Louis, Missouri Jersey 5.La Mirada, Tennessee 4.Gaggenau, Germany 5.Sullivan, Missouri 5.Statesville, North California 7.Pasadena, Texas 5.Istanbul, Turkey 6.Massillon, Ohio Carolina 6.Manitowoc, 8.Seabrook, Texas 6.Barbastro, Spain 7.Norwalk, Ohio 6.Elyria, Ohio Wisconsin 9.Orangeville, Ontario, 7.Melle, Germany 8.North Baltimore, 7.La Porte, Texas 7.McMinnville, Canada 8 & 9. Weighted-average assumptions used to determine net periodic benefit cost for the years ended December 31: Pension Benefits Health Care Benefits 2014 2013 2012 2014 2013 2012 Discount rate* 4.83% 4.12% 5.11% 4.38% 3.71% 4.66% Expected long-term return on plan assets* 6.86% 8.41% 8.43% —% —% —% Assumed health care cost trend rates at December 31: Health care cost trend rate assumed for next year N/A N/A N/A 7.02% 7.39% 8.35% Rate to which the cost trend rate is assumed to decline (the ultimate trend rate) N/A N/A N/A 4.50% 4.63% 5.00% Year that the rate reaches the ultimate trend rate N/A N/A N/A 2027 2025 2019 * The mark-to-market component of net periodic costs is determined based on discount rates as of year end and actual asset returns during the year.

Louvain-La-Nueve, Belgium 46. La Porte, Indiana 28.

La Porte, Texas (4) 7. Pension Benefits Health Care Benefits (In millions) 2012 2011 2012 2011 Change in benefit obligation: Projected benefit obligation — beginning of year $ 543.5 $ 514.4 $ 21.9 $ 23.2 Service cost 1.5 1.6 — — Interest cost 27.2 28.3 0.8 1.0 Actuarial loss (gain) 63.4 38.4 (2.0) 0.4 Participant contributions — — 0.5 0.8 Benefits paid (39.8) (38.7) (2.7) (3.3) Other 1.4 (0.5) 0.4 (0.2) Projected benefit obligation — end of year $ 597.2 $ 543.5 $ 18.9 $ 21.9 Projected salary increases 2.8 2.6 — — Accumulated benefit obligation $ 594.4 $ 540.9 $ 18.9 $ 21.9 Change in plan assets: Plan assets — beginning of year $ 335.6 $ 354.6 $ — $ — Actual return on plan assets 46.9 (15.9) — — Company contributions 66.8 35.6 2.0 2.5 Plan participants’ contributions — — 0.5 0.8 Benefits paid (39.8) (38.7) (2.7) (3.3) Other 0.9 — 0.2 — Plan assets — end of year $ 410.4 $ 335.6 $ — $ — Under-funded status at end of year $ (186.8) $ (207.9) $ (18.9) $ (21.9) 60 POLYONE CORPORATION Amounts included in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets are as follows: Pension Benefits Health Care Benefits (In millions) 2012 2011 2012 2011 Accrued expenses and other liabilities $ 4.0 $ 4.3 $ 1.9 $ 3.0 Other non-current liabilities 182.8 203.6 17.0 18.9 Change in accumulated other comprehensive loss before tax: Pension Benefits Health Care Benefits (In millions) 2012 2011 2012 2011 Prior year $ 0.3 $ 0.5 $ (17.4) $ (34.9) Prior service (cost) credit recognized during year — (0.2) 17.4 17.4 Other adjustments — — — 0.1 Current year $ 0.3 $ 0.3 $ — $ (17.4) As of December 31, 2012 and 2011, we had plans with total projected and accumulated benefit obligations in excess of the related plan assets as follows: Pension Benefits Health Care Benefits (In millions) 2012 2011 2012 2011 Projected benefit obligation $ 596.4 $ 542.8 $ 18.9 $ 21.9 Accumulated benefit obligation 593.6 540.3 18.9 21.9 Fair value of plan assets 409.6 334.9 — — Weighted-average assumptions used to determine benefit obligations at December 31: Pension Benefits Health Care Benefits 2012 2011 2012 2011 Discount rate 4.12% 5.11% 3.71% 4.51% Assumed health care cost trend rates at December 31: Health care cost trend rate assumed for next year N/A N/A 7.39% 8.50% Rate to which the cost trend rate is assumed to decline (the ultimate trend rate) N/A N/A 4.63% 5.00% Year that the rate reaches the ultimate trend rate N/A N/A 2025 2019 Assumed health care cost trend rates have an effect on the amounts reported for the health care plans.

La Porte, Indiana 31. La Porte, Texas 10.

La Porte, Texas (4) 8.