The Evolution of U.S. Markets: What’s Next?

Andy Jung Presenter: Senior Director, Market & Strategic Analysis Date: December 14, 2017 South Dakota Agri-Business Association Agronomy Conference 1 Safe Harbor Statement

This document contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such statements include, but are not limited to, statements about our proposed acquisition of the global phosphate and operations of Vale S.A. (“Vale”) conducted through Vale Fertilizantes S.A. (the “Transaction”) and the anticipated benefits and synergies of the proposed Transaction, other proposed or pending future transactions or strategic plans and other statements about future financial and operating results. Such statements are based upon the current beliefs and expectations of ’s management and are subject to significant risks and uncertainties. These risks and uncertainties include but are not limited to risks and uncertainties arising from the possibility that the closing of the proposed Transaction may be delayed or may not occur, including delays or risks arising from any inability of Vale to achieve certain specified regulatory and operational milestones, and the ability to satisfy any of the other closing conditions; our ability to secure financing, or financing on satisfactory terms and in amounts sufficient to fund the cash portion of the purchase price without the need for additional funds from other liquidity sources; difficulties with realization of the benefits of the proposed Transaction, including the risks that the acquired business may not be integrated successfully or that the anticipated synergies or cost or capital expenditure savings from the Transaction may not be fully realized or may take longer to realize than expected, including because of political and economic instability in Brazil or changes in government policy in Brazil; the predictability and volatility of, and customer expectations about, agriculture, fertilizer, raw material, energy and transportation markets that are subject to competitive and other pressures and economic and credit market conditions; the level of inventories in the distribution channels for crop nutrients; the effect of future product innovations or development of new technologies on demand for our products; changes in foreign currency and exchange rates; international trade risks and other risks associated with Mosaic’s international operations and those of joint ventures in which Mosaic participates, including the risk that protests against natural resource companies in Peru extend to or impact the Miski Mayo mine, the ability of the Wa’ad Al Shamal Phosphate Company (also known as MWSPC) to obtain additional planned funding in acceptable amounts and upon acceptable terms, the timely development and commencement of operations of production facilities in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the future success of current plans for MWSPC and any future changes in those plans; difficulties with realization of the benefits of our long term natural gas based pricing ammonia supply agreement with CF Industries, Inc., including the risk that the cost savings initially anticipated from the agreement may not be fully realized over its term or that the price of natural gas or ammonia during the term are at levels at which the pricing is disadvantageous to Mosaic; customer defaults; the effects of Mosaic’s decisions to exit business operations or locations; changes in government policy; changes in environmental and other governmental regulation, including expansion of the types and extent of water resources regulated under federal law, carbon taxes or other greenhouse gas regulation, implementation of numeric water quality standards for the discharge of nutrients into Florida waterways or efforts to reduce the flow of excess nutrients into the Mississippi River basin, the Gulf of Mexico or elsewhere; further developments in judicial or administrative proceedings, or complaints that Mosaic’s operations are adversely impacting nearby farms, business operations or properties; difficulties or delays in receiving, increased costs of or challenges to necessary governmental permits or approvals or increased financial assurance requirements; resolution of global tax audit activity; the effectiveness of Mosaic’s processes for managing its strategic priorities; adverse weather conditions affecting operations in Central Florida, the Mississippi River basin, the Gulf Coast of the United States or Canada, and including potential hurricanes, excess heat, cold, snow, rainfall or drought; actual costs of various items differing from management’s current estimates, including, among others, asset retirement, environmental remediation, reclamation or other environmental regulation, Canadian resources taxes and royalties, or the costs of the MWSPC, its existing or future funding and Mosaic’s commitments in support of such funding; reduction of Mosaic’s available cash and liquidity, and increased leverage, due to its use of cash and/or available debt capacity to fund financial assurance requirements and strategic investments; brine inflows at Mosaic’s Esterhazy, , potash mine or other potash shaft mines; other accidents and disruptions involving Mosaic’s operations, including potential mine fires, floods, explosions, seismic events, sinkholes or releases of hazardous or volatile chemicals; and risks associated with cyber security, including reputational loss, as well as other risks and uncertainties reported from time to time in The Mosaic Company’s reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Actual results may differ from those set forth in the forward-looking statements.

2 Agenda

▪ Agricultural update: Things are ‘OK’ ▪ N: Nitrogen market update • Big shift in U.S. production and trade flows continues ▪ P: Phosphate market update • Consolidation • Strained margins • Chinese export volumes will be key ▪ K: Potash market update • Supply / Demand outlook is balanced

3 Agricultural Update

4 Agricultural Update ▪ Recent developments − Headline ag markets remain ‘OK’ – little-changed from a year ago − Divergence of managed money positions (big short in corn / small bean long) and CME prices (for 2018 new crop) that are holding up reasonably well ▪ Markets closely watching − South American crop progress – off to a rocky start

− Macroeconomic/political developments (e.g. NAFTA) and their impact on the dollar/trade flows − China imports (but most analysts seem to have looked past their mandate) ▪ Price outlook − Corn/soybean/wheat prices: Still appears to be a general bearish bias (particularly corn) without a significant weather event − Other crop prices: Mixed outlooks, but generally steady to higher after (mostly) bearish moves in 2017

5 The Good news for Ag: No structural imbalance ▪ Just a string of above- trend grain and oilseed Bil Tonnes World Grain and Oilseed Production and Use harvests 3.2 Source: USDA 3.0 • A giant step-up in global grain and oilseed output 2.8 after 2012 2.6 − Due in large part to Mother Nature, but also due to farmers: 2.4 ➢ More area brought into production 2.2 ➢ Better seed, nutrition, chemicals, equipment and information 2.0 utilized on the farm 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Production Use

6 Corn & Soybeans Update

▪ Prices have been largely range-bound the past few years (with a little weather volatility) ▪ Last year’s big South American crop had a minimal impact U.S. exports (infrastructure limits and growing domestic demand in Brazil)

New Crop Corn Price New Crop Soybean Price US$ BU Daily Close of the New Crop Contract (Sep 1 - Aug 31) US$ BU Daily Close of the New Crop Contract (Sep 1- Aug 31) 4.50 12.00 Source: CME 11.50 4.25 11.00

4.00 10.50 10.00

3.75 9.50

9.00 3.50 Source: CME 8.50 3.25 8.00 S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A 2015 2016 2017 2018 2015 2016 2017 2018

7 Other Ag Commodity Prices

▪ Other than rice, most other globally-important crop prices struggled in 2017, but have stabilized

Rice Prices Malaysian Palm Oil Prices Sugar Prices Cotton Prices US$ Rngts US$ US$ Daily Close of Nearby Option Daily Close of Nearby Option Daily Close of Nearby Option Daily Close of Nearby Option CWT Tonne CWT CWT 14 3,500 24 90.0 Source: NYMEX Source: NYMEX Source: CRB 23 Source: NYMEX 3,300 22 85.0 13 21 3,100 80.0 20 12 2,900 19 75.0 18 2,700 17 70.0 11 2,500 16 15 65.0 2,300 14 60.0 10 13 2,100 12 55.0 11 9 1,900 Sep-15 Sep-16 Sep-17 Sep-15 Sep-16 Sep-17 10 50.0 Sep-15 Sep-16 Sep-17 Sep-15 Sep-16 Sep-17

8 Managed money: Wild swings in 2017, but still a big short on corn

000's Net Position of Managed Funds Contracts Data through December 5, 2017 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 -50 -100 -150 -200 Source: CFTC -250 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Corn Soybeans

9 Ag Wildcards: China (Ethanol & Soybean Imports)

▪ Planned development of a large Chinese ethanol industry MMT Cumulative Chinese Soybean Imports • Could boost corn use 20-30 million tonnes 90 annually (from current levels) 80 Source: GTIS ▪ Soybean imports running 16% ahead of 70 last year (through Oct) 60 50 40 China Ethanol Program Impact 30 Bil Gal/Bu Per Year 2020 Assumptions 2016 20 Gasoline Consumption (Bil Gal) 40.00 up from 38 today 2017 10 E10 Ethanol Blending Requirement (Bil Gal) 4.00 100% penetration 0

From Current Capacity (Bil Gal) 0.85

Jul

Apr

Oct

Jan

Jun

Feb

Mar

Aug

Sep

Nov Dec Additional Ethanol Required (Bil Gal) 3.16 May Additional Corn Required (bbu) 1.11 2.85 (gal/bu) Additional Corn Required (mmt) 28.1 19.7 mmt (at 70%)

10 Fertilizer Market Evolution & Outlook

11 Fertilizer price evolution

▪ Nitrogen remains quite volatile $ per ton Plant Nutrient Prices

550 DAP NOLA MOP Cornbelt Urea NOLA ▪ Phosphates sideways until 500 unseasonal rally late in the 450 year 400 350 300 ▪ Potash bottomed-out in 2016 250 before trending higher, but 200 broadly flat (in the U.S.) in 150 2017 14 15 16 17

Source: Weekly Price Publications

12 Nutrients remain affordable by historical norms

Plant Nutrient Affordability Plant Nutrient Price Index / Crop Price Index 1.60 Source: Weekly Price Publications, CME, USDA, AAPFCO, Mosaic 1.40

1.20

1.00 Less Affordable

0.80

0.60 More Affordable 0.40 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Affordability Metric Average (2010-present)

13 There has been a broad-based rise in demand in 2017…

▪ This is as expected – in general, fertilizer demand is relatively price inelastic. And in a lower ag commodity price environment, the focus should be on maximizing yield.

Global Potash Shipments Mil Tonnes Global Phosphate Shipments Mil Tonnes KCl DAP/MAP/NPS/TSP 67.5 72.5 64-66 Source: IFA, CRU, Mosaic and Company Reports Source: CRU and Mosaic 68.5-70.5 65.0 63.5 70.0 68.3 62.5 67.5 60.0 65.0 57.5 62.5 55.0 60.0 52.5

50.0 57.5

47.5 55.0 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17E 18F 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17E 18F

14 …and a broad-based demand outlook to 2022

Global Phosphate Shipments MMT DAP/MAP/NPS/TSP MMT MOP Global Potash Shipments 80 75 Source: Mosaic and CRU Phosphate Outlook October 2017 Source: Mosaic, CRU 75 70

65 70 60 65 55 60 50 55 45

50 40 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17E 18F 22F 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17E 22F Actual Range Low Forecast Likely Forecast CRU - October 2017 Actual High Forecast Low Forecast Likely Forecast CRU - August 2017

15 Nitrogen Market Evolution & Outlook

16 N: Nitrogen Market Update ▪ Recent developments − New capacity commissioned, notably in the U.S., which has resulted in new trade patterns − Chinese urea exports collapsed in 2017 ➢ A function of higher costs and capacity reductions driven by environmental concerns ▪ Markets closely watching − Further impact of Chinese environmental regulations ➢ Direct: Reduced production thereby reducing urea export availability ➢ Indirect: Reduced production due to a lack of natural gas (being redirected to power production) ▪ What’s next? − Markets are likely to remain volatile, as additional new capacity is ramped up/commissioned in 2018 (U.S. and elsewhere) − The U.S. becomes a globally-important exporter of nitrogen products

17 U.S. Nitrogen Trade Flows: Falling Imports

Mil Tonnes Mil Tonnes U.S. Ammonia Imports U.S. UAN Imports Mil Tonnes U.S. Urea Imports 8.0 3.5 8.0 Source: U.S. Department of Commerce Source: U.S. Department of Commerce Source: U.S. Department of Commerce 7.0 Plant Nutrient Year Ending June 30 7.0 Plant Nutrient Year Ending June 30 3.0 Plant Nutrient Year Ending June 30 6.0 6.0 2.5 5.0 5.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 1.5 3.0 3.0

2.0 1.0 2.0

1.0 0.5 1.0

0.0 0.0 0.0 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

▪ The reliance of the U.S. market on imported U.S. Nitrogen Import Statistics nitrogen took a step back in 2016/17, and the Year-To-Date % Chg % Chg decline is expected to continue YTD YTD Last 7-Yr 7-Yr 1,000 MT 17/18 16/17 Yr Avg Avg - Several new world-scale nitrogen projects were commissioned in Ammonia 1,116 1,406 -21% 1,946 -43% the U.S. during calendar years 2016 and 2017 UAN Solution 560 702 -20% 859 -35% ▪ Thus far in 2017/18 (Jul-Oct), urea imports have Urea 803 1,240 -35% 1,986 -60% dropped by more than one-third Source: U.S. Department of Commerce 18 U.S. Nitrogen Trade Flows: Rising Exports

1000 Tonnes U.S. Ammonia Exports 1000 Tonnes U.S. UAN Exports 1000 Tonnes U.S. Urea Exports 800 1,400 1,000 Source: TFI, U.S. Department of Commerce Source: TFI, U.S. Department of Commerce, Source: TFI, U.S. Department of Commerce 700 Plant Nutrient Year Ending June 30 900 1,200 Fertilizer Year Ending June 30 Plant Nutrient Year Ending June 30 800 600 1,000 700 500 600 800 400 500 600 300 400 400 300 200 200 100 200 100 0 0 0 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

▪ Exports of UAN and ammonia surged in U.S. Nitrogen Export Statistics 2016/17 Year-To-Date % Chg % Chg YTD YTD Last 7-Yr 7-Yr ▪ Thus far in 2017/18 (Jul-Oct), urea exports have 1,000 MT 17/18 16/17 Yr Avg Avg Ammonia 293 114 158% 25 1076% are 5x last year at this point UAN Solution 582 518 12% 139 320% Urea 420 80 422% 67 523% Source: U.S. Department of Commerce U.S. trade data one month delayed 19 Chinese urea exports halved in 2017

Mil Tonnes China Urea Exports 16.0 Source: China Customs, Mosaic 14.0

12.0

10.0

8.0

6.0

4.0

2.0

0.0 00 02 04 06 08 10 12 14 16 Actual Forecast

Year-To-Date (Jan-Oct) % Chg 1000 MT YTD YTD % Chg 7-Yr 7-Yr 2017 2016 Prior Yr Avg Avg Urea 3,740 7,793 -52% 6,376 -41% Source: China Customs 20 Phosphate Market Evolution & Outlook

21 P: Phosphate Market Update ▪ Recent developments − Consolidation/rationalization: Mosaic idling of Plant City, FL operation (~1.5mmt production) and impending acquisition of Vale Fertilizantes assets in Brazil − Strained industry margins ➢ Mostly driven by new supply in 2016 and 2017, and recently by raw material costs ▪ Markets closely watching − Chinese phosphate production/exports held up during the first phase of environmental audits ➢ More noteworthy changes possible in 2018 as environmental taxes are imposed − Other supply changes – new capacity in Morocco and Saudi Arabia was been slow to commission / ramp up in 2017 ▪ What’s next? − Market began to tighten in late-2017 – continuation of that dynamic will depend on the outcome of the above issues − The U.S. continues as a major market for imported product

22 North American Phosphate Industry Evolution

Firms: 18 12 4 Source: IFA, IFDC and Mosaic Facilities: 21 20 12 10.9 Acid Capacity (mmt P2O5): 12.3 8.8

Acid Capacity (mmt P2O5) Percent NA Capacity

5.4 61%

1.9 22%

0.8 9% 0.7 8% 23 Global Consolidation in the P&K space

World's Largest P&K Producers (Mosaic includes Vale Fertilizantes*) Vale Mosaic Vale Fert.

PotashCorp

Uralkali

Belaruskali MOP Equivalent OCP DAP Equivalent K+S

ICL Based on 2015 production Mosaic includes approximately 2 million tonnes Vale Yuntianhua Fertilizantes production, excluding Cubatão P2O5 production based on PACID and SSP production Qinghai Salt Lake K2O production includes MOP, KMS, and SOP Source: Company reports, IFA, CRU, and Mosaic estimates Agrium

0.0 4.0 8.0 12.0 16.0 20.0 24.0

Million Tonnes

*Assumes completion of our a acquisition of the global phosphate and potash operations conducted through Vale Fertilizantes S.A, which we refer to as the “Vale Fertilizantes Acquisition” 24 DAP Margins Strained by Raw Materials

DAP/MAP Prices $ Tonne Published Weekly Spot Prices 550 525 500 Benchmark DAP Stripping Margin 475 450 $ Tonne Calculated from Published Weekly Spot Prices 425 350 400 375 325 350 325 300 Source: Argus 300 275 Jan-14 Jan-15 Jan-16 Jan-17 DAP NOLA MAP Brazil DAP China 275 Ammonia Weekly Raw Materials Prices Sulphur $ Tonne c&f Tampa $ LT 250 700 175

600 150 225 Source: Argus 500 125

200 400 100 Jan-14 Jan-15 Jan-16 Jan-17 300 75

200 50 Source: Argus 100 25 Jan-14 Jan-15 Jan-16 Jan-17 Ammonia Sulphur 25 Timing of China Restructuring Top of Mind

Mil Tonnes China Phosphate Exports DAP/MAP/TSP 12 Source: China Customs, Mosaic 10

8 ▪ Chinese exports of DAP/MAP/TSP:

6 o 11.6 million tonnes in 2015

4 o 9.5mmt last year 2 o Through Oct 2017 are up 20% y-o-y, but 0 a sharp pullback expected in Nov-Dec 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17E

Jan-Oct % Chg YTD YTD % Chg 7-Yr 7-Yr ▪ Stricter environmental enforcement 1000 MT 2017 2016 Prior Yr Avg Avg DAP 5,449 5,006 9% 3,661 49% and industry restructuring look to MAP 2,412 1,609 50% 1,069 126% TSP 781 571 37% 739 6% trim exports in 2018 DAP/M AP/TSP 8,641 7,186 20% 5,608 54% MOP 196 213 -8% 183 7% Urea 3,740 7,793 -52% 6,376 -41% Source: China Customs 26 The U.S. has become a sizable import market

Mil Tonnes U.S. DAP+MAP Imports 1.80 Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, Mosaic 1.60 Plant Nutrient Year Ending June 30

1.40 U.S. trade data one month delayed Thousands 1.20

1.00

0.80

0.60

0.40

0.20

0.00 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

27 Potash Market Evolution & Outlook

28 K: Potash Market Update ▪ Recent developments − Industry expansion has had many analysts calling out an oversupply situation… − …but analysts have a tendency to overestimate capacity ▪ Markets closely watching − New capacity commissioning / ramp up in Canada (K+S) and Russia (Eurochem) − Consolidation and optimization: merger (Agrium + PotashCorp) − Other supply changes – closure of a number of high-cost / resource depleted operations over the past few years – will there be more? ▪ What’s next? − Markets could see more volatility than in the recent past, as additional new capacity is ramped up/commissioned in 2018 − U.S. imports could be disrupted with the ramp-up of the new K+S mine placing volumes domestically, while Eurochem may look to send volumes this direction via their Ben-Trei acquisition

29 No long-term supply and demand imbalance

Mil Tonnes Global Potash Supply and Demand Op Rate MOP Capacity, Production and Operating Rate 90 97.5% ▪ Strong demand outlook 80 95.0% leads to a tighter S&D from 70 92.5%

2019 forward Thousands 60 90.0% ▪ The global MOP operating 50 87.5% rate is forecast to dip to 40 85.0% ~86% in 2018 before 30 82.5% 20 80.0% moving back up to the 89% 10 Source: Company Reports, CRU and Mosaic 77.5% range by 2022 0 75.0% 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17E 18F 19F 20F 21F 22F Operational Capacity Production Operating Rate

30 The industry has rationalized high-cost mines

Capacity Company Facility Date Closed (Tonnes) Mosaic Hersey 50,000 Mid-2014 Mosaic Carlsbad 450,000 December 2014 ▪In the U.S. alone, 3.65 million PotashCorp Penobsquis 800,000 December 2015 tonnes of capacity has been PotashCorp Picadilly 2,000,000 December 2015 PotashCorp Cory Red 600,000 November 2016 shuttered Intrepid West Mine 350,000 July 2016 Intrepid East Mine 200,000 Conversion to Trio Total 3,650,000 Picadilly was a larger replacement for the Penobsquis mine so the net loss in Eastern Canada is 2.0 million tonnes KCl.

31 U.S. imports have been inconsistent

Mil Tonnes U.S. Offshore MOP Imports KCl 2.0 Source: U.S. Department of Commerce 1.8 Fertilizer Year Ending June 30 1.6 ▪ New supply from the K+S 1.4 mine in Canada to compete with Eurochem looking to 1.2 place tonnes from their new 1.0 Russian mines into the U.S. 0.8 (though this latter issue is 0.6 likely to be more of a story in 0.4 2019) 0.2 0.0 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

32 The Evolution of U.S. Fertilizer Markets: What’s Next? Questions?

Andy Jung Presenter: Senior Director, Market & Strategic Analysis Date: December 14, 2017 South Dakota Agri-Business Association Agronomy Conference 33