Hello, Welcome to Pfizer's 2021 annual meeting of shareholders. Please note that today's meeting is being recorded. During today's meeting, we'll have a question and answer session by telephone only. If you enter the virtual meeting platform using a 15 or 16-digit control number, you will be able to access the dial-in information displayed on the virtual meeting platform. Only investors entering the meeting site using a control number can ask questions or make comments. Questions and comments will be handled as indicated in the rules of conduct and meeting procedures. Questions submitted in advance of the meeting will also be answered during the question and answer session. It is now my pleasure to turn today's meeting over to Margaret Madden, Pfizer's Corporate Secretary. Ms. Madden, the floor is yours. Good morning. I am Maggie Madden, Pfizer's Corporate Secretary. Welcome to this year's annual meeting of shareholders. Today's meeting will be held in a virtual-only format due to public health concerns related to COVID-19 and to support the health and well-being of our shareholders and other meeting participants. I am joined today by Albert Bourla, Pfizer's Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Pfizer's executive leadership team, and the board of directors. We also have the inspectors of election with us today, John Lano and Donna Bent from Computershare. In order to make sure we have fair play for all shareholders, it is important that you abide by the Rules of Conduct and Meeting Procedures available on the virtual meeting website. During this meeting, we will provide projected financial and other forward-looking information, including about our COVID-19 efforts, which is subject to substantial risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied by such statements. For additional information on these factors, I refer you to the Item 1A Risk Factors section in our latest annual report on Form 10-K, which is filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and also included as an appendix to our 2021 proxy statement and accessible via www.pfizer.com. These forward-looking statements speak only as of the date of this meeting, and we undertake no obligation to update or revise any of these statements. In addition, during this meeting, we may discuss some financial measures that were not prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, GAAP. You can find the reconciliation of those measures to the most directly comparable U.S. GAAP financial measures in our 2020 annual report on Form 10-K. Please join me in welcoming Pfizer's Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer, Albert Bourla. Thank you, Maggie. Good morning, everyone, welcome to this year's annual meeting. As Maggie mentioned, today's meeting, once again, is being held in a virtual-only format due to ongoing health guidelines related to the COVID-19 pandemic. I want to thank everyone who helped prepare the logistics for this event. 2020 was a year like none other in Pfizer's history. Thanks to our colleagues around the world, it was defined by bold decisions, even bolder actions, and breakthrough results. With the separation of Upjohn, we created a company that was 20% smaller, but more focused than ever on delivering first-in-class science for the benefit of patients. Through our collaboration with BioNTech, we delivered a breakthrough COVID-19 vaccine in less than a year. By harnessing the power of the variety of digital capabilities, as well as our own unwavering commitment to patients, we made sure that despite lockdowns and travel restrictions, we continued to reach more than 400 million patients worldwide with our medicines and vaccines. I will start with a few words about the new Pfizer. With the completion of the Upjohn Mylan transaction, we saw the culmination of a bold transformation of Pfizer from a large, diversified enterprise to a smaller, science-driven, innovative biopharma company. The new Pfizer is all about two things, science and patients. By uniting transformational technology and cutting-edge science, we are pioneering biopharmaceutical innovations to do more than just treat difficult diseases. We want to cure and prevent them. As the calendar turned to 2021, we marked this transformation by launching a new corporate brand identity. Our new emblem is a digital-first expression of our commitment to the transformative power of science and the dynamic reflection of our purpose, breakthroughs that change patients' lives. The biggest story of 2020 for Pfizer was our work with BioNTech to develop and deliver a breakthrough COVID-19 vaccine, which was the first powerful display of what the new Pfizer can achieve. Normally, the development of a new vaccine usually takes about 10 years. Recognizing the urgency of the situation, our R&D teams worked tirelessly to find ways to accelerate that timeline. We deliver the vaccine in less than nine months. We did this by making the bold decision to use a promising technology, mRNA, that had never before used in an approved vaccine. I would also point out that we could not have done this without the real-time feedback from regulatory authorities and the outstanding collaboration of our suppliers and partners. Our work on the manufacturing and supply side has been just as groundbreaking. This includes developing new GPS-enabled thermal shippers to keep our vaccine at ultra-cold temperature while in transit, and new manufacturing equipment that didn't even exist before the pandemic, including machines that assemble the mRNA vaccine components. At our facility in Kalamazoo, Michigan, we also have created four freezer farms that are as big as an NFL football field, with each farm capable of storing about 100 million doses of the vaccine. As of April 20th, we have shipped 350 million doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine worldwide, including 148 million to the U.S. and 98 million to the EU, and our shipment accuracy is 99.9%. Because of the dire need to vaccinate as many people as possible, as quickly as possible, we continue to take steps to further accelerate our production. We now expect to produce 2.5 billion doses in total by the end of 2021, subject to continuous process improvements, expansion at current facilities, and adding new suppliers and contract manufacturers. This is more than double our previous estimates. We are not letting up with regard to our science. We have begun booster trials to understand the effect of a third dose on continuing evolving variant strains of the virus. We are running studies in additional populations, such as pregnant women and children, and we have started a phase I trial of a potential novel oral antiviral treatment to potentially help patients battling COVID-19. While driving a dramatic transformation of our company and delivering a vaccine that quite literally might change the world, we continue to deliver strong results in our R&D pipeline with our financial performance and with regard to our environment, social, and governance, or ESG, as they say them, commitments. In terms of R&D productivity, we have driven incredible improvements in our clinical success rates. For example, our phase II success rate on a five-year rolling average more than tripled from 15% five years ago to 52% as of year-end 2020, which is almost double the 2019 industry benchmark of 29%. In terms of our financial performance, we generated 8% operational revenue growth for the year from our biopharmaceutical product portfolio, despite the challenging business environment created by the pandemic. We also are working to more intentionally connect our purpose with ESG strategies. One example of the progress we have made in this area was Pfizer moving up to fourth place from 11th in the most recent Access to Medicine Index. This ranking underscores our continued commitment to access and equity in healthcare. Looking ahead, we remain focused on being nimble and investing in our R&D organization so we can build on the strong improvement in key metrics we have seen over the past five years. We continue to expect a revenue CAGR of at least 6% on a risk-adjusted basis through the end of 2025, as well as double-digit growth on the bottom line. Of note, these projections do not include any potential impact from our COVID-19 vaccine. We remain very confident in our ability to achieve those growth rates because of the strength of both our current product portfolio and our R&D pipeline. At the same time, we will continue to pursue business development opportunities with the potential to enhance our long-term growth prospects. Before I close, I would like to say how incredibly proud I am of the people of Pfizer, who enabled Pfizer to step up when the world needed us most. We set three priorities at the beginning of the pandemic: ensuring the safety and well-being of our people, maintaining a reliable supply of critical medicines and vaccines, and contributing medical solutions to the pandemic. By living our values of courage, excellence, equity, and joy, staying true to our purpose, and demonstrating an unwavering belief that science will win, our colleagues helped ensure we would accomplish each of these goals. Thank you for your continued confidence and support of the work we do every day. Now it's time to proceed with the business portion of the meeting. We are scheduled to end by approximately 10 o'clock, and we want to maintain an informative, productive, and orderly business meeting, marked by fairness to all shareholders. Therefore, we will follow the order of business available on the virtual meeting website. We will get right to the first item of business, a declaration of quorum. Notice of this meeting was given to all shareholders of record as of February 24th, 2021. Shares representing at least 76.3% of the votes entitled to be cast at this meeting are present here today. This percentage represents a quorum. We now move to the next order of business items requiring your vote. We have six voting items in all. Three that we address at every annual meeting, and three proposals from shareholders. Each item will be open for questions and discussion. To ensure fair play for all shareholders, it is important that you follow the rules of conduct and meeting procedures available on the virtual meeting platform. Shareholders will be able to ask questions during the meeting after the presentation of each proposal and during the Q&A period later in the meeting. A telephone number is available to shareholders who enter the virtual meeting platform using their 15 or 16-digit control number. Please focus your questions or comments only on the voting item being discussed. Questions will be answered in the order received, and we will identify the shareholder by name. There will be a general question and answer period later in the meeting. We have a lot of business to transact today, so we will reserve the right to move on to other questions or comments if a question or comment is out of order or has been substantially answered previously. In a moment, I will officially open the polls. Please note that if you have entered this meeting using a 15 or 16-digit control number, you can still vote on all of the proposals that are included in the proxy statement. If you have not yet voted, but would like to do so, or you have already voted but would like to change your vote, please use the annual meeting platform to vote your shares. I declare the polls open as of 9:18 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time on April 22nd, 2021. The polls will close today following the presentation of the items of business. We will now turn to the first voting item, the election of directors. This year, the board has nominated 12 individuals in all to serve one-year terms, all ending at the next annual meeting of shareholders. You will find their extensive backgrounds in our proxy statement. In addition to me, the director nominees in item one are Ronald Blaylock, Susan Desmond-Hellmann, Joseph Echevarria, Scott Gottlieb, Helen Hobbs, Susan Hockfield, Dan Littman, Shantanu Narayen, Suzanne Nora Johnson, James Quincey, and James Smith. The board recommends that you vote for all director nominees. If you have any comments or questions concerning this voting item, please access the dial-in information displayed on the meeting platform. Maggie, were there any questions submitted in advance of today's meeting on this item? Albert, we did not receive any questions in advance for this voting item. Thank you, Maggie. Operator, are there any shareholder on the line who would like to ask a question or make a comment concerning any of the nominees? To make a comment or ask a question on item one, you should have entered the meeting platform using your control number. Please press star one to pose questions on item one. As a reminder, please mute your computer or playback device before being called on to minimize background noise. We will now pause to compile the list. I show no questions at this time. Thank you, operator. We will now move to the next voting item. Item two is to ratify the selection of KPMG LLP as the company's independent registered public accounting firm for 2021. Two representatives from KPMG are participating by audio connection with us today, Melissa Taylor and Greg Brunner. The audit committee of the board of directors has done a thorough job of reviewing the performance of KPMG in 2020 and has selected the firm as Pfizer's independent registered accounting firm for the year 2021. The board has ratified this selection and recommends that you vote for this proposal. Maggie, were there any questions submitted in advance of today's meeting on this item? No, Albert, we did not receive any questions in advance for this voting item. Thank you, Maggie. Operator, are there any shareholders on the line who would like to ask a question or make a comment concerning this proposal? Please press star one to pose questions on item two. In order to ask a question, as a reminder, please mute your computer or playback device before being called on to minimize background noise. We will now pause to compile the list. Your 1st question comes from the line of Eugene Falik. Hello. I pressed star one on the previous question. I think requiring us to agree to Computershare's terms is inappropriate. If we're going to attend the meeting, we have every right to, and we don't have to subscribe to any additional terms. Thank you. Thank you very much for your comments. Noted. Operator, are there any other questions? You have your next question comes from the line of John Taylor. Dr. Bourla, my question is on this audit question, and I do agree with the previous caller about agreeing to the terms and conditions of Computershare. I would like to know, from the KPMG auditors, how many staff are currently engaged on the PFE engagement? Thank you. Thank you. Maybe, Frank, you want to take this question, and also maybe we can ask the people from KPMG that are presently here to answer that. Yes. I'll let Melissa give the specific number, Albert. The way to think about this, we have dedicated staff from KPMG that are co-located with us and work with us every day. Obviously, during the pandemic it's been virtual, but normally they're co-located, work with us every day. Obviously we also have access to the national office and all the resources that KPMG can provide on a national office basis. I'll let Melissa give the specific number. Melissa, please. Maggie, do we have Melissa on the line? Is there a technical problem? It might be Greg. Albert, can you hear me? Yes. All right. Please, Greg, go ahead. Maybe you're muted. We can't hear you. Hello, Albert. Can you hear me? Yes, now we can hear you, Greg. Go ahead, please. Yes. Thank you very much. Present yourself and then answer the question. Yes. Thank you for the question. This is Greg Brunner from KPMG. I completely agree with Frank's comment. In regards to the quantity of employees representing the firm, I'd say several hundred across dozens of countries. Thank you. Operator, are there any other questions? I show no further questions at this time. Okay, thank you. We now move to the next item. Item three is a management proposal asking our shareholders to cast an advisory vote to approve the compensation of our company's named Executive Officers, identified in the summary compensation table in the executive compensation section of the 2021 proxy statement. While this advisory vote is non-binding, the compensation committee and the entire board of directors will review the results of the vote. Consistent with Pfizer's record of responsiveness, we will consider the feedback of shareholders and take that feedback into account in future determinations relating to our executive compensation program. Accordingly, the board recommends a vote in favor of the resolution to approve, on an advisory basis, the compensation of the company's named executive officers as stated in the proxy statement. Maggie, were there any questions submitted in advance of today's meeting on this item? We did not receive any answers in advance for this voting item, Albert. Thank you, Maggie. Operator, are there any shareholders on the line who would like to ask a question or make a comment concerning this proposal? Please press star one to pose questions on item three. As a reminder, please mute your computer or playback device before being called on to minimize background noise. We will now pause to compile the list. Our 1st question comes from the line of Eugene Falik. Without commenting on any of the named officers, it seems to me that compensation, both for corporate executives and directors, is absolutely unreasonable in the U.S. Many times higher than compensation in any other country. If the officers want to have the compensation that they enjoy at the expense of the shareholders, I think then that the lowest-paid employees must have similarly high compensation. Thank you very much for your comments. I didn't detect a question. Your comments and statement, I think, have been heard by the shareholders. Operator, any other question? I show no further questions at this time. Thank you very much. Now we move to our next item. This proposal, submitted by Kenneth Steiner of Great Neck, New York, requests that our board of directors adopt as policy and amend the bylaws as necessary to require the chair of the board of directors, whenever possible, to be an independent member of the board. This policy could be phased in for the next CEO transition. The board of directors opposes this proposal for the reasons set forth in the proxy statement. Mr. Chevedden is representing Mr. Steiner and is connected by audio. Mr. Chevedden, the floor is now yours for three minutes to move the proposal forward for discussion. Operator, please open the line for Mr. Chevedden. Mr. Chevedden, your line is now open. Hello, this is John Chevedden. Can you hear me okay? We can hear you very well. Okay. Just as a point of order, it's kind of hard to figure out how to get access to this meeting. The directions should be a lot more clearer. It takes a lot of troubleshooting. I'll go on with proposal four, an independent board chairman, sponsored by Kenneth Steiner. The shareholders request that the board of directors adopt a policy to require the chair of the board of directors to be an independent member of the board whenever possible. Management is afraid of the level of shareholder support for this proposal. Management has spent shareholder money to put its hand on the scale of the voting at this meeting in attempt to have an outsized influence on the shareholder vote. This is a sign that management thinks shareholder engagement is nothing more than a slick campaign to get shareholders to agree in lockstep with management. Management is targeting shareholders who do not have access to objective proxy voting advice. If you have voted against this proposal, please consider changing your vote before the polls close. Since management performance setbacks often result in greater support for this proposal topic, the mere submission of this proposal may have been an incentive for our CEO to perform better leading up to this 2021 annual meeting. Giving the chairman job to the CEO can simply be an ego trip for the CEO. The CEO can then think that his vision for the company is invincible, and this could blind the CEO to emerging problems. In regard to the roles of Chairman and CEO, the role of the CEO and management is to run the company. The role of the board of directors is to provide independent oversight of management and the CEO. There is potential conflict of interest for a CEO to have the role of Chairman. Shareholders are best served by an independent board chair who can provide a balance of power between the CEO and the board. The primary duty of a board of directors is to oversee the management of a company on behalf of the shareholders. A CEO serving as chair can result in excessive management influence on the board and weaker oversight of management. Numerous institutional investors recommend independence for these two roles. For example, California's Retirement System Principles and Guidelines encourage separation even with a lead director in place. The support for this proposal topic at Pfizer increased by 19% from 2019- 2020. If you have voted against this proposal, please change your vote before the polls close. Independent board chairman, proposal four. Thank you, Mr. Chevedden. Apologies for finding the connecting to the system complicated. We will certainly look at it to see if we can simplify it for next time. Thank you also for spending your time. As I said before, the board opposes this proposal for the reasons stated in the proxy statement. Maggie, were there any questions submitted in advance of today's meeting on this item? No, Albert, we didn't receive any questions in advance for this item. Thank you very much. Operator, are there any questions or comments on this voting item from shareholders? To make a comment or ask a question, you should have entered the meeting platform using your control number. Please press star one to pose questions on item four. As a reminder, please mute your computer or playback device before being called on to minimize background noise. We will now pause to compile the list. I show no questions at this time. Thank you. We will now move to the next voting item. Hold on. Number five. The next proposal was submitted, thank you, by Tara Health Foundation, from San Francisco, California, and requests that Pfizer prepare a report analyzing the congruency of political and electioneering expenditures during the preceding year against publicly stated company values and policies. The Board of Directors opposes this proposal for the reasons set forth in the proxy statement. Mr. Ruth Shaber is representing the Tara Health Foundation. Mr. Shaber is participating via pre-recorded video. Can you please play Dr. Shaber's video? Good morning, Mr. Chairman, board of directors, and my fellow shareholders. I am Dr. Ruth Shaber, Founder and President of the Tara Health Foundation, which is dedicated to improving the health and well-being of women and girls. In addition to my 26-year practice in obstetrics and gynecology, I served in a senior executive role at Kaiser Permanente for 15 years. Our proposal asks Pfizer to publish an annual report analyzing the congruency of political and electioneering expenditures during the preceding year against publicly stated company values and policies. Like many companies, Pfizer engages extensively in the political process through lobbying and making political donations, both directly and via its employee PACs. Unfortunately, these contributions sometimes end up undermining the good work and high aspirations of our company's corporate responsibility initiatives. We included three examples in the body of our proposal. The 1st concerns Pfizer's contributions to political committees supporting candidates who have repeatedly sought to repeal the Affordable Care Act. The 2nd concerns direct and indirect contributions to candidates actively working to weaken women's access to reproductive healthcare. $10.8 million in the last three election cycles. The 3rd concerns Pfizer's support for politicians whose actions would make meaningless our company's ambitious commitment to reduce its carbon emissions. Bloomberg News found that one-third of Pfizer's contributions in 2020 went to such candidates. More examples since come to our attention. In the last three election cycles, Pfizer's political action committees contributed roughly $400,000 to the members of Congress who challenged the 2020 electoral college vote. Not a single Republican in Congress supported by Pfizer voted for the 2021 American Rescue Plan, which included $20 billion for vaccination efforts. Pfizer helps its LGBTQ employees celebrate Pride Month every June, but in 2019 supported 52 politicians who voted against LGBTQ rights. Pfizer shareholders and its other stakeholders deserve a responsible and coherent political spending strategy that aligns with the company's values. Inconsistency can pose risks to corporate reputation by leaving companies vulnerable to charges of hypocrisy or indifference to the welfare of their employees and the communities in which they operate. Nearly two-thirds of market value can be attributed to a company's overall reputation. This is highly relevant to a company like Pfizer. Vaccine companies are highly celebrated today, but it's worthwhile to remember that only two years ago, the industry finished dead last in an annual Gallup poll asking Americans for their favorability views on 25 industries. We offer our proposal as a friendly amendment to your corporate governance processes. It's designed to move Pfizer toward a political spending footprint that is truer to our company's aspirations to be an exemplary corporate citizen while remaining an industry leader. Thank you for your attention. Thank you, Mr. Shaber, for making the points and moving your proposal. The board of directors, as I said before, opposes this proposal for the reasons set forth in the proxy statement. Maggie, were there any questions submitted in advance of today's meeting on this item? No, Albert, we didn't receive any questions in advance for this item. Operator, Are there any questions on the line on this voting item? To make a comment or ask a question, you should have entered the meeting platform using your control number. Please press star one to post questions on item five. As a reminder, please mute your computer or playback device before being called on to minimize background noise. We will now pause to compile the list. I show no questions at this time. Thank you very much. We will now move to the next and the last voting item. The next proposal submitted by Trinity Health of the Bronx, N.Y., and the other co-filers, request the board report to shareholders on whether and how receipt by Pfizer or its business partners of public financial support for development and manufacture of a vaccine or therapeutics for COVID-19 is being or will be taken into account when making decisions that affect access to such products, such as setting prices. The board of directors opposes this proposal for the reasons set forth in the proxy statement. Ms. Catherine Rowan is representing Trinity Health and the co-filers and is connected by audio. Ms. Rowan, the floor is now yours for three minutes to move the proposal forward for discussion. Operator, please open the line for Ms. Rowan. Ms. Rowan, your line is now open. Thank you. Good morning, Dr. Bourla, members of the board, fellow shareholders. My name is Kathy Rowan, on behalf of Trinity Health and 14 co-filing investors who are members of the Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility, I present item six. We recognize the great work of Pfizer and its business partner, BioNTech, in developing a safe, efficacious COVID-19 vaccine. We also recognize that the pharmaceutical industry relies on public financial support to conduct and pay for basic biomedical research as the starting point for investing in the development of new vaccines and medicines. The U.S. government supported basic research that underpins the vaccine and committed in advance to buy nearly $2 billion worth of doses. The German government provided over $400 million in support of BioNTech's R&D. We are distressed at the inequitable access to COVID-19 vaccines globally. Clearly, governments must address the moral need for vaccine equity, but pharmaceutical companies have a critical responsibility here, too. Pfizer does not disclose whether or how it considers the role played by public funding in expediting the development of the vaccine and reducing the risk associated with scaling up vaccine manufacturing in making decisions affecting access. Those decisions include pricing and sharing of technical know-how and intellectual property to address supply challenges. Our company committed to equitable and affordable access of COVID-19 vaccines for people around the world. Our world has yet to achieve this equity. The head of the WHO said that on average, one in four people in rich countries has received at least one dose of a vaccine so far, compared to only one in 500 people in low-income countries. If vaccine-produced immunity wanes, billions more doses could be sold as booster shots in the future. Dr. Bourla said recently that a third vaccine dose is likely to be needed within 12 months of getting fully vaccinated, possibly followed by yearly vaccinations. We've heard company leaders speak about getting more on price for the vaccine once we are no longer in a pandemic pricing environment. We haven't heard how the company is addressing the challenges of inequitable access to the vaccine. The pandemic has reminded us all of our interdependence and our responsibilities to care for one another. Each of us can be safe only when all of us are safe. If one part of the world is left to suffer the pandemic, all parts of the world will be put at ever-increasing risk. Justice and equity must be foundational to Pfizer's decisions affecting access to this life-saving vaccine. I urge fellow shareholders to support item six. Thanks very much. Thank you very much, Ms. Rowan, and also thank you for your kind words about the vaccine and the efforts that we did. The proposal is moved. The Board opposes this proposal for the reasons stated in the proxy statement. Maggie, were there any questions submitted in advance of today's meeting on this item? Yes, Albert. We received a question from Heike Cosse from Aegon Asset Management. She asks, Does Pfizer plan to have new supply agreements with COVAX, expanding on the small contract, 40 million doses, that you already have in place? Can we get confirmation that even after the pandemic phase, availability and affordability will remain a central consideration for setting prices and ensuring access in low and middle-income countries? What more can you tell about your plans and commitments for access? Thank you very much. First of all, we are a very proud partner of COVAX, and we are providing 40 million doses of our COVID vaccine in 2021, which is exactly the number that they have ordered from us. Now we are really trying to open even more the contributions to COVAX, and we are in constant discussions with countries that will receive through COVAX vaccines and with the COVAX facility per se. Since the beginning, we have been committed to working towards equitable and affordable access to COVID-19 vaccines for people around the world. One of the keys has been our approach to pricing. We have selected a tier pricing for our vaccines. The high-income countries, as defined by the World Bank definition, they have one tier pricing. They have one range of prices. In some countries, those prices have become known, but in other countries, this is the range, and I will call it is the cost of a meal in the U.S. For middle-income countries, we are having half this price. For low-income countries, we are offering the vaccine at cost. With that, we try to make sure that price is not an access barrier. Of course, there is availability issue, and the best way to resolve the availability issue, it is by increasing your manufacturing capacity. There will not be a question who receives, but will be a question that everybody will be able to receive enough doses. To that extent, which is what we can control, or at least we can try to control and improve, we have tremendous progress. I would say distinct progress compared to every other pharmaceutical company in the world right now. We are constantly delivering doses at very high accuracy rate. We have expanded through series of investments our capacity, and we feel very comfortable at this stage that we will produce 2.5 billion doses by the end of the year. This means that on an annualized basis, that is at least 3 billion doses for 2022. This increase in the production capacity plus our policy on pricing, the tier pricing, I am very optimistic that will resolve the issue of everyone deserving to get a good, safe, and effective vaccine. We are seriously committed to make that happen as soon as possible. Thank you. Operator, are there any other questions or comments on this voting item? Your 1st question comes from the line of John Taylor. Dr. Bourla, you mentioned in this proposal that we are working as a company to constantly deliver doses of the COVID-19 vaccine to both low-income, middle-income, and high-income countries in the world, and that we have a tier pricing platform. I'm wondering, Dr. Bourla, if you could speak further, especially regarding this shareholder proposal. Isn't one of the big problems that Pfizer produces the vaccine, but that we can't constantly deliver doses, that you can't meet that threshold because they arrive in low-income countries where they just sit on docks? Isn't that the case, Dr. Bourla? Thank you. I'm not aware of doses that are arriving right now in low-income countries and they are not used in the population. Following your question, I'm interested to learn more about it. I will try to identify it. It's very difficult for me to believe that those doses are not used. I'm not aware of any situation like that. Operator, are there any other questions? Our next question comes from the line of John Rowell. My question is whether Pfizer is considering joining the World Health Organization's C-TAP organization, that's the Technology Access Pool. Thank you for this question. We are in very constant contact with the WHO. Myself, I'm speaking to a lot of their officials, including the General Secretary of the organization. We are jointly resolving in a very collaborative spirit all the issues that are standing in the way of providing access to the low-income countries. The fundamental issue that the world is facing is clearly not an IP issue, an issue of Intellectual Property. In fact, to be honest, without a vibrant private sector, the world wouldn't be where we are right now in many aspects of addressing this pandemic. Starting from incubators or respirators, moving to diagnostics, moving to vaccines, or moving to treatments. The only reason why the pandemic found a very vibrant public sector is because the IP system allows investors, like you, to place their bets on projects that will fail 99x before one becomes a product. The IP actually was what brought us to the situation of having reliable solutions for the world. The issue of not having enough quantities for everyone in the first few months of the release of the vaccine is related to the fact that those technologies, particularly the mRNA technology, was so new that there was no at all available capacity in the world that was producing anything like mRNA. Until the moment that we embark into this journey, the only mRNA quantities that were produced were produced at laboratories for clinical and trial purposes. We had to scale up manufacturing from scratch, and we did that at our completely own risk. It is not true that the U.S. government underwrote our manufacturing efforts. The orders that we had received from the U.S. government were only going to be delivered, and the U.S. government was only going to pay us if the vaccine was successful, if the vaccine was successful in receiving regulatory approval, and if the vaccine was successful to be manufactured. The risk all was with us. We were able to scale up the manufacturing capacity to levels that no one else would be able to do it. I don't think that the question is do we need If we feel that some countries left behind in the first few months, this is true, the real question is: How fast can we ramp up our capacity so the entire world will be able to have access to a life-saving vaccine? To this, I'm very proud for the work that the thousands of employees working in Pfizer manufacturing sites are doing right now to bring capacity that will make this issue a non-issue within the second part of the year, hopefully. Thank you for your question, and the concern is clearly understood. It is the concern of all of us, and I want to end by saying that in a pandemic, you are as protected as your neighbor. It is extremely important for all the countries to understand that the entire world needs to be protected to end this pandemic. Operator, are there any other questions on this item? There are no further questions. We have concluded the presentation for the items of business, and we now move to the next order of business item, which is final voting. Closing the polls. If you would like to vote or change your vote, please submit your vote on the virtual voting platform at this time. Thank you. I now declare the polls officially closed as of 9:54 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time on April 22nd, 2021, and we now move to the next order of business. We will now tell you the preliminary results of the voting, and I will ask Maggie Madden to review the inspector's preliminary report on the vote. The inspector's report is preliminary and is subject to the inspector's final tabulation, which should not significantly change the preliminary results. The final results will appear in a Form 8-K filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission within four business days of this annual meeting. The inspector's report shows that shares representing 76.3% of the votes entitled to be cast at this meeting were represented in person or by proxy, constituting a quorum. Proposal one, the inspector's preliminary report further shows that each of the 12 nominees for election as director, named in item one of the proxy statement, received a favorable vote of at least 90.7% of the votes cast at this meeting. Proposal two, the proposal to ratify the selection of KPMG LLP to serve as the independent registered public accounting firm for the company for 2021 received the following votes: 95.1% of the votes cast voted for the proposal, 4.9% of the votes cast voted against the proposal. Proposal three, the 2021 advisory vote on executive compensation received the following votes: 92.3% of the votes cast voted for the proposal, 7.7% of the votes cast voted against the proposal. Proposal four, the shareholder proposal regarding an independent chair policy received the following votes. 32.5% of the votes cast voted for the proposal, 67.5% of the votes cast voted against the proposal. Proposal five, the shareholder proposal regarding a political spending report received the following votes. 43% of the votes cast voted for the proposal, 57% of the votes cast voted against the proposal. Proposal six, the shareholder proposal regarding a report on access to COVID-19 products received the following votes. 29.9% of the votes cast voted for the proposal, 70.1% of the votes cast voted against the proposal. The results of this preliminary report indicate that the shareholders of the company have elected all nominees for the board of directors as named in the proxy statement, have approved the proposal regarding ratification of the selection of our independent registered public accounting firm for the 2021 fiscal year, have approved, on an advisory basis, the compensation of our named executive officers, and the shareholder proposals have not been approved. This concludes the inspector's report. Thank you, Maggie. We now move to the next order of business of questions and answers. Having completed the voting items, and also having reported on the voting, we welcome questions from our shareholders via telephone. As a reminder, to access the telephone number, please enter your 15 or 16-digit control number on the annual meeting platform. You will need to press star one to enter the Q&A queue. We now have approximately 15- minutes set aside for general questions and comments. We will follow the rules of conduct and meeting procedures for the handling of your questions. We will make every effort to answer all questions in the time allowed. However, if multiple questions were submitted in advance on the same topic, those questions may be grouped and answered collectively. If more questions are presented than time permits to be answered, all unanswered pertinent questions and responses will be posted on the company's website. We ask that you please focus your question on an issue of general importance to shareholders, so we can make this discussion more meaningful and interesting. Also, in the interest of fair play to all shareholders, if a question has already been substantially answered, we will move on to another shareholder's question. Maggie, before we open the floor line, did you receive any questions in advance of today's meeting? Yes, Albert, we received one question. This question was also raised by Heike Cosse from Aegon Asset Management. She states, We have seen several positive steps by the pharmaceutical sector to expand manufacturing capacity, including cross-industry partnerships and voluntary licensing agreements. This does not seem enough to ensure fair and equitable access to COVID-19 tools across the world. What other steps are you considering to expand production and accelerate distribution of your COVID-19 vaccines? Are you willing to share IP and engage in tech transfers to increase vaccine production worldwide and therefore reduce the tremendous societal impact of the COVID-19 pandemic? Thank you very, very much for your question. Clearly, this is one of our highest priorities. Clearly, one of our highest priority is to make sure that the vaccine, of Pfizer at least, will reach all people in the world that they need it. Let me give some background information. We keep investing, per your question, to be able to significantly increase our manufacturing capacity. As I said before, we are now at the level that we will have an annual capacity of 3 billion doses, three and a half by the end of this year. That will continue this expansion even further. We haven't stopped yet our efforts. The second also I answer that the IP, by any means, is not the problem right now. Actually, the IP protections were what created this vibrant private sector that was able to deliver these breakthrough solutions. Also, I want to explain that from day one, Pfizer reached out to basically all the countries of the world. The few that maybe we were not proactively reached, they knew where to find us. We offer advanced purchase agreements to all of them in the May or June timeframe, and we offer them at the pricing that we consider is fair and equitable. As I said, different tier for high-income countries, half of this price for the middle-income countries, and at cost for the low-income countries. Many countries placed orders, unfortunately, many didn't. Many didn't because they placed their bets in other technologies or other vaccines. Eventually, many of these countries came back to Pfizer asking for incremental doses. Those doses had been already allocated to those that had placed already their orders. We tried, and we found substantial solutions that improved the situation by increasing dramatically our manufacturing output. As a result, we were able to provide doses to people, but they were only placing their orders really late in the game. All the way to now, or one month earlier, or two months earlier. We will continue doing so. As I said, the solution to this problem is only one. We need to make enough for the whole world. We are seriously committed, and actually, I'm very encouraged from our progress. Let's move now to other questions. Operator, next question, please. To make a comment or ask a question, you should have entered the meeting platform using your control number. Please press star one to pose questions. As a reminder, please mute your computer or playback device before being called on to minimize background noise. We will now pause to compile the list. Your 1st question comes from Michael Piccirillo. Your line is now open. Good morning, Mr. Chairman. My name is Michael Piccirillo. I am from the United Brotherhood of Carpenters. Mr. Chairman, the Carpenters Union pension funds have an ownership position of over 1.3 million shares of the company's common stock. As long-term investors, we commend the senior executive team, the board, and all Pfizer employees on their outstanding responses to the challenges posed by COVID-19. The executive compensation plan should drive the successful execution of the company's long-term strategic business plan. We support the company's compensation plan and the addition of the pipeline advancement factor metric in the annual incentive plan as it supports the company's business strategy. Could you or the compensation committee chair indicate whether there is a consideration of including the pipeline metric in the long-term incentive compensation portion of the plan? Thank you very much. Thank you very much. As you know, the company's future is strictly related with the progress of our R&D pipeline. This is the reason why we enter this criteria in the performance of the pipeline as the main element that will define the bonus pools for every employee in this company, irrelevant if they are working on the R&D or not. In addition to that, we are having special programs, that they are targeting the entire R&D organization, that they are long-term in nature, and they are dependent on over time progress of specific R&D metrics that the compensation committee reviews every year to make sure that they are current and relevant. Of course, everyone in the long-term incentive plan is rewarded based on the performance that includes a significant part on the stock price, which clearly, as we know, in our industry, reflects the belief or the results that the R&D pipeline is demonstrating. That being said, our compensation committee keeps reviewing their plans constantly every year and the spirit of what you're suggesting. To make sure that progress in the R&D pipeline reflects into the rewards that we are giving to the employees. It's something that is a vital principle for our compensation committee. Thank you again for your question. Operator, next question, please. Your next question comes from the line of Louis Malizia. Your line is now open. Mr. Chairman, on behalf of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, I wish to thank Pfizer for its constructive engagement over enhancing the company's corporate lobbying expenditure disclosures. We commend Pfizer for its commitment to disclosure of payments to trade associations for its lobbying annually, its plans to assess state lobbying disclosures with the goal of providing more clarity to improve stakeholders' ability to digest this crucial data. Pfizer's openness to continuing our dialogue on this topic is very much welcomed by the Teamsters and our investor colleagues who seek to mitigate the risks associated with dark money political activity and how such expenditures can lead to unintended consequences that run contrary to corporate goals. Case in point, ALEC initiatives to support voter suppression bills, as well as its latest climate science denial initiatives, which certainly do not reflect Pfizer's science-focused culture. We thank you for the company's openness and its willingness to continue to engage. Thank you very much. It is extremely important for us, the topics that you just mentioned. This importance is clearly expressed in our four core cultural values that we have in the company. One of them is equity, that covers a very big extent items that you yourself pointed out. Thank you again for your question and your comments. Operator, next question, please. Your next question comes from the line of Jim Merrick. Your line is now open. Yes. My question is, with the merger with GlaxoSmithKline, are the shareholders going to get shares in the new company with the GlaxoSmithKline/Pfizer products? Another question is, will Pfizer's dividend be reduced when Viatris starts declaring a dividend? Thank you. Yes. Thank you. I assume you are referring to the joint venture that we have for our consumer business with GlaxoSmithKline. We are having approximately one-third and GlaxoSmithKline has two-thirds of this merger. We are receiving, clearly, dividends from this business, and that reflects in our financial statements. We had publicly stated together with GlaxoSmithKline that the intention is that this company will become independent one day. The exact form of how that will happen and also how we are going to use the proceeds of something like that has not been yet decided. I will have to defer until those decisions are made. As regards the dividend, you may recall that we had made publicly several times the statement that our dividend will be adjusted once Viatris makes a declaration of their dividend, so that their shareholders will be kept whole in terms of their dividend. Today, early in the morning, we announced that our board has decided that we will not adjust our dividend, and the dividend maintain the same for the next quarter at $0.39, despite the fact that Viatris had already declared a dividend for their shares. This means that de facto, our shareholders that are keeping both the Pfizer and the Viatris will see a de facto increase in the dividend that they are receiving. This was feasible because of the very strong financial performance of the company. Thank you very much for both your questions. Operator, next question, please. Your next question comes from David Soderberg. Your line is now open. Thank you. I'm David Soderberg with the National Center for Public Policy Research. Pfizer has joined the rush to condemn Georgia's voter integrity law, a law designed to stop election fraud as by requiring voters to provide an ID. Could you explain in detail how requiring voters to show ID when they vote undermines any voting access or voting rights, and which other specific provisions of the bill do you object to and why? Thank you very much for your question. What Pfizer has made very clear, it is that one of Pfizer values is equity. Nowhere is equity more important than in ensuring every American citizen's right to vote, which is fundamental to our democracy. I firmly believe that all eligible voters should be afforded equal access and opportunity to cast their ballots. I urge policymakers to remain true to this principle and work to ensure the right to vote is never compromised. Of course, also, I want to take the opportunity that we encourage our colleagues to be informed, to speak out against policies that would hinder free and fair elections, and to fully participate in the electoral process. We are not taking a position on specifics of specific laws, but we are clearly stating our basic principle that access to vote is very important for the democracy, and it's very important for us as a company that operates in the healthcare sector. Thank you for your question. Now I think we have time for one more final question, if I'm not mistaken. Operator. The final question comes from Anthony A. Your line is now open. Hi. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and fellow shareholders. I would like to know, if we do have one, what is the vaccine rollout plan for the next two to five years for Pfizer? Do we plan on rolling out an annual vaccine booster each year, or is it something that's a one-time occurrence for the users? Thank you. Thank you very much for your question. This is something that not only Pfizer for our vaccines, but health authorities of the entire world are monitoring very closely. We do not know the answer to this question as we have right now clear evidence up to six months post the second vaccination in our vaccine. I'm going to speak only about our vaccine. Post six months, the efficacy is maintained very high. Even in the last two periods of this six months, two months in this six-month period, the efficacy maintained is very, very high. I want to emphasize that also the efficacy against variants was also very, very good. We have seen that there is a slight reduction as time passes, and the efficacy in the first two months is way higher than the efficacy in the third two months of the six-month period. In the totality of what we know so far, without being able to be certain about it, but it looks like there will be a need for a booster. If this booster will come in 6, 7, 8, 9, or 12 months is something that we are currently investigating. In addition to being able to maintain high efficacy with a booster, we believe that that could be a very good solution also for variants because maintaining the very high efficacy also ensures that very few variants will be able to escape or variants will not escape. We should wait to see the results. The likely scenario, as I have said it publicly, it is right now based on the totality of the evidence, that there will be a need for a booster and there will be a need for annual revaccinations or for regular revaccinations after that. I think that was the last question, and then thank you for your questions and comments. If your question was not answered at today's meeting, you may submit your question on the virtual meeting platform, which will remain open until 11:00 A.M. We will post the answers to all unanswered pertinent questions on our website. We now move to our last order of business, and this is the adjournment. We are about to adjourn, but before we do, I would like to thank everyone who worked on this meeting, both Pfizer colleagues and our valued business partners. It has been our pleasure to be able to conduct our annual meeting of shareholders virtually to ensure everyone's safety during this COVID-19 pandemic. This has been a very valuable meeting. We appreciate the opportunity to listen and learn from our shareholders. Speaking of all of us in executive leadership and on the board, I'm grateful for your continued confidence in Pfizer and for your continued interest in the progress of our company. Please stay safe and stay healthy. With that, the meeting is adjourned. This concludes the meeting. You may now disconnect.