PotashCorp.com

JP Morgan Industrials Conference

March 11, 2014

David Delaney

Vice President & COO

This presentation contains forward-looking statements or forward-looking information (forward-looking statements). These statements can be identified by expressions of belief, expectation or intention, as well as those statements that are not historical fact. These statements oftencontain words such as “should,” “could,” “expect,” “may,” “anticipate,” “believe,” “intend,” “estimates,” “plans” and similar expressions. These statements are based on certain factors and assumptions including with respect to: foreign exchange rates, expected growth, results of operations, performance, business prospects and opportunities and effective tax rates. While the company considers these factors and assumptions to be reasonable based on information currently available, they may prove to be incorrect. Forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that are difficult to predict. The results or events set forth in forward-looking statements may differ materially from actual results or events. Several factors could cause actual results or events to differ materially from those expressed in the forward-looking statements, including, but not limited to the following: variations from our assumptions with respect to foreign exchange rates, expected growth, results of operations, performance, business prospects and opportunities, and effective tax rates; risks and uncertainties related to operating and workforce changes made in response to our industry and the markets we serve; changes in competitive pressures, including pricing pressures; risks and uncertainties related to our international operations and assets; fluctuations in supply and demand in the fertilizer, sulfur, transportation and petrochemical markets; costs and availability of transportation and distribution for our raw materials and products, including railcars and ocean freight; adverse or uncertain economic conditions and changes in credit and financial markets; the results of sales contract negotiations within major markets; unexpected geological or environmental conditions, including water inflows; economic and political uncertainty around the world; risks associated with natural gas and other hedging activities; changes in capital markets; unexpected or adverse weather conditions; changes in currency and exchange rates; imprecision in reserve estimates; adverse developments in new and pending legal proceedings or government investigations; acquisitions we may undertake; increases in the price or reduced availability of the raw materials that we use; strikes or other forms of work stoppage or slowdowns; timing and impact of capital expenditures; rates of return on, and the risks associated with, our investments and capital expenditures; changes in, and the effects of, government policies and regulations; security risks related to our information technology systems; risks related to reputational loss; and earnings, and the decisions of taxing authorities, which could affect oureffective tax rates. Additional risks and uncertainties can be found in our Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013 under the captions “Forward-Looking Statements” and “Item 1A – Risk Factors” and in our other filings with the US Securities and Exchange Commission and the Canadian provincial securities commissions. Forward-looking statements are given only as at the date of this release and the company disclaims any obligation to update or revise the forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by law.

Forward-looking Statements

Slide#2

PotashCorp Overview

Slide#3

World’s largest fertilizer producer by capacity; #1 in potash and among the largest in nitrogen and phosphate.

Global leader in potash; nutrient with highest margins and significant barriers to entry.

Canadian potash operations and strategic offshore investments position us to benefit from growth markets.

World-class nitrogen and phosphate businesses focused on more stable feed and industrial markets.

• Strong cash flow• Cash flow from operating activities of $3.2B in 2013

• Well positioned potash business• Low-cost supplier to key markets

• 93 percent complete CDN $8.3B expansion program

• Operational capability aligned with anticipated near-term demand, with flexibility to significantly grow sales volume

• Strong balance sheet affords good flexibility• Low leverage relative to historical levels (Net debt to EBITDA)

• Access to $3.5B liquidity (commercial paper/credit facility) at low borrowing rates

• Proven track record of returning capital to shareholders• Dividend increase of 950 percent since January 2011

• Executing share repurchase program (authorization to repurchase up to 5 percent of o/s)

PotashCorp Highlights

Slide#4

PotashCorp Operating Strategy

PotashCorp’s Operational Strategy

Slide#6

Corporate Goals and Operational Strategy Aligned to Drive Value

• Financial Health• Focused growth initiatives• Maintain operational flexibility to capture opportunities and

enhance gross margin• Build and sustain advantaged competitive position

• Supplier of Choice• Product quality standards that set us apart from competitors

• Community engagement• Maintain social license to operate by building relationships and

opportunities in our local communities

• Engaged employees• Attract and retain top talent by providing competitive

compensation and opportunities for development

• No harm to people or environment• Commitment to best-in-class safety and environmental

performance

Focused Growth Initiatives

POT Projects MOS Projects AGU Projects SK Greenfield*0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500BrownfieldGreenfield (Excluding infrastructure and reserve costs)Greenfield (Including infrastructure and reserve costs)

Source: AMEC, Company Reports, PotashCorp

* Based on 2MMT conventional greenfield mine constructed in Saskatchewan.

PotashCorp project costs exclude infrastructure outside the plant gate. Assuming US$/CDN$ at par

Capital Cost per Tonne – (CDN$)

Enhancing Potash Position Through Lower-cost Brownfield Expansions

Potash: Focused Growth Initiatives

Estimated Cost of New Potash Capacity

Slide#8

Rocanville Construction Nearing Completion; Will Add Significant Low-cost Capacity

Potash: Focused Growth Initiatives

Source: PotashCorp

2013 2014 2015F 2016F0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

Slide#9

Million Tonnes (KCl)Remaining Spend: ~$0.3B

Expected Completion: 2015

Incremental Capacity: +3MMT

Competitive Advantage: PotashCorp’s lowest cost capacity, estimated among lowest mine-site production costs globally

Status: • Mill complete and beginning commissioning

efforts• New shaft at ~900 meters; underground

development work progressing concurrently• Conversion of service shaft to production shaft

underway

Rocanville Nameplate Capacity*

* Estimated capacity as per design specifications or completed Canpotex entitlement runs; does not necessarily represent operational capability.

Picadilly Construction Expected to be Complete by the End of 2014

Potash: Focused Growth Initiatives

Source: PotashCorp

2013 2014 2015F 2016F0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

Slide#10

Million Tonnes (KCl)Remaining Spend: ~$0.3B

Expected Completion: 2014

Incremental Capacity: +1.2MMT**

Competitive Advantage: Well positioned to competitively serve PotashCorp’s customers in Latin America

Status: • Mill expansion complete and commissioned• Ceasing production at higher-cost Penobsquis

mine, while simultaneously developing new Picadilly ore body. First production anticipated in late 2014.

• New service and production shafts are now operational

New Brunswick Nameplate Capacity*

* Estimated capacity as per design specifications; does not necessarily represent operational capability.

**Represents replacement of existing 0.8MMT capacity at Penobsquis mine. Potential to increase operational capability to 1.8MMT with staffing and ramp-up.

Enhancing US Operations Through Lower-cost Brownfield Expansions

Nitrogen: Supporting Growth Initiatives

Source: Blue Johnson, Company Reports, CRU, Fertecon, Green Markets, PotashCorp

PotashCorp Average Brown-field Cost

Competitor Average Brown-field Costs**

Estimated Greenfield Cost0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

Slide#11

$US – Cost per Tonne

Estimated Cost of New Ammonia Capacity*

* Calculation based on total projected costs per tonne of ammonia capacity

** Based on publically available information for peer ammonia projects (Austin Powder, Incitec Pivot, Koch, LSB)

Source: PotashCorp

Ammonia Capacity*

New Ammonia Capacity Adds Margin Growth Potential

Nitrogen: Focused Growth Initiatives

2012 2013 2016E0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5 Trinidad Augusta Lima Geismar

Million Tonnes

* All estimated capacity amounts as at beginning of year.

** Contributions based on 2013 per-tonne margins for anticipated capacity additions.

Augusta Expansion• Completed: 2012 (August)• Incremental Capacity: 70K MT• Incremental Gross Margin (2013): ~$15M

Geismar Expansion• Completed: 2013 (February)• Incremental Capacity: 500K MT• Incremental Gross Margin (2013): ~$100M

Lima Expansion• Anticipated Completion: 2015 (September)• Incremental Capacity:

• 100K MT (Ammonia)• 80K MT (Urea solution)

• Incremental Gross Margin (Potential)**: ~$40M

Slide#12

Operational Flexibility

Million Tonnes (KCl)

Capability Aligned With Expected Demand; Flexibility to Capture Growth

Potash: Operational Flexibility

Source: PotashCorp

• 93 percent complete spend on multi-year expansion program

• Expansion construction to be finalized on two remaining projects (Rocanville and Picadilly) to support approximately 18 million tonnes of nameplate capacity by 2015

• Operations will be staffed and ramped up each year according to expected market conditions

• Inventory position provides additional flexibility to serve customer needs

2013 2014F 2015E 2016E0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20Nameplate Capacity* Inventory Estimate

2014 Volume Guidance Midpoint

* Estimated capacity as per design specifications or completed Canpotex entitlement runs; does not necessarily represent operational capability.

** Estimated annual achievable production level at current staffing and operational readiness. Estimate does not include inventory-related shutdowns and unplanned downtime.

Slide#14

Source: PotashCorp

PotashCorp Gross Margin by Category

Portfolio Directed to Higher Margin, More Stable Products

Nitrogen: Operational Flexibility

2009 2010 2011 2012 20130%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

140%

160%

180%Industrial Fertilizer

Percentage of Five-year Average

Slide#15

Trinidad Augusta Geismar Lima0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500 Industrial Fertilizer

Thousand Tonnes Product – 2013

PotashCorp Sales by Nitrogen Plant

Source: Company Reports, CRU, PotashCorp

Industrial and Feed Products Provide Flexibility and Enhance Stability in Phosphate

Phosphate: Operational Flexibility

Slide#16

PotashCorp Gross Margin by Category

Feed & Industrial Fertilizer0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Percentage of Net Sales (2013)

PotashCorp

OCP** Mosaic* Agrium* CF*0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%Feed & Industrial Fertilizer

Finished Product Mix

* Based on most recently reported 12-month sales volume totals as per publicly available data

** Estimate per CRU. Excludes phosphate rock sales

Percentage

Advantaged Competitive Position

Potash: Advantaged Competitive Position

Source: CRU (2012 Study), Public Filings, PotashCorp

Slide#18

Competitively Positioned on the Global Cost Curve

POT (SK)

POT (NB)

Potash Industry Site Cost Profile*

US$ Per Tonne (FOB Mine**)

* Site cost includes all cash operating costs, estimated per-tonne sustaining capital expenditures, royalties and taxes. Darker shaded bars represent CRU estimated mine site production costs at actual production levels; lighter shaded bars represent PotashCorp’s estimate of competitors cost range based on company reported data. Includes impact of PotashCorp’s announced changes for 2014 (upper end of range) and 2016 target (lower end of range).

** Competitive position dependent on end-market destination.

Optimizing Production at Our Lowest-cost Facilities

Potash: Advantaged Competitive Position

Source: PotashCorp

* Based on PotashCorp’s estimate of cash costs of production (defined as total cost of production less per-tonne depreciation cost) at full operating rates; levels not adjusted for inflation

2013 Cash Costs Profile

Slide#19

2016E Cash Cost Profile*

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0 RocanvilleLaniganPatience LakeCoryAllan

$50-$75 per tonne

$100-$125

per tonne

>$125 per tonne

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0 RocanvilleAllanLaniganCoryPatience LakeNew Brunswick

$50-$75 per tonne

$75-$100 per tonne

$100-$125 per

tonne

>$125 per tonne

Operational Capability - Million Tonnes KCl Operational Capability - Million Tonnes KCl

Targeted Cost Improvements

Potash: Advantaged Competitive Position

Source: PotashCorp

2013Cash Cost

2014ECash Cost

2016Cash Cost Target

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

* As compared to 2013 levels (not adjusted for inflation); target assumes successful ramp-up of expansions at lower-cost facilities.

Annualized Improvement*:

~$15-$20 per tonne

Cash Cost of Production – Potash

Annualized Improvement*:

~$20-$30 per tonne

Slide#20

US$ Per Tonne

Optimize Delivered Cost Advantages; US Advantaged Position

Nitrogen: Advantaged Competitive Position

Source: PotashCorp

Slide#21

Ammonia Urea0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700 POT Avg US Netback US Benchmark Price*• Geographic positioning and lower

transportation costs provide opportunity for higher average realized prices

• Proximity to corn belt allows for reduced freight costs on fertilizer sales

• Industrial ammonia production located near consumers, some via pipeline direct to customers

* Represents average Tampa Ammonia and NOLA Urea prices for 2013

Source: Fertecon, PotashCorp

Q4-10

Q4-11

Q4-12

Q4-13

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8 Trinidad Gas* US Gas

Production – Million Tonnes

Optimize Delivered Cost Advantages; Trinidad Position Improving

Nitrogen: Advantaged Competitive Position

Gas Cost – US$ Per MMBtu

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014E0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

Slide#22

* Estimate based on Tampa ammonia priced divided by 100. Actual price based on specific contract, which may vary slightly.

Natural Gas Costs Estimated Production Lost to Gas Curtailments

Production - Million Tonnes (P2O5)

Focus on Efficiencies and Optimization of P2O5 Production Portfolio

Phosphate: Advantaged Competitive Position

Source: PotashCorp

• Optimizing production portfolio

• Close Suwannee River chemical plant – one of two plants at White Springs

• Net reduction of P2O5 (after offset from higher operating rates at Aurora) is ~215,000 tonnes;

• No expected impact to customers given ability to flex production of end products

2013 2014E 2015E0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5 Aurora White Springs Geismar

Slide#23

Focus on Efficiencies and Optimization of P2O5 Production Portfolio

Phosphate: Advantaged Competitive Position

Source: PotashCorp

Slide#24

2012 2013 2014F150

250

350

450

550US$ Per Product Tonne

Costs of Goods Sold

• Greater efficiency and improved procurement practices expected to reduce costs in 2014• Reduced workforce levels expected to improve

cost structure

• Mining efficiencies (course ore recovery in Aurora) to lower rock costs

• Optimizing sulfur sourcing points and freight terms to reduce delivered cost

• Lower ammonia prices and shifting sales mix away from more ammonia intensive fertilizer products

Creating Shareholder Value

Source: PotashCorp

PotashCorp Total Capital Spending**

CAPEX Spending Largely Complete

PotashCorp’s Opportunity

93%

7%

Completed Remaining

PotashCorp Potash Projects Estimated Capital Spending*

US$ Billions

Slide#26

* As at December 31, 2013. Includes both debottleneck and expansion spending.

** Cash additions to property, plant and equipment per cash flow statement (2006-2013)

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014E 2015E 2016E

Utilizing Strong Cash Flow to Enhance Long-term Shareholder Returns

PotashCorp’s Opportunity

* Dividends declared each quarter** $0.10 per share dividend adjusted for 3 for 1 stock split; rounded to nearest cent.

Source: Bloomberg, PotashCorp

5 PercentShare Repurchase

ProgramAnnounced July 24, 2013 (up to $2 billion through August 1, 2014)

POT AGU MOS CF IPI0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

4.0%

3.1%

2.0%

1.5%

0.0%

Percent Yield*

Slide#27

* Indicated yield percentage as per Bloomberg at March 6, 2014.

Q4-10**

Q1-11

Q2-11

Q3-11

Q4-11

Q1-12

Q2-12

Q3-12

Q4-12

Q1-13

Q2-13

Q3-13

Q4-13

$0.00

$0.05

$0.10

$0.15

$0.20

$0.25

$0.30

$0.35

$0.40

$0.03

$0.35

Dividend* per Share – US$

950% Increase

There’s more online:

PotashCorp.comVisit us online

Facebook.com/PotashCorpFind us on Facebook

Twitter.com/PotashCorpFollow us on Twitter

Thank you

Click icon to add picture

Try Our Overview Site: www.potashcorp.com/overview

Looking For More Industry and Company Information?

Explore our Key Markets… Find Data on Key Crops… Learn about our Company