What changed in this filing

/stocks — the workspaceLOADING

Item 1. Financial Statements

2025-07-18 compared with 2025-04-22 · 532 added, 373 removed, 1149 unchanged (44% of the section changed)

3 unchanged sentences

Three months ended

June 30, Six months ended

(Millions, except per share amounts) 2025 2024 2025 2024

4 unchanged sentences

Research, development and related expenses 288 280 573 534

Loss on business divestitures

Total operating expenses 5,204 4,983 9,912 9,850

Operating income

1,140 1,272 2,386 2,421

Other expense (income), net 217 ( 138 ) 78 82

Income from continuing operations before income taxes

923 1,410 2,308 2,339

Provision for income taxes

245 203 510 423

Income from continuing operations of consolidated group

678 1,207 1,798 1,916

Income from unconsolidated subsidiaries, net of taxes

Net income from continuing operations including noncontrolling interest

725 1,210 1,847 1,920

net income attributable to noncontrolling interest

Net income from continuing operations attributable to 3M

Net income from discontinued operations, net of taxes

723 1,204 1,839 1,909

Net income (loss) from discontinued operations, net of taxes

— ( 59 ) — 164

Net income attributable to 3M

4 unchanged sentences

$ 1.35 $ 2.17 $ 3.40 $ 3.44

Earnings per share from discontinued operations — basic

Earnings (loss) per share from discontinued operations — basic

— ( 0.10 ) — 0.30

Earnings per share — basic

3 unchanged sentences

$ 1.34 $ 2.17 $ 3.38 $ 3.44

Earnings per share from discontinued operations — diluted

Earnings (loss) per share from discontinued operations — diluted

— ( 0.10 ) — 0.29

Earnings per share — diluted

4 unchanged sentences

Three months ended

June 30, Six months ended

(Millions) 2025 2024 2025 2024

3 unchanged sentences

Net income including noncontrolling interest

725 1,151 1,847 2,084

Other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax:

4 unchanged sentences

Comprehensive income including noncontrolling interest

1,030 1,825 2,352 2,711

Comprehensive (income) attributable to noncontrolling interest

( 2 ) ( 5 ) ( 8 ) ( 11 )

Comprehensive income attributable to 3M

3 unchanged sentences

Consolidated Balance Sheet

(Dollars in millions, except per share amount) March 31, 2025 December 31, 2024

(Dollars in millions, except per share amount) June 30, 2025 December 31, 2024

Current assets

35 unchanged sentences

944,033,056 shares issued

Shares outstanding - March 31, 2025:

Shares outstanding - June 30, 2025:

532,629,702 , December 31, 2024:

3 unchanged sentences

( 35,542 ) ( 34,462 )

Shares at March 31, 2025:

Shares at June 30, 2025:

411,403,354 , December 31, 2024:

7 unchanged sentences

Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows 1

Three months ended

Six months ended June 30,

(Millions) 2025 2024

7 unchanged sentences

Stock-based compensation expense 129 200

Loss on business divestitures

Deferred income taxes 217 115

11 unchanged sentences

Proceeds from maturities and sale of marketable securities and investments 2,130 707

Proceeds from sale of businesses, net of cash sold 5 —

Other — net ( 3 ) ( 29 )

7 unchanged sentences

Dividends paid to shareholders ( 786 ) ( 1,221 )

Cash transferred to Solventum related to separation, net

Other — net ( 15 ) ( 57 )

16 unchanged sentences

Certain amounts in prior periods’ consolidated financial statements have been reclassified to conform to current period presentation.

In addition, information provided herein reflects the impact of the following changes for all applicable periods presented.

• As discussed in Note 2, on April 1, 2024, 3M completed the previously announced separation of its Health Care business (the Separation) resulting in Solventum becoming an independent public company.

As a result, 3M no longer consolidates Solventum into 3M’s financial results and reports Solventum's historical net income, applicable assets and liabilities in 3M's consolidated financial statements as discontinued operations.

New Accounting Pronouncements:

5 unchanged sentences

3M continuing involvement with Solventum in the form of net sales under supply agreements and income from transition agreements is reflected in amounts disclosed in "Corporate and Other" in Note 19, recorded as net sales and associated costs and recorded as a direct offset to associated costs within selling, general and administrative expenses, respectively.

Solventum transition agreement income for the first three months of 2025 was approximately $ 50 million (approximately $ 0.2 billion gross fees, net of assigned costs).

Solventum transition agreement income for the three and six and months ended June 30, 2025 was approximately $ 40 million and $ 90 million, respectively (approximately $ 0.2 billion and $ 0.4 billion gross fees, net of assigned costs, respectively).

Solventum transition agreement income for the three and six months ended June 30, 2024 was approximately $ 30 million (approximately $ 0.2 billion gross fees, net of assigned costs).

Transition services or purchases from Solventum are not material to 3M.

Amounts due from Solventum and amounts due to Solventum under the agreements referenced above were approximately $ 0.4 billion and $ 0.2 billion, respectively, as of March 31, 2025 and as of December 31, 2024.

Amounts due from Solventum and amounts due to Solventum under the agreements referenced above were approximately $ 0.4 billion and $ 0.2 billion, respectively, as of June 30, 2025 and as of December 31, 2024.

Information regarding net income from discontinued operations, net of taxes includes the following:

Three months ended

Net income from discontinued operations, net of taxes (millions)

Net income (loss) from discontinued operations, net of taxes (millions)

Three months ended June 30, 2024 Six months ended June 30, 2024

Cost of sales — 844

1 unchanged sentence

Other expense (income), net

Income from discontinued operations before income taxes 308

Income (loss) from discontinued operations before income taxes

Provision for income taxes 13 98

Net income from discontinued operations, net of taxes $ 223

Net income (loss) from discontinued operations, net of taxes

$ ( 59 ) $ 164

Cash flows related to discontinued operations have not been segregated, and are included in the Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows for all periods presented.

Selected financial information related to cash flows from discontinued operations is below.

Three months ended

Selected cash flow information from discontinued operations (millions)

Six months ended June 30, 2024

Depreciation and amortization $ 139

Purchases of property, plant and equipment (PP&E) 77

Purchases of PP&E

Disaggregated Revenue Information:

The Company views the following disaggregated disclosures as useful to understanding the composition of revenue recognized during the respective reporting periods:

Three months ended

Three months ended June 30, Six months ended June 30,

Net sales (millions)

2025 2024 2025 2024

Abrasives $ 338 $ 324 $ 655 $ 652

3 unchanged sentences

Industrial Specialties Division

294 291 582 581

Personal Safety 882 857 1,732 1,714

1 unchanged sentence

Total Safety and Industrial Business segment

2,857 2,759 5,602 5,491

Advanced Materials 227 244 445 507

1 unchanged sentence

Commercial Branding and Transportation

689 672 1,305 1,282

Electronics 740 746 1,421 1,471

Total Transportation and Electronics Business segment

2,130 2,143 4,120 4,247

Consumer Safety and Well-Being 280 280 554 546

3 unchanged sentences

Total Consumer Business segment

1,270 1,263 2,394 2,403

Corporate and Other

87 90 182 130

Total company

$ 6,344 $ 6,255 $ 12,298 $ 12,271

Three months ended

Three months ended June 30, Six months ended June 30,

Net sales by geographic area (millions)

2025 2024 2025 2024

Americas $ 3,482 $ 3,480 $ 6,689 $ 6,630

2 unchanged sentences

Worldwide $ 6,344 $ 6,255 $ 12,298 $ 12,271

Americas included United States net sales to customers of $ 2.6 billion and $ 2.5 billion for the three months ended March 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively.

Asia Pacific included China/Hong Kong net sales to customers of $ 0.7 billion for the three months ended March 31, 2025 and 2024.

Three months ended June 30, Six months ended June 30,

Net sales by particular country (billions)

2025 2024 2025 2024

United States

$ 2.8 $ 2.8 $ 5.4 $ 5.3

China/Hong Kong

0.8 0.7 1.5 1.4

Refer to Note 4 to the Consolidated Financial Statements in 3M's 2024 Annual Report on Form 10-K for more information on relevant pre-2025 divestitures.

In June 2025, 3M completed the sale of its fused silica business, formerly part of the Transportation and Electronics business, for immaterial proceeds slightly below the business's book value.

Goodwill and Intangible Assets

4 unchanged sentences

Translation and other 104 35 13 — 152

Balance as of March 31, 2025 $ 4,507 $ 1,508 $ 264 $ 58 $ 6,337

Balance as of June 30, 2025 $ 4,573 $ 1,531 $ 271 $ 58 $ 6,433

The amounts in the “Translation and other” row in the above table primarily relate to changes in foreign currency exchange rates.

As of March 31, 2025, the Company's accumulated goodwill impairment loss is $ 0.3 billion.

As of June 30, 2025, the Company's accumulated goodwill impairment loss is $ 0.3 billion.

Acquired Intangible Assets:

The carrying amount and accumulated amortization of acquired finite-lived intangible assets, in addition to the balance of non-amortizable intangible assets follow:

(Millions) March 31, 2025 December 31, 2024

(Millions) June 30, 2025 December 31, 2024

Customer related $ 1,354 $ 1,319

14 unchanged sentences

Amortization expense follows:

Three months ended

Three months ended June 30, Six months ended June 30,

(Millions) 2025 2024 2025 2024

Amortization expense $ 26 $ 27 $ 52 $ 54

Expected amortization expense for acquired amortizable intangible assets recorded as of March 31, 2025 follows:

Expected amortization expense for acquired amortizable intangible assets recorded as of June 30, 2025 follows:

(Millions) Remainder of 2025

4 unchanged sentences

2023 to 2025 Structural Reorganization Actions:

As described in Note 6 in 3M's 2024 Annual Report on Form 10-K, in 2023, 3M announced it would undertake structural reorganization actions to reduce the size of the corporate center of the Company, simplify supply chain, streamline 3M’s geographic footprint, reduce layers of management, further align business go-to-market models to customers, and reduce manufacturing roles to align with production volumes.

In 2023, 3M announced it would undertake structural reorganization actions to reduce the size of the corporate center of the Company, simplify supply chain, streamline 3M’s geographic footprint, reduce layers of management, further align business go-to-market models to customers, and reduce manufacturing roles to align with production volumes.

This aggregate initiative, beginning in the first quarter of 2023 and continuing through 2025, is expected (as updated to exclude discontinued operations) to impact approximately 8,000 positions worldwide.

During 2024, management approved and committed to undertake additional actions under this initiative impacting approximately 1,100 positions and other actions resulting in a pre-tax charge of $ 187 million, the relevant portion of which relating to the first quarter is indicated in the table below.

In the first quarter of 2025, management approved and committed to undertake additional actions resulting in a pre-tax charge as indicated in the table below.

Since its beginning in 2023 through committed first quarter 2025 actions, this initiative impacted approximately 6,800 positions worldwide.

Remaining activities related to the restructuring actions approved and committed through March 31, 2025 under this initiative are expected to be largely completed in 2025.

3M expects to commit to further actions under this initiative.

The related restructuring charges for periods presented were recorded in the income (loss) statement as follows:

Three months ended

In the first six months of 2025, management approved and committed to undertake additional actions resulting in a pre-tax charge as indicated in the table below.

Since its beginning in 2023 through committed second quarter 2025 actions, this initiative impacted approximately 6,900 positions worldwide.

Remaining activities related to the restructuring actions approved and committed through June 30, 2025 under this initiative are expected to be largely completed in 2025.

Remaining actions 3M may commit to under this initiative are not expected to be material.

The related restructuring charges for periods presented were recorded in the income statement as follows:

Three months ended June 30, Six months ended June 30,

(Millions) 2025 2024 2025 2024

3 unchanged sentences

Total operating income impact $ 8 $ 35 $ 21 $ 138

The business segment operating income (loss) impact of these restructuring charges is summarized as follows:

Three months ended March 31,

The business segment operating income impact of these restructuring charges is summarized as follows:

Three months ended June 30,

(Millions) Employee related

4 unchanged sentences

Consumer 1 4 2 6

Total operating expense $ 8 $ 24 $ 11 $ 35

Six months ended June 30,

(Millions) Employee Related Employee Related Asset-Related and Other Total

Safety and Industrial $ 10 $ 39 $ 25 $ 64

Transportation and Electronics 7 16 18 34

Consumer 4 9 11 20

Corporate and Other

3 unchanged sentences

Accrued restructuring action balance as of December 31, 2024

Incremental expense (benefit) incurred in the first quarter of 2025

Incremental expense incurred in the first quarter of 2025

Incremental expense incurred in the second quarter of 2025

Cash payments ( 48 )

Accrued restructuring action balance as of March 31, 2025

2023 to 2025 PFAS Exit Actions:

As described in Note 6 in 3M's 2024 Annual Report on Form 10-K, 3M announced in 2022 that it will exit all PFAS manufacturing by the end of 2025 and began related workforce actions in 2023.

In the first quarter of 2024, management approved and committed to undertake actions resulting in an immaterial pre-tax charge.

During the first quarter of 2025, such actions resulted in a pre-tax charge as indicated in the table below.

These charges were reflected within the Transportation and Electronics business segment and primarily impacted cost of sales.

Accrued restructuring action balance as of June 30, 2025

2023 to 2025 PFAS Exit Restructuring Actions:

3M announced in 2022 that it will exit all PFAS manufacturing by the end of 2025 and began related workforce actions in 2023.

In the first six months of 2024, management approved and committed to undertake actions resulting in an immaterial pre-tax charge.

During the first six months of 2025, such actions resulted in a pre-tax charge as indicated in the table below.

These charges were reflected within the Transportation and Electronics business segment and primarily impacted cost of sales and selling, general and administrative expenses.

This initiative, beginning in 2023 through committed 2025 actions, impacted approximately 1,200 positions worldwide.

The remaining period of activities related to these approved and committed actions aligns with 3M's PFAS exit timeframe.

(Millions) Employee-related

1 unchanged sentence

Incremental expense incurred in the first quarter of 2025

Incremental expense incurred in the second quarter of 2025

Cash payments ( 22 )

Accrued restructuring action balance as of March 31, 2025

Accrued restructuring action balance as of June 30, 2025

Supplemental Income Statement Information

Other expense (income), net consists of the following:

Three months ended

Three months ended June 30, Six months ended June 30,

(Millions) 2025 2024 2025 2024

Interest expense 2

$ 237 $ 322 $ 492 $ 663

Interest income ( 50 ) ( 143 ) ( 129 ) ( 253 )

Pension and postretirement net periodic benefit cost (benefit) 3

23 796 51 785

Solventum ownership - change in value 4

7 ( 1,113 ) ( 336 ) ( 1,113 )

Total $ 217 $ ( 138 ) $ 78 $ 82

Interest expense includes $ 110 million and $ 137 million during the three months ended March 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively, related to outstanding debt.

Interest expense also includes imputed interest associated with the obligations resulting from the PWS Settlement and the CAE Settlement (discussed in Note 17).

Pension and postretirement net periodic benefit income described in the table above include all components of defined benefit plan net periodic benefit cost (benefit) except service cost, which is reported in various operating expense lines.

2 Interest expense related to outstanding debt is as follows below.

Interest expense in the table above also includes imputed interest associated with the obligations resulting from the PWS Settlement, New Jersey Settlement, and CAE Settlement (all discussed in Note 17).

Three months ended June 30, Six months ended June 30,

(Millions) 2025 2024 2025 2024

Interest expense related to outstanding debt

$ 116 $ 120 $ 226 $ 257

3 Pension and postretirement net periodic benefit income described in the table above includes all components of defined benefit plan net periodic benefit cost (benefit) except service cost, which is reported in various operating expense lines.

Refer to Note 13 for additional details on the components of pension and postretirement net periodic benefit cost (benefit).

1 unchanged sentence

Solventum separated from 3M in April 2024 (discussed in Note 2).

At March 31, 2025, the balance of unrealized gain on this investment is $ 1.9 billion.

As of June 30, 2025, the balance of unrealized gain on this investment was $ 1.9 billion.

Supplemental Equity and Comprehensive Income Information

Cash dividends declared and paid totaled $ 0.73 and $ 1.51 per share for the first quarter of 2025 and 2024, respectively.

The table below presents the consolidated changes in equity for three months ended March 31, 2025 and 2024:

Cash dividends declared and paid totaled $ 0.73 per share for each of the first and second quarters of 2025 and $ 1.51 and $ 0.70 per share for the first and second quarters of 2024, respectively, or $ 1.46 and $ 2.21 per share for the first six months of 2025 and 2024, respectively.

The table below presents the consolidated changes in equity for three and six months ended June 30, 2025 and 2024:

3M Company Shareholders Non-controlling interest

3 unchanged sentences

Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)

Balance at December 31, 2024

Balance at March 31, 2025

$ 4,523 $ 7,310 $ 37,432 $ ( 34,747 ) $ ( 5,531 ) $ 59

1 unchanged sentence

Other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax 305 305 —

Solventum spin-off ( 3 ) ( 14 ) 11

Dividends declared ( 390 ) ( 390 )

3 unchanged sentences

Issuances pursuant to stock option and benefit plans 93 ( 58 ) 151

Balance at June 30, 2025

$ 4,351 $ 7,354 $ 37,693 $ ( 35,542 ) $ ( 5,215 ) $ 61

Balance at March 31, 2024

$ 4,933 $ 6,982 $ 37,472 $ ( 32,762 ) $ ( 6,826 ) $ 67

Net income 1,151 1,145 6

Other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax 674 675 ( 1 )

Solventum spin-off ( 2,169 ) ( 2,753 ) 584

Dividends declared ( 386 ) ( 386 )

Stock-based compensation 173 173

Reacquired stock ( 400 ) ( 400 )

Issuances pursuant to stock option and benefit plans 12 ( 3 ) 15

Balance at June 30, 2024

$ 3,988 $ 7,155 $ 35,475 $ ( 33,147 ) $ ( 5,567 ) $ 72

Balance at December 31, 2024 $ 3,894 $ 7,238 $ 36,797 $ ( 34,462 ) $ ( 5,731 ) $ 52

1 unchanged sentence

Other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax

Solventum spin-off ( 3 ) ( 14 ) 11

Dividends declared ( 786 ) ( 786 )

Purchase of non-controlling interest 1 — 1

Stock-based compensation 116 116

1 unchanged sentence

Issuances pursuant to stock option and benefit plans 998 ( 143 ) 1,141

Balance at March 31, 2024

$ 4,933 $ 6,982 $ 37,472 $ ( 32,762 ) $ ( 6,826 ) $ 67

The table below presents the changes in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) attributable to 3M (AOCI), including the reclassifications out of AOCI by component for the three months ended March 31, 2025 and 2024:

Balance at June 30, 2025 $ 4,351 $ 7,354 $ 37,693 $ ( 35,542 ) $ ( 5,215 ) $ 61

Balance at December 31, 2023 $ 4,868 $ 6,965 $ 37,479 $ ( 32,859 ) $ ( 6,778 ) $ 61

Net income 2,084 2,073 11

Other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax

Solventum spin-off ( 2,169 ) ( 2,753 ) 584

Dividends declared ( 1,221 ) ( 1,221 )

Stock-based compensation 190 190

Reacquired stock ( 421 ) ( 421 )

Issuances pursuant to stock option and benefit plans 30 ( 103 ) 133

Balance at June 30, 2024 $ 3,988 $ 7,155 $ 35,475 $ ( 33,147 ) $ ( 5,567 ) $ 72

(Millions) Cumulative translation adjustment

2 unchanged sentences

Total accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)

Balance at December 31, 2024, net of tax:

Balance at March 31, 2025, net of tax:

$ ( 2,782 ) $ ( 2,705 ) $ ( 44 ) $ ( 5,531 )

5 unchanged sentences

Total other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax 339 49 ( 83 ) 305

Solventum spin-off — 11 — 11

Balance at June 30, 2025, net of tax:

$ ( 2,443 ) $ ( 2,645 ) $ ( 127 ) $ ( 5,215 )

Balance at March 31, 2024, net of tax:

$ ( 2,715 ) $ ( 4,083 ) $ ( 28 ) $ ( 6,826 )

Other comprehensive income (loss), before tax:

Amounts before reclassifications ( 148 ) 218 23 93

Amounts reclassified out 11 876 ( 30 ) 857

Total other comprehensive income (loss), before tax ( 137 ) 1,094 ( 7 ) 950

( 7 ) ( 268 ) — ( 275 )

Total other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax ( 144 ) 826 ( 7 ) 675

Solventum spin-off 64 520 — 584

Balance at June 30, 2024, net of tax:

$ ( 2,795 ) $ ( 2,737 ) $ ( 35 ) $ ( 5,567 )

Balance at December 31, 2024, net of tax:

6 unchanged sentences

Total other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax 510 107 ( 112 ) 505

Balance at March 31, 2024, net of tax:

Solventum spin-off — 11 — 11

Balance at June 30, 2025, net of tax:

$ ( 2,443 ) $ ( 2,645 ) $ ( 127 ) $ ( 5,215 )

Balance at December 31, 2023, net of tax:

$ ( 2,506 ) $ ( 4,218 ) $ ( 54 ) $ ( 6,778 )

Other comprehensive income (loss), before tax:

Amounts before reclassifications ( 401 ) 285 84 ( 32 )

Amounts reclassified out 68 972 ( 57 ) 983

Total other comprehensive income (loss), before tax ( 333 ) 1,257 27 951

( 20 ) ( 296 ) ( 8 ) ( 324 )

Total other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax ( 353 ) 961 19 627

Solventum spin-off 64 520 — 584

Balance at June 30, 2024, net of tax:

$ ( 2,795 ) $ ( 2,737 ) $ ( 35 ) $ ( 5,567 )

5 Includes tax expense (benefit) reclassified out of AOCI related to the following:

Three months ended March 31,

(millions) 2025 2024

Three months ended June 30, Six months ended June 30,

2025 2024 2025 2024

Cumulative translation adjustment

$ — $ — $ — $ —

Defined benefit pension and postretirement plans adjustment ( 17 ) ( 216 ) ( 35 ) ( 229 )

9 unchanged sentences

• Cash flow hedging instruments, realized gain (loss):

foreign currency forward/option contacts amounts were reclassified into cost of sales;

interest rate contract amounts were reclassified into interest expense (see Note 15).

amounts from foreign currency forward/option contacts were reclassified into cost of sales, while amounts from interest rate contracts were reclassified into interest expense (see Note 15).

• The tax effects, if applicable, associated with these reclassifications were reflected in provision for income taxes.

The effective tax rate for the first quarter of 2025 was 19.1 percent, a decrease from 23.7 percent in the prior year.

The primary factors that decreased the Company's effective tax rate for first quarter 2025 were the effective tax rate benefit on the change in value of 3M's retained ownership interest in Solventum offset by the effective tax rate on the PWS and CAE Settlements (as discussed in Note 17) and implementation of Pillar Two Model Rules published by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).

The total amounts of unrecognized tax benefits that, if recognized, would affect the effective tax rate as of March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024 are $ 669 million and $ 686 million, respectively.

It is reasonably possible that the amount of unrecognized tax benefits could significantly change within the next 12 months.

At this time, the Company is not able to estimate the range by which these potential events could impact 3M’s unrecognized tax benefits in the next 12 months.

Net deferred tax assets are included as components of Other Assets and Other Liabilities within the Consolidated Balance Sheet.

As of March 31, 2025, 3M's net non-current deferred tax asset balance was approximately $ 4.0 billion.

This included a balance of approximately $ 2.6 billion as a result of the 2023 pre-tax charges related to the PWS and CAE Settlements (as discussed in Note 17).

As of March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024, the Company had valuation allowances of $ 1.0 billion and $ 1.1 billion on its deferred tax assets, respectively, with the amounts impacted by a valuation allowance related to the difference in basis of the retained ownership interest in Solventum.

The effective tax rates were as follows:

Three months ended June 30, Six months ended June 30,

(Percent of pre-tax income) 2025 2024 2025 2024

Effective tax rate 26.6 % 14.4 % 22.1 % 18.1 %

The primary factors that increased the Company's effective tax rate for the three and six months ending June 30, 2025, when compared to 2024, were the tax effect of the change in value of 3M's retained ownership interest in Solventum and application of Pillar Two Model Rules published by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).

These were partially offset by the 2024 charge related to the Company's change in assertion on earnings no longer considered permanently reinvested.

Net deferred tax assets (net of valuation allowance and deferred tax liabilities) are included as components of other assets and other liabilities within the Consolidated Balance Sheet.

This net balance was the following:

June 30, 2025 December 31, 2024

Net deferred tax assets

Earnings Per Share

The difference in the weighted average 3M shares outstanding for calculating basic and diluted earnings per share attributable to 3M common shareholders is the result of the dilution associated with the Company’s stock-based compensation plans.

Certain awards outstanding under these stock-based compensation plans were not included in the computation of diluted earnings per share attributable to 3M common shareholders because they would have had an anti-dilutive effect of 14.6 million and 32.8 million average options for the three months ended March 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively.

The computations for basic and diluted earnings per share follow:

Three months ended

Three months ended June 30, Six months ended June 30,

(Amounts in millions, except per share amounts) 2025 2024 2025 2024

Net income from continuing operations attributable to 3M $ 723 $ 1,204 $ 1,839 $ 1,909

$ 1,116 $ 705

Net income from discontinued operations, net of taxes

Net income (loss) from discontinued operations, net of taxes — ( 59 ) — 164

Net income attributable to 3M $ 723 $ 1,145 $ 1,839 $ 2,073

Weighted average 3M common shares outstanding – basic

537.4 553.8 540.6 554.4

Denominator for weighted average 3M common shares outstanding – basic

Dilution associated with stock-based compensation plans

Denominator for weighted average 3M common shares outstanding – diluted

3.2 1.0 3.6 0.9

Weighted average 3M common shares outstanding – diluted

540.6 554.8 544.2 555.3

Earnings per share attributable to 3M common shareholders:

Earnings per share from continuing operations — basic $ 1.35 $ 2.17 $ 3.40 $ 3.44

$ 2.05 $ 1.27

Earnings per share from discontinued operations — basic

Earnings (loss) per share from discontinued operations — basic — ( 0.10 ) — 0.30

Earnings per share — basic $ 1.35 $ 2.07 $ 3.40 $ 3.74

$ 2.05 $ 1.67

Earnings per share from continuing operations — diluted $ 1.34 $ 2.17 $ 3.38 $ 3.44

$ 2.04 $ 1.27

Earnings per share from discontinued operations — diluted

Earnings (loss) per share from discontinued operations — diluted — ( 0.10 ) — 0.29

Earnings per share — diluted $ 1.34 $ 2.07 $ 3.38 $ 3.73

Certain awards outstanding below under these stock-based compensation plans were not included in the computation of diluted earnings per share attributable to 3M common shareholders because they would have had an anti-dilutive effect.

Three months ended June 30, Six months ended June 30,

2025 2024 2025 2024

Average number of antidilutive shares

17.9 33.1 16.2 32.9

Marketable Securities

1 unchanged sentence

The following is a summary of amounts recorded on the Consolidated Balance Sheet for marketable securities (current and non-current).

(Millions) March 31, 2025 December 31, 2024

(Millions) June 30, 2025 December 31, 2024

Asset backed securities

10 unchanged sentences

Total marketable securities $ 518 $ 2,144

At March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024, gross unrealized, gross realized, and net realized gains and/or losses (pre-tax) were not material.

The balances at March 31, 2025 for marketable securities by contractual maturity are shown below.

At June 30, 2025 and December 31, 2024, gross unrealized, gross realized, and net realized gains and/or losses (pre-tax) were not material.

The balances at June 30, 2025 for marketable securities by contractual maturity are shown below.

Actual maturities may differ from contractual maturities because the issuers of the securities may have the right to prepay obligations without prepayment penalties.

1 unchanged sentence

Due after one year through five years 50

Due after five years through ten years —

Total marketable securities $ 518

2 unchanged sentences

The Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows include the results of continuing and discontinued operations and, therefore, information regarding similar debt-related activity for 2024 includes activity associated with Solventum through its April 2024 Separation.

The Company had no commercial paper outstanding at March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024.

In March 2025, 3M issued $ 1.1 billion aggregate principal amount of fixed rate unsecured notes.

The Company had no commercial paper outstanding at June 30, 2025 and December 31, 2024.

In the first and second quarter of 2025, 3M repaid $ 750 million and $ 500 million, respectively, in aggregate principal amount of fixed rate unsecured notes that matured.

In the first quarter of 2025, 3M issued $ 1.1 billion aggregate principal amount of fixed rate unsecured notes.

These were comprised of $ 550 million of 5-year notes due 2030 with a coupon rate of 4.80 % and $ 550 million of 10-year notes due 2035 with a coupon rate of 5.15 %.

In February 2025, 3M repaid $ 750 million aggregate principal amount of fixed rate unsecured notes that matured.

Future Maturities of Long-term Debt:

Maturities of long-term debt in the table below reflect the impact of put provisions associated with certain debt instruments and are net of the unamortized debt issue costs such that total maturities equal the carrying value of long-term debt as of March 31, 2025.

The maturities of long-term debt for the periods subsequent to March 31, 2025 are as follows (in millions):

Maturities of long-term debt in the table below reflect the impact of put provisions associated with certain debt instruments and are net of items such as unamortized debt issue costs such that total maturities equal the carrying value of long-term debt as of June 30, 2025.

The maturities of long-term debt for the periods subsequent to June 30, 2025 are as follows (in millions):

Remainder of 2025

7 unchanged sentences

Effective April 1, 2024, approximately $ 2.7 billion of benefit obligations and $ 2.4 billion of plan assets for certain pension and postretirement benefit plans, were transferred to Solventum, which is treated as a discontinued operation.

Components of net periodic benefit cost and other supplemental information for the three months ended March 31, 2025 and 2024 follow:

Three months ended March 31,

Components of net periodic benefit cost and other supplemental information for the three and six months ended June 30, 2025 and 2024 follow:

Qualified and non-qualified pension benefits

1 unchanged sentence

United States International

(Millions) 2025 2024 2025 2024 2025 2024

Net periodic benefit cost (benefit)

Three months ended June 30,

Net periodic benefit cost (benefit) (millions)

2025 2024 2025 2024 2025 2024

Operating expense

6 unchanged sentences

Amortization of net actuarial loss 69 83 2 3 3 4

Settlements, curtailments, special termination benefits and other — 795 — — — —

Total non-operating expense (benefit) 36 819 ( 18 ) ( 27 ) 5 4

Total net periodic benefit cost (benefit) $ 61 $ 848 $ ( 5 ) $ ( 13 ) $ 10 $ 9

Six months ended June 30,

2025 2024 2025 2024 2025 2024

Operating expense

Service cost $ 51 $ 66 $ 24 $ 35 $ 9 $ 12

Non-operating expense

Interest cost 217 301 92 103 38 43

Expected return on plan assets ( 284 ) ( 433 ) ( 131 ) ( 167 ) ( 28 ) ( 34 )

Amortization of transition asset — — — 2 — —

Amortization of prior service benefit — ( 8 ) 1 1 ( 4 ) ( 12 )

Amortization of net actuarial loss 138 178 4 6 8 10

Settlements, curtailments, special termination benefits and other — 795 — — — —

Total non-operating expense (benefit) 71 833 ( 34 ) ( 55 ) 14 7

Total net periodic benefit cost (benefit) 122 899 ( 10 ) ( 20 ) 23 19

Service cost - continuing operations $ 51 $ 59 $ 24 $ 30 $ 9 $ 11

7 unchanged sentences

Total net periodic benefit cost (benefit) $ 122 $ 899 $ ( 10 ) $ ( 20 ) $ 23 $ 19

For the three months ended March 31, 2025 contributions totaling $ 20 million were made to the Company’s U.S.

For the six months ended June 30, 2025 contributions totaling $ 55 million were made to the Company’s U.S.

and international pension plans and $ 6 million to its postretirement plans.

6 unchanged sentences

There were also several small international pension plans remeasured for purposes of transferring Solventum employees to new pension plans.

Refer to Note 15 to the Consolidated Financial Statements in 3M's 2024 Annual Report on Form 10-K for additional information regarding this remeasurement.

Additionally in 2024, primarily in the second quarter, 3M recorded a non-cash pension settlement charge of approximately $ 0.8 billion reflected in other expense (income), net as a result of transferring approximately $ 2.5 billion of its U.S.

pension payment obligations and related plan assets to an insurance company.

The pension risk transfer required remeasurement of the plan prior to the calculation of the settlement charge.

Refer to Note 15 to the Consolidated Financial Statements in 3M's 2024 Annual Report on Form 10-K for additional information regarding these remeasurements.

Supplier Finance Program Obligations

2 unchanged sentences

Separately, the banks may have arrangements with the suppliers that provide them the option to request early payment from the banks for invoices confirmed by 3M.

3M's outstanding balances of confirmed invoices in the programs as of March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024 were approximately $ 0.3 billion.

3M's outstanding balances of confirmed invoices in the programs as of June 30, 2025 and December 31, 2024 were approximately $ 0.3 billion.

These amounts are included within accounts payable on 3M's consolidated balance sheet.

6 unchanged sentences

• Derivatives and/or hedging instruments associated with the Company’s long-term debt are described in Note 14 to the Consolidated Financial Statements in 3M's 2024 Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Refer to the section below titled Location on Statement of Income (Loss) and Impact of Cash Flow and Fair Value Derivative Instruments and Derivatives Not Designated as Hedging Instruments for details on the location within the consolidated statements of income (loss) for amounts of gains and losses related to derivative instruments designated as cash flow or fair value hedges (along with similar information relative to the hedged items) and derivatives not designated as hedging instruments.

Refer to the section below titled Location on Statement of Income and Impact of Cash Flow and Fair Value Derivative Instruments and Derivatives Not Designated as Hedging Instruments for details on the location within the consolidated statements of income for amounts of gains and losses related to derivative instruments designated as cash flow or fair value hedges (along with similar information relative to the hedged items) and derivatives not designated as hedging instruments.

Additional information relative to cash flow hedges, fair value hedges, net investment hedges and derivatives not designated as hedging instruments is included below as applicable.

Cash Flow Hedges:

As of March 31, 2025, the Company had a balance of $ 44 million associated with the after-tax net unrealized loss associated with cash flow hedging instruments recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss).

As of June 30, 2025, the Company had a balance of $ 127 million associated with the after-tax net unrealized loss associated with cash flow hedging instruments recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss).

This includes a remaining balance of $ 77 million (after-tax loss) related to forward starting interest rate swap and treasury rate lock contracts terminated in 2019 concurrent with associated debt issuances, which is being amortized over the respective lives of the underlying notes.

Based on exchange rates as of March 31, 2025, of the total after-tax net unrealized balance as of March 31, 2025, 3M expects to reclassify approximately $ 25 million after-tax net unrealized gain over the next 12 months (with the impact offset by earnings/losses from underlying hedged items).

Based on exchange rates as of June 30, 2025, of the total after-tax net unrealized balance as of June 30, 2025, 3M expects to reclassify approximately $ 29 million after-tax net unrealized loss over the next 12 months (with the impact offset by earnings/losses from underlying hedged items).

The amount of pretax gain (loss) recognized in other comprehensive income (loss) related to derivative instruments designated as cash flow hedges is provided in the following table.

Pretax gain (loss) recognized in other comprehensive income (loss) on derivative

Three months ended

Three months ended June 30, Six months ended June 30,

(Millions) 2025 2024 2025 2024

1 unchanged sentence

Fair Value Hedges:

The following amounts were recorded on the consolidated balance sheet related to cumulative basis adjustments for active fair value hedges, as well as remaining amounts for discontinued fair value hedges:

Carrying value of the hedged (and formerly hedged) liabilities

Cumulative amount of fair value hedging adjustment included in carrying value of the hedged (and formerly hedged) liabilities

Location on the consolidated balance sheet (millions)

Carrying value of the hedged liabilities

Cumulative amount of fair value hedging adjustment included in the carrying value of the hedged liabilities

March 31, 2025 December 31, 2024 March 31, 2025 December 31, 2024

June 30, 2025 December 31, 2024 June 30, 2025 December 31, 2024

Long-term debt $ 949 $ 924 $ ( 54 ) $ ( 79 )

Net Investment Hedges:

At March 31, 2025, 3M has a principal amount of long-term debt instruments designated in net investment hedges totaling 1.8 billion euros, in addition to the gross notional amount of foreign exchange forward/option contracts and cross-currency swaps designated in net investment hedges included in the totals within the "Location, Fair Value, and Gross Notional Amounts of Derivative Instruments" table further below.

At June 30, 2025, 3M has a principal amount of long-term debt instruments designated in net investment hedges totaling 1.8 billion euros, in addition to the gross notional amount of foreign exchange forward/option contracts and cross-currency swaps designated in net investment hedges included in the totals within the "Location, Fair Value, and Gross Notional Amounts of Derivative Instruments" table further below.

In the first quarter of 2025, 3M expanded its net investment hedge activity by entering into cross-currency swaps with a gross notional value at inception of $ 1.1 billion ($ 550 million with tenor to 2030 and $ 550 million with tenor to 2035) designated in hedges of portions of its net investment in international subsidiaries.

2 unchanged sentences

Pretax gain (loss) recognized as cumulative translation within other comprehensive income (loss)

Three months ended

Three months ended June 30, Six months ended June 30,

(Millions) 2025 2024 2025 2024

8 unchanged sentences

The Company does not hold or issue derivative financial instruments for trading purposes.

Location on Statement of Income (Loss) and Impact of Cash Flow and Fair Value Derivative Instruments and Derivatives Not Designated as Hedging Instruments:

Location and amount of gain (loss) recognized in income (loss)

Three months ended March 31,

Cost of sales Other expense (income), net

Location on Statement of Income and Impact of Cash Flow and Fair Value Derivative Instruments and Derivatives Not Designated as Hedging Instruments:

Location and amount of gain (loss) recognized in income

Three months ended June 30, Six months ended June 30,

Cost of sales Other expense (income), net Cost of sales Other expense (income), net

(Millions) 2025 2024 2025 2024 2025 2024 2025 2024

13 unchanged sentences

Information regarding derivatives not designated as hedging instruments:

(Gain) or loss on derivatives not designated as instruments:

(Gain) or loss on derivatives not designated as hedging instruments:

Foreign currency forward/option contracts ( 33 ) 2 ( 71 ) 4 ( 49 ) 7 ( 99 ) 6

7 unchanged sentences

Location Fair value amount

March 31, 2025 December 31, 2024 March 31, 2025 December 31, 2024 March 31, 2025 December 31, 2024

June 30, 2025 December 31, 2024 June 30, 2025 December 31, 2024 June 30, 2025 December 31, 2024

Derivatives designated as hedging instruments

6 unchanged sentences

Foreign currency forward/option contracts 2,805 2,217 Other current assets 17 3 Other current liabilities 15 13

Foreign currency forward/option contracts 3 — Other assets

— — Other liabilities

Total derivatives not designated as hedging instruments 17 3 15 13

8 unchanged sentences

3M has elected to present the fair value of derivative assets and liabilities within the Company’s consolidated balance sheet on a gross basis even when derivative transactions are subject to master netting arrangements and may otherwise qualify for net presentation.

3M determined that the impact of the amount of eligible offsetting derivative assets and liabilities was not material if it had elected to offset the asset and liability balances of derivative instruments, netted in accordance with various criteria in the event of default or termination as stipulated by the terms of netting arrangements with each of the counterparties.

However, the following tables provide information as if the Company had to offset the asset and liability balances of derivative instruments, netted in accordance with various criteria in the event of default or termination as stipulated by the terms of netting arrangements with each of the counterparties.

For each counterparty, if netted, the Company would offset the asset and liability balances of all derivatives at the end of the reporting period based on the 3M entity that is a party to the transactions.

1 unchanged sentence

For the periods presented, 3M has not received cash collateral from derivative counterparties.

Offsetting of Financial Assets under Master Netting Agreements with Derivative Counterparties

(Millions) Gross Amount of Derivative Assets Presented in the Consolidated Balance Sheet Gross Amount of Eligible Offsetting Recognized Derivative Liabilities Net Amount of Derivative Assets

2025 December 31,

2024 June 30,

2025 December 31,

2024 June 30,

2025 December 31,

Derivatives subject to master netting agreements 139 142 134 64 5 78

Offsetting of Financial Liabilities under Master Netting Agreements with Derivative Counterparties

(Millions) Gross Amount of Derivative Liabilities Presented in the Consolidated Balance Sheet Gross Amount of Eligible Offsetting Recognized Derivative Assets Net Amount of Derivative Liabilities

2025 December 31,

2024 June 30,

2025 December 31,

2024 June 30,

2025 December 31,

Derivatives subject to master netting agreements 395 165 134 64 261 101

Currency Effects:

3M estimates that year-on-year foreign currency transaction effects, including hedging impacts, increased pre-tax income by approximately $ 5 million and decreased pre-tax income by approximately $ 21 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively.

3M estimates that year-on-year foreign currency transaction effects, including hedging impacts, approximately impacted pre-tax income as follows:

Three months ended June 30, Six months ended June 30,

(Millions) 2025 2024 2025 2024

Year-on-year foreign currency transaction effects on pre-tax income $ ( 30 ) $ 2 $ ( 25 ) $ ( 19 )

These estimates include transaction gains and losses, including derivative instruments designed to reduce foreign currency exchange rate risks.

2 unchanged sentences

Refer to Note 18 to the Consolidated Financial Statements in 3M's 2024 Annual Report on Form 10-K for a qualitative discussion of the assets and liabilities that are measured at fair value on a recurring and nonrecurring basis, a description of the valuation methodologies used by 3M, and categorization within the valuation framework of ASC 820.

The following table provides information by level for material assets and liabilities that are measured at fair value on a recurring basis at March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024.

The following table provides information by level for material assets and liabilities that are measured at fair value on a recurring basis at June 30, 2025 and December 31, 2024.

Fair value at

1 unchanged sentence

Level 1 Level 2 Level 3

March 31, 2025 December 31, 2024 March 31, 2025 December 31, 2024 March 31, 2025 December 31, 2024 March 31, 2025 December 31, 2024

June 30, 2025 December 31, 2024 June 30, 2025 December 31, 2024 June 30, 2025 December 31, 2024 June 30, 2025 December 31, 2024

Available-for-sale marketable securities:

18 unchanged sentences

In addition, the plan assets of 3M’s pension and postretirement benefit plans are measured at fair value on a recurring basis (at least annually).

Refer to Note 15 to the Consolidated Financial Statements in 3M's 2024 Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Assets and Liabilities that are Measured at Fair Value on a Nonrecurring Basis:

3M had no material measurements at fair value on a nonrecurring basis of applicable assets or liabilities for the first quarters of 2025 and 2024.

3M had no material measurements at fair value on a nonrecurring basis of applicable assets or liabilities for the second quarter and first six months of 2025 and 2024.

Fair Value of Financial Instruments :

5 unchanged sentences

Information with respect to the carrying amounts and estimated fair values of these financial instruments follow:

March 31, 2025 December 31, 2024

June 30, 2025 December 31, 2024

(Millions) Carrying value

2 unchanged sentences

The fair values reflected in the sections above consider the terms of the related debt absent the impacts of derivative/hedging activity.

The carrying amount of long-term debt referenced above is impacted by certain fixed-to-floating interest rate swaps that are designated as fair value hedges and by the designation of certain fixed rate Eurobond securities issued by the Company as hedging instruments of the Company’s net investment in its European subsidiaries.

The carrying amount of long-term debt referenced above is impacted by certain fixed-to-floating interest rate swaps that are designated as fair value hedges and by foreign exchange rates on non-U.S.

dollar denominated debt.

Commitments and Contingencies

49 unchanged sentences

Respirator Mask/Asbestos Litigation:

As of March 31, 2025, the Company is a named defendant, with multiple co-defendants, in numerous lawsuits in various courts that purport to represent approximately 3,600 individual claimants, compared to approximately 3,500 individual claimants with actions pending December 31, 2024.

As of June 30, 2025, the Company is a named defendant, with multiple co-defendants, in numerous lawsuits in various courts that purport to represent approximately 3,500 individual claimants, compared to approximately 3,500 individual claimants with actions pending as of December 31, 2024.

The vast majority of the lawsuits and claims resolved by and currently pending against the Company allege use of some of the Company’s mask and respirator products and seek damages from the Company and other defendants for alleged personal injury from workplace exposures to asbestos, silica, coal mine dust or other occupational dusts found in products manufactured by other defendants or generally in the workplace.

7 unchanged sentences

As previously reported, the State of West Virginia, through its Attorney General, filed a complaint in 2003 against the Company and two other manufacturers of respiratory protection products in the Circuit Court of Lincoln County, West Virginia, and amended its complaint in 2005.

The amended complaint seeks substantial, but unspecified, compensatory damages primarily for reimbursement of the costs allegedly incurred by the State for worker’s compensation and healthcare benefits provided to all workers with occupational pneumoconiosis and unspecified punitive damages.

The amended complaint seeks substantial, but unspecified, compensatory damages primarily for reimbursement of the costs allegedly incurred by the State for workers' compensation and healthcare benefits provided to all workers with occupational pneumoconiosis and unspecified punitive damages.

In October 2019, the court granted the State’s motion to sever its unfair trade practices claim, which seeks civil penalties of up to $ 5,000 per violation under the state's Consumer Credit Protection Act relating to statements that the State contends were misleading about 3M’s 8710 respirators, which were last sold by the Company in 1998 in the United States.

1 unchanged sentence

The issues presented during the bench trial include the statute of limitations, the period available for any penalties under the West Virginia Consumer Protection Act, and the State’s claims that the 8710 respirators did not perform as advertised.

The bench trial is scheduled to resume in June 2025 and a completion date has not been set.

The bench trial is scheduled to resume in August 2025 and a completion date has not been set.

Following resolution by the court of the issues presented during the initial bench trial, the amount, if any, of any civil penalties upon a finding of liability against the Company would be determined through subsequent trial proceedings at an unspecified future date.

12 unchanged sentences

These developments include, but are not limited to, significant changes in (i) the key assumptions underlying the Company’s accrual, including the number of future claims, the nature and mix of those claims, and the average cost of defending and resolving claims and in maintaining trial readiness (ii) trial and appellate outcomes, (iii) the law and procedure applicable to these claims, and (iv) the financial viability of other co-defendants and insurers.

As a result of its review of its respirator mask/asbestos liabilities, of pending and expected lawsuits and of the cost of resolving claims of persons who claim more serious injuries, including mesothelioma, other malignancies, and black lung disease, the Company increased its accruals in the first quarter of 2025 for respirator mask/asbestos liabilities by an immaterial amount, and made payments for legal defense costs and settlements of $ 13 million related to the respirator mask/asbestos litigation.

As of March 31, 2025, the Company had an accrual for respirator mask/asbestos liabilities (excluding Aearo accruals) of $ 511 million.

As a result of its review of its respirator mask/asbestos liabilities, of pending and expected lawsuits and of the cost of resolving claims of persons who claim more serious injuries, including mesothelioma, other malignancies, and black lung disease, the Company increased its accruals in the first six months of 2025 for respirator mask/asbestos liabilities by $ 17 million, and made payments for legal defense costs and settlements of $ 66 million related to the respirator mask/asbestos litigation.

As of June 30, 2025, the Company had an accrual for respirator mask/asbestos liabilities (excluding Aearo accruals) of $ 474 million.

This accrual represents the Company’s estimate of probable loss and reflects an estimation period for future claims that may be filed against the Company approaching the year 2050.

5 unchanged sentences

and Cabot Corporation (“Cabot”)) are named defendants, with multiple co-defendants, including the Company, in numerous lawsuits in various courts in which plaintiffs allege use of mask and respirator products and seek damages from Aearo and other defendants for alleged personal injury from workplace exposures to asbestos, silica-related, coal mine dust, or other occupational dusts found in products manufactured by other defendants or generally in the workplace.

As of March 31, 2025, the Company, through its Aearo subsidiary, had accruals of $ 52 million for product liabilities and defense costs related to current and future Aearo-related asbestos, silica-related and coal mine dust claims.

As of June 30, 2025, the Company, through its Aearo subsidiary, had accruals of $ 53 million for product liabilities and defense costs related to current and future Aearo-related asbestos, silica-related and coal mine dust claims.

Responsibility for legal costs, as well as for settlements and judgments, is shared in an informal arrangement among Aearo, Cabot, American Optical Corporation and a subsidiary of Warner Lambert and their respective insurers (the “Payor Group”).

25 unchanged sentences

The Company ceased manufacturing and using the vast majority of those compounds within approximately two years of the phase-out announcement and ceased all manufacturing and the last significant use of those compounds by the end of 2008.

3M announced in December 2022 it will take two actions with respect to PFAS:

3M announced in December 2022 it would take two further actions with respect to PFAS:

exiting all PFAS manufacturing by the end of 2025, and working to discontinue the use of PFAS across its product portfolio by the end of 2025.

1 unchanged sentence

Until that time, the Company continues to manufacture a variety of shorter-chain-length PFAS compounds.

These compounds are used as input materials to a variety of products, including engineered fluorinated fluids, fluoropolymers and fluorelastomers, as well as surfactants, additives, and coatings.

These compounds are used as input materials to a variety of products, including engineered fluorinated fluids, fluoropolymers and fluoroelastomers, as well as surfactants, additives, and coatings.

Through its ongoing life cycle management and its raw material composition identification processes associated with the Company’s policies covering the use of all persistent and bio-accumulative materials, the Company continues to review, control or eliminate the presence of certain PFAS in purchased materials, as intended substances in products, or as byproducts in some of 3M’s current manufacturing processes, products, and waste streams.

3M is progressing toward the exit of all PFAS manufacturing by the end of 2025.

As noted, 3M is progressing toward the exit of all PFAS manufacturing by the end of 2025.

The Company continues to discuss its PFAS manufacturing exit, and related issues involving the disposition of manufacturing assets, with customers, government authorities, and other stakeholders, and the Company remains focused on completing the exit in a timely and orderly fashion.

3M is also working to discontinue the use of PFAS across its product portfolio by the end of 2025 and has made progress in eliminating the use of PFAS across its product portfolio in a variety of applications.

As also noted, 3M is working to discontinue the use of PFAS across its product portfolio by the end of 2025 and has made progress in eliminating the use of PFAS across its product portfolio in a variety of applications.

With respect to PFAS-containing products not manufactured by 3M in the Company's supply chains, the Company continues to evaluate the availability and feasibility of third-party products that do not contain PFAS.

Depending on the availability and feasibility of such third-party products not containing PFAS, the Company continues to evaluate circumstances in which the use of PFAS-containing products manufactured by third parties and used in certain applications in 3M’s product portfolios, such as lithium ion batteries, printed circuit boards and certain seals and gaskets, all widely used in commerce across a variety of industries, and in some cases required by regulatory or industry standards, may or are expected to, depending on applications, continue beyond 2025.

In other cases, sales of products manufactured before the end of 2025, regulatory approval, or customer re-certification or re-qualification of substitutes or replacements to eliminate the use of PFAS manufactured by third parties may not be completed, or, depending on circumstances, are not expected to be completed, by the end of 2025.

Depending on the availability and feasibility of such third-party products not containing PFAS, the Company continues to evaluate circumstances in which the use of PFAS-containing products manufactured by third parties and used in certain applications in 3M’s product portfolios, such as lithium ion batteries, printed circuit boards, certain seals and gaskets, and other products widely used in commerce across a variety of industries, and in some cases required by regulatory or industry standards, may, are expected to or, in some cases, will, depending on applications, continue beyond 2025.

In other cases, sales of products manufactured before the end of 2025, sales of products through customer transitions to new products, regulatory approvals, or customer re-certifications or re-qualifications of substitutes or replacements to eliminate the use of PFAS may not or are not expected to be completed, or, depending on circumstances, will not be completed, by the end of 2025.

With respect to PFAS-containing products manufactured by third parties, the Company intends to continue to evaluate beyond the end of 2025 the adoption of third-party products that do not contain PFAS to the extent such products are available and such adoption is feasible.

11 unchanged sentences

These substances have also been listed in the Stockholm Convention, which has been ratified by more than 180 countries and aims for global elimination of certain listed substances (with narrow exceptions).

In February 2023, an EU-wide restriction on the manufacturing, use, placing on the market and import of certain perfluoro carboxylic acids (C9-C14 PFCAs), which are PFAS substances, also went into effect.

A proposal for the global restriction on production and use of these substances was finalized by a subsidiary body of the Stockholm Convention and will be considered for adoption by the parties to the Stockholm Convention in April 2025.

In February 2023, an EU-wide restriction on the manufacture, use, placing on the market and import of certain perfluoro carboxylic acids (C9-C14 PFCAs), which are PFAS substances, also went into effect.

A proposal for the global restriction on production and use of long-chain PFCAs was adopted by the parties to the Stockholm Convention in May 2025, and will enter into force in most countries globally in late 2026.

In September 2024, the EU adopted a restriction on certain uses of perfluorohexanoic acid (“PFHxA”) and PFHxA-related substances, including in consumer goods and some uses of firefighting foams and concentrates.

With respect to the applicability of the amendment of the EU POPs Regulation to include PFOA, which has been applicable since 2021, Dyneon, a 3M subsidiary that operates the Gendorf facility in Germany, proactively consulted with the relevant German competent authority regarding improvements necessary to meet applicable limits for a recycling process for a critical emulsifier for which small amounts of PFOA are present after recycling as an unintended contaminant.

In consultation with German regulatory authorities, to achieve the applicable limits for the use of the emulsifier until the exit of PFAS manufacturing, Dyneon has started to use a method containing a mix of recycled and virgin emulsifier.

In consultation with German regulatory authorities, to achieve the applicable limits for the use of the emulsifier until the exit of PFAS manufacturing, Dyneon uses a method containing a mix of recycled and virgin emulsifier.

In February 2023, the European Chemicals Agency published a proposal to restrict the manufacture, placing on the market, and use of PFAS under REACH, subject to certain proposed exceptions.

3 unchanged sentences

The EU regulates PFAS in drinking water via a Drinking Water Directive, which includes a limit of 0.1 micrograms per liter (µg/l) (or 0.1 parts per billion (ppb)) for a sum of 20 PFAS in drinking water.

January 2023 was the deadline for Member States to implement the Directive in their countries.

January 2023 was the deadline for Member States to implement the Directive.

A majority of Member States have implemented the EU Directive.

2 unchanged sentences

Government interactions related to PFAS manufacturing in Gendorf

Dyneon and the predecessor operators of the Gendorf facility have commissioned a voluntary feasibility study by an independent soil consultant.

Dyneon and the predecessor operators of the Gendorf facility commissioned a voluntary feasibility study by an independent soil consultant.

The study discusses the feasibility of various options to treat PFOA in soil and groundwater as well as associated costs and the environmental impact of such treatment or disposal.

The study has been shared with the competent authority.

An expert body advising the competent authorities in the county recently provided feedback on the feasibility study and identified several additional recommended steps, including certain immediate measures and additional soil and groundwater investigations, and the competent authorities have indicated that they are likely to adopt at least some of the recommended steps.

An expert body advising the competent authorities in the county provided feedback on the feasibility study and identified several additional recommended steps, including certain immediate measures and additional soil and groundwater investigations, and the competent authorities have indicated that they are likely to adopt at least some of the recommended steps.

As a result of this process, Dyneon has agreed to sponsor environmental studies related to the potential establishment of a landfill to dispose of PFOA-impacted soil, and a local authority has indicated that Dyneon should contribute to the financing of that landfill.

Dyneon also continues to engage with the authorities about potential remedial actions, which may be required in the future to address soil and groundwater.

In January 2025, the competent authority issued a draft order that, if issued as drafted, would require Dyneon to undertake certain technical planning and testing activities and submit those results to the competent authority to allow it to determine whether such data provides a sufficient basis to thereafter plan for a hydraulic barrier at a location to be determined near the Gendorf site.

In January 2025, the competent German authority issued a draft order that, if issued as drafted, would require Dyneon to undertake certain technical planning and testing activities and submit those results to the competent authority to allow it to determine whether such data provides a sufficient basis to thereafter plan for a hydraulic barrier at a location to be determined near the Gendorf site.

In March 2025, Dyneon responded to the draft order saying, in part, that the draft order’s terms are unsuited to addressing concerns arising out of the historical use of PFAS in the region and instead offering to engage with the competent authority to discuss potential solutions to the concerns raised.

Also in March 2025, Dyneon received from the competent authority a draft order that would, if issued as drafted, require Dyneon to undertake a comprehensive remedial investigation of PFOA in soil and groundwater in areas outside the Gendorf facility.

Dyneon is also evaluating this draft order.

In June 2025, Dyneon responded to the draft order and offered to undertake on a voluntary basis certain elements of the investigatory work described in the draft order.

Dyneon continues to engage with the competent authorities about potential remedial actions related to the Gendorf facility that may be required in the future.

PFAS manufacturing in Zwijndrecht:

3M Belgium, a subsidiary of the Company, owns and operates a facility in Zwijndrecht, Antwerp, Belgium that manufactured various PFAS containing products.

3M Belgium, a subsidiary of the Company, owns and operates a facility in Zwijndrecht, Antwerp, Belgium that formerly manufactured various PFAS containing products.

All PFAS manufacturing was completed and discontinued at the Zwijndrecht facility in 2024 as part of the Company’s previously-announced global exit of all PFAS manufacturing by the end of 2025.

3M Belgium has been working with the Public Flemish Waste Agency ("OVAM") for several years to investigate and remediate PFAS contamination at and near the Zwijndrecht facility.

In connection with a ring road construction project (the Oosterweel Project) in Antwerp that involved extensive soil work, an investigative committee with judicial investigatory powers was formed in June 2021 by the Flemish Parliament to investigate PFAS found in the soil and groundwater near the Zwijndrecht facility.

In connection with a ring road construction project (the Oosterweel Project) in Antwerp that involves extensive soil work, an investigative committee with judicial investigatory powers was formed in June 2021 by the Flemish Parliament to investigate PFAS found in the soil and groundwater near the Zwijndrecht facility.

At various points, the Flemish Parliament, the Minister of the Environment, and regulatory authorities initiated investigations and demands for information related to the release of PFAS from the Zwijndrecht facility.

3M Belgium has cooperated with the authorities with respect to the investigations and information requests and is working with the authorities on an ongoing basis.

In August 2024, the province of Antwerp approved 3M Belgium's latest application for modifying the water discharge permit related to certain PFAS parameters.

In August 2024, the province of Antwerp approved 3M Belgium's latest application for modifying its water discharge permit related to certain PFAS parameters.

Following an appeal against the permit by a local non-profit organization, in March 2025, the Flemish Government confirmed the permit.

This decision remains subject to appeal and 3M Belgium cannot predict whether an appeal will be filed, or the outcome of any appeal if so, and is therefore unable to assess whether the current Zwijndrecht wastewater treatment system, or currently conceived additional treatment technology, ultimately will be determined to meet permit limits imposed with respect to manufacturing at the Zwijndrecht facility.

It is possible that additional actions will be required to reduce legacy sources of PFAS or that the wastewater treatment system will be unable to meet future discharge limits.

The Flemish Government's confirmation was appealed by a Belgian non-profit organization.

3M Belgium cannot predict the outcome of such appeal and is therefore unable to assess whether the current Zwijndrecht wastewater treatment system, or currently conceived additional treatment technology, ultimately will be determined to meet permit limits imposed with respect to manufacturing at the Zwijndrecht facility.

It is possible that the outcome of the appeal or future permit amendments will alter discharge limits and will require additional actions to reduce legacy sources of PFAS or that the wastewater treatment system there will be unable to meet future discharge limits.

If 3M Belgium is unable to meet the eventual discharge limits, such development could have a significant adverse impact on 3M Belgium's normal operations and the Company's businesses that receive products and other materials from the Zwijndrecht facility, some of which may not be available or in similar quantities from other 3M facilities, which could in turn impact these businesses' ability to fulfill supply obligations to their customers.

11 unchanged sentences

3M Belgium has also submitted additional required RAPs, which OVAM deemed to be not in conformity with the Flemish Soil Decree and will require additional analysis.

OVAM provided extensions of time for 3M Belgium to revise and re-submit each purportedly non-conforming RAP.

OVAM provided extensions of time for 3M Belgium to revise and re-submit each RAP it found to be non-conforming.

3M Belgium representatives continue to have discussions with the relevant authorities regarding further soil remedial actions and related groundwater actions in connection with the Flemish Soil Decree.

1 unchanged sentence

In December 2022, the Flemish Cabinet took steps to implement an executive action (the “Site Decision”) designed to expand 3M Belgium’s remedial obligations around the Zwijndrecht site.

On March 31, 2023, the Site Decision was fully approved by the Flemish Cabinet and the Site Decision was published in April 2023.

Among other things, the Site Decision purported to establish conditional obligations within 5 kilometers of Zwijndrecht that could have resulted in additional financial and remedial obligations for 3M Belgium.

In June 2023, 3M Belgium submitted a petition for annulment of the Site Decision to the Belgian Council of State.

In March 2025, the Council of State affirmed 3M Belgium's petition to annul the Site Decision and annulled the Site Decision in its entirety.

3M Belgium filed a legal challenge seeking to annul the Site Decision.

In March 2025, the Council of State affirmed 3M Belgium's petition and annulled the Site Decision in its entirety.

In July 2023, the Flemish government approved another executive action establishing a temporary action framework that sets soil and groundwater values for evaluation of remediation of PFAS.

While the full impact of the temporary action framework remains to be determined, its use of the values in the EU Drinking Water Directive for remediation of groundwater, regardless of whether the groundwater would be used for drinking water, may create a presently undetermined amount of additional financial and remedial obligations for 3M Belgium.

In December 2023, 3M Belgium submitted a petition for annulment of the temporary action framework to the Belgian Council of State, which petition is still pending before the Council of State.

In December 2023, 3M Belgium filed a legal challenge seeking to annul the temporary action framework.

On June 23, 2025, the Flemish Minister of the Environment announced the intent to withdraw the temporary action framework and announced a review focused upon harmonizing the objectives of protecting human health and the environment with the social cost of management of PFAS in the environment and remedial activities.

This includes proposed modifications to the Flemish Soil Decree, as well as interpretations and other guidance from competent regulatory authorities.

3M Belgium is unable to predict the outcome of this process and any changes to existing standards could impose additional financial and remedial obligations on 3M Belgium depending on the standards ultimately adopted.

In May 2024, the Flemish government adopted legislation expanding the authority of OVAM to require financial security for remediation work and giving it the ability to impose a percentage of the cost of remediating river sediment on various parties while requiring financial assurance for such work.

2 unchanged sentences

Pending or potential litigation and investigations outside the United States

As of March 31, 2025, a total of seventeen actions against 3M Belgium are pending in Belgian civil courts.

As of June 30, 2025, a total of eighteen actions against 3M Belgium are pending in Belgian civil courts.

3M Belgium has also received pre-litigation notices from individuals and entities in Belgium indicating potential claims.

1 unchanged sentence

While most of the actions are in early stages, one of the actions resulted in an award of provisional damages of 500 euros to each of four family members who live near the Zwijndrecht site.

Approximately 1,400 individuals have petitioned to intervene in a second "follow-on action" alleging primarily nuisance claims.

Approximately 1,400 individuals have petitioned to intervene in a second "follow-on action" primarily alleging nuisance claims.

The Belgian court has not yet determined that the interventions will be permitted.

3 unchanged sentences

In June 2024, Lantis, an entity involved in the Oosterweel project, filed a lawsuit against 3M Belgium seeking damages related to soil storage costs and other alleged claims.

The parties are engaged in mediation regarding the dispute.

The parties have been engaged in mediation regarding the dispute as the litigation proceeds.

Investigations .

6 unchanged sentences

The notice purports to identify claims by the Dutch government and references potential damages to other parties.

3M Belgium has met with representatives of the Dutch government to discuss the notice as well as with parties the Dutch government may also represent.

3M Belgium has met with representatives of the Dutch government to discuss the notice as well as with parties whose interests the Dutch government may also represent.

Certain private groups in the Netherlands have indicated that they may bring legal claims on behalf of one or more parties for purported damages allegedly caused by PFAS.

17 unchanged sentences

The lawsuits seek compensatory damages for the investigation, sampling, testing, assessment, treatment, remediation, and monitoring of well water as well as punitive damages.

In July 2025, the Canadian Department of National Defence filed a third-party contribution and indemnification action against 3M Canada, 3M Company, and other defendants in connection with a pending individual action filed in the Ontario Superior Court alleging property contamination from AFFF firefighting training at the Canadian Forces Detachment Mountain View.

In September 2024, a putative nationwide consumer class action was filed against 3M Canada, 3M Company, and other defendants in the British Columbia Supreme Court on behalf of all persons who purchased carpeting treated with PFAS-containing products before January 1, 2020.

3 unchanged sentences

Canada’s Minister of the Environment announced in July 2024 a mandatory survey on the manufacture, import, and use of 312 PFAS due on January 29, 2025.

The Canadian government approved 3M's request to extend its reporting deadline to May 8, 2025.

3M timely submitted its response to the survey on May 8, 2025.

In October 2024, 3M Australia received notice that the New South Wales Environmental Protection Agency has made a preliminary determination that 3M Australia is responsible for investigating and cleaning up PFAS contamination at a site that 3M Australia formerly leased.

3M Australia submitted a response to the preliminary determination in January 2025.

The Company is aware of a writ of summons that was filed in Australia on behalf of individuals with connections to property that has been allegedly impacted by 3M PFAS products.

In May 2025, the Agency issued a Clean Up Notice related to the site.

3M is continuing to confer with the Agency and is preparing a work plan for a site investigation.

The Company is aware of a writ of summons that was filed in Australia on behalf of individuals with connections to property that has been allegedly impacted by 3M PFAS products, however, 3M Australia has not been served with any such summons.

Regulation in the United States

Federal Activity

In the United States, the EPA's “PFAS Strategic Roadmap:

EPA's Commitments to Action 2021-2024” presented the EPA’s regulatory approach to PFAS, including investing in research to increase the understanding of PFAS, pursuing a comprehensive approach to proactively control PFAS exposures to humans and the environment, and broadening and accelerating the scope of clean-up of PFAS in the environment.

As set forth below, the EPA engaged in rulemaking pursuant to consistent with the approach set forth in the Roadmap.

On January 20, 2025, the new Administration issued an Executive Order entitled “Regulatory Freeze Pending Review.” Among other things, the Executive Order directs agencies to:

(1) temporarily postpone proposing or issuing new final or proposed rules;

(2) withdraw any rules sent to but not yet published in the Federal Register;

and (3) consider postponing for 60 days the effective date of any rules published in the Federal Register or that have been issued but not taken effect, for the purpose of conducting further review.

On January 31, 2025, the Administration issued an Executive Order entitled "Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation," which directs agencies to repeal ten existing regulations for each new proposed regulation, assess incremental costs of new regulations and offset those costs by the elimination of existing regulations, and provide annual regulatory cost submissions to the Office of Management and Budget.

On February 18, 2025, the Administration issued an Executive Order entitled “Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies,” which directs all executive departments and agencies to submit for review all proposed and final significant regulatory actions to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs within the Executive Office of the President before publication in the Federal Register.

On February 19, 2025, the Administration issued an Executive Order entitled “Ensuring Lawful Governance and Implementing the President’s ‘Department of Government Efficiency’ Deregulatory Initiative, which directs the heads of all executive departments and agencies to identify certain categories of unlawful and potentially unlawful regulations within 60 days and begin plans to repeal them.

The ultimate impact, if any, of these Executive Orders and other executive actions, on existing rules, on proposed rules not yet finalized, and on new rulemaking, remains unclear.

In the United States, in April 2025, the EPA announced “Major EPA Actions to Combat PFAS Contamination,” including the designation of an agency lead for PFAS, the creation of effluent limitations guidelines (ELGs) for certain PFAS, and initiatives to engage with Congress and industry to establish a clear liability framework that includes “polluter pays” and “passive receiver” protection principles.

3M is evaluating the potential impact of this announcement.

The Company has previously discussed the evolving regulatory environment in the United States with respect to PFAS in past filings.

5 unchanged sentences

Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

On February 7, 2025, the Court granted the EPA’s request for a 60-day abeyance to allow the new administration time to review the case.

On April 10, 2025, the court granted EPA’s request to extend the abeyance by an additional 30 days and gave EPA until May 12, 2025 to file motions related to further proceedings in the case.

In May 2025, EPA announced that it would maintain the 4 ppt standards for PFOA and PFOS but rescind and reconsider the standards for PFHxS, PFNA, HFPO-DA and PFBS.

EPA has until July 21, 2025, to file motions related to further proceedings in the case.

In April 2024, EPA released its final rule listing PFOA and PFOS, and their salts and structural isomers, as CERCLA hazardous substances.

1 unchanged sentence

Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

In February 2025, EPA sought and was granted a 60-day abeyance of the proceedings to allow the new administration time to review the case.

Motions to govern future proceedings are due on April 25, 2025.

As a result of the CERCLA designation of PFOA and PFOS, and to the extent EPA finalizes additional proposals related to PFAS, 3M may be required to undertake additional investigative or remediation activities, including where 3M conducts operations or where 3M has disposed of waste.

3M may also face additional litigation from other entities that have liability under CERCLA for claims seeking contribution for clean-up costs other entities might have.

In February 2025, EPA sought and was granted an abeyance of the proceedings to allow the new administration time to review the case.

Motions to govern future proceedings are due on August 18, 2025.

As a result of the CERCLA designation of PFOA and PFOS, and to the extent EPA finalizes additional proposals related to PFAS, 3M may be required to undertake additional investigative and/or remediation activities, including where 3M conducts operations or where 3M has disposed of waste.

3M may also face additional litigation from other entities that have liability under CERCLA for claims seeking contribution for clean-up costs other entities may incur.

In February 2024, EPA proposed two rules under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (“RCRA”).

4 unchanged sentences

These criteria, once finalized, may be used by states and tribes to establish water quality standards.

In June 2024, EPA submitted to OMB for review its proposed rule under the Clean Water Act setting Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for PFAS Manufacturers Under the Organic Chemicals, Plastics and Synthetic Fibers Point Source Category.

In January 2025, EPA withdrew the proposed rule from OMB review.

In October 2023, EPA published a final rule imposing reporting and recordkeeping requirements under TSCA for manufacturers or importers, including 3M, of certain PFAS in any year since January 2011.

2 unchanged sentences

This is a one-time reporting requirement covering in-scope activities over a 12-year look-back period from 2011-2022.

In September 2024, EPA extended the reporting deadline for most companies, including 3M, from May 8, 2025, to January 11, 2026.

In March 2024, EPA issued a TSCA test order requiring two manufacturers, including 3M, to conduct certain health and safety testing on NMeFOSE, a PFAS substance.

3M has not manufactured or processed NMeFOSE for over 20 years and, in January 2025, EPA confirmed that 3M is not subject to the test order.

EPA has delayed the submission period for this reporting rule twice and reports for most companies (including 3M) are now due October 13, 2026.

In August 2024, three states (New Jersey, New Mexico, and North Carolina) petitioned EPA to list PFOA, PFOS, PFNA, and HFPO-DA as hazardous air pollutants under Clean Air Act and to establish emission standards from source categories.

2 unchanged sentences

The updates include provisions that, if finalized, would require dischargers in those sectors and in jurisdictions where EPA is the permitting authority to monitor for certain PFAS in their stormwater discharges and report the results.

Public comments on the proposed permit are due in May 2025.

Public comments on the proposed permit were due in May 2025.

In January 2025, EPA released a draft risk assessment for PFOA and PFOS in biosolids.

6 unchanged sentences

States with finalized drinking water standards for certain PFAS include Vermont, New Jersey, New York, New Hampshire, Michigan, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

Several other states, including Delaware, Idaho, Rhode Island, and North Carolina, have started processes to adopt EPA’s federal drinking water standards for PFAS into state rules.

Several states, including California, Connecticut, Maine, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Vermont have started processes to adopt EPA’s federal drinking water standards for PFAS into state rules.

Delaware, Idaho, Rhode Island, and North Carolina previously began those processes.

In April 2021, 3M filed a lawsuit against the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy ("EGLE") to invalidate the drinking water standards EGLE promulgated under an accelerated timeline.

9 unchanged sentences

The law also requires manufacturers of any products containing intentionally added PFAS to submit certain information to the New Mexico Environment Department and gives that Department authority to require product testing for PFAS.

Certain states, including Colorado, California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nevada, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington, have enacted restrictions on PFAS in certain categories of products, including textiles, children’s products, cosmetics, fire fighter personal protective equipment and food packaging products.

In June 2025, Vermont enacted a statute restricting the manufacture, sale, offer for sale, distribution for sale, and distribution for use of certain consumer products that contain PFAS.

Most of the restrictions on consumer products take effect January 1, 2026, with later deadlines for certain product categories.

Certain states, including Colorado, California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nevada, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Washington, have enacted restrictions on PFAS in certain categories of products, including textiles, children’s products, cosmetics, fire fighter personal protective equipment and food packaging products.

The Company cannot predict what additional regulatory or legislative actions in the United States, Europe and elsewhere arising from the foregoing or other proceedings and activities, if any, may be taken regarding such compounds or the consequences of any such actions to the Company, including to its manufacturing operations and its products.

Given divergent and rapidly evolving regulatory standards, there is currently significant uncertainty about the potential costs to industry and communities associated with remediation and control technologies that may be required.

Given divergent and rapidly evolving regulatory standards, there currently is significant uncertainty about the potential costs to industry and communities associated with remediation and control technologies that may be required.

Litigation Related to Historical PFAS Manufacturing Operations in Alabama

As previously reported, 3M has resolved numerous claims relating to alleged PFAS contamination of properties and water supplies by 3M’s Decatur, Alabama manufacturing facility.

As previously reported, 3M has resolved numerous claims relating to PFAS contamination of properties and water supplies allegedly caused by 3M’s Decatur, Alabama manufacturing facility.

3M continues to make payments pursuant to these resolutions.

1 unchanged sentence

This work will complement an Interim Consent Order that 3M entered into with the Alabama Department of Environmental Management (“ADEM") in 2020 and includes sampling of environmental media, such as ground water, regarding the potential presence of PFAS at the 3M Decatur facility and legacy disposal sites, as well as supporting the execution of appropriate remedial actions.

In August 2022, Colbert County, Alabama, which opted out of an earlier class settlement, filed a lawsuit against 3M and several co-defendants alleging that discharge from operations in Decatur, Alabama has contaminated the Tennessee River, from which the County draws its drinking water.

In August 2022, Colbert County, Alabama, which opted out of an earlier class settlement, filed a lawsuit against 3M and several co-defendants alleging that discharge from operations in Decatur had contaminated the Tennessee River, from which the County draws its drinking water.

Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (“JPML”) issued a conditional transfer order of this case to the AFFF federal Multi-District Litigation ("MDL") in December 2024.

Plaintiff’s motion to remand the case to state court was denied without prejudice to refile following the Fourth Circuit's decision in 3M's appeal of the orders remanding cases brought by the Maryland and South Carolina Attorneys General, as discussed below.

In February 2023, the City of Muscle Shoals, Alabama filed a lawsuit against 3M and several co-defendants alleging that discharge from operations in Decatur, Alabama has contaminated the Tennessee River, from which the City draws its drinking water.

In February 2023, the City of Muscle Shoals, Alabama filed a lawsuit against 3M and several co-defendants alleging that discharge from operations in Decatur had contaminated the Tennessee River, from which the City draws its drinking water.

The JPML issued a conditional transfer order of this case to the AFFF MDL in December 2024.

In April 2025, Colbert County and the City of Muscle Shoals filed a joint motion to remand the two above-referenced cases to state court.

Since December 2023, a number of personal injury actions have been filed against 3M and other defendants, alleging exposure to PFAS from defendants' operations in Decatur.

5 unchanged sentences

Several state attorneys general have also filed multiple lawsuits against 3M and other defendants.

In general, preliminary judicial proceedings evaluate whether these lawsuits should proceed in state or federal court and inside AFFF MDL or outside of the AFFF MDL.

In general, preliminary judicial proceedings evaluate whether these lawsuits should proceed in state or federal court and inside the AFFF MDL or outside of the AFFF MDL.

Cases at times are moved to the AFFF MDL or remanded to another venue, such as state court.

2 unchanged sentences

Currently in the AFFF MDL, state attorneys general lawsuits have been brought against 3M on behalf of the people of the states of Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin, as well as on behalf of the people of the District of Columbia and the territories of Guam, Puerto Rico, and the Northern Mariana Islands.

Examples of state attorneys general lawsuits that are proceeding outside the AFFF MDL are described below.

In March 2019, the New Jersey Attorney General filed two actions against 3M, E.I.

DuPont De Nemours and Co.

(“DuPont”), and Chemours Co.

("Chemours") on behalf of the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection ("NJDEP"), the NJDEP’s commissioner, and the New Jersey Spill Compensation Fund regarding alleged discharges at two DuPont facilities in Pennsville, New Jersey (Salem County) and Parlin, New Jersey (Middlesex County).

3M is included as a defendant in both cases because it allegedly supplied PFOA to DuPont for use at the facilities at issue and because 3M allegedly sent PFAS-containing waste to one of the facilities for disposal.

Both cases expressly seek to have the defendants pay all costs necessary to investigate, remediate, assess, and restore the facilities at issue and the allegedly affected natural resources of New Jersey.

DuPont removed these cases to federal court.

In June 2020, the court consolidated the two actions, along with two others brought by the NJDEP relating to the DuPont facilities, for case management and pretrial purposes.

3M and the NJDEP continue court-facilitated mediation discussions in advance of the scheduled trial date.

The court has ordered that a phased trial will commence on May 19, 2025.

The first phase will be a bench trial to determine whether 3M and DuPont are liable on certain of NJDEP's claims in the Salem County case.

The Middlesex County case remains on administrative termination.

In March 2019, the New Jersey Attorney General filed two actions against 3M on behalf of New Jersey and certain of its departments regarding alleged PFAS discharges at two facilities:

the Chambers Works facility in Salem County (“Chambers Works”) and the Parlin facility in Middlesex County.

Although 3M has never owned or operated either facility, New Jersey alleged that 3M supplied PFAS to the facilities, which was then discharged into the environment.

In May 2025, 3M agreed to a proposed Judicial Consent Order with the State (the “New Jersey Settlement”).

The New Jersey Settlement is subject to public notice and comment and court approval.

If the court approves the Settlement, New Jersey and its departments would agree to dismiss with prejudice the two actions described above and the State’s case against 3M pending in the AFFF MDL.

In addition, the New Jersey Settlement resolved broader statewide PFAS claims that the State and its departments have, or may in the future have, against 3M, as more fully described in the proposed Judicial Consent Order.

The New Jersey Settlement is not an admission of liability.

If the court approves the New Jersey Settlement and all conditions are met, 3M will pay the State up to $ 450 million.

3M recorded a pre-tax charge of $ 281 million in the second quarter of 2025 related to the New Jersey Settlement.

The charge reflected the present value of the $ 400 million amount 3M expects to pay , discounted at an estimated 5.0 % blended interest rate at time of proposed settlement.

The New Jersey Settlement includes payments with a present value of $ 207 million for Chambers Works and other elements of the settlement beginning in 2026 over 8 years and payments with a present value of $ 74 million for existing and future PFAS-related claims by the State of New Jersey starting in 2030 and running through 2050.

The actual amount that 3M will pay will be determined in part by how much 3M is ultimately obligated to pay under the PWS Settlement, as discussed elsewhere in this Note 17.

3M may also receive certain credits towards its payment obligations under the New Jersey Settlement based on other contingencies.

Additional state attorneys general lawsuits that are proceeding outside the AFFF MDL are described below.

New Hampshire.

1 unchanged sentence

One lawsuit was transferred to the AFFF MDL.

The other lawsuit is proceeding in state court pending a ruling by the federal court of appeals on 3M’s appeal of the order remanding the case to state court.

In March 2025, the federal court of appeals upheld the order remanding the case to state court.

The other lawsuit is proceeding with discovery in state court following a March 2025 ruling by the federal court of appeals denying 3M’s appeal of the order remanding the case to state court.

In June 2019, the Vermont Attorney General filed two lawsuits alleging contamination of the state’s drinking water supplies and other natural resources from PFAS-containing products.

1 unchanged sentence

The other lawsuit is proceeding in state court, pending a ruling by the federal court of appeals on 3M's appeal of the order remanding the case to state court.

The federal court held a hearing on 3M's appeal in February 2025.

The state court has set an August 31, 2025, trial-ready date for the matter.

The federal court of appeals held a hearing on 3M's appeal in February 2025.

The state court has set a November 7, 2025, trial-ready date for the matter.

In March 2022, the Illinois Attorney General filed a lawsuit in Illinois state court against 3M alleging contamination of the state's natural resources by PFAS compounds disposed of by, or discharged, or emitted from 3M's Cordova plant.

1 unchanged sentence

In August 2024, the Seventh Circuit affirmed the order remanding the case to state court.

The state court held a hearing in December 2024 on a motion to dismiss filed by 3M.

The case is proceeding with discovery.

In April 2025, the state court granted in part and denied in part a motion to dismiss filed by 3M.

The remaining claims in the case are proceeding with discovery.

In March 2023, the Maine Attorney General filed two lawsuits alleging contamination of the state's drinking water supplies and other natural resources from PFAS-containing products.

1 unchanged sentence

The other lawsuit is proceeding in state court, pending a ruling by the federal court of appeals on 3M's appeal of the order remanding the case to state court.

The federal court of appeals set a hearing on 3M's appeal for October 2025.

The state court dismissed the state's strict liability and trespass claims but denied the remainder of 3M's motion to dismiss in December 2024.

The case is proceeding with discovery.

The case is proceeding with discovery on the remaining claims.

In May 2023, the Maryland Attorney General filed two lawsuits alleging contamination of the state's drinking water supplies and other natural resources from PFAS-containing products.

4 unchanged sentences

This appeal was consolidated with 3M’s appeal of a remand order in the South Carolina Attorney General case, as described below.

In March 2025, the federal court of appeals vacated the remand orders and returned the cases back to the district courts for further proceedings.

The state has requested rehearing en banc by the court of appeals.

In March 2025, the federal court of appeals vacated the remand orders and returned the cases to the district courts for further proceedings.

In May 2025, the federal court of appeals denied the state's petition for rehearing en banc.

South Carolina.

5 unchanged sentences

This appeal was consolidated with 3M’s appeal of a remand order in the Maryland Attorney General case, as described above.

In March 2025, the federal court of appeals vacated the remand order and returned the cases back to the district courts for further proceedings.

The state has requested rehearing en banc by the court of appeals.

In March 2025, the federal court of appeals vacated the remand order and returned the cases to the district courts for further proceedings.

In May 2025, the federal court of appeals denied the state's petition for rehearing en banc.

In January 2024, the Connecticut Attorney General filed two lawsuits alleging contamination of the state's drinking water supplies and other natural resources from PFAS-containing products.

8 unchanged sentences

In addition, the Company is in discussions with several state attorneys general and agencies, responding to information and other requests, including entering into tolling agreements, relating to PFAS matters and exploring potential resolution of some of the matters raised.

Aqueous Film Forming Foam (AFFF) Environmental Litigation

3M manufactured and marketed AFFF containing certain PFAS for use in firefighting from approximately 1963 to 2002.

As of March 31, 2025, more than 7,800 lawsuits alleging injuries or damages from PFAS contamination or exposure allegedly caused by AFFF use are pending against 3M (along with other defendants) in various state and federal courts.

Aqueous Film Forming Foam (AFFF) Litigation

As of June 30, 2025, more than 7,800 lawsuits alleging injuries or damages from PFAS contamination or exposure allegedly caused by AFFF use are pending against 3M (along with other defendants) in various state and federal courts, along with purported unfiled personal injury claims.

As further described below, a vast majority of these pending cases are in a federal MDL court in South Carolina.

7 unchanged sentences

District Court for the District of South Carolina to be managed in an MDL proceeding to centralize pre-trial proceedings.

Over the past six years, the parties in the MDL have conducted and are continuing to conduct ongoing master discovery and discovery regarding specific groups of cases, including public water supplier, personal injury, and attorneys general cases, among other types of cases.

Over the past six years, the parties in the MDL have conducted and are continuing to conduct ongoing master discovery and discovery regarding specific groups of cases, including public water suppliers, personal injury, and attorneys general cases, among other types of cases.

In September 2022, the court issued an order denying defendants' MDL-wide summary judgment motions on the government contractor defense, which defense can be presented to a jury at future trials.

On June 22, 2023, 3M entered into a class-action settlement to resolve a wide range of drinking water claims by public water systems in the United States (the “PWS Settlement”), which was approved by the court in March 2024 and took effect in May 2024.

Eligible class members are United States public water systems as defined in the PWS Settlement.

On June 22, 2023, 3M entered into a class-action settlement to resolve a wide range of drinking water claims by public water suppliers in the United States (the “PWS Settlement”), which was approved by the court in March 2024 and took effect in May 2024.

Eligible class members are United States public water suppliers as defined in the PWS Settlement.

The PWS Settlement provides that 3M does not admit any liability or wrongdoing and does not waive any defenses.

12 unchanged sentences

In January 2025, the Court issued an order setting the first bellwether personal injury trial to begin on October 20, 2025.

Further, the Court ordered the parties to submit joint or competing proposals for bellwether trial picks among the kidney and testicular cancer plaintiffs by May 6, and has set June 20 for a "Science Day" regarding liver and thyroid cancers.

In May 2025, the Court decided that the trial would involve one or more of three kidney cancer plaintiffs.

On June 20, the Court conducted a "Science Day" regarding liver and thyroid cancers.

At the Court's direction, the parties continue to negotiate processes for bellwethers of certain other personal injury claims.

The Court continues to encourage the parties to settle matters and 3M is participating in Court-ordered settlement discussions facilitated by a Court-appointed mediator in advance of the first bellwether personal injury trial scheduled to begin on October 20, 2025.

In November 2024, the Court issued an order directing the parties to work together to develop a process to select approximately 15 sites allegedly contaminated with PFAS from AFFF use for the purpose of conducting focused product identification discovery.

The parties agreed to a case management order adopted by the Court in January 2025 and submitted 12 proposed sites to the Court in March 2025, which the Court approved in April 2025.

The parties will now conduct six months of product-identification discovery regarding those sites and report back to the Court.

The parties are now conducting six months of product-identification discovery regarding those sites and will report back to the Court.

Other AFFF Cases

2 unchanged sentences

Two of these cases have been removed to federal court and transferred to the AFFF MDL, and one case was voluntarily dismissed.

The five cases that remain pending in state courts are stayed by agreement of the parties.

The four cases that remain pending in state courts are stayed by agreement of the parties.

The Company is aware of other AFFF suits outside the AFFF MDL in which the Company has been named as a defendant.

3M anticipates seeking to have most of these cases be removed to federal court and transferred to the AFFF MDL;

3M anticipates seeking to have most of these cases removed to federal court and transferred to the AFFF MDL;

however, several cases are expected to remain pending in state courts, including a case in Illinois state court brought by an oil refinery worker alleging harm caused by PFAS and other chemicals.

Separately, the Company is aware of pre-suit claims or demands by other parties related to the use and disposal of AFFF, one of which purports to represent a large group of firefighters.

In that case (Bannister), 3M filed a motion to dismiss in April 2025, which resulted in the plaintiff being granted leave to amend her complaint.

The matter currently is scheduled for trial in September 2026.

Other PFAS-related Product and Environmental Litigation

Numerous other PFAS-related suits naming 3M as a defendant have been filed outside the MDL in courts across the country in which 3M has been named a defendant.

The Company anticipates seeking to have most of the cases that relate to AFFF be removed to federal court and transferred to the MDL.

However, some of these cases are likely to remain in state or federal courts outside of the MDL.

3M manufactured and sold various products containing PFOA and PFOS, including Scotchgard, for several decades.

Starting in 2017, 3M has been served with individual and putative class action complaints in various state and federal courts alleging, among other things, that 3M’s customers’ improper disposal of PFOA and PFOS resulted in the contamination of groundwater, surface water, or biosolids that were then land-applied.

Numerous other PFAS-related suits naming 3M as a defendant have been filed outside the MDL in courts across the country.

The Company anticipates seeking to have most of the cases that relate to AFFF removed to federal court and transferred to the MDL.

However, some of these cases are likely to remain in state or federal courts outside the MDL.

Since 2017, 3M has been served with individual and putative class action complaints in various state and federal courts alleging, among other things, that 3M’s customers’ improper disposal of PFOA and PFOS resulted in the contamination of groundwater, surface water, or biosolids that were then land-applied.

The plaintiffs in these cases generally allege that 3M failed to warn its customers or the plaintiffs themselves about the hazards of improper disposal of the product.

1 unchanged sentence

Several companies have been sued along with 3M, including, but not limited to, DuPont, Chemours, and various carpet, paper and textile manufacturers.

The cases brought on behalf of drinking water providers described below will be covered by the PWS Settlement if the water providers did not opt out of the PWS Settlement.

In Alabama, 3M, together with multiple co-defendants, is defending several state court cases brought by municipal water utilities.

As described immediately below, some of these cases have been brought by drinking water providers that opted out of the PWS Settlement.

In Alabama, 3M, together with multiple co-defendants, is defending several court cases brought by municipal water utilities.

The plaintiffs in one of these cases (Shelby/Talladega Counties) are water utilities alleging that carpet manufacturers in Georgia improperly discharged PFAS into the surface water and groundwater, contaminating drinking water supplies of cities located downstream along the Coosa River in Alabama.

The case has a trial date in February 2026.

3M removed this case to federal court and has sought transfer the case to the AFFF MDL.

The plaintiffs have moved to remand and have opposed transfer to the MDL.

In the second action, 3M is defending a putative class action by the Utilities Board of Tuskegee on behalf of all drinking water utilities within Alabama whose finished drinking water has contained a detectable concentration level of PFOA, PFOS, GenX, or PFBS that exceed the June 2022 health advisory levels issued by the EPA.

This case was dismissed without prejudice in February 2025 by agreement of the parties.

In the third case, the city of Albertville, Alabama filed suit for alleged contamination of the Tennessee River (upstream of 3M’s Decatur facility) by a carpet manufacturer located upriver in Alabama.

3M removed this case to federal court and a motion to remand remains pending.

The city of Albertville, Alabama filed suit for alleged contamination of the Tennessee River (upstream of 3M’s Decatur facility) by a carpet manufacturer in Alabama.

Defendants filed a joint motion to dismiss in May 2024.

Oral argument on the motion is scheduled for April 2025.

In the fourth case, the city of Mobile alleges that 3M and other defendants are responsible for PFAS contamination of the city’s water supply resulting from PFAS released by a local landfill.

In October 2024, the Court granted 3M’s and several other defendants’ motions to dismiss and in November 2024, 3M’s co-defendants filed a motion asking the Court to certify the dismissal order as a final judgment.

Plaintiff has moved for reconsideration of the dismissal order, and the matter is set for hearing in April 2025.

In the fifth case, the Town of Pine Hill, Alabama filed suit alleging that PFAS discharges from paper mills currently owned by International Paper have contaminated its water supply.

3M removed the case to federal court and moved to transfer the case to the AFFF MDL.

In March 2025, the JPML declined to transfer the case to the AFFF MDL, and the district court ordered the case remanded.

Oral argument on the motion was held in April 2025 and the motion remains pending.

The city of Mobile alleges that 3M and other defendants are responsible for PFAS contamination of the city’s water supply resulting from PFAS released by a local landfill.

In October 2024, the Court granted 3M’s and several other defendants’ motions to dismiss.

Claims against one local defendant remain pending, which prevents the motion to dismiss ruling from becoming final.

The Town of Pine Hill, Alabama filed suit alleging that PFAS discharges from paper mills currently owned by International Paper have contaminated its water supply.

3M removed the case to federal court.

In March 2025, the district court ordered the case remanded.

3M has filed a notice of appeal.

In the sixth case, the City of Irondale, Alabama filed suit alleging PFAS contamination of its water supply due to industrial discharges from several users of PFAS in different industries, including alleged customers of 3M.

3M removed the case to federal court and moved to transfer the case to the AFFF MDL.

In March 2025, the JPML declined to transfer the case to the AFFF MDL.

Plaintiff's motion to remand remains pending.

The City of Irondale, Alabama filed suit alleging PFAS contamination of its water supply due to industrial discharges from several users of PFAS in different industries, including alleged customers of 3M.

3M removed the case to federal court and a motion to remand remains pending.

In May 2025, the City of Opelika, Alabama sued 3M and numerous other defendants alleging that releases by users of PFAS in carpet, textile, and paper manufacturing operations upstream of its drinking water intake have contaminated its water supply.

3M removed the case to federal court and has moved to transfer the case to the AFFF MDL.

3M’s transfer motion and Plaintiff’s motion to remand is pending.

All other deadlines are stayed until the remand is decided.

In May 2025 the City of Foley, Alabama sued 3M and others alleging that releases by users of PFAS in local manufacturing operations contaminated groundwater used for drinking water supplies.

3M filed a Motion to Dismiss on July 16, 2025.

3M is also defending a mass action filed in Alabama in June 2024 by hundreds of individual customers of the Water Works and Sewer Board for the City of Gadsden, Alabama, alleging emotional distress and property damage related to PFAS contamination of their drinking water.

3M removed the case to federal court.

In Georgia, 3M, together with co-defendants, is also defending a putative class action in federal court, in which plaintiffs seek relief on behalf of a class of individual ratepayers in Summerville, Georgia who allege their water supply was contaminated by PFAS discharged from a textile mill.

In May 2021, the City of Summerville filed a motion to intervene in the lawsuit, which was granted in March 2022.

The case is in expert discovery and no trial date has been set.

Another case originally filed in Georgia state court was brought by individuals asserting PFAS contamination by the Georgia carpet manufacturers and seeking economic damages and injunctive relief on behalf of a putative class of Rome and Floyd County water subscribers.

3M removed the case to federal court, where the case is proceeding through discovery.

In Georgia, 3M, together with other defendants, is also defending a putative class action in federal court, in which plaintiffs seek relief on behalf of a class of individual ratepayers in Summerville, Georgia who allege their water supply was contaminated by PFAS discharged from a textile mill.

The City of Summerville intervened in the case and also brought claims against 3M and other defendants.

Briefing on dispositive motions is underway and no trial date has been set.

Another case currently pending in federal court in Georgia was brought by individuals asserting PFAS contamination by 3M and other defendants and seeks economic damages and injunctive relief on behalf of a putative class of Rome and Floyd County water subscribers.

Class certification has been fully briefed, and the plaintiff's injunctive relief claims were recently dismissed.

Plaintiff's claims for economic damages related to alleged increases in their water rates due to the presence of PFAS remain pending.

No trial date has been set.

In February 2024, two landowners in Gordon County, Georgia sued 3M and other defendants for alleged contamination of their properties from wastewater treatment sludge allegedly containing PFAS from nearby carpet manufacturing operations.

One of 3M’s co-defendant’s, the City of Calhoun, Georgia, has filed a cross claim against 3M and other defendants alleging that biosolids from its wastewater treatment plant were contaminated with PFAS that has migrated into its water supply.

One of 3M’s co-defendants, the City of Calhoun, Georgia, filed a cross claim against 3M and other defendants alleging that biosolids from its wastewater treatment plant were contaminated with PFAS that has migrated into its water supply.

In June 2024, a related lawsuit was filed on behalf of other property owners receiving biosolids from the same municipal water treatment plant.

Motions to dismiss have been denied, and these claims are in active discovery.

In January 2025, private plaintiffs filed a lawsuit against 3M, DuPont, Daikin, Mohawk Industries, Shaw, and others in Gordon County, Georgia alleging PFAS contamination on their property.

In January 2025, private plaintiffs filed lawsuit against 3M and other defendants in Gordon County, Georgia alleging similar PFAS contamination on their property.

All of these cases remain pending.

In July 2024, the City of Lyerly sued 3M and other defendants, alleging that discharges from local carpet mills contaminated the City's water supply.

A motion to dismiss filed by 3M was denied in March 2025.

3M's motion to dismiss was denied in March 2025 and discovery is underway.

In November 2024, Mohawk Industries, a carpet manufacturer, filed a lawsuit in Whitfield County, Georgia against 3M, DuPont, and Daikin alleging various counts of tort and contract liability, including fraud, related to sales of fluorochemicals.

In December 2024, Dalton Utilities, located in Dalton, Georgia, filed a suit against 3M, DuPont, Dakin, and several carpet manufacturers seeking clean-up costs under CERCLA for alleged PFAS contamination related to the Dalton Land Application System, which is a field that has received carpet mill effluent pursuant to a Georgia Environmental Protection Division permit since the late 1980s.

In December 2024, Murray County, Georgia filed suit against 3M, DuPont, Daikin, and several carpet manufacturers seeking clean-up costs for alleged PFAS contamination related to the Murray County landfill and other locations throughout the County.

3M filed a motion to dismiss, and briefing is ongoing.

Motions to dismiss have been briefed and argued and remain pending.

Discovery in the case is proceeding.

In December 2024, Dalton Utilities, located in Dalton, Georgia, filed a suit against 3M and other defendants seeking clean-up costs under CERCLA for alleged PFAS contamination related to the Dalton Land Application System, which is a field that has received carpet mill effluent pursuant to a Georgia Environmental Protection Division permit since the late 1980s.

Briefing on motions to dismiss is ongoing.

In December 2024, Murray County, Georgia filed suit against 3M and other defendants seeking clean-up costs for alleged PFAS contamination related to the Murray County landfill and other locations throughout the County.

3M filed a motion to dismiss, which has been fully briefed.

In January 2025, Catoosa County, Georgia and Gordon County, Georgia filed substantively identical complaints alleging similar PFAS impacts as Murray County related to county-owned landfills.

3M filed a motion to dismiss, which has been fully briefed.

In February 2025, the City of Savannah, Georgia sued 3M and multiple other defendants, including carpet makers, alleging PFAS discharges upstream of its surface water drinking intake have contaminated its water supply.

3M removed the case to federal court, where plaintiff has filed a motion to remand.

3M also intends to file a motion to transfer the case to the MDL.

In Delaware, 3M has been defending one putative class action brought by individuals alleging PFAS contamination of their water supply resulting from the operations of local metal plating facilities.

Plaintiffs alleged that 3M supplied PFAS to the metal plating facilities.

DuPont, Chemours, and the metal platers had also been named as defendants.

3M filed a motion to transfer the case to the MDL, which was granted in June 2025.

There are no current responsive pleading deadlines.

In April 2025, the City of Chatsworth, Georgia sued 3M and multiple other defendants, including carpet makers, alleging PFAS discharges have contaminated its water supply.

3M's responsive pleading deadline is August 8, 2025.

In April 2025, a private landowner and an environmental organization (Coosa River Basin Initiative) sued 3M and others, including carpet makers and Dalton Utilities, for property damages and injunctive relief related to the Dalton Utilities Land Application System.

Dalton Utilities filed a motion to stay the case in favor of its pending action in the same district court, and briefing on that issue is ongoing.

All other deadlines are stayed until the stay is decided.

In April 2025, private landowners in Chattooga County, Georgia sued 3M and multiple other defendants, including a textile mill, alleging that PFAS discharges to the Town of Trion, Georgia wastewater treatment plant made its way to sludge that was deposited on plaintiffs’ properties via land application for years.

3M's responsive pleading deadline is August 11, 2025.

In June 2025, private landowners in northwest Georgia filed three cases against 3M and other defendants alleging PFAS from nearby carpet making facilities has contaminated soil, water, and indoor dust at their properties.

3M's responsive pleading deadline is July 24, 2025.

In June 2025, Walker County, Georgia and the City of Chickamauga, Georgia sued 3M and multiple other defendants, including carpet makers, alleging that the carpet manufacturers discharged PFAS into the public sewer system, which caused it to enter plaintiffs’ drinking water.

3M's responsive pleading deadline is July 20, 2025.

In Delaware, 3M, together with several co-defendants, has been defending one putative class action brought by individuals alleging PFAS contamination of their water supply resulting from the operations of local metal plating facilities.

In August 2023, the court dismissed all but plaintiffs' negligence claim.

Plaintiffs filed a motion for class certification in August 2024, and 3M filed a motion for summary judgment in December 2024.

In March 2025, the court granted 3M's motion for summary judgment as to the remaining claim.

In New Jersey, 3M, together with several co-defendants, is also defending numerous cases in New Jersey federal court brought by individuals with private drinking water wells near certain DuPont and Solvay facilities that were allegedly supplied with PFAS by 3M.

3M has agreed to settle for an immaterial amount with the plaintiffs in certain cases that sought property damages, subject in certain cases to court approval.

In New Jersey, 3M, together with several co-defendants, is also defending numerous cases in federal court brought by individuals with private drinking water wells near certain DuPont and Solvay facilities that were allegedly supplied with PFAS by 3M.

3M settled for an immaterial amount with the plaintiffs in certain cases that sought property damages, and for those cases requiring court approval, such approval was granted in May 2025.

Plaintiffs in the remaining individual cases allege personal injuries to themselves or to their adult children.

In addition, 3M and several other defendants were named in a complaint filed in New Jersey state court in May 2025 by individuals who resided near Solvay’s facility and who allege personal injuries to themselves or to their children from PFAS exposure.

3M has not been served yet.

3M and Middlesex Water Company are defending a putative class action filed in New Jersey federal court in November 2021 by individuals who received drinking water from Middlesex Water Company that was allegedly contaminated with PFOA.

3 unchanged sentences

In March 2023, a personal injury lawsuit was filed against 3M and Middlesex Water Company by another Middlesex Water Company customer.

In May 2023, 3M filed a motion to dismiss certain of the claims in that lawsuit and plaintiff subsequently amended his complaint to withdraw certain claims against 3M.

The case is now proceeding in discovery.

In South Carolina, a putative class action lawsuit was filed in South Carolina state court against 3M, DuPont and DuPont related entities in March 2022.

The lawsuit alleges property damage and personal injuries from contamination from PFAS compounds used and disposed of at the textile plant known as the Galey & Lord plant from 1966 until 2016.

In South Carolina, a putative class action lawsuit was filed in South Carolina state court against 3M and other defendants in March 2022.

The lawsuit alleges property damage and personal injuries from contamination from PFAS compounds used and disposed of at the textile plant.

The complaint seeks remedies including damages, punitive damages, and medical monitoring.

The case has been removed to federal court.

Plaintiff filed a second amended complaint in November 2022, and 3M and DuPont filed a joint motion to dismiss, which was largely denied in September 2023.

In August of 2024, a companion personal injury case was filed in South Carolina.

3M removed this case to federal court.

Discovery is proceeding in both cases.

In January 2025, eight water systems that opted out of the PWS Settlement filed complaints in South Carolina state court against 3M and other defendants, alleging PFAS contamination from a variety of industrial sources.

3M removed all eight cases into the AFFF MDL in federal court in February 2025.

In April 2025, plaintiffs filed motions to remand all eight cases to state court.

In May and June 2025, nine additional water providers that opted out of the PWS Settlement filed complaints against only 3M in South Carolina federal court outside the AFFF MDL, alleging PFAS contamination from a variety of industrial sources.

In June 2025, 3M identified the cases as related to the AFFF MDL.

3M has not yet responded to the complaints.

In Massachusetts, a putative class action lawsuit was filed in August 2022 in state court against 3M and several other defendants alleging PFAS contamination from waste generated by local paper manufacturing facilities that was subsequently incorporated into biosolids.

1 unchanged sentence

This case was removed to federal court, where it was consolidated with a previously-filed federal case involving similar allegations and claims against 3M’s co-defendants.

3M filed a motion to dismiss the second amended complaint in March 2023, which was granted in part and denied in part in December 2023.

In February and March 2024, 3M and the remaining defendants answered the complaint and filed cross claims against one another.

The case is now proceeding in discovery.

In January 2025, the plaintiffs filed their class certification motion, and, in March 2025, 3M filed its opposition to class certification.

The case is now proceeding in discovery and class certification.

In April 2025, the class action was consolidated with another class action brought by the same plaintiffs against different defendants.

Class certification proceedings in the original action are stayed until April 2026 to allow the cases to proceed to a single class certification hearing, which is expected in the third quarter of 2026.

No trial date has been set.

In October 2024, one of the former plaintiffs in the putative class action filed a separate suit in Massachusetts state court against 3M and other defendants alleging PFAS-related personal injury as well as property damage to a private well.

3M filed a motion to dismiss that case in March 2025.

3M filed a motion to dismiss that case in June 2025, which remains pending.

In March 2025, another resident of Westminster, Massachusetts filed an additional suit against 3M and other defendants alleging PFAS-related personal injury.

3M has not yet responded to that complaint.

In Maine, a group of landowners filed a second amended complaint in October 2022 in federal district court, adding 3M and several other alleged chemical suppliers as defendants in a case previously filed against several paper mills, alleging PFAS contamination from waste generated by the paper mills that was then incorporated into biosolids.

5 unchanged sentences

In Wisconsin, in August 2023, 3M and other defendants were named as defendants in a putative class action brought in federal court by several residents of Oneida County alleging property damage resulting from PFAS contamination they attribute to waste generated from the operations of a paper mill in Rhinelander, Wisconsin that was then incorporated into biosolids.

In December 2023, the JPML denied 3M’s request to transfer the case to the AFFF MDL.

3M has filed a motion to dismiss, which remains pending.

3M’s motion to dismiss was granted in part and denied in part in June 2025.

The case is proceeding through discovery.

The court has set a trial date in March 2027.

The court has set a trial date in June 2027.

In December 2024, 3M was named as a defendant in a putative class action brought in federal court by several private well owners near 3M's Wausau Greystone quarry seeking to recover for property damages and medical monitoring related to alleged PFAS contamination.

1 unchanged sentence

3M filed a motion to dismiss this case in February 2025 and filed a motion to transfer the case to the AFFF MDL in March 2025.

3M also filed a motion to stay the case pending a decision on transfer to the AFFF MDL in March 2025.

The case was stayed pending a ruling by the JPML on 3M's motion for transfer, which was denied in June 2025.

In Illinois, 3M has been sued in three separate actions by individual plaintiffs alleging personal injury and/or property damage claims relating to alleged PFAS contamination from 3M’s Cordova facility.

1 unchanged sentence

The remaining two cases were filed in September 2024 and 3M has removed these cases to federal court.

3M has filed a motion to transfer all three cases to the AFFF MDL.

In Missouri, in April 2024, 3M and certain DuPont-related entities were added as defendants to a pending putative class action brought by individuals alleging PFAS contamination of their properties and drinking water from metal plating operations in southeastern Missouri.

3M filed a motion to transfer all three cases to the AFFF MDL.

In April 2025, the JPML denied transfer of the earliest of the cases (Noland) to the AFFF MDL and granted the transfer of the other two cases to the AFFF MDL.

In May 2025, the Noland case was remanded to state court.

In Missouri, in April 2024, 3M was added as a defendant to a pending putative class action brought by individuals alleging PFAS contamination of their properties and drinking water from metal plating operations in southeastern Missouri.

In October 2024, the court denied 3M's motion to dismiss.

1 unchanged sentence

In Connecticut, in June 2024, 3M and numerous other defendants were sued in a putative class action brought by individual firefighters and several firefighter unions, alleging exposure to PFAS from certain turnout gear worn by the class members.

3M filed a motion to transfer the case to the AFFF MDL, which was denied.

3M filed a motion to dismiss in December 2024.

Plaintiffs filed a second amended complaint in April 2025, and 3M filed a motion to dismiss in June 2025.

In October 2018, 3M and other defendants, including DuPont and Chemours, were named in a putative class action in the U.S.

9 unchanged sentences

A co-defendant removed the case to federal court, where plaintiff has moved to remand the case to state court.

3M has filed a motion for transfer to the AFFF MDL, which was denied in February 2025.

The plaintiff's motion to remand remains pending.

In April 2025, 3M was named as a defendant in a similar case in Virginia, which was removed to federal court by another defendant.

In June 2025, 3M was served in a third similar case currently pending in Virginia state court.

In Minnesota, in August 2024, 3M, DuPont, and Chemours were named in a putative nationwide class action brought on behalf of all persons who purchased carpeting treated with PFAS-containing products before January 1, 2020.

2 unchanged sentences

Oral argument on 3M's motion was heard in April 2025.

In Pennsylvania, in March 2025, 3M, DuPont, and the designers, manufacturers, and distributors of AstroTurf were named in a complaint filed in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas by former Philadelphia Phillies players alleging personal injury claims (brain, testicular, and thyroid cancers) allegedly resulting from exposure to PFAS and ethylene oxide in AstroTurf at Veterans Stadium.

In Minnesota, in May 2025, 3M.

DuPont, and Chemours were named in a putative nationwide class action in federal court brought on behalf of all municipalities and governmental entities who purchased fire fighter personal protective equipment from the named defendants alleging injuries from exposure to PFAS in the protective equipment.

In Pennsylvania, in March 2025, 3M, DuPont, and the designers, manufacturers, and distributors of AstroTurf were named in a complaint filed in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas by former Philadelphia Phillies players alleging personal injury claims allegedly resulting from exposure to PFAS and ethylene oxide in AstroTurf at Veterans Stadium.

Plaintiffs’ alleged exposures date back to the 1970s.

The case was served on 3M in March 2025.

In Montana, in April 2025, 3M, DuPont, and Chemours were named in a putative nationwide class action in Montana District Court, brought on behalf of all entities in the United States who bought turnout gear that was manufactured, designed, or sold, in whole or in part, by any of the named defendants.

In June 2025, 3M filed its preliminary objections.

In June 2025, 3M and several other entities were named as defendants in a case filed in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas by a firefighter alleging that his cancer was caused by exposure to PFAS from turnout gear.

In Montana, in April 2025, 3M, DuPont, and Chemours were named in a putative nationwide class action in Montana District Court, brought on behalf of all entities who bought turnout gear from the named defendants alleging injuries from exposure to PFAS in the turnout gear.

The lawsuit alleges claims under RICO and state conspiracy, product liability, consumer protection, and deceptive trade practices laws.

In New York, in May 2025, the owner of a tree nursery located in Hoosick Falls filed suit against 3M, Saint-Gobain Performance Plastics Corp., Honeywell International Inc., and DuPont seeking to recover for property damage allegedly resulting from PFOA contamination that plaintiff attributes to a nearby fabric coating facility.

In Michigan, 3M previously settled claims brought by Wolverine World Wide (Wolverine) related to Wolverine’s alleged use of 3M Scotchgard in its shoe manufacturing operations.

3M continues to incur liabilities for immaterial amounts pursuant to the settlement agreement.

Since January 2025, one plaintiffs’ firm has filed 16 multi-plaintiff matters in state courts in New York, New Jersey, Illinois, and Delaware against 3M and over a dozen co-defendants.

The plaintiffs alleged personal injury from drinking water exposure to PFAS from consumer products and/or direct exposure to household products.

3M has removed the first eight of these cases and moved to transfer them to the AFFF MDL.

Although plaintiffs initially sought remand and opposed transfer of these cases, plaintiffs have since withdrawn their motions to remand and withdrawn plaintiff’s opposition to 3M’s motion to transfer the cases to the AFFF MDL.

Other PFAS-related Matters

In August 2024, the Company received a request for information from EPA under CERCLA seeking information and documents, including regarding the use and disposal of PFAS at its Greystone facility and its downtown Wausau facility.

3M has provided the EPA with information responsive to that request.

In March 2025, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources issued a letter to 3M stating that it has determined there has been a release of hazardous substances from the Greystone facility based on PFAS detected in groundwater, and ordering 3M to submit a work plan for investigation.

Depending on the results of that investigation, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources may require 3M to conduct remediation at the site.

The Company is authorized to discharge wastewater from its Cordova plant pursuant to an NPDES permit issued by the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (“IEPA”).

As previously reported, in November 2019, the Company disclosed to the EPA, and, in January 2020, disclosed to the IEPA, that the Company's NPDES permit for the Cordova facility did not include all PFAS that had been identified in its water discharge.

An application to add to the plant's permit the additional PFAS was submitted to IEPA, and the Company has now brought on-line and continues to optimize a wastewater treatment specifically designed to treat PFAS.

The Company continues to work with the EPA and IEPA.

IEPA has not acted on the pending application.

In November 2022, the Company entered into an Administrative Consent Order under the Safe Drinking Water Act ("SDWA") that requires the Company to continue to sample and survey private and public drinking water wells within the vicinity of the Cordova facility, provide treatment of private water wells within a three-mile radius of the Cordova facility, and to provide alternate treatment/supply for the Camanche, Iowa public drinking water system.

The Company continues to work with EPA and the City of Camanche as it implements the SDWA Administrative Consent Order.

In April 2022, the Company received a TSCA information request from EPA seeking information related to the operation of specific PFAS-related processes at the Cordova facility.

The Company has completed its production of documents and information and is cooperating with this inquiry.

In May 2022, the Company received a notice of potential violation and opportunity to confer and a notice of intent to file a complaint from EPA alleging violations of RCRA related to the use of tanks associated with certain chemical processes at the Cordova facility.

While not admitting to the alleged violations, the Company elected to resolve the matter by entering into a Consent Agreement and Final Order with EPA in September 2024.

As part of the settlement, the Company agreed to pay an immaterial penalty.

In January 2025, the Company reached an agreement with the EPA on the terms of a consent order under RCRA, that requires the Company to delineate PFAS in soil and groundwater at the Cordova plant and a surrounding area that extends up to 1/2 mile from the plant site.

The order also requires collecting a specified number of soil and groundwater samples at up to 80 locations in the area extending 5 miles from the plant.

Decatur, Alabama

In Alabama, as previously disclosed, the Company entered into a voluntary remedial action agreement with the Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM) to remediate the presence of PFAS in the soil and groundwater at the Company’s manufacturing facility in Decatur, Alabama.

With ADEM’s agreement, 3M substantially completed installation of a multilayer cap on the former sludge incorporation areas.

As previously disclosed, the Company operates under a 2009 consent order issued under the federal TSCA (the “2009 TSCA consent order”) for the manufacture and use of two perfluorinated materials (FBSA and FBSEE) at the Decatur site that prohibits release of these materials into “the waters of the United States.” In March 2019, the Company halted the manufacture, processing, and use of these materials at the site upon learning that these materials may have been released from certain specified processes at the Decatur site into the Tennessee River.

Grand Jury Matter.

The Company operates under a 2009 consent order issued under the federal TSCA (the “2009 TSCA consent order”) for the manufacture and use of two perfluorinated materials (FBSA and FBSEE) at the Decatur site that prohibits release of these materials into “the waters of the United States.” In March 2019, the Company halted the manufacture, processing, and use of these materials at the site upon learning that these materials may have been released from certain specified processes at the Decatur site into the Tennessee River.

In April 2019, the Company voluntarily disclosed the releases to the U.S.

EPA and ADEM.

EPA and the Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM).

During June and July 2019, the Company took steps to fully control the aforementioned processes by capturing all wastewater produced by the processes and treating all air emissions.

These processes are no longer in use.

As previously reported, in December 2019, the Company received a grand jury subpoena from the U.S.

Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Alabama for documents related to, among other matters:

(1) the Company’s compliance with the 2009 TSCA Consent Order;

and (2) unpermitted discharges to the Tennessee River from its Decatur facility.

The Company continues to cooperate with the U.S.

Attorney’s Office, the U.S.

Department of Justice, and the EPA with respect to these issues

In parallel, the Company continues to engage with the EPA, ADEM, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA) related to potential civil claims arising out of the discharges at issue in the above-described grand jury investigation, as well as with respect to certain discharges of PFAS from the Cottage Grove and Cordova facilities, which are described below.

Other Regulatory .

The Company is authorized to discharge wastewater from its Decatur plant pursuant to an NPDES permit issued by ADEM.

6 unchanged sentences

ADEM has not acted on the request to modify the NPDES permit.

As previously reported, in December 2019, the Company received a grand jury subpoena from the U.S.

Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Alabama for documents related to, among other matters, the Company’s compliance with the 2009 TSCA consent order and unpermitted discharges to the Tennessee River from its Decatur facility.

The Company continues to cooperate with the U.S.

Attorney’s Office, the U.S.

Department of Justice, and the EPA with respect to this issue.

3M and ADEM agreed to the terms of an interim consent order in July 2020 to cover all PFAS-related wastewater discharges and air emissions from the Company’s Decatur facility.

2 unchanged sentences

Obligations related to ongoing future site operations under the Consent Order or any further investigations may involve additional operating costs and capital expenditures over multiple years.

Cordova, Illinois

The Company is authorized to discharge wastewater from its Cordova plant pursuant to an NPDES permit issued by the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (“IEPA”).

As noted above, 3M continues to engage with EPA and IEPA on potential civil claims related to these discharges.

An application to add the additional PFAS to the plant's permit was submitted to IEPA, and the Company has now brought on-line and continues to optimize a wastewater treatment specifically designed to treat PFAS.

IEPA has not acted on the pending application.

The Company continues to work with EPA and the City of Camanche as it implements the SDWA Administrative Consent Order.

The order also requires collecting a specified number of soil and groundwater samples at up to 80 locations in the area extending 5 miles from the plant.

Cottage Grove, Minnesota

1 unchanged sentence

As previously reported, the Company discovered it had not fully characterized its PFAS discharge in its NPDES permit for the Cottage Grove facility and, in March 2020, disclosed this matter to the EPA and MPCA.

As noted above, 3M continues to engage with EPA and MPCA on potential civil claims related to these discharges.

The Company submitted an application to add the additional PFAS to its NPDES permit.

8 unchanged sentences

The Company also continues to implement the previously disclosed 2008 remedial decision adopted by MPCA for the Woodbury and Oakdale sites and the 2009 remedial decision adopted by MPCA for the Cottage Grove site.

In the spring and summer of 2010, 3M began implementing MPCA-approved remedial options at the Cottage Grove and Woodbury sites, and in late 2010, 3M commenced the approved remedial option at the Oakdale site.

The Company continues to implement those remediation activities.

In January 2021, MPCA issue a Notice of Violation that included measures requiring the Company to address the presence of PFAS in wastewater and to undertake certain facility improvements related to its wastewater discharge system.

2 unchanged sentences

The Company worked with MPCA to develop a plan to address its stormwater, which is embodied in an order issued by MPCA in December 2022, which the Company is working to implement.

In July 2024, MPCA published for public comment a draft Clean Water Act permit for the Cottage Grove facility that contains significantly revised effluent limits for certain PFAS in compounds in water discharged from the facility, some of which are below current limits of quantification for those compounds.

3M engaged with the MPCA on the draft permit through the public comment period and submitted comments to the permit in August 2024.

In response to comments submitted by 3M and other interested parties, in December 2024, MPCA issued a revised draft Clean Water Act permit for the Cottage Grove facility.

The Company submitted comments on the draft permit in February 2025.

The outcome of the Clean Water Act permit issuance process for the Cottage Grove facility could have a significant adverse impact on the facility's operations and the Company's businesses that receive products and other materials from the Cottage Grove facility, some of which may not be available or in similar quantities from other 3M facilities.

Hutchinson, Minnesota

MPCA issued to the Company a Notice of Violation in March 2023, alleging that the Company is discharging stormwater containing PFAS at the 3M’s facility in Hutchinson, Minnesota.

The Company is working with MPCA regarding the allegations in the Notice of Violation.

The Company continues to work with relevant federal and state agencies (including EPA, the U.S.

Department of Justice, state environmental agencies and state attorneys general) as it responds to information, inspection, and other requests from the agencies.

The Company is in negotiations with EPA, the U.S.

Department of Justice, and the Alabama, Illinois, and Minnesota state environmental agencies to address claims arising under the CWA and the TSCA related to the Company’s plants in those states.

The Company cannot predict at this time the outcomes of resolving these compliance matters, what actions may be taken by the regulatory agencies or the potential consequences to the Company.

In May 2025, MPCA issued a final NPDES permit for the Cottage Grove plant, with an effective date of June 1, 2025.

The permit includes ultra-low effluent limits for certain PFAS, some of which are below current limits of quantification for those compounds.

The permit also includes low, but measurable "compliance limits" for those same compounds that are deemed to demonstrate compliance with the permit.

In June 2025, 3M filed a notice of appeal challenging several elements of the permit.

The Company cannot predict the outcome of the appeal.

It is possible that the outcome of the appeal or future permit amendments will result in discharge limits that will require additional actions to reduce legacy sources of PFAS or require additional capital or operational expenditures in order to meet such limits.

If the Company is unable to meet discharge limits, such development could have a significant adverse impact on 3M's normal operations and the Company's businesses that receive products and other materials from the Cottage Grove facility, some of which may not be available or in similar quantities from other 3M facilities, which could in turn impact these businesses' ability to fulfill supply obligations to their customers.

Minnesota 2018 Natural Resources Defense Settlement

5 unchanged sentences

MPCA and 3M also disagree over whether certain projected long-term operations and maintenance and other expenses that will not be paid for many years should be factored into determining when the fund is depleted.

3M initiated mediation in March of 2025 under the settlement to address these disagreements.

3M initiated the mediation process in February of 2025 under the settlement to address these disagreements.

That process remains ongoing.

Hutchinson, Minnesota

MPCA issued to the Company a Notice of Violation in March 2023, alleging that the Company is discharging stormwater containing PFAS at the 3M’s facility in Hutchinson, Minnesota.

The Company is working with MPCA regarding the allegations in the Notice of Violation.

The Company continues to work with relevant federal and state agencies (including EPA, the U.S.

Department of Justice, state environmental agencies and state attorneys general) as it responds to information, inspection, and other requests from the agencies.

As noted above, the Company is in negotiations with EPA, the U.S.

Department of Justice, and the Alabama, Illinois, and Minnesota state environmental agencies to address claims arising under the CWA and the TSCA related to the Company’s plants in those states.

The Company cannot predict at this time the outcomes of resolving these compliance matters, what actions may be taken by the regulatory agencies or the potential consequences to the Company.

Wausau, Wisconsin

3M has provided the EPA with information responsive to that request.

In March 2025, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) issued a letter to 3M stating that it has determined there has been a release of hazardous substances from the Greystone facility based on PFAS detected in groundwater, and ordering 3M to submit a work plan for investigation.

A site investigation work plan, which describes the initial scope of sampling to take place at the facility, was submitted to the WDNR in June 2025 and is currently under agency review.

Depending on the results of that investigation, the WDNR may require 3M to conduct remediation at the site.

Cynthiana, Kentucky

In May 2025, 3M’s Cynthiana facility received a subpoena and a letter from the Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet.

The subpoena seeks information regarding PFAS and alleged hazardous substances used or released at the site.

The letter directs 3M to develop a site characterization plan to investigate suspected PFAS releases at the site.

3M is engaged with the regulatory authority on these issues.

Other Environmental Matters

14 unchanged sentences

The Company periodically examines whether the contingent liabilities related to the environmental matters and litigation described above are probable and reasonably estimable based on experience and ongoing developments in those matters, including discussions regarding negotiated resolutions.

During the first quarter of 2025, primarily as a result of interest accretion on the PWS Settlement, the Company increased its accrual for PFAS-related other environmental liabilities by $ 134 million and made related payments of an immaterial amount.

As of March 31, 2025, the Company had recorded liabilities of $ 8.7 billion for “other environmental liabilities.” These amounts are reflected in the consolidated balance sheet within other current liabilities ($ 2.0 billion) and other liabilities ($ 6.7 billion).

During the first six months of 2025, primarily as a result of the New Jersey Settlement and interest accretion on the PWS Settlement, the Company increased its accrual for PFAS-related other environmental liabilities by approximately $ 0.4 billion and made related payments of $ 1.8 billion.

As of June 30, 2025, the Company had recorded liabilities of $ 7.4 billion for “other environmental liabilities.” These amounts are reflected in the consolidated balance sheet within other current liabilities ($ 0.7 billion) and other liabilities ($ 6.7 billion).

The accruals represent the Company’s estimate of the probable loss in connection with the environmental matters and PFAS-related matters and litigation described above.

The Company also made a $ 1.8 billion payment in April 2025 pursuant to the schedule in the PWS settlement agreement.

The Company is not able to estimate a possible loss or range of possible loss in excess of the established accruals at this time.

As of March 31, 2025, the Company had recorded liabilities of $ 37 million for estimated non-PFAS related “environmental remediation” costs to clean up, treat, or remove hazardous substances at current or former 3M manufacturing or third-party sites.

As of June 30, 2025, the Company had recorded liabilities of $ 38 million for estimated non-PFAS related “environmental remediation” costs to clean up, treat, or remove hazardous substances at current or former 3M manufacturing or third-party sites.

The Company evaluates available facts with respect to each individual site each quarter and records liabilities for remediation costs on an undiscounted basis when they are probable and reasonably estimable, generally no later than the completion of feasibility studies or the Company’s commitment to a plan of action.

35 unchanged sentences

For example, the Company is aware of a writ of summons that was filed in Australia on behalf of purported users of the Company's earplug products.

During the first quarter of 2025, the Company increased its existing accrual for CAE by approximately $ 46 million primarily for interest accretion on the CAE Settlement and made the related payments of approximately $ 0.7 billion.

As of March 31, 2025, the Company had an accrued liability of $ 3.0 billion related to CAE.

During the first six months of 2025, the Company increased its existing accrual for CAE by approximately $ 87 million primarily for interest accretion on the CAE Settlement and made related payments of approximately $ 1.4 billion.

As of June 30, 2025, the Company had an accrued liability of $ 2.4 billion related to CAE.

This amount is reflected within contingent liability claims and other ($ 0.4 billion within other current liabilities and $ 2.0 billion within other liabilities) on 3M’s consolidated balance sheet.

The accruals represent the Company’s estimate of the probable loss in connection with the CAE Settlement.

The Company also made a $ 0.6 billion payment in April 2025 pursuant to the schedule in the amended settlement agreement.

The Company is not able to estimate a possible loss or range of possible loss in excess of the established accruals at this time.

3 unchanged sentences

courts, arbitration proceedings, mediations, and negotiations with insurers.

During the first quarter of 2025, the Company recorded an aggregate of $ 26 million in insurance recovery benefits related to respirator mask/asbestos, CAE, and PFAS-related matters.

During the second quarter of 2025, the Company recorded $ 59 million in insurance recovery benefits related to respirator mask/asbestos, CAE, and PFAS-related matters.

The Company's aggregate recovery benefits for these matters during the first six months of 2025 was $ 85 million.

Insurance recoveries related to CAE litigation are provided to the Qualified Settlement Fund as part of the consideration for the settlement.

16 unchanged sentences

In addition, for awards associated with remaining 3M employees, the number of shares underlying unvested stock awards was adjusted along with the exercise price and the number of shares underlying outstanding stock options.

Refer to Note 21 to the Consolidated Financial Statements in 3M's 2024 Annual Report on Form 10-K for additional information.

The adjustments to shares underlying unvested stock awards and outstanding stock options did not result in a material stock-based compensation cost.

2 unchanged sentences

Capitalized stock-based compensation amounts were not material.

Three months ended

Three months ended June 30, Six months ended June 30,

(Millions) 2025 2024 2025 2024

15 unchanged sentences

Therefore, management does not represent that these segments, if operated independently, would report the operating income information shown.

3M discloses business segment operating income (loss) as its measure of segment profit/loss, reconciled to both total 3M operating income (loss) and income before taxes.

Business segment operating income (loss) excludes certain expenses and income that are not allocated to business segments (as described below in “Corporate and Other”).

3M discloses business segment operating income as its measure of segment profit, reconciled to both total 3M operating income and income before taxes.

Business segment operating income excludes certain expenses and income that are not allocated to business segments (as described below in “Corporate and Other”).

Business segment disclosures consider information used by/provided to 3M's chief operating decision maker (CODM).

For 3M, the CODM is the chief executive officer.

The CODM uses business segment operating income (loss) to allocate resources to segments in the planning and forecasting process along with periodic ongoing reviews of results and overall market activity.

The CODM uses business segment operating income to allocate resources to segments in the planning and forecasting process along with periodic ongoing reviews of results and overall market activity.

Business Segment Information

Three months ended

Three months ended June 30, Six months ended June 30,

Net sales (millions) 2025 2024 2025 2024

5 unchanged sentences

Total company $ 6,344 $ 6,255 $ 12,298 $ 12,271

$ 5,954 $ 6,016

Significant segment expenses and operating performance (millions)

3 unchanged sentences

Research, development and related expenses 127 126 252 242

Safety and Industrial operating income (loss) 696 657

Safety and Industrial operating income 721 612 1,417 1,269

Transportation and Electronics

Cost of sales 1,277 1,255 2,520 2,500

Selling, general, administrative and goodwill impairment expenses

Selling, general, administrative expenses 270 342 546 615

Research, development and related expenses 121 118 240 223

Transportation and Electronics operating income (loss) 352 481

Transportation and Electronics operating income 462 428 814 909

Cost of sales 748 749 1,417 1,429

1 unchanged sentence

Research, development and related expenses 31 34 63 64

Consumer operating income (loss) 219 216

Total reportable business segment operating income (loss) 1,267 1,354

Consumer operating income 268 219 487 435

Total reportable business segment operating income 1,451 1,259 2,718 2,613

Corporate and Other

2 unchanged sentences

Divestiture costs — ( 14 ) — ( 20 )

Loss on business divestitures ( 3 ) — ( 3 ) —

Total corporate special items ( 333 ) ( 22 ) ( 404 ) ( 91 )

1 unchanged sentence

Total Corporate and Other ( 311 ) 13 ( 332 ) ( 192 )

( 21 ) ( 205 )

Total company operating income (loss)

Total company operating income 1,140 1,272 2,386 2,421

Other expense/(income), net 217 ( 138 ) 78 82

Income (loss) from continuing operations before income taxes

$ 1,385 $ 929

Income from continuing operations before income taxes $ 923 $ 1,410 $ 2,308 $ 2,339

Depreciation and amortization

Three months ended June 30, Six months ended June 30,

(Millions) 2025 2024 2025 2024

Safety and Industrial $ 141 $ 137 $ 280 $ 272

Transportation and Electronics 111 113 219 220

Consumer 36 39 75 77

Corporate and Other 2 13 6 23

Total continuing operations $ 290 $ 302 $ 580 $ 592

Capital expenditures

Three months ended March 31, Three months ended March 31,

Three months ended June 30, Six months ended June 30,

(Millions) 2025 2024 2025 2024

4 unchanged sentences

Total continuing operations $ 208 $ 269 $ 444 $ 567

(Millions) March 31, 2025 December 31, 2024

(Millions) June 30, 2025 December 31, 2024

Business segment assets:

Safety and Industrial $ 1,726 $ 1,509

$ 1,597 $ 1,509

Transportation and Electronics 1,341 1,269

Consumer 804 719

Total business segment assets 3,871 3,497

All other current assets 9,556 12,387

11,984 12,387

Total non-current assets 24,562 23,984

24,294 23,984

$ 39,951 $ 39,868

Total assets $ 37,989 $ 39,868

Beginning in the first quarter of 2025, "business segment assets" represent inventories, based on the extent of business segment information regularly provided to 3M's CODM.

4 unchanged sentences

Because Corporate and Other includes a variety of miscellaneous items, it is subject to fluctuation on a quarterly and annual basis.

Corporate and Other operating income (loss) includes “corporate special items” and “other corporate (expense) income-net”.

Corporate and Other operating income (loss) includes:

• Corporate special items includes, for the periods presented:

◦ net costs for significant litigation impacting operating income (loss) associated with PFAS-related other environmental and Combat Arms Earplugs matters.

◦ loss on business divestitures (see Note 4).

◦ divestiture costs (related to separating and divesting substantially an entire business segment of 3M following public announcement of its intended divestiture) that were not eligible to be part of discontinued operations.

• Other corporate (expense) income-net includes:

◦ certain enterprise and governance activities resulting in unallocated corporate costs and other activity and net costs that 3M may choose not to allocate directly to its business segments.

◦ certain enterprise and governance activities resulting in unallocated corporate costs and other activity or costs that 3M may choose not to allocate directly to its business segments.

◦ commercial activity with Solventum following its April 1, 2024 Separation and certain operations of the former Health Care business segment retained by 3M.

◦ transition arrangement agreements (e.g.

fees charged by 3M, net of underlying costs) related to divested businesses, including those related to the Solventum Separation, as well as other applicable divestitures.

◦ operations of businesses of the former Health Care segment divested prior to the Separation and therefore not reflected as discontinued operations within 3M's financial statements, along with limited-duration supply agreements with those previous divestitures.

fees charged by 3M, net of underlying costs) related to divested businesses, including those related to the Solventum Separation.

◦ costs previously allocated to Solventum prior to the Separation that were not eligible to be part of discontinued operations.

Compared sentence by sentence after normalising whitespace, quotation marks, case and digits, so re-formatting and restated figures do not read as changed language. Wording changes appear as one removal and one addition. The current filing and the prior one are authoritative.

What changed 10-Q

Item 1. Financial Statements