renal cell carcinoma.
Other: Cozaar (losartan potassium) and Hyzaar (losartan potassium and hydrochlorothiazide), treatments for hypertension; Arcoxia (etoricoxib) for the treatment of arthritis and pain, which the Company markets outside the United States; Fosamax (alendronate sodium) (marketed as Fosamac in Japan) for the treatment and prevention of osteoporosis; Zocor (simvastatin), a statin for modifying cholesterol; and Propecia (finasteride), a product for the treatment of male pattern hair loss.

2


Vaccines
Gardasil (Human Papillomavirus Quadrivalent [Types 6, 11, 16 and 18] Vaccine, Recombinant)/Gardasil 9 (Human Papillomavirus 9-valent Vaccine, Recombinant), vaccines to help prevent certain diseases caused by certain types of human papillomavirus (HPV); ProQuad (Measles, Mumps, Rubella and Varicella Virus Vaccine Live), a pediatric combination vaccine to help protect against measles, mumps, rubella and varicella; M-M-R II (Measles, Mumps and Rubella Virus Vaccine Live), a vaccine to help prevent measles, mumps and rubella; Varivax (Varicella Virus Vaccine Live), a vaccine to help prevent chickenpox (varicella); ZostavaxPneumovax (Zoster Vaccine Live)23 (pneumococcal vaccine polyvalent), a vaccine to help prevent shingles (herpes zoster)pneumococcal disease; ; RotaTeq (Rotavirus Vaccine, Live Oral, Pentavalent), a vaccine to help protect against rotavirus gastroenteritis in infants and children; and PneumovaxZostavax 23 (pneumococcal vaccine polyvalent)(Zoster Vaccine Live), a vaccine to help prevent pneumococcal disease.shingles (herpes zoster).
Hospital Acute Care
Bridion (sugammadex) Injection, a medication for the reversal of two types of neuromuscular blocking agents used during surgery; Noxafil (posaconazole) for the prevention of invasive fungal infections; Invanz (ertapenem sodium) for the treatment of certain infections; Cubicin (daptomycin for injection), an I.V. antibiotic for complicated skin and skin structure infections or bacteremia, when caused by designated susceptible organisms; Cancidas (caspofungin acetate), an anti-fungal product; Primaxin (imipenem and cilastatin sodium), an anti-bacterial product; and Zerbaxa (ceftolozane and tazobactam) is currently approved in the United States for the treatment of adult patients with complicated urinary tract infections caused by certain susceptible Gram-negative microorganisms, and is also indicated, in combination with metronidazole, for the treatment of adult patients with complicated intra-abdominal infections caused by certain susceptible Gram-negative and Gram-positive microorganisms.
Immunology
Simponi (golimumab), a once-monthly subcutaneous treatment for certain inflammatory diseases; and Remicade (infliximab), a treatment for inflammatory diseases, which the Company markets in Europe, Russia and Turkey.
Neuroscience
Belsomra (suvorexant), an orexin receptor antagonist indicated for the treatment of insomnia, characterized by difficulties with sleep onset and/or sleep maintenance.
Virology
Isentress/Isentress HD (raltegravir), an HIV integrase inhibitor for use in combination with other antiretroviral agents for the treatment of HIV-1 infection; and Zepatier (elbasvir and grazoprevir) for the treatment of adult patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype (GT) 1 or GT4 infection, with ribavirin in certain patient populations.

Cardiovascular
Zetia (ezetimibe) (marketed as Ezetrol in most countries outside the United States); Vytorin (ezetimibe/simvastatin) (marketed as Inegy outside the United States); Atozet (ezetimibe and atorvastatin) (marketed in certain countries outside of the United States) and Rosuzet (ezetimibe and rosuvastatin) (marketed in certain countries outside of the United States), cholesterol modifying medicines; and Adempas (riociguat), a cardiovascular drug for the treatment of pulmonary arterial hypertension.
Diabetes
Januvia (sitagliptin) and Janumet (sitagliptin/metformin HCl) for the treatment of type 2 diabetes.
Women’s Health
NuvaRing (etonogestrel/ethinyl estradiol vaginal ring), a vaginal contraceptive product; and Implanon (etonogestrel implant), a single-rod subdermal contraceptive implant/Nexplanon (etonogestrel implant), a single, radiopaque, rod-shaped subdermal contraceptive implant.
Animal Health
The Animal Health segment discovers, develops, manufactures and markets animal health products, including vaccines.pharmaceutical and vaccine products, for the prevention, treatment and control of disease in all major livestock and companion animal species. Principal products in this segment include:
Livestock Products:Products
Nuflor Nuflor(Florfenicol) antibiotic range for use in cattle and swine; Bovilis/Vista vaccine lines for infectious diseases in cattle; Banamine (Flunixin meglumine) bovine and swine anti-inflammatory; Estrumate (cloprostenol sodium) for the treatment of fertility disorders in cattle; Matrix (altrenogest) fertility management for swine; Resflor a (florfenicol and flunixin meglumine), a combination broad-spectrum antibiotic and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug for bovine respiratory disease; Zuprevo (Tildipirosin) for bovine respiratory disease; Zilmax (zilpaterol hydrochloride) and Revalor (trenbolone acetate and estradiol) to improve production efficiencies in beef cattle; Safe-Guard (fenbendazole) de-wormer for cattle; M+Pac (Mycoplasma Hyopneumoniae Bacterin) swine pneumonia vaccine; and Porcilis (Lawsonia intracellularis baterin) and Circumvent (Porcine Circovirus Vaccine, Type 2, Killed Baculovirus Vector) vaccine lines for infectious diseases in swine.
Poultry Products:swine; Nobilis/Innovax (Live Marek’s Disease Vector),vaccine lines for poultry; and Paracox and Coccivac coccidiosis vaccines.
Companion Animal Products:vaccines; BravectoExzolt, a chewable tablet that kills fleas and ticks in dogs for up to 12 weeks; Nobivac vaccine lines for flexible dog and cat vaccination; Otomax/Mometamax/Posatex ear ointments for acute and chronic otitis; Caninsulin/Vetsulin diabetes mellitussystemic treatment for dogs and cats;poultry red mite infestations; Panacur/SafeguardSlice broad-spectrum anthelmintic (de-wormer) for use in many animals; Regumate fertility management for horses; Prestige vaccine line for horses; and Activyl/Scalibor/Exspot for protecting against bites from fleas, ticks, mosquitoes and sandflies.
Aquaculture Products: Slice(Emamectin benzoate) parasiticide for sea lice in salmon; Aquavac (Avirulent Live Culture)/Norvax vaccines against bacterial and viral disease in fish; Compact PD vaccine for salmon; and Aquaflor (Florfenicol) antibiotic for farm-raised fish.
Companion Animal Products
Bravecto (fluralaner), a line of oral and topical products that kills fleas and ticks in dogs and cats for up to 12 weeks; Nobivac vaccine lines for flexible dog and cat vaccination; Otomax (Gentamicin sulfate, USP; Betamethasone valerate USP; and Clotrimazole USP ointment)/Mometamax (Gentamicin sulfate, USP, Mometasone Furoate Monohydrate and Clotrimazole, USP, Otic Suspension)/Posatex (Orbifloxacin, Mometasone Furoate Monohydrate and Posaconazole, Suspension) ear ointments for acute and chronic otitis; Caninsulin/Vetsulin (porcine insulin zinc suspension) diabetes mellitus treatment for dogs and cats; Panacur (fenbendazole)/Safeguard (fenbendazole) broad-spectrum anthelmintic (de-wormer) for use in many animals; Regumate (altrenogest) fertility management for horses; Prestige vaccine line for horses; and Scalibor (Deltamethrin)/Exspot for protecting against bites from fleas, ticks, mosquitoes and sandflies.
For a further discussion of sales of the Company’s products, see Item 7. “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” below.

2018 Product Approvals
In January 2016, Merck announced that the FDA approved Zepatier for the treatment
Set forth below is a summary of adult patients with chronic HCV GT1 or GT4 infection, with or without ribavirin.
In December 2015, Merck announced that the FDA approved an expanded age indication for Gardasil 9, Merck’s 9-valent HPV vaccine, to include use in males 16 through 26 years of age for the prevention of anal cancers, precancerous or dysplastic lesions and genital warts causedsignificant product approvals received by certain HPV types. Gardasil 9 includes the greatest number of HPV types in any available HPV vaccine.
Also, in December 2015, the Company announced that the FDA approved an expanded indication for Keytruda, an anti-PD-1 (programmed death receptor-1) therapy, to include the first-line treatment of patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma. Additionally, the FDA approved an update to the product labeling for Keytruda for the treatment of patients with ipilimumab-refractory advanced melanoma.in 2018.
In October 2015, the FDA granted accelerated approval of Keytruda at a dose of 2mg/kg every three weeks for the treatment of patients with metastatic NSCLC whose tumors express PD-L1 as determined by an FDA-approved test and who have disease progression on or after platinum-containing chemotherapy. Patients with EGFR or ALK genomic tumor aberrations should have disease progression on FDA-approved therapy for these aberrations prior to receiving Keytruda. In addition to approving Keytruda for NSCLC, the FDA approved the first companion diagnostic that will enable physicians to determine the level of PD-L1 expression in a patient’s tumor.
ProductDateApproval
KeytrudaDecember 2018
The Japanese Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare (JMHLW) approved Keytruda for three expanded uses in unresectable, advanced or recurrent NSCLC, one in malignant melanoma, as well as a new indication in high microsatellite instability solid tumors.
December 2018
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved Keytruda for the treatment of adult and pediatric patients with recurrent locally advanced or metastatic Merkel cell carcinoma.
December 2018
The European Commission (EC) approved Keytruda for the adjuvant treatment of adults with stage III melanoma and lymph node involvement who have undergone complete resection.
November 2018
FDA approved Keytruda for the treatment of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma who have been previously treated with sorafenib.
October 2018
FDA approved Keytruda, in combination with carboplatin and either paclitaxel or nab-paclitaxel, for the first-line treatment of patients with metastatic squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).
September 2018
EC approved Keytruda in combination with pemetrexed and platinum chemotherapy for the first-line treatment of metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC in adults whose tumors have no EGFR or ALK positive mutations.
September 2018
EC approved Keytruda for the treatment of recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) in adults whose tumors express PD-L1 with a ≥ 50% TPS and progressing on or after platinum-containing chemotherapy.
August 2018
FDA approved Keytruda in combination with pemetrexed and platinum chemotherapy for the first-line treatment of metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC patients with no EGFR or ALK genomic tumor aberrations.
July 2018
The China National Drug Administration (CNDA) approved Keytruda for the treatment of adult patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma following failure of one prior line of therapy.
June 2018
FDA approved Keytruda for the treatment of adult and pediatric patients with refractory primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma (PMBCL), or who have relapsed after two or more prior lines of therapy.
June 2018
FDA approved Keytruda for the treatment of patients with recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer with disease progression on or after chemotherapy whose tumors express PD-L1 as determined by an FDA-approved test.
Lynparza(1)
December 2018FDA approved Lynparza for use as maintenance treatment of certain patients with advanced ovarian, fallopian tube or primary peritoneal cancer who are in complete or partial response to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy.
July 2018
JMHLW approved Lynparza for use in patients with unresectable or recurrent BRCA-mutated, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative breast cancer who have received prior chemotherapy.
May 2018
EC approved Lynparza for use as a maintenance therapy in patients with platinum-sensitive relapsed high grade epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer, who are in response (complete or partial) to platinum based chemotherapy regardless of BRCA mutation status.
January 2018
FDA approved Lynparza for use in patients with BRCA-mutated, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer who have been previously treated with chemotherapy.
January 2018
JMHLW approved Lynparza for use as a maintenance therapy in patients with platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer, regardless of BRCA mutation status.

3

Lenvima(2)
September 2018CNDA approved Lenvima for the treatment of certain patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.
August 2018FDA approved Lenvima for the treatment of certain patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.
August 2018EC approved Lenvima for the treatment of certain patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.
March 2018JMHLW approved Lenvima for the treatment of certain patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.
Gardasil 9
October 2018
FDA approved Gardasil 9 for an expanded age indication for use in women and men ages 27 to 45 for the prevention of certain cancers and diseases caused by the nine HPV types covered by the vaccine.
April 2018
CNDA approved Gardasil 9 for use in girls and women ages 16 to 26.
DelstrigoNovember 2018
EC approved Delstrigo (doravirine, lamivudine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate) for the treatment of adults infected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV-1) without past or present evidence of resistance to the non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) class, lamivudine, or tenofovir.
August 2018
FDA approved Delstrigo for the treatment of HIV-1 infection in adult patients with no prior antiretroviral treatment experience.
PifeltroNovember 2018
EC approved Pifeltro (doravirine), in combination with other antiretroviral medicinal products, for the treatment of adults infected with HIV-1 without past or present evidence of resistance to the NNRTI class.
August 2018
FDA approved Pifeltro for the treatment of HIV-1 infection in adult patients with no prior antiretroviral treatment experience.
IsentressMarch 2018
EC approved Isentress for an extension to the existing indication to cover treatment of neonates. Isentress is now indicated in combination with other anti-retroviral medicinal products for the treatment of HIV-1 infection.
PrevymisJanuary 2018
EC approved Prevymis (letermovir) for the prophylaxis of cytomegalovirus (CMV) reactivation and disease in adult CMV-seropositive recipients [R+] of an allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant.
Steglatro, Steglujan and Segluromet(3)
March 2018
EC approved Steglatro (ertugliflozin), Steglujan (ertugliflozin and sitagliptin) and Segluromet (ertugliflozin and metformin hydrochloride) for the treatment of adults aged 18 years and older with type 2 diabetes mellitus as an adjunct to diet and exercise to improve glycaemic control (as monotherapy in patients for whom the use of metformin is considered inappropriate due to intolerance or contraindications, and in addition to other medicinal products for the treatment of diabetes).
VaxelisDecember 2018
FDA approved Vaxelis (Diphtheria and Tetanus Toxoids and Acellular Pertussis Adsorbed, Inactivated Poliovirus, Haemophilus b Conjugate [Meningococcal Protein Conjugate] and Hepatitis B [Recombinant] Vaccine) for use in children from 6 weeks through 4 years of age (prior to the 5th birthday)
(1)
In July 2017, Merck and AstraZeneca entered into a global strategic oncology collaboration to co-develop and co-commercialize AstraZeneca’s Lynparza.
(2)
In March 2018, Merck and Eisai Co., Ltd. announced a strategic collaboration for the worldwide co-development and co-commercialization of Eisai’s Lenvima.
(3)
In 2013, Merck and Pfizer Inc. announced that they entered into a worldwide collaboration, except Japan, for the co-development and co-promotion of ertugliflozin.
Table of Contents

In September 2015, Merck announced that the Japanese Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency approved Marizev (omarigliptin) 25 mg and 12.5 mg tablets, an oral, once-weekly dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor indicated for the treatment of adults with type 2 diabetes. Japan is the first country to have approved omarigliptin.
Joint Ventures
Sanofi Pasteur MSD
In 1994, Merck and Pasteur Mérieux Connaught (now Sanofi Pasteur S.A.) formed a joint venture to market human vaccines in Europe and to collaborate in the development of combination vaccines for distribution in the then-existing European Union (EU) and the European Free Trade Association. Merck and Sanofi Pasteur contributed, among other things, their European vaccine businesses for equal shares in the joint venture, known as Pasteur Mérieux MSD, S.N.C. (now Sanofi Pasteur MSD, S.N.C.) (SPMSD). The joint venture maintains a presence, directly or through affiliates or branches, in Belgium, Italy, Germany, Spain, France, Austria, Ireland, Sweden, Portugal, the Netherlands, Switzerland and the United Kingdom (UK) and through distributors in the rest of its territory.
Licenses
In 1998, a subsidiary of Schering-Plough Corporation (Schering-Plough) entered into a licensing agreement with Centocor Ortho Biotech Inc. (Centocor), a Johnson & Johnson (J&J) company, to market Remicade, which is prescribed for the treatment of inflammatory diseases. In 2005, Schering-Plough’s subsidiary exercised an option under its contract with Centocor for license rights to develop and commercialize Simponi, a fully human monoclonal antibody. The Company has marketing rights to both products throughout Europe, Russia and Turkey. In 2007, Schering-Plough and Centocor revised their distribution agreement regarding the development, commercialization and distribution of both Remicade and Simponi, extending the Company’s rights to exclusively market Remicade to match the duration of the Company’s exclusive marketing rights for Simponi. In addition, Schering-Plough and Centocor agreed to share certain development costs relating to Simponi’s auto-injector delivery system. In 2009, the European Commission (EC) approved Simponi as a treatment for rheumatoid arthritis and other immune system disorders in two presentations — a novel auto-injector and a prefilled syringe. As a result, the Company’s marketing rights for both products extend for 15 years from the first commercial sale of Simponi in the EU following the receipt of pricing and reimbursement approval within the EU. Remicade lost market exclusivity in major European markets in February 2015 and the Company no longer has market exclusivity in any of its marketing territories. The Company continues to have market exclusivity for Simponi in all of its marketing territories. All profits derived from Merck’s distribution of the two products in these countries are equally divided between Merck and J&J.
Competition and the Health Care Environment
Competition
The markets in which the Company conducts its business and the pharmaceutical industry in general are highly competitive and highly regulated. The Company’s competitors include other worldwide research-based pharmaceutical companies, smaller research companies with more limited therapeutic focus, generic drug manufacturers and animal health care companies. The Company’s operations may be adversely affected by generic and biosimilar competition as the Company’s products mature, as well as technological advances of competitors, industry consolidation,

patents granted to competitors, competitive combination products, new products of competitors, the generic availability of competitors’ branded products, and new information from clinical trials of marketed products or post-marketing surveillance. In addition, patent rights are increasingly being challenged by competitors, and the outcome can be highly uncertain. An adverse result in a patent dispute can preclude commercialization of products or negatively affect sales of existing products and could result in the payment of royalties or in the recognition of an impairment charge with respect to intangible assets associated with certain products. Competitive pressures have intensified as pressures in the industry have grown.
Pharmaceutical competition involves a rigorous search for technological innovations and the ability to market these innovations effectively. With its long-standing emphasis on research and development, the Company is well positionedwell-positioned to compete in the search for technological innovations. Additional resources required to meet market challenges include quality control, flexibility to meet customer specifications, an efficient distribution system and a strong technical information service. The Company is active in acquiring and marketing products through external alliances, such as licensing arrangements and collaborations, and has been refining its sales and marketing efforts to further address

4


changing industry conditions. However, the introduction of new products and processes by competitors may result in price reductions and product displacements, even for products protected by patents. For example, the number of compounds available to treat a particular disease typically increases over time and can result in slowed sales growth or reduced sales for the Company’s products in that therapeutic category.
The highly competitive animal health business is affected by several factors including regulatory and legislative issues, scientific and technological advances, product innovation, the quality and price of the Company’s products, effective promotional efforts and the frequent introduction of generic products by competitors.
Health Care Environment and Government Regulation
Global efforts toward health care cost containment continue to exert pressure on product pricing and market access. In the United States, federal and state governments for many years also have pursued methods to reduce the cost of drugs and vaccines for which they pay. For example, federal laws require the Company to pay specified rebates for medicines reimbursed by Medicaid and to provide discounts for outpatient medicines purchased by certain Public Health Service entities and hospitals serving a disproportionate share of low income or uninsured patients.
Against this backdrop, the United States enacted major health care reform legislation in 2010 (the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act), which began to be implemented in 2010.Act (ACA)). Various insurance market reforms have since advanced and state and federal insurance exchanges were launched in 2014. By the end of the decade, the law is expected to expand access to health care to about 32 million Americans who did not previously have insurance coverage. With respect to the effect of the law on the pharmaceutical industry, the law increased the mandated Medicaid rebate from 15.1% to 23.1%, expanded the rebate to Medicaid managed care utilization, and increased the types of entities eligible for the federal 340B drug discount program. The law also requires pharmaceutical manufacturers to pay a 50% point of service discount to Medicare Part D beneficiaries when they are in the Medicare Part D coverage gap (i.e., the so-called “donut hole”). Approximately $550$365 million, $430$385 million and $280$415 million was recorded by Merck as a reduction to revenue in 2015, 20142018, 2017 and 2013,2016, respectively, related to the donut hole provision. Beginning in 2019, the 50% point of service discount will increase to a 70% point of service discount in the coverage gap, as a result of the Balanced Budget Act of 2018. In addition, the 70% point of service discount will be extended to biosimilar products. Also, pharmaceutical manufacturers are now required to pay an annual non-tax deductible health care reform fee. The total annual industry fee was $3.0$4.1 billion in 20152018 and will remain $3.0decrease to $2.8 billion in 2016.2019 and is currently planned to remain at that amount thereafter. The fee is assessed on each company in proportion to its share of prior year branded pharmaceutical sales to certain government programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid. The Company recorded $173$124 million, $390$210 million and $151$193 million of costs within MarketingSelling, general and administrative expenses in 2015, 20142018, 2017 and 2013,2016, respectively, for the annual health care reform fee. The higher expenses in 2014 reflect final regulations on the annual health care reform fee issued by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) on July 28, 2014. The final IRS regulations accelerated the recognition criteria for the fee obligation by one year to the year in which the underlying sales used to allocate the fee occurred rather than the year in which the fee was paid. As a result of this change, Merck recorded an additional year of expense of $193 million in 2014. On January 21,In February 2016, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) issued the Medicaid Rebate Final Rulerebate final rule that implements provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care ActACA effective April 1, 2016. The rule provides comprehensive guidance on the calculation of Average Manufacturer Price and Best Price; two metrics utilized to determine the rebates drug manufacturers are required to pay to state Medicaid programs. The impact of changes resulting from the issuance of the rule is not material to Merck at this time. However, the Company is still evaluatingawaiting guidance from CMS on two aspects of the rule that were deferred for later implementation. These include a definition of what constitutes a product ‘line extension’ and a delay in the participation of the U.S. Territories in the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program until April 1, 2020. The Company will evaluate the financial impact of these two elements when they become effective.

There is significant uncertainty about the future of the ACA in particular and health care laws in general in the United States. The Company is participating in the debate, and monitoring how any proposed changes could affect its business. The Company is unable to determine whether it willpredict the likelihood of changes to the ACA. Depending on the nature of any repeal and replacement of the ACA, such actions could have a material impactadverse effect on Merck’s Medicaid rebate liability.the Company’s business, cash flow, results of operations, financial position and prospects.
A number of states have passed pharmaceutical price and cost transparency laws. These laws typically require manufacturers to report certain product price information or other financial data to the state. In the case of a California law, manufacturers also are required to provide advance notification of price increases. The Company expects that states will continue their focus on pharmaceutical price transparency and that this focus will continue to exert pressure on product pricing.
The Company also faces increasing pricing pressure globally from managed care organizations, government agencies and programs that could negatively affect the Company’s sales and profit margins. In the United States, these include (i) practices of managed care organizations, federal and state exchanges, and institutional and governmental purchasers, and (ii) U.S. federal laws and regulations related to Medicare and Medicaid, including the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 and the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. ACA.
Changes to the health care system enacted as part of health care reform in the United States, as well as increased purchasing power of entities that negotiate on behalf of Medicare, Medicaid, and private sector beneficiaries, could result in further pricing pressures. As an example, health care reform is contributing to an increase in the number of patients in the Medicaid program under which sales of pharmaceutical products are subject to substantial rebates.
In addition, in the effort to contain the U.S. federal deficit, the pharmaceutical industry could be considered a potential source of savings via legislative proposals that have been debated but not enacted. These types of revenue generating or cost saving proposals include additional direct price controls in the Medicare prescription drug program (Part D). In addition, Congress may again consider proposals to allow, under certain conditions, the importation of

5


medicines from other countries. It remains very uncertain as to what proposals, if any, may be included as part of future federal budget deficit reduction proposals that would directly or indirectly affect the Company.
In the U.S. private sector, consolidation and integration among health care providers is a major factor in the competitive marketplace for pharmaceutical products. Health plans and pharmacy benefit managers have been consolidating into fewer, larger entities, thus enhancing their purchasing strength and importance. Private third-party insurers, as well as governments, increasingly employ formularies to control costs by negotiating discounted prices in exchange for formulary inclusion. Failure to obtain timely or adequate pricing or formulary placement for Merck’s products or obtaining such placement at unfavorable pricing could adversely impact revenue. In addition to formulary tier co-pay differentials, private health insurance companies and self-insured employers have been raising co-payments required from beneficiaries, particularly for branded pharmaceuticals and biotechnology products. Private health insurance companies also are increasingly imposing utilization management tools, such as clinical protocols, requiring prior authorization for a branded product if a generic product is available or requiring the patient to first fail on one or more generic products before permitting access to a branded medicine. These same management tools are also used in treatment areas in which the payer has taken the position that multiple branded products are therapeutically comparable. As the U.S. payer market concentrates further and as more drugs become available in generic form, pharmaceutical companies may face greater pricing pressure from private third-party payers.
In order to provide information about the Company’s pricing practices, the Company annually posts on its website its Pricing Transparency Report for the United States. The report provides the Company’s average annual list price and net price increases across the Company’s U.S. portfolio dating back to 2010. 
Efforts toward health care cost containment also remain intense in several European countries. Many countries have continued to announce and execute austerity measures, which include the implementation ofThe Company faces competitive pricing actions to reduce prices ofpressure resulting from generic and patented drugs and mandatory switches to genericbiosimilar drugs. While the Company is taking steps to mitigate the impact in these countries, the austerity measures continued to negatively affect the Company’s revenue performance in 2015 and the Company anticipates the austerity measures will continue to negatively affect revenue performance in 2016. In addition, a majority of countries in Europe attempt to contain drug costs by engaging in reference pricing in which authorities examine pre-determined markets for published prices of drugs by brand. The authorities then use price data from those markets to set new local prices for brand-name drugs, including the Company’s. Guidelines for examining reference pricing are usually set in local markets and can be changed pursuant to local regulations.

In addition, in Japan, the pharmaceutical industry is subject to government-mandated biennial price reductions of pharmaceutical products and certain vaccines, which will occur againoccurred in 2016.2018. Furthermore, the government can order repricings for classes of drugs if it determines that it is appropriate under applicable rules.
Certain markets outside of the United States have also implemented other cost management strategies, such as health technology assessments (HTA), which require additional data, reviews and administrative processes, all of which increase the complexity, timing and costs of obtaining product reimbursement and exert downward pressure on available reimbursement. In the United States, HTAs are also being used by government and private payers.
The Company’s focus on emerging markets has increased.continued. Governments in many emerging markets are also focused on constraining health care costs and have enacted price controls and related measures, such as compulsory licenses, that aim to put pressure on the price of pharmaceuticals and constrain market access. The Company anticipates that pricing pressures and market access challenges will continue in 20162019 to varying degrees in the emerging markets.
Beyond pricing and market access challenges, other conditions in emerging market countries can affect the Company’s efforts to continue to grow in these markets, including potential political instability, changes in trade sanctions and embargoes, significant currency fluctuation and controls, financial crises, limited or changing availability of funding for health care, and other developments that may adversely impact the business environment for the Company. Further, the Company may engage third-party agents to assist in operating in emerging market countries, which may affect its ability to realize continued growth and may also increase the Company’s risk exposure.
In addressing cost containment pressures, the Company engages in public policy advocacy with policymakers and continues to work to demonstrate that its medicines provide value to patients and to those who pay for health care. The Company advocates with government policymakers to encourage a long-term approach to sustainable health care financing that ensures access to innovative medicines and does not disproportionately target pharmaceuticals as a source of budget savings. In markets with historically low rates of health care spending, the Company encourages those governments to increase their investments and adopt market reforms in order to improve their citizens’ access to appropriate health care, including medicines.
Operating conditions have become more challenging under the global pressures of competition, industry regulation and cost containment efforts. Although no one can predict the effect of these and other factors on the Company’s business, the Company continually takes measures to evaluate, adapt and improve the organization and its business practices to better meet customer needs and believes that it is well positionedwell-positioned to respond to the evolving health care environment and market forces.
The pharmaceutical industry is also subject to regulation by regional, country, state and local agencies around the world focused on standards and processes for determining drug safety and effectiveness, as well as conditions for sale or reimbursement.
Of particular importance is the FDA in the United States, which administers requirements covering the testing, approval, safety, effectiveness, manufacturing, labeling, and marketing of prescription pharmaceuticals. In some cases, the FDA requirements and practices have increased the amount of time and resources necessary to develop new products and bring them to market in the United States. At the same time, the FDA has committed to expediting the development and review of products bearing the “breakthrough therapy” designation, which appears to havehas accelerated the regulatory review process for medicines with this designation. The FDA has also undertaken efforts to bring generic competition to market more efficiently and in a more timely manner.

6


The EUEuropean Union (EU) has adopted directives and other legislation concerning the classification, labeling, advertising, wholesale distribution, integrity of the supply chain, enhanced pharmacovigilance monitoring and approval for marketing of medicinal products for human use. These provide mandatory standards throughout the EU, which may be supplemented or implemented with additional regulations by the EU member states. The Company’s policies and procedures are already consistent with the substance of these directives; consequently, it is believed that they will not have any material effect on the Company’s business.
The Company’s business in China has grown rapidly in the past few years, and the importance of China to the Company’s overall pharmaceutical and vaccines business has increased accordingly. Continued growth of the Company’s business in China is dependent upon ongoing development of a favorable environment for innovative pharmaceutical products and vaccines, sustained access for the Company’s current in-line products, and the absence

of trade impediments or adverse pricing controls. In recent years, the Chinese government has introduced and implemented a number of structural reforms to accelerate the shift to innovative products and reduce costs. Since 2017, there have been multiple new policies introduced by the government to improve access to new innovation, reduce the complexity of regulatory filings, and accelerate the review and approval process. This has led to a significant expansion of the new products being approved each year. Additionally, in 2017, the government updated the National Reimbursement Drug List for the first time in eight years. While the mechanism for drugs being added to the list evolves, it is likely that in the future, inclusion will require a price negotiation which could impact the outlook in the market for selected brands. While pricing pressure has always existed in China, health care reform has led to the acceleration of generic substitution, through a pilot tendering process for mature products that have generic substitutes with a Generic Quality Consistency Evaluation approval.
The Company believes that it will continue to be able to conduct its operations, including launching new drugs, in this regulatory environment. (See “Research and Development” below for a discussion of the regulatory approval process.)
Access to Medicines
As a global health care company, Merck’s primary role is to discover and develop innovative medicines and vaccines. The Company also recognizes that it has an important role to play in helping to improve access to its products around the world. The Company’s efforts in this regard are wide-ranging and include a set of principles that the Company strives to embed into its operations and business strategies to guide the Company’s worldwide approach to expanding access to health care. In addition, the Company has many far-reaching philanthropic programs. The Merck Patient Assistance Program provides medicines and adult vaccines for free to people in the United States who do not have prescription drug or health insurance coverage and who, without the Company’s assistance, cannot afford their Merck medicine and vaccines. In 2011, Merck launched “Merck for Mothers,” a long-term effort with global health partners to end preventable deaths from complications of pregnancy and childbirth. Merck has also provided funds to the Merck Foundation, an independent organization, which has partnered with a variety of organizations dedicated to improving global health.
Privacy and Data Protection
The Company is subject to a significant number of privacy and data protection laws and regulations globally, many of which place restrictions on the Company’s ability to efficiently transfer, access and use personal data across its business. The legislative and regulatory landscape for privacy and data protection continues to evolve. There has been increased attention to privacy and data protection issues in both developed and emerging markets with the potential to affect directly the Company’s business, including athe new EU General Data Protection Regulation, which will become effective inwent into effect on May 25, 2018 and imposeimposes penalties up to four percent4% of global revenue, additionalrevenue. Additional laws and regulations enacted in the United States, Europe, Asia and Latin America, increasedincreases enforcement and litigation activity in the United States and other developed markets, and increasedincreases regulatory cooperation among privacy authorities globally. The Company has adopted a comprehensive global privacy program to manage these evolving risks which has been certified as compliant with and approved by the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation Cross-Border Privacy Rules System, the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield Program, and is under regulatory reviewthe Binding Corporate Rules in the EU.
In October 2015, the Court of Justice of the EU invalidated a 2000 decision of the EC, which had held that the U.S.-EU Safe Harbor Framework (Safe Harbor) provided adequate protection for transfers of personal data from the European Economic Area to the United States. Merck had annually self-certified adherence to the Safe Harbor since 2001 and relied on the Safe Harbor for a significant number of data transfers across its business. Since November 2014, Merck has been working toward regulatory recognition of its global privacy program as meeting the EU’s binding corporate rules requirements, an alternative legal mechanism for internal company transfers. At the end of January 2016, EU review for the Company’s binding corporate rules application was completed for the 21 EU member states that participate in the EU mutual recognition process. Completion of the final EU cooperation review phase is expected in the first quarter of 2016. Binding corporate rules approval in the EU is expected to reduce the operational impact of the Safe Harbor invalidation on our global business. Cross-border data transfers to third parties that support the Company’s business will not be directly facilitated by its binding corporate rules, once approved. However, the Company anticipates that the standards its global privacy program has met through its binding corporate rules review will support its ability to comply with the new EU-U.S. Privacy Shield, a transatlantic data transfer agreement to replace the Safe Harbor, which was announced on February 2, 2016, as well as to continue to implement other data transfer mechanisms as necessary to support its business.

7


Distribution
The Company sells its human health pharmaceutical products primarily to drug wholesalers and retailers, hospitals, government agencies and managed health care providers, such as health maintenance organizations, pharmacy benefit managers and other institutions. Human health vaccines are sold primarily to physicians, wholesalers, physician distributors and government entities. The Company’s professional representatives communicate the effectiveness, safety and value of the Company’s pharmaceutical and vaccine products to health care professionals in private practice, group practices, hospitals and managed care organizations. The Company sells its animal health products to veterinarians, distributors and animal producers.
Raw Materials
Raw materials and supplies, which are generally available from multiple sources, are purchased worldwide and are normally available in quantities adequate to meet the needs of the Company’s business.

Patents, Trademarks and Licenses
Patent protection is considered, in the aggregate, to be of material importance into the Company’s marketing of its products in the United States and in most major foreign markets. Patents may cover products per se, pharmaceutical formulations, processes for or intermediates useful in the manufacture of products or the uses of products. Protection for individual products extends for varying periods in accordance with the legal life of patents in the various countries. The protection afforded, which may also vary from country to country, depends upon the type of patent and its scope of coverage.
The Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act includes a Pediatric Exclusivity Provision that may provide an additional six months of market exclusivity in the United States for indications of new or currently marketed drugs if certain agreed upon pediatric studies are completed by the applicant. Current U.S. patent law provides additional patent term under Patent Term Restoration for periods when the patented product was under regulatory review by the FDA.

8

Table The EU also provides an additional six months of Contentspediatric market exclusivity attached to a product’s Supplementary Protection Certificate (SPC). Japan provides the additional term for pediatric studies attached to market exclusivity unrelated to patent rights.

Patent portfolios developed for products introduced by the Company normally provide market exclusivity. The Company has the following key U.S. patent protection in the United States, the EU and Japan (including the potential for Patent Term Restorationpatent term extensions (PTE) and Pediatric ExclusivitySPCs where indicated) for the following marketed products:

Product
Year of Expiration (in the U.S.)(1)
Invanz2016 (compound)/2017 (composition)
Cubicin(2)
2016 (composition)
Zostavax2016 (use)
Dulera2017 (formulation)/2020 (combination)
Zetia(3)/Vytorin
2017
Asmanex2018 (formulation)
Nasonex(4)
2018 (formulation)
NuvaRing2018 (delivery system)
Emend for Injection(5)
2019
Noxafil(5)
2019
RotaTeq2019
Intron A2020
Recombivax2020 (method of making/vectors)
Januvia(5)/Janumet(5)/Janumet XR(5)
2022
Isentress(5)
2023
Bridion(5)
2026 (with pending Patent Term Restoration)
Nexplanon2026 (device)/2027 (device with applicator)
Grastek2026 (use)
Ragwitek2026 (use)
Bravecto2027 (with pending Patent Term Restoration)
Zontivity(5)
2027 (with pending Patent Term Restoration)
Gardasil/Gardasil 92028
Keytruda2028
Zerbaxa(5)
2028 (with pending Patent Term Restoration)
Sivextro(5)
2028 (with pending Patent Term Restoration)
Belsomra(5)
2029
Zepatier(5)
2031
ProductYear of Expiration (U.S.)
Year of Expiration (EU)(1)
Year of Expiration (Japan)(3)
EmendExpired20192019
Emend for Injection
2019
2020(2)
2020
Noxafil20192019N/A
Vaxelis(4)
2020 (method of making)
2021(5) (SPCs)
Not Marketed
Januvia
2022(2)
2022(2)
2025-2026
Janumet
2022(2)
2023N/A
Janumet XR
2022(2)
N/AN/A
Isentress2024
2022(2)
2022
Simponi
N/A(6)
2025(7)
N/A(6)
Lenvima(8)
2025(2) (with pending PTE)
2021 (patents), 2026(2) (SPCs)
2026
Adempas(9)
2026(2)
2028(2)
2027-2028
Bridion
2026(2) (with pending PTE)
20232024
Nexplanon2027 (device)2025 (device)Not Marketed
Bravecto2027 (with pending PTE)2025 (patents), 2029 (SPCs)2029
Gardasil2028
2021(2)
Expired
Gardasil 9
2028
2025 (patents), 2030(2) (SPCs)
N/A
Keytruda2028
2028 (patents), 2030(2) (SPCs)
2032
Lynparza(10)
2028(2) (with pending PTE)
2024 (patents), 2029(2) (SPCs)
2028-2029 (with pending PTE)
Zerbaxa
2028(2) (with pending PTE)
2023 (patents), 2028(2) (SPCs)
N/A
Sivextro
2028(2)
2024 (patents), 2029(2) (SPCs)
2029 (with pending PTE)
Belsomra
2029(2)
N/A2031
Prevymis
2029(2) (with pending PTE)
2024 (patents), 2029(2) (SPCs)
2029 (with pending PTE)
Steglatro(11)
2031(2) (with pending PTE)
2029 (patents), 2034(2) (SPCs)
N/A
Steglujan(11)
2031 (with pending PTE)
2029 (patents), 2034 (SPCs)N/A
Segluromet(11)
2031 (with pending PTE)2029 (patents), 2034 (SPCs)N/A
Delstrigo2032 (with pending PTE)
2031(12)
N/A
Pifeltro2032 (with pending PTE)
2031(12)
N/A
(1)
N/A:
Currently no marketing approval.
Note:Compound patent unless otherwise noted. Certain of the products listed may be the subject of patent litigation. See Item 8. “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data,” Note 10.11. “Contingencies and Environmental Liabilities” below.
(1)
The EU date represents the expiration date for the following five countries: France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the United Kingdom (Major EU Markets). If SPC applications have been filed but have not been granted in all Major EU Markets, both the patent expiry date and the SPC expiry date are listed.
(2) 
In a December 2014 decision of a district court action against Hospira, Inc. (Hospira), the June 2016 patent was found to be valid and infringed. Later patentsEligible for Cubicin, expiring in September 2019 and November 2020, were found to be invalid. In November 2015, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) affirmed the lower court decision. Hospira’s application to the FDA will not be approved until at least June 2016. An earlier district court action against Teva resulted in a settlement whereby Teva can launch a generic version of Cubicin at the latest in December 2017, or earlier under certain conditions, but in no event before June 2016.
6 months Pediatric Exclusivity.
(3) 
By agreement,The PTE system in Japan allows for a generic manufacturerpatent to be extended more than once provided the later approval is directed to a different indication from that of the previous approval. This may launchresult in multiple PTE approvals for a generic version of Zetia in the United States in December 2016.
given patent, each with its own expiration date.
(4) 
A district court decision (upheld on appeal to the CAFC) found thatBeing commercialized in a proposed generic product by Apotex, a generic manufacturer, would not infringe on Merck’s Nasonex formulation patent. Thus, if Apotex’s application is approved by the FDA, it can enter the market in the United StatesU.S.-based joint partnership with a generic version of Nasonex.
Sanofi Pasteur.
(5) 
Eligible for 6 monthsSPCs are granted in four Major EU Markets and pending in one, based on a patent that expired in 2016.
(6)
The Company has no marketing rights in the U.S. and Japan.
(7)
Includes Pediatric Exclusivity.Exclusivity, which is granted in four Major EU Markets and pending in one.
(8)
Being developed and commercialized in a global strategic oncology collaboration with Eisai.
(9)
Being commercialized in a worldwide collaboration with Bayer AG.
(10)
Being developed and commercialized in a global strategic oncology collaboration with AstraZeneca.
(11)
Being developed and promoted in a worldwide, except Japan, collaboration with Pfizer.
(12)
SPC applications to be filed by May 2019.

While the expiration of a product patent normally results in a loss of market exclusivity for the covered pharmaceutical product, commercial benefits may continue to be derived from: (i) later-granted patents on processes and intermediates related to the most economical method of manufacture of the active ingredient of such product; (ii) patents relating to the use of such product; (iii) patents relating to novel compositions and formulations; and (iv) in the United States and certain other countries, market exclusivity that may be available under relevant law. The effect of product patent expiration on pharmaceutical products also depends upon many other factors such as the nature of the market and the position of the product in it, the growth of the market, the complexities and economics of the process for manufacture of the active ingredient of the product and the requirements of new drug provisions of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act or similar laws and regulations in other countries.
Additions to market exclusivity are sought in the United States and other countries through all relevant laws, including laws increasing patent life. Some of the benefits of increases in patent life have been partially offset by an

9


increase in the number of incentives for and use of generic products. Additionally, improvements in intellectual property laws are sought in the United States and other countries through reform of patent and other relevant laws and implementation of international treaties.
The Company has the following key U.S. patent protection for drug candidates under review in the United States by the FDA. Additional patent term may be provided for these pipeline candidates based on Patent Term Restoration and Pediatric Exclusivity. 
Under Review (in the U.S.)
Currently Anticipated
Year of Expiration (in the U.S.)
V419 (pediatric hexavalent combinationV920 (ebola vaccine)2020 (method of making/vectors)2023
MK-6072 (bezlotoxumab)MK-7655A (relebactam + imipenem/cilastatin)20252029
The Company also has the following key U.S. patent protection for drug candidates in Phase 3 development: 
Phase 3 Drug Candidate
Currently Anticipated
Year of Expiration (in the U.S.)
V212 (inactivated varicella zoster virus (VZV) vaccine)
MK-1242 (vericiguat)(1)
2016 (use)2031
V920 (ebola vaccine)2023
MK-0822 (odanacatib)2024
MK-8228 (letermovir)2025
MK-8237 (allergy, house dust mites)2026 (use)
MK-0859 (anacetrapib)MK-7264 (gefapixant)2027
MK-7655A (relebactam + imipenem/cilastatin)2029
MK-3102 (omarigliptin)2030
MK-8931 (verubecestat)2030
MK-8835 (ertugliflozin)2030
MK-8835A (ertugliflozin + sitagliptin)2030
MK-8835B (ertugliflozin + metformin)2030
MK-1439 (doravirine)V114 (pneumoconjugate vaccine)2031
MK-8342B (contraception, next generation ring)2034
(1)
Being developed in a worldwide clinical development collaboration with Bayer AG.
Unless otherwise noted, the patents in the above charts are compound patents. Each patent is subject to any future patent term restoration of up to five years and six month pediatric market exclusivity, either or both of which may be available. In addition, depending on the circumstances surrounding any final regulatory approval of the compound, there may be other listed patents or patent applications pending that could have relevance to the product as finally approved; the relevance of any such application would depend upon the claims that ultimately may be granted and the nature of the final regulatory approval of the product. Also, regulatory exclusivity tied to the protection of clinical data is complementary to patent protection and, in some cases, may provide more effective or longer lasting marketing exclusivity than a compound’s patent estate. In the United States, the data protection generally runs five years from first marketing approval of a new chemical entity, extended to seven years for an orphan drug indication and 12 years from first marketing approval of a biological product.
For further information with respect to the Company’s patents, see Item 1A. “Risk Factors” and Item 8. “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data,” Note 10.11. “Contingencies and Environmental Liabilities” below.
Worldwide, all of the Company’s important products are sold under trademarks that are considered in the aggregate to be of material importance. Trademark protection continues in some countries as long as used; in other countries, as long as registered. Registration is for fixed terms and can be renewed indefinitely.
Royalty income in 20152018 on patent and know-how licenses and other rights amounted to $221$135 million. Merck also incurred royalty expenses amounting to $1.2$1.3 billion in 20152018 under patent and know-how licenses it holds.
Research and Development
The Company’s business is characterized by the introduction of new products or new uses for existing products through a strong research and development program. Approximately 11,900At December 31, 2018, approximately 14,500 people arewere employed in the Company’s research activities. Research and development expenses were $6.7 billion in 2015, $7.2 billion in 2014 and

10


$7.5 billion in 2013 (which included restructuring costs and acquisition and divestiture-related costs in all years). The Company prioritizes its research and development efforts and focuses on candidates that it believes represent breakthrough science that will make a difference for patients and payers.
The Company maintains a number of long-term exploratory and fundamental research programs in biology and chemistry as well as research programs directed toward product development. The Company’s research and development model is designed to increase productivity and improve the probability of success by prioritizing the Company’s research and development resources on candidates the Company believes are capable of providing unambiguous, promotable advantages to patients and payers and delivering the maximum value of its approved medicines and vaccines through new indications and new formulations. Merck is pursuing emerging product opportunities independent of therapeutic area or modality (small molecule, biologics and vaccines) and is building its biologics capabilities. The Company is committed to makingensuring that externally sourced programs a greater remain an important

component of its pipeline strategy, with a renewed focus on supplementing its internal research with a licensing and external alliance strategy focused on the entire spectrum of collaborations from early research to late-stage compounds, as well as access to new technologies.
The Company also reviews its pipeline to examine candidates whichthat may provide more value through out-licensing. The Company continues to evaluate certain late-stage clinical development and platform technology assets to determine their out-licensing or sale potential.
The Company’s clinical pipeline includes candidates in multiple disease areas, including atherosclerosis, cancer, cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, infectious diseases, inflammatory/autoimmune diseases, neurodegenerative diseases, osteoporosis,neurosciences, obesity, pain, respiratory diseases, and women’s health.vaccines.
In the development of human health products, industry practice and government regulations in the United States and most foreign countries provide for the determination of effectiveness and safety of new chemical compounds through preclinical tests and controlled clinical evaluation. Before a new drug or vaccine may be marketed in the United States, recorded data on preclinical and clinical experience are included in the New Drug Application (NDA) for a drug or the Biologics License Application (BLA) for a vaccine or biologic submitted to the FDA for the required approval.
Once the Company’s scientists discover a new small molecule compound or biologics moleculebiologic that they believe has promise to treat a medical condition, the Company commences preclinical testing with that compound. Preclinical testing includes laboratory testing and animal safety studies to gather data on chemistry, pharmacology, immunogenicity and toxicology. Pending acceptable preclinical data, the Company will initiate clinical testing in accordance with established regulatory requirements. The clinical testing begins with Phase 1 studies, which are designed to assess safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary pharmacodynamic activity of the compound in humans. If favorable, additional, larger Phase 2 studies are initiated to determine the efficacy of the compound in the affected population, define appropriate dosing for the compound, as well as identify any adverse effects that could limit the compound’s usefulness. In some situations, the clinical program incorporates adaptive design methodology to use accumulating data to decide how to modify aspects of the ongoing clinical study as it continues, without undermining the validity and integrity of the trial. One type of adaptive clinical trial is an adaptive Phase 2a/2b trial design, a two-stage trial design consisting of a Phase 2a proof-of-concept stage and a Phase 2b dose-optimization finding stage. If data from the Phase 2 trials are satisfactory, the Company commences large-scale Phase 3 trials to confirm the compound’s efficacy and safety. Another type of adaptive clinical trial is an adaptive Phase 2/3 trial design, a study that includes an interim analysis and an adaptation that changes the trial from having features common in a Phase 2 study (e.g. multiple dose groups) to a design similar to a Phase 3 trial. An adaptive Phase 2/3 trial design reduces timelines by eliminating activities which would be required to start a separate study. Upon completion of Phase 3 trials, if satisfactory, the Company submits regulatory filings with the appropriate regulatory agencies around the world to have the product candidate approved for marketing. There can be no assurance that a compound that is the result of any particular program will obtain the regulatory approvals necessary for it to be marketed.
Vaccine development follows the same general pathway as for drugs. Preclinical testing focuses on the vaccine’s safety and ability to elicit a protective immune response (immunogenicity). Pre-marketing vaccine clinical trials are typically done in three phases. Initial Phase 1 clinical studies are conducted in normal subjects to evaluate the safety, tolerability and immunogenicity of the vaccine candidate. Phase 2 studies are dose-ranging studies. Finally, Phase 3 trials provide the necessary data on effectiveness and safety. If successful, the Company submits regulatory

11


filings with the appropriate regulatory agencies. Also during this stage, the proposed manufacturing facility undergoes a pre-approval inspection during which production of the vaccine as it is in progress is examined in detail.
In the United States, the FDA review process begins once a complete NDA or BLA is submitted, received and accepted for review by the agency. Within 60 days after receipt, the FDA determines if the application is sufficiently complete to permit a substantive review. The FDA also assesses, at that time, whether the application will be granted a priority review or standard review. Pursuant to the Prescription Drug User Fee Act V (PDUFA), the FDA review period target for NDAs or original BLAs is either six months, for priority review, or ten months, for a standard review, from the time the application is deemed sufficiently complete. Once the review timelines are determined, the FDA will generally act upon the application within those timelines, unless a major amendment has been submitted (either at the Company’s own initiative or the FDA’s request) to the pending application. If this occurs, the FDA may extend the review period to allow for review of the new information, but by no more than three months. Extensions to the review period are communicated to the Company. The FDA can act on an application either by issuing an approval letter or by issuing a Complete Response Letter (CRL) stating that the application will not be approved in its present form and describing all deficiencies that the FDA has identified. Should the Company wish to pursue an application after receiving

a CRL, it can resubmit the application with information that addresses the questions or issues identified by the FDA in order to support approval. Resubmissions are subject to review period targets, which vary depending on the underlying submission type and the content of the resubmission.
The FDA has four program designations — Fast Track, Breakthrough Therapy, Accelerated Approval, and Priority Review — to facilitate and expedite development and review of new drugs to address unmet medical needs in the treatment of serious or life-threatening conditions. The Fast Track designation provides pharmaceutical manufacturers with opportunities for frequent interactions with FDA reviewers during the product’s development and the ability for the manufacturer to do a rolling submission of the NDA/BLA. A rolling submission allows completed portions of the application to be submitted and reviewed by the FDA on an ongoing basis. The Breakthrough Therapy designation provides manufacturers with all of the features of the Fast Track designation as well as intensive guidance on implementing an efficient development program for the product and a commitment by the FDA to involve senior managers and experienced staff in the review. The Accelerated Approval designation allows the FDA to approve a product based on an effect on a surrogate or intermediate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict a product’s clinical benefit and generally requires the manufacturer to conduct required post-approval confirmatory trials to verify the clinical benefit. The Priority Review designation means that the FDA’s goal is to take action on the NDA/BLA within six months, compared to ten months under standard review.
In addition, under the Generating Antibiotic Incentives Now Act, the FDA may grant Qualified Infectious Disease Product (QIDP) status to antibacterial or antifungal drugs intended to treat serious or life threatening infections including those caused by antibiotic or antifungal resistant pathogens, novel or emerging infectious pathogens, or other qualifying pathogens. QIDP designation offers certain incentives for development of qualifying drugs, including Priority Review of the NDA when filed, eligibility for Fast Track designation, and a five-year extension of applicable exclusivity provisions under the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act.
The primary method the Company uses to obtain marketing authorization of pharmaceutical products in the EU is through the “centralized procedure.” This procedure is compulsory for certain pharmaceutical products, in particular those using biotechnological processes, and is also available for certain new chemical compounds and products. A company seeking to market an innovative pharmaceutical product through the centralized procedure must file a complete set of safety data and efficacy data as part of a Marketing Authorization Application (MAA) with the European Medicines Agency (EMA). After the EMA evaluates the MAA, it provides a recommendation to the EC and the EC then approves or denies the MAA. It is also possible for new chemical products to obtain marketing authorization in the EU through a “mutual recognition procedure” in which an application is made to a single member state and, if the member state approves the pharmaceutical product under a national procedure, the applicant may submit that approval to the mutual recognition procedure of some or all other member states.
Outside of the United States and the EU, the Company submits marketing applications to national regulatory authorities. Examples of such are the Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency in Japan, Health Canada, Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanatária in Brazil, Korea Food and Drug Administration in South Korea, Therapeutic Goods Administration in Australia and China Food and Drug Administration. Each country has a separate and independent review process and timeline. In many markets, approval times can be longer as the regulatory authority requires approval

12


in a major market, such as the United States or the EU, and issuance of a Certificate of Pharmaceutical Product from that market before initiating their local review process.
Research and Development Update
The Company currently has several candidates under regulatory review in the United States orand internationally.
Keytruda is an FDA-approvedapproved anti-PD-1 therapy in clinical development for expanded indications in different cancer types.
In February 2019, the FDA accepted and granted Priority Review for a supplemental BLA for Keytruda is currently approvedin combination with Inlyta (axitinib), a tyrosine kinase inhibitor, for the first-line treatment of melanoma,patients with advanced melanomarenal cell carcinoma. This supplemental BLA is based on findings from the Phase 3 KEYNOTE-426 trial, which demonstrated that Keytruda in combination with axitinib, as compared to sunitinib, significantly improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in the first-line treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma. These data were presented at the American Society for Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Genitourinary Cancers Symposium in

February 2019. The supplemental BLA also included supporting data from the Phase 1b KEYNOTE-035 trial. The FDA set a PDUFA date of June 20, 2019. Merck has filed data from KEYNOTE-426 with regulatory authorities worldwide.
In February 2019, the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use of the EMA adopted a positive opinion recommending Keytruda, in combination with carboplatin and either paclitaxel or nab-paclitaxel, for the first-line treatment of metastatic squamous NSCLC in adults. This recommendation is based on results from the pivotal Phase 3 KEYNOTE-407 trial, which enrolled patients regardless of PD-L1 tumor expression status. The trial showed a significant improvement in OS and PFS for patients taking Keytruda in combination with chemotherapy (carboplatin and either paclitaxel or nab-paclitaxel) compared with chemotherapy alone. If approved, this would mark the first approval in Europe for an anti-PD-1 therapy in combination with chemotherapy for adults with metastatic squamous NSCLC. In October 2018, the FDA approved Keytruda in combination with carboplatin-paclitaxel or nab-paclitaxel as a first-line treatment for metastatic squamous NSCLC, regardless of PD-L1 expression.
In December 2015, Merck announced results from2018, the pivotal KEYNOTE-010 study to evaluateFDA extended the potential of an immunotherapy compared to chemotherapy based on prospective measurement of PD-L1 expression in patients with advanced NSCLC. Inaction date for the Phase 2/3 study,supplemental BLA seeking approval for Keytruda significantly improved overall survivalas monotherapy for the first-line treatment of locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC in patients whose tumors express PD-L1 (TPS ≥1%) without EGFR or ALK genomic tumor aberrations. The supplemental BLA is based on results of the Phase 3 KEYNOTE-042 trial where Keytruda monotherapy demonstrated a significant improvement in OS compared towith chemotherapy in patientsthis patient population. The Company submitted additional data and analyses to the FDA, which constituted a major amendment and extended the PDUFA date by three months to April 11, 2019. Merck continues to work closely with any levelthe FDA during the review of PD-L1 expression. Based on these data, Merck has submittedthis supplemental BLA.
In February 2019, the FDA accepted and granted Priority Review for a supplemental BLA to the FDA and has filed an MAA with the EMA.
In November 2015, Merck announced that the FDA granted Breakthrough Therapy designation tofor Keytruda as monotherapy for the treatment of patients with microsatellite instability high metastatic colorectal cancer.advanced small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) whose disease has progressed after two or more lines of prior therapy. This supplemental BLA, which is seeking accelerated approval for this new indication, is based on data from the SCLC cohorts of the Phase 2 KEYNOTE-158 and Phase 1b KEYNOTE-028 trials. The FDA set a PDUFA date of June 17, 2019. Keytruda is also being studied in combination with chemotherapy in the ongoing Phase 3 KEYNOTE-604 study in patients with newly diagnosed extensive stage SCLC.
In February 2019, the FDA accepted a supplemental BLA for Keytruda as monotherapy or in combination with platinum and 5-fluorouracil chemotherapy for the first-line treatment of patients with recurrent or metastatic HNSCC. This supplemental BLA is based in part on data from the pivotal Phase 3 KEYNOTE-048 trial where Keytruda demonstrated a significant improvement in OS compared with the standard of care, as monotherapy in patients whose tumors expressed PD-L1 with Combined Positive Score (CPS)≥20 and CPS≥1 and in combination with chemotherapy in the total patient population. These data were presented at the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) 2018 Congress. The FDA granted Priority Review to the supplemental BLA and set a PDUFA date of June 10, 2019. KEYNOTE-048 also serves as the confirmatory trial for KEYNOTE-012, a Phase 1b study which supported the previous accelerated approval for Keytruda as monotherapy for the treatment of patients with recurrent or metastatic HNSCC with disease progression on or after platinum-containing chemotherapy.
In November 2018, Merck announced that the Phase 3 KEYNOTE-181 trial investigating Keytruda as monotherapy in the second-line treatment of advanced or metastatic esophageal or esophagogastric junction carcinoma met a primary endpoint of OS in patients whose tumors expressed PD-L1 (CPS ≥10). In this pivotal study, treatment with Keytruda resulted in a statistically significant improvement in OS compared to chemotherapy (paclitaxel, docetaxel or irinotecan) in patients with CPS ≥10, regardless of histology. The primary endpoint of OS was previously grantedalso evaluated in patients with squamous cell histology and in the entire intention-to-treat study population. While directionally favorable, statistical significance for OS was not met in these two patient groups. Per the statistical analysis plan, the key secondary endpoints of PFS and objective response rate (ORR) were not formally tested, as OS was not reached in the full intention-to-treat study population. These results were presented in January 2019 at the ASCO Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium and have been submitted for regulatory review.
Additionally, Keytruda has received Breakthrough Therapy statusdesignation from the FDA for the treatment of high-risk early-stage triple-negative breast cancer in combination with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The FDA’s Breakthrough Therapy designation is intended to expedite the development and review of a candidate that is planned for use, alone or in combination, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition when preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the drug may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints.

In October 2018, Merck announced the first presentation of results from an interim analysis of KEYNOTE-057, a Phase 2 trial evaluating Keytruda for previously treated patients with high-risk non-muscle invasive bladder cancer. An interim analysis of the study’s primary endpoint showed a complete response rate of nearly 40% at three months with Keytruda in patients whose disease was unresponsive to Bacillus Calmette-Guérin therapy, the current standard of care for this disease, and who were ineligible for or who refused to undergo radical cystectomy. These results, as well as other study findings, were presented at the ESMO 2018 Congress.
In February 2019, Merck announced that the pivotal Phase 3 KEYNOTE-240 trial evaluating Keytruda, plus best supportive care, for the treatment of patients with advanced melanomahepatocellular carcinoma who were previously treated with systemic therapy, did not meet its co-primary endpoints of OS and advanced NSCLC.PFS compared with placebo plus best supportive care. In the final analysis of the study, there was an improvement in OS for patients treated with Keytruda compared to placebo, however these OS results did not meet statistical significance per the pre-specified statistical plan. Results for PFS were also directionally favorable in the Keytruda arm compared with placebo but did not reach statistical significance. The key secondary endpoint of ORR was not formally tested, since superiority was not reached for OS or PFS. Results will be presented at an upcoming medical meeting and have been shared with the FDA for discussion.
The Keytruda clinical development program consists of more than 200900 clinical trials, including over 100more than 600 trials that combine Keytruda with other cancer treatments. These studies encompass more than 30 cancer types including: bladder, cervical, colorectal, esophageal, gastric, head and neck, hepatocellular, Hodgkin lymphoma, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, melanoma, multiple myeloma, non-small-cellmesothelioma, nasopharyngeal, NSCLC, ovarian, PMBCL, prostate, renal, small-cell lung and triple negativetriple-negative breast, severalmany of which are currently in Phase 3 clinical development. Further trials are being planned for other cancers.
MK-6072, bezlotoxumab,Lynparza, is an investigational antitoxinoral PARP inhibitor currently approved for the preventioncertain types of Clostridium difficile(C. difficile) infection recurrence currently under review with the FDAovarian and EMA.breast cancer. In January 2016,July 2017, Merck and AstraZeneca entered into a global strategic oncology collaboration to co-develop and co-commercialize AstraZeneca’s Lynparza for multiple cancer types.
In April 2018, Merck and AstraZeneca announced that the FDA acceptedEMA validated for review the BLAMAA for bezlotoxumab and granted Priority ReviewLynparza for use in patients with a PDUFA action date of July 23, 2016. In September 2015, Merck announced that the two pivotal Phase 3 clinical studies for bezlotoxumab met their primary efficacy endpoint: the reduction indeleterious or suspected deleterious C. difficileBRCA recurrence through week 12 compared to placebo, when used in conjunction-mutated, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer who have been previously treated with standard of care antibiotics for the treatment of C. difficile. The Company is also seeking approvalchemotherapy in the EU and intends to fileneoadjuvant, adjuvant or metastatic setting. This was the first regulatory submission for a PARP inhibitor in Canadabreast cancer in 2016. Currently, thereEurope.
Lynparza tablets are no therapies approved for the prevention of recurrent disease caused by C. difficile.
MK-1293 is an insulin glargine candidate for the treatment of patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes being developed in collaboration with Samsung Bioepis. In December 2015, the Company submitted an application for regulatory approval in the EU and plans to submit MK-1293 to the FDA in 2016.
MK-5172A, Zepatier, currentlyalso under review in the EU for theas a maintenance treatment of chronic HCV, is a once-daily, fixed-dose combination tablet containing the NS5A inhibitor elbasvir (50 mg) and the NS3/4A protease inhibitor grazoprevir (100 mg). Zepatier was approved by the FDA in January 2016 for the treatment of adult patients with chronic HCV GT1newly-diagnosed, BRCA-mutated advanced ovarian cancer who were in complete or GT4 infection, with or without ribavirin.
V419 is an investigational pediatric hexavalent combination vaccine, DTaP5-IPV-Hib-HepB, under review with the FDA that is being developed and, if approved, will be commercialized through a partnership of Merck and Sanofi Pasteur.partial response following first-line standard platinum-based chemotherapy. This vaccine is designed to help protect against six important diseases - diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis (whooping cough), polio (poliovirus types 1, 2, and 3), invasive disease caused by Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib), and hepatitis B. On November 2, 2015, the FDA issued a CRL with respect to the BLA for V419. Both companies are reviewing the CRL and plan to have further communication with the FDA. In February 2016, the EC granted marketing authorization for V419 for prophylaxis against diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, hepatitis B, poliomyelitis, and invasive disease caused by Hib, in infants and toddlers from the age of 6 weeks. V419 will be marketed as Vaxelis in the EU through SPMSD, the Company’s joint venture with Sanofi Pasteur.
In addition to the candidates under regulatory review, the Company has several drug candidates in Phase 3 clinical development in addition to the Keytruda programs discussed above. The Company anticipates filing applications for regulatory approval with the FDA with respect to certain of these candidates in 2016, including MK-1293 as noted above.
MK-0822, odanacatib, is an oral, once-weekly investigational treatment for patients with osteoporosis. Osteoporosis is a disease that reduces bone density and strength andsubmission was based on positive results in an increased risk of bone fractures.

13


Odanacatib is a cathepsin K inhibitor that selectively inhibits the cathepsin K enzyme. Cathepsin K is known to play a central role in the function of osteoclasts, which are cells that break down existing bone tissue, particularly the protein components of bone. Inhibition of cathepsin K is a novel approach to the treatment of osteoporosis. In September 2014, Merck announced data from the pivotal Phase 3 fracture outcomes studySOLO-1 trial. The trial showed a statistically-significant and clinically-meaningful improvement in PFS for odanacatib in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. In the Long-Term Odanacatib Fracture Trial (LOFT), odanacatib met its primary endpoints and significantly reducedLynparza compared to placebo, reducing the risk of three typesdisease progression or death by 70% in patients with newly-diagnosed, BRCA-mutated advanced ovarian cancer who were in complete or partial response to platinum-based chemotherapy.
In December 2018, Merck and AstraZeneca announced positive results from the randomized, open-label, controlled, Phase 3 SOLO-3 trial of osteoporotic fractures (radiographically-assessed vertebral, clinical hip,Lynparza tablets in patients with relapsed ovarian cancer after two or more lines of treatment. The trial was conducted as a post-approval commitment in agreement with the FDA. Results from the trial showed BRCA-mutated advanced ovarian cancer patients treated with Lynparza following two or more prior lines of chemotherapy demonstrated a statistically significant and clinical non-vertebral) compared to placeboclinically meaningful improvement in the primary endpoint of ORR and also reduced the risk of thekey secondary endpoint of clinical vertebral fractures. In addition, treatment with odanacatib led to progressive increases over five years in bone mineral density at the lumbar spine and total hip. The rates of adverse events overall in LOFT were generally balanced between patients taking odanacatib and placebo. Adjudicated events of morphea-like skin lesions and atypical femoral fractures occurred more often in the odanacatib group than in the placebo group. Adjudicated major adverse cardiovascular events were generally balanced overall between the treatment groups. There were numerically more adjudicated stroke events with odanacatib than with placebo. Adjudicated atrial fibrillation was reported more often in the odanacatib group than in the placebo group. A numeric imbalance in mortality was observed; this numeric difference does not appear to be related to a particular reported cause or causes of death. Merck continues to collect data from the blinded extension study and is planning additional analyses of data from the trial, including an independent re-adjudication of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), in support of regulatory submissions. Merck plans to submit an NDA to the FDA for odanacatib in 2016 following completion of the independent adjudication and analysis of MACE. Merck also plans to submit applications to the EMA and the Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare in Japan.
MK-3102, omarigliptin, is an investigational once-weekly DPP-4 inhibitor in development for the treatment of adults with type 2 diabetes. In September 2015, the Company announced that omarigliptin achieved its primary efficacy endpoint in a Phase 3 study. Omarigliptin was found to be non-inferior to Januvia, at reducing patients’ A1C (an estimate of a person’s blood glucose over a two-to three-month period) levels from baseline, with similar A1C reductions achieved in both groups. The head-to-head study was designed to evaluate once-weekly treatment with omarigliptin 25 mgPFS compared to 100 mg of Januvia once daily. Results were presented during an oral session at the 51st European Association for the Study of Diabetes Annual Meeting. Also, in September 2015, Merck announced that the Japanese Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency approved Marizev (omarigliptin) 25 mg and 12.5 mg tablets. Japan is the first country to have approved omarigliptin. Merck plans to submit omarigliptin for regulatory approval in the United States in 2016. Other worldwide regulatory submissions will follow.
MK-8835, ertugliflozin, is an investigational oral sodium glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitor being evaluated for the treatment of type 2 diabetes in collaboration with Pfizer Inc. Ertugliflozin is also being studied in combination with Januvia (sitagliptin) and metformin. Merck expects to submit applications for regulatory approval in the United States for ertugliflozin and the two fixed-dose combination tablets by the end of 2016.
MK-8237 is an investigational allergy immunotherapy tablet for house dust mite allergy that is part of a North America partnership betweenchemotherapy. Merck and ALK-Abello. Merck plansAstraZeneca plan to submit an NDA todiscuss these results with the FDA for MK-8237 in the first half of 2016.
MK-8931, verubecestat, is Merck’s novel investigational oral ß-amyloid precursor protein site-cleaving enzyme (BACE) inhibitor for the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease being studied in a Phase 3 trial (APECS) designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of MK-8931 versus placebo in patients with amnestic mild cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer’s disease, also known as prodromal Alzheimer’s disease. MK-8931 is also being studied in another Phase 2/3 randomized, placebo-controlled, study in patients with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer’s disease (EPOCH). The EPOCH study completed enrollment in the fourth quarter of 2015 and is estimated to reach primary trial completion in mid-2017.
MK-0859, anacetrapib, is an investigational inhibitor of the cholesteryl ester transfer protein (CETP) in development for raising HDL-C and reducing LDL-C. Anacetrapib is being evaluated in a 30,000 patient, event-driven cardiovascular clinical outcomes trial sponsored by Oxford University, REVEAL (Randomized EValuation of the Effects of Anacetrapib Through Lipid-modification), involving patients with preexisting vascular disease, which is projected to conclude in early 2017. In November 2015, Merck announced that the Data Monitoring Committee (DMC) of the REVEAL outcomes study completed its planned review of unblinded study data and recommended the study continue with no changes. The DMC reviewed safety and efficacy data from the study, which included an assessment of futility. Merck remains blinded to the actual results of this analysis and to other REVEAL safety and efficacy data.

14


The REVEAL Steering Committee and Merck will continue to monitor the progress of the study. No additional interim efficacy analyses are planned.FDA.
MK-7655A is a combination of relebactam, an investigational beta-lactamase inhibitor, and imipenem/cilastatin (an approved carbapenem antibiotic). In February 2019, Merck announced that the FDA accepted for Priority Review an NDA for MK-7655A for the treatment of complicated urinary tract infections and complicated intra-abdominal infections caused by certain susceptible Gram-negative bacteria in adults with limited or no alternative therapies available. The PDUFA date is July 16, 2019. In April 2018, Merck announced that a pivotal Phase 3 study of MK-7655A demonstrated a favorable overall response in the treatment of certain imipenem-non-susceptible bacterial infections, the primary endpoint, with lower treatment-emergent nephrotoxicity (kidney toxicity), a secondary endpoint, compared to a colistin (colistimethate sodium) plus imipenem/cilastatin regimen. The FDA hashad previously designated this combination a QIDPQualified Infectious Disease Product with designated Fast Track status for the treatment of hospital-acquiredhospital-

acquired bacterial pneumonia, ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia, complicated intra-abdominal infections and complicated urinary tract infections.
MK-8228, letermovir,V920 (rVSV∆G-ZEBOV-GP, live attenuated), is an investigational oral, once-daily antiviral candidate for the prevention and treatment of Human Cytomegalovirus infection. Letermovir has received Orphan Drug Status in the EU and in the United States, where it has also been granted Fast Track designation.
MK-8342B, referred to as the Next Generation Ring, is an investigational combination (etonogestrel and 17β-estradiol) vaginal ring for contraception and the treatment of dysmenorrhea in women seeking contraception.
MK-0431J is an investigational fixed-dose combination of sitagliptin and ipragliflozin under development for commercialization in Japan in collaboration with Astellas Pharma Inc. (Astellas). Ipragliflozin, an SGLT2 inhibitor, co-developed by Astellas and Kotobuki Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. (Kotobuki), is approved for use in Japan and is being co-promoted with Merck and Kotobuki.
V920 is an investigational rVSV-ZEBOV (Ebola)Ebola Zaire disease vaccine candidate being studied in large scale Phase 2/3 clinical trials currently underway in West Africa. In November 2014, Merck and NewLink Genetics announced an exclusive licensing and collaboration agreement for the investigational Ebola vaccine.trials. In December 2015, Merck announced that the application for Emergency Use Assessment and Listing (EUAL) for V920 has beenwas accepted for review by the World Health Organization (WHO). According to the WHO, the EUAL process is designed to expedite the availability of vaccines needed for public health emergencies such as another outbreak of Ebola. The procedure is intended to assist United Nations’ procurement agencies and Member States on the acceptability of using a vaccine candidate in an emergency-use setting. EUAL designation is not prequalification by the WHO but rather is a special procedure implemented when there is an outbreak of a disease with high rates of morbidity and/or mortality and a lack of treatment and/or prevention options. In such instances, the WHO may recommend making a vaccine available for a limited time, while further clinical trial data are being gathered for formal regulatory agency review by a national regulatory authority. The decision to grant V920 EUAL status will be based on data regarding quality, safety, and efficacy/effectiveness; as well as a risk/benefit analysis for emergency use. While EUAL designation allows for emergency use, the vaccine remains investigational and has not yet been licensed for commercial distribution.
V212 is an inactivated varicella zoster virus (VZV) vaccine in development for the prevention of herpes zoster. The Company is conducting two Phase 3 trials, one in autologous hematopoietic cell transplant patients and the other in patients with solid tumor malignancies undergoing chemotherapy and hematological malignancies.
MK-1439, doravirine, is an investigational, once-daily oral next-generation non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor being developed by Merck for the treatment of HIV-1 infection.
In 2015, the Company also divested or discontinued certain drug candidates.
In July 2015,2016, Merck announced that the FDA granted V920 Breakthrough Therapy designation, and Allergan plc (Allergan) entered into an agreement pursuantthat the EMA granted the vaccine candidate PRIME (PRIority MEdicines) status. In November 2018, Merck announced that it has started the submission of a rolling BLA to which Allergan acquired the exclusive worldwide rights to MK-1602 and MK-8031, Merck’s investigational small molecule oral calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonists, which are being developed for the treatment and prevention of migraine.
MK-4261, surotomycin, is an investigational oral antibiotic in development for the treatment of C. difficile associated diarrhea. Merck acquired surotomycin as part of its purchase of Cubist. During the second quarter of 2015, the Company received unfavorable efficacy data from a randomized, double-blinded, active-controlled study in patients with C. difficile associated diarrhea. The evaluation of this data, combined with an assessment of the commercial opportunity for surotomycin, resulted in the discontinuation of the program.
MK-2402, bevenopran, is an oral investigational therapy in development as a potential treatment for opioid-induced constipation in patients with chronic, non-cancer pain. Merck acquired bevenopran as a part of its purchase of Cubist. The Company has made the decision not to continue development of this program and is seeking to out-license the asset.

15


MK-8962, corifollitropin alfa injection, is an investigational fertility treatment for controlled ovarian stimulation in women participating in assisted reproductive technology. In July 2014, Merck received a CRL from the FDA for itsV920. This rolling submission was made pursuant to the FDA’s Breakthrough Therapy designation. Merck expects the rolling submission of the BLA to be completed in 2019. The Company also intends to file V920 with the EMA in 2019.
In February 2019, Merck announced that the FDA accepted for Priority Review a supplemental NDA for corifollitropin alfa injection. Merck has made a decisionZerbaxa to discontinue development of corifollitropin alfa injectiontreat adult patients with nosocomial pneumonia, including ventilator-associated pneumonia, caused by certain susceptible Gram-negative microorganisms. The PDUFA date is June 3, 2019. Zerbaxa is also under review for this indication by the EMA. Zerbaxa is currently approved in the United States for business reasons. Corifollitropin alfa injectionthe treatment of adult patients with complicated urinary tract infections caused by certain susceptible Gram-negative microorganisms, and is marketedalso indicated, in combination with metronidazole, for the treatment of adult patients with complicated intra-abdominal infections caused by certain susceptible Gram-negative and Gram-positive microorganisms.
In addition to the candidates under regulatory review, the Company has several drug candidates in Phase 3 clinical development in addition to the Keytruda programs discussed above.
MK-7264, gefapixant, is a selective, non-narcotic, orally-administered P2X3-receptor agonist being investigated in Phase 3 trials for the treatment of refractory, chronic cough and in a Phase 2 trial for the treatment of women with endometriosis-related pain.
Lenvima, is an orally available tyrosine kinase inhibitor currently approved for certain types of thyroid cancer, hepatocellular carcinoma, and in combination for certain patients with renal cell carcinoma. In March 2018, Merck and Eisai entered into a strategic collaboration for the worldwide co-development and co-commercialization of Lenvima. Under the agreement, Merck and Eisai will develop and commercialize Lenvima jointly, both as monotherapy and in combination with ElonvaKeytruda. Per the agreement, the companies will jointly initiate clinical studies evaluating the Keytruda/Lenvima combination to support 11 potential indications in six types of cancer (endometrial cancer, NSCLC, hepatocellular carcinoma, head and neck cancer, bladder cancer and melanoma), as well as a basket trial targeting multiple cancer types. The FDA granted Breakthrough Therapy designation for Keytruda in combination with Lenvima for the potential treatment of patients with advanced and/or metastatic renal cell carcinoma and for the potential treatment of certain markets outsidepatients with advanced and/or metastatic non-microsatellite instability high/proficient mismatch repair endometrial carcinoma.
MK-1242, vericiguat, is an investigational treatment for heart failure being studied in patients suffering from chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fracture (Phase 3 clinical trial) and from chronic heart failure with preserved ejection fracture (Phase 2 clinical trial). The development of vericiguat is part of a worldwide strategic collaboration between Merck and Bayer.
V114 is an investigational polyvalent conjugate vaccine for the United States.prevention of pneumococcal disease. In June 2018, Merck initiated the first Phase 3 study in the adult population for the prevention of invasive pneumococcal disease. Currently five Phase 3 adult studies are ongoing, including studies in healthy adults 50 years of age or older, adults with risk factors for pneumococcal disease, those infected with HIV, and those who are recipients of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant. In October 2018, Merck began the first Phase 3 study in the pediatric population. Currently, three studies are ongoing, including studies in healthy infants and in children afflicted with sickle cell disease. In January 2019, Merck announced that V114 received Breakthrough Therapy designation from the FDA for the prevention of invasive pneumococcal disease caused by the vaccine serotypes in pediatric patients 6 weeks to 18 years of age.

As a result of changes in the herpes zoster vaccine environment, Merck is ending development of V212, its investigational vaccine for the prevention of shingles in immunocompromised patients.
The chart below reflects the Company’s research pipeline as of February 19, 2016.22, 2019. Candidates shown in Phase 3 include specific products and the date such candidate entered into Phase 3 development. Candidates shown in Phase 2 include the most advanced compound with a specific mechanism or, if listed compounds have the same mechanism, they are each currently intended for commercialization in a given therapeutic area. Small molecules and biologics are given MK-number designations and vaccine candidates are given V-number designations. Except as otherwise noted, candidates in Phase 1, additional indications in the same therapeutic area (other than with respect to cancer and certain other indications) and additional claims, line extensions or formulations for in-line products are not shown.

Phase 2Phase 3 (Phase 3 entry date)Entry Date)Under Review
Alzheimer’s Disease
MK-7622
Asthma
MK-1029
Cancer
CancerNew Molecular Entities/Vaccines
MK-3475 Keytruda
Hodgkin Lymphoma
PMBCL (Primary Mediastinal
Large B-Cell Lymphoma)
Advanced Solid Tumors
MK-2206
MK-8628
Diabetes
MK-8521
Heart Failure
MK-1242 (vericiguat)(1)
Hepatitis C
MK-3682B (MK-3682/MK-8408/
MK-5172 (grazoprevir))
Pneumoconjugate Vaccine
V114
Allergy
MK-8237, House Dust Mite (March 2014)(1,2)
Alzheimer’s Disease
MK-8931 (verubecestat) (December 2013)
Atherosclerosis
MK-0859 (anacetrapib) (May 2008)
Bacterial Infection
MK-7655A (relebactam+imipenem/cilastatin)
(October 2015)
Cancer
MK-3475 Keytruda
Bladder (October 2014)
Bacterial Infection
Advanced Solid TumorsBreast (October 2015)
MK-7655A relebactam+imipenem/cilastatin
Cutaneous Squamous Cell CarcinomaCervical (October 2018) (EU)(U.S.)
ProstateColorectal (November 2015)
Esophageal (December 2015)
Gastric (May 2015)
Head and Neck (November 2014)
Multiple Myeloma (December 2015)
CMV Prophylaxis in Transplant Patients
MK-8228 (letermovir) (June 2014)
Contraception, Next Generation Ring
MK-8342B (September 2015)
Diabetes Mellitus
MK-3102 (omarigliptin) (September 2012)
Ebola Vaccine
MK-8835 (ertugliflozin) (November 2013)MK-7902 Lenvima(1)
MK-8835A (ertugliflozin+sitagliptin)
Esophageal (December 2015)
(September 2015)V920(1)(4)
MK-8835B (ertugliflozin+metformin)
(August 2015)(1)
MK-1293 (February 2014) (U.S.)(1)
MK-0431J (sitagliptin+ipragliflozin)
Biliary TractGastric (May 2015) (EU)
Non-Small-Cell LungHepatocellular (May 2016) (EU)Certain Supplemental Filings
(October 2015) (Japan)V937 (1)Cavatak
Ebola Vaccine
V920 (March 2015)
Herpes Zoster
V212 (inactivated VZV vaccine) (December 2010)
HIV
MK-1439 (doravirine) (December 2014)
Osteoporosis
MK-0822 (odanacatib) (September 2007)
Mesothelioma (May 2018)
Cancer
MelanomaNasopharyngeal (April 2016)
MK-3475 Keytruda
Non-Small-Cell Lung (EU)
MK-7690Ovarian (December 2018)
Clostridium difficile Infection    First-Line Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma
MK-6072 (bezlotoxumab) (U.S./EU)
Diabetes Mellitus
MK-1293Colorectal(2)
Renal (October 2016) (EU)(KEYNOTE-426) (U.S.)
MK-7339 Lynparza(1)
Hepatitis C
Small-Cell Lung (May 2017) (EU)
MK-5172A First-Line Metastatic Squamous Non-Small-
Advanced Solid Tumors
MK-7902 LenvimaZepatier(1,2)
Cell Lung Cancer (KEYNOTE-407) (EU)
Cytomegalovirus VaccineEndometrial (June 2018)
First-Line Metastatic Non-Small-Cell Lung
V160
MK-7339 Lynparza(1)
Cancer (KEYNOTE-042) (U.S.) (EU)
Diabetes MellitusPancreatic (December 2014)
    (EU)Third-Line Advanced Small-Cell Lung
Pediatric Hexavalent Combination Vaccine
V419 (U.S.)MK-8521(3)
Prostate (April 2017)Cancer (KEYNOTE-158) (U.S.)
HIV-1 InfectionCough

First-Line Head and Neck Cancer
MK-8591MK-7264 (gefapixant) (March 2018)(KEYNOTE-048) (U.S.)
Pediatric Neurofibromatosis Type-1Heart Failure
    Alternative Dosing Regimen
MK-5618 (selumetinib)(1)
MK-1242 (vericiguat) (September 2016)(1)
(Q6W) (EU)
Respiratory Syncytial VirusPneumoconjugate Vaccine
MK-7339 Lynparza(1)
MK-1654V114 (June 2018)
Second-Line Metastatic Breast Cancer (EU)
Schizophrenia
First-Line Advanced Ovarian Cancer (EU)
MK-8189
HABP/VABP(5)
MK-7625A Zerbaxa (U.S.)
Footnotes:
(1)    Being developed in a collaboration.
(2) North American rights only.Being developed in combination with
Keytruda.
(3)V419    Development is an investigational pediatric hexavalent combination vaccine, DTaP5-IPV-Hib-HepB, that is being developed and, if approved, will be commercialized through a partnership of Merck and Sanofi Pasteur. On November 2, 2015, the FDA issued a CRL with respect to V419. Both companies are reviewing the CRL and plan to have further communication with the FDA.currently on hold.
(4)    Rolling submission.
(5)    HABP - Hospital-Acquired Bacterial
Pneumonia / VABP - Ventilator-Associated
Bacterial Pneumonia

Employees
As of December 31, 2015,2018, the Company had approximately 68,00069,000 employees worldwide, with approximately 26,20025,400 employed in the United States, including Puerto Rico. Approximately 32%30% of worldwide employees of the Company are represented by various collective bargaining groups.
2013 Restructuring Program
In 2013, the Company initiated actions under a global restructuring program (the 2013 Restructuring Program) as part of a global initiative to sharpen its commercial and research and development focus. The actions under

16


this program primarily include the elimination of positions in sales, administrative and headquarters organizations, as well as research and development. Additionally, these actions include the reduction of the Company’s global real estate footprint and improvements in the efficiency of its manufacturing and supply network. Since inception of the 2013 Restructuring Program through December 31, 2015, Merck has eliminated approximately 8,630 positions comprised of employee separations, as well as the elimination of contractors and vacant positions. The actions under the 2013 Restructuring Program were substantially completed by the end of 2015.
Merger Restructuring ProgramActivities
In 2010 subsequent to the Merck and Schering-Plough merger (Merger),2013, the Company commenced actions under a global restructuring program (the Merger Restructuring Program)programs designed to streamline theits cost structure of the combined company. Further actions under this program were initiated in 2011.structure. The actions under this program primarilythese programs include the elimination of positions in sales, administrative and headquarters organizations, as well as the sale or closure of certain manufacturing and research and

development sites and the consolidation of office facilities. The Company also continues to reduce its global real estate footprint and improve the efficiency of its manufacturing and supply network. Since inception of the Merger Restructuring Programprograms through December 31, 2015,2018, Merck has eliminated approximately 29,64545,510 positions comprised of employee separations, as well as the elimination of contractors and vacant positions. The non-facility related restructuringCompany has substantially completed the actions under the Merger Restructuring Program are substantially completed.these programs.
Environmental Matters
The Company believes that there are no compliance issues associated with applicable environmental laws and regulations that would have a material adverse effect on the Company. The Company is also remediating environmental contamination resulting from past industrial activity at certain of its sites. Expenditures for remediation and environmental liabilities were $8$16 million in 2015,2018, and are estimated at $59$57 million in the aggregate for the years 20162019 through 2020.2023. These amounts do not consider potential recoveries from other parties. The Company has taken an active role in identifying and accruing for these costs and, in management’s opinion, the liabilities for all environmental matters that are probable and reasonably estimable have been accrued and totaled $109$71 million and $125$82 million at December 31, 20152018 and 2014,2017, respectively. Although it is not possible to predict with certainty the outcome of these matters, or the ultimate costs of remediation, management does not believe that any reasonably possible expenditures that may be incurred in excess of the liabilities accrued should exceed $57$60 million in the aggregate. Management also does not believe that these expenditures should have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial position, results of operations, liquidity or capital resources for any year.
Merck believes that climate change could present risks to its business. Some of the potential impacts of climate change to its business include increased operating costs due to additional regulatory requirements, physical risks to the Company’s facilities, water limitations and disruptions to its supply chain. These potential risks are integrated into the Company’s business planning including investment in reducing energy, water use and greenhouse gas emissions. The Company does not believe these risks are material to its business at this time.
Geographic Area Information
The Company’s operations outside the United States are conducted primarily through subsidiaries. Sales worldwide by subsidiaries outside the United States as a percentage of total Company sales were 56%57% of sales in 2015, 60%2018, 57% of sales in 20142017 and 59%54% of sales in 2013.2016.
The Company’s worldwide business is subject to risks of currency fluctuations, governmental actions and other governmental proceedings abroad. The Company does not regard these risks as a deterrent to further expansion of its operations abroad. However, the Company closely reviews its methods of operations and adopts strategies responsive to changing economic and political conditions.
Merck has expanded its operations in countries located in Latin America, the Middle East, Africa, Eastern Europe and Asia Pacific. Business in these developing areas, while sometimes less stable, offers important opportunities for growth over time.
Financial information about geographic areas of the Company’s business is provided in Item 8. “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” below.

17


Available Information
The Company’s Internet website address is www.merck.com. The Company will make available, free of charge at the “Investors” portion of its website, its Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K, and all amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, as soon as reasonably practicable after such reports are electronically filed with, or furnished to, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC)(SEC). The address of that website is http://www.sec.gov. In addition, the Company will provide without charge a copy of its Annual Report on Form 10-K, including financial statements and schedules, upon the written request of any shareholder to the Office of the Secretary, Merck & Co., Inc., 2000 Galloping Hill Road, K1-4157, Kenilworth, NJ 07033 U.S.A.
The Company’s corporate governance guidelines and the charters of the Board of Directors’ four standing committees are available on the Company’s website at www.merck.com/about/leadership and all such information is available in print to any stockholdershareholder who requests it from the Company.

Item 1A.Risk Factors.
Investors should carefully consider all of the information set forth in this Form 10-K, including the following risk factors, before deciding to invest in any of the Company’s securities. The risks below are not the only ones the Company faces. Additional risks not currently known to the Company or that the Company presently deems immaterial may also impair its business operations. The Company’s business, financial condition, results of operations or prospects could be materially adversely affected by any of these risks. This Form 10-K also contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. The Company’s results could materially differ from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of certain factors, including the risks it faces described below and elsewhere. See “Cautionary Factors that May Affect Future Results” below.
The Company is dependent on its patent rights, and if its patent rights are invalidated or circumvented, its business would be adversely affected.
Patent protection is considered, in the aggregate, to be of material importance into the Company’s marketing of human health and animal health products in the United States and in most major foreign markets. Patents covering products that it has introduced normally provide market exclusivity, which is important for the successful marketing and sale of its products. The Company seeks patents covering each of its products in each of the markets where it intends to sell the products and where meaningful patent protection is available.
Even if the Company succeeds in obtaining patents covering its products, third parties or government authorities may challenge or seek to invalidate or circumvent its patents and patent applications. It is important for the Company’s business to defend successfully the patent rights that provide market exclusivity for its products. The Company is often involved in patent disputes relating to challenges to its patents or claims by third parties of infringement and similar claims against the Company. The Company aggressively defends its important patents both within and outside the United States, including by filing claims of infringement against other parties. See Item 8. “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data,” Note 10.11. “Contingencies and Environmental Liabilities” below. In particular, manufacturers of generic pharmaceutical products from time to time file Abbreviated New Drug Applicationsabbreviated NDAs with the FDA seeking to market generic forms of the Company’s products prior to the expiration of relevant patents owned or licensed by the Company. The Company normally responds by vigorously defending its patent, including by filing lawsuits alleging patent infringement. Patent litigation and other challenges to the Company’s patents are costly and unpredictable and may deprive the Company of market exclusivity for a patented product or, in some cases, third-party patents may prevent the Company from marketing and selling a product in a particular geographic area.
Additionally, certain foreign governments have indicated that compulsory licenses to patents may be granted in the case of national emergencies or in other circumstances, which could diminish or eliminate sales and profits from those regions and negatively affect the Company’s results of operations. Further, court decisions relating to other companies’ patents, potential legislation relating to patents, as well as regulatory initiatives may result in further erosiona more general weakening of intellectual property protection.
If one or more important products lose patent protection in profitable markets, sales of those products are likely to decline significantly as a result of generic versions of those products becoming available and, in the case of certain products, such a loss could result in a material non-cash impairment charge.available. The Company’s results of operations may be adversely affected by the lost sales unless and until the Company has successfully launched commercially successful replacement products.

18


A chart listing the U.S. patent protection for certain of the Company’s marketed products, and U.S. patent protection for candidates under review and in Phase 3 candidatesclinical development is set forth above in Item 1. “Business — Patents, Trademarks and Licenses.”
As the Company’s products lose market exclusivity, the Company generally experiences a significant and rapid loss of sales from those products.
The Company depends upon patents to provide it with exclusive marketing rights for its products for some period of time. Loss of patent protection for one of the Company’s products typically leads to a significant and rapid loss of sales for that product as lower priced generic versions of that drug become available. In the case of products that contribute significantly to the Company’s sales, the loss of patent protectionmarket exclusivity can have a material adverse effect

on the Company’s business, cash flow, results of operations, financial position and prospects. For example, a court has ruled that a proposed generic form of Nasonex does not infringe the Company’s U.S. patent for Nasonex. If the generic form of Nasonex receives marketing approval in the United States, the Company will experience a loss of Nasonex sales. In addition, the Company will lose U.S. patent protection for Cubicin in June 2016. Also, pursuant to an agreement with a generic manufacturer, that manufacturer may launchlaunched in the United States a generic version of Zetia in December 2016. In addition, the Company lost U.S. patent protection for Vytorin in April 2017. As a result, the Company experienced a significant and rapid loss of sales of Zetia and Vytorin in the United States in 2017, which continued in 2018. Furthermore, the patents that provide U.S. and EU market exclusivity for Noxafil will expire in July 2019 and December 2019, respectively, and the Company anticipates a significant decline in U.S. and EU Noxafil sales thereafter.
Key Company products generate a significant amount of the Company’s profits and cash flows, and any events that adversely affect the markets for its leading products could have a material and negative impact on results of operations and cash flows.
The Company’s ability to generate profits and operating cash flow depends largely upon the continued profitability of the Company’s key products, such as Keytruda,Januvia, Zetia,Janumet, Gardasil/Gardasil 9 Isentressand ,and VytorinBridion. As a result of the Company’s dependence on key products, any event that adversely affects any of these products or the markets for any of these products could have a significant adverse impact on results of operations and cash flows. These events could include loss of patent protection, increased costs associated with manufacturing, generic or over-the-counter availability of the Company’s product or a competitive product, the discovery of previously unknown side effects, results of post-marketpost-approval trials, increased competition from the introduction of new, more effective treatments and discontinuation or removal from the market of the product for any reason. If any of theseSuch events hadcould have a material adverse effect on the sales of certain products,any such an event could resultproducts.
For example, in a material non-cash impairment charge.2018, sales of Zepatier were materially unfavorably affected by increasing competition and declining patient volumes. Sales of Zostavax were also materially unfavorably affected due to competition. The Company expects that competition will continue to adversely affect the sales of these products.
The Company’s research and development efforts may not succeed in developing commercially successful products and the Company may not be able to acquire commercially successful products in other ways; in consequence, the Company may not be able to replace sales of successful products that have lost patent protection.
Like other major pharmaceutical companies, in order to remain competitive, the Company must continue to launch new products each year.products. Expected declines in sales of products after the loss of market exclusivity mean that the Company’s future success is dependent on its pipeline of new products, including new products whichthat it may develop through collaborations and joint ventures and products whichthat it is able to obtain through license or acquisition. To accomplish this, the Company commits substantial effort, funds and other resources to research and development, both through its own dedicated resources and through various collaborations with third parties. There is a high rate of failure inherent in the research and development process for new drugs. As a result, there is a high risk that funds invested by the Company in research programs will not generate financial returns. This risk profile is compounded by the fact that this research has a long investment cycle. To bring a pharmaceutical compound from the discovery phase to market may take a decade or more and failure can occur at any point in the process, including later in the process after significant funds have been invested.
For a description of the research and development process, see Item 1. “Business — Research and Development” above. Each phase of testing is highly regulated and during each phase there is a substantial risk that the Company will encounter serious obstacles or will not achieve its goals, therefore, the Company may abandon a product in which it has invested substantial amounts of time and resources. Some of the risks encountered in the research and development process include the following: pre-clinical testing of a new compound may yield disappointing results; competing products from other manufacturers may reach the market first; clinical trials of a new drug may not be successful; a new drug may not be effective or may have harmful side effects; a new drug may not be approved by the regulators for its intended use; it may not be possible to obtain a patent for a new drug; payers may refuse to cover or reimburse the new product; or sales of a new product may be disappointing.

19


The Company cannot state with certainty when or whether any of its products now under development will be approved or launched; whether it will be able to develop, license or otherwise acquire compounds, product candidates or products; or whether any products, once launched, will be commercially successful. The Company must maintain a continuous flow of successful new products and successful new indications or brand extensions for existing products

sufficient both to cover its substantial research and development costs and to replace sales that are lost as profitable products lose market exclusivity or are displaced by competing products or therapies. Failure to do so in the short term or long term would have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, results of operations, cash flow, financial position and prospects.
The Company’s success is dependent on the successful development and marketing of new products, which are subject to substantial risks.
Products that appear promising in development may fail to reach the market or fail to succeed for numerous reasons, including the following:
findings of ineffectiveness, superior safety or efficacy of competing products, or harmful side effects in clinical or pre-clinical testing;
failure to receive the necessary regulatory approvals, including delays in the approval of new products and new indications, or the anticipated labeling, and uncertainties about the time required to obtain regulatory approvals and the benefit/risk standards applied by regulatory agencies in determining whether to grant approvals;
failure in certain markets to obtain reimbursement commensurate with the level of innovation and clinical benefit presented by the product;
lack of economic feasibility due to manufacturing costs or other factors; and
preclusion from commercialization by the proprietary rights of others.
In the future, if certain pipeline programs are cancelled or if the Company believes that their commercial prospects have been reduced, the Company may recognize material non-cash impairment charges for those programs that were measured at fair value and capitalized in connection with acquisitions.acquisitions or certain collaborations.
Failure to successfully develop and market new products in the short term or long term would have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, results of operations, cash flow, financial position and prospects.
The Company’s products, including products in development, can notcannot be marketed unless the Company obtains and maintains regulatory approval.
The Company’s activities, including research, preclinical testing, clinical trials and the manufacturing and marketing of its products, are subject to extensive regulation by numerous federal, state and local governmental authorities in the United States, including the FDA, and by foreign regulatory authorities, including in the EU.EU, Japan and China. In the United States, the FDA is of particular importance to the Company, as it administers requirements covering the testing, approval, safety, effectiveness, manufacturing, labeling and marketing of prescription pharmaceuticals. In many cases, the FDA requirements have increased the amount of time and money necessary to develop new products and bring them to market in the United States. Regulation outside the United States also is primarily focused on drug safety and effectiveness and, in many cases, reduction in the cost reduction.of drugs. The FDA and foreign regulatory authorities have substantial discretion to require additional testing, to delay or withhold registration and marketing approval and to otherwise preclude distribution and sale of a product.
Even if the Company is successful in developing new products, it will not be able to market any of those products unless and until it has obtained all required regulatory approvals in each jurisdiction where it proposes to market the new products. Once obtained, the Company must maintain approval as long as it plans to market its new products in each jurisdiction where approval is required. The Company’s failure to obtain approval, significant delays in the approval process, or its failure to maintain approval in any jurisdiction will prevent it from selling the new products in that jurisdiction until approval is obtained, if ever.jurisdiction. The Company would not be able to realize revenues for those new products in any jurisdiction where it does not have approval.

20


Developments following regulatory approval may adversely affect sales of the Company’s products.
Even after a product reaches the market, certain developments following regulatory approval including results in post-marketing Phase 4 trials or other studies, may decrease demand for the Company’s products, including the following:
results in post-approval Phase 4 trials or other studies;

the re-review of products that are already marketed;
new scientific information and evolution of scientific theories;
the recall or loss of marketing approval of products that are already marketed;
changing government standards or public expectations regarding safety, efficacy or labeling changes; and
greater scrutiny in advertising and promotion.
In the past several years, clinical trials and post-marketing surveillance of certain marketed drugs of the Company and of competitors within the industry have raised concerns that have led to recalls, withdrawals or adverse labeling of marketed products. Clinical trials and post-marketing surveillance of certain marketed drugs also have raised concerns among some prescribers and patients relating to the safety or efficacy of pharmaceutical products in general that have negatively affected the sales of such products. In addition, increased scrutiny of the outcomes of clinical trials has led to increased volatility in market reaction. Further, these matters often attract litigation and, even where the basis for the litigation is groundless, considerable resources may be needed to respond.
In addition, following in the wake of product withdrawals and other significant safety issues, health authorities such as the FDA, the EMA and Japan’s Pharmaceutical and Medical Device Agency have increased their focus on safety when assessing the benefit/risk balance of drugs. Some health authorities appear to have become more cautious when making decisions about approvability of new products or indications and are re-reviewing select products that are already marketed, adding further to the uncertainties in the regulatory processes. There is also greater regulatory scrutiny, especially in the United States, on advertising and promotion and, in particular, direct-to-consumer advertising.
If previously unknown side effects are discovered or if there is an increase in negative publicity regarding known side effects of any of the Company’s products, it could significantly reduce demand for the product or require the Company to take actions that could negatively affect sales, including removing the product from the market, restricting its distribution or applying for labeling changes. Further, in the current environment in which all pharmaceutical companies operate, the Company is at risk for product liability and consumer protection claims and civil and criminal governmental actions related to its products, research and/or marketing activities.
The Company faces intense competition from lower cost-genericcost generic products.
In general, the Company faces increasing competition from lower-cost generic products. The patent rights that protect its products are of varying strengths and durations. In addition, in some countries, patent protection is significantly weaker than in the United States or in the EU. In the United States and the EU, political pressure to reduce spending on prescription drugs has led to legislation and other measures which encouragesthat encourage the use of generic and biosimilar products. Although it is the Company’s policy to actively protect its patent rights, generic challenges to the Company’s products can arise at any time, and the Company’s patents may not prevent the emergence of generic competition for its products.
Loss of patent protection for a product typically is followed promptly by generic substitutes, reducing the Company’s sales of that product. Availability of generic substitutes for the Company’s drugs may adversely affect its results of operations and cash flow. In addition, proposals emerge from time to time in the United States and other countries for legislation to further encourage the early and rapid approval of generic drugs. Any such proposal that is enacted into law could worsen this substantial negative effect on the Company’s sales and, potentially, its business, cash flow, results of operations, financial position and prospects.
The Company faces intense competition from competitors’ products which, in addition to other factors, could in certain circumstances lead to non-cash impairment charges.products.
The Company’s products face intense competition from competitors’ products. This competition may increase as new products enter the market. In such an event, the competitors’ products may be safer or more effective,

21


more convenient to use, have better insurance coverage or reimbursement levels or be more effectively marketed and sold than the Company’s products. Alternatively, in the case of generic competition, including the generic availability of competitors’ branded products, they may be equally safe and effective products that are sold at a substantially lower price than the Company’s products. As a result, if the Company fails to maintain its competitive position, this could have a material adverse effect on its business, cash flow, results of operations, financial position and prospects. In addition, if products that were measured at fair value and capitalized in connection with acquisitions experience

difficulties in the market that negatively impact product cash flows, the Company may recognize material non-cash impairment charges with respect to the value of those products.
The Company faces continued pricing pressure with respect to its products.
The Company faces increasingcontinued pricing pressure globally and, particularly in mature markets, from managed care organizations, government agencies and programs that could negatively affect the Company’s sales and profit margins. In the United States, these include (i) practices of managed care groups and institutional and governmental purchasers, and (ii) U.S. federal laws and regulations related to Medicare and Medicaid, including the Medicare Prescription Drug Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003 and the Patient ProtectionACA, and Affordable(iii) state activities aimed at increasing price transparency, including new laws as noted above in Item 1. “Competition and the Health Care Act of 2010.Environment — Health Care Environment and Government Regulations.” Changes to the health care system enacted as part of health care reform in the United States, as well as increased purchasing power of entities that negotiate on behalf of Medicare, Medicaid, and private sector beneficiaries, could result in further pricing pressures. The Company also faces the risk of litigation with the government over its pricing calculations. In addition, in the U.S., larger customers may, in the future, ask for and receive higher rebates on drugs in certain highly competitive categories. The Company must also compete to be placed on formularies of managed care organizations. Exclusion of a product from a formulary can lead to reduced usage in the managed care organization.
In order to provide information about the Company’s pricing practices, the Company annually posts on its website its Pricing Transparency Report for the United States. The report provides the Company’s average annual list price and net price increases across the Company’s U.S. portfolio dating back to 2010.
Outside the United States, numerous major markets, including the EU, Japan and Japan,China have pervasive government involvement in funding health care and, in that regard, fix the pricing and reimbursement of pharmaceutical and vaccine products. Consequently, in those markets, the Company is subject to government decision making and budgetary actions with respect to its products.
The Company expects pricing pressures to increasecontinue in the future.
The health care industry in the United States will continue to be subject to increasing regulation and political action.
The Company believes that the health care industry will continue to be subject to increasing regulation as well as political and legal action, as future proposals to reform the health care system are considered by the Executive branch, Congress and state legislatures.
In 2010, the United States enacted major health care reform legislation (the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act).in the form of the ACA. Various insurance market reforms have advanced and state and federal insurance exchanges were launched in 2014. By the end of the decade, the law is expected to expand access to health care to about 32 million Americans who did not previously have insurance coverage. With respect to the effect of the law on the pharmaceutical industry, the law increased the mandated Medicaid rebate from 15.1% to 23.1%, expanded the rebate to Medicaid managed care utilization, and increased the types of entities eligible for the federal 340B drug discount program.
The law also requires pharmaceutical manufacturers to pay a 50% point of service discount to Medicare Part D beneficiaries when they are in the Medicare Part D coverage gap (i.e., the so-called “donut hole”). In 2018, the Company’s revenue was reduced by $365 million due to this requirement. Beginning in 2019, the 50% point of service discount will increase to a 70% point of service discount in the coverage gap, as a result of the Balanced Budget Act of 2018. In addition, the 70% point of service discount will be extended to biosimilar products. Also, pharmaceutical manufacturers are now required to pay an annual non-tax deductible health care reform fee. The total annual industry fee was $3.0$4.1 billion in 20152018 and will remain $3.0be $2.8 billion in 2016.2019. The fee is assessed on each company in proportion to its share of prior year branded pharmaceutical sales to certain government programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid. In 2018, the Company recorded $124 million of costs for this annual fee.
On January 21,In 2016, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) issued the Medicaid Rebate Final Rulerebate final rule that implements provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care ActACA effective April 1, 2016. The rule provides comprehensive guidance on the calculation of Average Manufacturer Price and Best Price; two metrics utilized to determine the rebates drug manufacturers are required to pay to state Medicaid programs. The impact of changes resulting from the issuance of the rule is not material to Merck, at this time. However, the Company is still evaluatingawaiting guidance from CMS on two aspects of the rule to determine whether itthat were deferred for later implementation. These include a definition of what constitutes a product ‘line extension’ and a delay

in the participation of the U.S. Territories in the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program until April 1, 2020. The Company will have a materialevaluate the financial impact on Merck’s Medicaid rebate liability.

22

Table of Contentsthese two elements when they become effective.

The Company cannot predict the likelihood of future changes in the health care industry in general, or the pharmaceutical industry in particular, or what impact they may have on the Company’s business, cash flow, results of operations, financial position and prospects.
The Company is increasingly dependent on sophisticated software applications and computing infrastructure. In 2017, the Company experienced a network cyber-attack that led to a disruption of its worldwide operations, including manufacturing, research and sales operations. The Company could be a target of future cyber-attacks.
The Company is increasingly dependent on sophisticated software applications and complex information technology systems and computing infrastructure (collectively, “IT systems”) to conduct critical operations. Disruption, degradation, or manipulation of these IT systems through intentional or accidental means could impact key business processes. Cyber-attacks against the Company’s IT systems could result in exposure of confidential information, the modification of critical data, and/or the failure of critical operations. Misuse of these IT systems could result in the disclosure of sensitive personal information or the theft of trade secrets, intellectual property, or other confidential business information. The Company continues to leverage new and innovative technologies across the enterprise to improve the efficacy and efficiency of its business processes; the use of which can create new risks.
In 2017, the Company experienced a network cyber-attack that led to a disruption of its worldwide operations, including manufacturing, research and sales operations. Due to the cyber-attack, the Company was unable to fulfill orders for certain products in certain markets, which had an unfavorable effect on sales in 2017 of approximately $260 million. In addition, the Company recorded manufacturing-related expenses, primarily unfavorable manufacturing variances, in Cost of sales, as well as expenses related to remediation efforts in Selling, general and administrative expenses and Research and development expenses, which aggregated $285 million in 2017, net of insurance recoveries of approximately $45 million. Due to a residual backlog of orders, 2018 sales were unfavorably affected in certain markets by approximately $150 million from the cyber-attack.
The Company has insurance coverage insuring against costs resulting from cyber-attacks and has received proceeds. However, there are disputes with certain of the insurers about the availability of some of the insurance coverage for claims related to the 2017 cyber-attack.
The Company has implemented a variety of measures to further enhance and modernize its systems to guard against similar attacks in the future, and also is pursuing an enterprise-wide effort to enhance the Company's resiliency against future cyber-attacks, including incidents similar to the 2017 attack. The objective of these efforts is not only to protect against future cyber-attacks, but also to improve the speed of the Company’s recovery from such attacks and enable continued business operations to the greatest extent possible during any recovery period.
Although the aggregate impact of cyber-attacks and network disruptions, including the 2017 cyber-attack, on the Company’s operations and financial condition has not been material to date, the Company continues to be a target of events of this nature and expects them to continue. The Company monitors its data, information technology and personnel usage of Company IT systems to reduce these risks and continues to do so on an ongoing basis for any current or business.potential threats. There can be no assurance that the Company’s efforts to protect its data and IT systems will be successful in preventing disruptions to its operations, including its manufacturing, research and sales operations. Any such disruption could result in loss of revenue, or the loss of critical or sensitive information from the Company’s or the Company’s third party providers’ databases or IT systems and could also result in financial, legal, business or reputational harm to the Company and potentially substantial remediation costs.
The Company is subject to a variety of U.S. and international laws and regulations.
The Company is currently subject to a number of government laws and regulations and, in the future, could become subject to new government laws and regulations. The costs of compliance with such laws and regulations, or the negative results of non-compliance, could adversely affect the business, cash flow, results of operations, financial position and prospects of the Company; these laws and regulations include (i) additional healthcare reform initiatives in the United States or in other countries, including additional mandatory discounts or fees; (ii) the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act or other anti-bribery and corruption laws; (iii) new laws, regulations and judicial or other governmental

decisions affecting pricing, drug reimbursement, and access or marketing within or across jurisdictions; (iv) changes in intellectual property laws; (v) changes in accounting standards; (vi) new and increasing data privacy regulations and enforcement, particularly in the EU and the United States; (vii) legislative mandates or preferences for local manufacturing of pharmaceutical or vaccine products; (viii) emerging and new global regulatory requirements for reporting payments and other value transfers to healthcare professionals; (ix) environmental regulations; and (x) the potential impact of importation restrictions, embargoes, trade sanctions and legislative and/or other regulatory changes.
The uncertainty in global economic conditions together with austeritycost-reduction measures being taken by certain governments could negatively affect the Company’s operating results.
The uncertaintyUncertainty in global economic and geopolitical conditions may result in a further slowdown to the global economy that could affect the Company’s business by reducing the prices that drug wholesalers and retailers, hospitals, government agencies and managed health care providers may be able or willing to pay for the Company’s products or by reducing the demand for the Company’s products, which could in turn negatively impact the Company’s sales and result in a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, cash flow, results of operations, financial position and prospects.
Global efforts toward health care cost containment continue to exert pressure on product pricing and market access. In the United States, pricing pressures continue on many of the Company’s products and, in several international markets, government-mandated pricing actions have reduced prices of generic and patented drugs. In addition, other austerity measures negatively affected the Company’s revenue performance in 2015. The Company anticipates these pricing actions including the biennial price reductions in Japan that will occur again in 2016, and other austerity measures will continue to negatively affect revenue performance in 2016.2019.
If credit and economic conditions worsen, the resulting economic and currency impacts in the affected markets and globally could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s results.
The Company has significant global operations, which expose it to additional risks, and any adverse event could have a material negative impact on the Company’s results of operations.
The extent of the Company’s operations outside the United States is significant. Risks inherent in conducting a global business include:
changes in medical reimbursement policies and programs and pricing restrictions in key markets;
multiple regulatory requirements that could restrict the Company’s ability to manufacture and sell its products in key markets;
trade protection measures and import or export licensing requirements;requirements, including the imposition of trade sanctions or similar restrictions by the United States or other governments;
foreign exchange fluctuations;
diminished protection of intellectual property in some countries; and
possible nationalization and expropriation.
In addition, there may be changes to the Company’s business and political position if there is instability, disruption or destruction in a significant geographic region, regardless of cause, including war, terrorism, riot, civil insurrection or social unrest; and natural or man-made disasters, including famine, flood, fire, earthquake, storm or disease. For example, in 2017, the Company’s lone manufacturing plant in Puerto Rico was negatively affected by Hurricane Maria.
In 2016, the United Kingdom (UK) held a referendum in which voters approved an exit from the EU, commonly referred to as “Brexit”. As a result of that referendum, the British government has been in the process of negotiating the terms of the UK’s future relationship with the EU. While the Company has taken actions and made certain contingency plans for scenarios in which the UK and the EU do not reach a mutually satisfactory understanding as to that relationship, it is not possible at this time to predict whether there will be any such understanding, or if such an understanding is reached, whether its terms will vary in ways that result in greater restrictions on imports and exports between the UK and EU countries, increased regulatory complexities, and/or cross border labor issues that could materially adversely impact the Company’s business operations in the UK.

Failure to attract and retain highly qualified personnel could affect the Company’s ability to successfully develop and commercialize products.
The Company’s success is largely dependent on its continued ability to attract and retain highly qualified scientific, technical and management personnel, as well as personnel with expertise in clinical research and development, governmental regulation and commercialization. Competition for qualified personnel in the pharmaceutical industry is intense. The Company cannot be sure that it will be able to attract and retain quality personnel or that the costs of doing so will not materially increase.
In the past, the Company has experienced difficulties and delays in manufacturing of certain of its products.products, including vaccines.
As previously disclosed, Merck has, in the past, experienced difficulties in manufacturing certain of its vaccines and other products.products, including vaccines. In addition, the network cyber-attack experienced by the Company in June 2017 led to a disruption of the Company’s operations, including its manufacturing operations. The Company may, in the future, experience difficulties and delays inherent in manufacturing its products, such as (i) failure of the Company or any of its vendors or suppliers to comply with Current Good Manufacturing Practices and other applicable regulations and quality assurance guidelines that could lead to manufacturing shutdowns, product shortages and delays in product manufacturing; (ii) construction delays related to the construction of new facilities or the expansion of existing facilities, including those intended to support future demand for the Company’s products; and (iii) other manufacturing or distribution problems including changes in manufacturing production sites and limits to manufacturing capacity due to regulatory requirements, changes in types of products produced, or physical limitations that could impact continuous supply. In addition, the Company could experience difficulties or delays in manufacturing its products caused by natural disasters, such as hurricanes. Manufacturing difficulties can result in product shortages, leading to lost sales and reputational harm to the Company.

23


The Company may not be able to realize the expected benefits of its investments in emerging markets.
The Company has been taking steps to increase its sales in emerging markets. However, there is no guarantee that the Company’s efforts to expand sales in these markets will succeed. Some countries within emerging markets may be especially vulnerable to periods of global financial instability or may have very limited resources to spend on health care. In order for the Company to successfully implement its emerging markets strategy, it must attract and retain qualified personnel. The Company may also be required to increase its reliance on third-party agents within less developed markets. In addition, many of these countries have currencies that fluctuate substantially and, if such currencies devalue and the Company cannot offset the devaluations, the Company’s financial performance within such countries could be adversely affected.
The Company’s business in China has grown rapidly in the past few years, and the importance of China to the Company’s overall pharmaceutical and vaccines business outside the United States has increased accordingly. Continued growth of the Company’s business in China is dependent upon ongoing development of a favorable environment for innovative pharmaceutical products and vaccines, sustained access for the Company’s currently marketed products, and the absence of trade impediments or adverse pricing controls. As noted above in Healthcare Environment, pricing pressure in China has increased as the Chinese government has been taking steps to reduce costs, including implementing healthcare reform that has led to the acceleration of generic substitution, where available. In addition, in China, commercial and economic conditions may adversely affect the Company’s growth prospects in that market. While the Company continues to believe that China represents an important growth opportunity, these events, coupled with heightened scrutiny of the health care industry, may continue to have an impact on product pricing and market access generally. The Company anticipates that the reported inquiries made by various governmental authorities involving multinational pharmaceutical companies in China may continue.
For all these reasons, sales within emerging markets carry significant risks. However, a failure to continue to expandmaintain the Company’s businesspresence in emerging markets could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, financial condition orcash flow, results of the Company’s operations.operations, financial position and prospects.
The Company is exposed to market risk from fluctuations in currency exchange rates and interest rates.
The Company operates in multiple jurisdictions and virtually all sales are denominated in currencies of the local jurisdiction. Additionally, the Company has entered and will enter into acquisition, licensing,business development transactions, borrowings or other financial transactions that may give rise to currency and interest rate exposure.

Since the Company cannot, with certainty, foresee and mitigate against such adverse fluctuations, fluctuations in currency exchange rates, and interest rates and inflation could negatively affect the Company’s business, cash flow, results of operations, financial position and cash flows as occurred with respect to Venezuela in 2015.prospects.
In order to mitigate against the adverse impact of these market fluctuations, the Company will from time to time enter into hedging agreements. While hedging agreements, such as currency options and forwards and interest rate swaps, may limit some of the exposure to exchange rate and interest rate fluctuations, such attempts to mitigate these risks may be costly and not always successful.
The Company is subject to evolving and complex tax laws, which may result in additional liabilities that may affect results of operations.
The Company is subject to evolving and complex tax laws in the jurisdictions in which it operates. Significant judgment is required for determining the Company’s tax liabilities, and the Company’s tax returns are periodically examined by various tax authorities. The Company believes that its accrual for tax contingencies is adequate for all open years based on past experience, interpretations of tax law, and judgments about potential actions by tax authorities; however, due to the complexity of tax contingencies, the ultimate resolution of any tax matters may result in payments greater or less than amounts accrued.
In March 2014, President Obama’s administration re-proposed significant changes to the U.S. international tax laws, including changes that would tax companies on “excess returns” attributable to certain offshore intangible assets, limit U.S. tax deductions for expenses related to un-repatriated foreign-source income and modify the U.S. foreign tax credit rules. Other potentially significant changes to the U.S. international laws, including a move toward a territorial tax system and taxing currently the accumulated unrepatriated foreign earnings of controlled foreign corporations, have been set out by various Congressional committees. The Company cannot determine whether these proposals will be enacted into law or what, if any, changes may be made to such proposals prior to their being enacted into law. If these or other changes to the U.S. international tax laws are enacted, they could have a significant impact on the financial results of the Company.

24


In addition, the Company may be affected by changes in tax laws, including tax rate changes, changes to the laws related to the remittance of foreign earnings (deferral), or other limitations impacting the U.S. tax treatment of foreign earnings, new tax laws, andaffecting, for example, tax rates, and/or revised tax law interpretations in domestic andor foreign jurisdictions.
Pharmaceutical products can develop unexpected safety or efficacy concerns.
Unexpected safety or efficacy concerns can arise with respect to marketed products, whether or not scientifically justified, leading to product recalls, withdrawals, or declining sales, as well as product liability, consumer fraud and/or other claims, including potential civil or criminal governmental actions.
Reliance on third partythird-party relationships and outsourcing arrangements could adversely affect the Company’s business.
The Company depends on third parties, including suppliers, alliances with other pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, and third partythird-party service providers, for key aspects of its business including development, manufacture and commercialization of its products and support for its information technology systems. Failure of these third parties to meet their contractual, regulatory and other obligations to the Company or the development of factors that materially disrupt the relationships between the Company and these third parties could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business.
The Company is increasingly dependent on sophisticated information technology and infrastructure.
The Company is increasingly dependent on sophisticated information technology and infrastructure. A significant breakdown, invasion, corruption, destruction or interruption of critical information technology systems or infrastructure, by the Company’s workforce, others with authorized access to the Company’s systems, or unauthorized persons could negatively impact operations. The ever-increasing use and evolution of technology, including cloud-based computing, creates opportunities for the unintentional dissemination, intentional destruction of confidential information stored in the Company’s systems or in non-encrypted portable media or storage devices. The Company could also experience a business interruption, intentional theft of confidential information, or reputational damage from espionage attacks, malware or other cyber-attacks, or insider threat attacks, which may compromise the Company’s system infrastructure or lead to data leakage, either internally or at the Company’s third-party providers. Although the aggregate impact on the Company’s operations and financial condition has not been material to date, the Company has been the target of events of this nature and expects them to continue. The Company monitors its data, information technology and personnel usage of Company systems to reduce these risks and continues to do so on an ongoing basis for any current or potential threats. There can be no assurance that the Company’s efforts to protect its data and systems will prevent service interruption or the loss of critical or sensitive information from the Company’s or the Company’s third party providers’ databases or systems that could result in financial, legal, business or reputational harm to the Company.
Negative events in the animal health industry could have a negative impact on future results of operations.
Future sales of key animal health products could be adversely affected by a number of risk factors including certain risks that are specific to the animal health business. For example, the outbreak of disease carried by animals, such as Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy or mad cow disease, could lead to their widespread death and precautionary destruction as well as the reduced consumption and demand for animals, which could adversely impact the Company’s results of operations. Also, the outbreak of any highly contagious diseases near the Company’s main production sites could require the Company to immediately halt production of vaccines at such sites or force the Company to incur substantial expenses in procuring raw materials or vaccines elsewhere. Other risks specific to animal health include epidemics and pandemics, government procurement and pricing practices, weather and global agribusiness economic events. As the Animal Health segment of the Company’s business becomes more significant, the impact of any such events on future results of operations would also become more significant.

25


Biologics and vaccines carry unique risks and uncertainties, which could have a negative impact on future results of operations.
The successful development, testing, manufacturing and commercialization of biologics and vaccines, particularly human and animal health vaccines, is a long, complex, expensive and uncertain process. There are unique risks and uncertainties with biologics and vaccines, including:
There may be limited access to, and supply of, normal and diseased tissue samples, cell lines, pathogens, bacteria, viral strains and other biological materials. In addition, government regulations in multiple

jurisdictions, such as the United States and the EU, could result in restricted access to, or transport or use of, such materials. If the Company loses access to sufficient sources of such materials, or if tighter restrictions are imposed on the use of such materials, the Company may not be able to conduct research activities as planned and may incur additional development costs.
The development, manufacturing and marketing of biologics and vaccines are subject to regulation by the FDA, the EMA and other regulatory bodies. These regulations are often more complex and extensive than the regulations applicable to other pharmaceutical products. For example, in the United States, a BLA, including both preclinical and clinical trial data and extensive data regarding the manufacturing procedures, is required for human vaccine candidates, and FDA approval is generally required for the release of each manufactured commercial lot.
Manufacturing biologics and vaccines, especially in large quantities, is often complex and may require the use of innovative technologies to handle living micro-organisms. Each lot of an approved biologic and vaccine must undergo thorough testing for identity, strength, quality, purity and potency. Manufacturing biologics requires facilities specifically designed for and validated for this purpose, and sophisticated quality assurance and quality control procedures are necessary. Slight deviations anywhere in the manufacturing process, including filling, labeling, packaging, storage and shipping and quality control and testing, may result in lot failures, product recalls or spoilage. When changes are made to the manufacturing process, the Company may be required to provide pre-clinical and clinical data showing the comparable identity, strength, quality, purity or potency of the products before and after such changes.
Biologics and vaccines are frequently costly to manufacture because production ingredients are derived from living animal or plant material, and most biologics and vaccines cannot be made synthetically. In particular, keeping up with the demand for vaccines may be difficult due to the complexity of producing vaccines.
The use of biologically derived ingredients can lead to variability in the manufacturing process and could lead to allegations of harm, including infections or allergic reactions, orwhich allegations would be reviewed through a standard investigation process that could lead to closure of product facilities due to possible contamination. Any of these events could result in substantial costs.
Product liability insurance for products may be limited, cost prohibitive or unavailable.
As a result of a number of factors, product liability insurance has become less available while the cost has increased significantly. The Company is subject to a substantial number of product liability claims. See Item 8. “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data,” Note 11. “Contingencies and Environmental Liabilities” below for more information on the Company’s current product liability litigation. With respect to product liability, the Company self-insures substantially all of its risk, as the availability of commercial insurance has become more restrictive. The Company has evaluated its risks and has determined that the cost of obtaining product liability insurance outweighs the likely benefits of the coverage that is available and, as such, has no insurance for certain product liabilities effective August 1, 2004, including liability for legacy Merck products first sold after that date. The Company will continually assess the most efficient means to address its risk; however, there can be no guarantee that insurance coverage will be obtained or, if obtained, will be sufficient to fully cover product liabilities that may arise.
Changes in laws and regulations could adversely affect the Company’s business.
All aspects of the Company’s business, including research and development, manufacturing, marketing, pricing, sales, litigation and intellectual property rights, are subject to extensive legislation and regulation. Changes in applicable federal and state laws and agency regulations could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business.

26


Social media platforms present risks and challenges.
The inappropriate and/or unauthorized use of certain media vehicles could cause brand damage or information leakage or could lead to legal implications, including from the improper collection and/or dissemination of personally identifiable information. In addition, negative or inaccurate posts or comments about the Company or its products on any social networking web siteplatforms could damage the Company’s reputation, brand image and goodwill. Further, the disclosure of non-public Company-sensitive information by the Company’s workforce or others through external media channels could lead to information loss. Although there is an internal Company Social Media Policy that guides employees on appropriate personal and professional use of social media about the Company, the processes in place may not completely secure and protect information. Identifying new points of entry as social media continues to expand also presents new challenges.

Cautionary Factors that May Affect Future Results
(Cautionary Statements Under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995)
This report and other written reports and oral statements made from time to time by the Company may contain so-called “forward-looking statements,” all of which are based on management’s current expectations and are subject to risks and uncertainties which may cause results to differ materially from those set forth in the statements. One can identify these forward-looking statements by their use of words such as “anticipates,” “expects,” “plans,” “will,” “estimates,” “forecasts,” “projects” and other words of similar meaning.meaning, or negative variations of any of the foregoing. One can also identify them by the fact that they do not relate strictly to historical or current facts. These statements are likely to address the Company’s growth strategy, financial results, product development, product approvals, product potential, and development programs. One must carefully consider any such statement and should understand that many factors could cause actual results to differ materially from the Company’s forward-looking statements. These factors include inaccurate assumptions and a broad variety of other risks and uncertainties, including some that are known and some that are not. No forward-looking statement can be guaranteed and actual future results may vary materially. The Company does not assume the obligation to update any forward-looking statement. The Company cautions you not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements. Although it is not possible to predict or identify all such factors, they may include the following:
Competition from generic and/or biosimilar products as the Company’s products lose patent protection.
Increased “brand” competition in therapeutic areas important to the Company’s long-term business performance.
The difficulties and uncertainties inherent in new product development. The outcome of the lengthy and complex process of new product development is inherently uncertain. A drug candidate can fail at any stage of the process and one or more late-stage product candidates could fail to receive regulatory approval. New product candidates may appear promising in development but fail to reach the market because of efficacy or safety concerns, the inability to obtain necessary regulatory approvals, the difficulty or excessive cost to manufacture and/or the infringement of patents or intellectual property rights of others. Furthermore, the sales of new products may prove to be disappointing and fail to reach anticipated levels.
Pricing pressures, both in the United States and abroad, including rules and practices of managed care groups, judicial decisions and governmental laws and regulations related to Medicare, Medicaid and health care reform, pharmaceutical reimbursement and pricing in general.
Changes in government laws and regulations, including laws governing intellectual property, and the enforcement thereof affecting the Company’s business.
Efficacy or safety concerns with respect to marketed products, whether or not scientifically justified, leading to product recalls, withdrawals or declining sales.
Significant changes in customer relationships or changes in the behavior and spending patterns of purchasers of health care products and services, including delaying medical procedures, rationing prescription medications, reducing the frequency of physician visits and foregoing health care insurance coverage.
Legal factors, including product liability claims, antitrust litigation and governmental investigations, including tax disputes, environmental concerns and patent disputes with branded and generic competitors, any of which could preclude commercialization of products or negatively affect the profitability of existing products.

27Cyber-attacks on the Company’s information technology systems, which could disrupt the Company’s operations.


Lost market opportunity resulting from delays and uncertainties in the approval process of the FDA and foreign regulatory authorities.
Increased focus on privacy issues in countries around the world, including the United States and the EU. The legislative and regulatory landscape for privacy and data protection continues to evolve, and there has been

an increasing amount of focus on privacy and data protection issues with the potential to affect directly the Company’s business, including recently enacted laws in a majority of states in the United States requiring security breach notification.
Changes in tax laws including changes related to the taxation of foreign earnings.
Changes in accounting pronouncements promulgated by standard-setting or regulatory bodies, including the Financial Accounting Standards Board and the SEC, that are adverse to the Company.
Economic factors over which the Company has no control, including changes in inflation, interest rates and foreign currency exchange rates.
This list should not be considered an exhaustive statement of all potential risks and uncertainties. See “Risk Factors” above.
Item 1B.Unresolved Staff Comments.
None.
Item 2.Properties.
The Company’s corporate headquarters is located in Kenilworth, New Jersey. The Company’s U.S. commercial operations are headquartered in Upper Gwynedd, Pennsylvania. The Company’s U.S. pharmaceutical business is conducted through divisional headquarters located in Upper Gwynedd, Pennsylvania and Cokesbury,Kenilworth, New Jersey. The Company’s vaccines business is conducted through divisional headquarters located in West Point,Upper Gwynedd, Pennsylvania. Merck’s Animal Health global headquarters function is located in Madison, New Jersey. Principal U.S. research facilities are located in Rahway and Kenilworth, New Jersey, West Point, Pennsylvania, Palo Alto, California, Boston, Massachusetts, South San Francisco, California and Elkhorn, Nebraska (Animal Health). Principal research facilities outside the United States are located in Switzerland and China. Merck’s manufacturing operations are headquartered in Whitehouse Station, New Jersey. The Company also has production facilities for human health products at nine locations in the United States and Puerto Rico. Outside the United States, through subsidiaries, the Company owns or has an interest in manufacturing plants or other properties in Japan, Singapore, South Africa, and other countries in Western Europe, Central and South America, and Asia.
Capital expenditures were $1.3$2.6 billion in 2015, $1.32018, $1.9 billion in 20142017 and $1.5$1.6 billion in 2013.2016. In the United States, these amounted to $879 million$1.5 billion in 2015, $873 million2018, $1.2 billion in 20142017 and $902 million$1.0 billion in 2013.2016. Abroad, such expenditures amounted to $404$1.1 billion in 2018, $728 million in 2015, $4442017 and $594 million in 2014 and $646 million in 2013.2016.
The Company and its subsidiaries own their principal facilities and manufacturing plants under titles that they consider to be satisfactory. The Company considersbelieves that its properties are in good operating condition and that its machinery and equipment have been well maintained. Plants for the manufacture of products are suitable for their intended purposes and have capacities and projected capacities adequate for current and projected needs for existing Company products. Some capacity of the plants is being converted, with any needed modification, to the requirements of newly introduced and future products. In addition, in October 2018, the Company announced it plans to invest approximately $16 billion on new capital projects from 2018-2022. The focus of this investment will primarily be on increasing manufacturing capacity across Merck’s key businesses.
Item 3.Legal Proceedings.
The information called for by this Item is incorporated herein by reference to Item 8. “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data,” Note 10.11. “Contingencies and Environmental Liabilities”.
Item 4.Mine Safety Disclosures.
Not ApplicableApplicable.

28



Executive Officers of the Registrant (ages as of February 1, 2016)
KENNETH C. FRAZIER — Age 61
December 2011 — Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
January 2011 — President and Chief Executive Officer
May 2010 — President — responsible for the Company’s three largest global divisions - Global Human Health, Merck Manufacturing Division and Merck Research Laboratories
Prior to May 2010, Mr. Frazier was Executive Vice President and President, Global Human Health from 2007 to 2010.
ADELE D. AMBROSE — Age 59
November 2009 — Senior Vice President and Chief Communications Officer — responsible for the Global Communications organization
ROBERT M. DAVIS — Age 49
April 2014 — Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer — responsible for the Company’s global financial organization, investor relations, corporate strategy and business development, global facilities, and the Company’s joint venture relationships
Prior to April 2014, Mr. Davis was Corporate Vice President and President, Medical Products of Baxter International, Inc. (Baxter) from 2010 to 2014, Corporate Vice President and President, Renal Division of Baxter in 2010 and Baxter’s Corporate Vice President and Chief Financial Officer from 2006 to 2010
WILLIE A. DEESE — Age 60
November 2009 — Executive Vice President and President, Merck Manufacturing Division — responsible for the Company’s global manufacturing, procurement, and distribution and logistics functions
RICHARD R. DELUCA, JR. — Age 53
September 2011 — Executive Vice President and President, Merck Animal Health — responsible for the Merck Animal Health organization
Prior to September 2011, Mr. DeLuca was Chief Financial Officer, Becton Dickinson Biosciences (a medical technology company) since 2010 and President, Wyeth’s Fort Dodge Animal Health division from 2007 to 2010.
JULIE L. GERBERDING, M.D., M.P.H. — Age 60
January 2015 — Executive Vice President for Strategic Communications, Global Public Policy and Population Health — responsible for Merck’s Global Public Policy, Corporate Responsibility and Global Communications functions
January 2010 — President, Merck Vaccines — responsible for Merck’s portfolio of vaccines, planning for the introduction of vaccines from the Company’s pipeline, and accelerating efforts to broaden access to Merck’s vaccines around the world

29


CLARK GOLESTANI — Age 49
December 2012 — Executive Vice President and Chief Information Officer — responsible for the Company’s global information technology (IT) organization
August 2008 — Vice President, Merck Research Laboratories Information Technology — responsible for global IT for the Company’s Research & Development division, including Basic Research, Pre-Clinical, Clinical and Regulatory
MIRIAN M. GRADDICK-WEIR — Age 61
November 2009 — Executive Vice President, Human Resources — responsible for the Global Human Resources organization
MICHAEL J. HOLSTON — Age 53
July 2015 — Executive Vice President and General Counsel — responsible for the Company’s legal function
June 2012 — Executive Vice President and Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer — responsible for the Company’s global compliance function, including Global Safety & Environment, Systems Assurance, Ethics and Privacy and security organization
Prior to June 2012, Mr. Holston was Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Board Secretary for Hewlett-Packard Company since 2007, where he oversaw the legal, compliance, government affairs, privacy and ethics operations.
RITA A. KARACHUN — Age 52
March 2014 — Senior Vice President Finance - Global Controller — responsible for the Company’s global controller’s organization including all accounting, controls, external reporting and financial standards and policies
November 2009 — Assistant Controller — responsible for the global consolidation of the Company’s entities as well as acting as controller for the U.S.-based entities
ROGER M. PERLMUTTER, M.D., Ph.D. — Age 63
April 2013 — Executive Vice President and President, Merck Research Laboratories — responsible for the Company’s global research and development efforts
Prior to April 2013, Dr. Perlmutter was Executive Vice President of Research and Development, Amgen Inc. from 2001 to 2012.
MICHAEL ROSENBLATT, M.D. — Age 68
December 2009 — Executive Vice President and Chief Medical Officer — the Company’s primary voice to the global medical community on critical issues such as patient safety and benefit:risk of medications
ADAM H. SCHECHTER — Age 51
May 2010 — Executive Vice President and President, Global Human Health — responsible for the Company’s global pharmaceutical and vaccine business
November 2009 — President, Global Human Health, U.S. Market and Integration Leader — commercial responsibility in the United States for the Company’s portfolio of prescription medicines. Leader for the integration efforts for the Merck/Schering-Plough merger across all divisions and functions.2019)
All officers listed abovebelow serve at the pleasure of the Board of Directors. None of these officers was elected pursuant to any arrangement or understanding between the officer and the Board.any other person(s).

30

NameAgeOffices and Business Experience
Kenneth C. Frazier64Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer (since December 2011)
Sanat Chattopadhyay59Executive Vice President and President, Merck Manufacturing Division (since March 2016); Senior Vice President, Operations, Merck Manufacturing Division (November 2009-March 2016)
Frank Clyburn54Executive Vice President, Chief Commercial Officer (since January 2019); President, Global Oncology Business Unit (October 2013-December 2018); President, Primary Care and Women’s Health Business Line (September 2011-October 2013)
Robert M. Davis52Executive Vice President, Global Services, and Chief Financial Officer (since April 2016); Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (April 2014-April 2016); Corporate Vice President and President, Medical Products, Baxter International, Inc. (October 2010-March 2014)
Richard R. DeLuca, Jr.56Executive Vice President and President, Merck Animal Health (since September 2011)
Julie L. Gerberding62Executive Vice President and Chief Patient Officer, Strategic Communications, Global Public Policy and Population Health (since July 2016); Executive Vice President for Strategic Communications, Global Public Policy and Population Health (January 2015-July 2016); President, Merck Vaccines (January 2010-January 2015)
Rita A. Karachun55Senior Vice President Finance - Global Controller (since March 2014); Assistant Controller (November 2009-March 2014)
Steven C. Mizell

58Executive Vice President, Chief Human Resources Officer, Human Resources (since October 2018); Executive Vice President, Chief Human Resources Officer (December 2016-October 2018) and Executive Vice President, Human Resources, Monsanto Company (August 2011-December 2016)
Michael T. Nally43Executive Vice President, Chief Marketing Officer (since January 2019); President, Global Vaccines, Global Human Health (September 2016-January 2019); Managing Director, United Kingdom and Ireland, Global Human Health (January 2014-September 2016); Managing Director, Sweden, Global Human Health (November 2011-January 2014)
Roger M. Perlmutter, M.D., Ph.D.66Executive Vice President and President, Merck Research Laboratories (since April 2013)
Jim Scholefield56Executive Vice President, Chief Information and Digital Officer (since October 2018); Chief Information Officer, Nike, Inc (July 2015-October 2018); Chief Technology Officer, The Coca-Cola Company, (November 2010-June 2015)
Jennifer Zachary41Executive Vice President and General Counsel (since April 2018); Partner, Covington & Burling LLP (January 2013-March 2018)


PART IIHealth Care Environment and Government Regulation
Global efforts toward health care cost containment continue to exert pressure on product pricing and market access. In the United States, federal and state governments for many years also have pursued methods to reduce the cost of drugs and vaccines for which they pay. For example, federal laws require the Company to pay specified rebates for medicines reimbursed by Medicaid and to provide discounts for outpatient medicines purchased by certain Public Health Service entities and hospitals serving a disproportionate share of low income or uninsured patients.
Item 5.Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities.
Against this backdrop, the United States enacted major health care reform legislation in 2010 (the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA)). Various insurance market reforms have since advanced and state and federal insurance exchanges were launched in 2014. With respect to the effect of the law on the pharmaceutical industry, the law increased the mandated Medicaid rebate from 15.1% to 23.1%, expanded the rebate to Medicaid managed care utilization, and increased the types of entities eligible for the federal 340B drug discount program. The law also requires pharmaceutical manufacturers to pay a 50% point of service discount to Medicare Part D beneficiaries when they are in the Medicare Part D coverage gap (i.e., the so-called “donut hole”). Approximately $365 million, $385 million and $415 million was recorded by Merck as a reduction to revenue in 2018, 2017 and 2016, respectively, related to the donut hole provision. Beginning in 2019, the 50% point of service discount will increase to a 70% point of service discount in the coverage gap, as a result of the Balanced Budget Act of 2018. In addition, the 70% point of service discount will be extended to biosimilar products. Also, pharmaceutical manufacturers are now required to pay an annual non-tax deductible health care reform fee. The total annual industry fee was $4.1 billion in 2018 and will decrease to $2.8 billion in 2019 and is currently planned to remain at that amount thereafter. The fee is assessed on each company in proportion to its share of prior year branded pharmaceutical sales to certain government programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid. The Company recorded $124 million, $210 million and $193 million of costs within Selling, general and administrative expenses in 2018, 2017 and 2016, respectively, for the annual health care reform fee. In February 2016, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) issued the Medicaid rebate final rule that implements provisions of the ACA effective April 1, 2016. The rule provides comprehensive guidance on the calculation of Average Manufacturer Price and Best Price; two metrics utilized to determine the rebates drug manufacturers are required to pay to state Medicaid programs. The impact of changes resulting from the issuance of the rule is not material to Merck at this time. However, the Company is still awaiting guidance from CMS on two aspects of the rule that were deferred for later implementation. These include a definition of what constitutes a product ‘line extension’ and a delay in the participation of the U.S. Territories in the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program until April 1, 2020. The Company will evaluate the financial impact of these two elements when they become effective.

There is significant uncertainty about the future of the ACA in particular and health care laws in general in the United States. The Company is participating in the debate, and monitoring how any proposed changes could affect its business. The Company is unable to predict the likelihood of changes to the ACA. Depending on the nature of any repeal and replacement of the ACA, such actions could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, cash flow, results of operations, financial position and prospects.
A number of states have passed pharmaceutical price and cost transparency laws. These laws typically require manufacturers to report certain product price information or other financial data to the state. In the case of a California law, manufacturers also are required to provide advance notification of price increases. The Company expects that states will continue their focus on pharmaceutical price transparency and that this focus will continue to exert pressure on product pricing.
The principalCompany also faces increasing pricing pressure globally from managed care organizations, government agencies and programs that could negatively affect the Company’s sales and profit margins. In the United States, these include (i) practices of managed care organizations, federal and state exchanges, and institutional and governmental purchasers, and (ii) U.S. federal laws and regulations related to Medicare and Medicaid, including the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 and the ACA.
Changes to the health care system enacted as part of health care reform in the United States, as well as increased purchasing power of entities that negotiate on behalf of Medicare, Medicaid, and private sector beneficiaries, could result in further pricing pressures. As an example, health care reform is contributing to an increase in the number of patients in the Medicaid program under which sales of pharmaceutical products are subject to substantial rebates.
In addition, in the effort to contain the U.S. federal deficit, the pharmaceutical industry could be considered a potential source of savings via legislative proposals that have been debated but not enacted. These types of revenue generating or cost saving proposals include additional direct price controls in the Medicare prescription drug program (Part D). In addition, Congress may again consider proposals to allow, under certain conditions, the importation of medicines from other countries. It remains very uncertain as to what proposals, if any, may be included as part of future federal budget deficit reduction proposals that would directly or indirectly affect the Company.
In the U.S. private sector, consolidation and integration among health care providers is a major factor in the competitive marketplace for pharmaceutical products. Health plans and pharmacy benefit managers have been consolidating into fewer, larger entities, thus enhancing their purchasing strength and importance. Private third-party insurers, as well as governments, increasingly employ formularies to control costs by negotiating discounted prices in exchange for formulary inclusion. Failure to obtain timely or adequate pricing or formulary placement for Merck’s products or obtaining such placement at unfavorable pricing could adversely impact revenue. In addition to formulary tier co-pay differentials, private health insurance companies and self-insured employers have been raising co-payments required from beneficiaries, particularly for branded pharmaceuticals and biotechnology products. Private health insurance companies also are increasingly imposing utilization management tools, such as clinical protocols, requiring prior authorization for a branded product if a generic product is available or requiring the patient to first fail on one or more generic products before permitting access to a branded medicine. These same management tools are also used in treatment areas in which the payer has taken the position that multiple branded products are therapeutically comparable. As the U.S. payer market concentrates further and as more drugs become available in generic form, pharmaceutical companies may face greater pricing pressure from private third-party payers.
In order to provide information about the Company’s pricing practices, the Company annually posts on its website its Pricing Transparency Report for tradingthe United States. The report provides the Company’s average annual list price and net price increases across the Company’s U.S. portfolio dating back to 2010. 
Efforts toward health care cost containment also remain intense in European countries. The Company faces competitive pricing pressure resulting from generic and biosimilar drugs. In addition, a majority of countries in Europe attempt to contain drug costs by engaging in reference pricing in which authorities examine pre-determined markets for published prices of drugs by brand. The authorities then use price data from those markets to set new local prices for brand-name drugs, including the Company’s. Guidelines for examining reference pricing are usually set in local markets and can be changed pursuant to local regulations.

In addition, in Japan, the pharmaceutical industry is subject to government-mandated biennial price reductions of pharmaceutical products and certain vaccines, which occurred in 2018. Furthermore, the government can order repricings for classes of drugs if it determines that it is appropriate under applicable rules.
Certain markets outside of the United States have also implemented other cost management strategies, such as health technology assessments (HTA), which require additional data, reviews and administrative processes, all of which increase the complexity, timing and costs of obtaining product reimbursement and exert downward pressure on available reimbursement. In the United States, HTAs are also being used by government and private payers.
The Company’s focus on emerging markets has continued. Governments in many emerging markets are also focused on constraining health care costs and have enacted price controls and related measures, such as compulsory licenses, that aim to put pressure on the price of pharmaceuticals and constrain market access. The Company anticipates that pricing pressures and market access challenges will continue in 2019 to varying degrees in the emerging markets.
Beyond pricing and market access challenges, other conditions in emerging market countries can affect the Company’s efforts to continue to grow in these markets, including potential political instability, changes in trade sanctions and embargoes, significant currency fluctuation and controls, financial crises, limited or changing availability of funding for health care, and other developments that may adversely impact the business environment for the Company. Further, the Company may engage third-party agents to assist in operating in emerging market countries, which may affect its ability to realize continued growth and may also increase the Company’s risk exposure.
In addressing cost containment pressures, the Company engages in public policy advocacy with policymakers and continues to work to demonstrate that its medicines provide value to patients and to those who pay for health care. The Company advocates with government policymakers to encourage a long-term approach to sustainable health care financing that ensures access to innovative medicines and does not disproportionately target pharmaceuticals as a source of budget savings. In markets with historically low rates of health care spending, the Company encourages those governments to increase their investments and adopt market reforms in order to improve their citizens’ access to appropriate health care, including medicines.
Operating conditions have become more challenging under the global pressures of competition, industry regulation and cost containment efforts. Although no one can predict the effect of these and other factors on the Company’s business, the Company continually takes measures to evaluate, adapt and improve the organization and its business practices to better meet customer needs and believes that it is well-positioned to respond to the evolving health care environment and market forces.
The pharmaceutical industry is also subject to regulation by regional, country, state and local agencies around the world focused on standards and processes for determining drug safety and effectiveness, as well as conditions for sale or reimbursement.
Of particular importance is the FDA in the United States, which administers requirements covering the testing, approval, safety, effectiveness, manufacturing, labeling, and marketing of prescription pharmaceuticals. In some cases, the FDA requirements and practices have increased the amount of time and resources necessary to develop new products and bring them to market in the United States. At the same time, the FDA has committed to expediting the development and review of products bearing the “breakthrough therapy” designation, which has accelerated the regulatory review process for medicines with this designation. The FDA has also undertaken efforts to bring generic competition to market more efficiently and in a more timely manner.
The European Union (EU) has adopted directives and other legislation concerning the classification, labeling, advertising, wholesale distribution, integrity of the supply chain, enhanced pharmacovigilance monitoring and approval for marketing of medicinal products for human use. These provide mandatory standards throughout the EU, which may be supplemented or implemented with additional regulations by the EU member states. The Company’s policies and procedures are already consistent with the substance of these directives; consequently, it is believed that they will not have any material effect on the Company’s business.
The Company’s business in China has grown rapidly in the past few years, and the importance of China to the Company’s overall pharmaceutical and vaccines business has increased accordingly. Continued growth of the Company’s Common Stockbusiness in China is dependent upon ongoing development of a favorable environment for innovative pharmaceutical products and vaccines, sustained access for the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) underCompany’s current in-line products, and the symbol MRK. The Common Stock market price information set forthabsence

of trade impediments or adverse pricing controls. In recent years, the Chinese government has introduced and implemented a number of structural reforms to accelerate the shift to innovative products and reduce costs. Since 2017, there have been multiple new policies introduced by the government to improve access to new innovation, reduce the complexity of regulatory filings, and accelerate the review and approval process. This has led to a significant expansion of the new products being approved each year. Additionally, in 2017, the government updated the National Reimbursement Drug List for the first time in eight years. While the mechanism for drugs being added to the list evolves, it is likely that in the table below is based on historical NYSEfuture, inclusion will require a price negotiation which could impact the outlook in the market prices.for selected brands. While pricing pressure has always existed in China, health care reform has led to the acceleration of generic substitution, through a pilot tendering process for mature products that have generic substitutes with a Generic Quality Consistency Evaluation approval.
The following table also sets forth,Company believes that it will continue to be able to conduct its operations, including launching new drugs, in this regulatory environment. (See “Research and Development” below for the calendar periods indicated, the dividend per share information.
 Cash Dividends Paid per Common Share         
  Year
 4th Q
 3rd Q
 2nd Q
 1st Q
 2015$1.80
 $0.45
 $0.45
 $0.45
 $0.45
 2014$1.76
 $0.44
 $0.44
 $0.44
 $0.44
 Common Stock Market Prices
 
 2015  4th Q
 3rd Q
 2nd Q
 1st Q
 High  $55.77
 $60.07
 $61.70
 $63.62
 Low  $48.35
 $45.69
 $56.22
 $55.64
 2014         
 High  $62.20
 $61.33
 $59.84
 $57.65
 Low  $52.49
 $55.57
 $54.40
 $49.30

As of January 31, 2016, there were approximately 135,000 shareholders of record.

Issuer purchases of equity securities for the three months ended December 31, 2015 were as follows:
Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
      ($ in millions)
Period 
Total Number
of Shares
Purchased(1)
 
Average Price
Paid Per
Share
 
Approximate Dollar Value of Shares
That May Yet Be Purchased
Under the Plans or Programs(1)
October 1 — October 31 8,968,000 $50.45 $9,218
November 1 — November 30 6,136,400 $54.25 $8,885
December 1 — December 31 7,464,600 $53.06 $8,489
Total 22,569,000 $52.35 $8,489

(1)
All shares purchased during the period were made as part of a plan approved by the Board of Directors in March 2015 to purchase up to $10 billion in Merck shares.

31


Performance Graph
The following graph assumes a $100 investment on December 31, 2010, and reinvestment of all dividends, in eachdiscussion of the Company’s Common Shares, the S&P 500 Index, and a composite peer group of the major U.S.-based pharmaceutical companies, which are: AbbVie Inc., Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Johnson & Johnson, Eli Lilly and Company, and Pfizer Inc.regulatory approval process.)
Comparison of Five-Year Cumulative Total ReturnAccess to Medicines
Merck & Co., Inc., Composite Peer Group and S&P 500 Index
 
End of
Period Value
 
2015/2010
CAGR**
MERCK$177
 12%
PEER GRP.**244
 20%
S&P 500181
 13%

 201020112012201320142015
MERCK100.00109.40123.72156.90183.56176.53
PEER GRP.100.00122.23141.20196.84229.34244.08
S&P 500100.00102.10118.44156.78178.22180.67

*Compound Annual Growth Rate
**Peer group average was calculated on a market cap weighted basis. In addition, AbbVie Inc. replaced Abbott Laboratories in the peer group beginning 2013 following the spin off from Abbott Laboratories.

This Performance Graph will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference. In addition, the Performance Graph will not be deemed to be “soliciting material” or to be “filed” with the SEC or subject to Regulation 14A or 14C, other than as provided in Regulation S-K, or to the liabilities of section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, except to the extent that the Company specifically requests that such information be treated as soliciting material or specifically incorporates it by reference into a filing under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act.


32


Item 6.Selected Financial Data.                        
The following selected financial data should be read in conjunction with Item 7. “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and consolidated financial statements and notes thereto contained in Item 8. “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” of this report.
Merck & Co., Inc. and Subsidiaries
($ in millions except per share amounts)
 
2015 (1)
 
2014 (2)
 2013 
2012(3)
 
2011(4)
Results for Year:         
Sales$39,498
 $42,237
 $44,033
 $47,267
 $48,047
Materials and production14,934
 16,768
 16,954
 16,446
 16,871
Marketing and administrative10,313
 11,606
 11,911
 12,776
 13,733
Research and development6,704
 7,180
 7,503
 8,168
 8,467
Restructuring costs619
 1,013
 1,709
 664
 1,306
Other (income) expense, net1,527
 (11,613) 411
 474
 336
Income before taxes5,401
 17,283
 5,545
 8,739
 7,334
Taxes on income942
 5,349
 1,028
 2,440
 942
Net income4,459
 11,934
 4,517
 6,299
 6,392
Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests17
 14
 113
 131
 120
Net income attributable to Merck & Co., Inc.4,442
 11,920
 4,404
 6,168
 6,272
Basic earnings per common share attributable to Merck & Co., Inc. common shareholders$1.58
 $4.12
 $1.49
 $2.03
 $2.04
Earnings per common share assuming dilution attributable to Merck & Co., Inc. common shareholders$1.56
 $4.07
 $1.47
 $2.00
 $2.02
Cash dividends declared5,115
 5,156
 5,132
 5,173
 4,818
Cash dividends declared per common share$1.81
 $1.77
 $1.73
 $1.69
 $1.56
Capital expenditures1,283
 1,317
 1,548
 1,954
 1,723
Depreciation1,593
 2,471
 2,225
 1,999
 2,351
Average common shares outstanding (millions)2,816
 2,894
 2,963
 3,041
 3,071
Average common shares outstanding assuming dilution (millions)2,841
 2,928
 2,996
 3,076
 3,094
Year-End Position:         
Working capital (5)
$10,561
 $14,208
 $17,469
 $15,926
 $16,128
Property, plant and equipment, net12,507
 13,136
 14,973
 16,030
 16,297
Total assets (5)
101,779
 98,167
 105,440
 105,921
 104,699
Long-term debt23,929
 18,699
 20,539
 16,254
 15,525
Total equity44,767
 48,791
 52,326
 55,463
 56,943
Year-End Statistics:         
Number of stockholders of record135,500
 142,000
 149,400
 157,400
 166,100
Number of employees68,000
 70,000
 77,000
 83,000
 86,000
(1)
Amounts for 2015 include a net charge related to the settlement of Vioxx shareholder class action litigation, foreign exchange losses related to Venezuela, gains on the dispositions of businesses and other assets and the favorable benefit of certain tax items.
(2)
Amounts for 2014 reflect the divestiture of Merck’s Consumer Care business on October 1, 2014, including a gain on the sale, as well as a gain recognized on an option exercise by AstraZeneca, gains on the dispositions of other businesses and assets, and a loss on extinguishment of debt.
(3)
Amounts for 2012 include a net charge recorded in connection with the settlement of certain shareholder litigation.
(4)
Amounts for 2011 include an arbitration settlement charge.
(5)
Amounts have been restated to give effect to the early adoption of accounting guidance issued by the Financial Accounting Standards Board. See Note 2 to Item 8(a). “Financial Statements.”



33


Item 7.Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.
Description of Merck’s Business
Merck & Co., Inc. (Merck or the Company) isAs a global health care company, Merck’s primary role is to discover and develop innovative medicines and vaccines. The Company also recognizes that delivers innovative health solutions throughit has an important role to play in helping to improve access to its prescription medicines, vaccines, biologic therapies and animal health products which it markets directly and through its joint ventures.around the world. The Company’s efforts in this regard are wide-ranging and include a set of principles that the Company strives to embed into its operations are principally managedand business strategies to guide the Company’s worldwide approach to expanding access to health care. In addition, the Company has many far-reaching philanthropic programs. The Merck Patient Assistance Program provides medicines and adult vaccines for free to people in the United States who do not have prescription drug or health insurance coverage and who, without the Company’s assistance, cannot afford their Merck medicine and vaccines. In 2011, Merck launched “Merck for Mothers,” a long-term effort with global health partners to end preventable deaths from complications of pregnancy and childbirth. Merck has also provided funds to the Merck Foundation, an independent organization, which has partnered with a variety of organizations dedicated to improving global health.
Privacy and Data Protection
The Company is subject to a significant number of privacy and data protection laws and regulations globally, many of which place restrictions on the Company’s ability to transfer, access and use personal data across its business. The legislative and regulatory landscape for privacy and data protection continues to evolve. There has been increased attention to privacy and data protection issues in both developed and emerging markets with the potential to affect directly the Company’s business, including the new EU General Data Protection Regulation, which went into effect on May 25, 2018 and imposes penalties up to 4% of global revenue. Additional laws and regulations enacted in the United States, Europe, Asia and Latin America, increases enforcement and litigation activity in the United States and other developed markets, and increases regulatory cooperation among privacy authorities globally. The Company has adopted a products basiscomprehensive global privacy program to manage these evolving risks which has been certified as compliant with and are comprised of four operating segments, the Pharmaceutical, Animal Health, Alliances and Healthcare Services segments. The Pharmaceutical segment is the only reportable segment. The Pharmaceutical segment includes human health pharmaceutical and vaccine products marketed either directlyapproved by the Company or through joint ventures. Human health pharmaceutical products consist of therapeuticAsia Pacific Economic Cooperation Cross-Border Privacy Rules System, the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield Program, and preventive agents, generally sold by prescription, for the treatment of human disorders. Binding Corporate Rules in the EU.
Distribution
The Company sells theseits human health pharmaceutical products primarily to drug wholesalers and retailers, hospitals, government agencies and managed health care providers, such as health maintenance organizations, pharmacy benefit managers and other institutions. Vaccine products consist of preventive pediatric, adolescent and adultHuman health vaccines primarily administered at physician offices. The Company sells these human health vaccinesare sold primarily to physicians, wholesalers, physician distributors and government entities. The Company’s professional representatives communicate the effectiveness, safety and value of the Company’s pharmaceutical and vaccine products to health care professionals in private practice, group practices, hospitals and managed care organizations. The Company also hassells its animal health operations that discover, develop, manufacture and market animal health products including vaccines, which the Company sells to veterinarians, distributors and animal producers. Merck’s Alliances segment primarily includes results
Raw Materials
Raw materials and supplies, which are generally available from multiple sources, are purchased worldwide and are normally available in quantities adequate to meet the needs of the Company’s relationshipbusiness.

Patents, Trademarks and Licenses
Patent protection is considered, in the aggregate, to be of material importance to the Company’s marketing of its products in the United States and in most major foreign markets. Patents may cover products per se, pharmaceutical formulations, processes for or intermediates useful in the manufacture of products or the uses of products. Protection for individual products extends for varying periods in accordance with AstraZeneca LP until the terminationlegal life of patents in the various countries. The protection afforded, which may also vary from country to country, depends upon the type of patent and its scope of coverage.
The Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act includes a Pediatric Exclusivity Provision that relationshipmay provide an additional six months of market exclusivity in the United States for indications of new or currently marketed drugs if certain agreed upon pediatric studies are completed by the applicant. Current U.S. patent law provides additional patent term for periods when the patented product was under regulatory review by the FDA. The EU also provides an additional six months of pediatric market exclusivity attached to a product’s Supplementary Protection Certificate (SPC). Japan provides the additional term for pediatric studies attached to market exclusivity unrelated to patent rights.
Patent portfolios developed for products introduced by the Company normally provide market exclusivity. The Company has the following key patent protection in the United States, the EU and Japan (including the potential for patent term extensions (PTE) and SPCs where indicated) for the following marketed products:

ProductYear of Expiration (U.S.)
Year of Expiration (EU)(1)
Year of Expiration (Japan)(3)
EmendExpired20192019
Emend for Injection
2019
2020(2)
2020
Noxafil20192019N/A
Vaxelis(4)
2020 (method of making)
2021(5) (SPCs)
Not Marketed
Januvia
2022(2)
2022(2)
2025-2026
Janumet
2022(2)
2023N/A
Janumet XR
2022(2)
N/AN/A
Isentress2024
2022(2)
2022
Simponi
N/A(6)
2025(7)
N/A(6)
Lenvima(8)
2025(2) (with pending PTE)
2021 (patents), 2026(2) (SPCs)
2026
Adempas(9)
2026(2)
2028(2)
2027-2028
Bridion
2026(2) (with pending PTE)
20232024
Nexplanon2027 (device)2025 (device)Not Marketed
Bravecto2027 (with pending PTE)2025 (patents), 2029 (SPCs)2029
Gardasil2028
2021(2)
Expired
Gardasil 9
2028
2025 (patents), 2030(2) (SPCs)
N/A
Keytruda2028
2028 (patents), 2030(2) (SPCs)
2032
Lynparza(10)
2028(2) (with pending PTE)
2024 (patents), 2029(2) (SPCs)
2028-2029 (with pending PTE)
Zerbaxa
2028(2) (with pending PTE)
2023 (patents), 2028(2) (SPCs)
N/A
Sivextro
2028(2)
2024 (patents), 2029(2) (SPCs)
2029 (with pending PTE)
Belsomra
2029(2)
N/A2031
Prevymis
2029(2) (with pending PTE)
2024 (patents), 2029(2) (SPCs)
2029 (with pending PTE)
Steglatro(11)
2031(2) (with pending PTE)
2029 (patents), 2034(2) (SPCs)
N/A
Steglujan(11)
2031 (with pending PTE)
2029 (patents), 2034 (SPCs)N/A
Segluromet(11)
2031 (with pending PTE)2029 (patents), 2034 (SPCs)N/A
Delstrigo2032 (with pending PTE)
2031(12)
N/A
Pifeltro2032 (with pending PTE)
2031(12)
N/A
N/A:Currently no marketing approval.
Note:Compound patent unless otherwise noted. Certain of the products listed may be the subject of patent litigation. See Item 8. “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data,” Note 11. “Contingencies and Environmental Liabilities” below.
(1)
The EU date represents the expiration date for the following five countries: France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the United Kingdom (Major EU Markets). If SPC applications have been filed but have not been granted in all Major EU Markets, both the patent expiry date and the SPC expiry date are listed.
(2)
Eligible for 6 months Pediatric Exclusivity.
(3)
The PTE system in Japan allows for a patent to be extended more than once provided the later approval is directed to a different indication from that of the previous approval. This may result in multiple PTE approvals for a given patent, each with its own expiration date.
(4)
Being commercialized in a U.S.-based joint partnership with Sanofi Pasteur.
(5)
SPCs are granted in four Major EU Markets and pending in one, based on a patent that expired in 2016.
(6)
The Company has no marketing rights in the U.S. and Japan.
(7)
Includes Pediatric Exclusivity, which is granted in four Major EU Markets and pending in one.
(8)
Being developed and commercialized in a global strategic oncology collaboration with Eisai.
(9)
Being commercialized in a worldwide collaboration with Bayer AG.
(10)
Being developed and commercialized in a global strategic oncology collaboration with AstraZeneca.
(11)
Being developed and promoted in a worldwide, except Japan, collaboration with Pfizer.
(12)
SPC applications to be filed by May 2019.

While the expiration of a product patent normally results in a loss of market exclusivity for the covered pharmaceutical product, commercial benefits may continue to be derived from: (i) later-granted patents on June 30, 2014. processes and intermediates related to the most economical method of manufacture of the active ingredient of such product; (ii) patents relating to the use of such product; (iii) patents relating to novel compositions and formulations; and (iv) in the United States and certain other countries, market exclusivity that may be available under relevant law. The effect of product patent expiration on pharmaceutical products also depends upon many other factors such as the nature of the market and the position of the product in it, the growth of the market, the complexities and economics of the process for manufacture of the active ingredient of the product and the requirements of new drug provisions of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act or similar laws and regulations in other countries.
Additions to market exclusivity are sought in the United States and other countries through all relevant laws, including laws increasing patent life. Some of the benefits of increases in patent life have been partially offset by an

increase in the number of incentives for and use of generic products. Additionally, improvements in intellectual property laws are sought in the United States and other countries through reform of patent and other relevant laws and implementation of international treaties.
The Company has the following key U.S. patent protection for drug candidates under review in the United States by the FDA. Additional patent term may be provided for these pipeline candidates based on Patent Term Restoration and Pediatric Exclusivity.
Under Review (in the U.S.)
Currently Anticipated
Year of Expiration (in the U.S.)
V920 (ebola vaccine)2023
MK-7655A (relebactam + imipenem/cilastatin)2029
The Company also has the following key U.S. patent protection for drug candidates in Phase 3 development:
Phase 3 Drug Candidate
Currently Anticipated
Year of Expiration (in the U.S.)
MK-1242 (vericiguat)(1)
2031
MK-7264 (gefapixant)2027
V114 (pneumoconjugate vaccine)2031
(1)
Being developed in a worldwide clinical development collaboration with Bayer AG.
Unless otherwise noted, the patents in the above charts are compound patents. Each patent is subject to any future patent term restoration of up to five years and six month pediatric market exclusivity, either or both of which may be available. In addition, depending on the circumstances surrounding any final regulatory approval of the compound, there may be other listed patents or patent applications pending that could have relevance to the product as finally approved; the relevance of any such application would depend upon the claims that ultimately may be granted and the nature of the final regulatory approval of the product. Also, regulatory exclusivity tied to the protection of clinical data is complementary to patent protection and, in some cases, may provide more effective or longer lasting marketing exclusivity than a compound’s patent estate. In the United States, the data protection generally runs five years from first marketing approval of a new chemical entity, extended to seven years for an orphan drug indication and 12 years from first marketing approval of a biological product.
For further information with respect to the Company’s patents, see Item 1A. “Risk Factors” and Item 8. “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data,” Note 11. “Contingencies and Environmental Liabilities” below.
Worldwide, all of the Company’s important products are sold under trademarks that are considered in the aggregate to be of material importance. Trademark protection continues in some countries as long as used; in other countries, as long as registered. Registration is for fixed terms and can be renewed indefinitely.
Royalty income in 2018 on patent and know-how licenses and other rights amounted to $135 million. Merck also incurred royalty expenses amounting to $1.3 billion in 2018 under patent and know-how licenses it holds.
Research and Development
The Company’s Healthcare Services segment provides servicesbusiness is characterized by the introduction of new products or new uses for existing products through a strong research and solutions that focus on engagement, health analytics and clinical services to improvedevelopment program. At December 31, 2018, approximately 14,500 people were employed in the value of care delivered to patients. On October 1, 2014, theCompany’s research activities. The Company divested its Consumer Care segment that developed, manufactured and marketed over-the-counter, foot care and sun care products.
Overview
During 2015, Merck continued to executeprioritizes its research and development focused-strategy, advanceefforts and focuses on candidates that it believes represent breakthrough science that will make a difference for patients and payers.
The Company maintains a number of long-term exploratory and fundamental research programs in biology and chemistry as well as research programs directed toward product development. The Company’s research and development model is designed to increase productivity and improve the probability of success by prioritizing the Company’s research and development resources on candidates the Company believes are capable of providing unambiguous, promotable advantages to patients and payers and delivering the maximum value of its approved medicines and vaccines through new indications and new formulations. Merck is pursuing emerging product opportunities independent of therapeutic area or modality (small molecule, biologics and vaccines) and is building its biologics capabilities. The Company is committed to ensuring that externally sourced programs remain an important

component of its pipeline strategy, with a focus on supplementing its internal research with a licensing and commercial portfolio while maintaining a disciplined approachexternal alliance strategy focused on the entire spectrum of collaborations from early research to cost management and delivering capital returnslate-stage compounds, as well as access to shareholders. new technologies.
The Company also reviews its pipeline to examine candidates that may provide more value through out-licensing. The Company continues to evaluate certain late-stage clinical development and platform technology assets to determine their out-licensing or sale potential.
The Company’s clinical pipeline includes candidates in multiple disease areas, including cancer, cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, infectious diseases, neurosciences, obesity, pain, respiratory diseases, and vaccines.
In the development of human health products, industry practice and government regulations in the United States and most foreign countries provide for the determination of effectiveness and safety of new chemical compounds through preclinical tests and controlled clinical evaluation. Before a new drug or vaccine may be marketed in the United States, recorded data on preclinical and clinical experience are included in the New Drug Application (NDA) for a drug or the Biologics License Application (BLA) for a vaccine or biologic submitted to the FDA for the required approval.
Once the Company’s scientists discover a new small molecule compound or biologic that they believe has promise to treat a medical condition, the Company commences preclinical testing with that compound. Preclinical testing includes laboratory testing and animal safety studies to gather data on chemistry, pharmacology, immunogenicity and toxicology. Pending acceptable preclinical data, the Company will initiate clinical testing in accordance with established regulatory requirements. The clinical testing begins with Phase 1 studies, which are designed to assess safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary pharmacodynamic activity of the compound in humans. If favorable, additional, larger Phase 2 studies are initiated to determine the efficacy of the compound in the affected population, define appropriate dosing for the compound, as well as identify any adverse effects that could limit the compound’s usefulness. In some situations, the clinical program incorporates adaptive design methodology to use accumulating data to decide how to modify aspects of the ongoing clinical study as it continues, without undermining the validity and integrity of the trial. One type of adaptive clinical trial is an adaptive Phase 2a/2b trial design, a two-stage trial design consisting of a Phase 2a proof-of-concept stage and a Phase 2b dose-optimization finding stage. If data from the Phase 2 trials are satisfactory, the Company commences large-scale Phase 3 trials to confirm the compound’s efficacy and safety. Another type of adaptive clinical trial is an adaptive Phase 2/3 trial design, a study that includes an interim analysis and an adaptation that changes the trial from having features common in a Phase 2 study (e.g. multiple dose groups) to a design similar to a Phase 3 trial. An adaptive Phase 2/3 trial design reduces timelines by eliminating activities which would be required to start a separate study. Upon completion of Phase 3 trials, if satisfactory, the Company submits regulatory filings with the appropriate regulatory agencies around the world to have the product candidate approved for marketing. There can be no assurance that a compound that is the result of any particular program will obtain the regulatory approvals necessary for it to be marketed.
Vaccine development follows the same general pathway as for drugs. Preclinical testing focuses on the vaccine’s safety and ability to elicit a protective immune response (immunogenicity). Pre-marketing vaccine clinical trials are typically done in three phases. Initial Phase 1 clinical studies are conducted in normal subjects to evaluate the safety, tolerability and immunogenicity of the vaccine candidate. Phase 2 studies are dose-ranging studies. Finally, Phase 3 trials provide the necessary data on effectiveness and safety. If successful, the Company submits regulatory filings with the appropriate regulatory agencies.
In the United States, the FDA review process begins once a complete NDA or BLA is submitted, received and accepted for review by the agency. Within 60 days after receipt, the FDA determines if the application is sufficiently complete to permit a substantive review. The FDA also assesses, at that time, whether the application will be granted a priority review or standard review. Pursuant to the Prescription Drug User Fee Act V (PDUFA), the FDA review period target for NDAs or original BLAs is either six months, for priority review, or ten months, for a standard review, from the time the application is deemed sufficiently complete. Once the review timelines are determined, the FDA will generally act upon the application within those timelines, unless a major amendment has been submitted (either at the Company’s own initiative or the FDA’s request) to the pending application. If this occurs, the FDA may extend the review period to allow for review of the new information, but by no more than three months. Extensions to the review period are communicated to the Company. The FDA can act on an application either by issuing an approval letter or by issuing a Complete Response Letter (CRL) stating that the application will not be approved in its present form and describing all deficiencies that the FDA has identified. Should the Company wish to pursue an application after receiving

a CRL, it can resubmit the application with information that addresses the questions or issues identified by the FDA in order to support approval. Resubmissions are subject to review period targets, which vary depending on the underlying submission type and the content of the resubmission.
The FDA has four program designations — Fast Track, Breakthrough Therapy, Accelerated Approval, and Priority Review — to facilitate and expedite development and review of new drugs to address unmet medical needs in the treatment of serious or life-threatening conditions. The Fast Track designation provides pharmaceutical manufacturers with opportunities for frequent interactions with FDA reviewers during the product’s development and the ability for the manufacturer to do a rolling submission of the NDA/BLA. A rolling submission allows completed portions of the application to be submitted and reviewed by the FDA on an ongoing basis. The Breakthrough Therapy designation provides manufacturers with all of the features of the Fast Track designation as well as intensive guidance on implementing an efficient development program for the product and a commitment by the FDA to involve senior managers and experienced staff in the review. The Accelerated Approval designation allows the FDA to approve a product based on an effect on a surrogate or intermediate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict a product’s clinical benefit and generally requires the manufacturer to conduct required post-approval confirmatory trials to verify the clinical benefit. The Priority Review designation means that the FDA’s goal is to take action on the NDA/BLA within six months, compared to ten months under standard review.
In addition, under the Generating Antibiotic Incentives Now Act, the FDA may grant Qualified Infectious Disease Product (QIDP) status to antibacterial or antifungal drugs intended to treat serious or life threatening infections including those caused by antibiotic or antifungal resistant pathogens, novel or emerging infectious pathogens, or other qualifying pathogens. QIDP designation offers certain incentives for development of qualifying drugs, including Priority Review of the NDA when filed, eligibility for Fast Track designation, and a five-year extension of applicable exclusivity provisions under the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act.
The primary method the Company uses to obtain marketing authorization of pharmaceutical products in the EU is through the “centralized procedure.” This procedure is compulsory for certain pharmaceutical products, in particular those using biotechnological processes, and is also available for certain new chemical compounds and products. A company seeking to market an innovative pharmaceutical product through the centralized procedure must file a complete set of safety data and efficacy data as part of a Marketing Authorization Application (MAA) with the European Medicines Agency (EMA). After the EMA evaluates the MAA, it provides a recommendation to the EC and the EC then approves or denies the MAA. It is also possible for new chemical products to obtain marketing authorization in the EU through a “mutual recognition procedure” in which an application is made to a single member state and, if the member state approves the pharmaceutical product under a national procedure, the applicant may submit that approval to the mutual recognition procedure of some or all other member states.
Outside of the United States and the EU, the Company submits marketing applications to national regulatory authorities. Examples of such are the Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency in Japan, Health Canada, Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanatária in Brazil, Korea Food and Drug Administration in South Korea, Therapeutic Goods Administration in Australia and China Food and Drug Administration. Each country has a separate and independent review process and timeline. In many markets, approval times can be longer as the regulatory authority requires approval in a major market, such as the United States or the EU, and issuance of a Certificate of Pharmaceutical Product from that market before initiating their local review process.
Research and Development Update
The Company currently has several product approvalscandidates under regulatory review in 2015 that includethe United States and internationally.
Keytruda is an approved anti-PD-1 therapy in clinical development for expanded indications in different cancer types.
In February 2019, the FDA accepted and granted Priority Review for a supplemental BLA for Keytruda in combination with Inlyta (axitinib), the Company’s anti-PD-1 (programmed death receptor-1) therapya tyrosine kinase inhibitor, for the first-line treatment of patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. This supplemental BLA is based on findings from the Phase 3 KEYNOTE-426 trial, which demonstrated that Keytruda in combination with axitinib, as compared to sunitinib, significantly improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in the first-line treatment of advanced melanomarenal cell carcinoma. These data were presented at the American Society for Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Genitourinary Cancers Symposium in

February 2019. The supplemental BLA also included supporting data from the Phase 1b KEYNOTE-035 trial. The FDA set a PDUFA date of June 20, 2019. Merck has filed data from KEYNOTE-426 with regulatory authorities worldwide.
In February 2019, the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use of the EMA adopted a positive opinion recommending Keytruda, in combination with carboplatin and either paclitaxel or nab-paclitaxel, for the first-line treatment of metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC)squamous NSCLC in adults. This recommendation is based on results from the pivotal Phase 3 KEYNOTE-407 trial, which enrolled patients regardless of PD-L1 tumor expression status. The trial showed a significant improvement in OS and PFS for patients taking Keytruda in combination with chemotherapy (carboplatin and either paclitaxel or nab-paclitaxel) compared with chemotherapy alone. If approved, this would mark the first approval in Europe for an anti-PD-1 therapy in combination with chemotherapy for adults with metastatic squamous NSCLC. In October 2018, the FDA approved Keytruda in combination with carboplatin-paclitaxel or nab-paclitaxel as a first-line treatment for metastatic squamous NSCLC, regardless of PD-L1 expression.
In December 2018, the FDA extended the action date for the supplemental BLA seeking approval for Keytruda as monotherapy for the first-line treatment of locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC in patients whose tumors express PD-L1 with disease progression following other therapies, as well as U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for(TPS ≥1%) without EGFR or ALK genomic tumor aberrations. The supplemental BLA is based on results of the Phase 3 KEYNOTE-042 trial where BridionKeytruda (sugammadex) Injection,monotherapy demonstrated a medication for the reversal of two types of neuromuscular blocking agents used during surgery. Additionally,significant improvement in January 2016,OS compared with chemotherapy in this patient population. The Company submitted additional data and analyses to the FDA, approved Zepatier,which constituted a once-daily, single tablet combination therapy inmajor amendment and extended the treatment of chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype (GT) 1 or GT4 infection, with or without ribavirin. Business development is a critical part of the Company’s strategy as Merck looksPDUFA date by three months to combine internal and external innovation to enhance its pipeline. During 2015, Merck acquired Cubist Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Cubist), a leader in the development of new therapies to treat serious and potentially life-threatening infections caused by a broad range of increasingly drug-resistant bacteria, and cCAM Biotherapuetics Ltd. (cCAM), a biopharmaceutical company focused on the discovery and development of novel cancer immunotherapies. Also in 2015, Merck entered into a multi-year collaboration with NGM Biopharmaceuticals, Inc. (NGM) to research, discover, develop and commercialize novel biologic therapies across a wide range of therapeutic areas. In January 2016, Merck acquired IOmet Pharma Ltd (IOmet), a drug discovery company focused on the development of innovative medicines for the treatment of cancer, with a particular emphasis on the fields of cancer immunotherapy and cancer metabolism.
Worldwide sales were $39.5 billion in 2015, a decline of 6% compared with 2014, including a 6% unfavorable effect from foreign exchange. The acquisition of Cubist in 2015, the divestiture of Merck’s Consumer Care business (MCC) in 2014, as well as product divestitures and the termination in 2014 of the Company’s relationship with AstraZeneca LP (AZLP) had a net unfavorable impact to sales of approximately 3%. Sales performance was also unfavorably affected by the ongoing impacts of the loss of market exclusivity for several products. These unfavorable impacts were partially offset by volume growth in oncology, diabetes, women’s health and vaccine products, and positive performance from Merck’s Animal Health business.
April 11, 2019. Merck continues to support its in-line portfolio, as well as ongoing and upcoming product launches. Keytruda, initially approved bywork closely with the FDA in September 2014during the review of this supplemental BLA.
In February 2019, the FDA accepted and granted Priority Review for the treatment of advanced melanoma in patients with disease progression after other therapies, is launching in more than 40 markets, including in the European Union (EU). In 2015, Merck achieved multiple additional regulatory milestonesa supplemental BLA for Keytruda including accelerated approval from the FDA

34


as monotherapy for the treatment of patients with advanced small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) whose disease has progressed after two or more lines of prior therapy. This supplemental BLA, which is seeking accelerated approval for this new indication, is based on data from the SCLC cohorts of the Phase 2 KEYNOTE-158 and Phase 1b KEYNOTE-028 trials. The FDA set a PDUFA date of June 17, 2019. Keytruda is also being studied in combination with chemotherapy in the ongoing Phase 3 KEYNOTE-604 study in patients with newly diagnosed extensive stage SCLC.
In February 2019, the FDA accepted a supplemental BLA for Keytruda as monotherapy or in combination with platinum and 5-fluorouracil chemotherapy for the first-line treatment of patients with recurrent or metastatic NSCLCHNSCC. This supplemental BLA is based in part on data from the pivotal Phase 3 KEYNOTE-048 trial where Keytruda demonstrated a significant improvement in OS compared with the standard of care, as monotherapy in patients whose tumors expressexpressed PD-L1 with Combined Positive Score (CPS)≥20 and CPS≥1 and in combination with chemotherapy in the total patient population. These data were presented at the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) 2018 Congress. The FDA granted Priority Review to the supplemental BLA and set a PDUFA date of June 10, 2019. KEYNOTE-048 also serves as determined by an FDA-approved test and who havethe confirmatory trial for KEYNOTE-012, a Phase 1b study which supported the previous accelerated approval for Keytruda as monotherapy for the treatment of patients with recurrent or metastatic HNSCC with disease progression on or after platinum-containing chemotherapy.
In addition,November 2018, Merck announced that the FDA approved an expanded indication forPhase 3 KEYNOTE-181 trial investigating Keytruda as monotherapy in the second-line treatment of advanced or metastatic esophageal or esophagogastric junction carcinoma met a primary endpoint of OS in patients whose tumors expressed PD-L1 (CPS ≥10). In this pivotal study, treatment with Keytruda resulted in a statistically significant improvement in OS compared to includechemotherapy (paclitaxel, docetaxel or irinotecan) in patients with CPS ≥10, regardless of histology. The primary endpoint of OS was also evaluated in patients with squamous cell histology and in the first-lineentire intention-to-treat study population. While directionally favorable, statistical significance for OS was not met in these two patient groups. Per the statistical analysis plan, the key secondary endpoints of PFS and objective response rate (ORR) were not formally tested, as OS was not reached in the full intention-to-treat study population. These results were presented in January 2019 at the ASCO Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium and have been submitted for regulatory review.
Additionally, Keytruda has received Breakthrough Therapy designation from the FDA for the treatment of high-risk early-stage triple-negative breast cancer in combination with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The FDA’s Breakthrough Therapy designation is intended to expedite the development and review of a candidate that is planned for use, alone or in combination, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition when preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the drug may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints.

In October 2018, Merck announced the first presentation of results from an interim analysis of KEYNOTE-057, a Phase 2 trial evaluating Keytruda for previously treated patients with high-risk non-muscle invasive bladder cancer. An interim analysis of the study’s primary endpoint showed a complete response rate of nearly 40% at three months with Keytruda in patients whose disease was unresponsive to Bacillus Calmette-Guérin therapy, the current standard of care for this disease, and who were ineligible for or who refused to undergo radical cystectomy. These results, as well as other study findings, were presented at the ESMO 2018 Congress.
In February 2019, Merck announced that the pivotal Phase 3 KEYNOTE-240 trial evaluating Keytruda, plus best supportive care, for the treatment of patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma. Additionally,advanced hepatocellular carcinoma who were previously treated with systemic therapy, did not meet its co-primary endpoints of OS and PFS compared with placebo plus best supportive care. In the final analysis of the study, there was an improvement in 2015, the European Commission (EC) approvedOS for patients treated with Keytruda compared to placebo, however these OS results did not meet statistical significance per the pre-specified statistical plan. Results for PFS were also directionally favorable in the treatmentKeytruda arm compared with placebo but did not reach statistical significance. The key secondary endpoint of advanced (unresectableORR was not formally tested, since superiority was not reached for OS or metastatic) melanoma in adults. PFS. Results will be presented at an upcoming medical meeting and have been shared with the FDA for discussion.
The Keytruda clinical trialsdevelopment program currently includesconsists of more than 30 tumor types in more than 200900 clinical trials, including over 100more than 600 trials that combine Keytruda with other cancer treatments (see “Researchtreatments. These studies encompass more than 30 cancer types including: bladder, cervical, colorectal, esophageal, gastric, head and Development” below). The Companyneck, hepatocellular, Hodgkin lymphoma, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, melanoma, mesothelioma, nasopharyngeal, NSCLC, ovarian, PMBCL, prostate, renal, small-cell lung and triple-negative breast, many of which are currently in Phase 3 clinical development. Further trials are being planned for other cancers.
Lynparza, is also launchingan oral PARP inhibitor currently approved for certain types of ovarian and breast cancer. In July 2017, Merck and AstraZeneca entered into a global strategic oncology collaboration to co-develop and co-commercialize AstraZeneca’s Lynparza for multiple cancer types.
In April 2018, Merck and AstraZeneca announced that the EMA validated for review the MAA for Lynparza for use in patients with deleterious or suspected deleterious ZepatierBRCA and Bridion-mutated, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer who have been previously treated with chemotherapy in the United States.neoadjuvant, adjuvant or metastatic setting. This was the first regulatory submission for a PARP inhibitor in breast cancer in Europe.
While the Company continues to execute its strategy of pursuing business development opportunities to complement its internal research capabilities, as part of Merck’s prioritization efforts, the Company also continues to review its existing assets to determine whether they can provide the best short- and longer-term value with Merck or elsewhere. In connection with its portfolio assessment process, the Company divested its remaining ophthalmics business in international markets during 2015. The Company’s portfolio assessment process is ongoing and future divestitures may occur.
Merck is focusing its research efforts on the therapeutic areas that it believes can make the most impact on addressing critical areas of unmet medical need, such as cancer, hepatitis C, cardiometabolic disease, resistant microbial infection and Alzheimer’s disease. During 2015, the Company continued to make strides in its late-stage pipeline. MK-6072, bezlotoxumab, is an investigational antitoxin for the prevention of Clostridium difficile(C. difficile) infection recurrence that is currently under review with the FDA and the European Medicines Agency (EMA). MK-1293, an insulin glargine candidate for the treatment of patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes being developed in a collaboration, isLynparza tablets are also under review in the EU as isa maintenance treatment in patients with newly-diagnosed, ZepatierBRCA.-mutated advanced ovarian cancer who were in complete or partial response following first-line standard platinum-based chemotherapy. This submission was based on positive results from the pivotal Phase 3 SOLO-1 trial. The trial showed a statistically-significant and clinically-meaningful improvement in PFS for Lynparza compared to placebo, reducing the risk of disease progression or death by 70% in patients with newly-diagnosed, KeytrudaBRCA is under review-mutated advanced ovarian cancer who were in complete or partial response to platinum-based chemotherapy.
In December 2018, Merck and AstraZeneca announced positive results from the randomized, open-label, controlled, Phase 3 SOLO-3 trial of Lynparza tablets in patients with relapsed ovarian cancer after two or more lines of treatment. The trial was conducted as a post-approval commitment in agreement with the FDA. Results from the trial showed BRCA-mutated advanced ovarian cancer patients treated with Lynparza following two or more prior lines of chemotherapy demonstrated a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in the EUprimary endpoint of ORR and the key secondary endpoint of PFS compared to chemotherapy. Merck and AstraZeneca plan to discuss these results with the FDA.
MK-7655A is a combination of relebactam, an investigational beta-lactamase inhibitor, and imipenem/cilastatin (an approved carbapenem antibiotic). In February 2019, Merck announced that the FDA accepted for Priority Review an NDA for MK-7655A for the treatment of NSCLC.complicated urinary tract infections and complicated intra-abdominal infections caused by certain susceptible Gram-negative bacteria in adults with limited or no alternative therapies available. The PDUFA date is July 16, 2019. In April 2018, Merck announced that a pivotal Phase 3 study of MK-7655A demonstrated a favorable overall response in the treatment of certain imipenem-non-susceptible bacterial infections, the primary endpoint, with lower treatment-emergent nephrotoxicity (kidney toxicity), a secondary endpoint, compared to a colistin (colistimethate sodium) plus imipenem/cilastatin regimen. The FDA had previously designated this combination a Qualified Infectious Disease Product with designated Fast Track status for the treatment of hospital-

acquired bacterial pneumonia, ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia, complicated intra-abdominal infections and complicated urinary tract infections.
V920 (rVSV∆G-ZEBOV-GP, live attenuated), is an investigational Ebola Zaire disease vaccine candidate being studied in large scale Phase 2/3 clinical trials. In December 2015, Merck announced that the application for Emergency Use Assessment and Listing (EUAL) for V920 was accepted for review by the World Health Organization (WHO). According to the WHO, the EUAL process is designed to expedite the availability of vaccines needed for public health emergencies such as another outbreak of Ebola. The WHO decision to grant V920 EUAL status will be based on data regarding quality, safety, and efficacy/effectiveness; as well as a risk/benefit analysis for emergency use. While EUAL designation allows for emergency use, the vaccine remains investigational and has not yet been licensed for commercial distribution. In July 2016, Merck announced that the FDA granted V920 Breakthrough Therapy designation, and that the EMA granted the vaccine candidate PRIME (PRIority MEdicines) status. In November 2018, Merck announced that it has started the submission of a rolling BLA to the FDA for V920. This rolling submission was made pursuant to the FDA’s Breakthrough Therapy designation. Merck expects the rolling submission of the BLA to be completed in 2019. The Company also intends to file V920 with the EMA in 2019.
In February 2019, Merck announced that the FDA accepted for Priority Review a supplemental NDA for Zerbaxa to treat adult patients with nosocomial pneumonia, including ventilator-associated pneumonia, caused by certain susceptible Gram-negative microorganisms. The PDUFA date is June 3, 2019. Zerbaxa is also under review for this indication by the EMA. Zerbaxa is currently approved in the United States for the treatment of adult patients with complicated urinary tract infections caused by certain susceptible Gram-negative microorganisms, and is also indicated, in combination with metronidazole, for the treatment of adult patients with complicated intra-abdominal infections caused by certain susceptible Gram-negative and Gram-positive microorganisms.
In addition to Phase 3 programs for Keytruda in the therapeutic areas of bladder, breast, colorectal, gastric, head and neck, multiple myeloma, and esophageal cancers,candidates under regulatory review, the Company also has more than 10several drug candidates in Phase 3 clinical development in its core therapeutic areas, as well as other areas with significant potential, including MK-3102, omarigliptin, an investigational once-weekly dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitoraddition to the Keytruda programs discussed above.
MK-7264, gefapixant, is a selective, non-narcotic, orally-administered P2X3-receptor agonist being investigated in developmentPhase 3 trials for the treatment of adultsrefractory, chronic cough and in a Phase 2 trial for the treatment of women with type 2 diabetes; MK-0822, odanacatib,endometriosis-related pain.
Lenvima, is an oral, once-weekly investigational treatmentorally available tyrosine kinase inhibitor currently approved for certain types of thyroid cancer, hepatocellular carcinoma, and in combination for certain patients with osteoporosis; MK-8835, ertugliflozin, an investigational oral sodium glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitor being evaluated alonerenal cell carcinoma. In March 2018, Merck and Eisai entered into a strategic collaboration for the worldwide co-development and co-commercialization of Lenvima. Under the agreement, Merck and Eisai will develop and commercialize Lenvima jointly, both as monotherapy and in combination with JanuviaKeytruda (sitagliptin). Per the agreement, the companies will jointly initiate clinical studies evaluating the Keytruda/Lenvima combination to support 11 potential indications in six types of cancer (endometrial cancer, NSCLC, hepatocellular carcinoma, head and metformin for the treatment of type 2 diabetes;neck cancer, bladder cancer and MK-8237, an investigational allergy immunotherapy tablet for house dust mite allergy. Merck expects to submit applications for regulatory approval in the United States for each of these candidates,melanoma), as well as MK-1293 described above,a basket trial targeting multiple cancer types. The FDA granted Breakthrough Therapy designation for Keytruda in 2016.combination with Lenvima for the potential treatment of patients with advanced and/or metastatic renal cell carcinoma and for the potential treatment of certain patients with advanced and/or metastatic non-microsatellite instability high/proficient mismatch repair endometrial carcinoma.
MK-1242, vericiguat, is an investigational treatment for heart failure being studied in patients suffering from chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fracture (Phase 3 clinical trial) and from chronic heart failure with preserved ejection fracture (Phase 2 clinical trial). The development of vericiguat is part of a worldwide strategic collaboration between Merck and Bayer.
V114 is an investigational polyvalent conjugate vaccine for the prevention of pneumococcal disease. In June 2018, Merck initiated the first Phase 3 study in the adult population for the prevention of invasive pneumococcal disease. Currently five Phase 3 adult studies are ongoing, including studies in healthy adults 50 years of age or older, adults with risk factors for pneumococcal disease, those infected with HIV, and those who are recipients of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant. In October 2018, Merck began the first Phase 3 study in the pediatric population. Currently, three studies are ongoing, including studies in healthy infants and in children afflicted with sickle cell disease. In January 2019, Merck announced that V114 received Breakthrough Therapy designation from the FDA for the prevention of invasive pneumococcal disease caused by the vaccine serotypes in pediatric patients 6 weeks to 18 years of age.

As a result of continued portfolio prioritization,changes in the herpes zoster vaccine environment, Merck is ending development of V212, its investigational vaccine for the prevention of shingles in immunocompromised patients.
The chart below reflects the Company’s research pipeline as of February 22, 2019. Candidates shown in Phase 3 include specific products and the date such candidate entered into Phase 3 development. Candidates shown in Phase 2 include the most advanced compound with a specific mechanism or, if listed compounds have the same mechanism, they are each currently intended for commercialization in a given therapeutic area. Small molecules and biologics are given MK-number designations and vaccine candidates are given V-number designations. Except as otherwise noted, candidates in Phase 1, additional indications in the same therapeutic area (other than with respect to cancer and certain other indications) and additional claims, line extensions or formulations for in-line products are not shown.
Phase 2Phase 3 (Phase 3 Entry Date)Under Review
CancerCancerNew Molecular Entities/Vaccines
MK-3475 Keytruda
MK-3475 Keytruda
Bacterial Infection
Advanced Solid TumorsBreast (October 2015)MK-7655A relebactam+imipenem/cilastatin
Cutaneous Squamous Cell CarcinomaCervical (October 2018) (EU)(U.S.)
ProstateColorectal (November 2015)Ebola Vaccine
MK-7902 Lenvima(1)
Esophageal (December 2015)
V920(4) (U.S.)
Biliary TractGastric (May 2015) (EU)
Non-Small-Cell LungHepatocellular (May 2016) (EU)Certain Supplemental Filings
V937 Cavatak
Mesothelioma (May 2018)Cancer
MelanomaNasopharyngeal (April 2016)
MK-3475 Keytruda
MK-7690Ovarian (December 2018)
    First-Line Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma
Colorectal(2)
Renal (October 2016) (EU)(KEYNOTE-426) (U.S.)
MK-7339 Lynparza(1)
Small-Cell Lung (May 2017) (EU)
First-Line Metastatic Squamous Non-Small-
Advanced Solid Tumors
MK-7902 Lenvima(1,2)
Cell Lung Cancer (KEYNOTE-407) (EU)
Cytomegalovirus VaccineEndometrial (June 2018)
First-Line Metastatic Non-Small-Cell Lung
V160
MK-7339 Lynparza(1)
Cancer (KEYNOTE-042) (U.S.) (EU)
Diabetes MellitusPancreatic (December 2014)
    Third-Line Advanced Small-Cell Lung
MK-8521(3)
Prostate (April 2017)Cancer (KEYNOTE-158) (U.S.)
HIV-1 InfectionCough
First-Line Head and Neck Cancer
MK-8591MK-7264 (gefapixant) (March 2018)(KEYNOTE-048) (U.S.)
Pediatric Neurofibromatosis Type-1Heart Failure
    Alternative Dosing Regimen
MK-5618 (selumetinib)(1)
MK-1242 (vericiguat) (September 2016)(1)
(Q6W) (EU)
Respiratory Syncytial VirusPneumoconjugate Vaccine
MK-7339 Lynparza(1)
MK-1654V114 (June 2018)
Second-Line Metastatic Breast Cancer (EU)
Schizophrenia
First-Line Advanced Ovarian Cancer (EU)
MK-8189
HABP/VABP(5)
MK-7625A Zerbaxa (U.S.)
Footnotes:
(1)     Being developed in a collaboration.
(2)     Being developed in combination with
Keytruda.
(3)    Development is currently on hold.
(4)    Rolling submission.
(5)    HABP - Hospital-Acquired Bacterial
Pneumonia / VABP - Ventilator-Associated
Bacterial Pneumonia

Employees
As of December 31, 2018, the Company is out-licensing or discontinuing selected late-stage clinical development assets. During 2015,had approximately 69,000 employees worldwide, with approximately 25,400 employed in the United States, including Puerto Rico. Approximately 30% of worldwide employees of the Company out-licensed MK-1602 and MK-8031, investigational small molecule oral calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonists, which are being developed for the treatment and prevention of migraine.represented by various collective bargaining groups.
The Company continued to make strong progress in 2015 reducing its cost base. As a result of disciplined cost management, Merck has achieved its overall savings goal in 2015 as noted below. The Company has in turn invested its resources to grow its strongest brands and to support the most promising assets in its pipeline. Marketing and administrative expenses declined in 2015 as compared with 2014 reflecting in part this continued focus by the Company on prioritizing its resources to the highest growth areas.Restructuring Activities
In 2010 and 2013, the Company initiatedcommenced actions under a global restructuring program (the 2013 Restructuring Program) as part of a global initiativeprograms designed to sharpenstreamline its commercial and research and development focus.cost structure. The actions under this program primarily include the elimination of positions in sales, administrative and headquarters organizations, as well as research and development. Additionally, these actions include the reduction of the Company’s global real estate footprint and improvements in the efficiency of its manufacturing and supply network. The Company recorded total pretax costs of $527 million in 2015 and $1.2 billion in both 2014 and 2013 related to this restructuring program. The actions under the 2013 Restructuring Program were substantially completed by the end of 2015. The Company has met its projected $2.0 billion in annual net cost savings for actions under the 2013 Restructuring Program. When the actions under the 2013 Restructuring Program are combined with the actions under the Merger Restructuring Program (discussed below), the Company has also met its annual net cost savings projection of $2.5 billion compared with full-year 2012 expense levels.

35


The global restructuring program (the Merger Restructuring Program) that was initiated in 2010 subsequent to the Merck and Schering-Plough Corporation (Schering-Plough) merger (the Merger) is intended to streamline the cost structure of the combined company. The actions under this planprograms include the elimination of positions in sales, administrative and headquarters organizations, as well as the sale or closure of certain manufacturing and research and

development sites and the consolidation of office facilities. The Company recorded total pretax costsalso continues to reduce its global real estate footprint and improve the efficiency of $583its manufacturing and supply network. Since inception of the programs through December 31, 2018, Merck has eliminated approximately 45,510 positions comprised of employee separations, as well as the elimination of contractors and vacant positions. The Company has substantially completed the actions under these programs.
Environmental Matters
The Company believes that there are no compliance issues associated with applicable environmental laws and regulations that would have a material adverse effect on the Company. The Company is also remediating environmental contamination resulting from past industrial activity at certain of its sites. Expenditures for remediation and environmental liabilities were $16 million in 2015, $7302018, and are estimated at $57 million in 2014 and $1.1 billion in 2013 related to this restructuring program. The non-facility related restructuring actions under the Merger Restructuring Program are substantially complete.
Beginning January 1, 2016, the remaining restructuring actions under both plans, which primarily relate to ongoing facility rationalizations, will be accounted for in the aggregate prospectively.for the years 2019 through 2023. These amounts do not consider potential recoveries from other parties. The Company expectshas taken an active role in identifying and accruing for these costs and, in management’s opinion, the liabilities for all environmental matters that are probable and reasonably estimable have been accrued and totaled $71 million and $82 million at December 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively. Although it is not possible to complete such actions bypredict with certainty the endoutcome of 2017 and incur approximately $1.5 billionthese matters, or the ultimate costs of additional pretax costs.
Costs associated with the Company’s restructuring actions are includedremediation, management does not believe that any reasonably possible expenditures that may be incurred in Materials and production costs, Marketing and administrative expenses, Research and development expenses and Restructuring costs. The Company estimates that approximately two-thirdsexcess of the cumulative pretax costs relate to cash outlays, primarily related to employee separation expense. Approximately one-third of the cumulative pretax costs are non-cash, relating primarily to the accelerated depreciation of facilities to be closed or divested.
In November 2015, Merck’s Board of Directors raised the Company’s quarterly dividend to $0.46 per share from $0.45 per share. During 2015, the Company returned $9.3 billion to shareholders through dividends and share repurchases.
In January 2016, Merck announced that it had reached an agreement with plaintiffs to resolve Vioxx shareholder class action litigation pending in New Jersey federal court. Under the agreement, Merck will pay $830 million to resolve the settlement class members’ claims, plus an additional amount for approved attorneys’ fees and expenses. In connection with the settlement, Merck recorded a net pretax charge of $680liabilities accrued should exceed $60 million in the fourth quarteraggregate. Management also does not believe that these expenditures should have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial position, results of 2015, which includes anticipated insurance recoveries. See Note 10operations, liquidity or capital resources for any year.
Merck believes that climate change could present risks to its business. Some of the potential impacts of climate change to its business include increased operating costs due to additional regulatory requirements, physical risks to the consolidatedCompany’s facilities, water limitations and disruptions to its supply chain. These potential risks are integrated into the Company’s business planning including investment in reducing energy, water use and greenhouse gas emissions. The Company does not believe these risks are material to its business at this time.
Geographic Area Information
The Company’s operations outside the United States are conducted primarily through subsidiaries. Sales worldwide by subsidiaries outside the United States as a percentage of total Company sales were 57% of sales in 2018, 57% of sales in 2017 and 54% of sales in 2016.
The Company’s worldwide business is subject to risks of currency fluctuations, governmental actions and other governmental proceedings abroad. The Company does not regard these risks as a deterrent to further expansion of its operations abroad. However, the Company closely reviews its methods of operations and adopts strategies responsive to changing economic and political conditions.
Merck has operations in countries located in Latin America, the Middle East, Africa, Eastern Europe and Asia Pacific. Business in these developing areas, while sometimes less stable, offers important opportunities for growth over time.
Available Information
The Company’s Internet website address is www.merck.com. The Company will make available, free of charge at the “Investors” portion of its website, its Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K, and all amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, as soon as reasonably practicable after such reports are electronically filed with, or furnished to, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The address of that website is http://www.sec.gov. In addition, the Company will provide without charge a copy of its Annual Report on Form 10-K, including financial statements.statements and schedules, upon the written request of any shareholder to the Office of the Secretary, Merck & Co., Inc., 2000 Galloping Hill Road, K1-4157, Kenilworth, NJ 07033 U.S.A.
Earnings per common share assuming dilution attributableThe Company’s corporate governance guidelines and the charters of the Board of Directors’ four standing committees are available on the Company’s website at www.merck.com/about/leadership and all such information is available in print to common shareholders (EPS)any shareholder who requests it from the Company.

Item 1A.Risk Factors.
Investors should carefully consider all of the information set forth in this Form 10-K, including the following risk factors, before deciding to invest in any of the Company’s securities. The risks below are not the only ones the Company faces. Additional risks not currently known to the Company or that the Company presently deems immaterial may also impair its business operations. The Company’s business, financial condition, results of operations or prospects could be materially adversely affected by any of these risks. This Form 10-K also contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. The Company’s results could materially differ from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of certain factors, including the risks it faces described below and elsewhere. See “Cautionary Factors that May Affect Future Results” below.
The Company is dependent on its patent rights, and if its patent rights are invalidated or circumvented, its business would be adversely affected.
Patent protection is considered, in the aggregate, to be of material importance to the Company’s marketing of human health and animal health products in the United States and in most major foreign markets. Patents covering products that it has introduced normally provide market exclusivity, which is important for 2015 were $1.56 comparedthe successful marketing and sale of its products. The Company seeks patents covering each of its products in each of the markets where it intends to sell the products and where meaningful patent protection is available.
Even if the Company succeeds in obtaining patents covering its products, third parties or government authorities may challenge or seek to invalidate or circumvent its patents and patent applications. It is important for the Company’s business to defend successfully the patent rights that provide market exclusivity for its products. The Company is often involved in patent disputes relating to challenges to its patents or claims by third parties of infringement against the Company. The Company defends its patents both within and outside the United States, including by filing claims of infringement against other parties. See Item 8. “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data,” Note 11. “Contingencies and Environmental Liabilities” below. In particular, manufacturers of generic pharmaceutical products from time to time file abbreviated NDAs with $4.07the FDA seeking to market generic forms of the Company’s products prior to the expiration of relevant patents owned or licensed by the Company. The Company normally responds by defending its patent, including by filing lawsuits alleging patent infringement. Patent litigation and other challenges to the Company’s patents are costly and unpredictable and may deprive the Company of market exclusivity for a patented product or, in 2014. EPSsome cases, third-party patents may prevent the Company from marketing and selling a product in both years reflecta particular geographic area.
Additionally, certain foreign governments have indicated that compulsory licenses to patents may be granted in the impactcase of acquisitionnational emergencies or in other circumstances, which could diminish or eliminate sales and divestiture-related costsprofits from those regions and restructuring costs,negatively affect the Company’s results of operations. Further, court decisions relating to other companies’ patents, potential legislation relating to patents, as well as certain other items, whichregulatory initiatives may result in 2014 include an $11.2 billion gain recognizeda more general weakening of intellectual property protection.
If one or more important products lose patent protection in connection with the divestitureprofitable markets, sales of MCC. Non-GAAP EPS, which excludes these items, were $3.59 in 2015 and $3.49 in 2014 (see “Non-GAAP Income and Non-GAAP EPS” below).
Competition and the Health Care Environment
Competition
The markets in which the Company conducts its business and the pharmaceutical industry in generalthose products are highly competitive and highly regulated.likely to decline significantly as a result of generic versions of those products becoming available. The Company’s competitors include other worldwide research-based pharmaceutical companies, smaller research companies with more limited therapeutic focus, generic drug manufacturers and animal health care companies. The Company’sresults of operations may be adversely affected by the lost sales unless and until the Company has successfully launched commercially successful replacement products. In addition, if products that were measured at fair value and capitalized in connection with acquisitions experience difficulties in the market that negatively affect product cash flows, the Company may recognize material non-cash impairment charges with respect to the value of those products.
A chart listing the patent protection for certain of the Company’s marketed products, and U.S. patent protection for candidates under review and in Phase 3 clinical development is set forth above in Item 1. “Business — Patents, Trademarks and Licenses.”
As the Company’s products lose market exclusivity, the Company generally experiences a significant and rapid loss of sales from those products.
The Company depends upon patents to provide it with exclusive marketing rights for its products for some period of time. Loss of patent protection for one of the Company’s products typically leads to a significant and rapid loss of sales for that product as lower priced generic versions of that drug become available. In the case of products that contribute significantly to the Company’s sales, the loss of market exclusivity can have a material adverse effect

on the Company’s business, cash flow, results of operations, financial position and prospects. For example, pursuant to an agreement with a generic manufacturer, that manufacturer launched in the United States a generic version of Zetia in December 2016. In addition, the Company lost U.S. patent protection for Vytorin in April 2017. As a result, the Company experienced a significant and rapid loss of sales of Zetia and Vytorin in the United States in 2017, which continued in 2018. Furthermore, the patents that provide U.S. and EU market exclusivity for Noxafil will expire in July 2019 and December 2019, respectively, and the Company anticipates a significant decline in U.S. and EU Noxafil sales thereafter.
Key products generate a significant amount of the Company’s profits and cash flows, and any events that adversely affect the markets for its leading products could have a material and negative impact on results of operations and cash flows.
The Company’s ability to generate profits and operating cash flow depends largely upon the continued profitability of the Company’s key products, such as Keytruda,Januvia, Janumet, Gardasil/Gardasil 9and Bridion. As a result of the Company’s dependence on key products, any event that adversely affects any of these products or the markets for any of these products could have a significant adverse impact on results of operations and cash flows. These events could include loss of patent protection, increased costs associated with manufacturing, generic or over-the-counter availability of the Company’s product or a competitive product, the discovery of previously unknown side effects, results of post-approval trials, increased competition from the introduction of new, more effective treatments and discontinuation or removal from the market of the product for any reason. Such events could have a material adverse effect on the sales of any such products.
For example, in 2018, sales of Zepatier were materially unfavorably affected by increasing competition and declining patient volumes. Sales of Zostavax were also materially unfavorably affected due to competition. The Company expects that competition will continue to adversely affect the sales of these products.
The Company’s research and development efforts may not succeed in developing commercially successful products and the Company may not be able to acquire commercially successful products in other ways; in consequence, the Company may not be able to replace sales of successful products that have lost patent protection.
Like other major pharmaceutical companies, in order to remain competitive, the Company must continue to launch new products. Expected declines in sales of products after the loss of market exclusivity mean that the Company’s future success is dependent on its pipeline of new products, including new products that it may develop through collaborations and joint ventures and products that it is able to obtain through license or acquisition. To accomplish this, the Company commits substantial effort, funds and other resources to research and development, both through its own dedicated resources and through various collaborations with third parties. There is a high rate of failure inherent in the research and development process for new drugs. As a result, there is a high risk that funds invested by the Company in research programs will not generate financial returns. This risk profile is compounded by the fact that this research has a long investment cycle. To bring a pharmaceutical compound from the discovery phase to market may take a decade or more and failure can occur at any point in the process, including later in the process after significant funds have been invested.
For a description of the research and development process, see Item 1. “Business — Research and Development” above. Each phase of testing is highly regulated and during each phase there is a substantial risk that the Company will encounter serious obstacles or will not achieve its goals, therefore, the Company may abandon a product in which it has invested substantial amounts of time and resources. Some of the risks encountered in the research and development process include the following: pre-clinical testing of a new compound may yield disappointing results; competing products from other manufacturers may reach the market first; clinical trials of a new drug may not be successful; a new drug may not be effective or may have harmful side effects; a new drug may not be approved by the regulators for its intended use; it may not be possible to obtain a patent for a new drug; payers may refuse to cover or reimburse the new product; or sales of a new product may be disappointing.
The Company cannot state with certainty when or whether any of its products now under development will be approved or launched; whether it will be able to develop, license or otherwise acquire compounds, product candidates or products; or whether any products, once launched, will be commercially successful. The Company must maintain a continuous flow of successful new products and successful new indications or brand extensions for existing products

sufficient both to cover its substantial research and development costs and to replace sales that are lost as profitable products lose market exclusivity or are displaced by competing products or therapies. Failure to do so in the short term or long term would have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, results of operations, cash flow, financial position and prospects.
The Company’s success is dependent on the successful development and marketing of new products, which are subject to substantial risks.
Products that appear promising in development may fail to reach the market or fail to succeed for numerous reasons, including the following:
findings of ineffectiveness, superior safety or efficacy of competing products, or harmful side effects in clinical or pre-clinical testing;
failure to receive the necessary regulatory approvals, including delays in the approval of new products and new indications, or the anticipated labeling, and uncertainties about the time required to obtain regulatory approvals and the benefit/risk standards applied by regulatory agencies in determining whether to grant approvals;
failure in certain markets to obtain reimbursement commensurate with the level of innovation and clinical benefit presented by the product;
lack of economic feasibility due to manufacturing costs or other factors; and
preclusion from commercialization by the proprietary rights of others.
In the future, if certain pipeline programs are cancelled or if the Company believes that their commercial prospects have been reduced, the Company may recognize material non-cash impairment charges for those programs that were measured at fair value and capitalized in connection with acquisitions or certain collaborations.
Failure to successfully develop and market new products in the short term or long term would have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, results of operations, cash flow, financial position and prospects.
The Company’s products, including products in development, cannot be marketed unless the Company obtains and maintains regulatory approval.
The Company’s activities, including research, preclinical testing, clinical trials and the manufacturing and marketing of its products, are subject to extensive regulation by numerous federal, state and local governmental authorities in the United States, including the FDA, and by foreign regulatory authorities, including in the EU, Japan and China. In the United States, the FDA administers requirements covering the testing, approval, safety, effectiveness, manufacturing, labeling and marketing of prescription pharmaceuticals. In many cases, the FDA requirements have increased the amount of time and money necessary to develop new products and bring them to market in the United States. Regulation outside the United States also is primarily focused on drug safety and effectiveness and, in many cases, reduction in the cost of drugs. The FDA and foreign regulatory authorities have substantial discretion to require additional testing, to delay or withhold registration and marketing approval and to otherwise preclude distribution and sale of a product.
Even if the Company is successful in developing new products, it will not be able to market any of those products unless and until it has obtained all required regulatory approvals in each jurisdiction where it proposes to market the new products. Once obtained, the Company must maintain approval as long as it plans to market its new products in each jurisdiction where approval is required. The Company’s failure to obtain approval, significant delays in the approval process, or its failure to maintain approval in any jurisdiction will prevent it from selling the products in that jurisdiction. The Company would not be able to realize revenues for those new products in any jurisdiction where it does not have approval.
Developments following regulatory approval may adversely affect sales of the Company’s products.
Even after a product reaches the market, certain developments following regulatory approval may decrease demand for the Company’s products, including the following:
results in post-approval Phase 4 trials or other studies;

the re-review of products that are already marketed;
the recall or loss of marketing approval of products that are already marketed;
changing government standards or public expectations regarding safety, efficacy or labeling changes; and
greater scrutiny in advertising and promotion.
In the past several years, clinical trials and post-marketing surveillance of certain marketed drugs of the Company and of competitors within the industry have raised concerns that have led to recalls, withdrawals or adverse labeling of marketed products. Clinical trials and post-marketing surveillance of certain marketed drugs also have raised concerns among some prescribers and patients relating to the safety or efficacy of pharmaceutical products in general that have negatively affected the sales of such products. In addition, increased scrutiny of the outcomes of clinical trials has led to increased volatility in market reaction. Further, these matters often attract litigation and, even where the basis for the litigation is groundless, considerable resources may be needed to respond.
In addition, following in the wake of product withdrawals and other significant safety issues, health authorities such as the FDA, the EMA and Japan’s Pharmaceutical and Medical Device Agency have increased their focus on safety when assessing the benefit/risk balance of drugs. Some health authorities appear to have become more cautious when making decisions about approvability of new products or indications and are re-reviewing select products that are already marketed, adding further to the uncertainties in the regulatory processes. There is also greater regulatory scrutiny, especially in the United States, on advertising and promotion and, in particular, direct-to-consumer advertising.
If previously unknown side effects are discovered or if there is an increase in negative publicity regarding known side effects of any of the Company’s products, it could significantly reduce demand for the product or require the Company to take actions that could negatively affect sales, including removing the product from the market, restricting its distribution or applying for labeling changes. Further, in the current environment in which all pharmaceutical companies operate, the Company is at risk for product liability and consumer protection claims and civil and criminal governmental actions related to its products, research and/or marketing activities.
The Company faces intense competition from lower cost generic products.
In general, the Company faces increasing competition from lower-cost generic products. The patent rights that protect its products are of varying strengths and durations. In addition, in some countries, patent protection is significantly weaker than in the United States or in the EU. In the United States and the EU, political pressure to reduce spending on prescription drugs has led to legislation and other measures that encourage the use of generic and biosimilar competition asproducts. Although it is the Company’s policy to actively protect its patent rights, generic challenges to the Company’s products mature,can arise at any time, and the Company’s patents may not prevent the emergence of generic competition for its products.
Loss of patent protection for a product typically is followed promptly by generic substitutes, reducing the Company’s sales of that product. Availability of generic substitutes for the Company’s drugs may adversely affect its results of operations and cash flow. In addition, proposals emerge from time to time in the United States and other countries for legislation to further encourage the early and rapid approval of generic drugs. Any such proposal that is enacted into law could worsen this substantial negative effect on the Company’s sales and, potentially, its business, cash flow, results of operations, financial position and prospects.
The Company faces intense competition from competitors’ products.
The Company’s products face intense competition from competitors’ products. This competition may increase as well as technological advances of competitors, industry consolidation, patents granted to competitors, competitive combination products, new products enter the market. In such an event, the competitors’ products may be safer or more effective, more convenient to use, have better insurance coverage or reimbursement levels or be more effectively marketed and sold than the Company’s products. Alternatively, in the case of competitors,generic competition, including the generic availability of competitors’ branded products, they may be equally safe and effective products that are sold at a substantially lower price than the Company’s products. As a result, if the Company fails to maintain its competitive position, this could have a material adverse effect on its business, cash flow, results of operations, financial position and prospects. In addition, if products that were measured at fair value and capitalized in connection with acquisitions experience

difficulties in the market that negatively impact product cash flows, the Company may recognize material non-cash impairment charges with respect to the value of those products.
The Company faces continued pricing pressure with respect to its products.
The Company faces continued pricing pressure globally and, particularly in mature markets, from managed care organizations, government agencies and programs that could negatively affect the Company’s sales and profit margins. In the United States, these include (i) practices of managed care groups and institutional and governmental purchasers, (ii) U.S. federal laws and regulations related to Medicare and Medicaid, including the Medicare Prescription Drug Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003 and the ACA, and (iii) state activities aimed at increasing price transparency, including new laws as noted above in Item 1. “Competition and the Health Care Environment — Health Care Environment and Government Regulations.” Changes to the health care system enacted as part of health care reform in the United States, as well as increased purchasing power of entities that negotiate on behalf of Medicare, Medicaid, and private sector beneficiaries, could result in further pricing pressures. In addition, in the U.S., larger customers may, in the future, ask for and receive higher rebates on drugs in certain highly competitive categories. The Company must also compete to be placed on formularies of managed care organizations. Exclusion of a product from a formulary can lead to reduced usage in the managed care organization.
In order to provide information about the Company’s pricing practices, the Company annually posts on its website its Pricing Transparency Report for the United States. The report provides the Company’s average annual list price and net price increases across the Company’s U.S. portfolio dating back to 2010.
Outside the United States, numerous major markets, including the EU, Japan and China have pervasive government involvement in funding health care and, in that regard, fix the pricing and reimbursement of pharmaceutical and vaccine products. Consequently, in those markets, the Company is subject to government decision making and budgetary actions with respect to its products.
The Company expects pricing pressures to continue in the future.
The health care industry in the United States will continue to be subject to increasing regulation and political action.
The Company believes that the health care industry will continue to be subject to increasing regulation as well as political and legal action, as future proposals to reform the health care system are considered by the Executive branch, Congress and state legislatures.
In 2010, the United States enacted major health care reform legislation in the form of the ACA. Various insurance market reforms have advanced and state and federal insurance exchanges were launched in 2014. With respect to the effect of the law on the pharmaceutical industry, the law increased the mandated Medicaid rebate from 15.1% to 23.1%, expanded the rebate to Medicaid managed care utilization, and increased the types of entities eligible for the federal 340B drug discount program.
The law also requires pharmaceutical manufacturers to pay a 50% point of service discount to Medicare Part D beneficiaries when they are in the Medicare Part D coverage gap (i.e., the so-called “donut hole”). In 2018, the Company’s revenue was reduced by $365 million due to this requirement. Beginning in 2019, the 50% point of service discount will increase to a 70% point of service discount in the coverage gap, as a result of the Balanced Budget Act of 2018. In addition, the 70% point of service discount will be extended to biosimilar products. Also, pharmaceutical manufacturers are now required to pay an annual non-tax deductible health care reform fee. The total annual industry fee was $4.1 billion in 2018 and will be $2.8 billion in 2019. The fee is assessed on each company in proportion to its share of prior year branded pharmaceutical sales to certain government programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid. In 2018, the Company recorded $124 million of costs for this annual fee.
In 2016, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) issued the Medicaid rebate final rule that implements provisions of the ACA effective April 1, 2016. The rule provides comprehensive guidance on the calculation of Average Manufacturer Price and Best Price; two metrics utilized to determine the rebates drug manufacturers are required to pay to state Medicaid programs. The impact of changes resulting from the issuance of the rule is not material to Merck, at this time. However, the Company is still awaiting guidance from CMS on two aspects of the rule that were deferred for later implementation. These include a definition of what constitutes a product ‘line extension’ and a delay

in the participation of the U.S. Territories in the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program until April 1, 2020. The Company will evaluate the financial impact of these two elements when they become effective.
The Company cannot predict the likelihood of future changes in the health care industry in general, or the pharmaceutical industry in particular, or what impact they may have on the Company’s business, cash flow, results of operations, financial position and prospects.
The Company is increasingly dependent on sophisticated software applications and computing infrastructure. In 2017, the Company experienced a network cyber-attack that led to a disruption of its worldwide operations, including manufacturing, research and sales operations. The Company could be a target of future cyber-attacks.
The Company is increasingly dependent on sophisticated software applications and complex information technology systems and computing infrastructure (collectively, “IT systems”) to conduct critical operations. Disruption, degradation, or manipulation of these IT systems through intentional or accidental means could impact key business processes. Cyber-attacks against the Company’s IT systems could result in exposure of confidential information, the modification of critical data, and/or the failure of critical operations. Misuse of these IT systems could result in the disclosure of sensitive personal information or the theft of trade secrets, intellectual property, or other confidential business information. The Company continues to leverage new and innovative technologies across the enterprise to improve the efficacy and efficiency of its business processes; the use of which can create new risks.
In 2017, the Company experienced a network cyber-attack that led to a disruption of its worldwide operations, including manufacturing, research and sales operations. Due to the cyber-attack, the Company was unable to fulfill orders for certain products in certain markets, which had an unfavorable effect on sales in 2017 of approximately $260 million. In addition, the Company recorded manufacturing-related expenses, primarily unfavorable manufacturing variances, in Cost of sales, as well as expenses related to remediation efforts in Selling, general and administrative expenses and Research and development expenses, which aggregated $285 million in 2017, net of insurance recoveries of approximately $45 million. Due to a residual backlog of orders, 2018 sales were unfavorably affected in certain markets by approximately $150 million from the cyber-attack.
The Company has insurance coverage insuring against costs resulting from cyber-attacks and has received proceeds. However, there are disputes with certain of the insurers about the availability of some of the insurance coverage for claims related to the 2017 cyber-attack.
The Company has implemented a variety of measures to further enhance and modernize its systems to guard against similar attacks in the future, and also is pursuing an enterprise-wide effort to enhance the Company's resiliency against future cyber-attacks, including incidents similar to the 2017 attack. The objective of these efforts is not only to protect against future cyber-attacks, but also to improve the speed of the Company’s recovery from such attacks and enable continued business operations to the greatest extent possible during any recovery period.
Although the aggregate impact of cyber-attacks and network disruptions, including the 2017 cyber-attack, on the Company’s operations and financial condition has not been material to date, the Company continues to be a target of events of this nature and expects them to continue. The Company monitors its data, information technology and personnel usage of Company IT systems to reduce these risks and continues to do so on an ongoing basis for any current or potential threats. There can be no assurance that the Company’s efforts to protect its data and IT systems will be successful in preventing disruptions to its operations, including its manufacturing, research and sales operations. Any such disruption could result in loss of revenue, or the loss of critical or sensitive information from the Company’s or the Company’s third party providers’ databases or IT systems and could also result in financial, legal, business or reputational harm to the Company and potentially substantial remediation costs.
The Company is subject to a variety of U.S. and international laws and regulations.
The Company is currently subject to a number of government laws and regulations and, in the future, could become subject to new government laws and regulations. The costs of compliance with such laws and regulations, or the negative results of non-compliance, could adversely affect the business, cash flow, results of operations, financial position and prospects of the Company; these laws and regulations include (i) additional healthcare reform initiatives in the United States or in other countries, including additional mandatory discounts or fees; (ii) the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act or other anti-bribery and corruption laws; (iii) new laws, regulations and judicial or other governmental

decisions affecting pricing, drug reimbursement, and access or marketing within or across jurisdictions; (iv) changes in intellectual property laws; (v) changes in accounting standards; (vi) new and increasing data privacy regulations and enforcement, particularly in the EU and the United States; (vii) legislative mandates or preferences for local manufacturing of pharmaceutical or vaccine products; (viii) emerging and new information from clinical trialsglobal regulatory requirements for reporting payments and other value transfers to healthcare professionals; (ix) environmental regulations; and (x) the potential impact of marketed products importation restrictions, embargoes, trade sanctions and legislative and/or post-marketing surveillance. In addition, patent rights are increasinglyother regulatory changes.
The uncertainty in global economic conditions together with cost-reduction measures being challengedtaken by competitors,certain governments could negatively affect the Company’s operating results.
Uncertainty in global economic and the outcome can be highly uncertain. An adversegeopolitical conditions may result in a slowdown to the global economy that could affect the Company’s business by reducing the prices that drug wholesalers and retailers, hospitals, government agencies and managed health care providers may be able or willing to pay for the Company’s products or by reducing the demand for the Company’s products, which could in turn negatively impact the Company’s sales and result in a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, cash flow, results of operations, financial position and prospects.
Global efforts toward health care cost containment continue to exert pressure on product pricing and market access. In the United States, pricing pressures continue on many of the Company’s products and, in several international markets, government-mandated pricing actions have reduced prices of generic and patented drugs. The Company anticipates these pricing actions will continue to negatively affect revenue performance in 2019.
If credit and economic conditions worsen, the resulting economic and currency impacts in the affected markets and globally could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s results.
The Company has significant global operations, which expose it to additional risks, and any adverse event could have a material negative impact on the Company’s results of operations.
The extent of the Company’s operations outside the United States is significant. Risks inherent in conducting a global business include:
changes in medical reimbursement policies and programs and pricing restrictions in key markets;
multiple regulatory requirements that could restrict the Company’s ability to manufacture and sell its products in key markets;
trade protection measures and import or export licensing requirements, including the imposition of trade sanctions or similar restrictions by the United States or other governments;
foreign exchange fluctuations;
diminished protection of intellectual property in some countries; and
possible nationalization and expropriation.
In addition, there may be changes to the Company’s business and political position if there is instability, disruption or destruction in a significant geographic region, regardless of cause, including war, terrorism, riot, civil insurrection or social unrest; and natural or man-made disasters, including famine, flood, fire, earthquake, storm or disease. For example, in 2017, the Company’s lone manufacturing plant in Puerto Rico was negatively affected by Hurricane Maria.
In 2016, the United Kingdom (UK) held a referendum in which voters approved an exit from the EU, commonly referred to as “Brexit”. As a result of that referendum, the British government has been in the process of negotiating the terms of the UK’s future relationship with the EU. While the Company has taken actions and made certain contingency plans for scenarios in which the UK and the EU do not reach a mutually satisfactory understanding as to that relationship, it is not possible at this time to predict whether there will be any such understanding, or if such an understanding is reached, whether its terms will vary in ways that result in greater restrictions on imports and exports between the UK and EU countries, increased regulatory complexities, and/or cross border labor issues that could materially adversely impact the Company’s business operations in the UK.

Failure to attract and retain highly qualified personnel could affect the Company’s ability to successfully develop and commercialize products.
The Company’s success is largely dependent on its continued ability to attract and retain highly qualified scientific, technical and management personnel, as well as personnel with expertise in clinical research and development, governmental regulation and commercialization. Competition for qualified personnel in the pharmaceutical industry is intense. The Company cannot be sure that it will be able to attract and retain quality personnel or that the costs of doing so will not materially increase.
In the past, the Company has experienced difficulties and delays in manufacturing certain of its products, including vaccines.
Merck has, in the past, experienced difficulties in manufacturing certain of its products, including vaccines. In addition, the network cyber-attack experienced by the Company in June 2017 led to a disruption of the Company’s operations, including its manufacturing operations. The Company may, in the future, experience difficulties and delays inherent in manufacturing its products, such as (i) failure of the Company or any of its vendors or suppliers to comply with Current Good Manufacturing Practices and other applicable regulations and quality assurance guidelines that could lead to manufacturing shutdowns, product shortages and delays in product manufacturing; (ii) construction delays related to the construction of new facilities or the expansion of existing facilities, including those intended to support future demand for the Company’s products; and (iii) other manufacturing or distribution problems including changes in manufacturing production sites and limits to manufacturing capacity due to regulatory requirements, changes in types of products produced, or physical limitations that could impact continuous supply. In addition, the Company could experience difficulties or delays in manufacturing its products caused by natural disasters, such as hurricanes. Manufacturing difficulties can result in product shortages, leading to lost sales and reputational harm to the Company.
The Company may not be able to realize the expected benefits of its investments in emerging markets.
The Company has been taking steps to increase its sales in emerging markets. However, there is no guarantee that the Company’s efforts to expand sales in these markets will succeed. Some countries within emerging markets may be especially vulnerable to periods of global financial instability or may have very limited resources to spend on health care. In order for the Company to successfully implement its emerging markets strategy, it must attract and retain qualified personnel. The Company may also be required to increase its reliance on third-party agents within less developed markets. In addition, many of these countries have currencies that fluctuate substantially and, if such currencies devalue and the Company cannot offset the devaluations, the Company’s financial performance within such countries could be adversely affected.
The Company’s business in China has grown rapidly in the past few years, and the importance of China to the Company’s overall pharmaceutical and vaccines business outside the United States has increased accordingly. Continued growth of the Company’s business in China is dependent upon ongoing development of a favorable environment for innovative pharmaceutical products and vaccines, sustained access for the Company’s currently marketed products, and the absence of trade impediments or adverse pricing controls. As noted above in Healthcare Environment, pricing pressure in China has increased as the Chinese government has been taking steps to reduce costs, including implementing healthcare reform that has led to the acceleration of generic substitution, where available. In addition, the Company anticipates that the reported inquiries made by various governmental authorities involving multinational pharmaceutical companies in China may continue.
For all these reasons, sales within emerging markets carry significant risks. However, a failure to maintain the Company’s presence in emerging markets could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, cash flow, results of operations, financial position and prospects.
The Company is exposed to market risk from fluctuations in currency exchange rates and interest rates.
The Company operates in multiple jurisdictions and virtually all sales are denominated in currencies of the local jurisdiction. Additionally, the Company has entered and will enter into business development transactions, borrowings or other financial transactions that may give rise to currency and interest rate exposure.

Since the Company cannot, with certainty, foresee and mitigate against such adverse fluctuations, fluctuations in currency exchange rates, interest rates and inflation could negatively affect the Company’s business, cash flow, results of operations, financial position and prospects.
In order to mitigate against the adverse impact of these market fluctuations, the Company will from time to time enter into hedging agreements. While hedging agreements, such as currency options and forwards and interest rate swaps, may limit some of the exposure to exchange rate and interest rate fluctuations, such attempts to mitigate these risks may be costly and not always successful.
The Company is subject to evolving and complex tax laws, which may result in additional liabilities that may affect results of operations.
The Company is subject to evolving and complex tax laws in the jurisdictions in which it operates. Significant judgment is required for determining the Company’s tax liabilities, and the Company’s tax returns are periodically examined by various tax authorities. The Company believes that its accrual for tax contingencies is adequate for all open years based on past experience, interpretations of tax law, and judgments about potential actions by tax authorities; however, due to the complexity of tax contingencies, the ultimate resolution of any tax matters may result in payments greater or less than amounts accrued. In addition, the Company may be affected by changes in tax laws, or new tax laws, affecting, for example, tax rates, and/or revised tax law interpretations in domestic or foreign jurisdictions.
Pharmaceutical products can develop unexpected safety or efficacy concerns.
Unexpected safety or efficacy concerns can arise with respect to marketed products, whether or not scientifically justified, leading to product recalls, withdrawals, or declining sales, as well as product liability, consumer fraud and/or other claims, including potential civil or criminal governmental actions.
Reliance on third-party relationships and outsourcing arrangements could adversely affect the Company’s business.
The Company depends on third parties, including suppliers, alliances with other pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, and third-party service providers, for key aspects of its business including development, manufacture and commercialization of its products and support for its information technology systems. Failure of these third parties to meet their contractual, regulatory and other obligations to the Company or the development of factors that materially disrupt the relationships between the Company and these third parties could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business.
Negative events in the animal health industry could have a negative impact on future results of operations.
Future sales of key animal health products could be adversely affected by a number of risk factors including certain risks that are specific to the animal health business. For example, the outbreak of disease carried by animals, such as Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy or mad cow disease, could lead to their widespread death and precautionary destruction as well as the reduced consumption and demand for animals, which could adversely impact the Company’s results of operations. Also, the outbreak of any highly contagious diseases near the Company’s main production sites could require the Company to immediately halt production of vaccines at such sites or force the Company to incur substantial expenses in procuring raw materials or vaccines elsewhere. Other risks specific to animal health include epidemics and pandemics, government procurement and pricing practices, weather and global agribusiness economic events. As the Animal Health segment of the Company’s business becomes more significant, the impact of any such events on future results of operations would also become more significant.
Biologics and vaccines carry unique risks and uncertainties, which could have a negative impact on future results of operations.
The successful development, testing, manufacturing and commercialization of biologics and vaccines, particularly human and animal health vaccines, is a long, complex, expensive and uncertain process. There are unique risks and uncertainties with biologics and vaccines, including:
There may be limited access to, and supply of, normal and diseased tissue samples, cell lines, pathogens, bacteria, viral strains and other biological materials. In addition, government regulations in multiple

jurisdictions, such as the United States and the EU, could result in restricted access to, or transport or use of, such materials. If the Company loses access to sufficient sources of such materials, or if tighter restrictions are imposed on the use of such materials, the Company may not be able to conduct research activities as planned and may incur additional development costs.
The development, manufacturing and marketing of biologics and vaccines are subject to regulation by the FDA, the EMA and other regulatory bodies. These regulations are often more complex and extensive than the regulations applicable to other pharmaceutical products. For example, in the United States, a BLA, including both preclinical and clinical trial data and extensive data regarding the manufacturing procedures, is required for human vaccine candidates, and FDA approval is generally required for the release of each manufactured commercial lot.
Manufacturing biologics and vaccines, especially in large quantities, is often complex and may require the use of innovative technologies to handle living micro-organisms. Each lot of an approved biologic and vaccine must undergo thorough testing for identity, strength, quality, purity and potency. Manufacturing biologics requires facilities specifically designed for and validated for this purpose, and sophisticated quality assurance and quality control procedures are necessary. Slight deviations anywhere in the manufacturing process, including filling, labeling, packaging, storage and shipping and quality control and testing, may result in lot failures, product recalls or spoilage. When changes are made to the manufacturing process, the Company may be required to provide pre-clinical and clinical data showing the comparable identity, strength, quality, purity or potency of the products before and after such changes.
Biologics and vaccines are frequently costly to manufacture because production ingredients are derived from living animal or plant material, and most biologics and vaccines cannot be made synthetically. In particular, keeping up with the demand for vaccines may be difficult due to the complexity of producing vaccines.
The use of biologically derived ingredients can lead to variability in the manufacturing process and could lead to allegations of harm, including infections or allergic reactions, which allegations would be reviewed through a standard investigation process that could lead to closure of product facilities due to possible contamination. Any of these events could result in substantial costs.
Product liability insurance for products may be limited, cost prohibitive or unavailable.
As a result of a number of factors, product liability insurance has become less available while the cost has increased significantly. The Company is subject to a substantial number of product liability claims. See Item 8. “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data,” Note 11. “Contingencies and Environmental Liabilities” below for more information on the Company’s current product liability litigation. With respect to product liability, the Company self-insures substantially all of its risk, as the availability of commercial insurance has become more restrictive. The Company has evaluated its risks and has determined that the cost of obtaining product liability insurance outweighs the likely benefits of the coverage that is available and, as such, has no insurance for certain product liabilities effective August 1, 2004, including liability for legacy Merck products first sold after that date. The Company will continually assess the most efficient means to address its risk; however, there can be no guarantee that insurance coverage will be obtained or, if obtained, will be sufficient to fully cover product liabilities that may arise.
Social media platforms present risks and challenges.
The inappropriate and/or unauthorized use of certain media vehicles could cause brand damage or information leakage or could lead to legal implications, including from the improper collection and/or dissemination of personally identifiable information. In addition, negative or inaccurate posts or comments about the Company or its products on any social networking platforms could damage the Company’s reputation, brand image and goodwill. Further, the disclosure of non-public Company-sensitive information by the Company’s workforce or others through external media channels could lead to information loss. Although there is an internal Company Social Media Policy that guides employees on appropriate personal and professional use of social media about the Company, the processes in place may not completely secure and protect information. Identifying new points of entry as social media continues to expand also presents new challenges.

Cautionary Factors that May Affect Future Results
(Cautionary Statements Under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995)
This report and other written reports and oral statements made from time to time by the Company may contain so-called “forward-looking statements,” all of which are based on management’s current expectations and are subject to risks and uncertainties which may cause results to differ materially from those set forth in the statements. One can identify these forward-looking statements by their use of words such as “anticipates,” “expects,” “plans,” “will,” “estimates,” “forecasts,” “projects” and other words of similar meaning, or negative variations of any of the foregoing. One can also identify them by the fact that they do not relate strictly to historical or current facts. These statements are likely to address the Company’s growth strategy, financial results, product development, product approvals, product potential, and development programs. One must carefully consider any such statement and should understand that many factors could cause actual results to differ materially from the Company’s forward-looking statements. These factors include inaccurate assumptions and a broad variety of other risks and uncertainties, including some that are known and some that are not. No forward-looking statement can be guaranteed and actual future results may vary materially. The Company does not assume the obligation to update any forward-looking statement. The Company cautions you not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements. Although it is not possible to predict or identify all such factors, they may include the following:
Competition from generic and/or biosimilar products as the Company’s products lose patent disputeprotection.
Increased “brand” competition in therapeutic areas important to the Company’s long-term business performance.
The difficulties and uncertainties inherent in new product development. The outcome of the lengthy and complex process of new product development is inherently uncertain. A drug candidate can fail at any stage of the process and one or more late-stage product candidates could fail to receive regulatory approval. New product candidates may appear promising in development but fail to reach the market because of efficacy or safety concerns, the inability to obtain necessary regulatory approvals, the difficulty or excessive cost to manufacture and/or the infringement of patents or intellectual property rights of others. Furthermore, the sales of new products may prove to be disappointing and fail to reach anticipated levels.
Pricing pressures, both in the United States and abroad, including rules and practices of managed care groups, judicial decisions and governmental laws and regulations related to Medicare, Medicaid and health care reform, pharmaceutical reimbursement and pricing in general.
Changes in government laws and regulations, including laws governing intellectual property, and the enforcement thereof affecting the Company’s business.
Efficacy or safety concerns with respect to marketed products, whether or not scientifically justified, leading to product recalls, withdrawals or declining sales.
Significant changes in customer relationships or changes in the behavior and spending patterns of purchasers of health care products and services, including delaying medical procedures, rationing prescription medications, reducing the frequency of physician visits and foregoing health care insurance coverage.
Legal factors, including product liability claims, antitrust litigation and governmental investigations, including tax disputes, environmental concerns and patent disputes with branded and generic competitors, any of which could preclude commercialization of products or negatively affect salesthe profitability of existing productsproducts.
Cyber-attacks on the Company’s information technology systems, which could disrupt the Company’s operations.
Lost market opportunity resulting from delays and could resultuncertainties in the recognitionapproval process of the FDA and foreign regulatory authorities.
Increased focus on privacy issues in countries around the world, including the United States and the EU. The legislative and regulatory landscape for privacy and data protection continues to evolve, and there has been

an impairment chargeincreasing amount of focus on privacy and data protection issues with respectthe potential to intangible assets associated with certain products. Competitive pressures have intensified as pressuresaffect directly the Company’s business, including recently enacted laws in a majority of states in the industry have grown.United States requiring security breach notification.
Pharmaceutical competition involves a rigorous search for technological innovationsChanges in tax laws including changes related to the taxation of foreign earnings.
Changes in accounting pronouncements promulgated by standard-setting or regulatory bodies, including the Financial Accounting Standards Board and the abilitySEC, that are adverse to market these innovations effectively. With its long-standing emphasis on research and development,the Company.
Economic factors over which the Company has no control, including changes in inflation, interest rates and foreign currency exchange rates.
This list should not be considered an exhaustive statement of all potential risks and uncertainties. See “Risk Factors” above.
Item 1B.Unresolved Staff Comments.
None.
Item 2.Properties.
The Company’s corporate headquarters is well positioned to competelocated in Kenilworth, New Jersey. The Company’s U.S. commercial operations are headquartered in Upper Gwynedd, Pennsylvania. The Company’s U.S. pharmaceutical business is conducted through divisional headquarters located in Upper Gwynedd, Pennsylvania and Kenilworth, New Jersey. The Company’s vaccines business is conducted through divisional headquarters located in Upper Gwynedd, Pennsylvania. Merck’s Animal Health headquarters is located in Madison, New Jersey. Principal U.S. research facilities are located in Rahway and Kenilworth, New Jersey, West Point, Pennsylvania, Palo Alto, California, Boston, Massachusetts, South San Francisco, California and Elkhorn, Nebraska (Animal Health). Principal research facilities outside the United States are located in Switzerland and China. Merck’s manufacturing operations are headquartered in Whitehouse Station, New Jersey. The Company also has production facilities for human health products at nine locations in the search for technological innovations. Additional resources requiredUnited States and Puerto Rico. Outside the United States, through subsidiaries, the Company owns or has an interest in manufacturing plants or other properties in Japan, Singapore, South Africa, and other countries in Western Europe, Central and South America, and Asia.
Capital expenditures were $2.6 billion in 2018, $1.9 billion in 2017 and $1.6 billion in 2016. In the United States, these amounted to meet market challenges include quality control, flexibility$1.5 billion in 2018, $1.2 billion in 2017 and $1.0 billion in 2016. Abroad, such expenditures amounted to meet customer specifications, an efficient distribution system$1.1 billion in 2018, $728 million in 2017 and a strong technical information service. $594 million in 2016.
The Company is activeand its subsidiaries own their principal facilities and manufacturing plants under titles that they consider to be satisfactory. The Company believes that its properties are in acquiringgood operating condition and marketing products through external alliances, such as licensing arrangements,that its machinery and hasequipment have been refining its sales and marketing efforts to further address changing industry conditions. However, the introduction of new products and processes by competitors may result in price reductions and product displacements, even for products protected by patents. For example, the number of

36


compounds available to treat a particular disease typically increases over time and can result in slowed sales growth or reduced saleswell maintained. Plants for the Company’smanufacture of products in that therapeutic category.
The highly competitive animal health business is affected by several factors including regulatoryare suitable for their intended purposes and legislative issues, scientifichave capacities and technological advances, product innovation, the qualityprojected capacities adequate for current and priceprojected needs for existing Company products. Some capacity of the Company’s products, effective promotional effortsplants is being converted, with any needed modification, to the requirements of newly introduced and future products. In addition, in October 2018, the frequent introductionCompany announced it plans to invest approximately $16 billion on new capital projects from 2018-2022. The focus of generic productsthis investment will primarily be on increasing manufacturing capacity across Merck’s key businesses.
Item 3.Legal Proceedings.
The information called for by competitors.this Item is incorporated herein by reference to Item 8. “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data,” Note 11. “Contingencies and Environmental Liabilities”.
Item 4.Mine Safety Disclosures.
Not Applicable.

Executive Officers of the Registrant (ages as of February 1, 2019)
All officers listed below serve at the pleasure of the Board of Directors. None of these officers was elected pursuant to any arrangement or understanding between the officer and any other person(s).
NameAgeOffices and Business Experience
Kenneth C. Frazier64Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer (since December 2011)
Sanat Chattopadhyay59Executive Vice President and President, Merck Manufacturing Division (since March 2016); Senior Vice President, Operations, Merck Manufacturing Division (November 2009-March 2016)
Frank Clyburn54Executive Vice President, Chief Commercial Officer (since January 2019); President, Global Oncology Business Unit (October 2013-December 2018); President, Primary Care and Women’s Health Business Line (September 2011-October 2013)
Robert M. Davis52Executive Vice President, Global Services, and Chief Financial Officer (since April 2016); Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (April 2014-April 2016); Corporate Vice President and President, Medical Products, Baxter International, Inc. (October 2010-March 2014)
Richard R. DeLuca, Jr.56Executive Vice President and President, Merck Animal Health (since September 2011)
Julie L. Gerberding62Executive Vice President and Chief Patient Officer, Strategic Communications, Global Public Policy and Population Health (since July 2016); Executive Vice President for Strategic Communications, Global Public Policy and Population Health (January 2015-July 2016); President, Merck Vaccines (January 2010-January 2015)
Rita A. Karachun55Senior Vice President Finance - Global Controller (since March 2014); Assistant Controller (November 2009-March 2014)
Steven C. Mizell

58Executive Vice President, Chief Human Resources Officer, Human Resources (since October 2018); Executive Vice President, Chief Human Resources Officer (December 2016-October 2018) and Executive Vice President, Human Resources, Monsanto Company (August 2011-December 2016)
Michael T. Nally43Executive Vice President, Chief Marketing Officer (since January 2019); President, Global Vaccines, Global Human Health (September 2016-January 2019); Managing Director, United Kingdom and Ireland, Global Human Health (January 2014-September 2016); Managing Director, Sweden, Global Human Health (November 2011-January 2014)
Roger M. Perlmutter, M.D., Ph.D.66Executive Vice President and President, Merck Research Laboratories (since April 2013)
Jim Scholefield56Executive Vice President, Chief Information and Digital Officer (since October 2018); Chief Information Officer, Nike, Inc (July 2015-October 2018); Chief Technology Officer, The Coca-Cola Company, (November 2010-June 2015)
Jennifer Zachary41Executive Vice President and General Counsel (since April 2018); Partner, Covington & Burling LLP (January 2013-March 2018)



Health Care Environment and Government Regulation
Global efforts toward health care cost containment continue to exert pressure on product pricing and market access. In the United States, federal and state governments for many years also have pursued methods to reduce the cost of drugs and vaccines for which they pay. For example, federal laws require the Company to pay specified rebates for medicines reimbursed by Medicaid and to provide discounts for outpatient medicines purchased by certain Public Health Service entities and hospitals serving a disproportionate share of low income or uninsured patients.
Against this backdrop, the United States enacted major health care reform legislation in 2010 (the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act), which began to be implemented in 2010.Act (ACA)). Various insurance market reforms have since advanced and state and federal insurance exchanges were launched in 2014. By the end of the decade, the law is expected to expand access to health care to about 32 million Americans who did not previously have insurance coverage. With respect to the effect of the law on the pharmaceutical industry, the law increased the mandated Medicaid rebate from 15.1% to 23.1%, expanded the rebate to Medicaid managed care utilization, and increased the types of entities eligible for the federal 340B drug discount program. The law also requires pharmaceutical manufacturers to pay a 50% point of service discount to Medicare Part D beneficiaries when they are in the Medicare Part D coverage gap (i.e., the so-called “donut hole”). Approximately $550$365 million, $430$385 million and $280$415 million was recorded by Merck as a reduction to revenue in 2015, 20142018, 2017 and 2013,2016, respectively, related to the donut hole provision. Beginning in 2019, the 50% point of service discount will increase to a 70% point of service discount in the coverage gap, as a result of the Balanced Budget Act of 2018. In addition, the 70% point of service discount will be extended to biosimilar products. Also, pharmaceutical manufacturers are now required to pay an annual non-tax deductible health care reform fee. The total annual industry fee was $3.0$4.1 billion in 20152018 and will remain $3.0decrease to $2.8 billion in 2016.2019 and is currently planned to remain at that amount thereafter. The fee is assessed on each company in proportion to its share of prior year branded pharmaceutical sales to certain government programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid. The Company recorded $173$124 million, $390$210 million and $151$193 million of costs within MarketingSelling, general and administrative expenses in 2015, 20142018, 2017 and 2013,2016, respectively, for the annual health care reform fee. The higher expenses in 2014 reflect final regulations on the annual health care reform fee issued by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) on July 28, 2014. The final IRS regulations accelerated the recognition criteria for the fee obligation by one year to the year in which the underlying sales used to allocate the fee occurred rather than the year in which the fee was paid. As a result of this change, Merck recorded an additional year of expense of $193 million in 2014. On January 21,In February 2016, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) issued the Medicaid Rebate Final Rulerebate final rule that implements provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care ActACA effective April 1, 2016. The rule provides comprehensive guidance on the calculation of Average Manufacturer Price and Best Price; two metrics utilized to determine the rebates drug manufacturers are required to pay to state Medicaid programs. The impact of changes resulting from the issuance of the rule is not material to Merck at this time. However, the Company is still evaluatingawaiting guidance from CMS on two aspects of the rule that were deferred for later implementation. These include a definition of what constitutes a product ‘line extension’ and a delay in the participation of the U.S. Territories in the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program until April 1, 2020. The Company will evaluate the financial impact of these two elements when they become effective.

There is significant uncertainty about the future of the ACA in particular and health care laws in general in the United States. The Company is participating in the debate, and monitoring how any proposed changes could affect its business. The Company is unable to determine whether it willpredict the likelihood of changes to the ACA. Depending on the nature of any repeal and replacement of the ACA, such actions could have a material impactadverse effect on Merck’s Medicaid rebate liability.the Company’s business, cash flow, results of operations, financial position and prospects.
A number of states have passed pharmaceutical price and cost transparency laws. These laws typically require manufacturers to report certain product price information or other financial data to the state. In the case of a California law, manufacturers also are required to provide advance notification of price increases. The Company expects that states will continue their focus on pharmaceutical price transparency and that this focus will continue to exert pressure on product pricing.
The Company also faces increasing pricing pressure globally from managed care organizations, government agencies and programs that could negatively affect the Company’s sales and profit margins. In the United States, these include (i) practices of managed care organizations, federal and state exchanges, and institutional and governmental purchasers, and (ii) U.S. federal laws and regulations related to Medicare and Medicaid, including the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 and the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. ACA.
Changes to the health care system enacted as part of health care reform in the United States, as well as increased purchasing power of entities that negotiate on behalf of Medicare, Medicaid, and private sector beneficiaries, could result in further pricing pressures. As an example, health care reform is contributing to an increase in the number of patients in the Medicaid program under which sales of pharmaceutical products are subject to substantial rebates.
In addition, in the effort to contain the U.S. federal deficit, the pharmaceutical industry could be considered a potential source of savings via legislative proposals that have been debated but not enacted. These types of revenue generating or cost saving proposals include additional direct price controls in the Medicare prescription drug program (Part D). In addition, Congress may again consider proposals to allow, under certain conditions, the importation of medicines from other countries. It remains very uncertain as to what proposals, if any, may be included as part of future federal budget deficit reduction proposals that would directly or indirectly affect the Company.

In the U.S. private sector, consolidation and integration among health care providers is a major factor in the competitive marketplace for pharmaceutical products. Health plans and pharmacy benefit managers have been consolidating into fewer, larger entities, thus enhancing their purchasing strength and importance. Private third-party insurers, as well as governments, increasingly employ formularies to control costs by negotiating discounted prices in exchange for formulary inclusion. Failure to obtain timely or adequate pricing or formulary placement for Merck’s products or obtaining such placement at unfavorable pricing could adversely impact revenue. In addition to formulary tier co-pay differentials, private health insurance companies and self-insured employers have been raising co-payments required from beneficiaries, particularly for branded pharmaceuticals and biotechnology products. Private health insurance companies also are increasingly imposing utilization management tools, such as clinical protocols, requiring prior authorization for a branded product if a generic product is available or requiring the patient to first fail on one or more generic products before permitting access to a branded medicine. These same management tools are also used in treatment areas in which the payer has taken the position that multiple branded products are therapeutically comparable. As the U.S. payer market concentrates further and as more drugs become available in generic form, pharmaceutical companies may face greater pricing pressure from private third-party payers.
37In order to provide information about the Company’s pricing practices, the Company annually posts on its website its Pricing Transparency Report for the United States. The report provides the Company’s average annual list price and net price increases across the Company’s U.S. portfolio dating back to 2010. 


Efforts toward health care cost containment also remain intense in several European countries. Many countries have continued to announce and execute austerity measures, which include the implementation ofThe Company faces competitive pricing actions to reduce prices ofpressure resulting from generic and patented drugs and mandatory switches to genericbiosimilar drugs. While the Company is taking steps to mitigate the impact in these countries, the austerity measures continued to negatively affect the Company’s revenue performance in 2015 and the Company anticipates the austerity measures will continue to negatively affect revenue performance in 2016. In addition, a majority of countries in Europe attempt to contain drug costs by engaging in reference pricing in which authorities examine pre-determined markets for published prices of drugs by brand. The authorities then use price data from those markets to set new local prices for brand-name drugs, including the Company’s. Guidelines for examining reference pricing are usually set in local markets and can be changed pursuant to local regulations.

In addition, in Japan, the pharmaceutical industry is subject to government-mandated biennial price reductions of pharmaceutical products and certain vaccines, which will occur againoccurred in 2016.2018. Furthermore, the government can order repricings for classes of drugs if it determines that it is appropriate under applicable rules.
Certain markets outside of the United States have also implemented other cost management strategies, such as health technology assessments (HTA), which require additional data, reviews and administrative processes, all of which increase the complexity, timing and costs of obtaining product reimbursement and exert downward pressure on available reimbursement. In the United States, HTAs are also being used by government and private payers.
The Company’s focus on emerging markets has increased.continued. Governments in many emerging markets are also focused on constraining health care costs and have enacted price controls and related measures, such as compulsory licenses, that aim to put pressure on the price of pharmaceuticals and constrain market access. The Company anticipates that pricing pressures and market access challenges will continue in 20162019 to varying degrees in the emerging markets.
Beyond pricing and market access challenges, other conditions in emerging market countries can affect the Company’s efforts to continue to grow in these markets, including potential political instability, changes in trade sanctions and embargoes, significant currency fluctuation and controls, financial crises, limited or changing availability of funding for health care, and other developments that may adversely impact the business environment for the Company. Further, the Company may engage third-party agents to assist in operating in emerging market countries, which may affect its ability to realize continued growth and may also increase the Company’s risk exposure.
In addressing cost containment pressures, the Company engages in public policy advocacy with policymakers and continues to work to demonstrate that its medicines provide value to patients and to those who pay for health care. The Company advocates with government policymakers to encourage a long-term approach to sustainable health care financing that ensures access to innovative medicines and does not disproportionately target pharmaceuticals as a source of budget savings. In markets with historically low rates of health care spending, the Company encourages those governments to increase their investments and adopt market reforms in order to improve their citizens’ access to appropriate health care, including medicines.
Operating conditions have become more challenging under the global pressures of competition, industry regulation and cost containment efforts. Although no one can predict the effect of these and other factors on the Company’s business, the Company continually takes measures to evaluate, adapt and improve the organization and its business practices to better meet customer needs and believes that it is well positionedwell-positioned to respond to the evolving health care environment and market forces.
The pharmaceutical industry is also subject to regulation by regional, country, state and local agencies around the world focused on standards and processes for determining drug safety and effectiveness, as well as conditions for sale or reimbursement.
Of particular importance is the FDA in the United States, which administers requirements covering the testing, approval, safety, effectiveness, manufacturing, labeling, and marketing of prescription pharmaceuticals. In some cases, the FDA requirements and practices have increased the amount of time and resources necessary to develop new products and bring them to market in the United States. At the same time, the FDA has committed to expediting the development and review of products bearing the “breakthrough therapy” designation, which appears to havehas accelerated the regulatory review process for medicines with this designation. The FDA has also undertaken efforts to bring generic competition to market more efficiently and in a more timely manner.

38


The EUEuropean Union (EU) has adopted directives and other legislation concerning the classification, labeling, advertising, wholesale distribution, integrity of the supply chain, enhanced pharmacovigilance monitoring and approval for marketing of medicinal products for human use. These provide mandatory standards throughout the EU, which may be supplemented or implemented with additional regulations by the EU member states. The Company’s policies and procedures are already consistent with the substance of these directives; consequently, it is believed that they will not have any material effect on the Company’s business.
The Company’s business in China has grown rapidly in the past few years, and the importance of China to the Company’s overall pharmaceutical and vaccines business has increased accordingly. Continued growth of the Company’s business in China is dependent upon ongoing development of a favorable environment for innovative pharmaceutical products and vaccines, sustained access for the Company’s current in-line products, and the absence

of trade impediments or adverse pricing controls. In recent years, the Chinese government has introduced and implemented a number of structural reforms to accelerate the shift to innovative products and reduce costs. Since 2017, there have been multiple new policies introduced by the government to improve access to new innovation, reduce the complexity of regulatory filings, and accelerate the review and approval process. This has led to a significant expansion of the new products being approved each year. Additionally, in 2017, the government updated the National Reimbursement Drug List for the first time in eight years. While the mechanism for drugs being added to the list evolves, it is likely that in the future, inclusion will require a price negotiation which could impact the outlook in the market for selected brands. While pricing pressure has always existed in China, health care reform has led to the acceleration of generic substitution, through a pilot tendering process for mature products that have generic substitutes with a Generic Quality Consistency Evaluation approval.
The Company believes that it will continue to be able to conduct its operations, including launching new drugs, in this regulatory environment. (See “Research and Development” below for a discussion of the regulatory approval process.)
Access to Medicines
As a global health care company, Merck’s primary role is to discover and develop innovative medicines and vaccines. The Company also recognizes that it has an important role to play in helping to improve access to its products around the world. The Company’s efforts in this regard are wide-ranging and include a set of principles that the Company strives to embed into its operations and business strategies to guide the Company’s worldwide approach to expanding access to health care. In addition, the Company has many far-reaching philanthropic programs. The Merck Patient Assistance Program provides medicines and adult vaccines for free to people in the United States who do not have prescription drug or health insurance coverage and who, without the Company’s assistance, cannot afford their Merck medicine and vaccines. In 2011, Merck launched “Merck for Mothers,” a long-term effort with global health partners to end preventable deaths from complications of pregnancy and childbirth. Merck has also provided funds to the Merck Foundation, an independent organization, which has partnered with a variety of organizations dedicated to improving global health.
Privacy and Data Protection
The Company is subject to a significant number of privacy and data protection laws and regulations globally, many of which place restrictions on the Company’s ability to transfer, access and use personal data across its business. The legislative and regulatory landscape for privacy and data protection continues to evolve. There has been increased attention to privacy and data protection issues in both developed and emerging markets with the potential to affect directly the Company’s business, including the new EU General Data Protection Regulation, which went into effect on May 25, 2018 and imposes penalties up to 4% of global revenue. Additional laws and regulations enacted in the United States, Europe, Asia and Latin America, increases enforcement and litigation activity in the United States and other developed markets, and increases regulatory cooperation among privacy authorities globally. The Company has adopted a comprehensive global privacy program to manage these evolving risks which has been certified as compliant with and approved by the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation Cross-Border Privacy Rules System, the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield Program, and the Binding Corporate Rules in the EU.
Distribution
The Company sells its human health pharmaceutical products primarily to drug wholesalers and retailers, hospitals, government agencies and managed health care providers, such as health maintenance organizations, pharmacy benefit managers and other institutions. Human health vaccines are sold primarily to physicians, wholesalers, physician distributors and government entities. The Company’s professional representatives communicate the effectiveness, safety and value of the Company’s pharmaceutical and vaccine products to health care professionals in private practice, group practices, hospitals and managed care organizations. The Company sells its animal health products to veterinarians, distributors and animal producers.
Raw Materials
Raw materials and supplies, which are generally available from multiple sources, are purchased worldwide and are normally available in quantities adequate to meet the needs of the Company’s business.

Patents, Trademarks and Licenses
Patent protection is considered, in the aggregate, to be of material importance to the Company’s marketing of its products in the United States and in most major foreign markets. Patents may cover products per se, pharmaceutical formulations, processes for or intermediates useful in the manufacture of products or the uses of products. Protection for individual products extends for varying periods in accordance with the legal life of patents in the various countries. The protection afforded, which may also vary from country to country, depends upon the type of patent and its scope of coverage.
The Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act includes a Pediatric Exclusivity Provision that may provide an additional six months of market exclusivity in the United States for indications of new or currently marketed drugs if certain agreed upon pediatric studies are completed by the applicant. Current U.S. patent law provides additional patent term for periods when the patented product was under regulatory review by the FDA. The EU also provides an additional six months of pediatric market exclusivity attached to a product’s Supplementary Protection Certificate (SPC). Japan provides the additional term for pediatric studies attached to market exclusivity unrelated to patent rights.
Patent portfolios developed for products introduced by the Company normally provide market exclusivity. The Company has the following key patent protection in the United States, the EU and Japan (including the potential for patent term extensions (PTE) and SPCs where indicated) for the following marketed products:

ProductYear of Expiration (U.S.)
Year of Expiration (EU)(1)
Year of Expiration (Japan)(3)
EmendExpired20192019
Emend for Injection
2019
2020(2)
2020
Noxafil20192019N/A
Vaxelis(4)
2020 (method of making)
2021(5) (SPCs)
Not Marketed
Januvia
2022(2)
2022(2)
2025-2026
Janumet
2022(2)
2023N/A
Janumet XR
2022(2)
N/AN/A
Isentress2024
2022(2)
2022
Simponi
N/A(6)
2025(7)
N/A(6)
Lenvima(8)
2025(2) (with pending PTE)
2021 (patents), 2026(2) (SPCs)
2026
Adempas(9)
2026(2)
2028(2)
2027-2028
Bridion
2026(2) (with pending PTE)
20232024
Nexplanon2027 (device)2025 (device)Not Marketed
Bravecto2027 (with pending PTE)2025 (patents), 2029 (SPCs)2029
Gardasil2028
2021(2)
Expired
Gardasil 9
2028
2025 (patents), 2030(2) (SPCs)
N/A
Keytruda2028
2028 (patents), 2030(2) (SPCs)
2032
Lynparza(10)
2028(2) (with pending PTE)
2024 (patents), 2029(2) (SPCs)
2028-2029 (with pending PTE)
Zerbaxa
2028(2) (with pending PTE)
2023 (patents), 2028(2) (SPCs)
N/A
Sivextro
2028(2)
2024 (patents), 2029(2) (SPCs)
2029 (with pending PTE)
Belsomra
2029(2)
N/A2031
Prevymis
2029(2) (with pending PTE)
2024 (patents), 2029(2) (SPCs)
2029 (with pending PTE)
Steglatro(11)
2031(2) (with pending PTE)
2029 (patents), 2034(2) (SPCs)
N/A
Steglujan(11)
2031 (with pending PTE)
2029 (patents), 2034 (SPCs)N/A
Segluromet(11)
2031 (with pending PTE)2029 (patents), 2034 (SPCs)N/A
Delstrigo2032 (with pending PTE)
2031(12)
N/A
Pifeltro2032 (with pending PTE)
2031(12)
N/A
N/A:Currently no marketing approval.
Note:Compound patent unless otherwise noted. Certain of the products listed may be the subject of patent litigation. See Item 8. “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data,” Note 11. “Contingencies and Environmental Liabilities” below.
(1)
The EU date represents the expiration date for the following five countries: France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the United Kingdom (Major EU Markets). If SPC applications have been filed but have not been granted in all Major EU Markets, both the patent expiry date and the SPC expiry date are listed.
(2)
Eligible for 6 months Pediatric Exclusivity.
(3)
The PTE system in Japan allows for a patent to be extended more than once provided the later approval is directed to a different indication from that of the previous approval. This may result in multiple PTE approvals for a given patent, each with its own expiration date.
(4)
Being commercialized in a U.S.-based joint partnership with Sanofi Pasteur.
(5)
SPCs are granted in four Major EU Markets and pending in one, based on a patent that expired in 2016.
(6)
The Company has no marketing rights in the U.S. and Japan.
(7)
Includes Pediatric Exclusivity, which is granted in four Major EU Markets and pending in one.
(8)
Being developed and commercialized in a global strategic oncology collaboration with Eisai.
(9)
Being commercialized in a worldwide collaboration with Bayer AG.
(10)
Being developed and commercialized in a global strategic oncology collaboration with AstraZeneca.
(11)
Being developed and promoted in a worldwide, except Japan, collaboration with Pfizer.
(12)
SPC applications to be filed by May 2019.

While the expiration of a product patent normally results in a loss of market exclusivity for the covered pharmaceutical product, commercial benefits may continue to be derived from: (i) later-granted patents on processes and intermediates related to the most economical method of manufacture of the active ingredient of such product; (ii) patents relating to the use of such product; (iii) patents relating to novel compositions and formulations; and (iv) in the United States and certain other countries, market exclusivity that may be available under relevant law. The effect of product patent expiration on pharmaceutical products also depends upon many other factors such as the nature of the market and the position of the product in it, the growth of the market, the complexities and economics of the process for manufacture of the active ingredient of the product and the requirements of new drug provisions of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act or similar laws and regulations in other countries.
Additions to market exclusivity are sought in the United States and other countries through all relevant laws, including laws increasing patent life. Some of the benefits of increases in patent life have been partially offset by an

increase in the number of incentives for and use of generic products. Additionally, improvements in intellectual property laws are sought in the United States and other countries through reform of patent and other relevant laws and implementation of international treaties.
The Company has the following key U.S. patent protection for drug candidates under review in the United States by the FDA. Additional patent term may be provided for these pipeline candidates based on Patent Term Restoration and Pediatric Exclusivity.
Under Review (in the U.S.)
Currently Anticipated
Year of Expiration (in the U.S.)
V920 (ebola vaccine)2023
MK-7655A (relebactam + imipenem/cilastatin)2029
The Company also has the following key U.S. patent protection for drug candidates in Phase 3 development:
Phase 3 Drug Candidate
Currently Anticipated
Year of Expiration (in the U.S.)
MK-1242 (vericiguat)(1)
2031
MK-7264 (gefapixant)2027
V114 (pneumoconjugate vaccine)2031
(1)
Being developed in a worldwide clinical development collaboration with Bayer AG.
Unless otherwise noted, the patents in the above charts are compound patents. Each patent is subject to any future patent term restoration of up to five years and six month pediatric market exclusivity, either or both of which may be available. In addition, depending on the circumstances surrounding any final regulatory approval of the compound, there may be other listed patents or patent applications pending that could have relevance to the product as finally approved; the relevance of any such application would depend upon the claims that ultimately may be granted and the nature of the final regulatory approval of the product. Also, regulatory exclusivity tied to the protection of clinical data is complementary to patent protection and, in some cases, may provide more effective or longer lasting marketing exclusivity than a compound’s patent estate. In the United States, the data protection generally runs five years from first marketing approval of a new chemical entity, extended to seven years for an orphan drug indication and 12 years from first marketing approval of a biological product.
For further information with respect to the Company’s patents, see Item 1A. “Risk Factors” and Item 8. “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data,” Note 11. “Contingencies and Environmental Liabilities” below.
Worldwide, all of the Company’s important products are sold under trademarks that are considered in the aggregate to be of material importance. Trademark protection continues in some countries as long as used; in other countries, as long as registered. Registration is for fixed terms and can be renewed indefinitely.
Royalty income in 2018 on patent and know-how licenses and other rights amounted to $135 million. Merck also incurred royalty expenses amounting to $1.3 billion in 2018 under patent and know-how licenses it holds.
Research and Development
The Company’s business is characterized by the introduction of new products or new uses for existing products through a strong research and development program. At December 31, 2018, approximately 14,500 people were employed in the Company’s research activities. The Company prioritizes its research and development efforts and focuses on candidates that it believes represent breakthrough science that will make a difference for patients and payers.
The Company maintains a number of long-term exploratory and fundamental research programs in biology and chemistry as well as research programs directed toward product development. The Company’s research and development model is designed to increase productivity and improve the probability of success by prioritizing the Company’s research and development resources on candidates the Company believes are capable of providing unambiguous, promotable advantages to patients and payers and delivering the maximum value of its approved medicines and vaccines through new indications and new formulations. Merck is pursuing emerging product opportunities independent of therapeutic area or modality (small molecule, biologics and vaccines) and is building its biologics capabilities. The Company is committed to ensuring that externally sourced programs remain an important

component of its pipeline strategy, with a focus on supplementing its internal research with a licensing and external alliance strategy focused on the entire spectrum of collaborations from early research to late-stage compounds, as well as access to new technologies.
The Company also reviews its pipeline to examine candidates that may provide more value through out-licensing. The Company continues to evaluate certain late-stage clinical development and platform technology assets to determine their out-licensing or sale potential.
The Company’s clinical pipeline includes candidates in multiple disease areas, including cancer, cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, infectious diseases, neurosciences, obesity, pain, respiratory diseases, and vaccines.
In the development of human health products, industry practice and government regulations in the United States and most foreign countries provide for the determination of effectiveness and safety of new chemical compounds through preclinical tests and controlled clinical evaluation. Before a new drug or vaccine may be marketed in the United States, recorded data on preclinical and clinical experience are included in the New Drug Application (NDA) for a drug or the Biologics License Application (BLA) for a vaccine or biologic submitted to the FDA for the required approval.
Once the Company’s scientists discover a new small molecule compound or biologic that they believe has promise to treat a medical condition, the Company commences preclinical testing with that compound. Preclinical testing includes laboratory testing and animal safety studies to gather data on chemistry, pharmacology, immunogenicity and toxicology. Pending acceptable preclinical data, the Company will initiate clinical testing in accordance with established regulatory requirements. The clinical testing begins with Phase 1 studies, which are designed to assess safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary pharmacodynamic activity of the compound in humans. If favorable, additional, larger Phase 2 studies are initiated to determine the efficacy of the compound in the affected population, define appropriate dosing for the compound, as well as identify any adverse effects that could limit the compound’s usefulness. In some situations, the clinical program incorporates adaptive design methodology to use accumulating data to decide how to modify aspects of the ongoing clinical study as it continues, without undermining the validity and integrity of the trial. One type of adaptive clinical trial is an adaptive Phase 2a/2b trial design, a two-stage trial design consisting of a Phase 2a proof-of-concept stage and a Phase 2b dose-optimization finding stage. If data from the Phase 2 trials are satisfactory, the Company commences large-scale Phase 3 trials to confirm the compound’s efficacy and safety. Another type of adaptive clinical trial is an adaptive Phase 2/3 trial design, a study that includes an interim analysis and an adaptation that changes the trial from having features common in a Phase 2 study (e.g. multiple dose groups) to a design similar to a Phase 3 trial. An adaptive Phase 2/3 trial design reduces timelines by eliminating activities which would be required to start a separate study. Upon completion of Phase 3 trials, if satisfactory, the Company submits regulatory filings with the appropriate regulatory agencies around the world to have the product candidate approved for marketing. There can be no assurance that a compound that is the result of any particular program will obtain the regulatory approvals necessary for it to be marketed.
Vaccine development follows the same general pathway as for drugs. Preclinical testing focuses on the vaccine’s safety and ability to elicit a protective immune response (immunogenicity). Pre-marketing vaccine clinical trials are typically done in three phases. Initial Phase 1 clinical studies are conducted in normal subjects to evaluate the safety, tolerability and immunogenicity of the vaccine candidate. Phase 2 studies are dose-ranging studies. Finally, Phase 3 trials provide the necessary data on effectiveness and safety. If successful, the Company submits regulatory filings with the appropriate regulatory agencies.
In the United States, the FDA review process begins once a complete NDA or BLA is submitted, received and accepted for review by the agency. Within 60 days after receipt, the FDA determines if the application is sufficiently complete to permit a substantive review. The FDA also assesses, at that time, whether the application will be granted a priority review or standard review. Pursuant to the Prescription Drug User Fee Act V (PDUFA), the FDA review period target for NDAs or original BLAs is either six months, for priority review, or ten months, for a standard review, from the time the application is deemed sufficiently complete. Once the review timelines are determined, the FDA will generally act upon the application within those timelines, unless a major amendment has been submitted (either at the Company’s own initiative or the FDA’s request) to the pending application. If this occurs, the FDA may extend the review period to allow for review of the new information, but by no more than three months. Extensions to the review period are communicated to the Company. The FDA can act on an application either by issuing an approval letter or by issuing a Complete Response Letter (CRL) stating that the application will not be approved in its present form and describing all deficiencies that the FDA has identified. Should the Company wish to pursue an application after receiving

a CRL, it can resubmit the application with information that addresses the questions or issues identified by the FDA in order to support approval. Resubmissions are subject to review period targets, which vary depending on the underlying submission type and the content of the resubmission.
The FDA has four program designations — Fast Track, Breakthrough Therapy, Accelerated Approval, and Priority Review — to facilitate and expedite development and review of new drugs to address unmet medical needs in the treatment of serious or life-threatening conditions. The Fast Track designation provides pharmaceutical manufacturers with opportunities for frequent interactions with FDA reviewers during the product’s development and the ability for the manufacturer to do a rolling submission of the NDA/BLA. A rolling submission allows completed portions of the application to be submitted and reviewed by the FDA on an ongoing basis. The Breakthrough Therapy designation provides manufacturers with all of the features of the Fast Track designation as well as intensive guidance on implementing an efficient development program for the product and a commitment by the FDA to involve senior managers and experienced staff in the review. The Accelerated Approval designation allows the FDA to approve a product based on an effect on a surrogate or intermediate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict a product’s clinical benefit and generally requires the manufacturer to conduct required post-approval confirmatory trials to verify the clinical benefit. The Priority Review designation means that the FDA’s goal is to take action on the NDA/BLA within six months, compared to ten months under standard review.
In addition, under the Generating Antibiotic Incentives Now Act, the FDA may grant Qualified Infectious Disease Product (QIDP) status to antibacterial or antifungal drugs intended to treat serious or life threatening infections including those caused by antibiotic or antifungal resistant pathogens, novel or emerging infectious pathogens, or other qualifying pathogens. QIDP designation offers certain incentives for development of qualifying drugs, including Priority Review of the NDA when filed, eligibility for Fast Track designation, and a five-year extension of applicable exclusivity provisions under the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act.
The primary method the Company uses to obtain marketing authorization of pharmaceutical products in the EU is through the “centralized procedure.” This procedure is compulsory for certain pharmaceutical products, in particular those using biotechnological processes, and is also available for certain new chemical compounds and products. A company seeking to market an innovative pharmaceutical product through the centralized procedure must file a complete set of safety data and efficacy data as part of a Marketing Authorization Application (MAA) with the European Medicines Agency (EMA). After the EMA evaluates the MAA, it provides a recommendation to the EC and the EC then approves or denies the MAA. It is also possible for new chemical products to obtain marketing authorization in the EU through a “mutual recognition procedure” in which an application is made to a single member state and, if the member state approves the pharmaceutical product under a national procedure, the applicant may submit that approval to the mutual recognition procedure of some or all other member states.
Outside of the United States and the EU, the Company submits marketing applications to national regulatory authorities. Examples of such are the Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency in Japan, Health Canada, Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanatária in Brazil, Korea Food and Drug Administration in South Korea, Therapeutic Goods Administration in Australia and China Food and Drug Administration. Each country has a separate and independent review process and timeline. In many markets, approval times can be longer as the regulatory authority requires approval in a major market, such as the United States or the EU, and issuance of a Certificate of Pharmaceutical Product from that market before initiating their local review process.
Research and Development Update
The Company currently has several candidates under regulatory review in the United States and internationally.
Keytruda is an approved anti-PD-1 therapy in clinical development for expanded indications in different cancer types.
In February 2019, the FDA accepted and granted Priority Review for a supplemental BLA for Keytruda in combination with Inlyta (axitinib), a tyrosine kinase inhibitor, for the first-line treatment of patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. This supplemental BLA is based on findings from the Phase 3 KEYNOTE-426 trial, which demonstrated that Keytruda in combination with axitinib, as compared to sunitinib, significantly improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in the first-line treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma. These data were presented at the American Society for Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Genitourinary Cancers Symposium in

February 2019. The supplemental BLA also included supporting data from the Phase 1b KEYNOTE-035 trial. The FDA set a PDUFA date of June 20, 2019. Merck has filed data from KEYNOTE-426 with regulatory authorities worldwide.
In February 2019, the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use of the EMA adopted a positive opinion recommending Keytruda, in combination with carboplatin and either paclitaxel or nab-paclitaxel, for the first-line treatment of metastatic squamous NSCLC in adults. This recommendation is based on results from the pivotal Phase 3 KEYNOTE-407 trial, which enrolled patients regardless of PD-L1 tumor expression status. The trial showed a significant improvement in OS and PFS for patients taking Keytruda in combination with chemotherapy (carboplatin and either paclitaxel or nab-paclitaxel) compared with chemotherapy alone. If approved, this would mark the first approval in Europe for an anti-PD-1 therapy in combination with chemotherapy for adults with metastatic squamous NSCLC. In October 2018, the FDA approved Keytruda in combination with carboplatin-paclitaxel or nab-paclitaxel as a first-line treatment for metastatic squamous NSCLC, regardless of PD-L1 expression.
In December 2018, the FDA extended the action date for the supplemental BLA seeking approval for Keytruda as monotherapy for the first-line treatment of locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC in patients whose tumors express PD-L1 (TPS ≥1%) without EGFR or ALK genomic tumor aberrations. The supplemental BLA is based on results of the Phase 3 KEYNOTE-042 trial where Keytruda monotherapy demonstrated a significant improvement in OS compared with chemotherapy in this patient population. The Company submitted additional data and analyses to the FDA, which constituted a major amendment and extended the PDUFA date by three months to April 11, 2019. Merck continues to work closely with the FDA during the review of this supplemental BLA.
In February 2019, the FDA accepted and granted Priority Review for a supplemental BLA for Keytruda as monotherapy for the treatment of patients with advanced small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) whose disease has progressed after two or more lines of prior therapy. This supplemental BLA, which is seeking accelerated approval for this new indication, is based on data from the SCLC cohorts of the Phase 2 KEYNOTE-158 and Phase 1b KEYNOTE-028 trials. The FDA set a PDUFA date of June 17, 2019. Keytruda is also being studied in combination with chemotherapy in the ongoing Phase 3 KEYNOTE-604 study in patients with newly diagnosed extensive stage SCLC.
In February 2019, the FDA accepted a supplemental BLA for Keytruda as monotherapy or in combination with platinum and 5-fluorouracil chemotherapy for the first-line treatment of patients with recurrent or metastatic HNSCC. This supplemental BLA is based in part on data from the pivotal Phase 3 KEYNOTE-048 trial where Keytruda demonstrated a significant improvement in OS compared with the standard of care, as monotherapy in patients whose tumors expressed PD-L1 with Combined Positive Score (CPS)≥20 and CPS≥1 and in combination with chemotherapy in the total patient population. These data were presented at the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) 2018 Congress. The FDA granted Priority Review to the supplemental BLA and set a PDUFA date of June 10, 2019. KEYNOTE-048 also serves as the confirmatory trial for KEYNOTE-012, a Phase 1b study which supported the previous accelerated approval for Keytruda as monotherapy for the treatment of patients with recurrent or metastatic HNSCC with disease progression on or after platinum-containing chemotherapy.
In November 2018, Merck announced that the Phase 3 KEYNOTE-181 trial investigating Keytruda as monotherapy in the second-line treatment of advanced or metastatic esophageal or esophagogastric junction carcinoma met a primary endpoint of OS in patients whose tumors expressed PD-L1 (CPS ≥10). In this pivotal study, treatment with Keytruda resulted in a statistically significant improvement in OS compared to chemotherapy (paclitaxel, docetaxel or irinotecan) in patients with CPS ≥10, regardless of histology. The primary endpoint of OS was also evaluated in patients with squamous cell histology and in the entire intention-to-treat study population. While directionally favorable, statistical significance for OS was not met in these two patient groups. Per the statistical analysis plan, the key secondary endpoints of PFS and objective response rate (ORR) were not formally tested, as OS was not reached in the full intention-to-treat study population. These results were presented in January 2019 at the ASCO Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium and have been submitted for regulatory review.
Additionally, Keytruda has received Breakthrough Therapy designation from the FDA for the treatment of high-risk early-stage triple-negative breast cancer in combination with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The FDA’s Breakthrough Therapy designation is intended to expedite the development and review of a candidate that is planned for use, alone or in combination, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition when preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the drug may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints.

In October 2018, Merck announced the first presentation of results from an interim analysis of KEYNOTE-057, a Phase 2 trial evaluating Keytruda for previously treated patients with high-risk non-muscle invasive bladder cancer. An interim analysis of the study’s primary endpoint showed a complete response rate of nearly 40% at three months with Keytruda in patients whose disease was unresponsive to Bacillus Calmette-Guérin therapy, the current standard of care for this disease, and who were ineligible for or who refused to undergo radical cystectomy. These results, as well as other study findings, were presented at the ESMO 2018 Congress.
In February 2019, Merck announced that the pivotal Phase 3 KEYNOTE-240 trial evaluating Keytruda, plus best supportive care, for the treatment of patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma who were previously treated with systemic therapy, did not meet its co-primary endpoints of OS and PFS compared with placebo plus best supportive care. In the final analysis of the study, there was an improvement in OS for patients treated with Keytruda compared to placebo, however these OS results did not meet statistical significance per the pre-specified statistical plan. Results for PFS were also directionally favorable in the Keytruda arm compared with placebo but did not reach statistical significance. The key secondary endpoint of ORR was not formally tested, since superiority was not reached for OS or PFS. Results will be presented at an upcoming medical meeting and have been shared with the FDA for discussion.
The Keytruda clinical development program consists of more than 900 clinical trials, including more than 600 trials that combine Keytruda with other cancer treatments. These studies encompass more than 30 cancer types including: bladder, cervical, colorectal, esophageal, gastric, head and neck, hepatocellular, Hodgkin lymphoma, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, melanoma, mesothelioma, nasopharyngeal, NSCLC, ovarian, PMBCL, prostate, renal, small-cell lung and triple-negative breast, many of which are currently in Phase 3 clinical development. Further trials are being planned for other cancers.
Lynparza, is an oral PARP inhibitor currently approved for certain types of ovarian and breast cancer. In July 2017, Merck and AstraZeneca entered into a global strategic oncology collaboration to co-develop and co-commercialize AstraZeneca’s Lynparza for multiple cancer types.
In April 2018, Merck and AstraZeneca announced that the EMA validated for review the MAA for Lynparza for use in patients with deleterious or suspected deleterious BRCA-mutated, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer who have been previously treated with chemotherapy in the neoadjuvant, adjuvant or metastatic setting. This was the first regulatory submission for a PARP inhibitor in breast cancer in Europe.
Lynparza tablets are also under review in the EU as a maintenance treatment in patients with newly-diagnosed, BRCA-mutated advanced ovarian cancer who were in complete or partial response following first-line standard platinum-based chemotherapy. This submission was based on positive results from the pivotal Phase 3 SOLO-1 trial. The trial showed a statistically-significant and clinically-meaningful improvement in PFS for Lynparza compared to placebo, reducing the risk of disease progression or death by 70% in patients with newly-diagnosed, BRCA-mutated advanced ovarian cancer who were in complete or partial response to platinum-based chemotherapy.
In December 2018, Merck and AstraZeneca announced positive results from the randomized, open-label, controlled, Phase 3 SOLO-3 trial of Lynparza tablets in patients with relapsed ovarian cancer after two or more lines of treatment. The trial was conducted as a post-approval commitment in agreement with the FDA. Results from the trial showed BRCA-mutated advanced ovarian cancer patients treated with Lynparza following two or more prior lines of chemotherapy demonstrated a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in the primary endpoint of ORR and the key secondary endpoint of PFS compared to chemotherapy. Merck and AstraZeneca plan to discuss these results with the FDA.
MK-7655A is a combination of relebactam, an investigational beta-lactamase inhibitor, and imipenem/cilastatin (an approved carbapenem antibiotic). In February 2019, Merck announced that the FDA accepted for Priority Review an NDA for MK-7655A for the treatment of complicated urinary tract infections and complicated intra-abdominal infections caused by certain susceptible Gram-negative bacteria in adults with limited or no alternative therapies available. The PDUFA date is July 16, 2019. In April 2018, Merck announced that a pivotal Phase 3 study of MK-7655A demonstrated a favorable overall response in the treatment of certain imipenem-non-susceptible bacterial infections, the primary endpoint, with lower treatment-emergent nephrotoxicity (kidney toxicity), a secondary endpoint, compared to a colistin (colistimethate sodium) plus imipenem/cilastatin regimen. The FDA had previously designated this combination a Qualified Infectious Disease Product with designated Fast Track status for the treatment of hospital-

acquired bacterial pneumonia, ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia, complicated intra-abdominal infections and complicated urinary tract infections.
V920 (rVSV∆G-ZEBOV-GP, live attenuated), is an investigational Ebola Zaire disease vaccine candidate being studied in large scale Phase 2/3 clinical trials. In December 2015, Merck announced that the application for Emergency Use Assessment and Listing (EUAL) for V920 was accepted for review by the World Health Organization (WHO). According to the WHO, the EUAL process is designed to expedite the availability of vaccines needed for public health emergencies such as another outbreak of Ebola. The WHO decision to grant V920 EUAL status will be based on data regarding quality, safety, and efficacy/effectiveness; as well as a risk/benefit analysis for emergency use. While EUAL designation allows for emergency use, the vaccine remains investigational and has not yet been licensed for commercial distribution. In July 2016, Merck announced that the FDA granted V920 Breakthrough Therapy designation, and that the EMA granted the vaccine candidate PRIME (PRIority MEdicines) status. In November 2018, Merck announced that it has started the submission of a rolling BLA to the FDA for V920. This rolling submission was made pursuant to the FDA’s Breakthrough Therapy designation. Merck expects the rolling submission of the BLA to be completed in 2019. The Company also intends to file V920 with the EMA in 2019.
In February 2019, Merck announced that the FDA accepted for Priority Review a supplemental NDA for Zerbaxa to treat adult patients with nosocomial pneumonia, including ventilator-associated pneumonia, caused by certain susceptible Gram-negative microorganisms. The PDUFA date is June 3, 2019. Zerbaxa is also under review for this indication by the EMA. Zerbaxa is currently approved in the United States for the treatment of adult patients with complicated urinary tract infections caused by certain susceptible Gram-negative microorganisms, and is also indicated, in combination with metronidazole, for the treatment of adult patients with complicated intra-abdominal infections caused by certain susceptible Gram-negative and Gram-positive microorganisms.
In addition to the candidates under regulatory review, the Company has several drug candidates in Phase 3 clinical development in addition to the Keytruda programs discussed above.
MK-7264, gefapixant, is a selective, non-narcotic, orally-administered P2X3-receptor agonist being investigated in Phase 3 trials for the treatment of refractory, chronic cough and in a Phase 2 trial for the treatment of women with endometriosis-related pain.
Lenvima, is an orally available tyrosine kinase inhibitor currently approved for certain types of thyroid cancer, hepatocellular carcinoma, and in combination for certain patients with renal cell carcinoma. In March 2018, Merck and Eisai entered into a strategic collaboration for the worldwide co-development and co-commercialization of Lenvima. Under the agreement, Merck and Eisai will develop and commercialize Lenvima jointly, both as monotherapy and in combination with Keytruda. Per the agreement, the companies will jointly initiate clinical studies evaluating the Keytruda/Lenvima combination to support 11 potential indications in six types of cancer (endometrial cancer, NSCLC, hepatocellular carcinoma, head and neck cancer, bladder cancer and melanoma), as well as a basket trial targeting multiple cancer types. The FDA granted Breakthrough Therapy designation for Keytruda in combination with Lenvima for the potential treatment of patients with advanced and/or metastatic renal cell carcinoma and for the potential treatment of certain patients with advanced and/or metastatic non-microsatellite instability high/proficient mismatch repair endometrial carcinoma.
MK-1242, vericiguat, is an investigational treatment for heart failure being studied in patients suffering from chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fracture (Phase 3 clinical trial) and from chronic heart failure with preserved ejection fracture (Phase 2 clinical trial). The development of vericiguat is part of a worldwide strategic collaboration between Merck and Bayer.
V114 is an investigational polyvalent conjugate vaccine for the prevention of pneumococcal disease. In June 2018, Merck initiated the first Phase 3 study in the adult population for the prevention of invasive pneumococcal disease. Currently five Phase 3 adult studies are ongoing, including studies in healthy adults 50 years of age or older, adults with risk factors for pneumococcal disease, those infected with HIV, and those who are recipients of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant. In October 2018, Merck began the first Phase 3 study in the pediatric population. Currently, three studies are ongoing, including studies in healthy infants and in children afflicted with sickle cell disease. In January 2019, Merck announced that V114 received Breakthrough Therapy designation from the FDA for the prevention of invasive pneumococcal disease caused by the vaccine serotypes in pediatric patients 6 weeks to 18 years of age.

As a result of changes in the herpes zoster vaccine environment, Merck is ending development of V212, its investigational vaccine for the prevention of shingles in immunocompromised patients.
The chart below reflects the Company’s research pipeline as of February 22, 2019. Candidates shown in Phase 3 include specific products and the date such candidate entered into Phase 3 development. Candidates shown in Phase 2 include the most advanced compound with a specific mechanism or, if listed compounds have the same mechanism, they are each currently intended for commercialization in a given therapeutic area. Small molecules and biologics are given MK-number designations and vaccine candidates are given V-number designations. Except as otherwise noted, candidates in Phase 1, additional indications in the same therapeutic area (other than with respect to cancer and certain other indications) and additional claims, line extensions or formulations for in-line products are not shown.
Phase 2Phase 3 (Phase 3 Entry Date)Under Review
CancerCancerNew Molecular Entities/Vaccines
MK-3475 Keytruda
MK-3475 Keytruda
Bacterial Infection
Advanced Solid TumorsBreast (October 2015)MK-7655A relebactam+imipenem/cilastatin
Cutaneous Squamous Cell CarcinomaCervical (October 2018) (EU)(U.S.)
ProstateColorectal (November 2015)Ebola Vaccine
MK-7902 Lenvima(1)
Esophageal (December 2015)
V920(4) (U.S.)
Biliary TractGastric (May 2015) (EU)
Non-Small-Cell LungHepatocellular (May 2016) (EU)Certain Supplemental Filings
V937 Cavatak
Mesothelioma (May 2018)Cancer
MelanomaNasopharyngeal (April 2016)
MK-3475 Keytruda
MK-7690Ovarian (December 2018)
    First-Line Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma
Colorectal(2)
Renal (October 2016) (EU)(KEYNOTE-426) (U.S.)
MK-7339 Lynparza(1)
Small-Cell Lung (May 2017) (EU)
First-Line Metastatic Squamous Non-Small-
Advanced Solid Tumors
MK-7902 Lenvima(1,2)
Cell Lung Cancer (KEYNOTE-407) (EU)
Cytomegalovirus VaccineEndometrial (June 2018)
First-Line Metastatic Non-Small-Cell Lung
V160
MK-7339 Lynparza(1)
Cancer (KEYNOTE-042) (U.S.) (EU)
Diabetes MellitusPancreatic (December 2014)
    Third-Line Advanced Small-Cell Lung
MK-8521(3)
Prostate (April 2017)Cancer (KEYNOTE-158) (U.S.)
HIV-1 InfectionCough
First-Line Head and Neck Cancer
MK-8591MK-7264 (gefapixant) (March 2018)(KEYNOTE-048) (U.S.)
Pediatric Neurofibromatosis Type-1Heart Failure
    Alternative Dosing Regimen
MK-5618 (selumetinib)(1)
MK-1242 (vericiguat) (September 2016)(1)
(Q6W) (EU)
Respiratory Syncytial VirusPneumoconjugate Vaccine
MK-7339 Lynparza(1)
MK-1654V114 (June 2018)
Second-Line Metastatic Breast Cancer (EU)
Schizophrenia
First-Line Advanced Ovarian Cancer (EU)
MK-8189
HABP/VABP(5)
MK-7625A Zerbaxa (U.S.)
Footnotes:
(1)     Being developed in a collaboration.
(2)     Being developed in combination with
Keytruda.
(3)    Development is currently on hold.
(4)    Rolling submission.
(5)    HABP - Hospital-Acquired Bacterial
Pneumonia / VABP - Ventilator-Associated
Bacterial Pneumonia

Employees
As of December 31, 2018, the Company had approximately 69,000 employees worldwide, with approximately 25,400 employed in the United States, including Puerto Rico. Approximately 30% of worldwide employees of the Company are represented by various collective bargaining groups.
Restructuring Activities
In 2010 and 2013, the Company commenced actions under global restructuring programs designed to streamline its cost structure. The actions under these programs include the elimination of positions in sales, administrative and headquarters organizations, as well as the sale or closure of certain manufacturing and research and

development sites and the consolidation of office facilities. The Company also continues to reduce its global real estate footprint and improve the efficiency of its manufacturing and supply network. Since inception of the programs through December 31, 2018, Merck has eliminated approximately 45,510 positions comprised of employee separations, as well as the elimination of contractors and vacant positions. The Company has substantially completed the actions under these programs.
Environmental Matters
The Company believes that there are no compliance issues associated with applicable environmental laws and regulations that would have a material adverse effect on the Company. The Company is also remediating environmental contamination resulting from past industrial activity at certain of its sites. Expenditures for remediation and environmental liabilities were $16 million in 2018, and are estimated at $57 million in the aggregate for the years 2019 through 2023. These amounts do not consider potential recoveries from other parties. The Company has taken an active role in identifying and accruing for these costs and, in management’s opinion, the liabilities for all environmental matters that are probable and reasonably estimable have been accrued and totaled $71 million and $82 million at December 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively. Although it is not possible to predict with certainty the outcome of these matters, or the ultimate costs of remediation, management does not believe that any reasonably possible expenditures that may be incurred in excess of the liabilities accrued should exceed $60 million in the aggregate. Management also does not believe that these expenditures should have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial position, results of operations, liquidity or capital resources for any year.
Merck believes that climate change could present risks to its business. Some of the potential impacts of climate change to its business include increased operating costs due to additional regulatory requirements, physical risks to the Company’s facilities, water limitations and disruptions to its supply chain. These potential risks are integrated into the Company’s business planning including investment in reducing energy, water use and greenhouse gas emissions. The Company does not believe these risks are material to its business at this time.
Geographic Area Information
The Company’s operations outside the United States are conducted primarily through subsidiaries. Sales worldwide by subsidiaries outside the United States as a percentage of total Company sales were 57% of sales in 2018, 57% of sales in 2017 and 54% of sales in 2016.
The Company’s worldwide business is subject to risks of currency fluctuations, governmental actions and other governmental proceedings abroad. The Company does not regard these risks as a deterrent to further expansion of its operations abroad. However, the Company closely reviews its methods of operations and adopts strategies responsive to changing economic and political conditions.
Merck has operations in countries located in Latin America, the Middle East, Africa, Eastern Europe and Asia Pacific. Business in these developing areas, while sometimes less stable, offers important opportunities for growth over time.
Available Information
The Company’s Internet website address is www.merck.com. The Company will make available, free of charge at the “Investors” portion of its website, its Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K, and all amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, as soon as reasonably practicable after such reports are electronically filed with, or furnished to, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The address of that website is http://www.sec.gov. In addition, the Company will provide without charge a copy of its Annual Report on Form 10-K, including financial statements and schedules, upon the written request of any shareholder to the Office of the Secretary, Merck & Co., Inc., 2000 Galloping Hill Road, K1-4157, Kenilworth, NJ 07033 U.S.A.
The Company’s corporate governance guidelines and the charters of the Board of Directors’ four standing committees are available on the Company’s website at www.merck.com/about/leadership and all such information is available in print to any shareholder who requests it from the Company.

Item 1A.Risk Factors.
Investors should carefully consider all of the information set forth in this Form 10-K, including the following risk factors, before deciding to invest in any of the Company’s securities. The risks below are not the only ones the Company faces. Additional risks not currently known to the Company or that the Company presently deems immaterial may also impair its business operations. The Company’s business, financial condition, results of operations or prospects could be materially adversely affected by any of these risks. This Form 10-K also contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. The Company’s results could materially differ from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of certain factors, including the risks it faces described below and elsewhere. See “Cautionary Factors that May Affect Future Results” below.
The Company is dependent on its patent rights, and if its patent rights are invalidated or circumvented, its business would be adversely affected.
Patent protection is considered, in the aggregate, to be of material importance to the Company’s marketing of human health and animal health products in the United States and in most major foreign markets. Patents covering products that it has introduced normally provide market exclusivity, which is important for the successful marketing and sale of its products. The Company seeks patents covering each of its products in each of the markets where it intends to sell the products and where meaningful patent protection is available.
Even if the Company succeeds in obtaining patents covering its products, third parties or government authorities may challenge or seek to invalidate or circumvent its patents and patent applications. It is important for the Company’s business to defend successfully the patent rights that provide market exclusivity for its products. The Company is often involved in patent disputes relating to challenges to its patents or claims by third parties of infringement against the Company. The Company defends its patents both within and outside the United States, including by filing claims of infringement against other parties. See Item 8. “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data,” Note 11. “Contingencies and Environmental Liabilities” below. In particular, manufacturers of generic pharmaceutical products from time to time file abbreviated NDAs with the FDA seeking to market generic forms of the Company’s products prior to the expiration of relevant patents owned or licensed by the Company. The Company normally responds by defending its patent, including by filing lawsuits alleging patent infringement. Patent litigation and other challenges to the Company’s patents are costly and unpredictable and may deprive the Company of market exclusivity for a patented product or, in some cases, third-party patents may prevent the Company from marketing and selling a product in a particular geographic area.
Additionally, certain foreign governments have indicated that compulsory licenses to patents may be granted in the case of national emergencies or in other circumstances, which could diminish or eliminate sales and profits from those regions and negatively affect the Company’s results of operations. Further, court decisions relating to other companies’ patents, potential legislation relating to patents, as well as regulatory initiatives may result in a more general weakening of intellectual property protection.
If one or more important products lose patent protection in profitable markets, sales of those products are likely to decline significantly as a result of generic versions of those products becoming available. The Company’s results of operations may be adversely affected by the lost sales unless and until the Company has successfully launched commercially successful replacement products. In addition, if products that were measured at fair value and capitalized in connection with acquisitions experience difficulties in the market that negatively affect product cash flows, the Company may recognize material non-cash impairment charges with respect to the value of those products.
A chart listing the patent protection for certain of the Company’s marketed products, and U.S. patent protection for candidates under review and in Phase 3 clinical development is set forth above in Item 1. “Business — Patents, Trademarks and Licenses.”
As the Company’s products lose market exclusivity, the Company generally experiences a significant and rapid loss of sales from those products.
The Company depends upon patents to provide it with exclusive marketing rights for its products for some period of time. Loss of patent protection for one of the Company’s products typically leads to a significant and rapid loss of sales for that product as lower priced generic versions of that drug become available. In the case of products that contribute significantly to the Company’s sales, the loss of market exclusivity can have a material adverse effect

on the Company’s business, cash flow, results of operations, financial position and prospects. For example, pursuant to an agreement with a generic manufacturer, that manufacturer launched in the United States a generic version of Zetia in December 2016. In addition, the Company lost U.S. patent protection for Vytorin in April 2017. As a result, the Company experienced a significant and rapid loss of sales of Zetia and Vytorin in the United States in 2017, which continued in 2018. Furthermore, the patents that provide U.S. and EU market exclusivity for Noxafil will expire in July 2019 and December 2019, respectively, and the Company anticipates a significant decline in U.S. and EU Noxafil sales thereafter.
Key products generate a significant amount of the Company’s profits and cash flows, and any events that adversely affect the markets for its leading products could have a material and negative impact on results of operations and cash flows.
The Company’s ability to generate profits and operating cash flow depends largely upon the continued profitability of the Company’s key products, such as Keytruda,Januvia, Janumet, Gardasil/Gardasil 9and Bridion. As a result of the Company’s dependence on key products, any event that adversely affects any of these products or the markets for any of these products could have a significant adverse impact on results of operations and cash flows. These events could include loss of patent protection, increased costs associated with manufacturing, generic or over-the-counter availability of the Company’s product or a competitive product, the discovery of previously unknown side effects, results of post-approval trials, increased competition from the introduction of new, more effective treatments and discontinuation or removal from the market of the product for any reason. Such events could have a material adverse effect on the sales of any such products.
For example, in 2018, sales of Zepatier were materially unfavorably affected by increasing competition and declining patient volumes. Sales of Zostavax were also materially unfavorably affected due to competition. The Company expects that competition will continue to adversely affect the sales of these products.
The Company’s research and development efforts may not succeed in developing commercially successful products and the Company may not be able to acquire commercially successful products in other ways; in consequence, the Company may not be able to replace sales of successful products that have lost patent protection.
Like other major pharmaceutical companies, in order to remain competitive, the Company must continue to launch new products. Expected declines in sales of products after the loss of market exclusivity mean that the Company’s future success is dependent on its pipeline of new products, including new products that it may develop through collaborations and joint ventures and products that it is able to obtain through license or acquisition. To accomplish this, the Company commits substantial effort, funds and other resources to research and development, both through its own dedicated resources and through various collaborations with third parties. There is a high rate of failure inherent in the research and development process for new drugs. As a result, there is a high risk that funds invested by the Company in research programs will not generate financial returns. This risk profile is compounded by the fact that this research has a long investment cycle. To bring a pharmaceutical compound from the discovery phase to market may take a decade or more and failure can occur at any point in the process, including later in the process after significant funds have been invested.
For a description of the research and development process, see Item 1. “Business — Research and Development” above. Each phase of testing is highly regulated and during each phase there is a substantial risk that the Company will encounter serious obstacles or will not achieve its goals, therefore, the Company may abandon a product in which it has invested substantial amounts of time and resources. Some of the risks encountered in the research and development process include the following: pre-clinical testing of a new compound may yield disappointing results; competing products from other manufacturers may reach the market first; clinical trials of a new drug may not be successful; a new drug may not be effective or may have harmful side effects; a new drug may not be approved by the regulators for its intended use; it may not be possible to obtain a patent for a new drug; payers may refuse to cover or reimburse the new product; or sales of a new product may be disappointing.
The Company cannot state with certainty when or whether any of its products now under development will be approved or launched; whether it will be able to develop, license or otherwise acquire compounds, product candidates or products; or whether any products, once launched, will be commercially successful. The Company must maintain a continuous flow of successful new products and successful new indications or brand extensions for existing products

sufficient both to cover its substantial research and development costs and to replace sales that are lost as profitable products lose market exclusivity or are displaced by competing products or therapies. Failure to do so in the short term or long term would have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, results of operations, cash flow, financial position and prospects.
The Company’s success is dependent on the successful development and marketing of new products, which are subject to substantial risks.
Products that appear promising in development may fail to reach the market or fail to succeed for numerous reasons, including the following:
findings of ineffectiveness, superior safety or efficacy of competing products, or harmful side effects in clinical or pre-clinical testing;
failure to receive the necessary regulatory approvals, including delays in the approval of new products and new indications, or the anticipated labeling, and uncertainties about the time required to obtain regulatory approvals and the benefit/risk standards applied by regulatory agencies in determining whether to grant approvals;
failure in certain markets to obtain reimbursement commensurate with the level of innovation and clinical benefit presented by the product;
lack of economic feasibility due to manufacturing costs or other factors; and
preclusion from commercialization by the proprietary rights of others.
In the future, if certain pipeline programs are cancelled or if the Company believes that their commercial prospects have been reduced, the Company may recognize material non-cash impairment charges for those programs that were measured at fair value and capitalized in connection with acquisitions or certain collaborations.
Failure to successfully develop and market new products in the short term or long term would have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, results of operations, cash flow, financial position and prospects.
The Company’s products, including products in development, cannot be marketed unless the Company obtains and maintains regulatory approval.
The Company’s activities, including research, preclinical testing, clinical trials and the manufacturing and marketing of its products, are subject to extensive regulation by numerous federal, state and local governmental authorities in the United States, including the FDA, and by foreign regulatory authorities, including in the EU, Japan and China. In the United States, the FDA administers requirements covering the testing, approval, safety, effectiveness, manufacturing, labeling and marketing of prescription pharmaceuticals. In many cases, the FDA requirements have increased the amount of time and money necessary to develop new products and bring them to market in the United States. Regulation outside the United States also is primarily focused on drug safety and effectiveness and, in many cases, reduction in the cost of drugs. The FDA and foreign regulatory authorities have substantial discretion to require additional testing, to delay or withhold registration and marketing approval and to otherwise preclude distribution and sale of a product.
Even if the Company is successful in developing new products, it will not be able to market any of those products unless and until it has obtained all required regulatory approvals in each jurisdiction where it proposes to market the new products. Once obtained, the Company must maintain approval as long as it plans to market its new products in each jurisdiction where approval is required. The Company’s failure to obtain approval, significant delays in the approval process, or its failure to maintain approval in any jurisdiction will prevent it from selling the products in that jurisdiction. The Company would not be able to realize revenues for those new products in any jurisdiction where it does not have approval.
Developments following regulatory approval may adversely affect sales of the Company’s products.
Even after a product reaches the market, certain developments following regulatory approval may decrease demand for the Company’s products, including the following:
results in post-approval Phase 4 trials or other studies;

the re-review of products that are already marketed;
the recall or loss of marketing approval of products that are already marketed;
changing government standards or public expectations regarding safety, efficacy or labeling changes; and
greater scrutiny in advertising and promotion.
In the past several years, clinical trials and post-marketing surveillance of certain marketed drugs of the Company and of competitors within the industry have raised concerns that have led to recalls, withdrawals or adverse labeling of marketed products. Clinical trials and post-marketing surveillance of certain marketed drugs also have raised concerns among some prescribers and patients relating to the safety or efficacy of pharmaceutical products in general that have negatively affected the sales of such products. In addition, increased scrutiny of the outcomes of clinical trials has led to increased volatility in market reaction. Further, these matters often attract litigation and, even where the basis for the litigation is groundless, considerable resources may be needed to respond.
In addition, following in the wake of product withdrawals and other significant safety issues, health authorities such as the FDA, the EMA and Japan’s Pharmaceutical and Medical Device Agency have increased their focus on safety when assessing the benefit/risk balance of drugs. Some health authorities appear to have become more cautious when making decisions about approvability of new products or indications and are re-reviewing select products that are already marketed, adding further to the uncertainties in the regulatory processes. There is also greater regulatory scrutiny, especially in the United States, on advertising and promotion and, in particular, direct-to-consumer advertising.
If previously unknown side effects are discovered or if there is an increase in negative publicity regarding known side effects of any of the Company’s products, it could significantly reduce demand for the product or require the Company to take actions that could negatively affect sales, including removing the product from the market, restricting its distribution or applying for labeling changes. Further, in the current environment in which all pharmaceutical companies operate, the Company is at risk for product liability and consumer protection claims and civil and criminal governmental actions related to its products, research and/or marketing activities.
The Company faces intense competition from lower cost generic products.
In general, the Company faces increasing competition from lower-cost generic products. The patent rights that protect its products are of varying strengths and durations. In addition, in some countries, patent protection is significantly weaker than in the United States or in the EU. In the United States and the EU, political pressure to reduce spending on prescription drugs has led to legislation and other measures that encourage the use of generic and biosimilar products. Although it is the Company’s policy to actively protect its patent rights, generic challenges to the Company’s products can arise at any time, and the Company’s patents may not prevent the emergence of generic competition for its products.
Loss of patent protection for a product typically is followed promptly by generic substitutes, reducing the Company’s sales of that product. Availability of generic substitutes for the Company’s drugs may adversely affect its results of operations and cash flow. In addition, proposals emerge from time to time in the United States and other countries for legislation to further encourage the early and rapid approval of generic drugs. Any such proposal that is enacted into law could worsen this substantial negative effect on the Company’s sales and, potentially, its business, cash flow, results of operations, financial position and prospects.
The Company faces intense competition from competitors’ products.
The Company’s products face intense competition from competitors’ products. This competition may increase as new products enter the market. In such an event, the competitors’ products may be safer or more effective, more convenient to use, have better insurance coverage or reimbursement levels or be more effectively marketed and sold than the Company’s products. Alternatively, in the case of generic competition, including the generic availability of competitors’ branded products, they may be equally safe and effective products that are sold at a substantially lower price than the Company’s products. As a result, if the Company fails to maintain its competitive position, this could have a material adverse effect on its business, cash flow, results of operations, financial position and prospects. In addition, if products that were measured at fair value and capitalized in connection with acquisitions experience

difficulties in the market that negatively impact product cash flows, the Company may recognize material non-cash impairment charges with respect to the value of those products.
The Company faces continued pricing pressure with respect to its products.
The Company faces continued pricing pressure globally and, particularly in mature markets, from managed care organizations, government agencies and programs that could negatively affect the Company’s sales and profit margins. In the United States, these include (i) practices of managed care groups and institutional and governmental purchasers, (ii) U.S. federal laws and regulations related to Medicare and Medicaid, including the Medicare Prescription Drug Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003 and the ACA, and (iii) state activities aimed at increasing price transparency, including new laws as noted above in Item 1. “Competition and the Health Care Environment — Health Care Environment and Government Regulations.” Changes to the health care system enacted as part of health care reform in the United States, as well as increased purchasing power of entities that negotiate on behalf of Medicare, Medicaid, and private sector beneficiaries, could result in further pricing pressures. In addition, in the U.S., larger customers may, in the future, ask for and receive higher rebates on drugs in certain highly competitive categories. The Company must also compete to be placed on formularies of managed care organizations. Exclusion of a product from a formulary can lead to reduced usage in the managed care organization.
In order to provide information about the Company’s pricing practices, the Company annually posts on its website its Pricing Transparency Report for the United States. The report provides the Company’s average annual list price and net price increases across the Company’s U.S. portfolio dating back to 2010.
Outside the United States, numerous major markets, including the EU, Japan and China have pervasive government involvement in funding health care and, in that regard, fix the pricing and reimbursement of pharmaceutical and vaccine products. Consequently, in those markets, the Company is subject to government decision making and budgetary actions with respect to its products.
The Company expects pricing pressures to continue in the future.
The health care industry in the United States will continue to be subject to increasing regulation and political action.
The Company believes that the health care industry will continue to be subject to increasing regulation as well as political and legal action, as future proposals to reform the health care system are considered by the Executive branch, Congress and state legislatures.
In 2010, the United States enacted major health care reform legislation in the form of the ACA. Various insurance market reforms have advanced and state and federal insurance exchanges were launched in 2014. With respect to the effect of the law on the pharmaceutical industry, the law increased the mandated Medicaid rebate from 15.1% to 23.1%, expanded the rebate to Medicaid managed care utilization, and increased the types of entities eligible for the federal 340B drug discount program.
The law also requires pharmaceutical manufacturers to pay a 50% point of service discount to Medicare Part D beneficiaries when they are in the Medicare Part D coverage gap (i.e., the so-called “donut hole”). In 2018, the Company’s revenue was reduced by $365 million due to this requirement. Beginning in 2019, the 50% point of service discount will increase to a 70% point of service discount in the coverage gap, as a result of the Balanced Budget Act of 2018. In addition, the 70% point of service discount will be extended to biosimilar products. Also, pharmaceutical manufacturers are now required to pay an annual non-tax deductible health care reform fee. The total annual industry fee was $4.1 billion in 2018 and will be $2.8 billion in 2019. The fee is assessed on each company in proportion to its share of prior year branded pharmaceutical sales to certain government programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid. In 2018, the Company recorded $124 million of costs for this annual fee.
In 2016, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) issued the Medicaid rebate final rule that implements provisions of the ACA effective April 1, 2016. The rule provides comprehensive guidance on the calculation of Average Manufacturer Price and Best Price; two metrics utilized to determine the rebates drug manufacturers are required to pay to state Medicaid programs. The impact of changes resulting from the issuance of the rule is not material to Merck, at this time. However, the Company is still awaiting guidance from CMS on two aspects of the rule that were deferred for later implementation. These include a definition of what constitutes a product ‘line extension’ and a delay

in the participation of the U.S. Territories in the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program until April 1, 2020. The Company will evaluate the financial impact of these two elements when they become effective.
The Company cannot predict the likelihood of future changes in the health care industry in general, or the pharmaceutical industry in particular, or what impact they may have on the Company’s business, cash flow, results of operations, financial position and prospects.
The Company is increasingly dependent on sophisticated software applications and computing infrastructure. In 2017, the Company experienced a network cyber-attack that led to a disruption of its worldwide operations, including manufacturing, research and sales operations. The Company could be a target of future cyber-attacks.
The Company is increasingly dependent on sophisticated software applications and complex information technology systems and computing infrastructure (collectively, “IT systems”) to conduct critical operations. Disruption, degradation, or manipulation of these IT systems through intentional or accidental means could impact key business processes. Cyber-attacks against the Company’s IT systems could result in exposure of confidential information, the modification of critical data, and/or the failure of critical operations. Misuse of these IT systems could result in the disclosure of sensitive personal information or the theft of trade secrets, intellectual property, or other confidential business information. The Company continues to leverage new and innovative technologies across the enterprise to improve the efficacy and efficiency of its business processes; the use of which can create new risks.
In 2017, the Company experienced a network cyber-attack that led to a disruption of its worldwide operations, including manufacturing, research and sales operations. Due to the cyber-attack, the Company was unable to fulfill orders for certain products in certain markets, which had an unfavorable effect on sales in 2017 of approximately $260 million. In addition, the Company recorded manufacturing-related expenses, primarily unfavorable manufacturing variances, in Cost of sales, as well as expenses related to remediation efforts in Selling, general and administrative expenses and Research and development expenses, which aggregated $285 million in 2017, net of insurance recoveries of approximately $45 million. Due to a residual backlog of orders, 2018 sales were unfavorably affected in certain markets by approximately $150 million from the cyber-attack.
The Company has insurance coverage insuring against costs resulting from cyber-attacks and has received proceeds. However, there are disputes with certain of the insurers about the availability of some of the insurance coverage for claims related to the 2017 cyber-attack.
The Company has implemented a variety of measures to further enhance and modernize its systems to guard against similar attacks in the future, and also is pursuing an enterprise-wide effort to enhance the Company's resiliency against future cyber-attacks, including incidents similar to the 2017 attack. The objective of these efforts is not only to protect against future cyber-attacks, but also to improve the speed of the Company’s recovery from such attacks and enable continued business operations to the greatest extent possible during any recovery period.
Although the aggregate impact of cyber-attacks and network disruptions, including the 2017 cyber-attack, on the Company’s operations and financial condition has not been material to date, the Company continues to be a target of events of this nature and expects them to continue. The Company monitors its data, information technology and personnel usage of Company IT systems to reduce these risks and continues to do so on an ongoing basis for any current or potential threats. There can be no assurance that the Company’s efforts to protect its data and IT systems will be successful in preventing disruptions to its operations, including its manufacturing, research and sales operations. Any such disruption could result in loss of revenue, or the loss of critical or sensitive information from the Company’s or the Company’s third party providers’ databases or IT systems and could also result in financial, legal, business or reputational harm to the Company and potentially substantial remediation costs.
The Company is subject to a variety of U.S. and international laws and regulations.
The Company is currently subject to a number of government laws and regulations and, in the future, could become subject to new government laws and regulations. The costs of compliance with such laws and regulations, or the negative results of non-compliance, could adversely affect the business, cash flow, results of operations, financial position and prospects of the Company; these laws and regulations include (i) additional healthcare reform initiatives in the United States or in other countries, including additional mandatory discounts or fees; (ii) the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act or other anti-bribery and corruption laws; (iii) new laws, regulations and judicial or other governmental

decisions affecting pricing, drug reimbursement, and access or marketing within or across jurisdictions; (iv) changes in intellectual property laws; (v) changes in accounting standards; (vi) new and increasing data privacy regulations and enforcement, particularly in the EU and the United States; (vii) legislative mandates or preferences for local manufacturing of pharmaceutical or vaccine products; (viii) emerging and new global regulatory requirements for reporting payments and other value transfers to healthcare professionals; (ix) environmental regulations; and (x) the potential impact of importation restrictions, embargoes, trade sanctions and legislative and/or other regulatory changes.
The uncertainty in global economic conditions together with cost-reduction measures being taken by certain governments could negatively affect the Company’s operating results.
Uncertainty in global economic and geopolitical conditions may result in a slowdown to the global economy that could affect the Company’s business by reducing the prices that drug wholesalers and retailers, hospitals, government agencies and managed health care providers may be able or willing to pay for the Company’s products or by reducing the demand for the Company’s products, which could in turn negatively impact the Company’s sales and result in a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, cash flow, results of operations, financial position and prospects.
Global efforts toward health care cost containment continue to exert pressure on product pricing and market access. In the United States, pricing pressures continue on many of the Company’s products and, in several international markets, government-mandated pricing actions have reduced prices of generic and patented drugs. The Company anticipates these pricing actions will continue to negatively affect revenue performance in 2019.
If credit and economic conditions worsen, the resulting economic and currency impacts in the affected markets and globally could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s results.
The Company has significant global operations, which expose it to additional risks, and any adverse event could have a material negative impact on the Company’s results of operations.
The extent of the Company’s operations outside the United States is significant. Risks inherent in conducting a global business include:
changes in medical reimbursement policies and programs and pricing restrictions in key markets;
multiple regulatory requirements that could restrict the Company’s ability to manufacture and sell its products in key markets;
trade protection measures and import or export licensing requirements, including the imposition of trade sanctions or similar restrictions by the United States or other governments;
foreign exchange fluctuations;
diminished protection of intellectual property in some countries; and
possible nationalization and expropriation.
In addition, there may be changes to the Company’s business and political position if there is instability, disruption or destruction in a significant geographic region, regardless of cause, including war, terrorism, riot, civil insurrection or social unrest; and natural or man-made disasters, including famine, flood, fire, earthquake, storm or disease. For example, in 2017, the Company’s lone manufacturing plant in Puerto Rico was negatively affected by Hurricane Maria.
In 2016, the United Kingdom (UK) held a referendum in which voters approved an exit from the EU, commonly referred to as “Brexit”. As a result of that referendum, the British government has been in the process of negotiating the terms of the UK’s future relationship with the EU. While the Company has taken actions and made certain contingency plans for scenarios in which the UK and the EU do not reach a mutually satisfactory understanding as to that relationship, it is not possible at this time to predict whether there will be any such understanding, or if such an understanding is reached, whether its terms will vary in ways that result in greater restrictions on imports and exports between the UK and EU countries, increased regulatory complexities, and/or cross border labor issues that could materially adversely impact the Company’s business operations in the UK.

Failure to attract and retain highly qualified personnel could affect the Company’s ability to successfully develop and commercialize products.
The Company’s success is largely dependent on its continued ability to attract and retain highly qualified scientific, technical and management personnel, as well as personnel with expertise in clinical research and development, governmental regulation and commercialization. Competition for qualified personnel in the pharmaceutical industry is intense. The Company cannot be sure that it will be able to attract and retain quality personnel or that the costs of doing so will not materially increase.
In the past, the Company has experienced difficulties and delays in manufacturing certain of its products, including vaccines.
Merck has, in the past, experienced difficulties in manufacturing certain of its products, including vaccines. In addition, the network cyber-attack experienced by the Company in June 2017 led to a disruption of the Company’s operations, including its manufacturing operations. The Company may, in the future, experience difficulties and delays inherent in manufacturing its products, such as (i) failure of the Company or any of its vendors or suppliers to comply with Current Good Manufacturing Practices and other applicable regulations and quality assurance guidelines that could lead to manufacturing shutdowns, product shortages and delays in product manufacturing; (ii) construction delays related to the construction of new facilities or the expansion of existing facilities, including those intended to support future demand for the Company’s products; and (iii) other manufacturing or distribution problems including changes in manufacturing production sites and limits to manufacturing capacity due to regulatory requirements, changes in types of products produced, or physical limitations that could impact continuous supply. In addition, the Company could experience difficulties or delays in manufacturing its products caused by natural disasters, such as hurricanes. Manufacturing difficulties can result in product shortages, leading to lost sales and reputational harm to the Company.
The Company may not be able to realize the expected benefits of its investments in emerging markets.
The Company has been taking steps to increase its sales in emerging markets. However, there is no guarantee that the Company’s efforts to expand sales in these markets will succeed. Some countries within emerging markets may be especially vulnerable to periods of global financial instability or may have very limited resources to spend on health care. In order for the Company to successfully implement its emerging markets strategy, it must attract and retain qualified personnel. The Company may also be required to increase its reliance on third-party agents within less developed markets. In addition, many of these countries have currencies that fluctuate substantially and, if such currencies devalue and the Company cannot offset the devaluations, the Company’s financial performance within such countries could be adversely affected.
The Company’s business in China has grown rapidly in the past few years, and the importance of China to the Company’s overall pharmaceutical and vaccines business outside the United States has increased accordingly. Continued growth of the Company’s business in China is dependent upon ongoing development of a favorable environment for innovative pharmaceutical products and vaccines, sustained access for the Company’s currently marketed products, and the absence of trade impediments or adverse pricing controls. As noted above in Healthcare Environment, pricing pressure in China has increased as the Chinese government has been taking steps to reduce costs, including implementing healthcare reform that has led to the acceleration of generic substitution, where available. In addition, the Company anticipates that the reported inquiries made by various governmental authorities involving multinational pharmaceutical companies in China may continue.
For all these reasons, sales within emerging markets carry significant risks. However, a failure to maintain the Company’s presence in emerging markets could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, cash flow, results of operations, financial position and prospects.
The Company is exposed to market risk from fluctuations in currency exchange rates and interest rates.
The Company operates in multiple jurisdictions and virtually all sales are denominated in currencies of the local jurisdiction. Additionally, the Company has entered and will enter into business development transactions, borrowings or other financial transactions that may give rise to currency and interest rate exposure.

Since the Company cannot, with certainty, foresee and mitigate against such adverse fluctuations, fluctuations in currency exchange rates, interest rates and inflation could negatively affect the Company’s business, cash flow, results of operations, financial position and prospects.
In order to mitigate against the adverse impact of these market fluctuations, the Company will from time to time enter into hedging agreements. While hedging agreements, such as currency options and forwards and interest rate swaps, may limit some of the exposure to exchange rate and interest rate fluctuations, such attempts to mitigate these risks may be costly and not always successful.
The Company is subject to evolving and complex tax laws, which may result in additional liabilities that may affect results of operations.
The Company is subject to evolving and complex tax laws in the jurisdictions in which it operates. Significant judgment is required for determining the Company’s tax liabilities, and the Company’s tax returns are periodically examined by various tax authorities. The Company believes that its accrual for tax contingencies is adequate for all open years based on past experience, interpretations of tax law, and judgments about potential actions by tax authorities; however, due to the complexity of tax contingencies, the ultimate resolution of any tax matters may result in payments greater or less than amounts accrued. In addition, the Company may be affected by changes in tax laws, or new tax laws, affecting, for example, tax rates, and/or revised tax law interpretations in domestic or foreign jurisdictions.
Pharmaceutical products can develop unexpected safety or efficacy concerns.
Unexpected safety or efficacy concerns can arise with respect to marketed products, whether or not scientifically justified, leading to product recalls, withdrawals, or declining sales, as well as product liability, consumer fraud and/or other claims, including potential civil or criminal governmental actions.
Reliance on third-party relationships and outsourcing arrangements could adversely affect the Company’s business.
The Company depends on third parties, including suppliers, alliances with other pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, and third-party service providers, for key aspects of its business including development, manufacture and commercialization of its products and support for its information technology systems. Failure of these third parties to meet their contractual, regulatory and other obligations to the Company or the development of factors that materially disrupt the relationships between the Company and these third parties could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business.
Negative events in the animal health industry could have a negative impact on future results of operations.
Future sales of key animal health products could be adversely affected by a number of risk factors including certain risks that are specific to the animal health business. For example, the outbreak of disease carried by animals, such as Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy or mad cow disease, could lead to their widespread death and precautionary destruction as well as the reduced consumption and demand for animals, which could adversely impact the Company’s results of operations. Also, the outbreak of any highly contagious diseases near the Company’s main production sites could require the Company to immediately halt production of vaccines at such sites or force the Company to incur substantial expenses in procuring raw materials or vaccines elsewhere. Other risks specific to animal health include epidemics and pandemics, government procurement and pricing practices, weather and global agribusiness economic events. As the Animal Health segment of the Company’s business becomes more significant, the impact of any such events on future results of operations would also become more significant.
Biologics and vaccines carry unique risks and uncertainties, which could have a negative impact on future results of operations.
The successful development, testing, manufacturing and commercialization of biologics and vaccines, particularly human and animal health vaccines, is a long, complex, expensive and uncertain process. There are unique risks and uncertainties with biologics and vaccines, including:
There may be limited access to, and supply of, normal and diseased tissue samples, cell lines, pathogens, bacteria, viral strains and other biological materials. In addition, government regulations in multiple

jurisdictions, such as the United States and the EU, could result in restricted access to, or transport or use of, such materials. If the Company loses access to sufficient sources of such materials, or if tighter restrictions are imposed on the use of such materials, the Company may not be able to conduct research activities as planned and may incur additional development costs.
The development, manufacturing and marketing of biologics and vaccines are subject to regulation by the FDA, the EMA and other regulatory bodies. These regulations are often more complex and extensive than the regulations applicable to other pharmaceutical products. For example, in the United States, a BLA, including both preclinical and clinical trial data and extensive data regarding the manufacturing procedures, is required for human vaccine candidates, and FDA approval is generally required for the release of each manufactured commercial lot.
Manufacturing biologics and vaccines, especially in large quantities, is often complex and may require the use of innovative technologies to handle living micro-organisms. Each lot of an approved biologic and vaccine must undergo thorough testing for identity, strength, quality, purity and potency. Manufacturing biologics requires facilities specifically designed for and validated for this purpose, and sophisticated quality assurance and quality control procedures are necessary. Slight deviations anywhere in the manufacturing process, including filling, labeling, packaging, storage and shipping and quality control and testing, may result in lot failures, product recalls or spoilage. When changes are made to the manufacturing process, the Company may be required to provide pre-clinical and clinical data showing the comparable identity, strength, quality, purity or potency of the products before and after such changes.
Biologics and vaccines are frequently costly to manufacture because production ingredients are derived from living animal or plant material, and most biologics and vaccines cannot be made synthetically. In particular, keeping up with the demand for vaccines may be difficult due to the complexity of producing vaccines.
The use of biologically derived ingredients can lead to variability in the manufacturing process and could lead to allegations of harm, including infections or allergic reactions, which allegations would be reviewed through a standard investigation process that could lead to closure of product facilities due to possible contamination. Any of these events could result in substantial costs.
Product liability insurance for products may be limited, cost prohibitive or unavailable.
As a result of a number of factors, product liability insurance has become less available while the cost has increased significantly. The Company is subject to a substantial number of product liability claims. See Item 8. “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data,” Note 11. “Contingencies and Environmental Liabilities” below for more information on the Company’s current product liability litigation. With respect to product liability, the Company self-insures substantially all of its risk, as the availability of commercial insurance has become more restrictive. The Company has evaluated its risks and has determined that the cost of obtaining product liability insurance outweighs the likely benefits of the coverage that is available and, as such, has no insurance for certain product liabilities effective August 1, 2004, including liability for legacy Merck products first sold after that date. The Company will continually assess the most efficient means to address its risk; however, there can be no guarantee that insurance coverage will be obtained or, if obtained, will be sufficient to fully cover product liabilities that may arise.
Social media platforms present risks and challenges.
The inappropriate and/or unauthorized use of certain media vehicles could cause brand damage or information leakage or could lead to legal implications, including from the improper collection and/or dissemination of personally identifiable information. In addition, negative or inaccurate posts or comments about the Company or its products on any social networking platforms could damage the Company’s reputation, brand image and goodwill. Further, the disclosure of non-public Company-sensitive information by the Company’s workforce or others through external media channels could lead to information loss. Although there is an internal Company Social Media Policy that guides employees on appropriate personal and professional use of social media about the Company, the processes in place may not completely secure and protect information. Identifying new points of entry as social media continues to expand also presents new challenges.

Cautionary Factors that May Affect Future Results
(Cautionary Statements Under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995)
This report and other written reports and oral statements made from time to time by the Company may contain so-called “forward-looking statements,” all of which are based on management’s current expectations and are subject to risks and uncertainties which may cause results to differ materially from those set forth in the statements. One can identify these forward-looking statements by their use of words such as “anticipates,” “expects,” “plans,” “will,” “estimates,” “forecasts,” “projects” and other words of similar meaning, or negative variations of any of the foregoing. One can also identify them by the fact that they do not relate strictly to historical or current facts. These statements are likely to address the Company’s growth strategy, financial results, product development, product approvals, product potential, and development programs. One must carefully consider any such statement and should understand that many factors could cause actual results to differ materially from the Company’s forward-looking statements. These factors include inaccurate assumptions and a broad variety of other risks and uncertainties, including some that are known and some that are not. No forward-looking statement can be guaranteed and actual future results may vary materially. The Company does not assume the obligation to update any forward-looking statement. The Company cautions you not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements. Although it is not possible to predict or identify all such factors, they may include the following:
Competition from generic and/or biosimilar products as the Company’s products lose patent protection.
Increased “brand” competition in therapeutic areas important to the Company’s long-term business performance.
The difficulties and uncertainties inherent in new product development. The outcome of the lengthy and complex process of new product development is inherently uncertain. A drug candidate can fail at any stage of the process and one or more late-stage product candidates could fail to receive regulatory approval. New product candidates may appear promising in development but fail to reach the market because of efficacy or safety concerns, the inability to obtain necessary regulatory approvals, the difficulty or excessive cost to manufacture and/or the infringement of patents or intellectual property rights of others. Furthermore, the sales of new products may prove to be disappointing and fail to reach anticipated levels.
Pricing pressures, both in the United States and abroad, including rules and practices of managed care groups, judicial decisions and governmental laws and regulations related to Medicare, Medicaid and health care reform, pharmaceutical reimbursement and pricing in general.
Changes in government laws and regulations, including laws governing intellectual property, and the enforcement thereof affecting the Company’s business.
Efficacy or safety concerns with respect to marketed products, whether or not scientifically justified, leading to product recalls, withdrawals or declining sales.
Significant changes in customer relationships or changes in the behavior and spending patterns of purchasers of health care products and services, including delaying medical procedures, rationing prescription medications, reducing the frequency of physician visits and foregoing health care insurance coverage.
Legal factors, including product liability claims, antitrust litigation and governmental investigations, including tax disputes, environmental concerns and patent disputes with branded and generic competitors, any of which could preclude commercialization of products or negatively affect the profitability of existing products.
Cyber-attacks on the Company’s information technology systems, which could disrupt the Company’s operations.
Lost market opportunity resulting from delays and uncertainties in the approval process of the FDA and foreign regulatory authorities.
Increased focus on privacy issues in countries around the world, including the United States and the EU. The legislative and regulatory landscape for privacy and data protection continues to evolve, and there has been

an increasing amount of focus on privacy and data protection issues with the potential to affect directly the Company’s business, including recently enacted laws in a majority of states in the United States requiring security breach notification.
Changes in tax laws including changes related to the taxation of foreign earnings.
Changes in accounting pronouncements promulgated by standard-setting or regulatory bodies, including the Financial Accounting Standards Board and the SEC, that are adverse to the Company.
Economic factors over which the Company has no control, including changes in inflation, interest rates and foreign currency exchange rates.
This list should not be considered an exhaustive statement of all potential risks and uncertainties. See “Risk Factors” above.
Item 1B.Unresolved Staff Comments.
None.
Item 2.Properties.
The Company’s corporate headquarters is located in Kenilworth, New Jersey. The Company’s U.S. commercial operations are headquartered in Upper Gwynedd, Pennsylvania. The Company’s U.S. pharmaceutical business is conducted through divisional headquarters located in Upper Gwynedd, Pennsylvania and Kenilworth, New Jersey. The Company’s vaccines business is conducted through divisional headquarters located in Upper Gwynedd, Pennsylvania. Merck’s Animal Health headquarters is located in Madison, New Jersey. Principal U.S. research facilities are located in Rahway and Kenilworth, New Jersey, West Point, Pennsylvania, Palo Alto, California, Boston, Massachusetts, South San Francisco, California and Elkhorn, Nebraska (Animal Health). Principal research facilities outside the United States are located in Switzerland and China. Merck’s manufacturing operations are headquartered in Whitehouse Station, New Jersey. The Company also has production facilities for human health products at nine locations in the United States and Puerto Rico. Outside the United States, through subsidiaries, the Company owns or has an interest in manufacturing plants or other properties in Japan, Singapore, South Africa, and other countries in Western Europe, Central and South America, and Asia.
Capital expenditures were $2.6 billion in 2018, $1.9 billion in 2017 and $1.6 billion in 2016. In the United States, these amounted to $1.5 billion in 2018, $1.2 billion in 2017 and $1.0 billion in 2016. Abroad, such expenditures amounted to $1.1 billion in 2018, $728 million in 2017 and $594 million in 2016.
The Company and its subsidiaries own their principal facilities and manufacturing plants under titles that they consider to be satisfactory. The Company believes that its properties are in good operating condition and that its machinery and equipment have been well maintained. Plants for the manufacture of products are suitable for their intended purposes and have capacities and projected capacities adequate for current and projected needs for existing Company products. Some capacity of the plants is being converted, with any needed modification, to the requirements of newly introduced and future products. In addition, in October 2018, the Company announced it plans to invest approximately $16 billion on new capital projects from 2018-2022. The focus of this investment will primarily be on increasing manufacturing capacity across Merck’s key businesses.
Item 3.Legal Proceedings.
The information called for by this Item is incorporated herein by reference to Item 8. “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data,” Note 11. “Contingencies and Environmental Liabilities”.
Item 4.Mine Safety Disclosures.
Not Applicable.

Executive Officers of the Registrant (ages as of February 1, 2019)
All officers listed below serve at the pleasure of the Board of Directors. None of these officers was elected pursuant to any arrangement or understanding between the officer and any other person(s).
NameAgeOffices and Business Experience
Kenneth C. Frazier64Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer (since December 2011)
Sanat Chattopadhyay59Executive Vice President and President, Merck Manufacturing Division (since March 2016); Senior Vice President, Operations, Merck Manufacturing Division (November 2009-March 2016)
Frank Clyburn54Executive Vice President, Chief Commercial Officer (since January 2019); President, Global Oncology Business Unit (October 2013-December 2018); President, Primary Care and Women’s Health Business Line (September 2011-October 2013)
Robert M. Davis52Executive Vice President, Global Services, and Chief Financial Officer (since April 2016); Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (April 2014-April 2016); Corporate Vice President and President, Medical Products, Baxter International, Inc. (October 2010-March 2014)
Richard R. DeLuca, Jr.56Executive Vice President and President, Merck Animal Health (since September 2011)
Julie L. Gerberding62Executive Vice President and Chief Patient Officer, Strategic Communications, Global Public Policy and Population Health (since July 2016); Executive Vice President for Strategic Communications, Global Public Policy and Population Health (January 2015-July 2016); President, Merck Vaccines (January 2010-January 2015)
Rita A. Karachun55Senior Vice President Finance - Global Controller (since March 2014); Assistant Controller (November 2009-March 2014)
Steven C. Mizell

58Executive Vice President, Chief Human Resources Officer, Human Resources (since October 2018); Executive Vice President, Chief Human Resources Officer (December 2016-October 2018) and Executive Vice President, Human Resources, Monsanto Company (August 2011-December 2016)
Michael T. Nally43Executive Vice President, Chief Marketing Officer (since January 2019); President, Global Vaccines, Global Human Health (September 2016-January 2019); Managing Director, United Kingdom and Ireland, Global Human Health (January 2014-September 2016); Managing Director, Sweden, Global Human Health (November 2011-January 2014)
Roger M. Perlmutter, M.D., Ph.D.66Executive Vice President and President, Merck Research Laboratories (since April 2013)
Jim Scholefield56Executive Vice President, Chief Information and Digital Officer (since October 2018); Chief Information Officer, Nike, Inc (July 2015-October 2018); Chief Technology Officer, The Coca-Cola Company, (November 2010-June 2015)
Jennifer Zachary41Executive Vice President and General Counsel (since April 2018); Partner, Covington & Burling LLP (January 2013-March 2018)



PART II
Item 5.Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities.
The principal market for trading of the Company’s Common Stock is the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) under the symbol MRK.

As of January 31, 2019, there were approximately 115,320 shareholders of record of the Company’s Common Stock.

Issuer purchases of equity securities for the three months ended December 31, 2018 were as follows:
Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
      ($ in millions)
Period 
Total Number
of Shares
Purchased(1)
 
Average Price
Paid Per
Share
 
Approximate Dollar Value of Shares
That May Yet Be Purchased
Under the Plans or Programs(1)
October 1 — October 31 59,154,075 $70.56 
$12,709(2)
November 1 — November 30 5,279,715 $74.64 $12,315
December 1 — December 31 4,788,526 $76.30 $11,949
Total 69,222,316 $71.27 $11,949

(1)
All shares purchased during the period were made as part of a plan approved by the Board of Directors in November 2017 to purchase up to $10 billion in Merck shares. In October 2018, the Board of Directors authorized additional purchases of up to $10 billion of Merck’s common stock for its treasury. Shares are approximated.
(2)
Amount includes $1.0 billion being held back pending final settlement under the accelerated share repurchase agreements discussed below.

Performance Graph
The following graph assumes a $100 investment on December 31, 2013, and reinvestment of all dividends, in each of the Company’s Common Shares, the S&P 500 Index, and a composite peer group of major pharmaceutical companies, which are: AbbVie Inc., Amgen Inc., AstraZeneca plc, Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Johnson & Johnson, Eli Lilly and Company, GlaxoSmithKline plc, Novartis AG, Pfizer Inc., Roche Holding AG, and Sanofi SA.
Comparison of Five-Year Cumulative Total Return*
Merck & Co., Inc., Composite Peer Group and S&P 500 Index
 
End of
Period Value
 
2018/2013
CAGR**
MERCK$179 12%
PEER GRP.**142 7%
S&P 500150 8%

chart-c37e259168895f1daaca01.jpg
 201320142015201620172018
MERCK100.00117.10112.40129.40127.40178.70
PEER GRP.100.00111.40114.80111.20133.00142.20
S&P 500100.00113.70115.20129.00157.20150.30

*Compound Annual Growth Rate
**Peer group average was calculated on a market cap weighted basis.

This Performance Graph will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference. In addition, the Performance Graph will not be deemed to be “soliciting material” or to be “filed” with the SEC or subject to Regulation 14A or 14C, other than as provided in Regulation S-K, or to the liabilities of section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, except to the extent that the Company specifically requests that such information be treated as soliciting material or specifically incorporates it by reference into a filing under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act.

Item 6.Selected Financial Data.                        
The following selected financial data should be read in conjunction with Item 7. “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and consolidated financial statements and notes thereto contained in Item 8. “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” of this report.
Merck & Co., Inc. and Subsidiaries
($ in millions except per share amounts)
 
2018 (1)
 
2017 (2)(3)
 
2016 (2)(4)
 
2015 (2)(5)
 
2014 (2)(6)
Results for Year:         
Sales$42,294
 $40,122
 $39,807
 $39,498
 $42,237
Cost of sales13,509
 12,912
 14,030
 15,043
 16,903
Selling, general and administrative10,102
 10,074
 10,017
 10,508
 11,816
Research and development9,752
 10,339
 10,261
 6,796
 7,290
Restructuring costs632
 776
 651
 619
 1,013
Other (income) expense, net(402) (500) 189
 1,131
 (12,068)
Income before taxes8,701
 6,521
 4,659
 5,401
 17,283
Taxes on income2,508
 4,103
 718
 942
 5,349
Net income6,193
 2,418
 3,941
 4,459
 11,934
Less: Net (loss) income attributable to noncontrolling interests(27) 24
 21
 17
 14
Net income attributable to Merck & Co., Inc.6,220
 2,394
 3,920
 4,442
 11,920
Basic earnings per common share attributable to Merck & Co., Inc. common shareholders$2.34
 $0.88
 $1.42
 $1.58
 $4.12
Earnings per common share assuming dilution attributable to Merck & Co., Inc. common shareholders$2.32
 $0.87
 $1.41
 $1.56
 $4.07
Cash dividends declared5,313
 5,177
 5,135
 5,115
 5,156
Cash dividends declared per common share$1.99
 $1.89
 $1.85
 $1.81
 $1.77
Capital expenditures2,615
 1,888
 1,614
 1,283
 1,317
Depreciation1,416
 1,455
 1,611
 1,593
 2,471
Average common shares outstanding (millions)2,664
 2,730
 2,766
 2,816
 2,894
Average common shares outstanding assuming dilution (millions)2,679
 2,748
 2,787
 2,841
 2,928
Year-End Position:         
Working capital$3,669
 $6,152
 $13,410
 $10,550
 $14,198
Property, plant and equipment, net13,291
 12,439
 12,026
 12,507
 13,136
Total assets82,637
 87,872
 95,377
 101,677
 98,096
Long-term debt19,806
 21,353
 24,274
 23,829
 18,629
Total equity26,882
 34,569
 40,308
 44,767
 48,791
Year-End Statistics:         
Number of stockholders of record115,800
 121,700
 129,500
 135,500
 142,000
Number of employees69,000
 69,000
 68,000
 68,000
 70,000
(1)
Amounts for 2018 include a charge related to the formation of a collaboration with Eisai Co., Ltd.
(2)
Amounts have been recast as a result of the adoption, on January 1, 2018, of a new accounting standard related to the classification of certain defined benefit plan costs. There was no impact to net income as a result of adopting the new accounting standard.
(3)
Amounts for 2017 include a provisional net tax charge related to the enactment of U.S. tax legislation and a charge related to the formation of a collaboration with AstraZeneca.
(4)
Amounts for 2016 include a charge related to the settlement of worldwide patent litigation related to Keytruda.
(5)
Amounts for 2015 include a net charge related to the settlement of Vioxx shareholder class action litigation, foreign exchange losses related to Venezuela, gains on the dispositions of businesses and other assets, and the favorable benefit of certain tax items.
(6)
Amounts for 2014 reflect the divestiture of Merck’s Consumer Care business on October 1, 2014, including a gain on the sale, as well as a gain recognized on an option exercise by AstraZeneca, gains on the dispositions of other businesses and assets, and a loss on extinguishment of debt.




Item 7.Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.
Description of Merck’s Business
Merck & Co., Inc. (Merck or the Company) is a global health care company that delivers innovative health solutions through its prescription medicines, vaccines, biologic therapies and animal health products. The Company’s operations are principally managed on a products basis and include four operating segments, which are the Pharmaceutical, Animal Health, Healthcare Services and Alliances segments. The Pharmaceutical and Animal Health segments are the only reportable segments.
The Pharmaceutical segment includes human health pharmaceutical and vaccine products. Human health pharmaceutical products consist of therapeutic and preventive agents, generally sold by prescription, for the treatment of human disorders. The Company sells these human health pharmaceutical products primarily to drug wholesalers and retailers, hospitals, government agencies and managed health care providers such as health maintenance organizations, pharmacy benefit managers and other institutions. Human health vaccine products consist of preventive pediatric, adolescent and adult vaccines, primarily administered at physician offices. The Company sells these human health vaccines primarily to physicians, wholesalers, physician distributors and government entities. On December 31, 2016, Merck and Sanofi Pasteur S.A. (Sanofi) terminated their equally-owned joint venture, Sanofi Pasteur MSD (SPMSD), which developed and marketed vaccines in Europe. In 2017, Merck began recording vaccine sales and incurring costs as a result of operating its vaccines business in the European markets that were previously part of the SPMSD joint venture, which was accounted for as an equity method affiliate.
The Animal Health segment discovers, develops, manufactures and markets animal health products, including pharmaceutical and vaccine products, for the prevention, treatment and control of disease in all major livestock and companion animal species, which the Company sells to veterinarians, distributors and animal producers.
The Healthcare Services segment provides services and solutions that focus on engagement, health analytics and clinical services to improve the value of care delivered to patients.
The Alliances segment primarily includes activity from the Company’s relationship with AstraZeneca LP related to sales of Nexium and Prilosec, which concluded in 2018 (see Note 9 to the consolidated financial statements).
Overview
The Company’s performance during 2018 demonstrates execution of its innovation strategy, with revenue growth in oncology, vaccines, hospital acute care and animal health, focused investment in the research and development pipeline, and disciplined allocation of resources. Additionally, Merck completed several business development transactions, expanded its capital expenditures program primarily to increase future manufacturing capacity, and returned capital to shareholders.
Worldwide sales were $42.3 billion in 2018, an increase of 5% compared with 2017. Strong growth in the oncology franchise reflects the performance of Keytruda, as well as alliance revenue related to Lynparza and Lenvima resulting from Merck’s business development activities. Also contributing to revenue growth were higher sales of vaccines, driven primarily by Gardasil/Gardasil 9, and growth in the hospital acute care franchise, largely attributable to Bridion and Noxafil. Higher sales of animal health products, reflecting increases in companion animal and livestock products both from in-line and recently launched products, also contributed to revenue growth. Growth in these areas was partially offset by competitive pressures on Zepatier and Zostavax, as well as the ongoing effects of generic and biosimilar competition that resulted in sales declines for products including Zetia, Vytorin, and Remicade.
Augmenting Merck’s portfolio and pipeline with external innovation remains an important component of the Company’s overall strategy. In 2018, Merck continued executing on this strategy by entering into a strategic collaboration with Eisai Co., Ltd. (Eisai) for the worldwide co-development and co-commercialization of Lenvima. Lenvima is an orally available tyrosine kinase inhibitor discovered by Eisai, which is approved for certain types of thyroid cancer, hepatocellular carcinoma, and in combination for certain patients with renal cell carcinoma. Under the agreement, Merck and Eisai will develop and commercialize Lenvima jointly, both as monotherapy and in combination with Keytruda. In addition, Merck acquired Viralytics Limited (Viralytics), a company focused on oncolytic immunotherapy treatments for a range of cancers. Also, the Company announced an agreement to acquire Antelliq Group (Antelliq), a leader in digital animal identification, traceability and monitoring solutions.

During 2018, the Company advanced its leadership in oncology through focused commercial execution, the achievement of important regulatory milestones and the presentation of clinical data. Keytruda continues its global launch with multiple new indicationsacross several tumor types, including approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of certain patients with cervical cancer, primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma (PMBCL), a type of non-Hodgkin lymphoma, hepatocellular carcinoma, Merkel cell carcinoma, and in combination with chemotherapy for the treatment of certain patients with squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Also during 2018, the European Commission (EC) approved Keytruda for the treatment of certain patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), for the adjuvant treatment of melanoma, and in combination with chemotherapy for the first-line treatment of certain patients with nonsquamous NSCLC. This was the first approval in Europe for an anti-PD-1 therapy in combination with chemotherapy. Also in 2018, Keytruda was approved in China for the treatment of certain patients with melanoma. Additionally, Merck recently announced the receipt of five new approvals for Keytruda in Japan, including three expanded uses in advanced NSCLC, one in adjuvant melanoma, as well as a new indication in advanced microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) tumors. Keytruda also continues to launch in many other international markets.
In 2018, Lynparza, which is being developed in a collaboration with AstraZeneca PLC (AstraZeneca), received FDA approval for use in certain patients with metastatic breast cancer who have been previously treated with chemotherapy, and for use as maintenance treatment of adult patients with certain types of advanced ovarian, fallopian tube or primary peritoneal cancer who are in complete or partial response to chemotherapy. Additionally, Lenvima was approved in the United States, European Union (EU), Japan and China for the treatment of certain patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. The FDA and EC also approved two new HIV-1 medicines: Delstrigo, a once-daily fixed-dose combination tablet of doravirine, lamivudine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate; and Pifeltro (doravirine), a new non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor to be administered in combination with other antiretroviral medicines.
Merck continues to invest in its pipeline, with an emphasis on being a leader in immuno-oncology and expanding in other areas such as vaccines and hospital acute care. In addition to the recent regulatory approvals discussed above, the Company has continued to advance its late-stage pipeline with several regulatory submissions. Keytruda is under review in the United States in combination with axitinib, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor, for the first-line treatment of patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma for which it has been granted Priority Review by the FDA; in the EU for the first-line treatment of certain patients with metastatic squamous NSCLC; in the United States and in the EU as monotherapy for the first-line treatment of certain patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC; in the United States as monotherapy for the treatment of certain patients with advanced small-cell lung cancer (SCLC); and in the United States as monotherapy or in combination with chemotherapy for the first-line treatment of certain patients with recurrent or metastatic HNSCC for which it has been granted Priority Review by the FDA. Additionally, MK-7655A, the combination of relebactam and imipenem/cilastatin, has been accepted for Priority Review by the FDA for the treatment of complicated urinary tract infections and complicated intra-abdominal infections caused by certain susceptible Gram-negative bacteria in adults with limited or no alternative therapies available. Merck has also started the submission of a rolling Biologics License Application (BLA) to the FDA for V920, an investigational Ebola Zaire disease vaccine candidate.
The Company’s Phase 3 oncology programs include Keytruda in the therapeutic areas of breast, cervical, colorectal, esophageal, gastric, hepatocellular, mesothelioma, nasopharyngeal, ovarian, renal and small-cell lung cancers; Lynparza for pancreatic and prostate cancer; and Lenvima in combination with Keytruda for endometrial cancer. Additionally, the Company has candidates in Phase 3 clinical development in several other therapeutic areas, including V114, an investigational polyvalent conjugate vaccine for the prevention of pneumococcal disease that received Breakthrough Therapy designation from the FDA for the prevention of invasive pneumococcal disease caused by the vaccine serotypes in pediatric patients 6 weeks to 18 years of age; MK-7264, gefapixant, a selective, non-narcotic, orally-administered P2X3-receptor agonist being developed for the treatment of refractory, chronic cough; and MK-1242, vericiguat, an investigational treatment for heart failure being developed in a collaboration (see “Research and Development” below).
The Company is allocating resources to effectively support its commercial opportunities in the near term while making the necessary investments to support long-term growth. Research and development expenses in 2018 reflect higher clinical development spending and investment in discovery and early drug development.

In October 2018, Merck’s Board of Directors approved a 15% increase to the Company’s quarterly dividend, raising it to $0.55 per share from $0.48 per share on the Company’s outstanding common stock. Also in October 2018, Merck’s Board of Directors approved a $10 billion share repurchase program and the Company entered into $5 billion of accelerated share repurchase (ASR) agreements. During 2018, the Company returned $14.3 billion to shareholders through dividends and share repurchases.
Earnings per common share assuming dilution attributable to common shareholders (EPS) for 2018 were $2.32 compared with $0.87 in 2017. EPS in both years reflect the impact of acquisition and divestiture-related costs, as well as restructuring costs and certain other items. Certain other items in 2018 include a charge related to the formation of the collaboration with Eisai and in 2017 include a provisional net tax charge related to the enactment of U.S. tax legislation and a charge related to the formation of a collaboration with AstraZeneca. Non-GAAP EPS, which exclude these items, were $4.34 in 2018 and $3.98 in 2017 (see “Non-GAAP Income and Non-GAAP EPS” below).
Pricing
Global efforts toward health care cost containment continue to exert pressure on product pricing and market access worldwide. In the United States, pricing pressure continues on many of the Company’s products. Changes to the U.S. health care system as part of health care reform, as well as increased purchasing power of entities that negotiate on behalf of Medicare, Medicaid, and private sector beneficiaries, have contributed to pricing pressure. In several international markets, government-mandated pricing actions have reduced prices of generic and patented drugs. In addition, the Company’s revenue performance in 2018 was negatively affected by other cost-reduction measures taken by governments and other third-parties to lower health care costs. The Company anticipates all of these actions will continue to negatively affect revenue performance in 2019.
Cyber-attack
On June 27, 2017, the Company experienced a network cyber-attack that led to a disruption of its worldwide operations, including manufacturing, research and sales operations. Due to a backlog of orders for certain products as a result of the cyber-attack, the Company was unable to fulfill orders for certain products in certain markets, which had an unfavorable effect on sales in 2018 and 2017 of approximately $150 million and $260 million, respectively. In addition, the Company recorded manufacturing-related expenses, primarily unfavorable manufacturing variances, in Cost of sales, as well as expenses related to remediation efforts in Selling, general and administrative expenses and Research and development expenses, which aggregated approximately $285 million in 2017, net of insurance recoveries of approximately $45 million. Costs in 2018 were immaterial.
As referenced above, the Company has insurance coverage insuring against costs resulting from cyber-attacks and has received insurance proceeds. However, there are disputes with certain of the insurers about the availability of some of the insurance coverage for claims related to this incident.
Operating Results
Sales
Worldwide sales were $39.5$42.3 billion in 2015, a decline2018, an increase of 6%5% compared with 2014 including a 6% unfavorable effect from foreign exchange. The acquisition2017. Sales growth was driven primarily by higher sales in the oncology franchise reflecting strong growth of Cubist in 2015, the divestiture of MCC in 2014,Keytruda, as well as product divestituresalliance revenue related to Lynparza and the termination of the Company’s relationship with AstraZeneca LP (AZLP) also in 2014, as discussed below, had a net unfavorable impactLenvima. Also contributing to revenue growth were higher sales of approximately 3%. In addition, sales performance in 2015 reflects declines in PegIntron and Victrelis, medicines for the treatment of HCV, Remicade, a treatment for inflammatory diseases, Pneumovax 23, avaccines, driven primarily by human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine to help prevent pneumococcal disease, Nasonex, an inhaled corticosteroid for the treatment of nasal allergy symptoms and Vytorin, a cholesterol modifying medicine. These declines were partially offset by volume growth in Keytruda, an anti-PD-1 therapy; Januvia and Janumet, for the treatment of type 2 diabetes, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, vaccines to help prevent certain diseases caused by certain types of human papillomavirus (HPV), Noxafil, for the prevention of invasive fungal infections, Simponi, a once-monthly subcutaneous treatment for inflammatory diseases, Implanon/Nexplanon, single-rod subdermal contraceptive implants, Invanz, for the treatment of certain infections, Dulera Inhalation Aerosol, a combination medicine for the treatment of asthma, and Bridion, a medication for the reversal of two types of neuromuscular blocking agents used during surgery, as well as volume growth in Animal Health products and higher third-party manufacturing sales.
In January 2015, the Company acquired Cubist, which contributed sales of $1.3 billion to Merck’s revenues in 2015. In 2014, the Company divested certain ophthalmic products in several international markets (most of which closed on July 1, 2014). In addition, on October 1, 2014, the Company divested its MCC business including the prescription rights to Claritin and Afrin. The sales decline in 2015 attributable to these divestitures was approximately $1.9 billion of which $1.5 billion related to the Consumer Care segment and $400 million related to the Pharmaceutical segment. Also, in 2014, the Company sold the U.S. marketing rights to Saphris, an antipsychotic indicated for the treatment of schizophrenia and bipolar I disorder in adults, which resulted in revenue of $232 million. Additionally, the Company’s relationship with AZLP terminated on June 30, 2014; therefore, effective July 1, 2014, the Company no longer records supply sales to AZLP. These supply sales were $463 million in 2014 through the termination date and were reflected in the Alliances segment.
Sales in the United States were $17.5 billion in 2015, an increase of 3% compared with $17.1 billion in 2014. The increase was driven primarily by the acquisition of Cubist, as well as higher sales in the hospital acute care franchise, largely attributable to Bridion and Noxafil. Higher sales of animal health products also drove revenue growth in 2018.
Keytruda, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Januvia/Janumet, Zetia, a cholesterol modifying medicine, and higher third-party manufacturing sales. These increases wereSales growth in 2018 was partially offset by declines in the 2014 divestiturevirology franchise driven primarily by lower sales of MCC, the termination of the Company’s relationship with AZLP in 2014, revenue recognized in 2014 in connection with the sale of the U.S. marketing rights tohepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment SaphrisZepatier, as well as lower sales in 2015 of shingles (herpes zoster) vaccine PneumovaxZostavax 23 . The ongoing effects of generic and biosimilar competition for cardiovascular products Zetia and NasonexVytorin.
International sales were $22.0 billion in 2015, a decline of 13% compared with $25.2 billion in 2014. Foreign exchange unfavorably affected international sales performance by 11% in 2015. Excluding the unfavorable effect of foreign exchange, the sales decrease reflects the divestiture of MCC, as well as lower sales in the Pharmaceutical segment, largely reflecting declines in Europe, and Japan, partially offset by growth in the emerging markets. Sales in Europe declined 19% in 2015, to $7.7 billion, including a 14% unfavorable effect from foreign exchange. Excluding the unfavorable effect from foreign exchange, the decline was driven primarily by lower sales ofimmunology product Remicade, as well as lower sales of products forwithin the treatment of HCV and from product divestitures and ongoing generic erosion and fiscal austerity measures in this region,diversified brands franchise also partially offset byrevenue growth in 2018. The diversified brands franchise includes certain products that are approaching the expiration of their marketing exclusivity or that are no longer protected by patents in developed markets.
Sales in the United States were $18.2 billion in 2018, growth of 5% compared with 2017. The increase was driven primarily by higher sales of SimponiKeytruda,Gardasil/Gardasil Keytruda9, NuvaRing, and Januvia/Janumet. Sales in Japan declined 23% in 2015, to $2.6 billion, of which 11% was due to the unfavorable effect of foreign exchange. The sales decline was largely driven by product divestitures and the ongoing impacts of the loss of market exclusivity for several products, including Cozaar and HyzaarBridion, treatments for hypertension, as well as loweralliance revenue

from Lynparza and Lenvima, and higher sales of PegIntron and Januvia.

39


Sales in the emerging markets were $7.3 billion in 2015, a decline of 6% including an 11% unfavorable effect from foreign exchange. Excluding the unfavorable effect of foreign exchange, sales performance reflects volume growth of diabetes, hospital acute care, oncology and certain diversified brand products,animal health products. Growth was partially offset by lower sales of HCVZepatier, Zetia, Vytorin, Zostavax, Januvia, Janumet, Invanz, and products as well as from product divestitures. Total internationalwithin the diversified brands franchise.
International sales represented 56% and 60% of total saleswere $24.1 billion in 2015 and 2014, respectively.
Global efforts toward health care cost containment continue to exert pressure on product pricing and market access worldwide. In the United States, health care reform is contributing to2018, an increase in the number of patients in the Medicaid program under which sales of pharmaceutical products are subject to substantial rebates. In many international markets, government-mandated pricing actions have reduced prices of generic and patented drugs. In addition, other austerity measures negatively affected the Company’s revenue performance in 2015. The Company anticipates these pricing actions, including the biennial price reductions in Japan that will occur again in 2016, and other austerity measures will continue to negatively affect revenue performance in 2016.
Worldwide sales totaled $42.2 billion in 2014, a decline of 4%6% compared with $44.0 billion2017. The increase primarily reflects growth in 2013. Foreign exchange unfavorably affected global sales performance by 1% in 2014. The decline reflects lower revenue resulting from the ongoing impacts of the loss of market exclusivity for several products, including TemodarKeytruda, a treatment for certain types of brain tumors, Singulair Gardasil/Gardasil , a once-a-day oral medicine for the chronic treatment of asthma and for the relief of symptoms of allergic rhinitis, and9, CozaarJanuvia, Janumet and Hyzaar. In addition, the sales decline was attributable to product divestitures that occurred in 2014 and 2013 as discussed below, the termination of the Company’s relationship with AZLP, as well as the divestiture of MCC. The revenue decline was also driven by lower sales of Victrelis and PegIntron, Nasonex, and Vytorin. These declines were partially offset by growth in Remicade and Simponi, the diabetes franchise of Januvia/Janumet, Dulera Inhalation Aerosol, Implanon/NexplanonAtozet, as well as higher sales of animal health products. Sales growth was partially offset by lower sales of Zepatier, Remicade, Zetia, Vytorin, and products within the diversified brands franchise. International sales represented 57% of total sales in both 2018 and 2017.
Worldwide sales were $40.1 billion in 2017, an increase of 1% compared with 2016. Sales growth in 2017 was driven primarily by higher sales of Keytruda, Zepatier and Bridion. Additionally, sales in 2017 benefited from hospital acute carethe December 31, 2016 termination of SPMSD, which marketed vaccines in most major European markets. In 2017, Merck began recording vaccine sales in the markets that were previously part of the SPMSD joint venture resulting in incremental vaccine sales of approximately $400 million during 2017. Higher sales of Pneumovax 23, Adempas, and animal health products. In addition,products also contributed to revenue growth in 2017. These increases were largely offset by the effects of generic competition for certain products including Zetia, which lost U.S. market exclusivity in December 2016, Vytorin, which lost U.S. market exclusivity in April 2017, Cubicin due to U.S. patent expiration in June 2016, and Cancidas, which lost EU patent protection in April 2017. Revenue growth was also offset by continued biosimilar competition for Remicade and ongoing generic erosion for products including Singulair and Nasonex. Collectively, the sales decline attributable to the above products affected by generic and biosimilar competition was $3.3 billion in 2017. Lower sales of other products within the diversified brands franchise, as well as lower combined sales of the diabetes franchise of Januvia and Janumet, and declines in sales of Isentress/Isentress HD also partially offset revenue growth. Additionally, sales in 2017 were reduced by $125 million due to a borrowing the Company recognized revenue of $232 million in 2014 in connection with the sale ofmade from the U.S. marketing rights toCenters for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Pediatric Vaccine Stockpile of doses of Saphris.Gardasil
In October 2013, 9 as discussed below. Also, the Company sold its active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) manufacturing business and, effective December 31, 2013,was unable to fulfill orders for certain related products within Diversified Brands. In November 2013, Merck sold the U.S. rights to certain ophthalmic products and in January 2014 sold the U.S. marketing rights to Saphris. In addition, the Company sold the U.S. rights to Zioptan in April 2014. Also in 2014, as noted above, the Company divested certain ophthalmic products in several internationalcertain markets and sold its MCC business. The sales decline in 2014 attributable to these divestitures was approximately $1.1 billion, of which approximately $575 million relateddue to the Pharmaceutical segment, $345 million relatedcyber-attack, which had an unfavorable effect on sales in 2017 of approximately $260 million.
See Note 19 to the Consumer Care segment and $150 million related to the divested API manufacturing business (non-segment revenues). Also, the terminationconsolidated financial statements for details on sales of the Company’s relationship with AZLP resulted in a sales decline of approximately $450 million in the Alliances segment in 2014 compared with 2013.products.


40


Sales of the Company’s products were as follows:
($ in millions)2015 2014 2013
Primary Care and Women’s Health     
Cardiovascular     
Zetia$2,526
 $2,650
 $2,658
Vytorin1,251
 1,516
 1,643
Diabetes     
Januvia3,863
 3,931
 4,004
Janumet2,151
 2,071
 1,829
General Medicine and Women’s Health     
NuvaRing732
 723
 686
Implanon/Nexplanon588
 502
 403
Dulera536
 460
 324
Follistim AQ383
 412
 481
Hospital and Specialty     
Hepatitis     
PegIntron182
 381
 496
HIV     
Isentress1,511
 1,673
 1,643
Hospital Acute Care     
Cubicin (1)
1,127
 25
 24
Cancidas573
 681
 660
Invanz569
 529
 488
Noxafil487
 402
 309
Bridion353
 340
 288
Primaxin313
 329
 335
Immunology     
Remicade1,794
 2,372
 2,271
Simponi690
 689
 500
Oncology     
Keytruda566
 55
 
Emend535
 553
 507
Temodar312
 350
 708
Diversified Brands     
Respiratory     
Singulair931
 1,092
 1,196
Nasonex858
 1,099
 1,335
Clarinex187
 232
 235
Other     
Cozaar/Hyzaar667
 806
 1,006
Arcoxia471
 519
 484
Fosamax359
 470
 560
Zocor217
 258
 301
Propecia183
 264
 283
Vaccines (2)
     
Gardasil/Gardasil 9
1,908
 1,738
 1,831
ProQuad/M-M-R II/Varivax
1,505
 1,394
 1,306
Zostavax749
 765
 758
RotaTeq610
 659
 636
Pneumovax 23
542
 746
 653
Other pharmaceutical (3)
4,553
 5,356
 6,596
Total Pharmaceutical segment sales34,782
 36,042
 37,437
Other segment sales (4)
3,659
 5,758
 6,397
Total segment sales38,441
 41,800
 43,834
Other (5)
1,057
 437
 199
 $39,498
 $42,237
 $44,033
(1)
Sales of Cubicin in 2015 represent sales subsequent to the Cubist acquisition date. Sales of Cubicin in 2014 and 2013 reflect sales in Japan pursuant to a previously existing licensing agreement.
(2)
These amounts do not reflect sales of vaccines sold in most major European markets through the Company’s joint venture, Sanofi Pasteur MSD, the results of which are reflected in equity income from affiliates which is included in Other (income) expense, net. These amounts do, however, reflect supply sales to Sanofi Pasteur MSD.
(3)
Other pharmaceutical primarily reflects sales of other human health pharmaceutical products, including products within the franchises not listed separately.
(4)
Represents the non-reportable segments of Animal Health, Alliances and Healthcare Services, as well as Consumer Care until its divestiture on October 1, 2014. The Alliances segment includes revenue from the Company’s relationship with AZLP until termination on June 30, 2014.
(5)
Other revenues are primarily comprised of miscellaneous corporate revenues, including revenue hedging activities, as well as third-party manufacturing sales. Other revenues in 2014 also include $232 million received by Merck in connection with the sale of the U.S. marketing rights to Saphris. Other revenues in 2013 reflect $50 million of revenue for the out-license of a pipeline compound.


41


Pharmaceutical Segment
PrimaryOncology
Keytruda is approved in the United States and in the EU as monotherapy for the treatment of certain patients with NSCLC, melanoma, classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL), HNSCC and urothelial carcinoma, a type of bladder cancer, and in combination with chemotherapy for certain patients with nonsquamous NSCLC. Keytruda is also approved in the United States as monotherapy for the treatment of certain patients with gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma and MSI-H or mismatch repair deficient cancer. In addition, the FDA recently approved Keytruda for the treatment of certain patients with cervical cancer, PMBCL, hepatocellular carcinoma, Merkel cell carcinoma, and in combination with chemotherapy for patients with squamous NSCLC (see below). Keytruda is approved in Japan for the treatment of certain patients with NSCLC, both as monotherapy and in combination with chemotherapy, melanoma, cHL, MSI-H tumors, and urothelial carcinoma. Additionally, Keytruda has been approved in China for the treatment of certain patients with melanoma. Keytruda is also approved in many other international markets. The Keytruda clinical development program includes studies across a broad range of cancer types (see “Research and Development” below).
In August 2018, the FDA approved an expanded label for Keytruda in combination with pemetrexed and platinum chemotherapy for the first-line treatment of patients with metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC, with no EGFR or ALK genomic tumor aberrations, based on results of the KEYNOTE-189 trial. Keytruda in combination with pemetrexed and carboplatin was first approved in 2017 under the FDA’s accelerated approval process for the first-line treatment of patients with metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC, based on tumor response rates and progression-free survival (PFS) data from a Phase 2 study (KEYNOTE-021, Cohort G1). In accordance with the accelerated approval process, continued approval was contingent upon verification and description of clinical benefit, which was demonstrated in KEYNOTE-189 and resulted in the FDA converting the accelerated approval to full (regular) approval. Also, in September 2018, the EC approved Keytruda in combination with pemetrexed and platinum chemotherapy for the first-line treatment of metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC in adults whose tumors have no EGFR or ALK positive mutations.
In June 2018, the FDA approved Keytruda for the treatment of patients with recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer with disease progression on or after chemotherapy whose tumors express PD-L1 as determined by an FDA-

approved test. Also in June 2018, the FDA approved Keytruda for the treatment of adult and pediatric patients with refractory PMBCL, or who have relapsed after two or more prior lines of therapy.
In September 2018, the EC approved Keytruda as monotherapy for the treatment of recurrent or metastatic HNSCC in adults whose tumors express PD-L1 with a tumor proportion score (TPS) of ≥50%, and who progressed on or after platinum-containing chemotherapy, based on data from the Phase 3 KEYNOTE-040 trial.
In October 2018, the FDA approved Keytruda, in combination with carboplatin and either paclitaxel or nab-paclitaxel, for the first-line treatment of patients with metastatic squamous NSCLC based on results from the KEYNOTE-407 trial. This approval marks the first time an anti-PD-1 regimen has been approved for the first-line treatment of squamous NSCLC regardless of tumor PD-L1 expression status.
In November 2018, the FDA approved Keytruda for the treatment of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma who have been previously treated with sorafenib based on data from the KEYNOTE-224 trial.
In December 2018, the FDA approved Keytruda for the treatment of adult and pediatric patients with recurrent locally advanced or metastatic Merkel cell carcinoma, based on the results of the Cancer Immunotherapy Trials Network’s CITN-09/KEYNOTE-017 trial.
Also in December 2018, the EC approved Keytruda for the adjuvant treatment of adults with stage III melanoma and lymph node involvement who have undergone complete resection. Keytruda was approved for this indication by the FDA in February 2019. These approvals were based on data from the pivotal Phase 3 EORTC1325/KEYNOTE-054 trial, conducted in collaboration with the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer.
Global sales of Keytruda were $7.2 billion in 2018, $3.8 billion in 2017 and $1.4 billion in 2016. The year-over-year increases were driven by volume growth as the Company continues to launch Keytruda with multiple new indications globally. Sales in the United States continue to build across the multiple approved indications, in particular for the treatment of NSCLC reflecting both the continued adoption of Keytruda in the first-line setting as monotherapy for patients with metastatic NSCLC whose tumors have high PD-L1 expression, as well as the uptake of Keytruda in combination with pemetrexed and carboplatin, a commonly used chemotherapy regimen, for the first-line treatment of metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC with or without PD-L1 expression. Other indications contributing to sales growth include HNSCC, bladder, and melanoma. Recently approved indications, including squamous NSCLC and MSI-H cancer, also contributed to growth in 2018. Sales growth in international markets reflects continued uptake for the treatment of NSCLC as the Company has secured reimbursement in most major markets. Sales growth in international markets in 2018 also includes contributions from the more recently approved indications as described above, including for the treatment of HNSCC, bladder cancer and in combination with chemotherapy for the treatment of NSCLC in the EU, multiple new indications in Japan, and for the treatment of melanoma in China.
In January 2017, Merck entered into a settlement and license agreement to resolve worldwide patent infringement litigation related to Keytruda. Pursuant to the settlement, the Company will pay royalties of 6.5% on net sales of Keytruda in 2017 through 2023; and 2.5% on net sales of Keytruda in 2024 through 2026.
Global sales of Emend, for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced and post-operative nausea and vomiting, were $522 million in 2018, a decline of 6% compared with 2017 including a 1% favorable effect from foreign exchange. The decline primarily reflects lower demand in the United States due to competition. Worldwide sales of Emend were $556 million in 2017, an increase of 1% compared with 2016. The patent that provided U.S. market exclusivity for Emend expired in 2015 and the patent that provides market exclusivity in most major European markets will expire in May 2019. The patent that provides U.S. market exclusivity for Emend for Injection expires in September 2019 and the patent that provides market exclusivity in major European markets expires in February 2020 (although six-month pediatric exclusivity may extend this date). The Company anticipates that sales of Emend in these markets will decline significantly after these patent expiries.
Lynparza, an oral poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor being developed as part of a collaboration with AstraZeneca entered into in July 2017 (see Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements), is currently approved for certain types of ovarian and breast cancer. Merck recorded alliance revenue of $187 million in 2018 and $20 million in 2017 related to Lynparza. The revenue increase reflects the approval of new indications, as well as a full year of activity in 2018. In January 2018, the FDA approved Lynparza for use in patients with BRCA-mutated, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative metastatic breast cancer who have been previously treated with chemotherapy,

triggering a $70 million capitalized milestone payment from Merck to AstraZeneca. Lynparza was also approved in Japan in July 2018 for use in patients with unresectable or recurrent BRCA-mutated, HER2-negative breast cancer who have received prior chemotherapy. Additionally, Lynparza was approved for use as a maintenance therapy in patients with platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer, regardless of BRCA mutation status in Japan in January 2018 and in the EU in May 2018. In December 2018, the FDA approved Lynparza for use as maintenance treatment of adult patients with deleterious or suspected deleterious germline or somatic BRCA-mutated advanced epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube or primary peritoneal cancer who are in complete or partial response to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy based on the results of the SOLO-1 clinical trial, triggering a $70 million capitalized milestone payment from Merck to AstraZeneca.
Lenvima, an oral receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor being developed as part of a collaboration with Eisai entered into in March 2018 (see Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements), is approved for certain types of thyroid cancer, hepatocellular carcinoma, and in combination for certain patients with renal cell carcinoma. Merck recorded alliance revenue of $149 million in 2018 related to Lenvima. In 2018, Lenvima was approved for the treatment of certain patients with hepatocellular carcinoma in the United States, the EU, Japan and China, triggering capitalized milestone payments of $250 million in the aggregate from Merck to Eisai.
Vaccines
On December 31, 2016, Merck and Sanofi terminated their equally-owned joint venture, SPMSD, which developed and marketed vaccines in Europe. Accordingly, vaccine sales in 2018 and 2017 include sales of Merck vaccines in the European markets that were previously part of the SPMSD joint venture, whereas sales in periods prior to 2017 do not. Prior to 2017, vaccine sales in these European markets were sold through the SPMSD joint venture, the results of which were reflected in equity income from affiliates included in Other (income) expense, net. Supply sales to SPMSD, however, are included in vaccine sales in periods prior to 2017. Incremental vaccine sales resulting from the termination of the SPMSD joint venture were approximately $400 million in 2017, of which approximately $215 million relate to Gardasil/Gardasil 9.
Worldwide sales of Gardasil/Gardasil 9, vaccines to help prevent certain cancers and other diseases caused by certain types of HPV, were $3.2 billion in 2018, growth of 37% compared with 2017 including a 1% favorable effect from foreign exchange. Sales growth was driven primarily by higher sales in the Asia Pacific region, particularly in China reflecting continued uptake since launch, as well as higher demand in certain European markets. The sales increase was also attributable to the replenishment in 2018 of doses borrowed from the CDC Pediatric Vaccine Stockpile in 2017 as discussed below. In April 2018, China’s Food and Drug Administration approved Gardasil 9 for use in girls and women ages 16 to 26. In October 2018, the FDA approved an expanded age indication for use in women and men ages 27 to 45 for the prevention of certain cancers and diseases caused by the nine HPV types covered by the vaccine.
During 2017, the Company made a request to borrow doses of Gardasil 9 from the CDC Pediatric Vaccine Stockpile, which the CDC granted. The Company’s decision to borrow the doses from the CDC was driven in part by the temporary shutdown resulting from the cyber-attack that occurred in June 2017, as well as by overall higher demand than expected. As a result of the borrowing, the Company reversed the sales related to the borrowed doses and recognized a corresponding liability. The Company subsequently replenished a portion of the doses borrowed from the stockpile. The net effect of the borrowing and subsequent partial replenishment was a reduction in sales of $125 million in 2017. The Company replenished the remaining borrowed doses in 2018 resulting in the recognition of sales of $125 million in 2018 and a reversal of the related liability.
Global sales of Gardasil/Gardasil 9 were $2.3 billion in 2017, growth of 6% compared with 2016. Sales growth was driven primarily by higher sales in Europe resulting from the termination of the SPMSD joint venture noted above, as well as higher demand in the Asia Pacific region due in part to the launch in China, partially offset by lower sales in the United States. Lower sales in the United States reflect the timing of public sector purchases and the CDC stockpile borrowing as described above.
The Company is a party to certain third-party license agreements with respect to Gardasil/Gardasil 9 pursuant to which the Company pays royalties on worldwide Gardasil/Gardasil 9 sales. The royalties, which vary by country and range from 7% to 13%, are included in Cost of sales.
Global sales of ProQuad, a pediatric combination vaccine to help protect against measles, mumps, rubella and varicella, were $593 million in 2018, an increase of 12% compared with 2017, driven primarily by higher volumes

and pricing in the United States and volume growth in certain European markets. Worldwide sales of ProQuad were $528 million in 2017, an increase of 7% compared with $495 million in 2016. Sales growth in 2017 was driven primarily by higher pricing and volumes in the United States, as well as volume growth in international markets, particularly in Europe. Foreign exchange favorably affected global sales performance by 1% in 2017.
Worldwide sales of M-M-R II, a vaccine to help protect against measles, mumps and rubella, were $430 million in 2018, an increase of 13% compared with 2017, driven primarily by volume growth in Latin America. Global sales of M-M-R II were $382 million in 2017, an increase of 8% compared with $353 million in 2016. Sales growth in 2017 was largely attributable to higher sales in Europe resulting from the termination of the SPMSD joint venture. Foreign exchange favorably affected global sales performance by 1% in 2018 and unfavorably affected global sales performance by 1% in 2017.
Global sales of Varivax, a vaccine to help prevent chickenpox (varicella), were $774 million in 2018, an increase of 1% compared with 2017, reflecting volume growth in Latin America and the Asia Pacific region, along with higher pricing in the United States, largely offset by volume declines in Turkey from the loss of a government tender due to competition. Worldwide sales of Varivax were $767 million in 2017, a decline of 3% compared with $792 million in 2016. The sales decline in 2017 was driven primarily by lower volumes in Brazil due to the loss of a government tender, as well as lower sales in the United States reflecting lower demand that was partially offset by higher pricing. Higher sales in Europe resulting from the termination of the SPMSD joint venture partially offset the sales decline in 2017.
Worldwide sales of Pneumovax 23, a vaccine to help prevent pneumococcal disease, were $907 million in 2018, an increase of 10% compared with 2017. Sales growth was driven primarily by higher pricing in the United States and volume growth in Europe. Global sales of Pneumovax 23 were $821 million in 2017, an increase of 28% compared with 2016, driven primarily by higher demand and pricing in the United States, as well as higher sales in Europe resulting from the termination of the SPMSD joint venture. Foreign exchange unfavorably affected sales performance by 1% in 2017.
Global sales of RotaTeq, a vaccine to help protect against rotavirus gastroenteritis in infants and children, were $728 million in 2018, an increase of 6% compared with 2017, driven primarily by the launch in China. Worldwide sales of RotaTeq were $686 million in 2017, an increase of 5% compared with 2016, driven primarily by higher sales in Europe resulting from the termination of the SPMSD joint venture.
Worldwide sales of Zostavax, a vaccine to help prevent shingles (herpes zoster) in adults 50 years of age and older, were $217 million in 2018, a decline of 68% compared with 2017, driven by lower volumes in most markets, particularly in the United States. Lower demand in the United States reflects the launch of a competing vaccine that received a preferential recommendation from the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices in October 2017 for the prevention of shingles over Zostavax. The declines were partially offset by higher demand in certain European markets. The Company anticipates competition will continue to have an adverse effect on sales of Zostavax in future periods. Global sales of Zostavax were $668 million in 2017, a decline of 2% compared with 2016 including a 1% favorable effect from foreign exchange. The sales decline was driven primarily by lower demand in the United States reflecting the approval of a competing vaccine as noted above, partially offset by growth in Europe resulting from the termination of the SPMSD joint venture and volume growth in the Asia Pacific region.
In 2018, the FDA approved Vaxelis (Diphtheria and Tetanus Toxoids and Acellular Pertussis Adsorbed, Inactivated Poliovirus, Haemophilus b Conjugate [Meningococcal Protein Conjugate] and Hepatitis B [Recombinant] Vaccine) for use in children from 6 weeks through 4 years of age (prior to the 5th birthday). Vaxelis, which is currently being marketed in Europe, was developed as part of a joint-partnership between Merck and Sanofi. Merck and Sanofi are working to maximize production of Vaxelis to allow for a sustainable supply to meet anticipated U.S. demand. Commercial supply will not be available prior to 2020. 
Hospital Acute Care
Global sales of Bridion, for the reversal of two types of neuromuscular blocking agents used during surgery, were $917 million in 2018, growth of 30% compared with 2017, driven primarily by volume growth in the United States and Women’s Healthcertain European markets. Worldwide sales of Bridion were $704 million in 2017, growth of 46% compared with 2016, driven by strong global demand, particularly in the United States.

Worldwide sales of Noxafil, for the prevention of invasive fungal infections, were $742 million in 2018, an increase of 17% compared with 2017 including a 2% favorable effect from foreign exchange. Sales growth primarily reflects higher demand in the United States, certain European markets and China. Global sales of Noxafil were $636 million in 2017, an increase of 7% compared with 2016, primarily reflecting higher demand and pricing in the United States, as well as volume growth in Europe. The patent that provides U.S. market exclusivity for Noxafil expires in July 2019. Additionally, the patent for Noxafil will expire in a number of major European markets in December 2019. The Company anticipates sales of Noxafil in these markets will decline significantly thereafter.
Global sales of Invanz, for the treatment of certain infections, were $496 million in 2018, a decline of 18% compared with 2017 including a 1% unfavorable effect from foreign exchange. The sales decline was driven by lower volumes in the United States. The patent that provided U.S. market exclusivity for Invanz expired in November 2017 and generic competition began in the second half of 2018. The Company is experiencing a significant decline in U.S. Invanz sales as a result of this generic competition and expects the decline to continue. Worldwide sales of Invanz were $602 million in 2017, an increase of 7% compared with 2016, driven primarily by higher sales in the United States, reflecting higher pricing that was partially offset by lower demand, as well as higher demand in Brazil.
Global sales of Cubicin, an I.V. antibiotic for complicated skin and skin structure infections or bacteremia when caused by designated susceptible organisms, were $367 million in 2018, a decline of 4% compared with 2017 including a 1% favorable effect from foreign exchange. Worldwide sales of Cubicin were $382 million in 2017, a decline of 65% compared with 2016, resulting from generic competition in the United States following expiration of the U.S. composition patent for Cubicin in June 2016.
Global sales of Cancidas, an anti-fungal product sold primarily outside of the United States, were $326 million in 2018, a decline of 23% compared with 2017, and were $422 million in 2017, a decline of 24% compared with 2016. Foreign exchange favorably affected global sales performance by 2% in 2018. The sales declines were driven primarily by generic competition in certain European markets. The EU compound patent for Cancidas expired in April 2017. Accordingly, the Company is experiencing a significant decline in Cancidas sales in these European markets and expects the decline to continue.
Immunology
Sales of Simponi, a once-monthly subcutaneous treatment for certain inflammatory diseases (marketed by the Company in Europe, Russia and Turkey), were $893 million in 2018, growth of 9% compared with 2017 including a 4% favorable effect from foreign exchange. Sales of Simponi were $819 million in 2017, growth of 7% compared with 2016 including a 1% favorable effect from foreign exchange. Sales growth in both years was driven by higher demand in Europe. The Company anticipates sales of Simponi will be unfavorably affected in future periods by the recent launch of biosimilars for a competing product.
Sales of Remicade, a treatment for inflammatory diseases (marketed by the Company in Europe, Russia and Turkey), were $582 million in 2018, a decline of 31% compared with 2017, and were $837 million in 2017, a decline of 34% compared with 2016. Foreign exchange favorably affected sales performance by 2% in 2018. The Company lost market exclusivity for Remicade in major European markets in 2015 and no longer has market exclusivity in any of its marketing territories. The Company is experiencing pricing and volume declines in these markets as a result of biosimilar competition and expects the declines to continue.
Virology
Worldwide sales of Isentress/Isentress HD, an HIV integrase inhibitor for use in combination with other antiretroviral agents for the treatment of HIV-1 infection, were $1.1 billion in 2018, a decline of 5% compared with 2017, and were $1.2 billion in 2017, a decline of 13% compared with 2016. Foreign exchange favorably affected global sales performance by 1% in 2017. The sales declines primarily reflect competitive pressure in the United States and Europe.
In August 2018, the FDA approved two new HIV-1 medicines: Delstrigo, a once-daily fixed-dose combination tablet of doravirine, lamivudine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate; and Pifeltro (doravirine), a new non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor to be administered in combination with other antiretroviral medicines. Both Delstrigo and Pifeltro are indicated for the treatment of HIV-1 infection in adult patients with no prior antiretroviral treatment experience. Delstrigo and Pifeltro were also approved by the EC in November 2018. In January 2019, the FDA accepted for review supplemental New Drug Applications (NDA) for Pifeltro and Delstrigo seeking approval for

use in patients living with HIV-1 who are switching from a stable antiretroviral regimen and whose virus is suppressed. The Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA) date for the supplemental NDAs is September 20, 2019.
Global sales of Zepatier, a treatment for adult patients with certain types of chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, were $455 million in 2018, a decline of 73% compared with 2017. The sales decline was driven primarily by the unfavorable effects of increasing competition and declining patient volumes, particularly in the United States, Europe and Japan. The Company anticipates that sales of Zepatier in the future will continue to be adversely affected by competition and lower patient volumes. Worldwide sales of Zepatier were $1.7 billion in 2017 compared with $555 million in 2016. Sales growth in 2017 was driven primarily by higher sales in Europe, the United States and Japan following product launch in 2016.
Cardiovascular
Combined global sales of Zetia (marketed in most countries outside the United States as Ezetrol) and, Vytorin (marketed outside the United States as Inegy), as well as Atozet and Rosuzet (both marketed in certain countries outside of the United States), medicines for lowering LDL cholesterol, were $3.8$1.8 billion in 2015,2018, a decline of 9%26% compared with 20142017 including a 7% unfavorable3% favorable effect from foreign exchange. The sales decline was driven primarily by lower volumesdemand in the United States and Europe. Zetia and Vytorin lost market exclusivity in the United States in December 2016 and April 2017, respectively. Accordingly, the Company experienced a rapid and substantial decline in U.S. Zetia and Vytorin sales as a result of generic competition and has lost nearly all U.S. sales of these products. In addition, the Company lost market exclusivity in major European markets for Ezetrol in Canada where itApril 2018 and has also lost market exclusivity in September 2014,certain European markets for Inegy (see Note 11 to the consolidated financial statements). Accordingly, the Company is experiencing significant sales declines in these markets as well as by lower volumes ina result of generic competition and expects the United States,declines to continue. These declines were partially offset by higher pricingsales in Japan due in part to the United States.launch of Atozet. Combined worldwide sales of the ezetimibe family were $2.4 billion in 2017, a decline of 39% compared with 2016. The sales decline was driven by lower volumes and pricing of Zetia and Vytorin were $4.2 billion in 2014,the United States as a declineresult of 3%generic competition due to the loss of U.S. market exclusivity as described above.
Pursuant to a collaboration with Bayer AG (Bayer) (see Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements), Merck has lead commercial rights for Adempas, a cardiovascular drug for the treatment of pulmonary arterial hypertension, in countries outside the Americas while Bayer has lead rights in the Americas, including the United States. The companies share profits equally under the collaboration. In 2016, Merck began promoting and distributing Adempas in Europe. Transition from Bayer in other Merck territories, including Japan, continued in 2017. Revenue from Adempas includes sales in Merck’s marketing territories, as well as Merck’s share of profits from the sale of Adempas in Bayer’s marketing territories. Merck recorded revenue related to Adempas of $329 million in 2018, an increase of 10% compared with 2013.2017, reflecting higher sales in Merck’s marketing territories, partially offset by lower profit sharing from Bayer due in part to lower pricing in the United States. Revenue related to Adempas was $300 million in 2017, an increase of 78% compared with 2016, reflecting both higher sales in Merck’s marketing territories, as well as the recognition of higher profit sharing from Bayer. Foreign exchange unfavorablyfavorably affected global sales performance by 3% in 2018 and by 1% in 2014. The sales decline was driven primarily by lower volumes of Vytorin in the United States and Ezetrol in Canada due to loss of market exclusivity.
In November 2014, Merck announced that the investigational IMPROVE-IT study (IMProved Reduction of Outcomes: Vytorin Efficacy International Trial) met its primary and all secondary composite efficacy endpoints. In IMPROVE-IT, patients taking Vytorin - which combines simvastatin with Zetia - experienced significantly fewer major cardiovascular events (as measured by a composite of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, re-hospitalization for unstable angina or coronary revascularization occurring at least 30 days after randomization) than patients treated with simvastatin alone. The results from this 18,144 patient study of high-risk patients presenting with acute coronary syndromes were presented at the American Heart Association 2014 Scientific Sessions. In April 2015, Merck submitted the data from IMPROVE-IT to the FDA to support a new indication for reduction of cardiovascular events for Vytorin and Zetia. Vytorin and Zetia are currently indicated for use along with a healthy diet to reduce elevated LDL cholesterol in patients with hyperlipidemia. The current U.S. Prescribing Information for both products states that the effect of ezetimibe on cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, alone or incremental to statin therapy, has not been determined. In February 2016, Merck announced that the FDA issued a Complete Response Letter (CRL) regarding Merck’s supplemental new drug applications. Merck is reviewing the letter and will determine next steps. Also, in February 2016, through a decentralized process, Merck received a positive outcome of the mutual recognition procedure for updated product information for Ezetrol and Inegy based on the results of IMPROVE-IT. Following the completion of this procedure, the EU Member States concerned will amend local labeling on a country by country basis to include the reduction of risk of cardiovascular events in patients with coronary heart disease and a history of acute coronary syndrome.
By agreement, a generic manufacturer may launch a generic version of Zetia in the United States in December 2016. The U.S. patent and exclusivity periods for Zetia and Vytorin otherwise expire in April 2017. The Company has market exclusivity for Ezetrol in major European markets until October 2017; however, the Company expects to apply for pediatric extensions to the term which would extend the date to April 2018. The Company has market exclusivity for Inegy in those markets until April 2019.
In May 2014, Merck announced that the FDA approved Zontivity for the reduction of thrombotic cardiovascular events in patients with a history of myocardial infarction or with peripheral arterial disease. The U.S. prescribing information for Zontivity includes a boxed warning regarding bleeding risk. In January 2015, Zontivity was approved by the EC for coadministration with acetylsalicylic acid and, where appropriate, clopidogrel, to reduce atherothrombotic events in adult patients with a history of myocardial infarction. Merck currently plans to begin launching Zontivity in certain European markets in 2016. The Company continues to monitor and assess Zontivity and the related intangible asset. Merck continues to focus on building product awareness in the United States for Zontivity. If the Company’s efforts to build product awareness in the United States or the launches in Europe are not successful, the Company may take a non-cash impairment charge with respect to the Zontivity intangible asset, which was $292 million at December 31, 2015.
Diabetes
Worldwide combined sales of Januvia and Janumet, medicines that help lower blood sugar levels in adults with type 2 diabetes, were $6.0$5.9 billion in 2015,2018, essentially flat as compared with 2014 including a 7% unfavorable effect from foreign exchange. Sales performance reflects higher volumes and pricing in the United States, as well as volume growth in the emerging markets and Europe. Volume declines of co-marketed sitagliptin in Japan due to the timing of sales to the licensee partially offset growth in 2015. Combined global2017. Global combined sales of Januvia and Janumet were $6.0$5.9 billion in 2014, an increase2017, a decline of 3% compared with 2013 including a2016. Foreign exchange favorably affected sales performance by 1% unfavorable effect from foreign exchange.

42


The growthin both 2018 and 2017. Sales performance in both periods was driven primarily by higher sales of both Januvia and Janumetongoing pricing pressure, particularly in the United States, and by volume growth in Europe, partially offset by lower sales of Januviahigher demand in Japan duemost international markets. The Company expects pricing pressure to lower pricing. In April 2014, all DPP-4 inhibitors, including Januvia, were subject to repricing in Japan.continue.
In June 2015, Merck announced the primary results of the Trial Evaluating Cardiovascular Outcomes with Sitagliptin (TECOS), a placebo-controlled study of the cardiovascular (CV) safety of Merck’s DPP-4 inhibitor Januvia (sitagliptin), added to usual care in more than 14,000 patients. The study achieved its primary composite CV endpoint of non-inferiority (defined as the time to the first confirmed event of any of the following: CV-related death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or hospitalization for unstable angina) compared to usual care without sitagliptin. In addition, there was no increase in hospitalization for heart failure and rates of all-cause mortality were similar in both treatments groups, which were two key secondary endpoints. These data were presented at the annual scientific meeting of the American Diabetes Association in June 2015.
In September 2015, Merck announced that the Japanese Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency approved Marizev (omarigliptin) 25 mg and 12.5 mg tablets, an oral, once-weekly DPP-4 inhibitor indicated for the treatment of adults with type 2 diabetes. Japan is the first country to have approved omarigliptin. Other worldwide regulatory submissions will follow.
General Medicine and Women’s Health 
Worldwide sales of NuvaRing, a vaginal contraceptive product, were $732$902 million in 2015,2018, an increase of 1%19% compared with 2014, and were $723 million in 2014, an increase of 5% compared with 2013. Foreign exchange unfavorably affected global sales performance by 7% and 1% in 2015 and 2014, respectively. Sales growth in both years largely reflects higher pricing in the United States.
Worldwide sales of Implanon/Nexplanon, single-rod subdermal contraceptive implants, rose to $588 million in 2015, a 17% increase compared with 2014 including a 6% unfavorable effect from foreign exchange. The increase was driven primarily by higher demand in the United States and in the emerging markets. Implanon/Nexplanon sales grew 25% to $502 million in 2014 compared with 2013 driven primarily by higher demand in the United States.
Global sales of Dulera Inhalation Aerosol, a combination medicine for the treatment of asthma, grew 16% in 2015 to $536 million and increased 42% in 2014 to $460 million driven primarily by higher demand in the United States.
Global sales of Follistim AQ (marketed in most countries outside the United States as Puregon), a fertility treatment, were $383 million in 2015, a decline of 7% compared with 2014, reflecting a 9% unfavorable effect from foreign exchange that was offset by higher pricing in the United States. Worldwide sales of Follistim AQ declined 14% to $412 million in 2014 compared with 2013 driven largely by lower pricing in the United States, as well as by lower sales in Europe driven primarily by volume declines. Foreign exchange unfavorably affected global sales performance by 1% in 2014. The patent that provided market exclusivity for Follistim AQ in the United States expired in June 2015.

Hospital and Specialty
Hepatitis
Worldwide sales of PegIntron, a treatment for chronic HCV, were $182 million in 2015, a decline of 52% compared with 2014 including a 5% unfavorable effect from foreign exchange. The decline was driven by lower volumes in nearly all regions as the availability of newer therapeutic options continues to reduce market share. Global sales of PegIntron were $381 million in 2014, a decline of 23% compared with 2013 including a 3% unfavorable effect from foreign exchange. The decrease was driven by lower volumes in most regions as the availability of newer therapeutic options resulted in loss of market share or led to patient treatment delays in markets anticipating the availability of new therapeutic options.
Global sales of Victrelis, an oral medicine for the treatment of chronic HCV, were $18 million in 2015, a decline of 89% compared with 2014, driven by lower volumes in Europe and the emerging markets as the availability of newer therapeutic options continues to reduce market share. Worldwide sales of Victrelis were $153 million in 2014, a decline of 64% compared with 2013, driven by lower volumes in nearly all regions, particularly within the United States, as the availability of newer therapeutic options resulted in loss of market share or led to patient treatment delays in markets anticipating the availability of newer therapeutic options.

43


In January 2016, the FDA approved Zepatier for the treatment of adult patients with chronic HCV GT1 or GT4 infection, with or without ribavirin. Zepatier is a once-daily, fixed-dose combination tablet containing the NS5A inhibitor elbasvir (50 mg) and the NS3/4A protease inhibitor grazoprevir (100 mg). The FDA previously granted two Breakthrough Therapy designations to Zepatier, for the treatment of chronic HCV GT1 infection in patients with end stage renal disease on hemodialysis, and for the treatment of patients with chronic HCV GT4 infection. Breakthrough Therapy designation is given to investigational medicines for serious or life-threatening conditions that may offer substantial improvement over existing therapies. Across multiple clinical studies, Zepatier achieved high rates of sustained virologic response ranging from 94% to 97% in GT1-infected patients, and 97% to 100% in GT4-infected patients. Sustained virologic response is defined as HCV RNA levels measuring less than the lower limit of quantification at 12 weeks after the cessation of treatment, indicating that a patient’s HCV infection has been cured. Zepatier became available in the United States in February 2016. Zepatier is under review in the EU.
HIV
Worldwide sales of Isentress, an HIV integrase inhibitor for use in combination with other antiretroviral agents for the treatment of HIV-1 infection, were $1.5 billion in 2015, a decline of 10% compared with 2014 including an 8% unfavorable effect from foreign exchange. The decline was driven primarily by lower volumes in the United States and lower demand and pricing in Europe due to competitive pressures, partially offset by higher volumes in Latin America and higher pricing in the United States. Global sales of Isentress increased 2% in 2014 to $1.7 billion compared with 2013 primarily reflecting volume growth in Europe and the emerging markets, particularly in Latin America resulting from government tenders, partially offset by volume declines in the United States reflecting competitive pressures. Foreign exchange unfavorably affected global sales performance by 1% in 2014.
Hospital Acute Care
In January 2015, Merck acquired Cubist, a leader in the development of therapies to treat serious infections caused by a broad range of bacteria. Cubist’s products include Cubicin, an I.V. antibiotic for complicated skin and skin structure infections or bacteremia, when caused by designated susceptible organisms. Sales of Cubicin were $1.1 billion in 2015 subsequent to the acquisition. The U.S. composition patent for Cubicin expires in June 2016 and significant losses of Cubicin sales are expected to occur thereafter.
In many markets outside of the United States, Cubicin is commercialized by other companies in accordance with distribution agreements established prior to Merck’s acquisition of Cubist. In the fourth quarter of 2015, Merck entered into agreements to reacquire the marketing rights to Cubicin in certain international markets (including Europe, Latin America, Australia, New Zealand, China, South Africa and certain other Asia Pacific countries).
Cubist’s products also include Zerbaxa, a combination product approved by the FDA in December 2014 for the treatment of adults with complicated urinary tract infections caused by designated susceptible Gram-negative organisms or with complicated intra-abdominal infections caused by designated susceptible Gram-negative and Gram-positive organisms, and Sivextro, a product approved by the FDA in June 2014 for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI) in adults caused by designated susceptible Gram-positive organisms. Sivextro was also approved by the EC in March 2015 for the treatment of ABSSSI in adults. The Company began launching Sivextro in the second quarter of 2015. In September 2015, Zerbaxa was approved by the EC for the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infections, acute pyelonephritis, and complicated urinary tract infections in adults. Zerbaxa and Sivextro are in Phase 3 development in the United States for the treatment of hospital-acquired bacterial pneumonia and ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia.
Global sales of Cancidas, an anti-fungal product, were $573 million in 2015, a decrease of 16% compared with 2014 reflecting a 12% unfavorable effect from foreign exchange and volume declines in certain emerging markets. Worldwide sales of Cancidas grew 3% in 2014 to $681 million compared with 2013 largely reflecting volume growth in the Asia Pacific region, particularly in China. Foreign exchange unfavorably affected global sales performance by 1% in 2014.
Worldwide sales of Noxafil, for the prevention of invasive fungal infections, grew 21% in 2015 to $487 million and increased 30% in 2014 to $402 million driven by pricing and higher demand in the United States and volume growth in Europe reflecting a positive impact from the approval of new formulations. Foreign exchange unfavorably affected global sales performance by 12% in 2015.

44


Sales of Bridion, for the reversal of two types of neuromuscular blocking agents used during surgery, grew 4% in 2015 to $353 million and rose 18% in 2014 to $340 million driven by volume growth in the international markets where it is sold. Foreign exchange unfavorably affected global sales performance by 19% in 2015 and 6% in 2014. Bridion is approved and marketed in many countries outside of the United States. In December 2015, the FDA approved Bridion for the reversal of neuromuscular blockade induced by rocuronium bromide and vecuronium bromide in adults undergoing surgery.
Immunology
Sales of Remicade, a treatment for inflammatory diseases (marketed by the Company in Europe, Russia and Turkey), were $1.8 billion in 2015, a decline of 24% compared with 2014 including a 14% unfavorable effect from foreign exchange. In February 2015, the Company lost market exclusivity for Remicade in major European markets and no longer has market exclusivity in any of its marketing territories. The Company is experiencing pricing and volume declines in these markets as a result of biosimilar competition. While the Company has retained a majority of its existing patients, the Company has lost market share as new patients are prescribed biosimilars. The Company expects the Remicade sales decline to accelerate throughout 2016. Sales of Remicade were $2.4 billion in 2014, an increase of 4% compared with 2013 reflecting sales growth in Europe, partially offset by a decline in Russia.
Sales of Simponi, a once-monthly subcutaneous treatment for certain inflammatory diseases (marketed by the Company in Europe, Russia and Turkey), were $690 million in 2015, essentially flat as compared with 2014, driven by higher demand in Europe, reflecting in part an ongoing positive impact from the ulcerative colitis indication, which was offset by a 19% unfavorable effect from foreign exchange. Sales of Simponi grew 38% in 2014 to $689 million compared with 2013 driven by demand in Europe reflecting in part a positive impact from the ulcerative colitis indication.
Other products contained in Hospital and Specialty include among others, Invanz for the treatment of certain infections; and Primaxin, an anti-bacterial product.
Oncology
Sales of Keytruda, an anti-PD-1 (programmed death receptor-1) therapy, were $566 million in 2015 and $55 million in 2014. The increase primarily reflects higher sales in the United States, as well as in the emerging markets and Europe as the Company continues to launch Keytruda. In September 2014, the FDA granted accelerated approval of Keytruda at a dose of 2 mg/kg every three weeks for the treatment of patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma and disease progression following ipilimumab and, if BRAF V600 mutation positive, a BRAF inhibitor. In December 2015, the Company announced that the FDA approved an expanded indication for Keytruda to include the first-line treatment of patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma regardless of BRAF status. Additionally, the FDA approved an update to the product labeling for Keytruda for the treatment of patients with ipilimumab-refractory advanced melanoma.
In addition, in October 2015, the FDA granted accelerated approval of Keytruda at a dose of 2 mg/kg every three weeks for the treatment of patients with metastatic NSCLC whose tumors express PD-L1 as determined by an FDA-approved test and who have disease progression on or after platinum-containing chemotherapy across both squamous and non-squamous metastatic NSCLC. Patients with EGFR or ALK genomic tumor aberrations should have disease progression on FDA-approved therapy for these aberrations prior to receiving Keytruda. In addition to approving Keytruda for NSCLC, the FDA approved the first companion diagnostic that will enable physicians to determine the level of PD-L1 expression in a patient’s tumor.
In July 2015, Merck announced that the EC approved Keytruda for the treatment of advanced (unresectable or metastatic) melanoma in adults. In October 2015, Merck announced the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) of the UK issued a draft recommendation, in the form of a Final Appraisal Determination, recommending Keytruda as a first-line treatment option for adults with advanced melanoma. In addition, the NICE issued final guidance recommending Keytruda for the treatment of advanced melanoma after disease progression with ipilimumab.
The Company has made additional regulatory filings in other countries and further filings are planned. The Keytruda clinical development program includes studies across a broad range of cancer types (see “Research and Development” below).

45


Global sales of Emend, for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced and post-operative nausea and vomiting, were $535 million in 2015, a decline of 3% reflecting a 6% unfavorable effect from foreign exchange that was partially offset by higher pricing in the United States and volume growth in Europe. Worldwide sales of Emend were $553 million in 2014, an increase of 9% compared with 20132017 including a 1% unfavorable effect from foreign exchange, largely reflecting volume growth in most regions. In February 2016, Merck announced that the FDA approved a supplemental new drug application for single-dose Emend for injection for the prevention of delayed nausea and vomiting in adults receiving initial and repeat courses of moderately emetogenic chemotherapy. With this approval, Emend for injection is the first intravenous single-dose NK1 receptor antagonist approved in the United States for both highly emetogenic chemotherapy as well as moderately emetogenic chemotherapy.
Sales of Temodar (marketed as Temodal outside the United States), a treatment for certain types of brain tumors, were $312 million in 2015, a decline of 11% compared with 2014, reflecting a 14% unfavorable effect from foreign exchange that was partially offset by growth in the emerging markets. Global sales of Temodar declined 51% to $350 million in 2014. Foreign exchange unfavorably affected global sales performance by 3% in 2014. The sales decline in 2014 was driven primarily by generic competition in the United States, as well as in Europe. By agreement, a generic manufacturer launched a generic version of Temodar in the United States in August 2013. The U.S. patent and exclusivity periods otherwise expired in February 2014.
Diversified Brands
Merck’s diversified brands include human health pharmaceutical products that are approaching the expiration of their marketing exclusivity or are no longer protected by patents in developed markets, but continue to be a core part of the Company’s offering in other markets around the world.
Respiratory
Worldwide sales of Singulair, a once-a-day oral medicine for the chronic treatment of asthma and for the relief of symptoms of allergic rhinitis, were $931 million in 2015, a decline of 15% compared with 2014 including a 10% unfavorable effect from foreign exchange. The sales decline in 2015 was driven primarily by lower volumes in Japan and lower demand in Europe as a result of generic competition. Global sales of Singulair were $1.1 billion in 2014, a decline of 9% compared with 2013 including a 5% unfavorable effect from foreign exchange, primarily reflecting lower sales in Europe as a result of generic competition. The Company has lost market exclusivity for Singulair in the United States and in most major international markets with the exception of Japan and expects generic competition in these markets to continue. The patent that provides market exclusivity for Singulair in Japan will expire in 2016. Singulair sales in Japan were $452 million in 2015.
Global sales of Nasonex, an inhaled nasal corticosteroid for the treatment of nasal allergy symptoms, were $858 million in 2015, a decline of 22% compared with 2014 including a 6% unfavorable effect from foreign exchange. The decline was driven primarily by lower volumes in the United States reflecting competition from alternative generic treatment options, as well as from supply constraints. The supply issue was resolved and Nasonex became available again in October. In addition, lower volumes and pricing in Europe from ongoing generic erosion also contributed to the Nasonex sales decline. By agreement, generic manufacturers were able to launch a generic version of Nasonex in most European markets on January 1, 2014 and generic versions of Nasonex have since launched in most of these markets. Accordingly, the Company continues to experience volume and pricing declines in Nasonex sales in Europe. Worldwide sales of Nasonex decreased 18% to $1.1 billion in 2014 compared with 2013. Foreign exchange unfavorably affected global sales performance by 2% in 2014. The sales decline was driven primarily by lower demand in the United States, as well as by lower volumes in Europe and Canada resulting from generic competition. In 2009, Apotex Inc. and Apotex Corp. (collectively, Apotex) filed an application with the FDA seeking approval to sell its generic version of Nasonex. In June 2012, the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey ruled against the Company in a patent infringement suit against Apotex holding that Apotex’s generic version of Nasonex does not infringe on the Company’s formulation patent. In June 2013, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a decision affirming the U.S. District Court decision and the Company has exhausted all of its appeal options. Apotex has not yet launched a generic version of Nasonex in the United States; however, if Apotex’s generic version becomes available, significant losses of U.S. Nasonex sales could occur. U.S. sales of Nasonex were $449 million in 2015.

46


Other
Global sales of Cozaar and its companion agent Hyzaar (a combination of Cozaar and hydrochlorothiazide), treatments for hypertension, declined 17% in 2015 to $667 million and decreased 20% in 2014 to $806 million. Foreign exchange unfavorably affected global sales performance by 9% and 4% in 2015 and 2014, respectively. The patents that provided market exclusivity for Cozaar and Hyzaar in the United States and in most major international markets have expired. Accordingly, the Company is experiencing declines in Cozaar and Hyzaar sales and expects the declines to continue.
Worldwide sales of ophthalmic products Cosopt and Trusopt were $61 million in 2015, $257 million in 2014 and $416 million in 2013. The declines were driven largely by the divestiture of Cosopt and Trusopt in many international markets in 2014. In addition, the sale of the U.S. rights to Cosopt and Cosopt PF in 2013 also contributed to the sales decline in 2014 as compared with 2013. In December 2015, the Company divested its remaining ophthalmics portfolio in international markets to Mundipharma Ophthalmology Products Limited (see Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements).
Other products contained in Diversified Brands include among others, Clarinex, a non-sedating antihistamine; Arcoxia for the treatment of arthritis and pain (which the Company markets outside the United States); Fosamax (marketed as Fosamac in Japan) and Fosamax Plus D (marketed as Fosavance throughout the EU) for the treatment and, in the case of Fosamax, prevention of osteoporosis; Zocor, a statin for modifying cholesterol; and Propecia, a product for the treatment of male pattern hair loss.
Vaccines
The following discussion of vaccines does not include sales of vaccines sold in most major European markets through Sanofi Pasteur MSD (SPMSD), the Company’s joint venture with Sanofi Pasteur, the results of which are reflected in equity income from affiliates included in Other (income) expense, net (see “Selected Joint Venture and Affiliate Information” below). Supply sales to SPMSD, however, are included.
Merck’s sales of Gardasil/Gardasil 9, vaccines to help prevent certain diseases caused by certain types of HPV, were $1.9 billion in 2015, an increase of 10% compared with 2014 including a 1% unfavorablefavorable effect from foreign exchange. Sales growth was driven primarily by higher salespricing in the United States resulting from higher pricing and increased volumes reflecting the timing of public sector purchases, as well as increased government tenders in the Asia Pacific region, partially offset by declines in Latin America due to both price and volume. Gardasil 9, Merck’s 9-valent HPV vaccine, was approved by the FDA in December 2014 for use in girls and young women 9 to 26 years of age. Gardasil 9 includes the greatest number of HPV types in any available HPV vaccine. In December 2015, the FDA approved an expanded age indicationStates. The patent that provided U.S. market exclusivity for Gardasil NuvaRing9, to include use expired in males 16 through 26 yearsApril 2018 and the Company anticipates a significant decline in U.S. NuvaRing sales in future periods as a result of age for the prevention of anal cancers, precancerous or dysplastic lesions and genital warts caused by certain HPV types. Merck’sgeneric competition. Global sales of GardasilNuvaRing were $1.7 billion$761 million in 2014,2017, a decline of 5%2% compared with 20132016 including a 2% unfavorable1% favorable effect from foreign exchange. The decline reflects lower sales in Asia Pacific, Japan and Canada, partially offset by higher government tenders in Brazil from the national immunization program, as well as higher public sector purchases in the United States. Sales in 2014 and 2013 included $56 million and $37 million, respectively, of purchases for the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Pediatric Vaccine Stockpile. The Company is a party to certain third-party license agreements with respect to Gardasil/Gardasil 9 (including a cross-license and settlement agreement with GlaxoSmithKline). As a result of these agreements, the Company pays royalties on worldwide Gardasil/Gardasil 9 sales of 17% to 25% which vary by country and are included in Materials and production costs.
Merck’s sales of ProQuad, a pediatric combination vaccine to help protect against measles, mumps, rubella and varicella, were $454 million in 2015, $395 million in 2014 and $314 million in 2013. Sales growth in 2015 as compared with 2014decline was driven primarily by higherlower sales in the United States reflecting increased volumes, which were driven in part by measles outbreaks in the United States, as well as higher pricing. The increase in 2014 as compared with 2013 was driven primarily by higher sales in the United States reflecting approximately $30 million of government purchases for the CDC Pediatric Vaccine Stockpile.
Merck’s sales of M-M-R II, a vaccine to help protect against measles, mumps and rubella, were $365 million in 2015, $326 million in 2014 and $307 million in 2013. Sales growth in 2015 as compared with 2014 was driven by higher demand resulting from measles outbreaks in the United States and higher pricing.

47


Merck’s sales of Varivax, a vaccine to help prevent chickenpox (varicella), were $686 million in 2015, $672 million in 2014 and $684 million in 2013. Sales growth in 2015 as compared with 2014 reflects higher volumes in certain emerging markets and higher pricing in the United States, partially offset by lower volumes in the United States. Sales performance in 2014 as compared with 2013 reflects lower sales in the United States largely offset by growth in the emerging markets.
Merck’s sales of Zostavax, a vaccine to help prevent shingles (herpes zoster) in adults 50 years of age and older,that were $749 million in 2015, a decline of 2% compared with 2014 including a 2% unfavorable effect from foreign exchange. Sales performance in 2015 as compared with 2014 reflects lower volumes in the United States, partially offset by higher demand in Canadapricing, and higher pricing in the United States. Merck’s sales of Zostavax were $765 million in 2014, an increase of 1% compared with 2013, driven primarily by higher sales in the Asia Pacific region due to ongoing launches, partially offset by lower demand in the United States, as well as in Canada. The Company is continuing to educate U.S. customers on the broad managed care coverage for Zostavax and the process for obtaining reimbursement. Merck is continuing to launch Zostavax outside of the United States.Europe.
Merck’s sales of RotaTeq, a vaccine to help protect against rotavirus gastroenteritis in infants and children, were $610 million in 2015, a decline of 7% compared with 2014 including a 3% unfavorable effect from foreign exchange. The decline was driven primarily by the effects of public sector purchasing in the United States. Merck’s sales of RotaTeq increased 4% in 2014 to $659 million compared with 2013 primarily reflecting higher sales in certain emerging markets.
Merck’s sales of Pneumovax 23, a vaccine to help prevent pneumococcal disease, declined 27% in 2015 to $542 million compared with 2014 driven primarily by lower demand in the United States due to near term market dynamics and sales in the emerging markets. Merck’s sales of Pneumovax 23 grew 14% in 2014 to $746 million compared with 2013 driven primarily by higher sales in Japan from the national immunization program, as well as higher sales in the United States attributable to both price and volume. Foreign exchange unfavorably affected sales performance by 2% and 3% in 2015 and 2014, respectively.
Other Segments
The Company’s other segments are the Animal Health, Alliances and Healthcare Services segments, which are not material for separate reporting. Prior to its disposition on October 1, 2014, the Company also had a Consumer Care segment which had sales of $1.5 billion in 2014 and $1.9 billion in 2013.
Animal Health Segment
Animal Health includes pharmaceutical and vaccine products for the prevention, treatment and control of disease in all major farm and companion animal species. Animal Health sales are affected by competition and the frequent introduction of generic products. Global sales of Animal Health products were $3.3$4.2 billion in 2015, a decline2018, an increase of 4%9% compared with 2014 including a 13% unfavorable effect2017, reflecting growth from foreign exchange. Sales performance in 2015 reflects volume growth inboth in-line and recently launched companion animal and livestock products. Higher sales of companion animal products driven primarily byreflect growth in the Bravecto line of products that kill fleas and ticks in dogs and cats for up to 12 weeks, as well as higher sales of Bravecto chewable tablets for dogs to treat fleascompanion animal vaccines. Growth in livestock products reflects higher sales of ruminant, poultry and ticks that began launching in Europe and the United States in 2014, as well as volume growth in swine and aqua products. Worldwide sales of Animal Health products totaled $3.5were $3.9 billion in 2014, growth2017, an increase of 3%11% compared with 2013 including a 2% unfavorable effect from foreign exchange. The sales growth was driven2016, primarily byreflecting higher sales of companion animal products, reflecting the launch oflargely driven by growth in Bravecto, reflecting both growth in Europethe oral formulation and continued uptake in the United States, as well astopical formulation, which was launched in 2016. Animal Health sales growth in 2017 was also driven by higher sales of ruminant, poultry and aqua products, partially offset by lower sales of Zilmax, a feed supplement for beef cattle.swine products.
Alliances
The Alliances segment includes results from the Company’s relationship with AZLP. On June 30, 2014, AstraZeneca exercised its option to buy Merck’s interest in a subsidiary and, through it, Merck’s interest in Nexium and Prilosec. As a result, as of July 1, 2014,In December 2018, the Company no longer records equity income from AZLPsigned an agreement to acquire Antelliq, a leader in digital animal identification, traceability and supply salesmonitoring solutions (see Note 3 to AZLP, primarily relating to sales of Nexium and Prilosec, have terminated (see “Selected Joint Venture and Affiliate Information” below). Revenue from AZLP was $463 million in 2014 through the June 30 termination date and $920 million in 2013.consolidated financial statements).


48


Costs, Expenses and Other
($ in millions)2015 Change 2014 Change 20132018 Change 2017 Change 2016
Materials and production$14,934
 -11 % $16,768
 -1 % $16,954
Marketing and administrative10,313
 -11 % 11,606
 -3 % 11,911
Research and development (1)
6,704
 -7 % 7,180
 -4 % 7,503
Cost of sales$13,509
 5 % $12,912
 -8 % $14,030
Selling, general and administrative10,102
  % 10,074
 1 % 10,017
Research and development9,752
 -6 % 10,339
 1 % 10,261
Restructuring costs619
 -39 % 1,013
 -41 % 1,709
632
 -19 % 776
 19 % 651
Other (income) expense, net1,527
 *
 (11,613) *
 411
(402) -20 % (500) *
 189
$34,097
 37 % $24,954
 -35 % $38,488
$33,593
  % $33,601
 -4 % $35,148
* Greater than 100% or greater..
(1)
Includes $63 million, $49 million and $279 million of IPR&D impairment charges in 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively.
Materials and ProductionCost of Sales
Materials and production costs were $14.9Cost of sales was $13.5 billion in 2015, $16.82018, $12.9 billion in 20142017 and $17.0$14.0 billion in 2013.2016. Costs in 2018 include a $423 million charge related to the termination of a collaboration agreement with Samsung Bioepis Co., Ltd. (Samsung) for insulin glargine (see Note 3 to the consolidated financial statements). Also in 2018, the Company recorded $188 million of cumulative amortization expense for amounts capitalized in connection with the recognition of liabilities for potential future milestone payments related to collaborations (see Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements). Cost of sales includes expenses for the amortization of intangible assets recorded in connection with business acquisitions which totaled $4.7$2.7 billion in 2015, $4.22018, $3.1 billion in 20142017 and $4.7$3.7 billion in 2013. In addition, expenses for 2015 include $105 million of amortization of purchase accounting adjustments to Cubist’s inventories.2016. Costs in 2015, 20142017 and 20132016 also include intangible asset impairment charges of $45$58 million $1.1 billion and $486$347 million, respectively, related to marketed products and other intangibles recorded in connection with business acquisitions (see Note 78 to the consolidated financial statements). Costs in 2017 also include a $76 million intangible asset impairment charge related to a licensing agreement. The Company may recognize additional non-cash impairment charges in the future related to intangiblesintangible assets that were measured at fair value and capitalized in connection with business acquisitions and such charges could be material. Additionally, costs in 2013 include a $41 million intangible asset impairment charge related to a licensing agreement. Also included in materials and productioncost of sales are costsexpenses associated with restructuring activities which amounted to $361$21 million, $482$138 million and $446$181 million in 2015, 20142018, 2017 and 2013,2016, respectively, includingprimarily reflecting accelerated depreciation and asset write-offs related to the planned sale or closure of manufacturing facilities. Separation costs associated with manufacturing-related headcount reductions have been incurred and are reflected in Restructuring costs as discussed below.
Gross margin was 62.2%68.1% in 20152018 compared with 60.3%67.8% in 20142017 and 61.5%64.5% in 2013.2016. The year-over-year improvements in gross margin reflect a lower net impact from the amortization of intangible assets and purchase accounting adjustmentsintangible asset impairment charges related to inventories,business acquisitions, as well as restructuring costs as noted above, which reduced gross margin by 6.3 percentage points in 2018, 8.3 percentage points in 2017 and 10.6 percentage points in 2016. The gross margin improvement in 2018 compared with 2017 also reflects the favorable effects of product mix and amortization of unfavorable manufacturing variances recorded in 2017, resulting in part from the June 2017 cyber-attack. The gross margin improvement in 2018 was partially offset by a charge associated with the termination of a collaboration agreement

with Samsung, as well as the restructuringunfavorable effects of pricing pressure and impairment chargescumulative amortization expense for potential future milestone payments related to collaborations as noted above reducedabove. The gross margin by 13.2 percentage pointsimprovement in 2015, 13.6 percentage points in 2014 and 12.8 percentage points in 2013. Excluding these impacts,2017 compared with 2016 also reflects the favorable effects of product mix. Manufacturing-related costs associated with the cyber-attack partially offset the gross margin improvement in 2015 as2017.
Selling, General and Administrative
Selling, general and administrative (SG&A) expenses were $10.1 billion in 2018, essentially flat compared with 2014 was driven primarily by2017, reflecting higher administrative costs and the favorable effectsunfavorable effect of foreign exchange, offset by lower selling and lower inventory write-offs, as well as the net impactpromotional expenses. SG&A expenses were $10.1 billion in 2017, an increase of acquisitions and divestitures. The gross margin decline in 2014 as1% compared with 2013 was driven primarily by2016. Higher administrative costs, including costs associated with the unfavorable effects of inventory write-offs largely related to Victrelis, as well as by changesCompany operating its vaccines business in product mix, partially offset by the saleEuropean markets that were previously part of the U.S. marketing rights to Saphris.
Marketing and Administrative
Marketing and administrative expenses declined 11% in 2015 to $10.3 billion in 2015 largely reflecting the favorable effects from foreign exchange, the prior year divestiture of MCC, additional expenses in the prior yearSPMSD joint venture, remediation costs related to the health care reform fee as discussed below, lower restructuring costs, as well as lower selling costs, partially offset bycyber-attack, and higher promotional spending largelyexpenses related to product launches, as well as higher costs related to the January acquisition of Cubistwere partially offset by lower restructuring and higher acquisition and divestiture-related costs. Marketing and administrative expenses decreased 3% in 2014 to $11.6 billion driven primarily bycosts, lower selling costs and promotional spending, the divestiture of MCCexpenses and the favorable effectseffect of foreign exchange, partially offset by an additional year of expense related to the health care reform fee, as well as higher acquisition and divestiture-related costs. Expenses for 2015, 2014 and 2013exchange. SG&A expenses in 2016 include restructuring costs of $78$95 million $200 million and $145 million, respectively, related primarily to accelerated depreciation for facilities to be closed or divested. Separation costs associated with sales force reductions have been incurred and are reflected in Restructuring costs as discussed below. ExpensesSG&A expenses also include $436 million, $234 million and $94 million of acquisition and divestiture-related costs of $32 million, $44 million and $78 million in 2015, 20142018, 2017 and 2013,2016, respectively, consisting of integration, transaction, and certain other costs related to business acquisitions including severance costs which are not part of the Company’s formal restructuring programs, as well as transaction and certain other costs related to divestitures.

49


On July 28, 2014, the IRS issued final regulations on the annual non-tax deductible health care reform fee imposed by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act that is based on an allocation of a company’s market share of prior year branded pharmaceutical sales to certain government programs. The final IRS regulations accelerated the recognition criteria for the fee obligation by one year to the year in which the underlying sales used to allocate the fee occurred rather than the year in which the fee was paid. As a result of this change, Merck recorded an additional year of expense of $193 million during 2014.
Research and Development
Research and development (R&D) expenses were $6.7$9.8 billion in 2015,2018, a decline of 7%6% compared with $7.2 billion2017. The decrease primarily reflects lower expenses in 2014 driven primarily by the favorable effects of foreign exchange, expenses recognized in the prior year to increase the estimated fair value of liabilities2018 for contingent consideration, lower restructuring costs, a charge in the prior yearupfront and license option payments related to a collaboration with Bayer AG (Bayer) and the prior year divestitureformation of MCC, partially offset by the acquisition of Cubist, higher licensing costs and higher clinical development spending. Research and development expenses declined 4% in 2014 to $7.2 billion compared with $7.5 billion in 2013 reflecting targeted reductions andoncology collaborations, lower clinical development spend as a result of portfolio prioritization, cost savings resulting from restructuring activities and lower acquired in-process research and development (IPR&D) impairment charges, partially offset by higher charges to increaseand a reduction in expenses associated with a decrease in the estimated fair value measurement of liabilities for contingent consideration, partially offset by higher restructuring costsclinical development spending and investment in discovery and early drug development, as well as higher expenses related to other business development activities, including a charge in 2018 for the acquisition of Viralytics. R&D expenses were $10.3 billion in 2017, an increase of 1% compared with 2016. The increase was driven primarily by a charge in 2017 related to the formation of a collaboration with Bayer.AstraZeneca, an unfavorable effect from changes in the estimated fair value measurement of liabilities for contingent consideration, and higher clinical development spending, largely offset by lower IPR&D impairment charges and lower restructuring costs.
Research and developmentR&D expenses are comprised of the costs directly incurred by Merck Research Laboratories (MRL), the Company’s research and development division that focuses on human health-related activities, which were approximately $4.0$5.1 billion in 2015, $3.72018, $4.6 billion in 20142017 and $4.2$4.4 billion in 2013.2016. Also included in research and developmentR&D expenses are costs incurred by other divisions in support of research and developmentR&D activities, including depreciation, production and general and administrative, as well as licensing activity, and certain costs from operating segments, including the Pharmaceutical and Animal Health segments, which in the aggregate were $2.8 billion, $2.9 billion and $2.6 billion $2.8for 2018, 2017 and 2016, respectively. Additionally, R&D expenses in 2018 include a $1.4 billion and $2.9charge related to the formation of a collaboration with Eisai (see Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements), as well as a $344 million charge for the acquisition of Viralytics (see Note 3 to the consolidated financial statements). R&D expenses in 2017 include a $2.35 billion for 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively. Research and developmentcharge related to the formation of a collaboration with AstraZeneca (see Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements). R&D expenses also include IPR&D impairment charges of $63$152 million, $49$483 million and $279 million$3.6 billion in 2015, 20142018, 2017 and 2013,2016, respectively (see “Research and Development” below)Note 8 to the consolidated financial statements). The Company may recognize additional non-cash impairment charges in the future forrelated to the cancellation or delay of other pipeline programs that were measured at fair value and capitalized in connection with business acquisitions and such charges could be material. In addition, research and developmentR&D expenses include expense or income related to changes in the estimated fair value measurement of liabilities for contingent consideration recorded in connection with acquisitions. During 2015,2018 and 2016, the Company recorded a net reduction ofin expenses of $24$54 million and $402 million, respectively, to decrease the estimated fair value of liabilities for contingent consideration and during 2014related to the discontinuation or delay of certain programs (see Note 6 to the consolidated financial statements). During 2017, the Company recorded a chargecharges of $316$27 million to increase the estimated fair value of liabilities for contingent consideration (see Note 5 to the consolidated financial statements). Research and developmentconsideration. R&D expenses in 2015, 2014 and 20132016 also reflect $52$142 million $283 million and $101 million, respectively, of accelerated depreciation and asset abandonment costs associated with restructuring activities.

Restructuring Costs
In 2010 and 2013, the Company commenced actions under global restructuring programs designed to streamline its cost structure. The actions under these programs include the elimination of positions in sales, administrative and headquarters organizations, as well as the sale or closure of certain manufacturing and research and development sites and the consolidation of office facilities. The Company also continues to reduce its global real estate footprint and improve the efficiency of its manufacturing and supply network.
Restructuring costs, primarily representing separation and other related costs associated with these restructuring activities, were $619$632 million, $1.0 billion and $1.7 billion in 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively. Costs in 2015, 2014 and 2013 include $363 million, $594$776 million and $898$651 million respectively, of expenses related to the 2013 Restructuring Program. The remaining costs in 2015, 20142018, 2017 and nearly all of the remaining costs recorded in 2013 related to the Merger Restructuring Program.2016, respectively. In 2015, 20142018, 2017 and 2013,2016, separation costs of $208$473 million, $674$552 million and $1.4 billion,$216 million, respectively, were incurred associated with actual headcount reductions, as well as estimated expenses under existing severance programs for headcount reductions that were probable and could be reasonably estimated. PositionsMerck eliminated under the 2013 Restructuring Program were approximately 2,5352,160 positions in 2015, 4,5552018, 2,450 positions in 20142017 and 1,5402,625 positions in 2013. Positions eliminated under the Merger Restructuring Program were approximately 1,235 in 2015, 1,530 in 2014 and 4,475 in 2013. These position eliminations are comprised of actual headcount reductions, and the elimination of contractors and vacant positions.2016 related to these restructuring activities. Also included in restructuring costs are asset abandonment, shut-down and other related costs, as well as employee-related costs such as curtailment, settlement and termination charges associated with pension and other postretirement benefit plans and share-based compensation plan costs. For segment reporting, restructuring costs are unallocated expenses.
Additional costs associated with the Company’s restructuring activities are included in Materials and productionCost of sales, MarketingSelling, general and administrative and Research and development as discussed above.

50


Other (Income) Expense, Net
Other (income) expense, net was $1.5$658 million in 2018, $927 million in 2017 and $1.1 billion of expense in 2015 compared with $11.6 billion of income in 2014. The unfavorability was driven primarily by gains recognized in 2014, including an $11.2 billion gain2016 related to the divestiture of MCCrestructuring program activities (see Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements), a $741 million gain related to AstraZeneca’s option exercise (see Note 8 to the consolidated financial statements), a $480 million gain on the divestiture of certain ophthalmic products in several international markets (see Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements) and a $204 million gain related to the divestiture of the Company’s Sirna Therapeutics, Inc. subsidiary (see Note 45 to the consolidated financial statements). The unfavorability was also driven by a $680 million net charge recorded in 2015 related toCompany has substantially completed the settlement of Vioxx shareholder class action litigation (see Note 10 to the consolidated financial statements), foreign exchange losses of $876 million in 2015 related to the devaluation of the Company’s net monetary assets in Venezuela (see Note 14 to the consolidated financial statements), and lower equity income from AZLP. Partially offsetting the unfavorability ofactions under these items was a $628 million loss on extinguishment of debt in 2014 (see Note 9 to the consolidated financial statements), a $250 million gain in 2015 on the sale of certain migraine clinical development programs (see Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements), a $147 million gain on the divestiture of the Company’s remaining ophthalmics business in international markets (see Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements), higher equity income from certain research investment funds, and a $93 million goodwill impairment charge in 2014 related to the Company’s joint venture with Supera (see Note 7 to the consolidated financial statements).programs.
Other (Income) Expense, Net
Other (income) expense, net, was $11.6 billion$402 million of income in 2014 compared with $4112018, $500 million of income in 2017 and $189 million of expense in 2013 driven primarily by gains recognized in 2014 as noted above, lower foreign exchange losses due to a Venezuelan currency devaluation in 2013, partially offset by charges recognized in 2014 related2016. For details on the components of Other (income) expense, net, see Note 15 to the extinguishment of debt and goodwill impairment as noted above, as well as lower equity income from AZLP in 2014.consolidated financial statements.
Segment Profits          
($ in millions)2015 2014 20132018 2017 2016
Pharmaceutical segment profits$21,658
 $22,164
 $22,983
$24,292
 $22,495
 $22,141
Animal Health segment profits1,659
 1,552
 1,357
Other non-reportable segment profits1,659
 2,458
 3,049
103
 275
 146
Other(17,916) (7,339) (20,487)(17,353)
(17,801)
(18,985)
Income before income taxes$5,401
 $17,283
 $5,545
Income before taxes$8,701
 $6,521
 $4,659
SegmentPharmaceutical segment profits are comprised of segment sales less standard costs, certain operatingas well as SG&A and R&D expenses directly incurred by the segment. Animal Health segment componentsprofits are comprised of equity income or loss from affiliatessegment sales, less all cost of sales, as well as SG&A and certain depreciation and amortization expenses.R&D expenses directly incurred by the segment. For internal management reporting presented to the chief operating decision maker, Merck does not allocate materials and production costs, other than standard costs, the majorityremaining cost of sales not included in segment profits as described above, research and development expenses incurred in MRL, or general and administrative expenses, nor the cost of financing these activities. Separate divisions maintain responsibility for monitoring and managing these costs, including depreciation related to fixed assets utilized by these divisions and, therefore, they are not included in segment profits. Also excluded from the determination of segment profits are acquisition and divestiture-related costs including the amortization(amortization of purchase accounting adjustments, and intangible asset impairment charges and expense or income related to changes in the estimated fair value measurement of liabilities for contingent consideration), restructuring costs, taxes paid at the joint venture level and a portion of equity income. Additionally, segment profits do not reflect other expenses from corporate and manufacturing cost centers and other miscellaneous income or expense. These unallocated items, including gainsa charge related to the termination of a collaboration agreement with Samsung for insulin glargine in 2018, a loss on divestitures,the extinguishment of debt in 2017, and a net charge related to the settlement of Vioxxworldwide shareholder class actionKeytruda patent litigation the gainand gains on AstraZeneca’s option exercise, foreign exchange losses related to the devaluation of the Company’s net monetary assetsdivestitures in Venezuela, the loss on extinguishment of debt and an additional year of expense related to the health care reform fee,2016, are reflected in “Other” in the above table. Also included in “Other” are miscellaneous corporate profits (losses), as well as operating profits (losses) related to third-party manufacturing sales. In the first quarter of 2018, the Company adopted a new accounting standard related to the classification of certain defined benefit plan costs, which resulted in a change to the measurement of segment profits (see Note 19 to the consolidated financial statements). Prior period amounts have been recast to conform to the new presentation.

Pharmaceutical segment profits declined 2%grew 8% in 20152018 compared with 20142017 primarily reflecting the unfavorable effect of foreign exchange.higher sales and lower selling and promotional costs. Pharmaceutical segment profits declined 4%grew 2% in 20142017 compared with 20132016 primarily reflecting higher sales and the favorable effects of product mix. Animal Health segment profits grew 7% in 2018 and 14% in 2017 driven primarily by the unfavorable effects of product divestitures and loss of market exclusivity for certain products,higher sales, partially offset by cost savings from productivity measures. The declines in other segment profits in 2015increased selling and 2014 reflect the termination of the Company’s relationship with AZLP, as well as the divestiture of MCC.promotional costs.

51


Taxes on Income
The effective income tax rates of 17.4%28.8% in 2015, 30.9%2018, 62.9% in 20142017 and 18.5%15.4% in 20132016 reflect the impacts of acquisition and divestiture-related costs, and restructuring costs partially offset byand the beneficial impact of foreign earnings. The effective income tax rate in 2018 includes measurement-period adjustments to the provisional amounts recorded in 2017 associated with the enactment of U.S. tax legislation known as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), including $124 million related to the transition tax (see Note 16 to the consolidated financial statements). In addition, the effective income tax rate for 20152018 reflects the unfavorable impacts of a $1.4 billion pretax charge recorded in connection with the formation of a collaboration with Eisai and a $423 million pretax charge related to the termination of a collaboration agreement with Samsung for which no tax benefits were recognized. The effective income tax rate for 2017 includes a provisional net charge of $2.6 billion related to the enactment of the TCJA. The effective income tax rate for 2017 also reflects the unfavorable impact of a $2.35 billion pretax charge recorded in connection with the formation of a collaboration with AstraZeneca for which no tax benefit was recognized, partially offset by the favorable impact of a net tax benefit of $410$234 million related to the settlement of certain federal income tax issues (see Note 16 to the impactconsolidated financial statements), and a benefit of the net charge$88 million related to the settlement of Vioxx shareholder class action litigation being fully deductible at combined U.S. federal anda state tax rates and the favorable impact of tax legislation enacted in the fourth quarter of 2015, as well as the unfavorable effect of non-tax deductible foreign exchange losses related to Venezuela (see Note 14 to the consolidated financial statements). The effective income tax rate for 2014 reflects the impact of the gain on the divestiture of MCC being taxed at combined U.S. federal and state tax rates. In addition, the effective income tax rate for 2014 includes a net tax benefit of $517 million recorded in connection with AstraZeneca’s option exercise (see Note 8 to the consolidated financial statements) and a benefit of approximately $300 million associated with a capital loss generated in connection with the sale of Sirna (see Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements). The effective income tax rate for 2014 also includes the unfavorable impact of an additional year of expense for the non-tax deductible health care reform fee that the Company recorded in accordance with final regulations issued in the third quarter by the IRS. The effective income tax rate in 2013 reflects a net benefit of $165 million from the settlements of certain federal income tax issues, net benefits from reductions in tax reserves upon expiration of applicable statutes of limitations, the favorable impact of tax legislation enacted in the first quarter of 2013 that extended the R&D tax credit for both 2012 and 2013, as well as an out-of-period net tax benefit of approximately $160 million associated with the resolution of a previously disclosed legacy Schering-Plough federal income tax issue (see Note 15 to the consolidated financial statements).
The Company is under examination by numerous tax authorities in various jurisdictions globally. The ultimate finalization of the Company’s examinations with relevant taxing authorities can include formal administrative and legal proceedings, which could have a significant impact on the timing of the reversal of unrecognized tax benefits. The Company believes that its reserves for uncertain tax positions are adequate to cover existing risks or exposures. However, there is one item that is currently under discussion with the IRS relating to the 2006 through 2008 examination. The Company has concluded that its position should be sustained upon audit. However, if this item were to result in an unfavorable outcome or settlement, it could have a material adverse impact on the Company’s financial position, liquidity and results of operations.issue.
Net (Loss) Income Attributable to Noncontrolling Interests
Net (loss) income attributable to noncontrolling interests was $17$(27) million in 2015, $14 million in 2014 and $113 million in 2013. The declines in 2015 and 2014 as2018 compared with 2013 reflect$24 million in part the termination of the Company’s relationship with AZLP2017 and the resulting retirement of KBI preferred stock (see Note 11 to the consolidated financial statements). In addition, the amount for 2014 includes$21 million in 2016. The loss in 2018 primarily reflects the portion of intangible asset and goodwill impairment charges related to certain business in the Company’s joint venture with Supera (see Note 7 to the consolidated financial statements)Healthcare Services segment that are attributable to noncontrolling interests.
Net Income and Earnings per Common Share
Net income attributable to Merck & Co., Inc. was $4.4$6.2 billion in 2015, $11.92018, $2.4 billion in 20142017 and $4.4$3.9 billion in 2013.2016. EPS was $1.56$2.32 in 2015, $4.072018, $0.87 in 20142017 and $1.47$1.41 in 2013.2016.
Non-GAAP Income and Non-GAAP EPS
Non-GAAP income and non-GAAP EPS are alternative views of the Company’s performance used by management that Merck is providing because management believes this information enhances investors’ understanding of the Company’s results.results as it permits investors to understand how management assesses performance. Non-GAAP income and non-GAAP EPS exclude certain items because of the nature of these items and the impact that they have on the analysis of underlying business performance and trends. The excluded items (which should not be considered non-recurring) consist of acquisition and divestiture-related costs, restructuring costs and certain other items. These excluded items are significant components in understanding and assessing financial performance. Therefore,
Non-GAAP income and non-GAAP EPS are important internal measures for the information onCompany. Senior management receives a monthly analysis of operating results that includes non-GAAP EPS. Management uses these measures internally for planning and forecasting purposes and to measure the performance of the Company along with other metrics. Senior management’s annual compensation is derived in part using non-GAAP income and non-GAAP EPS should be considered in addition to, but not in lieu of, net income and EPS prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States (GAAP). Additionally, sinceEPS. Since non-GAAP income and non-GAAP EPS are not measures determined in accordance with GAAP, they have no standardized meaning prescribed by GAAP and, therefore, may not be comparable to the calculation of similar measures of other companies.

52


Non-GAAP income and non-GAAP EPS are important internal measures for the Company. Senior management receives a monthly analysis of operating results that includes The information on non-GAAP income and non-GAAP EPS and the performance of the Company is measured on this basis along with other performance metrics. Senior management’s annual compensation is derivedshould be considered in part using non-GAAPaddition to, but not as a substitute for or superior to, net income and non-GAAP EPS.EPS prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States (GAAP).

A reconciliation between GAAP financial measures and non-GAAP financial measures is as follows:
($ in millions except per share amounts)2015 2014 2013
Pretax income as reported under GAAP$5,401
 $17,283
 $5,545
Increase (decrease) for excluded items:     
Acquisition and divestiture-related costs5,398
 5,946
 5,549
Restructuring costs1,110
 1,978
 2,401
Other items:     
Foreign currency devaluation related to Venezuela876
 
 
Net charge related to the settlement of Vioxx shareholder class action litigation
680
 
 
Gain sale of certain migraine clinical development programs(250) 
 
Gain on the divestiture of certain ophthalmic products(147) (480) 
Gain on divestiture of Merck Consumer Care
 (11,209) 
Gain on AstraZeneca option exercise
 (741) 
Loss on extinguishment of debt
 628
 
Additional year of expense for health care reform fee
 193
 
Other(34) (9) (13)
 13,034
 13,589
 13,482
Taxes on income as reported under GAAP942
 5,349
 1,028
Estimated tax benefit (provision) on excluded items (1)
1,470
 (2,345) 1,573
Net tax benefits from settlements of federal income tax issues410
 
 325
Tax benefits related to sale of Sirna Therapeutics, Inc. subsidiary
 300
 
 2,822
 3,304
 2,926
Non-GAAP net income10,212
 10,285
 10,556
Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests as reported under GAAP17
 14
 113
Acquisition and divestiture-related costs attributable to non-controlling interests
 56
 
 17
 70
 113
Non-GAAP net income attributable to Merck & Co., Inc.$10,195
 $10,215
 $10,443
EPS assuming dilution as reported under GAAP$1.56
 $4.07
 $1.47
EPS difference (2)
2.03
 (0.58) 2.02
Non-GAAP EPS assuming dilution$3.59
 $3.49
 $3.49
($ in millions except per share amounts)2018 2017 2016
Income before taxes as reported under GAAP$8,701
 $6,521
 $4,659
Increase (decrease) for excluded items:     
Acquisition and divestiture-related costs3,066
 3,760
 7,312
Restructuring costs658
 927
 1,069
Other items:     
Charge related to the formation of an oncology collaboration with Eisai1,400
 
 
Charge related to the termination of a collaboration with Samsung423
 
 
Charge for the acquisition of Viralytics344
 
 
Charge related to the formation of an oncology collaboration with AstraZeneca
 2,350
 
Charge related to the settlement of worldwide Keytruda patent litigation

 
 625
Other(57) (16) (67)
Non-GAAP income before taxes14,535
 13,542
 13,598
Taxes on income as reported under GAAP2,508
 4,103
 718
Estimated tax benefit on excluded items (1)
535
 785
 2,321
Net tax charge related to the enactment of the TCJA (2)
(160) (2,625) 
Net tax benefit from the settlement of certain federal income tax issues
 234
 
Tax benefit related to the settlement of a state income tax issue
 88
 
Non-GAAP taxes on income2,883

2,585

3,039
Non-GAAP net income11,652
 10,957
 10,559
Less: Net (loss) income attributable to noncontrolling interests as reported under GAAP(27) 24
 21
Acquisition and divestiture-related costs attributable to noncontrolling interests(58) 
 
Non-GAAP net income attributable to noncontrolling interests31

24

21
Non-GAAP net income attributable to Merck & Co., Inc.$11,621

$10,933

$10,538
EPS assuming dilution as reported under GAAP$2.32
 $0.87
 $1.41
EPS difference (3)
2.02
 3.11
 2.37
Non-GAAP EPS assuming dilution$4.34
 $3.98
 $3.78
(1) 
Amount for 2014 includes a net benefitThe estimated tax impact on the excluded items is determined by applying the statutory rate of $517 million recorded in connection with AstraZeneca’s option exercise.the originating territory of the non-GAAP adjustments.
(2) Amount in 2017 was provisional (see Note 16 to the consolidated financial statements).
(2)(3) 
Represents the difference between calculated GAAP EPS and calculated non-GAAP EPS, which may be different than the amount calculated by dividing the impact of the excluded items by the weighted-average shares for the applicable year.
Acquisition and Divestiture-Related Costs
Non-GAAP income and non-GAAP EPS exclude the impact of certain amounts recorded in connection with business acquisitions and divestitures. These amounts include the amortization of intangible assets and amortization of purchase accounting adjustments to inventories, as well as intangible asset impairment charges and expense or income related to changes in the estimated fair value measurement of liabilities for contingent consideration. Also excluded are integration, transaction, and certain other costs associated with business acquisitions including severance costs which are not part

53


of the Company’s formal restructuring programs, as well as transaction and certain other costs related to divestitures. These costs should not be considered non-recurring; however, management excludes these amounts from non-GAAP income and non-GAAP EPS because it believes it is helpful for understanding the performance of the continuing business.
Restructuring Costs
Non-GAAP income and non-GAAP EPS exclude costs related to restructuring actions (see Note 35 to the consolidated financial statements). These amounts include employee separation costs and accelerated depreciation associated with facilities to be closed or divested. Accelerated depreciation costs represent the difference between the depreciation expense to be recognized over the revised useful life of the site,asset, based upon the anticipated date the site will be closed or divested or the equipment disposed of, and depreciation expense as determined utilizing the useful

life prior to the restructuring actions. Restructuring costs also include asset abandonment, shut-down and other related costs, as well as employee-related costs such as curtailment, settlement and termination charges associated with pension and other postretirement benefit plans and share-based compensation costs. The Company has undertaken restructurings of different types during the covered periods and, therefore, these charges should not be considered non-recurring; however, management excludes these amounts from non-GAAP income and non-GAAP EPS because it believes it is helpful for understanding the performance of the continuing business.
Certain Other Items
Non-GAAP income and non-GAAP EPS exclude certain other items. These items represent substantive, unusualare adjusted for after evaluating them on an individual basis, considering their quantitative and qualitative aspects, and typically consist of items that are evaluated on an individual basis. Such evaluation considers bothunusual in nature, significant to the quantitative and the qualitative aspectresults of their unusual nature and generally represent items that, either as a resultparticular period or not indicative of their nature or magnitude, management would not anticipate that they would occur as part of the Company’s normal business on a regular basis.future operating results. Excluded from non-GAAP income and non-GAAP EPS in 2015 are foreign exchange losses related to the devaluation of the Company’s net monetary assets in Venezuela (see Note 14 to the consolidated financial statements),2018 is a net charge related to the settlementformation of Vioxx shareholder class action litigation (see Note 10 to the consolidated financial statements), a gain on the sale of certain migraine clinical development programscollaboration with Eisai (see Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements), a gain oncharge related to the divestituretermination of a collaboration agreement with Samsung for insulin glargine (see Note 3 to the Company’s remaining ophthalmics businessconsolidated financial statements), a charge for the acquisition of Viralytics (see Note 3 to the consolidated financial statements), and measurement-period adjustments related to the provisional amounts recorded for the TCJA (see Note 16 to the consolidated financial statements). Excluded from non-GAAP income and non-GAAP EPS in international markets2017 is a charge related to the formation of a collaboration with AstraZeneca (see Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements), as well as a provisional net tax charge related to the enactment of the TCJA, a net tax benefit related to the settlement of certain federal income tax issues and a tax benefit related to the settlement of a state income tax issue (see Note 1516 to the consolidated financial statements). Excluded from non-GAAP income and non-GAAP EPS in 2014 are certain gains, including2016 is a gain on the divestiture of MCC (see Note 4charge to the consolidated financial statements), a gain recognized in conjunction with AstraZeneca’s option exercise, including a related net tax benefit on the transaction (see Note 8 to the consolidated financial statements), a gain on the divestiture of certain ophthalmic products in several international markets (see Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements), as well as a loss on extinguishment of debt (see Note 9 to the consolidated financial statements), an additional year of expensesettle worldwide patent litigation related to the health care reform fee as discussed above, and a tax benefit from the sale of Sirna and tax benefits from the settlements of certain federal income tax issues (see Note 15 to the consolidated financial statements)Keytruda.
Research and Development
A chart reflecting the Company’s current research pipeline as of February 19, 201622, 2019 is set forth in Item 1. “Business — Research and Development” above.

Research and Development Update
The Company currently has several candidates under regulatory review in the United States orand internationally.
Keytruda is an FDA-approvedapproved anti-PD-1 (programmed death receptor-1) therapy in clinical development for expanded indications in different cancer types.
In February 2019, the FDA accepted and granted Priority Review for a supplemental BLA for Keytruda is currently approvedin combination with Inlyta (axitinib), a tyrosine kinase inhibitor, for the first-line treatment of melanoma,patients with advanced melanomarenal cell carcinoma. This supplemental BLA is based on findings from the Phase 3 KEYNOTE-426 trial, which demonstrated that Keytruda in combination with axitinib, as compared to sunitinib, significantly improved overall survival (OS) and PFS in the first-line treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma. These data were presented at the American Society for Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Genitourinary Cancers Symposium in February 2019. The supplemental BLA also included supporting data from the Phase 1b KEYNOTE-035 trial. The FDA set a PDUFA date of June 20, 2019. Merck has filed data from KEYNOTE-426 with regulatory authorities worldwide.
In February 2019, the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use of the European Medicines Agency (EMA) adopted a positive opinion recommending Keytruda, in combination with carboplatin and either paclitaxel or nab-paclitaxel, for the first-line treatment of metastatic squamous NSCLC (see “Pharmaceutical Segment” above).in adults. This recommendation is based on results from the pivotal Phase 3 KEYNOTE-407 trial, which enrolled patients regardless of PD-L1 tumor expression status. The trial showed a significant improvement in OS and PFS for patients taking Keytruda in combination with chemotherapy (carboplatin and either paclitaxel or nab-paclitaxel) compared with chemotherapy alone. If approved, this would mark the first approval in Europe for an anti-PD-1 therapy in combination with chemotherapy for adults with metastatic squamous NSCLC. In October 2018, the FDA approved Keytruda in combination with carboplatin-paclitaxel or nab-paclitaxel as a first-line treatment for metastatic squamous NSCLC, regardless of PD-L1 expression.
In December 2015, Merck announced results from2018, the pivotal KEYNOTE-010 study to evaluateFDA extended the potential of an immunotherapy compared to chemotherapy based on prospective measurement of PD-L1 expression in patients with advanced NSCLC. Inaction date for the Phase 2/3 study,supplemental BLA seeking approval for Keytruda significantly improved overall survivalas monotherapy for the first-line treatment of locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC in patients whose tumors express PD-L1 (TPS ≥1%) without EGFR or ALK genomic tumor aberrations. The supplemental BLA is based on results of the Phase 3 KEYNOTE-042 trial where Keytruda monotherapy demonstrated a significant improvement in OS compared towith chemotherapy in patientsthis patient population. The Company submitted additional data and analyses to

the FDA, which constituted a major amendment and extended the PDUFA date by three months to April 11, 2019. Merck continues to work closely with any levelthe FDA during the review of PD-L1 expression. Based on these data, Merck has submittedthis supplemental BLA.
In February 2019, the FDA accepted and granted Priority Review for a supplemental Biologics License Application to the FDA and has filed a Marketing Authorization Application with the EMA.

54


In November 2015, Merck announced that the FDA granted Breakthrough Therapy designation toBLA for Keytruda as monotherapy for the treatment of patients with microsatellite instability highadvanced SCLC whose disease has progressed after two or more lines of prior therapy. This supplemental BLA, which is seeking accelerated approval for this new indication, is based on data from the SCLC cohorts of the Phase 2 KEYNOTE-158 and Phase 1b KEYNOTE-028 trials. The FDA set a PDUFA date of June 17, 2019. Keytruda is also being studied in combination with chemotherapy in the ongoing Phase 3 KEYNOTE-604 study in patients with newly diagnosed extensive stage SCLC.
In February 2019, the FDA accepted a supplemental BLA for Keytruda as monotherapy or in combination with platinum and 5-fluorouracil chemotherapy for the first-line treatment of patients with recurrent or metastatic colorectal cancer.HNSCC. This supplemental BLA is based in part on data from the pivotal Phase 3 KEYNOTE-048 trial where Keytruda demonstrated a significant improvement in OS compared with the standard of care, as monotherapy in patients whose tumors expressed PD-L1 with Combined Positive Score (CPS)≥20 and CPS≥1 and in combination with chemotherapy in the total patient population. These data were presented at the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) 2018 Congress. The FDA granted Priority Review to the supplemental BLA and set a PDUFA date of June 10, 2019. KEYNOTE-048 also serves as the confirmatory trial for KEYNOTE-012, a Phase 1b study which supported the previous accelerated approval for Keytruda as monotherapy for the treatment of patients with recurrent or metastatic HNSCC with disease progression on or after platinum-containing chemotherapy.
In November 2018, Merck announced that the Phase 3 KEYNOTE-181 trial investigating Keytruda as monotherapy in the second-line treatment of advanced or metastatic esophageal or esophagogastric junction carcinoma met a primary endpoint of OS in patients whose tumors expressed PD-L1 (CPS ≥10). In this pivotal study, treatment with Keytruda resulted in a statistically significant improvement in OS compared to chemotherapy (paclitaxel, docetaxel or irinotecan) in patients with CPS ≥10, regardless of histology. The primary endpoint of OS was also evaluated in patients with squamous cell histology and in the entire intention-to-treat study population. While directionally favorable, statistical significance for OS was not met in these two patient groups. Per the statistical analysis plan, the key secondary endpoints of PFS and objective response rate (ORR) were not formally tested, as OS was not reached in the full intention-to-treat study population. These results were presented in January 2019 at the ASCO Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium and have been submitted for regulatory review.
Additionally, Keytruda has received Breakthrough Therapy designation from the FDA for the treatment of high-risk early-stage triple-negative breast cancer in combination with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The FDA’s Breakthrough Therapy designation is intended to expedite the development and review of a candidate that is planned for use, alone or in combination, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition when preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the drug may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints.
In October 2018, Merck announced the first presentation of results from an interim analysis of KEYNOTE-057, a Phase 2 trial evaluating Keytruda for previously treated patients with high-risk non-muscle invasive bladder cancer. An interim analysis of the study’s primary endpoint showed a complete response rate of nearly 40% at three months with Keytruda in patients whose disease was unresponsive to Bacillus Calmette-Guérin therapy, the current standard of care for this disease, and who were ineligible for or who refused to undergo radical cystectomy. These results, as well as other study findings, were presented at the ESMO 2018 Congress.
In February 2019, Merck announced that the pivotal Phase 3 KEYNOTE-240 trial evaluating Keytruda, plus best supportive care, for the treatment of patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma who were previously granted Breakthrough Therapy statustreated with systemic therapy, did not meet its co-primary endpoints of OS and PFS compared with placebo plus best supportive care. In the final analysis of the study, there was an improvement in OS for advanced melanomapatients treated with Keytruda compared to placebo, however these OS results did not meet statistical significance per the pre-specified statistical plan. Results for PFS were also directionally favorable in the Keytruda arm compared with placebo but did not reach statistical significance. The key secondary endpoint of ORR was not formally tested, since superiority was not reached for OS or PFS. Results will be presented at an upcoming medical meeting and advanced NSCLC.have been shared with the FDA for discussion.

The Keytruda clinical development program consists of more than 200900 clinical trials, including over 100more than 600 trials that combine Keytruda with other cancer treatments. These studies encompass more than 30 cancer types including: bladder, cervical, colorectal, esophageal, gastric, head and neck, hepatocellular, Hodgkin lymphoma, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, melanoma, multiple myeloma, non-small-cellmesothelioma, nasopharyngeal, NSCLC, ovarian, PMBCL, prostate, renal, small-cell lung and triple negativetriple-negative breast, severalmany of which are currently in Phase 3 clinical development. Further trials are being planned for other cancers.
MK-6072, bezlotoxumab,Lynparza, is an investigational antitoxinoral PARP inhibitor currently approved for certain types of ovarian and breast cancer. In July 2017, Merck and AstraZeneca entered into a global strategic oncology collaboration to co-develop and co-commercialize AstraZeneca’s Lynparza for multiple cancer types (see Note 4 to the prevention of consolidated financial statements).
C. difficile infection recurrence currently under review with the FDAIn April 2018, Merck and EMA. In January 2016, MerckAstraZeneca announced that the FDA acceptedEMA validated for review the Biologics LicenseMarketing Authorization Application (BLA) for bezlotoxumab and granted Priority ReviewLynparza for use in patients with a Prescription Drug User Fee Act action date of July 23, 2016. In September 2015, Merck announced that the two pivotal Phase 3 clinical studies for bezlotoxumab met their primary efficacy endpoint: the reduction indeleterious or suspected deleterious C. difficileBRCA recurrence through week 12 compared to placebo, when used in conjunction-mutated, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer who have been previously treated with standard of care antibiotics for the treatment of C. difficile. The Company is also seeking approvalchemotherapy in the EU and intends to fileneoadjuvant, adjuvant or metastatic setting. This was the first regulatory submission for a PARP inhibitor in Canadabreast cancer in 2016. Currently, thereEurope.
Lynparza tablets are no therapies approved for the prevention of recurrent disease caused by C. difficile.
MK-1293 is an insulin glargine candidate for the treatment of patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes being developed in collaboration with Samsung Bioepis. In December 2015, the Company submitted an application for regulatory approval in the EU and plans to submit MK-1293 to the FDA in 2016.
MK-5172A, Zepatier, currentlyalso under review in the EU for theas a maintenance treatment of chronic HCV, is a once-daily, fixed-dose combination tablet containing the NS5A inhibitor elbasvir (50 mg) and the NS3/4A protease inhibitor grazoprevir (100 mg). Zepatier was approved by the FDA in January 2016 for the treatment of adult patients with chronic HCV GT1newly-diagnosed, BRCA-mutated advanced ovarian cancer who were in complete or GT4 infection, with or without ribavirin.
V419 is an investigational pediatric hexavalent combination vaccine, DTaP5-IPV-Hib-HepB, under review with the FDA that is being developed and, if approved, will be commercialized through a partnership of Merck and Sanofi Pasteur.partial response following first-line standard platinum-based chemotherapy. This vaccine is designed to help protect against six important diseases - diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis (whooping cough), polio (poliovirus types 1, 2, and 3), invasive disease caused by Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib), and hepatitis B. On November 2, 2015, the FDA issued a CRL with respect to the BLA for V419. Both companies are reviewing the CRL and plan to have further communication with the FDA. In February 2016, the EC granted marketing authorization for V419 for prophylaxis against diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, hepatitis B, poliomyelitis, and invasive disease caused by Hib, in infants and toddlers from the age of 6 weeks. V419 will be marketed as Vaxelis in the EU through SPMSD, the Company’s joint venture with Sanofi Pasteur.
In addition to the candidates under regulatory review, the Company has several drug candidates in Phase 3 clinical development in addition to the Keytruda programs discussed above. The Company anticipates filing applications for regulatory approval with the FDA with respect to certain of these candidates in 2016, including MK-1293 as noted above.
MK-0822, odanacatib, is an oral, once-weekly investigational treatment for patients with osteoporosis. Osteoporosis is a disease that reduces bone density and strength andsubmission was based on positive results in an increased risk of bone fractures. Odanacatib is a cathepsin K inhibitor that selectively inhibits the cathepsin K enzyme. Cathepsin K is known to play a central role in the function of osteoclasts, which are cells that break down existing bone tissue, particularly the protein components of bone. Inhibition of cathepsin K is a novel approach to the treatment of osteoporosis. In September 2014, Merck announced data from the pivotal Phase 3 fracture outcomes studySOLO-1 trial. The trial showed a statistically-significant and clinically-meaningful improvement in PFS for odanacatib in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. In the Long-Term Odanacatib Fracture Trial (LOFT), odanacatib met its primary endpoints and significantly reducedLynparza compared to placebo, reducing the risk of three typesdisease progression or death by 70% in patients with newly-diagnosed, BRCA-mutated advanced ovarian cancer who were in complete or partial response to platinum-based chemotherapy.
In December 2018, Merck and AstraZeneca announced positive results from the randomized, open-label, controlled, Phase 3 SOLO-3 trial of osteoporotic fractures (radiographically-assessed vertebral, clinical hip,Lynparza tablets in patients with relapsed ovarian cancer after two or more lines of treatment. The trial was conducted as a post-approval commitment in agreement with the FDA. Results from the trial showed BRCA-mutated advanced ovarian cancer patients treated with Lynparza following two or more prior lines of chemotherapy demonstrated a statistically significant and clinical non-vertebral) compared to placeboclinically meaningful improvement in the primary endpoint of ORR and also reduced the risk of thekey secondary endpoint of clinical vertebral fractures. In addition, treatment with odanacatib led to progressive increases over five years in bone mineral density at the lumbar spine and total hip. The rates of adverse events overall in LOFT were generally balanced between patients

55


taking odanacatib and placebo. Adjudicated events of morphea-like skin lesions and atypical femoral fractures occurred more often in the odanacatib group than in the placebo group. Adjudicated major adverse cardiovascular events were generally balanced overall between the treatment groups. There were numerically more adjudicated stroke events with odanacatib than with placebo. Adjudicated atrial fibrillation was reported more often in the odanacatib group than in the placebo group. A numeric imbalance in mortality was observed; this numeric difference does not appear to be related to a particular reported cause or causes of death. Merck continues to collect data from the blinded extension study and is planning additional analyses of data from the trial, including an independent re-adjudication of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), in support of regulatory submissions. Merck plans to submit a New Drug Application (NDA) to the FDA for odanacatib in 2016 following completion of the independent adjudication and analysis of MACE. Merck also plans to submit applications to the EMA and the Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare in Japan.
MK-3102, omarigliptin, is an investigational once-weekly DPP-4 inhibitor in development for the treatment of adults with type 2 diabetes. In September 2015, the Company announced that omarigliptin achieved its primary efficacy endpoint in a Phase 3 study. Omarigliptin was found to be non-inferior to Januvia, at reducing patients’ A1C (an estimate of a person’s blood glucose over a two-to three-month period) levels from baseline, with similar A1C reductions achieved in both groups. The head-to-head study was designed to evaluate once-weekly treatment with omarigliptin 25 mgPFS compared to 100 mg of Januvia once daily. Results were presented during an oral session at the 51st European Association for the Study of Diabetes Annual Meeting. Also, in September 2015, Merck announced that the Japanese Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency approved Marizev (omarigliptin) 25 mg and 12.5 mg tablets. Japan is the first country to have approved omarigliptin. Merck plans to submit omarigliptin for regulatory approval in the United States in 2016. Other worldwide regulatory submissions will follow.
MK-8835, ertugliflozin, is an investigational oral SGLT2 inhibitor being evaluated for the treatment of type 2 diabetes in collaboration with Pfizer Inc. Ertugliflozin is also being studied in combination with Januvia (sitagliptin) and metformin. Merck expects to submit applications for regulatory approval in the United States for ertugliflozin and the two fixed-dose combination tablets by the end of 2016.
MK-8237 is an investigational allergy immunotherapy tablet for house dust mite allergy that is part of a North America partnership betweenchemotherapy. Merck and ALK-Abello. Merck plansAstraZeneca plan to submit an NDA todiscuss these results with the FDA for MK-8237 in the first half of 2016.
MK-8931, verubecestat, is Merck’s novel investigational oral ß-amyloid precursor protein site-cleaving enzyme (BACE) inhibitor for the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease being studied in a Phase 3 trial (APECS) designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of MK-8931 versus placebo in patients with amnestic mild cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer’s disease, also known as prodromal Alzheimer’s disease. MK-8931 is also being studied in another Phase 2/3 randomized, placebo-controlled, study in patients with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer’s disease (EPOCH). The EPOCH study completed enrollment in the fourth quarter of 2015 and is estimated to reach primary trial completion in mid-2017.
MK-0859, anacetrapib, is an investigational inhibitor of the cholesteryl ester transfer protein (CETP) in development for raising HDL-C and reducing LDL-C. Anacetrapib is being evaluated in a 30,000 patient, event-driven cardiovascular clinical outcomes trial sponsored by Oxford University, REVEAL (Randomized EValuation of the Effects of Anacetrapib Through Lipid-modification), involving patients with preexisting vascular disease, which is projected to conclude in early 2017. In November 2015, Merck announced that the Data Monitoring Committee (DMC) of the REVEAL outcomes study completed its planned review of unblinded study data and recommended the study continue with no changes. The DMC reviewed safety and efficacy data from the study, which included an assessment of futility. Merck remains blinded to the actual results of this analysis and to other REVEAL safety and efficacy data. The REVEAL Steering Committee and Merck will continue to monitor the progress of the study. No additional interim efficacy analyses are planned.FDA.
MK-7655A is a combination of relebactam, an investigational beta-lactamase inhibitor, and imipenem/cilastatin (an approved carbapenem antibiotic). In February 2019, Merck announced that the FDA accepted for Priority Review an NDA for MK-7655A for the treatment of complicated urinary tract infections and complicated intra-abdominal infections caused by certain susceptible Gram-negative bacteria in adults with limited or no alternative therapies available. The PDUFA date is July 16, 2019. In April 2018, Merck announced that a pivotal Phase 3 study of MK-7655A demonstrated a favorable overall response in the treatment of certain imipenem-non-susceptible bacterial infections, the primary endpoint, with lower treatment-emergent nephrotoxicity (kidney toxicity), a secondary endpoint, compared to a colistin (colistimethate sodium) plus imipenem/cilastatin regimen. The FDA hashad previously designated this combination a Qualified Infectious Disease Product with designated Fast Track status for the treatment of hospital-acquired bacterial pneumonia, ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia, complicated intra-abdominal infections and complicated urinary tract infections.

56


MK-8228, letermovir,V920 (rVSV∆G-ZEBOV-GP, live attenuated), is an investigational oral, once-daily antiviral candidate for the prevention and treatment of Human Cytomegalovirus infection. Letermovir has received Orphan Drug Status in the EU and in the United States, where it has also been granted Fast Track designation.
MK-8342B, referred to as the Next Generation Ring, is an investigational combination (etonogestrel and 17β-estradiol) vaginal ring for contraception and the treatment of dysmenorrhea in women seeking contraception.
MK-0431J is an investigational fixed-dose combination of sitagliptin and ipragliflozin under development for commercialization in Japan in collaboration with Astellas Pharma Inc. (Astellas). Ipragliflozin, an SGLT2 inhibitor, co-developed by Astellas and Kotobuki Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. (Kotobuki), is approved for use in Japan and is being co-promoted with Merck and Kotobuki.
V920 is an investigational rVSV-ZEBOV (Ebola)Ebola Zaire disease vaccine candidate being studied in large scale Phase 2/3 clinical trials currently underway in West Africa. In November 2014, Merck and NewLink Genetics announced an exclusive licensing and collaboration agreement for the investigational Ebola vaccine.trials. In December 2015, Merck announced that the application for Emergency Use Assessment and Listing (EUAL) for V920 has beenwas accepted for review by the World Health Organization (WHO). According to the WHO, the EUAL process is designed to expedite the availability of vaccines needed for public health emergencies such as another outbreak of Ebola. The procedure is intended to assist United Nations’ procurement agencies and Member States on the acceptability of using a vaccine candidate in an emergency-use setting. EUAL designation is not prequalification by the WHO but rather is a special procedure implemented when there is an outbreak of a disease with high rates of morbidity and/or mortality and a lack of treatment and/or prevention options. In such instances, the WHO may recommend making a vaccine available for a limited time, while further clinical trial data are being gathered for formal regulatory agency review by a national regulatory authority. The decision to grant V920 EUAL status will be based on data regarding quality, safety, and efficacy/effectiveness; as well as a risk/benefit analysis for emergency use. While EUAL designation allows for emergency use, the vaccine remains investigational and has not yet been licensed for commercial distribution.
V212 is an inactivated varicella zoster virus In July 2016, Merck announced that the FDA granted V920 Breakthrough Therapy designation, and that the EMA granted the vaccine candidate PRIME (PRIority MEdicines) status. In November 2018, Merck announced that it has started the submission of a rolling BLA to the FDA for V920. This rolling submission was made pursuant to the FDA’s Breakthrough Therapy designation. Merck expects the rolling submission of the BLA to be completed in development for the prevention of herpes zoster.2019. The Company is conducting two Phase 3 trials, onealso intends to file V920 with the EMA in autologous hematopoietic cell transplant patients and2019.

In February 2019, Merck announced that the other inFDA accepted for Priority Review a supplemental NDA for Zerbaxa to treat adult patients with solid tumor malignancies undergoing chemotherapy and hematological malignancies.
MK-1439, doravirine,nosocomial pneumonia, including ventilator-associated pneumonia, caused by certain susceptible Gram-negative microorganisms. The PDUFA date is an investigational, once-daily oral next-generation non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor being developedJune 3, 2019. Zerbaxa is also under review for this indication by Merckthe EMA. Zerbaxa is currently approved in the United States for the treatment of HIV-1 infection.
In 2015, the Companyadult patients with complicated urinary tract infections caused by certain susceptible Gram-negative microorganisms, and is also divested or discontinued certain drug candidates.
In July 2015, Merck and Allergan plc (Allergan) entered into an agreement pursuant to which Allergan acquired the exclusive worldwide rights to MK-1602 and MK-8031, Merck’s investigational small molecule oral CGRP receptor antagonists, which are being developedindicated, in combination with metronidazole, for the treatment of adult patients with complicated intra-abdominal infections caused by certain susceptible Gram-negative and preventionGram-positive microorganisms.
In addition to the candidates under regulatory review, the Company has several drug candidates in Phase 3 clinical development in addition to the Keytruda programs discussed above.
MK-7264, gefapixant, is a selective, non-narcotic, orally-administered P2X3-receptor agonist being investigated in Phase 3 trials for the treatment of migrainerefractory, chronic cough and in a Phase 2 trial for the treatment of women with endometriosis-related pain.
Lenvima, is an orally available tyrosine kinase inhibitor currently approved for certain types of thyroid cancer, hepatocellular carcinoma, and in combination for certain patients with renal cell carcinoma. In March 2018, Merck and Eisai entered into a strategic collaboration for the worldwide co-development and co-commercialization of Lenvima (see Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements). Under the agreement, Merck and Eisai will develop and commercialize Lenvima jointly, both as monotherapy and in combination with Keytruda. Per the agreement, the companies will jointly initiate clinical studies evaluating the Keytruda/Lenvima combination to support 11 potential indications in six types of cancer (endometrial cancer, NSCLC, hepatocellular carcinoma, head and neck cancer, bladder cancer and melanoma), as well as a basket trial targeting multiple cancer types. The FDA granted Breakthrough Therapy designation for Keytruda in combination with Lenvima for the potential treatment of patients with advanced and/or metastatic renal cell carcinoma and for the potential treatment of certain patients with advanced and/or metastatic non-microsatellite instability high/proficient mismatch repair endometrial carcinoma.
MK-1242, vericiguat, is an investigational treatment for heart failure being studied in patients suffering from chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fracture (Phase 3 clinical trial) and from chronic heart failure with preserved ejection fracture (Phase 2 clinical trial). The development of vericiguat is part of a worldwide strategic collaboration between Merck and Bayer (see Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements).
MK-4261, surotomycin,V114 is an investigational oral antibiotic in developmentpolyvalent conjugate vaccine for the treatmentprevention of C. difficile associated diarrhea.pneumococcal disease. In June 2018, Merck acquired surotomycin as part of its purchase of Cubist. Duringinitiated the second quarter of 2015, the Company received unfavorable efficacy data from a randomized, double-blinded, active-controlledfirst Phase 3 study in patientsthe adult population for the prevention of invasive pneumococcal disease. Currently five Phase 3 adult studies are ongoing, including studies in healthy adults 50 years of age or older, adults with C. difficile associated diarrhea. The evaluationrisk factors for pneumococcal disease, those infected with HIV, and those who are recipients of this data, combined with an assessment ofallogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant. In October 2018, Merck began the commercial opportunity for surotomycin, resultedfirst Phase 3 study in the discontinuation of the programpediatric population. Currently, three studies are ongoing, including studies in healthy infants and an IPR&D impairment charge in 2015 (see Note 7 to the consolidated financial statements).
MK-2402, bevenopran, is an oral investigational therapy in development as a potential treatment for opioid-induced constipation in patientschildren afflicted with chronic, non-cancer pain.sickle cell disease. In January 2019, Merck acquired bevenopran as a part of its purchase of Cubist. The Company has made the decision not to continue development of this program and is seeking to out-license the asset.
MK-8962, corifollitropin alfa injection, is an investigational fertility treatment for controlled ovarian stimulation in women participating in assisted reproductive technology. In July 2014, Merckannounced that V114 received a CRLBreakthrough Therapy designation from the FDA for its NDA for corifollitropin alfa injection.the prevention of invasive pneumococcal disease caused by the vaccine serotypes in pediatric patients 6 weeks to 18 years of age.
As a result of changes in the herpes zoster vaccine environment, Merck has made a decision to discontinueis ending development of corifollitropin alfa injectionV212, its investigational vaccine for the prevention of shingles in the United States for business reasons. Corifollitropin alfa injection is marketed as Elonva in certain markets outside of the United States.immunocompromised patients.

57


The Company maintains a number of long-term exploratory and fundamental research programs in biology and chemistry as well as research programs directed toward product development. The Company’s research and development model is designed to increase productivity and improve the probability of success by prioritizing the Company’s research and development resources on candidates the Company believes are capable of providing unambiguous, promotable advantages to patients and payers and delivering the maximum value of its approved medicines and vaccines through new indications and new formulations. Merck is pursuing emerging product opportunities independent of therapeutic area or modality (small molecule, biologics and vaccines) and is building its biologics capabilities. The Company is committed to makingensuring that externally sourced programs a greaterremain an important component of its pipeline strategy, with a renewed focus on supplementing its internal research with a licensing and external alliance strategy focused on the entire spectrum of collaborations from early research to late-stage compounds, as well as access to new technologies.

The Company also reviews its pipeline to examine candidates whichthat may provide more value through out-licensing. The Company continues to evaluate certain late-stage clinical development and platform technology assets to determine their out-licensing or sale potential.
The Company’s clinical pipeline includes candidates in multiple disease areas, including atherosclerosis, cancer, cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, infectious diseases, inflammatory/autoimmune diseases, neurodegenerative diseases, osteoporosis,neurosciences, obesity, pain, respiratory diseases, and women’s health.vaccines.

Acquired In-Process Research and Development
In connection with business acquisitions, the Company has recorded the fair value of in-process research projects which, at the time of acquisition, had not yet reached technological feasibility. At December 31, 2015,2018, the balance of IPR&D was $4.2$1.1 billion. Of this amount, $3.2 billion relates to the clinical development program for MK-3682, which the Company acquired in 2014 with the acquisition of Idenix Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Idenix).
During 2015, 2014 and 2013, approximately $280 million, $654 million and $346 million, respectively, of IPR&D projects received marketing approval in a major market and the Company began amortizing these assets based on their estimated useful lives.
All of theThe IPR&D projects that remain in development are subject to the inherent risks and uncertainties in drug development and it is possible that the Company will not be able to successfully develop and complete the IPR&D programs and profitably commercialize the underlying product candidates. The time periods to receive approvals from the FDA and other regulatory agencies are subject to uncertainty. Significant delays in the approval process, or the Company’s failure to obtain approval at all, would delay or prevent the Company from realizing revenues from these products. Additionally, if certain of the IPR&D programs fail or are abandoned during development, then the Company will not realize the future cash flows it has estimated and recorded as IPR&D as of the acquisition date, and the Company may also not recover the research and development expenditures made since the acquisition to further develop such program.programs. If such circumstances were to occur, the Company’s future operating results could be adversely affected and the Company may recognize impairment charges and such charges could be material.
During 2015,In 2018, 2017, and 2016 the Company recorded $63 million of IPR&D impairment charges within Research and developmentexpenses. Of this amount, $50 expenses of $152 million, relates$483 million and $3.6 billion, respectively (see Note 8 to the surotomycin clinical development program obtained in connection with the acquisition of Cubist. During 2015, the Company received unfavorable efficacy data from a clinical trial for surotomycin. The evaluation of this data, combined with an assessment of the commercial opportunity for surotomycin, resulted in the discontinuation of the program and the IPR&D impairment charge noted above. During 2014, the Company recorded $49 million of IPR&D impairment charges primarily as a result of changes in cash flow assumptions for certain compounds obtained in connection with the Supera joint venture, as well as for the discontinuation of certain Animal Health programs. During 2013, the Company recorded $279 million of IPR&D impairment charges. Of this amount, $181 million related to the write-off of the intangible asset associated with preladenant as a result of the discontinuation of the clinical development program for this compound. In addition, the Company recorded impairment charges resulting from changes in cash flow assumptions for certain compounds, as well as for pipeline programs that had previously been deprioritized and were subsequently deemed to have no alternative use in the period.consolidated financial statements).
Additional research and development will be required before any of the remaining programs reach technological feasibility. The costs to complete the research projects will depend on whether the projects are brought

58


to their final stages of development and are ultimately submitted to the FDA or other regulatory agencies for approval. As of December 31, 2015, the estimated costs to complete projects acquired in connection with acquisitions in Phase 3 development for human health and the analogous stage of development for animal health were approximately $480 million.

Acquisitions, Research Collaborations and License Agreements
Merck continues to remain focused on pursuing opportunities that have the potential to drive both near- and long-term growth. Certain of the more recent significant transactions are described below. Merck is actively monitoring the landscape for growth opportunities that meet the Company’s strategic criteria.
In January 2016,March 2018, Merck acquired IOmet,and Eisai announced a privately held UK-based drug discovery company focused on the development of innovative medicinesstrategic collaboration for the treatmentworldwide co-development and co-commercialization of cancer,Lenvima, an orally available tyrosine kinase inhibitor discovered by Eisai. Under the agreement, Merck and Eisai will develop and commercialize Lenvima jointly, both as monotherapy and in combination with a particular emphasis onMerck’s anti-PD-1 therapy, Keytruda. Under the fields of cancer immunotherapy and cancer metabolism. Total purchase consideration in the transaction includedagreement, Merck made an upfront cash payment to Eisai of $150$750 million and future additional milestonewill make payments of up to $250$650 million that are contingent uponfor certain option rights through 2021 (of which $325 million will be paid in March 2019, $200 million is expected to be paid in 2020 and $125 million is expected to be paid in 2021). The Company recorded a charge of $1.4 billion in Research and development expenses in 2018 related to the upfront payment and future option payments. In addition, the agreement provides for Eisai to receive up to $385 million associated with the achievement of certain clinical and regulatory milestones being achieved. The acquisition provides Merckand up to $3.97 billion for the achievement of milestones associated with IOmet’s pre-clinical pipelinesales of IDO (indoleamine-2,3-dioxygenase 1), TDO (tryptophan-2,3-dioxygenase), and dual-acting IDO/TDO inhibitors. The Company is inLenvima (see Note 4 to the process of determining the preliminary fair value of assets acquired, liabilities assumed and total consideration transferred for this business acquisition. This transaction closed on January 11, 2016; accordingly, the results of operations of the acquired business will be included in the Company’s results of operations beginning after that date.consolidated financial statements).
In July 2015,June 2018, Merck acquired cCAM, a privately held biopharmaceuticalViralytics Limited (Viralytics), an Australian publicly traded company focused on the discovery and developmentoncolytic immunotherapy treatments for a range of novel cancer immunotherapies.cancers, for AUD 502 million ($378 million). The acquisition providestransaction provided Merck with cCAM’s lead pipeline candidate, CM-24, a novel monoclonal antibody targeting the immune checkpoint protein CEACAM1full rights to Cavatak (V937, formerly CVA21), Viralytics’s investigational oncolytic immunotherapy. Cavatak is based on Viralytics’s proprietary formulation of an oncolytic virus (Coxsackievirus Type A21) that has been shown to preferentially infect and kill cancer cells. Cavatakis currently being evaluated in amultiple Phase 1 and Phase 2 clinical trials, both as an intratumoral and intravenous agent, including in combination with Keytruda. Under a previous agreement between Merck and Viralytics, a study foris investigating the treatmentuse of advanced or recurrent malignancies, includingthe Keytruda and Cavatak combination in melanoma, non-small-cellprostate, lung and bladder gastric, colorectal, and ovarian cancers. Total purchase consideration in the transaction of $201 million included an upfront payment of $96 million in cash and future additional payments of up to $510 million associated with the attainment of certain clinical development, regulatory and commercial milestones, which the Company determined had a fair value of $105 million at the acquisition date. The transaction was accounted for as an acquisition of a business; accordingly, the assets acquired and liabilities assumed werean asset. Merck recorded at their respective fair values as of the acquisition date. Merck recognized an intangible asset for IPR&D of $180 million and other net assets of $7 million. The excess$34 million (primarily cash) at the acquisition date and Research

and development expenses of the consideration transferred over the fair value of net assets acquired of $14$344 million was recorded as goodwill that was allocatedin 2018 related to the Pharmaceutical segment and is not deductible for tax purposes. The fair value oftransaction. There are no future contingent payments associated with the identifiable intangible asset related to IPR&D was determined using an income approach through which fair value is estimated based on the asset’s probability-adjusted future net cash flows, which reflects the stage of development of the project and the associated probability of successful completion. The asset’s probability-adjusted future net cash flows were then discounted to present value using a discount rate of 10.5%. The fair value of the contingent consideration was determined utilizing a probability-weighted estimated cash flow stream adjusted for the expected timing of each payment also utilizing a discount rate of 10.5%. Actual cash flows are likely to be different than those assumed. This transaction closed on July 31, 2015; accordingly, the results of operations of the acquired business have been included in the Company’s results of operations beginning after that date.acquisition.
In February 2015,2019, Merck and NGM, a privately held biotechnology company,Immune Design entered into a multi-year collaboration to research, discover, develop and commercialize novel biologic therapies across a wide range of therapeutic areas. The collaboration includes multiple drug candidates currently in preclinical development at NGM, including NP201,definitive agreement under which is being evaluated for the treatment of diabetes, obesity and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. NGM will lead the research and development of the existing preclinical candidates and have the autonomy to identify and pursue other discovery stage programs at its discretion. Merck will haveacquire Immune Design for $5.85 per share in cash for an approximate value of $300 million. Immune Design is a late-stage immunotherapy company employing next-generation in vivo approaches to enable the optionbody’s immune system to license all resulting NGM programs following human proof of concept trials. If Merck exercises this option, Merck will lead global product developmentfight disease. Immune Design’s proprietary technologies, GLAAS and commercialization forZVex, are engineered to activate the resulting products, if approved.immune system’s natural ability to generate and/or expand antigen-specific cytotoxic immune cells to fight cancer and other chronic diseases. Under the terms of the acquisition agreement, Merck, made an upfront paymentthrough a subsidiary, will initiate a tender offer to NGMacquire all outstanding shares of $94 million, which is included in Research and development expenses, and purchasedImmune Design. The closing of the tender offer will be subject to certain conditions, including the tender of shares representing at least a 15% equity stake in NGM for $106 million. Merck committed up to $250 million to fund allmajority of NGM’s effortsthe total number of Immune Design’s outstanding shares, the expiration of the waiting period under the initial five-year term of the collaboration, with the potential for additional funding if certain conditions are met. PriorHart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act and other customary conditions. The transaction is expected to Merck initiating a Phase 3 study for a licensed program, NGM may elect to either receive milestone and royalty payments or,close early in certain cases, to co-fund development and participate in a global cost and revenue share arrangement

59


of up to 50%. The agreement also provides NGM with the option to participate in the co-promotion of any co-funded program in the United States. Merck will have the option to extend the research agreement for two additional two-year terms. Each party has certain termination rights under the agreement in the event of an uncured material breach by the other party. Additionally, Merck has certain termination rights in the event of the occurrence of certain defined conditions. Upon a termination event, depending on the circumstances, the parties have varying rights and obligations with respect to the continued development and commercialization of compounds discovered under the agreement and certain related payment obligations.
In January 2015, Merck acquired Cubist, a leader in the development of therapies to treat serious infections caused by a broad range of bacteria, for total consideration of $8.3 billion (see Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements). This transaction closed on January 21, 2015; accordingly, the results of operations of the acquired business have been included in the Company’s results of operations beginning after that date. The estimated fair values of identifiable intangible assets related to currently marketed products were determined using an income approach. The Company’s estimates of projected net cash flows considered historical and projected pricing, margins and expense levels; the performance of competing products where applicable; relevant industry and therapeutic area growth drivers and factors; current and expected trends in technology and product life cycles; the extent and timing of potential new product introductions by the Company’s competitors; and the life of each asset’s underlying patent. The net cash flows were then probability-adjusted where appropriate to consider the uncertainties associated with the underlying assumptions, as well as the risk profile of the net cash flows utilized in the valuation. The probability-adjusted future net cash flows of each product were then discounted to present value utilizing a discount rate of 8%. Actual cash flows are likely to be different than those assumed. The most significant intangible assets relate to Zerbaxa, Cubicin and Sivextro.
The Company recorded the fair value of incomplete research project surotomycin (MK-4261) which, at the time of acquisition, had not reached technological feasibility and had no alternative future use. The amount was capitalized and accounted for as an indefinite-lived intangible asset, subject to impairment testing until completion or abandonment of the project. The fair value of surotomycin was determined by using an income approach. The probability-adjusted future net cash flows were then discounted to present value using a discount rate of 9%. During the second quarter of 2015, the Company received unfavorable efficacy data from a clinical trial for surotomycin. The evaluation of this data, combined with an assessment of the commercial opportunity for surotomycin, resulted in the discontinuation of the program and an IPR&D impairment charge.
In connection with the Cubist acquisition, liabilities were recorded for potential future consideration that is contingent upon the achievement of future sales-based milestones. The fair value of contingent consideration liabilities was determined at the acquisition date using unobservable inputs. These inputs include the estimated amount and timing of projected cash flows, the probability of success (achievement of the contingent event) and a risk-adjusted discount rate of 8% used to present value the probability-weighted cash flows. Changes in the inputs could result in a different fair value measurement.
Selected Joint Venture and Affiliate Information
AstraZeneca LP
In 1982, Merck entered into an agreement with Astra AB (Astra) to develop and market Astra products under a royalty-bearing license. In 1993, Merck’s total sales of Astra products reached a level that triggered the first step in the establishment of a joint venture business carried on by Astra Merck Inc. (AMI), in which Merck and Astra each owned a 50% share. This joint venture, formed in 1994, developed and marketed most of Astra’s new prescription medicines in the United States.
In 1998, Merck and Astra completed the restructuring of the ownership and operations of the joint venture whereby Merck acquired Astra’s interest in AMI, renamed KBI Inc. (KBI), and contributed KBI’s operating assets to a new U.S. limited partnership, Astra Pharmaceuticals L.P. (the Partnership), in exchange for a 1% limited partner interest. Astra contributed the net assets of its wholly owned subsidiary, Astra USA, Inc., to the Partnership in exchange for a 99% general partner interest. The Partnership, renamed AstraZeneca LP (AZLP) upon Astra’s 1999 merger with Zeneca Group Plc, became the exclusive distributor of the products for which KBI retained rights.
Merck earned revenue based on sales of KBI products and such revenue was $463 million in 2014 and $920 million in 2013 primarily relating to sales of Nexium, as well as Prilosec. In addition, Merck earned certain Partnership

60


returns from AZLP of $192 million in 2014 and $352 million in 2013, which were recorded in equity income from affiliates.
On June 30, 2014, AstraZeneca exercised its option to purchase Merck’s interest in KBI for $419 million in cash. Of this amount, $327 million reflects an estimate of the fair value of Merck’s interest in Nexium and Prilosec. This portion of the exercise price, which is subject to a true-up in 2018 based on actual sales from closing in 2014 to June 2018, was deferred and is being recognized over time in Other (income) expense, net as the contingency is eliminated as sales occur. During 2015 and 2014, $182 million and $140 million, respectively, of the deferred income was recognized bringing cumulative deferred income recognized through December 31, 2015 to $322 million. The remaining exercise price of $91 million primarily represents a multiple of ten times Merck’s average 1% annual profit allocation in the partnership for the three years prior to exercise. Merck recognized the $91 million as a gain in 2014 within Other (income) expense, net. As a result of AstraZeneca’s option exercise, the Company’s remaining interest in AZLP was redeemed. Accordingly, the Company also recognized a non-cash gain of approximately $650 million in 2014 within Other (income) expense, net resulting from the retirement of $2.4 billion of KBI preferred stock (see Note 11 to the consolidated financial statements), the elimination of the Company’s $1.4 billion investment in AZLP and a $340 million reduction of goodwill. This transaction resulted in a net tax benefit of $517 million in 2014 primarily reflecting the reversal of deferred taxes on the AZLP investment balance.2019.
As a result of AstraZeneca exercising its option, as of July 1, 2014, the Company no longer records equity income from AZLP and supply sales to AZLP have terminated.

Sanofi Pasteur MSD
In 1994, Merck and Pasteur Mérieux Connaught (now Sanofi Pasteur S.A.) established an equally-owned joint venture to market vaccines in Europe and to collaborate in the development of combination vaccines for distribution in Europe.
Sales of joint venture products were as follows:
($ in millions)2015 2014 2013
Gardasil$184
 $248
 $291
Influenza vaccines128
 159
 162
Zostavax87
 103
 68
Other viral vaccines77
 87
 104
RotaTeq56
 65
 55
Hepatitis vaccines62
 38
 31
Other vaccines329
 430
 453
 $923
 $1,130
 $1,164

Simcere MSD (Shanghai) Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.
In March 2015, Merck and Simcere Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. (Simcere) executed a restructuring agreement in which Merck agreed to transfer its 51% ownership interest in the Simcere MSD (Shanghai) Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. joint venture to Simcere. As a result, Merck deconsolidated the joint venture and recorded a net loss of $7 million in Other (income) expense, net in 2015.
Capital Expenditures
Capital expenditures were $1.3$2.6 billion in 2015, $1.32018, $1.9 billion in 20142017 and $1.5$1.6 billion in 2013.2016. Expenditures in the United States were $879 million$1.5 billion in 2015, $873 million2018, $1.2 billion in 20142017 and $902 million$1.0 billion in 2013.2016. In October 2018, the Company announced it plans to invest approximately $16 billion on new capital projects from 2018-2022. The focus of this investment will primarily be on increasing manufacturing capacity across Merck’s key businesses.
Depreciation expense was $1.4 billion in 2018, $1.5 billion in 2017 and $1.6 billion in 2015, $2.52016. In each of these years, $1.0 billion in 2014 and $2.2 billion in 2013 of which $1.1 billion, $2.0 billion and $1.5 billion, respectively,the depreciation expense applied to locations in the United States. Total depreciation expense in 2015, 20142017 and 20132016 included accelerated depreciation of $174 million, $900$60 million and $577$227 million, respectively, associated with restructuring activities (see Note 35 to the consolidated financial statements).


61


Analysis of Liquidity and Capital Resources
Merck’s strong financial profile enables it to fully fund research and development, focus on external alliances, support in-line products and maximize upcoming launches while providing significant cash returns to shareholders.
Selected Data          
($ in millions)2015 2014 20132018 2017 2016
Working capital$10,561
 $14,208
 $17,469
$3,669
 $6,152
 $13,410
Total debt to total liabilities and equity26.1% 21.8% 23.8%30.4% 27.8% 26.0%
Cash provided by operations to total debt0.5:1
 0.4:1
 0.5:1
0.4:1
 0.3:1
 0.4:1
The decline in working capital in 2018 compared with 2017 reflects the utilization of cash and short-term borrowings to fund $5.0 billion of ASR agreements, a $1.25 billion payment to redeem debt in connection with the exercise of a make-whole provision as discussed below, as well as a $750 million upfront payment related to the formation of a collaboration with Eisai discussed above. The decline in working capital in 2017 compared with 2016 primarily reflects the reclassification of $3.0 billion of notes due in the first half of 2018 from long-term debt to short-term debt, $1.85 billion of upfront and option payments related to the formation of the AstraZeneca collaboration discussed above, as well as $810 million paid to redeem debt in connection with tender offers discussed below.
Cash provided by operating activities was $12.4$10.9 billion in 2015, $7.92018, $6.5 billion in 20142017 and $11.7$10.4 billion in 2013.2016. The decline inlower cash provided by operating activities in 2014 as compared2017 reflects a $2.8 billion payment related to the settlement of certain federal income tax issues (see Note 16 to the consolidated financial statements), payments of $1.85 billion related to the formation of a collaboration with 2013 reflects approximately $5.0 billion of taxes paid onAstraZeneca (see Note 4 to the divestiture of MCC. Cash provided by operating activities in 2013 includesconsolidated financial statements), and a $625 million payment made by the Company of $480 million in connection withrelated to the previously disclosed settlement of the ENHANCE Litigation.worldwide Keytruda patent litigation. Cash provided by operating activities continues to be the Company’s primary source of funds to finance operating needs, capital expenditures, a portion of treasury stock purchases and dividends paid to shareholders.
Cash used inprovided by investing activities was $4.8$4.3 billion in 20152018 compared with $374 million$2.7 billion in 20142017. The increase in cash provided by investing activities was driven primarily reflecting cash received in 2014 from the divestiture of MCC, higher cash received in 2014 from other dispositions of businesses and in connection with AstraZeneca’s option exercise, as well as cash used for the acquisition of Cubist in 2015, partially offset by lower purchases of securities and other investments, partially offset by higher capital expenditures, lower proceeds from the sales of securities and other investments, and a $350 million milestone payment in 2018 related to a collaboration with Bayer (see Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements). Cash provided by investing activities was $2.7 billion in 2017 compared with a use

of cash in investing activities of $3.2 billion in 2016. The change was driven primarily by lower purchases of securities and other investments, higher proceeds from the sales of securities and other investments and a lower use of cash used in 2014 for the acquisitionacquisitions of Idenix and a cash payment made in 2014 upon the formation of the collaboration with Bayer. Cash used in investing activities was $374 million in 2014 compared with $3.1 billion in 2013 reflecting cash received in 2014 from the divestiture of MCC and from other dispositions of businesses, as well as cash received in connection with AstraZeneca’s option exercise, partially offset by higher purchases of and lower proceeds from the sale of securities and other investments, cash used for the acquisition of Idenix and a cash payment made upon formation of the collaboration with Bayer.businesses.
Cash used in financing activities was $5.3$13.2 billion in 20152018 compared with $15.1$10.0 billion in 20142017. The increase in cash used in financing activities was driven primarily by higher proceeds from the issuancepurchases of debt, lowertreasury stock (largely under ASR agreements as discussed below), higher payments on debt and lower purchasespayment of treasury stock,contingent consideration related to a prior year business acquisition, partially offset by lower proceeds from the exercise of stock options and a decreasean increase in short-term borrowings. Cash used in financing activities was $15.1$10.0 billion in 20142017 compared with $6.0$9.0 billion in 20132016. The increase in cash used in financing activities was driven primarily by higher payments on debt, lower proceeds from the issuance of debt in 2016, as well as higher purchases of treasury stock and a decrease in short-term borrowings, partially offset by higherlower proceeds from the exercise of stock options.
During 2015, the Company recorded charges of $876 million related to the devaluation of its net monetary assetsoptions in Venezuela, the large majority of which was cash (see Note 14 to the consolidated financial statements).
At December 31, 2015, the total of worldwide cash and investments was $26.5 billion, including $13.4 billion of cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments, and $13.0 billion of long-term investments. Generally 80%-90% of cash and investments are held2017, partially offset by foreign subsidiaries and would be subject to significant taxlower payments if such cash and investments were repatriatedon debt in the form of dividends. The Company records U.S. deferred tax liabilities for certain unremitted earnings, but when amounts earned overseas are expected to be indefinitely reinvested outside of the United States, no accrual for U.S. taxes is provided. The amount of cash and investments held by U.S. and foreign subsidiaries fluctuates due to a variety of factors including the timing and receipt of payments in the normal course of business. Cash provided by operating activities in the United States continues to be the Company’s primary source of funds to finance domestic operating needs, capital expenditures, a portion of treasury stock purchases and dividends paid to shareholders.2017.

62


The Company’s contractual obligations as of December 31, 20152018 are as follows:
Payments Due by Period                  
($ in millions)Total 2016 2017—2018 2019—2020 ThereafterTotal 2019 2020—2021 2022—2023 Thereafter
Purchase obligations (1)
$2,333
 $605
 $786
 $435
 $507
$2,349
 $886
 $1,011
 $407
 $45
Loans payable and current portion of long-term debt (2)
2,585
 2,585
 
 
 
5,309
 5,309
 
 
 
Long-term debt23,785
 
 3,328
 3,216
 17,241
19,882
 
 4,237
 4,000
 11,645
Interest related to debt obligations9,752
 651
 1,274
 1,187
 6,640
7,680
 662
 1,163
 932
 4,923
Vioxx shareholder class action settlement reserve (3)
1,062
 1,062
 
 
 
Unrecognized tax benefits (4)
1,244
 1,244
 
 
 
Operating leases789
 213
 250
 166
 160
Unrecognized tax benefits (2)
44
 44
 
 
 
Transition tax related to the enactment of the TCJA (3)
4,899
 275
 873
 1,217
 2,534
Leases997
 188
 348
 218
 243
$41,550
 $6,360
 $5,638
 $5,004
 $24,548
$41,160
 $7,364
 $7,632
 $6,774
 $19,390
(1)  
Includes future bulk supplyinventory purchases the Company has committed to in connection with certain divestitures.
(2)
In January 2016, $850 million of debt matured and was repaid.
(3) The Company anticipates receiving insurance proceeds of approximately $380 million to partially fund this liability (see Note 10 to the consolidated financial statements).
(4)  
As of December 31, 2015,2018, the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheet reflects liabilities for unrecognized tax benefits, interest and penalties of $4.2$2.3 billion, including $1.2 billion$44 million reflected as a current liability. Due to the high degree of uncertainty regarding the timing of future cash outflows of liabilities for unrecognized tax benefits beyond one year, a reasonable estimate of the period of cash settlement for years beyond 20162019 cannot be made.
(3)
In connection with the enactment of the TCJA, the Company is required to pay a one-time transition tax, which the Company has elected to pay over a period of eight years as permitted under the TCJA (see Note 16 to the consolidated financial statements).
Purchase obligations are enforceable and legally binding obligations for purchases of goods and services including minimum inventory contracts, research and development and advertising. Amounts reflected for research and development obligations do not include contingent milestone payments.payments related to collaborative arrangements and acquisitions. Contingent milestone payments are not considered contractual obligations as they are contingent upon the successful achievement of developmental, regulatory approval and commercial milestones. At December 31, 2018, the Company has liabilities for milestone payments related to collaborations with AstraZeneca, Eisai and Bayer (see Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements). Also excluded from research and development obligations are potential future funding commitments of up to approximately $120$40 million for investments in research venture capital funds. Loans payable and current portion of long-term debt reflects $226$149 million of long-dated notes that are subject to repayment at the option of the holders. Required funding obligations for 20162019 relating to the Company’s pension and other postretirement benefit plans are not expected to be material. However, the Company currently anticipates contributing approximately $50 million to its U.S. pension plans, $150 million to its international pension plans and $60$15 million to its other postretirement benefit plans during 2016.2019.
In August 2014,December 2018, the Company terminatedexercised a make-whole provision on its existing credit facility$1.25 billion, 5.00% notes due 2019 and entered intorepaid this debt.
In November 2017, the Company launched tender offers for certain outstanding notes and debentures. The Company paid $810 million in aggregate consideration (applicable purchase price together with accrued interest) to redeem $585 million principal amount of debt that was validly tendered in connection with the tender offers.
In November 2016, the Company issued €1.0 billion principal amount of senior unsecured notes consisting of €500 million principal amount of 0.50% notes due 2024 and €500 million principal amount of 1.375% notes due 2036. The Company used the net proceeds of the offering of $1.1 billion for general corporate purposes.

The Company has a $6.0 billion five-year credit facility that matures in August 2019.June 2023. The facility provides backup liquidity for the Company’s commercial paper borrowing facility and is to be used for general corporate purposes. The Company has not drawn funding from this facility.
In February 2015, Merck issued $8.0 billion aggregate principal amount of senior unsecured notes consisting of $300 million principal amount of floating rate notes due 2017, $700 million principal amount of floating rate notes due 2020, $1.25 billion principal amount of 1.85% notes due 2020, $1.25 billion aggregate principal amount of 2.35% notes due 2022, $2.5 billion aggregate principal amount of 2.75% notes due 2025 and $2.0 billion aggregate principal amount of 3.70% notes due 2045. The Company used a portion of the net proceeds of the offering of $7.9 billion to repay commercial paper issued to substantially finance the Company’s acquisition of Cubist. The remaining net proceeds were used for general corporate purposes, including for repurchases of the Company’s common stock, and the repayment of outstanding commercial paper borrowings and debt maturities.
Also in February 2015, the Company redeemed $1.9 billion of legacy Cubist debt acquired in the acquisition (see Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements).
In December 2015,March 2018, the Company filed a securities registration statement with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) under the automatic shelf registration process available to “well-known seasoned issuers” which is effective for three years.
Effective as of November 3, 2009, the Company executed a full and unconditional guarantee of the then existing debt of its subsidiary Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. (MSD) and MSD executed a full and unconditional guarantee

63


of the then existing debt of the Company (excluding commercial paper), including for payments of principal and interest. These guarantees do not extend to debt issued subsequent to that date.
The Company continues to maintain a conservative financial profile. The Company places its cash and investments in instruments that meet high credit quality standards, as specified in its investment policy guidelines. These guidelines also limit the amount of credit exposure to any one issuer. The Company does not participate in any off-balance sheet arrangements involving unconsolidated subsidiaries that provide financing or potentially expose the Company to unrecorded financial obligations.
In November 2015,October 2018, Merck announced that its Board of Directors approved a 15% increase to the Company’s quarterly dividend, raising it to $0.55 per share from $0.48 per share on the Company’s outstanding common stock. Payment was made in January 2019. In January 2019, the Board of Directors declared a quarterly dividend of $0.46$0.55 per share on the Company’s common stock for the second quarter of 2019 payable in January 2016.April 2019.
In March 2015,November 2017, Merck’s boardBoard of directorsDirectors authorized additional purchases of up to $10 billion of Merck’s common stock for its treasury. The treasury stock purchase authorization has no time limit and will be made over time in open-market transactions, block transactions, on or off an exchange, or in privately negotiated transactions. In October 2018, Merck’s Board of Directors authorized an additional $10 billion of treasury stock purchases with no time limit for completion and the Company entered into ASR agreements of $5 billion as discussed below. The Company purchased $4.2spent $9.1 billion to purchase shares of its common stock (75 million shares) for its treasury during 2015. The Company has approximately $8.5 billion2018. As of December 31, 2018, the Company’s remaining under the March share repurchase program.authorization was $11.9 billion. The Company purchased $7.7$4.0 billion and $6.5$3.4 billion of its common stock during 20142017 and 2013,2016, respectively, under this and previously authorized share repurchase programs.
On October 25, 2018, the Company entered into ASR agreements with two third-party financial institutions (Dealers). Under the ASR agreements, Merck agreed to purchase $5 billion of Merck’s common stock, in total, with an initial delivery of 56.7 million shares of Merck’s common stock, based on the then-current market price, made by the Dealers to Merck, and payments of $5 billion made by Merck to the Dealers on October 29, 2018, which were funded with existing cash and investments, as well as short-term borrowings. The number of shares of Merck’s common stock that Merck may receive, or may be required to remit, upon final settlement under the ASR agreements will be based upon the average daily volume weighted-average price of Merck’s common stock during the term of the ASR program, less a negotiated discount. Final settlement of the transaction under the ASR agreements is expected to occur in the first half of 2019, but may occur earlier at the option of the Dealers, or later under certain circumstances. If Merck is obligated to make adjustment payments to the Dealers under the ASR agreements, Merck may elect to satisfy such obligations in cash or in shares of Merck’s common stock.
Financial Instruments Market Risk Disclosures
The Company manages the impact of foreign exchange rate movements and interest rate movements on its earnings, cash flows and fair values of assets and liabilities through operational means and through the use of various financial instruments, including derivative instruments.
A significant portion of the Company’s revenues and earnings in foreign affiliates is exposed to changes in foreign exchange rates. The objectives and accounting related to the Company’s foreign currency risk management program, as well as its interest rate risk management activities are discussed below.

Foreign Currency Risk Management
The Company has established revenue hedging, balance sheet risk management, and net investment hedging programs to protect against volatility of future foreign currency cash flows and changes in fair value caused by volatility in foreign exchange rates.

The primary objective of the revenue hedging program is to reduce the potential for longer-term unfavorablevariability caused by changes in foreign exchange rates to decreasethat would affect the U.S. dollar value of future cash flows derived from foreign currency denominated sales, primarily the euro and Japanese yen. To achieve this objective, the Company will hedge a portion of its forecasted foreign currency denominated third-party and intercompany distributor entity sales (forecasted sales) that are expected to occur over its planning cycle, typically no more than threetwo years into the future. The Company will layer in hedges over time, increasing the portion of third-party and intercompany distributor entityforecasted sales hedged as it gets closer to the expected date of the forecasted foreign currency denominated sales. The portion of forecasted sales hedged is based on assessments of cost-benefit profiles that consider natural offsetting exposures, revenue and exchange rate volatilities and correlations, and the cost of hedging instruments. The hedged anticipated sales are a specified component of a portfolio of similarly denominated foreign currency-based sales transactions, each of which responds to the hedged currency risk in the same manner. The Company manages its anticipated transaction exposure principally with purchased local currency put options, which provide the Company with a right, but not an obligation, to sell foreign currencies in the future at a predetermined price. If the U.S. dollar strengthens relative to the currency of the hedged anticipated sales, total changes in the options’ cash flows offset the decline in the expected future U.S. dollar equivalent cash flows of the hedgedforward contracts, and purchased collar options.
Because Merck principally sells foreign currency sales. Conversely, if the U.S. dollar weakens, the options’ value reduces to zero, but the Company benefits from the increase in the U.S. dollar equivalent value of the anticipated foreign currency cash flows.
In connection with the Company’sits revenue hedging program, a purchased collar option strategy may be utilized. With a purchased collar option strategy, the Company writes a local currency call option and purchases a local currency put option. As compared to a purchased put option strategy alone, a purchased collar strategy reduces the upfront costs associated with purchasing puts through the collectionuniform weakening of premiums by writing call options. If the U.S. dollar weakens relative towould yield the currency oflargest overall potential loss in the hedged anticipated sales, the purchased put optionmarket value of the collar strategy reduces to zero and the Company benefits from the increase in the U.S. dollar equivalent value of its anticipated

64


foreign currency cash flows; however, this benefit would be capped at the strike level of the written call. If the U.S. dollar strengthens relative to the currency of the hedged anticipated sales, the written call option value of the collar strategy reduces to zero and the changes in the purchased put cash flows of the collar strategy would offset the decline in the expected future U.S. dollar equivalent cash flows of the hedged foreign currency sales.
these hedge instruments. The Company may also utilize forward contracts in its revenue hedging program. If the U.S. dollar strengthens relative to the currency of the hedged anticipated sales, the increase in the fair value of the forward contracts offsets the decrease in the expected future U.S. dollar cash flows of the hedged foreign currency sales. Conversely, if the U.S. dollar weakens, the decrease in the fair value of the forward contracts offsets the increase in the value of the anticipated foreign currency cash flows. While a weaker U.S. dollar would result in a net benefit, the market value of Merck’s hedges would have declined by an estimated $502$441 million and $660$400 million at December 31, 20152018 and 2014,2017, respectively, from a uniform 10% weakening of the U.S. dollar. The market value was determined using a foreign exchange option pricing model and holding all factors except exchange rates constant. Because Merck principally uses purchased local currency put options, a uniform weakening of the U.S. dollar would yield the largest overall potential loss in the market value of these options. The sensitivity measurement assumes that a change in one foreign currency relative to the U.S. dollar would not affect other foreign currencies relative to the U.S. dollar. Although not predictive in nature, the Company believes that a 10% threshold reflects reasonably possible near-term changes in Merck’s major foreign currency exposures relative to the U.S. dollar. The cash flows from these contracts are reported as operating activities in the Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows.
The primary objectiveCompany manages operating activities and net asset positions at each local subsidiary in order to mitigate the effects of theexchange on monetary assets and liabilities. The Company also uses a balance sheet risk management program is to mitigate the exposure of net monetary assets that are denominated in a currency other than a subsidiary’s functional currency from the effects of volatility in foreign exchange. In these instances, Merck principally utilizes forward exchange contracts, which enable the Company to buy and sell foreign currencies in the future at fixed exchange rates and economically offset the consequences of changes in foreign exchange from the monetary assets. Merck routinely enters into contracts to offset the effects of exchange on exposures denominated in developed country currencies, primarily the euro and Japanese yen. For exposures in developing country currencies, the Company will enter into forward contracts to partially offset the effects of exchange on exposures when it is deemed economical to do so based on a cost-benefit analysis that considers the magnitude of the exposure, the volatility of the exchange rate and the cost of the hedging instrument. The Company will also minimize the effect of exchange on monetary assets and liabilities by managing operating activities and net asset positions at the local level. The cash flows from these contracts are reported as operating activities in the Consolidated StatementsStatement of Cash Flows.
A sensitivity analysis to changes in the value of the U.S. dollar on foreign currency denominated derivatives, investments and monetary assets and liabilities indicated that if the U.S. dollar uniformly strengthenedweakened by 10% against all currency exposures of the Company at December 31, 20152018 and 2014,2017, Income before taxes would have declined by approximately $45$134 million and $92 million in 20152018 and $25 million in 2014.2017, respectively. Because the Company was in a net long (receivable)short (payable) position relative to its major foreign currencies after consideration of forward contracts, a uniform strengtheningweakening of the U.S. dollar will yield the largest overall potential net loss in earnings due to exchange. This measurement assumes that a change in one foreign currency relative to the U.S. dollar would not affect other foreign currencies relative to the U.S. dollar. Although not predictive in nature, the Company believes that a 10% threshold reflects reasonably possible near-term changes in Merck’s major foreign currency exposures relative to the U.S. dollar. The cash flows from these contracts are reported as operating activities in the Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows.
Since January 2010, Venezuela has been designatedThe economy of Argentina was determined to be hyperinflationary and, as a result, local foreign operations are remeasured in 2018; consequently, in accordance with U.S. dollars withGAAP, the impact recorded in results of operations.
In February 2013, the Venezuelan government devaluedCompany began remeasuring its currency (Bolívar Fuertes) from 4.30 VEF per U.S. dollar to 6.30 VEF per U.S. dollar. The Company recognized losses due to exchange of approximately $140 million in 2013 resulting from the remeasurement of the local monetary assets and liabilities at the new rate.
In additionfor those operations in earnings. The impact to the official rate of 6.30 VEF per U.S. dollar, the Venezuelan government maintains two other official rates. These are the Sistema Complementario de Administracion de Divisas, or SICAD, and the Sistema Marginal de Divisas, or SIMADI. Both the SICAD and SIMADI average rates are published by the Central Bank of Venezuela and at December 31, 2015, the average exchange rates inferred were 13.50 VEF per U.S. dollar and 198.70 VEF per U.S. dollar, respectively. Historically, the Venezuelan government has indicated that essential goods, including food and medicine, would remain at the official rate of 6.30 VEF per U.S. dollar.

65


During the second quarter of 2015, upon evaluation of evolving economic conditions in Venezuela and volatility in the country, combined with a decline in transactions that were settled at the official rate, the Company determined itCompany’s results was unlikely that all outstanding net monetary assets would be settled at the official rate. Accordingly, during the second quarter of 2015, the Company recorded a charge of $715 million within Other (income) expense, net to devalue its net monetary assets in Venezuela to an amount that represented the Company’s estimate of the U.S. dollar amount that would ultimately be collected. During the third quarter of 2015, the Company recorded additional exchange losses of $138 million reflecting the ongoing effect of translating transactions and net monetary assets consistent with the second quarter. As a result of the further deterioration of economic conditions in Venezuela and continued declines in transactions which were settled at the official rate, in the fourth quarter of 2015, the Company began using the SIMADI rate to report its Venezuelan operations. The Company also revalued its remaining net monetary assets at the SIMADI rate, which resulted in an additional charge in the fourth quarter of 2015 of $161 million. Accordingly,at December 31, 2015, the Company had approximately $20 million (U.S. dollar equivalent at the SIMADI rate) of remaining net monetary assets in its Venezuelan entities, of which the large majority was cash. Merck’s sales in Venezuela were approximately $625 million in 2015. The Company has reduced its operations in Venezuela; however, Merck continues to work with the government of Venezuela to import essential medicines into the country. As a result of transitioning to the SIMADI rate in the fourth quarter of 2015 for purposes of reporting its Venezuelan operations, Merck anticipates that sales in Venezuela in 2016 will be de minimis.immaterial.
The Company also uses forward exchange contracts to hedge its net investment in foreign operations against movements in exchange rates. The forward contracts are designated as hedges of the net investment in a foreign operation. The Company hedges a portion of the net investment in certain of its foreign operations and measures ineffectiveness based upon changes in spot foreign exchange rates.operations. The effective portion of the unrealized gains or losses on these contracts isare recorded in foreign currency translation adjustment within Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) (“OCI”OCI), and remainsremain in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income(Loss) (“AOCI”)AOCI) until either the sale or complete or substantially complete liquidation of the subsidiary. The Company excludes certain portions of the change in fair value of its derivative instruments from the assessment of hedge effectiveness (excluded component). Changes in fair value of the excluded components are recognized in OCI. In accordance with the new guidance adopted on January 1, 2018 (see Note 2 to the consolidated financial statements), the Company has elected to recognize in earnings the initial value of the excluded component on a straight-line basis over the life of the derivative instrument, rather

than using the mark-to-market approach. The cash flows from these contracts are reported as investing activities in the Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows.
Foreign exchange risk is also managed through the use of foreign currency debt. The Company’s senior unsecured euro-denominated notes have been designated as, and are effective as, economic hedges of the net investment in a foreign operation. Accordingly, foreign currency transaction gains or losses due to spot rate fluctuations on the euro-denominated debt instruments are included in foreign currency translation adjustment within OCI.

Interest Rate Risk Management
The Company may use interest rate swap contracts on certain investing and borrowing transactions to manage its net exposure to interest rate changes and to reduce its overall cost of borrowing. The Company does not use leveraged swaps and, in general, does not leverage any of its investment activities that would put principal capital at risk.
In May 2018, four interest rate swaps with notional amounts aggregating $1.0 billion matured. These swaps effectively converted the Company’s $1.0 billion, 1.30% fixed-rate notes due 2018 to variable rate debt. In December 2018, in connection with the early repayment of debt, the Company settled three interest rate swaps with notional amounts aggregating $550 million. These swaps effectively converted a portion of the Company’s $1.25 billion, 5.00% notes due 2019 to variable rate debt. At December 31, 2015,2018, the Company was a party to 3019 pay-floating, receive-fixed interest rate swap contracts designated as fair value hedges of fixed-rate notes in which the notional amounts match the amount of the hedged fixed-rate notes as detailed in the table below.
($ in millions)20152018
Debt InstrumentPar Value of Debt Number of Interest Rate Swaps Held Total Swap Notional AmountPar Value of Debt Number of Interest Rate Swaps Held Total Swap Notional Amount
0.70% notes due 2016$1,000
 4
 $1,000
1.30% notes due 20181,000
 4
 1,000
5.00% notes due 20191,250
 3
 550
1.85% notes due 20201,250
 5
 1,250
$1,250
 5
 $1,250
3.875% notes due 20211,150
 5
 1,150
1,150
 5
 1,150
2.40% notes due 20221,000
 4
 1,000
1,000
 4
 1,000
2.35% notes due 20221,250
 5
 1,250
1,250
 5
 1,250
The interest rate swap contracts are designated hedges of the fair value changes in the notes attributable to changes in the benchmark London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR) swap rate. The fair value changes in the notes attributable to changes in the LIBOR swap rate are recorded in interest expense and offset byalong with the offsetting fair value changes in

66

Table of Contents

the swap contracts. The cash flows from these contracts are reported as operating activities in the Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows.
The Company’s investment portfolio includes cash equivalents and short-term investments, the market values of which are not significantly affected by changes in interest rates. The market value of the Company’s medium- to long-term fixed-rate investments is modestly affected by changes in U.S. interest rates. Changes in medium- to long-term U.S. interest rates have a more significant impact on the market value of the Company’s fixed-rate borrowings, which generally have longer maturities. A sensitivity analysis to measure potential changes in the market value of Merck’s investments and debt from a change in interest rates indicated that a one percentage point increase in interest rates at December 31, 20152018 and 20142017 would have positively affected the net aggregate market value of these instruments by $1.2 billion and $1.0$1.3 billion, respectively. A one percentage point decrease at December 31, 20152018 and 20142017 would have negatively affected the net aggregate market value by $1.5$1.4 billion and $1.2$1.5 billion, respectively. The fair value of Merck’s debt was determined using pricing models reflecting one percentage point shifts in the appropriate yield curves. The fair values of Merck’s investments were determined using a combination of pricing and duration models.


Critical Accounting Policies
The Company’s consolidated financial statements are prepared in conformity with GAAP and, accordingly, include certain amounts that are based on management’s best estimates and judgments. Estimates are used when accounting for amounts recorded in connection with acquisitions, including initial fair value determinations of assets and liabilities, primarily IPR&D, other intangible assets and contingent consideration, as well as subsequent fair value measurement.measurements. Additionally, estimates are used in determining such items as provisions for sales discounts and returns, depreciable and amortizable lives, recoverability of inventories, including those produced in preparation for product launches, amounts recorded for contingencies, environmental liabilities, accruals for contingent sales-based milestone payments and other reserves, pension and other postretirement benefit plan assumptions, share-based compensation assumptions, restructuring costs, impairments of long-lived assets (including intangible assets and goodwill) and investments, and taxes on income. Because of the uncertainty inherent in such estimates, actual results may differ from these estimates. Application of the following accounting policies result in accounting estimates having the potential for the most significant impact on the financial statements.
Acquisitions and Dispositions
To determine whether transactions should be accounted for as acquisitions qualify as business combinations(or disposals) of assets or asset acquisitions,businesses, the Company makes certain judgments, which include assessment of the inputs, processes, and outputs associated with the acquired set of activities. If the Company determines that substantially all of the acquisition consistsfair value of inputs, as well as processesgross assets included in a transaction is concentrated in a single asset (or a group of similar assets), the assets would not represent a business. To be considered a business, the assets in a transaction need to include an input and a substantive process that when appliedtogether significantly contribute to those inputs have the ability to create outputs, the acquisition is determined to be a business combination.outputs.
In a business combination, the acquisition method of accounting requires that the assets acquired and liabilities assumed be recorded as of the date of the acquisition at their respective fair values with limited exceptions. Assets acquired and liabilities assumed in a business combination that arise from contingencies are generally recognized at fair value ifvalue. If fair value can reasonably be estimated. If the acquisition date fair value of an asset acquired or liability assumed that arises from a contingency cannot be determined, the asset or liability is recognized if probable and reasonably estimable; if these criteria are not met, no asset or liability is recognized. Fair value is defined as the exchange price that would be received for an asset or paid to transfer a liability (an exit price) in the principal or most advantageous market for the asset or liability in an orderly transaction between market participants on the measurement date. Accordingly, the Company may be required to value assets at fair value measures that do not reflect the Company’s intended use of those assets. Any excess of the purchase price (consideration transferred) over the estimated fair values of net assets acquired is recorded as goodwill. Transaction costs and costs to restructure the acquired company are expensed as incurred. The operating results of the acquired business are reflected in the Company’s consolidated financial statements after the date of the acquisition. The fair values of intangible assets, including acquired IPR&D, are determined utilizing information available near the acquisition date based on expectations and assumptions that are deemed reasonable by management. Given the considerable judgment involved in determining fair values, the Company typically obtains assistance from third-party valuation specialists for significant items. Amounts allocated to acquired IPR&D are capitalized and accounted for as indefinite-lived intangible assets, subject to impairment testing until completion or abandonment of the projects. Upon successful completion of each project, Merck will make a separate determination as to the then usefulthen-useful life of the asset, generally determined by the period in which the substantial majority of the cash flows are expected to be generated, and begin amortization. Certain of the Company’s business acquisitions involve the potential for future payment of consideration that is contingent upon the achievement of

67

Table of Contents

performance milestones, including product development milestones and royalty payments on future product sales. The fair value of contingent consideration liabilities is determined at the acquisition date using unobservable inputs. These inputs include the estimated amount and timing of projected cash flows, the probability of success (achievement of the contingent event) and the risk-adjusted discount rate used to present value the probability-weighted cash flows. Subsequent to the acquisition date, at each reporting period, the contingent consideration liability is remeasured at current fair value with changes (either expense or income) recorded in earnings. Changes in any of the inputs may result in a significantly different fair value adjustment.
The judgments made in determining estimated fair values assigned to assets acquired and liabilities assumed in a business combination, as well as asset lives, can materially affect the Company’s results of operations.
If the Company determines the transaction will not be accounted for as an acquisition of a business, the transaction will be accounted for as an acquisition of assets rather than a business combination and, therefore, no goodwill will be recorded. In an asset acquisition, acquired IPR&D with no alternative future use is charged to expense at the acquisition date.
The fair values of identifiable intangible assets related to currently marketed products and product rights are primarily determined by using an income approach through which fair value is estimated based on each asset’s

discounted projected net cash flows. The Company’s estimates of market participant net cash flows consider historical and projected pricing, margins and expense levels; the performance of competing products where applicable; relevant industry and therapeutic area growth drivers and factors; current and expected trends in technology and product life cycles; the time and investment that will be required to develop products and technologies; the ability to obtain marketing and regulatory approvals; the ability to manufacture and commercialize the products; the extent and timing of potential new product introductions by the Company’s competitors; and the life of each asset’s underlying patent, if any. The net cash flows are then probability-adjusted where appropriate to consider the uncertainties associated with the underlying assumptions, as well as the risk profile of the net cash flows utilized in the valuation. The probability-adjusted future net cash flows of each product are then discounted to present value utilizing an appropriate discount rate.
The fair values of identifiable intangible assets related to IPR&D are also determined using an income approach, through which fair value is estimated based on each asset’s probability-adjusted future net cash flows, which reflect the different stages of development of each product and the associated probability of successful completion. The net cash flows are then discounted to present value using an appropriate discount rate.
If the Company determines the transaction will not be accounted for as an acquisition of a business, the transaction will be accounted for as an asset acquisition rather than a business combination and, therefore, no goodwill will be recorded. In an asset acquisition, acquired IPR&D with no alternative future use is charged to expense and contingent consideration is not recognized at the acquisition date.
Revenue Recognition
Revenues from sales of products are recognized when title and risk of loss passesOn January 1, 2018, the Company adopted a new standard on revenue recognition (see Note 2 to the customer, typically at timeconsolidated financial statements). Changes to the Company’s revenue recognition policy as a result of delivery. adopting the new guidance are described below.
Recognition of revenue also requires reasonable assuranceevidence of a contract, probable collection of sales proceeds and completion of substantially all performance obligations. Domestically,Merck acts as the principal in substantially all of its customer arrangements and therefore records revenue on a gross basis. The majority of the Company’s contracts related to the Pharmaceutical and Animal Health segments have a single performance obligation - the promise to transfer goods. Shipping is considered immaterial in the context of the overall customer arrangement and damages or loss of goods in transit are rare. Therefore, shipping is not deemed a separately recognized performance obligation.
The vast majority of revenues from sales of products are recognized at a point in time when control of the goods is transferred to the customer, which the Company has determined is when title and risks and rewards of ownership transfer to the customer and the Company is entitled to payment. Certain Merck entities, including U.S. entities, have contract terms under which control of the goods passes to the customer upon shipment; however, either pursuant to the terms of the contract or as a business practice, Merck retains responsibility for goods lost or damaged in transit. Prior to the adoption of the new standard, Merck would recognize revenue for these entities upon delivery of the goods. Under the new guidance, the Company is now recognizing revenue at time of shipment for these entities.
For businesses within the Company’s Healthcare Services segment and certain services in the Animal Health segment, revenue is recognized over time, generally ratably over the contract term as services are provided. These service revenues are not material.
The nature of the Company’s business gives rise to several types of variable consideration including discounts and returns, which are estimated at the time of sale generally using the expected value method, although the most likely amount method is used for prompt pay discounts.
In the United States, sales discounts are issued to customers as direct discounts at the point-of-sale, indirectly through an intermediary wholesaler known(known as chargebacks,chargebacks), or indirectly in the form of rebates. Additionally, sales are generally made with a limited right of return under certain conditions. Revenues are recorded net of provisions for sales discounts and returns, which are established at the time of sale. In addition, revenues are recorded net of time value of money discounts for customers for whichif collection of accounts receivable is expected to be in excess of one year.
The U.S. provision for aggregate indirect customer discounts covers chargebacks and rebates. Chargebacks are discounts that occur when a contracted customer purchases directly through an intermediary wholesaler. The contracted customer generally purchases product from the wholesaler at its contracted price plus a mark-up from the wholesaler.mark-up. The wholesaler, in turn, charges

the Company back for the difference between the price initially paid by the wholesaler and the contract price paid to the wholesaler by the customer. The provision for chargebacks is based on expected sell-through levels by the Company’s wholesale customers to contracted customers, as well as estimated wholesaler inventory levels. Rebates are amounts owed based upon definitive contractual agreements or legal requirements with private sector and public sector (Medicaid and Medicare Part D) benefit providers, after the final dispensing of the product by a pharmacy to a benefit plan participant. The provision for rebates is based on expected payments, which are driven by patient usage, and contract performance byas well as inventory levels in the distribution channel to determine the contractual obligation to the benefit provider customers.
providers. The Company uses historical customer segment utilization mix, adjusted for other known events,sales forecasts, changes to product mix and price, inventory levels in the distribution channel, government pricing calculations and prior payment history in order to estimate the expected provision. Amounts accrued for aggregate indirect customer discounts are evaluated on a quarterly basis

68

Table of Contents

through comparison of information provided by the wholesalers, health maintenance organizations, pharmacy benefit managers, federal and state agencies, and other customers to the amounts accrued. Adjustments are recorded when trends or significant events indicate that a change in the estimated provision is appropriate.
The Company continually monitors its provision for aggregate indirect customer discounts. There were no material adjustments to estimates associated with the aggregate indirect customer discount provision in 2015, 20142018, 2017 or 2013.2016.
Summarized information about changes in the aggregate indirect customer discount accrual related to U.S. sales is as follows:
($ in millions)2015 20142018 2017
Balance January 1$2,154
 $1,688
$2,551
 $2,945
Current provision8,068
 6,560
10,837
 11,001
Adjustments to prior years(77) (18)(117) (286)
Payments(7,347) (6,076)(10,641) (11,109)
Balance December 31$2,798
 $2,154
$2,630
 $2,551
Accruals for chargebacks are reflected as a direct reduction to accounts receivable and accruals for rebates as current liabilities. The accrued balances relative to these provisions included in Accounts receivable and Accrued and other current liabilities were $145$245 million and $2.7$2.4 billion, respectively, at December 31, 20152018 and were $112$198 million and $2.0$2.4 billion, respectively, at December 31, 2014.2017.
Outside of the United States, variable consideration in the form of discounts and rebates are a combination of commercially-driven discounts in highly competitive product classes, discounts required to gain or maintain reimbursement, or legislatively mandated rebates. In certain European countries, legislatively mandated rebates are calculated based on an estimate of the government’s total unbudgeted spending and the Company’s specific payback obligation. Rebates may also be required based on specific product sales thresholds. The Company applies an estimated factor against its actual invoiced sales to represent the expected level of future discount or rebate obligations associated with the sale.
The Company maintains a returns policy that allows its U.S. pharmaceutical customers to return product within a specified period prior to and subsequent to the expiration date (generally, three to six months before and 12 months after product expiration). The estimate of the provision for returns is based upon historical experience with actual returns. Additionally, the Company considers factors such as levels of inventory in the distribution channel, product dating and expiration period, whether products have been discontinued, entrance in the market of additional generic competition, changes in formularies or launch of over-the-counter products, among others. The product returns provision for U.S. pharmaceutical sales as a percentage of U.S. net pharmaceutical sales was 1.5%1.6% in 2015, 1.7%2018, 2.1% in 20142017 and 1.5%1.4% in 2013.2016. Outside of the United States, returns are only allowed in certain countries on a limited basis.
Merck’s payment terms for U.S. pharmaceutical customers are typically net 36 days from receipt of invoice and for U.S. animal health customers are typically net 30 days from receipt of invoice; however, certain products, including Keytruda, have longer payment terms up to 90 days. Outside of the United States, payment terms are typically 30 days to 90 days, although certain markets have longer payment terms.
Through its distribution programs with U.S. wholesalers, the Company encourages wholesalers to align purchases with underlying demand and maintain inventories below specified levels. The terms of the programs allow the wholesalers to earn fees upon providing visibility into their inventory levels, as well as by achieving certain performance parameters such as inventory management, customer service levels, reducing shortage claims and reducing

product returns. Information provided through the wholesaler distribution programs includes items such as sales trends, inventory on-hand, on-order quantity and product returns.
Wholesalers generally provide only the above mentionedabove-mentioned data to the Company, as there is no regulatory requirement to report lot level information to manufacturers, which is the level of information needed to determine the remaining shelf life and original sale date of inventory. Given current wholesaler inventory levels, which are generally less than a month, the Company believes that collection of order lot information across all wholesale customers would have limited use in estimating sales discounts and returns.
Inventories Produced in Preparation for Product Launches
The Company capitalizes inventories produced in preparation for product launches sufficient to support estimated initial market demand. Typically, capitalization of such inventory does not begin until the related product candidates are in Phase 3 clinical trials and are considered to have a high probability of regulatory approval. The Company monitors the status of each respective product within the regulatory approval process; however, the Company generally does not disclose specific timing for regulatory approval. If the Company is aware of any specific risks or contingencies other than the normal regulatory approval process or if there are any specific issues identified during the research process relating to safety, efficacy, manufacturing, marketing or labeling, the related inventory would generally not be capitalized. Expiry dates of the inventory are affected by the stage of completion. The Company manages the levels of inventory at each stage to optimize the shelf life of the inventory in relation to anticipated market demand in order to avoid product expiry issues. For inventories that are capitalized, anticipated future sales and shelf lives support the realization of the inventory value as the inventory shelf life is sufficient to meet initial product launch requirements.

69

Table of Contents

Inventories produced in preparation for product launches capitalized at December 31, 20152018 and 20142017 were $63$7 million and $74$80 million, respectively.
Contingencies and Environmental Liabilities
The Company is involved in various claims and legal proceedings of a nature considered normal to its business, including product liability, intellectual property and commercial litigation, as well as certain additional matters (see Note 1011 to the consolidated financial statements.)statements). The Company records accruals for contingencies when it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount can be reasonably estimated. These accruals are adjusted periodically as assessments change or additional information becomes available. For product liability claims, a portion of the overall accrual is actuarially determined and considers such factors as past experience, number of claims reported and estimates of claims incurred but not yet reported. Individually significant contingent losses are accrued when probable and reasonably estimable.
Legal defense costs expected to be incurred in connection with a loss contingency are accrued when probable and reasonably estimable. Some of the significant factors considered in the review of these legal defense reserves are as follows: the actual costs incurred by the Company; the development of the Company’s legal defense strategy and structure in light of the scope of its litigation; the number of cases being brought against the Company; the costs and outcomes of completed trials and the most current information regarding anticipated timing, progression, and related costs of pre-trial activities and trials in the associated litigation. The amount of legal defense reserves as of December 31, 20152018 and 20142017 of approximately $245 million and $215$160 million, respectively, represents the Company’s best estimate of the minimum amount of defense costs to be incurred in connection with its outstanding litigation; however, events such as additional trials and other events that could arise in the course of its litigation could affect the ultimate amount of legal defense costs to be incurred by the Company. The Company will continue to monitor its legal defense costs and review the adequacy of the associated reserves and may determine to increase the reserves at any time in the future if, based upon the factors set forth, it believes it would be appropriate to do so.
The Company and its subsidiaries are parties to a number of proceedings brought under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, commonly known as Superfund, and other federal and state equivalents. When a legitimate claim for contribution is asserted, a liability is initially accrued based upon the estimated transaction costs to manage the site. Accruals are adjusted as site investigations, feasibility studies and related cost assessments of remedial techniques are completed, and as the extent to which other potentially responsible parties who may be jointly and severally liable can be expected to contribute is determined.
The Company is also remediating environmental contamination resulting from past industrial activity at certain of its sites and takes an active role in identifying and accruing for these costs. In the past, Merck performed a worldwide survey to assess all sites for potential contamination resulting from past industrial activities. Where

assessment indicated that physical investigation was warranted, such investigation was performed, providing a better evaluation of the need for remedial action. Where such need was identified, remedial action was then initiated. As definitive information became available during the course of investigations and/or remedial efforts at each site, estimates were refined and accruals were established or adjusted accordingly. These estimates and related accruals continue to be refined annually.
The Company believes that there are no compliance issues associated with applicable environmental laws and regulations that would have a material adverse effect on the Company. Expenditures for remediation and environmental liabilities were $8$16 million in 2015,2018, and are estimated at $59$57 million in the aggregate for the years 20162019 through 2020.2023. In management’s opinion, the liabilities for all environmental matters that are probable and reasonably estimable have been accrued and totaled $109$71 million and $125$82 million at December 31, 20152018 and 2014,2017, respectively. These liabilities are undiscounted, do not consider potential recoveries from other parties and will be paid out over the periods of remediation for the applicable sites, which are expected to occur primarily over the next 15 years. Although it is not possible to predict with certainty the outcome of these matters, or the ultimate costs of remediation, management does not believe that any reasonably possible expenditures that may be incurred in excess of the liabilities accrued should exceed $57$60 million in the aggregate. Management also does not believe that these expenditures should result in a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial position, results of operations, liquidity or capital resources for any year.

70

Table of Contents

Share-Based Compensation
The Company expenses all share-based payment awards to employees, including grants of stock options, over the requisite service period based on the grant date fair value of the awards. The Company determines the fair value of certain share-based awards using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model which uses both historical and current market data to estimate the fair value. This method incorporates various assumptions such as the risk-free interest rate, expected volatility, expected dividend yield and expected life of the options. Total pretax share-based compensation expense was $299$348 million in 2015, $2782018, $312 million in 20142017 and $276$300 million in 2013.2016. At December 31, 2015,2018, there was $407$560 million of total pretax unrecognized compensation expense related to nonvested stock option, restricted stock unit and performance share unit awards which will be recognized over a weighted average period of 1.9 years. For segment reporting, share-based compensation costs are unallocated expenses.
Pensions and Other Postretirement Benefit Plans
Net periodic benefit cost for pension plans totaled $195 million in 2018, $201 million in 2017 and $144 million in 2016. Net periodic benefit (credit) for other postretirement benefit plans totaled $253was $(45) million in 2015, $1692018, $(60) million in 20142017 and $716$(88) million in 2013.2016. Pension and other postretirement benefit plan information for financial reporting purposes is calculated using actuarial assumptions including a discount rate for plan benefit obligations and an expected rate of return on plan assets. The changes in net periodic benefit cost year over year for pension and other postretirement benefit plans are largely attributable to changes in the discount rate affecting net loss amortization.
The Company reassesses its benefit plan assumptions on a regular basis. For both the pension and other postretirement benefit plans, the discount rate is evaluated on measurement dates and modified to reflect the prevailing market rate of a portfolio of high-quality fixed-income debt instruments that would provide the future cash flows needed to pay the benefits included in the benefit obligation as they come due. At December 31, 2015, theThe discount rates for the Company’s U.S. pension and other postretirement benefit plans ranged from 3.80%4.00% to 4.80%4.40% at December 31, 2018, compared with a range of 3.20% to 4.20%3.80% at December 31, 2014.2017.
The expected rate of return for both the pension and other postretirement benefit plans represents the average rate of return to be earned on plan assets over the period the benefits included in the benefit obligation are to be paid. In developing the expected rate of return, the Company considers long-term compound annualized returns of historical market data, as well ascurrent market conditions and actual returns on the Company’s plan assets. Using this reference information, the Company develops forward-looking return expectations for each asset category and a weighted-average expected long-term rate of return for a target portfolio allocated across these investment categories. The expected portfolio performance reflects the contribution of active management as appropriate. As a result of this analysis, for 2016,For 2019, the Company’s expected rate of return will range from 7.30% to 8.75%,for the same range as in 2015 for itsCompany’s U.S. pension and other postretirement benefit plans.plans will range from 7.70% to 8.10%, compared to a range of 7.70% to 8.30% in 2018. The decrease is primarily due to a modest shift in asset allocation.
The Company has established investment guidelines for its U.S. pension and other postretirement plans to create an asset allocation that is expected to deliver a rate of return sufficient to meet the long-term obligation of each

plan, given an acceptable level of risk. The target investment portfolio of the Company’s U.S. pension and other postretirement benefit plans is allocated 40%30% to 60%50% in U.S. equities, 20%15% to 40%30% in international equities, 15%30% to 25%45% in fixed-income investments, and up to 5% in cash and other investments. The portfolio’s equity weighting is consistent with the long-term nature of the plans’ benefit obligations. The expected annual standard deviation of returns of the target portfolio, which approximates 13%11%, reflects both the equity allocation and the diversification benefits among the asset classes in which the portfolio invests. For non-U.S. pension plans, the targeted investment portfolio varies based on the duration of pension liabilities and local government rules and regulations. Although a significant percentage of plan assets are invested in U.S. equities, concentration risk is mitigated through the use of strategies that are diversified within management guidelines.
Actuarial assumptions are based upon management’s best estimates and judgment. A reasonably possible change of plus (minus) 25 basis points in the discount rate assumption, with other assumptions held constant, would have had an estimated $46$80 million favorable (unfavorable) impact on itsthe Company’s net periodic benefit cost.cost in 2018. A reasonably possible change of plus (minus) 25 basis points in the expected rate of return assumption, with other assumptions held constant, would have had an estimated $45$50 million favorable (unfavorable) impact on itsMerck’s net periodic benefit cost.cost in 2018. Required funding obligations for 20162019 relating to the Company’s pension and other postretirement benefit plans are not expected to be material. The preceding hypothetical changes in the discount rate and expected rate of return assumptions would not impact the Company’s funding requirements.

71

Table of Contents

Net loss amounts, which reflect experience differentials primarily relating to differences between expected and actual returns on plan assets as well as the effects of changes in actuarial assumptions, are recorded as a component of AOCI. Expected returns for pension plans are based on a calculated market-related value of assets. Under this methodology, asset gains/losses resulting from actual returns that differ from the Company’s expected returns are recognized in the market-related value of assets ratably over a five-year period. Also, net loss amounts in AOCI in excess of certain thresholds are amortized into net periodic benefit cost over the average remaining service life of employees.
Restructuring Costs
Restructuring costs have been recorded in connection with restructuring programs designed to reducestreamline the Company’s cost structure, increase efficiency and enhance competitiveness.structure. As a result, the Company has made estimates and judgments regarding its future plans, including future termination benefits and other exit costs to be incurred when the restructuring actions take place. When accruing thesetermination costs, the Company will recognize the amount within a range of costs that is the best estimate within the range. When no amount within the range is a better estimate than any other amount, the Company recognizes the minimum amount within the range. In connection with these actions, management also assesses the recoverability of long-lived assets employed in the business. In certain instances, asset lives have been shortened based on changes in the expected useful lives of the affected assets. Severance and other related costs are reflected within Restructuring costs. Asset-related charges are reflected within Materials and productionCost of sales costs,, MarketingSelling, general and administrative expenses and Research and development expenses depending upon the nature of the asset.
Impairments of Long-Lived Assets
The Company assesses changes in economic, regulatory and legal conditions and makes assumptions regarding estimated future cash flows in evaluating the value of the Company’s property, plant and equipment, goodwill and other intangible assets.
The Company periodically evaluates whether current facts or circumstances indicate that the carrying values of its long-lived assets to be held and used may not be recoverable. If such circumstances are determined to exist, an estimate of the undiscounted future cash flows of these assets, or appropriate asset groupings, is compared to the carrying value to determine whether an impairment exists. If the asset is determined to be impaired, the loss is measured based on the difference between the asset’s fair value and its carrying value. If quoted market prices are not available, the Company will estimate fair value using a discounted value of estimated future cash flows approach.
Goodwill represents the excess of the consideration transferred over the fair value of net assets of businesses acquired andacquired. Goodwill is assigned to reporting units. The Company tests its goodwillunits and evaluated for impairment on at least an annual basis, or more frequently if impairment indicators exist, by first assessing qualitative factors to determine whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount. Some of the factors considered in the assessment include general macroeconomic conditions, conditions specific to the industry and market, cost factors which could have a significant effect on earnings or cash flows, the overall financial performance of the reporting unit,

and whether there have been sustained declines in the Company’s share price. Additionally, the Company evaluates the extent to which the fair value exceeded the carrying value of the reporting unit at the last date a valuation was performed. If the Company concludes it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount, a quantitative fair value test is performed. If the carrying value of a reporting unit is greater than its fair value, a goodwill impairment charge will be recorded for the difference (up to the carrying value of goodwill).
Other acquired intangiblesintangible assets (excluding IPR&D) are initially recorded at fair value, assigned an estimated useful life, and are amortized primarily on a straight-line basis over their estimated useful lives. When events or circumstances warrant a review, the Company will assess recoverability from future operations using pretax undiscounted cash flows derived from the lowest appropriate asset groupings. Impairments are recognized in operating results to the extent that the carrying value of the intangible asset exceeds its fair value, which is determined based on the net present value of estimated future cash flows.
IPR&D that the Company acquires through business combinations represents the fair value assigned to incomplete research projects which, at the time of acquisition, have not reached technological feasibility. The amounts are capitalized and accounted for as indefinite-lived intangible assets, subject to impairment testing until completion or abandonment of the project. The Company tests IPR&D for impairment at least annually, or more frequently if impairment indicators exist, by first assessing qualitative factors to determine whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of the IPR&D intangible asset is less than its carrying amount. If the Company concludes it is more likely

72

Table of Contents

than not that the fair value is less than the carrying amount, a quantitative test that compares the fair value of the IPR&D intangible asset with its carrying value is performed. For impairment testing purposes, the Company may combine separately recorded IPR&D intangible assets into one unit of account based on the relevant facts and circumstances. Generally, the Company will combine IPR&D intangible assets for testing purposes if they operate as a single asset and are essentially inseparable. If the fair value is less than the carrying amount, an impairment loss is recognized within the Company’s operating results.
The judgments made in evaluating impairment of long-lived intangibles can materially affect the Company’s results of operations.
Impairments of Investments
The Company reviews its investments in marketable debt securities for impairments based on the determination of whether the decline in market value of the investment below the carrying value is other-than-temporary. The Company considers available evidence in evaluating potential impairments of its investments in marketable debt securities, including the duration and extent to which fair value is less than cost and, for equity securities, the Company’s ability and intent to hold the investments. For debt securities, ancost. Changes in fair value that are considered temporary are reported net of tax in OCI. An other-than-temporary impairment has occurred if the Company does not expect to recover the entire amortized cost basis of the marketable debt security. If the Company does not intend to sell the impaired debt security, and it is not more likely than not it will be required to sell the debt security before the recovery of its amortized cost basis, the amount of the other-than-temporary impairment recognized in earnings, recorded in Other (income) expense, net, is limited to the portion attributed to credit loss. The remaining portion of the other-than-temporary impairment related to other factors is recognized in OCI.
Investments in publicly traded equity securities are reported at fair value determined using quoted market prices in active markets for identical assets or quoted prices for similar assets or other inputs that are observable or can be corroborated by observable market data. Changes in fair value are included in Other (income) expense, net. Investments in equity securities without readily determinable fair values are recorded at cost, plus or minus subsequent observable price changes in orderly transactions for identical or similar investments, minus impairments. Such adjustments are recognized in Other (income) expense, net. Realized gains and losses for equity securities are included in Other (income) expense, net.
Taxes on Income
The Company’s effective tax rate is based on pretax income, statutory tax rates and tax planning opportunities available in the various jurisdictions in which the Company operates. An estimated effective tax rate for a year is applied to the Company’s quarterly operating results. In the event that there is a significant unusual or one-time item recognized, or expected to be recognized, in the Company’s quarterly operating results, the tax attributable to that item would be separately calculated and recorded at the same time as the unusual or one-time item. The Company considers the resolution of prior year tax matters to be such items. Significant judgment is required in determining the Company’s tax provision and in evaluating its tax positions. The recognition and measurement of a tax position is based on

management’s best judgment given the facts, circumstances and information available at the reporting date. The Company evaluates tax positions to determine whether the benefits of tax positions are more likely than not of being sustained upon audit based on the technical merits of the tax position. For tax positions that are more likely than not of being sustained upon audit, the Company recognizes the largest amount of the benefit that is greater than 50% likely of being realized upon ultimate settlement in the financial statements. For tax positions that are not more likely than not of being sustained upon audit, the Company does not recognize any portion of the benefit in the financial statements. If the more likely than not threshold is not met in the period for which a tax position is taken, the Company may subsequently recognize the benefit of that tax position if the tax matter is effectively settled, the statute of limitations expires, or if the more likely than not threshold is met in a subsequent period (see Note 1516 to the consolidated financial statements.)statements).
Tax regulations require items to be included in the tax return at different times than the items are reflected in the financial statements. Timing differences create deferred tax assets and liabilities. Deferred tax assets generally represent items that can be used as a tax deduction or credit in the tax return in future years for which the Company has already recorded the tax benefit in the financial statements. The Company establishes valuation allowances for its deferred tax assets when the amount of expected future taxable income is not likely to support the use of the deduction or credit. Deferred tax liabilities generally represent tax expense recognized in the financial statements for which payment has been deferred or expense for which the Company has already taken a deduction on the tax return, but has not yet recognized as expense in the financial statements. At December 31, 2015, foreign earnings of $59.2 billion have been retained indefinitely by subsidiary companies for reinvestment; therefore, no provision has been made for income taxes that would be payable upon the distribution of such earnings and it would not be practicable to determine the amount of the related unrecognized deferred income tax liability.
Recently Issued Accounting Standards
In May 2014,For a discussion of recently issued accounting standards, see Note 2 to the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued amended accounting guidance on revenue recognition that will be applied to all contracts with customers. The objective of the new guidance is to improve

73

Table of Contents

comparability of revenue recognition practices across entities and to provide more useful information to users of financial statements through improved disclosure requirements. In August 2015, the FASB approved a one-year deferral of the effective date making this guidance effective for interim and annual periods beginning in 2018. Reporting entities may choose to adopt the standard as of the original effective date. The Company is currently assessing the impact of adoption on its consolidated financial statements.
In April 2015, the FASB issued accounting guidance which requires debt issuance costs to be presented as a direct deduction from the carrying amount of that debt on the balance sheet as opposed to being presented as a deferred charge. The new guidance is effective for interim and annual periods beginning in 2016. As of December 31, 2015, the Company had debt issuance costs recorded as deferred charges of approximately $100 million.
In January 2016, the FASB issued revised guidance for the accounting and reporting of financial instruments. The new guidance requires that equity investments with readily determinable fair values currently classified as available for sale be measured at fair value with changes in fair value recognized in net income. The new guidance also simplifies the impairment testing of equity investments without readily determinable fair values and changes certain disclosure requirements. This guidance is effective for interim and annual periods beginning in 2018. Early adoption is not permitted. The Company is currently assessing the impact of adoption on its consolidated financial statements.
Cautionary Factors That May Affect Future Results
This report and other written reports and oral statements made from time to time by the Company may contain so-called “forward-looking statements,” all of which are based on management’s current expectations and are subject to risks and uncertainties which may cause results to differ materially from those set forth in the statements. One can identify these forward-looking statements by their use of words such as “anticipates,” “expects,” “plans,” “will,” “estimates,” “forecasts,” “projects” and other words of similar meaning.meaning, or negative variations of any of the foregoing. One can also identify them by the fact that they do not relate strictly to historical or current facts. These statements are likely to address the Company’s growth strategy, financial results, product development, product approvals, product potential and development programs. One must carefully consider any such statement and should understand that many factors could cause actual results to differ materially from the Company’s forward-looking statements. These factors include inaccurate assumptions and a broad variety of other risks and uncertainties, including some that are known and some that are not. No forward-looking statement can be guaranteed and actual future results may vary materially.
The Company does not assume the obligation to update any forward-looking statement. One should carefully evaluate such statements in light of factors, including risk factors, described in the Company’s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, especially on this Form 10-K and Forms 10-Q and 8-K. In Item 1A. “Risk Factors” of this annual report on Form 10-K the Company discusses in more detail various important risk factors that could cause actual results to differ from expected or historic results. The Company notes these factors for investors as permitted by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. One should understand that it is not possible to predict or identify all such factors. Consequently, the reader should not consider any such list to be a complete statement of all potential risks or uncertainties.
 
Item 7a.7A.Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk.
The information required by this Item is incorporated by reference to the discussion under “Financial Instruments Market Risk Disclosures” in Item 7. “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.”

74


Item 8.Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.                
(a)Financial Statements
The consolidated balance sheet of Merck & Co., Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 20152018 and 2014,2017, and the related consolidated statements of income, of comprehensive income, of equity and of cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2015,2018, the notes to consolidated financial statements, and the report dated February 26, 201627, 2019 of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, independent registered public accounting firm, are as follows:
Consolidated Statement of Income
Merck & Co., Inc. and Subsidiaries
Years Ended December 31
($ in millions except per share amounts)
2015 2014 20132018 2017 2016
Sales$39,498
 $42,237
 $44,033
$42,294
 $40,122
 $39,807
Costs, Expenses and Other          
Materials and production14,934
 16,768
 16,954
Marketing and administrative10,313
 11,606
 11,911
Cost of sales13,509
 12,912
 14,030
Selling, general and administrative10,102
 10,074
 10,017
Research and development6,704
 7,180
 7,503
9,752
 10,339
 10,261
Restructuring costs619
 1,013
 1,709
632
 776
 651
Other (income) expense, net1,527
 (11,613) 411
(402) (500) 189
34,097
 24,954
 38,488
33,593
 33,601
 35,148
Income Before Taxes5,401
 17,283
 5,545
8,701
 6,521
 4,659
Taxes on Income942
 5,349
 1,028
2,508
 4,103
 718
Net Income4,459
 11,934
 4,517
6,193
 2,418
 3,941
Less: Net Income Attributable to Noncontrolling Interests17
 14
 113
Less: Net (Loss) Income Attributable to Noncontrolling Interests(27) 24
 21
Net Income Attributable to Merck & Co., Inc.$4,442
 $11,920
 $4,404
$6,220
 $2,394
 $3,920
Basic Earnings per Common Share Attributable to Merck & Co., Inc. Common Shareholders$1.58
 $4.12
 $1.49
$2.34
 $0.88
 $1.42
Earnings per Common Share Assuming Dilution Attributable to Merck & Co., Inc. Common Shareholders$1.56
 $4.07
 $1.47
$2.32
 $0.87
 $1.41

Consolidated Statement of Comprehensive Income
Merck & Co., Inc. and Subsidiaries
Years Ended December 31
($ in millions)
 2015 2014 2013
Net Income Attributable to Merck & Co., Inc.$4,442
 $11,920
 $4,404
Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) Net of Taxes:     
Net unrealized (loss) gain on derivatives, net of reclassifications(126) 398
 229
Net unrealized (loss) gain on investments, net of reclassifications(70) 57
 (19)
Benefit plan net gain (loss) and prior service credit (cost), net of amortization579
 (2,077) 2,758
Cumulative translation adjustment(208) (504) (483)
 175
 (2,126) 2,485
Comprehensive Income Attributable to Merck & Co., Inc.$4,617
 $9,794
 $6,889
 2018 2017 2016
Net Income Attributable to Merck & Co., Inc.$6,220
 $2,394
 $3,920
Other Comprehensive (Loss) Income Net of Taxes:     
Net unrealized gain (loss) on derivatives, net of reclassifications297
 (446) (66)
Net unrealized loss on investments, net of reclassifications(10) (58) (44)
Benefit plan net (loss) gain and prior service (cost) credit, net of amortization(425) 419
 (799)
Cumulative translation adjustment(223) 401
 (169)
 (361) 316
 (1,078)
Comprehensive Income Attributable to Merck & Co., Inc.$5,859
 $2,710
 $2,842
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

75


Consolidated Balance Sheet
Merck & Co., Inc. and Subsidiaries
December 31
($ in millions except per share amounts)
2015 20142018 2017
Assets      
Current Assets      
Cash and cash equivalents$8,524
 $7,441
$7,965
 $6,092
Short-term investments4,903
 8,278
899
 2,406
Accounts receivable (net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $165 in 2015
and $153 in 2014) (excludes accounts receivable of $10 in 2015 and $80
in 2014 classified in Other assets - see Note 5)
6,484
 6,626
Inventories (excludes inventories of $1,569 in 2015 and $1,664
in 2014 classified in Other assets - see Note 6)
4,700
 5,571
Accounts receivable (net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $119 in 2018
and $159 in 2017)
7,071
 6,873
Inventories (excludes inventories of $1,417 in 2018 and $1,187 in 2017
classified in Other assets - see Note 7)
5,440
 5,096
Other current assets5,153
 4,689
4,500
 4,299
Total current assets29,764
 32,605
25,875
 24,766
Investments13,039
 13,515
6,233
 12,125
Property, Plant and Equipment (at cost)      
Land490
 541
333
 365
Buildings12,154
 13,101
11,486
 11,726
Machinery, equipment and office furnishings14,261
 16,050
14,441
 14,649
Construction in progress1,525
 1,448
3,355
 2,301
28,430
 31,140
29,615
 29,041
Less: accumulated depreciation15,923
 18,004
16,324
 16,602
12,507
 13,136
13,291
 12,439
Goodwill17,723
 12,992
18,253
 18,284
Other Intangibles, Net22,602
 20,386
11,431
 14,183
Other Assets6,144
 5,533
7,554
 6,075
$101,779
 $98,167
$82,637
 $87,872
Liabilities and Equity      
Current Liabilities      
Loans payable and current portion of long-term debt$2,585
 $2,704
$5,308
 $3,057
Trade accounts payable2,533
 2,625
3,318
 3,102
Accrued and other current liabilities11,216
 10,523
10,151
 10,427
Income taxes payable1,560
 1,237
1,971
 708
Dividends payable1,309
 1,308
1,458
 1,320
Total current liabilities19,203
 18,397
22,206
 18,614
Long-Term Debt23,929
 18,699
19,806
 21,353
Deferred Income Taxes6,535
 4,467
1,702
 2,219
Other Noncurrent Liabilities7,345
 7,813
12,041
 11,117
Merck & Co., Inc. Stockholders’ Equity      
Common stock, $0.50 par value
Authorized - 6,500,000,000 shares
Issued - 3,577,103,522 shares in 2015 and 2014
1,788
 1,788
Common stock, $0.50 par value
Authorized - 6,500,000,000 shares
Issued - 3,577,103,522 shares in 2018 and 2017
1,788
 1,788
Other paid-in capital40,222
 40,423
38,808
 39,902
Retained earnings45,348
 46,021
42,579
 41,350
Accumulated other comprehensive loss(4,148) (4,323)(5,545) (4,910)
83,210
 83,909
77,630
 78,130
Less treasury stock, at cost:
795,975,449 shares in 2015 and 738,963,326 shares in 2014
38,534
 35,262
Less treasury stock, at cost:
984,543,979 shares in 2018 and 880,491,914 shares in 2017
50,929
 43,794
Total Merck & Co., Inc. stockholders’ equity44,676
 48,647
26,701
 34,336
Noncontrolling Interests91
 144
181
 233
Total equity44,767
 48,791
26,882
 34,569
$101,779
 $98,167
$82,637
 $87,872
The accompanying notes are an integral part of this consolidated financial statement.

76


Consolidated Statement of Equity
Merck & Co., Inc. and Subsidiaries
Years Ended December 31
($ in millions except per share amounts)
Common
Stock
 
Other
Paid-In
Capital
 
Retained
Earnings
 
Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Loss
 
Treasury
Stock
 
Non-
controlling
Interests
 Total
Common
Stock
 
Other
Paid-In
Capital
 
Retained
Earnings
 
Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Loss
 
Treasury
Stock
 
Non-
controlling
Interests
 Total
Balance January 1, 2013
$1,788
 $40,646
 $39,985
 $(4,682) $(24,717) $2,443
 $55,463
Balance January 1, 2016
$1,788
 $40,222
 $45,348
 $(4,148) $(38,534) $91
 $44,767
Net income attributable to Merck & Co., Inc.
 
 4,404
 
 
 
 4,404

 
 3,920
 
 
 
 3,920
Other comprehensive income, net of tax
 
 
 2,485
 
 
 2,485
Cash dividends declared on common stock ($1.73 per share)
 
 (5,132) 
 
 
 (5,132)
Other comprehensive loss, net of taxes
 
 
 (1,078) 
 
 (1,078)
Cash dividends declared on common stock ($1.85 per share)
 
 (5,135) 
 
 
 (5,135)
Treasury stock shares purchased
 
 
 
 (6,516) 
 (6,516)
 
 
 
 (3,434) 
 (3,434)
Supera joint venture formation
 116
 
 
 
 112
 228
Acquisition of The StayWell Company LLC
 
 
 
 
 124
 124
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests
 
 
 
 
 113
 113

 
 
 
 
 21
 21
Distributions attributable to noncontrolling interests
 
 
 
 
 (120) (120)
 
 
 
 
 (16) (16)
Share-based compensation plans and other
 (254) 
 
 1,642
 13
 1,401

 (283) 
 
 1,422
 
 1,139
Balance December 31, 20131,788
 40,508
 39,257
 (2,197) (29,591) 2,561
 52,326
Balance December 31, 20161,788
 39,939
 44,133
 (5,226) (40,546) 220
 40,308
Net income attributable to Merck & Co., Inc.
 
 11,920
 
 
 
 11,920

 
 2,394
 
 
 
 2,394
Other comprehensive loss, net of tax
 
 
 (2,126) 
 
 (2,126)
Cash dividends declared on common stock ($1.77 per share)
 
 (5,156) 
 
 
 (5,156)
Other comprehensive income, net of taxes
 
 
 316
 
 
 316
Cash dividends declared on common stock ($1.89 per share)
 
 (5,177) 
 
 
 (5,177)
Treasury stock shares purchased
 
 
 
 (7,703) 
 (7,703)
 
 
 
 (4,014) 
 (4,014)
AstraZeneca option exercise
 
 
 
 
 (2,400) (2,400)
Acquisition of Vallée S.A.
 
 
 
 
 7
 7
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests
 
 
 
 
 14
 14

 
 
 
 
 24
 24
Distributions attributable to noncontrolling interests
 
 
 
 
 (77) (77)
 
 
 
 
 (18) (18)
Share-based compensation plans and other
 (85) 
 
 2,032
 46
 1,993

 (37) 
 
 766
 
 729
Balance December 31, 20141,788
 40,423
 46,021
 (4,323) (35,262) 144
 48,791
Balance December 31, 20171,788
 39,902
 41,350
 (4,910) (43,794) 233
 34,569
Net income attributable to Merck & Co., Inc.
 
 4,442
 
 
 
 4,442

 
 6,220
 
 
 
 6,220
Other comprehensive income, net of tax
 
 
 175
 
 
 175
Cash dividends declared on common stock ($1.81 per share)
 
 (5,115) 
 
 
 (5,115)
Adoption of new accounting standards (see Note 2)
 
 322
 (274) 
 
 48
Other comprehensive loss, net of taxes
 
 
 (361) 
 
 (361)
Cash dividends declared on common stock ($1.99 per share)
 
 (5,313) 
 
 
 (5,313)
Treasury stock shares purchased
 
 
 
 (4,186) 
 (4,186)
 (1,000) 
 
 (8,091) 
 (9,091)
Changes in noncontrolling ownership interests
 (20) 
 
 
 (55) (75)
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests
 
 
 
 
 17
 17
Net loss attributable to noncontrolling interests
 
 
 
 
 (27) (27)
Distributions attributable to noncontrolling interests
 
 
 
 
 (15) (15)
 
 
 
 
 (25) (25)
Share-based compensation plans and other
 (181) 
 
 914
 
 733

 (94) 
 
 956
 
 862
Balance December 31, 2015$1,788
 $40,222
 $45,348
 $(4,148) $(38,534) $91
 $44,767
Balance December 31, 2018$1,788
 $38,808
 $42,579
 $(5,545) $(50,929) $181
 $26,882
The accompanying notes are an integral part of this consolidated financial statement.


77


Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows
Merck & Co., Inc. and Subsidiaries
Years Ended December 31
($ in millions)
2015 2014 20132018 2017 2016
Cash Flows from Operating Activities          
Net income$4,459
 $11,934
 $4,517
$6,193
 $2,418
 $3,941
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities:          
Depreciation and amortization6,375
 6,691
 6,988
4,519
 4,676
 5,471
Intangible asset impairment charges162
 1,222
 765
296
 646
 3,948
Foreign currency devaluation related to Venezuela876
 
 140
Net charge related to the settlement of Vioxx shareholder class action litigation
680
 
 
Gain on divestiture of Merck Consumer Care business
 (11,209) 
Gain on AstraZeneca option exercise
 (741) 
Loss on extinguishment of debt
 628
 
Equity income from affiliates(205) (257) (404)
Dividends and distributions from equity method affiliates50
 185
 237
Charge for future payments related to collaboration license options650
 500
 
Provisional charge for one-time transition tax related to the enactment of U.S. tax legislation
 5,347
 
Charge related to the settlement of worldwide Keytruda patent litigation

 
 625
Deferred income taxes(764) (2,600) (330)(509) (2,621) (1,521)
Share-based compensation299
 278
 276
348
 312
 300
Other757
 (95) 259
978
 190
 213
Net changes in assets and liabilities:          
Accounts receivable(480) (554) 436
(418) 297
 (619)
Inventories805
 79
 (365)(911) (145) 206
Trade accounts payable(37) 593
 522
230
 254
 278
Accrued and other current liabilities(8) 1,635
 (397)(341) (922) (2,018)
Income taxes payable(266) (21) (1,421)827
 (3,291) 124
Noncurrent liabilities(277) 190
 (132)(266) (123) (809)
Other(5) (98) 563
(674) (1,087) 237
Net Cash Provided by Operating Activities12,421
 7,860
 11,654
10,922
 6,451
 10,376
Cash Flows from Investing Activities          
Capital expenditures(1,283) (1,317) (1,548)(2,615) (1,888) (1,614)
Purchases of securities and other investments(16,681) (24,944) (17,991)(7,994) (10,739) (15,651)
Proceeds from sales of securities and other investments20,413
 15,114
 16,298
15,252
 15,664
 14,353
Divestiture of Merck Consumer Care business, net of cash divested
 13,951
 
Dispositions of other businesses, net of cash divested316
 1,169
 46
Proceeds from AstraZeneca option exercise
 419
 
Acquisition of Cubist Pharmaceuticals, Inc., net of cash acquired(7,598) 
 
Acquisition of Idenix Pharmaceuticals, Inc., net of cash acquired
 (3,700) 
Acquisitions of other businesses, net of cash acquired(146) (181) (246)
Acquisition of Bayer AG collaboration rights
 (1,000) 
Cash inflows from net investment hedges139
 195
 350
Acquisitions, net of cash acquired(431) (396) (780)
Other82
 (80) (57)102
 38
 482
Net Cash Used in Investing Activities(4,758) (374) (3,148)
Net Cash Provided by (Used in) Investing Activities4,314
 2,679
 (3,210)
Cash Flows from Financing Activities          
Net change in short-term borrowings(1,540) (460) (159)5,124
 (26) 
Payments on debt(2,906) (6,617) (1,775)(4,287) (1,103) (2,386)
Proceeds from issuance of debt7,938
 3,146
 6,467

 
 1,079
Purchases of treasury stock(4,186) (7,703) (6,516)(9,091) (4,014) (3,434)
Dividends paid to stockholders(5,117) (5,170) (5,157)(5,172) (5,167) (5,124)
Other dividends paid
 (77) (120)
Proceeds from exercise of stock options485
 1,560
 1,210
591
 499
 939
Other56
 208
 60
(325) (195) (118)
Net Cash Used in Financing Activities(5,270) (15,113) (5,990)(13,160) (10,006) (9,044)
Effect of Exchange Rate Changes on Cash and Cash Equivalents(1,310) (553) (346)
Net Increase (Decrease) in Cash and Cash Equivalents1,083
 (8,180) 2,170
Cash and Cash Equivalents at Beginning of Year7,441
 15,621
 13,451
Cash and Cash Equivalents at End of Year$8,524
 $7,441
 $15,621
Effect of Exchange Rate Changes on Cash, Cash Equivalents and Restricted Cash(205) 457
 (131)
Net Increase (Decrease) in Cash, Cash Equivalents and Restricted Cash1,871
 (419) (2,009)
Cash, Cash Equivalents and Restricted Cash at Beginning of Year (includes $4 million of restricted cash at January 1, 2018 included in Other Assets)6,096
 6,515
 8,524
Cash, Cash Equivalents and Restricted Cash at End of Year (includes $2 million of restricted cash at December 31, 2018 included in Other Assets)$7,967
 $6,096
 $6,515
The accompanying notes are an integral part of this consolidated financial statement.

78


Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
Merck & Co., Inc. and Subsidiaries
($ in millions except per share amounts)
1.    Nature of Operations
Merck & Co., Inc. (Merck or the Company) is a global health care company that delivers innovative health solutions through its prescription medicines, vaccines, biologic therapies and animal health products, which it markets directly and through its joint ventures.products. The Company’s operations are principally managed on a products basis and are comprised ofinclude four operating segments, which are the Pharmaceutical, Animal Health, AlliancesHealthcare Services and Healthcare ServicesAlliances segments. The Pharmaceutical segment isand Animal Health segments are the only reportable segment. segments.
The Pharmaceutical segment includes human health pharmaceutical and vaccine products marketed either directly by the Company or through joint ventures.products. Human health pharmaceutical products consist of therapeutic and preventive agents, generally sold by prescription, for the treatment of human disorders. The Company sells these human health pharmaceutical products primarily to drug wholesalers and retailers, hospitals, government agencies and managed health care providers such as health maintenance organizations, pharmacy benefit managers and other institutions. VaccineHuman health vaccine products consist of preventive pediatric, adolescent and adult vaccines, primarily administered at physician offices. The Company sells these human health vaccines primarily to physicians, wholesalers, physician distributors and government entities. On December 31, 2016, Merck and Sanofi Pasteur S.A. (Sanofi) terminated their equally-owned joint venture, Sanofi Pasteur MSD (SPMSD), which developed and marketed vaccines in Europe. In 2017, Merck began recording vaccine sales and incurring costs as a result of operating its vaccines business in the European markets that were previously part of the SPMSD joint venture, which was accounted for as an equity method affiliate.
The Company also has animal health operations that discover, develop, manufactureAnimal Health segment discovers, develops, manufactures and marketmarkets animal health products, including vaccines,pharmaceutical and vaccine products, for the prevention, treatment and control of disease in all major livestock and companion animal species, which the Company sells to veterinarians, distributors and animal producers. Merck’s Alliances segment primarily includes results from the Company’s relationship with AstraZeneca LP until the termination of that relationship on June 30, 2014.
The Company’s Healthcare Services segment provides services and solutions that focus on engagement, health analytics and clinical services to improve the value of care delivered to patients.
On January 21, 2015,The Alliances segment primarily includes activity from the Company acquired Cubist Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Cubist)Company’s relationship with AstraZeneca LP related to sales of Nexium and on July 31, 2015, Merck acquired cCAM Biotherapeutics Ltd. (cCAM). The results of Cubist’s and cCAM’s businesses have been includedPrilosec, which concluded in Merck’s financial statements subsequent to their respective acquisition dates2018 (see Note 4). On October 1, 2014, the Company divested its Consumer Care segment that developed, manufactured and marketed over-the-counter, foot care and sun care products see (Note 4)9).
2.    Summary of Accounting Policies
Principles of Consolidation — The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company and all of its subsidiaries in which a controlling interest is maintained. Intercompany balances and transactions are eliminated. Controlling interest is determined by majority ownership interest and the absence of substantive third-party participating rights or, in the case of variable interest entities, by majority exposure to expected losses, residual returns or both. For those consolidated subsidiaries where Merck ownership is less than 100%, the outside shareholders’ interests are shown as Noncontrolling interests in equity. Investments in affiliates over which the Company has significant influence but not a controlling interest, such as interests in entities owned equally by the Company and a third party that are under shared control, are carried on the equity basis.
Acquisitions — In a business combination, the acquisition method of accounting requires that the assets acquired and liabilities assumed be recorded as of the date of the acquisition at their respective fair values with limited exceptions. Assets acquired and liabilities assumed in a business combination that arise from contingencies are generally recognized at fair value ifvalue. If fair value can reasonably be estimated. If the acquisition date fair value of an asset acquired or liability assumed that arises from a contingency cannot be determined, the asset or liability is recognized if probable and reasonably estimable; if these criteria are not met, no asset or liability is recognized. Fair value is defined as the exchange price that would be received for an asset or paid to transfer a liability (an exit price) in the principal or most advantageous market for the asset or liability in an orderly transaction between market participants on the measurement date. Accordingly, the Company may be required to value assets at fair value measures that do not reflect the Company’s intended use of those assets. Any excess of the purchase price (consideration transferred) over the estimated fair values of net assets acquired is recorded as goodwill. Transaction costs and costs to restructure the acquired company are expensed as incurred. The operating results of the acquired business are reflected in the Company’s consolidated financial statements after the date of the acquisition. If the Company determines the assets acquired do not meet the

79


definition of a business under the acquisition method of accounting, the transaction will be accounted for as an acquisition of assets rather than a business combination and, therefore, no goodwill will be recorded. In an asset acquisition, acquired in-process research and development (IPR&D) with no alternative future use is charged to expense and contingent consideration is not recognized at the acquisition date.
Foreign Currency Translation — The net assets of international subsidiaries where the local currencies have been determined to be the functional currencies are translated into U.S. dollars using current exchange rates. The U.S. dollar effects that arise from translating the net assets of these subsidiaries at changing rates are recorded in the foreign currency translation account, which is included in Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) (AOCI) and reflected as a separate component of equity. For those subsidiaries that operate in highly inflationary economies and for those subsidiaries where the U.S. dollar has been determined to be the functional currency, non-monetary foreign currency assets and liabilities are translated using historical rates, while monetary assets and liabilities are translated at current rates, with the U.S. dollar effects of rate changes included in Other (income) expense, net.
Cash Equivalents — Cash equivalents are comprised of certain highly liquid investments with original maturities of less than three months.
Inventories — Inventories are valued at the lower of cost or market.net realizable value. The cost of a substantial majority of domesticU.S. pharmaceutical and vaccine inventories is determined using the last-in, first-out (LIFO) method for both financial reporting and tax purposes. The cost of all other inventories is determined using the first-in, first-out (FIFO) method. Inventories consist of currently marketed products, as well as certain inventories produced in preparation for product launches that are considered to have a high probability of regulatory approval. In evaluating the recoverability of inventories produced in preparation for product launches, the Company considers the likelihood that revenue will be obtained from the future sale of the related inventory together with the status of the product within the regulatory approval process.
Investments — Investments in marketable debt and equity securities classified as available-for-sale are reported at fair value. Fair values of the Company’s investments in marketable debt securities are determined using quoted market prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities or quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities or other inputs that are observable or can be corroborated by observable market data for substantially the full term of the assets or liabilities. Changes in fair value that are considered temporary are reported net of tax in Other Comprehensive Income (OCI). For declines in the fair value of equity securities that are considered other-than-temporary, impairment losses are charged to Other (income) expense, net. The Company considers available evidence in evaluating potential impairments of its investments in marketable debt securities, including the duration and extent to which fair value is less than cost and, for equity securities, the Company’s ability and intent to hold the investments. For debt securities, ancost. An other-than-temporary impairment has occurred if the Company does not expect to recover the entire amortized cost basis of the marketable debt security. If the Company does not intend to sell the impaired debt security, and it is not more likely than not it will be required to sell the debt security before the recovery of its amortized cost basis, the amount of the other-than-temporary impairment recognized in earnings, recorded in Other (income) expense, net, is limited to the portion attributed to credit loss. The remaining portion of the other-than-temporary impairment related to other factors is recognized in OCI. Realized gains and losses for both debt securities are included in Other (income) expense, net.
Investments in publicly traded equity securities are reported at fair value determined using quoted market prices in active markets for identical assets or quoted prices for similar assets or other inputs that are observable or can be corroborated by observable market data. Changes in fair value are included in Other (income) expense, net. Investments in equity securities without readily determinable fair values are recorded at cost, plus or minus subsequent observable price changes in orderly transactions for identical or similar investments, minus impairments. Such adjustments are recognized in Other (income) expense, net. Realized gains and losses for equity securities are included in Other (income) expense, net.
Revenue Recognition — RevenuesOn January 1, 2018, the Company adopted ASU 2014-09, Revenue from salesContracts with Customers, and subsequent amendments (ASC 606 or new guidance), using the modified retrospective method. Merck applied the new guidance to all contracts with customers within the scope of products arethe standard that were in effect on January 1, 2018 and recognized when title and riskthe cumulative effect of loss passesinitially applying the new guidance as an adjustment to the opening balance of retained earnings (see “Recently Adopted Accounting Standards” below). Comparative information for prior periods has not been restated and continues to be reported under the accounting standards in effect for those periods.

The new guidance requires an entity to recognize revenue to depict the transfer of goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration that it expects to be entitled to in exchange for those goods or services. The new guidance introduces a 5-step model to recognize revenue when or as control is transferred: identify the contract with a customer, typically upon delivery. identify the performance obligations in the contract, determine the transaction price, allocate the transaction price to the performance obligations in the contract, and recognize revenue when or as the performance obligations are satisfied. Changes to the Company’s revenue recognition policy as a result of adopting ASC 606 are described below. See Note 19 for disaggregated revenue disclosures.
Recognition of revenue also requires reasonable assuranceevidence of a contract, probable collection of sales proceeds and completion of substantially all performance obligations. Domestically,Merck acts as the principal in substantially all of its customer arrangements and therefore records revenue on a gross basis. The majority of the Company’s contracts related to the Pharmaceutical and Animal Health segments have a single performance obligation - the promise to transfer goods. Shipping is considered immaterial in the context of the overall customer arrangement and damages or loss of goods in transit are rare. Therefore, shipping is not deemed a separately recognized performance obligation.
The vast majority of revenues from sales of products are recognized at a point in time when control of the goods is transferred to the customer, which the Company has determined is when title and risks and rewards of ownership transfer to the customer and the Company is entitled to payment. Certain Merck entities, including U.S. entities, have contract terms under which control of the goods passes to the customer upon shipment; however, either pursuant to the terms of the contract or as a business practice, Merck retains responsibility for goods lost or damaged in transit. Prior to the adoption of the new standard, Merck would recognize revenue for these entities upon delivery of the goods. Under the new guidance, the Company is now recognizing revenue at time of shipment for these entities.
The Company recognizes revenue from the sales of vaccines to the Federal government for placement into vaccine stockpiles in accordance with Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Interpretation, Commission Guidance Regarding Accounting for Sales of Vaccines and BioTerror Countermeasures to the Federal Government for Placement into the Pediatric Vaccine Stockpile or the Strategic National Stockpile. This interpretation allows companies to recognize revenue for sales of vaccines into U.S. government stockpiles even though these sales might not meet the criteria for revenue recognition under other accounting guidance.
For businesses within the Company’s Healthcare Services segment and certain services in the Animal Health segment, revenue is recognized over time, generally ratably over the contract term as services are provided. These service revenues are not material.
The nature of the Company’s business gives rise to several types of variable consideration including discounts and returns, which are estimated at the time of sale generally using the expected value method, although the most likely amount method is used for prompt pay discounts.
In the United States, sales discounts are issued to customers as direct discounts at the point-of-sale, indirectly through an intermediary wholesaler known(known as chargebacks,chargebacks), or indirectly in the form of rebates. Additionally, sales are generally made with a limited right of return under certain conditions. Revenues are recorded net of provisions for sales discounts and returns, which are established at the time of sale. In addition, revenues are recorded net of time value of money discounts if collection of accounts receivable is expected to be in excess of one year. Accruals
The U.S. provision for aggregate customer discounts covering chargebacks and rebates was $10.7 billion in 2018, $10.7 billion in 2017 and $9.7 billion in 2016. Chargebacks are discounts that occur when a contracted customer purchases through an intermediary wholesaler. The contracted customer generally purchases product from the wholesaler at its contracted price plus a mark-up. The wholesaler, in turn, charges the Company back for the difference between the price initially paid by the wholesaler and the contract price paid to the wholesaler by the customer. The provision for chargebacks is based on expected sell-through levels by the Company’s wholesale customers to contracted customers, as well as estimated wholesaler inventory levels. Rebates are reflected asamounts owed based upon definitive contractual agreements or legal requirements with private sector and public sector (Medicaid and Medicare Part D) benefit providers, after the final dispensing of the product by a direct reductionpharmacy to accounts receivable and accrualsa benefit plan participant. The provision for rebates is based on expected patient usage, as well as inventory levels in the distribution channel to determine the contractual obligation to the benefit providers. The Company uses historical customer segment utilization mix, sales forecasts, changes to product mix and price, inventory levels in the distribution channel, government pricing calculations and prior payment history in order to estimate the expected provision. Amounts accrued for aggregate customer discounts

are recorded as current liabilities.evaluated on a quarterly basis through comparison of information provided by the wholesalers, health maintenance organizations, pharmacy benefit managers, federal and state agencies, and other customers to the amounts accrued. The accrued balances relative to the provisions for chargebacks and rebates included in Accounts receivable and Accrued and other current liabilities were $145$245 million and $2.7$2.4 billion,, respectively, at December 31, 20152018 and $112were $198 million and $2.0$2.4 billion,, respectively, at December 31, 2014.2017.
Outside of the United States, variable consideration in the form of discounts and rebates are a combination of commercially-driven discounts in highly competitive product classes, discounts required to gain or maintain reimbursement, or legislatively mandated rebates. In certain European countries, legislatively mandated rebates are calculated based on an estimate of the government’s total unbudgeted spending and the Company’s specific payback obligation. Rebates may also be required based on specific product sales thresholds. The Company recognizes revenue fromapplies an estimated factor against its actual invoiced sales to represent the salesexpected level of vaccinesfuture discount or rebate obligations associated with the sale.
The Company maintains a returns policy that allows its U.S. pharmaceutical customers to return product within a specified period prior to and subsequent to the Federal governmentexpiration date (generally, three to six months before and 12 months after product expiration). The estimate of the provision for placement into vaccine stockpilesreturns is based upon historical experience with actual returns. Additionally, the Company considers factors such as levels of inventory in accordance with Securitiesthe distribution channel, product dating and Exchange Commission (SEC) Interpretationexpiration period, whether products have been discontinued, entrance in the market of generic competition, changes in formularies or launch of over-the-counter products, among others. Outside of the United States, returns are only allowed in certain countries on a limited basis.
Merck’s payment terms for U.S. pharmaceutical customers are typically net 36 days from receipt of invoice and for U.S. animal health customers are typically net 30 days from receipt of invoice; however, certain products, including Keytruda, Commissionhave longer payment terms up to 90 days. Outside of the United States, payment terms are typically 30 days to 90 days, although certain markets have longer payment terms.

The following table provides the effects of adopting ASC 606 on the Consolidated Statement of Income:
80

Year Ended December 31, 2018As Reported Effects of Adopting ASC 606 Amounts Without Adoption of ASC 606
Sales$42,294
 $(2) $42,292
Cost of sales13,509
 (6) 13,503
Income before taxes8,701
 4
 8,705
Taxes on income2,508
 1
 2,509
Net income attributable to Merck & Co., Inc.6,220
 3
 6,223

The following table provides the effects of adopting ASC 606 on the Consolidated Balance Sheet:

Guidance Regarding Accounting for Sales of Vaccines and BioTerror Countermeasures to the Federal Government for Placement into the Pediatric Vaccine Stockpile or the Strategic National Stockpile.
December 31, 2018As Reported Effects of Adopting ASC 606 Amounts Without Adoption of ASC 606
Assets     
Accounts receivable$7,071
 $(13) $7,058
Inventories5,440
 7
 5,447
Liabilities     
Accrued and other current liabilities10,151
 (3) 10,148
Income taxes payable1,971
 (1) 1,970
Equity     
Retained earnings42,579
 (2) 42,577
Depreciation — Depreciation is provided over the estimated useful lives of the assets, principally using the straight-line method. For tax purposes, accelerated tax methods are used. The estimated useful lives primarily range from 25 to 45 years for Buildings, and from 3 to 15 years for Machinery, equipment and office furnishings. Depreciation expense was $1.4 billion in 2018, $1.5 billion in 2017 and $1.6 billion in 2015, $2.5 billion in 2014 and $2.2 billion in 2013.2016.

Advertising and Promotion Costs — Advertising and promotion costs are expensed as incurred. The Company recorded advertising and promotion expenses of $2.1 billion, $2.32.2 billion and $2.52.1 billion in 2015, 20142018, 2017 and 2013,2016, respectively.
Software Capitalization — The Company capitalizes certain costs incurred in connection with obtaining or developing internal-use software including external direct costs of material and services, and payroll costs for employees directly involved with the software development. Capitalized software costs are included in Property, plant and equipment and amortized beginning when the software project is substantially complete and the asset is ready for its intended use. Capitalized software costs associated with projects that are being amortized over 6 to 10 years (including the Company’s on-going multi-year implementation of an enterprise-wide resource planning system) were $421439 million and $505449 million, net of accumulated amortization at December 31, 20152018 and 2014,2017, respectively. All other capitalized software costs are being amortized over periods ranging from 3 to 5 years. Costs incurred during the preliminary project stage and post-implementation stage, as well as maintenance and training costs, are expensed as incurred.
Goodwill — Goodwill represents the excess of the consideration transferred over the fair value of net assets of businesses acquired. Goodwill is assigned to reporting units and evaluated for impairment on at least an annual basis, or more frequently if impairment indicators exist, by first assessing qualitative factors to determine whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount. If the Company concludes it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount, a quantitative fair value test is performed. If the carrying value of a reporting unit is greater than its fair value, a goodwill impairment charge will be recorded for the difference (up to the carrying value of goodwill).
Acquired Intangibles — Acquired intangibles include products and product rights, tradenames and patents, which are initially recorded at fair value, assigned an estimated useful life, and are amortized primarily on a straight-line basis over their estimated useful lives ranging from 12 to 20 years (see Note 7)8). The Company periodically evaluates whether current facts or circumstances indicate that the carrying values of its acquired intangibles may not be recoverable. If such circumstances are determined to exist, an estimate of the undiscounted future cash flows of these assets, or appropriate asset groupings, is compared to the carrying value to determine whether an impairment exists. If the asset is determined to be impaired, the loss is measured based on the difference between the carrying value of the intangible asset and its fair value, which is determined based on the net present value of estimated future cash flows.
Acquired In-Process Research and Development — Acquired in-process research and development (IPR&D)IPR&D that the Company acquires through business combinations represents the fair value assigned to incomplete research projects which, at the time of acquisition, have not reached technological feasibility. The amounts are capitalized and are accounted for as indefinite-lived intangible assets, subject to impairment testing until completion or abandonment of the projects. Upon successful completion of each project, Merck will make a determination as to the then usefulthen-useful life of the intangible asset, generally determined by the period in which the substantial majority of the cash flows are expected to be generated, and begin amortization. The Company tests IPR&D for impairment at least annually, or more frequently if impairment indicators exist, by first assessing qualitative factors to determine whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of the IPR&D intangible asset is less than its carrying amount. If the Company concludes it is more likely than not that the fair value is less than the carrying amount, a quantitative test that compares the fair value of the IPR&D intangible asset with its carrying value is performed. If the fair value is less than the carrying amount, an impairment loss is recognized in operating results.
Contingent Consideration — Certain of the Company’s business acquisitions involve the potential for future payment of consideration that is contingent upon the achievement of performance milestones, including product development milestones and royalty payments on future product sales. The fair value of contingent consideration liabilities is determined at the acquisition date using unobservable inputs. These inputs include the estimated amount and timing of projected cash flows, the probability of success (achievement of the contingent event) and the risk-

81


adjustedrisk-adjusted discount rate used to present value the probability-weighted cash flows. Subsequent to the acquisition date, at each reporting period, the contingent consideration liability is remeasured at current fair value with changes (either expense or income) recorded in earnings. Changes in any of the inputs may result in a significantly different fair value adjustment.
Research and Development — Research and development is expensed as incurred. Upfront and milestone payments due to third parties in connection with research and development collaborations prior to regulatory approval are expensed as incurred. Payments due to third parties upon or subsequent to regulatory approval are capitalized and amortized over the shorter of the remaining license or product patent life. Amounts due from collaborative partners related to development activities are generally reflected as a reduction of research and development expenses when the specific milestone has been achieved. Nonrefundable advance payments for goods and services that will be used in future research and development activities are expensed when the

activity has been performed or when the goods have been received rather than when the payment is made. Research and development expenses include restructuring costs and IPR&D impairment charges in all periods.charges. In addition, research and development expenses include expense or income related to changes in the estimated fair value measurement of liabilities for contingent consideration. Research and development expenses also include upfront and milestone payments related to asset acquisitions and licensing transactions involving clinical development programs that have not yet received regulatory approval.
Collaborative Arrangements — Merck has entered into collaborative arrangements that provide the Company with varying rights to develop, produce and market products together with its collaborative partners. When Merck is the principal on sales transactions with third parties, the Company recognizes sales, cost of sales and selling, general and administrative expenses on a gross basis. Profit sharing amounts it pays to its collaborative partners are recorded within Cost of sales. When the collaborative partner is the principal on sales transactions with third parties, the Company records profit sharing amounts received from its collaborative partners as alliance revenue (within Sales). Alliance revenue is recorded net of cost of sales and includes an adjustment to share commercialization costs between the partners in accordance with the collaboration agreement. The adjustment is determined by comparing the commercialization costs Merck has incurred directly and reported within Selling, general and administrative expenses with the costs the collaborative partner has incurred. Research and development costs Merck incurs related to collaborations are recorded within Research and development expenses. Cost reimbursements to the collaborative partner or payments received from the collaborative partner to share these costs pursuant to the terms of the collaboration agreements are recorded as increases or decreases to Research and development expenses.
In addition, the terms of the collaboration agreements may require the Company to make payments based upon the achievement of certain developmental, regulatory approval or commercial milestones. Upfront and milestone payments payable by Merck to collaborative partners prior to regulatory approval are expensed as incurred and included in Research and development expenses. Payments due to collaborative partners upon or subsequent to regulatory approval are capitalized and amortized over the estimated useful life of the corresponding intangible asset to Cost of sales provided that future cash flows support the amounts capitalized. Sales-based milestones payable by Merck to collaborative partners are accrued when probable of being achieved and capitalized, subject to cumulative amortization catch-up. The amortization catch-up is calculated either from the time of the first regulatory approval for indications that were unapproved at the time the collaboration was formed, or from time of the formation of the collaboration for approved products. The related intangible asset that is recognized is amortized to Cost of sales over its remaining useful life, subject to impairment testing.
Share-Based Compensation — The Company expenses all share-based payments to employees over the requisite service period based on the grant-date fair value of the awards.
Restructuring Costs — The Company records liabilities for costs associated with exit or disposal activities in the period in which the liability is incurred. In accordance with existing benefit arrangements, employee termination costs are accrued when the restructuring actions are probable and estimable. When accruing these costs, the Company will recognize the amount within a range of costs that is the best estimate within the range. When no amount within the range is a better estimate than any other amount, the Company recognizes the minimum amount within the range. Costs for one-time termination benefits in which the employee is required to render service until termination in order to receive the benefits are recognized ratably over the future service period.
Contingencies and Legal Defense Costs — The Company records accruals for contingencies and legal defense costs expected to be incurred in connection with a loss contingency when it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount can be reasonably estimated.
Taxes on Income — Deferred taxes are recognized for the future tax effects of temporary differences between financial and income tax reporting based on enacted tax laws and rates. The Company evaluates tax positions to determine whether the benefits of tax positions are more likely than not of being sustained upon audit based on the technical merits of the tax position. For tax positions that are more likely than not of being sustained upon audit, the Company recognizes the largest amount of the benefit that is greater than 50% likely of being realized upon ultimate settlement in the financial statements. For tax positions that are not more likely than not of being sustained upon audit, the Company does not recognize any portion of the benefit in the financial statements. The Company recognizes interest

and penalties associated with uncertain tax positions as a component of Taxes on income in the Consolidated Statement of Income.
Use of Estimates — The consolidated financial statements are prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (GAAP) and, accordingly, include certain amounts that are based on management’s best estimates and judgments. Estimates are used when accounting for amounts recorded in connection with acquisitions, including initial fair value determinations of assets and liabilities, primarily IPR&D, other intangible assets and contingent consideration, as well as subsequent fair value measurements. Additionally, estimates are used in determining such items as provisions for sales discounts and returns, depreciable and amortizable lives, recoverability of inventories, including those produced in preparation for product launches, amounts recorded for contingencies, environmental liabilities, accruals for contingent sales-based milestone payments and other reserves, pension and other postretirement benefit plan assumptions, share-based compensation assumptions, restructuring costs, impairments of long-lived assets (including intangible assets and goodwill) and investments, and taxes on income. Because of the uncertainty inherent in such estimates, actual results may differ from these estimates.
Reclassifications — Certain reclassifications have been made to prior year amounts to conform to the current year presentation.

82


Recently Adopted Accounting Standards — In November 2015,May 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued accounting guidance on the balance sheet classification of deferred taxes as part of its simplification initiative aimed at reducing complexity in accounting standards. The new guidance requires that all deferred tax assets and liabilities, along with any related valuation allowance, be classified as noncurrent on the balance sheet. The Company elected to early adopt the new guidance in the fourth quarter of 2015 (see Note 15).
Recently Issued Accounting Standards — In May 2014, the FASB issued amended accounting guidance on revenue recognition (ASU 2014-09) that will be appliedapplies to all contracts with customers. The objective of the new guidance is to improve comparability of revenue recognition practices across entities and to provide more useful information to users of financial statements through improved disclosure requirements. In August 2015,The new standard permits two methods of adoption: retrospectively to each prior reporting period presented (full retrospective method), or retrospectively with the FASB approved a one-year deferralcumulative effect of adopting the effectiveguidance being recognized at the date making this guidanceof initial application (modified retrospective method). The new standard was effective for interim and annual periods beginning in 2018. Reporting entities may choose to adopt the standard as of January 1, 2018 and was adopted using the original effective date.modified retrospective method. The Company is currently assessing the impact ofrecorded a cumulative-effect adjustment upon adoption on its consolidated financial statements.increasing Retained earnings by $5 million.
In April 2015, the FASB issued accounting guidance which requires debt issuance costs to be presented as a direct deduction from the carrying amount of that debt on the balance sheet as opposed to being presented as a deferred charge. The new guidance is effective for interim and annual periods beginning in 2016. As of December 31, 2015, the Company had debt issuance costs recorded as deferred charges of approximately $100 million.
In January 2016, the FASB issued revised guidance for the accounting and reporting of financial instruments.instruments (ASU 2016-01) and in 2018 issued related technical corrections (ASU 2018-03). The new guidance requires that equity investments with readily determinable fair values currently classified as available for sale be measured at fair value with changes in fair value recognized in net income. The new guidance also simplifies the impairment testing ofCompany has elected to measure equity investments without readily determinable fair values at cost, adjusted for subsequent observable price changes and changesless impairments, which will be recognized in net income. The new guidance also changed certain disclosure requirements. ASU 2016-01 was effective as of January 1, 2018 and was adopted using a modified retrospective approach. The Company recorded a cumulative-effect adjustment upon adoption increasing Retained earnings by $8 million. ASU 2018-03 was also adopted as of January 1, 2018 on a prospective basis and did not result in any additional impacts upon adoption.
In October 2016, the FASB issued guidance on the accounting for the income tax consequences of intra-entity transfers of assets other than inventory (ASU 2016-16). The new guidance requires the recognition of the income tax consequences of an intra-entity transfer of an asset (with the exception of inventory) when the intra-entity transfer occurs, replacing the prohibition against doing so. The current exception to defer the recognition of any tax impact on the transfer of inventory within the consolidated entity until it is sold to a third party remains unaffected. The new standard was effective as of January 1, 2018 and was adopted using a modified retrospective approach. The Company recorded a cumulative-effect adjustment upon adoption increasing Retained earnings by $54 million with a corresponding decrease to Deferred Income Taxes.
In August 2017, the FASB issued new guidance on hedge accounting (ASU 2017-12) that is intended to more closely align hedge accounting with companies’ risk management strategies, simplify the application of hedge accounting, and increase transparency as to the scope and results of hedging programs. The new guidance makes more financial and nonfinancial hedging strategies eligible for hedge accounting, amends the presentation and disclosure requirements, and changes how companies assess effectiveness. The Company elected to early adopt this guidance as of January 1, 2018 on a modified retrospective basis. The new guidance was applied to all existing hedges as of the adoption date. For fair value hedges of interest rate risk outstanding as of the date of adoption, the Company recorded a cumulative-effect adjustment upon adoption to the basis adjustment on the hedged item resulting from applying the benchmark component of the coupon guidance. This adjustment decreased Retained earnings by $11 million. Also, in

accordance with the transition provisions of ASU 2017-12, the Company was required to eliminate the separate measurement of ineffectiveness for its cash flow hedging instruments existing as of the adoption date through a cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings; however, all such amounts were de minimis.
In February 2018, the FASB issued new guidance to address a narrow-scope financial reporting issue that arose as a consequence of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 (TCJA) (ASU 2018-02). Existing guidance requires that deferred tax liabilities and assets be adjusted for a change in tax laws or rates with the effect included in income from continuing operations in the reporting period that includes the enactment date. That guidance is applicable even in situations in which the related income tax effects of items in accumulated other comprehensive income were originally recognized in other comprehensive income (rather than in net income), such as amounts related to benefit plans and hedging activity. As a result, the tax effects of items within accumulated other comprehensive income do not reflect the appropriate tax rate (the difference is referred to as stranded tax effects). The new guidance allows for a reclassification of the stranded tax effects resulting from the TCJA from accumulated other comprehensive income to retained earnings thereby eliminating these stranded tax effects. The Company elected to early adopt the new guidance in the first quarter of 2018 and reclassified the stranded income tax effects of the TCJA, increasing Accumulated other comprehensive loss in the amount of $266 million with a corresponding increase to Retained earnings (see Note 18). The Company’s policy for releasing disproportionate income tax effects from Accumulated other comprehensive loss is to utilize the item-by-item approach.
The impact of adopting the above standards is as follows:
($ in millions)ASU 2014-09 (Revenue) ASU 2016-01 (Financial Instruments) ASU 2016-16 (Intra-Entity Transfers of Assets Other than Inventory) ASU 2017-12 (Derivatives and Hedging) ASU 2018-02 (Reclassification of Certain Tax Effects) Total
Assets - Increase (Decrease)           
Accounts receivable$5
         $5
Liabilities - Increase (Decrease)           
Income Taxes Payable      (3)   (3)
Debt      14
   14
Deferred Income Taxes    (54)     (54)
Equity - Increase (Decrease)           
Retained earnings5
 8
 54
 (11) 266
 322
Accumulated other comprehensive loss  (8)     (266) (274)
In March 2017, the FASB issued amended guidance on retirement benefits (ASU 2017-07) related to net periodic benefit cost for defined benefit plans that requires entities to (1) disaggregate the current service cost component from the other components of net benefit cost and present it with other employee compensation costs in the income statement within operations if such a subtotal is presented; (2) present the other components of net benefit cost separately in the income statement and outside of income from operations; and (3) only capitalize the service cost component when applicable. The Company adopted the new standard as of January 1, 2018 using a retrospective transition method as to the requirement for separate presentation in the income statement of service costs and other components, and a prospective transition method as to the requirement to limit the capitalization of benefit costs to the service cost component. The Company utilized a practical expedient that permits it to use the amounts disclosed in its pension and other postretirement benefit plan note for the prior comparative periods as the estimation basis for applying the retrospective presentation requirements. Upon adoption, net periodic benefit cost (credit) other than service cost of $(512) million and $(531) million for the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016, respectively, was reclassified to Other (income) expense, net from the previous classification within Cost of sales, Selling, general and administrative expenses and Research and development expenses (see Note 15).
In August 2016, the FASB issued guidance on the classification of certain cash receipts and payments in the statement of cash flows intended to reduce diversity in practice. The Company adopted the new standard effective as of January 1, 2018 using a retrospective application. There were no changes to the presentation of the Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows in the previous years presented as a result of adopting the new standard.

In November 2016, the FASB issued guidance requiring that amounts generally described as restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents be included with cash and cash equivalents when reconciling the beginning-of-period and end-of-period total amounts shown on the statement of cash flows. The new standard was effective as of January 1, 2018 and was adopted using a retrospective application. The adoption of the new guidance did not have a material effect on the Company’s Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows.
In May 2017, the FASB issued guidance clarifying when to account for a change to the terms or conditions of a share-based payment award as a modification. Under the new guidance, modification accounting is required only if the fair value, the vesting conditions, or the classification of the award (as equity or liability) changes as a result of the change in terms or conditions. The Company adopted the new standard effective as of January 1, 2018 and will apply the new guidance to future share-based payment award modifications should they occur.
In January 2017, the FASB issued guidance that provides for the elimination of Step 2 from the goodwill impairment test. Under the new guidance, impairment charges are recognized to the extent the carrying amount of a reporting unit exceeds its fair value with certain limitations. The Company adopted the new standard in the fourth quarter of 2018 and applied the new guidance for purposes of its fourth quarter goodwill impairment assessment. The adoption of the new guidance had an immaterial effect on its consolidated financial statements.
Recently Issued Accounting Standards Not Yet Adopted —In February 2016, the FASB issued new accounting guidance for the accounting and reporting of leases and subsequently issued several updates to the new guidance. The new guidance requires that lessees recognize a right-of-use asset and a lease liability recorded on the balance sheet for each of its leases (other than leases that meet the definition of a short-term lease). Leases will be classified as either operating or finance. Operating leases will result in straight-line expense in the income statement (similar to current operating leases) while finance leases will result in more expense being recognized in the earlier years of the lease term (similar to current capital leases). The new standard is effective as of January 1, 2019 and will be adopted using a modified retrospective approach. Merck will elect the transition method that allows for application of the standard at the adoption date rather than at the beginning of the earliest comparative period presented in the financial statements. The Company intends to elect available practical expedients. Merck has implemented a lease accounting software application and has completed data validation of the Company’s portfolio of leases, including its assessment of potential embedded leases. Upon adoption, the Company anticipates it will recognize approximately $1 billion of additional assets and corresponding liabilities on its consolidated balance sheet, subject to finalization.
In June 2016, the FASB issued amended guidance on the accounting for credit losses on financial instruments. The guidance introduces an expected loss model for estimating credit losses, replacing the incurred loss model. The new guidance also changes the impairment model for available-for-sale debt securities, requiring the use of an allowance to record estimated credit losses (and subsequent recoveries). The new guidance is effective for interim and annual periods beginning in 2018. Early adoption2020, with earlier application permitted in 2019. The new guidance is not permitted.to be applied on a modified retrospective basis through a cumulative-effect adjustment directly to retained earnings in the beginning of the period of adoption. The Company is currently assessingevaluating the impact of adoption on its consolidated financial statements.
3.    Restructuring
2013 Restructuring ProgramIn April 2018, the FASB issued new guidance on the accounting for costs incurred to implement a cloud computing arrangement that is considered a service arrangement. The new guidance requires the capitalization of such costs, aligning it with the accounting for costs associated with developing or obtaining internal-use software. The new guidance is effective for interim and annual periods beginning in 2020. Early adoption is permitted, including adoption in any interim period. Prospective adoption for eligible costs incurred on or after the date of adoption or retrospective adoption is permitted. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of adoption on its consolidated financial statements and may elect to early adopt this guidance.
In 2013,November 2018, the Company initiated actions under a global restructuring program (the 2013 Restructuring Program) as part of a global initiativeFASB issued new guidance for collaborative arrangements intended to sharpen its commercial and research and development focus. The actions under this program primarily include the elimination of positionsreduce diversity in sales, administrative and headquarters organizations, as well as research and development. Additionally, these actions include the reduction of the Company’s global real estate footprint and improvements in the efficiency of its manufacturing and supply network. The Company recorded total pretax costs of $527 million in 2015 and $1.2 billion in both 2014 and 2013 related to this restructuring program. Since inception of the 2013 Restructuring Program through December 31, 2015, Merck has recorded total pretax accumulated costs of approximately $3.0 billion and eliminated approximately 8,630 positions comprised of employee separations, as well as the elimination of contractors and vacant positions. The actions under the 2013 Restructuring Program were substantially completedpractice by the end of 2015. Accordingly, as of January 1, 2016, the remaining accrued liability for future separations under the 2013 Restructuring Program was combined with the remaining accrued liability for the Merger Restructuring Program (see below) and any remaining activities under both programs willclarifying whether certain transactions between collaborative arrangement participants should be accounted for under the recently issued guidance on revenue recognition (ASC 606). The new guidance is effective for interim and annual periods beginning in 2020. Early adoption is permitted, including adoption in any interim period. The new guidance is to be applied on a modified retrospective basis through a cumulative-effect adjustment directly to retained earnings. The Company is currently evaluating the aggregate prospectively.impact of adoption on its consolidated financial statements.

Merger Restructuring Program
In 2010, subsequent to the Merck and Schering-Plough Corporation (Schering-Plough) merger, the Company commenced actions under a global restructuring program (the Merger Restructuring Program) designed to streamline the cost structure of the combined company. Further actions under this program were initiated in 2011. The actions under this program primarily include the elimination of positions in sales, administrative and headquarters organizations, as well as the sale or closure of certain manufacturing and research and development sites and the consolidation of office facilities.

83


The Company recorded total pretax costs of $583 million in 2015, $730 million in 2014 and $1.1 billion in 2013 related to this restructuring program. Since inception of the Merger Restructuring Program through December 31, 2015, Merck has recorded total pretax accumulated costs of approximately $8.5 billion and eliminated approximately 29,645 positions comprised of employee separations, as well as the elimination of contractors and vacant positions. The non-facility related restructuring actions under the Merger Restructuring Program are substantially complete. Accordingly, as noted above, as of January 1, 2016, the remaining accrued liability for future separations under the 2013 Restructuring Program was combined with the remaining accrued liability for the Merger Restructuring Program and any remaining activities under both programs, which primarily relate to ongoing facility rationalizations, will be accounted for in the aggregate prospectively. The Company expects to complete such actions by the end of 2017 and incur approximately $1.5 billion of additional pretax costs.
The Company estimates that approximately two-thirds of the cumulative pretax costs relate to cash outlays, primarily related to employee separation expense. Approximately one-third of the cumulative pretax costs are non-cash, relating primarily to the accelerated depreciation of facilities to be closed or divested.
On October 1, 2013, the Company sold its active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) manufacturing business, including the related manufacturing facility, in the Netherlands to Aspen Holdings (Aspen) as part of planned manufacturing facility rationalizations under the Merger Restructuring Program. In connection with the sale, Aspen acquired certain branded products from Merck, which transferred to Aspen effective December 31, 2013. Consideration for the transaction included cash of $705 million and notes receivable with a present value of $198 million at the time of disposition. Of the cash portion of the consideration, the Company received $172 million in the fourth quarter of 2013. The remaining $533 million was received by the Company in January 2014.

2008 Restructuring Program
In 2008, Merck announced a global restructuring program (the 2008 Restructuring Program) to reduce its cost structure, increase efficiency, and enhance competitiveness. Pretax costs of $54 million were recorded in 2013 related to the 2008 Restructuring Program.
For segment reporting, restructuring charges are unallocated expenses.

84


The following table summarizes the charges related to restructuring program activities by type of cost:
Year Ended December 31, 2015
Separation
Costs
 
Accelerated
Depreciation
 Other Total
2013 Restructuring Program       
Materials and production$
 $41
 $2
 $43
Marketing and administrative
 52
 18
 70
Research and development
 36
 15
 51
Restructuring costs199
 
 164
 363
 199
 129
 199
 527
Merger Restructuring Program       
Materials and production
 37
 281
 318
Marketing and administrative
 7
 1
 8
Research and development
 1
 
 1
Restructuring costs9
 
 247
 256
 9
 45
 529
 583
 $208
 $174
 $728
 $1,110
Year Ended December 31, 2014       
2013 Restructuring Program       
Materials and production$
 $204
 $23
 $227
Marketing and administrative
 142
 3
 145
Research and development
 273
 9
 282
Restructuring costs566
 
 28
 594
 566
 619
 63
 1,248
Merger Restructuring Program      

Materials and production
 225
 30
 255
Marketing and administrative
 56
 (1) 55
Research and development
 
 1
 1
Restructuring costs108
 
 311
 419
 108
 281
 341
 730
 $674
 $900
 $404
 $1,978
Year Ended December 31, 2013       
2013 Restructuring Program       
Materials and production$
 $186
 $7
 $193
Marketing and administrative
 72
 3
 75
Research and development
 76
 (1) 75
Restructuring costs866
 
 32
 898
 866
 334
 41
 1,241
Merger Restructuring Program       
Materials and production
 151
 98
 249
Marketing and administrative
 63
 3
 66
Research and development
 27
 (1) 26
Restructuring costs481
 
 284
 765
 481
 241
 384
 1,106
2008 Restructuring Program       
Materials and production
 (2) 6
 4
Marketing and administrative
 4
 
 4
Restructuring costs34
 
 12
 46
 34
 2
 18
 54
 $1,381
 $577
 $443
 $2,401
Separation costs are associated with actual headcount reductions, as well as those headcount reductions which were probable and could be reasonably estimated. Positions eliminated under the 2013 Restructuring Program were approximately 2,535 in 2015, 4,555 in 2014 and 1,540 in 2013. Positions eliminated under the Merger Restructuring Program were approximately 1,235 in 2015, 1,530 in 2014 and 4,475 in 2013. These position eliminations were comprised of actual headcount reductions and the elimination of contractors and vacant positions.
Accelerated depreciation costs primarily relate to manufacturing, research and administrative facilities and equipment to be sold or closed as part of the programs. Accelerated depreciation costs represent the difference between

85


the depreciation expense to be recognized over the revised useful life of the site, based upon the anticipated date the site will be closed or divested, and depreciation expense as determined utilizing the useful life prior to the restructuring actions. All of the sites have and will continue to operate up through the respective closure dates and, since future undiscounted cash flows were sufficient to recover the respective book values, Merck was required to accelerate depreciation of the site assets rather than record an impairment charge. Anticipated site closure dates, particularly related to manufacturing locations, have been and may continue to be adjusted to reflect changes resulting from regulatory or other factors.
Other activity in 2015, 2014 and 2013 includes $550 million, $240 million and $259 million, respectively, of asset abandonment, shut-down and other related costs. Additionally, other activity includes certain employee-related costs associated with pension and other postretirement benefit plans (see Note 13) and share-based compensation. Other activity also reflects net pretax losses resulting from sales of facilities and related assets of $117 million in 2015, $133 million in 2014 and $64 million in 2013 (primarily reflecting a loss on the transaction with Aspen discussed above).
Adjustments to previously recorded amounts were not material in any period.
The following table summarizes the charges and spending relating to restructuring activities by program:
 
Separation
Costs
 
Accelerated
Depreciation
 Other Total
2013 Restructuring Program       
Restructuring reserves January 1, 2014$745
 $
 $23
 $768
Expenses566
 619
 63
 1,248
(Payments) receipts, net(816) 
 (124) (940)
Non-cash activity
 (619) 52
 (567)
Restructuring reserves December 31, 2014495
 
 14
 509
Expenses199
 129
 199
 527
(Payments) receipts, net(425) 
 (212) (637)
Non-cash activity
 (129) 1
 (128)
Restructuring reserves December 31, 2015 (1)
$269
 $
 $2
 $271
Merger Restructuring Program       
Restructuring reserves January 1, 2014$725
 $
 $12
 $737
Expenses108
 281
 341
 730
(Payments) receipts, net(297) 
 (232) (529)
Non-cash activity
 (281) (115) (396)
Restructuring reserves December 31, 2014536
 
 6
 542
Expenses9
 45
 529
 583
(Payments) receipts, net(222) 
 (223) (445)
Non-cash activity
 (45) (261) (306)
Restructuring reserves December 31, 2015 (1)
$323
 $
 $51
 $374
(1)
The non-facility related cash outlays associated with both the 2013 Restructuring Program and the Merger Restructuring Program were substantially completed by the end of 2015; the remaining cash outlays are expected to be substantially completed by the end of 2017.
4.3.    Acquisitions, Divestitures, Research Collaborations and License Agreements
The Company continues its strategyto pursue the acquisition of establishingbusinesses and establishment of external alliances such as research collaborations and licensing agreements to complement its internal research capabilities, including research collaborations, licensing preclinical and clinical compounds to drive both near- and long-term growth. The Company supplements its internal research with a licensing and external alliance strategy focused on the entire spectrum of collaborations from early research to late-stage compounds, as well as access to new technologies.capabilities. These arrangements often include upfront payments, as well as expense reimbursements or payments to the third party, and milestone, royalty or profit share payments,arrangements, contingent upon the occurrence of certain future events linked to the success of the asset in development. The Company also reviews its marketed products and pipeline to examine candidates which may provide more value through out-licensing and, as part of its portfolio assessment process, may also divest certain products.

86

Tableassets. Pro forma financial information for acquired businesses is not presented if the historical financial results of Contentsthe acquired entity are not significant when compared with the Company’s financial results.

Acquisition of Cubist Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Recently Announced Transaction
In January 2015,December 2018, Merck acquired Cubist,and privately held Antelliq Group (Antelliq) signed a definitive agreement under which Merck will acquire Antelliq from funds advised by BC Partners. Antelliq is a leader in digital animal identification, traceability and monitoring solutions. These solutions help veterinarians, farmers and pet owners gather critical data to improve management, health and well-being of livestock and pets. Merck will make a cash payment of approximately €2.1 billion (approximately $2.4 billion based on exchange rates at the time of the announcement) to acquire all outstanding shares of Antelliq and will assume Antelliq’s debt of €1.1 billion (approximately $1.3 billion), which it intends to repay shortly after the closing of the acquisition. The transaction is subject to clearance by antitrust and competition law authorities and other customary closing conditions, and is expected to close in the second quarter of 2019.
2018 Transactions
In 2018, the Company recorded an aggregate charge of $423 million within Cost of sales in conjunction with the termination of a collaboration agreement entered into in 2014 with Samsung Bioepis Co., Ltd. (Samsung) for insulin glargine. The charge reflects a termination payment of $155 million, which represents the reimbursement of all fees previously paid by Samsung to Merck under the agreement, plus interest, as well as the release of Merck’s ongoing obligations under the agreement. The charge also included fixed asset abandonment charges of $137 million, inventory write-offs of $122 million, as well as other related costs of $9 million. The termination of this agreement has no impact on the Company’s other collaboration with Samsung.
In June 2018, Merck acquired Viralytics Limited (Viralytics), an Australian publicly traded company focused on oncolytic immunotherapy treatments for a range of cancers, for AUD 502 million ($378 million). The transaction provided Merck with full rights to Cavatak (V937, formerly CVA21), Viralytics’s investigational oncolytic immunotherapy. Cavatak is based on Viralytics’s proprietary formulation of an oncolytic virus (Coxsackievirus Type A21) that has been shown to preferentially infect and kill cancer cells. Cavatak is currently being evaluated in multiple Phase 1 and Phase 2 clinical trials, both as an intratumoral and intravenous agent, including in combination with Keytruda. Under a previous agreement between Merck and Viralytics, a study is investigating the use of the Keytruda and Cavatak combination in melanoma, prostate, lung and bladder cancers. The transaction was accounted for as an acquisition of an asset. Merck recorded net assets of $34 million (primarily cash) at the acquisition date and Research and development expenses of $344 million in 2018 related to the transaction. There are no future contingent payments associated with the acquisition.
In March 2018, Merck and Eisai Co., Ltd. (Eisai) entered into a strategic collaboration for the worldwide co-development and co-commercialization of Lenvima, an orally available tyrosine kinase inhibitor discovered by Eisai (see Note 4).
2017 Transactions
In October 2017, Merck acquired Rigontec GmbH (Rigontec). Rigontec is a leader in accessing the retinoic acid-inducible gene I pathway, part of the innate immune system, as a novel and distinct approach in cancer immunotherapy to induce both immediate and long-term anti-tumor immunity. Rigontec’s lead candidate, MK-4621 (formerly RGT100), is currently in Phase I development evaluating treatment in patients with various tumors. Under the terms of the agreement, Merck made an upfront cash payment of €119 million ($140 million) and may make additional contingent payments of up to €349 million (of which €184 million are related to the achievement of research milestones and regulatory approvals and €165 million are related to the achievement of commercial targets). The transaction was accounted for as an acquisition of an asset and the upfront payment is reflected within Research and development expenses in 2017.

In July 2017, Merck and AstraZeneca PLC (AstraZeneca) entered into a global strategic oncology collaboration to co-develop and co-commercialize AstraZeneca’s Lynparza for multiple cancer types (see Note 4).
In March 2017, Merck acquired a controlling interest in Vallée S.A. (Vallée), a leading privately held producer of animal health products in Brazil. Vallée has an extensive portfolio of products spanning parasiticides, anti-infectives and vaccines that include products for livestock, horses, and companion animals. Under the terms of the agreement, Merck acquired 93.5% of the shares of Vallée for $358 million. Of the total purchase price, $176 million was placed into escrow pending resolution of certain contingent items. The transaction was accounted for as an acquisition of a business. Merck recognized intangible assets of $297 million related to currently marketed products, net deferred tax liabilities of $102 million, other net assets of $32 million and noncontrolling interest of $25 million. In addition, the Company recorded liabilities of $37 million for contingencies identified at the acquisition date and corresponding indemnification assets of $37 million, representing the amounts to be reimbursed to Merck if and when the contingent liabilities are paid. The excess of the consideration transferred over the fair value of net assets acquired of $156 million was recorded as goodwill. The goodwill was allocated to the Animal Health segment and is not deductible for tax purposes. The estimated fair values of identifiable intangible assets related to currently marketed products were determined using an income approach. The probability-adjusted future net cash flows of each product were discounted to present value utilizing a discount rate of 15.5%. Actual cash flows are likely to be different than those assumed. The intangible assets related to currently marketed products are being amortized over their estimated useful lives of 15 years. In the fourth quarter of 2017, Merck acquired an additional 4.5% interest in Vallée for $18 million, which reduced the noncontrolling interest related to Vallée.
2016 Transactions
In July 2016, Merck acquired Afferent Pharmaceuticals (Afferent), a privately held pharmaceutical company focused on the development of therapies to treat serious infections caused bytherapeutic candidates targeting the P2X3 receptor for the treatment of common, poorly-managed, neurogenic conditions. Afferent’s lead investigational candidate, MK-7264 (formerly AF-219), gefapixant, is a broad rangeselective, non-narcotic, orally-administered P2X3 antagonist being evaluated for the treatment of bacteria. The acquisition complements Merck’s existing hospital acute care business.refractory, chronic cough and for the treatment of endometriosis-related pain. Total consideration transferred of $8.3 billion includes$510 million included cash paid for outstanding CubistAfferent shares of $7.8 billion,$487 million, as well as share-based compensation payments to settle equity awards attributable to precombination service and cash paid for transaction costs on behalf of Cubist. Share-based compensation payments to settle non-vested equity awards attributable to postcombination service were recognized as transaction expense in 2015.Afferent. In addition, former Afferent shareholders are eligible to receive a total of up to an additional $750 million contingent upon the Company assumed allattainment of the outstanding convertible debt of Cubist, which had a fair value of approximately $1.9 billion at the acquisition date. Merck redeemed this debt in February 2015. Thecertain clinical development and commercial milestones for multiple indications and candidates, including MK-7264. This transaction was accounted for as an acquisition of a business; accordingly, the assets acquired and liabilities assumed were recorded at their respective fair values as of the acquisition date.
The fair value of assets acquired and liabilities assumed from Cubist is as follows:
Cash and cash equivalents$733
Accounts receivable123
Inventories216
Other current assets55
Property, plant and equipment151
Identifiable intangible assets: 
Products and product rights (11 year weighted-average useful life)6,923
IPR&D50
Other noncurrent assets184
Current liabilities (1)
(233)
Deferred income tax liabilities(2,519)
Long-term debt(1,900)
Other noncurrent liabilities (1)
(122)
Total identifiable net assets3,661
Goodwill (2)
4,670
Consideration transferred$8,331
(1)
Included in current liabilities and other noncurrent liabilities is contingent consideration of $73 million and $50 million, respectively.
(2)
The goodwill recognized is largely attributable to anticipated synergies expected to arise after the acquisition and was allocated to the Pharmaceutical segment. The goodwill is not deductible for tax purposes.

The estimated fair values of identifiable intangible assets related to currently marketed products were determined using an income approach through which fair value is estimated based on market participant expectations of each asset’s discounted projected net cash flows. The Company’s estimates of projected net cash flows considered historical and projected pricing, margins and expense levels; the performance of competing products where applicable; relevant industry and therapeutic area growth drivers and factors; current and expected trends in technology and product life cycles; the extent and timing of potential new product introductions by the Company’s competitors; and the life of each asset’s underlying patent. The net cash flows were then probability-adjusted where appropriate to consider the uncertainties associated with the underlying assumptions, as well as the risk profile of the net cash flows utilized in the valuation. The probability-adjusted future net cash flows of each product were then discounted to present value utilizing a discount rate of 8%. Actual cash flows are likely to be different than those assumed. The most significant intangible assets relate to Zerbaxa, Cubicin and Sivextro (see Note 7).
business. The Company recordeddetermined the fair value of incomplete research project surotomycin (MK-4261) which, at the time of acquisition, had not reached technological feasibility and had no alternative future use. The amount was capitalized and accounted for as an indefinite-lived intangible asset, subject to impairment testing until completion or abandonment of the project. The fair value of surotomycin was determined by using an income approach, through which fair value is estimated based on the asset’s probability-adjusted future net cash flows, which reflects the stage of development of the project and the associated probability of successful completion. The net cash flows were then

87


discounted to present value using a discount rate of 9%. During the second quarter of 2015, the Company received unfavorable efficacy data from a clinical trial for surotomycin. The evaluation of this data, combined with an assessment of the commercial opportunity for surotomycin, resulted in the discontinuation of the program and an IPR&D impairment charge (see Note 7).
In connection with the Cubist acquisition, liabilities were recorded for potential future consideration that is contingent upon the achievement of future sales-based milestones. The fair value of contingent consideration liabilities was determined$223 million at the acquisition date utilizing a probability-weighted estimated cash flow stream using unobservable inputs. These inputs includean appropriate discount rate dependent on the estimated amountnature and timing of projected cash flows, the probability of success (achievement of the contingent event) and a risk-adjusted discount rate of 8% used to present value the probability-weighted cash flows. Changes in the inputs could result in a different fair value measurement.
This transaction closed on January 21, 2015; accordingly, the results of operations of the acquired business have been included in the Company’s results of operations beginning after that date. Cubist contributed sales of $1.3 billion in 2015 to Merck’s revenues. The Company is no longer able to provide the results of operations attributable to Cubist during 2015 as the operations of Cubist have been largely integrated. During 2015, the Company incurred $324 million of transaction costs directly related to the acquisition of Cubist including share-based compensation costs, severance costs and legal and advisory fees which are reflected in Marketing and administrative expenses.
The following unaudited supplemental pro forma data presents consolidated information as if the acquisition of Cubist had been completed on January 1, 2014:
Years Ended December 312015 2014
Sales$39,584
 $43,437
Net income attributable to Merck & Co., Inc.4,640
 10,887
Basic earnings per common share attributable to Merck & Co., Inc. common shareholders1.65
 3.76
Earnings per common share assuming dilution attributable to Merck & Co., Inc. common shareholders1.63
 3.72
The unaudited supplemental pro forma data reflects the historical information of Merck and Cubist adjusted to include additional amortization expense based on the fair value of assets acquired, additional interest expense that would have been incurred on borrowings used to fund the acquisition, transaction costs associated with the acquisition, and the related tax effects of these adjustments. The pro forma data should not be considered indicative of the results that would have occurred if the acquisition had been consummated on January 1, 2014, nor are they indicative of future results.
Other transactions
In December 2015, the Company divested its remaining ophthalmics portfolio in international markets to Mundipharma Ophthalmology Products Limited. Merck received consideration of approximately $170 million and recognized a gain of $147 million recorded in Other (income) expense, net in 2015.
In July 2015, Merck acquired cCAM, a privately held biopharmaceutical company focused on the discovery and development of novel cancer immunotherapies. The acquisition provides Merck with cCAM’s lead pipeline candidate, CM-24, a novel monoclonal antibody targeting the immune checkpoint protein CEACAM1 that is being evaluated in a Phase 1 study for the treatment of advanced or recurrent malignancies, including melanoma, non-small-cell lung, bladder, gastric, colorectal, and ovarian cancers. Total purchase consideration in the transaction of $201 million included an upfront payment of $96 million in cash and future additional payments of up to $510 million associated with the attainment of certain clinical development, regulatory and commercial milestones, which the Company determined had a fair value of $105 million at the acquisition date. The transaction was accounted for as an acquisition of a business; accordingly, the assets acquired and liabilities assumed were recorded at their respective fair values as of the acquisition date.milestone payment. Merck recognized an intangible asset for IPR&D of $180$832 million, net deferred tax liabilities of $258 million, and other net assets of $7 million.$29 million (primarily consisting of cash acquired). The excess of the consideration transferred over the fair value of net assets acquired of $14$130 million was recorded as goodwill that was allocated to the Pharmaceutical segment and is not deductible for tax purposes. The fair value of the identifiable intangible asset related to IPR&D was determined using an income approach. The asset’s probability-adjusted future net cash flows were then discounted to present value using a discount rate of 10.5%. The

88


fair value of the contingent consideration was determined utilizing a probability-weighted estimated cash flow stream adjusted for the expected timing of each payment also utilizing a discount rate of 10.5%. Actual cash flows are likely to be different than those assumed. This transaction closed on July 31, 2015; accordingly, the results of operations of the acquired business have been included in the Company’s results of operations beginning after that date. Pro forma financial information has not been included because cCAM’s historical financial results are not significant when compared with the Company’s financial results.
Also in July 2015, Merck and Allergan plc (Allergan) entered into an agreement pursuant to which Allergan acquired the exclusive worldwide rights to MK-1602 and MK-8031, Merck’s investigational small molecule oral calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonists, which are being developed for the treatment and prevention of migraine. Under the terms of the agreement, Allergan acquired these rights for upfront payments of $250 million, $125 million of which was paid in August 2015 upon closing of the transaction and $125 million of which is payable in April of 2016. Merck will additionally be entitled to receive potential development and commercial milestone payments and tiered double-digit royalties based on commercialization of the programs. Allergan will be fully responsible for development of the CGRP programs, as well as manufacturing and commercialization upon approval and launch of the products. The Company recorded a gain of $250 million within Other (income) expense, net in 2015 related to the transaction.
In February 2015, Merck and NGM Biopharmaceuticals, Inc. (NGM), a privately held biotechnology company, entered into a multi-year collaboration to research, discover, develop and commercialize novel biologic therapies across a wide range of therapeutic areas. The collaboration includes multiple drug candidates currently in preclinical development at NGM, including NP201, which is being evaluated for the treatment of diabetes, obesity and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. NGM will lead the research and development of the existing preclinical candidates and have the autonomy to identify and pursue other discovery stage programs at its discretion. Merck will have the option to license all resulting NGM programs following human proof of concept trials. If Merck exercises this option, Merck will lead global product development and commercialization for the resulting products, if approved. Under the terms of the agreement, Merck made an upfront payment to NGM of $94 million, which is included in Research and development expenses, and purchased a 15% equity stake in NGM for $106 million. Merck committed up to $250 million to fund all of NGM’s efforts under the initial five-year term of the collaboration, with the potential for additional funding if certain conditions are met. Prior to Merck initiating a Phase 3 study for a licensed program, NGM may elect to either receive milestone and royalty payments or, in certain cases, to co-fund development and participate in a global cost and revenue share arrangement of up to 50%. The agreement also provides NGM with the option to participate in the co-promotion of any co-funded program in the United States. Merck will have the option to extend the research agreement for two additional two-year terms. Each party has certain termination rights under the agreement in the event of an uncured material breach by the other party. Additionally, Merck has certain termination rights in the event of the occurrence of certain defined conditions. Upon a termination event, depending on the circumstances, the parties have varying rights and obligations with respect to the continued development and commercialization of compounds discovered under the agreement and certain related payment obligations.
In December 2014, Merck acquired OncoEthix, a privately held biotechnology company specializing in oncology drug development. Total purchase consideration in the transaction of $153 million included an upfront cash payment of $110 million and future additional milestone payments of up to $265 million that are contingent upon certain clinical and regulatory milestones being achieved, which the Company determined had a fair value of $43 million at the acquisition date. The transaction was accounted for as an acquisition of a business; accordingly, the assets acquired and liabilities assumed were recorded at their respective fair values as of the acquisition date. Merck recognized an intangible asset for IPR&D of $143 million related to MK-8628 (formerly OTX015), an investigational, novel oral BET (bromodomain) inhibitor currently in Phase 2 studies for the treatment of hematological malignancies and advanced solid tumors, as well as a liability for contingent consideration of $43 million and other net assets of $10 million. The fair value of the identifiable intangible asset related to IPR&D was determined using an income approach. The asset’s probability-adjusted future net cash flows were then discounted to present value using a discount rate of 11.5%. The fair value of the contingent consideration was determined utilizing a probability-weighted estimated cash flow stream adjusted for the expected timing of each payment also utilizing a discount rate of 11.5%. Actual cash flows are likely to be different than those assumed. This transaction closed on December 18, 2014; accordingly, the results of operations of the acquired business have been included in the Company’s results of operations beginning after that date. Pro forma

89


financial information has not been included because OncoEthix’s historical financial results are not significant when compared with the Company’s financial results.
On October 1, 2014, the Company completed the sale of its Merck Consumer Care (MCC) business to Bayer AG (Bayer) for $14.2 billion ($14.0 billion net of cash divested), less customary closing adjustments as well as certain contingent amounts held back that were payable upon the manufacturing site transfer in Canada and regulatory approval in Korea. Under the terms of the agreement, Bayer acquired Merck’s existing over-the-counter business, including the global trademark and prescription rights for Claritin and Afrin. The Company recognized a pretax gain from the sale of MCC of $11.2 billion in 2014.
Also on October 1, 2014, the Company entered into a worldwide clinical development collaboration with Bayer to market and develop its portfolio of soluble guanylate cyclase (sGC) modulators. This includes Bayer’s Adempas (riociguat), the first member of this novel class of compounds. Adempas is approved to treat pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) and is approved for patients with chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH). Adempas is marketed in the United States and Europe for both PAH and CTEPH and in Japan for CTEPH. The two companies will equally share costs and profits from the collaboration and implement a joint development and commercialization strategy. The collaboration also includes clinical development of Bayer’s vericiguat, which is currently in Phase 2 trials for worsening heart failure, as well as opt-in rights for other early-stage sGC compounds in development at Bayer. Merck will in turn make available its early-stage sGC compounds under similar terms. In return for these broad collaboration rights, Merck made an upfront payment to Bayer of $1.0 billion with the potential for additional milestone payments of up to $1.1 billion upon the achievement of agreed-upon sales goals. For Adempas, Bayer will continue to lead commercialization in the Americas, while Merck will lead commercialization in the rest of the world. For vericiguat and other potential opt-in products, Bayer will lead in the rest of world and Merck will lead in the Americas. For all products and candidates included in the agreement, both companies will share in development costs and profits on sales and will have the right to co-promote in territories where they are not the lead. The Company determined that Merck’s payment to access Bayer’s compounds constituted an acquisition of an asset. Of the $1.0 billion consideration paid by Merck, $915 million of fair value related to Adempas and was capitalized as an intangible asset subject to amortization over its estimated useful life of 12 years, and the remaining $85 million of fair value related to the vericiguat compound in clinical development and was expensed within Research and development expenses. The fair values of Adempas and vericiguat were determined using an income approach, through which fair value is estimated based upon probability-adjusted future net cash flows, and for vericiguat also for the stage of development of the project and the associated probability of successful completion. The net cash flows were then discounted to present value using a discount rate of 10.0% for Adempas and 10.5% for vericiguat. Future sales based milestones will be accrued when probable of being achieved; the related intangible asset will be recognized and amortized to Materials and production costs over its applicable useful life. The Company and Bayer each have the right to terminate the agreement for cause on a product-by-product basis for all products being developed and commercialized under the agreement (other than Adempas for which Bayer has no termination rights) in the event of the other party’s material, uncured breach related to any such product.
In September 2014, Merck and Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. (Sun Pharma) entered into an exclusive worldwide licensing agreement for Merck’s investigational therapeutic antibody candidate, MK-3222, tildrakizumab, for the treatment of chronic plaque psoriasis, a skin ailment. Under terms of the agreement, Sun Pharma acquired worldwide rights to tildrakizumab for use in all human indications from Merck in exchange for an upfront payment of $80 million. Merck will continue all clinical development and regulatory activities, which will be funded by Sun Pharma. Upon product approval, Sun Pharma will be responsible for regulatory activities, including subsequent submissions, pharmacovigilance, post approval studies, manufacturing and commercialization of the approved product. Merck is also eligible to receive future payments associated with regulatory (including product approval) and sales milestones, as well as tiered royalties ranging from mid-single digit through teen percentage rates on sales. Merck recorded a loss of $47 million in 2014 on the transaction included in Other (income) expense, net.
In August 2014, Merck completed the acquisition of Idenix Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Idenix) for approximately $3.9 billion in cash ($3.7 billion net of cash acquired). Idenix was a biopharmaceutical company engaged in the discovery and development of medicines for the treatment of human viral diseases, whose primary focus was on the development of next-generation oral antiviral therapeutics to treat hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. The transaction was accounted for as an acquisition of a business; accordingly, the assets acquired and liabilities assumed were recorded at their respective fair values as of the acquisition date. Merck recognized an intangible asset for IPR&D of $3.2 billion related

90


to MK-3682 (formerly IDX21437), net deferred tax liabilities of $951 million and other net liabilities of $12 million. MK-3682 is a nucleotide prodrug in Phase 2 clinical development being evaluated for potential inclusion in the development of all oral, pan-genotypic fixed-dose combination regimens. The excess of the consideration transferred over the fair value of net assets acquired of $1.5 billion was recorded as goodwill that was allocated to the Pharmaceutical segment and is not deductible for tax purposes. The fair value of the identifiable intangible asset related to IPR&D was determined using an income approach. The asset’s probability-adjusted future net cash flows were then discounted to present value using a discount rate of 11.5%. Actual cash flows are likely to be different than those assumed. This transaction closed on August 5, 2014; accordingly, the resultsIn 2018, as a result of operations of the acquired business have been included in the Company’s results of operations beginning after that date. Pro forma financial information has not been included because Idenix’s historical financial results are not significant when compared with the Company’s financial results.
In May 2014, Merck entered into an agreement to sell certain ophthalmic products to Santen Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. (Santen) in Japan and markets in Europe and Asia Pacific. The agreement provided for upfront payments from Santen and additional payments based on defined sales milestones. Santen will also purchase supply of ophthalmology products covered by the agreement for a two- to five-year period. The transaction closed in most markets on July 1, 2014 and in the remaining markets on October 1, 2014. The Company received $565 million of upfront payments from Santen, net of certain adjustments, and recognized gains of $480 million on the transactions in 2014 included in Other (income) expense, net.
In March 2014, Merck divested its Sirna Therapeutics, Inc. (Sirna) subsidiary to Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Alnylam) for consideration of $25 million and 2,520,044 shares of Alnylam common stock. Merck is eligible to receive future payments associated with the achievement of certain regulatory and commercial milestones,a clinical development milestone, Merck made a $175 million payment, which was accrued for at estimated fair value at the time of acquisition as well as royalties on future sales. Merck recorded a gain of $204 million in Other (income) expense, net in 2014 related to this transaction.noted above. The excess of Merck’s tax basis in its investment in Sirna over thecontingent consideration liability was then remeasured at current fair value received resulted in an approximate $300 million tax benefit recorded in 2014.at each subsequent reporting period until payment was made (see Note 6).
In January 2014,June 2016, Merck soldand Moderna Therapeutics (Moderna) entered into a strategic collaboration and license agreement to develop and commercialize novel messenger RNA (mRNA)-based personalized cancer vaccines. The development program will entail multiple studies in several types of cancer and include the U.S. marketing rightsevaluation of mRNA-based personalized cancer vaccines in combination with Merck’s Keytruda. Pursuant toSaphris, an antipsychotic indicated for the treatment of schizophrenia and bipolar I disorder in adults to Forest Laboratories, Inc. (Forest). Under the terms of the agreement, ForestMerck made an upfront paymentscash payment to Moderna of $232$200 million, which werewas recorded in SalesResearch and development expenses. Following human proof of concept studies, Merck has the right to elect to make an additional payment to Moderna. If Merck exercises this right, the two companies will then equally share costs and profits under a worldwide collaboration for the development of personalized cancer vaccines. Moderna will have the right to elect to co-promote the personalized cancer vaccines in 2014,the United States. The agreement entails exclusivity around combinations with Keytruda. Moderna and will make additional paymentsMerck each have the ability to Merck based on defined sales milestones. In addition, as part of this transaction, Merck agreed to supply product to Forest (subsequently acquired by Allergan) until patent expiry.combine mRNA-based personalized cancer vaccines with other (non-PD-1) agents.

In February 2013,January 2016, Merck and Supera Farma Laboratorios S.A. (Supera)acquired IOmet Pharma Ltd (IOmet), a Brazilian pharmaceuticalprivately held UK-based drug discovery company co-owned by Cristáliafocused on the development of innovative medicines for the treatment of cancer, with a particular emphasis on the fields of cancer immunotherapy and Eurofarma, established a joint venture that markets, distributescancer metabolism. The acquisition provided Merck with IOmet’s preclinical pipeline of IDO (indoleamine-2,3-dioxygenase 1), TDO (tryptophan-2,3-dioxygenase), and sells a portfolio of pharmaceutical and branded generic products from Merck, Cristália and Eurofarma in Brazil. Merck owns 51% of the joint venture, and Cristália and Eurofarma collectively own 49%.dual-acting IDO/TDO inhibitors. The transaction was accounted for as an acquisition of a business; accordingly,business. Total purchase consideration in the assets acquiredtransaction included a cash payment of $150 million and liabilities assumed were recordedfuture additional milestone payments of up to $250 million contingent upon certain clinical and regulatory milestones being achieved. The Company determined the fair value of the contingent consideration was $94 million at their respective fair values. This resulted inthe acquisition date utilizing a probability-weighted estimated cash flow stream adjusted for the expected timing of each payment utilizing a discount rate of 10.5%. Merck recognizingrecognized intangible assets for currently marketed products of $89 million, IPR&D of $155 million and net deferred tax assets of $32 million. The excess of the consideration transferred over the fair value of net assets acquired of $57 million was recorded as goodwill that was allocated to the Pharmaceutical segment and is not deductible for tax purposes. The fair values of the identifiable intangible assets related to IPR&D were determined using an income approach. The assets’ probability-adjusted future net cash flows were discounted to present value also using a discount rate of 10.5%. Actual cash flows are likely to be different than those assumed. In 2017, as a result of the achievement of a clinical development milestone, Merck made a $100 million goodwillpayment, which was accrued for at estimated fair value at the time of $103 million, and deferred tax liabilities of $64 million.acquisition as noted above. The Company also recorded increases to Noncontrolling interests and Other paid-in capital in the amounts of $112 million and $116 million, respectively. This transaction closed on February 1, 2013; accordingly, the results of operations of the acquired business have been included in the Company’s results of operations beginning after that date. The Company has recorded certain intangible asset impairments charges related to the Supera joint venturecontingent consideration liability was then remeasured at current fair value at each subsequent reporting period until payment was made (see Note 7)6).
Remicade/Simponi
In 1998, a subsidiary of Schering-Plough entered into a licensing agreement with Centocor Ortho Biotech Inc. (Centocor), a Johnson & Johnson (J&J) company, to market Remicade, which is prescribed for the treatment of inflammatory diseases. In 2005, Schering-Plough’s subsidiary exercised an option under its contract with Centocor for license rights to develop and commercialize Simponi, a fully human monoclonal antibody. The Company has marketing rights to both products throughout Europe, Russia and Turkey. In 2007, Schering-Plough and Centocor revised their distribution agreement regarding the development, commercialization and distribution of both Remicade and Simponi, extending the Company’s rights to exclusively market Remicade to match the duration of the Company’s exclusive marketing rights for Simponi. In addition, Schering-Plough and Centocor agreed to share certain development costs relating to Simponi’s auto-injector delivery system. In 2009, the European Commission approved Simponi as a treatment for rheumatoid arthritis and other immune system disorders in two presentations — a novel auto-injector and a prefilled syringe. As a result, the Company’s marketing rights for both products extend for 15 years from the first commercial

91


sale of Simponi in the European Union (EU) following the receipt of pricing and reimbursement approval within the EU. Remicade lost market exclusivity in major European markets in February 2015 and the Company no longer has market exclusivity in any of its marketing territories. The Company continues to have market exclusivity for Simponi in all of its marketing territories. All profits derived from Merck’s distribution of the two products in these countries are equally divided between Merck and J&J.
4.    Collaborative Arrangements
Merck has entered into collaborative arrangements that provide the Company with varying rights to develop, produce and market products together with its collaborative partners. Both parties in these arrangements are active participants and exposed to significant risks and rewards dependent on the commercial success of the activities of the collaboration. Merck’s more significant collaborative arrangements are discussed below.

AstraZeneca
In July 2017, Merck and AstraZeneca entered into a global strategic oncology collaboration to co-develop and co-commercialize AstraZeneca’s Lynparza for multiple cancer types. Lynparza is an oral poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor currently approved for certain types of ovarian and breast cancer. The companies are jointly developing and commercializing Lynparza, both as monotherapy and in combination trials with other potential medicines. Independently, Merck and AstraZeneca will develop and commercialize Lynparza in combinations with their respective PD-1 and PD-L1 medicines, Keytruda and Imfinzi. The companies will also jointly develop and commercialize AstraZeneca’s selumetinib, an oral, potent, selective inhibitor of MEK, part of the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway, currently being developed for multiple indications. Under the terms of the agreement, AstraZeneca and Merck will share the development and commercialization costs for Lynparza and selumetinib monotherapy and non-PD-L1/PD-1 combination therapy opportunities.
Gross profits from Lynparza and selumetinib product sales generated through monotherapies or combination therapies are shared equally. Merck will fund all development and commercialization costs of Keytruda in combination with Lynparza or selumetinib. AstraZeneca will fund all development and commercialization costs of Imfinzi in combination with Lynparza or selumetinib. AstraZeneca is currently the principal on Lynparza sales transactions. Merck records its share of Lynparza product sales, net of cost of sales and commercialization costs, as alliance revenue within the Pharmaceutical segment and its share of development costs associated with the collaboration as part of Research

and development expenses. Reimbursements received from AstraZeneca for research and development expenses are recognized as reductions to Research and development costs.
As part of the agreement, Merck made an upfront payment to AstraZeneca of $1.6 billion and will make payments of up to $750 million over a multi-year period for certain license options (of which $250 million was paid in December 2017, $400 million was paid in December 2018 and $100 million is expected be paid in 2019). The Company recorded an aggregate charge of $2.35 billion in Research and development expenses in 2017 related to the upfront payment and future license option payments. In addition, the agreement provides for additional contingent payments from Merck to AstraZeneca related to the successful achievement of regulatory and sales-based milestones.
In 2018, Merck determined it was probable that annual sales of Lynparza in the future would trigger three sales-based milestone payments from Merck to AstraZeneca aggregating $600 million. Accordingly, in 2018, Merck recorded $600 million of liabilities and a corresponding increase to the intangible asset related to Lynparza, and recognized $58 million of cumulative amortization expense within Cost of sales. During 2018, one of the sales-based milestones was triggered, resulting in a $150 million payment to AstraZeneca. In 2018, Merck made an additional $100 million sales-based milestone payment, which was accrued for in 2017 when the Company deemed to the payment to be probable. The remaining $3.4 billion of potential future sales-based milestone payments have not yet been accrued as they are not deemed by the Company to be probable at this time.
In 2018, Lynparza received approval in the United States for the treatment of certain patients with metastatic breast cancer and for use in the first-line maintenance setting for advanced ovarian cancer, triggering capitalized milestone payments of $140 million in the aggregate from Merck to AstraZeneca. Potential future regulatory milestone payments of $1.76 billion remain under the agreement.
The asset balance related to Lynparza (which includes capitalized sales-based and regulatory milestone payments) was $743 million at December 31, 2018 and is included in Other Assets on the Consolidated Balance Sheet. The amount is being amortized over its estimated useful life through 2028 as supported by projected future cash flows, subject to impairment testing.
Summarized information related to this collaboration is as follows:
Years Ended December 312018 2017
Alliance revenue$187
 $20
    
Cost of sales (1)
93
 4
Selling, general and administrative48
 1
Research and development (2)
152
 2,419
    
December 312018 2017
Receivables from AstraZeneca included in Other current assets
$52
 $12
Payables to AstraZeneca included in Accrued and other current liabilities (3)
405
 543
Payables to AstraZeneca included Other Noncurrent Liabilities (3)
250
 100
(1) Represents amortization of capitalized milestone payments.
(2) Amount for 2017 includes $2.35 billion related to the upfront payment and future license option payments.
(3) Includes accrued milestone and license option payments.
Eisai
In March 2018, Merck and Eisai announced a strategic collaboration for the worldwide co-development and co-commercialization of Lenvima, an orally available tyrosine kinase inhibitor discovered by Eisai. Under the agreement, Merck and Eisai will develop and commercialize Lenvima jointly, both as monotherapy and in combination with Merck’s anti-PD-1 therapy, Keytruda. Eisai records Lenvima product sales globally (Eisai is the principal on Lenvima sales transactions), and Merck and Eisai share gross profits equally. Merck records its share of Lenvima product sales, net of cost of sales and commercialization costs, as alliance revenue. Expenses incurred during co-development, including for studies evaluating Lenvima as monotherapy, are shared equally by the two companies and reflected in Research and development expenses.

Under the agreement, Merck made an upfront payment to Eisai of $750 million and will make payments of up to $650 million for certain option rights through 2021 (of which $325 million will be paid in March 2019, $200 million is expected to be paid in 2020 and $125 million is expected to be paid in 2021). The Company recorded an aggregate charge of $1.4 billion in Research and development expenses in 2018 related to the upfront payment and future option payments. In addition, the agreement provides for Eisai to receive up to $385 million associated with the achievement of certain clinical and regulatory milestones and up to $3.97 billion for the achievement of milestones associated with sales of Lenvima.
In 2018, Merck determined it was probable that annual sales of Lenvima in the future would trigger three sales-based milestone payments from Merck to Eisai aggregating $268 million. Accordingly, in 2018, Merck recorded $268 million of liabilities and a corresponding increase to the intangible asset related to Lenvima, and recognized $24 million of cumulative amortization expense within Cost of sales. The remaining $3.71 billion of potential future sales-based milestone payments have not yet been accrued as they are not deemed by the Company to be probable at this time.
In 2018, Lenvima was approved for the treatment of patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma in the United States, the European Union, Japan and China, triggering capitalized milestone payments to Eisai of $250 million in the aggregate. Potential future regulatory milestone payments of $135 million remain under the agreement.
The asset balance related to Lenvima (which includes capitalized sales-based and regulatory milestone payments) was $479 million at December 31, 2018 and is included in Other Assets on the Consolidated Balance Sheet. The amount is being amortized over its estimated useful life through 2026 as supported by projected future cash flows, subject to impairment testing.
Summarized information related to this collaboration is as follows:
Year Ended December 312018
Alliance revenue$149
  
Cost of sales (1)
39
Selling, general and administrative13
Research and development (2)
1,489
  
December 312018
Receivables from Eisai included in Other current assets
$71
Payables to Eisai included in Accrued and other current liabilities (3)
375
Payables to Eisai included in Other Noncurrent Liabilities (3)
543
(1) Represents amortization of capitalized milestone payments.
(2) Includes $1.4 billion related to the upfront payment and future option payments.
(3) Includes accrued milestone and option payments.
Bayer AG
In 2014, the Company entered into a worldwide clinical development collaboration with Bayer AG (Bayer) to market and develop soluble guanylate cyclase (sGC) modulators including Bayer’s Adempas, which is approved to treat pulmonary arterial hypertension and chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension. The two companies have implemented a joint development and commercialization strategy. The collaboration also includes clinical development of Bayer’s vericiguat, which is in Phase 3 trials for worsening heart failure, as well as opt-in rights for other early-stage sGC compounds in development by Bayer. Merck in turn made available its early-stage sGC compounds under similar terms. Under the agreement, Bayer leads commercialization of Adempas in the Americas, while Merck leads commercialization in the rest of the world. For vericiguat and other potential opt-in products, Bayer will lead commercialization in the rest of world and Merck will lead in the Americas. For all products and candidates included in the agreement, both companies will share in development costs and profits on sales and will have the right to co-promote in territories where they are not the lead. In 2016, Merck began promoting and distributing Adempas in Europe. Transition from Bayer in other Merck territories, including Japan, continued in 2017. Revenue from Adempas includes sales in Merck’s marketing territories, as well as Merck’s share of profits from the sale of Adempas in Bayer’s marketing territories.

In 2018, Merck determined it was probable that annual worldwide sales of Adempas in the future would trigger a $375 million sales-based milestone payment from Merck to Bayer. Accordingly, Merck recorded a $375 million noncurrent liability and a corresponding increase to the intangible asset related to Adempas, and recognized $106 million of cumulative amortization expense within Cost of sales. In 2018, the Company made a $350 million milestone payment to Bayer, which was accrued for in 2016 when Merck deemed the payment to be probable. There is an additional $400 million potential future sales-based milestone payment that has not yet been accrued as it is not deemed by the Company to be probable at this time.
The intangible asset balance related to Adempas (which includes the remaining acquired intangible asset balance, as well as capitalized sales-based milestone payments) was $1.0 billion at December 31, 2018 and is included in Other Intangibles, Net on the Consolidated Balance Sheet. The amount is being amortized over its estimated useful life through 2027 as supported by projected future cash flows, subject to impairment testing.
Summarized information related to this collaboration is as follows:
Years Ended December 312018 2017 2016
Net product sales recorded by Merck$190
 $149
 $88
Merck’s profit share from sales in Bayer’s marketing territories139
 151
 81
Total sales329
 300
 169
      
Cost of sales (1)
216
 99
 133
Selling, general and administrative35
 27
 26
Research and development127
 101
 82
      
December 31  2018 2017
Receivables from Bayer included in Other current assets
  $32
 $33
Payables to Bayer included in Accrued and other current liabilities (2)
  
 350
Payables to Bayer included in Other Noncurrent Liabilities (2)
  375
 
(1) Includes amortization of intangible assets.
(2) Includes accrued milestone payments.
Aggregate amortization expense related to capitalized license costs recorded within Cost of sales was $186 million in 2018, $39 million in 2017 and $30 million in 2016. The estimated aggregate amortization expense for each of the next five years is as follows: 2019, $196 million; 2020, $193 million; 2021, $191 million; 2022, $187 million; 2023, $181 million.
5.    Restructuring
In 2010 and 2013, the Company commenced actions under global restructuring programs designed to streamline its cost structure. The actions under these programs include the elimination of positions in sales, administrative and headquarters organizations, as well as the sale or closure of certain manufacturing and research and development sites and the consolidation of office facilities. The Company also continues to reduce its global real estate footprint and improve the efficiency of its manufacturing and supply network.
The Company recorded total pretax costs of $658 million in 2018, $927 million in 2017 and $1.1 billion in 2016 related to restructuring program activities. Since inception of the programs through December 31, 2018, Merck has recorded total pretax accumulated costs of approximately $14.1 billion and eliminated approximately 45,510 positions comprised of employee separations, as well as the elimination of contractors and vacant positions. The Company estimates that approximately two-thirds of the cumulative pretax costs are cash outlays, primarily related to employee separation expense. Approximately one-third of the cumulative pretax costs are non-cash, relating primarily to the accelerated depreciation of facilities to be closed or divested. The Company has substantially completed the actions under these programs.
For segment reporting, restructuring charges are unallocated expenses.

The following table summarizes the charges related to restructuring program activities by type of cost:
 
Separation
Costs
 
Accelerated
Depreciation
 Other Total
Year Ended December 31, 2018       
Cost of sales$
 $10
 $11
 $21
Selling, general and administrative
 2
 1
 3
Research and development
 (13) 15
 2
Restructuring costs473
 
 159
 632
 $473
 $(1) $186
 $658
Year Ended December 31, 2017       
Cost of sales$
 $52
 $86
 $138
Selling, general and administrative
 2
 
 2
Research and development
 6
 5
 11
Restructuring costs552
 
 224
 776
 $552

$60

$315

$927
Year Ended December 31, 2016       
Cost of sales$
 $77
 $104
 $181
Selling, general and administrative
 8
 87
 95
Research and development
 142
 
 142
Restructuring costs216
 
 435
 651
 $216

$227

$626

$1,069
Separation costs are associated with actual headcount reductions, as well as those headcount reductions which were probable and could be reasonably estimated. Positions eliminated under restructuring program activities were approximately 2,160 in 2018, 2,450 in 2017 and 2,625 in 2016.
Accelerated depreciation costs primarily relate to manufacturing, research and administrative facilities and equipment to be sold or closed as part of the programs. Accelerated depreciation costs represent the difference between the depreciation expense to be recognized over the revised useful life of the asset, based upon the anticipated date the site will be closed or divested or the equipment disposed of, and depreciation expense as determined utilizing the useful life prior to the restructuring actions. All the sites have and will continue to operate up through the respective closure dates and, since future undiscounted cash flows were sufficient to recover the respective book values, Merck is recording accelerated depreciation over the revised useful life of the site assets. Anticipated site closure dates, particularly related to manufacturing locations, have been and may continue to be adjusted to reflect changes resulting from regulatory or other factors.
Other activity in 2018, 2017 and 2016 includes $141 million, $267 million and $409 million, respectively, of asset abandonment, shut-down and other related costs. Additionally, other activity includes certain employee-related costs associated with pension and other postretirement benefit plans (see Note 14) and share-based compensation. Other activity also reflects net pretax losses resulting from sales of facilities and related assets of $151 million in 2016.
The following table summarizes the charges and spending relating to restructuring program activities:
 
Separation
Costs
 
Accelerated
Depreciation
 Other Total
Restructuring reserves January 1, 2017$395
 $
 $146
 $541
Expenses552
 60
 315
 927
(Payments) receipts, net(328) 
 (394) (722)
Non-cash activity
 (60) 61
 1
Restructuring reserves December 31, 2017619
 
 128
 747
Expenses473
 (1) 186
 658
(Payments) receipts, net(649) 
 (238) (887)
Non-cash activity
 1
 15
 16
Restructuring reserves December 31, 2018 (1)
$443
 $
 $91
 $534
(1)
The remaining cash outlays are expected to be substantially completed by the end of 2020.

6.    Financial Instruments
Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities
The Company manages the impact of foreign exchange rate movements and interest rate movements on its earnings, cash flows and fair values of assets and liabilities through operational means and through the use of various financial instruments, including derivative instruments.
A significant portion of the Company’s revenues and earnings in foreign affiliates is exposed to changes in foreign exchange rates. The objectives and accounting related to the Company’s foreign currency risk management program, as well as its interest rate risk management activities are discussed below.

Foreign Currency Risk Management
The Company has established revenue hedging, balance sheet risk management and net investment hedging programs to protect against volatility of future foreign currency cash flows and changes in fair value caused by volatility in foreign exchange rates.
The primary objective of the revenue hedging program is to reduce the potential for longer-term unfavorablevariability caused by changes in foreign exchange rates to decreasethat would affect the U.S. dollar value of future cash flows derived from foreign currency denominated sales, primarily the euro and Japanese yen. To achieve this objective, the Company will hedge a portion of its forecasted foreign currency denominated third-party and intercompany distributor entity sales (forecasted sales) that are expected to occur over its planning cycle, typically no more than threetwo years years into the future. The Company will layer in hedges over time, increasing the portion of third-party and intercompany distributor entityforecasted sales hedged as it gets closer to the expected date of the forecasted foreign currency denominated sales. The portion of forecasted sales hedged is based on assessments of cost-benefit profiles that consider natural offsetting exposures, revenue and exchange rate volatilities and correlations, and the cost of hedging instruments. The hedged anticipated sales are a specified component of a portfolio of similarly denominated foreign currency-based sales transactions, each of which responds to the hedged currency risk in the same manner. The Company manages its anticipated transaction exposure principally with purchased local currency put options, which provide the Company with a right, but not an obligation, to sell foreign currencies in the future at a predetermined price. If the U.S. dollar strengthens relative to the currency of the hedged anticipated sales, total changes in the options’ cash flows offset the decline in the expected future U.S. dollar equivalent cash flows of the hedged foreign currency sales. Conversely, if the U.S. dollar weakens, the options’ value reduces to zero, but the Company benefits from the increase in the U.S. dollar equivalent value of the anticipated foreign currency cash flows.
In connection with the Company’s revenue hedging program, aforward contracts, and purchased collar option strategy may be utilized. With a purchased collar option strategy, the Company writes a local currency call option and purchases a local currency put option. As compared to a purchased put option strategy alone, a purchased collar strategy reduces the upfront costs associated with purchasing puts through the collection of premiums by writing call options. If the U.S. dollar weakens relative to the currency of the hedged anticipated sales, the purchased put option value of the collar strategy reduces to zero and the Company benefits from the increase in the U.S. dollar equivalent value of its anticipated foreign currency cash flows; however, this benefit would be capped at the strike level of the written call. If the U.S. dollar strengthens relative to the currency of the hedged anticipated sales, the written call option value of the collar strategy reduces to zero and the changes in the purchased put cash flows of the collar strategy would offset the decline in the expected future U.S. dollar equivalent cash flows of the hedged foreign currency sales.
The Company may also utilize forward contracts in its revenue hedging program. If the U.S. dollar strengthens relative to the currency of the hedged anticipated sales, the increase in the fair value of the forward contracts offsets the decrease in the expected future U.S. dollar cash flows of the hedged foreign currency sales. Conversely, if the U.S. dollar weakens, the decrease in the fair value of the forward contracts offsets the increase in the value of the anticipated foreign currency cash flows.

92


The fair values of these derivative contracts are recorded as either assets (gain positions) or liabilities (loss positions) in the Consolidated Balance Sheet. Changes in the fair value of derivative contracts are recorded each period in either current earnings or OCI, depending on whether the derivative is designated as part of a hedge transaction and, if so, the type of hedge transaction. For derivatives that are designated as cash flow hedges, the effective portion of the unrealized gains or losses on these contracts is recorded in AOCI and reclassified into Sales when the hedged anticipated revenue is recognized. The hedge relationship is highly effective and hedge ineffectiveness has been de minimis. For those derivatives which are not designated as cash flow hedges, but serve as economic hedges of forecasted sales, unrealized gains or losses are recorded in Sales each period. The cash flows from both designated and non-designated contracts are reported as operating activities in the Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows. The Company does not enter into derivatives for trading or speculative purposes.
The primary objectiveCompany manages operating activities and net asset positions at each local subsidiary in order to mitigate the effects of theexchange on monetary assets and liabilities. The Company also uses a balance sheet risk management program is to mitigate the exposure of net monetary assets that are denominated in a currency other than a subsidiary’s functional currency from the effects of volatility in foreign exchange. In these instances, Merck principally utilizes forward exchange contracts, which enable the Company to buy and sell foreign currencies in the future at fixed exchange rates and economically offset the consequences of changes in foreign exchange from the monetary assets. Merck routinely enters into contracts to offset the effects of exchange on exposures denominated in developed country currencies, primarily the euro and Japanese yen. For exposures in developing country currencies, the Company will enter into forward contracts to partially offset the effects of exchange on exposures when it is deemed economical to do so based on a cost-benefit analysis that considers the magnitude of the exposure, the volatility of the exchange rate and the cost of the hedging instrument. The Company will also minimize the effect of exchange on monetary assets and liabilities by managing operating activities and net asset positions at the local level. The cash flows from these contracts are reported as operating activities in the Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows.
Monetary assets and liabilities denominated in a currency other than the functional currency of a given subsidiary are remeasured at spot rates in effect on the balance sheet date with the effects of changes in spot rates reported in Other (income) expense, net. The forward contracts are not designated as hedges and are marked to market through Other (income) expense, net. Accordingly, fair value changes in the forward contracts help mitigate the changes in the value of the remeasured assets and liabilities attributable to changes in foreign currency exchange rates, except to the extent of the spot-forward differences. These differences are not significant due to the short-term nature of the contracts, which typically have average maturities at inception of less than one year.

The Company also uses forward exchange contracts to hedge its net investment in foreign operations against movements in exchange rates. The forward contracts are designated as hedges of the net investment in a foreign operation. The Company hedges a portion of the net investment in certain of its foreign operations and measures ineffectiveness based upon changes in spot foreign exchange rates.operations. The effective portion of the unrealized gains or losses on these contracts isare recorded in foreign currency translation adjustment within OCI, and remainsremain in AOCI until either the sale or complete or substantially complete liquidation of the subsidiary. The Company excludes certain portions of the change in fair value of its derivative instruments from the assessment of hedge effectiveness (excluded component). Changes in fair value of the excluded components are recognized in OCI. In accordance with the new guidance adopted on January 1, 2018 (see Note 2), the Company has elected to recognize in earnings the initial value of the excluded component on a straight-line basis over the life of the derivative instrument, rather than using the mark-to-market approach. The cash flows from these contracts are reported as investing activities in the Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows.
Foreign exchange risk is also managed through the use of foreign currency debt. The Company’s senior unsecured euro-denominated notes have been designated as, and are effective as, economic hedges of the net investment in a foreign operation. Accordingly, foreign currency transaction gains or losses due to spot rate fluctuations on the euro-denominated debt instruments are included in foreign currency translation adjustment within OCI. Included in
The effects of the cumulative translation adjustmentCompany’s net investment hedges on OCI and the Consolidated Statement of Income are pretax gainsshown below:
 
Amount of Pretax (Gain) Loss Recognized in Other Comprehensive Income (1)
 
Amount of Pretax (Gain) Loss Recognized in Other (income) expense, net for Amounts Excluded from Effectiveness Testing
Years Ended December 312018 2017 2016 2018 2017 2016
Net Investment Hedging Relationships           
Foreign exchange contracts$(18) $
 $2
 $(11) $
 $(1)
Euro-denominated notes(183) 520
 (193) 
 
 
(1) No amounts were reclassified from AOCI into income related to the sale of $304 million in 2015 and $294 million in 2014 and pretax losses of $84 million in 2013 from the euro-denominated notes.a subsidiary.

Interest Rate Risk Management
The Company may use interest rate swap contracts on certain investing and borrowing transactions to manage its net exposure to interest rate changes and to reduce its overall cost of borrowing. The Company does not use leveraged swaps and, in general, does not leverage any of its investment activities that would put principal capital at risk.
In May 2018, four interest rate swaps with notional amounts aggregating $1.0 billion matured. These swaps effectively converted the Company’s $1.0 billion, 1.30% fixed-rate notes due 2018 to variable rate debt. In December 2018, in connection with the early repayment of debt, the Company settled three interest rate swaps with notional amounts aggregating $550 million. These swaps effectively converted a portion of the Company’s $1.25 billion, 5.00% notes due 2019 to variable rate debt. At December 31, 2015,2018, the Company was a party to 3019 pay-floating, receive-fixed interest rate swap contracts designated as fair value hedges of fixed-rate notes in which the notional amounts match the amount of the hedged fixed-rate notes as detailed in the table below.

93


20152018
Debt InstrumentPar Value of Debt Number of Interest Rate Swaps Held Total Swap Notional AmountPar Value of Debt Number of Interest Rate Swaps Held Total Swap Notional Amount
0.70% notes due 2016$1,000
 4
 $1,000
1.30% notes due 20181,000
 4
 1,000
5.00% notes due 20191,250
 3
 550
1.85% notes due 20201,250
 5
 1,250
$1,250
 5
 $1,250
3.875% notes due 20211,150
 5
 1,150
1,150
 5
 1,150
2.40% notes due 20221,000
 4
 1,000
1,000
 4
 1,000
2.35% notes due 20221,250
 5
 1,250
1,250
 5
 1,250
The interest rate swap contracts are designated hedges of the fair value changes in the notes attributable to changes in the benchmark London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR) swap rate. The fair value changes in the notes attributable to changes in the LIBOR swap rate are recorded in interest expense and offset byalong with the offsetting fair value changes in the swap contracts. The cash flows from these contracts are reported as operating activities in the Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows.

The table below presents the location of amounts recorded on the Consolidated Balance Sheet related to cumulative basis adjustments for fair value hedges as of December 31:
 Carrying Amount of Hedged Liabilities Cumulative Amount of Fair Value Hedging Adjustment Increase (Decrease) Included in the Carrying Amount
 2018 2017 2018 2017
Balance Sheet Line Item in which Hedged Item is Included       
Loans payable and current portion of long-term debt$
 $983
 $
 $(17)
Long-Term Debt (1)
4,560
 5,146
 (82) (41)
(1) Amounts include hedging adjustment gains related to discontinued hedging relationships of $11 million at December 31, 2017.
Presented in the table below is the fair value of derivatives on a gross basis segregated between those derivatives that are designated as hedging instruments and those that are not designated as hedging instruments as of December 31:
   2015 2014
   
Fair Value of
Derivative
 
U.S. Dollar
Notional
 
Fair Value of
Derivative
 
U.S. Dollar
Notional
 Balance Sheet Caption Asset Liability Asset Liability 
Derivatives Designated as Hedging Instruments             
Interest rate swap contracts (noncurrent)Other assets $42
 $
 $2,700
 $19
 $
 $1,950
Interest rate swap contracts (current)Accrued and other current liabilities 
 1
 1,000
 
 
 
Interest rate swap contracts (noncurrent)Other noncurrent liabilities 
 23
 3,500
 
 15
 2,000
Foreign exchange contracts (current)Other current assets 579
 
 4,171
 772
 
 5,513
Foreign exchange contracts (noncurrent)Other assets 386
 
 4,136
 691
 
 6,253
Foreign exchange contracts (current)Accrued and other current liabilities 
 1
 77
 
 
 
   $1,007
 $25
 $15,584
 $1,482
 $15
 $15,716
Derivatives Not Designated as Hedging Instruments             
Foreign exchange contracts (current)Other current assets $212
 $
 $8,783
 $365
 $
 $6,966
Foreign exchange contracts (noncurrent)Other assets 18
 
 179
 
 
 
Foreign exchange contracts (current)Accrued and other current liabilities 
 37
 2,508
 
 88
 3,386
Foreign exchange contracts (noncurrent)Other noncurrent liabilities 
 1
 6
 
 
 
   $230
 $38
 $11,476
 $365
 $88
 $10,352
   $1,237
 $63
 $27,060
 $1,847
 $103
 $26,068
   2018 2017
   
Fair Value of
Derivative
 
U.S. Dollar
Notional
 
Fair Value of
Derivative
 
U.S. Dollar
Notional
 Balance Sheet Caption Asset Liability Asset Liability 
Derivatives Designated as Hedging Instruments             
Interest rate swap contractsOther assets $
 $
 $
 $2
 $
 $550
Interest rate swap contractsAccrued and other current liabilities 
 
 
 
 3
 1,000
Interest rate swap contractsOther noncurrent liabilities 
 81
 4,650
 
 52
 4,650
Foreign exchange contractsOther current assets 263
 
 6,222
 51
 
 4,216
Foreign exchange contractsOther assets 75
 
 2,655
 38
 
 1,936
Foreign exchange contractsAccrued and other current liabilities 
 7
 774
 
 71
 2,014
Foreign exchange contractsOther noncurrent liabilities 
 1
 89
 
 1
 20
   $338

$89

$14,390

$91

$127

$14,386
Derivatives Not Designated as Hedging Instruments             
Foreign exchange contractsOther current assets $116
 $
 $5,430
 $39
 $
 $3,778
Foreign exchange contractsAccrued and other current liabilities 
 71
 9,922
 
 90
 7,431
   $116
 $71
 $15,352
 $39
 $90
 $11,209
   $454
 $160
 $29,742
 $130
 $217
 $25,595

94


As noted above, the Company records its derivatives on a gross basis in the Consolidated Balance Sheet. The Company has master netting agreements with several of its financial institution counterparties (see Concentrations of Credit Risk below). The following table provides information on the Company’s derivative positions subject to these master netting arrangements as if they were presented on a net basis, allowing for the right of offset by counterparty and cash collateral exchanged per the master agreements and related credit support annexes at December 31:
2015 20142018 2017
Asset Liability Asset LiabilityAsset Liability Asset Liability
Gross amounts recognized in the consolidated balance sheet$1,237
 $63
 $1,847
 $103
$454
 $160
 $130
 $217
Gross amount subject to offset in master netting arrangements not offset in the consolidated balance sheet(59) (59) (97) (97)(121) (121) (94) (94)
Cash collateral (received) posted(862) 
 (1,410) 
Cash collateral received(107) 
 (3) 
Net amounts$316
 $4
 $340
 $6
$226
 $39
 $33
 $123

The table below provides information onregarding the location and amount of pretax gain or loss amounts for(gains) losses of derivatives that are: (i) designated in a fair value hedging relationship, (ii) designated in a foreign currencyor cash flow hedging relationship, (iii) designated in a foreign currency net investment hedging relationship and (iv) not designated in a hedging relationship:
relationships:
Years Ended December 312015 2014 2013
Derivatives designated in a fair value hedging relationship     
Interest rate swap contracts     
Amount of (gain) loss recognized in Other (income) expense, net on derivatives (1)
$(14) $(17) $12
Amount of loss (gain) recognized in Other (income) expense, net on hedged item (1)
7
 14
 (14)
Derivatives designated in foreign currency cash flow hedging relationships     
Foreign exchange contracts     
Amount of (gain) loss reclassified from AOCI to Sales
(724) (143) 45
Amount of gain recognized in OCI on derivatives
(526) (775) (306)
 Derivatives designated in foreign currency net investment hedging relationships     
Foreign exchange contracts     
Amount of gain recognized in Other (income) expense, net on derivatives (2)
(4) (6) (10)
Amount of gain recognized in OCI on derivatives
(10) (192) (363)
Derivatives not designated in a hedging relationship     
Foreign exchange contracts     
Amount of (gain) loss recognized in Other (income) expense, net on derivatives (3)
(461) (516) 183
Amount of (gain) loss recognized in Sales 
(1) 15
 8
 Sales 
Other (income) expense, net (1)
 Other comprehensive income (loss)
Years Ended December 312018 2017 2016 2018 2017 2016 2018 2017 2016
Financial Statement Line Items in which Effects of Fair Value or Cash Flow Hedges are Recorded$42,294
 $40,122
 $39,807
 $(402) (500) 189
 $(361) $316
 $(1,078)
(Gain) loss on fair value hedging relationships                 
Interest rate swap contracts                 
Hedged items
 
 
 (27) (48) (29) 
 
 
Derivatives designated as hedging instruments
 
 
 50
 12
 (35) 
 
 
Impact of cash flow hedging relationships                 
Foreign exchange contracts                 
Amount of gain (loss) recognized in OCI on derivatives

 
 
 
 
 
 228
 (562) 210
(Decrease) increase in Sales as a result of AOCI reclassifications
(160) 138
 311
 
 
 
 160
 (138) (311)
(1)
(1) Interest expense is a component of Other (income) expense, net.
The table below provides information regarding the income statement effects of derivatives not designated as hedging instruments:
    Amount of Derivative Pretax (Gain) Loss Recognized in Income
Years Ended December 31 Income Statement Caption 2018 2017 2016
Derivatives Not Designated as Hedging Instruments        
Foreign exchange contracts (1)
 Other (income) expense, net $(260) $110
 $132
Foreign exchange contracts (2)
 Sales (8) (3) 
(1) These derivative contracts mitigate changes in the value of remeasured foreign currency denominated monetary assets and liabilities attributable to changes in foreign currency exchange rates.
(2) These derivative contracts serve as economic hedges of forecasted transactions.
There was $7 million, $3 million and $2 million of ineffectiveness on the hedge during 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively.
(2)
There was no ineffectiveness on the hedge. Represents the amount excluded from hedge effectiveness testing.
(3)
These derivative contracts mitigate changes in the value of remeasured foreign currency denominated monetary assets and liabilities attributable to changes in foreign currency exchange rates.
At December 31, 2015,2018, the Company estimates $429186 million of pretax net unrealized gains on derivatives maturing within the next 12 months that hedge foreign currency denominated sales over that same period will be reclassified from AOCI to Sales. The amount ultimately reclassified to Sales may differ as foreign exchange rates change. Realized gains and losses are ultimately determined by actual exchange rates at maturity.

95


Investments in Debt and Equity Securities
Information on available-for-sale investments in debt and equity securities at December 31 is as follows:
 
2015 20142018 2017
Fair
Value
 
Amortized
Cost
 Gross Unrealized 
Fair
Value
 
Amortized
Cost
 Gross Unrealized
Fair
Value
 
Amortized
Cost
 Gross Unrealized 
Fair
Value
 
Amortized
Cost
 Gross Unrealized
Gains Losses Gains LossesGains Losses Gains Losses
Corporate notes and bonds$10,259
 $10,299
 $7
 $(47) $10,107
 $10,102
 $22
 $(17)$4,920
 $4,985
 $3
 $(68) $9,806
 $9,837
 $9
 $(40)
Asset-backed securities1,275
 1,285
 1
 (11) 1,542
 1,548
 1
 (7)
U.S. government and agency securities892
 895
 2
 (5) 2,042
 2,059
 
 (17)
Foreign government bonds166
 167
 
 (1) 733
 739
 
 (6)
Mortgage-backed securities8
 8
 
 
 626
 634
 1
 (9)
Commercial paper2,977
 2,977
 
 
 6,970
 6,970
 
 

 
 
 
 159
 159
 
 
U.S. government and agency securities1,761
 1,767
 
 (6) 1,774
 1,775
 1
 (2)
Asset-backed securities1,284
 1,290
 
 (6) 1,460
 1,462
 1
 (3)
Mortgage-backed securities694
 697
 1
 (4) 602
 604
 2
 (4)
Foreign government bonds607
 586
 22
 (1) 385
 385
 
 
Equity securities534
 409
 125
 
 730
 557
 173
 
$18,116
 $18,025
 $155
 $(64) $22,028
 $21,855
 $199
 $(26)
Total debt securities7,261

7,340

6

(85)
14,908

14,976

11

(79)
Publicly traded equity securities (1)
456
       275
 265
 16
 (6)
Total debt and publicly traded equity securities$7,717










$15,183

$15,241

$27

$(85)
(1) Pursuant to the adoption of ASU 2016-01 (see Note 2), beginning on January 1, 2018, changes in the fair value of publicly traded equity securities are recognized in net income. Unrealized net losses of $35 million were recognized in Other (income) expense, net during 2018 on equity securities still held at December 31, 2018.
At December 31, 2018, the Company also had $568 million of equity investments without readily determinable fair values included in Other Assets. During 2018, the Company recognized unrealized gains of $167 million in Other (income) expense, net on certain of these equity investments based on favorable observable price changes from transactions involving similar investments of the same investee. In addition, during 2018, the Company recognized unrealized losses of $26 million in Other (income) expense, net related to certain of these investments based on unfavorable observable price changes.
Available-for-sale debt securities included in Short-term investments totaled $4.8 billion894 million at December 31, 2015.2018. Of the remaining debt securities, $11.85.8 billion mature within five years. At December 31, 20152018 and 2014,2017, there were no debt securities pledged as collateral.
Fair Value Measurements
Fair value is defined as the exchange price that would be received for an asset or paid to transfer a liability (an exit price) in the principal or most advantageous market for the asset or liability in an orderly transaction between market participants on the measurement date. The Company uses a fair value hierarchy which maximizes the use of observable inputs and minimizes the use of unobservable inputs when measuring fair value. There are three levels of inputs used to measure fair value with Level 1 having the highest priority and Level 3 having the lowest:
Level 1 — Quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities.
Level 2 — Observable inputs other than Level 1 prices, such as quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities, or other inputs that are observable or can be corroborated by observable market data for substantially the full term of the assets or liabilities.
Level 3 — Unobservable inputs that are supported by little or no market activity. Level 3 assets or liabilities are those whose values are determined using pricing models, discounted cash flow methodologies, or similar techniques with significant unobservable inputs, as well as assets or liabilities for which the determination of fair value requires significant judgment or estimation.
If the inputs used to measure the financial assets and liabilities fall within more than one level described above, the categorization is based on the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement of the instrument.


96


Financial Assets and Liabilities Measured at Fair Value on a Recurring Basis
Financial assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis at December 31 are summarized below:
Fair Value Measurements Using Fair Value Measurements UsingFair Value Measurements Using Fair Value Measurements Using
Quoted Prices
In Active
Markets for
Identical Assets
(Level 1)
 
Significant
Other
Observable
Inputs
(Level 2)
 
Significant
Unobservable
Inputs
(Level 3)
 Total 
Quoted Prices
In Active
Markets for
Identical Assets
(Level 1)
 
Significant
Other
Observable
Inputs
(Level 2)
 
Significant
Unobservable
Inputs
(Level 3)
 Total
Quoted Prices
In Active
Markets for
Identical Assets
(Level 1)
 
Significant
Other
Observable
Inputs
(Level 2)
 
Significant
Unobservable
Inputs
(Level 3)
 Total 
Quoted Prices
In Active
Markets for
Identical Assets
(Level 1)
 
Significant
Other
Observable
Inputs
(Level 2)
 
Significant
Unobservable
Inputs
(Level 3)
 Total
2015 20142018 2017
Assets                              
Investments                              
Corporate notes and bonds$
 $10,259
 $
 $10,259
 $
 $10,107
 $
 $10,107
$
 $4,835
 $
 $4,835
 $
 $9,678
 $
 $9,678
Asset-backed securities (1)

 1,253
 
 1,253
 
 1,476
 
 1,476
U.S. government and agency securities
 731
 
 731
 68
 1,767
 
 1,835
Foreign government bonds
 166
 
 166
 
 732
 
 732
Mortgage-backed securities
 
 
 
 
 547
 
 547
Commercial paper
 2,977
 
 2,977
 
 6,970
 
 6,970

 
 
 
 
 159
 
 159
U.S. government and agency securities
 1,761
 
 1,761
 
 1,774
 
 1,774
Asset-backed securities (1)

 1,284
 
 1,284
 
 1,460
 
 1,460
Mortgage-backed securities (1)

 694
 
 694
 
 602
 
 602
Foreign government bonds
 607
 
 607
 
 385
 
 385
Equity securities360
 
 
 360
 495
 
 
 495
Publicly traded equity securities147
 
 
 147
 104
 
 
 104
360
 17,582
 
 17,942
 495
 21,298
 
 21,793
147
 6,985
 
 7,132
 172
 14,359
 
 14,531
Other assets(2)                              
Securities held for employee compensation155
 19
 
 174
 181
 54
 
 235
Derivative assets (2)
               
U.S. government and agency securities55
 106
 
 161
 
 207
 
 207
Corporate notes and bonds
 85
 
 85
 
 128
 
 128
Asset-backed securities (1)

 22
 
 22
 
 66
 
 66
Mortgage-backed securities
 8
 
 8
 
 79
 
 79
Foreign government bonds
 
 
 
 
 1
 
 1
Publicly traded equity securities309
 
 
 309
 171
 
 
 171
364

221



585

171

481



652
Derivative assets (3)
               
Forward exchange contracts
 241
 
 241
 
 48
 
 48
Purchased currency options
 1,041
 
 1,041
 
 1,252
 
 1,252

 213
 
 213
 
 80
 
 80
Forward exchange contracts
 154
 
 154
 
 576
 
 576
Interest rate swaps
 42
 
 42
 
 19
 
 19

 
 
 
 
 2
 
 2

 1,237
 
 1,237
 
 1,847
 
 1,847


454



454



130



130
Total assets$515
 $18,838
 $
 $19,353
 $676
 $23,199
 $
 $23,875
$511

$7,660

$

$8,171

$343

$14,970

$

$15,313
Liabilities                              
Other liabilities                              
Contingent consideration$
 $
 $590
 $590
 $
 $
 $428
 $428
$
 $
 $788
 $788
 $
 $
 $935
 $935
Derivative liabilities (2)
               
Derivative liabilities (3)
               
Interest rate swaps
 81
 
 81
 
 55
 
 55
Forward exchange contracts
 38
 
 38
 
 46
 
 46

 74
 
 74
 
 162
 
 162
Written currency options
 1
 
 1
 
 42
 
 42

 5
 
 5
 
 
 
 
Interest rate swaps
 24
 
 24
 
 15
 
 15

 63
 
 63
 
 103
 
 103


160



160



217



217
Total liabilities$
 $63
 $590
 $653
 $
 $103
 $428
 $531
$

$160

$788

$948

$

$217

$935

$1,152
(1) 
Primarily all of the asset-backed securities are highly-rated (Standard & Poor’s rating of AAA and Moody’s Investors Service rating of Aaa), secured primarily by auto loan, credit card autoand student loan and home equity receivables, with weighted-average lives of primarily 5 years or less. Mortgage-backed securities represent AAA-rated securities issued or unconditionally guaranteed as to payment of principal and interest by U.S. government agencies.
(2)
Investments included in other assets are restricted as to use, primarily for the payment of benefits under employee benefit plans.
(3) 
The fair value determination of derivatives includes the impact of the credit risk of counterparties to the derivatives and the Company’s own credit risk, the effects of which were not significant.
There were no transfers between Level 1 and Level 2 during 2015.2018. As of December 31, 2015,2018, Cash and cash equivalents of $8.58.0 billion includedinclude $7.77.2 billion of cash equivalents (considered(which would be considered Level 2 in the fair value hierarchy).

97


Contingent Consideration
Summarized information about the changes in liabilities for contingent consideration is as follows:
2015 20142018 2017
Fair value January 1$428
 $69
$935
 $891
Changes in fair value (1)
(16) 316
Changes in estimated fair value (1)
89
 141
Additions228
 43
8
 3
Payments(50) 
(244) (100)
Fair value December 31(2)$590
 $428
$788
 $935
(1) Recorded in Research and development expenses, Cost of salesand Materials and productionOther (income) expense, net costs..Includes cumulative translation adjustments.
During 2015,(2) Balance at December 31, 2018 includes $89 million recorded as a current liability for amounts expected to be paid within the Company recognizednext 12 months.
The changes in the estimated fair value of liabilities for contingent consideration in 2018 were largely attributable to increases in the liabilities recorded in connection with the termination of $123the SPMSD joint venture in 2016 (see Note 9), partially offset by the reversal of a liability related to the discontinuation of a program obtained in connection with the acquisition of SmartCells (see Note 8). The changes in the estimated fair value of liabilities for contingent consideration in 2017 primarily relate to increases in the liabilities recorded in connection with the termination of the SPMSD joint venture and the clinical progression of a program related to the Afferent acquisition. The payments of contingent consideration in 2018 include $175 million related to the acquisitionachievement of Cubist and $105 million related toa clinical milestone in connection with the acquisition of cCAMAfferent (see Note 4)3). In addition,The remaining payments in 2015,2018 relate to liabilities recorded in connection with the Company paid $50 milliontermination of the SPMSD joint venture. The payments of contingent consideration relatedin 2017 relate to the first commercial sale of Zerbaxa in the United States. During 2014, the fair valueachievement of a liability for contingent consideration related to an acquisition that occurredclinical milestone in 2010 increased by $316 million resulting from the progression of the program from preclinical to Phase 1. The increase resulted from a higher fair value of future regulatory milestone and royalty payments due to an increased probability of success of the program given its progression into Phase 1. In addition, during 2014, the Company recognized a liability of $43 million for contingent consideration related toconnection with the acquisition of OncoEthix in 2014IOmet (see Note 4)3).

Other Fair Value Measurements
Some of the Company’s financial instruments, such as cash and cash equivalents, receivables and payables, are reflected in the balance sheet at carrying value, which approximates fair value due to their short-term nature.
The estimated fair value of loans payable and long-term debt (including current portion) at December 31, 2015,2018, was $27.025.6 billion compared with a carrying value of $26.5$25.1 billion and at December 31, 2014,2017, was $22.525.6 billion compared with a carrying value of $21.4$24.4 billion. Fair value was estimated using recent observable market prices and would be considered Level 2 in the fair value hierarchy.

Concentrations of Credit Risk
On an ongoing basis, the Company monitors concentrations of credit risk associated with corporate and government issuers of securities and financial institutions with which it conducts business. Credit exposure limits are established to limit a concentration with any single issuer or institution. Cash and investments are placed in instruments that meet high credit quality standards, as specified in the Company’s investment policy guidelines.
The majority of the Company’s accounts receivable arise from product sales in the United States and Europe and are primarily due from drug wholesalers and retailers, hospitals, government agencies, managed health care providers and pharmacy benefit managers. The Company monitors the financial performance and creditworthiness of its customers so that it can properly assess and respond to changes in their credit profile. The Company also continues to monitor global economic conditions, including the volatility associated with international sovereign economies, and associated impacts on the financial markets and its business, taking into consideration global economic conditions and the ongoing sovereign debt issues in certain European countries. At December 31, 2015 and 2014, Other assets included $10 million and $80 million, respectively, of accounts receivable not expected to be collected within one year. As of December 31, 2015, the Company’s total net accounts receivable outstanding for more than one year were approximately $125 million. The Company does not expect to have write-offs or adjustments to accounts receivable which would have a material adverse effect on its financial position, liquidity or results of operations.business. 
The Company’s customers with the largest accounts receivable balances are: McKesson Corporation, AmerisourceBergen Corporation and Cardinal Health, Inc., McKesson Corporation, Zuellig Pharma Ltd. (Asia Pacific), and AAH Pharmaceuticals Ltd (UK) which represented, in aggregate, approximately one-third40% of total accounts receivable at December 31, 2015.2018. The Company monitors the creditworthiness of its customers to which it grants credit terms in the normal course of business. Bad debts have been minimal. The Company does not normally require collateral or other security to support credit sales.

98

Table of Contents

Derivative financial instruments are executed under International Swaps and Derivatives Association master agreements. The master agreements with several of the Company’s financial institution counterparties also include credit support annexes. These annexes contain provisions that require collateral to be exchanged depending on the value of the derivative assets and liabilities, the Company’s credit rating, and the credit rating of the counterparty. As of December 31, 2015 and 2014,Cash collateral received by the Company had received cash collateral offrom various counterparties was $862107 million and $1.4 billion3 million, respectively, from various counterparties at December 31, 2018

and the2017, respectively. The obligation to return such collateral is recorded in Accrued and other current liabilities. The Company had not advanced anyNo cash collateral was advanced by the Company to counterparties as of December 31, 20152018 or 2014.2017.
6.7.    Inventories
Inventories at December 31 consisted of:
2015 20142018 2017
Finished goods$1,343
 $1,588
$1,658
 $1,334
Raw materials and work in process4,374
 5,141
5,004
 4,703
Supplies168
 197
194
 201
Total (approximates current cost)5,885
 6,926
6,856
 6,238
Increase to LIFO costs384
 309
1
 45
$6,269
 $7,235
$6,857
 $6,283
Recognized as:      
Inventories$4,700
 $5,571
$5,440
 $5,096
Other assets1,569
 1,664
1,417
 1,187
Inventories valued under the LIFO method comprised approximately $2.42.5 billion and $2.62.2 billion of inventories at December 31, 20152018 and 20142017, respectively. Amounts recognized as Other assets are comprised almost entirely of raw materials and work in process inventories. At December 31, 20152018 and 20142017, these amounts included $1.51.4 billion and $1.61.1 billion, respectively, of inventories not expected to be sold within one year. In addition, these amounts included $637 million and $74$80 million at December 31, 20152018 and 20142017, respectively, of inventories produced in preparation for product launches.
7.8.    Goodwill and Other Intangibles
The following table summarizes goodwill activity by segment:
 
Pharmaceutical
 All Other
 Total
Pharmaceutical Animal Health All Other Total
Balance January 1, 2014$10,065
 $2,236
 $12,301
Balance January 1, 2017$16,075
 $1,708
 $379
 $18,162
Acquisitions1,369
 38
 1,407

 177
 
 177
Divestitures(200) (362) (562)
Impairments(93) 
 (93)
 
 (38) (38)
Other (1)
(33) (28) (61)(9) (8) 
 (17)
Balance December 31, 201411,108
 1,884
 12,992
Balance December 31, 2017 (2)
16,066
 1,877
 341
 18,284
Acquisitions4,684
 29
 4,713

 17
 24
 41
Divestitures(18) 
 (18)
Impairments
 (47) (47)
 
 (144) (144)
Other (1)
88
 (5) 83
96
 (24) 
 72
Balance December 31, 2015 (2)
$15,862
 $1,861
 $17,723
Balance December 31, 2018 (2)
$16,162
 $1,870
 $221
 $18,253
(1) Other includes cumulative translation adjustments on goodwill balances and certain other adjustments.
(2) Accumulated goodwill impairment losses at December 31, 20152018 and 20142017 were $140$369 million and $93$225 million, respectively.
In 2015, theThe additions to goodwill within the Animal Health segment in the Pharmaceutical segment resulted2017 primarily fromrelate to the acquisition of CubistVallée (see Note 4). The reductions to Pharmaceutical segment goodwill resulted from the divestiture of the Company’s remaining ophthalmics business in international markets (see Note 4)3). The impairments of goodwill within other non-reportable segments relates primarilyin 2018 and 2017 relate to certain businesses within the Healthcare Services segment.

99


In 2014, the additions to goodwill in the Pharmaceutical segment primarily resulted from the acquisition of Idenix and the reductions resulted both from the sale of MCC and the divestiture of certain ophthalmic products in several international markets (see Note 4). The reductions to goodwill in other segments during 2014 resulted from the termination of the Company’s relationship with AstraZeneca LP (AZLP) (see Note 8) and the divestiture of MCC. Also, during the third quarter of 2014, the Company recorded an impairment charge on the goodwill related to the Supera joint venture as a result of changes in cash flow assumptions for certain compounds and currently marketed products.
Other intangibles at December 31 consisted of:
2015 20142018 2017
Gross
Carrying
Amount
 
Accumulated
Amortization
 Net 
Gross
Carrying
Amount
 
Accumulated
Amortization
 Net
Gross
Carrying
Amount
 
Accumulated
Amortization
 Net 
Gross
Carrying
Amount
 
Accumulated
Amortization
 Net
Products and product rights$45,949
 $28,514
 $17,435
 $38,714
 $23,830
 $14,884
$46,615
 $37,585
 $9,030
 $46,693
 $34,950
 $11,743
In-process research and development4,226
 
 4,226
 4,345
 
 4,345
IPR&D1,064
 
 1,064
 1,194
 
 1,194
Tradenames198
 79
 119
 198
 71
 127
209
 107
 102
 209
 97
 112
Other1,418
 596
 822
 1,527
 497
 1,030
2,403
 1,168
 1,235
 2,035
 901
 1,134
$51,791
 $29,189
 $22,602
 $44,784
 $24,398
 $20,386
$50,291
 $38,860
 $11,431
 $50,131
 $35,948
 $14,183
Acquired intangibles include products and product rights, tradenames and patents, which are initially recorded at fair value, assigned an estimated useful life, and are amortized primarily on a straight-line basis over their estimated useful lives. The increase in intangible assets for products and product rights in 2015 primarily relates to the acquisition of Cubist (see Note 4). Some of the Company’s more significant acquired intangibles related to marketed products (included in productproducts and product rights above) at December 31, 20152018 include Zerbaxa, $3.5 billion$2.7 billion;; Zetia, $2.4 billion; Vytorin, $1.5 billion; Sivextro, $1.0 billion;$833 million; Implanon/Nexplanon $645$470 million; Dificid, $644$395 million; Gardasil/Gardasil 9, $384 million; NuvaRingBridion, $502 million; $275 millionNasonex; and Simponi, $431 million and Cubicin, $418$194 million. During 2014, theThe Company recognizedhas an intangible asset related to Adempas as a result of the formation of a collaboration with Bayer (see Note 4) that had a carrying value of $706 million$1.0 billion at December 31, 20152018 reflected in “Other” in the table above.
During 2015, 20142017 and 2013,2016, the Company recorded impairment charges related to marketed products and other intangibles of $45$58 million $1.1 billion and $486$347 million, respectively, within Material and productionCost of sales costs. The charges in 2015 primarily relate to. During 2017, the Company recorded an intangible asset impairment charge of customer relationship and tradename intangibles for certain businesses within in the Healthcare Services segment. Of the amount recorded in 2014, $793$47 million related to PegIntron,$244 million related to Victrelis and $35 million related to RebetolIntron A, alla treatment for certain types of whichcancers. Sales of Intron A are products marketed by the Company for the treatment of chronic HCV infection. During 2014, sales of these products werebeing adversely affected by loss of market share or patient treatment delays in markets anticipating the availability of newernew therapeutic options. In 2014, these trends accelerated2017, sales of Intron A in the United States eroded more rapidly than previously anticipated by the Company. In addition, developmentsCompany, which led to changes in the competitive HCV treatment market led to market share losses that were greater than the Company had predicted. These factors caused changes in cash flow projectionsassumptions for PegIntronIntron A. , Victrelis and Rebetol that indicated the intangible asset values were not recoverable on an undiscounted cash flows basis. The Company utilized market participant assumptions to determine its best estimate of the fair values of the intangible assets related to PegIntron, Victrelis and Rebetol that, when compared with their related carrying values, resulted in the impairment charges noted above. Of the impairment charges recorded in 2013, $330 million resulted from lower cash flow projections for Saphris/Sycrest, due to reduced expectations in international markets and in the United States. These revisions to cash flows indicated that the Saphris/SycrestIntron A intangible asset value was not recoverable on an undiscounted cash flows basis. The Company utilized market participant assumptions and considered several different scenarios to determine its best estimate of the fair value of the intangible asset related to Saphris/Sycrest that, when compared with its related carrying value, resulted in the impairment charge noted above. The remaining $156 million of impairment charges in 2013 resulted from lower cash flow projections for Rebetol due to reduced expectations in Japan and Europe. These revisions to cash flows indicated that the Rebetol intangible asset value was notfully recoverable on an undiscounted cash flows basis. The Company utilized market participant assumptions to determine its best estimate of the fair value of the intangible asset related to RebetolIntron A that, when compared with its related carrying value, resulted in the impairment charge noted above. The remaining charges in 2017 relate to the impairment of customer relationship, tradename and developed technology intangibles for certain businesses in the Healthcare Services segment. In 2016, the Company lowered its cash flow projections for Zontivity, a product for the reduction of thrombotic cardiovascular events in patients with a history of myocardial infarction or with peripheral arterial disease, following several business decisions that reduced sales expectations for Zontivity in the United States and Europe. The Company utilized market participant assumptions and considered several different scenarios to determine the fair value of the intangible asset related to Zontivity that, when compared with its related carrying value, resulted in an impairment charge of $252 million. Also during 2016, the Company wrote-off $95 million that had been capitalized in connection with in-licensed products Grastek and Ragwitek, allergy immunotherapy tablets that, for business reasons, the Company returned to the licensor.
IPR&D that the Company acquires through business combinations represents the fair value assigned to incomplete research projects which, at the time of acquisition, have not reached technological feasibility. Amounts

100

Table of Contents

capitalized as IPR&D are accounted for as indefinite-lived intangible assets, subject to impairment testing until completion or abandonment of the projects. Upon successful completion of each project, the Company will make a separate determination as to the then useful life of the assetsasset and begin amortization. During 2015, 2014 and 2013, $280 million, $654 million and $346 million, respectively, of IPR&D was reclassified to products and product rights upon receipt of marketing approval in a major market.
During 2015,In 2018, the Company recorded $63$152 million of IPR&D impairment charges within Research and developmentexpenses. Of this amount, $50$139 million relates to the surotomycin clinicalwrite-off of the remaining intangible asset balance for a program obtained in connection with the SmartCells acquisition following a decision to terminate the program due to product development programissues. The Company previously recorded an impairment charge in 2016 for the other programs obtained in connection with the acquisition of Cubist. During 2015, the Company received unfavorable efficacy data from a clinical trial for surotomycin.SmartCells as described below. The evaluationdiscontinuation of this data, combined with an assessmentclinical development program resulted in a reversal of the commercial opportunityrelated liability for surotomycin, resulted in the discontinuationcontingent consideration of the program and the IPR&D impairment charge noted above. During 2014,$60 million (see Note 6).
In 2017, the Company recorded $49 million of IPR&D impairment charges primarily as a result of changes in cash flow assumptions for certain compounds obtained in connection with the Supera joint venture, as well as for the discontinuation of certain Animal Health programs. During 2013, the Company recorded $279$483 million of IPR&D impairment charges. Of this amount, $181$240 million resulted from a strategic decision to discontinue the development of the investigational combination regimens

MK-3682B (grazoprevir/ruzasvir/uprifosbuvir) and MK-3682C (ruzasvir/uprifosbuvir) for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. This decision was made based on a review of available Phase 2 efficacy data and in consideration of the evolving marketplace and the growing number of treatment options available for patients with chronic HCV infection, including Zepatier, which is marketed by the Company for the treatment of adult patients with chronic HCV infection. As a result of this decision, the Company recorded an IPR&D impairment charge to write-off the remaining intangible asset related to theuprifosbuvir. The Company had previously recorded an impairment charge for uprifosbuvir in 2016 as described below. The IPR&D impairment charges in 2017 also include a charge of $226 million to write-off of the intangible asset associated with preladenant as a resultrelated to verubecestat, an investigational small molecule inhibitor of the discontinuationbeta-site amyloid precursor protein cleaving enzyme 1 (BACE1), resulting from a decision in February 2018 to stop a Phase 3 study evaluating verubecestat in people with prodromal Alzheimer’s disease. The decision to stop the study followed a recommendation by the external Data Monitoring Committee (eDMC), which assessed overall benefit/risk during an interim safety analysis. The eDMC concluded that it was unlikely that positive benefit/risk could be established if the trial continued.
During 2016, the Company recorded $3.6 billion of IPR&D impairment charges. Of this amount, $2.9 billion related to the clinical development program for this compound. In addition,uprifosbuvir, a nucleotide prodrug that was being evaluated for the treatment of HCV. The Company recorded impairment charges resulting fromdetermined that changes in cash flow assumptions for certain compounds,to the product profile, as well as changes to Merck’s expectations for pricing and the market opportunity, taken together constituted a triggering event that required the Company to evaluate the uprifosbuvir intangible asset for impairment. Utilizing market participant assumptions, and considering different scenarios, the Company concluded that its best estimate of the fair value of the intangible asset related to uprifosbuvir was $240 million, resulting in the recognition of the impairment charge noted above. The IPR&D impairment charges in 2016 also included charges of $180 million and $143 million related to the discontinuation of programs obtained in connection with the acquisitions of cCAM Biotherapeutics Ltd. and OncoEthix, respectively, resulting from unfavorable efficacy data. An additional $72 million related to programs obtained in connection with the SmartCells acquisition following a decision to terminate the lead compound due to a lack of efficacy and to pursue a back-up compound which reduced projected future cash flows. The IPR&D impairment charges in 2016 also included $112 million related to an in-licensed program for house dust mite allergies that, for business reasons, was returned to the licensor. The remaining IPR&D impairment charges in 2016 primarily related to deprioritized pipeline programs that had previously been deprioritized and were subsequently deemed to have no alternative use during the period, including a $79 million impairment charge for an investigational candidate for contraception. The discontinuation or delay of certain of these clinical development programs resulted in the period.
Alla reduction of the related liabilities for contingent consideration.
The IPR&D projects that remain in development are subject to the inherent risks and uncertainties in drug development and it is possible that the Company will not be able to successfully develop and complete the IPR&D programs and profitably commercialize the underlying product candidates.
The Company may recognize additional non-cash impairment charges in the future related to other marketed products or pipeline programs and such charges could be material.
Aggregate amortization expense primarily recorded within Materials and productionCost of sales costs was $4.8$2.9 billion in 2015,2018, $4.23.2 billion in 20142017 and $4.83.8 billion in 2013.2016. The estimated aggregate amortization expense for each of the next five years is as follows: 2016,2019, $4.01.5 billion; 2017, $3.5 billion; 2018, $2.0 billion; 2019,2020, $1.2 billion; 2020,2021, $1.01.1 billion; 2022, $1.1 billion; 2023, $1.1 billion.
8.9.    Joint Ventures and Other Equity Method Affiliates
Equity income from affiliates reflectsSanofi Pasteur MSD
In 1994, Merck and Pasteur Mérieux Connaught (now Sanofi Pasteur S.A.) established an equally-owned joint venture (SPMSD) to market vaccines in Europe and to collaborate in the performancedevelopment of combination vaccines for distribution in Europe. Joint venture vaccine sales were $1.0 billion for 2016.

On December 31, 2016, Merck and Sanofi Pasteur (Sanofi) terminated SPMSD and ended their joint vaccines operations in Europe. Under the terms of the Company’s joint ventures and other equity method affiliates including Sanofi Pasteur MSD, certain investments funds,termination, Merck acquired Sanofi’s 50% interest in SPMSD in exchange for consideration of $657 million comprised of cash, as well as AZLP untilfuture royalties of 11.5% on net sales of all Merck products that were previously sold by the joint venture through December 31, 2024, which the Company determined had a fair value of $416 million on the date of termination. The Company accounted for this transaction as a step acquisition, which required that Merck remeasure its ownership interest (previously accounted for as an equity method investment) to fair value at the acquisition date. Merck in turn sold to Sanofi its intellectual property rights held by SPMSD in exchange for consideration of $596 million comprised of cash and future royalties of 11.5% on net sales of all Sanofi products that were previously sold by the joint venture through December 31, 2024, which the Company determined had a fair value of $302 million on the date of termination. Excluded from this arrangement are sales of Vaxelis (a jointly developed pediatric hexavalent combination vaccine that was approved by the European Commission in 2016 and by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in 2018). The European marketing rights for Vaxelis were transferred to a separate equally-owned joint venture between Sanofi and Merck.
The net impact of the termination of the Company’s relationship with AZLP on June 30, 2014SPMSD joint venture is as discussed below. Equity income from affiliates was $205 million in 2015, $257 million in 2014 and $404 million in 2013 and is includedfollows:
Products and product rights (8-year useful life)$936
Accounts receivable133
Income taxes payable(221)
Deferred income tax liabilities(147)
Other, net47
Net assets acquired748
Consideration payable to Sanofi, net(392)
Derecognition of Merck’s previously held equity investment in SPMSD(183)
Increase in net assets173
Merck’s share of restructuring costs related to the termination(77)
Net gain on termination of SPMSD joint venture (1)
$96
(1) Recorded in Other (income) expense, net (see Note 14).
InvestmentsThe estimated fair values of identifiable intangible assets related to products and product rights were determined using an income approach through which fair value is estimated based on market participant expectations of each asset’s projected net cash flows. The projected net cash flows were then discounted to present value utilizing a discount rate of 11.5%. Actual cash flows are likely to be different than those assumed. Of the amount recorded for products and product rights, $468 million related to Gardasil/Gardasil 9.
The fair value of liabilities for contingent consideration related to Merck’s future royalty payments to Sanofi of $416 million (reflected in affiliates accounted forthe consideration payable to Sanofi, net, in the table above) was determined at the acquisition date using unobservable inputs. These inputs include the equity method, includingestimated amount and timing of projected cash flows and a risk-adjusted discount rate of 8% used to present value the below joint ventures, totaled $702cash flows. Changes in the inputs could result in a different fair value measurement.
Based on an existing accounting policy election, Merck did not record the $302 million at December 31, 2015estimated fair value of contingent future royalties to be received from Sanofi on the sale of Sanofi products, but rather is recognizing such amounts as sales occur and $337the royalties are earned.
The Company incurred $24 million at December 31, 2014. These amounts are reported in Other assets. Amounts due fromof transaction costs related to the above joint venturestermination of SPMSD included in Other current assetsSelling, general and administrative were $34 million at December 31, 2015 and $45 million at December 31, 2014.expenses in 2016.
Pro forma financial information for this transaction has not been presented as the results are not significant when compared with the Company’s financial results.

AstraZeneca LP
In 1982, Merck entered into an agreement with Astra AB (Astra) to develop and market Astra products under a royalty-bearing license. In 1993, Merck’s total sales of Astra products reached a level that triggered the first step in the establishment of a joint venture business carried on by Astra Merck Inc. (AMI), in which Merck and Astra each owned a 50% share. This joint venture, formed in 1994, developed and marketed most of Astra’s new prescription medicines in the United States.
In 1998, Merck and Astra completed thea restructuring of the ownership and operations of the joint venture whereby Merck acquired Astra’s interest in AMI, renamed KBI Inc. (KBI), and contributed KBI’s operating assets to a new U.S. limited partnership, Astra Pharmaceuticals L.P. (the Partnership), in exchange for a 1% limited partner interest. Astra contributed the net assets of its wholly owned subsidiary, Astra USA, Inc., to the Partnership in exchange

101


for a 99% general partner interest. The Partnership, renamed AstraZeneca LP (AZLP) upon Astra’s 1999 merger with Zeneca Group Plc, became the exclusive distributor of the products for which KBI retained rights.
Merck earned revenue based on sales of KBI products and such revenue was $463 million in 2014 and $920 million in 2013 primarily relating to sales of Nexium, as well as Prilosec. In addition, Merck earned certain Partnership returns from AZLP of $192 million in 2014 and $352 million in 2013, which were recorded in equity income from affiliates.AZLP.
On June 30, 2014, AstraZeneca exercised its option to purchase Merck’s interest in KBI for $419 million in cash. Of this amount, $327 million reflects an estimate of the fair value of(and redeem Merck’s remaining interest in Nexium and Prilosec. ThisAZLP). A portion of the exercise price, which isremained subject to a true-up in 2018 based on actual sales of Nexium and Prilosec from closing in 2014 to June 2018, was deferred and is being recognized over timeas income as the contingency was eliminated as sales occurred. Once the deferred income amount was fully recognized, in 2016, the Company began recognizing income and a corresponding receivable for amounts that would be due to Merck from AstraZeneca based on the sales performance of Nexium and Prilosec subject to the true-up in June 2018. The Company recognized income of $99 million in 2018, $232 million in 2017, and $98 million in 2016 (including $5 million of remaining deferred income) in Other (income) expense, net as the contingency is eliminated as sales occur. During 2015 and 2014, $182 million and $140 million, respectively, of the deferred income was recognized bringing cumulative deferred income recognized through December 31, 2015related to $322 million. The remaining exercise price of $91 million primarily represents a multiple of ten times Merck’s average 1% annual profit allocation in the partnership for the three years prior to exercise. Merck recognized the $91 million as a gain in 2014 within Other (income) expense, net. As a result of AstraZeneca’s option exercise, the Company’s remaining interest in AZLP was redeemed. Accordingly,these amounts. In January 2019, the Company also recognized a non-cash gainreceived $424 million from AstraZeneca in settlement of approximately $650 million in 2014 within Other (income) expense, net resulting fromthese amounts, which concludes the retirement of $2.4 billion of KBI preferred stock (see Note 11),transactions related to the elimination of the Company’s $1.4 billion investment in AZLP and a $340 million reduction of goodwill. This transaction resulted in a net tax benefit of $517 million in 2014 primarily reflecting the reversal of deferred taxes on the AZLP investment balance.
As a result of AstraZeneca exercising its option, as of July 1, 2014, the Company no longer records equity income from AZLP and supply sales to AZLP have terminated.
Summarized financial information for AZLP is as follows:
Years Ended December��31
2014 (1)
 2013
Sales$2,205
 $4,611
Materials and production costs1,044
 2,222
Other expense, net604
 1,175
Income before taxes (2)
557
 1,214
(1) Includes results through the June 30, 2014 termination date.of Company’s relationship with AZLP.
(2) Merck’s partnership returns from AZLP were generally contractually determined as noted above and were not based on a percentage of income from AZLP, other than with respect to Merck’s 1% limited partnership interest.
Sanofi Pasteur MSD
In 1994, Merck and Pasteur Mérieux Connaught (now Sanofi Pasteur S.A.) established an equally-owned joint venture to market vaccines in Europe and to collaborate in the development of combination vaccines for distribution in Europe. Joint venture vaccine sales were $923 million for 2015, $1.1 billion for 2014 and $1.2 billion for 2013.
9.10.    Loans Payable, Long-Term Debt and Other Commitments
Loans payable at December 31, 20152018 included $2.3$5.1 billion of notes due in 2016, $10 million of short-term foreign borrowingscommercial paper and $226149 million of long-dated notes that are subject to repayment at the option of the holder.holders. Loans payable at December 31, 20142017 included $1.0$3.0 billion of notes due in 2015, $1.5 billion of commercial paper, $55 million of short-term foreign borrowings2018 and $14373 million of long-dated notes that are subject to repayment at the option of the holders. The weighted-average interest rate of commercial paper borrowings was 0.07%2.09% and 0.15%0.85% for the years ended December 31, 20152018 and 2014,2017, respectively.

102


Long-term debt at December 31 consisted of:
2015 20142018 2017
2.75% notes due 2025$2,496
 $
$2,490
 $2,488
3.70% notes due 20451,989
 
1,974
 1,973
2.80% notes due 20231,749
 1,749
1,745
 1,744
5.00% notes due 20191,285
 1,291
4.15% notes due 20431,247
 1,246
1,237
 1,237
1.85% notes due 20201,243
 
1,231
 1,232
2.35% notes due 20221,237
 
1,214
 1,220
1.125% euro-denominated notes due 20211,134
 1,185
3.875% notes due 20211,161
 1,150
1,132
 1,140
1.125% euro-denominated notes due 20211,096
 1,218
1.875% euro-denominated notes due 20261,090
 1,210
1,127
 1,178
2.40% notes due 20221,014
 1,000
983
 993
Floating-rate borrowing due 20181,000
 1,000
1.10% notes due 2018999
 999
1.30% notes due 2018987
 984
6.50% notes due 2033809
 812
726
 729
Floating-rate notes due 2020700
 
699
 699
6.55% notes due 2037596
 597
0.50% euro-denominated notes due 2024565
 591
1.375% euro-denominated notes due 2036561
 587
2.50% euro-denominated notes due 2034543
 603
560
 585
3.60% notes due 2042493
 493
490
 489
5.85% notes due 2039418
 418
6.55% notes due 2037414
 415
5.75% notes due 2036371
 371
338
 338
5.95% debentures due 2028356
 356
306
 306
5.85% notes due 2039270
 270
6.40% debentures due 2028326
 326
250
 250
Floating-rate notes due 2017300
 
6.30% debentures due 2026152
 152
135
 135
0.70% notes due 2016
 998
2.25% notes due 2016
 858
Floating-rate borrowing due 2016
 500
5.00% notes due 2019
 1,260
Other272
 368
225
 309
$23,929
 $18,699
$19,806
 $21,353
Other (as presented in the table above) includedincludes $225223 million and $309300 million at December 31, 20152018 and 2014,2017, respectively, of borrowings at variable rates that resulted in effective interest rates of zero2.27% and 1.42% for 20152018 and 2014. Other also included foreign borrowings of $43 million and $53 million at December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively, at varying rates up to 4.75% and 6.25%,2017, respectively.
With the exception of the 6.30% debentures due 2026, the notes listed in the table above are redeemable in whole or in part, at Merck’s option at any time, at varying redemption prices.
In February 2015, Merck issued $8.0December 2018, the Company exercised a make-whole provision on its $1.25 billion, aggregate principal amount of senior unsecured notes consisting of $300 million principal amount of floating rate5.00% notes due 2017, $700 million principal amount of floating rate notes due 2020, $1.25 billion principal amount of 1.85% notes due 2020, $1.25 billion aggregate principal amount of 2.35% notes due 2022, $2.5 billion aggregate principal amount of 2.75% notes due 20252019 and $2.0 billion aggregate principal amount of 3.70% notes due 2045. The Company used a portion of the net proceeds of the offering of $7.9 billion to repay commercial paper issued to substantially finance the Company’s acquisition of Cubist. The remaining net proceeds were used for general corporate purposes, including for repurchases of the Company’s common stock, and the repayment of outstanding commercial paper borrowings and debt maturities.
Also, in February 2015,repaid this debt. In November 2017, the Company redeemed $1.9 billion of legacy Cubist debt acquired in the acquisition (see Note 4).

103


In October 2014, the Company issued €2.5 billion principal amount of senior unsecured notes. The net proceeds of the offering of $3.1 billion were used in part to repay debt that was validly tendered in connection withlaunched tender offers launched by the Company for certain outstanding notes and debentures. The Company paid $2.5 billion$810 million in aggregate consideration (applicable purchase price together with accrued interest) to redeem $1.8 billion$585 million principal amount of debt. In November 2014, Merck redeemed an additional $2.0 billion principal amount of senior unsecured notes. The Company recorded a pretax loss of $628 million in 2014debt that was validly tendered in connection with these transactions.the tender offers and recognized a loss on extinguishment of debt of $191 million in 2017.
Effective as of November 3, 2009, the Company executed a full and unconditional guarantee of the then existing debt of its subsidiary Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. (MSD) and MSD executed a full and unconditional guarantee of the then existing debt of the Company (excluding commercial paper), including for payments of principal and interest. These guarantees do not extend to debt issued subsequent to that date.
Certain of the Company’s borrowings require that Merck comply with financial covenants including a requirement that the Total Debt to Capitalization Ratio (as defined in the applicable agreements) not exceed 60%. Atand, at December 31, 2015,2018, the Company was in compliance with these covenants.
The aggregate maturities of long-term debt for each of the next five years are as follows: 2016,2019, no maturities; 2020, $2.41.9 billion; 2017,2021, $317 million; 2018, $3.02.3 billion; 2019,2022, $1.32.2 billion; 2020,2023, $2.01.7 billion.

In August 2014, theThe Company terminated its existing credit facility and entered intohas a $6.0 billion, five-year credit facility that matures in August 2019.June 2023. The facility provides backup liquidity for the Company’s commercial paper borrowing facility and is to be used for general corporate purposes. The Company has not drawn funding from this facility.
Rental expense under operating leases, net of sublease income, was $303322 million in 2015,2018, $350327 million in 20142017 and $367292 million in 2013.2016. The minimum aggregate rental commitments under noncancellable leases are as follows: 2016, $213 million; 2017, $136 million; 2018, $114 million; 2019, $97188 million; 2020, $69198 million; 2021, $150 million; 2022, $134 million; 2023, $84 million and thereafter, $160243 million. The Company has no significant capital leases.
10.11.    Contingencies and Environmental Liabilities
The Company is involved in various claims and legal proceedings of a nature considered normal to its business, including product liability, intellectual property, and commercial litigation, as well as certain additional matters including governmental and environmental matters. In the opinion of the Company, it is unlikely that the resolution of these matters will be material to the Company’s financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
Given the nature of the litigation discussed below and the complexities involved in these matters, the Company is unable to reasonably estimate a possible loss or range of possible loss for such matters until the Company knows, among other factors, (i) what claims, if any, will survive dispositive motion practice, (ii) the extent of the claims, including the size of any potential class, particularly when damages are not specified or are indeterminate, (iii) how the discovery process will affect the litigation, (iv) the settlement posture of the other parties to the litigation and (v) any other factors that may have a material effect on the litigation.
The Company records accruals for contingencies when it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount can be reasonably estimated. These accruals are adjusted periodically as assessments change or additional information becomes available. For product liability claims, a portion of the overall accrual is actuarially determined and considers such factors as past experience, number of claims reported and estimates of claims incurred but not yet reported. Individually significant contingent losses are accrued when probable and reasonably estimable. Legal defense costs expected to be incurred in connection with a loss contingency are accrued when probable and reasonably estimable.
The Company’s decision to obtain insurance coverage is dependent on market conditions, including cost and availability, existing at the time such decisions are made. The Company has evaluated its risks and has determined that the cost of obtaining product liability insurance outweighs the likely benefits of the coverage that is available and, as such, has no insurance for most product liabilities effective August 1, 2004.


104


VioxxLitigation
Product Liability Lawsuits
As previously disclosed, Merck is a defendant in approximately 10 active federal and state lawsuits (Vioxx Product Liability Lawsuits) alleging personal injury as a result of the use of Vioxx. Most of these cases are coordinated in a multidistrict litigation in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana (Vioxx MDL) before Judge Eldon E. Fallon.
As previously disclosed, Merck is also a defendant in approximately 30 putative class action lawsuits alleging economic injury as a result of the purchase of Vioxx. All but one of those cases are in the Vioxx MDL. Merck has reached a resolution, approved by Judge Fallon, of these class actions in the Vioxx MDL. Under the settlement, Merck will pay up to $23 million to resolve all properly documented claims submitted by class members, approved attorneys’ fees and expenses, and approved settlement notice costs and certain other administrative expenses. The court entered an order approving the settlement in January 2014 and the claims review process was recently completed.
Merck is also a defendant in lawsuits brought by state Attorneys General of three states — Alaska, Montana and Utah. The lawsuits are pending in state courts. These actions allege that Merck misrepresented the safety of Vioxx and seek recovery for expenditures on Vioxx by government-funded health care programs, such as Medicaid, and/or penalties for alleged Consumer Fraud Act violations. Trial has been scheduled in the Montana case for September 12, 2016, and trial has been set in the Alaska case for January 9, 2017. Motions for judgment on the pleadings in the Alaska and Montana cases are currently pending, and a motion to dismiss was recently filed in the Utah case.

Shareholder Lawsuits
As previously disclosed, in addition to the Vioxx Product Liability Lawsuits, various putative class actions and individual lawsuits have been filed against Merck and certain former employees alleging that the defendants violated federal securities laws by making alleged material misstatements and omissions with respect to the cardiovascular safety of Vioxx (Vioxx Securities Lawsuits). The Vioxx Securities Lawsuits are coordinated in a multidistrict litigation in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey before Judge Stanley R. Chesler, and have been consolidated for all purposes. In August 2011, Judge Chesler granted in part and denied in part Merck’s motion to dismiss the Fifth Amended Class Action Complaint in the consolidated securities class action. Among other things, the court dismissed certain defendants from the case, and also dismissed claims based on statements made on or after the voluntary withdrawal of Vioxx on September 30, 2004. In October 2011, the remaining defendants answered the Fifth Amended Class Action Complaint. In April 2012, plaintiffs filed a motion for class certification for the period from May 21, 1999, through September 29, 2004, which the court granted in January 2013. In March 2013, plaintiffs filed a motion for leave to amend their complaint to add certain allegations to expand the class period. In May 2013, the court denied plaintiffs’ motion for leave to amend their complaint to expand the class period, but granted plaintiffs’ leave to amend their complaint to add certain allegations within the existing class period. In June 2013, plaintiffs filed their Sixth Amended Class Action Complaint (the Class Action). In July 2013, defendants answered the Class Action. Discovery has been completed and is now closed. On May 13, 2015, the court granted in part and denied in part defendants’ motions for summary judgment; the court granted judgment in defendants’ favor on five of the alleged misstatements, including all statements prior to March 27, 2000, but denied the motion with respect to the remaining statements. On January 15, 2016, the Company announced that it had reached an agreement with plaintiffs to settle the Class Action for $830 million, plus an additional amount for attorneys’ fees and expenses, in exchange for, among other things, a dismissal with prejudice of the Class Action and full releases of all claims against defendants. After available funds under certain insurance policies, Merck’s net cash payment for the settlement and fees will be approximately $680 million. The proposed settlement covers all claims relating to Vioxx by settlement class members who purchased Merck securities between May 21, 1999, and October 29, 2004. The settlement is not an admission of wrongdoing and, as part of the settlement agreement, defendants continue to deny the allegations. The proposed settlement, including any award of attorneys’ fees and expenses, is subject to final court approval. On February 8, 2016, the parties filed the stipulation of settlement, which the court preliminarily approved on February 11, 2016. The court has set a final approval hearing for June 28, 2016. The proposed settlement does not resolve the individual securities lawsuits discussed below.
As previously disclosed, 13 individual securities lawsuits filed by foreign and domestic institutional investors also are consolidated with the Vioxx Securities Lawsuits. The allegations in the individual securities lawsuits are substantially similar to the allegations in the Vioxx Securities Lawsuits. Discovery has been completed in those actions. The proposed settlement in the Class Action, discussed above, does not resolve the individual securities lawsuits,

105


although each individual plaintiff has the right, at its option, to join the settlement class at no additional cost to Merck. In light of the proposed settlement in the Class Action, the court adjourned the previously-scheduled trial date of March 1, 2016, for all cases in the consolidated action. The court has scheduled a conference on February 26, 2016, to discuss a pretrial schedule for any parties in the individual lawsuits for whom no settlement has been reached.

Insurance
As a result of the previously disclosed insurance arbitration, the Company will receive insurance proceeds of approximately $380 million in connection with the settlement of the Class Action. The Company also has Directors and Officers insurance coverage applicable to the Vioxx Securities Lawsuits with remaining stated upper limits of approximately $145 million. There are disputes with the insurers about the availability of some or all of the Company’s Directors and Officers insurance coverage for these claims. The amounts actually recovered under the Directors and Officers policies discussed in this paragraph may be less than the stated upper limits.

International Lawsuits
As previously disclosed, in addition to the lawsuits discussed above, Merck has been named as a defendant in litigation relating to Vioxx in Brazil and Europe (collectively, the Vioxx International Lawsuits). As previously disclosed, in January 2012, the Company entered into an agreement to resolve all claims related to Vioxx in Canada and, in April 2013, the Company paid approximately $21 million into a settlement fund. The agreement was approved by courts in Canada’s provinces and, during December 2015, the claims administrator finalized claimant eligibility determinations and the Company made a final payment of approximately $5 million into the settlement fund.

Reserves
In connection with the settlement of the Class Action, which remains subject to final court approval, the Company established a net reserve of $680 million in the fourth quarter of 2015. The Company believes that it has meritorious defenses to the remaining Vioxx Product Liability Lawsuits, Vioxx Securities Lawsuits and Vioxx International Lawsuits (collectively, the Remaining Vioxx Litigation) and will vigorously defend against them. In view of the inherent difficulty of predicting the outcome of litigation, particularly where there are many claimants and the claimants seek indeterminate damages, the Company is unable to predict the outcome of these matters and, at this time, cannot reasonably estimate the possible loss or range of loss with respect to the Remaining Vioxx Litigation. The Company has established a reserve with respect to certain Vioxx Product Liability Lawsuits. The Company also has an immaterial remaining reserve relating to the previously disclosed Vioxx investigation for the non-participating states with which litigation is continuing. The Company has established no other liability reserves with respect to the Remaining Vioxx Litigation.

Other Product Liability Litigation
Fosamax
As previously disclosed, Merck is a defendant in product liability lawsuits in the United States involving Fosamax (Fosamax Litigation). As of December 31, 2015,2018, approximately 4,6753,900 cases hadhave been filed and wereeither are pending or conditionally dismissed (as noted below) against Merck in either federal or state court, including one case which seeks class action certification, as well as damages and/or medical monitoring. In approximately 210court. Plaintiffs in the vast majority of these actions, plaintiffs allege, among other things, that they have suffered osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ), generally subsequent to invasive dental procedures, such as tooth extraction or dental implants and/or delayed healing, in association with the use of Fosamax; however, a large majority of those actions are subject to the settlement discussed below. In addition, plaintiffs in approximately 4,460 of these actionscases generally allege that they sustained femur fractures and/or other bone injuries (Femur Fractures) in association with the use of Fosamax.

Cases Alleging ONJ and/or Other Jaw Related Injuries
In August 2006, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) ordered that certain Fosamax product liability cases pending in federal courts nationwide should be transferred and consolidated into one multidistrict litigation (Fosamax ONJ MDL) for coordinated pre-trial proceedings.
In December 2013, Merck reached an agreement in principle with the Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee (PSC) in the Fosamax ONJ MDL to resolve pending ONJ cases not on appeal in the Fosamax ONJ MDL and in the state

106


courts for an aggregate amount of $27.7 million. Merck and the PSC subsequently formalized the terms of this agreement in a Master Settlement Agreement (ONJ Master Settlement Agreement) that was executed in April 2014. As a condition to the settlement, 100% of the state and federal ONJ plaintiffs had to agree to participate in the settlement plan or Merck could either terminate the ONJ Master Settlement Agreement, or waive the 100% participation requirement and agree to a lesser funding amount for the settlement fund. On July 14, 2014, Merck elected to proceed with the ONJ Master Settlement Agreement at a reduced funding level since the participation level was approximately 95%. Merck has fully funded the ONJ Master Settlement Agreement and the escrow agent under the agreement has begun making settlement payments to qualifying plaintiffs. Approximately 40 non-participants’ cases will remain once the settlement is complete. The ONJ Master Settlement Agreement has no effect on the cases alleging Femur Fractures discussed below.

Cases Alleging Femur Fractures
In March 2011, Merck submitted a Motion to Transfer to the JPMLJudicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) seeking to have all federal cases alleging Femur Fractures consolidated into one multidistrict litigation for coordinated pre-trial proceedings. The Motion to Transfer was granted in May 2011, and allAll federal cases involving allegations of Femur Fracture have been or will be transferred to a multidistrict litigation in the District of New Jersey (the Femur(Femur Fracture MDL). Judge Pisano presided over the Femur Fracture MDL until March 10, 2015, at which time the Femur Fracture MDL was reassigned from Judge Pisano to Judge Freda L. Wolfson following Judge Pisano’s retirement. In the only bellwether case tried to date in the Femur Fracture MDL, Glynn v. Merck, the jury returned a verdict in Merck’s favor. In addition, onin June 27, 2013, the Femur Fracture MDL court granted Merck’s motion for judgment as a matter of law in the Glynn case and held that the plaintiff’s failure to warn claim was preempted by federal law.
In August 2013, the Femur Fracture MDL court entered an order requiring plaintiffs in the Femur Fracture MDL to show cause why those cases asserting claims for a femur fracture injury that took place prior to September 14, 2010, should not be dismissed based on the court’s preemption decision in the Glynn case. Pursuant to the show cause order, onin March 26, 2014, the Femur Fracture MDL court dismissed with prejudice approximately 650 cases on preemption grounds. Plaintiffs in approximately 500515 of those cases are appealingappealed that decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.Circuit (Third Circuit). In June 2015,March 2017, the Third Circuit issued a decision reversing the Femur Fracture MDL court dismissed without prejudice another approximately 520 cases pending plaintiffs’ appeal of the

court’s preemption ruling toand remanding the Third Circuit.
On June 17, 2014, Judge Pisano granted Merck summary judgment in the Gaynorv. Merck case and found that Merck’s updates in January 2011appealed cases back to the Fosamax label regarding atypical femur fractures were adequate as a matter of law and that Merck adequately communicated those changes. The plaintiffs in Gaynor have appealed Judge Pisano’s decision to the Third Circuit. In August 2014, Merck filed a motion requesting that Judge Pisano enter a further order requiring all plaintiffs in the Femur Fracture MDL who claimcourt. Merck filed a petition for a writ of certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court in August 2017, seeking review of the Third Circuit’s decision. In December 2017, the Supreme Court invited the Solicitor General to file a brief in the case expressing the views of the United States, and in May 2018, the Solicitor General submitted a brief stating that the 2011 Fosamax label is inadequateThird Circuit’s decision was wrongly decided and recommended that the proximate cause of their alleged injuries to show cause why their cases should not be dismissed basedSupreme Court grant Merck’s cert petition. The Supreme Court granted Merck’s petition in June 2018, and an oral argument before the Supreme Court was held on January 7, 2019. The final decision on the Femur Fracture MDL court’s preemption decision and its ruling inis now pending before the Gaynor case. In November 2014, the court granted Merck’s motion and entered the requested show cause order.Supreme Court.
AsAccordingly, as of December 31, 2015, approximately 302018, nine cases were actively pending in the Femur Fracture MDL, excluding the 500and approximately 1,055 cases dismissed with prejudice on preemption grounds that are pending appeal and the 520 caseshave either been dismissed without prejudice that are alsoor administratively closed pending final resolution by the aforementioned appeal.Supreme Court of the appeal of the Femur Fracture MDL court’s preemption order.
As of December 31, 2015,2018, approximately 3,1002,555 cases alleging Femur Fractures have been filed in New Jersey state court and are pending before Judge Jessica MayerJames Hyland in Middlesex County. The parties selected an initial group of 30 cases to be reviewed through fact discovery. Two additional groups of 50 cases each to be reviewed through fact discovery were selected in November 2013 and March 2014, respectively. A further group of 25 cases to be reviewed through fact discovery was selected by Merck in July 2015.2015, and Merck has continued to select additional cases to be reviewed through fact discovery from 2016 to the present.
As of December 31, 2015,2018, approximately 305275 cases alleging Femur Fractures have been filed and are pending in California state court. A petition was filed seeking to coordinate allAll of the Femur Fracture cases filed in California state court have been coordinated before a single judge in Orange County, California. The petition was granted and Judge Thierry Colaw is currently presiding over the coordinated proceedings. In March 2014, the court directed that a group of 10 discovery pool cases be reviewed through fact discovery and subsequently scheduled the Galper v. Merck case, which plaintiffs’plaintiffs selected, as the first trial. The Galper trial began onin February 17, 2015 and the jury returned a verdict in Merck’s favor onin April 3, 2015, and plaintiff has appealed that verdict to the California appellate court. In April 2017, the California appellate court issued a decision affirming the lower court’s judgment in favor of Merck. The next Femur Fracture trial in California isthat was scheduled to be held onbegin in April 11, 2016 was stayed at plaintiffs’ request and is currently set to include several plaintiffs.a new trial date has not been set.

107

Table of Contents

Additionally, there are sixfour Femur Fracture cases pending in other state courts.
Discovery is ongoing in the Femur Fracture MDL and in state courts where Femur Fracture cases are pending and the Company intends to defend against these lawsuits.

Januvia/Janumet
As previously disclosed, Merck is a defendant in product liability lawsuits in the United States involving Januvia and/or Janumet. As of December 31, 2015,2018, Merck is aware of approximately 7851,290 product user claims have been served on Merckusers alleging generally that use of Januvia and/or Janumet caused the development of pancreatic cancer and other injuries. These complaints were
Most claims have been filed in several different state and federal courts.
Most of the claims were filed in a consolidated multidistrict litigation proceeding inbefore the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California called “In re Incretin-Based Therapies Products Liability Litigation” (MDL). The MDL includes federal lawsuits alleging pancreatic cancer due to useOutside of the following medicines: Januvia, Janumet, Byetta and Victoza,MDL, the latter two of which are products manufactured by other pharmaceutical companies. The majority of claims nothave been filed in the MDL were filed incoordinated proceedings before the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles (California State Court). There are 13 cases
In November 2015, the MDL and California State Court-in separate opinions-granted summary judgment to defendants on grounds of federal preemption.
Plaintiffs appealed in both forums. In November 2017, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit vacated the judgment and remanded for further discovery, which is ongoing. In November 2018, the California state appellate court reversed and remanded on similar grounds.
As of December 31, 2018, eight product users have claims pending against Merck in state courts other than California, including Illinois. In June 2017, the California State Court.
On November 9, 2015, the MDL grantedIllinois trial court denied Merck’s motion for summary judgment based on federal preemption. Merck appealed, and the grounds of preemption asIllinois appellate court affirmed in December 2018. Merck intends to all claims alleging injury due to pancreatic cancer. Based onappeal that ruling, on November 30, 2015, the MDL entered final judgment resulting in the dismissal of the pancreatic cancer claims against Merck relating to approximately 665 product users.
On November 16, 2015, the California State Court likewise granted summary judgment on preemption grounds as to claims alleging injury due to pancreatic cancer, which will result in the dismissal of the pancreatic cancer claims against Merck relating to approximately 350 product users.
Plaintiffs are appealing the MDL preemption ruling, and are expected to do likewise with respect to the California State Court ruling once that court enters final judgment.ruling.
In addition to the claims noted above, the Company has agreed as of December 31, 2015, to toll the statute of limitations for approximately 2050 additional claims. The Company intends to continue defending against these lawsuits.

NuvaRing
Vioxx
As previously disclosed, beginningMerck is a defendant in May 2007, a numberlawsuit brought by the Attorney General of product liability complaints were filed in various jurisdictions asserting claims againstUtah alleging that Merck misrepresented the Company and its subsidiaries relating tosafety of NuvaRingVioxx, a combined hormonal contraceptive vaginal ring.. The plaintiffs contended the Company, among other things, failed to adequately design and manufacture NuvaRing and failed to adequately warn of the alleged increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) posed by NuvaRing, and/or downplayed the risk of VTE. The plaintiffs sought damages for injuries allegedly sustained from their product use, including some alleged deaths, heart attacks and strokes. The majority of the cases werelawsuit is pending in a federal multidistrict litigation venuedUtah state court. Utah seeks damages and penalties under the Utah False Claims Act. A bench trial in Missouri.
Pursuant to a settlement agreement between Merck and negotiating plaintiffs’ counsel, which became effective as of June 4, 2014, Merck paid a lump total settlement of $100 million to resolve more than 95% of the cases filed and under retainer by counsel as of February 7, 2014. Plaintiffs in approximately 3,700 cases joined the settlement program. Each filed case is to be dismissed with prejudice once the settlement administration process is completed. Those dismissals began in the second quarter and continued on a rolling basis throughout 2015. The Company has certain insurance coverage available to it, whichthis matter is currently being used to partially fund the Company’s legal fees. This insurance coverage was also used to fund the settlement.
As of December 31, 2015, there were 16 cases pending outside of the settlement program, inclusive of cases filed after the settlement program closed. Of these cases, 15 are pending in the multidistrict litigation and are subject to individual case management orders requiring plaintiffs to meet various discovery and evidentiary requirements. As of December 31, 2015, these 15 plaintiffs were meeting those requirements and continuing to prosecute their cases.scheduled for July 2019.

Propecia/Proscar
As previously disclosed, Merck is a defendant in product liability lawsuits in the United States involving Propecia and/or Proscar. As of December 31, 2015, approximately 1,400 lawsuits have been filed by plaintiffs who allege that they have experienced persistent sexual side effects following cessation of treatment with Propecia and/or

108

Table of Contents

Proscar. Approximately 60 of the plaintiffs also allege that Propecia or Proscar has caused or can cause prostate cancer, testicular cancer or male breast cancer. The lawsuits have beenwere filed in various federal courts and in state court in New Jersey. The federal lawsuits have beenwere then consolidated for pretrial purposes in a federal multidistrict litigation before Judge John GleesonBrian Cogan of the Eastern District of New York. The matters pending in state court in New Jersey have beenwere consolidated before Judge Jessica MayerHyland in Middlesex County. In addition, there is one matterCounty (NJ Coordinated Proceedings).
As previously disclosed, on April 9, 2018, Merck and the Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee in the Propecia MDL and the Plaintiffs’ Liaison Counsel in the NJ Coordinated Proceedings entered into an agreement to resolve the above mentioned Propecia/Proscar lawsuits for an aggregate amount of $4.3 million. The settlement was subject to certain contingencies, including 95% plaintiff participation and a per plaintiff clawback if the participation rate was less than 100%. The contingencies were satisfied and the settlement agreement was finalized. After the settlement, fewer than 25 cases remain pending in state court in Massachusetts and one matter pending in state court in New York. the United States.
The Company intends to defend against theseany remaining unsettled lawsuits.

Governmental Proceedings
As previously disclosed, the Company has received a subpoena fromlearned that the Prosecution Office of Inspector GeneralMilan, Italy is investigating interactions between the Company’s Italian subsidiary, certain employees of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services on behalf of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Maryland and the Civil Division of the U.S. Department of Justice (the DOJ) which requests information relating to the Company’s marketing of Singulair and Dulera Inhalation Aerosolsubsidiary and certain Italian health care providers. The Company understands that this is part of its other marketing activities from January 1, 2006 to the present.a larger investigation involving engagements between various health care companies and those health care providers. The Company is cooperating with the government.investigation.
As previously disclosed, the United Kingdom (UK) Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) issued a Statement of Objections against the Company and MSD Sharp & Dohme Limited (MSD UK) in May 2017. In the Statement of Objections, the CMA alleges that MSD UK abused a dominant position through a discount program for Remicade over the period from March 2015 to February 2016. The Company and MSD UK are contesting the CMA’s allegations.
As previously disclosed, the Company has received a civilan investigative demandsubpoena from the U.S. Attorney’s Office, Eastern District of Pennsylvania which requestsCalifornia Insurance Commissioner’s Fraud Bureau (Bureau) seeking information relatingfrom January 1, 2007 to the Company’s contractingpresent related to the pricing and pricingpromotion of DuleraCubicin. The Bureau is investigating whether Cubist Pharmaceuticals, Inc., which the Company acquired in 2015, unlawfully induced the presentation of false claims for Cubicin Inhalation Aerosol with certain pharmacy benefit managers and Medicare Part D plans.to private insurers under the California Insurance Code False Claims Act. The Company is cooperating with the investigation.
As previously disclosed, the Company has received letters from the DOJ and the SEC that seek information about activities in a number of countries and reference the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. The Company has cooperated with the agencies in their requests and believes that this inquiry is part of a broader review of pharmaceutical industry practices in foreign countries. As previously disclosed, the Company has been advised by the DOJ that, based on the information that it has received, it has closed its inquiry into this matter as it relates to the Company. In the future, the Company may receive additional requests for information from either or both of the DOJ and the SEC.
As previously disclosed, the Company’s subsidiaries in China have received and may continue to receive inquiries regarding their operations from various Chinese governmental agencies. Some of these inquiries may be related to matters involving other multinational pharmaceutical companies, as well as Chinese entities doing business with such companies. The Company’s policy is to cooperate with these authorities and to provide responses as appropriate.
As previously disclosed, from time to time, the Company receives inquiries and is the subject of preliminary investigation activities from competition and other governmental authorities in markets outside the United States. These authorities may include regulators, administrative authorities, and law enforcement and other similar officials, and these preliminary investigation activities may include site visits, formal or informal requests or demands for documents or materials, inquiries or interviews and similar matters. Certain of these preliminary inquiries or activities may lead to the commencement of formal proceedings. Should those proceedings be determined adversely to the Company, monetary fines and/or remedial undertakings may be required.


Commercial and Other Litigation
K-DUR Zetia Antitrust Litigation
As previously disclosed, in June 1997Merck, MSD, Schering Corporation and January 1998, Schering-Plough settled patent litigation with Upsher-Smith, Inc. (Upsher-Smith) and ESI Lederle, Inc. (Lederle), respectively, relating to generic versions of K‑DUR, Schering-Plough’s long-acting potassium chloride product supplement used by cardiac patients, for which Lederle and Upsher-Smith had filed Abbreviated New Drug Applications (ANDAs). FollowingMSP Singapore Company LLC (collectively, the commencement of an administrative proceeding by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (the FTC)Merck Defendants) are defendants in 2001 alleging anti-competitive effects from those settlements (which has been resolved in Schering-Plough’s favor), putative class action and non-class action suits wereopt-out lawsuits filed in 2018 on behalf of direct and indirect purchasers of K-DUR against Schering-Plough, Upsher-Smith and Lederle and were consolidated in a multidistrict litigation in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey. These suits claimedZetia alleging violations of federal and state antitrust laws, as well as other state statutory and common law causes of action,action. The cases have been consolidated for pretrial purposes in a federal multidistrict litigation before Judge Rebecca Beach Smith in the Eastern District of Virginia. On December 6, 2018, the court denied the Merck Defendants’ motions to dismiss or stay the direct purchaser putative class actions pending bilateral arbitration. On February 6, 2019, the magistrate judge issued a report and sought unspecified damages. In April 2008,recommendation recommending that the indirect purchasers voluntarily dismissed their case. In March 2010, the District Court granted summary judgmentdistrict judge grant in part and deny in part defendants’ motions to dismiss on non-arbitration issues. On February 20, 2019, defendants and retailer opt-out plaintiffs filed objections to the defendantsreport and recommendation. After responses are filed, the parties will await a decision from the district judge.
Rotavirus Vaccines Antitrust Litigation
As previously disclosed, MSD is a defendant in putative class action lawsuits filed in 2018 on behalf of direct purchasers of RotaTeq, alleging violations of federal antitrust laws. The cases were consolidated in the remaining lawsuitsEastern District of Pennsylvania. On January 23, 2019, the court denied MSD’s motions to compel arbitration and dismissedto dismiss the matter in its entirety. In July 2012,consolidated complaint. On February 19, 2019, MSD appealed the Third Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the District Court’s grant of summary judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings. At the same time, the Third Circuit upheld a December 2008 decision by the District Court certifying certain direct purchaser plaintiffs’ claims as a class action.
In August 2012, the Company filed a petition for certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court seeking review of the Third Circuit’s decision. In June 2013, the Supreme Court granted that petition, vacated the judgment ofcourt’s order on arbitration to the Third Circuit, and remandedon February 22, 2019, the case for further considerationcourt granted MSD’s motion to vacate existing deadlines in the district court in light of its decision in FTC v. Actavis, Inc. That decision held that whether a so-called “reverse payment” — i.e., a payment from the holder of a pharmaceutical patent to a party challenging the patent made in connection with a settlement of their dispute — violates the antitrust laws should be

109


determined on the basis of a “rule of reason” analysis. In September 2013, the Third Circuit returned the case to the District Court for further proceedings in accordance with the Actavis standard. In April 2015, the Company filed motions for summary judgment. On February 25, 2016, the District Court denied the Company’s motion for summary judgment relating to all of the direct purchasers’ claims concerning the settlement with Upsher-Smith and granted the Company’s motion for summary judgment relating to all of the direct purchasers’ claims concerning the settlement with Lederle. No trial date has yet been set.appeal.
Sales Force Litigation
As previously disclosed, in May 2013, Ms. Kelli Smith filed a complaint against the Company in the United StatesU.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey on behalf of herself and a putative class of female sales representatives and a putative sub-class of female sales representatives with children, claiming (a) discriminatory policies and practices in selection, promotion and advancement, (b) disparate pay, (c) differential treatment, (d) hostile work environment and (e) retaliation under federal and state discrimination laws. In November 2013, the Company filed a motion to dismiss the class claims. Plaintiffs sought and were granted leave to file an amended complaint. In January 2014, plaintiffs filed an amended complaint adding four additional named plaintiffs. OnIn October 8, 2014, the court denied the Company’s motion to dismiss or strike the class claims as premature. In September 2015, plaintiffs filed additional motions, including a motion for conditional certification under the Equal Pay Act; a motion to amend the pleadings seeking to add ERISA and constructive discharge claims and a Company subsidiary as a named defendant; and a motion for equitable relief. Merck filed papers in opposition to the motions. In April 2016, the court granted plaintiff’s motion for conditional certification but denied plaintiffs’ motions to extend the liability period for their Equal Pay Act claims back to June 2009. In April 2016, the Magistrate Judge granted plaintiffs’ request to amend the complaint to add the following: (i) a Company subsidiary as a corporate defendant; (ii) an ERISA claim and (iii) an individual constructive discharge claim for one of the named plaintiffs. Approximately 700 individuals opted-in to this action; the opt-in period has closed. In August 2017, plaintiffs filed their motion for class certification. This motion sought to certify a Title VII pay discrimination class and also sought final collective action certification of plaintiffs’ Equal Pay Act claim.
On October 1, 2018, the parties entered into an agreement to fully resolve the Smith sales force litigation. As part of the settlement and in exchange for a full and general release of all individual and class claims, the Company agreed to pay $8.5 million. The settlement agreement, which are currently pending beforecontains an “opt-out” clause allowing Merck to pull out of the court.agreement if 30 or more individuals opt out, will be subject to court approval.
On December 18, 2018, plaintiffs filed a motion with the court seeking preliminary approval of the settlement.
Qui Tam Litigation
As previously disclosed, onin June 21, 2012, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania unsealed a complaint that has been filed against the Company under the federal False Claims Act by two former employees alleging, among other things, that the Company defrauded the U.S. government by falsifying data in connection with a clinical study conducted on the mumps component of the Company’s M-M-R II vaccine. The complaint alleges the fraud took place between 1999 and 2001. The U.S. government had the right to participate in and take over the prosecution of this lawsuit, but notified the court that it declined to exercise that right. The two former employees are pursuing the lawsuit without the involvement of the U.S. government. In addition, as previously disclosed, two putative class action lawsuits on behalf of direct purchasers of the M‑M‑R II vaccine, which charge that the Company misrepresented the efficacy of the M-M-R II vaccine in violation of federal antitrust laws and various state consumer

protection laws, are pending in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. OnIn September 4, 2014, the court denied Merck’s motion to dismiss the False Claims Act suit and granted in part and denied in part its motion to dismiss the then-pending antitrust suit. As a result, both the False Claims Act suit and the antitrust suits have proceeded into discovery.discovery, which is ongoing. The Company intendscontinues to defend against these lawsuits.
Merck KGaA Litigation
InAs previously disclosed, in January 2016, to protect its long-established brand rights in the United States, the Company filed a lawsuit against Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany (KGaA), historically operating as the EMD Group in the United States, alleging it improperly uses the name “Merck” in the United States. KGaA has filed suit against the Company in France, the United Kingdom (UK)UK, Germany, Switzerland, Mexico, India, Australia, Singapore, Hong Kong, and GermanyChina alleging, among other things, unfair competition, trademark infringement and/or corporate name infringement. In the UK, Australia, Singapore, Hong Kong, and India, KGaA also alleges breach of the parties’ co-existence agreement, unfair competition and/or trademark infringement.coexistence agreement. In December 2015, the Paris Court of First Instance issued a judgment finding that certain activities by the Company directed towards France did not constitute trademark infringement and unfair competition while other activities were found to infringe. To date,infringe and constitute unfair competition. The Company and KGaA hasappealed the decision, and the appeal was heard in May 2017. In June 2017, the French appeals court held that certain of the activities by the Company directed to France constituted unfair competition or trademark infringement and, in December 2017, the Company decided not taken steps to appeal the decision.pursue any further appeal. In January 2016, the UK High Court issued a judgment finding that the Company had breached the co-existence agreement and infringed KGaA’s trademark rights as a result of certain activities directed towards the UK based on use of the word MERCK on promotional and information activity. As noted in the UK decision, this finding was not based on the Company’s use of the sign MERCK in connection with the sale of products or any material pharmaceutical business transacted in the UK. ThisThe Company and KGaA have both appealed this decision, reflects one stepand the appeal was heard in June 2017. In November 2017, the UK Court of Appeals affirmed the decision on the co-existence agreement and remitted for re-hearing issues of trademark infringement, the scope of KGaA’s UK trademarks for pharmaceutical products, and the relief to which KGaA would be entitled. The re-hearing was held, and no decision has been handed down. In November 2018, the District Court in Hamburg, Germany dismissed all of KGaA’s claims concerning KGaA’s EU trademark with respect to the territory of the EU. In accordance with the Judgment of the Court of Justice of the EU delivered in October 2017, the District Court in Hamburg further held that it had no jurisdiction over the claim by KGaA insofar as the claim related to the territory of the UK. KGaA has appealed this decision. Further decisions from the District Court in Hamburg, Germany, in connection with claims concerning KGaA’s EU trademark, German trademark and trade name rights as well as unfair competition law with respect to the territory of Germany are expected on February 28, 2019. In January 2019, the Mexican Trademark Office issued a litigation process taking place in a numberdecision on KGaA’s action. The court found no trademark infringement by the Company and dismissed all of countriesKGaA’s claims for trademark infringement. The court ruled against the Company on KGaA’s unfair competition claim. Both KGaA and will be appealed.the Company have appealed this decision.

Patent Litigation
From time to time, generic manufacturers of pharmaceutical products file ANDAsabbreviated NDAs with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)FDA seeking to market generic forms of the Company’s products prior to the expiration of relevant patents owned by the Company. To protect its patent rights, the Company may file patent infringement lawsuits against such generic companies. Certain products of the Company (or products marketed via agreements with other companies) currently involved in such patent infringement litigation in the United States include: Cancidas, Cubicin,

110


Emend for Injection, Invanz, Nasonex, Noxafil, and NuvaRing. Similar lawsuits defending the Company’s patent rights may exist in other countries. The Company intends to vigorously defend its patents, which it believes are valid, against infringement by generic companies attempting to market products prior to the expiration of such patents. As with any litigation, there can be no assurance of the outcomes, which, if adverse, could result in significantly shortened periods of exclusivity for these products and, with respect to products acquired through acquisitions, potentially significant intangible asset impairment charges.
Inegy — The patents protecting Inegy in Europe have expired but supplemental protection certificates (SPCs) have been granted to the Company in many European countries that will expire in April 2019. There are multiple challenges to the SPCs related to Inegy throughout Europe and generic products have been launched in Austria, France, Italy, Ireland, Spain, Portugal, Germany, and the Netherlands. The Company has filed for preliminary injunctions in many countries that are still pending decision. Preliminary injunctions are presently in force in Austria, Czech Republic, Greece, Norway, Portugal, and Slovakia. Preliminary injunctions have been denied or revoked in Germany, Ireland, the Netherlands and Spain. The Company is appealing those decisions. In France and Belgium, preliminary injunctions were granted against some companies and denied against others, and appeals are pending. The SPC was held valid in
Cancidas — In February 2014, a
merits proceedings in Portugal and France. The Company has filed and will continue to file actions for patent infringement lawsuit was filed in the United Statesseeking damages against Xellia Pharmaceuticals ApS (Xellia) with respect to Xellia’s application to the FDA seeking pre-patent expiry approval to market athose companies that launch generic version of Cancidas. In June 2015, the district court found that Xellia infringed the Company’s patent and ordered that Xellia’s application not be approved until the patent expires in September 2017 (including pediatric exclusivity). Xellia has appealed this decision, and the appeal will be heard in March 2016. In August 2014, a patent infringement lawsuit was filed in the United States against Fresenius Kabi USA, LLC (Fresenius) in respect of Fresenius’s application to the FDA seeking pre-patent expiry approval to market a generic version of Cancidas. The lawsuit automatically stays FDA approval of Fresenius’s application until December 2016 or until an adverse court decision, if any, whichever may occur earlier.
Cubicin In March 2012, a patent infringement lawsuit was filed in the United States against Hospira, Inc. (Hospira), with respect to Hospira’s application to the FDA seeking pre-patent expiry approval to market a generic version of Cubicin. A trial was held in February 2014, and in December 2014 the district court found the composition patent, which expires in June 2016, to be valid and infringed. Later patents, expiring in September 2019 and November 2020, were found to be invalid. Hospira appealed the finding that the composition patent is not invalid and the Company cross-appealed the finding that the later patents are invalid. In November 2015, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the lower court decision. Hospira’s application will not be approved until at least June 2016.
In October 2013, a patent infringement lawsuit was filed in the United States against Strides, Inc. and Agila Specialties Private Limited (Strides/Agila), with respect to Strides/Agila’s application to the FDA seeking pre-patent expiry approval to market a generic version of Cubicin. As a result of the Hospira decision, Strides/Agila’s application will not be approved until at least June 2016.
In July 2014, a patent infringement lawsuit was filed in the United States against Fresenius, with respect to Fresenius’s application to the FDA seeking pre-patent expiry approval to market a generic version of Cubicin. As a result of the Hospira decision, Fresenius’s application will not be approved until at least June 2016.
In December 2015, a patent infringement lawsuit was filed in the United States against Sagent Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Sagent), with respect to Sagent’s application to the FDA seeking pre-patent expiry approval to market a generic version of Cubicin. As a result of the Hospira decision, Sagent’s application will not be approved until at least June 2016.
In December 2015, a patent infringement lawsuit was filed in the United States against Actavis LLC (Actavis), with respect to Actavis’s application to the FDA seeking pre-patent expiry approval to market a generic version of Cubicin. As a result of the Hospira decision, Actavis’s application will not be approved until at least June 2016.
In January 2016, a patent infringement lawsuit was filed in the United States against Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories, Ltd. and Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories, Inc. (Dr. Reddy), with respect to Dr. Reddy’s application to the FDA seeking pre-patent expiry approval to market a generic version of Cubicin. As a result of the Hospira decision, Dr. Reddy’s application will not be approved until at least June 2016.
An earlier district court action against Teva Parenteral Medicines Inc., Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. and Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. (collectively, Teva) resulted in a settlement whereby Teva can launch a generic version of Cubicin at the latest in December 2017, or earlier under certain conditions, but in no eventproducts before June 2016.
In October 2014, Agila Specialties Inc. and Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. (Agila/Mylan) filed petitions for Inter Partes Review (IPR) at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) seeking the invalidity of the September 2019 and November 2020 patents. In April 2015, Agila/Mylan withdrew its petitions for IPR in exchange for the Company agreeing to narrow the issues in the Strides/Agila lawsuit referenced above. In November 2014, Fresenius filed petitions for IPR at the USPTO seeking the invalidity of the September 2019 patents. In May 2015, the

111


USPTO granted Fresenius’s petition for an IPR on the September 2019 patents. The IPR hearing was held in February 2016. In July 2015, Fresenius filed petitions for IPR seeking invalidity of the November 2020 patents. In January 2016, the USPTO granted Fresenius’s petition for an IPR on the November 2020 patents.
Emend for Injection — In May 2012, a patent infringement lawsuit was filed in the United States against Sandoz Inc. (Sandoz) in respect of Sandoz’s application to the FDA seeking pre-patent expiry approval to market a generic version of Emend for Injection. A trial in the lawsuit against Sandoz was held and, in August 2015, the court found that the Company’s patent was infringed and not invalid. The court ordered that Sandoz’s application not be approved until the expiration of the Company’s patent in 2019. In December 2015, Sandoz dropped its appeal of the court’s decision. In June 2012, a patent infringement lawsuit was filed in the United States against Accord Healthcare, Inc. US, Accord Healthcare, Inc. and Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd (collectively, Intas) in respect of Intas’s application to the FDA seeking pre-patent expiry approval to market a generic version of Emend for Injection. The Company agreed with Intas to stay the lawsuit until the outcome of the lawsuit with Sandoz. In October 2015, following the Sandoz decision, the court found that the Company’s patent was infringed and not invalid. The court ordered that Intas’s application not be approved until the expiration of the Company’s patent in 2019. In July 2014, a patent infringement lawsuit was filed in the United States against Fresenius in respect of Fresenius’s application to the FDA seeking pre-patent expiry approval to market a generic version of Emend for Injection. In January 2016, the parties settled this matter. Under the terms of the settlement, Fresenius will not be entitled to enter the market pre-patent expiry except under certain conditions. In December 2014, Apotex Inc. (Apotex) filed a petition for IPR at the USPTO seeking the invalidity of claims in the compound patent covering Emend for Injection. The USPTO rejected Apotex’s petition in June 2015.
Invanz — In July 2014, a patent infringement lawsuit was filed in the United States against Hospira in respect of Hospira’s application to the FDA seeking pre-patent expiry approval to market a generic version of Invanz. The lawsuit automatically stays FDA approval of Hospira’s application until November 2016 or until an adverse court decision, if any, whichever may occur earlier. Since Hospira did not challenge an earlier patent covering Invanz, its application to the FDA will not be approved until at least that patent expires in May 2016. The trial in this matter is scheduled to begin in April 2016. In August 2015, a patent infringement lawsuit was filed in the United States against Savior Lifetec Corporation (Savior) in respect of Savior’s application to the FDA seeking pre-patent expiry approval to market a generic version of Invanz. The lawsuit automatically stays FDA approval of Savior’s application until November 2017 or until an adverse court decision, if any, whichever may occur earlier. Since Savior did not challenge an earlier patent covering Invanz, its application to the FDA will not be approved until at least that patent expires in May 2016.
Nasonex — In July 2014, a patent infringement lawsuit was filed in the United States against Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. (Teva Pharma) in respect of Teva Pharma’s application to the FDA seeking pre-patent expiry approval to market a generic version of Nasonex. The lawsuit automatically stays FDA approval of Teva Pharma’s application until November 2016 or until an adverse court decision, if any, whichever may occur earlier. The trial in this matter is scheduled to begin in May 2016. In March 2015, a patent infringement lawsuit was filed in the United States against Amneal Pharmaceuticals LLC (Amneal), in respect of Amneal’s application to the FDA seeking pre-patent expiry approval to market a generic version of Nasonex. The lawsuit automatically stays FDA approval of Amneal’s application until August 2017 or until an adverse court decision, if any, whichever may occur earlier. The trial in this matter is scheduled to begin in June 2016.
A previous decision, issued in June 2013, held that the Merck patent in the Teva Pharma and Amneal lawsuits covering mometasone furoate monohydrate was valid, but that it was not infringed by Apotex Corp.’s proposed product. In April 2015, a patent infringement lawsuit was filed against Apotex Inc. and Apotex Corp. (Apotex) in respect of Apotex’s application to the FDA seeking pre-patent expiry approval to market a generic version of Nasonex that allegedly differs from the generic version in the previous lawsuit.
Noxafil — In August 2015, the Company filed a lawsuit against Actavis Laboratories Fl, Inc. (Actavis) in the United States in respect of that company’s application to the FDA seeking pre-patent expiry approval to sell a generic version of Noxafil. The lawsuit automatically stays FDA approvalIn October 2017, the district court held the patent valid and infringed. Actavis appealed this decision. While the appeal was pending, the parties reached a settlement, subject to certain terms of Actavis’s application until December 2017 or until an adverse court decision, if any, whichever may occur earlier.
NuvaRingthe agreement being met, whereby Actavis can launch its generic version prior to expiry of the patent and pediatric exclusivity under certain conditions. In December 2013,March 2016, the Company filed a lawsuit against a subsidiary of Allergan in the United States in respect of that company’s application to the FDA seeking pre-patent expiry approval to sell a generic version

112


of NuvaRing. The trial in this matter was held in January 2016 and the Company is awaiting the court’s decision. In September 2015, the Company filed a lawsuit against Teva PharmaRoxane Laboratories, Inc. (Roxane) in the United States in respect of that company’s application to the FDA seeking pre-patent expiry approval to sell a generic version of NuvaRingNoxafil. In November 2017, the parties reached a settlement whereby Roxane can launch its generic version prior to expiry of the patent under certain conditions. In February 2016, the Company filed a lawsuit against Par Sterile Products LLC, Par Pharmaceutical, Inc., Par Pharmaceutical Companies, Inc. and Par Pharmaceutical Holdings, Inc. (collectively, Par) in the United States in respect of that company’s application to the FDA seeking pre-patent expiry approval to sell a generic version of Noxafil injection. In October 2016, the parties reached a settlement whereby Par can launch its generic version in January 2023, or earlier under certain conditions. In February 2018, the Company filed a lawsuit against Fresenius Kabi USA, LLC (Fresenius) in the United States in respect of that company’s application to the FDA seeking pre-patent expiry approval to sell a generic version of Noxafil. In November 2018, the Company reached a settlement with Fresenius, whereby Fresenius can launch its generic version of the intravenous product prior to expiry of the patent under certain conditions. In March 2018, the Company filed a lawsuit against Mylan Laboratories Limited in the United States in respect of that company’s application to the FDA seeking pre-patent expiry approval to sell a generic version of Noxafil.

Anti-PD-1 Antibody Patent OppositionsNasonexNasonex lost market exclusivity in the United States in 2016. Prior to that, in April 2015, the Company filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Apotex Inc. and LitigationApotex Corp. (Apotex) in respect of Apotex’s marketed product that the Company believed was infringing. In January 2018, the Company and Apotex settled this matter with Apotex agreeing to pay the Company $115 million plus certain other consideration.
As previously disclosed, OnoJanuvia, Janumet, Janumet XR — In February 2019, Par Pharmaceutical, Co. (Ono)Inc. (Par Pharmaceutical) filed suit against the Company in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, seeking a declaratory judgment of invalidity of a patent owned by the Company covering certain salt and polymorphic forms of sitagliptin that expires in 2026. A judgment in its favor may allow Par Pharmaceutical to bring to market a generic version of Janumet XR following the expiration of key patent protection in 2022, but prior to the expiration of the later-granted patent it is challenging. In response, the Company filed a patent infringement lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware against Par Pharmaceutical and additional companies that also indicated an intent to market generic versions of Januvia, Janumet, and Janumet XR following expiration of key patent protection in 2022, but prior to the expiration of the later-granted patent owned by the Company covering certain salt and polymorphic forms of sitagliptin that expires in 2026, and a later granted patent owned by the Company covering the Janumet formulation which expires in 2028. No schedule for the cases has abeen set by the court.
Gilead Patent Litigation and Opposition
The Company, through its Idenix Pharmaceuticals, Inc. subsidiary, has pending litigation against Gilead in the United States, Germany, and France based on different patent estates that would be infringed by Gilead’s sales of their two products, Sovaldi and Harvoni. Gilead opposed the European patent (EP 1 537 878) (’878) that broadly claims the use of an anti-PD-1 antibody, such as the Company’s immunotherapy, Keytruda, for the treatment of cancer. Ono has previously licensed its commercial rights to an anti-PD-1 antibody to Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS) in certain markets. The Company believes that the ’878 patent is invalid and filed an opposition inat the European Patent Office (EPO) seeking its revocation. In June 2014, the Opposition Division of the EPO found the claims. Trial in the ’878 patent are valid. The Company received the Opposition Division’s written opinion in September 2014 and the Company submitted its substantive appeal in February 2015. In April 2014, the Company, and three other companies, opposed another European patent (EP 2 161 336) (’336) owned by BMS and Ono that it believes is invalid. The ’336 patent, if valid, broadly claims anti-PD-1 antibodies that could include Keytruda. BMS and Ono recently submitted a request to amend the claims of the ’336 patent. If the EPO allows this amendment, the claims of the ’336 patent would no longer broadly claim anti-PD-1 antibodies such as Keytruda.
In May 2014, the Company filed a lawsuit in the UK seeking revocation of the UK national versions of both the ’878 and ’336 patents. In July 2014, Ono and BMS sued the Company seeking a declaration that the ’878 patent would be infringed in the UK by the marketing of Keytruda. The Company has sought a declaration from the UK court that Keytruda will not infringe the ’336 patent in the UK. BMS and Ono notified the Company of their request to amend the claims of the EPO ’336 patent and of their intention to seek permission from the court to similarly amend the UK national version so that the claims of the ’336 patent would no longer broadly claim anti-PD-1 antibodies such as Keytruda. A trialUnited States was held in December 2016 and the UK in July 2015. At that trial,jury returned a verdict for the Company, awarding damages of $2.54 billion. The Company submitted post-trial motions, including on the issues of validityenhanced damages and infringementfuture royalties. Gilead submitted post-trial motions for judgment as a matter of law. A hearing on the ’878 patent were heard at the same time by the court. In October 2015, the court issued its judgment, finding the ’878 patent valid and infringed. Merck appealed this judgment.
In February 2015, the Company filed lawsuits in the Netherlands seeking revocation of the Dutch national versions of both the ’878 and ’336 patents. BMS and Ono amended the claims of the ’336 patent so that the claims of the ’336 patent no longer broadly claim anti-PD-1 antibodies such as Keytruda. Trial regarding the validity and infringement of the ’878 patentmotions was held in January 2016September 2017. Also, in September 2017, the court denied the Company’s motion on enhanced damages, granted its motion on prejudgment interest and deferred its motion on future royalties. In February 2018, the court granted Gilead’s motion for judgment as a matter of law and found the patent was invalid for a lack of enablement. The Company appealed this decision. The appellate briefing is completed and the Company is anticipating a decision in April 2016.
In December 2015, BMS and Ono filed lawsuits againstwaiting for the Company in France, Ireland, Switzerland and Germany alleging infringement oforal argument to be scheduled. The EPO opposition division revoked the ’878 patent. In January 2016, BMS and Ono filed a lawsuit against the Company in Spain alleging infringement of the ’878 patent. In France, BMS and Ono have filed for preliminary relief seeking payment of damages in France while the case is pending. A hearing on this preliminary relief is set for February 2016. Dates for trials regarding the validity and infringement of the Irish, French, Swiss and Spanish national versions of the ’878 patent have not yet been scheduled. A trial concerning the infringement of the German version of the ’878 patent is currently scheduled to begin in March 2017.
The Company continues to believe the ’878 patent is invalid.
The Company can file lawsuits seeking revocation of the ’336 and ’878 patents in other national courts in Europe at any time, and Ono and BMS can file patent infringement actions against the Company in other national courts in Europe at or around the time the Company launches Keytruda. If a national court determines that the Company infringed a valid claim in the ’878 or ’336 patent, Ono and BMS may be entitled to monetary damages, including royalties on future sales of Keytruda, and potentially could seek an injunction to prevent the Company from marketing Keytruda in that country.
The USPTO granted US Patent Nos. 8,728,474 to Ono and 8,779,105 to Ono and BMS. These patents are equivalent to the ’878 and ’336 patents, respectively. In September 2014, BMS and Ono filed a lawsuit in the United States alleging that, by marketing Keytruda, the Company will infringe US Patent No. 8,728,474. BMS and Ono are not seeking to prevent or stop the marketing of Keytruda in the United States. The trial in this matter is currently scheduled to begin in April 2017. The Company believes that the 8,728,474European patent, and the 8,779,105 patent are both invalid. Recently, Ono filed lawsuitsCompany appealed this decision. The cases in France and Germany have been stayed pending the United States alleging that, by marketing Keytruda,final decision of the Company will

113


infringe US Patent Nos. 9,067,999 and 9,073,994, which are patents related to the 8,728,474 patent. The Company believes the 9,067,999 and 9,073,994 patents are also invalid.
In September 2014, the Company filed a lawsuit in Australia seeking the revocation of Australian Patent No. 2011203119, which is equivalent to the ’336 patent. In March 2015, BMS and Ono counterclaimed in this matter alleging that the Company’s manufacture and supply of Keytruda to the Australian market will infringe Australian Patent No. 2011203119.
Ono and BMS have similar and other patents and applications, which the Company is closely monitoring, pending in the United States, Japan and other countries.
The Company is confident that it will be able to market Keytruda in any country in which it is approved and that it will not be prevented from doing so by the Ono or BMS patents or any pending applications.EPO.


Other Litigation
There are various other pending legal proceedings involving the Company, principally product liability and intellectual property lawsuits. While it is not feasible to predict the outcome of such proceedings, in the opinion of the Company, either the likelihood of loss is remote or any reasonably possible loss associated with the resolution of such proceedings is not expected to be material to the Company’s financial position, results of operations or cash flows either individually or in the aggregate.

Legal Defense Reserves
Legal defense costs expected to be incurred in connection with a loss contingency are accrued when probable and reasonably estimable. Some of the significant factors considered in the review of these legal defense reserves are as follows: the actual costs incurred by the Company; the development of the Company’s legal defense strategy and structure in light of the scope of its litigation; the number of cases being brought against the Company; the costs and outcomes of completed trials and the most current information regarding anticipated timing, progression, and related costs of pre-trial activities and trials in the associated litigation. The amount of legal defense reserves as of December 31, 20152018 and December 31, 20142017 of approximately $245 million and $215160 million, respectively, represents the Company’s best estimate of the minimum amount of defense costs to be incurred in connection with its outstanding litigation; however, events such as additional trials and other events that could arise in the course of its litigation could affect the ultimate amount of legal defense costs to be incurred by the Company. The Company will continue to monitor its legal defense costs and review the adequacy of the associated reserves and may determine to increase the reserves at any time in the future if, based upon the factors set forth, it believes it would be appropriate to do so.

Environmental Matters
As previously disclosed, Merck’s facilities in Oss, the Netherlands, were inspected in 2012 by the Province of Brabant (the Province)(Province) pursuant to the Dutch Hazards of Major Accidents Decree and the sites’ environmental permits. The Province issued penalties for alleged violations of regulations governing preventing and managing accidents with hazardous substances, and the government also issued a fine for alleged environmental violations at one of the Oss facilities, which together totaled $235 thousand. The Company was subsequently advised that a criminal investigation had been initiated based upon certain of the issues that formed the basis of the administrative enforcement action by the Province. The Company intends to defend itself againstAs previously disclosed, the matter was settled, without any enforcement action that may result from this investigation.admission of liability, for an aggregate payment of €400 thousand.
In May 2015, the Environmental Protection Agency conducted an air compliance evaluation of the Company’s pharmaceutical manufacturing facility in Elkton, Virginia. As a result of the investigation, the Company was recently issued a Notice of Noncompliance and Show Cause Notification relating to certain federally enforceable requirements applicable to the Elkton facility. The Company is attempting to resolve these alleged violations by way of settlement but will defend itself if settlement cannot be reached.
The Company and its subsidiaries are parties to a number of proceedings brought under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, commonly known as Superfund, and other federal and state equivalents. These proceedings seek to require the operators of hazardous waste disposal facilities, transporters of waste to the sites and generators of hazardous waste disposed of at the sites to clean up the sites or to reimburse the government

114


for cleanup costs. The Company has been made a party to these proceedings as an alleged generator of waste disposed of at the sites. In each case, the government alleges that the defendants are jointly and severally liable for the cleanup costs. Although joint and several liability is alleged, these proceedings are frequently resolved so that the allocation of cleanup costs among the parties more nearly reflects the relative contributions of the parties to the site situation. The Company’s potential liability varies greatly from site to site. For some sites the potential liability is de minimis and for others the final costs of cleanup have not yet been determined. While it is not feasible to predict the outcome of many of these proceedings brought by federal or state agencies or private litigants, in the opinion of the Company, such proceedings should not ultimately result in any liability which would have a material adverse effect on the financial position, results of operations, liquidity or capital resources of the Company. The Company has taken an active role in identifying and accruing for these costs and such amounts do not include any reduction for anticipated recoveries of cleanup costs from former site owners or operators or other recalcitrant potentially responsible parties.
In management’s opinion, the liabilities for all environmental matters that are probable and reasonably estimable have been accrued and totaled $109$71 million and $125$82 million at December 31, 20152018 and 2014,2017, respectively. These liabilities are undiscounted, do not consider potential recoveries from other parties and will be paid out over the periods of remediation for the applicable sites, which are expected to occur primarily over the next 15 years. Although it is not possible to predict with certainty the outcome of these matters, or the ultimate costs of remediation, management does not believe that any reasonably possible expenditures that may be incurred in excess of the liabilities accrued

should exceed $57$60 million in the aggregate. Management also does not believe that these expenditures should result in a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial position, results of operations, liquidity or capital resources for any year.
11.12.    Equity
The Merck certificate of incorporation authorizes 6,500,000,000 shares of common stock and 20,000,000 shares of preferred stock.

Capital Stock
A summary of common stock and treasury stock transactions (shares in millions) is as follows:
2015 2014 20132018 2017 2016
Common
Stock
 
Treasury
Stock
 
Common
Stock
 
Treasury
Stock
 
Common
Stock
 
Treasury
Stock
Common
Stock
 
Treasury
Stock
 
Common
Stock
 
Treasury
Stock
 
Common
Stock
 
Treasury
Stock
Balance January 13,577
 739
 3,577
 650
 3,577
 550
3,577
 880
 3,577
 828
 3,577
 796
Purchases of treasury stock
 75
 
 134
 
 139

 122
 
 67
 
 60
Issuances (1)

 (18) 
 (45) 
 (39)
 (17) 
 (15) 
 (28)
Balance December 313,577
 796
 3,577
 739
 3,577
 650
3,577
 985
 3,577
 880
 3,577
 828
(1)  
Issuances primarily reflect activity under share-based compensation plans.

On October 25, 2018, the Company entered into accelerated share repurchase (ASR) agreements with two third-party financial institutions (Dealers). Under the ASR agreements, Merck agreed to purchase $5 billion of Merck’s common stock, in total, with an initial delivery of 56.7 million shares of Merck’s common stock, based on the then-current market price, made by the Dealers to Merck, and payments of $5 billion made by Merck to the Dealers on October 29, 2018, which were funded with existing cash and investments, as well as short-term borrowings. The payments to the Dealers were recorded as reductions to shareholders’ equity, consisting of a $4 billion increase in treasury stock, which reflects the value of the initial 56.7 million shares received on October 29, 2018, and a $1 billion decrease in other-paid-in capital, which reflects the value of the stock held back by the Dealers pending final settlement. The number of shares of Merck’s common stock that Merck may receive, or may be required to remit, upon final settlement under the ASR agreements will be based upon the average daily volume weighted-average price of Merck’s common stock during the term of the ASR program, less a negotiated discount. Final settlement of the transaction under the ASR agreements is expected to occur in the first half of 2019, but may occur earlier at the option of the Dealers, or later under certain circumstances. If Merck is obligated to make adjustment payments to the Dealers under the ASR agreements, Merck may elect to satisfy such obligations in cash or in shares of Merck’s common stock.
Noncontrolling Interests
In connection with the 1998 restructuring of AMI, Merck assumed $2.4 billion par value preferred stock with a dividend rate of 5% per annum, which was carried by KBI and included in Noncontrolling interests. In 2014, AstraZeneca exercised its option to acquire Merck’s interest in AZLP (see Note 8) and this preferred stock obligation was retired.
12.13.    Share-Based Compensation Plans
The Company has share-based compensation plans under which the Company grants restricted stock units (RSUs) and performance share units (PSUs) to certain management level employees. The Company also issues RSUs to employees of certain of the Company’s equity method investees. In addition, employees and non-employee directors may be granted options to purchase shares of Company common stock at the fair market value at the time of grant. These plans were approved by the Company’s shareholders.
At December 31, 2015,2018, 134111 million shares collectively were authorized for future grants under the Company’s share-based compensation plans. These awards are settled primarily with treasury shares.

115


Employee stock options are granted to purchase shares of Company stock at the fair market value at the time of grant. These awards generally vest one-third each year over a three-year period, with a contractual term of 7-10 years. RSUs are stock awards that are granted to employees and entitle the holder to shares of common stock as the awards vest. The fair value of the stock option and RSU awards is determined and fixed on the grant date based on the Company’s stock price. PSUs are stock awards where the ultimate number of shares issued will be contingent on the Company’s performance against a pre-set objective or set of objectives. The fair value of each PSU is determined on the date of grant based on the Company’s stock price. For RSUs and certain PSUs, granted before December 31, 2009 employees participate in dividends on the same basis as common shares and such dividends are nonforfeitable by the holder. For RSUs and PSUs issued on or after January 1, 2010, dividends declared during the vesting period are payable to the employees only upon vesting. Over the PSU performance period, the number of shares of stock that are expected to be issued will be adjusted based on the probability of achievement of a performance target and final compensation expense will be recognized based on the ultimate number of shares issued. RSU and PSU

distributions will be in shares of Company stock after the end of the vesting or performance period, generally three years, subject to the terms applicable to such awards. PSU awards generally vest after three years. Prior to 2018, RSU awards generally vested after three years; beginning with awards granted in 2018, RSU awards generally vest one-third each year over a three-year period.
Total pretax share-based compensation cost recorded in 2015, 20142018, 2017 and 20132016 was $299348 million, $278312 million and $276300 million, respectively, with related income tax benefits of $9355 million, $8657 million and $8492 million, respectively.
The Company uses the Black-Scholes option pricing model for determining the fair value of option grants. In applying this model, the Company uses both historical data and current market data to estimate the fair value of its options. The Black-Scholes model requires several assumptions including expected dividend yield, risk-free interest rate, volatility, and term of the options. The expected dividend yield is based on historical patterns of dividend payments. The risk-free rate is based on the rate at grant date of zero-coupon U.S. Treasury Notes with a term equal to the expected term of the option. Expected volatility is estimated using a blend of historical and implied volatility. The historical component is based on historical monthly price changes. The implied volatility is obtained from market data on the Company’s traded options. The expected life represents the amount of time that options granted are expected to be outstanding, based on historical and forecasted exercise behavior.
The weighted average exercise price of options granted in 2015, 20142018, 2017 and 20132016 was $59.7358.15, $58.1463.88 and $45.0154.63 per option, respectively. The weighted average fair value of options granted in 2015, 20142018, 2017 and 20132016 was $6.468.26, $6.797.04 and $6.215.89 per option, respectively, and were determined using the following assumptions:
Years Ended December 312015 2014 20132018 2017 2016
Expected dividend yield4.1% 4.3% 4.2%3.4% 3.6% 3.8%
Risk-free interest rate1.7% 2.0% 1.2%2.9% 2.0% 1.4%
Expected volatility19.9% 22.0% 25.0%19.1% 17.8% 19.6%
Expected life (years)6.2
 6.4
 7.0
6.1
 6.1
 6.2
Summarized information relative to stock option plan activity (options in thousands) is as follows:
Number
of Options
 
Weighted
Average
Exercise
Price
 
Weighted
Average
Remaining
Contractual
Term (Years)
 
Aggregate
Intrinsic
Value
Number
of Options
 
Weighted
Average
Exercise
Price
 
Weighted
Average
Remaining
Contractual
Term (Years)
 
Aggregate
Intrinsic
Value
Outstanding January 1, 201576,135
 $39.05
  
Outstanding January 1, 201836,274
 $46.77
  
Granted5,565
 59.73
  3,520
 58.15
  
Exercised(13,779) 35.23
  (14,598) 40.51
  
Forfeited(3,253) 39.10
    (1,389) 53.80
    
Outstanding December 31, 201564,668
 $41.64
 3.71 $785
Exercisable December 31, 201554,990
 $39.12
 2.87 $765
Outstanding December 31, 201823,807
 $51.89
 5.95 $584
Exercisable December 31, 201816,184
 $48.85
 4.82 $446

116


Additional information pertaining to stock option plans is provided in the table below:
Years Ended December 312015 2014 20132018 2017 2016
Total intrinsic value of stock options exercised$332
 $626
 $374
$348
 $236
 $444
Fair value of stock options vested30
 35
 42
29
 30
 28
Cash received from the exercise of stock options485
 1,560
 1,210
591
 499
 939

A summary of nonvested RSU and PSU activity (shares in thousands) is as follows:
 RSUs PSUs RSUs PSUs
 
Number
of Shares
 
Weighted
Average
Grant Date
Fair Value
 
Number
of Shares
 
Weighted
Average
Grant Date
Fair Value
 
Number
of Shares
 
Weighted
Average
Grant Date
Fair Value
 
Number
of Shares
 
Weighted
Average
Grant Date
Fair Value
Nonvested January 1, 2015 15,634
 $46.66
 1,882
 $52.81
Nonvested January 1, 2018 13,609
 $59.32
 1,868
 $60.03
Granted 4,562
 59.66
 909
 51.84
 7,270
 58.46
 1,081
 57.17
Vested (5,774) 39.45
 (743) 44.58
 (3,766) 59.66
 (758) 57.59
Forfeited (1,022) 52.64
 (164) 55.66
 (985) 59.30
 (152) 60.06
Nonvested December 31, 2015 13,400
 $53.73
 1,884
 $55.33
Nonvested December 31, 2018 16,128
 $58.85
 2,039
 $59.42
At December 31, 2015,2018, there was $407560 million of total pretax unrecognized compensation expense related to nonvested stock options, RSU and PSU awards which will be recognized over a weighted average period of 1.9 years. For segment reporting, share-based compensation costs are unallocated expenses.
13.14.    Pension and Other Postretirement Benefit Plans
The Company has defined benefit pension plans covering eligible employees in the United States and in certain of its international subsidiaries. Beginning on January 1, 2013, active participants in Merck’s primary U.S. defined benefit pension plans are accruing pension benefits using cash balance formulas based on age, service, pay and interest. However, during a transition period from January 1, 2013 through December 31, 2019, participants will earn the greater of the benefit as calculated under the employee’s legacy final average pay formula or their cash balance formula. For all years of service after December 31, 2019, participants will earn future benefits under only the cash balance formula. In addition, the Company provides medical benefits, principally to its eligible U.S. retirees and their dependents, through its other postretirement benefit plans. The Company uses December 31 as the year-end measurement date for all of its pension plans and other postretirement benefit plans.

Net Periodic Benefit Cost
The net periodic benefit cost (credit) for pension and other postretirement benefit plans consisted of the following components:
Pension Benefits      Pension Benefits      
U.S. International Other Postretirement BenefitsU.S. International Other Postretirement Benefits
Years Ended December 312015 2014 2013 2015 2014 2013 2015 2014 20132018 2017 2016 2018 2017 2016 2018 2017 2016
Service cost$307
 $300
 $386
 $251
 $266
 $296
 $80
 $78
 $102
$326
 $312
 $282
 $238
 $252
 $238
 $57
 $57
 $54
Interest cost434
 425
 402
 206
 269
 263
 110
 115
 107
432
 454
 456
 178
 172
 204
 69
 81
 82
Expected return on plan assets(819) (782) (721) (379) (416) (376) (143) (139) (126)(851) (862) (831) (431) (393) (382) (83) (78) (107)
Net amortization158
 74
 251
 104
 59
 85
 (59) (71) (50)
Amortization of unrecognized prior service cost(50) (53) (55) (13) (11) (11) (84) (98) (106)
Net loss amortization232
 180
 119
 84
 98
 87
 1
 1
 3
Termination benefits22
 53
 51
 1
 11
 7
 7
 22
 50
19
 44
 23
 2
 4
 4
 3
 8
 4
Curtailments(12) (69) (22) (9) (4) (1) (19) (39) (11)10
 3
 5
 1
 (4) (1) (8) (31) (18)
Settlements1
 11
 1
 12
 6
 22
 
 
 
5
 
 
 13
 5
 6
 
 
 
Net periodic benefit cost (credit)$91
 $12
 $348
 $186
 $191
 $296
 $(24) $(34) $72
$123
 $78
 $(1) $72
 $123
 $145
 $(45) $(60) $(88)
The changes in net periodic benefit cost for pension and other postretirement benefit plans(credit) year over year for pension plans are largely attributable to changes in the discount rate affecting net loss amortization.

117


In connection with restructuring actions (see Note 3)5), termination charges were recorded in 2015, 20142018, 2017 and 20132016 on pension and other postretirement benefit plans related to expanded eligibility for certain employees exiting Merck. Also, in connection with these restructuring activities, curtailments were recorded in 2015, 2014 and 2013 on pension and other postretirement benefit plans.
In addition,plans and settlements were recorded in 2015, 2014 and 2013 on certain U.S. and international pension plans.plans as reflected in the table above.
The components of net periodic benefit cost (credit) other than the service cost component are included in Other (income) expense, net (see Note 15), with the exception of certain amounts for termination benefits, curtailments and settlements, which are recorded in Restructuring costs if the event giving rise to the termination benefits, curtailment or settlement is related to restructuring actions as noted above.


Obligations and Funded Status
Summarized information about the changes in plan assets and benefit obligations, the funded status and the amounts recorded at December 31 is as follows:
Pension Benefits 
Other
Postretirement
Benefits
Pension Benefits 
Other
Postretirement
Benefits
U.S. International U.S. International 
2015 2014 2015 2014 2015 20142018 2017 2018 2017 2018 2017
Fair value of plan assets January 1$9,984
 $10,007
 $7,724
 $7,428
 $1,984
 $1,913
$10,896
 $9,766
 $9,339
 $7,794
 $1,114
 $1,019
Actual return on plan assets(226) 484
 138
 1,099
 (34) 114
(810) 1,723
 (289) 677
 (72) 161
Company contributions66
 92
 163
 276
 63
 67
Company contributions, net378
 58
 167
 226
 6
 (4)
Effects of exchange rate changes
 
 (568) (816) (1) 

 
 (352) 843
 
 
Benefits paid(523) (535) (196) (245) (99) (110)(772) (651) (202) (198) (80) (62)
Settlements(35) (64) (66) (31) 
 
(44) 
 (106) (17) 
 
Other
 
 9
 13
 
 

 
 23
 14
 
 
Fair value of plan assets December 31$9,266
 $9,984
 $7,204
 $7,724
 $1,913
 $1,984
$9,648
 $10,896
 $8,580
 $9,339
 $968
 $1,114
Benefit obligation January 1$10,632
 $8,666
 $8,331
 $7,389
 $2,638
 $2,329
$11,904
 $10,849
 $9,483
 $8,372
 $1,922
 $1,922
Service cost307
 300
 251
 266
 80
 78
326
 312
 238
 252
 57
 57
Interest cost434
 425
 206
 269
 110
 115
432
 454
 178
 172
 69
 81
Actuarial (gains) losses(1)(1,102) 1,857
 (127) 1,605
 (384) 212
(1,258) 881
 (154) (7) (341) (87)
Benefits paid(523) (535) (196) (245) (99) (110)(772) (651) (202) (198) (80) (62)
Effects of exchange rate changes
 
 (647) (864) (11) (6)
 
 (387) 916
 (6) 3
Plan amendments
 
 (1) (4) (531) 

 
 10
 (22) (9) 
Curtailments(14) (70) (15) (76) (3) 3
13
 15
 (2) (3) 
 
Termination benefits22
 53
 1
 11
 7
 22
19
 44
 2
 4
 3
 8
Settlements(35) (64) (66) (31) 
 
(44) 
 (106) (17) 
 
Other2
 
 (4) 11
 3
 (5)
 
 23
 14
 
 
Benefit obligation December 31$9,723
 $10,632
 $7,733
 $8,331
 $1,810
 $2,638
$10,620
 $11,904
 $9,083
 $9,483
 $1,615
 $1,922
Funded status December 31$(457) $(648) $(529) $(607) $103
 $(654)$(972) $(1,008) $(503) $(144) $(647) $(808)
Recognized as:                      
Other assets$179
 $68
 $567
 $565
 $359
 $1
$
 $
 $659
 $828
 $
 $
Accrued and other current liabilities(48) (41) (7) (11) (10) (11)(47) (59) (14) (17) (10) (11)
Other noncurrent liabilities(588) (675) (1,089) (1,161) (246) (644)(925) (949) (1,148) (955) (637) (797)
(1) Actuarial (gains) losses in 2018 and 2017 primarily reflect changes in discount rates.
At December 31, 20152018 and 2014,2017, the accumulated benefit obligation was $16.7$19.0 billion and $17.920.5 billion, respectively, for all pension plans, of which $9.410.4 billion and $10.111.5 billion, respectively, related to U.S. pension plans.
Actuarial gains in 2015 reflect a change in the discount rate. Actuarial losses in 2014 reflect a change in the discount rate and, for U.S. plans, also reflect an impact for the Company’s adoption of new retirement plan mortality assumptions issued by the Society of Actuaries in October 2014.
The decline in the benefit obligation for other postretirement benefits in 2015 resulting from plan amendments primarily reflects changes to Merck’s retiree medical benefits approved by the Company in December 2015. The changes provide that, beginning in 2017, Merck will provide access to retiree health insurance coverage that supplements government-sponsored Medicare through a private insurance marketplace. This new approach will allow Medicare-eligible retirees to choose insurance with the terms, cost and coverage that best fits their needs, while still receiving financial support as determined by Merck. The Company’s subsidy for these retirees for medical coverage

118


in 2017 is expected to be comparable to 2016. Future changes in support, if any, will be based on a number of factors such as business conditions, government actions, marketplace changes and the general consumer inflation rate.
Information related to the funded status of selected pension plans at December 31 is as follows:
U.S. InternationalU.S. International
2015 2014 2015 20142018 2017 2018 2017
Pension plans with a projected benefit obligation in excess of plan assets              
Projected benefit obligation$1,310
 $3,963
 $5,093
 $5,513
$10,620
 $11,904
 $6,251
 $3,323
Fair value of plan assets674
 3,247
 3,996
 4,341
9,648
 10,896
 5,089
 2,352
Pension plans with an accumulated benefit obligation in excess of plan assets              
Accumulated benefit obligation$611
 $810
 $4,812
 $2,749
$9,702
 $676
 $5,936
 $2,120
Fair value of plan assets
 138
 3,964
 1,870
8,966
 
 5,071
 1,346

Plan Assets
Entities are required to use a fair value hierarchy which maximizes the use of observable inputs and minimizes the use of unobservable inputs when measuring fair value. There are three levels of inputs used to measure fair value with Level 1 having the highest priority and Level 3 having the lowest:
Level 1 —  Quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities.
Level 2 —  Observable inputs other than Level 1 prices, such as quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities, or other inputs that are observable or can be corroborated by observable market data for substantially the full term of the assets or liabilities.
Level 3 —  Unobservable inputs that are supported by little or no market activity. The Level 3 assets are those whose values are determined using pricing models, discounted cash flow methodologies, or similar techniques with significant unobservable inputs, as well as instruments for which the determination of fair value requires significant judgment or estimation. At December 31, 20152018 and 2014,2017, $516826 million and $580488 million, respectively, or approximately 3%5% and 2%, respectively, of the Company’s pension investments at each year end, were categorized as Level 3 assets.
If the inputs used to measure the financial assets fall within more than one level described above, the categorization is based on the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement of the instrument.

119


The fair values of the Company’s pension plan assets at December 31 by asset category are as follows:
Fair Value Measurements Using Fair Value Measurements UsingFair Value Measurements Using Fair Value Measurements Using
Quoted Prices
In Active
Markets for
Identical Assets
(Level 1)
 
Significant
Other
Observable
Inputs
(Level 2)
 
Significant
Unobservable
Inputs
(Level 3)
 Total 
Quoted Prices
In Active
Markets for
Identical Assets
(Level 1)
 
Significant
Other
Observable
Inputs
(Level 2)
 
Significant
Unobservable
Inputs
(Level 3)
 Total
Quoted Prices
In Active
Markets for
Identical Assets
(Level 1)
 
Significant
Other
Observable
Inputs
(Level 2)
 
Significant
Unobservable
Inputs
(Level 3)
 Total 
Quoted Prices
In Active
Markets for
Identical Assets
(Level 1)
 
Significant
Other
Observable
Inputs
(Level 2)
 
Significant
Unobservable
Inputs
(Level 3)
 Total
2015 
  
 2014 
  
2018   2017  
U.S. Pension Plans                              
Assets
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
               
Cash and cash equivalents$
 $189
 $
 $189
 $2
 $234
 $
 $236
$40
 $
 $
 $40
 $6
 $
 $
 $6
Investment funds                              
Developed markets equities566
 3,704
 
 4,270
 540
 4,518
 
 5,058
169
 
 
 169
 390
 
 
 390
Emerging markets equities87
 632
 
 719
 107
 718
 
 825
121
 
 
 121
 138
 
 
 138
Government and agency obligations
 181
 
 181
 
 31
 
 31
Fixed income obligations
 134
 
 134
 
 132
 
 132
Equity securities                              
Developed markets2,444
 
 
 2,444
 2,169
 
 
 2,169
2,172
 
 
 2,172
 2,743
 
 
 2,743
Fixed income securities                              
Government and agency obligations
 391
 
 391
 
 516
 
 516

 1,509
 
 1,509
 
 757
 
 757
Corporate obligations
 679
 
 679
 
 722
 
 722

 1,246
 
 1,246
 
 900
 
 900
Mortgage and asset-backed securities
 236
 
 236
 
 245
 
 245

 262
 
 262
 
 240
 
 240
Other investments               
 
 13
 13
 
 
 15
 15
Derivatives
 
 
 
 1
 31
 
 32
Other
 
 23
 23
 
 
 28
 28
Liabilities               
Derivatives
 
 
 
 
 10
 
 10
$3,097
 $6,146

$23

$9,266

$2,819

$7,137

$28

$9,984
Net assets in fair value hierarchy$2,502
 $3,017

$13

$5,532

$3,277

$1,897

$15

$5,189
Investments measured at NAV (1)
      4,116
       5,707
Plan assets at fair value      $9,648
       $10,896
International Pension Plans                              
Assets
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
      
       
Cash and cash equivalents$63
 $9
 $
 $72
 $208
 $13
 $
 $221
$50
 $3
 $
 $53
 $54
 $19
 $
 $73
Investment funds      
       
      
       
Developed markets equities184
 3,024
 
 3,208
 217
 2,991
 
 3,208
461
 3,071
 
 3,532
 562
 3,326
 
 3,888
Emerging markets equities21
 228
 
 249
 31
 256
 
 287
56
 112
 
 168
 62
 176
 
 238
Government and agency obligations305
 1,269
 
 1,574
 317
 1,410
 
 1,727
372
 2,082
 
 2,454
 249
 2,095
 
 2,344
Corporate obligations173
 159
 
 332
 183
 170
 
 353
4
 7
 
 11
 5
 329
 
 334
Fixed income obligations8
 10
 
 18
 9
 16
 
 25
7
 4
 
 11
 7
 4
 
 11
Real estate (1)

 3
 10
 13
 
 8
 29
 37
Real estate (2)

 1
 1
 2
 
 1
 2
 3
Equity securities      
       
      
       
Developed markets496
 
 
 496
 509
 
 
 509
544
 
 
 544
 660
 
 
 660
Fixed income securities      
       
      
       
Government and agency obligations2
 465
 
 467
 28
 448
 
 476
2
 291
 
 293
 2
 266
 
 268
Corporate obligations
 161
 
 161
 2
 190
 1
 193
1
 113
 
 114
 1
 118
 
 119
Mortgage and asset-backed securities
 68
 
 68
 
 90
 
 90

 55
 
 55
 
 55
 
 55
Other investments      
       
      
       
Insurance contracts (2)

 60
 481
 541
 
 69
 521
 590
Insurance contracts (3)

 66
 811
 877
 
 67
 470
 537
Other
 3
 2
 5
 3
 4
 1
 8

 4
 1
 5
 
 6
 1
 7
$1,252
 $5,459
 $493
 $7,204
 $1,507
 $5,665
 $552
 $7,724
Net assets in fair value hierarchy$1,497
 $5,809
 $813
 $8,119
 $1,602
 $6,462
 $473
 $8,537
Investments measured at NAV (1)
      461
       802
Plan assets at fair value      $8,580
       $9,339
(1)
Certain investments that were measured at net asset value (NAV) per share or its equivalent as a practical expedient have not been classified in the fair value hierarchy. The fair value amounts presented in this table are intended to permit reconciliation of the fair value hierarchy to the fair value of plan assets at December 31, 2018 and 2017.
(2) 
The plans’ Level 3 investments in real estate funds are generally valued by market appraisals of the underlying investments in the funds.
(2)(3) 
The plans’ Level 3 investments in insurance contracts are generally valued using a crediting rate that approximates market returns and invest in underlying securities whose market values are unobservable and determined using pricing models, discounted cash flow methodologies, or similar techniques.

120


The table below provides a summary of the changes in fair value, including transfers in and/or out, of all financial assets measured at fair value using significant unobservable inputs (Level 3) for the Company’s pension plan assets:
2015 20142018 2017
Insurance
Contracts
 
Real
Estate
 Other Total 
Insurance
Contracts
 
Real
Estate
 Other Total
Insurance
Contracts
 
Real
Estate
 Other Total 
Insurance
Contracts
 
Real
Estate
 Other Total
U.S. Pension Plans                              
Balance January 1$
 $
 $28
 $28
 $
 $
 $31
 $31
$
 $
 $15
 $15
 $
 $
 $18
 $18
Actual return on plan assets:                              
Relating to assets still held at December 31
 
 (3) (3) 
 
 1
 1

 
 (3) (3) 
 
 (2) (2)
Relating to assets sold during the year
 
 5
 5
 
 
 4
 4

 
 4
 4
 
 
 4
 4
Purchases
 
 1
 1
 
 
 1
 1
Sales
 
 (8) (8) 
 
 (9) (9)
Purchases and sales, net
 
 (3) (3) 
 
 (5) (5)
Balance December 31$
 $
 $23
 $23
 $
 $
 $28
 $28
$

$

$13

$13

$

$

$15

$15
International Pension Plans                              
Balance January 1$521
 $29
 $2
 $552
 $540
 $49
 $2
 $591
$470
 $2
 $1
 $473
 $412
 $4
 $1
 $417
Actual return on plan assets:                              
Relating to assets still held at December 31(23) (3) 
 (26) (35) (4) 
 (39)(32) 
 
 (32) 52
 
 
 52
Relating to assets sold during the year
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Purchases20
 
 
 20
 22
 
 
 22
Sales(31) (16) 
 (47) (3) (10) 
 (13)
Transfers out of Level 3(6) 
 
 (6) (3) (6) 
 (9)
Purchases and sales, net380
 (1) 
 379
 5
 (2) 
 3
Transfers into Level 3(7) 
 
 (7) 1
 
 
 1
Balance December 31$481
 $10
 $2
 $493
 $521
 $29
 $2
 $552
$811

$1

$1

$813

$470

$2

$1

$473
The fair values of the Company’s other postretirement benefit plan assets at December 31 by asset category are as follows:
Fair Value Measurements Using Fair Value Measurements UsingFair Value Measurements Using Fair Value Measurements Using
Quoted Prices
In Active
Markets for
Identical Assets
(Level 1)
 
Significant
Other
Observable
Inputs
(Level 2)
 
Significant
Unobservable
Inputs
(Level 3)
 Total 
Quoted Prices
In Active
Markets for
Identical Assets
(Level 1)
 
Significant
Other
Observable
Inputs
(Level 2)
 
Significant
Unobservable
Inputs
(Level 3)
 Total
Quoted Prices
In Active
Markets for
Identical Assets
(Level 1)
 
Significant
Other
Observable
Inputs
(Level 2)
 
Significant
Unobservable
Inputs
(Level 3)
 Total 
Quoted Prices
In Active
Markets for
Identical Assets
(Level 1)
 
Significant
Other
Observable
Inputs
(Level 2)
 
Significant
Unobservable
Inputs
(Level 3)
 Total
2015    2014   2018    2017   
Assets                              
Cash and cash equivalents$65
 $17
 $
 $82
 $60
 $20
 $
 $80
$78
 $
 $
 $78
 $97
 $
 $
 $97
Investment funds                              
Developed markets equities53
 540
 
 593
 51
 613
 
 664
16
 
 
 16
 37
 
 
 37
Emerging markets equities29
 82
 
 111
 36
 93
 
 129
12
 
 
 12
 13
 
 
 13
Government and agency obligations2
 16
 
 18
 3
 2
 
 5
1
 
 
 1
 1
 
 
 1
Fixed income obligations
 12
 
 12
 
 12
 
 12
Equity securities                              
Developed markets229
 
 
 229
 204
 
 
 204
200
 
 
 200
 256
 
 
 256
Fixed income securities                              
Government and agency obligations
 339
 
 339
 
 333
 
 333

 141
 
 141
 
 71
 
 71
Corporate obligations
 311
 
 311
 
 336
 
 336

 116
 
 116
 
 84
 
 84
Mortgage and asset-backed securities
 218
 
 218
 
 219
 
 219

 24
 
 24
 
 23
 
 23
Other investments               
Derivatives
 
 
 
 
 2
 
 2
$378
 $1,535
 $
 $1,913
 $354
 $1,630
 $
 $1,984
Net assets in fair value hierarchy$307
 $281
 $
 $588
 $404
 $178
 $
 $582
Investments measured at NAV (1)
      380
       532
Plan assets at fair value      $968
       $1,114

121


(1)
Certain investments that were measured at net asset value (NAV) per share or its equivalent as a practical expedient have not been classified in the fair value hierarchy. The fair value amounts presented in this table are intended to permit reconciliation of the fair value hierarchy to the fair value of plan assets at December 31, 2018 and 2017.
The Company has established investment guidelines for its U.S. pension and other postretirement plans to create an asset allocation that is expected to deliver a rate of return sufficient to meet the long-term obligation of each

plan, given an acceptable level of risk. The target investment portfolio of the Company’s U.S. pension and other postretirement benefit plans is allocated 40%30% to 60%50% in U.S. equities, 20% to 40% in international equities, 15% to 25%30% in international equities, 30% to 45% in fixed-income investments, and up to 5% in cash and other investments. The portfolio’s equity weighting is consistent with the long-term nature of the plans’ benefit obligations. The expected annual standard deviation of returns of the target portfolio, which approximates 13%11%, reflects both the equity allocation and the diversification benefits among the asset classes in which the portfolio invests. For international pension plans, the targeted investment portfolio varies based on the duration of pension liabilities and local government rules and regulations. Although a significant percentage of plan assets are invested in U.S. equities, concentration risk is mitigated through the use of strategies that are diversified within management guidelines.

Expected Contributions
Expected contributions during 20162019 are approximately $50 million for U.S. pension plans, approximately $150 million for international pension plans and approximately $6015 million for other postretirement benefit plans.

Expected Benefit Payments
Expected benefit payments are as follows:
 U.S. Pension Benefits 
International Pension
Benefits
 
Other
Postretirement
Benefits
2016$528
 $206
 $101
2017532
 188
 100
2018555
 198
 104
2019596
 201
 108
2020610
 211
 111
2021 — 20253,414
 1,179
 624
 U.S. Pension Benefits 
International Pension
Benefits
 
Other
Postretirement
Benefits
2019$638
 $225
 $91
2020661
 213
 95
2021680
 221
 98
2022685
 239
 102
2023709
 249
 105
2024 — 20283,805
 1,349
 577
Expected benefit payments are based on the same assumptions used to measure the benefit obligations and include estimated future employee service.

Amounts Recognized in Other Comprehensive Income
Net loss amounts reflect experience differentials primarily relating to differences between expected and actual returns on plan assets as well as the effects of changes in actuarial assumptions. Net loss amounts in excess of certain thresholds are amortized into net pension and other postretirementperiodic benefit cost over the average remaining service life of employees. The following amounts were reflected as components of OCI:
Pension Plans 
Other Postretirement
Benefit Plans
Pension Plans 
Other Postretirement
Benefit Plans
U.S. International U.S. International 
Years Ended December 312015 2014 2013 2015 2014 2013 2015 2014 20132018 2017 2016 2018 2017 2016 2018 2017 2016
Net gain (loss) arising during the period$73
 $(2,085) $2,676
 $(66) $(779) $513
 $209
 $(223) $499
Net (loss) gain arising during the period$(397) $(19) $(743) $(505) $309
 $(380) $186
 $170
 $(45)
Prior service (cost) credit arising during the period(13) (59) (23) (4) (8) 226
 511
 (42) 26
(4) (13) (10) (10) 22
 (2) 2
 (31) (19)
$60
 $(2,144) $2,653
 $(70) $(787) $739
 $720
 $(265) $525
$(401) $(32) $(753) $(515) $331
 $(382) $188
 $139
 $(64)
Net loss amortization included in benefit cost$214
 $135
 $318
 $118
 $74
 $89
 $5
 $1
 $23
$232
 $180
 $119
 $84
 $98
 $87
 $1
 $1
 $3
Prior service (credit) cost amortization included in benefit cost(56) (61) (67) (14) (15) (4) (64) (72) (73)(50) (53) (55) (13) (11) (11) (84) (98) (106)
$158
 $74
 $251
 $104
 $59
 $85
 $(59) $(71) $(50)$182
 $127
 $64
 $71
 $87
 $76
 $(83) $(97) $(103)
The estimated net loss (gain) and prior service cost (credit) amounts that will be amortized from AOCI into net pension and postretirementperiodic benefit cost during 20162019 are $202204 million and $(67)(62) million, respectively, for pension

122


plans (of which $115$141 million and $(55)$(50) million, respectively, relates to U.S. pension plans). The estimated prior service cost (credit) amounts that will be amortized from AOCI into net pension and postretirement benefit cost during 2016$(7) million and $(78) million, respectively, for other postretirement benefit plans is $(106) million.plans.

Actuarial Assumptions
The Company reassesses its benefit plan assumptions on a regular basis. The weighted average assumptions used in determining U.S. pension and other postretirement benefit plan and international pension plan information are as follows:
U.S. Pension and Other
Postretirement Benefit Plans
 International Pension Plans
U.S. Pension and Other
Postretirement Benefit Plans
 International Pension Plans
December 312015
 2014
 2013
 2015
 2014
 2013
2018
 2017
 2016
 2018
 2017
 2016
Net periodic benefit cost                      
Discount rate4.20% 4.90% 4.10% 2.70% 3.80% 3.60%3.70% 4.30% 4.70% 2.10% 2.20% 2.80%
Expected rate of return on plan assets8.50% 8.50% 8.50% 5.70% 6.00% 5.80%8.20% 8.70% 8.60% 5.10% 5.10% 5.60%
Salary growth rate4.40% 4.50% 4.50% 2.90% 3.10% 3.30%4.30% 4.30% 4.30% 2.90% 2.90% 2.90%
Benefit obligation                      
Discount rate4.80% 4.20% 5.10% 2.80% 2.70% 3.80%4.40% 3.70% 4.30% 2.20% 2.10% 2.20%
Salary growth rate4.30% 4.40% 4.50% 2.90% 2.90% 3.10%4.30% 4.30% 4.30% 2.80% 2.90% 2.90%
For both the pension and other postretirement benefit plans, the discount rate is evaluated on measurement dates and modified to reflect the prevailing market rate of a portfolio of high-quality fixed-income debt instruments that would provide the future cash flows needed to pay the benefits included in the benefit obligation as they come due. The expected rate of return for both the pension and other postretirement benefit plans represents the average rate of return to be earned on plan assets over the period the benefits included in the benefit obligation are to be paid and is determined on a plan basis. In developing theThe expected rate of return within each plan is developed considering long-term historical returns data, are considered as well ascurrent market conditions, and actual returns on the plan assets and other capital markets experience.assets. Using this reference information, the long-term return expectations for each asset category and a weighted average expected return for each plan’s target portfolio is developed, according to the allocation among those investment categories. The expected portfolio performance reflects the contribution of active management as appropriate. For 2016,2019, the Company’s expected rate of return will range from 7.30% to 8.75%,for the same range as in 2015 for itsCompany’s U.S. pension and other postretirement benefit plans.plans will range from 7.70% to 8.10%, as compared to a range of 7.70% to 8.30% in 2018. The decrease is primarily due to a modest shift in asset allocation. The change in the weighted-average expected return on U.S. pension and other postretirement benefit plan assets from 2016 to 2018 is due to the relative weighting of the referenced plans’ assets.
The health care cost trend rate assumptions for other postretirement benefit plans are as follows:
December 312015 20142018 2017
Health care cost trend rate assumed for next year6.8% 6.9%7.0% 7.2%
Rate to which the cost trend rate is assumed to decline4.5% 4.6%4.5% 4.5%
Year that the trend rate reaches the ultimate trend rate2027
 2027
2032
 2032
A one percentage point change in the health care cost trend rate would have had the following effects:
One Percentage PointOne Percentage Point
Increase DecreaseIncrease Decrease
Effect on total service and interest cost components$34
 $(27)$11
 $(9)
Effect on benefit obligation75
 (64)88
 (74)

Savings Plans
The Company also maintains defined contribution savings plans in the United States. The Company matches a percentage of each employee’s contributions consistent with the provisions of the plan for which the employee is eligible. Total employer contributions to these plans in 2015, 20142018, 2017 and 20132016 were $125136 million, $124131 million and $138126 million, respectively.


123


14.15.    Other (Income) Expense, Net
Other (income) expense, net, consisted of:
Years Ended December 312015 2014 20132018 2017 2016
Interest income$(289) $(266) $(264)$(343) $(385) $(328)
Interest expense672
 732
 801
772
 754
 693
Exchange losses1,277
 180
 290
Equity income from affiliates(205) (257) (404)
Exchange losses (gains)145
 (11) 174
Income on investments in equity securities, net (1)
(324) (352) (43)
Net periodic defined benefit plan (credit) cost other than service cost(512) (512) (531)
Other, net72
 (12,002) (12)(140) 6
 224
$1,527
 $(11,613) $411
$(402) $(500) $189
(1) Includes net realized and unrealized gains and losses on investments in equity securities either owned directly or through ownership interests in investment funds.
Income on investments in equity securities, net, in 2018 reflects the recognition of unrealized net gains pursuant to the prospective adoption of ASU 2016-01 on January 1, 2018 (see Note 2). The increase in exchange losses in 2015 was driven by Venezuela. During the second quarter of 2015, upon evaluation of evolving economic conditions in Venezuela and volatility in the country, the Company determined it was unlikely that all outstanding net monetary assets would be settled at the official rate of 6.30 VEF (Bolívar Fuertes) per U.S. dollar. Accordingly, during the second quarter of 2015, the Company recorded a charge of $715 million to devalue its net monetary assets in Venezuela to an amount that included the Company’s estimate of the U.S. dollar amount that would ultimately be collected. During the third quarter of 2015, the Company recorded additional exchange losses of $138 million in the aggregate reflecting the ongoing effect of translating transactions and net monetary assets consistent with the second quarter. In the fourth quarter of 2015, as a result of the further deterioration of economic conditions in Venezuela, and continued declines in transactions which were settled at the official rate, the Company began using the SIMADI rate to report its Venezuelan operations. The Company also revalued its remaining net monetary assets at the SIMADI rate, which resulted in an additional charge in the fourth quarter of 2015 of $161 million. Exchange losses in 2013 reflect $140 million of losses due to a Venezuelan currency devaluation. In February 2013, the Venezuelan government devalued its currency from 4.30 VEF per U.S. dollar to 6.30 VEF per U.S. dollar. The Company recognized losses due to exchange of approximately $140 million in 2013 resulting from the remeasurement of the local monetary assets and liabilities at the new rate. Since January 2010, Venezuela has been designated hyperinflationary and, as a result, local foreign operations are remeasured in U.S. dollars with the impact recorded in results of operations.
The declineincome on investments in equity income from affiliatessecurities, net, in 2015 and 2014 as compared with 20132017 was driven primarily by the termination of the Company’s relationship with AZLPhigher realized gains on June 30, 2014 (see Note 8). In 2015, the lower equity income from AZLP was partially offset by higher equity income from certain research investment funds.sales.
Other, net (as presented in the table above) in 20152018 includes a $680gain of $115 million net charge related to the settlement of Vioxx shareholder class actioncertain patent litigation (see Note 10) and an expense11), income of $78 million for a contribution of investments in equity securities to the Merck Foundation, partially offset by a $250 million gain on the sale of certain migraine clinical development programs (see Note 4), a $147 million gain on the divestiture of Merck’s remaining ophthalmics business in international markets (see Note 4), and the recognition of $182 million of deferred income related to AstraZeneca’s option exercise (see Note 8). Other, net in 2014 includes an $11.2 billion gain on the divestiture of MCC (see Note 4), a gain of $741$99 million related to AstraZeneca’s option exercise (see Note 8)9), a $480 million gain on the divestiture of certain ophthalmic products in several international markets (see Note 4),and a gain of $204$85 million resulting from the receipt of a milestone payment for an out-licensed migraine clinical development program. Other, net in 2018 also includes $144 million of goodwill impairment charges related to certain businesses in the Healthcare Services segment (see Note 8), as well as $41 million of charges related to the divestiturewrite-down of Sirna (see Note 4) andassets held for sale to fair value in anticipation of the recognitiondissolution of $140the Company’s joint venture with Supera Farma Laboratorios S.A. in Brazil.
Other, net in 2017 includes income of $232 million of deferred income related to AstraZeneca’s option exercise partially offset byand a $628$191 million loss on extinguishment of debt (see Note 9) and10).
Other, net in 2016 includes a $93charge of $625 million goodwill impairment charge related to the Company’s joint venture with Supera (see Note 7).previously disclosed settlement of worldwide patent litigation related to Keytruda, a gain of $117 million related to the settlement of other patent litigation, gains of $100 million resulting from the receipt of milestone payments for out-licensed migraine clinical development programs, and $98 million of income related to AstraZeneca’s option exercise.
Interest paid was $653777 million in 2015,2018, $852723 million in 20142017 and $922686 million in 2013.2016.


124

Table of Contents

15.16.    Taxes on Income
A reconciliation between the effective tax rate and the U.S. statutory rate is as follows:
2015 2014 20132018 2017 2016
Amount Tax Rate Amount Tax Rate Amount Tax RateAmount Tax Rate Amount Tax Rate Amount Tax Rate
U.S. statutory rate applied to income before taxes$1,890
 35.0 % $6,049
 35.0 % $1,941
 35.0 %$1,827
 21.0 % $2,282
 35.0 % $1,631
 35.0 %
Differential arising from:                      
Impact of the TCJA289
 3.3
 2,625
 40.3
 
 
Valuation allowances269
 3.1
 632
 9.7
 (5) (0.1)
Impact of purchase accounting adjustments, including amortization267
 3.1
 713
 10.9
 623
 13.4
State taxes201
 2.3
 77
 1.2
 173
 3.7
Restructuring56
 0.6
 142
 2.2
 145
 3.1
Foreign earnings(2,105) (39.0) (1,367) (7.9) (1,296) (23.4)(245) (2.8) (1,654) (25.4) (1,546) (33.2)
R&D tax credit(96) (1.1) (71) (1.1) (58) (1.3)
Tax settlements(417) (7.7) (89) (0.5) (497) (9.0)(22) (0.3) (356) (5.5) 
 
AstraZeneca option exercise
 
 (774) (4.5) 
 
Sale of Sirna Therapeutics, Inc.
 
 (357) (2.1) 
 
The American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012
 
 
 
 (269) (4.8)
Impact of purchase accounting adjustments, including amortization797
 14.8
 1,013
 5.9
 990
 17.8
Foreign currency devaluation related to Venezuela321
 5.9
 
 
 27
 0.5
Unremitted foreign earnings260
 4.8
 (209) (1.2) (81) (1.5)
Restructuring167
 3.1
 289
 1.7
 224
 4.0
State taxes159
 2.9
 7
 
 44
 0.8
U.S. health care reform legislation66
 1.2
 134
 0.8
 65
 1.2
Divestiture of Merck Consumer Care
 
 440
 2.5
 
 
Other (1)
(196) (3.6) 213
 1.2
 (120) (2.1)(38) (0.4) (287) (4.4) (245) (5.2)
$942
 17.4 % $5,349
 30.9 % $1,028
 18.5 %$2,508
 28.8 % $4,103
 62.9 % $718
 15.4 %
(1) 
Other includes the tax effecteffects of contingency reserves, research credits, tax rate changeslosses on foreign subsidiaries and miscellaneous items.
The Company’s 2017 effective tax rate reflected a provisional impact of 40.3% for the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), which was enacted on December 22, 2017. Among other provisions, the TCJA reduced the U.S. federal corporate statutory tax rate from 35% to 21% effective January 1, 2018, requires companies to pay a one-time transition tax on undistributed earnings of certain foreign subsidiaries, and creates new taxes on certain foreign sourced earnings.
The Company reflected the impact of the TCJA in its 2017 financial statements. However, since application of certain provisions of the TCJA remained subject to further interpretation, in certain instances the Company made reasonable estimates of the effects of the TCJA. In 2018, these amounts were finalized as described below.
The one-time transition tax is based on the Company’s post-1986 undistributed earnings and profits (E&P). For a substantial portion of these undistributed E&P, the Company had not previously provided deferred taxes as these earnings were deemed by Merck to be retained indefinitely by subsidiary companies for reinvestment. The Company recorded a provisional amount in 2017 for its one-time transition tax liability of $5.3 billion. This provisional amount was reduced by the reversal of $2.0 billion of deferred taxes that were previously recorded in connection with the merger of Schering-Plough Corporation in 2009 for certain undistributed foreign E&P. On the basis of revised calculations of post-1986 undistributed foreign E&P and finalization of the amounts held in cash or other specified assets, the Company recognized a measurement-period adjustment of $124 million in 2018 related to the transition tax obligation, with a corresponding adjustment to income tax expense during the period, resulting in a revised transition tax obligation of $5.5 billion. The Company anticipates that it will be able to utilize certain foreign tax credits to partially reduce the transition tax payment. As permitted under the TCJA, the Company has elected to pay the one-time transition tax over a period of eight years. After payment of the amount due in 2018, the remaining transition tax liability at December 31, 2018, is $4.9 billion, of which $275 million is included in Income Taxes Payable and the remainder of $4.6 billion is included in Other Noncurrent Liabilities. As a result of the TCJA, the Company has made a determination it is no longer indefinitely reinvested with respect to its undistributed earnings from foreign subsidiaries and has provided a deferred tax liability for withholding tax that would apply.
In 2017, the Company remeasured its deferred tax assets and liabilities at the new federal statutory tax rate of 21%, which resulted in a provisional deferred tax benefit of $779 million. On the basis of clarifications to the deferred tax benefit calculation, the Company recorded measurement-period adjustments in 2018 of $32 million related to deferred income taxes.
Beginning in 2018, the TCJA includes a tax on “global intangible low-taxed income” (GILTI) as defined in the TCJA. The Company has made an accounting policy election to account for the tax effects of the GILTI tax in the income tax provision in future periods as the tax arises.

The foreign earnings tax rate differentials in the tax rate reconciliation above primarily reflect the impacts of operations in jurisdictions with different tax rates than the United States, particularly Ireland and Switzerland, as well as Singapore and Puerto Rico which operate under tax incentive grants (which begin to expire in 2022), where the earnings havehad been indefinitely reinvested, thereby yielding a favorable impact on the effective tax rate as compared with the 35.0%U.S. statutory rate.rate of 35% in 2017 and 2016 and 21% in 2018. The foreign earnings tax rate differentials do not include the impact of intangible asset impairment charges, amortization of purchase accounting adjustments or restructuring costs. These items are presented separately as they each represent a significant, separately disclosed pretax cost or charge, and a substantial portion of each of these items relates to jurisdictions with lower tax rates than the United States. Therefore, the impact of recording these expense items in lower tax rate jurisdictions is an unfavorable impact on the effective tax rate as compared to the 35.0%U.S. statutory rate.
The Company’s 2015 effective tax rate reflects the impact of the Protecting Americans From Tax Hikes Act, which was signed into law on December 18, 2015, extending the research credit permanently35% in 2017 and the controlled foreign corporation look-through provisions for five years. The Company’s 2014 effective tax rate reflects the impact of the Tax Increase Prevention Act, which was signed into law on December 19, 2014, extending the research credit2016 and the controlled foreign corporation look-through provisions for one year only. The American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 was signed into law on January 2, 2013, extending the research credit and the controlled foreign corporation look-through provisions for two years retroactively from January 1, 2012 through December 31, 2013. The Company recorded the entire 2012 benefit of $269 million21% in 2013, the financial statement period that included the date of enactment.2018.
Income before taxes consisted of:
Years Ended December 312015 2014 20132018 2017 2016
Domestic$2,247
 $15,730
 $3,513
$3,717
 $3,483
 $518
Foreign3,154
 1,553
 2,032
4,984
 3,038
 4,141
$5,401
 $17,283
 $5,545
$8,701
 $6,521
 $4,659

125

Table of Contents

Taxes on income consisted of:
Years Ended December 312015 2014 20132018 2017 2016
Current provision          
Federal$732
 $7,136
 $568
$536
 $5,585
 $1,166
Foreign844
 438
 923
2,281
 1,229
 916
State130
 375
 (133)200
 (90) 157
1,706
 7,949
 1,358
3,017
 6,724
 2,239
Deferred provision          
Federal(552) (2,162) 30
(402) (2,958) (1,255)
Foreign(163) (201) (398)(64) 75
 (225)
State(49) (237) 38
(43) 262
 (41)
(764) (2,600) (330)(509) (2,621) (1,521)
$942
 $5,349
 $1,028
$2,508
 $4,103
 $718

Deferred income taxes at December 31 consisted of:
 2015 2014
  
Assets Liabilities Assets Liabilities
Intangibles$
 $4,962
 $
 $3,358
Inventory related49
 752
 56
 699
Accelerated depreciation43
 910
 58
 892
Unremitted foreign earnings
 2,124
 
 2,016
Pensions and other postretirement benefits435
 131
 778
 156
Compensation related535
 
 578
 
Unrecognized tax benefits412
 
 401
 
Net operating losses and other tax credit carryforwards565
 
 379
 
Other1,217
 
 1,535
 65
Subtotal3,256
 8,879
 3,785
 7,186
Valuation allowance(304)   (265)  
Total deferred taxes$2,952
 $8,879
 $3,520
 $7,186
Net deferred income taxes  $5,927
   $3,666
Recognized as:       
Other assets$608
   $801
  
Deferred income taxes  $6,535
   $4,467
As discussed in Note 2, the Company elected to retrospectively early adopt new accounting guidance that requires that all deferred tax assets and liabilities, along with any related valuation allowance, be classified as noncurrent on the balance sheet. The adoption of this standard had the following impact on the 2014 Consolidated Balance Sheet amounts as previously reported: Other current assets reduced by $568 million, Other assets increased by $400 million, Accrued and other current liabilities reduced by $369 million, Deferred income taxes increased by $201 million.  Total assets and total liabilities as previously reported at December 31, 2014 were each reduced by $168 million.
 2018 2017
  
Assets Liabilities Assets Liabilities
Product intangibles and licenses$720
 $1,640
 $307
 $2,256
Inventory related32
 377
 29
 499
Accelerated depreciation
 582
 28
 642
Pensions and other postretirement benefits565
 151
 498
 192
Compensation related291
 
 314
 
Unrecognized tax benefits174
 
 156
 
Net operating losses and other tax credit carryforwards715
 
 654
 
Other621
 66
 909
 52
Subtotal3,118
 2,816
 2,895
 3,641
Valuation allowance(1,348)   (900)  
Total deferred taxes$1,770
 $2,816
 $1,995
 $3,641
Net deferred income taxes  $1,046
   $1,646
Recognized as:       
Other assets$656
   $573
  
Deferred income taxes  $1,702
   $2,219
The Company has net operating loss (NOL) carryforwards in several jurisdictions. As of December 31, 2015,2018, $257715 million of deferred taxes on NOL carryforwards relate to foreign jurisdictions, none of which are individually significant.jurisdictions. Valuation allowances of $304 million1.3 billion have been established on these foreign NOL carryforwards and other foreign deferred tax assets. In addition, theThe Company has $308 million of deferred tax assetsno NOL carryforwards relating to various U.S. tax credit carryforwards and NOL carryforwards, all of which are expected to be fully utilized prior to expiry.jurisdictions.
Income taxes paid in 2015, 20142018, 2017 and 20132016 were$1.5 billion, $4.9 billion and $1.8 billion, $7.9 billion and $2.3 billion, respectively. Income taxes paid in 2014 reflects approximately $5.0 billion of taxes paid on the divestiture of MCC. Tax benefits relating to stock option exercises were $109$77 million in 2015,2018, $20273 million in 20142017 and $70$147 million in 2013.2016.

126

Table of Contents

A reconciliation of the beginning and ending amount of unrecognized tax benefits is as follows:
2015 2014 20132018 2017 2016
Balance January 1$3,534
 $3,503
 $4,425
$1,723
 $3,494
 $3,448
Additions related to current year positions198
 389
 320
221
 146
 196
Additions related to prior year positions53
 23
 177
142
 520
 75
Reductions for tax positions of prior years (1)
(59) (156) (747)(73) (1,038) (90)
Settlements (1)
(184) (161) (603)(91) (1,388) (92)
Lapse of statute of limitations(94) (64) (69)(29) (11) (43)
Balance December 31$3,448
 $3,534
 $3,503
$1,893
 $1,723
 $3,494
(1) 
Amounts reflect the settlements with the IRS as discussed below.
If the Company were to recognize the unrecognized tax benefits of $3.4$1.9 billion at December 31, 2015,2018, the income tax provision would reflect a favorable net impact of $3.21.8 billion.
The Company is under examination by numerous tax authorities in various jurisdictions globally. The Company believes that it is reasonably possible that the total amount of unrecognized tax benefits as of December 31, 20152018 could decrease by up to approximately $1.2 billion750 million in the next 12 months as a result of various audit closures, settlements or the expiration of the statute of limitations. The ultimate finalization of the Company’s examinations with relevant taxing authorities can include formal administrative and legal proceedings, which could have a significant impact on the timing of the reversal of unrecognized tax benefits. The Company believes that its reserves for uncertain tax positions are adequate to cover existing risks or exposures. However, there is one item that is currently under discussion with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) relating to the 2006 through 2008 examination. The Company has concluded that its position should be sustained upon audit. However, if this item were to result in an unfavorable outcome or settlement, it could have a material adverse impact on the Company’s financial position, liquidity and results of operations.
InterestExpenses for interest and penalties associated with uncertain tax positions amounted to an expense of $10251 million in 20152018, $183 million in 2017 and $9134 million in 2014 and a benefit of $319 million in 2013.2016. These amounts reflect the beneficial impacts of various tax settlements, including those discussed below. Liabilities for accrued interest and penalties were $766372 million and $659341 million as of December 31, 20152018 and 2014,2017, respectively.

In 2017, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) concluded its examinations of Merck’s 2006-2011 U.S. federal income tax returns. As a result, the Company was required to make a payment of approximately $2.8 billion. The Company’s reserves for unrecognized tax benefits for the years under examination exceeded the adjustments relating to this examination period and therefore the Company recorded a net $234 million tax benefit in 2017. This net benefit reflects reductions in reserves for unrecognized tax benefits for tax positions relating to the years that were under examination, partially offset by additional reserves for tax positions not previously reserved for, as well as adjustments to reserves for unrecognized tax benefits relating to years which remain open to examination that are affected by this settlement.
The IRS is currently conducting examinations of the Company’s tax returns for the years 20062012 through 2008, as well as 2010 and 2011. Although the IRS’s examination of the Company’s 2002-2005 federal tax returns was concluded prior to 2015, one issue relating to a refund claim remained open. During 2015, this issue was resolved and the Company received a refund of approximately $715 million, which exceeded the receivable previously recorded by the Company, resulting in a tax benefit of $410 million.
2014. In addition, various state and foreign tax examinations are in progress. For most of its other significant taxprogress and for these jurisdictions, (both U.S. state and foreign), the Company’s income tax returns are open for examination for the period 2003 through 2015.2018.
In 2013, IRS finalized its examination of Schering-Plough’s 2007-2009 tax years. The Company’s unrecognized tax benefits for the years under examination exceeded the adjustments related to this examination period and therefore the Company recorded a net $165 million tax provision benefit in 2013.
In 2013, the Company recorded an out-of-period net tax benefit of $160 million related to an open issue originally raised during the 2003-2006 IRS examination. That issue was settled in the fourth quarter of 2012, with final resolution relating to interest owed being reached in the first quarter of 2013. The Company’s unrecognized tax benefits related to this issue exceeded the settlement amount. Management concluded that the exclusion of this benefit was not material to prior year financial statements.
At December 31, 2015, foreign earnings of $59.2 billion have been retained indefinitely by subsidiary companies for reinvestment; therefore, no provision has been made for income taxes that would be payable upon the distribution of such earnings and it would not be practicable to determine the amount of the related unrecognized deferred income tax liability. In addition, the Company has subsidiaries operating in Puerto Rico and Singapore under tax incentive grants that begin to expire in 2022.

127

Table of Contents

16.17.    Earnings per Share
The calculations of earnings per share (shares in millions) are as follows:
Years Ended December 312015 2014 20132018 2017 2016
Net income attributable to Merck & Co., Inc.$4,442
 $11,920
 $4,404
$6,220
 $2,394
 $3,920
Average common shares outstanding2,816
 2,894
 2,963
2,664
 2,730
 2,766
Common shares issuable (1)
25
 34
 33
15
 18
 21
Average common shares outstanding assuming dilution2,841
 2,928
 2,996
2,679
 2,748
 2,787
Basic earnings per common share attributable to Merck & Co., Inc. common shareholders$1.58
 $4.12
 $1.49
$2.34
 $0.88
 $1.42
Earnings per common share assuming dilution attributable to Merck & Co., Inc. common shareholders$1.56
 $4.07
 $1.47
$2.32
 $0.87
 $1.41
(1) 
Issuable primarily under share-based compensation plans.
In 2015, 20142018, 2017 and 2013, 92016, 6 million, 45 million and 2513 million, respectively, of common shares issuable under share-based compensation plans were excluded from the computation of earnings per common share assuming dilution because the effect would have been antidilutive.
17.

18.   Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)
Changes in AOCI by component are as follows:
Derivatives Investments 
Employee
Benefit
Plans
 
Cumulative
Translation
Adjustment
 
Accumulated Other
Comprehensive
Income (Loss)
Derivatives Investments 
Employee
Benefit
Plans
 
Cumulative
Translation
Adjustment
 
Accumulated Other
Comprehensive
Income (Loss)
Balance January 1, 2013, net of taxes$(97) $73
 $(3,667) $(991) $(4,682)
Balance January 1, 2016, net of taxes$404
 $41
 $(2,407) $(2,186) $(4,148)
Other comprehensive income (loss) before reclassification adjustments, pretax335
 33
 3,917
 (383) 3,902
210
 (38) (1,199) (150) (1,177)
Tax(132) (23) (1,365) (100) (1,620)(72) 16
 363
 (19) 288
Other comprehensive income (loss) before reclassification adjustments, net of taxes203
 10
 2,552
 (483) 2,282
138
 (22) (836) (169) (889)
Reclassification adjustments, pretax42
(1) 
(39)
(2) 
286
(3) 

 289
(314)
(1) 
(31)
(2) 
37
(3) 

 (308)
Tax(16) 10
 (80) 
 (86)110
 9
 
 
 119
Reclassification adjustments, net of taxes26
 (29) 206
 
 203
(204) (22) 37
 
 (189)
Other comprehensive income (loss), net of taxes229
 (19) 2,758
 (483) 2,485
(66) (44) (799) (169) (1,078)
Balance December 31, 2013, net of taxes132
 54
 (909) (1,474) (2,197)
Balance December 31, 2016, net of taxes338
 (3) (3,206) (2,355) (5,226)
Other comprehensive income (loss) before reclassification adjustments, pretax778
 48
 (3,196) (412) (2,782)(561) 212
 438
 235
 324
Tax(285) (17) 1,067
 (92) 673
207
 (35) (106) 166
 232
Other comprehensive income (loss) before reclassification adjustments, net of taxes493
 31
 (2,129) (504) (2,109)(354) 177
 332
 401
 556
Reclassification adjustments, pretax(146)
(1) 
43
(2) 
62
(3) 

 (41)(141)
(1) 
(291)
(2) 
117
(3) 

 (315)
Tax51
 (17) (10) 
 24
49
 56
 (30) 
 75
Reclassification adjustments, net of taxes(95) 26
 52
 
 (17)(92) (235) 87
 
 (240)
Other comprehensive income (loss), net of taxes398
 57
 (2,077) (504) (2,126)(446) (58) 419
 401
 316
Balance December 31, 2014, net of taxes530
 111
 (2,986)
(4) 
(1,978) (4,323)
Balance December 31, 2017, net of taxes(108) (61) (2,787)
(4) 
(1,954) (4,910)
Other comprehensive income (loss) before reclassification adjustments, pretax526
 (9) 710
 (158) 1,069
228
 (108) (728) (84) (692)
Tax(177) (13) (272) (28) (490)(55) 1
 169
 (139) (24)
Other comprehensive income (loss) before reclassification adjustments, net of taxes349
 (22) 438
 (186) 579
173
 (107) (559) (223) (716)
Reclassification adjustments, pretax(731)
(1) 
(73)
(2) 
203
(3) 
(22) (623)157
(1) 
97
(2) 
170
(3) 

 424
Tax256
 25
 (62) 
 219
(33) 
 (36) 
 (69)
Reclassification adjustments, net of taxes(475) (48) 141
 (22) (404)124
 97
 134
 
 355
Other comprehensive income (loss), net of taxes(126) (70) 579
 (208) 175
297
 (10) (425) (223) (361)
Balance December 31, 2015, net of taxes$404
 $41
 $(2,407)
(4) 
$(2,186) $(4,148)
         
Adoption of ASU 2018-02 (see Note 2)(23) 1
 (344) 100
 (266)
Adoption of ASU 2016-01 (see Note 2)
 (8) 
 
 (8)
         
Balance December 31, 2018, net of taxes$166

$(78)
$(3,556)
(4) 
$(2,077) $(5,545)
(1) 
Relates to foreign currency cash flow hedges that were reclassified from AOCI to Sales.
(2) 
Represents net realized (gains) losses on the sales of available-for-sale investments that were reclassified from AOCI to Other (income) expense, net. In 2017 and 2016, these amounts included both investments in debt and equity securities; however, as a result of the adoption of ASU 2016-01 (see Note 2), in 2018, these amounts relate only to investments in available-for-sale debt securities.
(3) 
Includes net amortization of prior service cost and actuarial gains and losses included in net periodic benefit cost (see Note 13)14).
(4) 
Includes pension plan net loss of $3.3$4.4 billion and $3.5 billion at December 31, 20152018 and 2014,2017, respectively, and other postretirement benefit plan net (gain) loss of $86$(170) million and $228$(16) million at December 31, 20152018 and in 2014,2017, respectively, as well as pension plan prior service credit of $414$314 million and $473$326 million at December 31, 20152018 and 2014,2017, respectively, and other postretirement benefit plan prior service credit of $547$375 million and $257$383 million at December 31, 20152018 and 2014.2017, respectively.

128


Table of Contents

18.19.    Segment Reporting
The Company’s operations are principally managed on a products basis and are comprised ofinclude four operating segments, which are the Pharmaceutical, Animal Health, Healthcare Services and Alliances segments. The Pharmaceutical and Healthcare Services.Animal Health segments are the only reportable segments. The Animal Health Alliances and Healthcare Services segments are not materialsegment met the criteria for separate reporting and are includedbecame a reportable segment in all other in the table below. 2018.
The Pharmaceutical segment includes human health pharmaceutical and vaccine products marketed either directly by the Company or through joint ventures.products. Human health pharmaceutical products consist of therapeutic and preventive agents, generally sold by prescription, for the treatment of human disorders. The Company sells these human health pharmaceutical products primarily to drug wholesalers and retailers, hospitals, government agencies and managed health care providers such as health maintenance organizations, pharmacy benefit managers and other institutions. VaccineHuman health vaccine products consist of preventive pediatric, adolescent and adult vaccines, primarily administered at physician offices. The Company sells these human health vaccines primarily to physicians, wholesalers, physician distributors and government entities. A large component of pediatric and adolescent vaccines is soldvaccine sales are made to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Vaccines for Children program, which is funded by the U.S. government. Additionally, the Company sells vaccines to the Federal government for placement into vaccine stockpiles. Sales of vaccines in most major European markets were marketed through the Company’s SPMSD joint venture until its termination on December 31, 2016 (see Note 9).
The Company also has animal health operations that discover, develop, manufactureAnimal Health segment discovers, develops, manufactures and marketmarkets animal health products, including vaccines,pharmaceutical and vaccine products, for the prevention, treatment and control of disease in all major livestock and companion animal species, which the Company sells to veterinarians, distributors and animal producers. Merck’s Alliances segment primarily includes results from the Company’s relationship with AstraZeneca LP until the termination of that relationship on June 30, 2014.
The Company’s Healthcare Services segment provides services and solutions that focus on engagement, health analytics and clinical services to improve the value of care delivered to patients. On October 1, 2014,
The Alliances segment primarily includes activity from the Company divested its Consumer Care segmentCompany’s relationship with AstraZeneca LP related to sales of Nexium and Prilosec, which concluded in 2018 (see Note 4) that developed, manufactured and marketed over-the-counter, foot care and sun care products.9).
The accounting policies for the segments described above are the same as those described in Note 2.

129


Sales of the Company’s products were as follows:
Years Ended December 312015 2014 20132018 2017 2016
Primary Care and Women’s Health     
Cardiovascular     
Zetia$2,526
 $2,650
 $2,658
Vytorin1,251
 1,516
 1,643
Diabetes     
Januvia3,863
 3,931
 4,004
Janumet2,151
 2,071
 1,829
General Medicine and Women’s Health     
NuvaRing732
 723
 686
Implanon/Nexplanon588
 502
 403
Dulera536
 460
 324
Follistim AQ383
 412
 481
Hospital and Specialty     
Hepatitis     
PegIntron182
 381
 496
HIV     
Isentress1,511
 1,673
 1,643
Hospital Acute Care     
Cubicin (1)
1,127
 25
 24
Cancidas573
 681
 660
Invanz569
 529
 488
Noxafil487
 402
 309
Bridion353
 340
 288
Primaxin313
 329
 335
Immunology     
Remicade1,794
 2,372
 2,271
Simponi690
 689
 500
U.S. Int’l Total U.S. Int’l Total U.S. Int’l Total
Pharmaceutical:                 
Oncology                      
Keytruda566
 55
 
$4,150
 $3,021
 $7,171
 $2,309
 $1,500
 $3,809
 $792
 $610
 $1,402
Emend535
 553
 507
312
 210
 522
 342
 213
 556
 356
 193
 549
Temodar312
 350
 708
6
 209
 214
 16
 256
 271
 15
 268
 283
Diversified Brands     
Respiratory     
Singulair931
 1,092
 1,196
Nasonex858
 1,099
 1,335
Clarinex187
 232
 235
Other     
Cozaar/Hyzaar667
 806
 1,006
Arcoxia471
 519
 484
Fosamax359
 470
 560
Zocor217
 258
 301
Propecia183
 264
 283
Vaccines (2)
     
Alliance revenue - Lynparza127
 61
 187
 
 20
 20
 
 
 
Alliance revenue - Lenvima95
 54
 149
 
 
 
 
 
 
Vaccines (1)
                 
Gardasil/Gardasil 9
1,908
 1,738
 1,831
1,873
 1,279
 3,151
 1,565
 743
 2,308
 1,780
 393
 2,173
ProQuad/M-M-R II/Varivax1,505
 1,394
 1,306
1,430
 368
 1,798
 1,374
 303
 1,676
 1,362
 279
 1,640
Pneumovax 23627
 281
 907
 581
 240
 821
 447
 193
 641
RotaTeq496
 232
 728
 481
 204
 686
 482
 169
 652
Zostavax749
 765
 758
22
 195
 217
 422
 246
 668
 518
 168
 685
RotaTeq610
 659
 636
Pneumovax 23542
 746
 653
Hospital Acute Care                 
Bridion386
 531
 917
 239
 465
 704
 77
 405
 482
Noxafil353
 389
 742
 309
 327
 636
 284
 312
 595
Invanz253
 243
 496
 361
 241
 602
 329
 233
 561
Cubicin (1)
191
 176
 367
 189
 193
 382
 906
 181
 1,087
Cancidas12
 314
 326
 20
 402
 422
 25
 533
 558
Primaxin7
 258
 265
 10
 270
 280
 4
 293
 297
Immunology                 
Simponi
 893
 893
 
 819
 819
 
 766
 766
Remicade
 582
 582
 
 837
 837
 
 1,268
 1,268
Neuroscience                 
Belsomra96
 164
 260
 98
 112
 210
 84
 70
 154
Virology                 
Isentress/Isentress HD513
 627
 1,140
 565
 639
 1,204
 721
 666
 1,387
Zepatier8
 447
 455
 771
 888
 1,660
 488
 67
 555
Cardiovascular                 
Zetia45
 813
 857
 352
 992
 1,344
 1,588
 972
 2,560
Vytorin10
 487
 497
 124
 627
 751
 473
 668
 1,141
Atozet
 347
 347
 
 225
 225
 1
 146
 146
Adempas
 329
 329
 
 300
 300
 
 169
 169
Diabetes                 
Januvia1,969
 1,718
 3,686
 2,153
 1,584
 3,737
 2,286
 1,622
 3,908
Janumet811
 1,417
 2,228
 863
 1,296
 2,158
 984
 1,217
 2,201
Women’s Health                 
NuvaRing722
 180
 902
 564
 197
 761
 576
 202
 777
Implanon/Nexplanon495
 208
 703
 496
 191
 686
 420
 186
 606
Diversified Brands                 
Singulair20
 688
 708
 40
 692
 732
 40
 874
 915
Cozaar/Hyzaar23
 431
 453
 18
 466
 484
 16
 494
 511
Nasonex23
 353
 376
 54
 333
 387
 184
 352
 537
Arcoxia
 335
 335
 
 363
 363
 
 450
 450
Follistim AQ115
 153
 268
 123
 174
 298
 157
 197
 355
Dulera186
 28
 214
 261
 26
 287
 412
 24
 436
Fosamax4
 205
 209
 6
 235
 241
 5
 279
 284
Other pharmaceutical (3)(2)
4,553
 5,356
 6,596
1,228
 2,855
 4,090
 1,148
 2,917
 4,065
 1,261
 3,158
 4,420
Total Pharmaceutical segment sales34,782
 36,042
 37,437
16,608

21,081

37,689

15,854

19,536

35,390

17,073

18,077

35,151
Other segment sales (4)
3,659
 5,758
 6,397
Animal Health:                 
Livestock528
 2,102
 2,630
 471
 2,013
 2,484
 446
 1,841
 2,287
Companion Animals710
 872
 1,582
 619
 772
 1,391
 543
 648
 1,191
Total Animal Health segment sales1,238

2,974

4,212

1,090

2,785

3,875

989

2,489

3,478
Other segment sales (3)
248
 2
 250
 396
 1
 397
 385
 
 385
Total segment sales38,441
 41,800
 43,834
18,094

24,057

42,151

17,340

22,322

39,662

18,447

20,566

39,014
Other (5)
1,057
 437
 199
Other (4)
118
 26
 143
 84
 376
 460
 31
 763
 793
$39,498
 $42,237
 $44,033
$18,212
 $24,083

$42,294

$17,424
 $22,698

$40,122

$18,478
 $21,329

$39,807
U.S. plus international may not equal total due to rounding.
(1) 
Sales of Cubicin in 2015 represent sales subsequent to the Cubist acquisition date. Sales of Cubicin in 2014On December 31, 2016, Merck and 2013 reflect sales in Japan pursuant to a previously existing licensing agreement.
(2)
These amounts do not reflect sales ofSanofi terminated their equally-owned joint venture, SPMSD, which marketed vaccines sold in most major European markets (see Note 9). Accordingly, vaccine sales in 2018 and 2017 include sales in the European markets that were previously part of SPMSD. Amounts for 2016 do not include sales of vaccines sold through the Company’s joint venture, Sanofi Pasteur MSD,SPMSD, the results of which are reflected in equity income from affiliates which is included in Other (income) expense, net. These amountsAmounts for 2016 do, however, reflectinclude supply sales to Sanofi Pasteur MSD.SPMSD.
(3)(2) 
Other pharmaceutical primarily reflects sales of other human health pharmaceutical products, including products within the franchises not listed separately.
(4)(3) 
Represents the non-reportable segments of Animal Health, Alliances and Healthcare Services as well as Consumer Care until its divestiture on October 1, 2014 (see Note 4). The Alliances segment includes revenue from the Company’s relationship with AZLP until termination on June 30, 2014 (see Note 8).and Alliances.
(5)(4) 
Other revenues areis primarily comprised of miscellaneous corporate revenues, including revenue hedging activities, as well as third-party manufacturing sales. Other revenues in 20142018, 2017 and 2016 also include $232includes approximately $95 million, received by Merck in connection with$85 million and $170 million, respectively, related to the sale of the U.S. marketing rights to Saphris (see Note 4). Other revenues in 2013 reflect $50 million of revenue for the out-license of a pipeline compound.
certain products.

130


Consolidated revenues by geographic area where derived are as follows:
Years Ended December 312015 2014 20132018 2017 2016
United States$17,519
 $17,071
 $18,246
$18,212
 $17,424
 $18,478
Europe, Middle East and Africa10,677
 13,174
 13,140
12,213
 11,478
 10,953
Asia Pacific3,820
 3,951
 3,845
Japan2,673
 3,471
 4,044
3,212
 3,122
 2,846
Asia Pacific (other than Japan and China)2,909
 2,751
 2,483
Latin America2,823
 3,151
 3,203
2,415
 2,339
 2,155
China2,184
 1,586
 1,435
Other1,986
 1,419
 1,555
1,149
 1,422
 1,457
$39,498
 $42,237
 $44,033
$42,294
 $40,122
 $39,807
A reconciliation of total segment profits to consolidated Income before taxes is as follows:
Years Ended December 312015 2014 20132018 2017 2016
Segment profits:          
Pharmaceutical segment$21,658
 $22,164
 $22,983
$24,292
 $22,495
 $22,141
Animal Health segment1,659
 1,552
 1,357
Other segments1,659
 2,458
 3,049
103
 275
 146
Total segment profits23,317
 24,622
 26,032
26,054
 24,322
 23,644
Other profits810
 627
 63
6
 26
 481
Unallocated:          
Interest income289
 266
 264
343
 385
 328
Interest expense(672) (732) (801)(772) (754) (693)
Equity income from affiliates135
 59
 (159)
Depreciation and amortization(1,573) (2,452) (2,250)(1,334) (1,378) (1,585)
Research and development(5,871) (5,823) (6,381)(8,853) (9,481) (9,218)
Amortization of purchase accounting adjustments(4,856) (4,182) (4,690)(2,664) (3,056) (3,692)
Restructuring costs(619) (1,013) (1,709)(632) (776) (651)
Charge related to termination of collaboration agreement with Samsung(423) 
 
Loss on extinguishment of debt
 (191) 
Gain on sale of certain migraine clinical development programs250
 
 

 
 100
Gain on the divestiture of certain ophthalmic products147
 480
 
Foreign currency devaluation related to Venezuela(876) 
 (140)
Net charge related to the settlement of Vioxx shareholder class action litigation
(680) 
 
Gain on divestiture of Merck Consumer Care
 11,209
 
Gain on AstraZeneca option exercise
 741
 
Loss on extinguishment of debt
 (628) 
Charge related to the settlement of worldwide Keytruda patent litigation

 
 (625)
Other unallocated, net(4,400) (5,891) (4,684)(3,024) (2,576) (3,430)
$5,401
 $17,283
 $5,545
$8,701
 $6,521
 $4,659
SegmentPharmaceutical segment profits are comprised of segment sales less standard costs, as well as selling, general and certain operatingadministrative expenses and research and development costs directly incurred by the segments.segment. Animal Health segment profits are comprised of segment sales, less all cost of sales, as well as selling, general and administrative expenses and research and development costs directly incurred by the segment. For internal management reporting presented to the chief operating decision maker, Merck does not allocate materials and production costs, other than standard costs, the majorityremaining cost of sales not included in segment profits as described above, research and development expenses incurred in Merck Research Laboratories, the Company’s research and development division that focuses on human health-related activities, or general and administrative expenses, nor the cost of financing these activities. Separate divisions maintain responsibility for monitoring and managing these costs, including depreciation related to fixed assets utilized by these divisions and, therefore, they are not included in segment profits. In addition, costs related to restructuring activities, as well as the amortization of purchase accounting adjustments are not allocated to segments.
Other profits are primarily comprised of miscellaneous corporate profits, as well as operating profits related to third-party manufacturing sales.

Other unallocated, net includes expenses from corporate and manufacturing cost centers, goodwill and productother intangible asset impairment charges, gains or losses on sales of businesses, expense or income related to changes in the estimated fair value of liabilities for contingent consideration, and other miscellaneous income or expense items.

131

TableIn 2018, the Company adopted a new accounting standard related to the classification of Contentscertain defined benefit plan costs (see Note 2), which resulted in a change to the measurement of segment profits. Net periodic benefit cost (credit) other than service cost is no longer included as a component of segment profits. Prior period amounts have been recast to conform to the new presentation.

Equity income(income) loss from affiliates and depreciation and amortization included in segment profits is as follows:
Pharmaceutical All Other TotalPharmaceutical Animal Health All Other Total
Year Ended December 31, 2015        
Year Ended December 31, 2018          
Included in segment profits:            
Equity income from affiliates$70
 $
 $70
Equity (income) loss from affiliates$4
 $
 $
 $4
Depreciation and amortization(82) (18) (100)243
 82
 10
 335
Year Ended December 31, 2014        
Year Ended December 31, 2017          
Included in segment profits:            
Equity income from affiliates$90
 $108
 $198
Equity (income) loss from affiliates$7
 $
 $
 $7
Depreciation and amortization(39) (18) (57)125
 75
 12
 212
Year Ended December 31, 2013        
Year Ended December 31, 2016          
Included in segment profits:            
Equity income from affiliates$88
 $475
 $563
Equity (income) loss from affiliates$(105) $
 $
 $(105)
Depreciation and amortization(27) (22) (49)160
 10
 13
 183
Property, plant and equipment, net, by geographic area where located is as follows:
December 312015 2014 20132018 2017 2016
United States$8,467
 $8,727
 $10,076
$8,306
 $8,070
 $8,114
Europe, Middle East and Africa2,844
 3,120
 3,346
3,706
 3,151
 2,732
Asia Pacific842
 897
 1,001
Asia Pacific (other than Japan and China)684
 632
 623
Latin America182
 207
 242
264
 271
 234
China167
 150
 152
Japan164
 172
 211
159
 158
 164
Other8
 13
 97
5
 7
 7
$12,507
 $13,136
 $14,973
$13,291
 $12,439
 $12,026
The Company does not disaggregate assets on a products and services basis for internal management reporting and, therefore, such information is not presented.

132


Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Board of Directors and ShareholdersStockholders of Merck & Co., Inc.:

Opinions on the Financial Statements and Internal Control over Financial Reporting

In our opinion,We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Merck & Co., Inc and its subsidiaries (the “Company”) as of December 31, 2018 and 2017, and the related consolidated statements of income, comprehensive income, equity and cash flows present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Merck & Co., Inc. and its subsidiaries at December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 20152018, including the related notes (collectively referred to as the “consolidated financial statements”). We also have audited the Company's internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2018, based on criteria established in Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO).

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Company as of December 31, 2018 and 2017, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2018 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. Also in our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2015,2018, based on criteria established in Internal Control - Integrated Framework(2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations ofCOSO.

Change in Accounting Principle

As discussed in Note 2 to the Treadway Commission (COSO). consolidated financial statements, the Company changed the manner in which it accounts for retirement benefits in 2018.


Basis for Opinions

The Company'sCompany’s management is responsible for these consolidated financial statements, for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting, and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in Management'sManagement’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting appearing under Item 9a.9A. Our responsibility is to express opinions on thesethe Company’s consolidated financial statements and on the Company's internal control over financial reporting based on our integrated audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB) and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States).PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the consolidatedfinancial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud, and whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects.

Our audits of the consolidated financial statements included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the consolidated financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence supportingregarding the amounts and disclosures in the consolidated financial statements, assessingstatements. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, andas well as evaluating the overall presentation of the consolidated financial statement presentation.statements. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our audits also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinions.

As discussed in Note 15 to the consolidated financial statements, the Company changed the manner in which it classifies deferred taxes in 2015
Definition and 2014 due to the adoptionLimitations of Accounting Standards Update 2015-17,Balance Sheet Classification of Deferred Taxes.Internal Control over Financial Reporting

A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
 
apwcsignature.jpg 
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Florham Park, New Jersey
February 26, 201627, 2019

We have served as the Company’s auditor since 2002.
133



(b)Supplementary Data
Selected quarterly financial data for 20152018 and 20142017 are contained in the Condensed Interim Financial Data table below.
Condensed Interim Financial Data (Unaudited)
($ in millions except per share amounts)
4th Q (1)
 
3rd Q (2)
 
2nd Q (3)
 
1st Q (4)
4th Q (1)
 
3rd Q (2)
 2nd Q 
1st Q (3)
2015 (5)
       
2018 (4)
       
Sales$10,215
 $10,073
 $9,785
 $9,425
$10,998
 $10,794
 $10,465
 $10,037
Materials and production3,850
 3,761
 3,754
 3,569
Marketing and administrative2,615
 2,472
 2,624
 2,601
Cost of sales3,289
 3,619
 3,417
 3,184
Selling, general and administrative2,643
 2,443
 2,508
 2,508
Research and development1,797
 1,500
 1,670
 1,737
2,214
 2,068
 2,274
 3,196
Restructuring costs233
 113
 191
 82
138
 171
 228
 95
Other (income) expense, net905
 (170) 739
 55
110
 (172) (48) (291)
Income before taxes815
 2,397
 807
 1,381
2,604
 2,665
 2,086
 1,345
Net income attributable to Merck & Co., Inc.976
 1,826
 687
 953
1,827
 1,950
 1,707
 736
Basic earnings per common share attributable to Merck & Co., Inc. common shareholders$0.35
 $0.65
 $0.24
 $0.34
$0.70
 $0.73
 $0.64
 $0.27
Earnings per common share assuming dilution attributable to Merck & Co., Inc. common shareholders$0.35
 $0.64
 $0.24
 $0.33
$0.69
 $0.73
 $0.63
 $0.27
2014 (5)
       
2017 (4) (5)
       
Sales$10,482
 $10,557
 $10,934
 $10,264
$10,433
 $10,325
 $9,930
 $9,434
Materials and production3,749
 4,223
 4,893
 3,903
Marketing and administrative2,924
 2,975
 2,973
 2,734
Cost of sales3,440
 3,307
 3,116
 3,049
Selling, general and administrative2,643
 2,459
 2,500
 2,472
Research and development2,283
 1,659
 1,664
 1,574
2,314
 4,413
 1,782
 1,830
Restructuring costs349
 376
 163
 125
306
 153
 166
 151
Other (income) expense, net(10,634) (166) (650) (163)(149) (207) (73) (71)
Income before taxes11,811
 1,490
 1,891
 2,091
1,879
 200
 2,439
 2,003
Net income attributable to Merck & Co., Inc.7,316
 895
 2,004
 1,705
Basic earnings per common share attributable to Merck & Co., Inc. common shareholders$2.57
 $0.31
 $0.69
 $0.58
Earnings per common share assuming dilution attributable to Merck & Co., Inc. common shareholders$2.54
 $0.31
 $0.68
 $0.57
Net (loss) income attributable to Merck & Co., Inc.(1,046) (56) 1,946
 1,551
Basic (loss) earnings per common share attributable to Merck & Co., Inc. common shareholders$(0.39) $(0.02) $0.71
 $0.56
(Loss) earnings per common share assuming dilution attributable to Merck & Co., Inc. common shareholders$(0.39) $(0.02) $0.71
 $0.56
(1) 
Amounts for 2015 reflect2017 include a provisional net tax charge related to the settlementenactment of Vioxx shareholder class action litigationU.S. tax legislation (see Note 10), foreign exchange losses related to Venezuela (see Note 14) and a gain on the sale of the Company’s remaining ophthalmics business in international markets (see Note 4)16). Amounts for 2014 reflect the divestiture of Merck’s Consumer Care business on October 1, 2014 (see Note 4), including an $11.2 billion gain on the sale. Amounts for 2014 also include a loss on extinguishment of debt (see Note 9).
(2) 
Amounts for 20152017 include a gain oncharge related to the saleformation of certain migraine clinical development programsa collaboration with AstraZeneca (see Note 4).
(3)
Amounts for 20142018 include gains on salesa charge related to the formation of businessesa collaboration with Eisai (see Note 4) and an additional year of expense for the health care reform fee..
(3) Amounts for 2015 include foreign exchange losses related to the devaluation of the Company’s net monetary assets in Venezuela (see Note 14). Amounts for 2014 include a gain on AstraZeneca’s option exercise (see Note 8).
(4) Amounts for 2014 include2018 and 2017 reflect acquisition and divestiture-related costs (see Note 8) and the impact of restructuring actions (see Note 5).
(5) Amounts have been recast as a tax benefit relatingresult of the adoption, on January 1, 2018, of a new accounting standard related to the saleclassification of Sirna Therapeutics, Inc.certain defined benefit plan costs. There was no impact to net income as a result of adopting the new accounting standard (see Note 4)2).
(5)


Amounts for 2015 and 2014 reflect acquisition and divestiture-related costs (see Note 7) and the impact of restructuring actions (see Note 3).

134

Table of Contents

Item 9.     Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure.
Not applicable.
Item 9A.  Controls and Procedures.
Management of the Company, with the participation of its Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, evaluated the effectiveness of the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures. Based on their evaluation, as of the end of the period covered by this Form 10-K, the Company’s Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have concluded that the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) or 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Act)) are effective. For the fourth quarter of 2018, there have been no changes in internal control over financial reporting that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.
Management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting, as such term is defined in Rule 13a-15(f) of the Act. Management conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting based on the framework in Internal Control — Integrated Framework issued in 2013 by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Based on this evaluation, management concluded that internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2015.2018. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, has performed its own assessment of the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting and its attestation report is included in this Form 10-K filing.
Management’s Report
Management’s Responsibility for Financial Statements
Responsibility for the integrity and objectivity of the Company’s financial statements rests with management. The financial statements report on management’s stewardship of Company assets. These statements are prepared in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles and, accordingly, include amounts that are based on management’s best estimates and judgments. Nonfinancial information included in the Annual Report on Form 10-K has also been prepared by management and is consistent with the financial statements.
To assure that financial information is reliable and assets are safeguarded, management maintains an effective system of internal controls and procedures, important elements of which include: careful selection, training and development of operating and financial managers; an organization that provides appropriate division of responsibility; and communications aimed at assuring that Company policies and procedures are understood throughout the organization. A staff of internal auditors regularly monitors the adequacy and application of internal controls on a worldwide basis.
To ensure that personnel continue to understand the system of internal controls and procedures, and policies concerning good and prudent business practices, annually all employees of the Company are required to complete Code of Conduct training, which includes financial stewardship.training. This training reinforces the importance and understanding of internal controls by reviewing key corporate policies, procedures and systems. In addition, the Company has compliance programs, including an ethical business practices program to reinforce the Company’s long-standing commitment to high ethical standards in the conduct of its business.
The financial statements and other financial information included in the Annual Report on Form 10-K fairly present, in all material respects, the Company’s financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. Our formal certification to the Securities and Exchange Commission is included in this Form 10-K filing.
Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
Management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting, as such term is defined in Rule 13a-15(f) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The Company’s internal control over financial reporting is designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States of America. Management conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting based on the framework in Internal Control — Integrated Framework issued

in 2013 by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Based on this evaluation, management concluded that internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2015.2018.

135

Table of Contents

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
The effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2015,2018, has been audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, as stated in their report which appears herein.
g438975g32h99a01a05.jpg
  
 
electronicsignaturedavisa05.jpg
  
Kenneth C. Frazier Robert M. Davis
Chairman, President
and Chief Executive Officer
 
Executive Vice President, Global Services,
and Chief Financial Officer
Item 9B.Other Information.
None.

136


PART III
 
Item 10.Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance.
The required information on directors and nominees is incorporated by reference from the discussion under Proposal 1. Election of Directors of the Company’s Proxy Statement for the Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be held May 24, 2016.28, 2019. Information on executive officers is set forth in Part I of this document on pages 29 through 30.page 32.
The required information on compliance with Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is incorporated by reference from the discussion under the heading “Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance” of the Company’s Proxy Statement for the Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be held May 24, 2016.28, 2019.
The Company has a Code of Conduct — Our Values and Standards applicable to all employees, including the principal executive officer, principal financial officer, principal accounting officer and Controller. The Code of Conduct is available on the Company’s website at www.merck.com/about/code_of_conduct.pdf. The Company intends to disclose future amendments to certain provisions of the Code of Conduct, and waivers of the Code of Conduct granted to executive officers and directors, if any, on the website within four business days following the date of any amendment or waiver. Every Merck employee is responsible for adhering to business practices that are in accordance with the law and with ethical principles that reflect the highest standards of corporate and individual behavior. A printed copy will be sent, without charge, to any shareholder who requests it by writing to the Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer of Merck & Co., Inc., 2000 Galloping Hill Road, Kenilworth, NJ 07033.
The required information on the identification of the audit committee and the audit committee financial expert is incorporated by reference from the discussion under the heading “Board Meetings and Committees” of the Company’s Proxy Statement for the Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be held May 24, 2016.28, 2019.
Item 11.Executive Compensation.
The information required on executive compensation is incorporated by reference from the discussion under the headings “Compensation Discussion and Analysis”, “Summary Compensation Table”, “All Other Compensation” table, “Grants of Plan-Based Awards” table, “Outstanding Equity Awards” table, “Option Exercises and Stock Vested” table, “Pension Benefits” table, “Nonqualified Deferred Compensation” table, Potential Payments Upon Termination or a Change in Control, including the discussion under the subheadings “Separation” and “Change in Control”, as well as all footnote information to the various tables, of the Company’s Proxy Statement for the Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be held May 24, 2016.28, 2019.
The required information on director compensation is incorporated by reference from the discussion under the heading “Director Compensation” and related “Director Compensation” table and “Schedule of Director Fees” table of the Company’s Proxy Statement for the Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be held May 24, 2016.28, 2019.
The required information under the headings “Compensation and Benefits Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation” and “Compensation and Benefits Committee Report” is incorporated by reference from the Company’s Proxy Statement for the Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be held May 24, 2016.28, 2019.

137



Item 12.Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters.
Information with respect to security ownership of certain beneficial owners and management is incorporated by reference from the discussion under the heading “Stock Ownership Information” of the Company’s Proxy Statement for the Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be held May 24, 2016.28, 2019.
Equity Compensation Plan Information
The following table summarizes information about the options, warrants and rights and other equity compensation under the Company’s equity compensation plans as of the close of business on December 31, 2015.2018. The table does not include information about tax qualified plans such as the Merck U.S. Savings Plan.
Plan Category 
Number of
securities to be
issued upon
exercise of
outstanding
options, warrants
and rights
(a)
 
Weighted-average
exercise price of
outstanding
options, warrants
and rights
(b)
 
Number of
securities remaining
available for future
issuance under equity
compensation plans
(excluding
securities
reflected in column (a))
(c)
 
Number of
securities to be
issued upon
exercise of
outstanding
options, warrants
and rights
(a)
 
Weighted-average
exercise price of
outstanding
options, warrants
and rights
(b)
 
Number of
securities remaining
available for future
issuance under equity
compensation plans
(excluding
securities
reflected in column (a))
(c)
Equity compensation plans approved by security holders(1)
 
64,668,238(2)

 $41.64
 133,513,514
 
23,807,101(2)

 $51.89
 110,977,283
Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders 
 
 
 
 
 
Total 64,668,238
 $41.64
 133,513,514
 23,807,101
 $51.89
 110,977,283
(1) 
Includes options to purchase shares of Company Common Stock and other rights under the following shareholder-approved plans: the Merck Sharp & Dohme 2004, 2007 and 2010 Incentive Stock Plans, the Merck & Co., Inc. 2006 and 2010 Non-Employee Directors Stock Option Plans, and the Merck & Co., Inc. Schering-Plough 2002 and 2006 Stock Incentive Plans.
(2) 
Excludes approximately 13,399,88116,128,455 shares of restricted stock units and 1,883,5972,039,065 performance share units (assuming maximum payouts) under the Merck Sharp & Dohme 2004, 2007 and 2010 Incentive Stock Plans. Also excludes 279,862224,599 shares of phantom stock deferred under the MSD Employee Deferral Program and 528,142582,155 shares of phantom stock deferred under the Merck & Co., Inc. Plan for Deferred Payment of Directors’ Compensation.
Item 13.Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence.
The required information on transactions with related persons is incorporated by reference from the discussion under the heading “Related Person Transactions” of the Company’s Proxy Statement for the Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be held May 24, 2016.28, 2019.
The required information on director independence is incorporated by reference from the discussion under the heading “Independence of Directors” of the Company’s Proxy Statement for the Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be held May 24, 2016.28, 2019.
Item 14.Principal Accountant Fees and Services.
The information required for this item is incorporated by reference from the discussion under Proposal 3,4. Ratification of Appointment of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm for 2016beginning2019 beginning with the caption “Pre-Approval Policy for Services of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” through “Fees for Services providedProvided by the Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” of the Company’s Proxy Statement for the Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be held May 24, 2016.28, 2019.

138


PART IV
 
Item 15.Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules.
(a)    The following documents are filed as part of this Form 10-K
1.    Financial Statements
Consolidated statement of income for the years ended December 31, 2015, 20142018, 2017 and 20132016
Consolidated statement of comprehensive income for the years ended December 31, 2015, 20142018, 2017 and 20132016
Consolidated balance sheet as of December 31, 20152018 and 20142017
Consolidated statement of equity for the years ended December 31, 2015, 20142018, 2017 and 20132016
Consolidated statement of cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2015, 20142018, 2017 and 20132016
Notes to consolidated financial statements
Report of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, independent registered public accounting firm
2.    Financial Statement Schedules
Schedules are omitted because they are either not required or not applicable.
Financial statements of affiliates carried on the equity basis have been omitted because, considered individually or in the aggregate, such affiliates do not constitute a significant subsidiary.

139


3.    Exhibits
Exhibit
Number
   Description
3.1  
3.2  
4.1  Indenture, dated as of April 1, 1991, between Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. (f/k/a Schering Corporation) and U.S. Bank Trust National Association (as successor to Morgan Guaranty Trust Company of New York), as Trustee (the 1991 Indenture) — Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4 to MSD’s Registration Statement on Form S-3 (No. 33-39349)
4.2  
4.3  
4.4  
4.5  
4.6  First
4.7Second Supplemental Indenture to the 2003 Indenture (including Form of Note), dated November 26, 2003 —Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.3 to Schering-Plough’s Current Report on Form 8‑K filed November 28, 2003 (No. 1-6571)
4.84.7  

4.9
Exhibit
Number
Description
4.8  Fourth Supplemental Indenture to the 2003 Indenture (including Form of Note), dated October 1, 2007 — Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to Schering-Plough’s Current Report on Form 8‑K filed October 2, 2007 (No.1-6571)
4.10
4.114.9  
4.124.10  Long-term debt instruments under which the total amount of securities authorized does not exceed 10% of Merck & Co., Inc.’s total consolidated assets are not filed as exhibits to this report. Merck & Co., Inc. will furnish a copy of these agreements to the Securities and Exchange Commission on request.
*10.1  
*10.2  
*10.3  Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. 2004 Incentive Stock Plan (amended and restated as of November 3, 2009) — Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.8 to Merck & Co., Inc.’s Current Report on Form 8‑K filed November 4, 2009 (No. 1-6571)

140



Exhibit
Number
Description
*10.4Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. 2007 Incentive Stock Plan (effective as amended and restated as of November 3, 2009) — Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.7 to Merck & Co., Inc.’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed November 4, 2009 (No. 1-6571)
*10.510.4  
*10.610.5  
*10.710.6  
*10.810.7  
*10.910.8  
*10.1010.9  Form of restricted stock unit terms for 2012 quarterly and annual grants under the Merck & Co., Inc. 2010 Incentive Stock Plan — Incorporated by reference to Merck & Co., Inc.’s Form 10-K Annual Report for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011 (No. 1-6571)
*10.11Form of performance share unit terms for 2012 grants under the Merck & Co., Inc. 2010 Incentive Stock Plan — Incorporated by reference to Merck & Co., Inc.’s Form 10-Q Quarterly Report for the period ended March 31, 2012 (No. 1-6571)
*10.12
*10.13Form of restricted stock unit terms for 2013 quarterly and annual grants under the Merck & Co., Inc. 2010 Incentive Stock Plan — Incorporated by referenceExhibit 10.19 to Merck & Co., Inc.’s Form 10-K Annual Report for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012 filed February 28, 2013 (No. 1-6571)
*10.1410.10  Form of performance share unit terms for 2013 grants under the Merck & Co., Inc. 2010 Incentive Stock Plan — Incorporated by reference to Merck & Co., Inc.’s Form 10-K Annual Report for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2014 (No. 1-6571)
*10.15
*10.16Form of restricted stock unit terms for 2014 quarterly and annual grants under the Merck & Co., Inc. 2010 Incentive Stock Plan — Incorporated by referenceExhibit 10.18 to Merck & Co., Inc.’s Form 10-K Annual Report for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2014 filed February 27, 2015 (No. 1-6571)
*10.1710.11  Form of performance share unit terms for 2014 grants under the Merck & Co., Inc. 2010 Stock Incentive Plan — Incorporated by reference to Merck & Co., Inc.’s Form 10-K Annual Report for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2014 (No. 1-6571)
*10.18
*10.1910.12  
*10.20Form of performance share unit terms for 2015 grants under the Incorporated by referent to Exhibit 10.12 to Merck & Co., Inc. 2010 Stock Incentive Plan’s Form 10-K Annual Report for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017 filed February 27, 2018 (No. 1-6571)

141


Exhibit
Number
   Description
*10.2110.13  
*10.22Merck & Co., Inc. U.S. Separation Benefits Plan (effective as of January 1, 2013) (amended and restated as of October 1, 2013) — Incorporated by reference to Merck & Co., Inc.’s Form 10‑Q Quarterly Report for the period ended September 30, 2013 (No. 1-6571)
*10.23Merck & Co., Inc. U.S. Separation Benefits Plan (amended and restated effective as of November 15, 2014) — Incorporated by referenceExhibit 10.19 to Merck & Co., Inc.’s Form 10-K Annual Report for the fiscal year ended December 31, 20142016 filed February 28, 2017 (No. 1-6571)
*10.2410.14  
*10.15
*10.16
10.17
*10.18
*10.19
*10.20
*10.2510.21  
*10.2610.22  
*10.2710.23  
*10.2810.24  Offer Letter between Merck & Co., Inc. and Robert Davis, dated March 17, 2014 — Incorporated by reference to Merck & Co., Inc.’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated March 27, 2014 (No. 1-6571)
*10.29Agreement Letter between Merck & Co., Inc. and Bruce N. Kuhlik, dated July 21, 2015 — Incorporated by reference to Merck & Co., Inc.’s Form 10-Q Quarterly Report for the period ended September 30, 2015 (No. 1-6571)
*10.30Form of employment agreement effective upon a change of control between Schering-Plough and certain executives for new agreements beginning in January 1, 2008 — Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10(e)(xv) to Schering-Plough’s 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 (No. 1-6571)
10.31
10.3210.25  
10.3310.26  
1210.27  Computation of Ratios of Earnings to Fixed Charges
10.28
21  
23  
24.1  
24.2  
31.1Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certification of Chief Executive Officer
31.2Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certification of Chief Financial Officer

142


Exhibit
Number
   Description
31.1
31.2
32.1  
32.2  
101  The following materials from Merck & Co., Inc.’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015,2018, formatted in XBRL (Extensible Business Reporting Language): (i) the Consolidated Statement of Income, (ii) the Consolidated Statement of Comprehensive Income, (iii) the Consolidated Balance Sheet, (iv) the Consolidated Statement of Equity, (v) the Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows, and (vi) Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
                
*Management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement.
Certain portions of the exhibit have been omitted pursuant to a request for confidential treatment. The non-public information has been filed separately with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to rule 24b-2 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.


143

Item 16.    Form 10-K Summary
Table of Contents
Not applicable.


SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
Dated:    February 26, 201627, 2019
 
MERCK & CO., INC.
  
By:KENNETH C. FRAZIER
 (Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer)
   
 By:/S/ MICHAEL J. HOLSTONs/ JENNIFER ZACHARY
  Michael J. HolstonJennifer Zachary
  (Attorney-in-Fact)
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the Registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.
Signatures Title Date
     
KENNETH C. FRAZIER 
Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer;
Principal Executive Officer; Director
 February 26, 201627, 2019
ROBERT M. DAVIS 
Executive Vice President, Global Services, and Chief Financial Officer;
Principal Financial Officer
 February 26, 201627, 2019
RITA A. KARACHUN 
Senior Vice President Finance-Global Controller;
Principal Accounting Officer
 February 26, 201627, 2019
LESLIE A. BRUN Director February 26, 201627, 2019
THOMAS R. CECH Director February 26, 201627, 2019
PAMELA J. CRAIG Director February 26, 201627, 2019
THOMAS H. GLOCER Director February 26, 2016
WILLIAM B. HARRISON, JR.DirectorFebruary 26, 2016
C. ROBERT KIDDERDirectorFebruary 26, 201627, 2019
ROCHELLE B. LAZARUS Director February 26, 201627, 2019
CARLOS E. REPRESASJOHN H. NOSEWORTHY Director February 26, 201627, 2019
PAUL B. ROTHMAN Director February 26, 201627, 2019
PATRICIA F. RUSSO Director February 26, 201627, 2019
CRAIG B. THOMPSONINGE G. THULIN Director February 26, 201627, 2019
WENDELL P. WEEKS Director February 26, 201627, 2019
PETER C. WENDELL Director February 26, 201627, 2019
Michael J. Holston,Jennifer Zachary, by signing hisher name hereto, does hereby sign this document pursuant to powers of attorney duly executed by the persons named, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission as an exhibit to this document, on behalf of such persons, all in the capacities and on the date stated, such persons including a majority of the directors of the Company.
 
By: /S/ MICHAEL J. HOLSTONJENNIFER ZACHARY
  Michael J. HolstonJennifer Zachary
  (Attorney-in-Fact)


144


EXHIBIT INDEX
 
Exhibit
Number
   Description
3.1  
3.2  
4.1  Indenture, dated as of April 1, 1991, between Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. (f/k/a Schering Corporation) and U.S. Bank Trust National Association (as successor to Morgan Guaranty Trust Company of New York), as Trustee (the 1991 Indenture) — Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4 to MSD’s Registration Statement on Form S-3 (No. 33-39349)
4.2  
4.3  
4.4  
4.5  
4.6  First
4.7Second Supplemental Indenture to the 2003 Indenture (including Form of Note), dated November 26, 2003 —Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.3 to Schering-Plough’s Current Report on Form 8‑K filed November 28, 2003 (No. 1-6571)
4.84.7  
4.94.8  Fourth Supplemental Indenture to the 2003 Indenture (including Form of Note), dated October 1, 2007 — Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to Schering-Plough’s Current Report on Form 8‑K filed October 2, 2007 (No.1-6571)
4.10
4.114.9  
4.124.10  Long-term debt instruments under which the total amount of securities authorized does not exceed 10% of Merck & Co., Inc.’s total consolidated assets are not filed as exhibits to this report. Merck & Co., Inc. will furnish a copy of these agreements to the Securities and Exchange Commission on request.
*10.1  
*10.2  
*10.3  Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. 2004 Incentive Stock Plan (amended and restated as of November 3, 2009) — Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.8 to Merck & Co., Inc.’s Current Report on Form 8‑K filed November 4, 2009 (No. 1-6571)

145


Exhibit
Number
Description
*10.4Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. 2007 Incentive Stock Plan (effective as amended and restated as of November 3, 2009) — Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.7 to Merck & Co., Inc.’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed November 4, 2009 (No. 1-6571)
*10.510.4  

Exhibit
Number
Description
*10.610.5  
*10.710.6  
*10.810.7  
*10.910.8  
*10.1010.9  Form of restricted stock unit terms for 2012 quarterly and annual grants under the Merck & Co., Inc. 2010 Incentive Stock Plan — Incorporated by reference to Merck & Co., Inc.’s Form 10-K Annual Report for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011 (No. 1-6571)
*10.11Form of performance share unit terms for 2012 grants under the Merck & Co., Inc. 2010 Incentive Stock Plan — Incorporated by reference to Merck & Co., Inc.’s Form 10-Q Quarterly Report for the period ended March 31, 2012 (No. 1-6571)
*10.12
*10.13Form of restricted stock unit terms for 2013 quarterly and annual grants under the Merck & Co., Inc. 2010 Incentive Stock Plan — Incorporated by referenceExhibit 10.19 to Merck & Co., Inc.’s Form 10-K Annual Report for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012 filed February 28, 2013 (No. 1-6571)
*10.1410.10  Form of performance share unit terms for 2013 grants under the Merck & Co., Inc. 2010 Incentive Stock Plan — Incorporated by reference to Merck & Co., Inc.’s Form 10-K Annual Report for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2014 (No. 1-6571)
*10.15
*10.16Form of restricted stock unit terms for 2014 quarterly and annual grants under the Merck & Co., Inc. 2010 Incentive Stock Plan — Incorporated by referenceExhibit 10.18 to Merck & Co., Inc.’s Form 10-K Annual Report for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2014 filed February 27, 2015 (No. 1-6571)
*10.1710.11  Form of performance share unit terms for 2014 grants under the Merck & Co., Inc. 2010 Stock Incentive Plan — Incorporated by reference to Merck & Co., Inc.’s Form 10-K Annual Report for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2014 (No. 1-6571)
*10.18
*10.1910.12  
*10.13
*10.14
*10.2010.15  
*10.16
*10.17
*10.18

146


Exhibit
Number
   Description
*10.2110.19  Merck & Co., Inc. Change in Control Separation Benefits Plan (Effective as Amended and Restated, as of January 1, 2013) — Incorporated by reference to Merck & Co., Inc.’s Current Report on Form 8‑K dated November 29, 2012 (No. 1-6571)
*10.22Merck & Co., Inc. U.S. Separation Benefits Plan (effective as of January 1, 2013) (amended and restated as of October 1, 2013) — Incorporated by reference to Merck & Co., Inc.’s Form 10‑Q Quarterly Report for the period ended September 30, 2013 (No. 1-6571)
*10.23
*10.2410.20  
*10.2510.21  
*10.2610.22  
*10.2710.23  
*10.2810.24  Offer Letter between Merck & Co., Inc. and Robert Davis, dated March 17, 2014 — Incorporated by reference to Merck & Co., Inc.’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated March 27, 2014 (No. 1-6571)
*10.29Agreement Letter between Merck & Co., Inc. and Bruce N. Kuhlik, dated July 21, 2015 — Incorporated by reference to Merck & Co., Inc.’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2015 (No. 1-6571)
10.30Form of employment agreement effective upon a change of control between Schering-Plough and certain executives for new agreements beginning in January 1, 2008 — Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10(e)(xv) to Schering-Plough’s 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 (No. 1-6571)
10.31
10.3210.25  
10.3310.26  
1210.27  Computation of Ratios of Earnings to Fixed Charges
10.28
21  
23  
24.1  
24.2  
31.1  
31.2  

147


Exhibit
Number
Description
32.1  
32.2  
101  The following materials from Merck & Co., Inc.’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015,2018, formatted in XBRL (Extensible Business Reporting Language): (i) the Consolidated Statement of Income, (ii) the Consolidated Statement of Comprehensive Income, (iii) the Consolidated Balance Sheet, (iv) the Consolidated Statement of Equity, (v) the Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows, and (vi) Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
                
*Management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement.
Certain portions of the exhibit have been omitted pursuant to a request for confidential treatment. The non-public information has been filed separately with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to rule 24b-2 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

148141