Table of Contents

Securities for which there is a reporting obligation pursuant to Section 15(d) of the Act. Act: None

Number of outstanding shares of each of the issuer’s classes of capital or common stock as of the close of the period covered by the annual report.

There were 9,233,965,143 Ordinary Shares outstanding as of June 30, 2022.

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.

o Yes   x No

If this report is an annual or transition report, indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

o Yes   x No

Note — Checking the box above will not relieve any registrant required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 from their obligations under those Sections.

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.

x Yes   o No

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted 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 such files).

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or an emerging growth company. See the definitionsdefinition of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):

If an emerging growth company that prepares its financial statements in accordance with U.S. GAAP, 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†standards† provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. o Yes  o No☐

† The term “new or revised financial accounting standard” refers to any update issued by the Financial Accounting Standards Board to its Accounting Standards Codification after April 5, 2012.

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed a report on and attestation to its management’s assessment of the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (15 U.S.C. 7262(b)) by the registered public accounting firm that prepared or issued its audit report.”

Indicate by check mark which basis of accounting the registrant has used to prepare the financial statements included in this filing:

If “Other” has been checked in response to the previous question, indicate by check mark which financial statement item the registrant has elected to follow.

o Item 17   o Item 18

If this is an annual report, indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).

o Yes   x No

(APPLICABLE ONLY TO ISSUERS INVOLVED IN BANKRUPTCY PROCEEDINGS DURING THE PAST FIVE YEARS)

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed all documents and reports required to be filed by Sections 12, 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 subsequent to the distribution of securities under a plan confirmed by a court. ☐ Yes ☐ No

o Yes   o No

Table of Contents

ii

Table of Contents

iii

Table of Contents

PART I

Item 1.Identity of Directors, Senior Management and Advisers

Not applicable

Item 2.Offer Statistics and Expected Timetable

Not applicable.

Item 3.Key Information

Item 3.A ReservedSelected Financial Data

The following selected financial data for the five years ended June 30, 2017 is derived from the audited consolidated financial statements of Genetic Technologies Limited, prepared in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”) as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board, which became effective for our Company as of our fiscal year ended June 30, 2006.

The balance sheet data as of June 30, 2017 and 2016 and the statement of comprehensive income/(loss) data for the 2017, 2016 and 2015 fiscal years are derived from our audited consolidated financial statements which are included in this Annual Report.  Balance sheet data as of June 30, 2015, 2014 and 2013 and statement of comprehensive income/ (loss) data for the 2014 and 2013 financial years are derived from our audited consolidated financial statements which are not included in this Annual Report.  The data should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements, related notes and other financial information included herein.

All amounts are stated in Australian dollars as of June 30, as noted.

GENETIC TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME/ (LOSS)

FOR 2017, 2016, 2015, 2014 AND 2013

GENETIC TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET DATA
FOR 2017, 2016, 2015, 2014 AND 2013

Exchange rates

The following table sets forth, for the periods and dates indicated, certain information concerning the noon buying rate in New York City for Australian dollars expressed in U.S. dollars per $1.00 as certified for customs purposes by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

Item 3.BCapitalization Capitalisation and Indebtedness

Not applicable.

Item 3.CReasons for the Offer and Use of Proceeds

Not applicable.

Item 3.DRisk Factors

Before you purchase our ADSs, you should be aware that there are risks, including those described below. You should consider carefully these risk factors together with all of the other information contained elsewhere in this Annual Report before you decide to purchase our ADSs.

Risk Factor Summary

Risk Related to our Business

Risk Related to our Securities

Risk Related to Taxation

Risks Related to our Business

A variety of risks associated with commercialising our products and Business Strategyproduct candidates internationally could materially adversely affect our business.

A material uncertainy existsWe, or our licensing partners, may seek regulatory approval for our products or product candidates in multiple jurisdictions, accordingly, we expect that we will be subject to additional risks for our products and product candidates related to operating in foreign countries if we obtain the necessary approvals, including:

These and other risks associated with our or our licensing partners’ international operations may cast significant doubt aboutmaterially adversely affect our Company’s ability to continue asattain or maintain profitable operations.

Our Company has a Going concern.history of incurring losses.

ForWe have incurred operating losses in every year since the year endingended June 30, 2017, the Group incurred a total comprehensive loss of $8,534,481 (2016: $7,151,746) and net cash outflow from operations of $6,813,639 (2016: $7,726,838).2011. As at June 30, 20172022, the Group held total cashCompany had accumulated losses of A$150,206,216 and cash equivalentsthe extent of $10,988,255.any future losses and whether or not the Company can generate profits in future years remains uncertain. The Company currently does not generate sufficient revenue to cover its operating expenses. We expect our capital outlays and operating expenditures to remain constant for the foreseeable future as we continue to focus on R&D and new product development, IP creation and the introduction of predictive genetic testing products. If we fail to generate sufficient revenue and eventually become profitable, or if we are unable to fund our continuing losses by raising additional financing when required, our shareholders could lose all or part of their investments.

In lightWe may not be successful in transitioning from our existing product portfolio to our next generation of these historical cash outflows,risk assessment tests, and further expected cash outflows from operationsour newly developed approach to marketing and distribution of such products may not generate revenues.

Although we developed and marketed our BREVAGen™ and BREVAGenplus products in the next twelve months,recent past, and had internally developed product distribution teams in both Australia and the DirectorsU.S., we believe that our future success is dependent upon our ability to successfully introduce and sell our newly developed products, “GeneType for Breast Cancer”, “GeneType for Colorectal Cancer” and or COVID severity risk test. Although we believe that we now have initiatedworld class products that are poised to be an important part of making predictive genetic testing a comprehensive strategic reviewmainstream healthcare activity, we may not be successful in transitioning from our existing products to these products, and there can be no assurance that the demand for these new products will develop. Furthermore, we plan to introduce our new products to healthcare providers through a global network of distribution partners instead of through our own sales force. Although we believe that we are building worthwhile sales and distribution relationships with experienced distribution firms, there can be no assurance that we will be able to enter into distribution arrangements on terms satisfactory to us, and that our marketing strategy will be successful and result in significant revenues.

Our products may never achieve significant market acceptance.

We may expend substantial funds and management effort on the development and marketing of our predictive genetic testing products with no assurance that we will be successful in selling our products or services. Our ability to enter into distribution arrangements to successfully sell our molecular risk assessment and predictive genetic testing products and services will depend significantly on the perception that our products and services can reduce patient risk and improve medical outcomes, and that our products and services are superior to existing tests. Our business could also be adversely affected if we expend money without any return.

We face additional risks as a result of the Group’s operations. This review, which commenced during the first half of the 2018 financial year, is exploring a wide range of possible strategic alternatives designed to maximise nearGeneral Genetics Acquisition and long-term value for the Group’s shareholders (the Group has retained Roth Capital Partners LLC to serve as a financial advisor in the process). The strategic review will also give consideration to future cash needs to ensure the Group continues to hold adequate levels of cash resources to meet creditors and other commitments.

The longer-term viability of the Group and its ability to continue as a going concern and meet its debts and commitments as they fall due is dependent on the successful completion and implementation of the results of the strategic review.

Due to the uncertainty surrounding the completion and implementation of the results of the strategic review, and the timing, quantum or the ability to raise additional funds if identified in the strategic review, there is a material uncertainty that may cast significant doubt on the Group’s ability to continue as a going concern and therefore, that it may be unable to realiseintegrate our businesses successfully and realize the anticipated synergies and related benefits of the General Genetics Acquisition or do so within the anticipated timeframe.

Failure to demonstrate the clinical utility of our products could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

The Company believes that its assetsGeneType for Breast Cancer, GeneType for Colorectal Cancer and dischargeCOVID severity risk tests, along with the pipeline of new tests under development have the capacity to transform health outcomes for entire populations. However, it is critical for the Company to demonstrate the clinical utility of its liabilitiesnew products. Clinical utility is the usefulness of a test for clinical practice. If the Company is unable to demonstrate clinical utility, or if the data is deemed insufficient to validate utility, there may be insufficient demand for the Company’s products.

If our competitors develop superior products, our operations and financial condition could be affected.

We are currently subject to increased competition from biotechnology and diagnostic companies, academic and research institutions and government or other publicly-funded agencies that are pursuing products and services which are substantially similar to our molecular risk assessment testing products, or which otherwise address the needs of our customers and potential customers.

Our competitors in the normalpredictive genetic testing and assessment market include private and public sector enterprises located in Australia, the U.S. and elsewhere. Many of the organisations competing with us are much larger and have more ready access to needed resources. In particular, they would have greater experience in the areas of finance, research and development, manufacturing, marketing, sales, distribution, technical and regulatory matters than we do. In addition, many of the larger current and potential competitors have already established name / brand recognition and more extensive collaborative relationships.

Our competitive position in the molecular risk assessment and predictive testing area is based upon, amongst other things, our ability to:

If we are not successful in meeting these goals, our business could be adversely affected. Similarly, our competitors may succeed in developing technologies, products or services that are more effective than any that we are developing or that would render our technology, products and services obsolete, noncompetitive or uneconomical.

We have important relationships with external parties over whom we have limited control.

We have relationships with academic consultants, research collaborators at other institutions and other advisers who are not employed by us. Accordingly, we have limited control over their activities and can expect only limited amounts of their time to be dedicated to our activities. These persons may have consulting, employment or advisory arrangements with other entities that may conflict with or compete with their obligations to us. Our consultants typically sign agreements that provide for confidentiality of our proprietary information and results of studies. However, we may not be able to maintain the confidentiality of our technology, the dissemination of which could hurt our competitive position and results of operations. To the extent that our scientific consultants, collaborators or advisors develop inventions or processes that may be applicable to our proposed products, disputes may arise as to the ownership of the proprietary rights to such information, and we may not be successful with any dispute outcomes.

We may be subject to liability and our insurance may not be sufficient to cover damages.

Our business exposes us to potential liability risks that are inherent in the testing, manufacturing, marketing and sale of molecular risk assessment and predictive tests. The use of our products and product candidates, whether for clinical trials or commercial sale, may expose us to professional and product liability claims and possible adverse publicity. We may be subject to claims resulting from incorrect results of analysis of genetic variations or other screening tests performed using our products. Litigation of such claims could be costly. Further, if a court were to require us to pay damages to a plaintiff, the amount of such damages could be significant and severely damage our financial condition. Although we have public and product liability insurance coverage under broad form liability and professional indemnity policies, the level or breadth of our coverage may not be adequate to fully cover any potential liability claims. In addition, we may not be able to obtain additional liability coverage in the future at an acceptable cost. A successful claim or series of claims brought against us in excess of our insurance coverage and the effect of professional and/or product liability litigation upon the reputation and marketability of our technology and products, together with the diversion of the attention of key personnel, could negatively affect our business.

Security breaches, privacy issues, loss of data and other incidents could compromise sensitive or personal information related to our business or prevent us from accessing critical information and expose us to liability, which could adversely affect our business and our reputation.

In the ordinary course of our business, we collect and store sensitive data, including protected health information, or PHI, personally identifiable information, genetic information, credit card information, intellectual property and proprietary business information owned or controlled by ourselves or our customers, payers and other parties. We manage and maintain our applications and data utilizing a combination of on-site systems, managed data center systems and cloud-based systems. We also communicate PHI and other sensitive patient data through our various customer tools and platforms. In addition to storing and transmitting sensitive data that is subject to multiple legal protections, these applications and data encompass a wide variety of business-critical information including research and development information, commercial information, and business and financial information. We face a number of risks relative to protecting this critical information, including loss of access risk, inappropriate disclosure, inappropriate modification, and the risk of our being unable to adequately monitor and modify our controls over our critical information. Any technical problems that may arise in connection with our data and systems, including those that are hosted by third-party providers, could result in interruptions to our business and operations or exposure to security vulnerabilities. These types of problems may be caused by a variety of factors, including infrastructure changes, intentional or accidental human actions or omissions, software errors, malware, viruses, security attacks, fraud, spikes in customer usage and denial of service issues. In addition, there has recently been a significant increase in ransomware and cyber security attacks related to the ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine, which could result in substantial harm to internal systems necessary for running our critical operations and revenue generating services.

The secure processing, storage, maintenance and transmission of this critical information are vital to our operations and business strategy, and we devote significant resources to protecting such information. Although we take what we believe to be reasonable and appropriate measures, including a formal, dedicated enterprise security program, to protect sensitive information from various compromises (including unauthorized access, disclosure, or modification or lack of availability), our information technology and infrastructure may be vulnerable to attacks by hackers or viruses or breached due to employee error, malfeasance or other disruptions. For example, we have been subject to phishing incidents in the past, and we may experience additional incidents in the future. Any such breach or interruption could compromise our networks, and the information stored therein could be accessed by unauthorized parties, altered, publicly disclosed, lost or stolen.

Unauthorized access, loss or dissemination could also disrupt our operations (including our ability to conduct our analyses, provide test results, bill payers or patients, process claims and appeals, provide customer assistance, conduct research and development activities, collect, process and prepare company financial information, provide information about our tests and other patient and physician education and outreach efforts through our website, and manage the administrative aspects of our business) and damage our reputation, any of which could adversely affect our business.

In addition to data security risks, we also face privacy risks. Should we actually violate, or be perceived to have violated, any privacy commitments we make to patients or consumers, we could be subject to a complaint from an affected individual or interested privacy regulator, such as the FTC, a state Attorney General, an EU Member State Data Protection Authority, or a data protection authority in another international jurisdiction. This risk is heightened given the sensitivity of the data we collect.

Any security compromise that causes an apparent privacy violation could also result in legal claims or proceedings; liability under federal, state, foreign, or multinational laws that regulate the privacy, security, or breach of personal information, such as but not limited to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act of 2009, or HITECH, state data security and data breach notification laws, the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation, or GDPR, and the UK Data Protection Act of 2018; and related regulatory penalties. Penalties for failure to comply with a requirement of HIPAA or HITECH vary significantly, and, depending on the knowledge and culpability of the HIPAA-regulated entity, may include civil monetary penalties of up to $1.5 million per calendar year for each provision of HIPAA that is violated. A person who knowingly obtains or discloses individually identifiable health information in violation of HIPAA may face a criminal penalty of up to $50,000 and up to one-year imprisonment. The criminal penalties increase if the wrongful conduct involves false pretenses or the intent to sell, transfer or use identifiable health information for commercial advantage, personal gain or malicious harm. Penalties for unfair or deceptive acts or practices under the FTC Act or state Unfair and Deceptive Acts and Practices, or UDAP, statutes may also vary significantly.

There has been unprecedented activity in the development of data protection regulation around the world. As a result, the interpretation and application of consumer, health-related and data protection laws in the United States, Europe and elsewhere are often uncertain, contradictory and in flux. The GDPR took effect on May 25, 2018. The GDPR applies to any entity established in the EU as well as extraterritorially to any entity outside the EU that offers goods or services to, or monitors the behavior of, individuals who are located in the EU. The GDPR imposes strict requirements on controllers and processors of personal data, including enhanced protections for “special categories” of personal data, which includes sensitive information such as health and genetic information of data subjects. The GDPR also grants individuals various rights in relation to their personal data, including the rights of access, rectification, objection to certain processing and deletion. The GDPR provides an individual with an express right to seek legal remedies if the individual believes his or her rights have been violated. Failure to comply with the requirements of the GDPR or the related national data protection laws of the member states of the EU, which may deviate from or be more restrictive than the GDPR, may result in significant administrative fines issued by EU regulators. Maximum penalties for violations of the GDPR are capped at 20M euros or 4% of an organization’s annual global revenue, whichever is greater.

Additionally, the implementation of GDPR has led other jurisdictions to either amend or propose legislation to amend their existing data privacy and cybersecurity laws to resemble the requirements of GDPR. For example, on June 28, 2018, California adopted the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018, or the CCPA. The CCPA regulates how certain for-profit businesses that meet one or more CCPA applicability thresholds collect, use, and disclose the personal information of consumers who reside in California. Among other things, the CCPA confers to California consumers the right to receive notice of the categories of personal information that will be collected by a business, how the business will use and share the personal information, and the third parties who will receive the personal information. The CCPA also confers rights to access, delete, or transfer personal information; and the right to receive equal service and pricing from a business after exercising a consumer right granted by the CCPA. In addition, the CCPA allows California consumers the right to opt out of the “sale” of their personal information, which the CCPA defines broadly as any disclosure of personal information to a third party in exchange for monetary or other valuable consideration. The CCPA also requires a business to implement reasonable security procedures to safeguard personal information against unauthorized access, use, or disclosure. The CCPA does not apply to PHI collected by certain parties subject to HIPAA, or to de-identified data as defined under HIPAA. The CCPA provides for civil penalties for violations, as well as a private right of action for certain data breaches resulting from a business’s failure to implement and maintain reasonable data security procedures that is expected to increase data breach litigation. On January 1, 2023, the California Privacy Rights Act, or CPRA, is scheduled to go into effect and will substantially amend the CCPA. The CPRA would, among other things, amend the CCPA to give California residents the ability to limit the use of their sensitive information, provide for penalties for CPRA violations concerning California residents under the age of 16, and establish a new California Privacy Protection Agency to implement and enforce the law.

Virginia, Colorado, and Utah have recently enacted similar privacy acts, and dozens of other states in the United States are currently considering similar consumer data privacy laws, which could impact our operations if enacted. Some observers have noted that the CCPA could mark the beginning of a trend toward more stringent privacy legislation in the United States, which could increase our potential liability and adversely affect our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

It is possible the GDPR, CCPA and other emerging United States and international data protection laws may be interpreted and applied in a manner that is inconsistent with our practices. If so, this could result in government-imposed fines or orders requiring that we change our practices, which could adversely affect our business. In addition, these privacy laws and regulations may differ from country to country and state to state, and our obligations under these laws and regulations vary based on the nature of our activities in the particular jurisdiction, such as whether we collect samples from individuals in the local jurisdiction, perform testing in the local jurisdiction, or process personal information regarding employees or other individuals in the local jurisdiction. Complying with these various laws and regulations could cause us to incur substantial costs or require us to change our business practices and compliance procedures in a manner adverse to our business. We can provide no assurance that we are or will remain in compliance with diverse privacy and data security requirements in all of the jurisdictions in which we do business. Failure to comply with privacy and data security requirements could result in a variety of consequences, including civil or criminal penalties, litigation, or damage to our reputation, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

We use potentially hazardous materials, chemicals and patient samples in our business and any disputes relating to improper handling, storage or disposal of these materials could be time consuming and costly.

Our research and development, production and service activities involve the controlled use of hazardous laboratory materials and chemicals, including small quantities of acid and alcohol, and patient tissue samples. We do not knowingly deal with infectious samples. We, our collaborators and service providers are subject to stringent Australian federal, state and local laws and regulations governing occupational health and safety standards, including those governing the use, storage, handling and disposal of these materials and certain waste products. However, we could be liable for accidental contamination or discharge or any resultant injury from hazardous materials, and conveyance, processing, and storage of and data on patient samples. If we, our collaborators or service providers fail to comply with applicable laws or regulations, we could be required to pay penalties or be held liable for any damages that result and this liability could exceed our financial resources. Further, future changes to environmental health and safety laws could cause us to incur additional expense or restrict our operations.

In addition, our collaborators and service providers may be working with these same types of hazardous materials, including hazardous chemicals, in connection with our collaborations. In the Directorsevent of a lawsuit or investigation, we could be held responsible for any injury caused to persons or property by exposure to, or release of, these hazardous materials or patient samples that may contain infectious materials. The cost of this liability could exceed our resources. While we maintain broad form liability insurance coverage for these risks, the level or breadth of our coverage may not be adequate to fully cover potential liability claims.

Our industry is subject to rapidly changing technology and new and increasing amounts of scientific data related to genes and genetic variants and their role in disease.

Our failure to develop tests to keep pace with these changes could make us obsolete. In recent years, there have been numerous advances in methods used to analyze very large amounts of genomic information and the role of genetics and gene variants in disease and treatment therapies. Our industry has and will continue to be characterized by rapid technological change, increasingly larger amounts of data, frequent new testing service introductions and evolving industry standards, all of which could make our tests obsolete. Our future success will also depend on our ability to keep pace with the evolving needs of our customers on a timely and cost-effective basis and to pursue new market opportunities that develop as a result of technological and scientific advances. Our tests could become obsolete and our business adversely affected unless we continually update our offerings to reflect new scientific knowledge about genes and genetic variations and their role in diseases and treatment therapies.

We depend on the collaborative efforts of our academic and corporate partners for research, development and commercialisation of our products. A breach by our partners of their obligations, or the termination of the relationship, could deprive us of valuable resources and require additional investment of time and money.

Our strategy for research, development and commercialisation of our products has historically involved entering into various arrangements with academic, corporate partners and others. As a result, the success of our strategy depends, in part, upon the strength of those relationships and these outside parties undertaking their responsibilities and performing their tasks to the best of their ability and responding in a timely manner. Our collaborators may also be our competitors. We cannot necessarily control the amount and timing of resources that our collaborators devote to performing their contractual obligations and we have no certainty that these parties will perform their obligations as expected or that any revenue will be derived from these arrangements.

If our collaborators breach or terminate their agreement with us or otherwise fail to conduct their collaborative activities in a timely manner, the development or commercialisation of the product candidate or research program under such collaborative arrangement may be delayed. If that is the case, we may be required to undertake unforeseen additional responsibilities or to devote unforeseen additional funds or other resources to such development or commercialisation, or such development or commercialisation could be terminated. The termination or cancellation of collaborative arrangements could adversely affect our financial condition, intellectual property position and general operations. In addition, disagreements between collaborators and us could lead to delays in the collaborative research, development, or commercialisation of certain products or could require or result in formal legal process or arbitration for resolution. These consequences could be time-consuming and expensive and could have material adverse effects on the Company.

We rely upon scientific, technical and clinical data supplied by academic and corporate collaborators, licensors, licensees, independent contractors and others in the evaluation and development of potential therapeutic methods. There may be errors or omissions in this data that would materially adversely affect the development of these methods.

If our sole laboratory facility becomes inoperable, we will be unable to perform our tests and our business will be harmed.

We rely on our sole laboratory facilities in Melbourne, Australia, which has been certified under the U.S. Clinical Laboratory Improvements Amendments (“CLIA”). Our current lease of laboratory premises expires February 28, 2025. The facility and the equipment we use to perform our tests would be costly to replace and could require substantial lead time to repair or replace. If we were to lose our CLIA certification or other required certifications or licenses, or if the facility is harmed or rendered inoperable by natural or man-made disasters, including flooding and power outages, it will be difficult or impossible for us to perform our tests for some period of time. The inability to perform our tests or the backlog of tests that could develop if our facility is inoperable for even a short period of time may result in the loss of customers or harm our reputation, and we may be unable to regain those customers in the future.

If we no longer had our own facility and needed to rely on a third party to perform our tests, we could only use another facility with established state licensure and CLIA accreditation. We cannot assure you that we would be able to find another CLIA certified facility willing to comply with the required procedures, that this laboratory would be willing to perform the tests on commercially reasonable terms, or that it would be able to meet our quality standards. In order to establish a redundant clinical reference laboratory facility, we would have to spend considerable time and money securing adequate space, constructing the facility, recruiting and training employees, and establishing the additional operational and administrative infrastructure necessary to support a second facility. We may not be able, or it may take considerable time, to replicate our testing processes or results in a new facility. Additionally, any new clinical reference laboratory facility would be subject to certification under CLIA and licensing by several states, including California and New York, which could take a significant amount of time and result in delays in our ability to begin operations.

The loss of key members of our senior management team or our inability to attract and retain highly skilled scientists, clinicians and salespeople could adversely affect our business.

Our success depends largely on the skills, experience and performance of key members of our executive management team and others in key management positions. The efforts of each of these persons together will be critical as we continue to develop our technologies and testing processes, continue our international expansion and transition to a company with multiple commercialised products. If we were to lose one or more of these key employees, we may experience difficulties in competing effectively, developing our technologies and implementing our business strategies.

Our research and development programs and commercial laboratory operations depend on our ability to attract and retain highly skilled scientists and technicians, including licensed laboratory technicians, chemists, biostatisticians and engineers. We may not be able to attract or retain qualified scientists and technicians in the future due to the competition for qualified personnel among life science businesses. In addition, if there were to be a shortage of clinical laboratory scientists in coming years, this would make it more difficult to hire sufficient numbers of qualified personnel. We also face competition from universities and public and private research institutions in recruiting and retaining highly qualified scientific personnel. In addition, our success depends on our ability to attract and retain salespeople with extensive experience in oncology and close relationships with medical oncologists, pathologists and other hospital personnel. We may have difficulties sourcing, recruiting or retaining qualified salespeople, which could cause delays or a decline in the rate of adoption of our tests. If we are not able to attract and retain the necessary personnel to accomplish our business objectives, we may experience constraints that could adversely affect our ability to support our research and development and sales programs.

Changes in the way that the FDA regulates our tests could result in the delay or additional expense in offering our tests and tests that we may develop in the future.

Historically, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) has exercised enforcement discretion with respect to most laboratory-developed tests (“LDTs”) and has not required laboratories that furnish LDTs to comply with the agency’s requirements for medical devices (e.g., establishment registration, device listing, quality systems regulations, premarket clearance or premarket approval, and post-market controls). In recent years, however, the FDA publicly announced its intention to regulate certain LDTs and issued two draft guidance documents that set forth a proposed phased-in risk-based regulatory framework that would apply varying levels of FDA oversight to LDTs. However, these guidance documents were withdrawn at the end of the Obama administration and replaced by an informal discussion paper reflecting some of the feedback that FDA had received on LDT regulation. The FDA acknowledged that the discussion paper in January 2017 does not represent the formal position of the FDA and is not enforceable. Nevertheless, the FDA wanted to share its synthesis of the feedback that it had received in the hope that it might advance public discussion on future LDT oversight.

Notwithstanding the discussion paper, the FDA continues to exercise enforcement discretion and may decide to regulate certain LDTs on a case-by-case basis at any time, which could result in delay or additional expense in offering our tests and tests that we may develop in the future.

As a matter of policy, the FDA generally does not review Direct-to-Consumer LDTs that are created and performed in a single laboratory, if they are offered to patients only when prescribed by a health care provider.

Legislative proposals addressing the FDA’s oversight of LDTs have been introduced in the current and previous Congresses, and we expect that new legislative proposals will be introduced from time-to-time. On May 17, 2022, the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee released an FDA user fees reauthorization legislative package, which incorporates contents from the Verifying Accurate Leading-edge IVCT Development (VALID) Act that would establish a new category of in vitro clinical tests (IVCTs) comprised of traditional in vitro diagnostics and LDTs, and grant the FDA authority to review and approve them pre-market. Such arrangement increased the likelihood for Congress to pass a legislation that will give the FDA clear authority to regulate LDTs, but the eventual result is difficult to predict at this time.

If the FDA ultimately regulates certain LDTs, whether via final guidance, final regulation, or as instructed by Congress, our tests may be subject to certain additional regulatory requirements. Complying with the FDA’s requirements can be expensive, time-consuming, and subject us to significant or unanticipated delays. Insofar as we may be required to obtain premarket clearance or approval to perform or continue performing an LDT, we cannot assure you that we will be able to obtain such authorization. Even if we obtain regulatory clearance or approval where required, such authorization may not be for the intended uses that we believe are commercially attractive or are critical to the commercial success of our tests. As a result, the application of the FDA’s requirements to our tests could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Our business could be harmed from the loss or suspension of a license or imposition of a fine or penalties under, or future changes in, or changing interpretations of, CLIA or state laboratory licensing laws to which we are subject.

The clinical laboratory testing industry is subject to extensive federal and state regulation. The regulations implementing CLIA set out federal regulatory standards that apply to virtually all clinical laboratories operating in the U.S. (regardless of the location, size or type of laboratory), including those operated by physicians in their offices, by requiring that they be certified by the federal government or by a federally approved accreditation agency. CLIA is a U.S. federal law regulating clinical laboratories that perform testing on specimens derived from humans for the purpose of providing information for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of disease. CLIA is intended to ensure the quality and reliability of clinical laboratories in the U.S. by mandating specific standards in the areas of personnel qualifications, administration, and participation in proficiency testing, patient test management, quality control, quality assurance and inspections.

Certain US States also require state laboratory licenses in order to test specimens received from patients residing in those states or requests received from ordering physicians in those states. We currently hold out-of-state laboratory licenses in California, New York, Maryland, Rhode Island, and Pennsylvania. Other US States may have similar requirements or may adopt similar requirements in the future.

Further, CLIA does not preempt state law, which in some cases may be more stringent than federal law and require additional personnel qualifications, quality control, record maintenance and proficiency testing. The sanction for failure to comply with CLIA and state requirements may be suspension, revocation or limitation of a laboratory’s CLIA certificate, which is necessary to conduct business, as well as significant fines, civil and criminal penalties, the imposition of directed plan of correction, and on-site monitoring. If we were to be found out of compliance with CLIA program requirements and subjected to sanctions, our business and reputation could be harmed. Several states have similar laws, and we may be subject to similar penalties. If the CLIA certification of one laboratory owned by the Company is suspended or revoked that may preclude the Company from owning or operating any other CLIA regulated laboratory for two years. Further, even if it were possible for us to bring our laboratory back into compliance, we could incur significant expenses and potentially lose revenue in doing so.

We cannot assure you that applicable statutes and regulations will not be interpreted or applied by a prosecutorial, regulatory or judicial authority in a manner that would adversely affect our business. Potential sanctions for violation of these statutes and regulations include significant fines and the suspension or loss of various licenses, certificates and authorisations, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. In addition, compliance with future legislation could impose additional requirements on us, which may be costly.

Failure to establish and comply with appropriate quality standards to assure that the highest level of quality is observed in the performance of our testing services and in the design, manufacture and marketing of our products could adversely affect the results of our operations and adversely impact our reputation.

The provision of clinical testing services, and the design, manufacture and marketing of diagnostic products involve certain inherent risks. The services that we provide and the products that we design, manufacture and market are intended to provide information for healthcare providers in providing patient care. Therefore, users of our services and products may have a greater sensitivity to errors than the users of services or products that are intended for other purposes. Similarly, negligence in performing our services can lead to injury or other adverse events. We may be sued under common law, physician liability or other liability law for acts or omissions by our laboratory personnel. We are subject to the attendant risk of substantial damages awards and risk to our reputation.

We could be adversely affected by violations of the FCPA and other worldwide anti-bribery laws.

We are subject to the FCPA, which prohibits companies and their intermediaries from making payments in violation of law to non-U.S. government officials for the purpose of obtaining or retaining business or securing any other improper advantage. We are increasing our direct sales and operations personnel outside the United States, in which we have limited experience. We use a limited number of independent distributors to sell our tests internationally, which requires a high degree of vigilance in maintaining our policy against participation in corrupt activity, because these distributors could be deemed to be our agents, and we could be held responsible for their actions. Other U.S. companies in the medical device and pharmaceutical fields have faced criminal penalties under the FCPA for allowing their agents to deviate from appropriate practices in doing business with these individuals. We are also subject to similar anti-bribery laws in the jurisdictions in which we operate, including anti-bribery laws in Australia which also prohibits commercial bribery and makes it a crime for companies to fail to prevent bribery. These laws are complex and far-reaching in nature, and, as a result, we cannot assure you that we would not be required in the future to alter one or more of our practices to be in compliance with these laws or any changes in these laws or the interpretation thereof. Any violations of these laws, or allegations of such violations, could disrupt our operations, involve significant management distraction, involve significant costs and expenses, including legal fees, and could result in a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, financial condition or results of operations. We could also incur severe penalties, including criminal and civil penalties, disgorgement and other remedial measures.

If we fail to maintain an effective system of internal control over financial reporting, we may not be able to accurately report our financial results or prevent fraud.

Effective internal controls over financial reporting are necessary for us to provide reliable financial reports and, together with adequate disclosure controls and procedures, are designed to prevent fraud. Any failure to design and implement an effective system of internal control may reveal deficiencies in our internal controls over financial reporting that are deemed to be material weaknesses. Ineffective internal controls could also cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information, which could have a negative effect on the trading price of the ADSs and our Ordinary Shares.

As of June 30, 2020, we had identified a material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting in relation to segregation of duties. Such material weakness was remedied as of June 30, 2021.

As of June 30, 2022, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer assessed the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. We did not identify any material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting during the year. However, we cannot assure you that the measures we have taken to date, and actions we may take in the future, will be sufficient to prevent potential future material weaknesses.

Failure to comply with health information privacy laws, including HIPAA or other U.S. federal or state health information privacy and security laws, as applicable, may negatively impact our business.

Pursuant to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act of 2009, or HITECH, covered entities (including health plans, healthcare clearing houses, and certain healthcare providers), as well as their respective “business associates” that create, receive, maintain or transmit individually identifiable health information for or on behalf of a covered entity, with respect to safeguarding the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information. Individuals and entities who are subject to HIPAA must comply with comprehensive privacy and security standards with respect to the use and disclosure of protected health information, as well as standards for electronic transactions, including specified transaction and code set rules. Under HITECH, HIPAA was expanded, including requirements to provide notification of certain identified data breaches, direct patient access to laboratory records, the extension of certain HIPAA privacy and security standards directly to business associates, and heightened penalties for noncompliance, and enforcement efforts. Failure to comply with HIPAA or other U.S. federal and state health information privacy and security laws, as applicable, could result in significant penalties

If we or our partners fail to comply with the complex federal, state, local and foreign laws and regulations to the extent that apply to our business, we could suffer severe consequences that could materially and adversely affect our operating results and financial condition.

Our operations are subject to extensive federal, state, local and foreign laws and regulations, all of which are subject to change. The U.S. laws and regulations that may apply to our business include, among other things:

These laws and regulations are complex and are subject to interpretation by the courts and by government agencies. Our failure to comply could lead to significant administrative civil or criminal penalties, exclusion from participation in state and federal health care programs, imprisonment, disgorgement, and prohibitions or restrictions on our laboratory’s ability to provide or receive payment for our services. We believe that we are in material compliance with all statutory and regulatory requirements that apply to us, but there is a risk that one or more government agencies could take a contrary position, or that a private, party could file suit under the Groupqui tam provisions of the federal False Claims Act or a similar state law. Such occurrences, regardless of their outcome, could damage our reputation and adversely affect important business relationships with third parties, including managed care organisations, and other private third-party payers.

A failure to comply with any of federal or state laws to the extent such are applicable to our business, particularly laws related to the elimination of healthcare fraud, may adversely impact our business.

The healthcare industry is subject to changing political, economic, and regulatory influences that may affect our business. During the past several years, the healthcare industry has been subject to an increase in governmental regulation and subject to potential disruption due to legislative initiatives and government regulation, as well as judicial interpretations thereof. While these regulations may not directly impact us or our offerings in every instance, they will affect the healthcare industry as a whole and may impact patient use of our services. We currently accept payments only from our customers not any third-party payers, such as government healthcare programs or health insurers. Because of this approach, we are not subject to many of the laws and regulations that impact many other participants in the healthcare industry.

If the government asserts broader regulatory control over companies like ours or if we determine that we will change our business model and accept payment from and/or participate in third-party payer programs, the complexity of our operations and our compliance obligations will materially increase. Failure to comply with any applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

While we seek to conduct our business in compliance with all applicable healthcare laws and regulations, regulatory or law enforcement authorities may not agree with our interpretation of these laws and regulations and may seek to enforce legal remedies or penalties against us for violations. Any action brought against us for violation of these or other laws or regulations, even if we successfully defend against it, could cause us to incur significant legal expenses and divert our management’s attention from the operation of our business. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of the federal, state, fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations that apply to us, we may be subject to penalties, including significant criminal, civil, and administrative penalties, damages and fines, disgorgement, additional reporting requirements and oversight, and imprisonment for individuals, as well as contractual damages and reputational harm. We could also be required to curtail or cease our operations. Any of the foregoing consequences could seriously harm our business and our financial results. From time to time we may need to change our operations, particularly pricing or billing practices, in response to changing interpretations of these laws and regulations or regulatory or judicial determinations with respect to these laws and regulations. These occurrences, regardless of their outcome, could damage our reputation and harm important business relationships that we have with healthcare providers, payers and others.

We face risks associated with currency exchange rate fluctuations, which could adversely affect our operating results.

We receive a portion of our revenues and pay a portion of our expenses in currencies other than the Australian dollar, such as the U.S. dollar, the Euro and the British pound. As a result, we are at risk for exchange rate fluctuations between such foreign currencies and the Australian dollar, which could affect the results of our operations. If the Australian dollar strengthens against foreign currencies, the translation of these foreign currency denominated transactions will result in decreased revenues and operating expenses. We may not be able to offset adverse foreign currency impact with increased revenues. We do not currently utilise hedging strategies to mitigate foreign currency risk and even if we were to implement hedging strategies to mitigate foreign currency risk, these strategies might not eliminate our exposure to foreign exchange rate fluctuations and would involve costs and risks of their own, such as ongoing management time and expertise, external costs to implement the strategies and potential accounting implications.

Government regulation of genetic research or testing may adversely affect the demand for our services and impair our business and operations.

In addition to the regulatory framework governing healthcare, genetic research and testing has been the focus of public attention and regulatory scrutiny. From time to time, federal, state and/or local governments adopt regulations relating to the conduct of genetic research and genetic testing. In the future, these regulations could limit or restrict genetic research activities as well as genetic testing for research or clinical purposes. In addition, if such regulations are adopted, these regulations may be inconsistent with, or in conflict with, regulations adopted by other government bodies. Regulations relating to genetic research activities could adversely affect our ability to conduct our research and development activities. Regulations restricting genetic testing could adversely affect our ability to market and sell our products and services. Accordingly, any regulations of this nature could increase the costs of our operations or restrict our ability to conduct our testing business.

Failure in our information technology systems could significantly increase testing turn-around times or impact on the billing processes or otherwise disrupt our operations.

Our laboratory operations depend, in part, on the continued performance of our information technology systems. Our information technology systems are potentially vulnerable to physical or electronic break-ins, computer viruses and similar disruptions. Sustained system failures or interruption of our systems in our laboratory operations could disrupt our ability to process laboratory requisitions, perform testing, and provide test results in a timely manner and/or billing process. Failure of our information technology systems could adversely affect our business and financial condition.

Any significant disruption in service on our website or in our computer or logistics systems, whether due to a failure with our information technology systems or that of a third-party vendor, could harm our reputation and may result in a loss of customers.

Customers purchase and access our services through our websites. Our reputation and ability to attract, retain and serve our customers, patients, and members is dependent upon the reliable performance of our website, network infrastructure and content delivery processes. Interruptions in any of these systems, whether due to system failures, computer viruses or physical or electronic break-ins, could affect the security or availability of our website, including our databases, and prevent our customers, patients, and members from accessing and using our services.

Our systems and operations are also vulnerable to damage or interruption from fire, flood, power loss, telecommunications failure, terrorist attacks, acts of war, electronic and physical break-ins, earthquake and similar events. For example, our headquarters are located in Melbourne, Australia where increased bush fire and flood activity has recently been experienced. In the event of any catastrophic failure involving our website, we may be unable to serve our web traffic. In addition, our sole laboratory in Melbourne, Australia is responsible for substantially all of our operations, which operations would be materially disrupted in the event any of these events were to occur at such laboratory. The occurrence of any of the foregoing risks could result in damage to our systems or could cause them to fail completely, and our insurance may not cover such risks or may be insufficient to compensate us for losses that may occur.

Additionally, our business model is dependent on our ability to deliver kits to customers and have kits processed and returned to us. This requires coordination between our logistics providers and third-party shipping services. Operational disruptions may be caused by factors outside of our control such as hostilities, political unrest, terrorist attacks, natural disasters, pandemics (such as COVID-19) and public health emergencies, such as COVID-19, affecting the geographies where our operations and customers are located. We may not be effective at preventing or mitigating the effects of such disruptions, particularly in the case of a catastrophic event. In addition, operational disruptions may occur during the holiday season, causing delays or failures in deliveries of our kits. Any such disruption may result in lost revenues, a loss of customers and reputational damage, which would have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Breaches of network or information technology, natural disasters or terrorist attacks could have an adverse impact on our business.

Cyber-attacks or other breaches of information technology security, natural disasters, or acts of terrorism or war may result in hardware failure or disrupt our product testing or research and development activities. There has been a substantial increase in frequency of successful and unsuccessful cyber-attacks on companies in recent years. Such an event may result in our inability, or the inability of our collaborative partners, to operate the facilities to conduct and complete the necessary activities, which even if the event is for a limited period of time, may result in significant expenses and/ or significant damage or delay to our commercial or research activities. While we maintain insurance cover for some of these events, the potential liabilities associated with these events could exceeded the cover we maintain.

Ethical and other concerns surrounding the use of genetic information may reduce the demand for our services.

Public opinion regarding ethical issues related to the confidentiality and appropriate use of genetic testing may influence government authorities to call for limits on, or regulation of the use of, genetic testing. In addition, such authorities could prohibit testing for genetic predisposition to certain conditions, particularly for those that have no known cure. Furthermore, adverse publicity or public opinion relating to genetic research and testing, even in the absence of any governmental regulation, could reduce the potential markets for our products and services.

Risks associated with our intellectual property.

The patenting of genes and issues surrounding access to genetic knowledge are the subjects of extensive and ongoing public debate in many countries. By way of example, the Australian Law Reform Commission has previously conducted two inquiries into the social uses of genetic information. The patents we hold in respect of “non-coding” DNA have broad scope and have also been the subject of debate and some criticism in the media. Individuals or organisations, in any one of the countries in which these patents have issued, could take legal action to seek their amendment, revocation or invalidation, something which has happened previously, on several occasions in various jurisdictions, though we have prevailed in all such cases. Furthermore, any time that we initiate legal action against parties that infringe our patents we face a risk that the infringer will defend itself through a counterclaim of patent invalidity or other such claims. Subsequent legal action could potentially overturn, invalidate or limit the scope of our patents.

We rely heavily upon patents and proprietary technology that may fail to protect our business.

We rely upon our portfolio of patent rights, patent applications and exclusive licenses to patents and patent applications relating to genetic technologies. We expect to aggressively patent and protect our proprietary technologies. However, we cannot be certain that any additional patents will be issued to us because of our domestic or foreign patent applications or that any of our patents will withstand challenges by others. Patents issued to, or licensed by us may be infringed or third parties may independently develop the same or similar technologies. Similarly, our patents may not provide us with meaningful protection from competitors, including those who may pursue patents which may prevent, limit or interfere with our products or which may require licensing and the payment of significant fees or royalties by us to such third parties in order to enable us to conduct our business. We may sue or be sued by third parties regarding our patents and other intellectual property rights. These suits are often costly and would divert valuable funds, time and technical resources from our operations and cause a distraction to management.

We also rely upon unpatented proprietary technologies and databases. Although we require employees, consultants and collaborators to sign confidentiality agreements, we may not be able to adequately protect our rights in such unpatented proprietary technologies and databases, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. For example, others may independently develop substantially equivalent proprietary information or techniques or otherwise gain access to our proprietary technologies or disclose our technologies to our competitors.

We may face difficulties in certain jurisdictions in protecting our intellectual property rights, which may diminish the value of our intellectual property rights in those jurisdictions.

The laws of some jurisdictions do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as the laws in the United States and Australia and many companies have encountered significant difficulties in protecting and defending such rights in such other jurisdictions. If we or our collaboration partners encounter difficulties in protecting, or are otherwise precluded from effectively protecting, the intellectual property rights for our business in such jurisdictions, the value of those rights may be diminished and we may face additional competition from others in those jurisdictions. In addition, many countries limit the enforceability of patents against governments agencies or government contractors. In those countries, the patent owner may have limited remedies, which could materially diminish the value of such patent.

Our operations may be adversely affected by the effects of extreme weather conditions or other interruptions in the timely transportation of specimens.

We may be required to transport specimens from the U.S. or other distant locations to our laboratory located in Melbourne, Australia. Our operations may be adversely impacted by extreme weather conditions or other interruptions such as the COVID pandemic in the timely transportation of such specimens or otherwise to provide our services, from time to time. The occurrence of any such event and/or a disruption to our operations as a result may harm our reputation and adversely impact our results of operations.

Our CIT Platform will expose us to various risks.

Our Consumer Initiated Testing platform (CIT), allows consumers to directly request any of our tests online with a practitioner involved in the process, will be subject to various risks, including:

Our ability to conduct our services in a particular U.S. state or non-U.S. jurisdiction is dependent upon the applicable laws governing remote healthcare, the practice of medicine and healthcare delivery in general in such location which are subject to changing political, regulatory and other influences, and corporate practice of medicine limitations. Some state medical boards have established new rules or interpreted existing rules in a manner that limits or restricts the practice of telemedicine. The extent to which a U.S. state or non-U.S. jurisdiction considers particular actions or relationships to constitute practicing medicine is subject to change and to evolving interpretations by (in the case of U.S. states) medical boards and state attorneys general, among others, and (in the case of non-U.S. jurisdictions) the relevant regulatory and legal authorities, each with broad discretion. Accordingly, we must monitor our compliance with law in every jurisdiction in which we operate, on an ongoing basis, and we cannot provide assurance that our activities and arrangements, if challenged, will be found to be in compliance with the law. If a successful legal challenge or an adverse change in the relevant laws were to occur, we could be subject to significant penalties. Further, if we were unable to adapt our business model to comply with such laws, our operations in the affected jurisdictions would be disrupted, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Discontinuation or recalls of existing testing products or our customers using new technologies to perform their own tests could adversely affect our business.

Discontinuation or recalls of existing testing products or our customers using new technologies to perform their own tests could adversely affect the Company’s business. Manufacturers may discontinue or recall reagents, test kits or instruments used by us to perform laboratory testing. Such discontinuations or recalls could adversely affect our costs, testing volume and revenue. In addition, advances in technology may lead to the development of more cost-effective technologies such as point-of-care testing equipment that can be operated by physicians or other healthcare providers in their offices or by patients themselves without requiring the services of freestanding clinical laboratories. Development of such technology and its use by our customers could reduce the demand for our laboratory testing services and the utilisation of certain tests offered by us and negatively impact our revenues.

Because the PRS test may not be able to obtain necessary regulatory clearance, we may not generate any revenue.

All of our existing products are subject to regulation in Australia by the TGA, the U.S. by the FDA and/or other domestic and international governmental, public health agencies, regulatory bodies or non-governmental organisations. The process of obtaining required approvals or clearances for a potential new product varies according to the nature of and uses for a specific product. These processes can involve lengthy and detailed laboratory testing, human clinical trials, sampling activities, and other costly, time-consuming procedures. The submission of an application to a regulatory authority does not guarantee that the authority will grant an approval or clearance for the product. Each authority may impose its own requirements and can delay or refuse to grant approval or clearance, even though a product has been approved in another country. The time taken to obtain approval or clearance varies depending on the nature of the application and may result in the passage of a significant period of time from the date of submission of the application. Delays in the approval or clearance processes increase the risk that we will not succeed in introducing or selling the subject products, and we may be required to abandon the PRS after devoting substantial time and resources to its development.

If our PRS test is required to obtain and maintain FDA approvals, it will be subject to continuing governmental regulations and additional foreign regulations.

If the FDA determines that enforcement discretion is not appropriate or that LDTs are generally subject to FDA regulation and that premarket review, including clearance or approval, is required for our PRS tests or any of our future tests, diagnostic test kits that we may develop, or other products that would be classified as medical devices, the process of obtaining regulatory clearances or approvals to market a medical device can be costly and time consuming, and we may not be able to obtain these clearances or approvals on a timely basis, if at all. In particular, the FDA permits commercial distribution of a new medical device only after the device has received clearance under Section 510(k) of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, or is the subject of an approved premarket approval application, or PMA or reclassification of the device through the De Novo classification process, unless the device is specifically exempt from those requirements. The FDA will clear marketing of a lower risk medical device through the 510(k) process if the manufacturer demonstrates that the new product is substantially equivalent to other 510(k)-cleared products. High risk devices deemed to pose the greatest risk, such as life-sustaining, life-supporting, or implantable devices, or devices not deemed substantially equivalent to a previously cleared device, require the approval of a PMA. The PMA process is more costly, lengthy and uncertain than the 510(k)-clearance process. A PMA application must be supported by extensive data, including, but not limited to, technical, preclinical, clinical trial, manufacturing and labeling data, to demonstrate to the FDA’s satisfaction the safety and efficacy of the device for its intended use. The De Novo classification process is an alternate pathway to classify medical devices that are automatically classified into Class III but which are low to moderate risk. A manufacturer can submit a petition for direct De Novo review if the manufacturer is unable to identify an appropriate predicate device and the new device or new use of the device presents moderate or low risk. De Novo classification may also be available after receipt of a “not substantially equivalent” letter following submission of a 510(k) to FDA. Our currently commercialised products have not received FDA clearance or approval, as they are marketed under the FDA’s enforcement discretion for LDTs. Even if regulatory clearance or approval of a product is required and granted, such clearance or approval may be subject to limitations on the intended uses for which the product may be marketed and reduce our potential to successfully commercialise the product and generate revenue from the product. If the FDA determines that our promotional materials, labeling, training or other marketing or educational activities constitute promotion of an unapproved use, it could request that we cease or modify our training or promotional materials or subject us to regulatory enforcement actions.

We are also subject to other federal, state, and foreign regulation concerning the manufacture and sale of our products. Our failure to comply with U.S. federal, state and foreign governmental regulations could lead to the issuance of warning letters or untitled letters, government investigation, the imposition of injunctions, suspensions or loss of regulatory clearance or approvals, product recalls, termination of distribution, product seizures or civil penalties. In the most extreme cases, criminal sanctions or closure of our manufacturing facility are possible, any of which could adversely affect our business, operating results and prospects.

The FDA and similar foreign governmental authorities have the authority to require the recall of regulated products in the event of material deficiencies or defects in design or manufacture. In the case of the FDA, the authority to require a recall must be based on an FDA finding that there is a reasonable probability that the device would cause serious injury or death. In addition, foreign governmental bodies have the authority to require the recall of our products in the event of material deficiencies or defects in design or manufacture. Manufacturers may, under their own initiative, recall a product if any material deficiency in a device is found. A government-mandated or voluntary recall by us could occur as a result of component failures, manufacturing errors, design or labeling defects or other deficiencies and issues. Recalls of any of our products would divert managerial and financial resources and have an adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. The FDA requires that certain classifications of recalls be reported to FDA within 10 working days after the recall is initiated. Companies are required to maintain certain records of recalls, even if they are not reportable to the FDA. We may initiate voluntary recalls involving our products in the future that we determine do not require notification of the FDA. If the FDA disagrees with our determinations, they could require us to report those actions as recalls. A future recall announcement could harm our reputation with customers and negatively affect our sales. In addition, the FDA could take enforcement action for failing to report the recalls when they were conducted.

Declining general economic or business conditions, including as a result of the recent COVID-19 outbreak, may have a negative impact on our business.

Continuing concerns over economic and business prospects in the United States and other countries have contributed to increased volatility and diminished expectations for the global economy. These factors, coupled with the prospect of decreased business and consumer confidence and increased unemployment resulting from the recent COVID-19 outbreak, may precipitate an economic slowdown and recession. If the economic climate deteriorates, our business, including our access to patient samples and the addressable market for diagnostic tests that we may successfully develop, as well as the financial condition of our suppliers and our third-party payers, could be adversely affected, resulting in a negative impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

The COVID-19 pandemic is having a negative impact on global markets and business activity, which has had an effect on the operations of the Company, including but not limited to, that sales of our products have been impacted not only by the inability for consumers to visit their practitioners but also the difficulty our sales team is having in arranging face to face meetings with practitioners. Our sales team has found it very difficult to reach practitioners to build on the sales momentum created prior to the pandemic. Additionally, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Company has done the following:

These new COVID-19 related activities will provide some revenue opportunities for us in the short term and will assist in the development of additional tests the Company is currently working on. We have not made significant progress to date that would lead to orders or requests to increase capacity and there is no guarantee we will ever receive orders or requests.

RISKS RELATED TO OUR SECURITIES

Our ADSs may be delisted from the NASDAQ Capital Market.

In 2019, we were subject to NASDAQ delisting proceedings as a result of our failure to maintain the bid price of the ADS above the minimum $1.00 per share requirement and because our reported stockholders’ equity was less than the minimum specified amount of $2,500,000 as of December 31, 2018. We regained compliance with NASDAQ’s Listing Rules with respect to our bid price as a result of the adjustment to the ratio of the ADSs that took effect on August 15, 2019, and we regained compliance with the minimum stockholders’ equity requirement by raising gross proceeds of approximately $3,043,000 in a rights offering completed on October 29, 2019. On November 6, 2019, we received a letter from NASDAQ notifying us that we had regained compliance with the equity rule (the “Compliance Letter”).

On March 13, 2020, we received a determination letter (the “Letter”) from NASDAQ indicating that we did not comply with the stockholders’ equity rule. The Letter indicates that Listing Rule 5815(d)(4)(B) does not permit an issuer that is deficient in stockholders’ equity to present a plan of compliance to the NASDAQ Staff if such issuer has failed to comply with that provision within one year of a Hearing Panel (the “Panel”) determination of compliance. The Letter states that since we are out of compliance with the equity rule within one year of the Compliance Letter, the Staff cannot allow us to submit a plan of compliance. We requested an appeal hearing with the Panel to review the delisting determination. Upon NASDAQ’s receipt of the hearing request by the Company, NASDAQ stayed the suspension of our securities and the filing of the Form 25-NSE pending the Panel’s decision. An oral hearing took place on April 30, 2020 and in a letter dated May 12, 2020, the Panel granted the Company the full 180-day extension until September 9, 2020, to publicly disclose full compliance with the minimum shareholder equity requirement under NASDAQ rules. Subsequent to this, the Company has regained compliance with NASDAQ Listing Rule 5550(b)(1) as of August 25, 2020 (refer to sequence of events below).

On April 2, 2020, we closed a registered direct offering of 1,028,574 ADSs, at a purchase price of $1.75 per ADS (the “First April Offering”). H.C. Wainwright & Co., LLC acted as the placement agent for this offering. We intend to use the net proceeds from this offering to support the introduction and distribution of our new products in the United States, for general product research and development, including the development of polygenic risk tests with TGen in the United States, for implementation of our consumer initiated testing platform, and for working capital. The Company issued 40,114,200 warrants to H.C. Wainwright & Co on April 3, 2020, exercisable at US$0.00365 each, expiring in 5 years from issue date. The warrants are exercisable for fully paid ordinary shares.

On April 17, 2020, we announced that we have developed a detailed implementation plan to enable a temporary transition of our genetic testing laboratory to a high-throughput COVID-19 testing laboratory, should it be required by government agencies to assist with demand (we have not received any such requests to date and there is no guarantee that we will ever receive such requests). Initial work to identify laboratory workflows, instrument modification, laboratory compliance for biologics and contaminated materials handling has commenced. Secure supply chain of test reagents has been confirmed. We believe we are prepared to commence testing within 21 days of receiving a request to assist with demand, if any.

On April 22, 2020, we closed a registered direct offering of 722,502 ADSs at a purchase price of $2.00 per ADS (the “Second April Offering,” and together with the First April Offering, the “April Offerings”). H.C. Wainwright & Co., LLC acted as the placement agent for this offering. We intend to use the net proceeds of this offering to support the introduction and distribution of our new products in the United States, for general product research and development, including the development of polygenic risk tests with TGen in the United States, for implementation of our consumer initiated testing platform and preparation for potential COVID-19 testing as well as for working capital. The Company issued 28,177,578 warrants to H.C. Wainwright & Co on April 22, 2020, exercisable at US$0.00417 each, expiring in 5 years from issue date. The warrants are exercisable for fully paid ordinary shares.

On May 26, 2020, we completed a capital raise by offering of (i) 3,500,000 ADSs, for a purchase price of United States Dollars (US$) US$2.00 per ADS (each representing six hundred (600) of the Company’s ordinary shares) and (ii) 500,000 pre-funded warrants to purchase one ADS (the “Pre-Funded Warrants”) for a purchase price of US$1.9999 per Pre-Funded Warrant. H.C. Wainwright & Co., LLC acted as the placement agent for this offering. In connection with such offering, the Company agreed to issue 156,000,000 warrants exercisable at US$0.004166 each, expiring in 5 years from issue date, to H.C. Wainwright & Co.

On July 21, 2020, we closed a registered direct offering of 1,025,000 ADSs, each representing six hundred (600) of the Company’s ordinary shares, at a purchase price of United States Dollars (US$) US$5.00 per ADS - or in Australian dollars $0.012 per ordinary share. The gross proceeds for this offering were approximately US$5.1 million. Against the offering, the Company agreed to issue 39,975,000 warrants exercisable at US$0.0104 each, expiring in 5 years from issue date, to H.C. Wainwright & Co which would form part of cost of raising capital.

As of August 25, 2020, the Company has regained compliance with the equity requirement of NASDAQ Listing Rule 5550(b) (1), as required by the Hearings Panel decision dated May 12, 2020.

On January 25, 2021, we closed a registered direct offering of 1,250,000 ADSs, each representing six hundred (600) of the Company’s ordinary shares, at a purchase price of United States Dollars (US$) US$5.25 per ADS - or in Australian dollars $0.01125 per ordinary share. The gross proceeds for this offering was approximately US$6.56 million. Against the offering, the Company agreed to issue 48,750,000 warrants exercisable at US$0.010938 each, expiring in 5 years from issue date, to H.C. Wainwright & Co which would form part of cost of raising capital. The said warrants are subject to shareholder approval.

However, there can be no assurance that we will be successful in these in maintaining net assets compliance and our securities will remain listed on the above mattersNASDAQ Capital Market. The delisting of our ADSs by NASDAQ would have material negative impacts on the liquidity of our securities and accordingly, have prepared the financial report on a going concern basis. As such no adjustments have been madeour ability to the financial statements relating to the recoverability and classification of the asset carrying amounts or classification of liabilities that might be necessary should the Group not be able to continue as a going concern.raise future capital.

Our stock price is volatile and can fluctuate significantly based on events not in our control and general industry conditions. As a result, the value of your investment may decline significantly.

The biotechnology sector can be particularly vulnerable to abrupt changes in investor sentiment. Stock prices of companies in the biotechnology industry, including ours, can swing dramatically, with little relationship to operating performance. Our stock price may be affected by a number of factors including, but not limited to:

·                       product development events;

·                       the outcome of litigation;

·                       decisions relating to intellectual property rights;

·                       the entrance of competitive products or technologies into our markets;

·                       new medical discoveries;

·                       the establishment of strategic partnerships and alliances;

·                       changes in reimbursement policies or other practices related to the pharmaceutical industry; or

·                       other industry and market changes or trends.

Since our listing on the Australian Securities Exchange in August 2000, the price of our Ordinary Shares has ranged from a low of $0.006A$0.003 to a high of $0.97A$0.88 per share. Further fluctuations are likely to occur due to events which are not within our control and general market conditions affecting the biotechnology sector or the stock market generally.

In addition, low trading volume may increase the volatility of the price of our ADSs. A thin trading market could cause the price of our ADSs to fluctuate significantly more than the stock market as a whole. For example, trades involving a relatively small number of our ADSs may have a greater impact on the trading price for our ADSs than would be the case if the trading volume were higher.

The following chart illustrates the fluctuation in the price of our shares (in Australian dollars) over the last five years:

A lack of significant liquidity does not eventuate for our ADSs on NASDAQ,may negatively affect your ability to resell your ADSs could be negatively affected because there would be limited buyers for your interests.our securities.

Historically, there was virtually no trading in our ADSs through the pink sheets after the establishment of our Level I ADR Program.  However, subsequent to the Level II listing of our ADSs on the NASDAQ Global Market on September 2, 2005, the trading volumes of ourOur ADSs have increased.  The Company subsequently transferred the listing of its ADSs totraded on the NASDAQ Capital Market effective as fromsince June 30, 2010. An active trading market for the ADSs, however, may not be maintained in the future. If an active trading market is not maintained, the liquidity and trading prices of the ADSs could be negatively affected.

On July 20, 2017 the Company received a notification letter (the “Notice”) from the Listing Qualifications Department of The Nasdaq Stock Market, notifying the Company that its closing bid price has been below the minimum $US1.00 per share requirement for a period of 30 consecutive business days and that the Company has not met the minimum bid price requirement of  $US1.00 per share for continued inclusion under Nasdaq Marketplace Listing Rules (the “Rules”).

The Notice stated that in accordance with the Rules the Company has 180 calendar days, or until January 15, 2018, to regain compliance. To regain compliance with the minimum bid price requirement, the Company’s securities must meet or exceed the $US1.00 per share price for 10 consecutive business days.

This deficiency notice does not immediately affect the Company’s Nasdaq listing.

If the Company does not regain compliance with the Rules by January 15, 2018, Nasdaq will determine whether the Company meets the continued listing requirement for market value of publicly held shares and all other initial listing standards for The Nasdaq Capital Market, with the exception of the bid price requirement. If it meets the initial listing criteria and upon written notice of the Company of its intention to cure the deficiency, Nasdaq will notify the Company that it has been granted an additional 180 calendar days compliance period. If the Company is not eligible for an additional compliance period, Nasdaq will provide written confirmation that the Company’s securities will be delisted from The Nasdaq Capital Market.

The relevant Listing Rules are:-

·                  5550(a)(2) - bid price

·                  5810(c)(3)(A) - compliance period

·                  5810(b) - public disclosure

·                  5505 - Capital Market criteria

In certain circumstances, holders of ADSs may have limited rights relative to holders of Ordinary Shares.

The rights of holders of ADSs with respect to the voting of Ordinary Shares and the right to receive certain distributions may be limited in certain respects by the deposit agreement entered into by us and The Bank of New York Mellon. For example, although ADS holders are entitled under the deposit agreement, subject to any applicable provisions of Australian law and of our Constitution, to instruct the depositary as to the exercise of the voting rights pertaining to the Ordinary Shares represented by the American Depositary Shares, and the depositary has agreed that it will try, as far as practical, to vote the Ordinary Shares so represented in accordance with such instructions, ADS holders may not receive notices sent by the depositary in time to ensure that the depositary will vote the Ordinary Shares. This means that, from a practical point of view, the holders of ADSs may not be able to exercise their right to vote. In addition, under the deposit agreement, the depositary has the right to restrict distributions to holders of the ADSs in the event that it is unlawful or impractical to make such distributions. We have no obligation to take any action to permit distributions to holders of our American Depositary Receipts, or ADSs. As a result, holders of ADSs may not receive distributions made by us.

RISKS RELATED TO TAXATION

Our Company has

We may be classified as a history of incurring losses.passive foreign investment company, which could result in adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences for U.S. holders.

The business now called Genetic Technologies Limited was founded in 1989.  With the exception of the year ended June 30, 2011, the Company has incurred operating losses in every year of its existence.  As at June 30, 2017, the Company had accumulated losses of $117,848,074 and the extent of any future losses and whether or not the Company can generate profits in future years remains uncertain.  The Company currently does not generate sufficient revenue to cover its operating expenses.  We expect our capital outlays and operating expenditures to continue to increase for the foreseeable future as we continue to commercialize and enhance the BREVAGenplus test, progress existing collaborative research programs while sourcing further collaborative opportunities and undertakeIn general, a comprehensive strategic review, exploring a wide range of strategic alternatives. In order to fund the commercialization of BREVAGenplus, further expand our clinical laboratory operations, technologies and research & development activities, and undertake a comprehensive strategic review we may need to raise additional capital. There is no certainty that the Companynon-U.S. company will be able to raise additional funds by issuing further shares and/or the raising of debt and, if such funds are available, on what terms the Company would be able to secure them.

There is a substantial risk that we are, or will become,considered a passive foreign investment company, or PFIC, which will subject our U.S. investors to adverse tax rules.

Holders of our ADSs who are U.S. residents face income tax risks. There is a substantial risk that we are, or will become, a passive foreign investment company, commonly referred to as a PFIC. Our treatment as a PFIC could result in a reduction in the after-tax return to the holders of our ADSs and would likely cause a reduction in the value of such ADSs. Forfor U.S. federal income tax purposes we will be classified as a PFIC for any taxable year in which either (i)(1) 75% or more of ourits gross income isconsists of passive income (the “income test”) or (ii) at least(2) 50% or more of the average quarterly value of all of ourits assets for the taxable yearis attributable to assets that produce, or are held for the production of, passive income.income (the “asset test”). For this purpose, cashpurposes of these tests, passive income generally includes dividends, interest, gains from the sale or exchange of investment property and certain rents and royalties. In addition, for purposes of the above calculations, a non-U.S. corporation that directly or indirectly owns at least 25% by value of the shares of another corporation is considered to be an asset that produces passive income. Wetreated as if it held its proportionate share of the assets and received directly its proportionate share of the income of such other corporation.

Based on the nature and composition of our income, assets, activities and market capitalization, we believe that we were classified as a PFIC for theour taxable year ended June 30, 20172022. However, our PFIC status is based on an annual determination that is subject to a number of uncertainties and there is a substantial riskmay change from year to year. Our PFIC status will depend on the composition of our income (including with respect to the R&D Tax Credit) and the composition and value of our assets, which may be determined in large part by reference to the market value of the ADSs and our Ordinary Shares, which may be volatile, from time to time. Our status may also depend, in part, on how quickly we utilize the cash we raise in any offering of our securities. There can be no assurance that we will not be classified asconsidered a PFIC in any past, current or future taxable year, and our U.S. counsel expresses no opinion regarding our conclusions or our expectations regarding our PFIC status.

If we are a PFIC for any taxable year during which a U.S. holder (as defined in the current taxable year. If we are classified as a PFIC for U.S. federal income tax purposes, highly complex rules will apply to U.S. holders owning ADSs. Accordingly, you are urged to consult your tax advisors regarding the application of such rules. United States residents should carefully readsection titled “Item 10.E. Additional Information—Taxation, United States Federal Income Tax Consequences”Taxation”) holds the ADSs or Ordinary Shares, the U.S. holder may be subject to adverse tax consequences regardless of whether we continue to qualify as a PFIC, including ineligibility for any preferred tax rates on capital gains or on actual or deemed dividends, interest charges on certain taxes treated as deferred, and additional reporting requirements. We will continue to be treated as a PFIC with respect to such U.S. holder in this Annual Report ,all succeeding years during which the U.S. holder owns the ADSs or Ordinary Shares, regardless of whether we continue to meet the income or asset tests described above, unless the U.S. holder makes a valid and timely qualified electing fund (QEF) or mark-to-market election, or makes a deemed sale election once we cease to be a PFIC; however, we do not currently intend to provide the information necessary for a more completeU.S. holder to make a QEF election. For further discussion of the PFIC rules and the adverse U.S. federal income tax risks relatedconsequences to U.S. holders in the event we are classified as a PFIC, see “Item 10.E. Additional Information—Taxation, United States Federal Income Taxation—Passive Foreign Investment Company Rules.”

If a United States person is treated as owning and disposingat least 10% of our ADSs.

Risks Related to our Industry

Our sales cycle is typically lengthy.

The sales cycle for our testing products is typically lengthy.  As a result, we may expend substantial funds and management effort with no assurance of successfully selling our products or services.  Our ability to obtain customers for our molecular risk assessment and predictive genetic testing services depends significantly on the perception that our services can help accelerate efforts in genomics.  Our sales effort requires the effective demonstration of the benefits of our services to, and significant training of, many different departments within a potential customer.  In addition, we sometimes are required to negotiate agreements containing terms unique to each customer.  Our business could also be adversely affected if we expend money without any return.

If our competitors develop superior products, our operations and financial condition could be affected.

We are currently subject to increased competition from biotechnology and diagnostic companies, academic and research institutions and government or other publicly-funded agencies that are pursuing products and services which are substantially similar to our molecular risk assessment testing services, or which otherwise address the needs of our customers and potential customers.  Our competitors in the predictive genetic testing and assessment market include private and public sector enterprises located in Australia, the U.S. and elsewhere. Many of the organizations competing with us are much larger and have more ready access to needed resources. In particular, they would have greater experience in the areas of finance, research and development, manufacturing, marketing, sales, distribution, technical and regulatory matters than we do.  In addition, many of the larger current and potential competitors have already established name / brand recognition and more extensive collaborative relationships.

Our competitive position in the molecular risk assessment and predictive testing area is based upon, amongst other things, our ability to:

·             maintain first to market advantage;

·             continue to strengthen and maintain scientific credibility through the process of obtaining scientific validation and undertaken further clinical trials supported by Peer-reviewed publication in medical journals;

·             create and maintain scientifically-advanced technology and offer proprietary products and services;

·             attract and retain qualified personnel;

·             obtain patent or other protection for our products and services;

·             obtain required government approvals and other accreditations on a timely basis; and

·             successfully market our products and services.

If we are not successful in meeting these goals, our business could be adversely affected.  Similarly, our competitors may succeed in developing technologies, products or services that are more effective than any that we are developing or that would render our technology and services obsolete, noncompetitive or uneconomical.

We rely heavily upon patents and proprietary technology that may fail to protect our business.

We rely upon our portfolio of patent rights, patent applications and exclusive licenses to patents and patent applications relating to genetic technologies.  We expect to aggressively patent and protect our proprietary technologies.  However, we cannot be certain that any additional patents will be issued to us as a result of our domestic or foreign patent applications or that any of our patents will withstand challenges by others.  Patents issued to, or licensed by us may be infringed or third parties may independently develop the same or similar technologies.  Similarly, our patents may not provide us with meaningful protection from competitors, including those who may pursue patents which may prevent, limit or interfere with our products or which may require licensing and the payment of significant fees or royalties by us toordinary shares, such third parties in order to enable us to conduct our business.  We may sue or be sued by third parties regarding our patents and other intellectual property rights.  These suits are often costly and would divert valuable funds, time and technical resources from our operations and cause a distraction to management.

We have important relationships with external parties over whom we have limited control.

We have relationships with academic consultants and other advisers who are not employed by us.  Accordingly, we have limited control over their activities and can expect only limited amounts of their time to be dedicated to our activities.  These persons may have consulting, employment or advisory arrangements with other entities that may conflict with or compete with their obligations to us.  Our consultants typically sign agreements that provide for confidentiality of our proprietary information and results of studies.  However, in connection with every relationship, we may not be able to maintain the confidentiality of our technology, the dissemination of which could hurt our competitive position and results from operations.  To the extent that our scientific consultants develop inventions or processes independently that may be applicable to our proposed products, disputes may arise as to the ownership of the proprietary rights to such information, and we may not be successful with any dispute outcomes.

Weholder may be subject to professional liability suits andadverse U.S. federal income tax consequences.

If a U.S. holder (as defined in the section titled “Item 10.E. Additional Information—Taxation, United States Federal Income Taxation”) is treated as owning (directly, indirectly or constructively) at least 10% of the value or voting power of our insurance may not be sufficient to cover damages.  If this occurs, our business and financial conditionOrdinary Shares or ADSs, such U.S. holder may be adversely affected.

Our business exposes ustreated, for U.S. federal income tax purposes, as a “United States shareholder” with respect to potential liability risks that are inherenteach “controlled foreign corporation” in the testing, manufacturing, marketing and sale of molecular risk assessment and predictive tests.  The useour group, if any. Because our group includes a U.S. subsidiary (Phenogen Sciences Inc.), certain of our productscurrent and product candidates,future non-U.S. subsidiaries will be treated as controlled foreign corporations, regardless of whether for clinical trials or commercial sale, may expose us to professional liability claims and possible adverse publicity.  We may be subject to claims resulting from incorrect results of analysis of genetic variations or other screening tests performed using our services.  Litigation of such claims could be costly.  We could expend significant funds during any litigation proceeding brought against us.  Further, ifwe are treated as a court were to require us to pay damages to a plaintiff, the amount of such damages could be significant and severely damage our financial condition.  Although we have public and product liability insurance coverage under broadform liability and professional indemnity policies, for an aggregate amount of A$60,000,000, the level or breadth of our coverage may not be adequate to fully cover any potential liability claims.  To date we have not been subject to any claims, or ultimately liability, in excess of the amount of our coverage.  In addition, we may not be able to obtain additional professional liability coverage in the future at an acceptable cost.controlled foreign corporation. A successful claim or series of claims brought against us in excess of our insurance coverage and the effect of professional liability litigation upon the reputation and marketability of our technology and products, together with the diversion of the attention of key personnel, could negatively affect our business.

We use potentially hazardous materials, chemicals and patient samples in our business and any disputes relating to improper handling, storage or disposal of these materials could be time consuming and costly.

Our research and development, production and service activities involve the controlled use of hazardous laboratory materials and chemicals, including small quantities of acid and alcohol, and patient tissue samples.  We do not knowingly deal with infectious samples.

We, our collaborators and service providers are subject to stringent Australian federal, state and local laws and regulations governing occupational health and safety standards, including those governing the use, storage, handling and disposal of these materials and certain waste products.  However, we could be liable for accidental contamination or discharge or any resultant injury from hazardous materials, and conveyance, processing, and storage of and data on patient samples.  If we, our collaborators or service providers fail to comply with applicable laws or regulations, we could be required to pay penalties or be held liable for any damages that result and this liability could exceed our financial resources.  Further, future changes to environmental health and safety laws could cause us to incur additional expense or restrict our operations.  To date, we have not had a reportable event or serious injury.

In addition, our collaborators and service providers may be working with these same types of hazardous materials, including hazardous chemicals, in connection with our collaborations.  In the eventUnited States shareholder of a lawsuit or investigation, we could be held responsible for any injury caused to persons or property by exposure to, or release of, these hazardous materials or patient samples that may contain infectious materials.  The cost of this liability could exceed our resources.  While we maintain broadform liability insurance coverage for these risks, in the amount of up to A$40,000,000, the level or breadth of our coverage may not be adequate to fully cover potential liability claims.  To date, we have not been subject to claims, or ultimately liability, in excess of the amount of our coverage.  Our broadform insurance coverage also covers us against losses arising from an interruption of our business activities as a result of the mishandling of such materials.  We also maintain workers’ compensation insurance, which is mandatory in Australia, covering all of our workers in the event of injury.

We depend on the collaborative efforts of our academic and corporate partners for research, development and commercialization of some of our products.  A breach by our partners of their obligations, or the termination of the relationship, could deprive us of valuable resources and require additional investment of time and money.

Our strategy for research, development and commercialization of some of our products has historically involved entering into various arrangements with academic, corporate partners and others.  As a result, the success of our strategy depends, in part, upon the strength of those relationships and these outside parties undertaking their responsibilities and performing their tasks to the best of their ability and responding in a timely manner.  Our collaborators may also be our competitors.  We cannot necessarily control the amount and timing of resources that our collaborators devote to performing their contractual obligations and we have no certainty that these parties will perform their obligations as expected or that any revenue will be derived from these arrangements.

If our collaborators breach or terminate their agreement with us or otherwise fail to conduct their collaborative activities in a timely manner, the development or commercialization of the product candidate or research program under such collaborative arrangement may be delayed.  If that is the case, wecontrolled foreign corporation may be required to undertake unforeseen additional responsibilitiesannually report and include in its U.S. taxable income its pro rata share of “Subpart F income,” “global intangible low-taxed income” and investments in U.S. property by controlled foreign corporations, regardless of whether we make any distributions. An individual that is a United States shareholder with respect to a controlled foreign corporation generally would not be allowed certain tax deductions or foreign tax credits that would be allowed to devote unforeseen additional funds or other resourcesa United States shareholder that is a U.S. corporation. We cannot provide any assurances that we will furnish to such development or commercialization, or such development or commercialization could be terminated.  The termination or cancellation of collaborative arrangements could adversely affect our financial condition, intellectual property position and general operations.  In addition, disagreements between collaborators and us could lead to delays in the collaborative research, development, or commercialization of certain products or could require or result in formal legal process or arbitration for resolution.  These consequences could be time-consuming and expensive and could have material adverse effects on the Company.

Other than our contractual rights under our license agreements, weany United States shareholder information that may be limited in our ability to convince our licensees to fulfill their obligations.  If our licensees fail to act promptly and effectively, or if a dispute arises, it could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and the price of our ordinary shares and ADSs.

We rely upon scientific, technical and clinical data supplied by academic and corporate collaborators, licensors, licensees, independent contractors and others in the evaluation and development of potential therapeutic methods.  There may be errors or omissions in this data that would materially adversely affect the development of these methods.

We may seek additional collaborative arrangements to develop and commercialize our products in the future.  We may not be able to negotiate acceptable arrangements in the future and, if negotiated, we have no certainty that they will be on favorable terms or if they will be successful.  In addition, our partners may pursue alternative technologies independently or in collaboration with others as a means of developing treatments for the diseases targeted by their collaborative programs with us.  If any of these events occur, the progress of the Company could be adversely affected and our results of operations and financial condition could suffer.

Currently our financial results depend largely on the sales of our breast cancer risk assessment test, BREVAGenplus.

For the near future, we expect to continue to derive a substantial majority of our revenues from sales of one product, our breast cancer risk test BREVAGen. We do not expect to recognize significant revenues from BREVAGenplus, a second generation BREVAGen product, until increased levels of adoption and reimbursement for this test have been established. If we are unable to increase sales of   BREVAGenplus or successfully develop and commercialize other tests or enhancements, our ability to achieve sustained revenues and profitability would be impacted.

If our sole laboratory facility becomes inoperable, we will be unable to perform our tests and our business will be harmed.

We do not have redundant clinical reference laboratory facilities outside of Melbourne, Australia. Our current lease of laboratory premises expires August 31, 2018. The facility and the equipment we use to perform our tests would be costly to replace and could require substantial lead time to repair or replace. The facility may be harmed or rendered inoperable by natural or man-made disasters, including flooding and power outages, which may render it difficult or impossible for us to perform our tests for some period of time. The inability to perform our tests or the backlog of tests that could develop if our facility is inoperable for even a short period of time may result in the loss of customers or harm our reputation, and we may be unable to regain those customers in the future.

If we no longer had our own facility and needed to rely on a third party to perform our tests, we could only use another facility with established state licensure and Clinical Laboratory Improvements Amendments (CLIA) accreditation under the scope of which BREVAgenplus tests could be performed following validation and other required procedures. We cannot assure you that we would be able to find another CLIA-certified facility willingnecessary to comply with the required procedures, that this laboratory would be willing to perform the tests on commercially reasonable terms, or that it would be able to meet our quality standards. In order to establish a redundant clinical reference laboratory facility, we would have to spend considerable timereporting and money securing adequate space, constructing the facility, recruiting and training employees, and establishing the additional operational and administrative infrastructure necessary to support a second facility. We may not be able, or it may take considerable time, to replicate our testing processes or results in a new facility. Additionally, any new clinical reference laboratory facility would be subject to certification under CLIA and licensing by several states, including California and New York, which could take a significant amount of time and result in delays in our ability to begin operations.

The loss of key members of our senior management team or our inability to attract and retain highly skilled scientists, clinicians and salespeople could adversely affect our business.

Our success depends largely on the skills, experience and performance of key members of our executive management team and others in key management positions. The efforts of each of these persons together will be critical as we continue to develop our technologies and testing processes, continue our international expansion and transition to a company with multiple commercialized products on offer. If we were to lose one or more of these key employees, we may experience difficulties in competing effectively, developing our technologies and implementing our business strategies.

Our research and development programs and commercial laboratory operations depend on our ability to attract and retain highly skilled scientists and technicians, including licensed laboratory technicians, chemists, biostatisticians and engineers. We may not be able to attract or retain qualified scientists and technicians in the future due to the competition for qualified personnel among life science businesses. In addition, if there were to be a shortage of clinical laboratory scientists in coming years, this would make it more difficult to hire sufficient numbers of qualified personnel. We also face competition from universities and public and private research institutions in recruiting and retaining highly qualified scientific personnel. In addition, our success depends on our ability to attract and retain salespeople with extensive experience in oncology and close relationships with medical oncologists, pathologists and other hospital personnel. We may have difficulties sourcing, recruiting or retaining qualified salespeople, which could cause delays or a decline in the rate of adoption of our tests. If we are not able to attract and retain the necessary personnel to accomplish our business objectives, we may experience constraints that could adversely affect our ability to support our research and development and sales programs. All of our U.S employees are at-will, which means that either we or the employee may terminate their employment at any time.

FDA regulation of LDTs may result in significant changes, and our business could be adversely impacted if we fail to adapt.

Clinical laboratory tests like ours are regulated under the CLIA, as well as by applicable state laws. Diagnostic kits that are sold and distributed through interstate commerce are regulated as medical devices by the federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The FDA has exercised its discretion and has not subjected most Laboratory Developed Tests, or LDTs to FDA regulation, although reagents or software provided by third parties and used to perform LDTs may be subject to regulation.

The FDA claims to have regulatory authority over LDTs under the Medical Device Amendments of 1976 and has stated in the past that it would issue guidance to the industry regarding its regulatory approach. In such discussions, the FDA has indicated that it would use a risk-based approach to regulation and would direct more resources to tests with wider distribution and with the highest risk of injury, but that it will be sensitive to the need to not adversely impact patient care or innovation.  In October 2014, the FDA announced its framework and timetable for implementing this guidance.  We cannot predict the ultimate timing or form of any such guidance or regulation and the potential impact on our existing tests. If adopted, such a regulatory approach by the FDA may lead to an increased regulatory burden, including additional costs and delays in introducing new tests or even continuing with our current tests. While the ultimate impact of the FDA’s approach is unknown, it may be extensive and may result in significant changes. Our failure to adapt to these changes could have a material adverse effect on our business.

If the FDA decides to regulate our tests, it may require additional pre-market clinical testing prior to submitting a regulatory notification or application for commercial sales. If we are required to conduct pre-market clinical trials, whether using prospectively

acquired samples or archival samples, delays in the commencement or completion of clinical testing could significantly increase our test development costs and delay commercialization of any future tests, and interrupt sales of our current tests. Many of the factors that may cause or lead to a delay in the commencement or completion of clinical trials may also ultimately lead to delay or denial of regulatory clearance or approval. The commencement of clinical trials may be delayed due to insufficient patient enrollment, which is a function of many factors, including the size of the patient population, the nature of the protocol, the proximity of patients to clinical sites and the eligibility criteria for the clinical trial.

We may find it necessary to engage contract research organizations to perform data collection and analysis and other aspects of our clinical trials, which might increase the cost and complexity of our trials. We may also depend on clinical investigators, medical institutions and contract research organizations to perform the trials. If these parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties orpayment obligations or meet expected deadlines, or if the quality, completeness or accuracy of the clinical data they obtain is compromised due to the failure to adhere to our clinical protocols or for other reasons, our clinical trials may have to be extended, delayed or terminated. Many of these factors would be beyond our control. We may not be able to enter into replacement arrangements without undue delays or considerable expenditures. If there are delays in testing or approvals as a result of the failure to perform by third parties, our research and development costs would increase, and we may not be able to obtain regulatory clearance or approval for our tests. In addition, we may not be able to establish or maintain relationships with these parties on favorable terms, if at all. Each of these outcomes would harm our ability to market our tests, or to achieve sustained profitability.

Even if the clinical trials are timely completed, there is no assurance that the results of those trials will be sufficient to support regulatory clearance or approval for the intended indications.  Failure of the clinical data to support an intended use of given LDT would likely have an adverse impact on the Company.

Our business could be harmed from the loss or suspension of a license or imposition of a fine or penalties under, or future changes in, or changing interpretations of, CLIA or state laboratory licensing laws to which we are subject.

The clinical laboratory testing industry is subject to extensive federal and state regulation, and many of these statutes and regulations have not been interpreted by the courts.  The regulations implementing CLIA set out federal regulatory standards that apply to virtually all clinical laboratories (regardless of the location, size or type of laboratory), including those operated by physicians in their offices, by requiring that they be certified by the federal government or by a federally approved accreditation agency.  CLIA does not preempt state law, which in some cases may be more stringent than federal law and require additional personnel qualifications, quality control, record maintenance and proficiency testing. The sanction for failure to comply with CLIA and state requirements may be suspension, revocation or limitation of a laboratory’s CLIA certificate, which is necessary to conduct business, as well as significant fines and/or criminal penalties. Several states have similar laws and we may be subject to similar penalties. If the certification of one laboratory owned by the Company is suspended or revoked that may preclude the Company from owning or operating any other laboratory in the Country for two years.

We cannot assure you that applicable statutes and regulations and more specifically, the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, will not be interpreted or applied by a prosecutorial, regulatory or judicial authority in a manner that would adversely affect our business. Potential sanctions for violation of these statutes and regulations include significant fines and the suspension or loss of various licenses, certificates and authorizations, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. In addition, compliance with future legislation could impose additional requirements on us, which may be costly.

Failure to establish, and perform to, appropriate quality standards to assure that the highest level of quality is observed in the performance of our testing services and in the design, manufacture and marketing of our products could adversely affect the results of our operations and adversely impact our reputation.

The provision of clinical testing services, and the design, manufacture and marketing of diagnostic products involve certain inherent risks. The services that we provide and the products that we design, manufacture and market are intended to provide information for healthcare providers in providing patient care. Therefore, users of our services and products may have a greater sensitivity to errors than the users of services or products that are intended for other purposes.

Similarly, negligence in performing our services can lead to injury or other adverse events. We may be sued under common law, physician liability or other liability law for acts or omissions by our laboratory personnel.  We are subject to the attendant risk of substantial damages awards and risk to our reputation.

Failure to timely or accurately bill for our services could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Billing for clinical testing services is extremely complicated and is subject to extensive and non-uniform rules and administrative requirements. Depending on the billing arrangement and applicable law, we bill various payers, such as patients, insurance companies,

Medicare, Medicaid, physicians and hospitals. Changes in laws regulations and contract terms could increase the complexity and cost of our billing process. Additionally, auditing for compliance with applicable laws and regulations as well as internal compliance policies and procedures add further cost and complexity to the billing process.

Missing or incorrect information on requisitions adds complexity to and slows the billing process, creates backlogs of unbilled requisitions, and generally increases the aging of accounts receivable and bad debt expense. Failure to timely or correctly bill may lead to us not being reimbursed for our services or an increase in the aging of our accounts receivable, which could adversely affect our results of operations and cash flows.described above. Failure to comply with applicablesuch obligations may subject a United States shareholder to significant monetary penalties and stall the beginning of the statute of limitations period for relevant U.S. federal income tax returns. U.S. holders should consult their tax advisors regarding the potential application of these rules to their investment in the Ordinary Shares or ADSs.

Changes to tax laws relatingcould materially adversely affect our company and reduce net returns to billing government healthcare programsour shareholders.

Our tax treatment is subject to the enactment of, or private healthcare programs thatchanges in, tax laws, regulations and treaties, or the interpretation thereof, tax policy initiatives and reforms under consideration and the practices of tax authorities in jurisdictions in which we operate, under government contract could leadincluding those related to various penalties, including: (1) exclusionthe Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development’s Base Erosion and Profit Shifting Project, the European Commission’s state aid investigations and other initiatives. Such changes may include (but are not limited to) the taxation of operating income, investment income, dividends received or suspension from participation(in the specific context of withholding tax) dividends paid. We are unable to predict what tax reform may be proposed or enacted in federal  health care programs ; (2) asset forfeitures; (3) civil and criminal fines and penalties; (3) possible liability under the federal False Claims Act and state analogs, and (4) the loss of various licenses, certificates and authorizations necessary to operatefuture or what effect such changes would have on our business, anybut such changes, to the extent they are brought into tax legislation, regulations, policies or practices, could affect our financial position and overall or effective tax rates in the future in countries where we have operations, reduce post-tax returns to our shareholders, and increase the complexity, burden and cost of which couldtax compliance.

Tax authorities may disagree with our positions and conclusions regarding certain tax positions, resulting in unanticipated costs, taxes or non-realization of expected benefits.

A tax authority may disagree with tax positions that we have a material adverse effect on our results of operations or cash flows.

In order to, amongst other things, simplify the billing process, in April 2017, the Company transitioned to a direct self-pay programme. We cannot assure you that this change will address and minimize all of the billing risks.

Failure to comply with complex federal and state laws and regulations related to submission of claims for clinical laboratory servicestaken, which could result in significant monetary damagesincreased tax liabilities. For example, the U.S. Internal Revenue Service or another tax authority could challenge our allocation of income by tax jurisdiction and penalties and exclusion from the Medicare and Medicaid programs.

We are subject to extensive federal and state laws and regulations relating to the submission of claims for payment for clinical laboratory services, including those that relate to coverage of our services under Medicare, Medicaid and other governmental health care programs, the amounts that may be billed forpaid between our servicesaffiliated companies pursuant to our intercompany arrangements and transfer pricing policies, including amounts paid with respect to whom claims for services may be submitted. In addition,our intellectual property development. Similarly, a tax authority could assert that we are subject to various laws regulating our interactions with other healthcare providers and with patients, such as the Anti-Kickback Statute, the Anti-Inducement Statute, and the Ethicstax in Patient Referrals Act of 1989, commonlya jurisdiction where we believe we have not established a taxable connection, often referred to as a “permanent establishment” under international tax treaties, and such an assertion, if successful, could increase our expected tax liability in one or more jurisdictions. A tax authority may take the Stark law.  These lawsposition that material income tax liabilities, interest and penalties are complicated.

Our failure to comply with applicable laws and regulations could resultpayable by us, in our inability to receive payment for our services or result in attempts by third-party payers, such as Medicare and Medicaid, to recover payments from us that have already been made. Submission of claims in violation of certain statutory or regulatory requirements can result in penalties, including substantial civil penalties for each item or service billed to Medicare in violation of the legal requirement, and exclusion from participation in Medicare, Medicaid and other federal health care programs. Government authorities or whistleblowers may also assert that violations of laws and regulations related to submission or causing the submission of claims violate the federal False Claims Act, or FCA, or other laws related to fraud and abuse, including submission of claims for services that were not medically necessary. Violations of the FCA could result in significant economic liability. The FCA provides that all damages are trebled, and each false claim submitted is subject to a penalty of up to $21,563 for violations occurring after November 2, 2015 and $11,000 for violations occurring before November 2, 2015.   For example,which case, we could be subject to FCA liability if it were determined that the services we provided were not medically necessary and not reimbursable or if it were determinedexpect that we improperly paid physicians who referred patients to our laboratory.  It is also possible that the government could attempt to hold us liable under fraudmight contest such assessment. Contesting such an assessment may be lengthy and abuse laws for improper claims submitted by an entity for services that we performedcostly and if we were found to have knowingly participatedunsuccessful in disputing the arrangement that resulted in submission ofassessment, the improper claims.

Failure to comply with HIPAA, including regarding the use of new “standard transactions,” may negatively impact our profitability and cash flows.

Pursuant to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, as amended, or HIPAA, we must comply with comprehensive privacy and security standards with respect to the use and disclosure of protected health information, as well as standards for electronic transactions, including specified transaction and code set rules. Under the 2009 HITECH amendments to HIPAA, the law was expanded, including requirements to provide notification of certain identified data breaches, direct patient access to laboratory records, the extension of certain HIPAA privacy and security standards directly to business associates, and heightened penalties for noncompliance, and enforcement efforts.

In addition, HIPAA not only seeks to ensure patient privacy, but also requires providers that bill electronically to do so using standard code sets.  These HIPAA transaction standards are complex, and subject to differences in interpretation by payers. For instance, some payers may interpret the standards to require us to provide certain types of information, including demographic information not usually provided to us by physicians. As a result of inconsistent application of transaction standards by payers or our inability to obtain certain billing information not usually provided to us by physicians, we could face increased costs and complexity, a temporary disruption in receipts and ongoing reductions in the timeliness of reimbursement. In addition, new requirements for additional standard transactions,

such as claims attachments, Version 5010 of the HIPAA Transaction Standards and the ICD-10-CM Code Set, could prove technically difficult, time-consuming or expensive to implement.

Complying with numerous regulations pertaining to our business is an expensive and time-consuming process, and any failure to comply could result in substantial penalties.

The clinical laboratory testing industry is highly regulated and there can be no assurance that the regulatory environment in which we operate will not change significantly and adversely in the future. Areas of the regulatory environment that may affect our ability to conduct business include, without limitation:

·                  federal and state laws applicable to billing and claims payment;

·                  federal and state laboratory anti-mark-up laws;

·                  federal and state anti-kickback laws;

·                  federal and state false claims laws;

·                  federal self-referral and financial inducement prohibition laws, commonly known as the Stark Law, and the state equivalents;

·                  federal and state laws governing laboratory licensing and testing, including CLIA;

·                  federal and state laws governing the LDTs;

·                  HIPAA, along with the revisions to HIPPA as a result of the HITECH Act, and analogous state laws;

·                  federal, state and foreign regulation of privacy, security, electronic transactions and identity theft;

·                  federal, state and local laws governing the handling, transportation and disposal of medical and hazardous waste;

·                  Occupational Safety and Health Administration rules and regulations;

·                  changes to laws, regulations and rules as a result of the Health Care Reform Law; and

·                  changes to other federal, state and local laws, regulations and rules, including tax laws.

We have adopted policies and procedures designed to comply with these laws.  In the ordinary course of business, there is an ongoing awareness of the importance of compliance with these laws.  The growth of our business and sales organization may increase the potential for violating these laws or our internal policies and procedures, despite our ongoing vigilance in maintaining and updating our compliance procedures. The risk of being found in violation of these or other laws and regulations is further increased by the fact that many of them are extremely complex and in many instances, there are no significant regulatory or judicial interpretations of these laws and regulations. Any action brought against us for violation of these or other laws or regulations, even if we successfully defend against it, could cause us to incur significant legal expenses and divert management’s attention. Any determination that we have violated these laws or regulations, or a public announcement that we are being investigated for possible violations of these laws or regulations, could harm our reputation, operating results and financial condition. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of these laws and regulations, we may be subject to any applicable penalty associated with the violation, including civil and criminal penalties, damages and fines, we could be required to refund payments received by us, and we could be required to curtail or cease our operations. In addition, a significant change in any of these laws or regulations may require us to change our business model in order to maintain compliance with these laws or regulations, which could harm our operating results and financial condition.

A failure to comply with any of federal or state laws applicable to our business, particularly laws related to the elimination of healthcare fraud, may adversely impact our business.

Federal officials responsible for administering and enforcing the healthcare laws and regulations have made a priority of eliminating healthcare fraud. For example, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care Education and Reconciliation Act of 2010, jointly the “Affordable Care Act,”  includes significant new fraud and abuse measures, including required disclosures of financial arrangements between drug and device manufacturers, on the one hand, and physicians and teaching hospitals, on the other hand. Federal funding available for combating health care fraud and abuse generally has increased. While we seek to conduct our business in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations, many of the laws and regulations applicable to our business, particularly those relating to billing and reimbursement of tests and those relating to relationships with physicians, hospitals and patients, contain language that has not been interpreted by courts. We must rely on our interpretation of these laws and regulations based on the advice of our counsel and regulatory or law enforcement authorities may not agree with our interpretation of these laws and regulations and may seek to enforce legal remedies or penalties against us for violations. From time to time we may need to change our operations, particularly pricing or billing practices, in response to changing interpretations of these laws and regulations or regulatory or judicial determinations with respect to these laws and regulations. These occurrences, regardless of their outcome, could damage our reputation and harm important business relationships that we have with healthcare providers, payers and others. Furthermore, if a regulatory or judicial authority finds that we have not complied with applicable laws and regulations, we could be required to refund amounts that were billed and collected in violation of such laws and regulations. In addition, we may voluntarily refund amounts that were alleged to have been billed and collected in violation of applicable laws and regulations. In either case, we could suffer civil and criminal damages, fines and penalties, exclusion from participation in governmental healthcare programs and the loss of licenses, certificates and

authorizations necessary to operate our business, as well as incur liabilities from third-party claims, all of which could harm our operating results and financial condition. Moreover, regardless of the outcome, if we or physicians or other third parties with whom we do business are investigated by a regulatory or law enforcement authority we could incur substantial costs, including legal fees, and our management may be required to divert a substantial amount of time to an investigation.

To enhance compliance with applicable health care laws, and mitigate potential liability in the event of noncompliance, regulatory authorities, such as the United States Department of Health and Human Services’  Office of Inspector General, or OIG, have recommended the adoption and implementation of a comprehensive health care compliance program that generally contains the elements of an effective compliance and ethics program described in Section 8B2.1 of the United States Sentencing Commission Guidelines Manual, and for many years the OIG has made available a model compliance program targeted to the clinical laboratory industry.  In addition, certain states, such as New York, require that health care providers, such as clinical laboratories, that engage in substantial business under the state Medicaid program have a compliance program that generally adheres to the standards set forth in the Model Compliance Program.  Also, under the Affordable Care Act, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, or HHS, will require suppliers, such as the Company, to adopt, as a condition of Medicare participation, compliance programs that meet a core set of requirements.

Failure to maintain the security of patient-related information or compliance with security requirements could damage our reputation with customers, cause us to incur substantial additional costs and become subject to litigation.

Pursuant to HIPAA, and certain similar state laws, we must comply with comprehensive privacy and security standards with respect to the use and disclosure of protected health information. Under the HITECH amendments to HIPAA, HIPAA was expanded to require certain data breach notification, to extend certain HIPAA privacy and security standards directly to business associates, to heighten penalties for noncompliance, and enhance enforcement efforts.

We receive certain personal and financial information about our clients and their patients. In addition, we rely heavily on communications and information systems to conduct our business. Our operations depend heavily upon the secure transmission of confidential information over public networks. We are transitioning our products’ commercial program to an ecommerce based solution, which places our assets, customer data and other personally identifiable data at higher risks. We are making investments to ensure that our employees are aware of cyber security risks facing the Company and how to prevent data breaches. A compromise in our security systems that results in client or patient personal information being obtained by unauthorized persons or our failure to comply with security requirements for financial transactions could adversely affect our reputation with our clients and result in litigation against us or the imposition of penalties, all of which may adversely affect our operations, financial condition and liquidity. Although we are not aware of the occurrence of any data beaches, we continue to update our cyber security tools and processes in an attempt to keep pace with evolving cyber security risks.

Changes in regulation and policies, including increasing downward pressure on health care reimbursement, may adversely affect reimbursement for diagnostic services and could have a material adverse impact on our business.

Reimbursement levels for health care services are subject to continuous and often unexpected changes, and we face a variety of efforts by government payers to reduce utilization and reimbursement for diagnostic testing services. Changes in governmental reimbursement may result from statutory and regulatory changes, retroactive rate adjustments, administrative rulings, competitive bidding initiatives, or other policy changes.

The U.S. Congress has considered, at least yearly in conjunction with budgetary legislation, changes to one or both of the Medicare fee schedules under which we receive reimbursement, which include the clinical laboratory fee schedule for our clinical laboratory services. For example, Congress has periodically considered imposing a 20 percent coinsurance on laboratory services. If enacted, this would require us to attempt to collect this amount from patients, although in many cases the costs of collection would exceed the amount actually received.

The CMS pays laboratories on the basis of a of a fee schedule that is reviewed and re-calculated on an annual basis.  CMS may change the fee schedule upward or downward on billing codes that we submit for reimbursement on a regular basis. Our revenue and business may be adversely affected if the reimbursement rates associated with such codes are reduced. Even when reimbursement rates are not reduced, policy changes add to our costs by increasing the complexity and volume of administrative requirements. Medicaid reimbursement, which varies by state, is also subject to administrative and billing requirements and budget pressures. Recently, state budget pressures have caused states to consider several policy changes that may impact our financial condition and results of operations, such as delaying payments, reducing reimbursement, restricting coverage eligibility and service coverage, and imposing taxes on our services.

The transition to a direct self-pay programme in April 2017 may reduce the reimbursement risks by placing the responsibility for payment purely with the patient, although overall market adoption and revenue generation may be adversely affected.

Healthcare policy changes, including recently enacted legislation reforming the U.S. healthcare system, may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

Fees for most laboratory services reimbursed by Medicare are established in the Clinical Laboratory Fee Schedule (CLFS), and fees for other testing reimbursed by Medicare, primarily related to pathology, are covered by the Physician Fee Schedule (PFS). Over the past several years, the Company has experienced governmental pay reductions as a direct result of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 (MACRA) and the Achieving a Better Life Experience Act of 2014 (ABLE Act). In addition, the Protecting Access to Medicare Act (PAMA), which became law on April 1, 2014, is expected to result in a future net reduction in reimbursement revenue under the CLFS. These laws include provisions designed to control healthcare expenses reimbursed by government programs through a combination of reductions to fee schedules, incentives to providers to participate in alternative payment models such as risk-sharing and new methods to establish and adjust fees.

The Affordable Care Act makes changes that are expected to significantly affect clinical laboratories, among others.  Beginning in 2013, each medical device manufacturer must pay a sales tax (medical device exise tax “MDET”) in an amount equal to 2.3% of the price for which such manufacturer sells its medical devices that are listed with the FDA. The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016 (Dec. 18, 2015) imposed a two-year moratorium on this medical device tax so it would not apply to the sale of a taxable medical device by the manufacturer, producer, or importer of the device during the period beginning on Jan. 1, 2016, and ending on Dec. 31, 2017.Repeal of the MDET was included in the House passed American Health Care Act of 2017 and the Senate’s Better Care Reconciliation Act released on July 13, 2017; however, the Senate has thus far failed to pass its bill to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act. Senate discussions appear to be ongoing, and MDET repeal could be included in other legislation considered in 2017, such as tax reform.

Although the FDA has contended that LDTs are medical devices, none of our products is currently listed with the FDA. We cannot assure you that the tax, once the moratorium sunsets, will not be extended to services such as ours in the future.  The  Affordable Care Act also mandates a reduction in payments for clinical laboratory services paid under the Medicare Clinical Laboratory Fee Schedule, or CLFS, of 1.75% through 2015 and a productivity adjustment to the CLFS.  Moreover, under Protecting Access to Medicare Act, CMS will be required to set and make adjustments to the CLFS using market-based information that reflects the scope of prices paid across the laboratory industry. On October 1, 2015, CMS issued a proposed rule to implement PAMA that would require applicable laboratories, including the Company, to begin reporting their test-specific private payer payment amounts to CMS during the first quarter of 2016. CMS intends to use that private market data to calculate weighted median prices for each test (based on applicable CPT codes) that would represent the new CLFS rates beginning in 2017, subject to certain phase-in limits. For 2017-2019, a test price cannot be reduced by more than 10.0% per year; for 2020-2022, a test price cannot be reduced by more than 15.0% per year. Reporting and pricing will occur every three years, or annually with respect to certain types of tests, to update the CLFS thereafter.

Other significant measures contained in the Affordable Care Act includes, for example, coordination and promotion of research on comparative clinical effectiveness of different technologies and procedures, initiatives to revise Medicare payment methodologies, such as bundling of payments across the continuum of care by providers and physicians, and initiatives to promote quality indicators in payment methodologies. The Affordable Care Act also includes significant new fraud and abuse measures, including required disclosures by drug and device manufacturers and distributors of financial arrangements with physicians and teaching hospitals. In addition, the Health Care Reform Law establishes an Independent Payment Advisory Board, or IPAB, to reduce the per capita rate of growth in Medicare spending. The IPAB has broad discretion to propose policies to reduce expenditures, which may have a negative impact on payment rates for services. The IPAB proposals may impact payments for clinical laboratory services beginning in 2016. We are monitoring the impact of the Health Care Reform Law in order to enable us to determine the trends and changes that may be necessitated by the legislation that may potentially impact on our business over time.

In addition to the Affordable Care Act, various healthcare reform proposals have also emerged from federal and state governments. For example, in February 2012, Congress passed the “Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012” which in part reduced the potential future cost-based increases to the Medicare Clinical Laboratory Fee Schedule by 2%. Overall the expected total fee cut to the CLFS for 2013 was 2.95% not including a further reduction of 2% from implementation of the automatic expense reductions (sequester) under the Budget Control Act of 2011 which went into effect for dates of service on or after April 1, 2013.  Reductions made by the Congressional sequester are applied to total claims payments made.  While these reductions did not result in a rebasing of the negotiated or established Medicare or Medicaid reimbursement rates, rebasing could occur as a result of future legislation.  In 2015, the total fee cut to the CLFS was 0.25%.

On June 23, 2016, the CMS published a final rule implementing PAMA, which required establishment of a new Medicare reimbursement system for clinical lab tests paid under the CLFS, based on private payer rates, as reported to CMS. Although the new payment system was supposed to go into effect for tests furnished after January 1, 2017, the CMS rulemaking process was delayed, and the new rates will not be effective until January 1, 2018 pursuant to the final rule. Under the new system the Company must collect data on private payer rates and report the data to CMS every three years for most types of tests.  The Company does not expect that the new reporting requirements will have a material impact on its business or results of operations. CMS will use the data reported by all applicable labs to calculate a weighted median of private payer rates for each test performed, and that weighted median will be the new Medicare rate. Rate reductions for existing tests under the new system

will be phased in over six years. The public comment period on the preliminary private payor rate based CLFS payment amounts will close on October 23, 2017 after which CMS will make available final CY 2018 CLFS rates on the CMS website for a January 1, 2018 implementaion. The Company is still assessing the full impact of the final rule, but has been preparing for it for some time.

We cannot be certain that these or future changes will not affect payment rates in the future. We also cannot predict whether future healthcare initiatives will be implemented at the federal or state level, or the effect any future legislation or regulation will have on us. The taxes imposed by the new federal legislation, cost reduction measures and the expansion in government’s role in the U.S. healthcare industry may result in decreased profits to us, lower reimbursements by payers for our products or reduced medical procedure volumes, all of which may adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Healthcare plans have taken steps to control the utilization and reimbursement of healthcare services, including clinical test services.

We also face efforts by non-governmental third-party payers, including healthcare plans, to reduce utilization and reimbursement for clinical testing services.

The healthcare industry has experienced a trend of consolidation among healthcare insurance plans, resulting in fewer but larger insurance plans with significant bargaining power to negotiate fee arrangements with healthcare providers, including clinical testing providers. These healthcare plans, and independent physician associations, may demand that clinical testing providers accept discounted fee structures or assume all or a portion of the financial risk associated with providing testing services to their members through capped payment arrangements. In addition, some healthcare plans have been willing to limit the PPO or POS laboratory network to only a single national laboratory to obtain improved fee-for-service pricing. There are also an increasing number of patients enrolling in consumer driven products and high deductible plans that involve greater patient cost-sharing.

The increased consolidation among healthcare plans also has increased the potential adverse impact of ceasing to be a contracted provider with any such insurer.

We expect continuing efforts to reduce reimbursements, to impose more stringent cost controls and to reduce utilization of clinical test services. These efforts, including future changes in third-party payer rules, practices and policies, or ceasing to be a contracted provider to a healthcare plan, may have a material adverse effect on our business.

Government regulation of genetic research or testing may adversely affect the demand for our services and impair our business and operations.

In addition to the regulatory framework governing healthcare, genetic research and testing has been the focus of public attention and regulatory scrutiny.  From time to time, federal, state and/or local governments adopt regulations relating to the conduct of genetic research and genetic testing.  In the future, these regulations could limit or restrict genetic research activities as well as genetic testing for research or clinical purposes.  In addition, if such regulations are adopted, these regulations may be inconsistent with, or in conflict with, regulations adopted by other government bodies.  Regulations relating to genetic research activities could adversely affect our ability to conduct our research and development activities.  Regulations restricting genetic testing could adversely affect our ability to market and sell our products and services.  Accordingly, any regulations of this natureimplications could increase the costs of our operations or restrict our ability to conduct our testing business and might adversely affect our operations and financial condition.anticipated effective tax rate, where applicable.

Our operations may be adversely affected by the effects of extreme weather conditions or other interruptions in the timely transportation of specimens.