Exelixis, Inc. (Exelixis, we, our or us) is an oncology-focused biotechnology company that strives to accelerate the discovery, development and commercialization of new medicines for difficult-to-treat cancers. Our drug discovery and development capabilities and commercialization platform are the foundations upon which we intend to bring to market novel, effective and tolerable therapies to provide cancer patients with additional treatment options.

Since we were founded in 1994, four products resulting from our discovery efforts have progressed through clinical development, received regulatory approval and established a commercial presence in various geographies around the world. Two are derived from cabozantinib, our flagship molecule, an inhibitor of multiple tyrosine kinases including MET, AXL, VEGF receptors and RET. Our cabozantinib products are: CABOMETYX® (cabozantinib) tablets approved for advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC), both alone and in combination with Bristol-Myers Squibb Company’s OPDIVO® (nivolumab), and for previously treated hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC); and COMETRIQ® (cabozantinib) capsules approved for progressive, metastatic medullary thyroid cancer. For these types of cancer, cabozantinib has become or is becoming a standard of care. Beyond these approved indications, cabozantinib is currently the focus of a broad clinical development program, and is being investigated both alone and in combination with other therapies in a wide variety of cancers.

The other two products resulting from our discovery efforts are: COTELLIC® (cobimetinib), an inhibitor of MEK, approved as part of multiple regimens to treat advanced melanoma and marketed under a collaboration with Genentech, Inc. (a member of the Roche Group) (Genentech); and MINNEBRO® (esaxerenone), an oral, non-steroidal, selective blocker of the mineralocorticoid receptor (MR), approved for the treatment of hypertension in Japan and licensed to Daiichi Sankyo Company, Limited (Daiichi Sankyo).

We have adopted a 52- or 53-week fiscal year policy that ends on the Friday closest to December 31st. Fiscal year 2020, which was a 52-week fiscal year, ended on January 1, 2021, fiscal year 2019, which was a 53-week fiscal year, ended on January 3, 2020 and fiscal year 2018, which was a 52-week fiscal year, ended on December 28, 2018. For convenience, references in this report as of and for the fiscal years ended January 1, 2021, January 3, 2020 and December 28, 2018 are indicated as being as of and for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018, respectively.

We operate in one business segment that focuses on the discovery, development and commercialization of new medicines for difficult-to-treat cancers. Our Chief Executive Officer, as the chief operating decision-maker, manages and allocates resources to our operations on a total consolidated basis. Consistent with this decision-making process, our Chief Executive Officer uses consolidated, single-segment financial information for purposes of evaluating performance, forecasting future period financial results, allocating resources and setting incentive targets.

The preparation of the accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements conforms to accounting principles generally accepted in the U.S., which requires management to make judgments, estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, equity, revenues and expenses, and related disclosures. On an ongoing basis, we evaluate our significant estimates. We base our estimates on historical experience and on various other market-specific and other relevant assumptions that we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results could differ materially from those estimates.

In March 2020, we received the Preliminary Calculation of our Branded Prescription Drug Fee for 2020, and in August 2020, the Final Calculation of our Branded Prescription Drug Fee for 2020 from the Internal Revenue Service for the 2018 sales year, which resulted in an increase in our estimate of such fees for the 2018 and 2019 sales years. Accordingly, we recorded an adjustment to increase selling, general and administrative expenses for these fees by $5.1 million during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2020. This adjustment resulted in a $0.02 decrease in basic and diluted earnings per share for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2020.

In the first quarter of 2020, we adopted Accounting Standards Update (ASU) No. 2018-18, Collaborative Arrangements (Topic 808): Clarifying the Interaction between Topic 808 and Topic 606 (ASU 2018-18). ASU 2018-18 clarifies that certain transactions between collaborative arrangement participants should be accounted for as part of revenues under Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) Topic 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606) when the counterparty is a customer for a distinct good or service (i.e., a unit of account). For units of account that are in the scope of Topic 606, all of the guidance in Topic 606 should be applied, including the guidance on recognition, measurement, presentation and disclosure. ASU 2018-18 precludes entities from presenting amounts related to transactions with a counterparty in a collaborative arrangement that is not a customer together with revenue from contracts with customers. If a portion of a distinct bundle of goods or services within an arrangement is not with a customer, then the unit of account is not within the scope of Topic 606, and the recognition and measurement of that unit of account shall be based on analogy to authoritative accounting literature or, if there is no appropriate analogy, a reasonable, rational, and consistently applied accounting policy election. Upon adoption of ASU 2018-18, we have presented revenues from performance obligations associated with our collaboration arrangements that are within the scope of Topic 606 (license revenues) separately from revenues from performance obligations that are not subject to Topic 606 (collaboration services revenues). The adoption of ASU 2018-18 was applied retrospectively, and prior periods have been restated to conform to the presentation prescribed by ASU 2018-18. The adoption of ASU 2018-18 did not impact total revenues for the prior period presented in the accompanying Consolidated Statements of Income.

In the first quarter 2020, we adopted ASU No. 2017-04, Intangibles—Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): Simplifying the Test for Goodwill Impairment (ASU 2017-04). ASU 2017-04 simplifies goodwill impairment testing by eliminating the second step of the impairment test. The amended guidance requires an impairment charge to be recognized for the amount by which the carrying amount of a reporting unit exceeds its fair value under a one-step impairment test. The adoption of ASU 2017-04 did not impact the accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements.

In the first quarter of 2020, we adopted ASU No. 2016-13, Financial Instruments—Credit Losses (Topic 326) (ASU 2016-13). ASU 2016-13 implements an impairment model, known as the current expected credit loss model, that is based on expected losses rather than incurred losses. Under the new guidance, we will recognize our estimate of current expected credit losses as an allowance on financial assets measured at amortized cost, including accounts receivable, contract assets, and investments classified as available for sale. Current expected credit losses were immaterial as of the date of adoption, and the adoption of ASU 2016-13 did not have a significant impact on the accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements.

Quarterly, we assess each of our investments in available-for-sale debt securities whose fair value is below its cost basis to determine if the investment’s impairment is due to credit-related factors or noncredit-related factors. Factors considered in determining whether an impairment is credit-related include the extent to which the investment’s fair value is less than its cost basis, declines in published credit ratings, issuer default on interest or principal payments, and declines in the financial condition and near-term prospects of the issuer. If we determine a credit-related impairment exists, we will measure the credit loss based on a discounted cash flows model. Credit-related impairments on available-for-sale debt securities are recognized as an allowance for credit losses with a corresponding adjustment to other income, net in the accompanying Consolidated Statements of Income. The portion of the impairment that is not credit-related is recorded as a reduction of other comprehensive income (loss), net of applicable taxes.

We define fair value as the amounts that would be received upon sale of an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date (exit price). When determining the fair value measurements for assets and liabilities which are required to be recorded at fair value, we consider the principal or most advantageous market in which we would transact and the market-based risk measurements or assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability, such as risks inherent in valuation techniques, transfer restrictions and credit risks.

Trade receivables, net, contain amounts billed to our customers for product sales, and amounts billed to our collaboration partners for development, regulatory and sales-based milestone payments, royalties on the sale of licensed products, profit-sharing arrangements, development cost reimbursements, and payments for product supply services. Our customers are primarily pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies that are located in the U.S., and collaboration partners that are located in Europe and Japan. We record trade receivables net of allowances for credit losses and chargebacks, and cash discounts for prompt payment. We apply an aging method to estimate credit losses and consider our historical loss information, adjusted to account for current conditions, and reasonable and supportable forecasts of future economic conditions affecting our customers. As of December 31, 2020 and 2019, the percentage of trade receivables by customer who individually accounted for 10% or more of our trade receivables were as follows:

We value inventory at the lower of cost or net realizable value. We determine the cost of inventory using the standard-cost method, which approximates actual cost based on a first-in, first-out method. We analyze our inventory levels quarterly and write down inventory subject to expiry in excess of expected requirements, or that has a cost basis in excess of its expected net realizable value. These write downs are charged to either cost of goods sold or the cost of supplied product included in collaboration services revenues in the accompanying Consolidated Statements of Income. On a quarterly basis, we analyze our estimated production levels for the following twelve-month period, which is our normal operating cycle, and reclassify inventory we expect to use or sell in periods beyond the next twelve months into other long-term assets in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets.

We record property and equipment at cost, net of depreciation. We compute depreciation using the straight-line method based on estimated useful lives of the assets, which ranges up to 15 years and depreciate leasehold improvements over the lesser of their estimated useful lives or the remainder of the lease term. We charge repairs and maintenance costs to expense as incurred. We periodically review property and equipment for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable. We did not recognize impairment charges in any of the periods presented.

We recorded goodwill amounts as the excess of purchase price over identifiable net assets acquired based on their estimated fair value. We review the carrying amount of goodwill for impairment annually and whenever events or changes in circumstance indicate that the carrying value may not be recoverable. We perform our annual assessment of the recoverability of our goodwill as of the first day of our fourth quarter. The assessment of recoverability may first consider qualitative factors to determine whether the existence of events or circumstances leads to a determination that it is more-likely-than-not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount. We perform a quantitative assessment if the qualitative assessment results in a more-likely-than-not determination or if a qualitative assessment is not performed. The quantitative assessment considers whether the carrying amount of a reporting unit exceeds its fair value, in which case an impairment charge is recorded for the amount by which the carrying amount of a reporting unit exceeds its fair value, limited to the goodwill balance. We operate in one business segment, which is also considered to be our sole reporting unit and therefore, goodwill is tested for impairment at the enterprise level. We did not recognize any impairment charges in any of the periods presented.

The carrying value of our long-lived assets, which includes property and equipment, right-of-use assets and leasehold improvements, is reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of the asset may not be recoverable. Should there be an indication of impairment, we test for recoverability by comparing the estimated undiscounted future cash flows expected to result from the use of the asset to the carrying amount of the asset or asset group. If the asset or asset group is determined to be impaired, any excess of the carrying value of the asset or asset group over its estimated fair value is recognized as an impairment loss.

In the first quarter of 2018, we adopted Topic 606 using the modified retrospective method applied to those contracts that were not completed as of the adoption date. Under Topic 606, an entity recognizes revenue when its customer obtains control of promised goods or services, in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity is entitled to in exchange for those goods or services. To determine revenue recognition for arrangements that are within the scope of Topic 606, we perform the following five steps: (1) identify the contract(s) with a customer; (2) identify the performance obligations in the contract; (3) determine the transaction price; (4) allocate the transaction price to the performance obligations in the contract; and (5) recognize revenue when (or as) we satisfy a performance obligation. We only apply the five-step model to contracts when it is probable that we will collect the consideration we are entitled to in exchange for the goods or services we transfer to the customer.

We sell our products principally to specialty distributors and specialty pharmacy providers, or collectively, our Customers. These Customers subsequently resell our products to health care providers and patients. In addition to distribution agreements with Customers, we enter into arrangements with health care providers and payors that provide for government-mandated and/or privately-negotiated rebates, chargebacks and discounts with respect to the purchase of our products. Revenues from product sales are recognized when the Customer obtains control of our product, which occurs at a point in time, typically upon delivery to the Customer.

We record revenues from product sales at the net sales price (transaction price), which includes estimates of variable consideration for which reserves are established primarily from discounts, chargebacks, rebates, co-pay assistance, returns and other allowances that are offered within contracts between us and our Customers, health care providers, payors and other indirect customers relating to the sales of our products. These reserves are based on the amounts earned or to be claimed on the related sales and are classified as reductions of accounts receivable (if the amount is payable to the Customer) or a current liability (if the amount is payable to a party other than a Customer). Where appropriate, these estimates take into consideration a range of possible outcomes that are probability-weighted for relevant factors such as our historical experience, current contractual and statutory requirements, specific known market events and trends, industry data and forecasted Customer buying and payment patterns. Overall, these reserves reflect our best estimates of the amount of consideration to which we are entitled based on the terms of our contracts. The amount of variable consideration that is included in the transaction price may be constrained, and is included in the net sales price only to the extent that it is probable that a significant reversal in the amount of the cumulative revenue recognized will not occur in a future period. Actual amounts of consideration ultimately received may differ from our estimates. If actual results in the future vary from our estimates, we will adjust these estimates, which would affect net product revenues and earnings in the period such variances become known.

Chargebacks: Chargebacks are discounts that occur when contracted Customers purchase directly from a specialty distributor. Contracted Customers, which currently consist primarily of Public Health Service institutions, Federal government entities purchasing via the Federal Supply Schedule, Group Purchasing Organizations, and health maintenance organizations, generally purchase the product at a discounted price. The specialty distributor, in turn, charges back to us the difference between the price initially paid by the specialty distributor and the discounted price paid to the specialty distributor by the Customer. The allowance for chargebacks is based on actual chargebacks received and an estimate of sales to contracted Customers.

Rebates: Allowances for rebates include mandated discounts under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, other government programs and commercial contracts. Rebate amounts owed after the final dispensing of the product to a benefit plan participant are based upon contractual agreements or legal requirements with public sector benefit providers, such as Medicaid. The allowance for rebates is based on statutory or contractual discount rates and expected utilization. Our estimates for the expected utilization of rebates are based on Customer and payer data received from the specialty pharmacies and distributors and historical utilization rates. Rebates are generally invoiced by the payer and paid in arrears, such that the accrual balance consists of an estimate of the amount expected to be incurred for the current quarter’s shipments to our Customers, plus an accrual balance for known prior quarters’ unpaid rebates. If actual future rebates vary from estimates, we may need to adjust our accruals, which would affect net product revenues in the period of adjustment.

Allowances for rebates also include amounts related to the Medicare Part D Coverage Gap Discount Program. In the U.S. during 2020, the Medicare Part D prescription drug benefit mandated participating manufacturers to fund 70% of the Medicare Part D insurance coverage gap for prescription drugs sold to eligible patients. Our estimates for expected Medicare Part D coverage gap amounts are based on Customer and payer data received from specialty pharmacies and distributors and historical utilization rates. Funding of the coverage gap is invoiced and paid in arrears so that the accrual balance consists of an estimate of the amount expected to be incurred for the current quarter’s shipments to Customer, plus an accrual balance for known prior quarters’ unpaid claims. If actual future funding varies from estimates, we may need to adjust our accruals, which would affect net product revenues in the period of adjustment.

We assess whether our collaboration agreements are subject to ASC Topic 808, Collaborative Arrangements (Topic 808) based on whether they involve joint operating activities and whether both parties have active participation in the arrangement and are exposed to significant risks and rewards. To the extent that the arrangement falls within the scope of Topic 808, we apply by analogy the unit of account guidance under Topic 606 to identify distinct performance obligations, and then determine whether a customer relationship exists for each distinct performance obligation. If we determine a performance obligation within the arrangement is with a customer, we apply the guidance in Topic 606. If a portion of a distinct bundle of goods or services within an arrangement is not with a customer, then the unit of account is not within the scope of Topic 606, and the recognition and measurement of that unit of account shall be based on analogy to authoritative accounting literature or, if there is no appropriate analogy, a reasonable, rational, and consistently applied accounting policy election.

We enter into collaboration arrangements, under which we license certain rights to our intellectual property to third parties. The terms of these arrangements typically include payments to us for one or more of the following: nonrefundable up-front license fees; development, regulatory and sales-based milestone payments; product supply services; development cost reimbursements; profit-sharing arrangements; and royalties on net sales of licensed products. As part of the accounting for these arrangements, we develop assumptions that require judgment to determine the standalone selling price for each performance obligation identified in the contract. These key assumptions may include forecasted revenues, clinical development timelines and costs, reimbursement rates for personnel costs, discount rates and probabilities of technical and regulatory success.

Up-front License Fees: If the license to our intellectual property is determined to be distinct from the other performance obligations identified in the arrangement, we recognize revenues from nonrefundable up-front fees allocated to the license when the license is transferred to the licensee and the licensee is able to use and benefit from the license, which generally occurs at or near the inception of the contract. For licenses that are bundled with other promises, we utilize judgment to assess the nature of the combined performance obligation to determine whether the combined performance obligation is satisfied over time or at a point in time and, if over time, the appropriate method of measuring progress for purposes of recognizing revenues from nonrefundable up-front fees. We evaluate the measure of progress at the end of each reporting period and, if necessary, adjust the measure of performance and related revenue recognition.

Regulatory and Development Milestone Payments: At the inception of each arrangement that includes development milestone payments, we evaluate whether the milestones are considered probable of being reached and estimate the amount to be included in the transaction price using the most likely amount method. If it is probable that a significant revenue reversal would not occur, the associated milestone value is included in the transaction price. Milestone payments that are not within our or the licensee’s control, such as regulatory approvals, are not considered probable of being achieved until uncertainty associated with the approvals has been resolved. The transaction price is then allocated to each performance obligation, on a relative standalone selling price basis, for which we recognize revenue as or when the performance obligations under the contract are satisfied. At the end of each subsequent reporting period, we re-evaluate the probability of achieving such development and regulatory milestones and any related variable consideration constraint, and if necessary, adjust our estimate of the overall transaction price. Any such adjustments are recorded on a cumulative catch-up basis.

accounted for as a separate performance obligation which we estimate using internal development costs incurred and projections through the term of the arrangements. We record revenues for these services as the performance obligations are satisfied over time based on measure of progress. However, if we conclude that our collaboration partner is not a customer for those collaborative research and development activities, we present such payments as a reduction of research and development expenses.

Profit-sharing Arrangements: Under the terms of our collaboration agreement with Genentech for cobimetinib, we are entitled to a share of U.S. profits and losses received in connection with the commercialization of cobimetinib. We account for this arrangement in accordance with Topic 606. We have determined that we are an agent under the agreement and therefore revenues are recorded net of costs incurred. We record revenues for the variable consideration associated with the profits and losses under the collaboration agreement when it is probable that a significant reversal in the amount of cumulative revenues recognized will not occur.

Research and development expenses consist of (1) direct and indirect internal costs for drug discovery; (2) upfront license and project initiation fees, license option fees and option exercise fees, funded research and milestone payments incurred or probable to be incurred for our in-licensing arrangements with our collaboration partners for research programs in development and prior to regulatory approval; and (3) development costs associated with our clinical trial projects, which include fees paid to Contract Research Organizations (CRO) performing work on our behalf.

Our clinical trial projects have been executed with support from third-party contract research organizations (CROs), who specialize in conducting and managing global clinical trials. We accrue expenses for clinical trial activities performed by the CROs based upon the estimated amount of work completed on each trial. For clinical trial expenses, the significant factors used in estimating accruals include direct CRO costs, the number of patients enrolled, the number of active clinical sites involved, the duration for which the patients will be enrolled in the trial and patient out of pocket costs. We monitor patient enrollment levels and related activities to the extent possible through CRO meetings and correspondence, internal reviews and review of contractual terms. We base our estimates on the best information available at the time. However, additional information may become available to us which may allow us to make a more accurate estimate in future periods. In this event, we may be required to record adjustments to research and development expenses in future periods when the actual level of activity becomes more certain. As described further above, certain payments made to us from our collaboration partners may be presented as a reduction of research and development expense.

We determine if an arrangement includes a lease at the inception of the agreement. For each of our lease arrangements, we record a right-of-use asset representing our right to use an underlying asset for the lease term and a lease liability representing our obligation to make lease payments. Operating lease right-of-use assets and liabilities are recognized at the lease commencement date based on the net present value of lease payments over the lease term. In determining the discount rate used to calculate the net present value of lease payments, we use our incremental borrowing rate based on the information available at the lease commencement date. Our leases may include options to extend or terminate the lease which are included in the lease term when it is reasonably certain that we will exercise any such

We account for stock-based payments to employees, including grants of service-based restricted stock units (RSUs), performance-based restricted stock units (PSUs), service-based stock options, performance-based stock options (PSOs), and purchases under our 2000 Employee Stock Purchase Plan (ESPP) in accordance with ASC 718, Compensation-Stock Compensation, which requires that stock-based payments (to the extent they are compensatory) be recognized in our Consolidated Statements of Income based on their fair values. We account for forfeitures of stock-based awards as they occur. The expense for stock-based compensation is based on the grant date fair value of the award. The grant date fair value of RSUs and PSUs are estimated as the value of the underlying shares of our common stock. The grant date fair values are estimated using a Monte Carlo simulation pricing model for certain PSUs and PSOs with market vesting conditions and a Black-Scholes Merton option pricing model for other stock options. Both option pricing models require the input of subjective assumptions. These variables include, but are not limited to, the expected volatility of our stock price and the expected term of the awards. We consider both implied and historical volatilities when developing an estimate of expected volatility. We estimate the term using historical data. We recognize compensation expense over the requisite service period on an accelerated basis for awards with a market or performance condition and on a straight-line basis for service-based stock options and awards. Compensation expense related to PSUs is recognized when we determine that it is probable that the performance goals will be achieved, which we assess on a quarterly basis.

Our provision for (benefit from) income taxes is computed under the asset and liability method. Significant estimates are required in determining our provision for (benefit from) income taxes. Some of these estimates are based on interpretations of existing tax laws or regulations. We recognize deferred tax assets and liabilities for the expected future tax consequences of events that have been included in the financial statements or tax returns. Under this method, deferred tax assets and liabilities are determined on the basis of the difference between the tax basis of assets and liabilities and their respective financial reporting amounts (temporary differences) at enacted tax rates in effect for the years in which the differences are expected to reverse. A valuation allowance is established for deferred tax assets for which it is more likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred tax assets, including net operating losses and tax credits, will not be realized. We periodically re-assess the need for a valuation allowance against our deferred tax assets based on various factors including our historical earnings experience by taxing jurisdiction, and forecasts of future operating results and utilization of net operating losses and tax credits prior to their expiration. Significant judgment is required in making this assessment and, to the extent that a reversal of any portion of our valuation allowance against our deferred tax assets is deemed appropriate, a tax benefit will be recognized against our provision for (benefit from) income taxes in the period of such reversal. Prior to 2018, we recorded a valuation allowance that fully offset our deferred tax assets. In the fourth quarter of 2018, based on our evaluation of various factors, including our achievement of a cumulative three-year income position as of December 31, 2018 and forecasts of future operating results, we released substantially all of our valuation allowance against our deferred tax assets and recorded a corresponding income tax benefit as described in “Note 9. Provision For (Benefit From) Income Taxes”, below. We continue to maintain a valuation allowance against our California state deferred tax assets.

In December 2019, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued ASU 2019-12, Income Taxes (Topic 740)-Simplifying the Accounting for Income Taxes (ASU 2019-12). ASU 2019-12 simplifies the accounting for income taxes by removing certain exceptions to the general principles in Topic 740 and clarifying and amending existing guidance. ASU 2019-12 will be effective for us in the first quarter of 2021 with early adoption permitted. The adoption of ASU 2019-12 on January 1, 2021 will not have a significant impact on our Consolidated Financial Statements.