40-F

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 40-F

[Check one]

oREGISTRATION STATEMENT PURSUANT TO SECTION 12 OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

OR

xANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13(a) or 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015 Commission File Number 001-13382

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)

N/A

(Translation of Registrant’s name into English (if applicable))

Province of Ontario, Canada

(Province or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)

1041

(Primary Standard Industrial Classification Code Number (if applicable))

650430083

(I.R.S. Employer Identification Number (if applicable))

25 York Street, 17th Floor, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5J 2V5 (416) 365-5123

(Address and telephone number of Registrant’s principal executive offices)

Brian G. Lloyd, Parr Brown Gee & Loveless,

101 South 200 East, Suite 700, Salt Lake City, Utah 84111

(801) 532-7840

(Name, address (including zip code) and telephone number (including area code)

of agent for service in the United States)

Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act.

Title of each class	Name of each exchange on which registered
Common stock, no par value	New York Stock Exchange Toronto Stock Exchange

Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act.

None

(Title of Class)

Securities for which there is a reporting obligation pursuant to Section 15(d) of the Act.

None

(Title of Class)

For annual reports, indicate by check mark the information filed with this Form:

x Annual information formx Audited annual financial statements

Indicate the number of outstanding shares of each of the issuer’s classes of capital or common stock as of the close of the period covered by the annual report.

As of December 31, 2015, there were 1,146,540,188 common shares and no preferred shares outstanding.

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant by filing the information contained in this form is also thereby furnishing the information to the Commission pursuant to Rule 12g3-2(b) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”).  If “Yes” is marked, indicate the file number assigned to the Registrant in connection with such Rule.

Yes o   No x

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant was required to file such reports) and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.

Yes x   No o

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant was required to submit and post such files).

Yes o   No ¨

NOTE FOR U.S. READERS ON CANADA/U.S. REPORTING DIFFERENCES

Our Annual Information Form dated March 30, 2016 and Management’s Discussion and Analysis, together with our audited consolidated financial statements and notes thereto as of December 31, 2015 and 2014 and for the years then ended, are filed under cover of this form as exhibits 99.1, 99.2 and 99.3, respectively. We prepare our financial statements in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”) as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board.

Our common shares are listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange and the New York Stock Exchange. There are certain differences between the corporate governance practices applicable to us and those applicable to U.S. companies under the New York Stock Exchange listing standards.  A summary of the significant differences can be found at http://www.kinross.com/about/governance/default.aspx.

DISCLOSURE CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

We maintain disclosure controls and procedures designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed in reports filed under the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, (the “Exchange Act”) is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the appropriate time periods and that such information is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate, to allow for timely disclosures regarding required disclosure.  In designing and evaluating the disclosure controls and procedures, we recognize that any disclosure controls and procedures, no matter how well conceived or operated, can only provide reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system are met, and management is required to exercise its judgment in evaluating the cost-benefit relationship of possible controls and procedures.

As required by Rule 13a-15(b) under the Exchange Act, we conducted an evaluation, under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures as of December 31, 2015, the end of the period covered by this annual report on Form 40-F. Based on that evaluation, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that, as of December 31, 2015, the design and operation of the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures provide reasonable assurance that they are effective.

MANAGEMENT’S REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING

Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting.  With the participation of the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer, our management conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting based on the framework and criteria established in Internal Control—Integrated Framework (2013), issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission.  Based on this evaluation, our management has concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2015.  Because of inherent limitations, internal controls over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatement. In addition, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risks that controls may become inadequate because of changes in relevant guidelines or conditions in the control structure, or that the degree of compliance with policies or procedures may deteriorate. KPMG LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, who audited the consolidated financial statements of the Company as at December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014 and for the years then ended, has issued an attestation report, included as an exhibit to this annual report on Form 40-F, addressing the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2015.

Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting

There have been no changes to our system of internal control over financial reporting for the year ended December 31, 2015 or since that time that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

AUDIT AND RISK COMMITTEE

The audit and risk committee of our Board of Directors is comprised of four directors: John A. Brough, chairman, John M.H. Huxley, Ave G. Lethbridge and Una M. Power.  Each of the members of the audit and risk committee is “independent” as that term is defined in the listing standards of the New York Stock Exchange.  The board of directors has determined that Mr. Brough is an “audit committee financial expert” as such term is defined in paragraph 8(b) of General Instructions B to Form 40-F.  Information concerning Mr. Brough’s relevant education and experience is included in his biographical information contained in the Company’s Annual Information Form included as exhibit 99.1.  The Securities and Exchange Commission has indicated that the designation of a person as an audit committee financial expert does not make such person an “expert” for any purpose, impose any duties, obligations or liabilities on such person that are greater than those imposed generally on members of the audit and risk committee and the board of directors who do not carry this designation, or affect the duties, obligations or liability of any other member of the audit and risk committee or board of directors.

CODE OF ETHICS

The Code of Business Conduct and Ethics may be viewed at the Company’s website at www.kinross.com under “About Kinross — Governance” and is available in print to any shareholder upon written request to the Company’s Corporate Secretary. Any amendments to the Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, including a description of such amendment, will be posted to the Company’s website within five business days following the date of the amendment.

The Company did not grant any waivers under its Code of Business Conduct and Ethics during 2015.

PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES

We paid the following fees to our independent registered public accounting firm during the last two fiscal years:

	2015		2014
Audit Fees	CDN $	3,914,000	CDN $	4,042,000
Audit-Related Fees	CDN $	160,000	CDN $	160,000
Tax Fees	CDN $	129,000	CDN $	57,000
All Other Fees	CDN $	80,000	CDN $	149,000

Audit-related fees include fees related to translation services and pension plan audits.  Tax fees were for tax compliance and advisory services.  “All Other Fees” includes amounts for products and services related to other non-audit services.

The audit and risk committee is required to approve all services provided by our principal auditor.  All audit services, audit-related services, tax services, and other services provided for the year ended December 31, 2015 were pre-approved by the audit and risk committee which concluded that the provision of such services by KPMG LLP was compatible with the maintenance of that firm’s independence in the conduct of its auditing functions.

OFF-BALANCE SHEET ARRANGEMENTS

Our off-balance sheet arrangements are disclosed in Kinross’ Management’s Discussion and Analysis included as exhibit 99.2 under the captions “Liquidity and Capital Resources” and “Risk Analysis” and in our audited consolidated financial statements under Note 12, “Long-term debt and credit facilities,” under Note 13, “Provisions,” and under Note 19, “Commitments and Contingencies” to Kinross’ audited consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2015 included as exhibit 99.3 to this annual report on Form 40-F and incorporated herein by this reference.

CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS

The contractual obligations of the Company are disclosed in Kinross’ Management’s Discussion and Analysis included as exhibit 99.2 under the caption “Liquidity and Capital Resources — Contractual Obligations and Commitments”, and under Note 12 “Long-term debt and credit facilities” and under Note 19, “Commitments and Contingencies” to Kinross’ audited consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2015 included as exhibit 99.3 to this annual report on Form 40-F and incorporated herein by this reference.

MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURE

Information concerning mine safety violations and other regulatory matters required by Section 1503(a) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act and paragraph (16) of General Instruction B to Form 40-F is included in exhibit 99.7 of this annual report on Form 40-F.

SAFE HARBOR FOR FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

Cautionary Statement on Forward-Looking Information

All statements, other than statements of historical fact, contained or incorporated by reference in this annual report on Form 40-F including, but not limited to, any information as to the future financial or operating performance of Kinross, constitute “forward-looking information” or “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of certain securities laws, including the provisions of the Securities Act (Ontario) and the provisions for “safe harbor” under the United States Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and are based on expectations, estimates and projections as of the date of this annual report on Form 40-F. Forward-looking statements contained in this annual report on Form 40-F, include, without limitation, statements with respect to our guidance for production; production costs of sales, all-in sustaining cost and capital expenditures; mineral reserve and mineral resource estimates as well as references to other possible events, the future price of gold and silver, the estimation of mineral reserves and mineral resources, the realization of mineral reserve and mineral resource estimates, the timing and amount of estimated future production, costs of production, capital expenditures, costs and timing of the development of projects and new deposits, success of exploration, development and mining activities, permitting timelines, government regulation of mining operations, environmental risks, currency fluctuations, capital requirements, project studies, mine life extensions, continuous improvement initiatives; and resolution of pending litigation. The words “anticipate”, “assumption”, “believe”, “budget”, “contemplate”, “consideration”, “contingent”, “estimates”, ‘‘expects’’, “explore”, “feasibility”, “forecast”, “focus”, “forward”, “guidance”, “indicate”, “intend”, “initiative”, “measures”, “model”, “objective”, “optimize”, “opportunity”, “options”, “plan”, “possible”, “planned” “potential”, “pre-feasibility”, “prospect”, “priority”, “project”, “prospect”, “pursue”, “schedule”, “seek”, “strategy”, “study”, “target”, “timeline” or “trend”, or variations of or similar such words and phrases or statements that certain actions, events or results may, could, should, would, might or will be achieved, received or taken, or will occur or result and similar such expressions identify forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are necessarily based upon a number of estimates and assumptions that, while considered reasonable by Kinross as of the date of such statements, are inherently subject to significant business, economic and competitive uncertainties and contingencies. The estimates, models and assumptions of Kinross referenced, contained or incorporated by reference in this annual report on Form 40-F, which may prove to be incorrect, include, but are not limited to, the various assumptions set forth herein: (1) there being no significant disruptions affecting the operations of the Company, whether due to extreme weather events (including, without limitation, excessive or lack of rainfall) and other or related natural disasters, labor disruptions (including but not limited to following workforce reductions), supply disruptions, power disruptions, damage to equipment or otherwise; (2) permitting, development, operations and production from the Company’s operations being consistent with Kinross’ current expectations including, without limitation, water and power supply, and operation of the tailings reprocessing facility at Paracatu; (3) political and legal developments in any jurisdiction in which the Company operates being consistent with its current expectations including, without limitation, the impact of political tensions and uncertainty in the Russian Federation and Ukraine or any related sanctions and any other similar restrictions or penalties imposed, or actions taken, by any government, including but not limited to potential power rationing, tailings facility regulation and amendments to mining laws in Brazil, potential amendments to water laws and/or other water use restrictions and regulatory actions in Chile, potential amendments to minerals and mining laws and dam safety regulation in Ghana, potential amendments to customs and mining laws (including but not limited amendments to the VAT) in Mauritania, and potential amendments to and enforcement of tax laws in Russia (including, but not limited to, the interpretation, implementation, application and enforcement of any such laws and amendments thereto), being consistent with Kinross’ current expectations; (4) the exchange rate between the Canadian dollar, Brazilian real, Chilean peso, Russian rouble, Mauritanian ouguiya, Ghanaian cedi and the U.S. dollar being approximately consistent with current levels; (5) certain price assumptions for gold and silver; (6) prices for diesel, natural gas, fuel oil, electricity and other key supplies being approximately consistent with

current levels; (7) production and cost of sales forecasts for the Company meeting expectations; (8) the accuracy of the current mineral reserve and mineral resource estimates of the Company (including but not limited to ore tonnage and ore grade estimates); (9) labor and materials costs increasing on a basis consistent with Kinross’ current expectations; (10) the terms and conditions of the legal and fiscal stability agreements for the Tasiast and Chirano operations being interpreted and applied in a manner consistent with their intent and Kinross’ expectations; (11) goodwill and/or asset impairment potential; and (12) access to capital markets, including but not limited to credit ratings being consistent with the Company’s current expectations. Known and unknown factors could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements. Such factors include, but are not limited to those set out in the Risk Factors section of our 2015 Annual Information From as well as: sanctions (or any other similar restrictions or penalties) now or subsequently imposed, or other actions taken, by, against, in respect of or otherwise impacting any jurisdiction in which the Company is domiciled or operates (including but not limited to the Russian Federation, Canada, the European Union and the United States), or any government or citizens of, persons or companies domiciled in, or the Company’s business, operations or other activities in, any such jurisdiction; litigation commenced, or other claims or actions brought, against the Company (and/or any of its directors, officers or employees) in respect of the cessation by the Company of investment in and development of Fruta Del Norte and its sale, or any of the Company’s prior activities on or in respect thereof or otherwise in Ecuador; fluctuations in the currency markets; fluctuations in the spot and forward price of gold or certain other commodities (such as fuel and electricity); changes in the discount rates applied to calculate the present value of net future cash flows based on country-specific real weighted average cost of capital; changes in the market valuations of peer group gold producers and the Company, and the resulting impact on market price to net asset value multiples; changes in various market variables, such as interest rates, foreign exchange rates, gold or silver prices and lease rates, or global fuel prices, that could impact the mark-to-market value of outstanding derivative instruments and ongoing payments/receipts under any financial obligations; risks arising from holding derivative instruments (such as credit risk, market liquidity risk and mark-to-market risk); changes in national and local government legislation, taxation (including but not limited to income tax, advance income tax, stamp tax, withholding tax, capital tax, tariffs, value-added or sales tax, capital outflow tax, capital gains tax, windfall or windfall profits tax, royalty, excise tax, customs/import or export taxes/duties, asset taxes, asset transfer tax, property use or other real estate tax, together with any related fine, penalty, surcharge, or interest imposed in connection with such taxes), controls, policies and regulations; the security of personnel and assets; political or economic developments in Brazil, Chile, Canada, Ghana, Mauritania, Russia, the United States, or other countries in which Kinross does business or may carry on business; business opportunities that may be presented to, or pursued by, us; our ability to successfully integrate acquisitions and complete divestitures; operating or technical difficulties in connection with mining or development activities; employee relations; litigation or other claims against, or regulatory investigations and/or any enforcement actions or sanctions in respect of the Company (and/or its directors, officers, or employees) including, but not limited to, securities class action litigation in Canada and/or the United States, or any investigations, enforcement actions and/or sanctions under any applicable anti-corruption, international sanctions and/or anti-money laundering laws and regulations in Canada, the United States or any other applicable jurisdiction; the speculative nature of gold exploration and development including, but not limited to, the risks of obtaining necessary licenses and permits; diminishing quantities or grades of mineral reserves; adverse changes in our credit rating; and contests over title to properties. In addition, there are risks and hazards associated with the business of gold exploration, development and mining, including environmental hazards, industrial accidents, unusual or unexpected formations, pressures, cave-ins, flooding and gold bullion losses (and the risk of inadequate insurance, or the inability to obtain insurance, to cover these risks). Many of these uncertainties and contingencies can directly or indirectly affect, and could cause, Kinross’ actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied in any forward-looking statements made by, or on behalf of, Kinross, including but not limited to resulting in an impairment charge on goodwill and/or assets. There can be no assurance that forward-looking statements will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. Forward-looking statements are

provided for the purpose of providing information about management’s expectations and plans relating to the future. All of the forward-looking statements made or incorporated by reference, in this annual report on Form 40-F are qualified by these cautionary statements, including but not limited to the “Risk Factors” section in our 2015 Annual Information Form, and those made in our other filings with the securities regulators of Canada and the United States including, but not limited to, the cautionary statements made in the “Risk Factors” section of our 2015 Annual Information Form and in the “Risk Analysis” section of our Management’s Discussion and Analysis for the year ended December 31, 2015. These factors are not intended to represent a complete list of the factors that could affect Kinross. Kinross disclaims any intention or obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements or to explain any material difference between subsequent actual events and such forward-looking statements, except to the extent required by applicable law.

UNDERTAKING AND CONSENT TO SERVICE OF PROCESS

Registrant undertakes to make available, in person or by telephone, representatives to respond to inquiries made by the Commission staff, and to furnish promptly, when requested to do so by the Commission staff, information relating to: the securities registered pursuant to Form 40-F; the securities in relation to which the obligation to file an annual report on Form 40-F arises; or transactions in said securities.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

A copy of Kinross’ audited consolidated financial statements as at December 31, 2015 and 2014, and for each of the years then ended, together with the accompanying Management’s Discussion and Analysis is available at www.kinross.com or under the Company’s profile on SEDAR (www.sedar.com). The Annual Information Form of Kinross in this annual report is also available at www.kinross.com and under the Company’s profile on SEDAR (www.sedar.com) and this annual report on Form 40-F, including all of the foregoing documents, is available on EDGAR (www.sec.gov).  Upon the written request of any shareholder, Kinross will provide a copy of this annual report on Form 40-F, including the Financial Statements, Management’s Discussion and Analysis, and the Annual Information Form included as exhibits hereto.  Written requests for such information should be directed to Investor Relations, Kinross Gold Corporation, 25 York Street, 17th Floor, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5J 2V5, toll free 1-866-561-3636 or info@kinross.com.

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of the Exchange Act, the Registrant certifies that it meets all of the requirements for filing on Form 40-F and has duly caused this annual report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereto duly authorized.

	KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION
March 30, 2016	By	/s/ Tony S. Giardini
		Tony S. Giardini
		Executive Vice President and
		Chief Financial Officer

EXHIBIT INDEX

Exhibit	Description
99.1	Annual Information Form for Kinross Gold Corporation dated March 30, 2016
99.2	Kinross Gold Corporation Management’s Discussion and Analysis as filed on Form 6-K on February 10, 2016
99.3	Audited consolidated financial statements of Kinross Gold Corporation as at December 31, 2015 and 2014 and for the years then ended, together with the report of KPMG LLP, the independent registered public accounting firm of Kinross Gold Corporation thereon, as filed on Form 6-K on February 10, 2016
99.4	Reports of KPMG LLP, independent registered public accounting firm for Kinross Gold Corporation on the audited consolidated financial statements and internal control over financial reporting
99.5	Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting
99.6	Consent of KPMG LLP, independent registered public accounting firm for Kinross Gold Corporation
99.7	Information concerning mine safety violations or other regulatory matters required by Section 1503(a) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, filed herewith
99.8	Consent of John Sims to being named as a qualified person
99.9	Certification of the Principal Executive Officer pursuant to Rule 13a — 14(a)
99.10	Certification of the Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Rule 13a — 14(a)
99.11	Certification of the Principal Executive Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 (Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)*
99.12	Certification of the Chief Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 (Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley act of 2002)*

* This information is furnished and not filed for purposes of Section 11 and 12 of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

EX-99.1

Exhibit 99.1

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

ANNUAL INFORMATION FORM

FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2015

Dated March 30, 2016

TABLE OF CONTENTS

	Page
CAUTIONARY STATEMENT	3
CORPORATE STRUCTURE	5
GENERAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE BUSINESS	10
OVERVIEW	10
THREE YEAR HISTORY	10
DESCRIPTION OF THE BUSINESS	12
COMPETITIVE CONDITIONS	12
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION	13
OPERATIONS	14
GOLD EQUIVALENT PRODUCTION AND SALES	15
MARKETING	16
KINROSS MINERAL RESERVES AND MINERAL RESOURCES	17
KINROSS MATERIAL PROPERTIES	25
Paracatu, Brazil	25
Kupol, Russian Federation	31
Tasiast, Mauritania	43
OTHER KINROSS PROPERTIES	50
Fort Knox and Area, Alaska, United States	50
Round Mountain, Nye County, Nevada, United States	51
Bald Mountain, White Pine Country, Nevada, United States	52
La Coipa, Chile	53
Kettle River – Buckhorn, Washington State, United States	54
Lobo-Marte, Chile	56
Cerro Casale, Chile	57
Maricunga, Chile	58
Chirano, Ghana	59
RISK FACTORS	61
DIVIDEND PAYMENTS AND DIVIDEND POLICY	77
LEGAL PROCEEDINGS AND REGULATORY ACTIONS	78
DESCRIPTION OF CAPITAL STRUCTURE	79
MARKET PRICE FOR KINROSS SECURITIES	80
RATINGS	81
DIRECTORS AND OFFICERS	82
CEASE TRADE ORDERS, BANKRUPTCIES, PENALTIES OR SANCTIONS	86
CONFLICT OF INTEREST	87
INTEREST OF MANAGEMENT AND OTHERS IN MATERIAL TRANSACTIONS	87
TRANSFER AGENT AND REGISTRAR	87
MATERIAL CONTRACTS	88
INTERESTS OF EXPERTS	88
AUDIT AND RISK COMMITTEE	88
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION	90
GLOSSARY OF TECHNICAL TERMS	90
SCHEDULE “A” - CHARTER OF THE AUDIT AND RISK COMMITTEE	97

IMPORTANT NOTICE

ABOUT INFORMATION IN THIS ANNUAL INFORMATION FORM

Unless specifically stated otherwise in this Annual Information Form:

·all dollar amounts are in United States dollars unless expressly stated otherwise;

·information is presented as of December 31, 2015; and

·references to “Kinross”, the “Company”, “its”, “our” and “we”, or related terms, refer to Kinross Gold Corporation or Kinross Gold Corporation and/or one or more or all of its subsidiaries, as may be applicable in the context.

CAUTIONARY STATEMENT

All statements, other than statements of historical fact, contained or incorporated by reference in this Annual Information Form (“AIF”) including, but not limited to, any information as to the future financial or operating performance of Kinross, constitute ‘‘forward-looking information’’ or ‘‘forward-looking statements’’ within the meaning of certain securities laws, including the provisions of the Securities Act (Ontario) and the provisions for ‘‘safe harbor’’ under the United States Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and are based on expectations, estimates and projections as of the date of this AIF. Forward-looking statements contained in this AIF, include, without limitation, statements with respect to our guidance for production; production costs of sales, all-in sustaining cost and capital expenditures; mineral reserve and mineral resource estimates as well as references to other possible events, the future price of gold and silver, the estimation of mineral reserves and mineral resources, the realization of mineral reserve and mineral resource estimates, the timing and amount of estimated future production, costs of production, capital expenditures, costs and timing of the development of projects and new deposits, success of exploration, development and mining activities, permitting timelines, government regulation of mining operations, environmental risks, currency fluctuations, capital requirements, project studies, mine life extensions, continuous improvement initiatives, and resolution of pending litigation. The words “anticipate”, “assumption”, “believe”, “budget”, “contemplate”, “consideration”, “contingent”, “estimates”, ‘‘expects’’, “explore”, “feasibility”, “forecast”, “focus”, “forward”, “guidance”, “indicate”, “intend”, “initiative”, “measures”, “model”, “objective”, “optimize”, “opportunity”, “options”, “plan”, “possible”, “planned” “potential”, “pre-feasibility”, “prospect”, “priority”, “project”, “prospect”, “pursue”, “schedule”, “seek”, “strategy”, “study”, “target”, “timeline” or “trend”, or variations of or similar such words and phrases or statements that certain actions, events or results may, could, should, would, might or will be achieved, received or taken, or will occur or result and similar such expressions identify forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are necessarily based upon a number of estimates and assumptions that, while considered reasonable by Kinross as of the date of such statements, are inherently subject to significant business, economic and competitive uncertainties and contingencies. The estimates, models and assumptions of Kinross referenced, contained or incorporated by reference in this AIF, which may prove to be incorrect, include, but are not limited to, the various assumptions set forth herein and in our Management’s Discussion and Analysis (“MD&A”) for the year-ended 2015 as well as: (1) there being no significant disruptions affecting the operations of the Company whether due to extreme weather events (including, without limitation, excessive or lack of rainfall) and other or related natural disasters, labour disruptions (including but not limited to following workforce reductions), supply disruptions, power disruptions, damage to equipment or otherwise; (2) permitting, development, operations and production from the Company’s operations being consistent with Kinross’ current expectations including, without limitation, water and power supply, and operation of the tailings reprocessing facility at Paracatu; (3) political and legal developments in any jurisdiction in which the Company operates being consistent with its current expectations including, without limitation, the impact of political tensions and uncertainty in the Russian Federation and Ukraine or any related sanctions and any other similar restrictions or penalties imposed, or actions taken, by any government, including but not limited to potential power rationing, tailings facility regulation and amendments to mining laws in Brazil, potential amendments to water laws and/or other water use restrictions and regulatory actions in Chile, potential amendments to minerals and mining laws and dam safety regulation in Ghana, potential amendments to customs and mining laws (including but not limited amendments to the VAT) in Mauritania, and potential amendments to and enforcement of tax laws in Russia (including, but not limited to, the interpretation, implementation, application and enforcement of any such laws and amendments thereto), being consistent with Kinross’ current expectations; (4) the exchange rate between the Canadian dollar, Brazilian real, Chilean peso, Russian rouble, Mauritanian ouguiya, Ghanaian cedi and the U.S. dollar being approximately consistent with current levels; (5) certain price assumptions for gold and silver; (6) prices for diesel, natural gas, fuel oil, electricity and other key supplies being

3

approximately consistent with current levels; (7) production and cost of sales forecasts for the Company meeting expectations; (8) the accuracy of the current mineral reserve and mineral resource estimates of the Company (including but not limited to ore tonnage and ore grade estimates); (9) labour and materials costs increasing on a basis consistent with Kinross’ current expectations; (10) the terms and conditions of the legal and fiscal stability agreements for the Tasiast and Chirano operations being interpreted and applied in a manner consistent with their intent and Kinross’ expectations; (11) goodwill and/or asset impairment potential; and (12) access to capital markets, including but not limited to credit ratings being consistent with the Company’s current expectations. Known and unknown factors could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements. Such factors include, but are not limited to those set out in the Risk Factors section hereof as well as: sanctions (or any other similar restrictions or penalties) now or subsequently imposed, or other actions taken, by, against, in respect of or otherwise impacting any jurisdiction in which the Company is domiciled or operates (including but not limited to the Russian Federation, Canada, the European Union and the United States), or any government or citizens of, persons or companies domiciled in, or the Company’s business, operations or other activities in, any such jurisdiction; litigation commenced, or other claims or actions brought, against the Company (and/or any of its directors, officers or employees) in respect of the cessation by the Company of investment in and development of Fruta del Norte and its sale, or any of the Company’s prior activities on or in respect thereof or otherwise in Ecuador; fluctuations in the currency markets; fluctuations in the spot and forward price of gold or certain other commodities (such as fuel and electricity); changes in the discount rates applied to calculate the present value of net future cash flows based on country-specific real weighted average cost of capital; changes in the market valuations of peer group gold producers and the Company, and the resulting impact on market price to net asset value multiples; changes in various market variables, such as interest rates, foreign exchange rates, gold or silver prices and lease rates, or global fuel prices, that could impact the mark-to-market value of outstanding derivative instruments and ongoing payments/receipts under any financial obligations; risks arising from holding derivative instruments (such as credit risk, market liquidity risk and mark-to-market risk); changes in national and local government legislation, taxation (including but not limited to income tax, advance income tax, stamp tax, withholding tax, capital tax, tariffs, value-added or sales tax, capital outflow tax, capital gains tax, windfall or windfall profits tax, royalty, excise tax, customs/import or export taxes/duties, asset taxes, asset transfer tax, property use or other real estate tax, together with any related fine, penalty, surcharge, or interest imposed in connection with such taxes), controls, policies and regulations; the security of personnel and assets; political or economic developments in Brazil, Chile, Canada, Ghana, Mauritania, Russia, the United States, or other countries in which Kinross does business or may carry on business; business opportunities that may be presented to, or pursued by, us; our ability to successfully integrate acquisitions and complete divestitures; operating or technical difficulties in connection with mining or development activities; employee relations; litigation or other claims against, or regulatory investigations and/or any enforcement actions or sanctions in respect of the Company (and/or its directors, officers, or employees) including, but not limited to, securities class action litigation in Canada and/or the United States, or any investigations, enforcement actions and/or sanctions under any applicable anti-corruption, international sanctions and/or anti-money laundering laws and regulations in Canada, the United States or any other applicable jurisdiction; the speculative nature of gold exploration and development including, but not limited to, the risks of obtaining necessary licenses and permits; diminishing quantities or grades of mineral reserves; adverse changes in our credit rating; and contests over title to properties. In addition, there are risks and hazards associated with the business of gold exploration, development and mining, including environmental hazards, industrial accidents, unusual or unexpected formations, pressures, cave-ins, flooding and gold bullion losses (and the risk of inadequate insurance, or the inability to obtain insurance, to cover these risks). Many of these uncertainties and contingencies can directly or indirectly affect, and could cause, Kinross’ actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied in any forward-looking statements made by, or on behalf of, Kinross, including but not limited to resulting in an impairment charge on goodwill and/or assets. There can be no assurance that forward-looking statements will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. Forward-looking statements are provided for the purpose of providing information about management’s expectations and plans relating to the future. All of the forward-looking statements made in this AIF are qualified by these cautionary statements, including but not limited to the “Risk Factors” section hereof, and those made in our other filings with the securities regulators of Canada and the United States including, but not limited to, the cautionary statements made in the ‘‘Risk Analysis’’ section of our MD&A for the year-ended 2015. These factors are not intended to represent a complete list of the factors that could affect Kinross. Kinross disclaims any intention or obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements or to explain any material difference between subsequent actual events and such forward-looking statements, except to the extent required by applicable law.

4

CORPORATE STRUCTURE

Kinross Gold Corporation was initially created in May 1993 by the amalgamation of CMP Resources Ltd., Plexus Resources Corporation, and 1021105 Ontario Corp. In December 2000, Kinross amalgamated with LT Acquisition Inc.; in January 2005, Kinross amalgamated with its wholly-owned subsidiary, TVX Gold Inc. (“TVX”); in January 2006, it amalgamated with its wholly-owned subsidiary, Echo Bay Mines Ltd. (“Echo Bay”); and in January 2011, it amalgamated with Underworld Resources Inc. Kinross is the continuing entity resulting from these amalgamations. Kinross is governed by the Business Corporations Act (Ontario) and its registered and principal offices are located at 25 York Street, 17th Floor, Toronto, Ontario, M5J 2V5.

Each of Kinross’ mining operations is a separate business unit. Regional operations are overseen by a Regional Vice-President, who reports to the Executive Vice-President and Chief Operating Officer. Exploration strategies, corporate financing, tax planning, additional technical support services, hedging and acquisition strategies are managed centrally. Execution of site/regional operations and exploration strategies is managed locally. Kinross’ risk management programs are subject to overview by its Audit and Risk Committee and the Board of Directors.

A significant portion of Kinross’ business is carried on through subsidiaries. A chart showing the names of the significant subsidiaries of Kinross and their respective jurisdictions of incorporation is set out below as of January 11, 2016. All subsidiaries are 100% owned unless otherwise noted.

5

6

Subsidiary Governance and Internal Controls

Kinross has a system of governance, internal controls over financial reporting, and disclosure controls and procedures that apply at all levels of the Company and its subsidiaries, including those that operate in emerging markets. These systems are overseen by the Company’s board of directors and are implemented by the Company’s senior management, and the senior management of its subsidiaries. The relevant features of these systems include:

Control over Subsidiaries. All of the Company’s subsidiaries are wholly-owned or controlled unless otherwise noted. Regional operations are overseen by a Regional Vice-President employed by the applicable foreign subsidiary, who reports to the Company’s Executive Vice-President and Chief Operating Officer. The mind and management of Kinross’ subsidiaries, including those subsidiaries in emerging markets, is located in the applicable jurisdictions, each of the subsidiaries legally or beneficially owns or controls its operating assets and the subsidiaries’ operational decisions are localized. Kinross, as the ultimate sole shareholder, has internal policies and systems in place which provide it with visibility into the operations of its subsidiaries, including its subsidiaries operating in emerging markets, and the Company’s management team is responsible for monitoring the activities of the subsidiaries.

Further, the board of directors (or similar governing body) of each subsidiary is appointed by the shareholders of such subsidiary. Directors (or those holding similar positions) may be replaced at any time by a written resolution of the shareholders (or equivalent corporate action under applicable law). Through its corporate structure, Kinross has the power to directly or indirectly appoint and replace the board members of each subsidiary, including those operating in emerging markets, and therefore the boards of directors (or similar governing bodies under applicable law) of Kinross’ subsidiaries (including those operating in emerging markets), subject to their respective fiduciary duties and in accordance with applicable corporate procedures, are accountable to Kinross and its board of directors and senior management, as the ultimate shareholder.

With respect to the bank accounts of subsidiaries, certain jurisdictions require authorized signatories to be residents of such jurisdictions; however, Kinross has internal controls that require each of the Company’s subsidiaries to notify the Company’s treasury team before opening or closing any bank accounts. Kinross’ treasury team is also responsible for generally monitoring the activity within all such bank accounts on an ongoing basis via a web-based global treasury management system and/or web-based account access provided by the applicable financial institution to the extent available.

Strategic Direction. While the mining operations of each of the Company’s subsidiaries are managed locally, exploration strategies, external corporate financing, tax governance, additional technical support services, hedging and acquisition strategies are established centrally by the Company’s management, and, on consideration, implemented accordingly by senior management of applicable subsidiaries under the oversight of their respective boards of directors. Each subsidiary is responsible for the development and execution of its own risk management programs based on the enterprise risk management process established by the Company. The subsidiaries report a summary of their respective risk registers to the Company’s management on a quarterly basis which is then reported to the Audit and Risk Committee.

Financial Reporting. Kinross prepares its consolidated financial statements and Management Discussion & Analysis (“MD&A”) on a quarterly and annual basis, using IFRS as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board, which includes financial information and disclosure from its subsidiaries. The Company has internal controls over the preparation of its financial statements and other financial disclosures to provide assurance that its financial reporting is reliable and that the quarterly and annual financial statements and MD&A are being prepared in accordance with IFRS and applicable securities laws. These internal controls include the following:

(a)As part of the quarterly results and reporting process, the Company holds quarterly business review meetings (each, a “QBR”) for each of the Company’s operating regions. The QBRs are hosted by the Chief Operating Officer, attended by senior finance and operations management of the Company and its subsidiaries and information is presented

7

by regional and site management of the applicable subsidiaries. The QBRs include a review of operational performance as well as key financial information pertaining to the quarter.

(b)The Company receives quarterly reporting packages from its key operating subsidiaries including financial information and disclosures required to complete the Company’s consolidated financial statements and MD&A.  Those responsible for the finance function of the Company’s subsidiaries report to the Company’s management, and the Company’s management has direct access to relevant financial information and finance personnel of the subsidiaries.

(c)All public disclosure documents and financial statements relating to the Company and its subsidiaries containing material information are reviewed by senior management and approved by the Company’s disclosure committee before such material is disclosed.  The disclosure committee is comprised of the Chief Financial Officer, the Chief Operating Officer and the Chief Legal Officer.  With respect to quarterly reporting including consolidated financial statements and MD&A, the disclosure committee meets to review and discuss all information prior to public disclosure. A summary of such meeting is provided to the Audit and Risk Committee by the Chief Financial Officer.  The disclosure committee also receives a report on quarterly and annual sub-certifications received from senior management responsible for direct oversight of the operations of each operating subsidiary.

(d)The primary responsibility of the Audit and Risk Committee is to oversee the Company’s financial reporting process on behalf of the board of directors of Kinross and to report the results of its activities to the board of directors.

(e)The Audit and Risk Committee reviews the Company’s quarterly and annual financial statements and MD&A and meets with senior management to discuss quarterly results, including accounting, disclosure and control matters.  The Audit and Risk Committee recommends the quarterly and annual consolidated financial statements to the Company’s board of directors for approval.

(f)The Audit and Risk Committee receives confirmation from the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer as to the matters addressed in the quarterly and annual certifications required under National Instrument 52-109 – Certification of Disclosure in Issuer’s Annual and Interim Filings. This confirmation is obtained from the quarterly CFO report which provides a summary of management’s assessment and evaluation of internal control over financial reporting and disclosure control and procedures.

(g)The Audit and Risk Committee periodically assesses and evaluates the adequacy of the procedures in place for the review of the Company’s public disclosure of financial information extracted or derived from the Company’s financial statements, other than the annual and interim financial statements and related notes, MD&A, earnings releases and the annual information form.

Pursuant to regulations adopted by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and those of the Canadian Securities Administrators, Kinross’ management evaluates the effectiveness of the design and operation of the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures and internal controls over financial reporting. This evaluation is done under the supervision of, and with the participation of, the Company’s Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer.

These systems of corporate governance, internal controls over financial reporting and disclosure controls and procedures are designed to enable, among other things, Kinross to have access to all material information about its subsidiaries, including those operating in emerging markets.

8

Fund Transfers from the Corporation’s Subsidiaries

Kinross has sufficient cash flow from the operations of its various subsidiaries. Certain of the Company’s subsidiaries have a long history of operating in emerging markets and Kinross has not had any material issues with respect to transferring funds from, to or within emerging markets. Funds are transferred to, from or among Kinross’ subsidiaries pursuant to a variety of methods which include the following: chargeback of costs undertaken on behalf of the subsidiaries via intercompany invoices; advances and repayment of intercompany loans and related interest expense; equity purchases; returns of capital and dividend declaration/payment by the subsidiaries. The method of transfer is dependent on the financing or other arrangement established amongst Kinross and/or its applicable subsidiaries. All fund transfers from Kinross’ subsidiaries are in compliance with applicable law.

Records Management of the Corporation’s Subsidiaries

As required by applicable law, original copies of all corporate records are required to be maintained in the language of, and stored at the offices of, each subsidiary in the jurisdiction of incorporation. However, where practical, a duplicate set of corporate records for certain subsidiaries are maintained at Kinross’ head office in Toronto. Kinross also maintains a web-based global entity management system for recording such corporate information and documents which is regularly monitored and updated by Kinross’ corporate secretarial team and/or the regional legal teams.

9

GENERAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE BUSINESS

Overview

Kinross is principally engaged in the mining and processing of gold and, as a by-product, silver ore and the exploration for, and the acquisition of, gold bearing properties in the Americas, the Russian Federation, West Africa and worldwide. The principal products of Kinross are gold and silver produced in the form of doré that is shipped to refineries for final processing.

Kinross’ strategy is to increase shareholder value through increases in precious metal reserves, net asset value, production, long-term cash flow and earnings per share. Kinross’ strategy also consists of optimizing the performance, and therefore, the value, of existing operations, investing in quality exploration and development projects and acquiring new potentially accretive properties and projects.

Kinross’ operations and mineral reserves are impacted by, among other things, changes in metal prices. The average gold price during 2015 was approximately $1,160 ($1,266 during 2014). Kinross used a gold price of $1,200 per ounce at the end of 2015 to estimate mineral reserves.

Kinross’ attributable estimated proven and probable mineral reserves as at December 31, 2015, was 34.0 million ounces of gold, 41.0 million ounces of silver and 1.4 billion pounds of copper, which includes estimated gold reserves from the January 2016 acquisition of the Bald Mountain gold mine and the remaining 50% interest in the Round Mountain gold mine.

Three Year History

In January 2008, Kinross completed a $460 million offering of convertible senior notes due March 15, 2028 (the “convertible senior notes”). Holders of the convertible senior notes had the right to require Kinross to repurchase the convertible senior notes at a purchase price equal to par plus accrued and unpaid interest, if any, to the repurchase date, on March 15, 2013, March 15, 2018 and March 15, 2023. On March 15, 2013, the Company repurchased $454.6 million of convertible senior notes in cash. On April 30, 2013, Kinross redeemed, in cash, the remaining convertible senior notes in the amount of $5.4 million.

On August 22, 2011, Kinross closed a $1 billion offering of debt securities, consisting of $250 million principal amount of its 3.625% Senior Notes due 2016, $500 million principal amount of its 5.125% Senior Notes due 2021 and $250 million principal amount of its 6.875% Senior Notes due 2041 (the “2011 notes”). The 2011 notes are unsecured, senior obligations of Kinross and are guaranteed by certain of Kinross’ wholly-owned subsidiaries that are also guarantors under Kinross’ senior unsecured credit facility.

On June 10, 2013, Kinross amended its $1.5 billion revolving credit facility and $1 billion term loan to extend the respective maturity dates and remove the minimum tangible net worth covenant. The revolving credit facility’s term was extended by one year to August 10, 2018 from August 10, 2017, and the term loan was extended by two years to August 10, 2017 from August 10, 2015. On March 10, 2014, the Company repaid $500.0 million of the term loan, leaving a balance of $500.0 million outstanding. On July 28, 2014, the Company amended its $500 million term loan and $1.5 billion revolving credit facility to extend the maturity dates by one year to August 10, 2018 and August 10, 2019, respectively.  On July 24, 2015, the Company extended the maturity dates of its $500 million term loan and $1.5 billion revolving credit facility by one year, to 2019 and 2020 respectively.

On October 9, 2013, Kinross began commercial production at its Dvoinoye underground gold mine located in Russia’s Chukotka region.

10

At the end of October 2013, the Company suspended mining of the existing ore body at La Coipa and placed the mine on care and maintenance.

On March 6, 2014, Kinross completed a $500 million offering of debt securities, consisting of $500 million principal amount of 5.95% Senior Notes due 2024 (the “2014 notes”). The 2014 notes are unsecured, senior obligations of Kinross and are wholly and unconditionally guaranteed by certain of Kinross’ wholly-owned subsidiaries that are also guarantors under Kinross’ revolving credit facility. Kinross used the net proceeds, as well as an additional $7 million in cash, to repay $500 million of the term loan.

On July 17, 2014, the Company entered into an amendment to increase the amount of its Letter of Credit guarantee facility with Export Development Canada from $200 million to $250 million.

On October 21, 2014, Kinross announced that it entered into an agreement with Fortress Minerals Corp. (subsequently renamed Lundin Gold Inc., “Lundin Gold”), a member of the Lundin Group of Companies, to sell all of its interest in Aurelian Resources Inc. and the FDN project in Ecuador for $240 million in cash and shares.  On December 17, 2014, the Company completed the sale for gross cash proceeds of $150 million and $90 million of Lundin Gold common shares.

On November 17, 2014, the Company withdrew its permit application and stopped the permitting process at its Lobo-Marte mine. Any future project would require the re-initiation of the permitting process. As a result of the withdrawal of the permit application, the Company reclassified the project’s estimated proven and probable mineral reserves as measured and indicated mineral resources.

On November 12, 2015, Kinross announced that it had entered into a definitive asset purchase agreement to acquire 100% of the Bald Mountain (“Bald Mountain”) gold mine, which includes a large associated land package, and the remaining 50% of the Round Mountain gold mine in Nevada from Barrick Gold Corporation (“Barrick”) for $610 million in cash. In addition, Barrick received a contingent 2% net smelter return royalty on future gold production from Kinross’ 100%-owned Bald Mountain lands that will come into effect following the post-closing production of 10 million ounces from such lands. Barrick also retained a 50% interest in an exploration joint venture partnership with Kinross over 40% of the land package outside the current core mining area. The transaction was completed on January 11, 2016.

On March 4, 2016, Kinross completed a bought deal public equity offering of 83,400,000 common shares at a price of $3.00 per common share for gross proceeds of approximately $250 million. Kinross sold the common shares to a syndicate of underwriters led by TD Securities Inc. and Scotiabank pursuant to an underwriting agreement dated February 24, 2016. Kinross intends to use the net proceeds of the offering to strengthen its balance sheet and improve its long-term liquidity position by using approximately $175 million of the net proceeds to repay the credit facilities that were utilized to purchase assets from Barrick, with the balance being used to repay debt maturing in 2016 and for general corporate purposes. On March 18, 2016, Kinross completed the offering of an additional 12,510,000 common shares at a price of $3.00 per common share for an additional gross proceeds of $37,530,000 pursuant to the exercise of the over-allotment option by the syndicate of underwriters.

On March 30, 2016, the Company filed an updated NI 43-101 Technical Report in respect of its Tasiast project and announced that it would proceed with a phase one expansion of its Tasiast mine as outlined in the Technical Report. The Company is proposing a two-phased expansion of the Tasiast project that leverages the existing mill infrastructure. Phase one of the expansion will increase the mill throughput from the current 8,000 tonnes per day to 12,000 tonnes per day. If Kinross decides to proceed, phase two would then further increase the mill throughput from 12,000 tonnes per day to 30,000 tonnes per day with the installation of additional milling, leaching, thickening and refinery capacity.  Kinross had initiated a feasibility study in 2015 to assess the economic viability of the first phase and a pre-feasibility to assess the economic viability of the second phase. The studies concluded with a recommendation to progress with the first phase into execution and advance the second phase into a feasibility study.

11

DESCRIPTION OF THE BUSINESS

Kinross is principally engaged in the exploration for, and acquisition, development and operation of, gold-bearing properties. The material properties of Kinross as of December 31, 2015 were as follows:

Property	Location	Property Ownership(1)
Paracatu	Brazil	100	%
Kupol-Dvoinoye	Russian Federation	100	%
Tasiast	Mauritania	100	%

(1)The Paracatu and Tasiast properties are subject to various royalties (see “Kinross Material Properties” —“Paracatu, Brazil” and “Tasiast, Mauritania”).

In addition, as of December 31, 2015, Kinross held a 100% interest in the Fort Knox property in Alaska, United States, 100% interest in the Kettle River-Buckhorn properties in Washington, United States, which includes the Kettle River mill and the Buckhorn mine, a 50%1 interest in the Round Mountain mine in Nevada, United States, a 100% interest in the La Coipa mine in Chile, a 90% interest in the Chirano mine in Ghana, a 100% interest in the Lobo-Marte property in Chile, a 25% interest in the Cerro Casale property in Chile, a 100% interest in the Maricunga mine in Chile and other mining properties in various stages of exploration, development, reclamation, and closure. The Company’s principal product is gold and it also produces silver as a by-product.

Employees

At December 31, 2015, Kinross and its subsidiaries employed approximately 9,1702 employees. In Brazil, the Paracatu collective agreement expired on January 31, 2016. Negotiations in respect of a new collective agreement are currently under way. In Chile, both of the La Coipa collective agreements expire on July 31, 2016 and both of the Maricunga collective agreements expire on February 28, 2017. In West Africa, employees at the Chirano and Tasiast mines are represented by unions. The collective agreement for Tasiast employees expired in December 2015. Negotiations for a new collective agreement commenced in March 2016.  Employees at Chirano are governed by two collective agreements covering senior staff and junior staff, respectively. The senior staff association agreement expires in May 2018 and the junior staff union agreement expires in August 2018. At Chirano, compensation and related benefits for both groups are negotiated annually. In Russia, a union was registered at Kupol in February of 2012; however, as of March 2016 there were no union members.  At Dvoinoye, a new union was registered last year with 16 potential members, however the proper legal filing processes have not yet been completed and collective bargaining is not required until a majority of employees have joined the union.  All of Kinross’ employees in the United States and Canada are non-unionized.

Competitive Conditions

The precious metal mineral exploration and mining business is a competitive business. Kinross competes with numerous other companies and individuals in the search for and the acquisition of attractive precious metal mineral properties. The ability of Kinross to replace or increase its mineral reserves and mineral resources in the future will depend not only on its ability to develop its present properties, but also

1  On January 11, 2016, Kinross acquired the remaining 50% interest in the Round Mountain mine and the Bald Mountain mine in Nevada, United States, from affiliates of Barrick. As a result of this acquisition, Kinross held a 100% interest in the Round Mountain mine in Nevada, United States and a 100% interest in the Bald Mountain mine in Nevada, United States as of January 11, 2016.

2  A further 441 employees are employed by Kinross and its subsidiaries as of January 11, 2016 as a result of the acquisition of the Bald Mountain mine.

12

on its ability to select and acquire suitable producing properties or prospects for precious metal development or mineral exploration.

Environmental Protection

Kinross’ exploration activities and mining and processing operations are subject to the federal, state, provincial, regional and local environmental laws and regulations in the jurisdictions in which Kinross’ activities and facilities are located. For example, in the United States, Kinross is subject to a number of such laws and regulations including, without limitation: the Clean Air Act; the Clean Water Act; the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act; the Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act; the Endangered Species Act; the Federal Land Policy and Management Act; the National Environmental Policy Act; the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; and related state laws.

Kinross is subject to similar laws in other jurisdictions in which it operates. In all jurisdictions in which Kinross operates, environmental licences, permits and other regulatory approvals are required in order to engage in exploration, mining and processing, and mine closure activities. Regulatory approval of a detailed plan of operations and a comprehensive environmental impact assessment is required prior to initiating mining or processing activities or for any substantive change to previously approved plans. In all jurisdictions in which Kinross operates, specific statutory and regulatory requirements and standards must be met throughout the life of the mining or processing operations in regard to air quality, water quality, fisheries, wildlife and biodiversity protection, archaeological and cultural resources, solid and hazardous waste management and disposal, the management and transportation of hazardous chemicals, toxic substances, noise, community right-to-know, land use, and reclamation. Except as may be otherwise disclosed herein, Kinross is currently in compliance, in all material respects, with all material applicable environmental laws and regulations. Details and quantification of the Company’s reclamation and remediation obligations are set out in Note 13 to the audited consolidated financial statements of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2015.

As part of Kinross’ Corporate Responsibility Management System, Kinross has implemented corporate environmental governance programs including:

STANDARDS — Corporate environmental management standards provide a clear bottom line for all Kinross activities in all jurisdictions in which we carry on business. Where legal requirements are unclear, Kinross’ environmental management standards provide clear direction regarding performance expectations and minimum design and operating requirements.

An example of this is Kinross’ adoption of the standards outlined in the International Cyanide Management Code for the Manufacture, Transport and Use of Cyanide in the Production of Gold (the “Cyanide Code”). Kinross is a signatory to the Cyanide Code, which is administered by the International Cyanide Management Institute (the “ICMI”). The ICMI is an independent body that was established by a multi-stakeholder group under the guidance of the United Nations Environmental Program. The ICMI established operating standards for cyanide manufacturers, transporters and mines and provides for third party certification of facilities’ compliance with the Cyanide Code. All Kinross operations have either already been certified as compliant with the Cyanide Code or are in the process of being certified.

AUDITS - Comprehensive environmental compliance audits are conducted at all operations and at selected residual properties on a biennial basis. The audit program assesses compliance with applicable legal requirements, measures effectiveness of management systems, and includes procedures to ensure timely follow-up on audit findings.

METRICS - Kinross has identified operational parameters that are key indicators of environmental performance, and measures these indicators on a regular basis. The Company tracks an index of these key performance indicators and sets performance targets to encourage continuous environmental improvement.

13

ENGINEERING - To effectively manage environmental risk, programs are in place to assess the management and stability of tailings and other engineered facilities. They include detailed water balance accounting, to assure sufficient storage capacity, and effective operational procedures. Every Kinross operation has a tailings or heap management plan in place. In addition, Kinross performs periodic assessments of engineered systems to assure adequate systems are in place to minimize or eliminate environmental risks.

RECLAMATION - Kinross recognizes its responsibility to manage the environmental change associated with its operations, and requires all sites to develop and maintain reclamation and closure plans to address the Company’s reclamation and closure obligations in accordance with applicable local regulations and Kinross’ corporate environmental management standards.

The results of these programs have been recognized by others within and outside the mining industry. Examples of significant recognition of Kinross’ efforts are listed on Kinross’ website at www.kinross.com.

Operations

Kinross’ total attributable production in 2015 was derived from the mines in the Americas (54%), West Africa (17%) and the Russian Federation (29%). The following shows the location of Kinross’ properties as of the date hereof.

14

Gold Equivalent Production and Sales

The following table summarizes total attributable production and sales from continuing operations by Kinross in the last three years:

	Years ended December 31,
	2015	2014	2013
Gold equivalent production – ounces	2,594,652	2,710,390	2,631,092
Gold equivalent sales – ounces	2,608,870	2,715,358	2,669,276

Included in gold equivalent production and sales is silver production and sales, as applicable, converted into gold production using a ratio of the average spot market prices of gold and silver for the three comparative years. The ratios were 73:92:1 in 2015, 66.29:1 in 2014 and 59.23:1 in 2013.

The following table sets forth the total attributable gold equivalent production (in ounces) reflective of Kinross’ interest in each of its operating assets during the last three years:

	2015	2014	2013
Americas:
Fort Knox	401,553	379,453	421,641
Round Mountain (1)	197,818	169,839	162,826
Kettle River-Buckhorn	97,368	123,382	150,157
Paracatu	477,662	521,026	500,380
Maricunga	212,155	247,216	187,815
Total	1,386,556	1,440,916	1,422,819
West Africa:
Tasiast	219,045	260,485	247,818
Chirano(2)	230,488	257,888	247,862
Total	449,533	518,373	495,680
Russian Federation:
Kupol-Dvoinoye	758,563	751,101	550,188

(1) Represents Kinross’ 50% ownership interest. On January 11, 2016, Kinross acquired the remaining 50% interest.

(2) Represents Kinross’ 90% ownership interest.

15

Marketing

Gold is a metal that is traded on world markets, with benchmark prices generally based on the London market. Gold has two principal uses: product fabrication and bullion investment. Fabricated gold has a wide variety of end uses, including jewelry manufacture (the largest fabrication component), electronics, dentistry, industrial and decorative uses, medals, medallions, and official coins. Gold bullion is held primarily as a store of value and a safeguard against devaluation of paper assets denominated in fiat currencies. Kinross sells all of its refined gold to banks, bullion dealers, and refiners. In 2015, sales from operations to its top three customers totaled $677.7 million, $599.6 million, and $349.4 million respectively, for an aggregate of $1,626.7 million. In 2014, sales from operations to its top three customers totaled $1,083.1 million, $517.4 million, and $423.9 million respectively, for an aggregate of $2,024.4 million. Due to the size of the bullion market and the above ground inventory of bullion, activities by Kinross will generally not influence gold prices. Kinross believes that the loss of any of these customers would have no material adverse impact on Kinross because of the active worldwide market for gold.

The following table sets forth for the years indicated the high and low London Bullion Market afternoon fix prices for gold:

Year	High		Low		Average
2005	$	536.50	$	411.10	$	444.45
2006	$	725.00	$	524.25	$	603.77
2007	$	841.10	$	608.40	$	695.39
2008	$	1,011.25	$	712.50	$	871.96
2009	$	1,212.50	$	810.00	$	972.35
2010	$	1,421.00	$	1,058.00	$	1,224.52
2011	$	1,895.00	$	1,319.00	$	1,570.25
2012	$	1,791.75	$	1,540.00	$	1,668.98
2013	$	1,693.75	$	1,192.00	$	1,411.23
2014	$	1,385.00	$	1,142.00	$	1,266.40
2015	$	1,295.75	$	1,049.40	$	1,160.06

16

Kinross Mineral Reserves and Mineral Resources

Definitions

The estimated mineral reserves and mineral resources for Kinross’ properties have been calculated in accordance with the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (“CIM”) — Definitions Adopted by CIM Council on May 10, 2014 (the “CIM Standards”) which were adopted by the Canadian Securities Administrators’ National Instrument 43-101 Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects (the “Instrument”). The following definitions are reproduced from the CIM Standards:

A Mineral Resource is a concentration or occurrence of solid material of economic interest in or on the Earth’s crust in such form, grade or quality that there are reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction. The location, quantity, grade or quality, continuity and other geological characteristics of a Mineral Resource are known, estimated or interpreted from specific geological evidence and knowledge, including sampling. Material of economic interest refers to diamonds, natural solid inorganic material, or natural solid fossilized organic material including base and precious metals, coal, and industrial minerals.

An Inferred Mineral Resource is that part of a Mineral Resource for which quantity and grade or quality are estimated on the basis of limited geological evidence and sampling. Geological evidence is sufficient to imply but not verify geological and grade or quality continuity. The estimate is based on limited information and sampling gathered through appropriate sampling techniques from locations such as outcrops, trenches, pits, workings and drillholes.

An Indicated Mineral Resource is that part of a Mineral Resource for which quantity, grade or quality, densities, shape and physical characteristics are estimated with sufficient confidence to allow the appropriate application of technical and economic parameters in sufficient detail to support mine planning and evaluation of the economic viability of the deposit. Geological evidence is derived from adequately detailed and reliable exploration, sampling and testing and is sufficient to assume geological and grade or quality continuity between points of observation.

A Measured Mineral Resource is that part of a Mineral Resource for which quantity, grade or quality, densities, shape, and physical characteristics are established with confidence sufficient to allow the appropriate application of technical and economic parameters to support detailed mine planning and final evaluation of the economic viability of the deposit. Geological evidence is derived from detailed and reliable exploration, sampling and testing and is sufficient to assume geological and grade or quality continuity between points of observation.

A Mineral Reserve is the economically mineable part of a Measured and/or Indicated Mineral Resource. A Mineral Reserve includes diluting materials and allowances for losses, which may occur when the material is mined or extracted and is defined by studies at Pre-Feasibility or Feasibility level as appropriate that include application of technical and economic parameters. Such studies demonstrate that, at the time of reporting, extraction could reasonably be justified. The public disclosure of a Mineral Reserve must be demonstrated by a Pre-Feasibility Study or Feasibility Study.

A Probable Mineral Reserve is the economically mineable part of an Indicated, and in some circumstances, a Measured Mineral Resource demonstrated by at least a Preliminary Feasibility Study. This study must include adequate information on mining, processing, metallurgical, economic, and other relevant factors that demonstrate, at the time of reporting, that economic extraction can be justified.

A Proven Mineral Reserve is the economically mineable part of a Measured Mineral Resource demonstrated by at least a Preliminary Feasibility Study. This study must include adequate information on mining, processing, metallurgical, economic, and other relevant factors that demonstrate, at the time of reporting, that economic extraction is justified.

17

Mineral Reserve and Mineral Resource Estimates

The following tables set forth the estimated mineral reserves and mineral resources attributable to interests held by Kinross for each of its properties:

MINERAL RESERVE AND MINERAL RESOURCE STATEMENT	GOLD
PROVEN AND PROBABLE MINERAL RESERVES (1),(3),(4),(5),(6),(8),(9),(11)
Kinross Gold Corporation’s Share at December 31, 2015

		Kinross		Proven			Probable			Proven and Probable
Property	Location	Interest		Tonnes	Grade	Ounces	Tonnes	Grade	Ounces	Tonnes	Grade	Ounces
		(%)		(kt)	(g/t)	(koz)	(kt)	(g/t)	(koz)	(kt)	(g/t)	(koz)
NORTH AMERICA
Bald Mountain 8	USA	100.0	%	14,647	0.8	372	39,980	0.6	745	54,627	0.6	1,117
Fort Knox Area	USA	100.0	%	47,740	0.4	628	99,578	0.4	1,394	147,318	0.4	2,022
Kettle River	USA	100.0	%	—	—	—	166	8.7	47	166	8.7	47
Round Mountain Area 8	USA	100.0	%	39,062	0.7	907	27,083	0.6	563	66,145	0.7	1,470
SUBTOTAL				101,449	0.6	1,907	166,807	0.5	2,749	268,256	0.5	4,656
SOUTH AMERICA
Cerro Casale 9	Chile	25.0	%	57,425	0.6	1,195	241,975	0.6	4,616	299,400	0.6	5,811
Maricunga	Chile	100.0	%	15,209	0.9	428	25,432	0.8	614	40,641	0.8	1,042
Paracatu	Brazil	100.0	%	427,432	0.4	5,653	260,558	0.5	3,992	687,990	0.4	9,645
SUBTOTAL				500,066	0.5	7,276	527,965	0.5	9,222	1,028,031	0.5	16,498
AFRICA
Chirano	Ghana	90.0	%	7,275	1.2	287	7,394	3.6	848	14,669	2.4	1,135
Tasiast 11	Mauritania	100.0	%	30,467	1.4	1,406	101,711	2.1	6,813	132,178	1.9	8,219
SUBTOTAL				37,742	1.4	1,693	109,105	2.2	7,661	146,847	2.0	9,354
RUSSIA
Dvoinoye	Russia	100.0	%	634	10.2	209	1,631	11.6	606	2,265	11.2	815
Kupol	Russia	100.0	%	1,253	8.8	355	5,904	8.1	1,544	7,157	8.3	1,899
SUBTOTAL				1,887	9.3	564	7,535	8.9	2,150	9,422	9.0	2,714
TOTAL GOLD				641,144	0.6	11,440	811,412	0.8	21,782	1,452,556	0.7	33,222

MINERAL RESERVE AND MINERAL RESOURCE STATEMENT	SILVER
PROVEN AND PROBABLE MINERAL RESERVES (1),(3),(4),(5),(6),(8),(9)
Kinross Gold Corporation’s Share at December 31, 2015

		Kinross		Proven			Probable			Proven and Probable
Property	Location	Interest		Tonnes	Grade	Ounces	Tonnes	Grade	Ounces	Tonnes	Grade	Ounces
		(%)		(kt)	(g/t)	(koz)	(kt)	(g/t)	(koz)	(kt)	(g/t)	(koz)
NORTH AMERICA
Round Mountain Area 8	USA	100.0	%	462	13.1	195	1,908	11.0	675	2,370	11.4	870
SUBTOTAL				462	13.1	195	1,908	11.0	675	2,370	11.4	870
SOUTH AMERICA
Cerro Casale 9	Chile	25.0	%	57,425	1.9	3,522	241,975	1.4	11,150	299,400	1.5	14,672
SUBTOTAL				57,425	1.9	3,522	241,975	1.4	11,150	299,400	1.5	14,672
RUSSIA
Dvoinoye	Russia	100.0	%	634	16.6	338	1,631	18.7	979	2,265	18.1	1,317
Kupol	Russia	100.0	%	1,253	124.4	5,011	5,904	100.7	19,112	7,157	104.8	24,123
SUBTOTAL				1,887	88.2	5,349	7,535	82.9	20,091	9,422	84.0	25,440
TOTAL SILVER				59,774	4.7	9,066	251,418	3.9	31,916	311,192	4.1	40,982

MINERAL RESERVE AND MINERAL RESOURCE STATEMENT	COPPER
PROVEN AND PROBABLE MINERAL RESERVES (1),(3),(4),(5),(6),(9)
Kinross Gold Corporation’s Share at December 31, 2015

		Kinross		Proven			Probable			Proven and Probable
Property	Location	Interest		Tonnes	Grade	Pounds	Tonnes	Grade	Pounds	Tonnes	Grade	Pounds
		(%)		(kt)	(%)	(Mlb)	(kt)	(%)	(Mlb)	(kt)	(%)	(Mlb)
SOUTH AMERICA
Cerro Casale 9	Chile	25.0	%	57,425	0.19	240	241,975	0.23	1,204	299,400	0.22	1,444
SUBTOTAL				57,425	0.19	240	241,975	0.23	1,204	299,400	0.22	1,444
TOTAL COPPER				57,425	0.19	240	241,975	0.23	1,204	299,400	0.22	1,444

Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources

Cautionary Note to United States Investors Concerning Estimates of Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources

This section uses the terms “Measured” and “Indicated” mineral resources. United States investors are advised that while those terms are recognized and required by Canadian regulations, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission

18

does not recognize them. United States investors are cautioned not to assume that all or any part of mineral deposits in these categories will ever be converted into proven and probable mineral reserves or recovered.

MINERAL RESERVE AND MINERAL RESOURCE STATEMENT	GOLD
MEASURED AND INDICATED MINERAL RESOURCES (EXCLUDES PROVEN AND PROBABLE MINERAL RESERVES) (2),(3),(4),(5),(6),(7),(8),(9),(10),(11)
Kinross Gold Corporation’s Share at December 31, 2015

		Kinross		Measured			Indicated			Measured and Indicated
Property	Location	Interest		Tonnes	Grade	Ounces	Tonnes	Grade	Ounces	Tonnes	Grade	Ounces
		(%)		(kt)	(g/t)	(koz)	(kt)	(g/t)	(koz)	(kt)	(g/t)	(koz)
NORTH AMERICA
Bald Mountain 8	USA	100.0	%	36,337	0.8	951	152,634	0.6	2,982	188,971	0.6	3,933
Fort Knox Area	USA	100.0	%	7,077	0.5	103	88,745	0.5	1,320	95,822	0.5	1,423
Kettle River	USA	100.0	%	—	—	—	72	5.1	12	72	5.1	12
Round Mountain Area 8	USA	100.0	%	14,624	0.5	258	27,534	0.5	425	42,158	0.5	683
White Gold	Yukon	100.0	%	—	—	—	9,788	2.7	840	9,788	2.7	840
SUBTOTAL				58,038	0.7	1,312	278,773	0.6	5,579	336,811	0.6	6,891
SOUTH AMERICA
Cerro Casale 9	Chile	25.0	%	5,739	0.3	56	68,423	0.4	787	74,162	0.4	843
La Coipa 10	Chile	100.0	%	5,364	1.8	307	25,452	1.8	1,440	30,816	1.8	1,747
Lobo Marte	Chile	100.0	%	96,646	1.1	3,525	88,720	1.2	3,489	185,366	1.2	7,014
Maricunga	Chile	100.0	%	17,860	0.8	445	180,224	0.7	3,830	198,084	0.7	4,275
Paracatu	Brazil	100.0	%	137,307	0.3	1,264	178,201	0.3	2,003	315,508	0.3	3,267
SUBTOTAL				262,916	0.7	5,597	541,020	0.7	11,549	803,936	0.7	17,146
AFRICA
Chirano	Ghana	90.0	%	3,378	1.5	161	7,585	2.4	578	10,963	2.1	739
Tasiast 11	Mauritania	100.0	%	8,611	0.8	230	66,236	1.4	2,980	74,847	1.3	3,210
SUBTOTAL				11,989	1.0	391	73,821	1.5	3,558	85,810	1.4	3,949
RUSSIA
Dvoinoye	Russia	100.0	%	4	8.0	1	132	18.2	77	136	17.9	78
Kupol	Russia	100.0	%	146	6.5	31	1,018	7.3	240	1,164	7.2	271
SUBTOTAL				150	6.6	32	1,150	8.6	317	1,300	8.4	349
TOTAL GOLD				333,093	0.7	7,332	894,764	0.7	21,003	1,227,857	0.7	28,335

MINERAL RESERVE AND MINERAL RESOURCE STATEMENT	SILVER
MEASURED AND INDICATED MINERAL RESOURCES (EXCLUDES PROVEN AND PROBABLE MINERAL RESERVES) (2),(3),(4),(5),(6),(7),(8),(9),(10)
Kinross Gold Corporation’s Share at December 31, 2015

		Kinross		Measured			Indicated			Measured and Indicated
Property	Location	Interest		Tonnes	Grade	Ounces	Tonnes	Grade	Ounces	Tonnes	Grade	Ounces
		(%)		(kt)	(g/t)	(koz)	(kt)	(g/t)	(koz)	(kt)	(g/t)	(koz)
NORTH AMERICA
Round Mountain Area 8	USA	100.0	%	1,214	9.3	362	10,025	7.2	2,325	11,239	7.4	2,687
SUBTOTAL				1,214	9.3	362	10,025	7.2	2,325	11,239	7.4	2,687
SOUTH AMERICA
Cerro Casale 9	Chile	25.0	%	5,739	1.2	220	68,423	1.1	2,328	74,162	1.1	2,548
La Coipa 10	Chile	100.0	%	5,364	40.0	6,893	25,452	70.1	57,341	30,816	64.8	64,234
SUBTOTAL				11,103	19.9	7,113	93,875	19.8	59,669	104,978	19.8	66,782
RUSSIA
Dvoinoye	Russia	100.0	%	4	6.6	1	132	15.9	68	136	15.7	69
Kupol	Russia	100.0	%	146	82.4	387	1,018	98.8	3,234	1,164	96.8	3,621
SUBTOTAL				150	80.3	388	1,150	89.3	3,302	1,300	88.3	3,690
TOTAL SILVER				12,467	19.6	7,863	105,050	19.3	65,296	117,517	19.4	73,159

MINERAL RESERVE AND MINERAL RESOURCE STATEMENT	COPPER
MEASURED AND INDICATED MINERAL RESOURCES (EXCLUDES PROVEN AND PROBABLE MINERAL RESERVES) (2),(3),(4),(5),(6),(7),(9)
Kinross Gold Corporation’s Share at December 31, 2015

		Kinross		Measured			Indicated			Measured and Indicated
Property	Location	Interest		Tonnes	Grade	Pounds	Tonnes	Grade	Pounds	Tonnes	Grade	Pounds
		(%)		(kt)	(%)	(Mlb)	(kt)	(%)	(Mlb)	(kt)	(%)	(Mlb)
SOUTH AMERICA
Cerro Casale 9	Chile	25.0	%	5,739	0.13	17	68,423	0.16	248	74,162	0.16	265
SUBTOTAL				5,739	0.13	17	68,423	0.16	248	74,162	0.16	265
TOTAL COPPER				5,739	0.13	17	68,423	0.16	248	74,162	0.16	265

Inferred Mineral Resources

Cautionary Note to United States Investors Concerning Estimates of Inferred Mineral Resources

This section uses the term “Inferred” mineral resources. United States investors are advised that while those terms are recognized and required by Canadian regulations, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission does not

19

recognize them. United States investors are cautioned not to assume that all or any part of mineral deposits in these categories will ever be converted into proven and probable mineral reserves or recovered.

MINERAL RESERVE AND MINERAL RESOURCE STATEMENT								GOLD
INFERRED MINERAL RESOURCES (2),(3),(4),(5),(6),(7),(8),(9),(10),(11)
Kinross Gold Corporation’s Share at December 31, 2015
		Kinross		Inferred
Property	Location	Interest		Tonnes	Grade				Ounces
		(%)		(kt)	(g/t)				(koz)
NORTH AMERICA
Bald Mountain 8	USA	100.0	%	24,396	0.5				378
Fort Knox Area	USA	100.0	%	14,824	0.5				221
Kettle River	USA	100.0	%	36	6.7				8
Round Mountain Area 8	USA	100.0	%	16,205	0.4				233
White Gold	Yukon	100.0	%	2,166	1.8				125
SUBTOTAL				57,627	0.5				965
SOUTH AMERICA
Cerro Casale 9	Chile	25.0	%	123,860	0.4				1,498
La Coipa 10	Chile	100.0	%	2,121	1.5				101
Lobo Marte	Chile	100.0	%	2,003	1.1				69
Maricunga	Chile	100.0	%	53,942	0.6				1,053
Paracatu	Brazil	100.0	%	10,515	0.4				143
SUBTOTAL				192,441	0.5				2,864
AFRICA
Chirano	Ghana	90.0	%	1,602	2.9				149
Tasiast 11	Mauritania	100.0	%	5,596	1.9				346
SUBTOTAL				7,198	2.1				495
RUSSIA
Dvoinoye	Russia	100.0	%	78	9.8				25
Kupol	Russia	100.0	%	404	8.3				108
SUBTOTAL				482	8.6				133
TOTAL GOLD				257,748	0.5				4,457
MINERAL RESERVE AND MINERAL RESOURCE STATEMENT							SILVER
INFERRED MINERAL RESOURCES (2),(3),(4),(5),(6),(7),(8),(9),(10)
Kinross Gold Corporation’s Share at December 31, 2015
		Kinross		Inferred
Property	Location	Interest		Tonnes	Grade				Ounces
		(%)		(kt)	(g/t)				(koz)
NORTH AMERICA
Round Mountain Area 8	USA	100.0	%	2,377	5.9				454
SUBTOTAL				2,377	5.9				454
SOUTH AMERICA
Cerro Casale 9	Chile	25.0	%	123,860	1.0				4,126
La Coipa 10	Chile	100.0	%	2,121	45.2				3,081
SUBTOTAL				125,981	1.8				7,207
RUSSIA
Dvoinoye	Russia	100.0	%	78	13.7				34
Kupol	Russia	100.0	%	404	125.2				1,626
SUBTOTAL				482	107.2				1,660
TOTAL SILVER				128,840	2.3				9,321
MINERAL RESERVE AND MINERAL RESOURCE STATEMENT						COPPER
INFERRED MINERAL RESOURCES (2),(3),(4),(5),(6),(7),(9)
Kinross Gold Corporation’s Share at December 31, 2015
		Kinross		Inferred
Property	Location	Interest		Tonnes	Grade				Pounds
		(%)		(kt)	(%)				(Mlb)
SOUTH AMERICA
Cerro Casale9	Chile	25.0	%	123,860	0.19				523
SUBTOTAL				123,860	0.19				523
TOTAL COPPER				123,860	0.19				523

20

Stockpiles

The following table reflects proven mineral reserves and measured resources attributable to Kinross’ ownership interest in stockpiles at the identified properties:

MINERAL RESERVE AND MINERAL RESOURCE STATEMENT

STOCKPILE INVENTORY (INCLUDED IN PROVEN AND PROBABLE MINERAL RESERVES) (8)

Kinross Gold Corporation’s Share at December 31, 2015

		Kinross		Proven			Probable			Proven and Probable
Property	Location	Interest		Tonnes	Grade	Ounces	Tonnes	Grade	Ounces	Tonnes	Grade	Ounces
		(%)		(kt)	(g/t)	(koz)	(kt)	(g/t)	(koz)	(kt)	(g/t)	(koz)
GOLD
Chirano Stockpile	Ghana	90.0	%	4,837	1.0	148	—	—	—	4,837	1.0	148
Dvoinoye Stockpile	Russia	100.0	%	372	11.1	132	—	—	—	372	11.1	132
Fort Knox Stockpile	USA	100.0	%	21,738	0.3	212	—	—	—	21,738	0.3	212
Kettle River Stockpile	USA	100.0	%	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Kupol Stockpile	Russia	100.0	%	289	7.0	65	—	—	—	289	7.0	65
Maricunga Stockpile	Chile	100.0	%	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Paracatu Stockpile	Brazil	100.0	%	7,666	0.3	75	—	—	—	7,666	0.3	75
Round Mountain Stockpile 8	USA	100.0	%	8,222	0.5	143	—	—	—	8,222	0.5	143
Tasiast Stockpile	Mauritania	100.0	%	8,045	1.0	264	—	—	—	8,045	1.0	264
TOTAL				51,169	0.6	1,039	—	—	—	51,169	0.6	1,039
SILVER
Dvoinoye Stockpile	Russia	100.0	%	372	17.4	208	—	—	—	372	17.4	208
Kupol Stockpile	Russia	100.0	%	289	130.7	1,215	—	—	—	289	130.7	1,215
TOTAL				661	67.0	1,423	—	—	—	661	67.0	1,423

MINERAL RESERVE AND MINERAL RESOURCE STATEMENT

STOCKPILE INVENTORY (INCLUDED IN MEASURED AND INDICATED MINERAL RESOURCES)

Kinross Gold Corporation’s Share at December 31, 2015

		Kinross		Measured			Indicated			Measured and Indicated
Property	Location	Interest		Tonnes	Grade	Ounces	Tonnes	Grade	Ounces	Tonnes	Grade	Ounces
		(%)		(kt)	(g/t)	(koz)	(kt)	(g/t)	(koz)	(kt)	(g/t)	(koz)
GOLD
Tasiast Stockpile	Mauritania	100.0	%	293	0.6	6	—	—	—	293	0.6	6
TOTAL				293	0.6	6	—	—	—	293	0.6	6

MINERAL RESERVE AND MINERAL RESOURCE STATEMENT

STOCKPILE INVENTORY (INCLUDED IN INFERRED MINERAL RESOURCES)

Kinross Gold Corporation’s Share at December 31, 2015

		Kinross		Measured
Property	Location	Interest		Tonnes	Grade	Ounces
		(%)		(kt)	(g/t)	(koz)
GOLD
Maricunga Stockpile	Chile	100.0	%	7,065	0.4	97
Paracatu Stockpile	Brazil	100.0	%	3,679	0.4	46
TOTAL				10,744	0.4	143

21

Notes – 2015 Kinross Mineral Reserve & Resource Statements

MINERAL RESERVE AND MINERAL RESOURCE STATEMENT NOTES

(1) Unless otherwise noted, the Company’s mineral reserves are estimated using appropriate cut-off grades based on an assumed gold price of $US 1,200 per ounce, a silver price of $US 17.00 per ounce and a copper price of $US $3.00 per pound. Mineral reserves are estimated using appropriate process recoveries, operating costs and mine plans that are unique to each property and include estimated allowances for dilution and mining recovery. Mineral reserve estimates are reported in contained units and are estimated based on the following foreign exchange rates:

Russian Ruble to $US 50

Chilean Peso to $US 600

Brazilian Real to $US 3.0

Ghanaian Cedi to $US 3.5

Mauritanian Ouguiya to $US 300

(2) Unless otherwise noted, the Company’s mineral resources are estimated using appropriate cut-off grades based on a gold price of $US 1,400 per ounce, a silver price of $US 20.00 per ounce, a copper price of $US $3.00 per pound. Foreign exchange rates for estimating mineral resources were the same as for mineral reserves.

(3) The Company’s mineral reserve and mineral resource estimates as at December 31, 2015 are classified in accordance with the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (“CIM”) “CIM Definition Standards - For Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves” adopted by the CIM Council (as amended, the “CIM Definition Standards”) in accordance with the requirements of National Instrument 43-101 “Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects” (“NI 43-101”). Mineral reserve and mineral resource estimates reflect the Company’s reasonable expectation that all necessary permits and approvals will be obtained and maintained.

(4) Cautionary note to U.S. Investors concerning estimates of mineral reserves and mineral resources. These estimates have been prepared in accordance with the requirements of Canadian securities laws, which differ from the requirements of United States’ securities laws. The terms “mineral reserve”, “proven mineral reserve and “probable mineral reserve” are Canadian mining terms as defined in accordance with NI 43-101 and the CIM Definition Standards. The CIM Definition Standards differ from the definitions in the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) Guide 7 (“SEC Guide 7”) under the United States Securities Act of 1933, as amended. Under SEC Guide 7, a “final” or “bankable” feasibility study is required to report mineral reserves, the three-year historical average price is used in any mineral reserve or cash flow analysis to designate mineral reserves and the primary environmental analysis or report must be filed with the appropriate governmental authority. In addition, the terms “mineral resource”, “measured mineral resource”, “indicated mineral resource” and “inferred mineral resource” are defined in NI 43-101 and recognized by Canadian securities laws but are not defined terms under SEC Guide 7 or recognized under U.S. securities laws. U.S. investors are cautioned not to assume that any part or all of mineral deposits in these categories will ever be upgraded to mineral reserves. “Inferred mineral resources” have a great amount of uncertainty as to their existence, and great uncertainty as to their economic and legal feasibility. It cannot be assumed that all or any part of an “inferred mineral resource” will ever by upgraded to a higher category. Under Canadian securities laws, estimates of “inferred mineral resources” may not form the basis of feasibility or pre-feasibility studies, except in rare cases. U.S. investors are cautioned not to assume that all or any part of an inferred mineral resource exists or is economically or legally mineable. Accordingly, these mineral reserve and mineral resource estimates and related information may not be comparable to similar information made public by U.S. companies subject to the reporting and disclosure requirements under the United States federal laws and the rules and regulations thereunder, including SEC Guide 7.

(5) Except as provided in Note (9), the Company’s mineral resource and mineral reserve estimates were prepared under the supervision of and verified by Mr. John Sims, an officer of Kinross, who is a qualified person as defined by NI 43-101.

(6) The Company’s normal data verification procedures have been used in collecting, compiling, interpreting and processing the data used to estimate mineral reserves and mineral resources. Independent data verification has not been performed.

(7) Mineral resources that are not mineral reserves do not have to demonstrate economic viability. Mineral resources are subject to infill drilling, permitting, mine planning, mining dilution and recovery losses, among other things, to be converted into mineral reserves. Due to the uncertainty associated with inferred mineral resources, it cannot be assumed that all or any part of an inferred mineral resource will ever be upgraded to indicated or measured mineral resources, including as a result of continued exploration.

(8) Bald Mountain and the remaining 50% interest of Round Mountain were were acquired by Kinross effective January 11, 2016.

(9) Estimates for the Cerro Casale project are based on a project update completed by Barrick Gold Corporation in the first half of 2011 and have been updated to reflect current guidance.  Mineral reserves and mineral resources are estimated using appropriate cut-off grades based on the following commodity prices and foreign exchange rates:

22

Mineral reserves - Gold price of $US 1,000 per ounce,  Silver price of $US 16.00 per ounce, Copper price of $US 2.00 per pound, Chilean Peso to $US 525

Mineral resources - Gold price of $US 1,400 per ounce, Silver price of $US 19.00 per ounce, Copper price of $US 3.50 per pound, Chilean Peso to $US 585

The mineral reserve and mineral resource estimates for Cerro Casale were prepared under the supervision of Mr. Rick Sims, who is a qualified person as defined by NI 43-101.

(10) Includes mineral resources from the Puren deposit in which the Company holds a 65% interest. Mineral resources for the Phase 7 project are reported at 100% ownership, however Kinross has a 75% interest in the Phase 7 project.

(11) The Tasiast proven and probable mineral reserve, and measured, indicated and inferred mineral resource estimates in this table, as at December 31, 2015, are based on the results of the pre-feasibility study assessing the 30,000 tonnes per day CIL mill expansion. For further information, please see the Company’s news release dated March 30, 2016 and the National Instrument 43-101 Technical Report for Tasiast dated March 30, 2016, both available at www.kinross.com and under the Company’s profile on SEDAR (www.sedar.com).

The following table summarizes the assumptions used in estimating mineral reserves, including average process recovery, cut-off grade assumptions, the foreign exchange rate into U.S. dollars, unit cost per tonne, and reserve drill spacing.

	Average	2015	Unit
	Process	Cutoff Grade(s)	Cost
Property	Recovery (%)	(g/t Au)	(U.S. $/tonne)
Bald Mountain	59% to 76%	0.23 to 0.33	$4.83 to $5.13
Fort Knox and Area	65% to 82%	0.11 to 0.33	$2.43 to $9.39
Kettle River - Buckhorn	92%	6.52 to 7.06	$199.35 to $231.72
Round Mountain and Area	6% to 66%	0.20 to 2.38	$4.77 to $11.92
Cerro Casale	50% to 95%	0.18 to 0.41	$2.9 to $7.7
Maricunga	53 to 77%	0.44 to 0.56	$10.54 to $10.60
Paracatu	77%	0.27	$7.90
Chirano	92%	0.88 to 2.56	$26.80 to $66.52
Tasiast	60 to 93%	0.4 to 0.7	$10.90 to $23.35
Dvoinoye	93%	3.67 to 7.73	$97.44 to $206.76
Kupol	87% to 90%	6 g/t AuEq*	$90.58 to $181.05

		(g/t Ag)
SILVER
Round Mountain and Area	5 to 32% (Gold Hill)	Included as AuEq*	$4.77 to $11.92
Cerro Casale	n/a	n/a	$2.9 to $7.7
Dvoinoye	83%	n/a	$97.44 to $206.76
Kupol	77%	Included as AuEq*	$90.58 to $181.05

		(% Cu)
COPPER
Cerro Casale	75% to 95%	0.20 to 0.30%	$2.9 to $7.7

* The cut-off grade at Round Mountain and Kupol is applied on a gold equivalent basis, using a silver to gold price ratio of 0.0142. The ratio of silver to gold recovery is also used at Round Mountain, and varies by ore type.

23

Reserve reconciliation is shown in the following tables:

2014 - 2015 Reserve Reconciliation

Gold Reserves (Proven and Probable)

	Kinross		2014	Production		Exploration/		M&A/Divestiture	Reserve Growth		2015
Mining Operation/Project	Interest		Reserves	Depletion		Engineering Change		Change	or Depletion		Reserves
	(%)		(koz)	(koz)		(koz)		(koz)	(koz)		(koz)
NORTH AMERICA
Bald Mountain	100	%	—	—		—		1,117	1,117		1,117
Fort Knox	100	%	2,398	(504	)	128		—	(376	)	2,022
Kettle River - Buckhorn	100	%	101	(99	)	45		—	(54	)	47
Round Mountain Area	100	%	690	(349	)	440		690	780		1,470
SUBTOTAL			3,189	(952	)	613		1,807	1,467		4,656
SOUTH AMERICA
Cerro Casale	25	%	5,811	—		—		—	—		5,811
Maricunga Area	100	%	1,670	(304	)	(323	)	—	(628	)	1,042
Paracatu	100	%	10,510	(822	)	(43	)	—	(865	)	9,645
SUBTOTAL			17,991	(1,126	)	(366	)	—	(1,493	)	16,498
AFRICA
Chirano	90	%	924	(245	)	457		—	211		1,135
Tasiast	100	%	9,196	(244	)	(733	)	—	(977	)	8,219
SUBTOTAL			10,120	(489	)	(276	)	—	(766	)	9,354
RUSSIA
Dvoinoye	100	%	1,028	(353	)	139		—	(213	)	815
Kupol	100	%	2,089	(375	)	186		—	(190	)	1,899
SUBTOTAL			3,117	(728	)	325		—	(403	)	2,714
TOTAL GOLD			34,417	(3,295	)	296		1,807	(1,195	)	33,222

Silver Reserves  (Proven and Probable)

	Kinross		2014	Production		Exploration/		M&A/Divestiture	Reserve Growth		2015
Mining Operation/Project	Interest		Reserves	Depletion		Engineering Change		Change	or Depletion		Reserves
	(%)		(koz)	(koz)		(koz)		(koz)	(koz)		(koz)
NORTH AMERICA
Round Mountain Area	100	%	935	(997	)	(3	)	935	(65	)	870
SUBTOTAL			935	(997	)	(3	)	935	(65	)	870
SOUTH AMERICA
Cerro Casale	25	%	14,672	—		—		—	—		14,672
SUBTOTAL			14,672	—		—		—	—		14,672
RUSSIA
Dvoinoye	100	%	1,588	(558	)	288		—	(271	)	1,317
Kupol	100	%	26,843	(4,857	)	2,136		—	(2,720	)	24,123
SUBTOTAL			28,431	(5,415	)	2,424		—	(2,991	)	25,440
TOTAL SILVER			44,038	(6,412	)	2,421		935	(3,056	)	40,982

Copper Reserves  (Proven and Probable)

	Kinross		2014	Production	Exploration/	M&A/Divestiture	Reserve Growth	2015
Mining Operation/Project	Interest		Reserves	Depletion	Engineering Change	Change	or Depletion	Reserves
	(%)		(Mlbs)	(Mlbs)	(Mlbs)	(Mlbs)	(Mlbs)	(Mlbs)
SOUTH AMERICA
Cerro Casale	25	%	1,444	—	—	—	—	1,444
SUBTOTAL			1,444	—	—	—	—	1,444
TOTAL COPPER			1,444	—	—	—	—	1,444

Note: Mineral reserves are inclusive of stockpile material.
Footnotes from Reserve statement apply.

24

Kinross Material Properties

The technical information in this Annual Information Form, has been prepared under the supervision of, or reviewed by, Mr. John Sims, a qualified person under NI 43-101, who is an officer of the Company.

Paracatu, Brazil

General

Kinross is the owner of the Paracatu mine located in the northwestern portion of the Minas Gerais State in Brazil. The Paracatu mine includes an open pit mine, two process plants (“Plant I” and “Plant II”), two tailings facilities areas, Santo Antônio and Eustáquio, and related surface infrastructure.

The Paracatu mine is 100% owned and operated by Kinross’ wholly-owned subsidiary Kinross Brasil Mineração S.A. (“KBM”). The site is known locally as “Morro do Ouro”.

Detailed financial, production and operational information for the Paracatu mine is available in Kinross’ MD&A for the year ended December 31, 2015. In addition, please see the Company’s National Instrument 43-101 Technical Report dated March 31, 2014 in respect of Paracatu, available at www.kinross.com and under the Company’s profile on SEDAR (www.sedar.com).

Property Description and Location

The Paracatu mine is a large scale open pit mine located adjacent to the city of Paracatu, situated in the northwestern portion of Minas Gerais State, 230 kilometres southeast of the national capital Brasília and 480 kilometres northwest of the state capital Belo Horizonte.

25

In Brazil, mining licences (known as decrees) are issued by the Departamento Nacional de Produção Mineral (“DNPM”). Once certain obligations have been satisfied, DNPM issues a mining decree that is renewable annually, and has no set expiry date. KBM currently holds its title by way of five mining licences (Grupamento Mineiro) totalling 1,916 hectares. The mine and most of the surface infrastructure lie within the mining licences and the new tailings facility is situated over a mining easement. The remaining infrastructure is built on lands controlled by KBM under exploration concessions. KBM holds title to 14 exploration permits (11,325 hectares) and has applied for title to an additional 12 exploration permits (12,860 hectares) and three mining applications (1,187 hectares) in the area surrounding the mine.

KBM must pay to DNPM a royalty equivalent to 1% of net sales. Another 0.5% has to be paid to the holders of surface rights in the mine area not already owned by KBM.

Kinross is in compliance with the Paracatu permits in all material respects.

Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure, and Physiography

Access to the site is provided by paved federal highways or by charter aircraft that can land at a small paved airstrip on the outskirts of Paracatu. The mine is the largest employer in Paracatu, directly employing approximately 1,380 Kinross employees and approximately 2,850 employees of contractors in 2015. Paracatu is a predominantly agricultural town (dairy and beef cattle as well as grain crops, soy beans, corn, coffee, etc.) located in Brazil’s tropical cerrado. Average temperatures range from 17 to 28 degrees Celsius.

The mine draws power from the Brazilian national power grid. The mine is dependent on rainfall as the primary source of process water. During the rainy season, the mine channels surface runoff water to temporary storage ponds from where it is pumped to the process plants. Similarly, surface runoff and rain water is stored in the tailings impoundment, which constitutes the main water reservoir for the process plants. The objective is to capture and store as much water as possible during the rainy season to ensure adequate water supply during the dry season. The mine is permitted to draw makeup water from three local rivers that also provide water for agricultural purposes. Recently, Southcentral Brazil has experienced a prolonged dry spell with two consecutive years of lower than normal rainfall. Due to the decline in avergae rainfall, on November 2, 2015, the Company temporarily suspended operation of Paracatu’s Plant 1 facility and one ball mill in Plant 2. Mining operations continued as normal and ore was stockpiled in the pit. On November 20, 2015, both Plants 1 and 2 resumed full operations. However, rainfall levels have recently fallen again and there is a risk of further shutdowns in the future.

The area topography consists of gently rolling hills. Vegetation in the area of Paracatu is known as cerrado, which is similar to savannah, with dispersed cover of trees and shrubs. The elevation at the site is approximately 780 metres above sea level.

Environmental Considerations

Paracatu operates in material compliance with applicable environmental laws and regulations and with Kinross’ policies on environment, health and safety. There are no known material environmental concerns at Paracatu. Kinross estimates the net present value of future cash outflows for site restoration costs at Paracatu under International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”), International Accounting Standard 37 (“IAS 37”) and International Financial Reporting Interpretations Committee 1 (“IFRIC 1”) for the year ended December 31, 2015, at approximately $84.0 million. There are currently no laws in Brazil requiring the posting of a reclamation bond or other financial assurance.

Kinross voluntarily initiated and entered into an agreement with the State Public Attorney to assume the obligation to submit financial security through annual contributions (in bank deposit, bank investment or letter of credit) in the amount of one million reais each year, until the execution of the mine closure plan and deactivation of dams, the rehabilitation of mined areas and the recovery plan for degraded areas. All contributions have been made up to and including 2016.

26

History

Gold mining has been associated with the Paracatu area since 1722 when placer gold was discovered in the creeks and rivers of the Paracatu region. Alluvial mining peaked in the mid-1800s and until the 1980s, was largely restricted to garimpeiro (artisanal) miners. In 1984, Rio Tinto Zinc (“Rio Tinto”) explored the property using modern exploration methods, and by 1987, the Rio Paracatu Mineração (now known as KBM) joint venture was formed between Rio Tinto and Autram Mineração e Participações (the latter being part of the TVX group of companies). Production commenced in 1987 and the mine has operated continuously since then.

In 2003, TVX’s 49% share in KBM was acquired by Kinross as part of the business combination between Kinross, TVX and Echo Bay. Kinross purchased the remaining 51% from Rio Tinto in December 2004.

In January 2005, Kinross and KBM commenced the exploration drill program west of Rico Creek and became aware of the potential for a significant reserve increase. A Plant Capacity Scope Study was completed in June 2005, which evaluated several alternatives to increase plant throughput. All options considered in this study assumed the installation of an in-pit crushing and conveying system (“IPCC”) and a 38-foot diameter SAG mill, which were the cornerstone assumptions in the original feasibility study carried out at the property.

In 2006, an expansion project (Plant II) was approved by Kinross’ Board of Directors, and in 2007, construction of a new 41 million tonnes per year (“Mtpa”) plant began. The new plant began operations in September 2008 and completion of ramp-up was achieved in the fourth quarter of 2009, stabilizing plant operation and increasing recovery to an average of 77.5% in 2010.

In 2009, the Company approved plans to undertake a new expansion project at Paracatu, which consisted of the implementation of a third ball mill to increase the grinding capacity needed to process harder ore from the Paracatu orebody. That 15 megawatt ball mill was delivered in 2010, and installation and commissioning was completed in the third quarter of 2011.

With a view to adding processing and grinding capacity, in 2010 the Company approved the addition of a fourth ball mill. Start-up of the fourth ball mill occurred in the third quarter of 2012.

Geological Setting

The mineralization at Paracatu is hosted by a thick sequence of phyllites belonging to the basal part of the Upper Proterozoic Paracatu Formation, in the Morro do Ouro Member. The sequence crops out in a northerly trend in the eastern Brasilia Belt, which, in turn, forms the western edge of the São Fransisco-Congo Craton. The Brasilia Belt predominantly consists of clastic sediments, which have undergone lower greenschist grade metamorphism along with significant tectonic deformation.

The phyllites at Paracatu lie within a broader series of regional phyllites. The Paracatu phyllites exhibit extensive deformation and feature well-developed quartz boudins and associated sulphide mineralization. Sericite minerals are common, likely as a result of extensive metamorphic alteration of the host rocks. Sulphide mineralization is dominantly arsenopyrite and pyrite, with pyrrhotite and lesser amounts of chalcopyrite, sphalerite and galena.

Exploration

Since Kinross acquired its initial share in KBM in 2003, exploration efforts have been focused primarily on the main mining area. Exploration outside of the immediate mine area was initiated in 2006.

In the licensed exploration areas immediately bordering the mine leases, exploration activities were concentrated on soil and termite-mound geochemical sampling and interpretation of airborne magnetic survey data to look for nearby features similar to Paracatu. Some target areas were generated, mostly located west and west-northwest of the mine. Follow-up exploration returned no significant results.

27

Mineralization

Gold is closely associated with arsenopyrite and pyrite and appears predominantly as fine-grained free gold along the arsenopyrite and pyrite grain boundaries or as inclusions in the individual arsenopyrite and pyrite grains.

The mineralization appears to be truncated to the north by a major normal fault trending east-northeast. The displacement along this fault is currently unknown. The current interpretation is that the fault has displaced the mineralization upwards and erosion has removed the mineralization in the up thrown block.

Drilling

The dominant sample collection method used to delineate the Paracatu resource and reserve model is by diamond core drilling. Since acquiring the project in early 2003, Kinross has completed 1,358 drillholes for a total of 109,105 metres.

All drill cores are logged geologically and litho-structural mineralization and physical data are recorded in detailed logging sheets. Diamond core is also photographed and a permanent record is maintained in the on-site electronic filing system. The information collected in the on-site electronic filing system is stored in a secure industry standard database management system.

In 2006, Kinross drilled 36 holes (3,786 metres) in the Albernaz area to the northwest of the pit and five holes (574 metres) west of Rico Creek.

The nominal drill spacing east-northeast of Rico Creek is 100 x 100 metres. An Optimum Drill Spacing Study commissioned by Kinross established that a 200 x 200 metre five spot pattern (a 200 x 200 metre grid plus one hole in the middle) would satisfactorily define indicated mineral resources. This pattern results in nominal 140 metre hole spacing and represents a departure from historical KBM practices.

In 2009, an infill drilling program was commenced to improve the local estimation inside the areas included in the Paracatu mine plan, including approximately 14,000 metres between 2009 and 2011. An additional 16,774 metres were drilled in 2012, 6,022 metres were drilled in 2013, 6,030 metres drilled in 2014, and 4,333 metres drilled in 2015. The infill drill spacing is designed for 70 x 70 metres overall spacing to further define the mine’s measured resource.

Sample Analysis and Security

Physical core recovery from the exploration and infill core drilling programs averages 99%. KBM employs a systematic sampling approach where the drilling is sampled using standard one metre sample lengths.

Samples are prepared by crushing to 95% passing 2.0 millimetres to 3.5 millimetres. Two kilogram splits of crushed material are then pulverized to 95% passing 100 to 150 mesh. The remaining coarse reject is stored.

Core samples for analysis are stored in a secure warehouse at site prior to sample preparation. The warehouse is either locked or under direct supervision of the geological staff. Prior to shipping, drill core samples are placed in large rice bags and sealed. A sample transmittal form that identifies each batch of samples is prepared. The samples are transported directly to the on-site laboratory for sample preparation and analyses.

All core boxes are transported by KBM personnel from the KBM rigs to the logging facility located inside the fenced mine gates. After photographing, logging and marking one metre sample intervals, the whole core is placed in heavy gauge plastic bags with a unique sample tag. The sample tag number is also written in indelible marker on the outside of each sample bag.

28

Samples are analyzed at the KBM laboratory and loaded by KBM personnel onto pickup trucks and transported to the on-site preparation laboratory where samples are rotary split. Approximately six kilograms are stored as coarse rejects and two kilograms are transported by pickup truck to the assay laboratory for pulverization and analysis.

Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve Estimates

Refer to Kinross Mineral Reserves and Mineral Resources on pages 18 — 21 for quantity, grades and category. Assumptions are outlined in the Notes – 2015 Kinross Mineral Reserve and Mineral Resource Statements section commencing on page 21.

Mining and Milling Operations

The Paracatu mine is a traditional open pit truck/shovel operation that has been in continuous operation since 1987. The plants at Paracatu have processed approximately 644 million tonnes of material and produced 6.93 million ounces of gold through 2015.

Mining is planned at an average rate of approximately 72 Mtpa over the next three years, followed by 88 Mtpa from 2019 to 2029, then declining to an average of 50 Mtpa in 2030 and 2031, due to the low strip ratio from the last pushback located under the “in pit” conveyor belt area in the center region of the pit.

Plant I at Paracatu has operated continuously since 1987, with expansion upgrades completed in 1997 and 1999. Plant I consists of primary and secondary crushing, ball milling to 80% passing 75 microns, rougher and cleaner flotation, concentrate regrinding, and cyanide leaching (hydromet plant). Final gold bullion is produced from the dedicated carbon adsorption, desorption and electrowinning circuit.

Plant II started production in September 2008, and achieved commercial production in December 2008. Currently, Plant II includes an in pit crusher, a 1.8 kilometre conveyor to a covered stockpile area, a 38 foot SAG mill, and four ball mills. The recovery process uses flotation to produce concentrate, which is then leached in a carbon-in-leach (“CIL”) circuit in the hydromet plant. Gold is recovered by a carbon elution and electrowinning process and refined to gold bars.

During 2014 crushing at Plant I was interconnected with crushing at Plant II. Plant I feed is pre crushed through the Plant II crusher and then fed to the Plant I crusher. This allowed for more efficient processing of harder ores in Plant I.

There are two tailings facilities at site. Historically, rougher tailings generated from Plant I and Plant II were discharged into the Santo Antônio tailings facility. However, a new tailings facility was required as part of the initial Plant II expansion and construction of the Eustáquio tailings storage facility began in 2009 and tailings have been discharged into the new basin since 2012. In 2015, the Santo Antônio facility capacity augmentation was finalized and a pumping system was implemented to place Plant I tailings into the Eustáquio tailings storage facility. Through a rigorous pre-closure sampling project, areas of the Santo Antônio facility were found to have recoverable mineralized zones. In late 2015, a mining plan was developed using hydraulic mining and pumping along with truck and shovel methods in coarser materials.

Life of Mine and Capital Expenditures

Based on the 2015 mineral reserves, Paracatu is expected to continue production until 2030.

In 2015, KBM incurred approximately $112.7 million in capital expenditures mainly related to tailings facility construction, mine fleet spare parts and optimization.

29

Exploration and Development

The only exploration drilling planned in 2016 is the continuation of the infill and short-range drilling program interior to the existing mining area.

30

Kupol and Dvoinoye, Russian Federation

General

Kupol

Development and construction of the Kupol mine commenced in 2005 by Bema Gold Corporation (“Bema”), which was acquired by Kinross in 2007. As part of the Bema acquisition, Kinross acquired a 75% interest in Chukotka Mining & Geological Company (“CMGC”).

On April 27, 2011, Kinross completed its acquisition of the remaining 25% of CMGC from the State Unitary Enterprise of the Chukotka Autonomous Okrug which is owned by the Government of Chukotka Autonomous District, an autonomous Okrug (region) in the northeast region of the Russian Federation. This transaction gave Kinross 100% ownership of the Kupol mine and the Kupol East and Kupol West exploration licences.

Dvoinoye

In 2010, Kinross acquired a 100% interest in the Dvoinoye underground gold mine through the acquisition of Northern Gold LLC and Regionruda LLC. The Dvoinoye mine is owned and operated by Northern Gold LLC, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Kinross. On October 1, 2013, Kinross began commercial production at the Dvoinoye underground gold mine. Ore from Dvoinoye is processed at the Kupol mill, which is owned by CMGC.

31

The Dvoinoye mine is a high grade epithermal gold deposit located approximately 100 kilometres north of Kinross’ Kupol operation within the remote, undeveloped, mountainous area of the Chukotka Autonomous Okrug. The Dvoinoye reserve is being mined using underground mechanised mining equipment, similar to Kinross’ Kupol operation.

A scoping study on the Dvoinoye project was completed in January 2011 and a feasibility study was completed in March 2012. The Russian equivalent of a feasibility study (a Tekhniko-Ekonomicheskoye Obosnivaniye) was concluded in December 2012. The feasibility study was based on developing Dvoinoye as an underground mine with an output of up to 1,000 tonnes per day and a mine life from 2013 through 2020.

The Dvoinoye mine site features a modern 400 person camp, an administration building, a power station with 6.5 megawatts of generating capacity, a truck shop and a fuel farm with a capacity of 9,000 cubic metres of fuel.

The Company’s ordinary course application to renew the Dvoinoye subsoil licence was approved in September 2013 and the licence is valid until January 1, 2023. Fees for the use of the Dvoinoye subsoil licence, for the purpose of prospecting, exploration and mining, are paid on a regular basis to the authorities. An environmental impact assessment was completed for the Dvoinoye mine in 2013.

Commercial production at Dvoinoye began in October 2013 with the official opening of the mine.  The Dvoinoye ore is being transported to the Kupol mill for processing via an all-season road. The Kupol mill has been expanded from 3,500 to 4,500 tonnes per day to handle the additional Dvoinoye ore. In 2015, 432,258 tonnes of Dvoinoye ore was processed at the Kupol mill with 337,749 ounces of gold and 487,683 ounces of silver being produced.

Detailed financial, production and operational information for the Kupol and Dvoinoye mines are available in Kinross’ MD&A for the year ended December 31, 2015. In addition, please see the Company’s National Instrument 43-101 Technical Report dated March 31, 2015 in respect of Kupol and Dvoinoye, available at www.kinross.com and under the Company’s profile on SEDAR (www.sedar.com).

Property Description and Location

Kupol

The Kupol property comprises a 17.5 square kilometre licence for subsoil use for geological study and production of gold and silver. This licence was issued by the Ministry of Natural Resource of the Russian Federation on October 4, 2002, and is held by CMGC.

There are no royalties payable in respect of the Kupol mine. However, Kupol is subject to a mineral extraction tax at a rate of 6% for gold and 6.5% for silver from a tax base which is calculated as the average of pure gold and silver sales (price per gram) multiplied by the amount of doré sold.

In 2006, CMGC acquired two new exploration licences surrounding, and adjacent to, the Kupol project. With the acquisition of these two licences, known as Kupol West and Kupol East, CMGC increased its overall land position in the Kupol project area from approximately 17.5 square kilometres to a combined total of approximately 443 square kilometres. On August 27, 2010, Kinross, certain subsidiaries, and B2Gold Corporation (“B2Gold”) completed an Assignment, Settlement and Release Agreement pursuant to which B2Gold released Kinross and the applicable subsidiaries from certain joint venture obligations that had existed among Kinross, the applicable subsidiaries and B2Gold pursuant to a purchase and sale agreement with respect to the Kupol West and Kupol East licences. In 2014, in accordance with the terms of the Kupol East license, a final report was submitted that concluded that no potential economic resources had been found after five years of exploration work. The Kupol East property will therefore be returned to the sub-soil authorities after completion of the environmental requirements stated in the licence agreement. In December of the same year, following an application by CMGC, the Company obtained two new licences in the Kupol

32

region at auction, Kupol North and Leva Mechkereva, totalling together 1,458 square kilometres thus substantially increasing the overall land position of Kinross in the Chukotka Okrug. In first half of 2015, another two licences (Shumnaya and Kitepvaamskaya), totalling together approximately 200 square kilometres were acquired pursuant to new Russian legislation. The duration of both the Shumnaya and Kitepvaamskaya licences is seven years.

Dvoinoye

The Dvoinoye mine is located 98 kilometres north of the Kupol mine.

The Dvoinoye exploration and mining licence, which covers an area of 5.76 square kilometres including mine operations and associated facilities, is located within the Vodorazdelnaya licence. The Vodorazdelnaya licence is a combined reconnaissance and mining claim. It was issued in 2008 and covers a total area of 916.4 square kilometres. The Dvoinoye licence was first issued in 2007, and was renewed in 2013. Its life now extends to 2023. Both the Dvoinoye and Vodorazdelnaya licences were acquired by Kinross in 2010 when it completed its acquisition of Northern Gold and Regionruda LLC, respectively, owners of the Dvoinoye licence and the Vodorazdelnaya licence. Due to the merger of Regionruda LLC with Northern Gold in 2015, Northern Gold is now the owner of both licences.

There are no royalties payable in respect of the Dvoinoye mine. However, a mineral extraction tax is applied to production at Dvoinoye (6% for gold and 6.5% for silver). Unlike Kupol, the Dvoinoye extraction tax is applied based on the amount of gold and silver produced (and not necessarily the amount of gold and silver sold).

Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure, and Physiography

Kupol

The Kupol deposit is located in the northwest part of the Anadyr foothills on the boundary between the Anadyr and Bilibino Regions in the Chukotka Autonomous Okrug. The total distance between the Kupol property and Bilibino is approximately 200 kilometres.

A regional airport serving Bilibino is located 35 kilometres south of Bilibino in Keperveem. Keperveem airport is the closest public airport to Kupol. In 2009 the airstrip at Kupol was certified as an airport and direct daily flights from Magadan to Kupol commenced. The main access point for land freight to Kupol is from the port facilities at Pevek, approximately 400 kilometres north of Kupol. Pevek and Kupol are connected by a combined all-season and winter road for a total distance of approximately 450 kilometres. Freight is transported from the port and stored at a storage yard and shop 21 kilometres from Pevek. From there, a winter road, constructed from November to January of every year, follows the contour of Chaunskii Bay for 133 kilometres then travels due south to Yarakvaam camp (formerly Dvoinoye camp) and onwards to join the Kupol-Dvoinoye all-season road 85 kilometres from Kupol. The winter road is serviced by three temporary camps and one permanent 60-person, containerized camp and is passable between early to mid-January and late April.

During the spring thaw, summer and fall, Kupol is only accessible by helicopter or fixed wing aircraft via a two to three hour flight from Magadan, a one hour flight from Keperveem or a two hour flight from Anadyr. Magadan is serviced by an all-season paved airstrip. Keperveem is serviced by a gravel airstrip capable of handling IL76 aircraft. Anadyr is serviced by an all-season paved airstrip. A 1,800 metre gravel airstrip at the Kupol site is currently in use.

The Chukotka region around the Kupol site belongs to the continental climatic region of the subarctic climate belt with extremely severe weather consisting of long and cold winters (8-8.5 months), overcast weather, and short summer periods (2.5 months). The average annual temperature at the Kupol site is -13 degrees Celsius, ranging from -58 degrees Celsius to 33 degrees Celsius.

33

The overall region is sparsely populated, with approximately 65,000 inhabitants. Of this population, approximately one half of the people live in the two districts where the Kupol deposit is located (Bilibino and Anadyr).

The Kupol property is situated on a height of land adjacent to the divide between the Arctic Ocean and Bering Sea drainages. The Straichnaya River drains north to the Anui River and the Sredniy Kaiemraveem River drains into the Mechkereva River to the south. Topography is moderate, characterized by low rolling hills and occasional flat midland areas. The Sredniy Kaiemraveem River bisects the eastern portion of the property. The elevation ranges from 450 to 755 metres.

Permafrost is distributed throughout the Kupol property area. Depending on geomorphology, the thickness of the permafrost layer ranges from surface to a depth of 200 to 320 metres and reaches its maximum depth under riverbeds.

The Kupol property is located approximately 40 kilometres north of the tree line and is covered with tundra, rock outcrop and felsenmeer. The vegetation is limited to lichen, grass and arctic shrubs and flowers.

Dvoinoye

The Dvoinoye site is isolated and can only be accessed by air (helicopter), by winter roads, or by an all-season road from Kupol. There is a network of winter roads that is passable between mid-January and mid-April.

An all-season road connecting the Dvoinoye site and Kupol was completed in 2013. The road is a two lane gravel road with a camp located at the approximate mid-point. The road includes a 110 metre long bridge across the Anui River. The road is used for the movement of ore to Kupol and for the transportation of crews and materials between Kupol and Dvoinoye. The responsibility for the road maintenance rests with Kupol.

By air, the Dvoinoye site can be accessed by helicopter from Pevek airport (about 1.5 hours), from the Kupol mine (about 40 minutes), or Bilibino airport (about 45 minutes). Personnel access to the site is by air to the Kupol airport and then by vehicle to Dvoinoye.

Dvoinoye is located in a mountainous region north of the Arctic Circle. The area is subject to extremely severe weather consisting of long and cold winters that persist for approximately nine months of the year. The climatic conditions for the area are characterized by an extreme continental subarctic climate and falls under Region 1 in the Russian regulatory ice and snow formation and loading categories. On average, there is snow cover for 246 days per year and the snow depth averages 1.8 metres. The average annual air temperature is -13.5 degrees Celsius and the average daily air temperature from December to February is -30 degrees Celsius. The summer is cool with regular fog, rain, and frosts.

The Dvoinoye terrain comprises strongly dissected alpine-type hilly terrain with clear traces of glacial activities. Elevations above sea level reach 1,385 metres, the relevant difference in elevations with valley bottoms being 300 metres to 500 metres.

The Dvoinoye area is drained by the Dvoynaya River and its tributaries with a total catchment area of 220 square kilometres. Water flow depends to a considerable extent on the season and precipitation. The Dvoynaya River freezes by the end of September and breaks up in the beginning of June. The Dvoinoye mine is in a zone of continuous permafrost (lower boundary varies from 200 metres to more than 500 metres below the surface). The depth of seasonal thawing varies from 0.02 metres to 2.4 metres in the river valleys to 2.4 metres to 3.0 metres on those watershed boundaries composed of hard and semi- hard rocks.

34

Environmental Considerations

Kupol

Kinross is in compliance with the Kupol permits in all material respects. Kupol operates in material compliance with applicable environmental laws and regulations and with Kinross’ policies on environment, health and safety. There are no known material environmental concerns at Kupol. Kinross estimates the net present value of future cash outflows for site restoration costs at Kupol under IFRS, IAS 37 and IFRIC 1 for the year ended December 31, 2015, at approximately $58.2 million. There are currently no regulatory requirements for the posting of security for the estimated site restoration costs.

Dvoinoye

Permits for Dvoinoye have been received for the exploration and mining, air emissions, water usage and wastewater discharge as well as the waste storage and disposal, landfill operation earth works, explosive storage and usage, site roads and fuel tank operation. Kinross is in compliance with the Dvoinoye permits in all material respects. Kinross estimates the net present value of future cash outflows for site restoration costs at Dvoinoye under IFRS, IAS 37 and IFRIC 1 for the year ended December 31, 2015, at approximately $5.6 million. There are currently no regulatory requirements for the posting of security for the estimated site restoration costs.

History

Kupol

Quartz vein float was originally located in the Kupol area in 1966 during a governmental regional mapping program. These float boulders assayed up to 3.0 grams per tonne gold and 660 grams per tonne silver and the find was designated as the “Oranzheviy Occurrence”. The main Kupol deposit was discovered by the Bilibino-based, state-funded Anyusk State Mining and Geological Enterprise (“Anyusk”) in 1995, through prospecting in the region of the “Oranzheviy Occurrence”. Prospecting was aided by the identification of gold, silver, arsenic, and antimony anomalies in a 1:200,000 stream sediment geochemical sampling program. During 1996 and 1997, Anyusk completed mapping, prospecting, magnetic and resistivity surveys, and lithogeochemical and soil surveys.

During 1998, two drillholes were drilled and four trenches were excavated. In 1999, Metall, a Chukotka-based, Russian mining cartel, acquired the rights to the deposit and contracted Anyusk to conduct the exploration work. From 1999 through 2001, an additional 31 trenches and 24 drillholes were completed. In 2000 and 2001, 450 metres of the central portion of the vein system was stripped, mapped and channel sampled in detail. By the end of 2001, the work completed included 3,004 metres of drilling in 26 drillholes, 5,034.1 metres of trenching and 3,110.8 metres of channel sampling. Additionally, the majority of the licence area was surveyed, and a frame for a small mill was constructed immediately south of Bolotnoye Lake, where the 2004-2006 camp was located.

The original Kupol Licence was issued to Metall on March 16, 1999. On October 4, 2002, this Kupol Licence was re-issued to CMGC, a newly established subsidiary of Metall. In December 2002, Bema entered into an agreement to acquire up to a 75% interest in the property.

Dvoinoye

The Dvoinoye deposit was discovered in 1984 through a program of regional soil sampling, geophysical surveys and geological mapping.  The Dvoinoye site includes an inactive open pit mine which previously operated six months per year, with throughput of approximately 250 tonnes per day. Open pit operations were initiated in 1996 by Northern Gold, which was originally a subsidiary of Anyusk. Operations continued under the ownership of the deposit by Millhouse Capital and its subsidiary Regionruda LLC and were terminated before acquisition by Kinross.

35

Geological Setting

Kupol

Gold and silver mineralization at Kupol is hosted by low sulphidation epithermal quartz-adularia veins within a north-south fault zone in Cretaceous andesite flows and pyroclastic units. Gold-bearing banded chalcedonic quartz-adularia veins and breccias are associated with silicification, argillization and rhyolite dykes for 4.1 kilometres along strike. The main vein zone is up to 50 metres wide and has been drilled to a maximum vertical depth of approximately 725 metres. The vein dips range from vertical to 75 degrees to the east. The deposit has been divided into six contiguous zones; from north to south these are North Extension, North, Central, Big Bend, South and South Extension. Mineralization, with widths up to 22 metres, has been defined along 3.9 kilometres of strike.

In 2005, a series of polymetallic veins were discovered starting 350 metres west of the main Kupol structure. These veins strike northwest and dip 55 to 75 degrees to the west.

Dvoinoye

Host rocks at Dvoinoye are Late Cretaceous intermediate-felsic volcanics of the Tytylveyem Suite, which is divided into three units. The main host rock here is porphyritic dacite lava, containing 20% to 30% phenocrysts (plagioclase, pyroxene and potassium feldspar), in a siliceous aphanitic matrix. Other components of the local geology include cross-cutting pyritic hydrothermal breccias that may mainly affect the tuff units. Their distribution and geometry are unclear but at least part of the Dvoinoye vein is hosted by narrow siliceous pyritic milled breccias that may be related to larger volume hydrothermal breccias.

Exploration

Kupol

During 2003, Bema completed 22,257 metres of drilling, extensive trenching, metallurgical test work, a site survey, hydrology studies and acquisition of environmental baseline information for Kupol. In addition, Bema conducted initial engineering work and studies toward a scoping or preliminary economic assessment, which was successfully completed in 2004, and on procurement of equipment and supplies for the 2004 exploration and development program. Drill campaigns conducted by Bema between 2003 and 2006 completed a total of 762 holes for 151,154 metres.

From 2007 to 2011, drill campaigns conducted by Kinross at Kupol completed a total of 1,824 holes for 215,966 metres.

In 2012, a total of 38,884 metres of core drilling was completed for the year at Kupol.

In 2013, drilling continued on the Kupol mining lease as well as on Kupol West and Moroshka Project. A total of 45,697 metres of core drilling were completed for the year.

In 2014, drilling continued on the Kupol mining lease as well as on Kupol West. A total of 31,071 metres of core drilling were completed for the year, which included 21,037 metres of infill drilling at Moroshka for resource estimation. The rest of the drilling consisted of prospecting drillholes within both licences.

In 2015, an extensive exploration work was completed over the four new licenses including approximately 1,500 square kilometres covered by soil and litho-geochemical sampling and more than 2,000 square kilometres of magnetic and gamma-spectrometry airborne survey for initial target identification. Also a pioneer helicopter-supported drilling program was successfully completed, drilling seven holes (1,292 metres) at three remote targets located up to 50 kilometres from Kupol. A number of proximal targets within Kupol West and Kupol North licenses were tested by diamond drilling (36,078 metres) and some of them were degraded although further work is planned for the next year. 16,482 metres out of the total were drilled

36

at Moroshka-Providence ore zones for ore body delineation, additional resources and geotechnical studies.

In first half of 2016 the exploration team will be focused on rigorous target check within the Kupol West, Kupol North and Leva Mechkereva licences.

Dvoinoye

The drilling programme conducted by Northern Gold between 2000 and 2009 completed a total of 200 drillholes for 44,335 metres. Northern Gold prepared initial engineering work and studies toward a scoping of preliminary economic assessment that was successfully accomplished in 2009.

From 2010 to 2012, the drill campaigns conducted by Kinross at Dvoinoye completed a total of 298 holes for 76,804 metres, including exploration, engineering and condemnation holes.

The focus of exploration work from 2012 to 2014 was on testing the mineralization along the vein system to expand the current resources and to identify new targets. During these years, a total of 69,886 metres of core drilling was completed within the Vodorazdelnaya licence.

By the end of 2015 an extensive exploration programme was completed over the Vodorazdelnaya licence. More than 300 square kilometres were covered by soil and litho-geochemical sampling. Airborne magnetic survey was done over the entire licence area.

In 2015, a total of 24,667 metres were drilled. This drilling included infill drilling at Sentyabrskoe NE and Zone 1 on the Dvoinoye mining licence, as well as exploration drilling at numerous other targets. A number of additional studies were completed for Sentyabrskoe NE, including detailed ground geophysics, environmental field works, geotechnical drilling and engineering studies, resource estimate, mine design and economic assessment.

During 2016, the work will be focused on the targets identified during the 2015-2016 target evaluation sessions.

Mineralization

Kupol

Gold and silver at Kupol occur as native gold, gold-silver alloy electrum, in acanthite and silver-rich sulphosalts (stephanite and pyrargyrite dominant). Gold and these minerals occur with pyrite and minor amounts of arsenopyrite, chalcopyrite, galena and sphalerite predominantly in bands within chalcedonic quartz, quartz and quartz-adularia colloform and crustiform veins and breccias.

Dvoinoye

Dvoinoye is a low sulphidation epithermal gold-silver vein deposit, characterized by low total sulphide content, generally less than one percent, by variable but low gold:silver ratios (average 1:1), and by the presence of considerable free gold in parts of the deposit. The main ore minerals and related sulphides in the vein are native gold, freibergite, pyrite, chalcopyrite, galena, and sphalerite, with minor acanthite. Ore minerals are generally fine grained. Gold occurs inter-grown with sulphides, free in quartz-illite aggregates, and in places as rare dendritic growth bands.

37

Drilling

Kupol

In 2007, a 105-hole underground diamond drillhole definition program produced 5,606 metres of NQ and BQ-sized core from drill stations. The geologists laid out the drill fans in Micromine software, and then distributed the layouts to the mine surveyors, who then painted backsights and frontsights in the drill stations for hole alignment. Drill fans were spaced ten metres apart with four or five holes per fan, designed to penetrate the vein every 15 metres vertically on dip, or in the centre of each stope panel. Drill recovery was >90% overall, with very few instances of poor vein recovery. In instances of bad ground, e.g., in shear zones in the footwall of the vein, the standard NQ rods served as casing and the drillers completed the holes with BQ tools. A REFLEX E-Z Shot downhole digital magnetic recorder measured uncorrected azimuth, dip, temperature and local magnetic field. The readings were transcribed by hand in the field and given to a data entry clerk to enter in the drillhole database. To convert to local north, the azimuth reading was adjusted by -1.8 degrees, based on USGS model WMM 2000 projected to 2007. The mine surveyors also surveyed the collar coordinates in local coordinates, azimuth, and dip of each hole after it was drilled. The surveyors were under the direction of the Russian Chief Mine Engineer.

In 2008, the South Extension (650) zone surface core drilling program comprised 12,325 metres of HQ- and NQ-sized core in 56 holes performed by Russian and Canadian drilling companies under Kinross’ supervision. The program infilled the existing pattern of holes from previous campaigns and resulted in a significant conversion of inferred resources to probable mineral reserves. The underground definition drilling was completed for a total of 15,568 metres.

In 2012, underground definition drilling was completed for a total of 25,118 metres (N- and B-sized core). In 2010 and 2011, underground definition drilling continued with NQ- and BQ-sized core for a total of 28,430 metres in 2010 and 30,116 metres in 2011. Termite core drilling was conducted to test the limits of mineralization in the development headings and to optimize slashing operations and panel extraction, and 2,559.5 metres were drilled in 2012, 4,148 metres were drilled in 2011, and 3,200 metres were drilled in 2010. The average sample length was one metre.

An RC drill rig was used for grade control in the open pit, completing 7,961.5 metres in 2009, 3,694 metres in 2010, and 2,067 metres in 2011. The RC drill results supplemented, and to some extent replaced, grade control trenching activities.

In 2013, the underground definition drilling consisted of NQ- and BQ-sized core for a total of 22,538 metres. The Termite core drilling consisted of 641 metres.

In 2014, underground definition drilling was completed with NQ- and BQ-sized core for a total of 23,426 metres. The Termite core drill was replaced by an on-site Sandvik Solo drill to test the limits of mineralization in the development headings and to optimize slashing operations and panel extraction, and 6,059 metres were drilled. The average sample length was one metre.

In 2015, the underground definition drilling continued with NQ- and BQ-sized core for a total of 24,437 metres. The average sample length was one metre. An additional 8,470 metres were drilled with Sandvik Solo in order to define the horizontal extension of mineralization.

Geological core drill logs included header, survey, recovery, rock quality designation (“RQD”), structural, mineralogical, and lithological information. The logging scheme was similar, but condensed from the exploration scheme described in the previous technical reports on Kupol. All information was logged directly into a data recording laptop with online validation parameters. The data logger downloaded to the Kupol server into the GBIS SQL database manager and the contents migrated to database tables. The first sampling task for the geologist was a log of recovery; RQD; and for selected core drillholes, full geotechnical logging of fractures and rock quality. This required some reconstruction of the core in the boxes such as sorting out jumbled sections and fitting broken core together before taking measurements. Next, sampling intervals were determined, marked up, and tagged by the Russian geologists using preprinted sample ticket

38

books. Sample intervals were based on geology (lithology or vein types, mineralogy, and structure). The geologist could sample across contacts if the vein width was less than the minimum sample width (30 centimetres). The maximum sample length was one metre and mineralized zones were bracketed by a minimum of one to three metres of sampling into the footwall and hanging wall. Geologists sampled all vein zones and alteration types; each major zone was continuously sampled. Definition drillhole sampling was whole core, with no sawing or splitting.

Chip channel sampling was the basis for all 2007-2015 underground production grade control and reporting. Geologists followed written procedures for each face, including mapping geologic and sample intervals graphically, and listing the sample information on a form. The form included a face sketch, depiction of painted instructions, temporal, spatial, and other information adequate to form a complete record of the face.

Four hundred and two faces were mapped in 2007 which cover 2,591 metres and 3,259 chip channel samples were collected. In 2008 underground face sampling consisted of 4,222 metres and 5,053 samples collected. During 2009 and 2010 the number of mapped and sampled faces was 1,131 and 1,058, respectively. The number of chip samples taken for these two years was 6,812 and 5,837, respectively.

In 2011, mine geologists and samplers documented 791 sublevel faces from which 4,653 samples were collected. Chip sampling, along with underground delineation drilling provided the underground production grade control and reporting in 2012. There were 8,233 chip samples taken in the underground mine in 2012. In 2013, 1,297 faces were documented and there were 7,551 chip samples taken. In 2014, chip samples consisted of 1,146 faces and 6,503 chip samples taken. In 2015 mine geologists documented 1,332 sublevel faces and took 7,859 channel samples.

Dvoinoye

There was no exploration drilling on the Dvoinoye licence in 2014, and only the limited resource estimation drilling referred to earlier on Zone 1 of the Dvoinoye mining licence during 2015. All other drilling was on the Vodorazdelnaya licence. Drill campaigns on Dvoinoye completed between 2000 and 2015 included 416 surface and underground core drillholes, totaling 108,387 metres.

Detailed logging was conducted by professional geologists. Information is hand written onto graphical log forms and then key data is entered manually into spreadsheet templates. Pre-2010 graphical drill logs are simpler and much less information is recorded on the drill logs. The Kinross drill logs are much more detailed and include lithology, colour, grain size, structures, core axis angles, oxidation type and intensity, mineralization, alteration, vein texture, core recovery, RQD, predominant fracture orientations, fault attitudes, fault gouge zones, and other information.

The core recovery is generally very good. RPA, Inc. previously reviewed the 2012YE database, which has 14,110 core recovery values that average 98.3% for 2010 and 2011 drillholes. There are 381 core recovery records representing 1,120.7 metres of vein intersections that average 99.4%. There is no electronic core recovery data for the pre-2010 drillholes. Micromine (2009) includes a table that summarizes the core recovery for each hole and the core recovery for the mineralized interval in each hole. Micromine (2009) notes that core recoveries for each run were not available. Overall, 100% of the core was recovered from most of the mineralized intervals with only a small number of exceptions.

Sampling and Analysis

Kupol

Underground chip sampling was a team effort conducted by a crew of one or two samplers, supervised and/or assisted by the geologist. The geologist inserted a sample ticket from preprinted books into each bag and the bags were laid on the ground in order. Sampling always occurred from the footwall to the hanging wall. The geologist painted a level sample line on the face at one metre above the ground and the objective was to make the line disappear during sampling. This approximated a five by five centimetre

39

channel. The geologist also painted sample numbers on the face, and photos were taken as a record of the sampling after it was complete. Geologists broke samples based on the same criteria as for the core sampling, and at the same maximum and minimum lengths.

Core sample minimum length was 0.25 metres for HQ diameter core and 0.30 metres for NQ diameter core. Generally, the maximum sample length was one metre. Mineralized zones were bracketed by a minimum of one to three metres of sampling into the footwall and hanging wall. All vein zones and alteration types of interest were sampled and each major zone was continuously sampled.

Samples containing visible gold or abundant sulphosalt mineralization were indicated by a sample bag at the start of the sample interval, so sampling technicians would employ contamination minimization protocols during cutting and laboratory preparation. Field duplicate samples were marked with flagging tape.

Core to be sampled during the initial Bema Kupol exploration program was delivered to the splitting shack and either taken inside or dead-stacked on the pallets outside. Core was 2/3 split using a diamond saw; the remaining third was returned to the core box as a permanent record. The rock saw core jig was calibrated to ensure that an even 2/3 split was taken of the core for both HQ and NQ sized samples.

Trench sampling followed a simple protocol that was similar to Core sampling. The protocol was to attempt to cut intervals that were five to six centimetres wide by five centimetres deep to approximate a core sample. The geologist wrote up a submittal sheet, picked up standards and blind pulp reruns at the office, and drove the samples to the lab the same day or to the ovens if they were wet and needed pre-drying.

RC drilling was dry; samples were collected in a cyclone, passed through a Gilson splitter at the end of the drilling interval, and a split transferred to a labelled bag. The hole was blown clean after each one metre sample interval and the cyclone and splitter cleaned with brushes and compressed air.

All samples and gold-silver analyses were performed on-site by a Russian-certified laboratory. Geology modified the on-site quality control program for 2007 to comprise: (a) insertion of standard reference material (standards) to monitor accuracy; (b) coarse blank material (blanks) to monitor contamination and sample mix-ups; and (c) field duplicates (duplicates) and prep duplicate split reruns to monitor precision. All quality control samples were blind to the Kupol laboratory.  The Kupol lab also maintained its own internal quality control program. All lab results were electronically imported to a secure, server-based SQL database maintained by a database administrator. Russian regulations require periodic submittal of a certain percentage of pulp duplicates to an outside Russian-certified laboratory as an outside check.

Dvoinoye

For exploration core samples, sampling intervals were determined, marked up, and tagged by the geologists. The intervals were based on geology (lithology, mineralogy, texture, and structure). Sampling across contacts was only permitted if the vein width was less than the minimum sample width. The core was manually oriented to ensure that the core was consistently split and that there was no sample bias. The minimum sample length was approximately 0.2 metre. Most of the drillholes recovered HQ diameter core and some drillholes recovered NQ diameter core. Generally, the maximum sample length was one metre in mineralization and up to three metres in waste. Mineralized zones were bracketed by a minimum of one metre to three metres of sampling into the footwall and hanging wall. All vein zones and alteration types of interest were sampled and each major zone was continuously sampled. The whole core was sampled in the oldest drillholes and split at an undefined point in time using a hammer and chisel. Fresh water is used to protect against re-circulation contamination.

From 2010 onwards, most exploration samples have been sent to the Kupol mine laboratory for gold and silver fire assay. The first on-site sample preparation facility was commissioned in 2012 at the old camp and then moved to the new camp in 2014 but the samples continued to be assayed at Kupol lab to keep the consistency of the geochemical results.

40

Security of Samples

The geologists arranged and personally conducted transport of drill core from the drills in covered wooden boxes. The core was laid out in a secure core logging hall by the responsible geologist and photographed immediately after logging was complete.

Samples were bagged and field blanks/reference standards were inserted into the sample stream by the geologists. The samples were assembled into batches of twenty, in the order they were sampled, and submitted to the laboratory two to three times per day. Well-mineralized or visible gold-bearing samples were indicated on the submission form to ensure that contamination reduction protocols were followed by the laboratory.

Core containing veining is stored in racks in locked rooms. Non-mineralized core from the 2005 program is stored either in open racks, or, if it is from areas of condemnation drilling, dead-stacked by hole.

Kinross implemented external analytical quality control measures on all sampling consisting of using control samples in all sample batches submitted for assaying including field blanks, certified standards, and field duplicates.

Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve Estimates

Refer to Kinross Mineral Reserves and Mineral Resources on pages 18 — 21 for quantity, grades and category. Assumptions are outlined in the Notes — 2015 Kinross Mineral Reserve and Mineral Resource Statements section commencing on page 21.

Mining and Milling Operations

Kupol

The Kupol deposit is mined by underground mining. The underground mining methods utilize mechanized sublevel mining methods to mine ore on a two shift per day, 365 days per year schedule. The first gold pour at Kupol occurred during the second quarter of 2008 and the mill reached a production rate of approximately 3,000 tonnes per day in October 2008. In 2013, the mill reached a production rate of approximately 4,500 tonnes per day.

The milling process consists of primary crushing and a SAG/ball mill grinding circuit, and includes conventional gravity technology with intensive leaching of gravity concentrate followed by whole ore leaching. Merrill-Crowe precipitation is used to produce gold and silver doré bars. Counter-current decantation wash thickeners recover soluble gold and silver values and a cyanide destruction system is used to reduce cyanide concentrations to an acceptable level for disposal. Tailings are pumped through a pipeline to a conventional tailings impoundment.

Dvoinoye

Dvoinoye underground mining operations have used two different mining methods, transverse longhole stoping and longitudinal longhole stoping. Transverse longhole stoping has accounted for more than 90% of the historical production, but the remaining reserves will predominantly be extracted using longitudinal longhole stoping.

Dvoinoye ore is transported by truck to the Kupol mill for processing.

Life of Mine and Capital Expenditures

Based on the 2015 mineral reserves, Kupol is expected to continue mine production until 2020 and Dvoinoye is expected to continue mine production until 2018. While the feasibility study conducted in 2012

41

estimated a mine life to 2020, an increased production rate at Dvoinoye explains the revised mine life to 2018. Kinross spent approximately $55.9 million on capital expenditures at Kupol and Dvoinoye in 2015.

Financing

On December 22, 2011, the Company announced that it had completed a $200.0 million non-recourse loan issued to CMGC by a group of international financial institutions. The non-recourse loan carried a term of five years with a maturity date of September 30, 2016 and had an annual interest rate of LIBOR plus 2.5%. On September 30, 2015, the Company repaid the loan in full, which included a prepayment of $20.0 million that would have otherwise been due in 2016.

42

Tasiast, Mauritania

General

The Tasiast mine is currently a conventional open pit gold mine with a combined carbon-in-leach (“CIL”), dump leach operation and Adsorption Desorption Recovery (“ADR”) plant producing doré. Commercial production at the mine commenced in 2008. The Tasiast mine and the existing exploitation permit are owned by Tasiast Mauritanie Limited S.A. (“TMLSA”). Affiliates of TMLSA currently hold two recently issued exploitation permits and two exploration permits whose underlying lands are contiguous to the Tasiast mining exploitation lands (collectively, the “Tasiast Lands”). The two exploitation permits were receipted in December 2014, as a result of the conversion of two exploration permits, and expire in November 2044. The two exploration permits expire in October 2017. Kinross currently expects to convert one of these exploration permits into an exploitation permit in accordance with the applicable permitting regime in Mauritania, including obtaining necessary government approvals.

As part of the conversion process of two exploration permits, Kinross has undertaken to transfer to the Government of Mauritania a 10% carried interest in Société d’Extraction du Nord de l’Inchiri S.A. (“SENISA”), the Kinross affiliate holding the two exploitation permits receipted in December 2014. Other than SENISA, all permit-holding affiliates of Kinross, including TMLSA, are wholly-owned indirect subsidiaries of Kinross. Kinross acquired TMLSA, including the Tasiast operation and exploitation and exploration permits and lands, through its acquisition of Red Back in September 2010.

In March 2014, Kinross completed a feasibility study to expand the Tasiast operation to 38,000 tonnes per day. As a result of lower gold prices in 2015, Kinross suspended the expansion of the Tasiast operation to 38,000 tonnes per day and initiated a Tasiast optimization study to explore alternatives for Tasiast’s growth potential in the current gold price environment. The Tasiast optimization study identified the possibility of a two-phase expansion.  Kinross also initiated a feasibility study to assess the economic viability of this potential two-phased approach.

On March 30, 2016, the Kinross board of directors approved proceeding with the phase one expansion, which is designed to increase the mill throughput from the current 8,000 tonnes per day to 12,000 tonnes per day

43

by installing incremental crushing and grinding capacity to the existing CIL circuit. Phase one will begin immediately and is expected to be completed in the first quarter of 2018, with a total estimated capital expenditure of approximately $300 million. If Kinross decides to proceed with phase two, it would increase the mill throughput from 12,000 tonnes per day to 30,000 tonnes per day with the installation of additional milling, leaching, thickening and refinery capacity. A feasibility study of phase two is expected to be initiated in the second half of 2016.

Kinross filed an updated NI 43-101 Technical Report for Tasiast and released details of the feasibility study for phase one and pre-feasibility study for phase two. The studies concluded with a recommendation to progress with phase one into execution and advance phase two into a feasibility study. The current mine plan, production schedule and reserves statement are based on the 30,000 tonnes per day (phase two) pre-feasibility study.

Detailed study results for a combined phase one and potential phase two 30,000 tonnes per day expansion can be found in the NI 43-101 Technical Report for Tasiast dated March 30, 2016 available on the Company website at www.kinross.com com, and under the Company’s profile on SEDAR (www.sedar.com).

Property Description and Location

The Tasiast mine is located in northwestern Mauritania, approximately 300 kilometres north of the capital city of Nouakchott and 250 kilometres east of the city of Nouadhibou. The mine and infrastructure are located entirely within the Tasiast Lands. These lands total approximately 312 square kilometres in area and fall within the administrative purview of the Inchiri District. The lands comprising the SENISA exploitation permits (Imkebdene and Tmeimichat), together with the land comprising the Tasiast exploration permits (Tasiast Sud and N’Daouas Est), total approximately 3,118 square kilometres in area and fall within the administrative purview of the Inchiri and Dakhlet Nouadhibou Districts.

Except for the 10% carried interest in SENISA that Kinross has undertaken to transfer to the Government of Mauritania, TMLSA and its affiliates, collectively, hold a 100% interest in the Tasiast mine, the Tasiast Lands, the existing exploitation permits and the exploration permits.

A royalty equal to 3% of the selling price of the product resulting from the final ore processing stage in Mauritania is payable to the Mauritanian government. This rate was established in the 1999 Mining Code and, subsequently, protected from the rate changes in the 2008 Code (as amended) by means of the Tasiast Mining Convention. This 3% royalty rate is also expected to apply to SENISA’s eventual production. Tasiast is also subject to a 2% royalty payable to a subsidiary of Franco-Nevada Corporation on life of mine gold production in excess of 600,000 ounces. Production at Tasiast reached 600,000 ounces in July 2011, and the first royalty payment to Franco-Nevada was made in October 2011. Such 2% royalty shall also apply to SENISA’s eventual production from the first ounce produced.

Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure, and Physiography

The Tasiast mine is accessed from Nouakchott by using the paved highway from Nouakchott to Nouadhibou for 370 kilometres and then via 66 kilometres of graded mine access road which is maintained by TMLSA. An airstrip has been constructed at the Tasiast mine and is used for light aircraft from Nouakchott or Nouadhibou. The principal ports of entry for goods and consumables are either Nouakchott or Nouadhibou.  Materials are transported by road to the mine.

The mine is located in a remote area where there is no electrical utility grid. The present power supply is comprised of: phase 1 plant — eight high-speed generators and three medium-speed generators providing capacity of 12.7 megawatts; phase 1A plant — four high-speed generators providing capacity of 4.8 megawatts; phase 1B plant — four medium-speed generators providing capacity of 18 megawatts; and the Tasiast camp plant — five high-speed generators providing capacity of 8.6 megawatts. The phase 1B plant operates as base load, with the phase 1 plant providing capacity reserve as required.

The current source of mine water supply is located 64 kilometres west of the mine and consists of a bore field of 47 wells in a semi-saline aquifer. There are an additional 18 wells used to monitor the aquifer and nearby aquifers. Water is pumped to the raw water storage facility at the mine site through two high-density polyethylene pipelines and one reinforced fibreglass pipeline. Based on a recent study, it is likely that the bore field is capable of providing the water required for the 30kt/d expansion. Potential water supply issues would be identified through monitoring, and providing a lead time of approximately three years to design and implement remedial measures. Tasiast will be required to apply for an extension of its water abstraction permit in order to continue abstraction from the field beyond 2020 by substantiating the field’s capacity with a technical evaluation.

44

The topography of the Tasiast Lands consists mainly of flat, barren plains which are primarily covered by regolith and locally by sand dunes, or eroded paleo-lateritic profiles. Locally, the drainage pattern within and outside of the Tasiast Lands consists of several intermittent dendritic first and second order streams that generally flow southwesterly. Vegetation found on the Tasiast Lands is sparse and consists primarily of grasses and the occasional acacia trees.

The climate is hot most of the year and characterized by low rainfall and strong prevailing northeast to Southwest winds. Temperatures can exceed 45 degrees Celsius and reach lows of approximately 10 degrees Celsius.

The average elevation is approximately 130 metres above sea level. Current third party land use in the Tasiast Lands area consists of limited nomadic livestock farmers. There are no villages, agricultural farms, or artisanal mining activity within or around the mine area. The nearest permanent settlements are located some 100 kilometres north of the mine area, on the Société Nationale Industrielle et Minière rail line at the railway maintenance station PK22.

Environmental Considerations

An environmental impact statement (“EIS”) was completed for Tasiast in 2004 and subsequently approved by the Director of Mines and Geology on April 12, 2005. To meet revised legislation, additional reporting was requested, which was completed in 2008. In 2009, an additional environment assessment was conducted for a second tailings storage facility, a dump leach facility and an expansion of the water bore field. The West Branch expansion was assessed in 2010, and subsequently approved in 2011.

Since acquiring Tasiast, TMLSA has completed significant permitting activities in support of the expansion project including Phase 1 (two Environmental Impact Notices (“EINs”) and one Environmental Impact Assessment (“EIA”)) in 2011 and Phase 2 (EIA for all on-site proposed expansion activities) in 2012. A Phase 3 EIA for “off-site” sea water supply was approved following submission of a Phase 3 addendum. A subsequent EIA was approved to allow receipt of pre-assembled equipment at a beach landing and transportation to site. In addition, following discussion with the government, an addendum to the Phase 2 EIA was submitted and approved that described the project optimization through incremental increases in production and relocation of certain infrastructure. This addendum was approved by the Ministry of Environment in February 2016, and subsequent approval by the Ministry of Mines is pending.

Current environmental liabilities are those that would be expected from a mining operation, and include the mine, crushing and CIL processing plant, dump leach facilities, power plant, tailings and waste rock facilities, power grids, roads, accommodation camp, ancillary facilities and drill pads established to support mining and exploration activities.

History

In 1996, the Office Mauritanien de Recherches Géologiques completed a regional reconnaissance exploration program within and around the Tasiast area. The results of this program were made available to third parties. As a result, Normandy LaSource Development Ltd. (“NLSD”), a subsidiary of Normandy Mining Ltd. of Australia, acquired the Tasiast area.

In 2001, NLSD was acquired by Newmont Mining Corporation creating Newmont LaSource.  Midas Gold plc (“Midas”) was incorporated in England and Wales in 2002 for the purpose of acquiring Newmont LaSource’s assets in Mauritania, including exploration permits over lands hosting the Tasiast deposit, as well as various other permit areas.  Midas completed its acquisition of the Tasiast deposit from Newmont LaSource on April 1, 2003, and in April 2003, Geomaque Explorations Inc. (“Geomaque”) announced the acquisition of Midas. The merger of Geomaque and Midas ultimately created a new entity; Defiance Mining Corporation (“Defiance”).  In June 2004, Rio Narcea Gold Mines Ltd. (“Rio Narcea”) acquired Defiance and took ownership of the Tasiast deposit.

45

Red Back acquired the Tasiast project from Lundin Mining Corporation (“Lundin”) in August 2007, following Lundin’s acquisition of Rio Narcea.

Kinross acquired the Tasiast gold mine on September 17, 2010 through its acquisition of Red Back. As required by Mauritanian law, the operation is carried out by TMLSA, which is incorporated under the laws of Mauritania.

Mining at Tasiast commenced in April 2007 and the mine was officially opened by the President of Mauritania on July 18, 2007. Commissioning of the Tasiast plant continued through 2007 with commercial production declared in January 2008.

Geological Setting

The Tasiast Lands consist of three main Precambrian greenstone belts located in the western compartment of the Reguibat Shield. The Reguibat Shield consists of a series of west to east accreted, north-south trending Archaean and Lower Proterozoic metavolcano-sedimentary belts and domal basement gneiss complexes.

The Tasiast Lands are underlain by the Aouéouat greenstone belt, a north-south trending belt that is continuous along a 75 kilometre strike length on the Tasiast Lands and that may continue further to the north and south. The mine geology is characterized by a mafic to felsic metavolcano-sedimentary succession that is overlain by an iron stone formation and epiclastic units. The rocks have undergone deformation, were metamorphosed to greenschist and lower amphibolite grades and were cut by volumetrically minor younger mafic dikes. Three main prospective trends are recognized at the property with all known deposits spatially associated with the Tasiast trend. Other trends also contain gold occurrences but have been significantly underexplored relative to the Tasiast trend.

Known deposits are aligned along a north-trending corridor with a strike length greater than 10 kilometres, with the Piment deposits at the northern half of the mine area and West Branch deposits at the southern half. At West Branch, first-order structural controls on mineralization include several subparallel anastomosing faults and several generations of veins developed predominantly in altered mafic meta-igneous and metavolcanic units locally called the Greenschist Zone. Mineralization at Piment is principally controlled by several anastomosing faults developed within the hanging wall block of iron formation, felsic metavolcanic and epiclastic rocks. Vein zones are spatially associated with mineralization over horizontal widths of up to 20 metres.

Exploration

The Tasiast deposit lies within an extensive gold system that is largely under-explored. Tasiast is the first mine in the highly prospective Aouéouat greenstone belt, which is geologically similar to other Archean greenstone belts in the world that host major gold deposits.

Early phases of exploration in the Tasiast area were largely empirical in nature with the known deposits discovered through routine soil geochemistry followed up by trenching and later drilling. Prior to 2010, detailed exploration drilling focused on delineating the known deposits.  In 2010 and 2011, TMLSA expanded resources by extending drilling on the known structures based on a combination of soil geochemistry, airborne geophysics and geological mapping. Recent exploration activities have largely focused outside the eight kilometre footprint of the Tasiast deposit and continued on both the exploitation permits (mainly focused on near mine exploration) and on the exploration licenses.

Mineralization

Gold mineralization has been defined over a strike length of greater than 10 kilometres and to vertical depths of at least 740 metres. All of the significant mineralized bodies defined to date dip moderately (45º to 60º) to the east and have a south-southeasterly plunge. Most of the gold mineralization at West Branch

46

is hosted in hydrothermally altered meta-igneous rocks (Greenschist zone) containing quartz-carbonate veins. The meta-igneous rocks are enveloped by felsic units known as felsites that occur on the footwall and hanging wall sides of the Greenschist zone. The Greenschist zone is characterized by consistently thick intervals of mineralization averaging 40 metres to 100 metres thick. Individual shoots are continuous over a strike length of at least 1,000 metres. Mineralogy within the Greenschist package is dominated by pyrrhotite, pyrite and native gold that occur as vein infill or alteration spots commonly in and around the foliation. Pyrrhotite and pyrite occur together in many places but in variable ratios. Zones of pyrite-only and pyrrhotite-only sulphide facies are rare.

Piment mineralization is largely hosted along fault splays and within the adjacent altered and veined iron formation and epiclastic units. Individual mineralized shoots are continuous over 300 metres and to vertical depths of at least 260 metres. The minerals associated with gold at Piment are pyrrhotite and pyrite.

Drilling

The Tasiast mine property has been the subject of numerous drill campaigns since its discovery. The total number of drillholes completed on the project totals 16,600 holes with an aggregate total of 1,739,350 metres.

During 1999 and 2000 NLSD completed 459 holes totalling 37,919 metres. Between March 2003 and October 2004, Defiance completed approximately 448 holes for 39,085 metres.  Rio Narcea resumed drilling from 2006 to 2008, completing 147 holes for 16,966 metres. Red Back drilled from 10 of August of 2007 until the completion of the acquisition in September 2010 and completed 6,132 RC holes for 504,407 metres and 132 core holes totalling 29,243 metres.

Since the acquisition of Tasiast by Kinross, TMLSA has completed 9,608 holes for 1,123,550 metres. In 2010, TMLSA drill campaigns completed 922 holes for 111,105 metres. In 2011, TMLSA drill campaigns completed 3,086 holes for 445,469 metres. In 2012, TMLSA drill campaigns completed 2,992 holes for 335,396 metres. In 2013, TMLSA drill campaigns completed 757 holes for 80,047 metres.  In 2014, 861 holes for 58,584 metres were drilled across the Tasiast mineral licenses. In 2015, 990 holes were completed for 82,949 metres.

Sampling and Analysis

Sampling of drill core and RC cuttings was done in accordance with standard industry practices.  Samples from the exploration program at Tasiast have been analysed at both the onsite SGS Mineral Services (“SGS”) facility and at the SGS laboratories at Kayes and Morila in Mali and Ouagadougou in Burkina Faso.

TMLSA sample pulps were analysed for gold using a 50 gram fire assay with an AAS finish with a detection limit of 0.01 grams per ton.

In 2010 a total of 22,863 quality assurance and quality control (“QA/QC”) samples including standards, blanks and duplicates were submitted routinely and blind to three different SGS laboratories, namely Kayes and Morila in Mali, and Tasiast in Mauritania. In 2011 a total of 34,130 QA/QC samples including standards, blank and field duplicates were submitted routinely and blind to five different labs. In 2012, a total of 42,706 QA/QC samples including standards, blanks and field duplicates were submitted routinely and blind to 12 labs. Additional crush and pulverised duplicate samples were analysed at various labs. Subsequent to the assay report directly imported into the database, QA/QC charts were routinely generated and reviewed by on-site geologists to determine the jobs that passed, accepted or failed QA/QC control.  In 2013, a total of 12,123 QA/QC samples including standards, blank and field duplicates were inserted routinely and blind to the laboratory. The samples were sent to numerous laboratories including: SGS Laboratory at Kayes and Tasiast, ALS Laboratory in Johannesburg, Kumasi, Nouakchott, Romenia and Tasiast. Since July 2013 ALS Laboratory took over the facilities at the Tasiast mine, and operated the laboratory. Since then, exploration samples are prepared and analysed at site by ALS Laboratory.

47

An independent consultant provided a QA/QC report throughout 2013 following a review of the sampling process, laboratory visits and review of the QA/QC data. The available data indicated that the analytical accuracy of the assaying for the exploration program is within the industry accepted standards.

Security of Samples

Closely following Red Back’s acquisition of the project in August 2007, the on-site SGS assay facility became operational. Prior to that time, samples had been prepared on site by staff of TMLSA under supervision of senior geological staff. Since that time, samples have been prepared and analysed under contract by SGS on site, SGS Kayes and Morila, Mali, and SGS Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso. Samples, including duplicates, blanks and certified reference materials were delivered daily from the drill rig to a secure storage area within the Tasiast office complex.

Following Kinross’ acquisition of Red Back in September 2010, all drill samples collected are under direct supervision of project staff of the operator at the time, up to the moment they are delivered to laboratory staff or placed on contracted trucks for delivery to the Mali laboratory. Samples, including duplicates, blanks and certified reference materials are delivered daily from the drill rig to a secure storage area within the fenced Tasiast core facility. Chain of custody procedures consist of filling out sample submittal forms that are sent to the laboratory with sample shipments to make certain that all samples are received by the laboratory.

Since July 2013 when ALS Laboratory took over the facilities at the Tasiast mine, exploration samples are prepared and analysed at site by ALS Laboratory.

Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve Estimates

Refer to Kinross Mineral Reserves and Mineral Resources on pages 18 — 21 for quantity, grades and category. Assumptions are outlined in the Notes — 2015 Kinross Mineral Reserve and Mineral Resource Statements section commencing on page 21.

Mining and Milling Operations

Ore and waste rock is currently mined by conventional open pit methods.  Drilling and blasting is required for the majority of material going forward. The mining fleet on site is made up of hydraulic excavators loading 90 ton and 230 ton haul trucks. A high level of grade control is currently performed using RC drill rigs.

Currently, ore is hauled to the mill with an approximate current annual capacity of a nominal 2.6 million tonnes. In accordance with the 2015 mine plan, ore comes solely from the West Branch deposit. This material is harder than the ore from the Piment deposits and the weathered portion of the West Branch deposit resulting in a decrease in mill capacity relative to previous years.  Crushing of the ore takes place in three stages; a primary jaw crusher that reduces ore to less than 150 millimetres; a secondary cone crusher and two tertiary cone crushers producing a final product size of nominally minus 10 millimetres.  Crushed ore is fed to two 2.2 megawatt ball mills in closed circuit with hydro cyclones and gravity concentration. The grinding circuit produces a product size of 80% passing 90 microns which is processed in a conventional CIL circuit and ADR plant to produce doré bullion.  Gold recovery varies from 91% to 93%.

Kinross will transition from the existing Tasiast 8 kt/d CIL plant to a potential 30 kt/d CIL plant by means of a potential two-phase expansion.

In phase one, a new front end gyratory crusher and a 40ft x 25ft, 26.5 MW gearless mill drive (“GMD”) SAG mill will be incorporated with additional leaching capacity to the existing 8 kt/d plant in order to increase capacity to 12 kt/d.

48

Phase two would consist of the addition of: a third ball mill, larger pebble crusher, pre-leach and tailings thickeners, leach tanks, CIL (carbon in leach) tanks, gravity circuit consisting of centrifugal concentrators and intensive leach cyanidation, elution circuit, gold room, cyanide destruction system, and reagent mixing storage and distribution. Phase two would include the necessary upgrades to consumable storage and utilities to facilitate full operation. The plant design life is 15 years.

Metallurgical test work has been performed to establish the gold recovery that could be achieved from oxide ore using a conventional run-of-mine dump leaching method.  The test work focused on lower-grade material which was below the economic cut-off grade for CIL milling, and which had to be mined.  The dump leach material constitutes a low-grade “halo” that typically is located adjacent to, or in association with, the higher grade oxide ore zones that are being mined to feed the CIL mill.

Tailings slurry from the CIL process is pumped to the tailings storage facility (“TSF”). The TSF is a specifically engineered facility, currently comprising one lined paddock dam, and designed to be impervious, located one kilometre southwest of the processing plant. After settling of the solids, process solution is recovered and pumped to the plant for re-use.

Life of Mine and Capital Expenditures

On March 30, 2016, Kinross announced a decision to execute the phase one expansion to 12,000 tonnes per day and advance the phase two, 30,000 tonnes per day option into a feasibility study. The current mine plan, production schedule and reserves statement are based on the 30,000 tonnes per day (phase two) pre-feasibility study, with mine life to continue through to 2030 (including mill production from stockpile following completion of mining).

Capital expenditures for 2015 at Tasiast were approximately $161.2 million.

Exploration and Development

The goal for the 2016 exploration program is to continue exploration along the main trend and to identify satellite deposits as well as delineate known targets. The exploration program consists of reconnaissance mapping, trenching and approximately 38,000 metres of drilling. Near pit exploration for oxide ores are in progress.

49

Other Kinross Properties

Fort Knox and Area, Alaska, United States

The Fort Knox mine is owned and operated by Kinross’ wholly-owned subsidiary Fairbanks Gold Mining Inc. (“FGMI”).  The Fort Knox property is located in Fairbanks North Star Borough, Alaska and includes the main Fort Knox open pit mine, mill, tailings storage facility, heap leach facility, the Gil project, and the True North open pit mine (which is under post-closure monitoring). Detailed financial production and operational information for the Fort Knox mine is available in Kinross’ MD&A for the year ended December 31, 2015.  In addition, please see the Company’s National Instrument 43-101 Technical Report dated March 31, 2015 in respect of Fort Knox, available at www.kinross.com and under the Company’s profile on SEDAR (www.sedar.com).

Fort Knox is located 42 kilometres by road northeast of the city of Fairbanks, in Alaska, United States of America. The Fort Knox property includes the main Fort Knox open pit mine, mill, heap leach, tailings storage facility, True North open pit and the Gil property, and encompasses 30,917 hectares. FGMI controls a large and diverse group of properties that comprise its mineral holdings in the Fairbanks Mining District. These properties include State of Alaska mining claims, patented and unpatented federal lode and placer mining claims, and private land. Some of the claims are owned outright, while others are controlled through leases. Mineral reserves at the Fort Knox mine are situated on 505 hectares of land that are covered by a State of Alaska Millsite Lease and the Fort Knox Upland Mining Lease.

The State of Alaska Upland Lease carries a 3% production royalty, based on net income and recovery of initial capital investment. Mineral production from State mining claims is subject to a mine license tax, following a three-year grace period after production commences. There has been no production from State claims situated outside the boundaries of the Upland Lease at the Fort Knox Mine. Fort Knox royalties and production taxes are estimated to be $6 million for 2016, based on a gold selling price of $1,100 per ounce.

All requisite permits have been obtained for mining of the existing Fort Knox open pit mine and are in good standing in all material respects. Current expansion projects for waste rock and heap leach were approved by the applicable agencies in 2014.

Mining at the True North open pit is complete.  Reclamation was substantially completed in 2012 and it is now under post-closure maintenance and monitoring.

Power is provided to the mine by Golden Valley Electric Association’s power grid, serving the area over a distribution line paid for by Kinross.

Access to the Fort Knox mine from Fairbanks is by 34 kilometres of paved highway and eight kilometres of unpaved road.  The True North mine is located 18 kilometres west of the Fort Knox property and is accessible by an unpaved road.  The area has a subarctic climate, with long, cold winters and short summers.

Fort Knox operates in material compliance with applicable environmental laws and regulations and with Kinross’ policies on environment, health and safety.  There are no known material environmental concerns at Fort Knox.  Kinross estimates the net present value of future cash outflows for site restoration costs at Fort Knox and True North under IFRS, IAS 37 and IFRIC 1 for the year ended December 31, 2015, at approximately $85.1 million. As at December 31, 2015, Kinross has posted approximately $96.8 million of letters of credit to various regulatory agencies in connection with its closure obligations at Fort Knox and True North.  The financial assurance for Fort Knox and True North is $96.8 million.

Kinross’ mining and exploration properties are located within the Fairbanks mining district, which is located within the northwestern part of the Yukon—Tanana terrane (YTT). The Fort Knox gold deposit is hosted by a granitic body that intruded the Fairbanks Schist.  The surface exposure of the intrusive body is approximately 1,100 metres in the east-west direction and 600 metres north-south.

50

The Fort Knox deposit is mined by conventional open pit methods.  Higher grade ore from the Fort Knox mine is processed at Kinross’ carbon-in-pulp mill located near the Fort Knox mine.  The mill processes ore 24 hours per day, year-round. Lower grade ore is processed on a dedicated leach pad that was commissioned in 2009. The Fort Knox mill has a daily capacity of between 33,000 and 45,000 tonnes.

The Fort Knox heap leach facility is located in the upper end of the Walter Creek drainage, immediately upstream of the tailings storage facility.  Construction began in 2008 and is separated into a total of seven stages covering approximately 196 hectares with a total capacity of 278 million tonnes. The first stage of the heap leach facility went into operation in the fall of 2009. The facility includes a valley fill leach pad and two carbon-in-column (“CIC”) plants with a capacity of 61,000 litres per minute.  Run of mine ore is hauled from the pit and from existing stockpiles and loaded onto the leach pad in 15 metre lifts.  Leach solution flows through the loaded ore into a 416 million litre in-heap storage reservoir.  The pregnant solution is pumped to the CIC plants located adjacent to the existing mill.  After the pregnant solution has been processed through the CIC plants, barren solution is pumped back to the heap leach to recirculate.

The final year for ore processed through the Fort Knox mill is 2018, after which the tailings storage facility will be at full capacity.  After 2018, all of the run of mine ore and ore stockpiles will be stacked on the Walter Creek Heap Leach.  Fort Knox pit production is expected to continue until 2020.  Capital expenditures for 2015 at the Fort Knox operations were $140.8 million.

Fort Knox continues to evaluate the potential to expand the existing operation within the available land package through exploration evaluation of projected gold mineralization.

Round Mountain, Nye County, Nevada, United States

The Round Mountain mine is owned and operated by Kinross’ wholly-owned subsidiary Round Mountain Gold Corporation (“RMGC”). On January 11, 2016, Kinross acquired the remaining 50% interest from two affiliates of Barrick Gold Corporation (“Barrick”). Prior to this acquisition, Kinross owned an undivided 50% interest in the joint venture common operation known as the Smoky Valley Common Operation (“SVCO”). Kinross acquired its initial interest in Round Mountain in January 2003. Detailed financial, production and operations information for Round Mountain is available in Kinross’ MD&A for the year ended December 31, 2015.

The Round Mountain mine is located approximately 90 kilometres north of Tonopah in Nye County, Nevada. The SVCO controls the mineral and surface rights covering approximately 22,907 hectares through ownership or lease of patented and unpatented mining claims.

Mine production at the Round Mountain pit is subject to two net smelter return royalties, one ranging from 3.53% at gold prices of $320 per ounce to 6.35% at gold prices of $440 or more per ounce and the other at a flat 1.5% rate3.  During 2014, a total of $24.1 million in royalties was paid (with Kinross paying $12.1 million). During 2015, a total of $21.1 million in royalties was paid (with Kinross paying $10.6 million). Round Mountain is also currently subject to the state of Nevada Net Proceeds Tax at a 5% rate whereby gross proceeds from the sale of minerals are adjusted for certain allowable deductions. The 2015 Net Proceeds Tax was $6.9 million compared with $4.9 million in 2014 (with Kinross’ portion being $3.5 million and $2.5 million, respectively).

The first gold production from the Round Mountain district occurred in 1906. The original SVCO was formed in 1975 to operate the mine and commercial production commenced in 1977. SVCO has produced approximately 13.93 million ounces of gold since inception. A total of 535,974 ounces was produced prior to the SVCO partnership.  A series of ownership changes occurred which eventually led to the 50-50 ownership by Barrick and Kinross that was in place until the acquisition that closed in early 2016.

3  This 1.5% royalty was previously paid to Barrick, but was acquired by Kinross as part of the acquisition from Barrick of the remaining 50% interest in Round Mountain on January 11, 2016.

51

The Round Mountain mine currently operates a conventional open pit that is approximately 10,700 feet long in the north-west, south-east direction and 8,800 feet wide. The operation uses conventional open-pit mining methods and recovers gold using four independent processing operations. These include crushed ore heap leaching (reusable pad), run-of-mine ore heap leaching (dedicated pad), milling and the gravity concentration circuit. Heap leachable material is being displaced by millable material as the pit becomes deeper. Many areas of the pit are mining material below the oxidation-sulphide boundary. The higher grade oxidized ores are crushed and placed on the reusable pad. This material is typically leached for 60-90 days and then relocated to the dedicated pad. Lower grade oxide ore is placed on the dedicated pad.

The Gold Hill mine is a small deposit located near the Round Mountain mine. Gold Hill is approximately 3,000 feet long in the east-west direction and up to 2,600 feet in the north-south direction.  The mine is operated as an independent operation also using conventional open-pit mining methods.  The ore consists of oxide material that is placed directly on a dedicated heap leach pad. Originally the higher grade material was to be crushed to minus eight inches then placed on the dedicated pad and the lower grade material was to be placed directly on the dedicated pad.  Presently none of the material is being crushed because adequate fragmentation is obtained through proper blasting.

Mining and ore processing operations at Round Mountain and Gold Hill have been conducted as approved in the 2010 Record of Decision and in the February 2015 Amendment to the Plan of Operations. Annual reviews of the operations have been made by relevant government authorities. The comprehensive reclamation plan and bond cost was $147.2 million prior to the recent Plan of Operation approval.  Based on the 2015 reclamation cost estimate, the required bond is $161.2 million. We anticipate that the bond will increase by some amount in 2016. Prior to the acquisition, Kinross’ share was covered by a letter of credit posted with the Bureau of Land Management (“BLM”). As it is now required to cover the entire reclamation bond, the Company is in the process of obtaining and posting security with the BLM for the full amount. The reclamation plan and bond cost estimate has been reviewed annually, but we anticipate that the regulatory agencies will review this obligation every three years starting in 2017. Adjustments are made to the estimate with documented increases in reclamation costs, concurrent reclamation, and approved minor changes to the plan of operations.

Based upon the current mineral reserve estimates, production from Round Mountain and Gold Hill is expected to end in 2019 and 2016, respectively, with mill stockpile and heap leach processing continuing through 2022 and 2027, respectively.  Exploration around the mine area will continue in 2016 with the primary emphasis on the area of mineralization to the west, and below the Round Mountain pit.

Bald Mountain, White Pine County, Nevada, United States

The Bald Mountain mine is owned and operated by Kinross’ wholly-owned subsidiary KG Mining (Bald Mountain) Inc. (“KGBMI”). On November 12, 2015, Kinross announced that it had entered into a definitive asset purchase agreement to acquire 100% of the Bald Mountain mine and an associated land package from an affiliate of Barrick, and acquired its interest on January 11, 2016.

The Bald Mountain mining district is located at the southern end of the Ruby Mountains in east-central Nevada, White Pine County, at the southeastern end of the Carlin Gold Trend. The property encompasses 240 square miles of patented and unpatented lode claims.

Pursuant to the terms of the acquisition, Barrick obtained a right to receive a 2% net smelter return royalty on future gold production from Kinross’ 100% owned Bald Mountain lands following the post-closing production of 10 million ounces from such lands. In addition, mine production at Bald Mountain is subject to eleven additional royalties on various land packages. The most significant royalties include two sliding scale net smelter return royalties, one ranging from 0% at gold prices under $400 per ounce to 5% at gold prices of $480 or more per ounce, and the other ranging from 3.5% at gold prices under $375 per ounce to 5% at gold prices of $425 or more per ounce, with only 50% of the royalty amount being payable to this third party. Another significant royalty is divided between three arm’s length parties, one receiving a 2.418% net smelter royalty, another a 0.5% net smelter royalty, while the third party retains 10% of net proceeds.

52

Bald Mountain will be subject to the state of Nevada Net Proceeds Tax at a 5% rate whereby gross proceeds from the sale of minerals will be adjusted for certain allowable deductions.

Placer gold (with minor copper, silver, and antimony), was initially mined in the Bald Mountain area from the 1870s to 1890s. Modern exploration for bulk disseminated gold deposits commenced in the late 1970s. Since 1977, gold exploration has mainly focused on defining the outcropping, oxide gold deposits. In 1981, Amselco Minerals began modern open pit mining and cyanide gold recovery via a mill in the Alligator Ridge-Vantage area in the southern portion of the district. Numerous small ore bodies were mined and heap leached by USMX Inc. from 1988 to 1993 in the southern and eastern areas of the district. Placer Dome Inc. mined several pits in the northwest area from 1983 to 2005, including Top, Sage Flats, Rat, LJ, and Numbers. Placer Dome Inc. acquired the USMX properties in 1993 and consolidated the district into one claim block. Barrick acquired Placer Dome in January 2006 to become 100% owner and operator of Bald Mountain, until the recent acquisition by KGBMI. Both the North and South areas are 100% Kinross-owned.

The Bald Mountain operation is an open pit mining operation with production from a number of different pits. The three main deposits are Top, Red Bird and Saga, with Top and Red Bird representing more than 66% of the known reserves. Bald Mountain includes several deposits scattered over the property, and two run of mine (“ROM”) leach pads (Bald Mountain and Mooney).

The processing method for the Bald Mountain Mine operation is a heap leach ROM ore and gold recovery in and carbon ADR plants. There is no comminution after the material is blasted in the pit. All blasted pit run ore is sent directly to heap leach pads for processing. The mining recovery is high because the ore blocks are large compared to the selective mining unit, and close to all of the material outlined as ore in the grade control process is mined. Selectivity of the ore mining is minimal due to the low cut-off grade and the fact that the grade control outlines large blocks of ore-grade material for mining.

Kinross has allocated approximately $6 million to exploring Bald Mountain in 2016, with the majority dedicated to the North and South mine operations, areas wholly-owned by the Company. Resource-conversion drilling commenced on the North mine area immediately after the acquisition was finalized.  Drilling in the South area is expected to commence in mid-2016.

Approximately 40% of the Bald Mountain land package in the less-explored ground located between the 100% Kinross-owned North and South mine operations areas is subject to a 50-50 exploration joint venture partnership between Kinross and Barrick. Kinross operates the joint venture, and in 2016, plans to compile and review geoscience data, followed by targeted field work to develop geological models and new drill targets.  The Company will consider drilling some of the drill targets in 2016.

La Coipa, Chile

Kinross acquired its initial 50% interest in the La Coipa mine in January 2003. Kinross now owns a 100% interest following the completion of an asset swap transaction with Goldcorp Inc. (“Goldcorp”) on December 21, 2007 pursuant to which Kinross acquired the 50% interest previously owned by Goldcorp. The mine and plant began partial temporary suspension of activities in October of 2013, while evaluation of several nearby mineralized zones is pursued.

The La Coipa mine, located approximately 1,000 kilometres north of Santiago in Chile’s Region 3 (Atacama), consists of five deposits (notable deposits being Ladera-Farellon, Coipa Norte, Brecha Norte, Can Can, and Puren), which are owned by Compania Minera Mantos de Oro (“MDO”), a Chilean subsidiary of Kinross, except for Puren which is owned through a joint venture between MDO and Codelco-Chile, with participation interests of 65% and 35%, respectively. The La Coipa mine consists of approximately 19,874 hectares of exploitation concessions (including Puren). In addition, Kinross holds a 50% interest in Minera La Coipa which has claims covering approximately 10,541 hectares in the area surrounding the La Coipa mine.

53

No royalties are payable on gold and silver produced from the La Coipa mine properties. A 35% withholding tax is applicable on all dividends disbursed to foreign shareholders, less the corporate income tax already paid. In addition, a mining tax is applicable, the specific applicable tax rate being based on a progressive scale that ranges from 0.5% to 4.5% based on the volume of sales made converted into metric tonnes of copper.

The La Coipa area was identified as a potential precious metals prospect almost a century ago, but did not receive much attention until the 1970s, when several companies began to actively explore the area. MDO began drilling in the La Coipa area in 1989 and has completed 442,576 metres of drilling since then, consisting of 2,097 RC holes and 337 Core holes.

The La Coipa mine received an ISO 14001 certification in July 2002. This certification must be renewed every 3 years. The last recertification was made in 2013. In 2012, La Coipa received a certification of full compliance under the Cyanide Code. The most significant environmental issue relates to the mercury contained in ore, which after processing and placement in the tailings facility resulted in mercury contamination of the Quebrada La Coipa Aquifer. In the mid-1990s, mercury and cyanide (Hg/CN) from tailings seepage were detected in control wells. MDO made appropriate notifications to responsible authorities and took remedial measures including installation of a groundwater treatment plant at the leading edge of the groundwater management area in 2000. During 2005 and 2006, geochemical investigations in the tailings were completed to characterize the source of the mercury and groundwater hydro chemical and hydrological models were updated for the Quebrada La Coipa Aquifer. The recommendation resulting from a workshop held in 2005 with various consultants and experts was to construct two concrete cut-off walls in the valley at the toe of the tailings areas to isolate the contaminated water and control the Hg/CN migration downstream in the valley. Construction of both cut-off walls was completed in 2007. Water treatment pilot plant tests, to treat water isolated between the concrete walls, were initiated in 2008. A seepage model for the tailings facility was developed that indicated tailings pore water will drain for about 80 years after the operation closes. MDO voluntarily provided a remediation project to the regional regulatory authority with a Declaration of Environmental Impact (“DIA”), which DIA was approved on August 31, 2007.  During 2015, a DIA for a second water treatment plant was approved and sectorial permitting is now under way. On March 17, 2016 Chile’s Superintendencia del Medio Ambiente (“SMA”), a national environmental agency, filed charges against MDO over a series of alleged breaches at La Coipa. The charges were filed following a planned inspection of the facilities. A total of seven charges were filed against MDO relating to alleged breaches of environmental permits and/or failure to properly permit certain activities at its facilities, including capturing water at an undesignated reservoir, deficiencies in the capturing system of mercury, deficiencies in the monitoring system, and concentrations of mercury above permitted levels in some effluent. MDO faces a fine of up to 10,000 annual tax units with an approximate value of $8 million, the temporary or definitive suspension of operations, or even the revocation of its environmental permit. The Company only recently received the SMA’s charges and is in the process of assessing them.

Beginning in 2009 and up until July 2012, recovered mercury was moved offshore and sold in accordance with the approved Environmental Impact Statement for the Transport of Mercury of La Coipa, adopted on August 20, 2007.  Sales of the remaining mercury (from production and small quantities generated by the water remediation activities) are being arranged.

Until October 2013, La Coipa operated two pits (Ladera-Farellon and Can Can). Mining was carried out with front-end loaders, diesel rotary drills and 150-tonne trucks. Ore was crushed and then ground in a circuit incorporating a SAG mill with a pebble crusher and two ball mills with a throughput of 15,000 tonnes per day. The ground ore was leached, then filtered and washed to separate out the tailings, and the solution was passed through a Merrill-Crowe plant to extract the leached gold and silver. The precipitate was then sent to the refinery.

Current activities undertaken at La Coipa are the operation of the water remediation plant, permitting to re-open La Coipa and studies to optimize the mine-life extension project.

Kettle River — Buckhorn, Washington State, United States

Kinross owns a 100% interest in the Buckhorn Mine following its acquisition of Crown Resources Corporation (“Crown”) in August 2006. Crown is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Kinross and is the operator

54

of the Buckhorn Mine. Echo Bay Minerals Company (“Echo Bay”) is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Kinross and is the operator of the Kettle River Mill. Both Crown and Echo Bay also hold mineral rights in northern Washington State. Detailed financial, production, and operational information for the Buckhorn Mine is available in Kinross’ MD&A for the year ended December 31, 2015.

The Buckhorn Mine is located in the Myers Creek Mining District of northeastern Okanogan County, Washington, approximately 77 kilometres by road from the town of Republic, Washington. Kinross controls mineral and surface rights covering approximately 190 hectares in the immediate mine area, through ownership of patented mining claims, and has access to an additional 5,300 hectares of mineral rights surrounding the mine through ownership or lease of unpatented mining claims, state mineral prospecting leases, and private mineral leases.

No royalties are payable on gold and silver produced from the mine. In 2006 Kinross exercised its right to buy-out the royalties on gold and silver production that had been retained by Newmont Mining Corporation.

Exploration occurred sporadically in the Buckhorn area beginning in the early twentieth century. There were concerted campaigns by large companies in the 1960s and 1970s, focused mostly on copper. Systematic gold exploration began on the current property in the mid-1980s, culminating in the discovery of significant gold mineralization in 1988. Since then, over 3,200 drillholes totalling over 270,000 metres have been completed in the area.

The Buckhorn Mine is a three-portal access underground mine that produces material from two separate areas, the Southwest and Gold Bowl zones. Both cut and fill and longhole stoping mining methods are employed and the current average production rate is 1,000 tonnes per day. The Buckhorn Mine ore is trucked 77 kilometres to the Kettle River Mill where the ore is processed using conventional crushing and grinding before entering a flotation circuit followed by CIL. The mill is capable of processing 2,100 tonnes per day. With excess capacity, the Kettle River Mill occasionally processes material from other mining companies in the western United States and Canada.

The environmental aspects of the project have been studied extensively since 1991, and on September 25, 2006 the Washington Department of Ecology (the “DOE”) issued a Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, and construction commenced. All permits necessary to commence commercial mining operations were issued by the end of 2007.  On February 27, 2014, the DOE renewed Buckhorn Mine’s National Pollution Discharge Elimination System Permit (the “Renewed Permit”), with an effective date of March 1, 2014. The Renewed Permit contained conditions that were more restrictive than the original discharge permit. In addition, the Company felt that the Renewed Permit was internally inconsistent, technically unworkable and inconsistent with existing agreements in place with the DOE, including a settlement agreement previously entered into by Crown and the DOE in June 2013 (“Settlement Agreement”). On February 28, 2014, Crown filed an appeal of the Renewed Permit with the Washington Pollution Control Hearings Board (“PCHB”). In addition, on January 15, 2015, Crown filed a lawsuit against the DOE in Ferry County Superior Court, Washington, claiming that the DOE breached the Settlement Agreement by including various unworkable compliance terms in the Renewed Permit. On July 30, 2015, the PCHB upheld the Renewed Permit.  Crown filed a Petition for Review in Ferry County Superior Court, Washington, on August 27, 2015, seeking to have the PCHB decision overturned.

In 2008, the Buckhorn mine commenced gold production, reaching design capacity of 900 tonnes per day in July 2009 and 1,100 tonnes per day in July 2010.

Based on the existing proven and probable mineral reserves at Buckhorn, the mine is scheduled to continue production until late 2016. The planned exploration program for 2016 consists of mine mapping, sampling, and approximately 500 metres of drilling.

55

Lobo-Marte, Chile

The Lobo-Marte project is owned by Compañía Minera Maricunga (“CMM”), a Chilean company that is 100%-owned by Kinross. Kinross holds a 100% interest in the Lobo-Marte project, having acquired a 40% interest in the project from Anglo American Plc (“Anglo”) in 2008, and the remaining 60% interest from Teck Cominco Limited (“Teck”) in early 2009.

Kinross completed a prefeasibility study at the Lobo-Marte project in 2009 and updated the prefeasibility study in 2010. In 2011, Kinross submitted the environmental and social impact study (“ESIA”) for the project to the Chilean authorities.  In 2012, Kinross decided to extend the project timeline as part of its capital optimization process.  In 2013, the permitting process was suspended pending further assessment of the project. On November 17, 2014, the Company withdrew its permit application and stopped the permitting process at Lobo-Marte due to substantial changes in the plan of operations, the footprint of the project, project economics, and stringent requirements associated with the permit application. As a result of the permit withdrawal, approximately 6 million estimated gold ounces at Lobo-Marte have been reclassified as measured and indicated mineral resources.  Any future development or operations at Lobo-Marte would require the re-initiation of the permitting process.

The Lobo-Marte project currently comprises two open-pit minable gold ore deposits, located approximately seven kilometres apart, in Region III of Northern Chile, approximately 650 kilometres north of Santiago and 100 kilometres east of Copiapó. The project lies approximately 65 kilometres south of Kinross’ La Coipa operation and 60 kilometres north of the Maricunga mine.

The Lobo-Marte project includes 123 concessions that are either granted (65) or in the process of receiving a final registered grant (58) covering a total of 50,355 hectares in a single contiguous block. Concessions are held in the name of CMM. Kinross has two established easements for the construction of roads, stockpiles, process facilities, camp, support facilities, water extraction and associated pipelines. Additional rights will be required to support project development.

The project has a 1.75% net smelter return royalty on 60% of future production, payable when the gold price is $760 per ounce or more. Kinross’ obligation to make royalty payments will cease when an aggregate amount of $40 million has been paid.

The Lobo deposit was discovered through regional geochemical surveys in 1981-1982. The Marte deposit was discovered in 1982 through a program of regional soil sampling, geophysical surveys and geological mapping. The Marte deposit was mined by a joint venture of Anglo American and Cominco from 1988 to 1992; a total of 3.78 million tonnes of ore grading 1.51 grams per tonne of gold, 0.3 million tonnes of low-grade mineralization and 4.7 million tonnes of waste were mined.

Prior to 2009, a total of 153 Core and RC drillholes (34,649 metres) were completed at Lobo, with an additional 211 Core and RC drillholes (26,658 metres) at Marte. During 2010 a total of 24,148 metres of Core drilling and 4,614 metres of RC drilling were completed at Lobo and Marte. During 2011 a total of 9,289 metres of Core drilling and 4,909 metres of RC drilling were completed at Lobo and Marte. In 2012, approximately 5,274 metres of Core drilling was completed at Lobo. The 2013 exploration plan consisted of surface exploration works including: rock chip samples, soil samples, trenching and mapping. No exploration work was performed in 2014 and 2015.

The project is located within a biological corridor established between two sectors of the Nevado Tres Cruces National Park, created to preserve and protect the vegetation of the desert steppes and the Andean salars (salt lakes). Kinross has completed the biophysical and socioeconomic baseline study to support the preparation of an ESIA. Because of the recognized environmental importance of these areas, the baseline study for the ESIA is critical to the development of the project. Areas which were addressed include proper management of water extraction, disposition of waste material, heap leach facilities and other installations that interact with the environment.

56

Cerro Casale, Chile

On March 31, 2010, Kinross sold one-half of its then 50% interest in the porphyry copper deposit known as Cerro Casale to Barrick. As a result, Kinross holds a 25% interest and Barrick holds a 75% interest. In July 2012, Barrick, as operator of the project, decided to delay making a construction decision after concluding that the project did not meet its required investment criteria. To date, no further decisions have been made in respect of Cerro Casale.

The Cerro Casale project is located in the Maricunga District of Region III of northern Chile. The city of Copiapó is 145 kilometres northwest of the deposit. The international border separating Chile and Argentina is located approximately 20 kilometres to the east.

The Cerro Casale project is owned by Compañía Minera Casale (“CMC”), a contractual mining company formed under the laws of the Republic of Chile. CMC owns 410 claim groups totalling 72,757 hectares. Of these, the mine-plant complex is protected by 56 claims, covering a total of 23,573 hectares, the balance, is mainly dedicated to protect the linear works and infrastructure.

Water rights are held in three areas: Piedra Pomez, Pedernales and Rio Gallina. Piedra Pomez and Pedernales are located 120 kilometres and 210 kilometres, respectively, north of Cerro Casale, while Rio Gallina is in very close proximity to Cerro Casale. Currently, extraction of 52 litres per second is permitted from Rio Gallina for project construction purposes only for a period of 5 years and extraction of 785 litres per second is permitted from Piedra Pomez for the 20 year operations phase.

Minera Anglo American Chile Limitada and its affiliates are owed a royalty from production from the Cachito and Nevado mining concessions, which cover all of the Cerro Casale deposit. The royalty is capped at $3 million and is based on a gold trigger price, and varies from 1% to 3% of net smelter returns. At the gold prices used to constrain mineral resources and mineral reserves, a 3% NSR royalty is applicable.

Environmental studies for the Cerro Casale project were initiated by CMC in 1998 and led to the preparation of the first environmental impact study (“EIS”) presented to the Government of Chile’s responsible authority on March 12, 2001. Following a documented review process, approval for this EIS was granted on February 1, 2002.

Since the approval was granted in 2002, there have been changes to the project plan, including new components (for example, the valley heap leach facility) and changes to the original plan (for example, a change in the proposed alignment of the concentrate pipeline). CMC submitted a new EIS in 2011 covering all changes made since the approval of the 2001 EIS. The 2011 EIS was approved on January 3, 2013.

The Cerro Casale deposit is located in the Aldebarán sub-district of the Maricunga Volcanic Belt. The Maricunga Volcanic Belt is made up of a series of coalescing composite, Miocene andesitic to rhyolitic volcanic centres that extend for 200 kilometres along the western crest of the Andes. The volcanic rocks are host to multiple epithermal gold and porphyry-hosted gold-copper deposits, including Cerro Casale, Maricunga, Lobo-Marte and La Coipa, as well as numerous other smaller mineral prospects. The volcanic rocks overlie older sedimentary and volcanic rocks of Mesozoic and Paleozoic age.

Gold-copper mineralization occurs in quartz-sulphide and quartz-magnetite-specularite veinlet stockworks developed in the dioritic to granodioritic intrusives and adjacent volcanic wall rocks. Stockworks are most common in two dioritic intrusive phases, particularly where intrusive and hydrothermal breccias are developed.

Mineralization extends at least 1,450 metres vertically and 850 metres along strike. The strike of mineralization follows west-northwest fault and fracture zones. The main zone of mineralization pinches and swells from 250 to 700 metres along strike and down dip steeply to the southwest. The highest grade mineralization is coincident with well-developed quartz-sulphide stockworks in strongly potassic-altered intrusive rocks.

Exploration programs have been undertaken by a number of companies, including AngloGold, Bema, Arizona Star Resource Group, Placer Dome Inc., Kinross and Barrick. Work completed during 1989-

57

2009 was comprised of property-wide geological mapping, interpretation of Landsat imagery, ground and airborne geophysical surveys, rock-chip and geochemical sampling, including bulk leach extractable gold and -80 mesh stream sediment, soil, talus, road-cut and grab sampling, trenching, RC and Core drilling, metallurgical testwork, and studies to support pre-feasibility and feasibility-level project assessment.

Maricunga, Chile

The Maricunga heap leach mine, formerly known as the Refugio mine, is owned and operated by CMM. Previously, each of Kinross and Bema held a 50% interest in the Maricunga property and Kinross acquired the remaining 50% when it acquired Bema in 2007. Detailed financial, production and operations information for Maricunga is available in Kinross’ MD&A for the year ended December 31, 2015.

The Maricunga property is located in the Maricunga District of the Region III of Chile, 120 kilometres east of the town of Copiapó.

All surface and mineral claims, surface rights and water rights are maintained in good standing. Mining claims total 9,380 hectares.  In addition to the mineral claim rights, CMM also holds title to surface rights at Maricunga, providing the land required for the leach pads, waste dumps, camp and other facilities. Water extraction rights, totalling 258 litres per second, have been secured by CMM.

Maricunga pays a royalty to Compañía Minera Refugio on the Pancho and Verde pits. The royalty varies from 1.25% to 2.5% of net smelter returns (depending on the applicable net operating margin), which will be paid until December 31, 2040.

The Verde and Pancho gold deposits at Maricunga occur in the Maricunga Gold Belt of the high Andes in northern Chile. Since 1980, a total of 40 million ounces of gold have been defined in the belt.

Gold mineralization at Maricunga is hosted in the Refugio volcanic-intrusive complex of Early Miocene age. These rocks are largely of intermediate composition. The Refugio volcanic-intrusive complex is exposed over an area of 12 square kilometres and consists of andesitic to dacitic domes, flows, and breccias that are intruded by subvolcanic porphyries and breccias.

Most of the structural trends affecting the Verde and Pancho deposits are related to fracture systems rather than fault zones. One of the main structural features influencing the Pancho deposit is the Falla Guatita fault zone. Field mapping suggests that there may be significant vertical displacement on this structure. Another major fault affecting the Pancho deposit is the Falla Moreno. This structure trends roughly east—west and forms an approximate northern boundary for the mineralization at Pancho.

Production at Maricunga reopened in October 2005 and achieved its targeted rate of 14 Mtpa (40,000 tonnes per day) in late 2005. The mine operates two 12-hour shifts per day for 352 days annually allowing for inclement weather interruptions. Final pit design for Verde and Pancho assumed ten metre bench heights, bench face angles of 65 to 70 degrees, berm widths between 8 to 11 metres, berm interval of 20 metres, inter-ramp angles of 38 to 53 degrees and haul road gradient at 10% with a 25 metre road width.

The Maricunga gold recovery process consists of a single-line primary crushing, fine crushing (secondary and tertiary), heap leaching using cyanide solution, followed by carbon adsorption and regeneration plant operation. The plant can process 48,000 tonnes per day of dry Maricunga ore. The crushing plant product is approximately 80% passing 12 millimetres. Crushed ore is hauled to the heap leach pads by haul trucks.

Construction of a sulfidization, acidification, recycling and thickening (“SART”) plant was completed in late 2012, commissioned during 2013 and has been in continuous operation since 2013.

Based on the recovery estimates by ore type, gold recovery over the mine life is expected to average 56.3% of contained gold in the plant feed. Life of mine annual gold production is expected to range from 120,000 to 225,000 ounces in situ on a 100% basis.  Based on the expected processing rates and mineral

58

reserves, mining at Maricunga is expected to continue until mid-2018 with heap leach processing continuing until 2020.

CMM spent approximately $24.5 million of expenditures on capital projects in 2015 primarily related to infrastructure upgrades, stripping of Phase 4 of West Verde and power line reconstruction.

No exploration activities were performed in 2015.

A wetland (bofedal) located near the Pantanillo groundwater extraction and supply area has experienced a reduction in surface and groundwater levels. Beginning in March of 2010, an irrigation program was implemented on the bofedal, but was unsuccessful. A more robust action plan to rehabilitate the bofedal was developed and presented to the applicable environmental agency (the Servicio de Evaluacion Ambiental (“SEA”)) in 2012. In late 2013, Kinross was fined approximately $40,000 in connection with this matter. Additionally, Kinross was required to submit a more detailed description of its rehabilitation plan and additional information to the authorities relating to its rehabilitation plan.  In 2014 and 2015, numerous regulatory agencies visited the site and requested additional information from CMM. CMM responded to all such requests.  In 2015, the SMA, a national environmental agency, issued a resolution alleging that CMM’s groundwater extraction has irreparably harmed the Pantanillo wetland, and portions of two other downstream wetlands, and that its water extraction poses an imminent risk to these and other area wetlands. CMM submitted various technical and legal defenses to the SMA. On March 18, 2016, the SMA issued a sanction seeking to require CMM to close the Maricunga mine’s water pumping wells located in the Pantanillo area. The Maricunga mine continues to operate normally but relies solely on water from Pantanillo wells to support its operations. The SMA has also publicly stated an intention to seek an expedited injunction to close the pumping wells. CMM intends to file an appeal of the resolution and oppose any injunction request with the appropriate environmental tribunal as permitted by law.

In September of 2013, the SMA issued a Notice of Violation (“NOV”) for certain violations that had been previously identified to the authorities by the Company. Certain of the violations dealt with deviations from the permitted configurations of the mine’s newest camp. The SMA rejected certain of the Company’s defenses to the NOV and, in the first quarter of 2014, fined the Company $4.6 million in relation to the NOV.  The Company appealed the sanction and in June 2014, Chile’s Environmental Court issued a ruling in favour of CMM, vacated the sanction and ordered the SMA to issue a new resolution taking into account the evidence and other information submitted by CMM. In October 2014, the sanctioning process was reopened and additional evidence and information was subsequently submitted by CMM. A new resolution has not yet been issued by the SMA.

In August 2015, the Company obtained an Approval Resolution for the CMM Closure Plan under the transitory regime before the Servicio Nacional de Geologia y Mineria (Sernageomin). A new closure plan is being developed in order to modify the approved closure measures in the environmental permits.

In 2013, CMM was recertified by the ICMI (International Cyanide Management Institute) in full compliance under the Cyanide Code. In the November 2015 recertification audit, CMM was found to be in “substantial compliance”. CMM has submitted the required corrective action plans to ICMI with the goal of achieving “full compliance” by May 2016.

Chirano, Ghana

Kinross acquired the Chirano gold mine as part of the September 17, 2010 acquisition of Red Back. Chirano Gold Mines Limited (“CGML”) is 90% owned by Kinross with the remaining 10% owned as a carried interest by the Government of Ghana.  Detailed financial, production and operations information for Chirano is available in Kinross’ MD&A for the year ended December 31, 2015.

The project is located in southwest Ghana primarily in the Bibiani-Anhwiaso-Bekwai District with the remainder located in the Sefwi Wiawso District of the Western Region of Ghana. The mine is located approximately 100 kilometres southwest of Kumasi, which is Ghana’s second largest city. Access to the gold

59

mine from the capital Accra is via a sealed highway to Kumasi and then running southwest towards Bibiani and onwards to Sefwi-Bekwai.

Geologically, the project area lies within the Paleoproterozoic terrain of south-west Ghana, located within the Sefwi Gold Belt, very close to its margin against the Kumasi Basin to the east. Both the belt and basin consist of rocks of Birimian age, with the belt dominated by mafic volcanics and the basin typified by fine grained, deep-water sediments. Both are intruded by granites. Gold mineralization of economic importance at Chirano is located along a 10 kilometre shear zone known as the Chirano Shear, which hosts the majority of the gold mineralization, although additional splay shears can host gold mineralization of economic importance.

The Chirano gold mine commenced production in October 2005 with a surface mining operation from three open pits. Surface mining operations are currently conducted in one pit, which supplements gold production from two underground mining operations. Approximately 65% of gold production is sourced from the underground mines. Underground mining and open pit mining operations as well as tailings construction were performed by CGML in 2015.

Processing capacity is 3.5 Mtpa using a conventional three stage crushing circuit, followed by primary and secondary ball mills for fine grinding. After grinding and 24 hours of cyanide leaching, a CIL circuit extracts gold in solution to activated carbon. A conventional carbon elution and electro-winning circuit recovers gold which is then smelted to gold doré for shipment to international gold refiners. Gold recovery using the above described process is typically 91 to 92%. Annual gold production was approximately 255,000 ounces in 2015.

Based on the 2015 mineral reserves, Chirano is expected to continue production up to 2021.

CGML employs approximately 1,100 permanent employees and 75 trainees and short-term employees. In addition there are approximately 700 contractor employees, many of whom are associated with the camp services, employee transport, exploration and site security services. CGML and the Company are committed to a health and safety program that protects the safety and well-being of staff, clients, contractors and the general public in all aspects of its business operations.

During 2015 exploration activities continued on the Chirano mining lease and on several district targets.  In addition to the completion of 47,000 metres of drilling in 165 drillholes, exploration work included expansion of surface geochemical grids, trenching, and geophysical surveys.   Drill programs beneath the existing pits continued to extend the limits of the known mineralization.   In 2016 planned exploration activities include approximately 25,000 metres of drilling to continue testing resources on the mining lease and adjacent prospecting licenses in support of engineering scoping studies.

The operations are guided by the Guidelines for Mining in Productive Forest Reserves in Ghana. Strategic efforts are being made to limit the impact of mine operations on the forest reserves. There is a closure plan in place to return disturbed areas to a functional, viable and self-sustaining ecosystem where feasible.

60

RISK FACTORS

The business and operations of Kinross are subject to risks. In addition to considering the other information in this Annual Information Form, you should consider carefully the following factors in deciding whether to invest in securities of Kinross. If any of these risks occur, or if other risks not currently anticipated or fully appreciated occur, the business and prospects of Kinross could be materially adversely affected, which could have a material adverse effect on Kinross’ valuation and the trading price for its shares.

The financial and operational performance of Kinross is dependent on gold and silver prices.

The profitability of Kinross’ operations is significantly affected by changes in the market price of gold and silver. Gold and silver prices fluctuate on a daily basis and are affected by numerous factors beyond the control of Kinross. The price of gold and/or silver can be subject to volatile price movements and future serious price declines could cause continued commercial production to be impractical. Depending on the prices of gold and silver, cash flow from mining operations may not be sufficient to cover costs of production and capital expenditures. If, as a result of a decline in gold and/or silver prices, revenues from metal sales were to fall below cash operating costs, production may be discontinued. The factors that may affect the price of gold and silver include industry factors such as: industrial and jewelry demand; the level of demand for the metal as an investment; central bank lending, sales and purchases of the metal; speculative trading; and costs of and levels of global production by producers of the metal. Gold and silver prices may also be affected by macroeconomic factors, including: expectations of the future rate of inflation; the strength of, and confidence in, the US dollar, the currency in which the price of the metal is generally quoted, and other currencies; interest rates; and global or regional political or economic uncertainties.

If the world market price of gold and/or silver continued to drop and the prices realized by Kinross on gold and/or silver sales were to decrease further and remain at such a level for any substantial period, Kinross’ profitability and cash flow would be negatively affected. In such circumstances, Kinross may determine that it is not economically feasible to continue commercial production at some or all of its operations or the development of some or all of its current projects, which could have an adverse impact on Kinross’ financial performance and results of operations. Kinross may curtail or suspend some or all of its exploration activities, with the result that depleted reserves are not replaced. In addition, the market value of Kinross’ gold and/or silver inventory may be reduced and existing reserves may be reduced to the extent that ore cannot be mined and processed economically at the prevailing prices. Furthermore, certain of Kinross’ mineral projects include copper which is similarly subject to price volatility based on factors beyond Kinross’ control.

Kinross’ operations and profitability are affected by shortages and price volatility of other commodities and equipment.

Kinross is dependent on various input commodities (such as diesel fuel, electricity, natural gas, steel, concrete and cyanide) and equipment (including parts) to conduct its mining operations and development projects.  A shortage of such input commodities or equipment or a significant increase in their cost could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s ability to carry out its operations and therefore limit, or increase the cost of, production.  The Company is also dependent on access to and supply of water and electricity to carry out its mining operations, and such access and supply may not be readily available, especially at the Company’s operations in Chile, Brazil and Ghana.  Market prices of input commodities can be subject to volatile price movements which can be material, occur over short periods of time and are affected by factors that are beyond the Company’s control.  An increase in the cost, or decrease in the availability, of input commodities or equipment may affect the timely conduct and cost of Kinross’ operations and development projects.  If the costs of certain input commodities consumed or otherwise used in connection with Kinross’ operations and development projects were to increase significantly, and remain at such levels for a substantial period, the Company may determine that it is not economically feasible to continue commercial production at some or all of its operations or the development of some or all of its

61

current projects, which could have an adverse impact on the Company’s financial performance and results of operations.

Paracatu water supply and use

Operations at Paracatu are dependent on rainfall as the primary source of process water.  Accordingly, prolonged periods without adequate rainfall may adversely impact operations at Paracatu. Recent rainfall levels have fallen below the historical average.  As a result, operations maybe partially or fully curtailed in the near future, and production may fall below historic or forecast levels and Kinross may incur significant costs or experience significant delays that could have a material effect on Kinross’ financial performance, liquidity and results of operations.

Changes to the extensive regulatory and environmental rules and regulations to which Kinross is subject could have a material adverse effect on Kinross’ future operations.

Kinross’ mining and processing operations and exploration activities are subject to various laws and regulations governing the protection of the environment, exploration, development, production, exports, taxes, labour standards, occupational health, waste disposal, toxic substances, mine safety, and other matters. The legal and political circumstances outside of North America cause these risks to be different from, and in many cases, greater than, comparable risks associated with operations within North America. New laws and regulations, amendments to existing laws and regulations, or more stringent enforcement of existing laws and regulations could have a material adverse impact on Kinross, increase costs, cause a reduction in levels of production and/or delay or prevent the development of new mining properties. For example, proposed legislation in Ghana may make it difficult for the Company to obtain authorization for a planned tailings facility. The inability to complete such tailings facility may impact production at Chirano. Compliance with these laws and regulations is part of the business and requires significant expenditures. Changes in regulations and laws, including those pertaining to the rights of leaseholders or the payment of royalties, net profit interest or similar amounts, could adversely affect Kinross’ operations or substantially increase the costs associated with those operations. Kinross is unable to predict what legislation or revisions may be proposed that might affect its business or when any such proposals, if enacted, might become effective.

The operations of Kinross require licences and permits from various governmental authorities to develop and exploit its properties, and the process for obtaining licences and permits from governmental authorities often takes an extended period of time and is subject to numerous delays and uncertainties. Such licences and permits are subject to change in various circumstances. Applicable governmental authorities may revoke or refuse to issue, amend or renew necessary permits. The loss of such permits may hinder Kinross’ ability to operate and could have a material effect on Kinross’ financial performance and results of operations. Failure to comply with applicable laws and regulations may result in injunctions, fines, criminal liability, suspensions or revocation of permits and licences and other penalties. There can be no assurance that Kinross has been or will be at all times in compliance with all such laws and regulations and with its licences and permits or that Kinross has all required licences and permits in connection with its operations. Kinross may be unable to obtain on a timely basis or maintain in the future all necessary licences and permits that may be required to explore and develop its properties, commence construction or operation of mining facilities and properties under exploration or development or to maintain continued operations that economically justify the cost. For example, the Company may not always be able to secure the necessary water access rights. In addition, third parties may, from time to time, challenge Kinross’ permits and licences and/or applications for permits and licences which could lead to delays and/or suspension of development projects and/or current operations.

In February 2014, the Company’s subsidiary, Crown, was issued a revised National Pollution Discharge Elimination System Permit (the “Renewed Permit”) which is required for its operations at its Kettle River-Buckhorn mine. The revised permit came into effect on March 1, 2014, and contained conditions that were more restrictive than the original discharge permit. In addition, the Company felt that the Renewed Permit was internally inconsistent, technically unworkable and inconsistent with existing agreements in place with the DOE, including a settlement agreement previously entered into by Crown and DOE in June 2013 (“Settlement Agreement”). On February 28, 2014, Crown filed an appeal of the Renewed Permit with the Washington Pollution Control Hearings Board (“PCHB”).  On July 30, 2015, the PCHB upheld the Renewed Permit.  In addition, on January 15, 2015, Crown filed a lawsuit against the DOE in Ferry County Superior Court, Washington, claiming that DOE breached the Settlement Agreement by including various unworkable

62

compliance terms in the Renewed Permit. Crown filed a Petition for Review in Ferry County Superior Court, Washington, on August 27, 2015, seeking to have the PCHB decision overturned.  If the Renewed Permit is not amended, operations at the Kettle River-Buckhorn mine may be adversely affected.

Kinross’ exploration programs are subject to federal, state, and local environmental regulations. For example, in the U.S., some of Kinross’ mining claims are on United States public lands and federal regulatory authorities extensively regulate mining operations conducted on public lands. Most operations involving the exploration for minerals are subject to laws and regulations relating to exploration procedures, safety precautions, employee health and safety, air quality standards, pollution of stream and fresh water sources, odour, noise, dust, and other environmental protection controls adopted by federal, state, and local governmental authorities as well as the rights of adjoining property owners. In addition, in order to conduct mining operations, Kinross is required to obtain performance bonds related to environmental permit compliance. These bonds may take the form of cash deposits, letters of credit provided through the banking syndicate line of credit, or, if available, provided by outside insurance policies. Kinross will be required to prepare and present to federal, state, or local authorities data pertaining to the effect or impact that any proposed exploration or mining activity may have upon the environment and propose mitigation to decrease environmental impacts. All requirements imposed by any such authorities may be costly and time-consuming and may delay commencement or continuation of exploration, mine development or production operations.

The Company has been subject to ongoing environmental review of its operations in Chile.   In late 2013, Kinross was fined approximately $40,000 in respect of the degradation of the Pantanillo wetland (bofedal) located near the Maricunga mine, and was required to submit a more detailed description and additional information to the authorities relating to its rehabilitation plan.  In 2015, the SMA issued a resolution alleging that Kinross had irreparably harmed the Pantanillo wetland and portions of two other downstream wetlands, and water use poses an imminent risk to these and other area wetlands. Kinross has submitted various technical and legal defenses in its defense, was notified by the SMA on March 18, 2016 that it was seeking as a sanction to require CMM to close the Maricunga mine’s water pumping wells located in the Pantanillo area. The Maricunga mine continues to operate normally but relies solely on water from Pantanillo wells to support its operations. The SMA has also publicly stated an intention to seek an expedited injunction to close the pumping wells. CMM intends to file an appeal of the resolution and to oppose any injunction request with the appropriate environmental tribunal as allowed by law. In addition, certain camp configurations at Maricunga deviate from permitted configurations.  In 2014, the Company was sanctioned $4.6 million in relation to such deviations. The Company appealed the sanction and in June 2014 the Environmental Court issued a ruling in favour of CMM, vacated the sanction and ordered the SMA to issue a new resolution taking into account the evidence and other information submitted by CMM.  In October 2014, the sanctioning process was reopened and additional evidence and information was subsequently submitted by CMM. A new resolution has not yet been issued by the SMA. These matters are subject to ongoing regulatory review and evaluation by Chilean authorities and may result in additional actions against Kinross. Ongoing regulatory review and investigations by Chilean authorities may have an adverse effect on the future operations or financial condition of the Maricunga mine.

On March 17, 2016 the SMA, filed charges against MDO over a series of alleged breaches at La Coipa. The charges were filed following a planned inspection of the facilities. A total of seven charges were filed against MDO relating to alleged breaches of environmental permits of its facilities and/or failure to properly permit certain activities, including capturing water at an undesignated reservoir, deficiencies in the capturing system of mercury, deficiencies in the monitoring system, and concentrations of mercury above permitted levels in some effluent. MDO faces a fine of up to 10,000 annual tax units with an approximate value of $8 million, the temporary or definitive suspension of operations, or even the revocation of its environmental permit. Ongoing regulatory review and investigations by Chilean authorities may have an adverse effect on the future operations or financial condition of the La Coipa mine.

Kinross is subject to various laws and regulations which, if the Company is alleged to, or does, violate, could result in regulatory or government investigations and/or sanctions, which could adversely impact the Company’s operations. These include anti-bribery laws (including without limitation the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, the Canadian Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act and anti-bribery laws in other jurisdictions in which the Company operates), international trade sanctions (including without

63

limitation, in respect of Russia and Ukraine), and anti-money laundering laws and regulations.  Kinross has internal policies and procedures to mandate compliance with such laws and regulations; however, there can be no assurance that such policies and procedures will be effective in revealing or preventing violations thereof. Various regulatory and government agencies review transactions and practices of Kinross in connection with the enforcement of applicable laws and regulations, and Kinross regularly cooperates in producing documents and other information sought by such authorities. Consequences of violations could range from cost and expense to remediate, increased operating costs or changes to operations, fines or penalties for violations, expenses of investigations and defense, and potentially cessation of operations.

In August 2013, Kinross received information regarding allegations of improper payments made to government officials and certain internal control deficiencies at its West Africa mining operations.  External legal counsel was immediately retained to conduct an objective internal investigation into the allegations.  In March and December 2014, and July 2015, Kinross received subpoenas from the United States Securities and Exchange Commission seeking information and documents on substantially the same subjects as had previously been raised.  In December 2014, Kinross received similar requests for information from the United States Department of Justice.  The internal investigation is ongoing, and additional issues or facts could become known as the investigation continues. On December 10, 2015, the NGOs MiningWatch Canada and the French anti-corruption association Sherpa announced that they had filed a report with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (“RCMP”) calling for an investigation of the Company for alleged breaches of Canada’s anti-corruption laws at the Company’s Tasiast mine in Mauritania and its Chirano mine in Ghana.  The Company has not received a copy of the report and as of the date hereof is not aware of any resulting RCMP investigation or other actions by any Canadian authorities.  Consequences of violations could include fines or penalties, de-listing of securities from US stock exchanges and restrictions on export licenses.

Kinross’ future plans rely on mine development projects, which involve significant uncertainties.

The Company’s ability to increase or maintain present gold and silver production levels is dependent in part on the successful development of new mines and/or expansion of existing mining operations. Kinross is dependent on future growth from development projects. Current potential development projects include potential development opportunities at Fort Knox, Round Mountain Phase W, Bald Mountain South Zone and Tasiast (Phase 1 and Phase 2). Development projects rely on the accuracy of predicted factors including: capital and operating costs; metallurgical recoveries; mineral reserve estimates; and future metal prices. Development projects are also subject to accurate feasibility studies, the acquisition of surface or land rights and the issuance of necessary governmental permits. Unforeseen circumstances, including those related to the amount and nature of the mineralization at the development site, technological impediments to extraction and processing, legal restrictions or governmental intervention, infrastructure limitations, environmental issues, disputes with local communities or other events, could result in one or more of our planned developments becoming impractical or uneconomic to complete. Any such occurrence could have an adverse impact on Kinross’ financial condition and results of operations.

In addition, as a result of the substantial expenditures involved in development projects, developments are prone to material cost overruns versus budget. The capital expenditures and time required to develop new mines are considerable and changes in cost or construction schedules can significantly increase both the time and capital required to build the project. The project development schedules are also dependent on obtaining the governmental approvals necessary for the operation of a project. The timeline to obtain these government approvals is often beyond the control of Kinross. It is not unusual in the mining industry for new mining operations to experience unexpected problems during the start-up phase, resulting in delays and requiring more capital than anticipated.

Actual production and cost outcomes may differ significantly from production and cost estimates

The Company prepares estimates of future production, operating costs and capital costs for its operations. Despite the Company’s best efforts to budget and estimate such costs, as a result of the substantial expenditures involved in the development of mineral projects and the fluctuation and increase of costs over time, development projects may be prone to material cost overruns. Kinross’ actual production and costs may vary from estimates for a variety of reasons, including: increased competition for resources and development

64

inputs; cost inflation affecting the mining industry in general; actual ore mined varying from estimates of grade, tonnage, dilution and metallurgical and other characteristics; short-term operating factors relating to the ore reserves, such as the need for sequential development of ore bodies and the processing of new or different ore grades; revisions to mine plans; difficulties with supply chain management, including the implementation and management of enterprise resource planning software; risks and hazards associated with mining; natural phenomena, such as inclement weather conditions, water availability, floods, and earthquakes; and unexpected labour shortages or strikes. Operating costs may also be affected by a variety of factors, including: changing waste-to-ore ratios, ore grade metallurgy, labour costs, cost of commodities and other inputs, general inflationary pressures and currency exchange rates. Many of these factors are beyond Kinross’ control. No assurance can be given that Kinross’ cost estimates will be achieved. Failure to achieve production or cost estimates or material increases in costs could have an adverse impact on Kinross’ future cash flows, profitability, results of operations and financial condition.

The mineral reserve and mineral resource figures of Kinross are only estimates and are subject to revision based on developing information.

The figures for mineral reserves and mineral resources presented herein, including the anticipated tonnages and grades that will be achieved or the indicated level of recovery that will be realized, are estimates and no assurances can be given as to their accuracy. Such estimates are, in large part, based on interpretations of geological data obtained from drillholes and other sampling techniques. Actual mineralization or formations may be different from those predicted. It may also take many years from the initial phase of drilling before production is possible, and during that time the economic feasibility of exploiting a deposit may change. Reserve and resource estimates are materially dependent on prevailing gold and silver prices and the cost of recovering and processing minerals at the individual mine sites. Market fluctuations in the price of gold or silver, or increases in recovery costs, as well as various short-term operating factors, may cause a mining operation to be unprofitable in any particular accounting period.

Prolonged declines in the market price of gold and/or silver may render reserves containing relatively lower grades of gold and/or silver mineralization uneconomic to exploit and could reduce materially Kinross’ mineral reserves and mineral resources. Should such reductions occur, material write downs of Kinross’ investment in mining properties or the discontinuation of development or production might be required, and there could be material delays in the development of new projects, increased net losses and reduced cash flow. There is no assurance that Kinross will achieve indicated levels of gold or silver recovery or obtain the prices assumed in determining the mineral reserves. The estimates of mineral reserves and mineral resources attributable to a specific property are based on accepted engineering and evaluation principles. The estimated amount of contained gold and silver in proven and probable mineral reserves does not necessarily represent an estimate of a fair market value of the evaluated properties.

There are numerous uncertainties inherent in estimating quantities of mineral reserves and mineral resources. The estimates in this Annual Information Form are based on various assumptions relating to gold prices and exchange rates during the expected life of production, mineralization of the area to be mined, the projected cost of mining, and the results of additional planned development work. Actual future production rates and amounts, revenues, taxes, operating expenses, environmental and regulatory compliance expenditures, development expenditures, and recovery rates may vary substantially from those assumed in the estimates. Any significant change in these assumptions, including changes that result from variances between projected and actual results, could result in material downward revision to current estimates.

Kinross’ operations may be adversely affected by changing political, legal and economic conditions.

The Company has mining and exploration operations in various regions of the world, including the United States, Canada, Brazil, Chile, the Russian Federation, Mauritania and Ghana, and such operations are exposed to various levels of political, economic, and other risks and uncertainties. These risks and uncertainties vary from country to country and include, but are not limited to: terrorism; hostage taking; thefts and illegal incursions on property (such as those which have occurred at Paracatu); extreme fluctuations in currency exchange rates; high rates of inflation; labour unrest; the risks of civil unrest; expropriation and nationalization; renegotiation or nullification of existing concessions, licences, permits and contracts; illegal

65

mining; changes to policies and regulations impacting the mining sector; restrictions on foreign exchange and repatriation; and changing political conditions, currency controls, and governmental regulations that favour or require the awarding of contracts to local contractors or require foreign contractors to employ citizens of, or purchase supplies from, a particular jurisdiction.

Future political and economic conditions in these countries may result in these governments adopting different policies with respect to foreign investment, and development and ownership of mineral resources. Any changes in such policies may result in changes in laws affecting ownership of assets, foreign investment, mining exploration and development, taxation, royalties, currency exchange rates, gold sales, environmental protection, labour relations, price controls, repatriation of income, and return of capital, which may affect both the ability of Kinross to undertake exploration and development activities in respect of future properties in the manner currently contemplated, as well as its ability to continue to explore, develop, and operate those properties to which it has rights relating to exploration, development, and operation. Future governments in these countries may adopt substantially different policies, which might extend to, as an example, expropriation of assets.

The tax regimes in these countries may be subject to differing interpretations and are subject to change from time to time. Kinross’ interpretation of taxation law as applied to its transactions and activities may not coincide with that of the tax authorities in a given country. As a result, transactions may be challenged by tax authorities and Kinross’ operations may be assessed, which could result in significant additional taxes, penalties and interest. In addition, in certain jurisdictions (such as Brazil and Mauritania) Kinross may be required to pay refundable value added tax (“VAT”) on certain purchases. There can be no assurance that the Company will be able to collect all, or part, of the amount of VAT refunds which are owed to the Company.

The Company is subject to the considerations and risks of operating in the Russian Federation. Certain currency conversion risks exist in the Russian economy. Russian legislation currently permits the conversion of rouble revenues into foreign currency. Any delay or other difficulty in converting roubles into a foreign currency to make a payment or delay in or restriction on the transfer of foreign currency could limit our ability to meet our payment and debt obligations, which could result in the loss of suppliers, acceleration of debt obligations, etc.

Kinross is subject to hazards and risks associated with exploration and mining activities and insurance may be insufficient to cover these risks.

The operations of Kinross are subject to the hazards and risks normally incidental to exploration, development, and production activities of precious metals mining properties, any of which could result in damage to life or property, environmental damage and possible legal liability for such damage. The activities of Kinross may be subject to prolonged disruptions due to weather conditions depending on the location of operations in which Kinross has interests. Hazards and risks, such as unusual or unexpected formations, faults and other geologic structures, rock bursts, pressures, cave-ins, flooding, pit wall failures, ground and slope failures and inventory theft, could have an adverse impact on Kinross’ operations. Severe weather conditions, including those resulting from global climate change, may adversely impact Kinross’ operations. As a result, production may fall below historic or estimated levels and Kinross may incur significant costs or experience significant delays that could have a material effect on Kinross’ financial performance, liquidity and results of operations. For example, at the Paracatu mine, a significant increase in rainfall could result in flooding, or a prolonged and significant lack of rainfall may disrupt mining operations.

Further, few mining properties that are explored are ultimately developed into producing mines. Major costs are required to establish reserves by drilling and to construct mining and processing facilities. Large amounts of capital are frequently required to purchase necessary equipment. Delays due to equipment malfunction or inadequacy may adversely affect Kinross’ results of operations. It is impossible to ensure that the current or proposed exploration programs on properties in which Kinross has an interest will result in profitable commercial mining operations.

66

Mining, processing, development, and exploration activities depend, to one degree or another, on adequate infrastructure. Reliable roads, bridges, power sources, and water supply are important determinants which affect capital and operating costs. Lack of such infrastructure or unusual or infrequent weather phenomena, sabotage, terrorism, government, or other interference in the maintenance or provision of such infrastructure could adversely affect Kinross’ operations, financial condition, and results of operations.

Available insurance does not cover all the potential risks associated with a mining company’s operations. Kinross may also be unable to maintain insurance to cover insurable risks at economically feasible premiums, and insurance coverage may not be available in the future or may not be adequate to cover any resulting loss. The Company’s existing insurance policies contain certain exceptions where coverage may not be available (including bullion losses not attributable to theft).

Moreover, insurance against risks such as the validity and ownership of unpatented mining claims and mill sites and environmental pollution or other hazards as a result of exploration and production is not generally available to Kinross or to other companies in the mining industry on acceptable terms. As a result, Kinross might become subject to liability for environmental damage or other hazards for which it is completely or partially uninsured or for which it elects not to insure because of premium costs or other reasons. Losses from these events may cause Kinross to incur significant costs that could have a material adverse effect upon its financial condition and results of operations.

If Kinross does not develop additional mineral reserves, it may not be able to sustain future operations.

Because mines have limited lives, Kinross must continually replace and expand its mineral reserves as they are depleted by production at its operations in order to maintain or grow its total mineral reserve base. The life of mine estimates included in this Annual Information Form for each of Kinross’ material properties are based on a number of factors and assumptions and may prove to be incorrect. Kinross’ ability to maintain or increase its annual production of gold and silver will significantly depend on its ability to bring new mines into production and to expand mineral reserves at existing mines. Once a site with mineralization is discovered, it may take several years from the initial phases of drilling until production is possible, during which time the economic feasibility of production may change. Substantial expenditures are required to establish mineral reserves and to construct mining and processing facilities. As a result of these uncertainties, there is no assurance that current or future exploration programs will be successful. There is a risk that depletion of reserves will not be offset by discoveries. As a result, the reserve base of Kinross may decline if reserves are mined without adequate replacement and Kinross may not be able to sustain production beyond the current mine lives, based on current production rates.

The mineral resources of Kinross may not be economically developable, in which case Kinross may never recover its expenditures for exploration and/or development.

Mineral resources that are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. Due to the uncertainty of measured, indicated or inferred mineral resources, these mineral resources may never be upgraded to proven and probable mineral reserves. Measured, indicated and inferred mineral resources are not recognized by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and U.S. investors are cautioned not to assume that any part of mineral deposits in these categories will ever be converted into reserves or recovered.

Kinross is subject to risks related to environmental liability, including liability for environmental damages caused by mining activities prior to ownership by Kinross and reclamation costs and related liabilities.

Mining, like many other extractive natural resource industries, is subject to potential risks and liabilities associated with the effects on the environment resulting from mineral exploration and production. The Company may be held responsible for the costs of addressing contamination at, or arising from, current or former activities. Environmental liability may result from mining activities conducted by others prior to the ownership of a property by Kinross. In addition, Kinross may be liable to third parties for exposure to hazardous materials. The costs associated with such responsibilities and liabilities may be substantial. The payment of such liabilities would reduce funds otherwise available and could have a material adverse effect

67

on Kinross. Should Kinross be unable to fully fund the cost of remedying an environmental problem, Kinross might be required to suspend operations or enter into interim compliance measures pending completion of the required remedy, which could have a material adverse effect on the operations and business of Kinross.

In the United States, certain mining wastes from extraction and beneficiation of ores that would otherwise be considered hazardous waste under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (“RCRA”) and state law equivalents, are currently exempt from certain Environmental Protection Agency (the “EPA”) regulations governing hazardous waste. If the Company’s mine wastes at its U.S. mines are not exempt, and are treated as hazardous waste under RCRA, or if the presence of mine wastes results in a release of hazardous substances which has required or will require remediation under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (“CERCLA”) or state law equivalents for cleanup, material expenditures could be required for the construction of additional waste disposal facilities, for other remediation expenditures, or for natural resource damages. Under CERCLA, subject to certain defenses, any present or past owners or operators of a CERCLA site, and any parties that disposed or arranged for the disposal of hazardous substances at such a site, may generally be held jointly and severally liable for response costs and may be forced to undertake remedial cleanup actions or to pay for the government’s cleanup efforts. Such parties may also be liable to governmental entities for the cost of damages to natural resources, which may be substantial. Additional regulations or requirements may also be imposed upon the Company’s operations, tailings, and waste disposal areas as well as upon mine closure under federal and state environmental laws and regulations, including, without limitation, the Clean Water Act (“CWA”) and state law equivalents. Air emissions in the U.S. are subject to the Clean Air Act and its state equivalents as well. Additionally, the Company is subject to other federal and state environmental laws, and potential claims existing under common law, relating to the operation and closure of the Company’s U.S. mine sites.

The Sunnyside Mine is an inactive mine situated in the Bonita Peak Mining District near Silverton, Colorado.  A subsidiary of Kinross, Sunnyside Gold Corporation (“SGC”), operated the mine for a period in the late-1980s to early 1990s and subsequently conducted various reclamation and closure activities at the mine and in the surrounding area.  The EPA is actively investigating the district and has indicated that it is considering proposing that portions of the district, including areas impacted by SGC’s operations and closure activities, be listed on the Superfund National Priorities List (“NPL”).  There is a substantial probability the EPA and others will assert that the Company is a potentially responsible party under CERCLA and is jointly and severally liable for CERCLA response costs incurred in the district.  In addition, EPA may seek to require SGC to conduct investigative and remedial activities.  On August 5, 2015, while working in another mine in the district known as the Gold King, EPA caused a release of approximately three million gallons of contaminated water into a tributary of the Animas River.  The Company has received a “notice of intent to sue” letter from the state of New Mexico indicating that it intends to sue a number of parties, including the EPA, and the Company, for, among other things, injunctive relief, future costs and attorneys’ fees under the RCRA to address endangerments allegedly arising out of releases of contaminated water from the Gold King, Sunnyside and other historic mines in the area.  The Company received a similar letter from the State of Utah indicating that it intends to sue a number of parties, including the EPA and the Company for, among other things, injunctive relief, costs, damages and attorneys’ fees under RCRA, the CWA and the Utah Water Quality Act.

Kinross is generally required to submit for government approval a reclamation plan and to pay for the reclamation of its mine sites upon the completion of mining activities. Kinross estimates the net present value of future cash outflows for reclamation costs under IFRS, IAS 37 and IFRIC 1 at $720.3 million as at December 31, 2015 based on information available as of that date. Any significant increases over the current estimates of these costs could have a material adverse effect on Kinross.

Regulatory authorities in certain jurisdictions require that security be provided to cover the estimated reclamation and remediation costs. As of December 31, 2015, letters of credit or other acceptable security totalling $249.5 million had been issued to various regulatory agencies to satisfy financial assurance requirements for this purpose. The letters of credit were issued against the Company’s Letter of Credit guarantee facility and the Company believes it is in material compliance with these reclamation and remediation security requirements. The Company may incur significant costs in connection with these reclamation activities, which may exceed the provisions the Company has made in respect of its reclamation

68

obligations.  In some jurisdictions, reclamation bonds, letters of credit or other forms of financial assurance are required as security for these reclamation obligations.  The amount and nature of financial assurance are dependent upon a number of factors, including the Company’s financial condition and reclamation cost estimates.  Kinross may be required to replace or supplement the existing financial assurance, or source new financial assurance with more expensive forms, which might include cash deposits, which would reduce its cash available for operations and financing activities.  There can be no assurance that Kinross will be able to maintain or add to its current level of financial assurance.  To the extent that Kinross is or becomes unable to post and maintain sufficient financial assurance for reclamation costs, where required  it could potentially result in closure of one or more of the Company’s operations, which could have a material adverse effect on the financial condition of the Company.

Developments in Russia may have adverse effects on Kinross’ operations in Russia.

On May 7, 2008, the Russian federal laws “On the Procedure for Foreign Investment in Companies of Strategic Significance for State Defence and Security” (as amended, the “Strategic Investments Law”) and “On Amendments to the Subsoil Law” (as amended, the “Subsoil Law”) came into effect. A number of important amendments to the Strategic Investments Law became effective on December 6, 2014.

The Strategic Investments Law sets forth the criteria whereby certain transactions entered into by a foreign investor require prior approval from the Russian Federation (“RF”) authorities.  Such approval will be required if: (a) a Russian company (“RusCo”) is engaged in activities which are defined as strategic for the purposes of national security and defence, and (b) a RusCo holds rights to a “strategic deposit” (such as Kupol and Dvoinoye) and a potential foreign investor directly or indirectly obtains 25% (formerly 10%) or more of the voting shares of the RusCo, or there exists some other mechanism for control over (such as a management agreement) the RusCo including any actions as a result of which a foreign investor or group of persons acquires the right to determine the decisions of the management of a company of strategic importance (such as terms of its business activities). This approval requirement applies in respect of number of transactions, including direct or indirect acquisitions of equity interests, such that a third party, non-Russian purchaser of 25% or more of Kinross’ ownership interest, will be required to obtain applicable governmental approvals. Any transactions involving the acquisition of ownership, possession or use of basic production assets, the value of which is 25% or more of the balance value, shall also be subject to the prior approval of the competent state bodies.

The Strategic Investments Law also provides for cases when no prior approval is required in respect of the companies holding the rights to a “strategic deposit”.

The Strategic Investments Law designates geological study and/or mining work in subsoil areas of federal significance as strategic activity.  According to the Subsoil Law, subsoil areas of federal significance, among other things, include those that contain according to the records of the state balance of mineral reserves as of January 1, 2006, gold reserves of 50 tonnes (or 1,763,698 ounces) or more and/or 500,000 tonnes or more of copper.

Kinross has successfully obtained Strategic Investments Law approval from the RF authorities respecting the acquisition of Dvoinoye and the acquisition of the remaining 25% of Kupol.

Under the Strategic Investments Law, the Subsoil Law and RF Government Resolution no. 697 dated September 16, 2008, combined licence holders (such as CMGC with respect to the Kupol East and Kupol West licences) are required to seek approval from the RF government prior to the commencement of mining operations on a strategic deposit under a combined licence.  The RF government has the right to terminate the combined licence after completion of geological surveys, if a strategic deposit is discovered during the exploration stage with respect to these deposits. If such approval is not obtained or the licence is terminated, CMGC will not be able to mine under the Kupol East and Kupol West combined exploration and mining licences or the Vodorazdelnaya property after completion of geological surveys.  Although the RF Government has granted such approval to other foreign parties (including Kinross, as noted above), there can be no assurance that such approval to mine will be granted to the licence holder by the RF Government or what the terms of such approval might be.  In the case of a withdrawal of a licence, the RF Government is

69

required to reimburse the expenses (including finance expenses, but subject to a cap on interest) incurred in respect of the geological study of the subsoil plot and any tender fee amount paid by the licence holder plus a termination fee (in the case of a gold deposit, the termination fee is equal to 30% of the amount of reimbursable expenses).  In addition, the licence holder may be paid a finder’s fee by the RF Government in its discretion.

Ongoing political tensions and uncertainties as a result of the Russian Federation’s foreign policy decisions and actions in respect of Ukraine have resulted in the imposition of economic sanctions and increased the risk that certain governments may impose further economic, or other, sanctions or penalties on, or may take other actions against, the Russian Federation or persons and/or companies conducting business in the Russian Federation, or may otherwise act in support of Ukraine. There can be no assurance that sanctions or other penalties will not be imposed, or other actions will not be taken, by the Russian Federation, including in response to existing or threatened sanctions or other penalties or actions by Canada, the United States, the European Union and/or other governments against the Russian Federation or persons and/or companies conducting business in the Russian Federation. The Company derives a significant portion of its cash flows from its operations in the Russian Federation. The imposition of economic sanctions or other penalties, or such other actions by the Russian Federation and/or other governments, could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s assets and operations. Debt markets and ratings agencies may take the view that the Company is exposed to concentration risk with respect to the Russian Federation, given its significant operations and cash flows coming from that jurisdiction.

Developments in Mauritania may have adverse effects on Kinross’ operations and development projects in Mauritania.

Kinross is subject to political, economic and security risks which, should they materialize, may adversely affect the Company’s ability to operate its Tasiast mine in Mauritania.

These risks include but are not limited to the following: (1) the potential that the government may attempt to renegotiate current mining conventions or to revoke existing stability provisions in those conventions; (2) the security situation in the country may deteriorate; (3) a number of public policy issues material to the economic viability of the current operation or any possible expansion may not be positively resolved; (4) a lack of transparency in the operation of the government and development of new laws; and (5) the potential for laws and regulations to be inconsistently applied. These issues include, but are not limited to, a process and timetable for payment or offset of VAT refunds owed by the government to the Company, the long-term stability in the Company’s relationship with the workers’ union, the application of a clear, comprehensive, legally certain and enforceable VAT exemption for the mining industry, labor force management and flexible labor practices and the timely issuance of work permits for the non-national workforce.

While the Company has no reason to believe that all or any of the above mentioned issues are likely to transpire there can be no assurance that these or other, unforeseeable, events will not occur.

Title and access to Kinross’ properties may be uncertain and subject to risks.

The validity of mining claims which constitute most of Kinross’ property holdings may, in certain cases, be uncertain and is subject to being contested. Kinross’ titles, including title to undeveloped properties, may be defective.

Certain of Kinross’ United States mineral rights consist of unpatented mining claims. Unpatented mining claims are unique property interests, and are generally considered to be subject to greater title risk than other real property interests because the validity of the multiple types of unpatented mining claims is often uncertain and is always subject to challenges of third parties or contests by the United States government. The validity of an unpatented mining claim, in terms of both its location and its maintenance, is dependent on strict compliance with a complex body of United States federal and state statutory and case law. The necessity for, and rights associated with, various types of unpatented mining claims is also subject to uncertainties, as illustrated by the claims made by plaintiffs in Earthworks, et. Al vs. U.S. Department of

70

the Interior, which is pending in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, and in which Kinross has intervened.

Certain of Kinross’ mining properties are subject to various royalty and land payment agreements. Failure by Kinross to meet its payment obligations under these agreements could result in the loss of related property interests.

Certain of Kinross’ properties may be subject to the rights or the asserted rights of various community stakeholders, including indigenous peoples. The presence of community stakeholders may also impact the Company’s ability to develop or operate its mining properties. In certain circumstances, consultation with such stakeholders may be required and the outcome may affect the Company’s ability to develop or operate its mining properties. While Kinross strives to develop excellent relationships with local stakeholders, there can be no assurance that such relations will remain amicable. If a dispute were to arise, it might result in reduced access to properties or a delay in operations.

For example, in Brazil, there is legislation requiring the government to grant title to the Quilombola people who either still occupy their traditional lands or who are found, through a process administered by the Instituto Nacional de Colonizacao e Reforma Agraria (“INCRA”), to have rights to certain lands. There are five Quilombola communities which have been registered and certified in the Paracatu area. An INCRA report issued on March 6, 2009 indicated that the Machadinho Quilombola community has rights to 2,217.52 hectares of land in the area, a portion of which (900 hectares) would be affected by the operation of the new Eustaquio tailings facility at Paracatu.

The Federal Public Attorney (“FPA”) in Brazil filed a lawsuit relating to the alleged rights of the Quilombola peoples in connection with certain lands being used to construct the Eustaquio tailings facility at Paracatu.  As part of the lawsuit, the FPA had applied for an injunction seeking to enjoin the issuance by the state authority of the permit to operate the Eustaquio tailings facility.  The FPA’s injunction was denied, the permit to operate was issued and the Eustaquio tailings facility has been operating since July 2012.  In December, 2013 and January of 2014, the trial court judge issued decisions denying the FPA’s claim.  In the fourth quarter of 2014, the FPA filed appeals challenging the decisions of the trial court.  Kinross has filed its response to the appeals and will continue to vigorously oppose the lawsuit.  The Company believes that the lawsuit by the FPA should not be successful.

Numerous other companies compete in the mining industry, some of which may have greater resources and technical capacity than Kinross and, as a result, Kinross may be unable to effectively compete, which could have a material adverse effect on Kinross’ future operations.

The mineral exploration and mining business is competitive in all of its phases. In the search for and the acquisition of attractive mineral properties, Kinross competes with numerous other companies and individuals, including competitors with greater financial, technical and other resources than Kinross. The ability of Kinross to operate successfully in the future will depend not only on its ability to develop its present properties, but also on its ability to select and acquire suitable producing properties or prospects for mineral exploration. Kinross may be unable to compete successfully with its competitors in acquiring such properties or prospects on terms it considers acceptable, if at all.

Internal controls provide no absolute assurances as to reliability of financial reporting and statement preparation, and ongoing evaluation may identify areas in need of improvement.

Kinross has invested resources to document and assess its system of internal controls over financial reporting and it is continuing its evaluation of such internal controls. Internal controls over financial reporting are procedures designed to provide reasonable assurance that transactions are properly authorized, assets are safeguarded against unauthorized or improper use, and transactions are properly recorded and reported. A control system, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance with respect to the reliability of financial reporting and financial statement preparation.

Kinross is required to satisfy the requirement of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (the “Sarbanes-Oxley Act”), which requires an annual assessment by management of the effectiveness of Kinross’

71

internal control over financial reporting and an attestation report by Kinross’ independent auditors addressing the effectiveness of Kinross’ internal control over financial reporting.

If Kinross fails to maintain the adequacy of its internal control over financial reporting, as such standards are modified, supplemented, or amended from time to time, Kinross may not be able to ensure that it can conclude on an ongoing basis that it has effective internal controls over financial reporting in accordance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Kinross’ failure to satisfy the requirement of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act on an ongoing, timely basis could result in the loss of investor confidence in the reliability of its financial statements, which in turn could harm Kinross’ business and negatively impact the trading price of its common shares. In addition, any failure to implement required new or improved controls, or difficulties encountered in their implementation, could harm Kinross’ operating results or cause it to fail to meet its reporting obligations.

Although Kinross is committed to ensure ongoing compliance, Kinross cannot be certain that it will be successful in complying with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.

To operate successfully, Kinross is reliant on finding and retaining qualified personnel, including key executives.

In order to operate successfully, Kinross must find and retain qualified employees. Kinross and other companies in the mining industry compete for personnel and Kinross is not always able to fill positions in a timely manner. One factor that has contributed to an increased turnover rate is the ageing workforce and it is expected that this factor will further increase the turnover rate in upcoming years. If Kinross is unable to attract and retain qualified personnel or fails to establish adequate succession planning strategies, Kinross’ operations could be adversely affected.

In addition, Kinross has a relatively small executive management team and in the event that the services of a number of these executives are no longer available, Kinross and its business could be adversely affected. Kinross does not carry key-man life insurance with respect to its executives.

Kinross may require additional capital that may not be available.

The mining, processing, development, and exploration of Kinross’ properties may require substantial additional financing. Failure to obtain sufficient financing may result in the delay or indefinite postponement of exploration, development or production on any or all of Kinross’ properties, or even a loss of property interest. Additional capital or other types of financing may not be available if needed or, if available, the terms of such financing may be unfavourable to Kinross.

The Company’s ability to access debt markets and the related cost of debt financing is dependent upon its credit ratings. The Company has an investment grade credit rating from Fitch Ratings as set out in the “Ratings” section of this Annual Information Form. There is no assurance that this credit rating will remain in effect for any given period of time or that such rating will not be revised or withdrawn entirely by the rating agency. On March 16, 2015, Moody’s announced a downgrade of the Company’s senior unsecured ratings from Baa3 to Ba1 in light of the Moody’s downgrade of the Russian Federation’s sovereign rating to Ba1 and the Company’s concentration of cash flows from its operations in the Russian Federation. On January 21, 2016, Moody’s announced plans to conduct a review of its ratings on a number of mining companies globally, including Kinross, in light of the recent downturn in the commodities markets. On February 18, 2016, Standard & Poor’s announced a downgrade of the Company’s rating from BBB- to BB+ in light of Kinross’ continued concentration of cash flows from its operations in the Russian Federation and comparatively high cost structure. On March 17, 2016 Moody’s completed the review of Kinross’ rating noted above and announced the rating was confirmed at Ba1. Real or anticipated changes in credit ratings can affect the price of the Company’s existing debt as well as the Company’s ability to access the capital markets and the cost of such debt financing.

If the Company is unable to maintain its indebtedness and financial ratios at levels acceptable to its credit rating agencies, or should the Company’s business prospects deteriorate, the ratings currently assigned to the Company by the rating agencies could be downgraded, which could adversely affect the value of the

72

Company’s outstanding securities and existing debt, its ability to obtain new financing on favourable terms, and increase the Company’s borrowing costs.

In particular, the availability of debt financing on economically feasible terms will be essential to the continuing development of our various new and expansion projects, and any lack of such availability may adversely affect our ability to complete those projects or the long-term economic viability of such projects.

Kinross’ level of indebtedness and an inability to satisfy repayment obligations could have a significant impact on its operations and financial performance.

Although Kinross has been successful in repaying debt in the past, there can be no assurance that it can continue to do so. Kinross’ level of indebtedness could have important consequences for its operations and the value of its common shares including: (a) limiting Kinross’ ability to borrow additional amounts for working capital, capital expenditures, debt service requirements, execution of Kinross’ growth strategy or other purposes; (b) limiting Kinross’ ability to use operating cash flow in other areas because of its obligations to service debt; (c) increasing Kinross’ vulnerability to general adverse economic and industry conditions, including increases in interest rates; (d) limiting Kinross’ ability to capitalize on business opportunities and to react to competitive pressures and adverse changes in government regulation; and (e) limiting Kinross’ ability or increasing the costs to refinance indebtedness.

Kinross expects to obtain the funds to pay its expenses and to pay principal and interest on its debt by utilizing cash flow from operations. Kinross’ ability to meet these payment obligations will depend on its future financial performance, which will be affected by financial, business, economic and other factors. Kinross will not be able to control many of these factors, such as economic conditions in the markets in which it operates. Kinross cannot be certain that its future cash flow from operations will be sufficient to allow it to pay principal and interest on Kinross’ debt and meet its other obligations. If cash flow from operations is insufficient or if there is a contravention of its debt covenants, Kinross may be required to refinance all or part of its existing debt, sell assets, borrow more money or issue additional equity. There can be no assurance that Kinross will be able to refinance all or part of its existing debt on terms that are commercially reasonable.

The operations of Kinross in various countries are subject to currency risk.

Currency fluctuations may affect the revenues which Kinross will realize from its operations since gold is sold in the world market in United States dollars. The costs of Kinross are incurred principally in Canadian dollars, United States dollars, Chilean pesos, Brazilian reais, Ghanaian cedis, Mauritanian ouguiyas and Russian roubles. The appreciation of non-U.S. dollar currencies against the U.S. dollar increases the cost of gold production in U.S. dollar terms. From time to time, Kinross transacts currency hedging to reduce the risk associated with currency fluctuations. Currency hedging involves risks and may require margin activities. Sudden fluctuations in currencies could result in margin calls that could have an adverse effect on Kinross’ financial position. While the Chilean peso, Brazilian real, Ghanaian cedi, Mauritanian ouguiya and Russian rouble are currently convertible into Canadian and United States dollars, they may not always be convertible in the future.

Kinross has a practice of “no gold hedging”, although the Company may from time to time acquire gold and/or silver hedge (or derivative product) obligations through acquisitions and/or employ hedge/derivative products in respect of other commodities, interest rates and/or currencies.

While Kinross does not hedge gold in the ordinary course, the Company has from time to time through acquisitions acquired gold and/or silver hedge (or derivative product) obligations and may do so in the future. Kinross has also from time to time employed hedge/derivative products in respect of other commodities, interest rates and/or currencies, and may do so in the future. Hedge (or derivative) products are used to manage the risks associated with gold or silver price volatility, changes in commodity prices, interest rates, foreign currency exchange rates and energy prices. Where Kinross holds such derivative positions, the Company will deliver into such arrangements in the prescribed manner. The use of derivative instruments involves certain inherent risks including: (a) credit risk - the risk of default on amounts owing to Kinross by the counterparties with which Kinross has entered into such transactions; (b) market liquidity risk — the risk

73

that Kinross has entered into a derivative position that cannot be closed out quickly, by either liquidating such derivative instrument or by establishing an offsetting position; and (c) unrealized mark-to-market risk — the risk that, in respect of certain derivative products, an adverse change in market prices for commodities, currencies or interest rates will result in Kinross incurring an unrealized mark-to-market loss in respect of such derivative products.

In the case of a gold or silver forward sales program, if the metal price rises above the price at which future production has been committed under a forward sales hedge program, Kinross may have an opportunity loss. However, if the metal price falls below that committed price, revenues will be protected to the extent of such committed production. There can be no assurance that Kinross will be able to achieve future realized prices for gold that exceed the spot price as a result of any forward sales hedge program.

The business of Kinross is dependent on good labour and employment relations.

Production at Kinross’ mines is dependent upon the efforts of, and maintaining good relationships with, employees of Kinross. Relations between Kinross and its employees may be impacted by changes in labour relations which may be introduced by, among others, employee groups, unions, and the relevant governmental authorities in whose jurisdictions Kinross carries on business. Adverse changes in such legislation or in the relationship between Kinross and its employees may have a material adverse effect on Kinross’ business, results of operations, and financial condition.

The results of Kinross’ operations could be adversely affected by its acquisition strategy and Kinross may not realize the anticipated benefits of recent acquisitions.

As part of Kinross’ business strategy, it has sought, and may continue to seek, to acquire new mining and development opportunities in the mining industry. Any acquisition that Kinross may choose to complete which may be of a significant size, may change the scale of Kinross’ business and operations, and may expose Kinross to new geographical, political, operational, financial and geological risks. Kinross’ success depends on its ability to identify appropriate acquisition candidates, negotiate acceptable arrangements, including arrangements to finance acquisitions, and to integrate the acquired businesses and their personnel. Kinross may be unable to complete any acquisition or business arrangement that it pursues on favourable terms. Any acquisitions or business arrangements completed may not ultimately benefit Kinross’ business and could impair its results of operations, profitability and financial results. Acquisitions and business arrangements are accompanied by risks including, without limitation: a significant change in commodity prices after Kinross has committed to complete the transaction and established the purchase price or exchange ratio; an acquired material ore body may prove to be below expectations; Kinross may have difficulty integrating and assimilating the operations, technologies and personnel of any acquired companies, realizing anticipated synergies and maximizing the financial and strategic position of the combined enterprise, and maintaining uniform standards, policies and controls across the organization to support the expansion of Kinross’ operations resulting from these acquisitions; the integration of the acquired business or assets may divert management’s attention and disrupt Kinross’ ongoing business and its relationships with employees, customers, suppliers and contractors; and the acquired business or assets may have unknown liabilities which may be significant. Should these or other risks develop, Kinross may suffer significant financial losses or be required to write-down the value of the assets acquired (See Risk Factors related to impairment, below).

In addition, in the event that Kinross chooses to raise debt capital to finance any such acquisition, Kinross’ leverage will be increased. If Kinross chooses to use equity as consideration for such acquisition, existing shareholders may suffer dilution. Alternatively, Kinross may choose to finance any such acquisition with its existing resources. There can be no assurance that Kinross would be successful in overcoming these risks or any other problems encountered in connection with such acquisitions.

Kinross is subject to credit and counterparty risks of third parties with which it contracts.

Credit risk relates to cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable, and derivative contracts and arises from the possibility that a counterparty to an instrument fails to perform. Counterparty risk is the risk

74

that a third party might fail to fulfill its performance obligations under the terms of a financial instrument. The Company is subject to counterparty risk and may be adversely affected in the event that a counterparty becomes insolvent. To manage both counterparty and credit risk, the Company proactively manages its exposure to individual counterparties. The Company only transacts with highly-rated counterparties. A limit on contingent exposure has been established for each counterparty based on the counterparty’s credit rating, and the Company monitors the financial condition of each counterparty.

The Company has not experienced any difficulties to date relating to the counterparties with which it transacts. The counterparties continue to be highly rated, and as noted above, the Company has employed measures to reduce the impact of counterparty risk.

Liquidity risk is the risk that the Company may not have sufficient cash resources available to meet its payment obligations. To manage liquidity risk, the Company maintains cash positions and has financing in place that the Company expects will be sufficient to meet its operating and capital expenditure requirements. Potential sources for liquidity could include, but are not limited to: the Company’s current cash position, existing credit facilities, future operating cash flow, and potential private and public financing. Additionally, the Company reviews its short-term operational forecasts regularly and long-term budgets to determine its cash requirements.

Kinross may be adversely affected by global financial conditions.

The volatility and challenges that economies continue to experience around the world continues to affect the profitability and liquidity of businesses in many industries, which in turn has resulted in the following conditions that may have an effect on the profitability and cash flows of the Company:

·              Volatility in commodity prices and foreign exchange rates;

·              Tightening of credit markets;

·              Increased counterparty risk; and

·              Volatility in the prices of publicly traded entities.

The volatility in commodity prices and foreign exchange rates directly impact the Company’s revenues, earnings and cash flows, as noted above in the Risk Factors related to the gold price and foreign currency exchange risk.

Although the tighter credit markets have restricted the ability of certain companies to access capital, to date this has not affected the Company’s liquidity.

The Company re-negotiated its term loan and revolving credit facility in 2015 to extend their terms to August 2019 and August 2020, respectively while also amending the leverage ratio covenant.  As at December 31, 2015, the Company had $1,506.0 million available under its credit facility arrangements.  However, continued tightening of credit markets may affect the ability of the Company to obtain equity or debt financing in the future on terms favourable to the Company.

The Company has not experienced any difficulties to date relating to the counterparties it transacts with.  The counterparties continue to be highly rated, and as noted above, the Company has employed measures to reduce the impact of counterparty risk.

Continued volatility in equity markets may affect the value of publicly listed companies in Kinross’ equity portfolio.  Should declines in the equity values continue and are deemed to be other than temporary, impairment losses may result.

75

Kinross is subject to certain legal proceedings and may be subject to additional litigation in the future.

Legal proceedings may be brought against Kinross, for example, litigation based on its business activities, environmental laws, tax matters, volatility in its stock price or failure to comply with its disclosure obligations, which could have a material adverse effect on Kinross’ financial condition or prospects.  Regulatory and government agencies may bring legal proceedings in connection with the enforcement of applicable laws and regulations, and as a result Kinross may be subject to expenses of investigations and defense, fines or penalties for violations if proven, and potentially cost and expense to remediate, increased operating costs or changes to operations, and cessation of operations if ordered to do so or required in order to resolve such proceedings.

In the event of a dispute arising at Kinross’ foreign operations, Kinross may be subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of foreign courts or may not be successful in subjecting foreign persons to the jurisdiction of courts in Canada. Kinross’ inability to enforce its rights could have an adverse effect on its future cash flows, earnings, results of operations and financial condition.

Kinross and certain of its executives were previously named as defendants in two putative securities class action suits filed in Canadian and U.S. courts in 2012. These suits have now been settled. See “Legal Proceedings And Regulatory Actions—Legal Proceedings”.

Kinross may not be able to control the decisions and strategy of joint arrangements to which it is a party.

Some of the mines and projects in which Kinross owns interests are operated through joint arrangements with other mining companies and are subject to the risks normally associated with the conduct of joint arrangements. The existence or occurrence of one or more of the following circumstances and events could have a material adverse impact on Kinross’ profitability or the viability of its interests held through joint arrangements, which could have a material adverse impact on Kinross’ results of operations and financial condition: (a) inability to exert influence over certain strategic decisions made in respect of joint arrangement properties; (b) disagreement with partners on how to develop and operate mines efficiently; (c) inability of partners to meet their obligations to the joint arrangements or third parties; and (d) litigation between partners regarding joint arrangement matters.

Kinross may be negatively affected by market price volatility.

Kinross’ common shares are listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange (“TSX”) and the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”). The price of Kinross’ common shares is likely to be significantly affected by short-term changes in the gold price or in its financial condition or results of operations as reflected in its quarterly earnings reports. Other factors unrelated to the performance of Kinross that may have an effect on the price of Kinross’ common shares include the following: a reduction in analytical coverage of Kinross by investment banks with research capabilities; a drop in trading volume and general market interest in the securities of Kinross may adversely affect an investor’s ability to liquidate an investment and consequently an investor’s interest in acquiring a significant stake in Kinross; a failure of Kinross to meet the reporting and other obligations under Canadian and U.S. securities laws or imposed by the exchanges could result in a delisting of Kinross’ common shares; and a substantial decline in the price of Kinross’ common shares that persists for a significant period of time could cause Kinross’ common shares to be delisted from the TSX or NYSE further reducing market liquidity.

As a result of any of these factors, the market price of Kinross’ common shares at any given point in time may not accurately reflect Kinross’ long-term value. Securities class action litigation has been brought against companies, including Kinross, following periods of volatility or significant decline in the market price of their securities. Securities litigation could result in substantial costs and damages and divert management’s attention and resources. Any decision resulting from any such litigation that is adverse to the Company could have a negative impact on the Company’s financial position.

76

Kinross may record impairment charges which may adversely affect financial results.

Kinross assesses, on at least an annual basis, the carrying amount of its cash generating units (“CGUs”) to determine whether current events and circumstances indicate that such carrying amount may no longer be recoverable. Goodwill is required to be tested annually for impairment and Kinross performs this annual test at the end of the fourth quarter. In addition, at each reporting period end, Kinross assesses whether there is any indication that any of its CGUs’ carrying amounts exceed their recoverable amounts, and if there is such an indication, the Company would test for potential impairment at that time. The recoverable amounts, or fair values, of its CGUs are based, in part, on certain factors that may be partially or totally outside of Kinross’ control. Kinross’ fair value estimates are based on numerous assumptions, some of which may be subjective, and it is possible that actual fair value could be significantly different than those estimates.

As at December 31, 2015, Kinross recorded an after-tax impairment charge of $430.2 million related to property, plant and equipment impairment.  In the absence of any mitigating valuation factors, Kinross’ failure to achieve its valuation assumptions or declines in the fair values of its CGUs may, over time, result in further impairment charges.

A significant delay or disruption in sales of doré as a result of the unexpected discontinuation of services provided by refineries or a failure by refineries to meet outstanding delivery obligations could have a material adverse effect on operations.

The Company currently engages third-party refineries to refine doré into good delivery gold and silver bars, which are in turn sold into open markets. The refineries are located in Canada, Switzerland, South Africa, Russia, Brazil, and the United States. The loss of any one refiner could have a material adverse effect on the Company if alternative refineries are unavailable. There can be no guarantee that alternative refineries would be available if the need for them were to arise or that it would not experience delays or disruptions in sales that would materially and adversely affect results of operations. In addition, the Company has doré inventory at refineries and could incur a loss arising from the refineries’ failure to fulfill their contractual obligations. The Company has legally binding agreements in place for gold and silver sales transactions and bullion insurance, but there is a risk that a refinery will not satisfy its delivery obligations. In such a case, the Company may pursue all remedies available, as appropriate, to enforce any outstanding delivery obligations. If such delivery obligations are not fulfilled by the refinery, remedied by a court in a specific performance or damages judgment or insurance proceeds are not received, the Company will incur a one-time non-cash charge related to the carrying value of the inventory.

DIVIDEND PAYMENTS AND DIVIDEND POLICY

On February 13, 2013, the board of directors declared a dividend of $0.08 per common share to shareholders of record on March 21, 2013.

On July 31, 2013, the board of directors suspended the payment of semi-annual dividends.

Kinross is under no obligation to declare or pay dividends on its common shares. Payment of any future dividends will be at the discretion of Kinross’ Board of Directors, after taking into account many factors, including Kinross’ operating results, financial condition, and current and anticipated cash requirements. Further, pursuant to Kinross’ syndicated credit facility, Kinross may be required to obtain consent from the lenders prior to declaring any common share dividend.

77

LEGAL PROCEEDINGS AND REGULATORY ACTIONS

Legal Proceedings

A putative securities class action complaint was filed on February 16, 2012 (the “U.S. Complaint”), entitled Bo Young Cha v. Kinross Gold Corporation et al., in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (the “Court”).  The U.S. Complaint named as defendants the Company, Tye Burt, former President and CEO, Paul Barry, former Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Glen Masterman, former Senior Vice President, Exploration and Kenneth Thomas, former Senior Vice President, Projects.  On May 31, 2012, the Court selected the City of Austin Police Retirement System (“City of Austin”) to be lead plaintiff.  Pursuant to an order of the Court, City of Austin filed an amended Complaint on July 23, 2012 (the “Amended U.S. Complaint”).   On March 26, 2015, the parties filed settlement papers with the Court, and asked it to grant an order preliminarily approving the settlement. The action was settled for $33 million, without admission of liability by the defendants and with the Company’s insurance carriers directly funding the full settlement.  On October 15, 2015, the Court granted final approval of the settlement. Having received final Court approval of the settlement agreement, without any valid objections, all class members (excepting only the six opting out, amounting to only 1,633 shares) were bound by the settlement and deemed to have released Kinross and the other defendants from any claims related to the Amended U.S. Complaint, with all further proceedings in the action being forever stayed.  The time to appeal the final Court approval has passed.

A notice of action in a proposed class proceeding under Ontario’s Class Proceedings Act, 1992, was filed in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice (the “Ontario Court”) on March 12, 2012, entitled Trustees of the Musicians’ Pension Fund of Canada v. Kinross Gold Corporation et al. (the “Ontario Action”). A statement of claim in the Ontario Action was subsequently served on April 11, 2012.  The Ontario Action named as defendants the Company, Tye Burt, former President and CEO, Paul Barry, former Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Glen Masterman, former Senior Vice President, Exploration, and Kenneth Thomas, former Senior Vice President, Projects.  On April 22, 2015, the parties advised the Ontario Court that they had agreed to a settlement of all claims in the Ontario Action.  On June 17, 2015, the Ontario Court approved the settlement.  All of the claims in the Ontario Action were settled for CDN$12.5 million, without any admission of liability by the defendants and with the Company’s insurance carriers directly funding the full settlement.  Pursuant to the settlement, the Ontario Action has been dismissed in its entirety.  All class members are bound by the settlement and are deemed to have released Kinross and the other defendants from all claims that were raised in the Ontario Action or could have been raised in the Ontario Action.

On January 16, 2015, a notice of action in a proposed class proceeding under Ontario’s Class Proceedings Act, 1992 was filed in the Ontario Court, entitled Frankfurt-Trust Invest Luxemburg AG v. Kinross Gold Corporation (the “Frankfurt Action”).  Pursuant to the settlement of the Ontario Action, the Frankfurt Action was dismissed in its entirety and all of the proposed class members are bound by the releases granted in the Ontario action.

Taxes

The Company operates in numerous countries around the world and accordingly is subject to, and pays taxes under the various regimes in countries in which it operates. These tax regimes are determined under tax laws of the country. The Company has historically filed, and continues to file, all required tax returns and filings and to pay the taxes reasonably determined to be due. The tax rules and regulations in many countries are complex and subject to interpretation. From time to time the Company will undergo a review of its historic tax returns and in connection with such reviews, disputes can arise with the taxing authorities over the Company’s interpretation of the country’s tax rules.

78

Regulatory Actions

In 2015, the Company was not subject to any regulatory actions.

DESCRIPTION OF CAPITAL STRUCTURE

KINROSS COMMON SHARES

Kinross has an unlimited number of common shares authorized and 1,244,137,896 common shares issued and outstanding as of March 28, 2016. There are no limitations contained in the articles or bylaws of Kinross on the ability of a person who is not a Canadian resident to hold Kinross common shares or exercise the voting rights associated with Kinross common shares. A summary of the rights of the Kinross common shares is set forth below.

Dividends

Holders of Kinross common shares are entitled to receive dividends when, as and if declared by the board of directors of Kinross out of funds legally available therefor, provided that if any Kinross preferred shares are at the time outstanding, the payment of dividends on common shares or other distributions (including repurchases of common shares by Kinross) will be subject to the declaration and payment of all cumulative dividends on outstanding Kinross preferred shares and any other preferred shares which are then outstanding. The Business Corporations Act (Ontario) provides that a corporation may not declare or pay a dividend if there are reasonable grounds for believing that the corporation is, or would after the payment of the dividend, be unable to pay its liabilities as they fall due or the realizable value of its assets would thereby be less than the aggregate of its liabilities and stated capital of all classes of shares of its capital.

Liquidation

In the event of the dissolution, liquidation, or winding up of Kinross, holders of Kinross common shares are entitled to share rateably in any assets remaining after the satisfaction in full of the prior rights of creditors, including holders of Kinross’ indebtedness, and the payment of the aggregate liquidation preference of the Kinross preferred shares, and any other preferred shares then outstanding.

Voting

Holders of Kinross common shares are entitled to one vote for each share on all matters voted on by shareholders, including the election of directors.

79

MARKET PRICE FOR KINROSS SECURITIES

In Canada, the Kinross common shares trade on the TSX under the symbol “K.” In the United States, the Kinross common shares trade on the NYSE under the symbol “KGC.” The Kinross common shares began trading on the NYSE on February 3, 2003. The following table sets forth, for the periods indicated, the high and low sales prices of the Kinross common shares on the TSX and the NYSE and the trading volume.

	Kinross Common Shares on the TSX			Kinross Common Shares on the NYSE
	High	Low	Trading Volume (in millions of shares)	High	Low	Trading Volume (in millions of shares)
	(CDN Dollars)	(CDN Dollars)		(US Dollars)	(US Dollars)
Fiscal Year Ending December 31, 2015
January	4.48	3.20	133.3	3.71	2.73	286.1
February	4.33	3.28	99.6	3.47	2.64	174.3
March	3.60	2.80	114.4	3.05	2.20	253.8
April	3.05	2.75	107.9	2.47	2.19	226.3
May	3.13	2.81	106.3	2.62	2.24	141.3
June	3.19	2.74	108.9	2.59	2.20	183.7
July	2.98	2.10	105.4	2.36	1.60	234.4
August	2.85	2.15	117.6	2.19	1.62	232.7
September	2.46	1.79	113.9	1.87	1.35	236.6
October	3.16	2.23	119.1	2.40	1.68	261.2
November	2.74	2.26	101.8	2.10	1.71	160.5
December	2.86	2.46	119.8	2.14	1.75	178.8

	Kinross Common Shares on the TSX			Kinross Common Shares on the NYSE
	High	Low	Trading Volume (in millions of shares)	High	Low	Trading Volume (in millions of shares)
	(CDN Dollars)	(CDN Dollars)		(US Dollars)	(US Dollars)
Fiscal Year Ending December 31, 2014
January	5.33	4.70	142.3	4.86	4.41	198.2
February	5.98	5.00	143.6	5.44	4.51	206.4
March	5.99	4.42	190.6	5.40	4.01	278.8
April	4.82	4.38	115.3	4.39	3.98	213.4
May	4.59	3.97	89.2	4.18	3.66	138.4
June	4.81	4.04	90.5	4.45	3.71	169.7
July	4.78	4.30	98.6	4.47	3.98	181.9
August	4.54	4.21	67.8	4.16	3.83	159.4
September	4.27	3.62	85.0	3.92	3.23	227.1
October	3.78	2.34	126.7	3.38	2.07	347.6
November	3.53	2.27	149.5	3.13	2.00	324.4
December	3.80	2.94	119.8	3.34	2.52	348.9

As of March 28, 2016 there were 7,574 registered holders of Kinross common shares.

80

RATINGS

The following table sets out the ratings of Kinross’ corporate debt by the rating agencies indicated as at March 28, 2016:

	Standard & Poor’s Rating Services	Moody’s Investors Service	Fitch Ratings Ltd.
US $500 million term loan due 2019	BB+	Not rated	BBB-
US $250 million, 3.625% notes due 2016	BB+	Ba1	BBB-
US $500 million, 5.125% notes due 2021	BB+	Ba1	BBB-
US $250 million, 6.875% notes due 2041	BB+	Ba1	BBB-
US $500 million, 5.95% notes due 2024	BB+	Ba1	BBB-

Standard & Poor’s Ratings Services credit ratings for long-term debt are on a rating scale that ranges from AAA to D, which represents the range from highest to lowest quality of such securities rated. The ratings from AA to CCC may be modified by the addition of a plus (+) or minus (–) sign to show relative standing within the major rating categories.

Moody’s Investors Service (“Moody’s”) credit ratings for long-term debt are on a rating scale that ranges from Aaa to C, which represents the range from highest to lowest quality of such securities rated. For ratings of Aa through Caa, Moody’s may apply numerical modifiers of 1, 2 or 3 in each generic rating classification to indicate relatively higher, middle or lower ranking.

Fitch Ratings Ltd. credit ratings are on a rating scale that ranges from AAA to D, which represents the range from highest to lowest quality. The ratings from AA to B may be modified by the addition of a plus (+) or minus (–) sign to show relative standing within the major rating categories.

A definition and description of the categories of the credit ratings described above which have been assigned to the Company’s debt are publicly available from the website of each of the individual rating agencies.

Kinross understands that the ratings are based on, among other things, information furnished to the above rating agencies by Kinross and information obtained by the rating agencies from publicly available sources. The credit ratings given to Kinross’ debt instruments by the rating agencies are not recommendations to buy, hold or sell such debt instruments since such ratings do not comment as to market price or suitability for a particular investor. There is no assurance that any rating will remain in effect for any given period of time or that any rating will not be revised or withdrawn entirely by a rating agency in the future if, in its judgment, circumstances so warrant. Credit ratings accorded to Kinross’ debt instruments may not reflect the potential impact of all risks on the value of such instruments, including risks related to market or other factors discussed in this Annual Information Form (See “Risk Factors”, above).

81

DIRECTORS AND OFFICERS

DIRECTORS(1)

Set forth below is information regarding the directors of Kinross as of March 28, 2016.

Name and Place of Residence	Principal Occupation	Director Since	Current Committees(2)
Ian Atkinson The Woodlands, Texas United States	Corporate Director	February 10, 2016	CGN, CR
John A. Brough Toronto, Ontario Canada	Corporate Director	January 19, 1994	A, H
John K. Carrington(3) Thornhill, Ontario Canada	Corporate Director	October 26, 2005	CR, CGN
John M. H. Huxley Toronto, Ontario Canada	Corporate Director	May 31, 1993	A, H, CGN
Ave G. Lethbridge Toronto, Ontario Canada	EVP and Chief Human Resources, Toronto Hydro Corporation	May 6, 2015	A, H
Catherine McLeod-Seltzer Vancouver, British Columbia Canada	Non-Executive Chairman and Director, Bear Creek Mining	October 26, 2005	CGN, CR
John E. Oliver Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada	Corporate Director	March 7, 1995	H
Kelly J. Osborne Horseshoe Bay, Texas United States	Corporate Director	May 6, 2015	CGN, CR
Una M. Power Calgary, Alberta Canada	CFO and SVP, Corporate Planning and Business Development, Nexen Inc.	April 3, 2013	A, CR
J. Paul Rollinson Toronto, Ontario Canada	President and Chief Executive Officer of Kinross	August 1, 2012	None

(1) Please note that Ian Atkinson was voted onto the board of directors on February 10, 2016.

(2) Committees: A-Audit and Risk, CGN-Corporate Governance and Nominating, CR-Corporate Responsibility and Technical, H-Human Resources and Compensation,

82

(3) As noted in the Company’s management information circular filed April 6, 2015, John Carrington is scheduled to retire from the board of directors in 2016.

Each of the directors has held the principal occupation set forth opposite his or her name, or other executive offices with the same firm or its affiliates, for the past five years with the exception of Messrs. Ian Atkinson and J. Paul Rollinson.

Below is a biography of each of the directors of Kinross:

Ian Atkinson

Mr. Atkinson was previously President and Chief Executive Officer, and a Director, of Centerra Gold before retiring in 2015. He has more than 40 years of experience in the mining industry with extensive background in exploration, project development and mergers and acquisitions. Prior to his ten-year tenure at Centerra, Mr. Atkinson held various senior leadership positions with Hecla Mining Company, Battle Mountain Gold, Hemlo Gold Mines and the Noranda Group. Mr. Atkinson has contributed to the discovery of several major mineral deposits and been involved in a number of large global mining projects in his career. Mr. Atkinson holds a Bachelor of Science degree in geology from King’s College, University of London and a Masters degree in geophysics from the Royal School of Mines, University of London.

John A. Brough

Mr. Brough retired as President of both Torwest Inc. and Wittington Properties Limited, real estate companies on December 31, 2007, a position he had held since 1998. From 1996 to 1998, Mr. Brough was the Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of iSTAR Internet, Inc. Between 1974 and 1996, he held a number of positions with Markborough Properties, Inc., his final position being Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, which position he held from 1986 to 1996. Mr. Brough is an executive with over 30 years of experience in the real estate industry. Mr. Brough holds a Bachelor of Arts (Economics) from the University of Toronto and he is a Chartered Professional Accountant, Chartered Accountant. Mr. Brough has graduated from the Director’s Education Program at the University of Toronto, Rotman School of Management. Mr. Brough is a member of the Institute of Corporate Directors and the Institute of Chartered Professional Accountants of Ontario.

John K. Carrington

Mr. Carrington was the Vice-Chairman and a director of Barrick from 1999 through 2004. Prior to that, Mr. Carrington was the Chief Operating Officer of Barrick from 1996 until February 2004. He has also occupied the functions of President and Executive Vice President, Operations of Barrick in 1997 and 1995 respectively. Prior to that, Mr. Carrington occupied officerships in other mining companies, including Noranda Minerals Inc., Brunswick Mining & Smelting Inc. and Minnova Inc. Mr. Carrington holds a Bachelor of Applied Science (Mining Engineering) and a Masters of Engineering (Mining). He is a member of the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario.

John M. H. Huxley

Mr. Huxley was most recently a Principal of Algonquin Management Inc., the manager of the Algonquin Power Income Fund, since 1997 until his retirement in 2006. Prior to that, he was the President of Algonquin Power Corporation, a builder, developer and operator of hydroelectric generating facilities in Canada and the United States. He holds a Bachelor of Laws degree from Osgoode Hall Law School. He is also a member of the Institute of Corporate Directors.

Ave G. Lethbridge

Ms. Lethbridge is currently Executive Vice-President and Chief Human Resources and Safety Officer of Toronto Hydro Corporation and serves on the Board of Governors of Georgian College. During her 17 years with Toronto Hydro, she has held various leadership positions in areas encompassing

83

environment, health and safety, corporate social responsibility, labour relations, workforce planning, talent management, succession planning and leadership development. Ms. Lethbridge holds a Master of Science degree in Organizational Development from Pepperdine University, California and has completed the Director’s Education Program from the Institute of Corporate Directors at the University of Toronto’s Rotman School of Management.

Catherine McLeod-Seltzer

Ms. McLeod-Seltzer has been the non-Executive Chairman and a director of Bear Creek Mining since 2003 and was the non-executive/independent Chairman and a director of Pacific Rim Mining Corp. until November, 2013. She had been an officer and director of Pacific Rim Mining Corp. since 1997. From 1994 to 1996, she was the President, Chief Executive Officer and a director of Arequipa Resources Ltd., a publicly traded company which she co-founded in 1992. From 1985 to 1993, she was employed by Yorkton Securities Inc. as an institutional trader and broker, and also as Operations Manager in Santiago, Chile (1991-92). She has a Bachelor’s degree in Business Administration from Trinity Western University.

John E. Oliver

Mr. Oliver retired after 41 years of working in retail, corporate and investment banking at the Bank of Nova Scotia.   He was Executive Managing Director and Co-Head of Scotia Capital U.S., Bank of Nova Scotia leading specialists groups in oil and gas, technology, real estate, diversified industries and leisure and gaming. Mr. Oliver is Chair of the Canadian Museum of Immigration, a Federal Crown Corporation and Vice Chair of Autism Nova Scotia. He was appointed the Independent Chairman of the company in August 2002.

Kelly. J. Osborne.

Mr. Osborne is a 30-year veteran of the mining industry and was most recently President and Chief Executive Officer of Duluth Metals where he also held the position of Chief Operating Officer from 2012 to 2014. Prior to that, he held various leadership positions with Freeport McMoRan Copper & Gold, Indonesia, culminating as Senior Vice-President, Underground Mines. Mr. Osborne holds a Bachelor of Science Degree in Mine Engineering from the University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona.

Una M. Power

Ms. Power is currently CFO and SVP, Corporate Planning and Business Development, of Nexen Inc., a former publicly-traded company that is a wholly-owned subsidiary of CNOOC Limited. During her career with Nexen Inc., spanning 24 years from 1992 to present, she has held various positions in areas covering financial reporting, financial management, investor relations, business development, strategic planning and investment. From 2009 to 2011, she was SVP, Corporate Planning and Business Development; from 2002 — 2009, Treasurer; from 1998 — 2002, Controller; and, from 1997 — 1998, Manager, Investor Relations. Prior to joining Nexen Inc., Ms. Power was Senior Auditor with Deloitte & Touche from 1989 to 1992, and was staff auditor with Peat Marwick from 1987 to 1989. Ms. Power is a Chartered Professional Accountant, Chartered Accountant and a Chartered Financial Analyst. She has completed the Advanced Management Program at the Wharton Business School, United States and INSEAD, France.

J. Paul Rollinson

Mr. Rollinson was appointed to the Kinross Board and as Chief Executive Officer on August 1, 2012.  He was appointed Executive Vice-President, Corporate Development in September 2009 after having joined Kinross as Executive Vice-President, New Investments, in September 2008.

Prior to joining Kinross, Mr. Rollinson had a long career in investment banking spanning 17 years. From June 2001 to September 2008, he worked at Scotia Capital where his final position was Deputy Head of Investment Banking. During his time with Scotia, he was responsible for the mining, power/utilities, forestry and industrial sectors. From April 1988 to June 2001 he worked for Deutsche Bank AG, where his final position was Managing Director/Head of Americas for the mining group, and before that, from 1994 to

84

April 1998 he was a senior member of the mining team at BMO Nesbitt Burns. Mr. Rollinson has an Honours BSc in Geology from Laurentian University and an M. Eng. in Mining from McGill University.

CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

The corporate governance practices established by Kinross’ board of directors are described in Kinross’ latest management information circular for its annual meeting of shareholders available at www.sedar.com. Details of Kinross’ corporate governance practices compared to the corporate governance listing standards of the New York Stock Exchange are available for review on Kinross’ website at www.kinross.com under the corporate governance section of the website.

OFFICERS

The following table sets forth the names of each of the executive and certain other officers of Kinross and all offices held by each of them as of March 28, 2016.

Name	Office Held
TONY S. GIARDINI Toronto, Ontario, Canada	Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
GEOFFREY P. GOLD Toronto, Ontario, Canada	Executive Vice-President, Corporate Development, External Relations and Chief Legal Officer
GINA JARDINE Toronto, Ontario, Canada	Senior Vice-President, Human Resources
WARWICK MORLEY-JEPSON Toronto, Ontario, Canada	Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer
JOHN E. OLIVER Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada	Independent Chairman
SHELLEY M. RILEY Toronto, Ontario, Canada	Vice President, Office Services and Corporate Secretary
J. PAUL ROLLINSON Toronto, Ontario, Canada	President and Chief Executive Officer

The following sets forth biographical information for each of the above officers of Kinross who is not also a director of Kinross:

Tony S. Giardini was appointed as Executive Vice-President and Chief Financial Officer, effective December 1, 2012. Prior to joining Kinross, he was Senior Vice-President and Chief Financial Officer at Capstone Mining. From 2006 to 2012, Tony was Chief Financial Officer of Ivanhoe Mines, and also spent ten years at Placer Dome, where he held a series of positions, including Vice-President and Treasurer. Tony is a Chartered Professional Accountant, Chartered Accountant and a Certified Public Accountant and spent 12 years with the accounting firm KPMG, prior to joining Placer Dome.

Geoffrey P. Gold was appointed Executive Vice President and Chief Legal Officer in February of 2008. Effective August of 2012, he assumed the role of Executive Vice President, Corporate Development and from October of 2013 to April of 2015 he assumed the role of Executive Vice President, Human Resources. He assumed the role of Executive Vice President, Corporate Development, External Relations and Chief Legal Officer on January 1, 2016. Prior to February 2008, he had been Senior Vice President and Chief Legal Officer since May 2006. Prior to that, he was Vice President, Assistant Secretary and Associate General Counsel for Placer Dome Inc. from 2001 until 2006; Assistant Secretary and Associate General

85

Counsel for Placer Dome Inc. from 1999 to 2001; General Counsel and Secretary for Placer Dome North America from 1998 to 1999; and held other legal positions with Placer Dome from 1994 to 1998. Mr. Gold holds a Bachelor of Commerce (Honours) and a Bachelor of Laws from the University of British Columbia.

Gina Jardine was appointed as Senior Vice-President, Human Resources effective April 7, 2015. Prior to joining Kinross, she was most recently Vice-President, Human Resources for Rio Tinto’s Diamonds and Minerals group, based in London. During her eight years at Rio Tinto, she also served as global HR executive for Rio’s shared services group, supporting 65 countries and 57,000 employees. Ms. Jardine brings more than 20 years of experience to her role and has extensive experience in a range of HR functions, including integration, organizational design, and performance management and employee engagement. A native of Australia, she has a bachelor’s degree in Psychology and a MBA from Melbourne Business School.

Warwick Morley-Jepson was appointed Chief Operating Officer on October 1, 2014. He first joined Kinross as Regional Vice-President, Russia in October 2009. Mr. Morley-Jepson has held executive positions in regional and corporate structures of multinational gold mining companies, including Barrick and Placer Dome. A veteran of the deep underground gold and platinum mines in South Africa, Mr. Morley-Jepson began his 35-year career in mine operations before moving into mine development and project execution.  Prior to joining Kinross, he was Chief Executive Officer of SUN Gold, a privately-held gold mining company with interests in Russia and Kazakhstan. Mr. Morley-Jepson graduated from the faculty of Mechanical Engineering (HNDT) at the Technicon Witwatersrand, now part of the University of Johannesburg.

John E. Oliver see biographical information on page 84.

Shelley M. Riley has been the Corporate Secretary of Kinross since June 1993 and was appointed Vice President, Office Services and Corporate Secretary in September 2005.

As at March 28, 2016, the directors and executive officers of Kinross, as a group owned, directly or indirectly, or exercised control or direction over 1,627,482 common shares of Kinross, representing less than one percent of the total number of common shares outstanding before giving effect to the exercise of options or other convertible securities held by such directors and officers. The statement as to the number of common shares beneficially owned directly or indirectly or over which control or direction is exercised by the directors and officers of Kinross as a group is based upon information provided by the directors and officers.

J. Paul Rollinson see biographical information on page 84.

CEASE TRADE ORDERS, BANKRUPTCIES, PENALTIES OR SANCTIONS

No director or executive officer of Kinross or a shareholder holding a sufficient number of securities to affect materially the control of Kinross is, or within the ten years prior to the date hereof has been, a director or executive officer of any company (including Kinross) that, while that person was acting in that capacity: (i) was the subject of a cease trade or similar order or an order that denied the relevant company access to any exemption under securities legislation, for a period of more than 30 consecutive days; (ii) was subject to an event that resulted, after the director or executive officer ceased to be a director or executive officer, in the company being the subject of a cease trade or similar order or an order that denied the relevant company access to any exemption under securities legislation for a period of more than 30 consecutive days; or (iii) within a year of that person ceasing to act in that capacity, became bankrupt, made a proposal under any legislation relating to bankruptcy or insolvency or was subject to or instituted any proceedings, arrangement or compromise with creditors or had a receiver, receiver manager or trustee appointed to hold its assets, except as follows:

On April 14, 2005, the Ontario Securities Commission issued a definitive management cease trade order which superseded a temporary management cease trade order dated April 1, 2005 against all the directors and officers of the Company in connection with the Company’s failure to file its audited financial

86

statements for the year ended December 31, 2004. The missed filings resulted from questions raised by the SEC about certain accounting practices related to the accounting for goodwill. The following current officers and directors of Kinross were the subject of the Ontario Securities Commission’s order: J. Brough, J. Huxley, J. Oliver and S. Riley. A similar order was issued by the Nova Scotia Securities Commission against Mr. John Oliver dated July 6, 2005. These management cease trade orders were lifted on February 22, 2006 when the Company completed the necessary filings following the SEC’s acceptance of Kinross’ accounting treatment for goodwill.

No director or executive officer of Kinross or a shareholder holding a sufficient number of securities of Kinross to affect materially the control of Kinross has, within the ten years prior to the date hereof, become bankrupt, made a proposal under any legislation relating to bankruptcy or insolvency, or become subject to or instituted any proceedings, arrangement or compromise with creditors, or had a receiver, receiver manager or trustee appointed to hold the assets of the director, officer or shareholder.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

To the best of Kinross’ knowledge, and other than as disclosed in this Annual Information Form, in the notes to Kinross’ financial statements and its MD&A, there are no known existing or potential conflicts of interest between Kinross and any director or officer of Kinross, except as disclosed below and that certain of the directors and officers serve as directors and officers of other public companies and therefore it is possible that a conflict may arise between their duties as a director or officer of Kinross and their duties as a director or officer of such other companies.

The directors and officers of Kinross are aware of the existence of laws governing accountability of directors and officers for corporate opportunity and requiring disclosure by directors of conflicts of interest and Kinross will rely upon such laws in respect of any directors’ and officers’ conflicts of interest or in respect of any breaches of duty by any of its directors or officers. All such conflicts will be disclosed by such directors or officers in accordance with the Business Corporations Act (Ontario) and they will govern themselves in respect thereof to the best of their ability in accordance with the obligations imposed upon them by law.

INTEREST OF MANAGEMENT AND OTHERS IN MATERIAL TRANSACTIONS

Other than as described elsewhere in this Annual Information Form, the notes to the Company’s financial statements and its MD&A, since January 1, 2013, no director, executive officer or 10% shareholder of Kinross or any associate or affiliate of any such person or company, has or had any material interest, direct or indirect, in any transaction that has materially affected or will materially affect the Company or any of its subsidiaries.

TRANSFER AGENT AND REGISTRAR

The transfer agent and registrar for Kinross’ common shares is Computershare Investor Services Inc. at its principal office at 100 University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5J 2Y1, telephone 1-800-564-6253.

87

MATERIAL CONTRACTS

Kinross Material Contracts

On November 11, 2015, Kinross entered into a definitive asset purchase agreement with Barrick to acquire for $610 million in cash, 100% of the Bald Mountain gold mine and 50% of the Round Mountain gold mine that it did not already own. Kinross acquired a 50% interest in a large land package associated with the Bald Mountain mine and entered into a joint venture with Barrick to explore this property. Kinross funded the transaction (subject to customary adjustments) with cash on hand and available liquidity, and the transaction closed on January 11, 2016.

No other material contracts were entered into by the Corporation within the financial year ended December 31, 2015 or before such time that is still in effect, other than in the ordinary course of business.

INTERESTS OF EXPERTS

The Company’s independent auditors for fiscal 2015, KPMG LLP, have audited the consolidated financial statements of Kinross for the two years ended December 31, 2015. In connection with their audit, KPMG LLP has confirmed that they are independent within the meaning of the relevant rules and related interpretations prescribed by the relevant professional bodies in Canada and any applicable legislation or regulation and under all relevant US professional and regulatory standards.

Mr. John Sims is the qualified person who supervised the preparation of the property descriptions contained herein and the Company’s mineral reserve and mineral resource estimates as at December 31, 2015. Mr. Sims is an officer of the Company.

The expert named in this section beneficially owned, directly or indirectly, less than 1% of any class of shares of the Company’s outstanding shares at the time of the preparation of the reserve and resource estimates and the technical reports.

AUDIT AND RISK COMMITTEE

The Audit and Risk Committee’s charter sets out its responsibilities and duties, qualifications for membership and reporting to the Company’s board of directors. A copy of the charter is attached hereto as Schedule “A”.

As of the date of this Annual Information Form, the members of the Company’s Audit and Risk Committee are John Brough (Chairman), John Huxley, Ave Lethbridge and Una Power. Each of Messrs. Brough and Huxley and Mses. Lethbrige and Power are independent and financially literate within the meaning of Multilateral Instrument 52-110 Audit Committees (“MI 52-110”). In addition to being independent directors as described above, all members of the Company’s Audit Committee must meet an additional “independence” test under MI 52-110 in that their directors’ fees are the only compensation they, or their firms, receive from the Company and that they are not affiliated with the Company. Mr. Brough is a “financial expert” in accordance with SEC requirements.

88

Relevant Education and Experience

Set out below is a description of the education and experience of each Audit and Risk Committee member that is relevant to the performance of his responsibilities as an Audit and Risk Committee member.

John A. Brough	Mr. Brough holds a Bachelor of Arts (Economics) degree from the University of Toronto and is a Chartered Professional Accountant, Chartered Accountant. Mr. Brough has graduated from the Director’s Education Program at the University of Toronto, Rotman School of Management and is a member of the Institute of Corporate Directors. Mr. Brough had been President of both Torwest Inc. and Wittington Properties Limited, real estate companies from 1998 until his retirement on December 31, 2007. Prior thereto, from 1996 to 1998, Mr. Brough was Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of iSTAR Internet, Inc. Prior thereto, from 1974 to 1996, he held a number of positions with Markborough Properties, Inc., his final position being Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer which position he held from 1986 to 1996. Mr. Brough is an executive with over 30 years of experience in the real estate industry. He is currently Chairman of the Audit Committee of Silver Wheaton Corp., Lead Director and Chairman of the Audit Committee of First National Financial Corp. and a director and Chairman of the Audit Committee of CREIT.
John M.H. Huxley	Mr. Huxley has a Bachelor of Laws degree, and was most recently a principal of Algonquin Management Inc., the manager of Algonquin Power Income Fund, from 1997 to 2006. Prior to that Mr. Huxley was President of Algonquin Power Corporation.
Ave G. Lethbridge	Ms. Lethbridge holds a Master of Science degree in Organizational Development from Pepperdine University, California and has completed the Director’s Education Program from the Institute of Corporate Directors at the University of Toronto’s Rotman School of Management. Ms. Lethbridge is currently Executive Vice-President and Chief Human Resources and Safety Officer of Toronto Hydro Corporation and serves on the Board of Governors of Georgian College. During her 17 years with Toronto Hydro, she has held various leadership positions in areas encompassing environment, health and safety, corporate social responsibility, labour relations, workforce planning, talent management, succession planning and leadership development.
Una M. Power	Ms. Power is a Chartered Professional Accountant, Chartered Accountant and a Chartered Financial Analyst. She has completed the Advanced Management Program at the Wharton Business School, United States and INSEAD, France. Ms. Power is currently CFO and SVP, Corporate Planning and Business Development, of Nexen Inc., a former publicly-traded company that is a wholly-owned subsidiary of CNOOC Limited. During her career with Nexen Inc., spanning 24 years from 1992 to present, she has held various positions in areas covering financial reporting, financial management, investor relations, business development, strategic planning and investment. From 2009 to 2011, she was SVP, Corporate Planning and Business Development; from 2002 – 2009, Treasurer; from 1998 – 2002, Controller; and, from 1997 – 1998, Manager, Investor Relations. Prior to joining Nexen Inc., Ms. Power was Senior Auditor with Deloitte & Touche from 1989 to 1992, and was staff auditor with Peat Marwick from 1987 to 1989.

Pre-Approval Policies and Procedures

The Audit and Risk Committee has formalized its approach to non-audit services by the external auditors in its charter, a copy of which is attached hereto as Schedule “A”.

89

External Auditor Service Fees

Audit Fees

The audit fees billed by the Company’s external auditors for the financial year ended December 31, 2015 were Cdn$3,914,000 (December 31, 2014 – Cdn$4,042,000).

Audit-Related Fees

The audit-related fees billed by the Company’s external auditors for the financial year ended December 31, 2015 were Cdn$160,000 (December 31, 2014 – Cdn$160,000) relating to translation services and pension plan audits.

Tax Fees

The tax fees in respect of tax compliance and tax advice billed by the Company’s external auditors for the financial year ended December 31, 2015 were Cdn$129,000 (December 31, 2014 – Cdn$57,000).

All Other Fees

Cdn$80,000 was paid to the Company’s external auditors in 2015 under this caption (December 31, 2014 – Cdn$149,000).

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

Additional information relating to the Company can be found on SEDAR at www.sedar.com. Additional information, including directors’ and officers’ remuneration and indebtedness, principal holders of the Company’s securities and securities authorized for issuance under equity compensation plans is contained in the management information circular of the Company filed for its most recent annual meeting of shareholders. Additional financial information is provided in the Company’s audited consolidated financial statements and the MD&A for the financial year ended December 31, 2015.

GLOSSARY OF TECHNICAL TERMS

adsorption, desorption, recovery (ADR) plant

A type of processing plant used to recover gold from leaching solutions (e.g., from carbon-in-leach).

adularia

A variety of orthoclase, in the feldspar group of minerals. A common mineral in granitic rocks.

alluvial mining

A method of extracting minerals by dredging alluvial (placer) deposits.

arsenopyrite

The most common arsenic mineral and principal ore of arsenic; occurs in many sulfide ore deposits, particularly those containing lead, silver and gold.

assay

To determine the value of various elements within an ore sample, streambed sample, or valuable metal sample.

90

ball mill

A steel cylinder filled with steel balls into which crushed ore is fed. The ball mill is rotated, causing the balls to cascade and grind the ore.

belt

A series of mineral deposits occurring in close proximity to each other, often with a common origin.

boudins

Sausage-shaped segments of rock occurring in a boudinage structure. Boudinage occurs when tensional (stretching) forces act on layers of relatively hard rock surrounded by softer rock. The overall resulting appearance is that of a string of linked sausages when observed in section.

breccia

A coarse-grained clastic rock, composed of angular broken rock fragments held together by a mineral cement or in a fine-grained matrix; it differs from conglomerate in that the fragments have sharp edges and unworn corners.

carbon-in-leach or CIL

A process step wherein granular activated carbon particles much larger than the ground ore particles are introduced into the ore pulp. Cyanide leaching and precious metals adsorption onto the activated carbon occur simultaneously. The loaded activated carbon is mechanically screened to separate it from the barren ore pulp and processed to remove the precious metals and prepare it for reuse.

carbon-in-pulp

A process step wherein granular activated particles much larger than the ground ore particles are introduced into the ore pulp after primary leaching in cyanide. Precious metals adsorption occurs onto the activated carbon from the pregnant cyanide solution.

cathode

A rectangular plate of metal, produced by electrolytic refining, which is melted into commercial shapes such as wire-bars, billets, ingots, etc.

chalcopyrite

A copper mineral composed of copper, iron and sulphur. This mineral is very similar to marcasite in its characteristics; it tarnishes easily; going from bronze or brassy yellow to yellowish or grayish brown, has a dark streak, and is lighter in weight and harder than gold.

chlorite

A group of minerals with a flaky or scaly structure, green in colour and relatively soft.

core

A long cylindrical piece of rock, about an inch in diameter, brought to surface by diamond drilling.

cyanidation

A method of extracting exposed gold or silver grains from crushed or ground ore by dissolving the contained gold and silver in a weak cyanide solution. May be carried out in tanks inside a mill or in heaps of ore out of doors.

dedicated pad

An area of topography where gold ore will be placed in order to be leached. The ore will remain permanently upon this pad upon the completion of the gold extraction.

dilution

The effect of waste or low-grade ore being included unavoidably in the mine ore, lowering the recovered grade.

91

doré

Unrefined gold and silver bullion bars, which will be further refined to almost pure metal.

electrowinning

Recovery of a metal from a solution by means of electro-chemical processes.

epithermal

A hydrothermal mineral deposit formed within about 1 kilometre of the Earth’s surface and in the temperature range of 50 to 200 degrees Celsius, occurring mainly as veins.

fault

A fracture in the earth’s crust accompanied by a displacement of one side of the fracture with respect to the other and in a direction parallel to the fracture.

flocculent

A chemical used to promote the formation of denser slurries.

flotation

A separation process in which valuable mineral particles are induced to become attached to bubbles and float, while the non-valuable minerals sink.

fold

Any bending or wrinkling of rock layers.

foliation

Parallel orientation of play minerals or mineral banding in rocks.

formation

Unit of sedimentary rock of characteristic composition or genesis.

galena

A lead mineral, which occurs with sphalerite in hydrothermal veins, also in sedimentary rocks as replacement deposits; an important source of lead and silver.

gold equivalent production

Gold equivalent production represents gold production plus silver production computed into gold ounces using a market price ratio.

grade

The amount of valuable metal in each tonne of material, expressed as grams per tonne for precious metals.

Cut-off grade – is the minimum metal grade at which a tonne of rock can be processed on an economic basis.

Recovered grade – is actual metal grade realized by the metallurgical process and treatment of ore, based on actual experience or laboratory testing.

granite

A light coloured, coarse grained, igneous rock.

granodiorite

A coarse grained, igneous rock, consisting primarily of quartz and a mineral known as plagioclase feldspar.

92

gravity concentration circuit

Equipment used within a plant to recover gold from the ore using the difference in specific gravity between the gold and the host rock. Typically used are shaking tables, spirals, etc.

greenschist

A metamorphosed basic igneous rock, which owes its colour and foliation to abundant chlorite.

heap leaching

A process whereby gold is extracted by “heaping” broken ore on sloping impermeable pads and repeatedly spraying the heaps with a weak cyanide solution which dissolves the gold content. The gold-laden solution is collected for gold recovery.

hedging

Taking a buy or sell position in a futures market opposite to a position held in the cash market to minimize the risk of financial loss from an adverse price change.

HQ

A diamond drill core measuring 2.500 inches in diameter (6.35 centimetres).

igneous

A term applied to rock that formed by crystallizing from molten rock

intrusive

Rock which while molten, penetrated into or between other rocks but solidified before reaching the surface.

leach

A method of extracting gold from ore by a chemical solution usually containing cyanide.

lode

Vein of metal ore.

low-grade

A term applied to ores relatively poor in the metal they are mined for; lean ore.

mafic

Containing or relating to a group of dark-coloured minerals, composed chiefly of magnesium and iron, that occur in igneous rocks.

Mesozoic

Era of geologic time from approximately 65 to 250 million years before present.

metabasalt

A rock formed by metamorphism of dark volcanic rock known as basalt.

metamorphism

The process by which the form or structure of rocks is changed by heat and pressure.

mica

A group of minerals formed of elastic flakes and sheets, which can be colourless, white, yellow, green, brown, or black. Micas are common rock-forming minerals in igneous, metamorphic, and sedimentary rocks.

micaceous

Consisting of or containing mica.

93

mill

A plant where ore is ground fine and undergoes physical or chemical treatment to extract the valuable metals.

mineral claim

A mineral claim usually authorizes the holder to prospect and mine for minerals and to carry out works in connection with prospecting and mining.

mineralization

The process or processes by which a mineral or minerals are introduced into a rock, resulting in a valuable or potentially valuable deposit. It is a general term, incorporating various types; e.g., fissure filling, impregnation, and replacement.

net smelter return

A type of royalty payment where the royalty owner receives a fixed percentage of the revenues of a property or operation.

NQ

A diamond drill core measuring 1.875 inches in diameter (4.76 centimetres).

open pit

A mine that is entirely on surface. Also referred to as open-cut or open-cast mine.

oxidation

A reaction where a material is reacted with an oxidizer such as pure oxygen or air in order to alter the state of the material.

Paleozoic

Era of geologic time from approximately 250 to 540 million years before present.

pegmatite

Very coarse grained, igneous rock.

placer

A place where gold is obtained by the washing of materials: rocks, boulders, sand, clay, etc. containing gold or other valuable minerals by the elements. These are deposits of valuable minerals that are found in the form of dust, flakes, grains, and nuggets.

porphyry

An igneous rock in which relatively large crystals, called phenocrysts, are surrounded by fine mineral grains.

pyrite

A yellow iron sulphide mineral, normally of little value. It is sometimes referred to as “fool’s gold.”

pyroclastic

Produced by explosive or aerial ejection of ash, fragments, and glassy material from a volcanic vent. Applied to the rocks and rock layers as well as to the textures so formed.

qualified person

An individual who is an engineer or geoscientist with at least five years of experience in mineral exploration, mine development or operation or mineral project assessment, or any combination of these; has experience relevant to the subject matter of the mineral project and the technical report; and is a member or licensee in good standing of a professional association recognized under National Instrument 43-101.

quartz

Common rock-forming mineral consisting of silicon and oxygen.

94

quartzite

A metamorphic rock composed mainly of quartz and typically formed from sandstone, a type of sedimentary rock.

reclamation

The restoration of a site after mining or exploration activity is completed.

recovery

A term used in process metallurgy to indicate the proportion of valuable material obtained in the processing of an ore. It is generally stated as a percentage of valuable metal in the ore that is recovered compared to the total valuable metal present in the ore.

run-of-mine

Ore in its unprocessed state after it is mined.

reusable pad

An area where heap leaching takes place on ore material temporarily placed onto it. Upon completion of leaching, the ore is removed from the pad and sent to disposal. New material is then placed on the pad.

sample

A small portion of rock or a mineral deposit taken so that the metal content can be determined by assaying.

schist

A foliated metamorphic rock the grains of which have a roughly parallel arrangement; generally developed by shearing.

sedimentary rocks

Secondary rocks formed from material derived from other rocks and laid down under water. Examples are limestone, shale and sandstone.

semi-autogenous (SAG) mill

A steel cylinder with steel balls into which run-of-mine material is fed. The ore is ground in the action of large lumps of rock and steel balls.

sericite

A white, fine-grained potassium mica occurring in small scales as an alteration product of various minerals, having a silky luster, and found in various metamorphic rocks (especially in schists and phyllites) or in the wall rocks, fault gouge, and vein fillings of many ore deposits.

shear zone

A geological term used to describe a geological area in which shearing has occurred on a large scale.

slurry

Fine rock particles suspended in a stream of water.

sphalerite

A zinc mineral which is composed of zinc and sulphur. It has a specific gravity of 3.9 to 4.1.

stockpile

Broken ore heaped on surface, pending treatment or shipment.

stockwork

A mineral deposit consisting of a three-dimensional network of planar to irregular veinlets closely enough spaced that the whole mass can be mined.

95

tailings

The material that remains after all metals considered economic have been removed from ore during milling.

vein

A fissure, fault or crack in a rock filled by minerals that have traveled upwards from some deep source.

volcanic

A collective term for igneous rocks that formed from eruptions of liquid rock onto the surface or from particles of rock that were ejected into the atmosphere.

96

SCHEDULE “A”

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION
(“KINROSS”)

CHARTER OF THE

AUDIT AND RISK COMMITTEE

I.Purpose

The Audit and Risk Committee shall provide assistance to the Board of Directors in fulfilling its financial reporting and risk oversight responsibilities to the shareholders of Kinross and the investment community.  The Audit and Risk Committee’s primary duties and responsibilities are to:

·Oversee (i) the integrity of Kinross’ financial statements; (ii) Kinross’ compliance with legal and regulatory requirements regarding financial disclosure; (iii) the independent auditors’ qualifications and independence; and (iv) the performance of Kinross’ internal audit function.

·Serve as an independent and objective party to monitor Kinross’ financial reporting processes and internal control systems.

·Review and appraise the audit activities of Kinross’ independent auditors and the internal auditing functions.

·Annually evaluate the performance of the Audit and Risk Committee in light of the requirements of its Charter.

·Provide open lines of communication among the independent auditors, financial and senior management, and the Board of Directors for financial reporting and control matters.  The Audit and Risk Committee will meet, periodically, with management, with the members of the internal audit function and with the independent auditors.

·Oversee the Kinross’ process for identifying and managing business risks.

·Review the use of derivative and hedging programs to manage operational, financial and currency risk.

·Review and approval of the Internal Audit Charter.

·Review Kinross’ overall tax plan and any material tax planning initiatives.

·Review, evaluate and oversee the periodic replacement of the lead audit partner of the independent auditors.

The primary responsibility of the Committee is to oversee Kinross’ financial reporting process on behalf of the Board of Directors and to report the results of its activities to the Board of Directors.  While the Committee has the responsibilities and powers provided in this Charter, it is the responsibility of management and the external auditors, not the responsibility of the Committee, to plan and conduct audits and to prepare and determine that Kinross’ financial statements are complete and accurate and are in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.  It is also the responsibility of management to establish, document, maintain and review systems of internal control and maintain the appropriate accounting and financial reporting principles and policies designed to assure compliance with accounting standards and applicable laws.  Absent

97

knowledge to the contrary (the details of which shall be promptly reported to the Board of Directors), each member of the Committee is entitled to rely on the accuracy of the financial and other information provided to the Committee by management and the external auditors and any representations made by management or the external auditors as to any non-audit services provided to Kinross or any of its subsidiaries.

II.Composition

The Audit and Risk Committee shall be comprised of at least three directors.  Each Committee member shall be an “independent director” as determined in accordance with applicable legal requirements for audit committee service, including the requirements of National Instrument 52-110 of the Canadian Securities Administrators (“NI 52-110”) and the Corporate Governance Rules of the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE Rules”), as such rules are revised, updated or replaced from time to time.  A copy of such requirements is reproduced in Schedule “A” attached hereto.

All members shall, to the satisfaction of the Board of Directors, be “financially literate”, and at least one member shall have accounting or related financial management expertise to qualify as a “financial expert” in accordance with applicable legal requirements, including the requirements of NI 52-110 and the rules adopted by the United States Securities and Exchange Commission, as revised, updated or replaced from time to time. A copy of such requirements reproduced in Schedule “A” attached hereto.

No director may serve as a member of the Committee if such director serves on the audit committee of more than two other public companies unless the Board of Directors determines that such simultaneous service would not impair the ability of such director to effectively serve on the Audit and Risk Committee, and this determination is disclosed in the annual management information circular.

The Committee members will be appointed by the Board of Directors annually at the meeting of the Board of Directors held closest to the annual general meeting of shareholders.

The Board of Directors may remove a member of the Committee at any time in its sole discretion by resolution of the Board of Directors.  Unless a Chair of the Committee is appointed by the full Board of Directors, the members of the Committee may designate a Chair of the Committee by majority vote of the full membership of the Committee.

III.Responsibilities and Powers

Responsibilities and powers of the Audit and Risk Committee include:

·Annually reviewing and recommending revisions to the Charter, as necessary, for consideration by the Board of Directors.

·Reviewing disclosure respecting the activities of the Audit and Risk Committee included in Kinross’ annual filings.

·Subject to the powers of the Board of Directors and the shareholders under Kinross’ articles and by-laws and under the Business Corporations Act (Ontario), the Audit and Risk Committee is responsible for the selection, appointment, oversight, evaluation, compensation, retention and, if necessary, the replacement of the independent auditors who prepare or issue an auditors’ report or perform other audit, review or attest services for Kinross.

·Overseeing procedures relating to the receipt, retention and treatment of complaints received by Kinross regarding accounting, internal accounting controls or auditing matters and the confidential anonymous submission by employees of the listed issuer of concerns regarding

98

questionable accounting of auditing matters, pursuant to Kinross’ whistleblower policy, or otherwise.

·Approving the appropriate audit engagement fees and the funding for payment of the independent auditors’ compensation and any advisors retained by the Audit and Risk Committee.

·Requiring that the auditors report directly to the Audit and Risk Committee and be accountable to the Board and the Audit and Risk Committee, as representatives of the shareholders to whom the auditors are ultimately responsible.

·Reviewing the independence of the auditors, which will require receipt from the auditors of a formal written statement delineating all relationships between the auditors and Kinross and any other factors that might affect the independence of the auditors and reviewing and discussing with the auditors any significant relationships and other factors identified in the statement.  Reporting to the Board of Directors its conclusions on the independence of the auditors and the basis for these conclusions.

·Reviewing the objectivity and professional skepticism of the independent auditors, the sufficiency of resources provided by the independent auditors and the integrity and candour of communications with the independent auditors.

·Reviewing the performance of the independent auditors, including assessing their effectiveness and quality of service, annually and, every 5 years, performing a comprehensive review of the performance of the independent auditors over multiple years to provide further insight on the audit firm, its independence and application of professional skepticism.

·Requiring the external auditors to provide the Committee with all reports: (i) which the external auditors are required to provide to the Committee or the Board of Directors under rules, policies or practices of professional or regulatory bodies applicable to external auditors; or (ii) are otherwise issued by such bodies which contain material findings respecting the quality of audits conducted by the independent auditors.

·Prohibiting the independent auditors from providing the following non-audit services and determining which other non-audit services the independent auditors are prohibited from providing:

·bookkeeping or other services related to the accounting records or financial statements of Kinross;

·financial information systems design and implementation;

·appraisal or valuation services, fairness opinions, or contribution-in-kind reports;

·actuarial services;

·internal audit outsourcing services;

·management functions or human resources;

·broker or dealer, investment adviser or investment banking services;

·legal services and expert services unrelated to the audit;

99

·tax services to any person in a financial reporting oversight role, or an immediate family member of any such person, unless the person is in that role solely because he or she is a Kinross director;

·services related to marketing, planning or opinions in favour of the tax treatment of transactions that are confidential transactions under the United States or Canadian tax laws or transactions that would be considered aggressive tax position transactions; and

·any other services which the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board determines to be impermissible.

·Approving any permissible non-audit engagements of the independent auditors in accordance with applicable laws.

·Obtaining from the independent auditors in connection with any audit a timely report relating to the Kinross’ annual audited financial statements describing all critical accounting policies and practices used, all alternative treatments within generally accepted accounting principles for policies and practices related to material items that have been discussed with management, ramifications of the use of such alternative disclosures and treatments, and the treatment preferred by the independent auditors, and any material written communications between the independent auditors and management, such as any “management” letter or schedule of unadjusted differences.

·Meeting with the auditors and financial management of Kinross to review the scope of the proposed audit for the current year, and the audit procedures to be used.

·Reviewing with management and the independent auditors:

·Kinross’ annual and interim financial statements and related notes, management’s discussion and analysis, earnings releases and the annual information form, for the purpose of recommending approval by the Board of Directors prior to being released or filed with regulators, and:

·reviewing with management, significant judgments affecting the financial statements, including any disagreements between the external auditors and management

·discussing among the members of the Committee, without management or the independent auditors present, the information disclosed to the Committee

·receiving the assurance of both financial management and the independent auditors that Kinross’ financial statements are fairly presented in conformity with Canadian GAAP in all material respects

·discussing with management the use of “pro forma” or “non GAAP information” in Kinross’ continuous disclosure documents.

·discussing with management and counsel any matter, including any litigation, claim or other contingency (including tax assessments) that could have a material effect on the financial position or operating results of Kinross and the manner in which any such matter has been described in the financial statements.

·reviewing the effect of any regulatory and accounting initiatives, including any off balance sheet structures, on Kinross’ financial statements.

100

·The financial reporting of any transactions between Kinross and any officer, director or other “related party” (including any significant shareholder) or any entity in which any person has a financial interest and any potential conflicts of interest.

·Any significant changes in the independent auditors’ audit plan.

·Other matters related to the conduct of the audit that are to be communicated to the Committee under generally accepted auditing standards.

·Review and approve in advance any proposed related-party transactions and required disclosures of such in accordance with applicable securities laws and regulations, and report to the Board on any approved transactions.

·Reviewing the effects of regulatory and accounting initiatives, as well as off-balance sheet structures, on Kinross’ financial statements.

·With respect to the internal auditing department,

(i)reviewing the appointment and replacement of the director of the internal auditing department;

(ii)advising the director of the internal auditing department that he or she is expected to provide to the Audit and Risk Committee copies of significant reports to management prepared by the internal auditing department and management’s responses thereto; and

(iii)considering if the internal auditing department has the resources needed to carry out its responsibilities.

·With respect to accounting principles and policies, financial reporting and internal control over financial reporting,

(i)to advise management, the internal auditing department and the independent auditors that they are expected to provide to the Audit and Risk Committee a timely analysis of significant issues and practices relating to accounting principles and policies, financial reporting and internal control over financial reporting;

(ii)to consider any reports or communications (and management’s and/or the internal audit department’s responses thereto) submitted to the Audit and Risk Committee by the independent auditors required by or referred to in Auditing Standard No. 16 (Communications with Audit Committee), as it may be modified or supplemented or other professional standards, including reports and communications related to:

·deficiencies, including significant deficiencies or material weaknesses, in internal control identified during the audit or other matters relating to internal control over financial reporting;

·consideration of fraud in a financial statement audit;

·detection of illegal acts;

·the independent auditors’ responsibility under generally accepted auditing standards;

·any restriction on audit scope;

101

·significant accounting policies;

·significant issues discussed with the national office respecting auditing or accounting issues presented by the engagement;

·management judgments and accounting estimates;

·any accounting adjustments arising from the audit that were noted or proposed by the auditors but were passed (as immaterial or otherwise);

·the responsibility of the independent auditors for other information in documents containing audited financial statements;

·disagreements with management;

·consultation by management with other accountants;

·major issues discussed with management prior to retention of the independent auditors;

·difficulties encountered with management in performing the audit;

·the independent auditors’ judgments about the quality of the entity’s accounting principles;

·reviews of interim financial information conducted by the independent auditors; and

·the responsibilities, budget and staffing of the Company’s internal audit function.

·Satisfying itself that adequate procedures are in place for the review of Kinross’ public disclosure of financial information extracted or derived from Kinross’ financial statements, other than the annual and interim financial statements and related notes, management’s discussion and analysis, earnings releases and the annual information form and assessing the adequacy of such procedures periodically.

·Reviewing with the independent auditors and management the adequacy and effectiveness of the financial and accounting controls of Kinross.

·Reviewing the quality and appropriateness of Kinross’ accounting policies and the clarity of financial information and disclosure practices adopted by Kinross and considering the independent auditors’ judgments about the quality and appropriateness of Kinross’ accounting principles and financial disclosure practices as applied in its financial reporting and whether the accounting principles and underlying estimates are common or minority practices.

·Establishing procedures: (i) for receiving, handling and retaining of complaints received by Kinross regarding accounting, internal controls, or auditing matters, and (ii) for employees to submit confidential anonymous concerns regarding questionable accounting or auditing matters.

·Reviewing with the independent auditors any audit problems or difficulties and management’s response and resolving disagreements between management and the auditors.

·Making inquiries of management and the independent auditors to identify significant, financial and control risks and exposures and assess the steps management has taken to minimize such risk to Kinross.

102

·Reviewing the adequacy of Kinross’ disaster recovery plan to consider if operations can be resumed as quickly and efficiently as possible following the occurrence of any disaster.

·Reviewing reports of compliance with Kinross’ policies on internal controls.

·Discussing any earnings guidance provided to analysts and rating agencies.

·Reviewing any significant tax exposures and tax planning initiatives intended to promote compliance with applicable laws while minimizing tax costs.

·At least annually obtaining and reviewing a report prepared by the independent auditors describing (i) the independent auditors’ internal quality-control procedures; (ii) any material issues raised by the most recent internal quality-control review, or peer review, of the auditors, or by any inquiry of investigation by governmental or professional authorities, within the preceding five years, respecting one or more independent audits carried out by the auditors, and any steps taken to deal with any such issues; (iii) (to assess the auditors’ independence) all relationships between the independent auditors and Kinross, including each non-audit service provided to the Company and at least the matters set forth in Ethics and Independence Rule 3526 (Communication with Audit Committees Concerning Independence); and (iv) the independent auditors’ responsiveness and service levels.

·Setting clear hiring policies for partners, employees or former partners and former employees of the independent auditors.

·Engaging and compensating (for which Kinross will provide appropriate funding) independent counsel and other advisors if the Committee determines such advisors are necessary to assist the Committee in carrying out its duties.

·Reporting disclosure respecting the mandate of the Committee and the Committee’s activities included in Kinross’ Management Information Circular prepared for the annual and general meeting of shareholders and Kinross’ Annual Information Form.

IV.Risk Identification and Oversight

·Review of the principal risks of Kinross’ business and operations, and any other circumstances and events that could have a significant impact on Kinross’ assets and stakeholders. Discussing with management potential risks to Kinross’ business and operations, their likelihood and magnitude and the interrelationships and potential compounding effects of such risks.  Assessing the steps management has taken to minimize such risks in light of Kinross’ risk tolerance.

·Assessing Kinross’ risk tolerance, the overall process for identifying Kinross’ principal business and operational risks and the implementation of appropriate measures to manage and disclose such risks.

·Reviewing with senior management annually, Kinross’ general liability, property and casualty insurance policies and considering the extent of any uninsured exposure and the adequacy of coverage.

·Reviewing disclosure respecting the oversight of management of Kinross’ principal business and operational risks.

·Review Kinross’ privacy and data security risk exposures and measures taken to protect the security and integrity of its management information systems and Company data.

103

V.Meetings and Other Matters

The Audit and Risk Committee will meet regularly at times necessary to perform the duties described above in a timely manner, but not less than four times a year.  Meetings may be held at any time deemed appropriate by the Committee.

The Audit and Risk Committee will meet periodically with representatives of the independent auditors, appropriate members of management and personnel responsible for the internal audit function, all either individually or collectively as may be required by the Committee.

The Audit and Risk Committee will also meet periodically without management present.

The independent auditors will have direct access to the Committee at their own initiative.

The Chair of the Committee will report periodically the Committee’s findings and recommendations to the Board of Directors.

The Audit and Risk Committee shall have the resources and authority appropriate to discharge its duties and responsibilities, including the authority to select, retain, terminate, and approve the fees and other retention terms of special or independent counsel, accountants or other experts and advisors, as it deems necessary or appropriate, without seeking approval of the Board or management.

Kinross shall provide for appropriate funding, as determined by the Audit and Risk Committee, in its capacity as a committee of the Board, for payment of:

1.             Compensation to the independent auditors and any other public accounting firm engaged for the purpose of preparing or issuing an audit report or performing other audit, review or attestation services for the Company;

2.             Compensation of any advisers employed by the Audit and Risk Committee; and

3.             Ordinary administrative expenses of the Audit and Risk Committee that are necessary or appropriate in carrying out its duties.

104

Schedule “A”

Independence Requirement of National Instrument 52-110

A member of the Audit and Risk Committee shall be considered “independent”, in accordance with National Instrument 52-110 - Audit and Risk Committees (“NI 52-110”), subject to the additional requirements or exceptions provided in NI 52-110, if that member has no direct or indirect relationship with the Company, which could reasonably interfere with the exercise of the member’s independent judgment.  The following persons are considered to have a material relationship with the Company and, as such, cannot be a member of the Audit and Risk Committee:

(a)an individual who is, or has been within the last three years, an employee or executive officer of the Company;

(b)an individual whose immediate family member is, or has been within the last three years, an executive officer of the Company;

(c)an individual who:

(i)is a partner of a firm that is the Company’s internal or external auditor;

(ii)is an employee of that firm; or

(iii)was within the last three years a partner or employee of that firm and personally worked on the Company’s audit within that time;

(d)an individual whose spouse, minor child or stepchild, or child or stepchild who shares a home with the individual:

(i)is a partner of a firm that is the Company’s internal or external auditor;

(ii)is an employee of that firm and participates in its audit, assurance or tax compliance (but not tax planning) practice, or

(iii)was within the last three years a partner or employee of that firm and personally worked on the Company’s audit within that time;

(e)an individual who, or whose immediate family member, is or has been within the last three years, an executive officer of an entity if any of the Company’s current executive officers serves or served at the same time on the entity’s compensation committee; and

(f)an individual who received, or whose immediate family member who is employed as an executive officer of the Company received, more than $75,000 in direct compensation from the Company during any 12 month period within the last three years, other than as remuneration for acting in his or her capacity as a member of the Board of Directors or any Board committee, or the receipt of fixed amounts of compensation under a retirement plan (including deferred compensation) for prior service for the Company if the compensation is not contingent in any way on continued service.

In addition to the independence criteria discussed above, for Audit and Risk Committee purposes, any individual who:

(a)has a relationship with the Company pursuant to which the individual may accept, directly or indirectly, any consulting, advisory or other compensatory fee from the Company or any subsidiary entity of the Company, other than as remuneration for acting in his or her capacity as a member of the board of directors or any board committee; or as a part-time chair or vice-chair of the board or any board or committee, or

105

(b)is an affiliated entity of the Company or any of its subsidiary entities,

is deemed to have a material relationship with the Company, and therefore, is deemed not to be independent.

The indirect acceptance by an individual of any consulting, advisory or other compensatory fee includes acceptance of a fee by:

(a)an individual’s spouse, minor child or stepchild, or a child or stepchild who shares the individual’s home; or

(b)an entity in which such individual is a partner, member, an officer such as a managing director occupying a comparable position or executive officer,  or occupies a similar position (except limited partners, non-managing members and those occupying similar positions who, in each case, have no active role in providing services to the entity) and which provides accounting, consulting, legal, investment banking or financial advisory services to the Company or any subsidiary entity of the Company.

Independence Requirement of NYSE Rules

A director shall be considered “independent” in accordance with NYSE Rules if that director has no material relationship with the Company (either directly or as a partner, shareholder or officer of an organization that has a relationship with the Company) that may interfere with the exercise of his/her independence from management and the Company.

In addition:

(a)A director who is an employee, or whose immediate family member is an executive officer, of the Company is not independent until three years after the end of such employment relationships.

(b)A director who receives, or whose immediate family member receives, more than $120,000 per year in direct compensation from the Company, other than director or committee fees and pension or other forms of deferred compensation for prior service (provided such compensation is not contingent in any way on continued service), is not independent until three years after he or she ceases to receive more than $120,000 per year in such compensation.

(c)A director who is (i) a current partner or employee of the Company’s internal or external auditor, (ii) was within the last three years a partner or employee of the auditor and personally worked on the Company’s audit during that time or (iii) whose immediate family member is a current partner of the Company’s auditor, a current employee of the auditor and personally works on the Company’s audit or was within the last three years a partner or employee of the auditor and personally worked on the Company’s audit during that time is not “independent”.

(d)A director who is employed, or whose immediate family member is employed, as an executive officer of another company where any of the Company’s present executives serve on that company’s compensation committee is not “independent” until three years after the end of such service or the employment relationship.

(e)A director who is an employee, or whose immediate family member is an executive officer, of a company that makes payments to, or receives payments from, the Company for property or services in an amount which, in any single fiscal year, exceeds the greater of $1 million, or 2% of such other company’s consolidated gross revenues, is not “independent” until three years after falling below such threshold.

A member of the Audit and Risk Committee must also satisfy the independence requirements of Rule 10A-3(b)(1) adopted under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as set out below:

106

In order to be considered to be independent, a member of an Audit and Risk Committee of a listed issuer that is not an investment company may not, other than in his or her capacity as a member of the Audit and Risk Committee, the board of directors, or any other board committee:

(a)Accept directly or indirectly any consulting, advisory, or other compensatory fee from the issuer or any subsidiary thereof, provided that, unless the rules of the national securities exchange or national securities association provide otherwise, compensatory fees do not include the receipt of fixed amounts of compensation under a retirement plan (including deferred compensation) for prior service with the listed issuer (provided that such compensation is not contingent in any way on continued service); or

(b)Be an affiliated person of the issuer or any subsidiary thereof.

An “affiliated person” means a person who directly or indirectly controls Kinross or a director who is an employee, executive officer, general partner or managing member of an entity that directly, or indirectly through one or more intermediaries, controls, or is controlled by, or is under common control with, Kinross.

Financial Literacy Under National Instrument 52-110

“Financially literate”, in accordance with NI 52-110, means that the director has the ability to read and understand a set of financial statements that present a breadth and level of complexity of accounting issues that are generally comparable to the breadth and complexity of the issues that can reasonably be expected to be raised by the Company’s financial statements.

Financial Expert under SEC Rules

An Audit and Risk Committee financial expert is defined as a person who has the following attributes:

(a)an understanding of generally accepted accounting principles and financial statements;

(b)the ability to assess the general application of such principles in connection with the accounting for estimates, accruals and reserves;

(c)experience preparing, auditing, analyzing or evaluating financial statements that present a breadth and level of complexity of accounting issues which are generally comparable to the breadth and complexity of issues that can reasonably be expected to be raised by the registrant’s financial statements, or experience actively supervising one or more persons engaged in such activities;

(d)an understanding of internal controls and procedures for financial reporting; and

(e)an understanding of Audit and Risk Committee functions.

An individual will be required to possess all of the attributes listed in the above definition to qualify as an Audit and Risk Committee financial expert and must have acquired such attributes through one or more of the following means:

(a)education and experience as a principal financial officer, principal accounting officer, controller, public accountant or auditor, or experience in one or more positions that involve the performance of similar function;

(b)experience actively supervising a principal financial officer, principal accounting officer, controller, public accountant, auditor or person performing similar functions;

(c)experience overseeing or assessing the performance of companies or public accountants with respect to the preparation, auditing or evaluation of financial statements; or

107

(d)other relevant experience.

Exceptions to Independence Requirements of NI 52-110 for Audit and Risk Committee Members

Every Audit and Risk Committee member must be independent, subject to certain exceptions relating to (i) controlled companies; (ii) events outside the control of the member; (iii) the death, disability or resignation of the member; and (iv) the occurrence of certain exceptional circumstances.

108

EX-99.2

Exhibit 99.2

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

For the year ended December 31, 2015

This management’s discussion and analysis (“MD&A”), prepared as of February 10, 2016, relates to the financial condition and results of operations of Kinross Gold Corporation together with its wholly owned subsidiaries, as at December 31, 2015 and for the year then ended, and is intended to supplement and complement Kinross Gold Corporation’s audited annual consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2015 and the notes thereto (the “financial statements”).  Readers are cautioned that the MD&A contains forward-looking statements about expected future events and financial and operating performance of the Company, and that actual events may vary from management’s expectations.  Readers are encouraged to read the Cautionary Statement on Forward Looking Information included with this MD&A and to consult Kinross Gold Corporation’s financial statements for 2015 and corresponding notes to the financial statements which are available on the Company’s web site at www.kinross.com and on www.sedar.com. The financial statements and MD&A are presented in U.S. dollars.  The financial statements have been prepared in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”) as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board (“IASB”). This discussion addresses matters we consider important for an understanding of our financial condition and results of operations as at and for the year ended December 31, 2015, as well as our outlook.

This section contains forward-looking statements and should be read in conjunction with the risk factors described in “Risk Analysis”. In certain instances, references are made to relevant notes in the financial statements for additional information.

Where we say “we”, “us”, “our”, the “Company” or “Kinross”, we mean Kinross Gold Corporation or Kinross Gold Corporation and/or one or more or all of its subsidiaries, as it may apply. Where we refer to the “industry”, we mean the gold mining industry.

1.             DESCRIPTION OF THE BUSINESS

Kinross is engaged in gold mining and related activities, including exploration and acquisition of gold-bearing properties, the extraction and processing of gold-containing ore, and reclamation of gold mining properties. Kinross’ gold production and exploration activities are carried out principally in Canada, the United States, the Russian Federation, Brazil, Chile, Ghana and Mauritania.  Gold is produced in the form of doré, which is shipped to refineries for final processing.  Kinross also produces and sells silver.

The profitability and operating cash flow of Kinross are affected by various factors, including the amount of gold and silver produced, the market prices of gold and silver, operating costs, interest rates, regulatory and environmental compliance, the level of exploration activity and capital expenditures, general and administrative costs, and other discretionary costs and activities.  Kinross is also exposed to fluctuations in currency exchange rates, political risks, and varying levels of taxation that can impact profitability and cash flow.  Kinross seeks to manage the risks associated with its business operations; however, many of the factors affecting these risks are beyond the Company’s control.

Commodity prices continue to be volatile as economies around the world continue to experience economic challenges.  Volatility in the price of gold and silver impacts the Company’s revenue, while volatility in the price of input costs, such as oil, and foreign exchange rates, particularly the Brazilian real, Chilean peso, Russian rouble, Mauritanian ouguiya, Ghanaian cedi, and Canadian dollar, may have an impact on the Company’s operating costs and capital expenditures.

Segment profile

Each of the Company’s significant operating mines is generally considered to be a separate segment. The reportable segments are those operations whose operating results are reviewed by the chief operating decision maker to make decisions about resources to be allocated to the segment and assess its performance.

			Ownership percentage at December 31,
Operating Segments	Operator	Location	2015		2014
Fort Knox	Kinross	U.S.A.	100	%	100	%
Round Mountain(a)	Kinross	U.S.A.	50	%	50	%
Kettle River-Buckhorn	Kinross	U.S.A.	100	%	100	%
Kupol(b)	Kinross	Russian Federation	100	%	100	%
Paracatu	Kinross	Brazil	100	%	100	%
Maricunga	Kinross	Chile	100	%	100	%
Tasiast	Kinross	Mauritania	100	%	100	%
Chirano	Kinross	Ghana	90	%	90	%

(a) On January 11, 2016, the Company acquired the remaining 50% interest in the Round Mountain mine from Barrick Gold Corporation (“Barrick”).

(b) The Kupol segment includes the Kupol and Dvoinoye mines.

1

Consolidated Financial and Operating Highlights

(in millions, except ounces, per share amounts and	Years ended December 31,									2015 vs. 2014					2014 vs. 2013
per ounce amounts)	2015			2014			2013			Change			% Change		Change			% Change
Operating Highlights from Continuing Operations (d)
Total gold equivalent ounces (a)
Produced (c)	2,620,262			2,739,044			2,658,632			(118,782		)	(4	)%	80,412			3	%
Sold (c)	2,634,867			2,743,398			2,697,093			(108,531		)	(4	)%	46,305			2	%
Attributable gold equivalent ounces (a)
Produced (c)	2,594,652			2,710,390			2,631,092			(115,738		)	(4	)%	79,298			3	%
Sold (c)	2,608,870			2,715,358			2,669,276			(106,488		)	(4	)%	46,082			2	%
Financial Highlights from Continuing Operations (d)
Metal sales	$	3,052.2		$	3,466.3		$	3,779.5		$	(414.1	)	(12	)%	$	(313.2	)	(8	)%
Production cost of sales	$	1,834.8		$	1,971.2		$	2,004.4		$	(136.4	)	(7	)%	$	(33.2	)	(2	)%
Depreciation, depletion and amortization	$	897.7		$	874.7		$	828.8		$	23.0		3	%	$	45.9		6	%
Impairment charges	$	699.0		$	1,251.4		$	3,169.6		$	(552.4	)	(44	)%	$	(1,918.2	)	(61	)%
Operating loss	$	(742.9	)	$	(1,027.2	)	$	(2,635.2	)	$	284.3		28	%	$	1,608.0		61	%
Net loss attributable to common shareholders	$	(984.5	)	$	(1,400.0	)	$	(3,012.6	)	$	415.5		30	%	$	1,612.6		54	%
Basic loss per share attributable to common shareholders	$	(0.86	)	$	(1.22	)	$	(2.64	)	$	0.36		30	%	$	1.42		54	%
Diluted loss per share attributable to common shareholders	$	(0.86	)	$	(1.22	)	$	(2.64	)	$	0.36		30	%	$	1.42		54	%
Adjusted net earnings (loss) attributable to common shareholders(b)	$	(91.0	)	$	131.1		$	321.2		$	(222.1	)	(169	)%	$	(190.1	)	(59	)%
Adjusted net earnings (loss) per share (b)	$	(0.08	)	$	0.11		$	0.28		$	(0.19	)	(173	)%	$	(0.17	)	(61	)%
Net cash flow provided from operating activities	$	831.6		$	858.1		$	796.6		$	(26.5	)	(3	)%	$	61.5		8	%
Adjusted operating cash flow (b)	$	786.6		$	1,023.8		$	1,171.8		$	(237.2	)	(23	)%	$	(148.0	)	(13	)%
Capital expenditures	$	610.0		$	631.8		$	1,262.4		$	(21.8	)	(3	)%	$	(630.6	)	(50	)%
Average realized gold price per ounce	$	1,159		$	1,263		$	1,402		$	(104	)	(8	)%	$	(139.0	)	(10	)%
Consolidated production cost of sales per equivalent ounce(c) sold(b)	$	696		$	719		$	743		$	(23	)	(3	)%	$	(24	)	(3	)%
Attributable(a) production cost of sales per equivalent ounce (c) sold(b)	$	696		$	720		$	743		$	(24	)	(3	)%	$	(23	)	(3	)%
Attributable(a) production cost of sales per ounce sold on a by-product basis(b)	$	684		$	705		$	703		$	(21	)	(3	)%	$	2		0	%
Attributable(a) all-in sustaining cost per ounce sold on a by-product basis(b)	$	971		$	965		$	1,063		$	6		1	%	$	(98	)	(9	)%
Attributable(a) all-in sustaining cost per equivalent ounce (c) sold (b)	$	975		$	973		$	1,082		$	2		0	%	$	(109	)	(10	)%
Attributable(a) all-in cost per ounce sold on a by-product basis(b)	$	1,047		$	1,072		$	1,357		$	(25	)	(2	)%	$	(285	)	(21	)%
Attributable(a) all-in cost per equivalent ounce (c) sold (b)	$	1,049		$	1,077		$	1,360		$	(28	)	(3	)%	$	(283	)	(21	)%

(a) “Total” includes 100% of Chirano production.  “Attributable” includes Kinross’ share of Chirano (90%) production.

(b) The definition and reconciliation of these non-GAAP financial measures is included in Section 11 of this document.

(c) “Gold equivalent ounces” include silver ounces produced and sold converted to a gold equivalent based on a ratio of the average spot market prices for the commodities for each period.  The ratio for 2015 was 73.92:1 (2014 - 66.29:1 and 2013 - 59.23:1).

(d) On June 10, 2013, the Company announced its decision to cease development of Fruta del Norte (“FDN”).  As a result, FDN was reclassified as a discontinued operation.  On December 17, 2014, the Company disposed of its interest in FDN.

2

Consolidated Financial Performance

2015 vs. 2014

Kinross’ attributable production decreased by 4% compared with 2014, primarily due to lower production at Tasiast as a result of a decrease in ounces recovered from the dump leach pads and at Maricunga as a result of the extreme weather event that occurred in March 2015.  In addition, production decreased at Kettle River—Buckhorn due to a decrease in grades and at Paracatu, largely due to lower mill throughput as a result of planned mine sequencing and lack of rainfall.  These decreases were partially offset by higher production at Round Mountain largely due to improved heap leach performance and at Fort Knox due to higher mill grades.

During 2015, metal sales declined by 12% compared with 2014 due to decreases in metal prices realized and gold equivalent ounces sold.  The average realized gold price decreased to $1,159 per ounce in 2015 from $1,263 per ounce in 2014.  Gold equivalent ounces sold in 2015 decreased to 2,634,867 ounces compared with 2,743,398 ounces in 2014, primarily due to the decrease in gold equivalent ounces produced as described above.

Production cost of sales decreased by 7% compared with 2014, primarily due to the decrease in gold equivalent ounces sold, lower energy costs and favourable foreign exchange movements.  The decrease in costs also resulted in a 3% decrease in attributable production cost of sales per equivalent ounce sold compared with 2014.

During 2015, depreciation, depletion and amortization increased by 3% compared with 2014, primarily due to increases in the depreciable asset base at Round Mountain, the Kupol segment, Tasiast, Fort Knox and Chirano.  These increases were partially offset by decreases in the depreciable asset base and gold equivalent ounces sold at Kettle River-Buckhorn.

As at December 31, 2015, upon completion of its annual assessment of the carrying value of its Cash Generating Units (“CGUs”), the Company recorded an after-tax impairment charge of $430.2 million as a result of a reduction in the Company’s short-term and long-term gold price forecast.  The impairment charge was entirely related to property plant and equipment and included a charge of $240.2 million at Fort Knox, $147.0 million at Tasiast and $43.0 million at Round Mountain.  The impairment charge at Fort Knox is net of a tax recovery of $9.3 million.  In addition, during 2015, the Company recognized impairment charges of $259.5 million related to inventory and other assets.  During 2014, the Company recorded after-tax impairment charges of $932.2 million, comprising goodwill impairment of $145.3 million and property plant and equipment impairment of $786.9 million.  The Company also recorded inventory impairment charges of $167.6 million in 2014.

The operating loss decreased to $742.9 million in 2015 from $1,027.2 million in 2014.  The change was primarily due to the decrease in impairment charges, partially offset by lower metal sales.

During 2015, net loss from continuing operations attributable to common shareholders was $984.5 million, or $0.86 per share, compared with $1,400.0 million, or $1.22 per share, in 2014.  The change was primarily a result of the decrease in operating loss as described above.  In addition, at December 31, 2014, an impairment charge of $156.6 million related to the Company’s investment in Cerro Casale was recorded in other income (expense).  These decreases were partially offset by an increase in income tax expense.  During 2015, the Company recorded a tax expense of $141.7 million compared with $109.7 million in 2014.  The $141.7 million tax expense in 2015 included a $30.3 million recovery due to impairment charges and $132.9 million of expense due to re-measurements of deferred tax assets and liabilities, as a result of significant fluctuations in foreign exchange rates with respect to the Brazilian real and the Russian rouble.  The $109.7 million tax expense in 2014 included a $137.8 million recovery due to impairment charges and $145.5 million of expense due to re-measurements of deferred tax assets and liabilities as a result of income tax reforms enacted in Chile and significant fluctuations in foreign exchange rates with respect to the Brazilian real and the Russian rouble.  In addition, tax expense increased due to differences in the level of income in the Company’s operating jurisdictions from one period to the next.

Adjusted net loss attributable to common shareholders was $91.0 million, or $0.08 per share, for 2015 compared with adjusted net earnings attributable to common shareholders of $131.1 million, or $0.11 per share, in 2014.  The decrease in adjusted net earnings was primarily due to the decrease in margins (metal sales less production cost of sales).

During 2015, net cash flow provided from operating activities decreased by 3% compared with 2014.  The decrease in cash flows was primarily the result of the decrease in metal sales, partially offset by favourable working capital changes and lower production costs.

Adjusted operating cash flow decreased to $786.6 million in 2015 compared with $1,023.8 million in 2014, primarily due to the decrease in metal sales.

3

Capital expenditures decreased by 3% in 2015 compared with 2014, primarily due to reduced spending at Kupol and at Tasiast, partially offset by increased spending at Fort Knox.

Attributable all-in sustaining cost per equivalent ounce sold and per ounce sold on a by-product basis increased slightly compared with 2014, mainly due to the decrease in attributable ounces sold and an increase in sustaining capital expenditures, largely offset by lower production costs as described above.

Attributable all-in cost per equivalent ounce sold and per ounce sold on a by-product basis decreased compared with 2014, primarily due to a decrease in non-sustaining capital expenditures at Tasiast, Chirano and the Kupol segment.

2014 vs. 2013

During 2014, Kinross’ attributable production increased by 3% compared with 2013, primarily due to increases in production from the Kupol segment as a result of processing higher grade ore from Dvoinoye and at Maricunga as a result of improved heap leach performance and increased efficiency of the Adsorption, Desorption and Recovery (“ADR”) plant, partially offset by a decrease in production as a result of the suspension of mining at La Coipa in October 2013.

Metal sales decreased to $3,466.3 million in 2014 from $3,779.5 million in 2013 due to a decrease in metal prices realized, partially offset by higher gold equivalent ounces sold.  The average realized gold price decreased to $1,263 per ounce in 2014 from $1,402 per ounce in 2013.

Production cost of sales decreased by 2% compared with 2013, primarily due to the impact of the suspension of mining at La Coipa and lower production costs at Chirano as a result of the transition to owner mining and reduced power costs.  These decreases were partially offset by an increase in gold equivalent ounces sold from the Kupol segment as a result of Dvoinoye commencing commercial production in October 2013 and higher costs at Fort Knox as a result of mining lower grade ore.

Depreciation, depletion and amortization increased by 6% in 2014 compared with 2013, primarily due to increases in the depreciable asset base and gold equivalent ounces sold from the Kupol segment as a result of Dvoinoye commencing commercial production and an increase in the depreciable asset base and a reduction in mineral reserves at Paracatu.  These increases were partially offset by the impact of the suspension of mining at La Coipa and decreases in the depreciable asset base at Tasiast and Maricunga.

As at December 31, 2014, the Company recorded an after-tax impairment charge of $932.2 million, upon completion of its annual assessment of the carrying value of its CGUs.  The impairment charge included goodwill impairment of $145.3 million and property plant and equipment impairment of $786.9 million. The property plant and equipment impairment included $342.5 million for Tasiast, $213.8 million for Chirano and $230.6 million for other CGUs, net of a tax recovery of $127.9 million and non-controlling interest of $23.7 million.  The Company also recorded inventory impairment charges of $167.6 million in 2014 and $177.6 million in 2013.  During 2013, the Company recorded after-tax impairment charges aggregating $2,834.1 million, comprised of $1,334.7 million for Tasiast, $573.6 million for Maricunga, and $925.8 million for other CGUs, net of a tax recovery of $157.9 million.

During 2014, the operating loss decreased to $1,027.2 million compared with an operating loss of $2,635.2 million in 2013.  The change was primarily due to decreases in impairment charges and exploration and business development costs, partially offset by a decrease in metal sales and an increase in depreciation, depletion and amortization.

Net loss from continuing operations attributable to common shareholders in 2014 was $1,400.0 million, or $1.22 per share, compared with $3,012.6 million, or $2.64 per share, in 2013.   The decrease was primarily a result of the change in operating loss as described above.  In addition, at December 31, 2014, an impairment charge of $156.6 million related to the Company’s investment in Cerro Casale was recorded in other income (expense).  During 2013, the Company recognized an impairment charge of $219.0 million related to its investment in Cerro Casale.  These decreases were partially offset by an increase in income tax expense.  The Company recorded a tax expense of $109.7 million in 2014 compared with $72.4 million in 2013.  The $109.7 million tax expense in 2014 included a $137.8 million recovery due to impairment charges and $145.5 million of expense due to re-measurements of deferred tax assets and liabilities as a result of income tax reforms enacted in Chile and significant fluctuations in foreign exchange rates with respect to the Brazilian real and the Russian rouble.  The $72.4 million tax expense in 2013 included a $174.6 million recovery due to a re-measurement of deferred tax liabilities in respect of impairment charges.  Excluding the impact of items that are not reflective of the underlying operating performance of our business, the Company’s adjusted effective tax rate for 2014 was 48.8%, compared with an adjusted effective tax rate of 34.8 % for 2013.  The increase in the Company’s adjusted effective tax rate for 2014, compared with 2013, was largely due to differences in the level of income in the Company’s operating jurisdictions from one period to the next.

4

Adjusted net earnings attributable to common shareholders was $131.1 million, or $0.11 per share, for 2014 compared with $321.2 million, or $0.28 per share, in 2013.  The decrease in adjusted net earnings attributable to common shareholders was primarily due to the decrease in metal sales.

Net cash flow provided from operating activities increased by 8% compared with 2013, primarily due to more favourable working capital changes and lower exploration and business development costs, partially offset by the decrease in metal sales.

During 2014, adjusted operating cash flow decreased to $1,023.8 million compared with $1,171.8 million in 2013, primarily due to the decrease in margins, partially offset by lower exploration and business development costs.

Capital expenditures decreased to $631.8 million compared with $1,262.4 million in 2013, primarily due to reduced spending at Tasiast, Chirano and Fort Knox.

Attributable all-in sustaining cost and all-in cost per equivalent ounce sold and per ounce sold on a by-product basis decreased in 2014 compared with 2013, primarily due to a decrease in both sustaining and non-sustaining capital expenditures and exploration and business development costs.

Mineral Reserves1

Kinross’ total estimated proven and probable gold reserves at year-end 2015 were approximately 34.0 million ounces, which include estimated gold reserves from the January 2016 acquisition of the Bald Mountain gold mine (“Bald Mountain”) and the remaining 50% interest in the Round Mountain gold mine.  The slight decrease of 0.4 million ounces in estimated gold reserves compared to year-end 2014 was mainly a result of depletion across the Company’s portfolio and revised pit designs at Maricunga.  This was offset in part by the January 2016 acquisition of assets in Nevada, which added 1.8 million gold ounces, including a net increase of 91 thousand gold ounces at Round Mountain on a 100% basis, and the net addition of 0.21 million estimated gold ounces at Chirano, as gold ounces from Akoti were upgraded into mineral reserves.

Proven and probable silver reserves at year-end 2015 were estimated at approximately 41.0 million ounces, a net decrease of 3.0 million ounces compared with year-end 2014, primarily due to production depletion.

Proven and probable copper reserves at year-end 2015, which are exclusively at Cerro Casale, were estimated at approximately 1.4 billion pounds, unchanged from year-end 2014.

1  For details concerning mineral reserve and mineral resource estimates, refer to the Mineral Reserves and Mineral Resources tables and notes in the Company’s news release filed with Canadian and U.S. regulators on February 10, 2016.

5

2.IMPACT OF KEY ECONOMIC TRENDS

Price of Gold

Source: London Bullion Marketing Association London PM Fix, Bloomberg, GFMS, Company records

The price of gold is the largest single factor in determining profitability and cash flow from operations, therefore, the financial performance of the Company has been, and is expected to continue to be, closely linked to the price of gold.  Historically, the price of gold has been subject to volatile price movements over short periods of time and is affected by numerous macroeconomic and industry factors that are beyond the Company’s control.  Major influences on the gold price include currency exchange rate fluctuations and the relative strength of the U.S. dollar, the supply of and demand for gold and macroeconomic factors such as the level of interest rates and inflation expectations.  During 2015, the price of gold fluctuated between a high of $1,296 per ounce in January to a low of $1,049 per ounce in December.  The average price for the year based on the London Bullion Market Association PM Fix was $1,160 per ounce, a $106 per ounce decrease over the 2014 average price of $1,266 per ounce.  The major influences on the gold price included the strengthening of the U.S. dollar with the U.S Federal Reserve beginning to normalize monetary policy, volatility in global financial markets and concerns over the global economy.

6

Source: London Bullion Marketing Association London PM Fix

During 2015, the Company realized an average gold price of $1,159 per ounce compared to the average PM Fix of $1,160 per ounce.

7

Gold Supply and Demand Fundamentals

Source: GFMS Gold Survey 2015 Q4 Update

Total gold supply decreased by approximately 2.3% in 2015 relative to 2014, largely due to a reduction in producer hedging.  Global gold mine production and supply of recycled gold was relatively unchanged during the year.  Mine production and recycled gold remain the dominant sources of gold supply, and in 2015 they represented approximately 73% and 27% of total supply, respectively.  Macroeconomic factors, global central bank monetary policy and geo-political events were the main drivers of lower gold prices in 2015.  Central banks have not been a source of supply to the market, but have rather been net buyers, as noted below.

8

Source: GFMS 2015 Gold Survey Q4 Update

Overall demand decreased by 2.2% in 2015 relative to 2014.  Fabrication demand is estimated to have decreased by 3.2% in 2015 relative to 2014 despite lower gold prices, mainly due to disappointing demand in China, partially offset by continued growth in India.  Bar hoarding decreased by approximately 3.9% in 2015, due to lower buying levels in key Asian markets during the year. Central banks continued to be buyers in 2015, increasing net purchases by 3.4% during the year.

9

Inflationary Cost Pressures

The Company’s profitability is subject to industry wide cost pressures on development and operating costs with respect to labour, energy, capital expenditures and consumables in general.  Since mining is generally an energy intensive activity, especially in open pit mining, energy prices can have a significant impact on operations.  The cost of fuel as a percentage of operating costs varies amongst the Company’s mines, and overall, operations have continued to experience lower fuel costs in 2015, reflecting global oil and fuel price decreases that have occurred since the second half of 2014.  Kinross manages its exposure to energy costs by entering, from time to time, into various hedge positions — refer to Section 6 Liquidity and Capital Resources for details.

Source: Bloomberg

In order to mitigate the impact of higher consumable prices, the Company continues to focus on continuous improvement, both by promoting more efficient use of materials and supplies, and by pursuing more advantageous pricing, whilst increasing performance and without compromising operational integrity.

10

Currency Fluctuations

Source: Bloomberg

At the Company’s non-U.S. mining operations and exploration activities, which are primarily located in Brazil, Chile, Ghana, Mauritania, the Russian Federation, and Canada, a portion of operating costs and capital expenditures are denominated in their respective local currencies.  Generally, as the U.S. dollar strengthens, these currencies weaken, and as the U.S. dollar weakens, these foreign currencies strengthen.  These currencies were subject to high market volatility over the course of the year.  Approximately 65% of the Company’s expected attributable production in 2016 is forecast to come from operations outside the U.S. and costs will continue to be exposed to foreign exchange rate movements.  In order to manage this risk, the Company uses currency hedges for certain foreign currency exposures — refer to Section 6 Liquidity and Capital Resources for details.

11

3.OUTLOOK

The forward-looking information contained in this section is subject to the risk factors and assumptions contained in the Cautionary Statement on Forward-Looking Information included with this MD&A and the risk factors set out in Section 10 — Risk Analysis.

Operational Outlook

In 2016, Kinross expects to produce 2.7 to 2.9 million gold equivalent ounces from its operations, compared with the 2015 production of 2.59 million gold equivalent ounces.  The forecast increase is mainly a result of the acquisition of Bald Mountain and the remaining 50% interest in Round Mountain that the Company did not already own, partially offset by grade reductions at Kupol and Chirano, and the expected closure of Kettle River-Buckhorn in the third quarter of 2016.  Production guidance also takes into consideration the potential for a temporary curtailment of mill operations at Paracatu due to a lack of rainfall in southcentral Brazil.  Based on the significant amount of rain already received in January 2016, the Company does not expect a curtailment in the first half of 2016.  Production in the second half of 2016 is expected to be higher compared with the first half of 2016 due mainly to mine sequencing at Tasiast and the seasonal impact on the heap leach at Fort Knox, Bald Mountain and Round Mountain.  The lower production during the first half of 2016 is expected to have a corresponding impact on cost guidance.

Production cost of sales per gold equivalent ounce sold is expected to be in the range of $675 to $735 for 2016, continuing the reduction experienced in 2015, largely as a result of favourable currency and oil movements.

The Company has forecast an all-in sustaining cost for 2016 of $890 to $990 per gold equivalent ounce sold, and per ounce sold on a by-product basis, which is lower than the 2015 guidance.

Material assumptions used to forecast 2016 production costs are: a gold price of $1,100 per ounce, a silver price of $15 per ounce, an oil price of $55 per barrel, and foreign exchange rates of 3.75 Brazilian real to the U.S. dollar, 1.25 Canadian dollar to the U.S. dollar, 55 Russian roubles to the U.S. dollar, 650 Chilean pesos to the U.S. dollar, 4.00 Ghanaian cedi to the U.S. dollar, 300 Mauritanian ouguiya to the U.S. dollar, and 1.10 U.S. dollars to the Euro.  Taking into account existing currency and oil hedges, a 10% change in foreign currency exchange rates would be expected to result in an approximate $15 impact on our production cost of sales per ounce, and specific to the Russian rouble and Brazilian real, a 10% change in the exchange rates would be expected to result in an impact of approximately $14 and $24 on the Russian and Brazilian production cost of sales per ounce, respectively.  A $10 per barrel change in the price of oil would be expected to result in an approximate $3 impact on our production cost of sales per ounce, and a $100 change in the price of gold would be expected to result in an approximate $3 impact on our production cost of sales per ounce as a result of a change in royalties.

Total capital expenditures for 2016 are forecast to be approximately $595 million (including estimated capitalized interest of approximately $25 million).  Of this amount, sustaining capital expenditures are expected to be approximately $430 million.

The 2016 forecast for exploration expenditures is approximately $70 million, none of which is expected to be capitalized.  2016 overhead (general and administrative and business development expenses) is expected to be approximately $165 million or 20% less than last year’s overhead guidance.

Other operating costs are forecast to be approximately $45 million, which includes $15 million for care and maintenance at La Coipa and Kettle River-Buckhorn, as well as an estimated $10 million for closing costs associated with the acquisition of assets in Nevada.

Based on the Company’s assumed metal price, oil price and foreign exchange rates, income tax expenses are expected to be $nil and taxes paid (net of recoveries) are expected to be approximately $75 million, with both increasing at 23% of any profit resulting from changes in those underlying assumptions.

Depreciation, depletion and amortization is forecast to be approximately $375 per gold equivalent ounce sold.

12

4.PROJECT UPDATES AND NEW DEVELOPMENTS

Tasiast expansion update

Kinross is finalizing studies on a two-phased expansion plan to realize Tasiast’s significant growth potential in the current gold price environment.  The two-phased expansion is expected to leverage existing mill infrastructure to optimize the current operation in the near term and lower overall capital costs compared with earlier project forecasts.

Phase One of the potential expansion contemplates adding incremental grinding capacity to the operation’s existing comminution circuit to increase mill throughput from the current 8,000 tonnes per day (“tpd”) to 12,000 tpd.  Phase Two contemplates further increasing throughput capacity with the installation of additional milling, leaching, thickening and refinery capacity.

The Company expects to complete and provide results of the Phase One feasibility study and the Phase Two pre-feasibility study in late March 2016.  The studies are progressing well, as the Company continues to focus on optimizing the potential expansion plan and reducing capital costs.  Any potential go-forward decision on the expansion will depend on a range of factors, including the gold price environment and projections, expected economic returns and various technical and other considerations.

Kinross is also continuing to optimize the current Tasiast operation to reduce costs.  During the fourth quarter of 2015, the Company upgraded the tertiary crushing circuit, automated the secondary crusher feed, optimized grinding media, and completed a comprehensive upgrade of conveyors.  These improvements resulted in increased average throughput of 7,500 tpd in the fourth quarter of 2015, compared with 6,800 tpd in the third quarter of 2015.

Russia projects update

The Company has completed a pre-feasibility study and is advancing the development of the Moroshka project, located approximately four kilometres east of Kupol and within the Kupol licence area.  The Company expects to commence mining in 2018 to process ore in the Kupol mill.

At the September Northeast target, located approximately 15 kilometres northwest of the Dvoinoye mine, material is currently being fast tracked to production, expected in late 2017, through a trial mining of bulk samples approved under terms of the exploration license.

Recent transactions

Acquisition of Bald Mountain and remaining 50% interest in Round Mountain

On November 12, 2015, the Company announced that it had entered into a definitive asset purchase agreement with Barrick to acquire 100% of Bald Mountain, which includes a large associated land package, and the remaining 50% interest in the Round Mountain gold mine for $610 million in cash, subject to a typical working capital adjustment.  In addition to the purchase price, Barrick will receive a contingent 2% net smelter return royalty on future gold production from Kinross’ 100%-owned Bald Mountain lands that will come into effect following the post-closing production of 10 million ounces from such lands.  Approximately 40% of the Bald Mountain land package is subject to a 50-50 exploration joint venture partnership between Kinross and Barrick, with Kinross as the operator.  On January 11, 2016, the Company completed the transaction.

The acquisition, which will be accounted for as a business combination as at January 11, 2016, represents a strategic fit with the Company’s open-pit heap leach skill set and existing portfolio of operating assets, and enhances the production profile in the United States.

Bald Mountain update

Bald Mountain represents a high-quality brownfield opportunity and will be a key aspect of Kinross’ 2016 exploration program, with approximately $6.0 million of the exploration budget allocated for the site.  The Company has established a new exploration team and initiated drilling to focus on upgrading and adding to the existing estimated mineral resource base.  The immediate priority is within the footprint of the active mining areas in extensions to known deposits.

Drilling in the North area of the property will include the Top, Redbird and Saga deposits while geological reviews will be conducted for the South area deposits including Yankee, Vantage and Gator.  Drilling in the South area will commence as soon as the permitting

13

process is completed, which is expected in mid-2016.  Both the North and South areas are 100% Kinross owned.

At the Kinross-Barrick 50-50 joint venture area, the Company will perform a review of the site geoscience data in addition to completing targeted field work with the objective of developing geological models and generating new targets.  The Company will also consider drilling some priority targets already identified by Barrick.

Other developments

Board of Directors update

The Board of Directors of Kinross has appointed Mr. Ian Atkinson as a Director.  Mr. Atkinson has more than 40 years of experience in the mining industry and was most recently the President and Chief Executive Officer, and a Director, of Centerra Gold.  Mr. Atkinson has contributed to the discovery of several major mineral deposits and been involved in a number of large global mining projects in his career, and has also held executive management positions with Hecla Mining Company and Battle Mountain Gold.  Mr. Atkinson has extensive background in exploration, project development, and mergers and acquisitions.

Mr. John K. Carrington, who has been a Kinross Board member since 2005, has decided to retire and will not stand for re-election at the Company’s next annual meeting of shareholders on May 11, 2016.

Kinross appointed Ms. Ave G. Lethbridge and Mr. Kelly J. Osborne to its Board of Directors, upon their election by shareholders at the Kinross Annual and Special Meeting of Shareholders held on May 6, 2015.

14

5.CONSOLIDATED RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

	Years ended December 31,									2015 vs. 2014					2014 vs. 2013
(in millions, except ounces and per ounce amounts)	2015			2014			2013			Change			% Change		Change			% Change
Operating Statistics from Continuing Operations (c)
Total gold equivalent ounces (a)
Produced (b)	2,620,262			2,739,044			2,658,632			(118,782		)	(4	)%	80,412			3	%
Sold (b)	2,634,867			2,743,398			2,697,093			(108,531		)	(4	)%	46,305			2	%
Attributable gold equivalent ounces (a)
Produced (b)	2,594,652			2,710,390			2,631,092			(115,738		)	(4	)%	79,298			3	%
Sold (b)	2,608,870			2,715,358			2,669,276			(106,488		)	(4	)%	46,082			2	%
Gold ounces - sold	2,562,219			2,669,278			2,545,736			(107,059		)	(4	)%	123,542			5	%
Silver ounces - sold (000’s)	5,378			4,923			9,021			455			9	%	(4,098		)	(45	)%
Average realized gold price per ounce	$	1,159		$	1,263		$	1,402		$	(104	)	(8	)%	$	(139	)	(10	)%
Financial Data from Continuing Operations (c)
Metal sales	$	3,052.2		$	3,466.3		$	3,779.5		$	(414.1	)	(12	)%	$	(313.2	)	(8	)%
Production cost of sales	$	1,834.8		$	1,971.2		$	2,004.4		$	(136.4	)	(7	)%	$	(33.2	)	(2	)%
Depreciation, depletion and amortization	$	897.7		$	874.7		$	828.8		$	23.0		3	%	$	45.9		6	%
Impairment charges	$	699.0		$	1,251.4		$	3,169.6		$	(552.4	)	(44	)%	$	(1,918.2	)	(61	)%
Operating loss	$	(742.9	)	$	(1,027.2	)	$	(2,635.2	)	$	284.3		28	%	$	1,608.0		61	%
Net loss attributable to common shareholders	$	(984.5	)	$	(1,400.0	)	$	(3,012.6	)	$	415.5		30	%	$	1,612.6		54	%

(a)“Total” includes 100% of Chirano production.  “Attributable” includes Kinross’ share of Chirano (90%) production.

(b)“Gold equivalent ounces” include silver ounces produced and sold converted to a gold equivalent based on a ratio of the average spot market prices for the commodities for each period.  The ratio for 2015 was 73.92:1 (2014 - 66.29:1 and 2013 - 59.23:1).

(c)On June 10, 2013, the Company announced its decision to cease development of FDN.  As a result, FDN was reclassified as a discontinued operation.  On December 17, 2014, the Company disposed of its interest in FDN.

15

Operating Earnings (Loss) by Segment

	Years ended December 31,									2015 vs. 2014					2014 vs. 2013
(in millions)	2015			2014			2013			Change			% Change (d)		Change			% Change
Operating segments
Fort Knox	$	(180.8	)	$	99.9		$	251.0		$	(280.7	)	nm		$	(151.1	)	(60	)%
Round Mountain	(8.9		)	44.0			(106.7		)	(52.9		)	(120	)%	150.7			141	%
Kettle River-Buckhorn	30.3			(45.6		)	53.6			75.9			166	%	(99.2		)	(185	)%
Paracatu	24.4			69.3			106.6			(44.9		)	(65	)%	(37.3		)	(35	)%
Maricunga	(60.4		)	36.3			(711.6		)	(96.7		)	nm		747.9			105	%
Kupol (a)	150.1			297.4			328.5			(147.3		)	(50	)%	(31.1		)	(9	)%
Tasiast	(361.2		)	(571.4		)	(1,575.4		)	210.2			37	%	1,004.0			64	%
Chirano	(70.1		)	(365.4		)	(344.4		)	295.3			81	%	(21.0		)	(6	)%
Non-operating segment
Corporate and Other (b)	(266.3		)	(591.7		)	(636.8		)	325.4			55	%	45.1			7	%
Total	$	(742.9	)	$	(1,027.2	)	$	(2,635.2	)	$	284.3		28	%	$	1,608.0		61	%
Discontinued operations
Fruta del Norte (c)	$	—		$	(5.2	)	$	(735.9	)	$	5.2		100	%	$	730.7		99	%

(a)The Kupol segment includes the Kupol and Dvoinoye mines.

(b)“Corporate and Other” includes operating costs which are not directly related to individual mining properties such as overhead expenses, gains and losses on disposal of assets and investments, and other costs relating to non-operating assets (including La Coipa, Lobo-Marte and White Gold).

(c)On June 10, 2013, the Company announced its decision to cease development of FDN.  As a result, FDN was reclassified as a discontinued operation.  On December 17, 2014, the Company disposed of its interest in FDN.

(d)“nm” means not meaningful.

16

Mining operations

Fort Knox (100% ownership and operator) — USA

	Years ended December 31,
	2015			2014			Change			% Change (c)
Operating Statistics
Tonnes ore mined (000’s)	22,761			14,886			7,875			53	%
Tonnes processed (000’s) (a)	38,664			39,386			(722		)	(2	)%
Grade (grams/tonne)(b)	0.76			0.66			0.10			15	%
Recovery(b)	82.9		%	84.4		%	(1.5		)%	(2	)%
Gold equivalent ounces:
Produced	401,553			379,453			22,100			6	%
Sold	402,104			408,472			(6,368		)	(2	)%
Financial Data (in millions)
Metal sales	$	467.0		$	515.7		$	(48.7	)	(9	)%
Production cost of sales	252.8			291.0			(38.2		)	(13	)%
Depreciation, depletion and amortization	130.3			118.0			12.3			10	%
Impairment charges	252.7			—			252.7			100	%
	(168.8		)	106.7			(275.5		)	nm
Exploration and business development	10.6			6.8			3.8			56	%
Other	1.4			—			1.4			100	%
Segment operating earnings (loss)	$	(180.8	)	$	99.9		$	(280.7	)	nm

(a)Includes 25,218,000 tonnes placed on the heap leach pads during 2015  (2014 - 25,848,000 tonnes).

(b)Amount represents mill grade and recovery only.  Ore placed on the heap leach pads had an average grade of 0.27  grams per tonne during 2015 (2014  – 0.29  grams per tonne).  Due to the nature of heap leach operations, point-in-time recovery rates are not meaningful.

(c)“nm” means not meaningful.

The Company has been operating the Fort Knox mine, located near Fairbanks, Alaska, since it was acquired in 1998.

2015 vs. 2014

During 2015, tonnes of ore mined increased by 53% compared with the same period in 2014 due to planned mine sequencing, which involved mining activities focused on Phase 7 South, and an increase in mine fleet.  Tonnes of ore processed were 2% lower compared with 2014, primarily due to a decline in tonnage placed on the heap leach pads as a result of longer haulage cycles arising from an increase in the proportion of mined ore, rather than stockpile ore, being stacked on the pads.  Mill grades were 15% higher compared with 2014 as a result of an increase in the processing of higher grade ore from Phase 7 South.  During 2015, mill recoveries decreased by 2% compared with the same period in 2014, largely due to the metallurgical characteristics of the ore mined.  Gold equivalent ounces produced increased by 6% compared with 2014, primarily due to the higher mill grades, partially offset by lower ounces recovered from the heap leach pads due to the decrease in the grade of ore placed on the pads.  During 2015, gold equivalent ounces sold decreased by 2% compared with the same period in 2014, primarily due to the timing of shipments as ounces produced at the end of 2013 were sold in 2014.

Metal sales were 9% lower compared with 2014 due to decreases in metal prices realized and gold equivalent ounces sold.  Production cost of sales decreased by 13% compared with 2014, primarily due to decreases in the cost of diesel and power, partially offset by higher labour costs largely due to the increase in mine fleet.  During 2015, depreciation, depletion and amortization increased by 10% compared with the same period in 2014, primarily due to an increase in the depreciable asset base.

As at December 31, 2015, the Company recorded impairment charges of $252.7 million, comprised of $249.5 million related to property, plant and equipment and $3.2 million related to inventory.  The non-cash impairment charge related to property, plant and equipment was primarily due to the reduction in the Company’s estimates of future metal prices.  No such impairment charges were recognized in 2014.

17

Round Mountain (50% ownership and operator; Barrick 50% ownership) — USA

	Years ended December 31,
	2015			2014			Change			% Change (c)
Operating Statistics
Tonnes ore mined (000’s)(a)	26,134			26,356			(222		)	(1	)%
Tonnes processed (000’s)(a)	22,084			26,026			(3,942		)	(15	)%
Grade (grams/tonne)(b)	0.93			0.94			(0.01		)	(1	)%
Recovery(b)	77.4		%	68.6		%	8.8		%	13	%
Gold equivalent ounces:
Produced	197,818			169,839			27,979			16	%
Sold	195,781			166,441			29,340			18	%
Financial Data (in millions)
Metal sales	$	228.1		$	211.7		$	16.4		8	%
Production cost of sales	146.9			142.3			4.6			3	%
Depreciation, depletion and amortization	44.9			25.2			19.7			78	%
Impairment charges	44.0			—			44.0			100	%
	(7.7		)	44.2			(51.9		)	(117	)%
Exploration and business development	1.2			0.2			1.0			nm
Segment operating earnings (loss)	$	(8.9	)	$	44.0		$	(52.9	)	(120	)%

(a)Tonnes of ore mined/processed represent 100% of operations. Includes 19,368,000 tonnes placed on the heap leach pads during 2015 (2014 - 23,098,000).

(b)Amount represents mill grade and recovery only.  Ore placed on the heap leach pads had an average grade of 0.42 grams per tonne for 2015 (2014 - 0.36  grams per tonne).  Due to the nature of heap leach operations, point-in-time recovery rates are not meaningful.

(c)“nm” means not meaningful.

The Company acquired its ownership interest in the Round Mountain open pit mine, located in Nye County, Nevada, with the acquisition of Echo Bay Mines Ltd. (“Echo Bay”) on January 31, 2003.

2015 vs. 2014

Tonnes of ore processed in 2015 were 15% lower compared with 2014, primarily due to planned mine sequencing.  Mill recoveries increased by 13% compared with 2014, mainly due to the characteristics of the ore processed through the mill in 2014.  Gold equivalent ounces produced increased by 16% compared with 2014, primarily due to an increase in ounces recovered from the heap leach pads, largely a result of higher grade ore recently placed on the pads, improved solutions management, a new pH enhancement system, and improvements made to optimize the flow of the loaded solution to the carbon columns at the ADR facility.

Metal sales in 2015 increased by 8% compared with 2014 due to an increase in gold equivalent ounces sold, partially offset by a decrease in metal prices realized.  During 2015, production cost of sales increased by 3% compared with 2014, primarily due to increases in gold equivalent ounces sold and reagent consumption, and higher labour costs, largely offset by a decrease in the cost of diesel as well as cost reductions achieved as a result of the above mentioned improvements to the heap leach operations.  Depreciation, depletion and amortization increased to $44.9 million from $25.2 million in 2014, primarily due to increases in the depreciable asset base and gold equivalent ounces sold.

As at December 31, 2015, the Company recorded impairment charges of $44.0 million, including $43.0 million related to property, plant and equipment due to a reduction in the Company’s estimates of future metal prices.  No such impairment charges were recognized in 2014.

18

Kettle River—Buckhorn (100% ownership and operator) — USA

	Years ended December 31,
	2015			2014			Change			% Change (a)
Operating Statistics
Tonnes ore mined (000’s)	369			347			22			6	%
Tonnes processed (000’s)	437			394			43			11	%
Grade (grams/tonne)	7.75			9.98			(2.23		)	(22	)%
Recovery	92.3		%	93.5		%	(1.2		)%	(1	)%
Gold equivalent ounces:
Produced	97,368			123,382			(26,014		)	(21	)%
Sold	97,576			123,262			(25,686		)	(21	)%
Financial Data (in millions)
Metal sales	$	113.3		$	156.0		$	(42.7	)	(27	)%
Production cost of sales	81.6			83.6			(2.0		)	(2	)%
Depreciation, depletion and amortization	12.0			50.2			(38.2		)	(76	)%
Impairment charges	—			53.8			(53.8		)	(100	)%
	19.7			(31.6		)	51.3			162	%
Exploration and business development	2.0			2.8			(0.8		)	(29	)%
Other	(12.6		)	11.2			(23.8		)	nm
Segment operating earnings (loss)	$	30.3		$	(45.6	)	$	75.9		(166	)%

(a)   “nm” means not meaningful.

The Kettle River—Buckhorn properties are located in Ferry and Okanogan Counties in the State of Washington.  Kinross acquired Kettle River through the acquisition of Echo Bay on January 31, 2003.

2015 vs. 2014

Tonnes of ore mined increased by 6% compared with 2014, primarily due to planned mine sequencing.  During 2015, tonnes of ore processed increased by 11% and grades decreased by 22% compared with 2014, primarily due to increased processing of lower grade stockpile ore as Kettle River nears the end of its mine life.  Gold equivalent ounces produced and sold decreased by 21%, compared with 2014, largely due to the decrease in grades and timing of ounces processed through the mill, partially offset by the increase in throughput.

During 2015, metal sales decreased by 27% compared with 2014 due to decreases in metal prices realized and gold equivalent ounces sold.  Production cost of sales decreased by 2% compared with 2014, primarily due to the decrease in gold equivalent ounces sold and lower labour and fuel costs, largely offset by higher milling and reagent costs associated with the processing of lower grade stockpile ore.  Depreciation, depletion and amortization decreased to $12.0 million from $50.2 million in 2014, primarily due to decreases in the depreciable asset base and gold equivalent ounces sold.

As at December 31, 2014, the Company recorded impairment charges of $53.8 million, comprised of $20.9 million related to goodwill and $32.9 million related to property, plant and equipment.  The non-cash impairment charge was primarily due to the mine approaching the end of its life.  No such impairment charges were recorded in 2015.  During 2015, other costs included a $12.8 million recovery, primarily due to a reduction in the estimated costs expected to be incurred for reclamation and remediation obligations relating to the closed Kettle-River property.

19

Paracatu (100% ownership and operator) — Brazil

	Years ended December 31,
	2015			2014			Change			% Change (a)
Operating Statistics
Tonnes ore mined (000’s)	47,750			53,584			(5,834		)	(11	)%
Tonnes processed (000’s)	45,277			51,397			(6,120		)	(12	)%
Grade (grams/tonne)	0.44			0.41			0.03			7	%
Recovery	75.4		%	74.7		%	0.7		%	1	%
Gold equivalent ounces:
Produced	477,662			521,026			(43,364		)	(8	)%
Sold	484,732			512,327			(27,595		)	(5	)%
Financial Data (in millions)
Metal sales	$	559.8		$	644.3		$	(84.5	)	(13	)%
Production cost of sales	374.3			418.2			(43.9		)	(10	)%
Depreciation, depletion and amortization	147.5			154.3			(6.8		)	(4	)%
Impairment charges	3.3			—			3.3			100	%
	34.7			71.8			(37.1		)	(52	)%
Other	10.3			2.5			7.8			nm
Segment operating earnings	$	24.4		$	69.3		$	(44.9	)	(65	)%

(a) “nm” means not meaningful.

The Company acquired a 49% ownership interest in the Paracatu open pit mine, located in the State of Minas Gerais, Brazil, in the acquisition of TVX Gold Inc. on January 31, 2003. On December 31, 2004, the Company purchased the remaining 51% of Paracatu from Rio Tinto Plc.

2015 vs. 2014

During 2015, tonnes of ore mined and processed were lower by 11% and 12%, respectively, compared with 2014, primarily due to planned mine sequencing, which involved processing, at a reduced throughput and an increased proportion of higher grade B2 ore.  In addition, mill throughput was lower as a result of the lack of rainfall in southcentral Brazil, which led to the temporary suspension of operations at Paracatu’s Plant 1 facility and one ball mill in Plant 2 in early November 2015.  On November 20, 2015, both Plants 1 and 2 resumed full operations.  Grades were 7% higher compared with 2014, primarily due to planned mine sequencing.  Gold equivalent ounces produced decreased by 8% compared with 2014, primarily due to the lower mill throughput and timing of ounces processed through the mill, partially offset by the higher grades.  Gold equivalent ounces sold decreased by 5% compared with 2014, largely due to a decrease in gold equivalent ounces produced, partially offset by timing of shipments.

Metal sales were lower by 13% in 2015 compared with 2014 due to decreases in metal prices realized and gold equivalent ounces sold.  Production cost of sales were lower by 10% compared with 2014, primarily due to the decrease in gold equivalent ounces sold, lower power and labour costs as a result of favourable foreign exchange movements, and a decrease in grinding media and reagent costs.  Depreciation, depletion and amortization were 4% lower in 2015 compared with the same period in 2014, primarily due to the decrease in gold equivalent ounces sold.  As at December 31, 2015, the Company recorded an impairment charge of $3.3 million to reduce the carrying value of inventory to its net realizable value.  No such impairment charges were recognized in 2014.

20

Maricunga (100% ownership and operator) — Chile

	Years ended December 31,
	2015			2014		Change			% Change (b)
Operating Statistics (a)
Tonnes ore mined (000’s)	12,261			16,900		(4,639		)	(27	)%
Tonnes processed (000’s)	12,790			16,018		(3,228		)	(20	)%
Grade (grams/tonne)	0.75			0.74		0.01			1	%
Gold equivalent ounces:
Produced	212,155			247,216		(35,061		)	(14	)%
Sold	214,055			247,469		(33,414		)	(14	)%
Financial Data (in millions)
Metal sales	$	249.1		$	314.6	$	(65.5	)	(21	)%
Production cost of sales	216.1			235.9		(19.8		)	(8	)%
Depreciation, depletion and amortization	27.3			36.2		(8.9		)	(25	)%
Impairment charges	48.7			—		48.7			100	%
	(43.0		)	42.5		(85.5		)	nm
Other	17.4			6.2		11.2			181	%
Segment operating earnings (loss)	$	(60.4	)	$	36.3	$	(96.7	)	nm

(a)   Due to the nature of heap leach operations, point-in-time recovery rates are not meaningful.

(b)   “nm” means not meaningful.

Kinross acquired its original 50% interest in the Maricunga open pit mine (formerly known as the Refugio mine), located 120 kilometres northeast of Copiapó, Chile in 1998.  On February 27, 2007, Kinross acquired the remaining 50% interest in Maricunga through the acquisition of Bema Gold Corporation (“Bema”).

2015 vs. 2014

Tonnes of ore mined and processed decreased by 27% and 20%, respectively, compared with 2014, primarily due to the planned stockpile tower replacement in February 2015 and the extreme weather event in March 2015 that caused mining and crushing operations to be temporarily suspended until May 2015.  Gold equivalent ounces produced decreased by 14% compared with 2014, largely due to a decrease in ounces recovered from the heap leach pads, which was mainly a result of a reduction in the quantity of ore placed on these pads due to the extreme weather event in March 2015.  During 2015, gold equivalent ounces sold exceeded production due to timing of shipments.

Metal sales decreased by 21% in 2015 compared with 2014 due to decreases in metal prices realized and gold equivalent ounces sold.  Production cost of sales decreased by 8% compared with 2014, primarily due to the decrease in gold equivalent ounces sold, lower labour and consumable costs resulting from favourable foreign exchange movements, partially offset by increases in the cost of power and consumption of cyanide.  Depreciation, depletion and amortization were 25% lower in 2015 compared with 2014, primarily due to the decrease in gold equivalent ounces sold.

At December 31, 2015, the Company recorded an impairment charge of $24.2 million to reduce the carrying value of inventory to its net realizable value.  In addition, at June 30, 2015, the carrying value of inventory was written down by $24.5 million due to the extreme weather event, which resulted in an increase in the per ounce cost to complete inventory, primarily due to additional energy and other costs related to the return to normal production of the heap leach, and also due to the expected delay in the recovery of ounces from the heap leach over the subsequent months as a result of fewer tonnes being placed since March 2015.  No such impairment charges were recognized during 2014.  During 2015, other costs of $17.4 million were incurred, primarily related to the March 2015 extreme weather event.

21

Kupol (100% ownership and operator) — Russian Federation (a)

	Years ended December 31,
	2015			2014			Change			% Change
Operating Statistics
Tonnes ore mined (000’s) (b)	1,897			1,742			155			9	%
Tonnes processed (000’s)	1,680			1,665			15			1	%
Grade (grams/tonne):
Gold	13.52			13.51			0.01			0	%
Silver	100.75			92.91			7.84			8	%
Recovery:
Gold	95.4		%	94.9		%	0.5		%	1	%
Silver	86.7		%	85.1		%	1.6		%	2	%
Gold equivalent ounces: (c)
Produced	758,563			751,101			7,462			1	%
Sold	764,613			750,998			13,615			2	%
Silver ounces:
Produced (000’s)	4,700			4,273			427			10	%
Sold (000’s)	4,730			4,331			399			9	%
Financial Data (in millions)
Metal sales	$	883.2		$	947.5		$	(64.3	)	(7	)%
Production cost of sales	362.8			380.5			(17.7		)	(5	)%
Depreciation, depletion and amortization	271.3			254.7			16.6			7	%
Impairment charges	84.7			—			84.7			100	%
	164.4			312.3			(147.9		)	(47	)%
Exploration and business development	14.5			14.9			(0.4		)	(3	)%
Other	(0.2		)	—			(0.2		)	(100	)%
Segment operating earnings	$	150.1		$	297.4		$	(147.3	)	(50	)%

(a)   The Kupol segment includes the Kupol and Dvoinoye mines.

(b)   Includes 605,000 tonnes of ore mined from Dvoinoye during 2015, respectively (2014 - 439,000).

(c)“Gold equivalent ounces” include silver ounces produced and sold converted to a gold equivalent based on a ratio of the average spot market prices for the commodities for each period.  The ratio for 2015 was 73.92:1 (2014 - 66.29:1).

The Company acquired a 75% interest in the Kupol project in Far Eastern Russia on February 27, 2007 through the acquisition of Bema.  The remaining 25% interest was acquired from the State Unitary Enterprise of the Chukotka Autonomous Okrug on April 27, 2011.

2015 vs. 2014

Tonnes of ore mined increased by 9% compared with 2014, primarily due to increased mining activity at Dvoinoye.  During 2015, gold equivalent ounces produced were slightly higher compared with the same period in 2014, largely due to an increase in the proportion of higher grade Dvoinoye ore processed, partially offset by a less favourable gold equivalent ratio.  Gold equivalent ounces sold increased by 2% compared with 2014 due to the increase in gold equivalent ounces produced and timing of shipments.

During 2015, metal sales decreased by 7% compared with 2014 due to a decrease in metal prices realized, partially offset by the increase in gold equivalent ounces sold.  Production cost of sales decreased by 5% compared with 2014, primarily due to lower labour, reagent and fuel costs as a result of favourable foreign exchange movements.  Depreciation, depletion and amortization increased by 7% compared with 2014, primarily due to an increase in the depreciable asset base of the Dvoinoye mine, partially offset by an increase in the mineral reserves of the Kupol mine at December 31, 2014.  At December 31, 2015, the Company recorded an impairment charge of $84.7 million to reduce the carrying value of inventory to its net realizable value.

22

Tasiast (100% ownership and operator) — Mauritania

	Years ended December 31,
	2015			2014			Change			% Change
Operating Statistics
Tonnes ore mined (000’s)	5,195			16,647			(11,452		)	(69	)%
Tonnes processed (000’s) (a)	4,080			10,584			(6,504		)	(61	)%
Grade (grams/tonne) (b)	2.17			2.16			0.01			0	%
Recovery (b)	90.5		%	90.9		%	(0.4		)%	(0	)%
Gold equivalent ounces:
Produced	219,045			260,485			(41,440		)	(16	)%
Sold	216,040			252,668			(36,628		)	(14	)%
Financial Data (in millions)
Metal sales	$	249.4		$	319.8		$	(70.4	)	(22	)%
Production cost of sales	220.6			252.2			(31.6		)	(13	)%
Depreciation, depletion and amortization	80.9			66.6			14.3			21	%
Impairment charges	259.7			505.5			(245.8		)	(49	)%
	(311.8		)	(504.5		)	192.7			38	%
Exploration and business development	14.1			16.0			(1.9		)	(12	)%
Other	35.3			50.9			(15.6		)	(31	)%
Segment operating loss	$	(361.2	)	$	(571.4	)	$	210.2		37	%

(a)   Includes 1,538,000  tonnes placed on the dump leach pads during 2015 (2014 - 8,028,000 tonnes).

(b)Amount represents mill grade and recovery only.  Ore placed on the dump leach pads had an average grade of 0.55 grams per tonne during 2015 (2014 - 0.66 grams per tonne).  Due to the nature of dump leach operations, point-in-time recovery rates are not meaningful.

Kinross acquired its 100% interest in the Tasiast mine on September 17, 2010 upon completing its acquisition of Red Back Mining Inc. (“Red Back”).  The Tasiast mine is an open pit operation located in north-western Mauritania and is approximately 300 kilometres north of the capital Nouakchott.

2015 vs. 2014

During 2015, tonnes of ore mined decreased by 69% compared with 2014, primarily due to planned mine sequencing which involved mining only from the West Branch area of the deposit.  Tonnes of ore placed on the dump leach pads and the related ore grade decreased by 81% and 17%, respectively, mainly due to reduced availability of oxide ore.  Gold equivalent ounces produced decreased by 16% compared with 2014, primarily due to lower ounces recovered from the dump leach pads.

Metal sales decreased by 22% compared with 2014 due to decreases in metal prices realized and gold equivalent ounces sold.  Production cost of sales were lower by 13% compared with 2014, primarily due to the decrease in gold equivalent ounces sold, lower fuel costs, and reduced consumption of reagents as a result of the decrease in tonnes of ore processed.  These decreases were partially offset by an increase in maintenance costs.  Depreciation, depletion and amortization increased by 21% in 2015 compared with 2014, largely due to an increase in the depreciable asset base.   During 2015, other costs of $35.3 million included severance costs of $5.8 million.

As at December 31, 2015, the Company recorded impairment charges of $259.7 million, comprised of $147.0 million related to property, plant and equipment, $98.0 million related to inventory and $14.7 million related to other assets.  The non-cash impairment charge related to property, plant and equipment was primarily due to the reduction in the Company’s estimates of future metal prices.  The impairment charge for inventory was recognized to reduce the carrying value of certain supplies and metal inventory to net realizable value.

As at December 31, 2014, the Company recorded impairment charges of $505.5 million, comprised of $342.5 million related to property, plant and equipment and $163.0 million related to inventory.  The non-cash impairment charge for property, plant and equipment was primarily due to a change in estimated future operating costs, operating cost underperformance of the existing mill and a decision not to proceed with a 38,000 tonne per day mill expansion at that time.  The impairment charge of $163.0 million related to inventory was recorded to reduce the carrying value of inventory to its net realizable value.

23

Chirano (90% ownership and operator) — Ghana(a)

	Years ended December 31,
	2015			2014			Change			% Change
Operating Statistics
Tonnes ore mined (000’s)	3,046			3,221			(175		)	(5	)%
Tonnes processed (000’s)	3,492			3,144			348			11	%
Grade (grams/tonne)	2.51			3.08			(0.57		)	(19	)%
Recovery	90.6		%	91.9		%	(1.3		)%	(1	)%
Gold equivalent ounces:
Produced	256,098			286,542			(30,444		)	(11	)%
Sold	259,966			280,396			(20,430		)	(7	)%
Financial Data (in millions)
Metal sales	$	302.3		$	354.9		$	(52.6	)	(15	)%
Production cost of sales	179.7			165.8			13.9			8	%
Depreciation, depletion and amortization	175.0			159.7			15.3			10	%
Impairment charges	5.9			370.0			(364.1		)	(98	)%
	(58.3		)	(340.6		)	282.3			83	%
Exploration and business development	13.5			13.1			0.4			3	%
Other	(1.7		)	11.7			(13.4		)	(115	)%
Segment operating loss	$	(70.1	)	$	(365.4	)	$	295.3		(81	)%

(a)Operating and financial data are at 100% for all periods.

Kinross acquired its 90% interest in the Chirano mine on September 17, 2010 upon completing its acquisition of Red Back.  Chirano is located in southwestern Ghana, approximately 100 kilometres southwest of Kumasi, Ghana’s second largest city.  A 10% carried interest is held by the government of Ghana.

2015 vs. 2014

Tonnes of ore mined decreased by 5% compared with 2014, primarily due to reduced mining activity at the Tano open pit and the Akwaaba underground deposit, partially offset by an increase in mining activity at the Mamnao open pit and Paboase underground deposit.  Tonnes of ore processed were 11% higher compared with 2014, primarily due to repairs at the mill, which were completed in June 2014, along with increased mill availability.  Grades were 19% lower compared with 2014, largely due to declining contribution from the higher grade Akwaaba underground deposit.  During 2015, gold equivalent ounces produced were 11% lower compared with 2014, primarily due to the lower grades, partially offset by an increase in tonnes processed.  Gold equivalent ounces sold in 2015 exceeded production due to timing of shipments.

Metal sales were lower by 15% compared with 2014 due to decreases in metal prices realized and gold equivalent ounces sold.  During 2015, production cost of sales increased by 8% compared with 2014, primarily due to an increase in power costs and higher labour and underground mobile equipment maintenance costs as a result of the transition to underground self-perform mining in the second quarter of 2014.  Depreciation, depletion and amortization were 10% higher compared with 2014, largely due to an increase in the depreciable asset base attributable to the equipment acquired to self-perform underground mining operations and a decrease in mineral reserves at December 31, 2014.

At December 31, 2015, the Company recorded an impairment charge of $5.9 million to reduce the carrying value of inventory to its net realizable value.  As at December 31, 2014, the Company recorded impairment charges of $370.0 million, comprised of $365.4 million related to property, plant and equipment and $4.6 million related to inventory.  The non-cash impairment charge for property, plant and equipment was mainly a result of a decrease in exploration potential.  The impairment charge of $4.6 million related to inventory was recorded to reduce the carrying value of inventory to its net realizable value.

24

Discontinued operations

FDN — Ecuador

On June 10, 2013, the Company announced that it would not proceed with further development of the FDN project in Ecuador as the Government of Ecuador and Kinross were unable to agree on certain key economic and legal terms.

On October 21, 2014, Kinross announced that it had entered into an agreement with Lundin Gold Inc. (“Lundin Gold”) to sell all of its interest in Aurelian Resources Inc., (“Aurelian”) and the FDN project in Ecuador for $240.0 million in cash and shares.  On December 17, 2014, the Company completed the sale for gross cash proceeds of $150.0 million and $90.0 million in Lundin Gold common shares, resulting in an after-tax recovery of $238.0 million.

25

Impairment charges

	Years ended December 31,
(in millions)	2015		2014		Change			% Change
Goodwill (i)	$	—	$	145.3	$	(145.3	)	(100	)%
Property, plant and equipment (i)	439.5		938.5		(499.0		)	(53	)%
Inventory and other assets (ii)	259.5		167.6		91.9			55	%
Impairment charges	$	699.0	$	1,251.4	$	(552.4	)	(44	)%

i.Goodwill and property, plant and equipment

At December 31, 2015, upon completion of its annual assessment of the carrying values of its CGUs, the Company recorded an after-tax impairment charge of $430.2 million as a result of decreases in the Company’s short-term and long-term gold price estimates.  The impairment charge was entirely related to property, plant and equipment and included a charge of $240.2 million at Fort Knox, $147.0 million at Tasiast, and $43.0 million at Round Mountain.  The Fort Knox impairment charge is net of a tax recovery of $9.3 million, which was recorded within income tax expense.

At December 31, 2014, the Company recorded an after-tax impairment charge of $932.2 million, upon completion of its annual assessment of the carrying values of its CGUs.  The impairment charge included goodwill impairment of $145.3 million and property plant and equipment impairment of $786.9 million.  The property, plant and equipment impairment was net of a tax recovery of $127.9 million, and non-controlling interest of $23.7 million.

The following table summarizes the goodwill and property, plant and equipment impairment charges, and the related tax recovery, recognized as at December 31, 2014:

CGU	Goodwill		Property, plant and equipment		Tax recovery			Total after-tax impairment
Tasiast	$	—	$	342.5	$	—		$	342.5
Chirano	—		329.0		(115.2		)	213.8
Kettle River-Buckhorn	20.9		32.9		—			53.8
La Coipa	124.4		—		—			124.4
Lobo-Marte	—		118.5		—			118.5
White Gold	—		79.2		—			79.2
Total	$	145.3	$	902.1	$	(115.2	)	$	932.2

The impairment charge at Tasiast reflects a change in estimated future operating costs, operating cost underperformance of the existing mill and a decision not to proceed with a 38,000 tonne per day mill expansion at that time.  Chirano’s impairment charge was related to a decrease in exploration potential.

The impairment charges at La Coipa and Lobo-Marte were a result of declines in valuations in Chile and a reduction in mineral reserves at Lobo-Marte.  The charge at Kettle River-Buckhorn was a result of the mine approaching the end of its life and the charge at White Gold was a result of a reduction in exploration potential.

Also as a result of its annual impairment assessment at December 31, 2014, the Company recognized an impairment charge of $156.6 million related to its investment in Cerro Casale.  The impairment charge was recorded in other income (expense).

The significant estimates and assumptions used in the above mentioned impairment assessments are disclosed in Note 3 to the financial statements.

Impairment charges recognized against property, plant and equipment may be reversed if there are changes in the assumptions or estimates used in determining the recoverable amounts of the CGUs which indicate that a previously recognized impairment loss may no longer exist or may have decreased.

ii.Inventory and other assets

During 2015, the Company recognized impairment charges of $259.5 million related to inventory and other assets.  The inventory

26

impairment charge of $244.8 million was recorded to reduce the carrying value of certain metal and supplies inventory to net realizable value.  During 2014, impairment charges of $167.6 million were recorded within cost of sales to reduce the carrying value of inventory to its net realizable value.

Exploration and business development

	Years ended December 31,
(in millions)	2015		2014		Change		% Change
Exploration and business development	$	108.0	$	105.6	$	2.4	2	%

During 2015, exploration and business development expenses were $108.0 million compared with $105.6 million in 2014.  Of the total exploration and business development expense, expenditures on exploration totaled $79.9 million in 2015 compared with $79.6 million in 2014.  Capitalized exploration expenses, including capitalized evaluation expenditures, totaled $11.7 million compared with $2.1 million during 2014.

Kinross was active on more than 21 mine sites, near-mine and greenfield initiatives in 2015, with a total 339,708 metres drilled.  Kinross was active on more than 32 mine sites, near-mine and greenfield initiatives in 2014, with a total of 257,858 metres drilled.

General and administrative

	Years ended December 31,
(in millions)	2015		2014		Change		% Change
General and administrative	$	179.4	$	178.8	$	0.6	0	%

General and administrative costs include expenses related to the overall management of the business which are not part of direct mine operating costs. These are costs that are incurred at corporate offices located in Canada, Brazil, the Russian Federation, Chile, and the Canary Islands.

General and administrative costs in 2015 included $16.4 million of corporate related restructuring costs.

Other income (expense) — net

During 2015, other income (expense) decreased to an expense of $20.3 million from an expense of $215.5 million in 2014.  The discussion below details the significant changes in other income (expense) for 2015 compared with 2014.

	Years ended December 31,
(in millions)	2015			2014			Change			% Change (a)
Losses on sale of other assets - net	$	(16.2	)	$	(3.1	)	$	(13.1	)	nm
Impairment of investments	(7.6		)	(158.1		)	150.5			95	%
Foreign exchange losses	(30.6		)	(50.1		)	19.5			39	%
Net non-hedge derivative losses	(3.4		)	(5.1		)	1.7			33	%
Other	37.5			0.9			36.6			nm
Other income (expense) - net	$	(20.3	)	$	(215.5	)	$	195.2		91	%

(a)  “nm” means not meaningful.

Gains (losses) on sale of other assets - net

During 2015, the sale of other assets resulted in a loss of $16.2 million compared with a loss of $3.1 million in 2014.

27

Impairment of investments

During 2015, the Company recognized impairment charges of $7.6 million on certain of its available-for-sale investments due to a significant or prolonged decline in the fair value of the investments.  As at December 31, 2014, the Company recognized an impairment charge of $158.1 million, of which $156.6 million was related to the impairment of the Company’s investment in Cerro Casale and $1.5 million related to the impairment of certain of its available-for-sale investments.

Foreign exchange losses

During 2015, foreign exchange losses were $30.6 million compared with losses of $50.1 million in 2014.  The foreign exchange losses of $30.6 million in 2015 were mainly due to the translation of net monetary assets denominated in foreign currencies to the U.S. dollar, with the U.S. dollar having strengthened against the Russian rouble, Brazilian real, Chilean peso, Canadian dollar, Ghanaian cedi and Mauritanian ouguiya at December 31, 2015 relative to December 31, 2014.

The foreign exchange losses of $50.1 million during 2014 were largely due to the translation of net monetary assets denominated in foreign currencies to the U.S. dollar, with the U.S. dollar having strengthened against the Brazilian real, Ghanaian cedi, Chilean peso, Russian rouble, Canadian dollar and Mauritanian ouguiya at December 31, 2014 relative to December 31, 2013.

Other

Other gains of $37.5 million recognized in 2015 included insurance recoveries of $31.7 million related to Chirano and Maricunga.

Finance expense

	Years ended December 31,
(in millions)	2015		2014		Change		% Change
Finance expense	$	96.0	$	80.1	$	15.9	20	%

Finance expense includes accretion on reclamation and remediation obligations and interest expense.

Finance expense increased by $15.9 million compared with 2014, largely due to an increase in interest expense.  During 2015, interest expense was $68.2 million compared with $52.0 million in 2014, with the increase primarily due to a reduction in interest capitalized as well as additional interest recognized on the $500.0 million senior notes issued in March 2014.  Interest capitalized was $40.5 million in 2015 compared with $62.7 million in 2014, with the decrease mainly due to lower qualifying capital expenditures.

Income and mining taxes

Kinross is subject to tax in various jurisdictions including Canada, the United States, Brazil, Chile, the Russian Federation, Mauritania, and Ghana.

Income tax expense in 2015 was $141.7 million, compared with an income tax expense of $109.7 million in 2014.  The $141.7 million tax expense in 2015 included a $30.3 million recovery due to impairment charges and $132.9 million of expense due to re-measurements of deferred tax assets and liabilities, as a result of significant fluctuations in foreign exchange rates with respect to the Brazilian real and the Russian rouble.  The $109.7 million tax expense in 2014 included $137.8 million of recovery due to impairment charges and $145.5 million of expense due to re-measurements of deferred tax assets and liabilities as a result of income tax reforms enacted in Chile and significant fluctuations in foreign exchange rates with respect to the Brazilian real and the Russian rouble.  Kinross’ combined federal and provincial statutory tax rate for both 2015 and 2014 was 26.5%.

There are a number of factors that can significantly impact the Company’s effective tax rate, including the geographic distribution of income, varying rates in different jurisdictions, the non-recognition of tax assets, mining allowance, foreign currency exchange rate movements, changes in tax laws, and the impact of specific transactions and assessments.

Due to the number of factors that can potentially impact the effective tax rate and the sensitivity of the tax provision to these factors, as discussed above, it is expected that the Company’s effective tax rate will fluctuate in future periods.

28

6.LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES

The following table summarizes Kinross’ cash flow activity:

	Years ended December 31,
(in millions)	2015			2014			Change			% Change
Cash flow
Of continuing operations provided from operating activities	$	831.6		$	858.1		$	(26.5	)	(3	)%
Of continuing operations used in investing activities	(632.6		)	(634.6		)	2.0			0	%
Of continuing operations used in financing activities	(131.7		)	(94.2		)	(37.5		)	(40	)%
Of discontinued operations (a)	1.0			139.4			(138.4		)	(99	)%
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents of continuing operations	(7.9		)	(19.7		)	11.8			60	%
Increase in cash and cash equivalents	60.4			249.0			(188.6		)	(76	)%
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period	983.5			734.5			249.0			34	%
Cash and cash equivalents, end of period	$	1,043.9		$	983.5		$	60.4		6	%

(a) On June 10, 2013, the Company announced its decision to cease development of FDN.  As a result, FDN was classified as a discontinued operation.  On December 17, 2014, the Company sold its interest in FDN.

Cash and cash equivalent balances increased by $60.4 million in 2015 compared with an increase of $249.0 million in 2014.  Detailed discussions regarding cash flow movements from continuing operations are noted below.

Operating Activities

2015 vs. 2014

Net cash flow provided from operating activities decreased by $26.5 million in 2015 compared with 2014. The decrease in cash flows was largely the result of the decrease in margins, partially offset by favourable working capital changes.

Investing Activities

2015 vs. 2014

Net cash flow used in investing activities was $632.6 million in 2015 compared with $634.6 million in 2014.  The primary use of cash in 2015 was for capital expenditures of $610.0 million and additions to long-term investments and other assets of $59.7 million, partially offset by a decrease in restricted cash of $30.8 million.  The primary use of cash in 2014 was for capital expenditures of $631.8 million and additions to long-term investments and other assets of $55.5 million, partially offset by the proceeds on disposal of property, plant and equipment of $30.5 million.

29

The following table presents a breakdown of capital expenditures on a cash basis:

	Year ended December 31,				2015 vs. 2014
(in millions)	2015		2014		Change			% Change
Operating segments
Fort Knox	$	140.8	$	86.0	$	54.8		64	%
Round Mountain	48.5		44.6		3.9			9	%
Kettle River - Buckhorn	0.6		6.8		(6.2		)	(91	)%
Paracatu	112.7		112.6		0.1			0	%
Maricunga	24.5		29.7		(5.2		)	(18	)%
Kupol (a)	55.9		91.3		(35.4		)	(39	)%
Tasiast	161.2		181.0		(19.8		)	(11	)%
Chirano	30.5		42.2		(11.7		)	(28	)%
Non-operating segment
Corporate and Other (b)	35.3		37.6		(2.3		)	(6	)%
Total	$	610.0	$	631.8	$	(21.8	)	(3	)%

(a)Includes $14.5 million of capital expenditures at Dvoinoye during 2015  (2014 - $34.1 million).

(b)“Corporate and Other” includes corporate and other non-operating assets (including La Coipa, Lobo-Marte and White Gold).

During 2015, capital expenditures decreased by $21.8 million compared with 2014.  The decrease in capital expenditures was primarily due to decreased spending at Kupol and Tasiast, partially offset by increased spending at Fort Knox related to Phase 8.

Financing Activities

2015 vs. 2014

Net cash flow used in financing activities was $131.7 million in 2015 compared with cash used of $94.2 million in 2014.  During 2015, the Company made repayments of debt of $80.0 million on the Kupol loan, which resulted in its full repayment.  During 2014, the Company made a net repayment of debt of $67.1 million, which included repayments of $500.0 million of the term loan and $60.0 million of the Kupol loan, partially offset by net proceeds of $492.9 million received from the issuance of senior notes on March 6, 2014.  In addition, total interest paid during 2015 was $91.5 million, of which $48.8 million was included in financing activities.  Total interest paid during 2014 was $82.4 million, of which $20.6 million was included in financing activities.

Cash Flow from Discontinued Operations

Net cash flow from discontinued operations decreased by $138.4 million compared with 2014.  The decrease in cash flow was due to gross cash proceeds of $150.0 million received in 2014 on completion of the sale of Aurelian and the FDN project.

30

Balance Sheet

	As at December 31,
(in millions)	2015		2014		2013
Cash and cash equivalents	$	1,043.9	$	983.5	$	734.5
Current assets	$	2,292.1	$	2,587.1	$	2,405.8
Total assets	$	7,735.4	$	8,951.4	$	10,286.7
Current liabilities, including current portion of long-term debt	$	701.8	$	604.4	$	712.9
Total long-term financial liabilities(a)	$	2,452.7	$	2,779.0	$	2,757.5
Total debt, including current portion	$	1,981.4	$	2,058.1	$	2,119.6
Total liabilities	$	3,802.2	$	4,059.6	$	4,196.8
Common shareholders’ equity	$	3,889.3	$	4,843.0	$	6,014.0
Non-controlling interest	$	43.9	$	48.8	$	75.9
Statistics
Working capital (b)	$	1,590.3	$	1,982.7	$	1,692.9
Working capital ratio (c)	3.27:1		4.28:1		3.37:1

(a) Includes long-term debt, provisions, and unrealized fair value of derivative liabilities.

(b) Calculated as current assets less current liabilities.

(c) Calculated as current assets divided by current liabilities.

At December 31, 2015, Kinross had cash and cash equivalents of $1.0 billion, an increase of $60.4 million from the balance as at December 31, 2014, primarily due to net operating cash flows of $831.6 million, partially offset by cash outflows of $610.0 million used in the purchase of property, plant and equipment, $59.7 million for additions to long-term investments and other assets, and $80.0 million for the repayment of the Kupol loan.  Current assets decreased to $2,292.1 million, mainly as a result of inventory impairment charges, partially offset by the increase in cash and cash equivalents.  Total assets decreased by $1,216.0 million to $7,735.4 million, largely due to impairment charges related to inventory and property, plant and equipment.  Current liabilities increased to $701.8 million, largely due to the increase in the current portion of long-term debt related to the $250.0 million senior notes due in August 2016. This was partially offset by the $80.0 million repayment of the Kupol loan during 2015.  Total debt decreased by $76.7 million to $1,981.4 million, primarily due to the repayment of the Kupol loan.

At December 31, 2014, Kinross had cash and cash equivalents of $983.5 million, an increase of $249.0 million from the balance as at December 31, 2013, primarily due to net operating cash flows of $858.1 million and proceeds of $150.0 million received from the sale of its interest in Aurelian and the FDN project, partially offset by cash flows of $631.8 million used in the purchase of property, plant and equipment and the periodic repayment of $60.0 million on the Kupol loan.  Current assets increased to $2,587.1 million, primarily due to an increase in cash and cash equivalents.  Total assets decreased by $1,335.3 million to $8,951.4 million, primarily due to the recognition of impairment charges related to property, plant and equipment, goodwill, inventory and investment in associate, partially offset by an increase in current assets and long-term investments.  Current liabilities decreased to $604.4 million, largely due to a decrease in accounts payable and accrued liabilities.  Total debt decreased by $61.5 million to $2,058.1 million, primarily due to repayments of $500.0 million of the term loan and $60.0 million of the Kupol loan, partially offset by net proceeds of $492.9 million received from the issuance of senior notes on March 6, 2014.

As of February 9, 2016, there were 1,146.5 million common shares of the Company issued and outstanding.  In addition, at the same date, the Company had 13.3 million share purchase options outstanding under its share option plan.

31

Financings and Credit Facilities

Senior notes

On August 22, 2011, the Company completed a $1.0 billion offering of debt securities, consisting of $250.0 million principal amount of 3.625% senior notes due 2016, $500.0 million principal amount of 5.125% senior notes due 2021 and $250.0 million principal amount of 6.875% senior notes due 2041.  Kinross received net proceeds of $980.9 million from the offering, after discount and payment of fees and expenses related to the offering.

On March 6, 2014, the Company completed a $500.0 million offering of debt securities consisting of 5.950% senior notes due 2024.  Kinross received net proceeds of $492.9 million from the offering, after discount and payment of fees and expenses related to the offering.

The senior notes referred to above (collectively, the “notes”) pay interest semi-annually.  Except as noted below, the notes are redeemable by the Company, in whole or part, for cash at any time prior to maturity, at a redemption price equal to the greater of 100% of the principal amount or the sum of the present value of the remaining scheduled principal and interest payments on the notes discounted at the applicable treasury rate, as defined in the indentures, plus a premium of between 40 and 50 basis points, plus accrued interest, if any.  Within three months of maturity of the notes due in 2021 and 2024 and within six months of maturity of the notes due in 2041, the Company can only redeem the notes in whole at 100% of the principal amount plus accrued interest, if any.  In addition, the Company is required to make an offer to repurchase the notes prior to maturity upon certain fundamental changes at a repurchase price equal to 101% of the principal amount of the notes plus accrued and unpaid interest to the repurchase date, if any.

Kupol loan

On December 21, 2011, the Company completed a $200.0 million non-recourse loan from a group of international financial institutions.  The non-recourse loan carried a term of five years with a maturity date of September 30, 2016, and had an annual interest of LIBOR plus 2.5%.  Semi-annual principal repayments of $30.0 million commenced in March 2013 and continued through September 30, 2015. Principal repayments were scheduled for March 31, 2016 and September 30, 2016, in the amounts of $13.0 million and $7.0 million, respectively.  On September 30, 2015, the Company prepaid the remaining $20 million, resulting in full repayment of the loan.

Corporate revolving credit and term loan facilities

In August 2012, the Company completed a new unsecured term loan facility for $1,000.0 million.  The facility was set to mature on August 10, 2015, with the full amount having been drawn on August 22, 2012.  Also, in August 2012, under the same agreement, the Company amended the revolving credit facility increasing the available amount to $1,500.0 million and extending the maturity date from March 2015 to August 2017.

On June 10, 2013, the Company amended its $1,500.0 million revolving credit facility and $1,000.0 million term loan to extend the respective maturity dates and remove the minimum tangible net worth covenant.  The revolving credit facility’s term was extended by one year to August 10, 2018 from August 10, 2017, and the term loan was extended by two years to mature on August 10, 2017 from August 10, 2015.

On March 10, 2014, the Company repaid $500.0 million of the term loan, leaving a balance of $500.0 million outstanding.  On July 28, 2014, the Company extended the maturity dates of the term loan and revolving credit facility by one year to August 10, 2018 and August 10, 2019, respectively.  On July 24, 2015, the Company extended the maturity dates of the term loan and revolving credit facility by one year to August 10, 2019 and August 10, 2020, respectively.  As at December 31, 2015, the Company had utilized $31.3 million (December 31, 2014 — $32.1 million) of the amended revolving credit facility.  The amount utilized was entirely for letters of credit.  On January 4, 2016, the Company drew $175.0 million in cash on the revolving credit facility.

32

Loan interest for both the amended revolving credit facility and the amended term loan is variable, set at LIBOR plus an interest rate margin which is dependent on the Company’s credit rating.  Based on the Company’s credit rating at December 31, 2015, interest charges and fees, are as follows:

Type of credit
Dollar based LIBOR loan:
Term Loan	LIBOR plus 1.65	%
Revolving credit facility	LIBOR plus 1.70	%
Letters of credit	1.13-1.70	%
Standby fee applicable to unused availability	0.34	%

When the term loan was originally arranged in August 2012, the Company entered into interest rate swaps to swap the underlying 1-month LIBOR interest rate into a fixed rate of 0.49% for the original three year term ending August 10, 2015.  During the second quarter of 2013, the term loan maturity was extended to August 2017.  Accordingly, the interest rate swaps only hedged the term loan’s interest rate exposure until the original maturity of August 2015.  Concurrent with the repayment of $500.0 million of the term loan on March 10, 2014, the Company closed out 60% of the interest rate swaps.  The remaining outstanding interest rate swaps that hedged 80% of the remaining underlying floating rate term loan matured on August 10, 2015.

The amended revolving credit facility and unsecured term loan were arranged under one credit agreement, which contains various covenants including limits on indebtedness, asset sales and liens.  The significant financial covenant is a ratio of net debt to EBITDA, as defined in the agreement, of no more than 3.5:1.  The Company is in compliance with this covenant at December 31, 2015.

Other

On June 15, 2012, the Company entered into an amendment to increase the amount of its Letter of Credit guarantee facility with EDC from $136.0 million to $200.0 million and to extend the maturity date to March 31, 2015.  On July 17, 2014, the Company further amended this facility to increase the amount from $200.0 million to $250.0 million.  Effective March 31, 2015, the maturity date for this facility was extended to June 30, 2016.  Letters of credit guaranteed by this facility are solely for reclamation liabilities at Fort Knox, Round Mountain, and Kettle River—Buckhorn.  Fees related to letters of credit under this facility are 1.00% to 1.25%.  As at December 31, 2015, $212.7 million (December 31, 2014 - $207.2 million) was utilized under this facility.

In addition, at December 31, 2015, the Company had $33.4 million (December 31, 2014 - $49.3 million) in letters of credit outstanding in respect of its operations in Brazil, Mauritania and Ghana.  These letters of credit have been issued pursuant to arrangements with certain international banks.

From time to time, the Company’s operations in Brazil may borrow U.S. dollars from Brazilian banks on a short-term unsecured basis to meet working capital requirements.  As at December 31, 2015 and 2014, $nil was outstanding under such borrowings.

The following table outlines the credit facility utilization and availability:

	As at December 31,
(in millions)	2015			2014
Utilization of revolving credit facility	$	(31.3	)	$	(32.1	)
Utilization of EDC facility	(212.7		)	(207.2		)
Borrowings	$	(244.0	)	$	(239.3	)
Available under revolving credit facility	$	1,468.7		$	1,467.9
Available under EDC credit facility	37.3			42.8
Available credit	$	1,506.0		$	1,510.7

Total debt of $1,981.4 million at December 31, 2015 consists of $1,483.4 million for the senior notes and $498.0 million for the corporate term loan facility.  The current portion of this debt is $249.5 million at December 31, 2015.

33

Liquidity Outlook

As discussed in Section 4 of the MD&A, on January 11, 2016, the Company completed its acquisition of Bald Mountain and the remaining 50% interest in Round Mountain for $610.0 million in cash.  In addition, the Company expects to repay $250.0 million of debt related to the 3.625% senior notes.

We believe that the Company’s existing cash and cash equivalents balance of $1,043.9 million, available credit of $1,506.0 million, and expected operating cash flows based on current assumptions (noted in Section 3 of this MD&A) will be sufficient to fund operations, our forecasted exploration and capital expenditures (noted in Section 3 of this MD&A), reclamation and remediation obligations currently estimated for 2016 and the payments discussed above.  Prior to any capital investments, consideration is given to the cost and availability of various sources of capital resources.

With respect to longer term capital expenditure funding requirements, the Company continues to have discussions with lending institutions that have been active in the jurisdictions in which the Company’s development projects are located.  Some of the jurisdictions in which the Company operates have seen the participation of lenders including export credit agencies, development banks and multi-lateral agencies.  The Company believes the capital from these institutions combined with traditional bank loans and capital available through debt capital market transactions may fund a portion of the Company’s longer term capital expenditure requirements.  Another possible source of capital could be proceeds from the sale of non-core assets.  These capital sources together with operating cash flow and the Company’s active management of its operations and development activities will enable the Company to maintain an appropriate overall liquidity position.

Contractual Obligations and Commitments

The following table summarizes our long-term financial liabilities and off-balance sheet contractual obligations as at December 31, 2015:

(in millions)	Total		2016		2017		2018		2019		2020		2021 and thereafter
Long-term debt obligations (a)	$	2,000.0	$	250.0	$	—	$	—	$	500.0	$	—	$	1,250.0
Operating lease obligations	28.6		9.2		7.7		5.2		4.4		1.6		0.5
Purchase obligations (b)	612.4		330.2		183.3		53.1		3.1		2.1		40.6
Reclamation and remediation obligations	1,246.6		38.0		49.6		36.3		34.7		122.8		965.2
Interest and other fees (a)	928.3		99.0		88.6		88.6		85.1		76.2		490.8
Derivative liabilities - net	15.0		15.0		—		—		—		—		—
Total	$	4,830.9	$	741.4	$	329.2	$	183.2	$	627.3	$	202.7	$	2,747.1

(a)  Debt repayments are based on amounts due pursuant to the terms of the loan agreements.  Projected interest payments on variable rate debt are based on interest rates in effect on December 31, 2015.

(b) Includes both capital and operating commitments, of which $19.9 million relates to commitments for capital expenditures.

The Company manages its exposure to fluctuations in input commodity prices, currency exchange rates and interest rates, by entering into derivative financial instruments from time to time, in accordance with the Company’s risk management policy.

34

The following table provides a summary of derivative contracts outstanding at December 31, 2015, all of which mature in 2016:

Foreign currency	2016
Brazilian real forward buy contracts (in millions of U.S. dollars)	$	67.4
Average price (Brazilian reais)	3.75
Chilean peso forward buy contracts (in millions of U.S. dollars)	$	37.0
Average price (Chilean pesos)	653.02
Canadian dollar forward buy contracts (in millions of U.S. dollars)	$	45.0
Average price (Canadian dollars)	1.26
Energy
Oil swap contracts (barrels)	404,400
Average price	$	47.55

The following new derivative contracts were entered into during 2015:

·$80.0 million Canadian dollars at an average rate of 1.25 with maturities in 2015 and 2016;

·$62.7 million Chilean pesos at an average rate of 645.34 with maturities in 2015 and 2016;

·$67.4 million Brazilian reais at an average rate of 3.75 maturing in 2016;

·570,520 barrels of crude oil at an average rate of $48.74 per barrel with maturities in 2015 and 2016; and

·25,168 tonnes of gasoil at an average rate of $488.59 per tonne which matured in 2015.

Subsequent to December 31, 2015, the following new derivative contracts were entered into:

·$16.5 million Canadian dollars at an average rate of 1.43 maturing in 2016 and the first quarter of 2017; and

·109,500 barrels of crude oil at an average rate of $37.63 per barrel maturing in 2016 and the first quarter of 2017.

When the term loan was originally arranged in August 2012, the Company entered into interest rate swaps to swap the underlying 1-month LIBOR interest rate into a fixed rate of 0.49% for the original three year term ending August 10, 2015.  During the second quarter of 2013, the term loan maturity was extended to August 2017.  Accordingly, the interest rate swaps only hedged the term loan’s interest rate exposure until the original maturity of August 2015.  Concurrent with the repayment of $500.0 million of the term loan on March 10, 2014, the Company closed out 60% of the interest rate swaps. The remaining outstanding interest rate swaps that hedged 80% of the remaining underlying floating rate term loan matured on August 10, 2015.

The Company enters into total return swaps (“TRS”) as economic hedges of the Company’s deferred share units (“DSUs”) and cash-settled restricted share units (“RSUs”).  Hedge accounting was not applied to the TRSs.

At December 31, 2015, 5,695,000 TRS units were outstanding.  The following TRS contracts were entered into during 2015:

·79,000 units at an average price of CDN$3.51 to hedge DSUs.

·3,000,000 units at an average price of CDN$3.48 to hedge cash-settled RSUs.

35

Fair value of derivative instruments

The fair values of derivative instruments are noted in the table below:

	As at December 31,
(in millions)	2015			2014
Asset (liability)
Interest rate swaps	$	—		$	(0.7	)
Foreign currency forward contracts	(13.8		)	(48.8		)
Energy swap contracts	(2.2		)	(9.9		)
Total return swap contracts	1.0			(0.6		)
	$	(15.0	)	$	(60.0	)

Contingencies

The Company is obligated to pay $20.0 million to Barrick if a positive production decision is made relating to the Cerro Casale project.

Other legal matters

The Company is from time to time involved in legal proceedings, arising in the ordinary course of its business. Typically, and currently, except in the case of the actions described below, the amount of ultimate liability with respect to these actions will not, in the opinion of management, materially affect Kinross’ financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

A putative securities class action complaint was filed on February 16, 2012 (the “U.S. Complaint”), entitled Bo Young Cha v. Kinross Gold Corporation et al., in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (the “Court”).  The U.S. Complaint named as defendants the Company, Tye Burt, former President and CEO, Paul Barry, former Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Glen Masterman, former Senior Vice President, Exploration and Kenneth Thomas, former Senior Vice President, Projects.  On May 31, 2012, the Court selected the City of Austin Police Retirement System (“City of Austin”) to be lead plaintiff.  Pursuant to an order of the Court, City of Austin filed an amended Complaint on July 23, 2012 (the “Amended U.S. Complaint”).  On March 26, 2015, the parties filed settlement papers with the Court, and asked it to grant an order preliminarily approving the settlement. The action was settled for $33 million, without admission of liability by the defendants and with the Company’s insurance carriers directly funding the full settlement.  On October 15, 2015, the Court granted final approval of the settlement. Having received final Court approval of the settlement agreement, without any valid objections, all class members (excepting only the six opting out, amounting to only 1,633 shares) were bound by the settlement and deemed to have released Kinross and the other defendants from any claims related to the Amended U.S. Complaint, with all further proceedings in the action being forever stayed.  The time to appeal the final Court approval has passed.

A notice of action in a proposed class proceeding under Ontario’s Class Proceedings Act, 1992, was filed in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice (the “Ontario Court”) on March 12, 2012, entitled Trustees of the Musicians’ Pension Fund of Canada v. Kinross Gold Corporation et al. (the “Ontario Action”). A statement of claim in the Ontario Action was subsequently served on April 11, 2012.  The Ontario Action named as defendants the Company, Tye Burt, former President and CEO, Paul Barry, former Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Glen Masterman, former Senior Vice President, Exploration, and Kenneth Thomas, former Senior Vice President, Projects.  On April 22, 2015, the parties advised the Ontario Court that they had agreed to a settlement of all claims in the Ontario Action.  On June 17, 2015, the Ontario Court approved the settlement.  All of the claims in the Ontario Action were settled for CDN$12.5 million, without any admission of liability by the defendants and with the Company’s insurance carriers directly funding the full settlement.  Pursuant to the settlement, the Ontario Action has been dismissed in its entirety.  All class members are bound by the settlement and are deemed to have released Kinross and the other defendants from all claims that were raised in the Ontario Action or could have been raised in the Ontario Action.

On January 16, 2015, a notice of action in a proposed class proceeding under Ontario’s Class Proceedings Act, 1992 was filed in the Ontario Court, entitled Frankfurt-Trust Invest Luxemburg AG v. Kinross Gold Corporation (the “Frankfurt Action”).  Pursuant to the settlement of the Ontario Action, the Frankfurt Action was dismissed in its entirety and all of the proposed class members are bound by the releases granted in the Ontario action.

36

7.SUMMARY OF QUARTERLY INFORMATION

	2015												2014
(in millions, except per share amounts)	Q4			Q3			Q2			Q1			Q4			Q3			Q2			Q1
Metal sales	$	706.2		$	809.4		$	755.2		$	781.4		$	791.3		$	945.7		$	911.9		$	817.4
Net earnings (loss) from continuing operations attributable to common shareholders	$	(841.9	)	$	(52.7	)	$	(83.2	)	$	(6.7	)	$	(1,473.5	)	$	(4.3	)	$	46.0		$	31.8
Net earnings (loss) from discontinued operations after-tax (a)	$	—		$	—		$	—		$	—		$	238.4		$	(0.8	)	$	(1.9	)	$	(2.2	)
Basic earnings (loss) per share from continuing operations attributable to common shareholders	$	(0.73	)	$	(0.05	)	$	(0.07	)	$	(0.01	)	$	(1.29	)	$	—		$	0.04		$	0.03
Diluted earnings (loss) per share from continuing operations attributable to common shareholders	$	(0.73	)	$	(0.05	)	$	(0.07	)	$	(0.01	)	$	(1.29	)	$	—		$	0.04		$	0.03
Net cash flow of continuing operations provided from operating activities	$	182.2		$	232.1		$	167.2		$	250.1		$	179.2		$	304.5		$	163.9		$	210.5

(a) On June 10, 2013, the Company announced its decision to cease development of FDN.  As a result, FDN was classified as a discontinued operation.  On December 17, 2014, the Company sold its interest in FDN.

The Company’s results over the past several quarters have been driven primarily by fluctuations in the gold price, input costs and changes in the gold equivalent ounces sold.  Fluctuations in the silver price have also affected results.

During the fourth quarter of 2015, revenue decreased to $706.2 million on total gold equivalent ounces sold of 638,040 compared with $791.3 million on sales of 658,730 total gold equivalent ounces during the fourth quarter of 2014.  The average gold price realized in the fourth quarter of 2015 was $1,108 per ounce compared with $1,201 per ounce in the fourth quarter of 2014.

Production cost of sales decreased to $439.4 million in the fourth quarter of 2015 compared with $469.2 million in the same period of 2014, primarily due to decreases in gold equivalent ounces sold and a decrease in input costs at various sites.

Fluctuations in the foreign exchange rates have also affected results.  Depreciation, depletion and amortization varied between each of the above quarters largely due to changes in gold equivalent ounces sold and depreciable asset bases.  In addition, changes in mineral reserves during each of these years affected depreciation, depletion and amortization for quarters in the subsequent year.

In the fourth quarter of 2015, the Company recorded an after-tax impairment charge of $430.2 million relating to its Fort Knox, Tasiast and Round Mountain CGUs, net of a tax recovery of $9.3 million, and inventory and other asset impairment charges of $235.0 million.  In addition, during the second quarter of 2015, the Company recognized an inventory impairment charge of $24.5 million at Maricunga.

In the fourth quarter of 2014, the Company recorded after-tax impairment charges of $932.2 million relating to several of its CGUs, net of a tax recovery of $127.9 million and non-controlling interest of $23.7 million.

During the fourth quarter of 2014, the Company completed the sale of its FDN project for gross cash proceeds of $150.0 million and $90.0 million of Lundin Gold common shares, resulting in an after-tax recovery of $238.0 million.

Operating cash flows increased slightly to $182.2 million in the fourth quarter of 2015, compared with $179.2 million in the same period of 2014, primarily due to more favourable working capital changes.

37

8.DISCLOSURE CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES AND INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING

Pursuant to regulations adopted by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (the “Sarbanes-Oxley Act”) and those of the Canadian Securities Administrators, Kinross’ management evaluates the effectiveness of the design and operation of the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures, and internal controls over financial reporting. This evaluation is done under the supervision of, and with the participation of, the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer.

As of the end of the period covered by this MD&A and the accompanying financial statements, Kinross’ management evaluated the effectiveness of its disclosure controls and procedures and internal controls over financial reporting.  In making this assessment, management used the Internal Controls - Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of the Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission.  Based on that evaluation, the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer have concluded that Kinross’ disclosure controls and procedures, and internal controls over financial reporting were effective as at December 31, 2015.  There has been no change in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting during the year ended December 31, 2015 that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.

Limitations of Controls and Procedures

Kinross’ management, including the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer, believes that any disclosure controls and procedures and internal controls over financial reporting, no matter how well designed and operated, can have inherent limitations. Therefore, even those systems determined to be effective can provide only reasonable assurance that the objectives of the control system are met.

9.CRITICAL ACCOUNTING POLICIES, ESTIMATES AND ACCOUNTING CHANGES

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

Kinross’ accounting policies are described in Note 3 to the financial statements.  The preparation of the Company’s financial statements in accordance with IFRS requires management to make judgments, estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosures of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period.  Estimates and assumptions are continually evaluated and are based on management’s experience and other factors, including expectations of future events that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances.  Actual results could differ from these estimates.

The areas which require management to make significant judgments, estimates and assumptions in determining carrying values include, but are not limited to:

Mineral Reserves and Mineral Resources

Proven and probable mineral reserves are the economically mineable parts of the Company’s measured and indicated mineral resources demonstrated by at least a preliminary feasibility study.  The Company estimates its proven and probable mineral reserves and measured and indicated and inferred mineral resources based on information compiled by appropriately qualified persons.  The information relating to the geological data on the size, depth and shape of the ore body requires complex geological judgments to interpret the data.  The estimation of future cash flows related to proven and probable mineral reserves is based upon factors such as estimates of foreign exchange rates, commodity prices, future capital requirements and production costs along with geological assumptions and judgments made in estimating the size and grade of the ore body.  Changes in the proven and probable mineral reserves or measured and indicated and inferred mineral resources estimates may impact the carrying value of property, plant and equipment, goodwill, reclamation and remediation obligations, recognition of deferred tax amounts and depreciation, depletion and amortization.

Purchase Price Allocation

Applying the acquisition method to business combinations requires each identifiable asset and liability to be measured at its acquisition-date fair value.  The excess, if any, of the fair value of consideration over the fair value of the net identifiable assets acquired is recognized as goodwill.  The determination of the acquisition-date fair values often requires management to make assumptions and estimates about future events.  The assumptions and estimates relating to determining the fair value of property, plant and equipment acquired generally require a high degree of judgment, and include estimates of mineral reserves acquired, future metal prices and discount rates.  Changes in any of the assumptions or estimates used in determining the fair value of acquired assets and liabilities could affect the amounts assigned to assets, liabilities and goodwill in the purchase price allocation.

38

Depreciation, Depletion and Amortization

Plants and other facilities used directly in mining activities are depreciated using the units-of-production (“UOP”) method over a period not to exceed the estimated life of the ore body based on recoverable ounces to be mined from proven and probable mineral reserves. Mobile and other equipment is depreciated, net of residual value, on a straight-line basis, over the useful life of the equipment but does not exceed the related estimated life of the mine based on proven and probable mineral reserves.

The calculation of the UOP rate, and therefore the annual depreciation, depletion and amortization expense, could be materially affected by changes in the underlying estimates.  Changes in estimates can be the result of actual future production differing from current forecasts of future production, expansion of mineral reserves through exploration activities, differences between estimated and actual costs of mining and differences in gold price used in the estimation of mineral reserves.

Significant judgment is involved in the determination of useful life and residual values for the computation of depreciation, depletion and amortization and no assurance can be given that actual useful lives and residual values will not differ significantly from current assumptions.

Impairment of Goodwill and Long-lived Assets

Goodwill is tested for impairment annually or more frequently if there is an indication of impairment.  The carrying value of property, plant and equipment is reviewed each reporting period to determine whether there is any indication of impairment.  If the carrying amount of an asset exceeds its recoverable amount, the asset is impaired and an impairment loss is recognized in the consolidated statement of operations. The assessment of fair values, including those of the CGUs for purposes of testing goodwill, require the use of estimates and assumptions for recoverable production, long-term commodity prices, discount rates, NAV multiples, foreign exchange rates, future capital requirements and operating performance.  Changes in any of the assumptions or estimates used in determining the fair value of goodwill or other assets could impact the impairment analysis.  Impairment charges recognized against property, plant and equipment may be reversed if there are changes in the assumptions or estimates used in determining the recoverable amounts of the CGUs which indicate that a previously recognized impairment loss may no longer exist or may have decreased.

Inventories

Expenditures incurred, and depreciation, depletion and amortization of assets used in mining and processing activities are deferred and accumulated as the cost of ore in stockpiles, ore on leach pads, in-process and finished metal inventories. These deferred amounts are carried at the lower of average cost or net realizable value (“NRV”).  Write-downs of ore in stockpiles, ore on leach pads, in-process and finished metal inventories resulting from NRV impairments are reported as a component of current period costs. The primary factors that influence the need to record write-downs include prevailing and long-term metal prices and prevailing costs for production inputs such as labour, fuel and energy, materials and supplies, as well as realized ore grades and actual production levels.

Costs are attributed to the leach pads based on current mining costs, including applicable depreciation, depletion and amortization relating to mining operations incurred up to the point of placing the ore on the pad.  Costs are removed from the leach pad based on the average cost per recoverable ounce of gold on the leach pad as the gold is recovered. Estimates of recoverable gold on the leach pads are calculated from the quantities of ore placed on the pads, the grade of ore placed on the leach pads and an estimated percentage of recovery.  Timing and ultimate actual recovery of gold contained on leach pads can vary significantly from the estimates.  The quantities of recoverable gold placed on the leach pads are reconciled to the quantities of gold actually recovered (metallurgical balancing), by comparing the grades of ore placed on the leach pads to actual ounces recovered.  The nature of the leaching process inherently limits the ability to precisely monitor inventory levels.  As a result, the metallurgical balancing process is constantly monitored and the engineering estimates are refined based on actual results over time.  The ultimate actual recovery of gold from a pad will not be known until the leaching process is completed.

The allocation of costs to ore in stockpiles, ore on leach pads and in-process inventories and the determination of NRV involve the use of estimates.  There is a high degree of judgment in estimating future costs, future production levels, forecasted usage of supplies inventory, proven and probable reserves estimates, gold and silver prices, and the ultimate estimated recovery for ore on leach pads.  There can be no assurance that actual results will not differ significantly from estimates used in the determination of the carrying value of inventories.

39

Provision for reclamation and remediation

The Company assesses its provision for reclamation and remediation on an annual basis or when new material information becomes available.  Mining and exploration activities are subject to various laws and regulations governing the protection of the environment.  In general, these laws and regulations are continually changing and the Company has made, and intends to make in the future, expenditures to comply with such laws and regulations.  Accounting for reclamation and remediation obligations requires management to make estimates of the future costs the Company will incur to complete the reclamation and remediation work required to comply with existing laws and regulations at each mining operation. Actual costs incurred may differ from those amounts estimated.  Also, future changes to environmental laws and regulations could increase the extent of reclamation and remediation work required to be performed by the Company. Increases in future costs could materially impact the amounts charged to operations for reclamation and remediation.  The provision represents management’s best estimate of the present value of the future reclamation and remediation obligation.  The actual future expenditures may differ from the amounts currently provided.

Taxes

The Company recognizes the deferred tax benefit related to deferred income and resource tax assets to the extent recovery is probable.  Assessing the recoverability of deferred income tax assets requires management to make estimates of future taxable profit.  To the extent that future cash flows and taxable profit differ significantly from estimates, the ability of the Company to realize the net deferred tax assets recorded at the balance sheet date could be impacted.  In addition, future changes in tax laws could limit the ability of the Company to obtain tax deductions in future periods from deferred income and resource tax assets.

In addition, the Company is subject to income taxes in numerous jurisdictions. Significant judgment is required in determining the provision for income taxes, due to the complexity of legislation.  There are many transactions and calculations for which the ultimate tax determination is uncertain during the ordinary course of business.

Contingencies

Due to the size, complexity and nature of the Company’s operations, various legal and tax matters are outstanding from time to time.  Contingencies can be possible assets or liabilities arising from past events which, by their nature, will only be resolved when one or more future events not wholly within our control occur or fail to occur.  The assessment of such contingencies involves the use of significant judgment and estimates.  In the event that management’s estimate of the future resolution of these matters changes, the Company will recognize the effects of the changes in its consolidated financial statements on the date such changes occur.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

Revenue recognition

In May 2014, the IASB issued IFRS 15 “Revenue from Contracts with Customers” (“IFRS 15”). The standard replaces IAS 11 “Construction Contracts”, IAS 18 “Revenue”, IFRIC 13 “Customer Loyalty Programmes”, IFRIC 15 “Agreements for the Construction of Real Estate”, IFRIC 18 “Transfer of Assets From Customers” and SIC 31 “Revenue — Barter Transactions Involving Advertising Services”.  IFRS 15 establishes principles for reporting the nature, amount, timing, and uncertainty of revenue and cash flows arising from an entity’s contracts with customers.  This standard is effective for annual periods beginning on or after January 1, 2018, and permits early adoption.  The Company is in the process of determining the impact of IFRS 15 on its consolidated financial statements.

Financial instruments

In July 2014, the IASB issued the final version of IFRS 9 “Financial Instruments” (“IFRS 9”).  This standard is effective for annual periods beginning on or after January 1, 2018, and permits early adoption. IFRS 9 provides a revised model for recognition and measurement and impairment of financial instruments and includes a substantially reformed approach to hedge accounting.  The Company is in the process of determining the impact of IFRS 9 on its consolidated financial statements.

Leases

In January 2016, the IASB issued IFRS 16 “Leases” (“IFRS 16”).  This standard is effective for annual periods beginning on or after January 1, 2019, and permits early adoption, provided IFRS 15, has been applied, or is applied at the same date as IFRS 16.  IFRS 16

40

requires lessees to recognize assets and liabilities for most leases.  The Company is in the process of determining the impact of IFRS 16 on its consolidated financial statements.

10.RISK ANALYSIS

The business of Kinross contains significant risk due to the nature of mining, exploration, and development activities.  Certain risk factors, including but not limited to those listed below, are related to the mining industry in general while others are specific to Kinross.  Included in the risk factors below are details on how Kinross seeks to mitigate these risks wherever possible.  For additional discussion of risk factors please refer to the Company’s Annual Information Form for the year ended December 31, 2014, which is available on the Company’s website www.kinross.com and on www.sedar.com or is available upon request from the Company, and to the Company’s Annual Information Form for the year ended December 31, 2015, which will be filed on SEDAR.

Gold Price and Silver Price

The profitability of Kinross’ operations is significantly affected by changes in the market price of gold and silver.  Gold and silver   prices fluctuate on a daily basis and are affected by numerous factors beyond the control of Kinross.  The price of gold and/or silver can be subject to volatile price movements and future serious price declines could cause continued commercial production to be impractical.  Depending on the prices of gold and silver, cash flow from mining operations may not be sufficient to cover costs of production and capital expenditures.  If, as a result of a decline in gold and/or silver prices, revenues from metal sales were to fall below cash operating costs, production may be discontinued.  The factors that may affect the price of gold and silver include industry factors such as: industrial and jewelry demand; the level of demand for the metal as an investment; central bank lending, sales and purchases of the metal; speculative trading; and costs of and levels of global production by producers of the metal.  Gold and silver prices may also be affected by macroeconomic factors, including: expectations of the future rate of inflation; the strength of, and confidence in, the US dollar, the currency in which the price of the metal is generally quoted, and other currencies; interest rates; and global or regional political or economic uncertainties.

In 2015, the Company’s average gold price realized decreased to $1,159 per ounce from $1,263 per ounce in 2014.  If the world market price of gold and/or silver continued to drop and the prices realized by Kinross on gold and/or silver sales were to decrease further and remain at such a level for any substantial period, Kinross’ profitability and cash flow would be negatively affected.  In such circumstances, Kinross may determine that it is not economically feasible to continue commercial production at some or all of its operations or the development of some or all of its current projects, which could have an adverse impact on Kinross’ financial performance and results of operations.  Kinross may curtail or suspend some or all of its exploration activities, with the result that depleted reserves are not replaced.  In addition, the market value of Kinross’ gold and/or silver inventory may be reduced and existing reserves may be reduced to the extent that ore cannot be mined and processed economically at the prevailing prices.  Furthermore, certain of Kinross’ mineral projects include copper which is similarly subject to price volatility based on factors beyond Kinross’ control.

Nature of Mineral Exploration and Mining

The exploration and development of mineral deposits involves significant financial and other risks over an extended period of time which may not be eliminated even with careful evaluation, experience and knowledge.  While discovery of gold-bearing structures may result in substantial rewards, few properties explored are ultimately developed into producing mines.  Major expenditures are required to establish reserves by drilling and to construct mining and processing facilities at a site.  It is impossible to ensure that the current or proposed exploration programs on properties in which Kinross has an interest will result in profitable commercial mining operations.

The operations of Kinross are subject to the hazards and risks normally incident to exploration, development and production of gold and silver, any of which could result in damage to life or property, environmental damage and possible legal liability for such damage.  The activities of Kinross may be subject to prolonged disruptions due to weather conditions depending on the location of operations in which it has interests.  Hazards, such as unusual or unexpected formations, rock bursts, pressures, cave-ins, flooding, pit wall failures or other conditions, may be encountered in the drilling and removal of material.  While Kinross may obtain insurance against certain risks, potential claims could exceed policy limits or could be excluded from coverage.  There are also risks against which Kinross cannot or may elect not to insure.  The potential costs which could be associated with any liabilities not covered by insurance or in excess of insurance coverage or compliance with applicable laws and regulations may cause substantial delays and require significant capital outlays, adversely affecting the future earnings and competitive position of Kinross and, potentially, its financial viability.

41

Whether a gold deposit will be commercially viable depends on a number of factors, some of which include the particular attributes of the deposit, such as its size and grade, costs and efficiency of the recovery methods that can be employed, proximity to infrastructure, financing costs and governmental regulations, including regulations relating to prices, taxes, royalties, infrastructure, land and water use, importing and exporting of gold and environmental protection.  The effect of these factors cannot be accurately predicted, but the combination of these factors may result in Kinross not receiving an adequate return on its invested capital.

Kinross mitigates the likelihood and potential severity of these mining risks it encounters in its day-to-day operations through the application of high operating standards.  In addition, Kinross reviews its insurance coverage at least annually to ensure that the most complete and cost-effective coverage is obtained.

Environmental and Regulatory Risks

Kinross’ mining and processing operations and exploration activities in the United States, the Russian Federation, Brazil, Chile, Mauritania, Ghana and Canada are subject to various laws and regulations governing the protection of the environment, exploration, development, production, exports, taxes, labour standards, occupational health, waste disposal, toxic substances, mine safety, and other matters.  New laws and regulations, amendments to existing laws and regulations, or more stringent implementation of existing laws and regulations could have a material adverse impact on Kinross through increased costs, a reduction in levels of production and/or a delay or prevention of the development of new mining properties.  Compliance with these laws and regulations requires significant expenditures and increases Kinross’ mine development and operating costs.

Permits from various governmental authorities are necessary in order to engage in mining operations in all jurisdictions in which Kinross operates.  Such permits relate to many aspects of mining operations, including maintenance of air, water and soil quality standards.  In most jurisdictions, the requisite permits cannot be obtained prior to completion of an environmental impact statement and, in some cases, public consultation.  Further, Kinross may be required to submit for government approval a reclamation plan, to post financial assurance for the reclamation costs of the mine site, and to pay for the reclamation of the mine site upon the completion of mining activities.  Kinross mitigates this risk by performing certain reclamation activities concurrent with production.

Mining, like many other extractive natural resource industries, is subject to potential risks and liabilities concerning the environmental effects associated with mineral exploration and production.  The Company may be held responsible for the costs of addressing contamination at, or arising from, current or former activities.  Environmental liability may result from mining activities conducted by others prior to Kinross’ ownership of a property.  In addition, Kinross may be liable to third parties for exposure to hazardous materials.  The costs associated with such responsibilities and liabilities may be substantial.  To the extent Kinross is subject to uninsured environmental liabilities, the payment of such liabilities would reduce funds otherwise available for business activities and could have a material adverse effect on Kinross.  Should Kinross be unable to fully fund the cost of remedying an environmental problem, Kinross might be required to suspend operations or enter into interim compliance measures pending completion of the required remedy, which could have a material adverse effect.  Kinross mitigates the likelihood and potential severity of these environmental risks it encounters in its day-to-day operations through the application of high operating standards.

Kinross is subject to various laws and regulations which, if the Company is alleged to, or does, violate, could result in regulatory or government investigations and/or sanctions, which could adversely impact the Company’s operations.  These include anti-bribery laws (including without limitation the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, the Canadian Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act and anti-bribery laws in other jurisdictions in which the Company operates), international trade sanctions (including without limitation, in respect of Russia and Ukraine), and anti-money laundering laws and regulations.  Kinross has internal policies and procedures to mandate compliance with such laws and regulations; however, there can be no assurance that such policies and procedures will be effective in revealing or preventing violations thereof.  Various regulatory and government agencies review transactions and practices of Kinross in connection with the enforcement of applicable laws and regulations, and Kinross regularly cooperates in producing documents and other information sought by such authorities.  Consequences of violations could range from cost and expense to remediate, increased operating costs or changes to operations, fines or penalties for violations, expenses of investigations and defense, and potentially cessation of operations.

In August 2013, Kinross received information regarding allegations of improper payments made to government officials and certain internal control deficiencies at its West Africa mining operations.  External legal counsel was immediately retained to conduct an objective internal investigation into the allegations.  In March and December 2014, and July 2015, Kinross received subpoenas from the United States Securities and Exchange Commission seeking information and documents on substantially the same subjects as had previously been raised.  In December 2014, Kinross received similar requests for information from the United States Department of Justice.  The internal investigation is ongoing, and additional issues or facts could become known as the investigation continues. On December 10, 2015, the NGOs MiningWatch Canada and the French anti-corruption association Sherpa announced that they had

42

filed a report with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (“RCMP”) calling for an investigation of the Company for alleged breaches of Canada’s anti-corruption laws at the Company’s Tasiast mine in Mauritania and its Chirano mine in Ghana.  The Company has not received a copy of the report and as of the date hereof is not aware of any resulting RCMP investigation or other actions by any Canadian authorities.  Consequences of violations could include fines or penalties, de-listing of securities from US stock exchanges and restrictions on export licenses.

Reclamation costs

In certain jurisdictions in which the Company has operations, the Company is required to submit a reclamation plan for its applicable operations to address post-operation reclamation obligations.  The Company may incur significant costs in connection with these reclamation activities, which may exceed the provisions the Company has made in respect of its reclamation obligations.  In some jurisdictions, reclamation bonds, letters of credit or other forms of financial assurance are required as security for these reclamation obligations.  The amount and nature of financial assurance are dependent upon a number of factors, including the Company’s financial condition and reclamation cost estimates.  Kinross may be required to replace or supplement the existing financial assurance, or source new financial assurance with more expensive forms, which might include cash deposits, which would reduce its cash available for operations and financing activities.  There can be no assurance that Kinross will be able to maintain or add to its current level of financial assurance.  To the extent that Kinross is or becomes unable to post and maintain sufficient financial assurance for reclamation costs, where required  it could potentially result in closure of one or more of the Company’s operations, which could have a material adverse effect on the financial condition of the Company.

Internal controls

Kinross has invested resources to document and assess its system of internal controls over financial reporting and it is continuing its evaluation of such internal controls.  Internal controls over financial reporting are procedures designed to provide reasonable assurance that transactions are properly authorized, assets are safeguarded against unauthorized or improper use, and transactions are properly recorded and reported.  A control system, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance with respect to the reliability of financial reporting and financial statement preparation.

Kinross is required to satisfy the requirement of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which requires an annual assessment by management of the effectiveness of Kinross’ internal control over financial reporting and an attestation report by Kinross’ independent auditors addressing the operating effectiveness of Kinross’ internal control over financial reporting.

If Kinross fails to maintain the adequacy of its internal control over financial reporting, as such standards are modified, supplemented, or amended from time to time, Kinross may not be able to ensure that it can conclude on an ongoing basis that it has effective internal controls over financial reporting in accordance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.  Kinross’ failure to satisfy the requirement of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act on an ongoing, timely basis could result in the loss of investor confidence in the reliability of its financial statements, which in turn could harm Kinross’ business and negatively impact the trading price of its common shares.  In addition, any failure to implement required new or improved controls, or difficulties encountered in their implementation, could harm Kinross’ operating results or cause it to fail to meet its reporting obligations.

Although Kinross is committed to ensure ongoing compliance, Kinross cannot be certain that it will be successful in complying with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.

Indebtedness and an inability to satisfy repayment obligations

Although Kinross has been successful in repaying debt in the past, there can be no assurance that it can continue to do so.  Kinross’ level of indebtedness could have important consequences for its operations and the value of its common shares including: (a) limiting Kinross’ ability to borrow additional amounts for working capital, capital expenditures, debt service requirements, execution of Kinross’ growth strategy or other purposes; (b) limiting Kinross’ ability to use operating cash flow in other areas because of its obligations to service debt; (c) increasing Kinross’ vulnerability to general adverse economic and industry conditions, including increases in interest rates; (d) limiting Kinross’ ability to capitalize on business opportunities and to react to competitive pressures and adverse changes in government regulation; and (e) limiting Kinross’ ability or increasing the costs to refinance indebtedness.

Kinross expects to obtain the funds to pay its expenses and to pay principal and interest on its debt by utilizing cash flow from operations.  Kinross’ ability to meet these payment obligations will depend on its future financial performance, which will be affected by financial, business, economic and other factors.  Kinross will not be able to control many of these factors, such as economic conditions in the markets in which it operates.  Kinross cannot be certain that its future cash flow from operations will be sufficient to allow it to pay principal and interest on Kinross’ debt and meet its other obligations.  If cash flow from operations is

43

insufficient or if there is a contravention of its debt covenants, Kinross may be required to refinance all or part of its existing debt, sell assets, borrow more money or issue additional equity.  There can be no assurance that Kinross will be able to refinance all or part of its existing debt on terms that are commercially reasonable.

Mineral Reserve and Mineral Resource Estimates

The mineral reserve and mineral resource figures are estimates, and no assurance can be given that the anticipated tonnages and grades will be achieved or that the indicated level of recovery will be realized.  Market fluctuations in the price of gold may render the mining of mineral reserves and mineral resources uneconomical and require Kinross to take a write-down of an asset or to discontinue development or production.  Moreover, short-term operating factors relating to the mineral reserves, such as the need for orderly development of the ore body or the processing of new or different ore grades, may cause a mining operation to be unprofitable in any particular accounting period.

Proven and probable mineral reserves at Kinross’ mines and development projects were estimated as of December 31, 2015, based upon a gold price of $1,200 per ounce of gold.

Prolonged declines in the market price of gold below this level may render mineral reserves containing relatively lower grades of gold mineralization uneconomic to exploit and could materially reduce Kinross’ mineral reserves.  Should such reductions occur, material write-downs of Kinross’ investments in mining properties or the discontinuation of development or production might be required, and there could be material delays in the development of new projects and reduced income and cash flow.

There are numerous uncertainties inherent in estimating quantities of proven and probable mineral reserves.  The estimates in this document are based on various assumptions relating to gold prices and exchange rates during the expected life of production and the results of additional planned development work.  Actual future production rates and amounts, revenues, taxes, operating expenses, environmental and regulatory compliance expenditures, development expenditures and recovery rates may vary substantially from those assumed in the estimates.  Any significant change in these assumptions, including changes that result from variances between projected and actual results, could result in a material downward or upward revision of current estimates.

Kinross’ future plans rely on mine development projects, which involve significant uncertainties

The Company’s ability to increase or maintain present gold and silver production levels is dependent in part on the successful development of new mines and/or expansion of existing mining operations.  Kinross is dependent on future growth from development projects.  Development projects rely on the accuracy of predicted factors including: capital and operating costs; metallurgical recoveries; reserve estimates; and future metal prices.  Development projects are also subject to accurate feasibility studies, the acquisition of surface or land rights and the issuance of necessary governmental permits.  Unforeseen circumstances, including those related to the amount and nature of the mineralization at the development site, technological impediments to extraction and processing, legal restrictions or governmental intervention, infrastructure limitations, environmental issues, disputes with local communities or other events, could result in one or more of our planned developments becoming impractical or uneconomic to complete.  Any such occurrence could have an adverse impact on Kinross’ financial condition and results of operations.

In addition, as a result of the substantial expenditures involved in development projects, developments are prone to material cost overruns versus budget.  The capital expenditures and time required to develop new mines are considerable and changes in cost or construction schedules can significantly increase both the time and capital required to build the project.  The project development schedules are also dependent on obtaining the governmental approvals necessary for the operation of a project.  The timeline to obtain these government approvals is often beyond the control of Kinross.  It is not unusual in the mining industry for new mining operations to experience unexpected problems during the start-up phase, resulting in delays and requiring more capital than anticipated.

Production and Cost Estimates

The Company prepares estimates of future production, operating costs and capital costs for its operations.  Despite the Company’s best efforts to budget and estimate such costs, as a result of the substantial expenditures involved in the development of mineral projects and the fluctuation and increase of costs over time, development projects may be prone to material cost overruns.  Kinross’ actual costs may vary from estimates for a variety of reasons, including: increased competition for resources and development inputs; cost inflation affecting the mining industry in general; short term operating factors; revisions to mine plans; risks and hazards associated with mining; natural phenomena, such as inclement weather conditions, water availability, floods, and earthquakes; and unexpected labour shortages or strikes.  Operating costs may also be affected by a variety of factors, including: ore grade metallurgy,

44

labour costs, cost of commodities and other inputs, general inflationary pressures and currency exchange rates.  Many of these factors are beyond Kinross’ control.  No assurance can be given that Kinross’ cost estimates will be achieved.  Failure to achieve production or cost estimates or material increases in costs could have an adverse impact on Kinross’ future cash flows, profitability, results of operations and financial condition.

Kinross’ actual production and costs may vary from estimates for a variety of reasons, including: actual ore mined varying from estimates of grade, tonnage, dilution and metallurgical and other characteristics; short-term operating factors relating to the ore reserves, such as the need for sequential development of ore bodies and the processing of new or different ore grades; revisions to mine plans; difficulties with supply chain management, including the implementation and management of enterprise resource planning software; risks and hazards associated with mining; natural phenomena, such as inclement weather conditions, floods, and earthquakes; and unexpected labour shortages or strikes.  Costs of production may also be affected by a variety of factors, including: changing waste-to-ore ratios, ore grade metallurgy, labour costs, the cost of supplies and services (for example, power and fuel), general inflationary pressures and currency exchange rates.

Shortages and Price Volatility of Input Commodities and Equipment

The Company is dependent on various input commodities (such as diesel fuel, electricity, natural gas, steel, concrete and cyanide) and equipment (including parts) to conduct its mining operations and development projects.  A shortage of such input commodities or equipment or a significant increase in their cost could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s ability to carry out its operations and therefore limit, or increase the cost of, production.  The Company is also dependent on access to and supply of water and electricity to carry out its mining operations, and such access and supply may not be readily available, especially at the Company’s operations in Chile, Brazil and Ghana.  Market prices of input commodities can be subject to volatile price movements which can be material, occur over short periods of time and are affected by factors that are beyond the Company’s control.  An increase in the cost, or decrease in the availability, of input commodities or equipment may affect the timely conduct and cost of Kinross’ operations and development projects.  If the costs of certain input commodities consumed or otherwise used in connection with Kinross’ operations and development projects were to increase significantly, and remain at such levels for a substantial period, the Company may determine that it is not economically feasible to continue commercial production at some or all of its operations or the development of some or all of its current projects, which could have an adverse impact on the Company’s financial performance and results of operations.

Political Developments and Uncertainty in the Russian Federation

Ongoing political tensions and uncertainties as a result of the Russian Federation’s foreign policy decisions and actions in respect of Ukraine have resulted in the imposition of economic sanctions and increased the risk that certain governments may impose further economic, or other, sanctions or penalties on, or may take other actions against, the Russian Federation or on persons and/or companies conducting business in the Russian Federation or may otherwise act in support of Ukraine. There can be no assurance that sanctions or other penalties will not be imposed, or other actions will not be taken, by the Russian Federation, including in response to existing or threatened sanctions or other penalties or actions by Canada, the United States or the European Union and/or other governments against the Russian Federation or persons and/or companies conducting business in the Russian Federation. The imposition of such economic sanctions or other penalties, or such other actions by the Russian Federation and/or other governments, could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s assets and operations.

Political, Economic and Legislative Risk

The Company has mining and exploration operations in various regions of the world, including the United States, Canada, Brazil, Chile, the Russian Federation, Mauritania and Ghana and such operations are exposed to various levels of political, economic, and other risks and uncertainties.  These risks and uncertainties vary from country to country and include, but are not limited to: terrorism; hostage taking; thefts and illegal incursions on property (such as those which have occurred at Paracatu); extreme fluctuations in currency exchange rates; high rates of inflation; labour unrest; the risks of civil unrest; expropriation and nationalization; renegotiation or nullification of existing concessions, licenses, permits and contracts; illegal mining; changes to policies and regulations impacting the mining sector; restrictions on foreign exchange and repatriation; and changing political conditions, currency controls, and governmental regulations that favour or require the awarding of contracts to local contractors or require foreign contractors to employ citizens of, or purchase supplies from, a particular jurisdiction.

Future political and economic conditions in these countries may result in these governments adopting different policies with respect to foreign investment, and development and ownership of mineral resources.  Any changes in such policies may result in changes in laws affecting ownership of assets, foreign investment, mining exploration and development, taxation, royalties, currency exchange rates, gold sales, environmental protection, labour relations, price controls, repatriation of income, and return of capital, which may

45

affect both the ability of Kinross to undertake exploration and development activities in respect of future properties in the manner currently contemplated, as well as its ability to continue to explore, develop, and operate those properties to which it has rights relating to exploration, development, and operation.  Future governments in these countries may adopt substantially different policies, which might extend to, as an example, expropriation of assets.

The tax regimes in these countries may be subject to differing interpretations and are subject to change from time to time.  Kinross’ interpretation of taxation law as applied to its transactions and activities may not coincide with that of the tax authorities in a given country.  As a result, transactions may be challenged by tax authorities and Kinross’ operations may be assessed, which could result in significant additional taxes, penalties and interest.

The Company is subject to the considerations and risks of operating in the Russian Federation.  Certain currency conversion risks exist in the Russian economy.  Russian legislation currently permits the conversion of rouble revenues into foreign currency.  Any delay or other difficulty in converting roubles into a foreign currency to make a payment or delay in or restriction on the transfer of foreign currency could limit our ability to meet our payment and debt obligations, which could result in the loss of suppliers, acceleration of debt obligations, etc.

Although the Company has completed the sale of all of its interest in Aurelian and the FDN project in Ecuador to Lundin Gold, certain residual risks may remain in respect of FDN.  Certain liabilities and obligations exist under the purchase agreement with Lundin Gold. In addition, the Company has also signed a bilateral treaty with the government of Ecuador in respect of the transition of the FDN assets to Lundin Gold.  There can be no guarantee that the Company (and/or any of its directors, officers or employees) will not be subject to any obligations or liabilities, litigation, or other claims or actions in respect of its ongoing contractual obligations, or any of the Company’s prior activities on or in respect thereof or otherwise in Ecuador.

Licenses and Permits

The operations of Kinross require licenses and permits from various governmental authorities.  However, such licenses and permits are subject to challenge and change in various circumstances.  There can be no guarantee that Kinross will be able to obtain or maintain all necessary licenses and permits that may be required to explore and develop its properties, commence construction or operation of mining facilities and properties under exploration or development or to maintain continued operations that economically justify the cost. Kinross endeavors to be in compliance with these regulations and permits at all times.

Title to Properties and Community Relations

The validity of mining claims which constitute most of Kinross’ property holdings may, in certain cases, be uncertain and subject to being contested.  Kinross’ titles, particularly title to undeveloped properties, may be defective and open to being challenged by governmental authorities and local communities.

Certain of Kinross’ properties may be subject to the rights or the asserted rights of various community stakeholders, including indigenous people.  The presence of community stakeholders may also impact on the Company’s ability to develop or operate its mining properties.  In certain circumstances, consultation with such stakeholders may be required and the outcome may affect the Company’s ability to develop or operate its mining properties.

Competition

The mineral exploration and mining business is competitive in all of its phases.  In the search for and the acquisition of attractive mineral properties, Kinross competes with numerous other companies and individuals, including competitors with greater financial, technical and other resources than Kinross.  The ability of the Company to operate successfully in the future will depend not only on its ability to develop its present properties, but also on its ability to select and acquire suitable producing properties or prospects for mineral exploration.  Kinross may be unable to compete successfully with its competitors in acquiring such properties or prospects on terms it considers acceptable, if at all.

Joint Arrangements

Certain of the operations in which the Company has an interest are operated through joint arrangements with other mining companies.  Any failure of such other companies to meet their obligations to Kinross or to third parties could have a material adverse effect on the joint arrangement.  In addition, Kinross may be unable to exert control over strategic decisions made in respect of such properties.

46

Disclosures About Market Risks

To determine its market risk sensitivities, Kinross uses an internally generated financial forecast model that is sensitized to various gold prices, currency exchange rates, interest rates and energy prices.  The variable with the greatest impact is the gold price, and Kinross prepares a base case scenario and then sensitizes it by a 10% increase and decrease in the gold price.  For 2016, sensitivity to a 10% change in the gold price is estimated to have an approximate $300 million impact on pre-tax earnings.  Kinross’ financial forecast covers the projected life of its mines. In each year, gold is produced according to the mine plan.  Additionally, for 2016, sensitivity to a 10% change in the silver price is estimated to have an $8 million impact on pre-tax earnings.  Costs are estimated based on current production costs plus the impact of any major changes to the operation during its life.

Interest Rate Fluctuations

Fluctuations in interest rates can affect the Company’s results of operations and cash flow.  The Company’s corporate revolving credit and term loan facilities are subject to variable interest rates.

Hedging Risks

The Company’s earnings can vary significantly with fluctuations in the market price of gold and silver.  Kinross’ practice is not to hedge metal sales.  On occasion, however, the Company may assume or enter into forward sales contracts or similar instruments if hedges are acquired in a business acquisition, if hedges are required under project financing requirements, or when deemed advantageous by management.  As at December 31, 2015, there were no gold or silver derivative financial instruments outstanding.  In addition, Kinross is not subject to margin requirements on any of its hedging lines.

Foreign Currency Exchange Risk

Currency fluctuations may affect the revenues which the Company will realize from its operations since gold is sold in the world market in United States dollars.  The costs of Kinross are incurred principally in Canadian dollars, United States dollars, Chilean pesos, Brazilian reais, Russian roubles, Mauritanian ouguiya and Ghanaian cedis.  The appreciation of non-U.S. dollar currencies against the U.S. dollar increases the cost of gold production in U.S. dollar terms.  Kinross’ results are positively affected when the U.S. dollar strengthens against these foreign currencies and are adversely affected when the U.S. dollar weakens against these foreign currencies.  Where possible, Kinross’ cash and cash equivalents balances are primarily held in U.S. dollars.  From time to time, Kinross transacts currency hedging to reduce the risk associated with currency fluctuations.  While the Chilean peso, Brazilian real, and Russian rouble are currently convertible into Canadian and United States dollars, they may not always be convertible in the future.  The Mauritanian ouguiya and Ghanaian cedis are convertible into Canadian and United States dollars, but conversion may be subject to regulatory and/or central bank approval.

The sensitivity of the Company’s pre-tax earnings to changes in the U.S. dollar is disclosed in Note 11 of the Company’s financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2015.

Credit, Counterparty and Liquidity Risk

Credit risk relates to cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable, and derivative contracts and arises from the possibility that a counterparty to an instrument fails to perform.  Counterparty risk is the risk that a third party might fail to fulfill its performance obligations under the terms of a financial instrument.  The Company is subject to counterparty risk and may be affected, in the event that a counterparty becomes insolvent.  To manage both counterparty and credit risk, the Company proactively manages its exposure to individual counterparties.  The Company only transacts with highly-rated counterparties.  A limit on contingent exposure has been established for each counterparty based on the counterparty’s credit rating, and the Company monitors the financial condition of each counterparty.

As at December 31, 2015, the Company’s gross credit exposure, including cash and cash equivalents, was $1,263.4 million and at December 31, 2014, the gross credit exposure, including cash and cash equivalents, was $1,176.0 million.

Liquidity risk is the risk that the Company may not have sufficient cash resources available to meet its payment obligations.  To manage liquidity risk, the Company maintains cash positions and has financing in place that the Company expects will be sufficient to meet its operating and capital expenditure requirements.  Potential sources for liquidity could include, but are not limited to: the Company’s current cash position, existing credit facilities, future operating cash flow, and potential private and public financing. Additionally, the Company reviews its short-term operational forecasts regularly and long-term budgets to determine its cash

47

requirements.

The Company has investment grade credit ratings from Fitch Ratings and Standard & Poor’s.  However, there is no assurance that these credit ratings will remain in effect for any given period of time or that any such ratings will not be revised or withdrawn entirely by a rating agency.  Real or anticipated changes in credit ratings can affect the price of the Company’s existing debt as well as the Company’s ability to access the capital markets and the cost of such debt financing.

Kinross’ ability to access capital markets is dependent upon its credit ratings

The Company’s ability to access debt markets and the related cost of debt financing is dependent upon its credit ratings.  The Company has investment grade credit ratings from Fitch Ratings and Standard & Poor’s.  On March 16, 2015, Moody’s announced a downgrade of the Company’s senior unsecured ratings from Baa3 to Ba1 in light of the Moody’s downgrade of the Russian Federation’s sovereign rating to Ba1 and the Company’s concentration of cash flows from its operations in the Russian Federation.  There is no assurance that these credit ratings will remain in effect for any given period of time or that any such ratings will not be revised or withdrawn entirely by a rating agency.  On January 21, 2016, Moody’s announced plans to conduct a review of its ratings on a number of mining companies globally, including Kinross, in light of the recent downturn in the commodities markets. Real or anticipated changes in credit ratings can affect the price of the Company’s existing debt as well as the Company’s ability to access the capital markets and the cost of such debt financing.

Potential for Incurring Unexpected Costs or Liabilities as a Result of Acquisitions

Although the Company has conducted investigations in connection with recent acquisitions, risks remain regarding any undisclosed or unknown liabilities associated with these acquisitions.  The Company may discover that it has acquired substantial undisclosed liabilities.  The Company may have little recourse against the seller if any of the representations or warranties provided in connection with these acquisitions proves to be inaccurate.  Such liabilities could have an adverse impact on the Company’s business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Global Financial Condition

The volatility and challenges that economies continue to experience around the world continues to affect the profitability and liquidity of businesses in many industries, which in turn has resulted in the following conditions that may have an effect on the profitability and cash flows of the Company:

·Volatility in commodity prices and foreign exchange rates;

·Tightening of credit markets;

·Increased counterparty risk; and

·Volatility in the prices of publicly traded entities.

The volatility in commodity prices and foreign exchange rates directly impact the Company’s revenues, earnings and cash flows, as noted above in the sections titled “Gold Price and Silver Price” and “Foreign Currency Exchange Risk”.

Although the tighter credit markets have restricted the ability of certain companies to access capital, to date this has not affected the Company’s liquidity.

The Company re-negotiated its term loan and revolving credit facility in 2015 to extend their terms to August 2019 and August 2020, respectively, while also amending the leverage ratio covenant.  As at December 31, 2015, the Company had $1,506.0 million available under its credit facility arrangements.  However, continued tightening of credit markets may affect the ability of the Company to obtain equity or debt financing in the future on terms favourable to the Company.

The Company has not experienced any difficulties to date relating to the counterparties it transacts with.  The counterparties continue to be highly rated, and as noted above, the Company has employed measures to reduce the impact of counterparty risk.

Continued volatility in equity markets may affect the value of publicly listed companies in Kinross’ equity portfolio.  Should declines in the equity values continue and are deemed to be other than temporary, impairment losses may result.

48

Market Price Risk

Kinross’ common shares are listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange (“TSX”) and the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”).  The price of Kinross’ common shares is likely to be significantly affected by short-term changes in the gold price or in its financial condition or results of operations as reflected in its quarterly earnings reports.  Other factors unrelated to the performance of Kinross that may have an effect on the price of the Kinross common shares include the following: a reduction in analytical coverage of Kinross by investment banks with research capabilities; increased political risk in countries where the Company operates; a drop in trading volume and general market interest in the securities of Kinross may adversely affect an investor’s ability to liquidate an investment and consequently an investor’s interest in acquiring a significant stake in Kinross; a failure of Kinross to meet the reporting and other obligations under Canadian and U.S. securities laws or imposed by the exchanges could result in a delisting of the Kinross common shares; and a substantial decline in the price of the Kinross common shares that persists for a significant period of time could cause the Kinross common shares to be delisted from the TSX or NYSE further reducing market liquidity.

As a result of any of these factors, the market price of Kinross’ common shares at any given point in time may not accurately reflect Kinross’ long-term value.  Securities class action litigation has been brought against companies, including Kinross, following periods of volatility or significant decline in the market price of their securities.  Securities litigation could result in substantial costs and damages and divert management’s attention and resources. Any decision resulting from any such litigation that is adverse to the Company could have a negative impact on the Company’s financial position.

Impairment

Kinross evaluates, on at least an annual basis, the carrying amount of its CGUs to determine whether current events and circumstances indicate that such carrying amount may no longer be recoverable.  Goodwill is required to be tested annually for impairment and Kinross performs this annual test at the end of the fourth quarter.  In addition, at each reporting period end, Kinross assesses whether there is any indication that any of its CGUs’ carrying amounts exceed their recoverable amounts, and if there is such an indication, the Company would test for potential impairment at that time.  The recoverable amounts, or fair values, of its CGUs are based, in part, on certain factors that may be partially or totally outside of Kinross’ control.  Kinross’ fair value estimates are based on numerous assumptions, some of which may be subjective, and it is possible that actual fair value could be significantly different than those estimates.

As at December 31, 2015, Kinross recorded an after-tax impairment charge of $430.2 million related to property plant and equipment impairment.  In the absence of any mitigating valuation factors, Kinross’ failure to achieve its valuation assumptions or declines in the fair values of its CGUs may, over time, result in further impairment charges.

Paracatu water supply and use

Operations at Paracatu are dependent on rainfall as the primary source of process water.  During the rainy season, the mine channels surface runoff water to temporary storage ponds from where it is pumped to the process plants.  Similarly, surface runoff and rain water are stored in the tailings impoundment, which constitutes the main water reservoir for the process plants.  The objective is to capture and store as much water as possible during the rainy season to ensure adequate water supply during the dry season.

Accordingly, prolonged periods without adequate rainfall may adversely impact operations at Paracatu.  As a result, production may fall below historic or forecast levels and Kinross may incur significant costs or experience significant delays that could have a material effect on Kinross’ financial performance, liquidity and results of operations.

Human Resources

In order to operate successfully, Kinross must find and retain qualified employees.  Kinross and other companies in the mining industry compete for personnel and Kinross is not always able to fill positions in a timely manner.  One factor that has contributed to an increased turnover rate is the ageing workforce and it is expected that this factor will further increase the turnover rate in upcoming years.  If Kinross is unable to attract and retain qualified personnel or fails to establish adequate succession planning strategies, Kinross’ operations could be adversely affected.

In addition, Kinross has a relatively small executive management team and in the event that the services of a number of these executives are no longer available, Kinross and its business could be adversely affected.  Kinross does not carry key-man life insurance with respect to its executives.

49

11.SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

Reconciliation of non-GAAP financial measures

The Company has included certain non-GAAP financial measures in this document.  These measures are not defined under IFRS and should not be considered in isolation.  The Company believes that these measures, together with measures determined in accordance with IFRS, provide investors with an improved ability to evaluate the underlying performance of the Company.  The inclusion of these measures is meant to provide additional information and should not be used as a substitute for performance measures prepared in accordance with IFRS.  These measures are not necessarily standard and therefore may not be comparable to other issuers.

Adjusted Net Earnings Attributable to Common Shareholders and Adjusted Net Earnings per Share

Adjusted net earnings attributable to common shareholders and adjusted net earnings per share are non-GAAP measures which determine the performance of the Company, excluding certain impacts which the Company believes are not reflective of the Company’s underlying performance for the reporting period, such as the impact of foreign exchange gains and losses, reassessment of prior year taxes and/or taxes otherwise not related to the current period, impairment charges, gains and losses and other one-time costs related to acquisitions, dispositions and other transactions, and non-hedge derivative gains and losses.  Although some of the items are recurring, the Company believes that they are not reflective of the underlying operating performance of its current business and are not necessarily indicative of future operating results.  Management believes that these measures, which are used internally to assess performance and in planning and forecasting future operating results, provide investors with the ability to better evaluate underlying performance, particularly since the excluded items are typically not included in public guidance.  However, adjusted net earnings and adjusted net earnings per share measures are not necessarily indicative of net earnings and earnings per share measures as determined under IFRS.

The following table provides a reconciliation of net earnings (loss) from continuing operations to adjusted net earnings (loss) from continuing operations for the periods presented:

	Years ended
	December 31,
(in millions, except share and per share amounts)	2015			2014
Net loss from continuing operations attributable to common shareholders - as reported
	$	(984.5	)	$	(1,400.0	)
Adjusting items:
Foreign exchange losses	30.6			50.1
Non-hedge derivatives losses - net of tax	3.5			4.5
Losses on sale of other assets - net of tax	13.7			3.1
Foreign exchange losses on translation of tax basis and foreign exchange on deferred income taxes within income tax expense	132.9			112.8
Impairment charges - net of tax	668.7			1,098.2
Change in deferred income taxes due to tax reforms enacted in Chile	—			32.7
Taxes in respect of prior years	22.2			45.2
Chile weather event related costs - net of tax	18.2			—
Impairment of investments and other - net of tax	9.5			162.6
Reclamation and remediation expense (recovery) - net of tax	(9.6		)	21.9
Insurance recoveries - net of tax	(18.4		)	—
Restructuring - net of tax	22.2			—
	893.5			1,531.1
Adjusted net earnings (loss) from continuing operations attributable to common shareholders	$	(91.0	)	$	131.1
Weighted average number of common shares outstanding - Basic	1,146.0			1,144.3
Adjusted net earnings (loss) from continuing operations per share	$	(0.08	)	$	0.11

50

Adjusted Operating Cash Flow

The Company makes reference to a non-GAAP measure for adjusted operating cash flow.  Adjusted operating cash flow is defined as cash flow from operations excluding certain impacts which the Company believes are not reflective of the Company’s regular operating cash flow and excluding changes in working capital.  Working capital can be volatile due to numerous factors, including the timing of tax payments, and in the case of Kupol, a build-up of inventory due to transportation logistics.  The Company uses adjusted operating cash flow internally as a measure of the underlying operating cash flow performance and future operating cash flow-generating capability of the Company.  However, the adjusted operating cash flow measure is not necessarily indicative of net cash flow from operations as determined under IFRS.

The following table provides a reconciliation of adjusted cash flow from continuing operations for the periods presented:

	Years ended
	December 31,
(in millions)	2015			2014
Net cash flow of continuing operations provided from operating activities - as reported	$	831.6		$	858.1
Adjusting items:
Working capital changes:
Accounts receivable and other assets	(91.0		)	(26.9		)
Inventories	(63.5		)	59.4
Accounts payable and other liabilities, including taxes	109.5			133.2
	(45.0		)	165.7
Adjusted operating cash flow from continuing operations	$	786.6		$	1,023.8

51

Consolidated and Attributable Production Cost of Sales per Equivalent Ounce Sold

Consolidated production cost of sales per gold equivalent ounce sold is a non-GAAP measure and is defined as production cost of sales as reported on the consolidated statement of operations divided by the total number of gold equivalent ounces sold.  This measure converts the Company’s non-gold production into gold equivalent ounces and credits it to total production.

Attributable production cost of sales per gold equivalent ounce sold is a non-GAAP measure and is defined as attributable production cost of sales divided by the attributable number of gold equivalent ounces sold.  This measure converts the Company’s non-gold production into gold equivalent ounces and credits it to total production.

Management uses these measures to monitor and evaluate the performance of its operating properties.

The following table provides a reconciliation of consolidated and attributable production cost of sales per equivalent ounce sold for the periods presented:

	Years ended December 31,
(in millions, except ounces and production cost of sales per equivalent ounce)	2015			2014
Production cost of sales - as reported	$	1,834.8		$	1,971.2
Less: portion attributable to Chirano non-controlling interest	(18.0		)	(16.6		)
Attributable production cost of sales	$	1,816.8		$	1,954.6
Gold equivalent ounces sold	2,634,867			2,743,398
Less: portion attributable to Chirano non-controlling interest	(25,997		)	(28,040		)
Attributable gold equivalent ounces sold	2,608,870			2,715,358
Consolidated production cost of sales per equivalent ounce sold	$	696		$	719
Attributable production cost of sales per equivalent ounce sold	$	696		$	720

52

Attributable Production Cost of Sales per Ounce Sold on a By-Product Basis

Attributable production cost of sales per ounce sold on a by-product basis is a non-GAAP measure which calculates the Company’s non-gold production as a credit against its per ounce production costs, rather than converting its non-gold production into gold equivalent ounces and crediting it to total production, as is the case in co-product accounting.  Management believes that this measure provides investors with the ability to better evaluate Kinross’ production cost of sales per ounce on a comparable basis with other major gold producers who routinely calculate their cost of sales per ounce using by-product accounting rather than co-product accounting.

The following table provides a reconciliation of attributable production cost of sales per ounce sold on a by-product basis for the periods presented:

	Years ended December 31,
(in millions, except ounces and production cost of sales per ounce)	2015			2014
Production cost of sales - as reported	$	1,834.8		$	1,971.2
Less: portion attributable to Chirano non-controlling interest	(18.0		)	(16.6		)
Less: attributable silver revenues	(82.5		)	(93.6		)
Attributable production cost of sales net of silver by-product revenue	$	1,734.3		$	1,861.0
Gold ounces sold	2,562,219			2,669,278
Less: portion attributable to Chirano non-controlling interest	(25,925		)	(27,970		)
Attributable gold ounces sold	2,536,294			2,641,308
Attributable production cost of sales per ounce sold on a by-product basis	$	684		$	705

53

Attributable All-In Sustaining Cost and All-In Cost per Ounce Sold on a By-Product Basis

In June 2013, the World Gold Council (“WGC”) published its guidelines for reporting all-in sustaining costs and all-in costs.  The WGC is a market development organization for the gold industry and is an association whose membership comprises leading gold mining companies including Kinross.  Although the WGC is not a mining industry regulatory organization, it worked closely with its member companies to develop these non-GAAP measures.  Adoption of the all-in sustaining cost and all-in cost metrics is voluntary and not necessarily standard, and therefore, these measures presented by the Company may not be comparable to similar measures presented by other issuers.  The Company believes that the all-in sustaining cost and all-in cost measures complement existing measures reported by Kinross.

All-in sustaining cost includes both operating and capital costs required to sustain gold production on an ongoing basis.  The value of silver sold is deducted from the total production cost of sales as it is considered residual production.  Sustaining operating costs represent expenditures incurred at current operations that are considered necessary to maintain current production.  Sustaining capital represents capital expenditures at existing operations comprising mine development costs and ongoing replacement of mine equipment and other capital facilities, and does not include capital expenditures for major growth projects or enhancement capital for significant infrastructure improvements at existing operations.

All-in cost is comprised of all-in sustaining cost as well as operating expenditures incurred at locations with no current operation, or costs related to other non-sustaining activities, and capital expenditures for major growth projects or enhancement capital for significant infrastructure improvements at existing operations.

Attributable all-in sustaining cost and all-in cost per ounce sold on a by-product basis are calculated by adjusting total production cost of sales, as reported on the consolidated statement of operations, as follows:

	Years ended December 31,
(in millions, except ounces and costs per ounce)	2015			2014
Production cost of sales - as reported	$	1,834.8		$	1,971.2
Less: portion attributable to Chirano non-controlling interest (a)	(18.0		)	(16.6		)
Less: attributable (b) silver revenues (c)	(82.5		)	(93.6		)
Attributable (b) production cost of sales net of silver by-product revenue	$	1,734.3		$	1,861.0
Adjusting items on an attributable (b) basis:
General and administrative (d)	160.6			178.8
Other operating expense - sustaining (e)	21.5			3.9
Reclamation and remediation - sustaining (f)	58.0			61.8
Exploration and business development - sustaining (g)	59.0			56.7
Additions to property, plant and equipment - sustaining (h)	428.5			387.0
All-in Sustaining Cost on a by-product basis - attributable (b)	$	2,461.9		$	2,549.2
Other operating expense - non-sustaining (e)	20.8			36.9
Reclamation and remediation - non-sustaining (f)	(7.9		)	17.5
Exploration - non-sustaining (g)	47.6			48.7
Additions to property, plant and equipment - non-sustaining (h)	132.7			179.2
All-in Cost on a by-product basis - attributable (b)	$	2,655.1		$	2,831.5
Gold ounces sold	2,562,219			2,669,278
Less: portion attributable to Chirano non-controlling interest (i)	(25,925		)	(27,970		)
Attributable (b) gold ounces sold	2,536,294			2,641,308
Attributable (b) all-in sustaining cost per ounce sold on a by-product basis	$	971		$	965
Attributable (b) all-in cost per ounce sold on a by-product basis	$	1,047		$	1,072

54

Attributable All-In Sustaining Cost and All-In Cost per Equivalent Ounce Sold

The Company also assesses its all-in sustaining cost and all-in cost on a gold equivalent ounce basis. Under these non-GAAP measures, the Company’s production of silver is converted into gold equivalent ounces and credited to total production.

Attributable all-in sustaining cost and all-in cost per equivalent ounce sold are calculated by adjusting total production cost of sales, as reported on the consolidated statement of operations, as follows:

	Years ended December 31,
(in millions, except ounces and costs per equivalent ounce)	2015			2014
Production cost of sales - as reported	$	1,834.8		$	1,971.2
Less: portion attributable to Chirano non-controlling interest (a)	(18.0		)	(16.6		)
Attributable (b) production cost of sales	$	1,816.8		$	1,954.6
Adjusting items on an attributable (b) basis:
General and administrative (d)	160.6			178.8
Other operating expense - sustaining (e)	21.5			3.9
Reclamation and remediation - sustaining (f)	58.0			61.8
Exploration and business development - sustaining (g)	59.0			56.7
Additions to property, plant and equipment - sustaining (h)	428.5			387.0
All-in Sustaining Cost - attributable (b)	$	2,544.4		$	2,642.8
Other operating expense - non-sustaining (e)	20.8			36.9
Reclamation and remediation - non-sustaining (f)	(7.9		)	17.5
Exploration - non-sustaining (g)	47.6			48.7
Additions to property, plant and equipment - non-sustaining (h)	132.7			179.2
All-in Cost - attributable (b)	$	2,737.6		$	2,925.1
Gold equivalent ounces sold	2,634,867			2,743,398
Less: portion attributable to Chirano non-controlling interest (i)	(25,997		)	(28,040		)
Attributable (b) gold equivalent ounces sold	2,608,870			2,715,358
Attributable (b) all-in sustaining cost per equivalent ounce sold	$	975		$	973
Attributable (b) all-in cost per equivalent ounce sold	$	1,049		$	1,077

55

(a) Portion attributable to Chirano non-controlling interest represents the non-controlling interest (10%) in the production cost of sales for the Chirano mine.

(b) “Attributable” includes Kinross’ share of Chirano (90%) production.

(c) “Attributable silver revenues” represents the attributable portion of metal sales realized from the production of the secondary or by-product metal (i.e. silver). Revenue from the sale of silver, which is produced as a by-product of the process used to produce gold, effectively reduces the cost of gold production.

(d) “General and administrative” expense is as reported on the consolidated statement of operations, net of certain restructuring and transaction costs. General and administrative expenses are considered sustaining costs as they are required to be absorbed on a continuing basis for the effective operation and governance of the Company, except to the extent incurred for specific items or activities not representative of the underlying operating performance of our business.

(e) “Other operating expense — sustaining” is calculated as “Other operating expense” as reported on the consolidated statement of operations, less other operating and reclamation and remediation expenses related to non-sustaining activities as well as other items not reflective of the underlying operating performance of our business. Other operating expenses are classified as either sustaining or non-sustaining based on the type and location of the expenditure incurred. The majority of other operating expenses that are incurred at existing operations are considered costs necessary to sustain operations, and are therefore classified as sustaining. Other operating expenses incurred at locations where there is no current operation or related to other non-sustaining activities are classified as non-sustaining.

(f) “Reclamation and remediation - sustaining” is calculated as current period accretion related to reclamation and remediation obligations plus current period amortization of the corresponding reclamation and remediation assets, and is intended to reflect the periodic cost of reclamation and remediation for currently operating mines. Reclamation and remediation costs for development projects or closed mines are excluded from this amount and classified as non-sustaining.

(g) “Exploration and business development — sustaining” is calculated as “Exploration and business development” expenses as reported on the consolidated statement of operations, less non-sustaining exploration expenses. Exploration expenses are classified as either sustaining or non-sustaining based on a determination of the type and location of the exploration expenditure. Exploration expenditures within the footprint of operating mines a reconsidered costs required to sustain current operations and so are included in sustaining costs. Exploration expenditures focused on new ore bodies near existing mines (i.e. brownfield), new exploration projects (i.e. greenfield) or for other generative exploration activity not linked to existing mining operations are classified as non-sustaining. Business development expenses are considered sustaining costs as they are required for general operations.

(h) “Additions to property, plant and equipment — sustaining” represents the majority of capital expenditures at existing operations including capitalized exploration costs, capitalized stripping and underground mine development costs, ongoing replacement of mine equipment and other capital facilities and other capital expenditures and is calculated as total additions to property, plant and equipment (as reported on the consolidated statements of cash flows) net of proceeds from the disposal of certain property, plant and equipment, less capitalized interest and non-sustaining capital. Non-sustaining capital represents capital expenditures for major growth projects as well as enhancement capital for significant infrastructure improvements at existing operations. Non-sustaining capital expenditures during the year ended December 31, 2015 relate to projects at Tasiast, Chirano and La Coipa.

(i) “Portion attributable to Chirano non-controlling interest” represents the non-controlling interest (10%) in the ounces sold from the Chirano mine.

56

Cautionary Statement on Forward-Looking Information

All statements, other than statements of historical fact, contained or incorporated by reference in this MD&A including, but not limited to, any information as to the future financial or operating performance of Kinross, constitute “forward-looking information” or “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of certain securities laws, including the provisions of the Securities Act (Ontario) and the provisions for “safe harbour” under the United States Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and are based on expectations, estimates and projections as of the date of this MD&A. Forward-looking statements contained in this MD&A, include, but are not limited to, those under the headings (or headings that include): “Mineral Reserve”, “Operational Outlook”, “Project Updates and New Developments”, “Liquidity Outlook”, “Contractual Obligations and Commitments”, “Contingencies”, “Other legal matters”, and “Risk Analysis”, and include, without limitation, statements with respect to our guidance for production; production costs of sales, all-in sustaining cost and capital expenditures; and continuous improvement initiatives,  as well as references to other possible events, the future price of gold and silver,  the timing and amount of estimated future production, costs of production, capital expenditures, costs and timing of the development of projects and new deposits, success of exploration, development and mining activities,  currency fluctuations, capital requirements, project studies, mine life extensions, restarting suspended or disrupted operations; continuous improvement initiatives; and resolution of pending litigation. The words “anticipate”, “assumption”, “believe”, “budget”, “contemplate”, “consideration”, “contingent”, “estimates”, “expects”, “explore”, “feasibility”, “forecast”, “focus”, “forward”, “guidance”, “indicate”, “intend”, “initiative”, “measures”, “model”, “objective”, “optimize”, “outlook”, “opportunity”, “phased,” “plan”, “possible”, “potential”, “pre-feasibility”, “priority”, “project”, “projection”, “strategy”, “study”, “target”, or “trend”, or variations of or similar such words and phrases or statements that certain actions, events or results may, could, should or ‘will be achieved, received or taken, or will occur or result and similar such expressions identify forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are necessarily based upon a number of estimates and assumptions that, while considered reasonable by Kinross as of the date of such statements, are inherently subject to significant business, economic and competitive uncertainties and contingencies. The estimates, models and assumptions of Kinross referenced, contained or incorporated by reference in this MD&A, which may prove to be incorrect, include, but are not limited to, the various assumptions set forth herein and in our most recently filed Annual Information Form as well as: (1) there being no significant disruptions affecting the operations of the Company whether due to extreme weather events (including, without limitation, excessive or lack of rainfall) and other or related natural disasters, labour disruptions (including but not limited to following workforce reductions), supply disruptions, power disruptions, damage to equipment or otherwise; (2) permitting, development, operations and production from the Company’s operations being consistent with Kinross’ current expectations including, without limitation, land acquisitions and permitting for the construction and operation of the new tailings facility, water and power supply and launch of the new tailings reprocessing facility at Paracatu; (3) political and legal developments in any jurisdiction in which the Company operates being consistent with its current expectations including, without limitation, the impact of any escalating political tensions and uncertainty in the Russian Federation and Ukraine or any related sanctions and any other similar restrictions or penalties imposed, or actions taken, by any government, including but not limited to potential power rationing, tailing facility regulation and amendments to mining laws in Brazil, potential amendments to water laws and/or other water use restrictions and regulatory actions in Chile, potential amendments to minerals and mining laws and dam safety regulation in Ghana, potential amendments to customs and mining laws (including but not limited amendments to the VAT) in Mauritania, and potential amendments to and enforcement of tax laws in Russia (including, but not limited to, the interpretation, implementation, application and enforcement of any such laws and amendments thereto), being consistent with Kinross’ current expectations; (4) the exchange rate between the Canadian dollar, Brazilian real, Chilean peso, Russian rouble, Mauritanian ouguiya, Ghanaian cedi and the U.S. dollar being approximately consistent with current levels; (5) certain price assumptions for gold and silver; (6) prices for diesel, natural gas, fuel oil, electricity and other key supplies being approximately consistent with current levels; (7) production and cost of sales forecasts for the Company meeting expectations; (8) the accuracy of the current mineral reserve and mineral resource estimates of the Company (including but not limited to ore tonnage and ore grade estimates); (9) labour and materials costs increasing on a basis consistent with Kinross’ current expectations; (10) the terms and conditions of the legal and fiscal stability agreements for the Tasiast and Chirano operations being interpreted and applied in a manner consistent with their intent and Kinross’ expectations; (11) goodwill and/or asset impairment potential; and (12) access to capital markets, including but not limited to maintaining an investment grade debt rating being consistent with the Company’s current expectations. Known and unknown factors could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements. Such factors include, but are not limited to: sanctions (any other similar restrictions or penalties) now or subsequently imposed, other actions taken, by, against, in respect of or otherwise impacting any jurisdiction in which the Company is domiciled or operates (including but not limited to the Russian Federation, Canada, the European Union and the United States), or any government or citizens of, persons or companies domiciled in, or the Company’s business, operations or other activities in, any such jurisdiction; litigation commenced, or other claims or actions brought, against the Company (and/or any of its directors, officers or employees) in respect of the cessation by the Company of investment in and development of FDN and its sale, or any of the Company’s prior activities on or in respect thereof or otherwise in Ecuador; fluctuations in the currency markets; fluctuations in the spot and forward price of gold or certain other commodities (such as fuel and electricity); changes in the discount rates applied to calculate the present value of net future cash flows based on country-specific real weighted average cost of capital; changes in the market valuations of peer group gold producers and the Company, and the resulting impact on market price to net asset value multiples; changes in various market variables, such as interest rates, foreign exchange rates, gold or silver prices and lease rates, or global fuel prices, that could impact the mark-to-market value of outstanding derivative instruments and ongoing payments/receipts under any financial obligations; risks arising from holding derivative instruments (such as credit risk, market liquidity risk and mark-to-market risk); changes in national and local government legislation, taxation (including but not limited to income tax, advance income tax, stamp tax, withholding tax, capital tax, tariffs, value-added or sales tax, capital outflow tax, capital gains tax, windfall or windfall profits tax, royalty, excise tax, customs/import or export taxes/duties, asset taxes, asset transfer tax, property use or other real estate tax, together with any related fine, penalty, surcharge, or interest imposed in connection with such taxes), controls, policies and regulations; the security of personnel and assets; political or economic developments in Canada, the United States, Chile, Brazil, Russia, Mauritania, Ghana, or other countries in which Kinross does business or may carry on business; business opportunities that may be presented to, or pursued by, us; our ability to successfully integrate acquisitions and complete divestitures; operating or technical difficulties in connection with mining or development activities; employee relations; litigation or other claims against, or regulatory investigations and/or any enforcement actions or sanctions in respect of the Company (and/or its directors, officers, or employees) including, but not limited to, securities class action litigation in Canada and/or the United States, or any investigations, enforcement actions and/or sanctions under any applicable anti-corruption, international sanctions and/or anti-money laundering laws and regulations in Canada, the United States or any other applicable jurisdiction; the speculative nature of gold exploration and development including, but not limited to, the risks of obtaining necessary licenses and permits; diminishing quantities or grades of reserves; adverse changes in our credit rating; and contests over title to properties, particularly title to undeveloped properties. In addition, there are risks and hazards associated with the business of gold exploration, development and mining, including environmental hazards, industrial accidents, unusual or unexpected formations, pressures, cave-ins, flooding and gold bullion losses (and the risk of inadequate insurance, or the inability to obtain insurance, to cover these risks). Many of these uncertainties and contingencies can directly or indirectly affect, and could cause, Kinross’ actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied in any forward-looking statements made by, or on behalf of, Kinross, including but not limited to resulting in an impairment charge on goodwill and/or assets. There can be no assurance that forward-looking statements will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. Forward-looking statements are provided for the purpose of providing information about management’s expectations and plans relating to the future. All of the forward-looking statements made in this MD&A are qualified by these cautionary statements and those

57

made in our other filings with the securities regulators of Canada and the United States including, but not limited to, the cautionary statements made in the “Risk Factors” section of our most recently filed Annual Information Form and the “Risk Analysis” section of our 2015 year-end MD&A. These factors are not intended to represent a complete list of the factors that could affect Kinross. Kinross disclaims any intention or obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements or to explain any material difference between subsequent actual events and such forward-looking statements, except to the extent required by applicable law.

Key Sensitivities

Approximately 70%-80% of the Company’s costs are denominated in U.S. dollars.

A 10% change in foreign exchange could result in an approximate $15 impact on production cost of sales per ounce2.

Specific to the Russian rouble, a 10% change in the exchange rate would be expected to result in an approximate $14 impact on Russian production cost of sales per ounce.

Specific to the Brazilian real, a 10% change in the exchange rate would be expected to result in an approximate $24 impact on Brazilian production cost of sales per ounce

A $10 per barrel change in the price of oil could result in an approximate $3 impact on production cost of sales per ounce.

A $100 change in the price of gold would be expected to result in an approximate $3 impact on production cost of sales per ounce as a result of a change in royalties.

Other information

Where we say “we”, “us”, “our”, the “Company”, or “Kinross” in this MD&A, we mean Kinross Gold Corporation and/or one or more or all of its subsidiaries, as may be applicable.

The technical information about the Company’s mineral properties contained in this MD&A has been prepared under the supervision of Mr. John Sims, an officer of the Company, who is a “qualified person” within the meaning of National Instrument 43-101.  The technical information about the Company’s exploration activities contained in this MD&A has been prepared under the supervision of Mr. Sylvain Guerard, an officer of the Company who is a “qualified person” within the meaning of NI 43-101.

2  Refers to all of the currencies in the countries where the Company has mining operations, fluctuating simultaneously by 10% in the same direction, either appreciating or depreciating, taking into consideration the impact of hedging and the weighting of each currency within our consolidated cost structure.

58

EX-99.3

Exhibit 99.3

MANAGEMENT’S RESPONSIBILITY FOR FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

The consolidated financial statements, the notes thereto, and other financial information contained in the Management’s Discussion and Analysis have been prepared in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board and are the responsibility of the management of Kinross Gold Corporation. The financial information presented elsewhere in the Management’s Discussion and Analysis is consistent with the data that is contained in the consolidated financial statements. The consolidated financial statements, where necessary, include amounts which are based on the best estimates and judgment of management.

In order to discharge management’s responsibility for the integrity of the financial statements, the Company maintains a system of internal accounting controls. These controls are designed to provide reasonable assurance that the Company’s assets are safeguarded, transactions are executed and recorded in accordance with management’s authorization, proper records are maintained and relevant and reliable financial information is produced. These controls include maintaining quality standards in hiring and training of employees, policies and procedures manuals, a corporate code of conduct and ensuring that there is proper accountability for performance within appropriate and well-defined areas of responsibility. The system of internal controls is further supported by a compliance function, which is designed to ensure that we and our employees comply with securities legislation and conflict of interest rules.

The Board of Directors is responsible for overseeing management’s performance of its responsibilities for financial reporting and internal control. The Audit Committee, which is composed of non-executive directors, meets with management as well as the external auditors to ensure that management is properly fulfilling its financial reporting responsibilities to the Directors who approve the consolidated financial statements. The external auditors have full and unrestricted access to the Audit Committee to discuss the scope of their audits, the adequacy of the system of internal controls and review financial reporting issues.

The consolidated financial statements have been audited by KPMG LLP, the independent registered public accounting firm, in accordance with Canadian generally accepted auditing standards and the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States).

J. Paul Rollinson	Tony S. Giardini
President and Chief Executive Officer Toronto, Canada February 10, 2016	Executive Vice-President and Chief Financial Officer Toronto, Canada February 10, 2016

1

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS’ REPORT OF REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To the Shareholders of Kinross Gold Corporation

We have audited the accompanying consolidated financial statements of Kinross Gold Corporation, which comprise the consolidated balance sheets as at December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014, the consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive loss, cash flows and equity for the years then ended, and notes, comprising a summary of significant accounting policies and other explanatory information.

Management’s Responsibility for the Consolidated Financial Statements

Management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of these consolidated financial statements in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board, and for such internal control as management determines is necessary to enable the preparation of consolidated financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error.

Auditors’ Responsibility

Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these consolidated financial statements based on our audits. We conducted our audits in accordance with Canadian generally accepted auditing standards and the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we comply with ethical requirements and plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the consolidated financial statements are free from material misstatement.

An audit involves performing procedures to obtain audit evidence about the amounts and disclosures in the consolidated financial statements. The procedures selected depend on our judgment, including the assessment of the risks of material misstatement of the consolidated financial statements, whether due to fraud or error. In making those risk assessments, we consider internal control relevant to the entity’s preparation and fair presentation of the consolidated financial statements in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances. An audit also includes evaluating the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of accounting estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the consolidated financial statements.

We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained in our audits is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our audit opinion.

Opinion

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated financial position of Kinross Gold Corporation as at December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014, and its consolidated financial performance and its consolidated cash flows for the years then ended in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board.

Chartered Professional Accountants, Licensed Public Accountants

February 10, 2016

Toronto, Canada

2

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

(expressed in millions of United States dollars, except share amounts)

		As at
		December 31,			December 31,
		2015			2014
Assets
Current assets
Cash and cash equivalents	Note 7	$	1,043.9		$	983.5
Restricted cash	Note 7	10.5			41.3
Accounts receivable and other assets	Note 7	109.2			170.4
Current income tax recoverable		123.3			115.2
Inventories	Note 7	1,005.2			1,276.7
		2,292.1			2,587.1
Non-current assets
Property, plant and equipment	Note 7	4,593.7			5,409.4
Goodwill	Note 7	162.7			162.7
Long-term investments	Note 7	83.1			111.0
Investments in associate and joint venture	Note 9	157.1			156.8
Other long-term assets	Note 7	370.2			417.9
Deferred tax assets	Note 17	76.5			106.5
Total assets		$	7,735.4		$	8,951.4
Liabilities
Current liabilities
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities	Note 7	$	379.6		$	421.9
Current income tax payable		6.4			19.2
Current portion of long-term debt	Note 12	249.5			60.0
Current portion of provisions	Note 13	50.3			43.1
Current portion of unrealized fair value of derivative liabilities	Note 10	16.0			60.2
		701.8			604.4
Non-current liabilities
Long-term debt	Note 12	1,731.9			1,998.1
Provisions	Note 13	720.8			780.9
Other long-term liabilities		148.7			207.2
Deferred tax liabilities	Note 17	499.0			469.0
Total liabilities		3,802.2			4,059.6
Equity
Common shareholders' equity
Common share capital	Note 14	$	14,603.5		$	14,587.7
Contributed surplus		239.2			239.0
Accumulated deficit		(10,922.1		)	(9,937.6		)
Accumulated other comprehensive loss	Note 7	(31.3		)	(46.1		)
Total common shareholders' equity		3,889.3			4,843.0
Non-controlling interest		43.9			48.8
Total equity		3,933.2			4,891.8
Commitments and contingencies	Note 19
Subsequent events	Note 6 i, 12
Total liabilities and equity		$	7,735.4		$	8,951.4
Common shares
Authorized		Unlimited			Unlimited
Issued and outstanding	Note 14	1,146,540,188			1,144,576,474

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements

Signed on behalf of the Board:

John A. Brough	John M. H. Huxley
Director	Director

3

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS

(expressed in millions of United States dollars, except share and per share amounts)

		Years ended
		December 31,			December 31,
		2015			2014
Revenue
Metal sales		$	3,052.2		$	3,466.3
Cost of sales
Production cost of sales		1,834.8			1,971.2
Depreciation, depletion and amortization		897.7			874.7
Impairment charges	Note 8	699.0			1,251.4
Total cost of sales		3,431.5			4,097.3
Gross loss		(379.3		)	(631.0		)
Other operating expense		76.2			111.8
Exploration and business development		108.0			105.6
General and administrative		179.4			178.8
Operating loss		(742.9		)	(1,027.2		)
Other income (expense) - net	Note 7	(20.3		)	(215.5		)
Equity in earnings (losses) of associate and joint venture	Note 7	3.2			(5.8		)
Finance income		8.3			11.2
Finance expense	Note 7	(96.0		)	(80.1		)
Loss before tax		(847.7		)	(1,317.4		)
Income tax expense - net	Note 17	(141.7		)	(109.7		)
Loss from continuing operations after tax		(989.4		)	(1,427.1		)
Earnings from discontinued operations after tax	Note 6 ii	—			233.5
Net loss		$	(989.4	)	$	(1,193.6	)
Net loss from continuing operations attributable to:
Non-controlling interest		$	(4.9	)	$	(27.1	)
Common shareholders		$	(984.5	)	$	(1,400.0	)
Net loss attributable to:
Non-controlling interest		$	(4.9	)	$	(27.1	)
Common shareholders		$	(984.5	)	$	(1,166.5	)
Loss per share from continuing operations attributable to common shareholders
Basic		$	(0.86	)	$	(1.22	)
Diluted		$	(0.86	)	$	(1.22	)
Loss per share attributable to common shareholders
Basic		$	(0.86	)	$	(1.02	)
Diluted		$	(0.86	)	$	(1.02	)
Weighted average number of common shares outstanding (millions)	Note 16
Basic		1,146.0			1,144.3
Diluted		1,146.0			1,144.3

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these interim consolidated financial statements

4

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE LOSS

(expressed in millions of United States dollars)

		Years ended
		December 31,			December 31,
		2015			2014
Net loss		$	(989.4	)	$	(1,193.6	)
Other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax:	Note 7
Other comprehensive income (loss) to be reclassified to profit or loss in subsequent periods:
Change in fair value of investments (a)		(28.1		)	7.0
Reclassification to earnings for impairment charges		7.6			1.5
Accumulated other comprehensive loss related to investments sold (b)		—			(6.1		)
Changes in fair value of derivative financial instruments designated as cash flow hedges (c)		(38.1		)	(40.3		)
Accumulated other comprehensive income related to derivatives settled (d)		73.4			28.3
		14.8			(9.6		)
Total comprehensive loss		$	(974.6	)	$	(1,203.2	)
Comprehensive loss from continuing operations		$	(974.6	)	$	(1,436.7	)
Comprehensive income from discontinued operations	Note 6 ii	—			233.5
Total comprehensive loss		$	(974.6	)	$	(1,203.2	)
Attributable to non-controlling interest		$	(4.9	)	$	(27.1	)
Attributable to common shareholders		$	(969.7	)	$	(1,176.1	)

(a)   Net of tax of $nil (2014 - $nil)

(b)   Net of tax of $nil (2014 - $nil)

(c)   Net of tax of $(13.1) million (2014 - $(4.9) million)

(d)   Net of tax of $21.3 million (2014 - $9.1 million)

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements

5

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

(expressed in millions of United States dollars)

	Years ended
	December 31,			December 31,
	2015			2014
Net inflow (outflow) of cash related to the following activities:
Operating:
Loss from continuing operations	$	(989.4	)	$	(1,427.1	)
Adjustments to reconcile loss from continuing operations to net cash provided from operating activities:
Depreciation, depletion and amortization	897.7			874.7
Impairment charges	699.0			1,251.4
Impairment of investments	7.6			158.1
Equity in (earnings) losses of associate and joint venture	(3.2		)	5.8
Non-hedge derivative (gains) losses - net	(1.5		)	5.1
Share-based compensation expense	17.1			26.2
Finance expense	96.0			80.1
Deferred tax expense (recovery)	53.0			(13.8		)
Foreign exchange losses and other	18.2			45.8
Reclamation expense (recovery)	(7.9		)	17.5
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
Accounts receivable and other assets	91.0			26.9
Inventories	63.5			(59.4		)
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities	27.9			52.1
Cash flow provided from operating activities	969.0			1,043.4
Income taxes paid	(137.4		)	(185.3		)
Net cash flow of continuing operations provided from operating activities	831.6			858.1
Net cash flow of discontinued operations used in operating activities	—			(8.8		)
Investing:
Additions to property, plant and equipment	(610.0		)	(631.8		)
Net additions to long-term investments and other assets	(59.7		)	(55.5		)
Net proceeds from the sale of property, plant and equipment	2.3			30.5
Decrease in restricted cash	30.8			17.7
Interest received and other	4.0			4.5
Net cash flow of continuing operations used in investing activities	(632.6		)	(634.6		)
Net cash flow of discontinued operations provided from investing activities	1.0			148.2
Financing:
Issuance of common shares on exercise of options	—			0.1
Proceeds from issuance of debt	22.5			913.0
Repayment of debt	(102.5		)	(980.1		)
Interest paid	(48.8		)	(20.6		)
Settlement of derivative instruments	—			(2.0		)
Other	(2.9		)	(4.6		)
Net cash flow of continuing operations used in financing activities	(131.7		)	(94.2		)
Net cash flow of discontinued operations used in financing activities	—			—
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents of continuing operations	(7.9		)	(19.7		)
Increase in cash and cash equivalents	60.4			249.0
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period	983.5			734.5
Cash and cash equivalents, end of period	$	1,043.9		$	983.5

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these interim consolidated financial statements

6

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF EQUITY

(expressed in millions of United States dollars)

	Years ended
	December 31,			December 31,
	2015			2014
Common share capital and common share purchase warrants
Balance at the beginning of the period	$	14,587.7		$	14,737.1
Transfer from contributed surplus on exercise of options and restricted shares	15.8			12.5
Options exercised, including cash	—			0.1
Expiry of warrants	—			(162.0		)
Balance at the end of the period	$	14,603.5		$	14,587.7
Contributed surplus
Balance at the beginning of the period	$	239.0		$	84.5
Share-based compensation	17.1			25.1
Transfer of fair value of exercised options and restricted shares	(16.9		)	(17.1		)
Expiry of warrants, net of tax	—			146.5
Balance at the end of the period	$	239.2		$	239.0
Accumulated deficit
Balance at the beginning of the period	$	(9,937.6	)	$	(8,771.1	)
Net loss attributable to common shareholders	(984.5		)	(1,166.5		)
Balance at the end of the period	$	(10,922.1	)	$	(9,937.6	)
Accumulated other comprehensive loss
Balance at the beginning of the period	$	(46.1	)	$	(36.5	)
Other comprehensive income (loss)	14.8			(9.6		)
Balance at the end of the period	$	(31.3	)	$	(46.1	)
Total accumulated deficit and accumulated other comprehensive loss	$	(10,953.4	)	$	(9,983.7	)
Total common shareholders’ equity	$	3,889.3		$	4,843.0
Non-controlling interest
Balance at the beginning of the period	$	48.8		$	75.9
Net loss attributable to non-controlling interest	(4.9		)	(27.1		)
Balance at the end of the period	$	43.9		$	48.8
Total equity	$	3,933.2		$	4,891.8

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these interim consolidated financial statements

7

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

1.DESCRIPTION OF BUSINESS AND NATURE OF OPERATIONS

Kinross Gold Corporation and its subsidiaries and joint arrangements (collectively, “Kinross” or the “Company”) are engaged in gold mining and related activities, including exploration and acquisition of gold-bearing properties, extraction and processing of gold-containing ore and reclamation of gold mining properties. Kinross Gold Corporation, the ultimate parent, is a public company incorporated and domiciled in Canada with its registered office at 25 York Street, 17th floor, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, M5J 2V5.  Kinross’ gold production and exploration activities are carried out principally in Canada, the United States, the Russian Federation, Brazil, Chile, Ghana and Mauritania.   Gold is produced in the form of doré, which is shipped to refineries for final processing.  Kinross also produces and sells a quantity of silver.   The Company is listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange and the New York Stock Exchange.

The consolidated financial statements of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2015 were authorized for issue in accordance with a resolution of the board of directors on February 10, 2016.

2.BASIS OF PRESENTATION

These consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2015 (“financial statements”) have been prepared in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”) as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board (“IASB”).

These financial statements were prepared on a going concern basis under the historical cost method except for certain financial assets and liabilities which are measured at fair value.  The significant accounting policies are presented in Note 3 and have been consistently applied in each of the periods presented.  Significant accounting estimates, judgments and assumptions used or exercised by management in the preparation of these financial statements are presented in Note 5.

8

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

3.SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

i.   Principles of consolidation

The significant mining properties and entities of Kinross are listed below. All operating activities involve gold mining and exploration.  Each of the significant entities has a December 31 year end.

			As at
			December 31,		December 31,
Entity	Property/ Segment	Location	2015		2014
Subsidiaries:
(Consolidated)
Fairbanks Gold Mining, Inc	Fort Knox	USA	100	%	100	%
Kinross Brasil Mineração S.A. (“KBM”)	Paracatu	Brazil	100	%	100	%
Compania Minera Maricunga	Maricunga and Lobo Marte / Maricunga and Corporate and Other	Chile	100	%	100	%
Compania Minera Mantos de Oro	La Coipa / Corporate and Other	Chile	100	%	100	%
Echo Bay Minerals Company	Kettle River - Buckhorn	USA	100	%	100	%
Chukotka Mining and Geological Company	Kupol	Russian Federation	100	%	100	%
Northern Gold LLC	Dvoinoye/ Kupol	Russian Federation	100	%	100	%
Selene Holdings LP	White Gold/ Corporate and Other	Canada	100	%	100	%
Tasiast Mauritanie Ltd. S.A.	Tasiast	Mauritania	100	%	100	%
Chirano Gold Mines Ltd. (Ghana) (a)	Chirano	Ghana	90	%	90	%
Interest in joint operation:
(Relative share consolidated)
Round Mountain Gold Corporation	Round Mountain	USA	50	%(b)	50	%
Investment in associate:
(Equity accounted)
Compania Minera Casale	Cerro Casale/ Corporate and Other	Chile	25	%	25	%
Interest in joint venture:
(Equity accounted)
Sociedad Contractual Minera Puren	La Coipa/ Corporate and Other	Chile	65	%	65	%

(a)The Company holds a 90% interest in the Chirano Gold Mine with the Government of Ghana having the right to the remaining 10% interest.

(b)The Company has a joint operation interest in Round Mountain through its 50% ownership in the Smoky Valley Common Operation. Under the joint operation agreement between the Company and Barrick Gold Corporation (“Barrick”), the Company is the operator.

The Management Committee of the joint operation represents the joint operation partners, authorizes annual programs and budgets and approves major transactions prior to execution by site management. The joint operation owners are entitled to their pro-rata share of production and are obliged to make their pro-rata share of contributions as requested.

On January 11, 2016, the Company acquired the remaining 50% interest in Round Mountain from Barrick. See Note 6 i.

9

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

(a)Subsidiaries

Subsidiaries are entities controlled by the Company.  Control exists when an investor is exposed, or has rights, to variable returns from its involvement with an investee and has the ability to affect those returns through its power over the investee.  Subsidiaries are included in the consolidated financial statements from the date control is obtained until the date control ceases.  Where the Company’s interest in a subsidiary is less than 100%, the Company recognizes non-controlling interests.  All intercompany balances, transactions, income, expenses, profits and losses, including unrealized gains and losses have been eliminated on consolidation.

(b)Joint Arrangements

The Company conducts a portion of its business through joint arrangements where the parties are bound by contractual arrangements establishing joint control over such arrangements and requiring unanimous consent of each of the parties regarding those activities that significantly affect the returns of the arrangement.  The Company’s interest in a joint arrangement is classified as either a joint operation or a joint venture depending on its rights and obligations in the arrangement.  In a joint operation, the Company has rights to its share of the assets, and obligations for its share of the liabilities, of the joint arrangement, while in a joint venture, the Company has rights to its share of the net assets of the joint arrangement.  For a joint operation, the Company recognizes in the consolidated financial statements, its share of the assets, liabilities, revenue, and expenses of the joint arrangement, while for a joint venture, the Company recognizes in the consolidated financial statements its investment in the joint arrangement using the equity method of accounting.

(c)Associates

Associates are entities, including unincorporated entities such as partnerships, over which the Company has significant influence and that are neither subsidiaries nor interests in joint arrangements.  Significant influence is the ability to participate in the financial and operating policy decisions of the investee without having control or joint control over those policies.   In general, significant influence is presumed to exist when the Company has between 20% and 50% of voting power.  Significant influence may also be evidenced by factors such as the Company’s representation on the board of directors, participation in policy-making of the investee, material transactions with the investee, interchange of managerial personnel, or the provision of essential technical information. Associates are equity accounted for from the effective date of commencement of significant influence to the date that the Company ceases to have significant influence.

Results of associates are equity accounted for using the results of their most recent annual financial statements or interim financial statements, as applicable.  Losses from associates are recognized in the consolidated financial statements until the interest in the associate is written down to nil.  Thereafter, losses are recognized only to the extent that the Company is committed to providing financial support to such associates.

The carrying value of the investment in an associate represents the cost of the investment, including goodwill, a share of the post-acquisition retained earnings and losses, accumulated other comprehensive income (“AOCI”) and any impairment losses.  At the end of each reporting period, the Company assesses whether there is any objective evidence that its investments in associates are impaired.

ii.  Functional and presentation currency

The functional and presentation currency of the Company is the United States dollar.

Transactions denominated in foreign currencies are translated into the United States dollar as follows:

·Monetary assets and liabilities are translated at the rates of exchange on the consolidated balance sheet date;

·Non-monetary assets and liabilities are translated at historical exchange rates prevailing at each transaction date;

·Revenue and expenses are translated at the exchange rate at the date of the transaction, except depreciation, depletion and amortization, which are translated at the rates of exchange applicable to the related assets, and share-based compensation expense, which is translated at the rates of exchange applicable on the date of grant of the share-based compensation; and

·Exchange gains and losses on translation are included in earnings.

When the gain or loss on certain non-monetary items, such as long-term investments classified as available-for-sale, is recognized in other comprehensive income (“OCI”), the translation differences are also recognized in OCI.

10

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

iii. Cash and cash equivalents

Cash and cash equivalents include cash and highly liquid investments with a maturity of three months or less at the date of acquisition.

Restricted cash is cash held in banks that is not available for general corporate use.

iv. Short-term investments

Short-term investments include short-term money market instruments with terms to maturity at the date of acquisition of between three and twelve months. The carrying value of short-term investments is equal to cost and accrued interest.

v. Long-term investments

Investments in entities that are not subsidiaries, joint operations, joint ventures or investments in associates are designated as available-for-sale investments.  These investments are measured at fair value on acquisition and at each reporting date.  Any unrealized holding gains and losses related to these investments are excluded from net earnings and are included in OCI until an investment is sold and gains or losses are realized, or there is objective evidence that the investment is impaired.  When there is evidence that an investment is impaired, the cumulative loss that was previously recognized in OCI is reclassified from AOCI to the consolidated statement of operations.

vi. Inventories

Inventories consisting of metal in circuit ore, metal in-process and finished metal are valued at the lower of cost or net realizable value (“NRV”). NRV is calculated as the difference between the estimated gold prices based on prevailing and long-term metal prices and estimated costs to complete production into a saleable form.

Metal in circuit is comprised of ore in stockpiles and ore on heap leach pads. Ore in stockpiles is coarse ore that has been extracted from the mine and is available for further processing. Costs are added to stockpiles based on the current mining cost per tonne and removed at the average cost per tonne. Costs are added to ore on the heap leach pads based on current mining costs and removed from the heap leach pads as ounces are recovered, based on the average cost per recoverable ounce of gold on the leach pad. Ore in stockpiles not expected to be processed in the next twelve months is classified as long-term.

The quantities of recoverable gold placed on the leach pads are reconciled by comparing the grades of ore placed on the leach pads to the quantities of gold actually recovered (metallurgical balancing); however, the nature of the leaching process inherently limits the ability to precisely monitor inventory levels. As a result, the metallurgical balancing process is constantly monitored and the engineering estimates are refined based on actual results over time. Variances between actual and estimated quantities resulting from changes in assumptions and estimates that do not result in write downs to NRV are accounted for on a prospective basis. The ultimate actual recovery of gold from a leach pad will not be known until the leaching process has concluded. In the event that the Company determines, based on engineering estimates, that a quantity of gold contained in ore on leach pads is to be recovered over a period exceeding twelve months, that portion is classified as long-term.

In-process inventories represent materials that are in the process of being converted to a saleable product.

Materials and supplies are valued at the lower of average cost and NRV.

Write downs of inventory are recognized in the consolidated statement of operations in the current period. The Company reverses inventory write downs in the event that there is a subsequent increase in NRV.

vii. Borrowing costs

Borrowing costs are generally expensed as incurred except where they relate to the financing of qualifying assets that require a substantial period of time to get ready for their intended use.  Qualifying assets include the cost of developing mining properties and constructing new facilities. Borrowing costs related to qualifying assets are capitalized up to the date when the asset is ready for its intended use.

Where funds are borrowed specifically to finance a project, the amount capitalized represents the actual borrowing costs incurred net of any investment income earned on the investment of those borrowings.  Where the funds used to finance a project form part of general borrowings, the amount capitalized is calculated using a weighted average of rates applicable to relevant general borrowings of the Company during the period.

11

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

viii. Business combinations

A business combination is a transaction or other event in which control over one or more businesses is obtained.  A business is an integrated set of activities and assets that is capable of being conducted and managed for the purpose of providing a return in the form of dividends, lower costs or other economic benefits.  A business consists of inputs and processes applied to those inputs that have the ability to create outputs that provide a return to the Company and its shareholders. A business need not include all of the inputs and processes that were used by the acquiree to produce outputs if the business can be integrated with the inputs and processes of the Company to continue to produce outputs.  If the integrated set of activities and assets is in the exploration and development stage, and thus, may not have outputs, the Company considers other factors to determine whether the set of activities and assets is a business.  Those factors include, but are not limited to, whether the set of activities and assets:

·has begun planned principal activities;

·has employees, intellectual property and other inputs and processes that could be applied to those inputs;

·is pursuing a plan to produce outputs; and

·will be able to obtain access to customers that will purchase the outputs.

Not all of the above factors need to be present for a particular integrated set of activities and assets in the development stage to qualify as a business.

Business acquisitions are accounted for using the acquisition method whereby acquired assets and liabilities are recorded at fair value as of the date of acquisition with the excess of the purchase consideration over such fair value being recorded as goodwill and allocated to cash generating units (“CGUs”).  Non-controlling interest in an acquisition may be measured at either fair value or at the non-controlling interest’s proportionate share of the fair value of the acquiree’s net identifiable assets.

If the fair value of the net assets acquired exceeds the purchase consideration, the difference is recognized immediately as a gain in the consolidated statement of operations.

Where a business combination is achieved in stages, previously held equity interests in the acquiree are re-measured at their acquisition-date fair value and any resulting gain or loss is recognized in the consolidated statement of operations.

Acquisition related costs are expensed during the period in which they are incurred, except for the cost of debt or equity instruments issued in relation to the acquisition which is included in the carrying amount of the related instrument.

Certain fair values may be estimated at the acquisition date pending confirmation or completion of the valuation process.  Where provisional values are used in accounting for a business combination, they are adjusted retrospectively in subsequent periods.   However, the measurement period will not exceed one year from the acquisition date.

If the assets acquired are not a business, the transaction is accounted for as an asset acquisition.

ix. Goodwill

Business acquisitions are accounted for using the acquisition method whereby acquired assets and liabilities are recorded at fair value as of the date of acquisition with the excess of the acquisition amount over such fair value being recorded as goodwill and allocated to CGUs.  CGUs are the smallest identifiable group of assets, liabilities and associated goodwill that generate cash inflows that are largely independent of the cash inflows from other assets or groups of assets. Each individual mineral property that is an operating or development stage mine is typically a CGU.

Goodwill arises principally because of the following factors:  (1) the going concern value of the Company’s capacity to sustain and grow by replacing and augmenting mineral reserves through completely new discoveries; (2) the ability to capture buyer-specific synergies arising upon a transaction; (3) the optionality (real option value associated with the portfolio of acquired mines as well as each individual mine) to develop additional higher-cost mineral reserves, to intensify efforts to develop the more promising acquired properties and to reduce efforts at developing the less promising acquired properties in the future  (this optionality may result from changes in the overall economics of an individual mine or a portfolio of mines, largely driven by changes in the gold price); and (4) the requirement to record a deferred tax liability for the difference between the assigned values and the tax bases of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed in a business combination.

12

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

x. Exploration and evaluation (“E&E”) costs

Exploration and evaluation costs are those costs required to find a mineral property and determine commercial viability. E&E costs include costs to establish an initial mineral resource and determine whether inferred mineral resources can be upgraded to measured and indicated mineral resources and whether measured and indicated mineral resources can be converted to proven and probable reserves.

E&E costs consist of:

·gathering exploration data through topographical and geological studies;

·exploratory drilling, trenching and sampling;

·determining the volume and grade of the resource;

·test work on geology, metallurgy, mining, geotechnical and environmental; and

·conducting engineering, marketing and financial studies.

Project costs in relation to these activities are expensed as incurred until such time as the Company expects that mineral resources will be converted to mineral reserves within a reasonable period.  Thereafter, costs for the project are capitalized prospectively as capitalized exploration and evaluation costs in property, plant and equipment.

The Company also recognizes E&E costs as assets when acquired as part of a business combination, or asset purchase.  These assets are recognized at fair value.  Acquired E&E costs consist of:

·fair value of the estimated potential ounces, and

·exploration properties.

Acquired or capitalized E&E costs for a project are classified as such until the project demonstrates technical feasibility and commercial viability.  Upon demonstrating technical feasibility and commercial viability, and subject to an impairment analysis, capitalized E&E costs are transferred to capitalized development costs within property, plant and equipment. Technical feasibility and commercial viability generally coincides with the establishment of proven and probable mineral reserves; however, this determination may be impacted by management’s assessment of certain modifying factors including: legal, environmental, social and governmental factors.

xi. Property, plant and equipment

Property, plant and equipment are recorded at cost and carried net of accumulated depreciation, depletion and amortization and accumulated impairment losses. The initial cost of an asset comprises its purchase price or construction cost, any costs directly attributable to bringing the asset into operation, the estimate of reclamation and remediation and, for qualifying assets, capitalized borrowing costs.

Costs to acquire mineral properties are capitalized and represent the property’s fair value at the time it was acquired, either as an individual asset purchase or as part of a business combination.

Interest expense attributable to the cost of developing mining properties and to constructing new facilities is capitalized until assets are ready for their intended use.

Acquired or capitalized exploration and evaluation costs may be included within mineral interests in development and operating properties or pre-development properties depending upon the nature of the property to which the costs relate. Repairs and maintenance costs are expensed as incurred. However, expenditures on major maintenance rebuilds or overhauls are capitalized when it is probable that the expenditures will extend the productive capacity or useful life of an asset.

(a)Asset categories

The Company categorizes property, plant and equipment based on the type of asset and/or the stage of operation or development of the property.

Land, plant and equipment includes land, mobile and stationary equipment, and refining and processing facilities for all properties regardless of their stage of development or operation.

13

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

Mineral interests consist of:

·Development and operating properties, which include capitalized development and stripping costs, cost of assets under construction, exploration and evaluation costs and mineral interests for those properties currently in operation, for which development has commenced, or for which proven and probable reserves have been declared; and

·Pre-development properties, which include exploration and evaluation costs and mineral interests for those properties for which development has not commenced.

(b)Depreciation, depletion and amortization

For plant and other facilities, stripping costs, reclamation and remediation costs, production stage mineral interests and plant expansion costs, the Company uses the units-of-production (“UOP”) method for determining depreciation, depletion and amortization.  The expected useful lives used in the UOP calculations are determined based on the facts and circumstances associated with the mineral interest. The Company evaluates the proven and probable reserves at least on an annual basis and adjusts the UOP calculation to correspond with the changes in reserves.  The expected useful life used in determining UOP does not exceed the estimated life of the ore body based on recoverable ounces to be mined from estimated proven and probable reserves.  Any changes in estimates of useful lives are accounted for prospectively from the date of the change.

Stripping and other costs incurred in a pit expansion are capitalized and amortized using the UOP method based on recoverable ounces to be mined from estimated proven and probable reserves contained in the pit expansion.

Land is not depreciated.

Mobile and other equipment are depreciated, net of residual value, using the straight-line method, over the estimated useful life of the asset. Useful lives for mobile and other equipment range from 2 to 10 years, but do not exceed the related estimated mine life based on proven and probable reserves.

The Company reviews useful lives and estimated residual values of its property, plant and equipment annually.

Acquired or capitalized exploration and evaluation costs and assets under construction are not depreciated.  These assets are depreciated when they are put into production in their intended use.

(c)Derecognition

The carrying amount of an item of property, plant and equipment is derecognized on disposal of the asset or when no future economic benefits are expected to accrue to the Company from its continued use.  Any gain or loss arising on derecognition is included in the consolidated statement of operations in the period in which the asset is derecognized.  The gain or loss is determined as the difference between the carrying value and the net proceeds on the sale of the assets, if any, at the time of disposal.

xii. Impairment of Goodwill and Long-lived Assets

Goodwill is tested for impairment on an annual basis as at December 31, and at any other time if events or changes in circumstances indicate that the recoverable amount of a CGU has been reduced below its carrying amount.

The carrying value of property, plant and equipment is reviewed each reporting period to determine whether there is any indication of impairment.  If any such indication exists, then the asset’s recoverable amount is estimated.  In addition, capitalized exploration and evaluation costs are assessed for impairment upon demonstrating the technical feasibility and commercial viability of a project.  For such non-current assets, the recoverable amount is determined for an individual asset unless the asset does not generate cash inflows that are independent of those generated from other assets or groups of assets, in which case, the individual assets are grouped together into CGUs for impairment testing purposes.

If the carrying amount of the CGU or asset exceeds its recoverable amount, an impairment is considered to exist and an impairment loss is recognized in the consolidated statement of operations to reduce the carrying value to its recoverable amount. The recoverable amount of a CGU or asset is the higher of its fair value less costs to sell and its value in use.

Fair value is determined as the amount that would be obtained from the sale of the asset in an arm’s length transaction between knowledgeable and willing parties. Fair value for mineral assets is generally determined as the present value of the estimated future cash flows expected to arise from the continued use of the asset, including any expansion prospects, and

14

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

its eventual disposal, using assumptions that an independent market participant may take into account. These cash flows are discounted by an appropriate discount rate to arrive at a net present value or net asset value (“NAV”) of the asset.

Value in use is determined as the present value of the estimated future cash flows expected to arise from the continued use of the asset in its present form and its eventual disposal.  Value in use is determined by applying assumptions specific to the Company’s continued use of the asset and does not take into account assumptions of significant future enhancements of an asset’s performance or capacity to which the Company is not committed.

Estimates of expected future cash flows reflect estimates of future revenues, cash costs of production and capital expenditures contained in the Company’s long-term life of mine (“LOM”) plans, which are updated for each CGU on an annual basis. The Company’s LOM plans are based on detailed research, analysis and modeling to maximize the NAV of each CGU.  As such, these plans consider the optimal level of investment, overall production levels and sequence of extraction taking into account all relevant characteristics of the ore body, including waste to ore ratios, ore grades, haul distances, chemical and metallurgical properties impacting process recoveries, capacities of available extraction, haulage and processing equipment, and other factors.  Therefore, the LOM plan is an appropriate basis for forecasting production output in each future year and the related production costs and capital expenditures. The LOM plans have been determined using cash flow projections from financial budgets approved by senior management covering a 7 year to 27 year period.

Projected future revenues reflect the forecast future production levels at each of the Company’s CGUs as detailed in the LOM plans.  These forecasts may include the production of mineralized material that does not currently qualify for inclusion in mineral reserve or mineral resource classification.  This is consistent with the methodology used to measure value beyond proven and probable reserves when allocating the purchase price of a business combination to acquired mining assets. The fair value arrived at as described above, is the Company’s estimate of fair value for accounting purposes and is not a “preliminary assessment” as defined in Canadian National Instrument 43-101 “Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects”.

Projected future revenues also reflect the Company’s estimates of future metals prices, which are determined based on current prices, forward prices and forecasts of future prices prepared by industry analysts.  These estimates often differ from current price levels, but the methodology used is consistent with how a market participant would assess future long-term metals prices. For the 2015 annual goodwill impairment analysis, estimated 2016, 2017 and long-term gold prices of $1,100, $1,100 and $1,250 per ounce, respectively, and estimated 2016, 2017 and long-term silver prices of $16.00, $17.00 and $18.00 per ounce, respectively, were used. For the 2014 annual goodwill impairment analysis, estimated 2015, 2016 and long-term gold prices of $1,200, $1,300 and $1,300 per ounce, respectively, and estimated 2015, 2016 and long-term silver prices of $18.00, $19.25 and $20.30 per ounce, respectively, were used.

The Company’s estimates of future cash costs of production and capital expenditures are based on the LOM plans for each CGU.  Costs incurred in currencies other than the US dollar are translated to US dollar equivalents based on long-term forecasts of foreign exchange rates, on a currency by currency basis, obtained from independent sources of economic data.   Oil prices are a significant component of cash costs of production and are estimated based on the current price, forward prices, and forecasts of future prices from third party sources.  For the 2015 annual goodwill impairment analysis, estimated 2016, 2017 and long-term oil prices of $55, $55 and $65 per barrel, respectively, were used. For the 2014 annual goodwill impairment analysis, an estimated 2015 and long-term oil price of $75 per barrel was used.

The discount rate applied to present value the net future cash flows is based on a real weighted average cost of capital by country to account for geopolitical risk. For the 2015 annual goodwill impairment analysis, real discount rates of between 4.36% and 6.44% were used. For the 2014 annual goodwill impairment analysis, real discount rates of between 4.75% and 6.16% were used.

Since public gold companies typically trade at a market capitalization that is based on a multiple of their underlying NAV, a market participant would generally apply a NAV multiple when estimating the fair value of a gold mining property.  Consequently, where applicable, the Company estimates the fair value of each CGU by applying a market NAV multiple to the NAV of each CGU.

When selecting NAV multiples to arrive at fair value, the Company considered the trading prices and NAV estimates of comparable gold mining companies as at December 31, 2015 in respect of the fair value determinations at that date, which ranged from 0.7 to 1.1.  NAV multiples observed at December 31, 2014 were in the range of 0.9 and 1.2. The selected ranges of multiples applied to each CGU, which may be different from the ranges noted above, took into consideration, among other factors: expected production growth in the near term; average cash costs over the life of the mine; potential remaining mine life; and stage of development of the asset.

15

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

For property, plant and equipment and other long-lived assets, a previously recognized impairment loss is reversed if there has been a change in the estimates used to determine the asset’s recoverable amount since the last impairment loss was recognized.

xiii. Financial instruments and hedging activity

(a)Financial instrument classification and measurement

Financial instruments are measured on initial recognition at fair value, plus, in the case of financial instruments other than those classified as “fair value through profit and loss”, directly attributable transaction costs.  Measurement of financial assets in subsequent periods depends on whether the financial instrument has been classified as “fair value through profit and loss”, “available-for-sale”, “held-to-maturity”, or “loans and receivables”.  Measurement of financial liabilities subsequent to initial recognition depends on whether they are classified as fair value through profit and loss or “other financial liabilities”.

Financial assets and financial liabilities at fair value through profit and loss include financial assets and financial liabilities that are held for trading or designated upon initial recognition as at fair value through profit and loss.  These financial instruments are measured at fair value with changes in fair values recognized in the consolidated statement of operations.  Financial assets classified as available-for-sale are measured at fair value, with changes in fair values recognized in OCI, except when there is objective evidence that the asset is impaired, at which point the cumulative loss that had been previously recognized in OCI is recognized within the consolidated statement of operations. Financial assets classified as held-to-maturity and loans and receivables are measured subsequent to initial recognition at amortized cost using the effective interest method. Financial liabilities, other than financial liabilities classified as fair value through profit and loss, are measured in subsequent periods at amortized cost using the effective interest method.

Cash and cash equivalents, restricted cash and short-term investments are designated as fair value through profit and loss and are measured at fair value.  Trade receivables and certain other assets are designated as loans and receivables.  Long-term investments in equity securities, where the Company cannot exert significant influence, are designated as available-for sale.  Accounts payable and accrued liabilities and long-term debt are classified as other financial liabilities.

Derivative assets and liabilities include derivative financial instruments that do not qualify as hedges, or are not designated as hedges and are classified as fair value through profit and loss.

(b)Hedges

The Company formally documents all relationships between hedging instruments and hedged items, as well as its risk management objectives and strategies for undertaking hedge transactions. This process includes linking all derivatives to specific assets and liabilities on the balance sheet or to specific firm commitments or forecasted transactions. Hedge effectiveness is assessed based on the degree to which the cash flows from the derivative contracts are expected to offset the cash flows of the underlying position or transaction being hedged.  At the time of inception of the hedge and on an ongoing basis, the Company assesses whether the derivatives that are used in hedging transactions are highly effective in offsetting changes in fair values or cash flows of hedged items.

Derivative contracts that have been designated as cash flow hedges have been entered into in order to effectively establish prices for future production of metals, to hedge exposure to exchange rate fluctuations of foreign currency denominated settlement of capital and operating expenditures, to establish prices for future purchases of energy or to hedge exposure to interest rate fluctuations. Unrealized gains or losses arising from changes in the fair value of these contracts are recorded in OCI, net of tax, and are only included in earnings when the underlying hedged transaction, identified at the contract inception, is completed.   Any ineffective portion of a hedge relationship is recognized immediately in the consolidated statement of operations.  The Company matches the realized gains or losses on contracts designated as cash flow hedges with the hedged expenditures at the maturity of the contracts.

When derivative contracts designated as cash flow hedges have been terminated or cease to be effective prior to maturity and no longer qualify for hedge accounting, any gains or losses recorded in OCI up until the time the contracts do not qualify for hedge accounting, remain in OCI.  Amounts recorded in OCI are recognized in the consolidated statement of operations in the period in which the underlying hedged transaction is completed.  Gains or losses arising subsequent to the derivative contracts not qualifying for hedge accounting are recognized in the consolidated statement of operations in the period in which they occur.

For hedges that do not qualify for hedge accounting, gains or losses are recognized in the consolidated statement of operations in the current period.

16

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

(c)Impairment of financial assets

The Company assesses at each reporting date whether there is objective evidence that a financial asset or a group of financial assets is impaired. In the case of investments classified as available-for-sale, an evaluation is made as to whether a decline in fair value is significant or prolonged based on an analysis of indicators such as market price of the investment and significant adverse changes in the technological, market, economic or legal environment in which the investee operates.

If an available-for-sale financial asset is impaired, an amount equal to the difference between its carrying value and its current fair value is transferred from AOCI and recognized in the consolidated statement of operations.  Reversals of impairment charges in respect of equity instruments classified as available-for-sale are not recognized in the consolidated statement of operations.

xiv.  Share-based payments

The Company has a number of equity-settled and cash-settled share-based compensation plans under which the Company issues either equity instruments or makes cash payments based on the value of the underlying equity instrument of the Company. The Company’s share-based compensation plans are comprised of the following:

Share Option Plan:  Stock options are generally equity-settled.  The fair value of stock options at the grant date is estimated using the Black-Scholes option pricing model. Compensation expense is recognized over the stock option vesting period based on the number of options estimated to vest. Management estimates the number of awards likely to vest at the time of a grant and at each reporting date up to the vesting date.  Annually, the estimated forfeiture rate is adjusted for actual forfeitures in the period.  On exercise of the vested options, the shares are issued from treasury.

Restricted Share Plan: Restricted share units (“RSUs”) and Restricted performance share units (“RPSUs”) are granted under the Restricted Share Plan.  Both RSUs and RPSUs are generally equity-settled and awarded to certain employees as a percentage of long-term incentive awards.

(a)RSUs are fair valued based on the market value of the shares at the grant date. The Company’s compensation expense is recognized over the vesting period based on the number of units estimated to vest. Management estimates the number of awards likely to vest on grant and at each reporting date up to the vesting date.  Annually, the estimated forfeiture rate is adjusted for actual forfeitures in the period.  On vesting of RSUs, shares are generally issued from treasury.

(b)RPSUs are subject to certain vesting requirements based on performance criteria over the vesting period established by the Company. RPSUs are fair valued as follows:  The portion of the RPSUs related to market conditions is fair valued based on the application of a Monte Carlo pricing model at the date of grant and the portion related to non-market conditions is fair valued based on the market value of the shares at the date of grant. The Company’s compensation expense is recognized over the vesting period based on the number of units estimated to vest. Management estimates the number of awards likely to vest on grant and at each reporting date up to the vesting date.  Annually, the estimated forfeiture rate is adjusted for actual forfeitures in the period.  On vesting of RPSUs, shares are generally issued from treasury.

Deferred Share Unit Plan:  Deferred share units (“DSUs”) are cash-settled and accounted for as a liability at fair value which is based on the market value of the shares at the grant date. The fair value of the liability is re-measured each period based on the current market value of the underlying stock at period end and any changes in the liability are recorded as compensation expense each period.

Employee Share Purchase Plan:  The Company’s contribution to the employee Share Purchase Plan (“SPP”) is recorded as compensation expense on a payroll cycle basis as the employer’s obligation to contribute is incurred.  The cost of the common shares purchased under the SPP are either based on the weighted average closing price of the last twenty trading sessions prior to the end of the period for shares issued from treasury, or are based on the price paid for common shares purchased in the open market.

xv.  Metal sales

Metal sales includes sales of refined gold and silver and doré, which are generally physically delivered to customers in the period in which they are produced, with their sales price based on prevailing spot market metal prices.  Revenue from metal sales is recognized when all the following conditions have been satisfied:

·The significant risks and rewards of ownership have been transferred;

17

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

·Neither continuing managerial involvement to the degree usually associated with ownership, nor effective control over the goods sold, has been retained;

·The amount of revenue can be measured reliably;

·It is probable that the economic benefits associated with the transaction will flow to the Company; and

·The costs incurred or to be incurred in respect of the transaction can be measured reliably.

These conditions are generally met when the sales price is fixed and title has passed to the customer.

xvi.  Provision for reclamation and remediation

The Company records a liability and corresponding asset for the present value of the estimated costs of legal and constructive obligations for future site reclamation and closure where the liability is probable and a reasonable estimate can be made of the obligation.  The estimated present value of the obligation is reassessed on an annual basis or when new material information becomes available.  Increases or decreases to the obligation usually arise due to changes in legal or regulatory requirements, the extent of environmental remediation required, methods of reclamation, cost estimates, or discount rates.  Changes to the provision for reclamation and remediation obligations related to operating mines, which are not the result of current production of inventory, are recorded with an offsetting change to the related asset.  For properties where mining activities have ceased or are in reclamation, changes are charged directly to earnings.  The present value is determined based on current market assessments of the time value of money using discount rates specific to the country in which the reclamation site is located and is determined as the risk-free rate of borrowing approximated by the yield on sovereign debt for that country, with a maturity approximating the end of mine life.  The periodic unwinding of the discount is recognized in the consolidated statement of operations as a finance expense.

xvii.  Income tax

The income tax expense or benefit for the period consists of two components: current and deferred. Income tax expense is recognized in the consolidated statement of operations except to the extent it relates to a business combination or items recognized directly in equity.

Current tax is the expected tax payable or receivable on the taxable profit or loss for the year. Current tax is calculated using tax rates and laws that were enacted or substantively enacted at the balance sheet date in each of the jurisdictions and includes any adjustments for taxes payable or recovery in respect of prior periods.

Deferred tax is recognized in respect of temporary differences between the carrying amount of assets and liabilities in the consolidated balance sheet and the corresponding tax bases used in the computation of taxable profit. Deferred tax is calculated based on the expected manner of realization or settlement of the carrying amount of assets and liabilities, using tax rates that are expected to apply in the year of realization or settlement based on tax rates and laws enacted or substantively enacted at the balance sheet date.

Deferred tax liabilities are generally recognized for all taxable temporary differences. Deferred tax liabilities are recognized for taxable temporary differences arising on investments in subsidiaries, associates and joint ventures except where the reversal of the temporary difference can be controlled and it is probable that the difference will not reverse in the foreseeable future.

Deferred tax assets are recognized for all deductible temporary differences, carryforward of unused tax credits and unused tax losses to the extent it is probable future taxable profits will be available against which they can be utilized. The carrying amount of deferred tax assets is reviewed at each balance sheet date and reduced to the extent that it is no longer probable that sufficient taxable profits will be available to allow all or part of the asset to be recovered.

Deferred tax liabilities are not recognized on temporary differences that arise from goodwill which is not deductible for tax purposes. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are not recognized in respect of temporary differences that arise on initial recognition of assets and liabilities acquired other than in a business combination.

Deferred tax assets and liabilities are offset where they relate to income taxes levied by the same taxation authority and the Corporation has the legal right and intent to offset.

xviii.  Earnings (loss) per share

Earnings (loss) per share calculations are based on the weighted average number of common shares and common share equivalents issued and outstanding during the period.  Basic earnings (loss) per share amounts are calculated by dividing net

18

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

earnings (loss) attributable to common shareholders for the period by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding during the period.  Diluted earnings (loss) per share amounts are calculated by dividing net earnings (loss) attributable to common shareholders for the period by the diluted weighted average shares outstanding during the period.

Diluted earnings per share is calculated using the treasury method.  The treasury method, which assumes that outstanding stock options, warrants, RSUs and RPSUs with an average exercise price below the market price of the underlying shares, are exercised and the assumed proceeds are used to repurchase common shares of the Company at the average market price of the common shares for the period.

4.RECENT ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS

Revenue recognition

In May 2014, the IASB issued IFRS 15 “Revenue from Contracts with Customers” (“IFRS 15”). The standard replaces IAS 11 “Construction Contracts”, IAS 18 “Revenue”, IFRIC 13 “Customer Loyalty Programmes”, IFRIC 15 “Agreements for the Construction of Real Estate”, IFRIC 18 “Transfer of Assets From Customers” and SIC 31 “Revenue — Barter Transactions Involving Advertising Services”.  IFRS 15 establishes principles for reporting the nature, amount, timing, and uncertainty of revenue and cash flows arising from an entity’s contracts with customers.  This standard is effective for annual periods beginning on or after January 1, 2018, and permits early adoption.  The Company is in the process of determining the impact of IFRS 15 on its consolidated financial statements.

Financial instruments

In July 2014, the IASB issued the final version of IFRS 9 “Financial Instruments” (“IFRS 9”).  This standard is effective for annual periods beginning on or after January 1, 2018, and permits early adoption. IFRS 9 provides a revised model for recognition, measurement and impairment of financial instruments and includes a substantially reformed approach to hedge accounting. The Company is in the process of determining the impact of IFRS 9 on its consolidated financial statements.

Leases

In January 2016, the IASB issued IFRS 16 “Leases” (“IFRS 16”).  This standard is effective for annual periods beginning on or after January 1, 2019, and permits early adoption, provided IFRS 15, has been applied, or is applied at the same date as IFRS 16.  IFRS 16 requires lessees to recognize assets and liabilities for most leases. The Company is in the process of determining the impact of IFRS 16 on its consolidated financial statements.

5.SIGNIFICANT JUDGMENTS, ESTIMATES AND ASSUMPTIONS

The preparation of the Company’s financial statements in conformity with IFRS requires management to make judgments, estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosures of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period.  Estimates and assumptions are continually evaluated and are based on management’s experience and other factors, including expectations of future events that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances.  Actual results could differ from these estimates.

i.Significant Judgments in Applying Accounting Policies

The areas which require management to make significant judgments in applying the Company’s accounting policies in determining carrying values include, but are not limited to:

(a)Mineral Reserves and Mineral Resources

The information relating to the geological data on the size, depth and shape of the ore body requires complex geological judgments to interpret the data.  Changes in the proven and probable mineral reserves or measured and indicated and inferred mineral resources estimates may impact the carrying value of property, plant and equipment, goodwill, reclamation and remediation obligations, recognition of deferred tax amounts and depreciation, depletion and amortization.

19

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

(b)Depreciation, depletion and amortization

Significant judgment is involved in the determination of useful life and residual values for the computation of depreciation, depletion and amortization and no assurance can be given that actual useful lives and residual values will not differ significantly from current assumptions.

(c)Taxes

The Company is subject to income taxes in numerous jurisdictions. Significant judgment is required in determining the provision for income taxes, due to the complexity of legislation. There are many transactions and calculations for which the ultimate tax determination is uncertain during the ordinary course of business.

ii.Significant Accounting Estimates and Assumptions

The areas which require management to make significant estimates and assumptions in determining carrying values include, but are not limited to:

(a)Mineral Reserves and Mineral Resources

Proven and probable mineral reserves are the economically mineable parts of the Company’s measured and indicated mineral resources demonstrated by at least a preliminary feasibility study.  The Company estimates its proven and probable mineral reserves and measured and indicated and inferred mineral resources based on information compiled by appropriately qualified persons.  The estimation of future cash flows related to proven and probable mineral reserves is based upon factors such as estimates of foreign exchange rates, commodity prices, future capital requirements and production costs along with geological assumptions and judgments made in estimating the size and grade of the ore body.  Changes in the proven and probable mineral reserves or measured and indicated and inferred mineral resources estimates may impact the carrying value of property, plant and equipment, goodwill, reclamation and remediation obligations, recognition of deferred tax amounts and depreciation, depletion and amortization.

(b)Purchase Price Allocation

Applying the acquisition method to business combinations requires each identifiable asset and liability to be measured at its acquisition-date fair value.  The excess, if any, of the fair value of consideration over the fair value of the net identifiable assets acquired is recognized as goodwill.  The determination of the acquisition-date fair values often requires management to make assumptions and estimates about future events.  The assumptions and estimates relating to determining the fair value of property, plant and equipment acquired generally require a high degree of judgment, and include estimates of mineral reserves acquired, future metal prices and discount rates.  Changes in any of the assumptions or estimates used in determining the fair value of acquired assets and liabilities could affect the amounts assigned to assets, liabilities and goodwill in the purchase price allocation.

(c)Depreciation, depletion and amortization

Plants and other facilities used directly in mining activities are depreciated using the UOP method over a period not to exceed the estimated life of the ore body based on recoverable ounces to be mined from proven and probable reserves. Mobile and other equipment is depreciated, net of residual value, on a straight-line basis, over the useful life of the equipment but does not exceed the related estimated life of the mine based on proven and probable reserves.

The calculation of the UOP rate, and therefore the annual depreciation, depletion and amortization expense, could be materially affected by changes in the underlying estimates.  Changes in estimates can be the result of actual future production differing from current forecasts of future production, expansion of mineral reserves through exploration activities, differences between estimated and actual costs of mining and differences in gold price used in the estimation of mineral reserves.

(d)Impairment of goodwill and long-lived assets

Goodwill is tested for impairment annually or more frequently if there is an indication of impairment.  The carrying value of property, plant and equipment is reviewed each reporting period to determine whether there is any indication of impairment.  If the carrying amount of an asset exceeds its recoverable amount, the asset is impaired and an impairment loss is recognized in the consolidated statement of operations.  The assessment of fair values, including those of the CGUs for purposes of testing goodwill, require the use of estimates and assumptions for recoverable production, future and long-

20

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

term commodity prices, discount rates, NAV multiples, foreign exchange rates, future capital requirements and operating performance.  Changes in any of the assumptions or estimates used in determining the fair value of goodwill or other assets could impact the impairment analysis.  Impairment charges recognized against property, plant and equipment may be reversed if there are changes in the assumptions or estimates used in determining the recoverable amounts of the CGUs which indicate that a previously recognized impairment loss may no longer exist or may have decreased.

(e)Inventories

Expenditures incurred, and depreciation, depletion and amortization of assets used in mining and processing activities are deferred and accumulated as the cost of ore in stockpiles, ore on leach pads, in-process and finished metal inventories. These deferred amounts are carried at the lower of average cost or NRV.  Write-downs of ore in stockpiles, ore on leach pads, in-process and finished metal inventories resulting from NRV impairments are reported as a component of current period costs. The primary factors that influence the need to record write-downs include prevailing and long-term metal prices and prevailing costs for production inputs such as labour, fuel and energy, materials and supplies, as well as realized ore grades and actual production levels.

Costs are attributed to the leach pads based on current mining costs, including applicable depreciation, depletion and amortization relating to mining operations incurred up to the point of placing the ore on the pad.  Costs are removed from the leach pad based on the average cost per recoverable ounce of gold on the leach pad as the gold is recovered. Estimates of recoverable gold on the leach pads are calculated from the quantities of ore placed on the pads, the grade of ore placed on the leach pads and an estimated percentage of recovery.  Timing and ultimate actual recovery of gold contained on leach pads can vary significantly from the estimates.  The quantities of recoverable gold placed on the leach pads are reconciled to the quantities of gold actually recovered (metallurgical balancing), by comparing the grades of ore placed on the leach pads to actual ounces recovered.  The nature of the leaching process inherently limits the ability to precisely monitor inventory levels.  As a result, the metallurgical balancing process is constantly monitored and the engineering estimates are refined based on actual results over time.  The ultimate actual recovery of gold from a pad will not be known until the leaching process is completed.

The allocation of costs to ore in stockpiles, ore on leach pads and in-process inventories and the determination of NRV involve the use of estimates.  There is a high degree of judgment in estimating future costs, future production levels, forecasted usage of supplies inventory, proven and probable reserves estimates, gold and silver prices, and the ultimate estimated recovery for ore on leach pads.  There can be no assurance that actual results will not differ significantly from estimates used in the determination of the carrying value of inventories.

(f)Provision for reclamation and remediation

The Company assesses its provision for reclamation and remediation on an annual basis or when new material information becomes available.  Mining and exploration activities are subject to various laws and regulations governing the protection of the environment.  In general, these laws and regulations are continually changing and the Company has made, and intends to make in the future, expenditures to comply with such laws and regulations.  Accounting for reclamation and remediation obligations requires management to make estimates of the future costs the Company will incur to complete the reclamation and remediation work required to comply with existing laws and regulations at each mining operation. Actual costs incurred may differ from those amounts estimated.  Also, future changes to environmental laws and regulations could increase the extent of reclamation and remediation work required to be performed by the Company. Increases in future costs could materially impact the amounts charged to operations for reclamation and remediation.  The provision represents management’s best estimate of the present value of the future reclamation and remediation obligation.  The actual future expenditures may differ from the amounts currently provided.

(g)Deferred taxes

The Company recognizes the deferred tax benefit related to deferred income and resource tax assets to the extent recovery is probable.  Assessing the recoverability of deferred income tax assets requires management to make estimates of future taxable profit.  To the extent that future cash flows and taxable profit differ significantly from estimates, the ability of the Company to realize the net deferred tax assets recorded at the balance sheet date could be impacted.  In addition, future changes in tax laws could limit the ability of the Company to obtain tax deductions in future periods from deferred income and resource tax assets.

21

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

(h)Contingencies

Due to the size, complexity and nature of the Company’s operations, various legal and tax matters are outstanding from time to time.  Contingencies can be possible assets or liabilities arising from past events which, by their nature, will only be resolved when one or more future events not wholly within our control occur or fail to occur. The assessment of such contingencies involves the use of significant judgment and estimates.  In the event that management’s estimate of the future resolution of these matters changes, the Company will recognize the effects of the changes in its consolidated financial statements on the date such changes occur.

22

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

6.ACQUISITIONS AND DISPOSITIONS

i.Acquisition of Bald Mountain and remaining 50% interest in Round Mountain

On November 12, 2015, the Company announced that it had entered into a definitive asset purchase agreement with Barrick to acquire 100% of the Bald Mountain gold mine (“Bald Mountain”), which includes a large associated land package, and the remaining 50% interest in the Round Mountain gold mine for $610 million in cash, subject to a working capital adjustment. In addition to the purchase price, Barrick will receive a contingent 2% net smelter return royalty on future gold production from Kinross’ 100%-owned Bald Mountain lands that will come into effect following the post-closing production of 10 million ounces from such lands. Approximately 40% of the Bald Mountain land package is subject to a 50/50 exploration joint venture partnership between Kinross and Barrick, with Kinross as the operator. On January 11, 2016, the Company completed the transaction.

The acquisition, which will be accounted for as a business combination as at January 11, 2016, represents a strategic fit with the Company’s open-pit heap leach skill set and existing portfolio of operating assets, and enhances the production profile in the United States.

The following table sets forth a preliminary allocation of the purchase price to assets and liabilities acquired, based on preliminary estimates of fair value. As the Company gained control of Round Mountain in the transaction, in accordance with IFRS, the assets and liabilities set out below represent 100% of the value of Round Mountain in addition to 100% of Bald Mountain. Final valuations of assets and liabilities are not yet complete due to the timing of the acquisition and the inherent complexity associated with the valuations. The preliminary allocation is subject to adjustment with the final allocation to be completed later in 2016.

Preliminary Purchase Price Allocation
Net working capital	$	182.8
Property, plant and equipment (including mineral interests)	725.9
Other long-term assets	19.7
Provisions	(178.3		)
Other long-term liabilities	(0.1		)
Net assets	$	750.0
Less: Fair value of previously held interest in Round Mountain	140.0
Cash consideration	$	610.0

ii.Disposition of interest in Fruta del Norte

On December 17, 2014, the Company completed the sale of its interest in Aurelian Resources Inc. (“Aurelian”) and the Fruta del Norte project in Ecuador to Lundin Gold Inc., a member of the Lundin Group of Companies, for gross cash proceeds of $150.0 million and $90.0 million in Lundin Gold Inc. common shares, resulting in an after-tax recovery of $238.0 million. Prior to the disposition, the Company’s interest in Aurelian was classified as a discontinued operation. For the year ended December 31, 2014 the Company recognized after tax earnings of $233.5 million from the discontinued operation, including the recovery on sale of Aurelian of $238.0 million.

23

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

7.CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENT DETAILS

Consolidated Balance Sheets

i.Cash and cash equivalents:

	December 31,		December 31,
	2015		2014
Cash on hand and balances with banks	$	460.3	$	503.2
Short-term deposits	583.6		480.3
	$	1,043.9	$	983.5

Restricted cash:

	December 31,		December 31,
	2015		2014
Restricted cash (a)	$	10.5	$	41.3

(a) As at December 31, 2015, restricted cash relates to loan escrow judicial deposits and environmental indemnities related to Chirano and certain other sites. As at December 31, 2014, restricted cash relates to the Kupol loan (see Note 12 (iii)), loan escrow judicial deposits and environmental indemnities related to Chirano and certain other sites.

ii.Accounts receivable and other assets:

	December 31,		December 31,
	2015		2014
Trade receivables	$	4.4	$	4.8
Prepaid expenses	17.0		32.3
VAT receivable	53.4		72.5
Deposits	11.8		36.3
Other	22.6		24.5
	$	109.2	$	170.4

24

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

iii.Inventories:

	December 31,			December 31,
	2015			2014
Ore in stockpiles (a)	$	195.7		$	197.1
Ore on leach pads (b)	250.0			304.9
In-process	85.5			81.2
Finished metal	24.4			48.8
Materials and supplies	607.2			788.7
	1,162.8			1,420.7
Long-term portion of ore in stockpiles and ore on leach pads (a),(b)	(157.6		)	(144.0		)
	$	1,005.2		$	1,276.7

(a)Ore in stockpiles relates to the Company’s operating mines. Ore in stockpiles includes low-grade material not scheduled for processing within the next twelve months which is included in other long-term assets on the consolidated balance sheet. See Note 7 vii.

(b)Ore on leach pads relates to the Company’s Maricunga, Tasiast, Fort Knox, and 50% owned Round Mountain mines. Based on current mine plans, the Company expects to place the last tonne of ore on its leach pads at Maricunga in 2018, Tasiast in 2016, Fort Knox in 2020, and 50% owned Round Mountain in 2019. Ore on leach pads includes material not scheduled for processing within the next twelve months which is included in other long-term assets on the consolidated balance sheet. See Note 7 vii.

(c)During the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, inventory impairment charges were recorded within cost of sales to reduce the carrying value of inventory to its net realizable value. See Note 8 ii.

25

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

iv.Property, plant and equipment:

				Mineral Interests (a)
	Land, plant and equipment			Development and operating properties			Pre-development properties			Total
Cost
Balance at January 1, 2015	$	7,020.1		$	7,462.2		$	168.8		$	14,651.1
Additions	349.3			175.9			—			525.2
Capitalized interest	16.9			23.6			—			40.5
Disposals	(71.0		)	(3.6		)	(4.7		)	(79.3		)
Other	16.9			(6.7		)	0.2			10.4
Balance at December 31, 2015	7,332.2			7,651.4			164.3			15,147.9
Accumulated depreciation, depletion, amortization and impairment
Balance at January 1, 2015	$	(4,191.8	)	$	(4,970.7	)	$	(79.2	)	$	(9,241.7	)
Depreciation, depletion and amortization	(484.5		)	(446.4		)	—			(930.9		)
Impairment charge (b)	(220.8		)	(218.7		)	—			(439.5		)
Disposals	59.9			—			—			59.9
Other	2.1			(3.9		)	(0.2		)	(2.0		)
Balance at December 31, 2015	(4,835.1		)	(5,639.7		)	(79.4		)	(10,554.2		)
Net book value	$	2,497.1		$	2,011.7		$	84.9		$	4,593.7
Amount included above as at December 31, 2015:
Assets under construction	$	201.9		$	121.2		$	—		$	323.1
Assets not being depreciated (c)	$	361.1		$	322.1		$	84.9		$	768.1

(a)At December 31, 2015, the significant development and operating properties include Fort Knox, 50% owned Round Mountain, Paracatu, Maricunga, Kupol, Kettle River-Buckhorn, Tasiast, Chirano, and Lobo-Marte. Included in pre-development properties are White Gold and other exploration properties.

(b)At December 31, 2015, an impairment charge was recorded against property, plant and equipment at Fort Knox, 50% owned Round Mountain, and Tasiast. See Note 8 i.

(c)Assets not being depreciated relate to land, capitalized exploration and evaluation costs, assets under construction, which relate to expansion projects, and other assets that are in various stages of being readied for use.

26

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

				Mineral Interests(a)
	Land, plant and equipment			Development and operating properties			Pre-development properties			Total
Cost
Balance at January 1, 2014	$	6,699.3		$	8,172.3		$	177.4		$	15,049.0
Additions	352.7			272.8			—			625.5
Capitalized interest	26.9			35.8			—			62.7
Disposals (b)	(77.8		)	(998.5		)	(8.6		)	(1,084.9		)
Other	19.0			(20.2		)	—			(1.2		)
Balance at December 31, 2014	7,020.1			7,462.2			168.8			14,651.1
Accumulated depreciation, depletion, amortization and impairment
Balance at January 1, 2014	$	(3,589.9	)	$	(4,876.4	)	$	—		$	(8,466.3	)
Depreciation, depletion and amortization	(422.8		)	(453.3		)	—			(876.1		)
Impairment charge (c)	(218.9		)	(640.4		)	(79.2		)	(938.5		)
Disposals (b)	43.2			998.5			—			1,041.7
Other	(3.4		)	0.9			—			(2.5		)
Balance at December 31, 2014	(4,191.8		)	(4,970.7		)	(79.2		)	(9,241.7		)
Net book value	$	2,828.3		$	2,491.5		$	89.6		$	5,409.4
Amount included above as at December 31, 2014:
Assets under construction	$	320.2		$	88.8		$	—		$	409.0
Assets not being depreciated (d)	$	476.4		$	287.2		$	89.6		$	853.2

(a)At December 31, 2014, the significant development and operating properties include Fort Knox, 50% owned Round Mountain, Paracatu, Maricunga, Kupol, Kettle River-Buckhorn, Tasiast, Chirano, and Lobo-Marte. Included in pre-development properties are White Gold and other exploration properties.

(b)On December 17, 2014, the Company disposed of its interest in FDN for gross proceeds of $240.0 million. See Note 6 ii.

(c)At December 31, 2014, an impairment charge was recorded against property, plant and equipment at Tasiast, Chirano, Kettle River-Buckhorn, Lobo-Marte, and White Gold. See Note 8 i.

(d)Assets not being depreciated relate to land, capitalized exploration and evaluation costs, assets under construction, which relate to expansion projects, and other assets that are in various stages of being readied for use.

Capitalized interest primarily relates to capital expenditures at Fort Knox, 50% owned Round Mountain, Paracatu, Kupol and La Coipa and had a weighted average borrowing rate of 4.7% and 4.6% during the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively.

At December 31, 2015, $215.6 million of exploration and evaluation (“E&E”) assets were included in mineral interests (December 31, 2014 — $207.9 million). The Company disposed of $4.0 million of E&E assets during the year ended December 31, 2015 (year ended December 31, 2014 — $8.6 million). During the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, the Company acquired no E&E assets and transferred no E&E assets to capitalized development. During the year ended December 31, 2015, the Company capitalized $11.7 million of E&E costs (year ended December 31, 2014 — $5.6 million). During the year ended December 31, 2015, $8.4 million (year ended December 31, 2014 — $7.4 million), of E&E expenditures were expensed by the Company and included in operating cash flows. The Company recognized property, plant and equipment impairment charges related to E&E assets for the year ended December 31, 2015 of $nil (year ended December 31, 2014 — $379.1  million).

27

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

v.Goodwill:

The goodwill allocated to the Company’s CGUs and included in the respective operating segment assets is shown in the table below:

	Round Mountain			Paracatu			La Coipa			Kettle River- Buckhorn			Kupol			Maricunga			Tasiast			Chirano			Other Operations (a)			Total
Cost
Balance at January 1, 2015	$	145.9		$	164.9		$	190.3		$	20.9		$	827.2		$	396.1		$	4,620.4		$	918.6		$	278.2		$	7,562.5
Acquisitions	—			—			—			—			—			—			—			—			—			—
Disposals	—			—			—			—			—			—			—			—			—			—
Balance at December 31, 2015	$	145.9		$	164.9		$	190.3		$	20.9		$	827.2		$	396.1		$	4,620.4		$	918.6		$	278.2		$	7,562.5
Accumulated impairment
Balance at January 1, 2015	$	(145.9	)	$	(164.9	)	$	(190.3	)	$	(20.9	)	$	(668.4	)	$	(396.1	)	$	(4,620.4	)	$	(918.6	)	$	(274.3	)	$	(7,399.8	)
Impairment loss	—			—			—			—			—			—			—			—			—			—
Disposals	—			—			—			—			—			—			—			—			—			—
Balance at December 31, 2015	$	(145.9	)	$	(164.9	)	$	(190.3	)	$	(20.9	)	$	(668.4	)	$	(396.1	)	$	(4,620.4	)	$	(918.6	)	$	(274.3	)	$	(7,399.8	)
Carrying amount at December 31, 2015	$	—		$	—		$	—		$	—		$	158.8		$	—		$	—		$	—		$	3.9		$	162.7

	Round Mountain			Paracatu			La Coipa			Kettle River-Buckhorn			Kupol			Maricunga			Tasiast			Chirano			Other Operations (a)			Total
Cost
Balance at January 1, 2014	$	145.9		$	164.9		$	190.3		$	20.9		$	827.2		$	396.1		$	4,620.4		$	918.6		$	278.2		$	7,562.5
Acquisitions	—			—			—			—			—			—			—			—			—			—
Disposals	—			—			—			—			—			—			—			—			—			—
Balance at December 31, 2014	$	145.9		$	164.9		$	190.3		$	20.9		$	827.2		$	396.1		$	4,620.4		$	918.6		$	278.2		$	7,562.5
Accumulated impairment
Balance at January 1, 2014	$	(145.9	)	$	(164.9	)	$	(65.9	)	$	—		$	(668.4	)	$	(396.1	)	$	(4,620.4	)	$	(918.6	)	$	(274.3	)	$	(7,254.5	)
Impairment loss (b)	—			—			(124.4		)	(20.9		)	—			—			—			—			—			(145.3		)
Disposals	—			—			—			—			—			—			—			—			—			—
Balance at December 31, 2014	$	(145.9	)	$	(164.9	)	$	(190.3	)	$	(20.9	)	$	(668.4	)	$	(396.1	)	$	(4,620.4	)	$	(918.6	)	$	(274.3	)	$	(7,399.8	)
Carrying amount at December 31, 2014	$	—		$	—		$	—		$	—		$	158.8		$	—		$	—		$	—		$	3.9		$	162.7

(a)At December 31, 2015 and 2014, other operations includes goodwill related to Jiboia.

(b)At December 31, 2014, as part of the annual impairment test for goodwill, it was determined that the carrying amounts of La Coipa and Kettle River-Buckhorn exceeded their recoverable amounts. See Note 8 i.

vi.Long-term investments:

Unrealized gains and losses on investments classified as available-for-sale are recorded in AOCI as follows:

	December 31, 2015					December 31, 2014
	Fair value		Gains (losses) in AOCI			Fair value		Gains (losses) in AOCI
Investments in an unrealized gain position	$	10.4	$	1.4		$	103.6	$	3.9
Investments in an unrealized loss position	72.7		(20.1		)	7.4		(2.1		)
	$	83.1	$	(18.7	)	$	111.0	$	1.8

28

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

vii.Other long-term assets:

	December 31,		December 31,
	2015		2014
Long-term portion of ore in stockpiles and ore on leach pads (a)	$	157.6	$	144.0
Deferred charges, net of amortization	7.9		6.5
Long-term receivables	161.7		209.0
Advances for the purchase of capital equipment	6.7		20.7
Other	36.3		37.7
	$	370.2	$	417.9

(a)Ore in stockpiles and on leach pads represents low-grade material not scheduled for processing within the next twelve months.  At December 31, 2015, long-term ore in stockpiles was at the Company’s Fort Knox, Kupol, Tasiast, Chirano and Paracatu mines, and long-term ore on leach pads was at the Company’s Fort Knox and 50% owned Round Mountain mines.

viii.Accounts payable and accrued liabilities:

	December 31,		December 31,
	2015		2014
Trade payables	$	75.2	$	86.9
Accrued liabilities	206.2		223.2
Employee related accrued liabilities	98.2		111.8
	$	379.6	$	421.9

ix.Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss):

	Long-term Investments			Derivative Contracts			Total
Balance at December 31, 2013	$	(0.6	)	$	(35.9	)	$	(36.5	)
Other comprehensive income (loss) before tax	2.4			(7.8		)	(5.4		)
Tax	—			(4.2		)	(4.2		)
Balance at December 31, 2014	$	1.8		$	(47.9	)	$	(46.1	)
Other comprehensive income (loss) before tax	(20.5		)	43.5			23.0
Tax	—			(8.2		)	(8.2		)
Balance at December 31, 2015	$	(18.7	)	$	(12.6	)	$	(31.3	)

29

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

Consolidated Statements of Operations

x.Other income (expense)  — net:

	Years ended December 31,
	2015			2014
Losses on sale of other assets - net	$	(16.2	)	$	(3.1	)
Impairment of investments (a)	(7.6		)	(158.1		)
Foreign exchange losses	(30.6		)	(50.1		)
Net non-hedge derivative losses	(3.4		)	(5.1		)
Other (b)	37.5			0.9
	$	(20.3	)	$	(215.5	)

(a)During the year ended December 31, 2014, the Company recognized an impairment charge of $156.6 million related to its investment in Cerro Casale as a result of the impairment assessment disclosed in Note 8 i. The Company also recognized impairment losses on certain of its available-for-sale investments during the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014.

(b)During the year ended December 31, 2015, the Company received $31.7 million in insurance claims.

30

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

xi.Equity in earnings (losses) of associate and joint venture:

	Years ended December 31,
	2015			2014
Cerro Casale(a)(b)	$	(3.0	)	$	(5.4	)
Puren (a)(c)	6.2			(0.4		)
	$	3.2		$	(5.8	)

(a)Represents Kinross’ share of the net earnings (loss) and other comprehensive income (loss).

(b)The Company holds a 25% interest in Cerro Casale which is classified as an investment in associate and accounted for under the equity method. See Note 9.

(c)Puren is classified as a joint venture and is accounted for under the equity method.

xii.Finance expense:

	Years ended December 31,
	2015			2014
Accretion on reclamation and remediation obligations	$	(27.8	)	$	(28.1	)
Interest expense, including accretion on debt (a)	(68.2		)	(52.0		)
	$	(96.0	)	$	(80.1	)

(a)During the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, $40.5 million and $62.7 million, respectively, of interest was capitalized to property, plant and equipment. See Note 7 iv.

Total interest paid, including interest capitalized, during the year ended December 31, 2015 was $91.5 million (year ended December 31, 2014 - $82.4 million).

xiii.Employee benefits expenses:

The following employee benefits expenses are included in production cost of sales, general and administrative, and exploration and business development expenses:

	Years ended December 31,
	2015		2014
Salaries, short-term incentives, and other benefits	$	611.5	$	659.5
Share-based payments	20.8		32.3
Other	15.5		30.2
	$	647.8	$	722.0

31

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

8.IMPAIRMENT

	Years ended December 31,
	2015		2014
Goodwill (i)	$	—	$	145.3
Property, plant and equipment (i)	439.5		938.5
Inventory and other assets (ii)	259.5		167.6
	$	699.0	$	1,251.4

i.Goodwill and property, plant and equipment

At December 31, 2015, upon completion of its annual assessment of the carrying values of its CGUs, the Company recorded an impairment charge of $439.5 million as a result of decreases in the Company’s short-term and long-term gold price estimates.  The impairment charge was entirely related to property, plant and equipment and included a charge of $249.5 million at Fort Knox, $147.0 million at Tasiast, and $43.0 million at Round Mountain.  As a result of the impairment charge related to the Fort Knox CGU, a tax recovery of $9.3 million was recorded within income tax expense.

As at December 31, 2015, the carrying amounts of Tasiast, Fort Knox, and Round Mountain were $827.9 million, $349.1 million, and $140.0 million, respectively.

At December 31, 2014, the Company recorded an impairment charge of $1,083.8 million, upon completion of its annual assessment of the carrying values of its CGUs.  The impairment charge included goodwill impairment of $145.3 million and property plant and equipment impairment of $938.5 million. As a result of the impairment charge related to property, plant and equipment, a tax recovery of $127.9 million was recorded within tax expense.

The following table summarizes the 2014 impairment charges by CGU:

CGU	Goodwill		Property, plant and equipment		Total
Tasiast	$	—	$	342.5	$	342.5
Chirano	—		365.4		365.4
Kettle River-Buckhorn	20.9		32.9		53.8
La Coipa	124.4		—		124.4
Lobo-Marte	—		118.5		118.5
White Gold	—		79.2		79.2
Total	$	145.3	$	938.5	$	1,083.8

As at December 31, 2014 the carrying amounts of Tasiast, Chirano, Kettle River-Buckhorn, La Coipa, Lobo-Marte and White Gold were $1,017.5 million, $458.9 million, ($79.2) million, ($54.8) million, $118.8 million and $44.3 million respectively. The carrying amounts for Kettle River-Buckhorn and La Coipa were negative as a result of reclamation and remediation obligations.

The impairment charge at Tasiast reflected a change in estimated future operating costs, operating cost underperformance of the existing mill and a decision not to proceed with a 38,000 tonne per day mill expansion at that time. Chirano’s impairment charge was related to a decrease in exploration potential. The impairment charges at La Coipa and Lobo-Marte were a result of declines in valuations in Chile and a reduction in mineral reserves at Lobo-Marte.  The charge at Kettle River-Buckhorn was a result of the mine approaching the end of its life and the charge at White Gold was a result of a reduction in exploration potential.

Also as a result of its annual impairment assessment at December 31, 2014, the Company recognized an impairment charge of $156.6 million related to its investment in Cerro Casale.  The impairment charge was recorded in other income (expense).

32

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

Key assumptions and sensitivity

The significant estimates and assumptions used in the Company’s annual impairment assessments are disclosed in Note 3 to the financial statements. The Company performed a sensitivity analysis on all key assumptions and determined that no reasonably possible change in any of the key assumptions would cause the carrying value of any CGU carrying goodwill to exceed its recoverable amount.

ii.Inventory and other assets

During 2015, the Company recognized impairment charges of $259.5 million related to inventory and other assets.  The inventory impairment charge of $244.8 million was recorded to reduce the carrying value of certain metal and supplies inventory to net realizable value.  During 2014, impairment charges of $167.6 million were recorded within cost of sales to reduce the carrying value of inventory to net realizable value.

33

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

9.INVESTMENTS IN ASSOCIATE AND JOINT VENTURE

The investments in associate and joint venture are accounted for under the equity method and had the following carrying values:

	December 31,		December 31,
	2015		2014
Cerro Casale	$	138.3	$	139.7
Puren	18.8		17.1
	$	157.1	$	156.8

There are no publicly quoted market prices for Cerro Casale and Puren.

Summarized financial information, reflecting fair value adjustments made by the Company, for Cerro Casale on a 100% basis are as follows:

	Balance Sheet
	As at December 31,
	2015			2014
Current assets	$	0.4		$	3.5
Non-current assets	2,061.1			2,066.3
	2,061.5			2,069.8
Current liabilities	5.9			8.6
Non-current liabilities	—			—
	5.9			8.6
Net assets	$	2,055.6		$	2,061.2
Ownership interest	25		%	25		%
	513.9			515.3
Impairment charge (a)	(375.6		)	(375.6		)
Carrying amount of the investment	$	138.3		$	139.7

	Statement of Operations
	For the years ended December 31,
	2015		2014
Revenue	$	—	$	—
Expense	12.0		21.6
Net loss and total comprehensive loss	$	12.0	$	21.6
Equity in losses of Cerro Casale	$	3.0	$	5.4

(a)During the year ended December 31, 2014, the Company recognized an impairment charge of $156.6 million related to its investment in Cerro Casale as a result of the impairment assessment disclosed in Note 8 i.

A contingent liability related to the Company’s investment in Cerro Casale is disclosed in Note 19.

34

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

10.FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENT

(a)Recurring fair value measurement:

Carrying values for financial instruments, including cash and cash equivalents, short-term investments, accounts receivable, and accounts payable and accrued liabilities approximate fair values due to their short-term maturities.

Fair value estimates for derivative contracts are based on quoted market prices for comparable contracts and represent the amount the Company would have received from, or paid to, a counterparty to unwind the contract at the market rates in effect at the consolidated balance sheet date.

The Company categorizes each of its fair value measurements in accordance with a fair value hierarchy. The fair value hierarchy establishes three levels to classify the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value.  Level 1 inputs are quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities. Level 2 inputs are quoted prices in markets that are not active, quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in active markets, inputs other than quoted prices that are observable for the asset or liability (for example, interest rate and yield curves observable at commonly quoted intervals, forward pricing curves used to value currency and commodity contracts and volatility measurements used to value option contracts), or inputs that are derived principally from or corroborated by observable market data or other means.  Level 3 inputs are unobservable (supported by little or no market activity). The fair value hierarchy gives the highest priority to Level 1 inputs and the lowest priority to Level 3 inputs.

For financial instruments that are recognized at fair value on a recurring basis, the Company determines whether transfers have occurred between levels in the hierarchy by re-assessing their classification (based on the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement as a whole) at the end of each reporting period.

Assets (liabilities) measured at fair value on a recurring basis as at December 31, 2015 include:

	Level 1		Level 2			Level 3		Aggregate Fair Value
Available-for-sale investments	$	83.1	$	—		$	—	$	83.1
Derivative contracts:
Foreign currency forward contracts	—		(13.8		)	—		(13.8		)
Energy swap contracts	—		(2.2		)	—		(2.2		)
Total return swap contracts	—		1.0			—		1.0
	$	83.1	$	(15.0	)	$	—	$	68.1

During the year ended December 31, 2015, there were no transfers between Level 1 and Level 2 fair value measurements, and no transfers into or out of Level 3 fair value measurements.

The valuation techniques that are used to measure fair value are as follows:

Available-for-sale investments:

The fair value of available-for-sale investments is determined based on a market approach reflecting the closing price of each particular security at the consolidated balance sheet date. The closing price is a quoted market price obtained from the exchange that is the principal active market for the particular security, and therefore available-for-sale investments are classified within Level 1 of the fair value hierarchy.

Derivative contracts:

The Company’s derivative contracts are valued using pricing models and the Company generally uses similar models to value similar instruments. Such pricing models require a variety of inputs, including contractual cash flows, market prices, applicable yield curves and credit spreads. The fair value of derivative contracts is based on quoted market prices for comparable contracts and represents the amount the Company would have received from, or paid to, a counterparty to unwind the contract at the quoted market rates in effect at the consolidated balance sheet date and therefore derivative contracts are classified within Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy.

35

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

The following table summarizes information about derivative contracts outstanding at December 31, 2015 and 2014:

	December 31, 2015						December 31, 2014
	Asset / (Liability)						Asset / (Liability)
	Fair Value			AOCI			Fair Value			AOCI
Interest rate contracts
Interest rate swaps (i)	$	—		$	—		$	(0.7	)	$	(0.9	)
Currency contracts
Foreign currency forward contracts (a) (ii)	(13.8		)	(10.9		)	(48.8		)	(39.1		)
Commodity contracts
Energy swap contracts (b) (iii)	(2.2		)	(1.7		)	(9.9		)	(7.9		)
Other contracts
Total return swap contracts (iv)	1.0			—			(0.6		)	—
Total all contracts	$	(15.0	)	$	(12.6	)	$	(60.0	)	$	(47.9	)
Unrealized fair value of derivative assets
Current	1.0						0.2
Non-current	—						—
	$	1.0					$	0.2
Unrealized fair value of derivative liabilities
Current	(16.0		)				(60.2		)
Non-current	—						—
	$	(16.0	)				$	(60.2	)
Total net fair value	$	(15.0	)				$	(60.0	)

(a)Of the total amount recorded in AOCI at December 31, 2015, $(10.9) million will be reclassified to net earnings within the next 12 months as a result of settling the contracts.

(b)Of the total amount recorded in AOCI at December 31, 2015, $(1.7) million will be reclassified to net earnings within the next 12 months as a result of settling the contracts.

(i)Interest rate swaps

When the floating rate term loan was originally arranged in August 2012 (see Note 12(i)), the Company entered into interest rate swaps to swap the underlying 1-month LIBOR interest rate into a fixed rate of 0.49% for the original three year term ending August 10, 2015. Concurrent with the repayment of $500.0 million of the term loan on March 10, 2014, the Company closed out 60% of the interest rate swaps. The remaining outstanding interest rate swaps that hedged 80% of the remaining underlying floating rate term loan matured on August 10, 2015.

36

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

(ii)Foreign currency forward contracts

The following table provides a summary of foreign currency forward contracts outstanding at December 31, 2015, maturing in 2016:

Foreign currency	2016
Brazilian real forward buy contracts (in millions of U.S. dollars)	$	67.4
Average price (Brazilian reais)	3.75
Chilean peso forward buy contracts (in millions of U.S. dollars)	$	37.0
Average price (Chilean pesos)	653.02
Canadian dollar forward buy contracts (in millions of U.S. dollars )	$	45.0
Average price (Canadian dollars)	1.26

During 2015, the following new forward buy derivative contracts were entered into:

·$80.0 million Canadian dollars at an average rate of 1.25 with maturities in 2015 and 2016;

·$62.7 million Chilean pesos at an average rate of 645.34 with maturities in 2015 and 2016; and

·$67.4 million Brazilian reais at an average rate of 3.75 maturing in 2016.

At December 31, 2015, the unrealized gain or loss on the derivative contracts recorded in AOCI is as follows:

·Brazilian real forward buy contracts — unrealized loss of $4.7 million (December 31, 2014 — $14.4 million loss);

·Chilean peso forward buy contracts - unrealized loss of $2.3 million (December 31, 2014 — $2.3 million loss);

·Canadian dollar forward buy contracts — unrealized loss of $3.9 million (December 31, 2014 — $3.1 million loss); and

·Russian rouble forward buy contracts — unrealized loss of $nil (December 31, 2014 — $19.3 million loss).

(iii)Energy swap contracts

The Company is exposed to changes in energy prices through its consumption of diesel and other fuels, and the price of electricity in some electricity supply contracts.  The Company entered into energy swap contracts that protect against the risk of fuel price increases.  Fuel is consumed in the operation of mobile equipment and electricity generation.

The following table provides a summary of energy swap contracts outstanding at December 31, 2015, maturing in 2016:

Energy	2016
Oil swap contracts (barrels)	404,400
Average price	$	47.55

37

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

During 2015, the following new commodity derivative contracts were entered into:

·570,520 barrels of crude oil at an average rate of $48.74 per barrel with maturities in 2015 and 2016; and

·25,168 tonnes of gasoil at an average rate of $488.59 per tonne which matured in 2015.

At December 31, 2015, the unrealized gain or loss on these derivative contracts recorded in AOCI is as follows:

·Oil swap contracts — unrealized loss of $1.7 million (December 31, 2014 — $6.1 million loss);

(iv)Total return swap contracts

The Company enters into total return swaps (“TRS”) as economic hedges of the Company’s DSUs and cash-settled RSUs.  Under the terms of the TRS, a bank has the right to purchase Kinross shares in the marketplace as a hedge against the returns in the TRS.  At December 31, 2015, 5,695,000 TRS units were outstanding.  The following TRS contracts were entered into during the year ended December 31, 2015:

·79,000 units at an average price of CDN$3.51 to hedge DSUs.

·3,000,000 units at an average price of CDN$3.48 to hedge cash-settled RSUs.

At December 31, 2015, 97% of the DSUs were economically hedged (December 31, 2014 — 88%) and 95% of cash-settled RSUs were economically hedged (December 31, 2014 — 61%), although hedge accounting was not applied.

(b)Non-recurring fair value measurement:

During the year ended December 31, 2015, property, plant and equipment related to certain CGUs were written down to their recoverable amounts. Certain assumptions used in the calculation of these recoverable amounts are categorized as Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy. See Note 3 (xii) and Note 8 i.

(c)Fair value of financial assets and liabilities not measured and recognized at fair value:

Long-term debt is measured at amortized cost. The fair value of long-term debt is primarily measured using market determined variables, and therefore was classified within Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy. See Note 12.

38

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

11.CAPITAL AND FINANCIAL RISK MANAGEMENT

The Company manages its capital to ensure that it will be able to continue to meet its financial and operational strategies and obligations, while maximizing the return to shareholders through the optimization of debt and equity financing. The Board of Directors has established a number of quantitative measures related to the management of capital. Management continuously monitors its capital position and periodically reports to the Board of Directors.

The Company’s operations are sensitive to changes in commodity prices, foreign exchange and interest rates.  The Company manages its exposure to changes in currency exchange rates and energy by periodically entering into derivative contracts in accordance with the formal risk management policy approved by the Company’s Board of Directors. The Company’s practice is to not hedge metal sales. However, in certain circumstances the Company may use derivative contracts to hedge against the risk of falling prices for a portion of its forecasted metal sales. The Company may also assume derivative contracts as part of a business acquisition or they may be required under financing arrangements.

All of the Company’s hedges are cash flow hedges. The Company applies hedge accounting whenever hedging relationships exist and have been documented.

i.Capital management

The Company’s objectives when managing capital are to:

·Ensure the Company has sufficient cash available to support the mining, exploration, and other areas of the business in any gold price environment;

·Ensure the Company has the capital and capacity to support a long-term growth strategy;

·Provide investors with a superior rate of return on their invested capital;

·Ensure compliance with all bank covenant ratios; and

·Minimize counterparty credit risk.

Kinross adjusts its capital structure based on changes in forecasted economic conditions and based on its long-term strategic business plan.  Kinross has the ability to adjust its capital structure by issuing new equity, drawing on existing credit facilities, issuing new debt, and by selling or acquiring assets.  Kinross can also control how much capital is returned to shareholders through dividends and share buybacks.

The Company is not subject to any externally imposed capital requirements.

The Company’s quantitative capital management objectives are largely driven by the requirements under its debt agreements as well as a target total debt to total debt and common shareholders’ equity ratio as noted in the table below:

	December 31,		December 31,
	2015		2014
Long-term debt	$	1,731.9	$	1,998.1
Current portion of long-term debt	249.5		60.0
Total debt	1,981.4		2,058.1
Common shareholders’ equity	3,889.3		4,843.0
Total debt / total debt and common shareholders’ equity ratio	33.8%		29.8%
Company target	0 – 30%		0 – 30%

ii.Gold and silver price risk management

The Company’s practice is to not hedge metal sales.  However, in certain circumstances the Company may use derivative contracts to hedge against the risk of falling prices for a portion of its forecasted metal sales.  The Company may also assume derivative contracts as part of a business acquisition or they may be required under financing arrangements.

No derivatives to hedge metal sales were outstanding in 2014 and 2015.

39

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

iii.Currency risk management

The Company is primarily exposed to currency fluctuations relative to the U.S. dollar on expenditures that are denominated in Canadian dollars, Brazilian reais, Chilean pesos, Russian roubles, Mauritanian ouguiya and Ghanaian cedi. This risk is reduced, from time to time, through the use of foreign currency forward contracts to lock in the exchange rates on future non-U.S. denominated currency cash outflows.  The Company has entered into forward contracts to purchase Canadian dollars, Brazilian reais and Chilean pesos as part of this risk management strategy.  The Company is also exposed to the impact of currency fluctuations on its monetary assets and liabilities. The Company may from time to time manage the exposure on the net monetary items.

At December 31, 2015, with other variables unchanged, the following represents the effect of movements in foreign exchange rates on the Company’s net working capital, on earnings before taxes from a 10% change in the exchange rate of the U.S. dollar against the Canadian dollar, Brazilian real, Chilean peso, Russian rouble, Mauritanian ouguiya, Ghanaian cedi and other.

			10% strengthening in		10% weakening in
			U.S. dollar		U.S. dollar
			Effect on earnings		Effect on earnings
	Foreign currency		before taxes, gain		before taxes, gain
	net working capital		(loss)(a)		(loss)(a)
Canadian dollars	(15.5	)	1.4		(1.7	)
Brazilian reais	(80.2	)	7.3		(8.9	)
Chilean pesos	(3.1	)	0.3		(0.3	)
Russian roubles	17.1		(1.6	)	1.9
Euros	(3.3	)	0.3		(0.4	)
Mauritanian ouguiya	(13.9	)	1.3		(1.5	)
Ghanaian cedi	20.2		(1.8	)	2.2
Other (b)	(0.1	)	—		—

(a)As described in Note 3 (ii), the Company translates its monetary assets and liabilities into U.S. dollars at the rates of exchange at the consolidated balance sheet dates.  Gains and losses on translation of foreign currencies are included in earnings.

(b)Includes British pounds, Australian dollars and South African rand.

At December 31, 2015, with other variables unchanged, the following represents the effect of the Company’s foreign currency forward contracts on OCI before taxes from a 10% change in the exchange rate of the U.S. dollar against the Canadian dollar, Brazilian real and Chilean peso.

	10% strengthening in U.S.			10% weakening in U.S.
	dollar			dollar
	Effect on OCI before			Effect on OCI before taxes,
	taxes, gain (loss) (a)			gain (loss) (a)
Canadian dollars	$	(3.7	)	$	4.5
Brazilian reais	$	(5.2	)	$	6.3
Chilean pesos	$	(2.9	)	$	3.6

(a)Upon maturity of these contracts, the amounts in OCI before taxes will reverse against hedged items the contracts relate to, which may be to earnings or property, plant and equipment.

40

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

iv.Energy price risk

The Company is exposed to changes in energy prices through its consumption of diesel and other fuels, and the price of electricity in some electricity supply contracts.  The Company entered into energy swap contracts that protect against the risk of fuel price increases.  Fuel is consumed in the operation of mobile equipment and electricity generation.

At December 31, 2015, with other variables unchanged, the following represents the effect of the Company’s energy swap contracts on OCI before taxes from a 10% change in oil prices.

	10% increase in price		10% decrease in price
	Effect on OCI before taxes, gain (loss) (a)		Effect on OCI before taxes, gain (loss) (a)
Oil	$	1.7	$	(1.7	)

(a)Upon maturity of these contracts, the amounts in OCI before taxes will reverse against hedged items the contracts relate to, which will be to earnings.

v.Liquidity risk

The Company manages liquidity risk by maintaining adequate cash and cash equivalent balances (December 31, 2015 - $1,043.9 million in aggregate), by utilizing its lines of credit and by monitoring developments in the capital markets.  The Company continuously monitors and reviews both actual and forecasted cash flows.  The contractual cash flow requirements for financial liabilities at December 31, 2015 are as follows:

	Total		Within 1 year		2 to 3 years		4 to 5 years		More than 5 years
Long-term debt (a)	$	2,901.1	$	342.1	$	166.1	$	652.1	$	1,740.8
Derivative Liabilities - net	$	15.0	$	15.0	$	—	$	—	$	—

(a)Includes long-term debt, including the current portion, interest and the full face value of the senior notes.

vi.Credit risk management

Credit risk relates to cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable and derivative contracts and arises from the possibility that any counterparty to an instrument fails to perform. The Company only transacts with highly-rated counterparties and a limit on contingent exposure has been established for any counterparty based on that counterparty’s credit rating.  As at December 31, 2015, the Company’s maximum exposure to credit risk was the carrying value of cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable and derivative contracts.

41

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

12.LONG-TERM DEBT AND CREDIT FACILITIES

		December 31, 2015												December 31, 2014
	Interest Rates	Nominal Amount			Deferred Financing Costs			Carrying Amount (a)			Fair Value (b)			Carrying Amount (a)			Fair Value (b)
Corporate term loan facility (i)	Variable	$	500.0		$	(2.0	)	$	498.0		$	498.0		$	498.0		$	498.0
Senior notes (ii)	3.625%-6.875%	1,494.2			(10.8		)	1,483.4			1,035.3			1,480.8			1,416.9
Kupol loan (iii)	Variable	—			—			—			—			79.3			79.3
		1,994.2			(12.8		)	1,981.4			1,533.3			2,058.1			1,994.2
Less: current portion		(249.9		)	0.4			(249.5		)	(250.4		)	(60.0		)	(60.0		)
Long-term debt		$	1,744.3		$	(12.4	)	$	1,731.9		$	1,282.9		$	1,998.1		$	1,934.2

(a) Includes transaction costs on debt financings.

(b) The fair value of debt is primarily determined using quoted market determined variables. See Note 10 (c).

Scheduled debt repayments

	2016		2017		2018		2019		2020		2021 and thereafter		Total
Corporate term loan facility	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	500.0	$	—	$	—	$	500.0
Senior notes	250.0		—		—		—		—		1,250.0		$	1,500.0
Total debt payable	$	250.0	$	—	$	—	$	500.0	$	—	$	1,250.0	$	2,000.0

(i)Corporate revolving credit and term loan facilities

In August 2012, the Company completed a new unsecured term loan facility for $1,000.0 million.  The facility was set to mature on August 10, 2015, with the full amount having been drawn on August 22, 2012.  Also, in August 2012, under the same agreement, the Company amended the revolving credit facility, increasing the available amount to $1,500.0 million and extending the maturity date from March 2015 to August 2017.

On June 10, 2013, the Company amended its $1,500.0 million revolving credit facility and $1,000.0 million term loan to extend the respective maturity dates and remove the minimum tangible net worth covenant.  The revolving credit facility’s term was extended by one year to August 10, 2018 from August 10, 2017, and the term loan was extended by two years to mature on August 10, 2017 from August 10, 2015.

On March 10, 2014, the Company repaid $500.0 million of the term loan, leaving a balance of $500.0 million outstanding. On July 28, 2014, the Company extended the maturity dates of the term loan and revolving credit facility by one year to August 10, 2018 and August 10, 2019, respectively.

On July 24, 2015, the Company amended its $1,500 million revolving credit facility and $500 million term loan to extend the respective maturity dates.  The revolving credit facility’s term was extended by one year to August 10, 2020 from August 10, 2019, and the term loan was extended by one year to August 10, 2019 from August 10, 2018.  As at December 31, 2015, the Company had utilized $31.3 million (December 31, 2014 — $32.1 million) of the amended revolving credit facility.  The amount utilized was entirely for letters of credit. On January 4, 2016, the Company drew $175.0 million in cash on the revolving credit facility.

Loan interest for both the amended revolving credit facility and the amended term loan is variable, set at LIBOR plus an interest rate margin which is dependent on the Company’s credit rating.  Based on the Company’s credit rating at December 31, 2015, interest charges and fees are as follows:

Type of credit

Dollar based LIBOR loan:
Term Loan	LIBOR plus 1.65%
Revolving credit facility	LIBOR plus 1.70%
Letters of credit	1.13-1.70%
Standby fee applicable to unused availability	0.34%

42

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

When the term loan was originally arranged in August 2012, the Company entered into interest rate swaps to swap the underlying 1-month LIBOR interest rate into a fixed rate of 0.49% for the original three year term ending August 10, 2015.  During the second quarter of 2013, the term loan maturity was extended to August 2017.  Accordingly, the interest rate swaps only hedged the term loan’s interest rate exposure until the original maturity of August 2015.  Concurrent with the repayment of $500.0 million of the term loan on March 10, 2014, the Company closed out 60% of the interest rate swaps. The remaining outstanding interest rate swaps that hedged 80% of the remaining underlying floating rate term loan matured on August 10, 2015.

The amended revolving credit facility and amended unsecured term loan were arranged under one credit agreement, which contains various covenants including limits on indebtedness, asset sales and liens.  The significant financial covenant is a ratio of net debt to EBITDA, as defined in the agreement, of no more than 3.5:1. The Company is in compliance with this covenant at December 31, 2015.

(ii)Senior notes

On August 22, 2011, the Company completed a $1.0 billion offering of debt securities consisting of $250.0 million principal amount of 3.625% senior notes due 2016, $500.0 million principal amount of 5.125% senior notes due 2021 and $250.0 million principal amount of 6.875% senior notes due 2041.  Kinross received net proceeds of $980.9 million from the offering, after discount and payment of fees and expenses related to the offering.

On March 6, 2014, the Company completed a $500.0 million offering of debt securities consisting of 5.950% senior notes due 2024.  Kinross received net proceeds of $492.9 million from the offering, after discount and payment of fees and expenses related to the offering.

The senior notes referred to above (collectively, the “notes”) pay interest semi-annually.  Except as noted below, the notes are redeemable by the Company, in whole or part, for cash at any time prior to maturity, at a redemption price equal to the greater of 100% of the principal amount or the sum of the present value of the remaining scheduled principal and interest payments on the notes discounted at the applicable treasury rate, as defined in the indentures, plus a premium of between 40 and 50 basis points, plus accrued interest, if any.  Within three months of maturity of the notes due in 2021 and 2024 and within six months of maturity of the notes due in 2041, the Company can only redeem the notes in whole at 100% of the principal amount plus accrued interest, if any.  In addition, the Company is required to make an offer to repurchase the notes prior to maturity upon certain fundamental changes at a repurchase price equal to 101% of the principal amount of the notes plus accrued and unpaid interest to the repurchase date, if any.

(iii)Kupol loan

On December 21, 2011, the Company completed a $200.0 million non-recourse loan from a group of international financial institutions. The non-recourse loan carried a term of five years with a maturity date of September 30, 2016 and had an annual interest rate of LIBOR plus 2.5%. Semi-annual principal repayments of $30.0 million commenced in March 2013 and continued through September 30, 2015. Principal repayments were scheduled for March 31, 2016 and September 30, 2016 in the amounts of $13.0 million and $7.0 million, respectively. On September 30, 2015, the Company prepaid the remaining $20.0 million, resulting in full repayment of the loan.

(iv)Other

On June 15, 2012, the Company entered into an amendment to increase the amount of its Letter of Credit guarantee facility with Export Development Canada (“EDC”) from $136.0 million to $200.0 million and to extend the maturity date to March 31, 2015. On July 17, 2014, the Company further amended this facility to increase the amount from $200.0 million to $250.0 million. Effective March 31, 2015, the maturity date for this facility was extended to June 30, 2016. Letters of credit guaranteed by this facility are solely for reclamation liabilities at Fort Knox, Round Mountain, and Kettle River—Buckhorn. Fees related to letters of credit under this facility are 1.00% to 1.25%.  As at December 31, 2015, $212.7 million (December 31, 2014 - $207.2 million) was utilized under this facility.

In addition, at December 31, 2015, the Company had $33.4 million (December 31, 2014 - $49.3 million) in letters of credit outstanding in respect of its operations in Brazil, Mauritania and Ghana.  These letters of credit have been issued pursuant to arrangements with certain international banks.

43

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

From time to time, the Company’s operations in Brazil may borrow US dollars from Brazilian banks on a short-term unsecured basis to meet working capital requirements.  As at December 31, 2015 and 2014, $nil was outstanding under such borrowings.

13.PROVISIONS

	Reclamation and remediation obligations (i)			Other			Total
Balance at January 1, 2015	$	773.6		$	50.4		$	824.0
Additions	41.8			11.3			53.1
Reductions	(101.0		)	(10.9		)	(111.9		)
Reclamation spending	(14.0		)	—			(14.0		)
Accretion	27.8			—			27.8
Reclamation recovery	(7.9		)	—			(7.9		)
Balance at December 31, 2015	$	720.3		$	50.8		$	771.1
Current portion	38.0			12.3			50.3
Non-current portion	682.3			38.5			720.8
	$	720.3		$	50.8		$	771.1

(i)Reclamation and remediation obligations

The Company conducts its operations so as to protect the public health and the environment, and to comply with all applicable laws and regulations governing protection of the environment.  Reclamation and remediation obligations arise throughout the life of each mine.  The Company estimates future reclamation costs based on the level of current mining activity and estimates of costs required to fulfill the Company’s future obligations. The above table details the items that affect the reclamation and remediation obligations.

Included in other operating costs for the year ended December 31, 2015 is a $7.9 million recovery (year ended December 31, 2014 — $17.5 million expense) reflecting revised estimated fair values of costs that support the reclamation and remediation obligations for properties that have been closed. The majority of the expenditures are expected to occur between 2016 and 2041. The discount rates used in estimating the site restoration cost obligation were between 0.6% and 11.2% for the year ended December 31, 2015 (year ended December 31, 2014 — 0.3% and 8.1%), and the inflation rate used was between 1.1% and 7.8% for the year ended December 31, 2015 (year ended December 31, 2014 — 2.0% and 11.2%).

Regulatory authorities in certain jurisdictions require that security be provided to cover the estimated reclamation and remediation obligations. As at December 31, 2015, letters of credit totaling $249.5 million (December 31, 2014 — $243.6 million) had been issued to various regulatory agencies to satisfy financial assurance requirements for this purpose. The letters of credit were issued against the Company’s Letter of Credit guarantee facility with EDC, the corporate revolving credit facility, and pursuant to arrangements with certain international banks. The Company is in compliance with all applicable requirements under these facilities.

44

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

14.COMMON SHARE CAPITAL AND COMMON SHARE PURCHASE WARRANTS

The authorized share capital of the Company is comprised of an unlimited number of common shares without par value. A summary of common share transactions for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 is as follows:

	Year ended December 31, 2015			Year ended December 31, 2014
	Number of shares	Amount ($)		Number of shares		Amount ($)
	(000’s)			(000’s)
Common shares
Balance at January 1,	1,144,576	$	14,587.7	1,143,428		$	14,575.1
Under share option and restricted share plans	1,964	15.8		1,112		12.0
Under Red Back options	—	—		36		0.6
Balance at end of period	1,146,540	$	14,603.5	1,144,576		$	14,587.7
Common share purchase warrants
Balance at January 1,	—	$	—	25,759		$	162.0
Expiry of warrants	—	—		(25,759	)	(162.0		)
Balance at end of period	—	$	—	—		$	—
Total common share capital		$	14,603.5			$	14,587.7

i.Common share purchase warrants

The Company’s U.S. dollar denominated common share purchase warrants expired on September 17, 2014.

45

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

15.SHARE-BASED PAYMENTS

Share-based compensation recorded during the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 was as follows:

	Years ended December 31,
	2015		2014
Share option plan expense (i)	$	6.0	$	7.3
Restricted share unit plan expense, including restricted performance shares (ii)	15.6		22.4
Deferred share units expense (iii)	1.0		1.8
Employer portion of employee share purchase plan (iv)	2.1		2.6
Total share-based compensation	$	24.7	$	34.1

(i)Share option plan

The Company has a share option plan for officers, employees, and contractors enabling them to purchase common shares. Under the share option plan, the aggregate number of shares reserved for issuance may not exceed the lower of 31.1 million common shares or 10% of the total number of outstanding common shares at any time. Each option granted under the plan before February 16, 2011 is for a maximum of five years.  Each option granted under the plan on or after February 16, 2011 is for a maximum term of seven years.  One-third of the options granted are exercisable each year commencing one year after the date of grant. The exercise price is determined by the Company’s Board of Directors at the time the option is granted, and may not be less than the closing market price of the common shares on the last trading day prior to the grant date of the option. The stock options outstanding at December 31, 2015 expire at various dates to 2022. The number of common shares available for the granting of options as at December 31, 2015 was 12.1 million.

The following table summarizes the status of the share option plan and changes during the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014:

	2015				2014
	Number of options (000’s)		Weighted average exercise price (CDN$/option)		Number of options (000’s)		Weighted average exercise price (CDN$/option)
Balance at January 1	14,175		$	10.66	14,342		$	12.09
Granted	3,599		3.69		3,295		5.82
Exercised	—		—		(36	)	3.76
Forfeited	(890	)	7.85		(967	)	10.40
Expired	(3,371	)	16.35		(2,459	)	12.71
Outstanding at end of period	13,513		$	7.57	14,175		$	10.66

For the year ended December 31, 2014, the weighted average share price at the date of exercise was CDN$5.48.

46

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

The following table summarizes information about the stock options outstanding and exercisable at December 31, 2015:

				Options outstanding				Options exercisable
Exercise price range in				Number of options	Weighted average exercise price		Weighted average remaining contractual life	Number of options	Weighted average exercise price		Weighted average remaining contractual life
CDN$:				(000’s)	(CDN$)		(years)	(000’s)	(CDN$)		(years)
$	2.96	$	4.22	3,407	$	3.69	5.97	39	$	3.55	3.21
4.23		9.53		6,640	6.92		4.37	3,959	7.30		4.17
9.54		14.31		2,275	10.74		2.73	2,275	10.74		2.73
14.32		16.25		1,191	16.25		1.87	1,191	16.25		1.87
				13,513	$	7.57	4.28	7,464	$	9.76	3.36

The following weighted average assumptions were used in computing the fair value of stock options using the Black-Scholes option pricing model granted during the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014:

	2015			2014
Weighted average share price (CDN$)	$	3.69		$	5.82
Expected dividend yield	0.0		%	0.0		%
Expected volatility	43.3		%	39.9		%
Risk-free interest rate	0.6		%	1.6		%
Expected option life (in years)	4.5			4.5
Weighted average fair value per stock option granted (CDN$)	$	1.34		$	2.05

The expected volatility used in the Black-Scholes option pricing model is based primarily on the historical volatility of the Company’s shares.

(ii)Restricted Share Plan

The Company has a Restricted Share Plan whereby RSUs and RPSUs may be granted to employees, officers and contractors of the Company. The current maximum number of common shares issuable under this plan is 16.0 million.

(a)Restricted share units

RSUs are generally exercisable into one common share entitling the holder to acquire the common share for no additional consideration. RSUs vest over a three year period.

The following table summarizes information about the RSUs outstanding at December 31, 2015 and 2014:

	2015				2014
	Number of units (000’s)		Weighted average fair value (CDN$/unit)		Number of units (000’s)		Weighted average fair value (CDN$/unit)
Balance at January 1	6,657		$	6.47	4,626		$	9.08
Granted	6,586		3.62		4,492		5.42
Redeemed	(2,850	)	7.18		(1,898	)	10.12
Forfeited	(1,352	)	4.87		(563	)	7.21
Outstanding at end of period	9,041		$	4.41	6,657		$	6.47

As at December 31, 2015, the Company had recognized a liability of $4.8 million (December 31, 2014 - $3.5 million) in respect of its cash-settled RSUs.

47

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

(b)Restricted performance share units

The RPSUs are subject to certain vesting requirements and vest at the end of three years.  The vesting requirements are based on certain performance criteria over the vesting period established by the Company.

The following table summarizes information about the RPSUs outstanding at December 31, 2015 and 2014:

	2015				2014
	Number of units (000’s)		Weighted average fair value (CDN$/unit)		Number of units (000’s)		Weighted average fair value (CDN$/unit)
Balance at January 1	2,425		$	7.12	1,390		$	9.60
Granted	2,723		3.57		1,517		5.39
Redeemed	(318	)	9.24		(97	)	14.51
Forfeited	(517	)	5.83		(385	)	7.42
Outstanding at end of period	4,313		$	4.88	2,425		$	7.12

(iii)Deferred share unit plan

The Company has a DSU plan for its outside directors which provides that each outside director receives, on the last date in each quarter a number of DSUs having a value equal to a minimum of 50% of the compensation of the outside director for the current quarter. Each outside director can elect to receive a greater percentage of their compensation in DSUs. The number of DSUs granted to an outside director is based on the closing price of the Company’s common shares on the Toronto Stock Exchange on the last date of each quarter. At such time as an outside director ceases to be a director, the Company will make a cash payment to the outside director, equal to the market value of a Kinross common share on the date of departure, multiplied by the number of DSUs held on that date.

The number of DSUs granted by the Company and the weighted average fair value per unit issued for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 are as follows:

	Years ended December 31,
	2015		2014
DSUs granted (000’s)	446		489
Weighted average grant-date fair value (CDN$/ unit)	$	2.60	$	3.91

There were 1,233,925 DSUs outstanding, for which the Company had recognized a liability of $2.2 million, as at December 31, 2015 (December 31, 2014 - $3.6 million).

(iv)Employee share purchase plan

The Company has an employee SPP whereby certain employees of the Company have the opportunity to contribute up to a maximum of 10% of their annual base salary to purchase common shares. Since 2004, the Company has made contributions equal to 50% of the employees’ contributions.

The compensation expense related to the employee SPP for the year ended December 31, 2015 was $2.1 million (year ended December 31, 2014 — $2.6 million).

48

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

16.EARNINGS (LOSS) PER SHARE

Basic and diluted net loss from continuing operations attributable to common shareholders of Kinross for the year ended December 31, 2015 was $984.5 million (year ended December 31, 2014 — $1,400.0 million). Basic and diluted net loss attributable to common shareholders of Kinross for the year ended December 31, 2015 was $984.5 million (year ended December 31, 2014 — $1,166.5 million).

Loss per share has been calculated using the weighted average number of common shares and common share equivalents issued and outstanding during the period. Stock options are reflected in diluted earnings per share by application of the treasury method. The following table details the weighted average number of outstanding common shares for the purpose of computing basic and diluted loss per common share for the following periods:

	Years ended December 31,
(Number of common shares in thousands)	2015	2014
Basic weighted average shares outstanding:	1,146,043	1,144,287
Weighted average shares dilution adjustments:
Stock options (a)	—	—
Restricted shares	—	—
Restricted performance shares	—	—
Diluted weighted average shares outstanding	1,146,043	1,144,287
Weighted average shares dilution adjustments - exclusions: (b)
Stock options (a)	13,064	15,728
Restricted shares	3,971	6,311
Restricted performance shares	3,940	2,486

(a)Dilutive stock options were determined using the Company’s average share price for the year. For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, the average share price used was $2.27 and $3.89, respectively.

(b)These adjustments were excluded, as they are anti-dilutive.

49

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

17.INCOME TAX EXPENSE

The following table shows the components of the current and deferred tax expense:

	Years ended December 31,
	2015			2014
Current tax expense
Current period	$	135.0		$	160.7
Adjustment for prior period	(46.2		)	(37.2		)
Deferred tax expense
Origination and reversal of temporary differences	64.8			(306.6		)
Impact of changes in tax rate	(0.3		)	2.0
Change in unrecognized deductible temporary differences	(9.4		)	293.7
Recognition of previously unrecognized tax losses	(2.2		)	(2.9		)
	$	141.7		$	109.7

The reconciliation of the combined Canadian federal and provincial statutory income tax rate to the effective tax rate is as follows:

	2015		2014
Combined statutory income tax rate	26.5	%	26.5	%
Increase (decrease) resulting from:
Mining taxes	0.4	%	0.3	%
Resource allowance and depletion	0.1	%	0.5	%
Difference in foreign tax rates and foreign exchange on deferred income taxes within income tax expense	(17.2	)%	(11.5	)%
Benefit of losses not recognized	(5.0	)%	(3.9	)%
Recognition of tax attributes not previously benefited	(20.3	)%	0.7	%
Under (over) provided in prior periods	3.3	%	(2.0	)%
Income not subject to tax	10.7	%	4.3	%
Effect of non-deductible impairment	(0.3	)%	(19.5	)%
Enacted rate change	0.0	%	(0.2	)%
Accounting expenses disallowed for tax	(12.6	)%	(3.2	)%
Taxes on repatriation of foreign earnings	(1.4	)%	(1.6	)%
Recovery on expiry of warrants	0.0	%	1.2	%
Other	(0.9	)%	0.1	%
Effective tax rate	(16.7	)%	(8.3	)%

i.Deferred income tax

The following table summarizes the components of deferred income tax:

	December 31,		December 31,
	2015		2014
Deferred tax assets
Accrued expenses and other	$	82.6	$	8.7
Property, plant and equipment	10.3		53.1
Reclamation and remediation obligations	94.8		205.3
Inventory capitalization	8.7		8.0
Non-capital loss carryforwards	—		4.9
	196.4		280.0
Deferred tax liabilities
Accrued expenses and other	1.2		11.3
Property, plant and equipment	567.6		578.4
Inventory capitalization	50.1		52.8
Deferred tax liabilities - net	$	422.5	$	362.5

For balance sheet disclosure purposes, deferred tax assets and liabilities have been offset where they relate to income taxes levied by the same taxation authority and the Company has the legal right and intent to offset.

50

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

Movement in net deferred tax liabilities:

	December 31,			December 31,
	2015			2014
Balance at the beginning of the period	$	362.5		$	370.2
Recognized in profit/loss	53.0			(13.8		)
Recognized in OCI	8.2			3.4
Other	(1.2		)	2.7
Balance at the end of the period	$	422.5		$	362.5

ii.Unrecognized deferred tax assets and liabilities

The aggregate amount of taxable temporary differences associated with investments in subsidiaries, for which deferred tax liabilities have not been recognized, as at December 31, 2015 is $6.0 billion (December 31, 2014 — $6.0 billion).

Deferred tax assets have not been recognized in respect of the following items:

	December 31,		December 31,
	2015		2014
Deductible temporary differences	$	731.4	$	750.7
Tax losses	436.4		215.2

The tax losses not recognized expire as per the amount and years noted below.  The deductible temporary differences do not expire under current tax legislation.  Deferred tax assets have not been recognized in respect of these items because it is not probable that future taxable profit will be available against which the Company can utilize the benefits therefrom.

iii.Non-capital losses (not recognized)

The following table summarizes the Company’s non-capital losses that can be applied against future taxable profit:

Country	Type	Amount		Expiry Date
Canada	Net operating losses	$	624.0	2016 - 2035
United States(a)	Net operating losses	42.8		2016 - 2035
Chile	Net operating losses	103.7		No expiry
Barbados	Net operating losses	885.4		2016 - 2024
Mauritania	Net operating losses	11.4		2016-2020
Other	Net operating losses	64.9		2025

(a)  Utilization of the United States loss carry forwards will be limited in any year as a result of the previous changes in ownership.

51

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

18.SEGMENTED INFORMATION

The Company operates primarily in the gold mining industry and its major product is gold. Its activities include gold production, acquisition, exploration and development of gold properties. The Company’s primary mining operations are in the United States, the Russian Federation, Brazil, Chile, Ghana and Mauritania.

The reportable segments are those operations whose operating results are reviewed by the chief operating decision maker to make decisions about resources to be allocated to the segment and assess its performance provided those operations pass certain quantitative thresholds. Operations whose revenues, earnings or losses, or assets exceed 10% of the total consolidated revenue, earnings or losses or assets are reportable segments.

In order to determine reportable operating segments, management reviews various factors, including geographical location and managerial structure. It was determined by management that a reportable operating segment generally consists of an individual mining property managed by a single general manager and management team.

The Kupol segment includes the Kupol and Dvoinoye mines. These mines have been aggregated into one reportable segment as they have integrated cost structures, due to the processing of Dvoinoye ore at the Kupol mill, and other shared infrastructure such as the purchasing function.

The Corporate and Other segment includes corporate, Cerro Casale, shutdown and other non-operating assets (including La Coipa, Lobo-Marte and White Gold). These entities have been aggregated into one reportable segment as they do not generate revenues for the Company. Non-mining and other operations are also reported in Corporate and other.

Certain properties that are in development or have not reached commercial production levels are considered reportable segments because they have reached quantitative thresholds. These have been identified as non-operating segments. Finance income, finance expense, other income (expense) - net, and equity in earnings (losses) of associate and joint venture are managed on a consolidated basis and are not allocated to operating segments.

52

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

i.Operating segments

The following tables set forth operating results by reportable segment for the following periods:

	Operating segments																Non-operating segments (a)
Year ended December 31, 2015:	Fort Knox			Round Mountain		Paracatu	Maricunga		Kupol		Kettle River- Buckhorn		Tasiast		Chirano		Corporate and other (b)		Total
Revenue
Metal sales	$	467.0		228.1		559.8	249.1		883.2		113.3		249.4		302.3		—		$	3,052.2
Cost of sales
Production cost of sales	252.8			146.9		374.3	216.1		362.8		81.6		220.6		179.7		—		1,834.8
Depreciation, depletion and amortization	130.3			44.9		147.5	27.3		271.3		12.0		80.9		175.0		8.5		897.7
Impairment charges	252.7			44.0		3.3	48.7		84.7		—		259.7		5.9		—		699.0
Total cost of sales	635.8			235.8		525.1	292.1		718.8		93.6		561.2		360.6		8.5		3,431.5
Gross profit (loss)	$	(168.8	)	(7.7	)	34.7	(43.0	)	164.4		19.7		(311.8	)	(58.3	)	(8.5	)	$	(379.3	)
Other operating expense	1.4			—		10.3	17.4		(0.2	)	(12.6	)	35.3		(1.7	)	26.3		76.2
Exploration and business development	10.6			1.2		—	—		14.5		2.0		14.1		13.5		52.1		108.0
General and administrative	—			—		—	—		—		—		—		—		179.4		179.4
Operating earnings (loss)	$	(180.8	)	(8.9	)	24.4	(60.4	)	150.1		30.3		(361.2	)	(70.1	)	(266.3	)	$	(742.9	)
Other income (expense) - net																			(20.3		)
Equity in earnings (losses) of associate and joint venture																			3.2
Finance income																			8.3
Finance expense																			(96.0		)
Loss from continuing operations before tax																			$	(847.7	)

	Operating segments												Non-operating segments (a)
Year ended December 31, 2014:	Fort Knox		Round Mountain	Paracatu	Maricunga	Kupol	Kettle River- Buckhorn		Tasiast		Chirano		Corporate and other (b)		Total
Revenue
Metal sales	$	515.7	211.7	644.3	314.6	947.5	156.0		319.8		354.9		1.8		$	3,466.3
Cost of sales
Production cost of sales	291.0		142.3	418.2	235.9	380.5	83.6		252.2		165.8		1.7		1,971.2
Depreciation, depletion and amortization	118.0		25.2	154.3	36.2	254.7	50.2		66.6		159.7		9.8		874.7
Impairment charges	—		—	—	—	—	53.8		505.5		370.0		322.1		1,251.4
Total cost of sales	409.0		167.5	572.5	272.1	635.2	187.6		824.3		695.5		333.6		4,097.3
Gross profit (loss)	$	106.7	44.2	71.8	42.5	312.3	(31.6	)	(504.5	)	(340.6	)	(331.8	)	$	(631.0	)
Other operating expense	—		—	2.5	6.2	—	11.2		50.9		11.7		29.3		111.8
Exploration and business development	6.8		0.2	—	—	14.9	2.8		16.0		13.1		51.8		105.6
General and administrative	—		—	—	—	—	—		—		—		178.8		178.8
Operating earnings (loss)	$	99.9	44.0	69.3	36.3	297.4	(45.6	)	(571.4	)	(365.4	)	(591.7	)	$	(1,027.2	)
Other income (expense) - net															(215.5		)
Equity in earnings (losses) of associate and joint venture															(5.8		)
Finance income															11.2
Finance expense															(80.1		)
Loss from continuing operations before tax															$	(1,317.4	)
Earnings from discontinued operations (c)															$	233.5

53

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

	Operating segments									Non-operating segments(a)
	Fort Knox		Round Mountain	Paracatu	Maricunga	Kupol	Kettle River- Buckhorn	Tasiast	Chirano	Corporate and other (b)	Total
Property, plant and equipment at:
December 31, 2015	$	244.9	161.4	1,693.0	139.0	753.0	2.5	736.3	489.2	374.4	$	4,593.7
Total assets at:
December 31, 2015	$	480.5	229.5	1,935.9	373.3	1,566.3	26.6	1,010.1	645.6	1,467.6	$	7,735.4
Capital expenditures for year ended December 31, 2015 (d)	$	145.0	50.0	109.0	31.2	56.7	0.5	165.4	32.0	35.1	$	624.9

	Operating segments									Non-operating segments(a)
	Fort Knox		Round Mountain	Paracatu	Maricunga	Kupol	Kettle River- Buckhorn	Tasiast	Chirano	Corporate and other (b)	Total
Property, plant and equipment at:
December 31, 2014	$	467.0	189.1	1,806.2	138.0	990.2	11.7	809.5	634.4	363.3	$	5,409.4
Total assets at:
December 31, 2014	$	703.3	262.0	2,058.7	416.4	1,956.6	38.9	1,465.4	796.9	1,253.2	$	8,951.4
Capital expenditures for year ended December 31, 2014 (d)	$	85.2	44.3	105.0	29.7	87.9	6.4	147.7	61.1	38.4	$	605.7

(a)	Non-operating segments include development properties.
(b)	Corporate and other includes corporate, Cerro Casale, shutdown and other non-operating assets (including La Coipa, Lobo-Marte and White Gold).
(c)	On December 17, 2014, the Company sold its interest in Aurelian Resources Inc. and the FDN Project. See Note 6 ii.
(d)	Segment capital expenditures are presented on an accrual basis. Additions to property, plant and equipment in the consolidated statements of cash flows are presented on a cash basis.

ii.Geographic segments

The following table shows metal sales and property, plant and equipment by geographic region:

	Metal sales				Property, plant and equipment
	Years ended December 31,				As at December 31,
	2015		2014		2015		2014
Geographic information (a)
United States	$	808.4	$	883.4	$	412.9	$	672.2
Russian Federation	883.2		947.5		786.1		990.2
Brazil	559.8		644.3		1,693.0		1,810.2
Chile	249.1		316.4		387.8		391.3
Mauritania	249.4		319.8		743.0		814.8
Ghana	302.3		354.9		498.4		643.6
Canada	—		—		72.5		87.1
Total	$	3,052.2	$	3,466.3	$	4,593.7	$	5,409.4

(a) Geographic location is determined based on location of the mining assets.

54

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

iii.Significant customers

The following table represents sales to individual customers exceeding 10% of annual metal sales for the following periods:

For the year ended December 31, 2015:	Fort Knox		Round Mountain	Paracatu	La Coipa	Maricunga	Kupol	Kettle River- Buckhorn	Tasiast	Chirano	Total
Customer
1	$	—	—	—	—	—	677.7	—	—	—	$	677.7
2	89.6		15.6	94.7	—	30.2	170.5	34.9	83.5	80.6	599.6
3	78.0		46.5	43.4	—	50.4	—	23.6	45.6	61.9	349.4
											$	1,626.7
% of total metal sales											53.3		%

For the year ended December 31, 2014:	Fort Knox		Round Mountain	Paracatu	La Coipa	Maricunga	Kupol	Kettle River- Buckhorn	Tasiast	Chirano	Total
Customer
1	$	83.2	19.4	115.8	1.7	262.9	430.1	61.1	59.3	49.6	$	1,083.1
2	—		—	—	—	—	517.4	—	—	—	517.4
3	158.7		22.5	82.0	—	14.5	—	19.3	72.3	54.6	423.9
											$	2,024.4
% of total metal sales											58.4		%

The Company is not economically dependent on a limited number of customers for the sale of its product because gold can be sold through numerous commodity market traders worldwide.

19.COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

i.Commitments

Operating leases

The Company has a number of operating lease agreements involving office space and equipment. The operating leases for equipment provide that the Company may, after the initial lease term, renew the lease for successive yearly periods or may purchase the equipment at its fair market value. The operating leases for certain office facilities contain escalation clauses for increases in operating costs and property taxes. A majority of these leases are cancelable and are renewable on a yearly basis.  Future minimum lease payments required to meet obligations that have initial or remaining non-cancelable lease terms in excess of one year are $9.2 million, $7.7 million, $5.2 million, $4.4 million and $1.6 million for each year from 2016 to 2020, respectively, and $0.5 million thereafter.

Purchase commitments

At December 31, 2015, the Company had future commitments of approximately $19.9 million (December 31, 2014 — $43.3 million) for capital expenditures.

ii.Contingencies

General

Estimated losses from contingencies are accrued by a charge to earnings when information available prior to the issuance of the financial statements indicates that it is likely that a future event will confirm that an asset has been impaired or a liability incurred at the date of the financial statements and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated.

55

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

Cerro Casale contingency

The Company is obligated to pay $20.0 million to Barrick if a positive production decision is made relating to the Cerro Casale project.

Other legal matters

The Company is from time to time involved in legal proceedings, arising in the ordinary course of its business. Typically, and currently, except in the case of the actions described below, the amount of ultimate liability with respect to these actions will not, in the opinion of management, materially affect Kinross’ financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

A putative securities class action complaint was filed on February 16, 2012 (the “U.S. Complaint”), entitled Bo Young Cha v. Kinross Gold Corporation et al., in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (the “Court”).  The U.S. Complaint named as defendants the Company, Tye Burt, former President and CEO, Paul Barry, former Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Glen Masterman, former Senior Vice President, Exploration and Kenneth Thomas, former Senior Vice President, Projects.  On May 31, 2012, the Court selected the City of Austin Police Retirement System (“City of Austin”) to be lead plaintiff.  Pursuant to an order of the Court, City of Austin filed an amended Complaint on July 23, 2012 (the “Amended U.S. Complaint”).  On March 26, 2015, the parties filed settlement papers with the Court, and asked it to grant an order preliminarily approving the settlement. The action was settled for $33 million, without admission of liability by the defendants and with the Company’s insurance carriers directly funding the full settlement.  On October 15, 2015, the Court granted final approval of the settlement. Having received final Court approval of the settlement agreement, without any valid objections, all class members (excepting only the six opting out, amounting to only 1,633 shares) were bound by the settlement and deemed to have released Kinross and the other defendants from any claims related to the Amended U.S. Complaint, with all further proceedings in the action being forever stayed. The time to appeal the final Court approval has passed.

A notice of action in a proposed class proceeding under Ontario’s Class Proceedings Act, 1992, was filed in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice (the “Ontario Court”) on March 12, 2012, entitled Trustees of the Musicians’ Pension Fund of Canada v. Kinross Gold Corporation et al. (the “Ontario Action”). A statement of claim in the Ontario Action was subsequently served on April 11, 2012.  The Ontario Action named as defendants the Company, Tye Burt, former President and CEO, Paul Barry, former Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Glen Masterman, former Senior Vice President, Exploration, and Kenneth Thomas, former Senior Vice President, Projects.  On April 22, 2015, the parties advised the Ontario Court that they had agreed to a settlement of all claims in the Ontario Action.  On June 17, 2015, the Ontario Court approved the settlement.  All of the claims in the Ontario Action were settled for CDN$12.5 million, without any admission of liability by the defendants and with the Company’s insurance carriers directly funding the full settlement.  Pursuant to the settlement, the Ontario Action has been dismissed in its entirety.  All class members are bound by the settlement and are deemed to have released Kinross and the other defendants from all claims that were raised in the Ontario Action or could have been raised in the Ontario Action.

On January 16, 2015, a notice of action in a proposed class proceeding under Ontario’s Class Proceedings Act, 1992 was filed in the Ontario Court, entitled Frankfurt-Trust Invest Luxemburg AG v. Kinross Gold Corporation (the “Frankfurt Action”). Pursuant to the settlement of the Ontario Action, the Frankfurt Action was dismissed in its entirety and all of the proposed class members are bound by the releases granted in the Ontario action.

Income taxes

The Company operates in numerous countries around the world and accordingly is subject to, and pays, annual income taxes under the various regimes in countries in which it operates.  These tax regimes are determined under general corporate income tax laws of the country.  The Company has historically filed, and continues to file, all required income tax returns and to pay the taxes reasonably determined to be due.  The tax rules and regulations in many countries are complex and subject to interpretation.  Changes in tax law or changes in the way that tax law is interpreted may also impact the Company’s effective tax rate as well as its business and operations. From time to time the Company will undergo a review of its historic tax returns and in connection with such reviews disputes can arise with the taxing authorities over the Company’s interpretation of the country’s income tax rules.

56

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

20.RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS

There were no material related party transactions in 2015 and 2014 other than compensation of key management personnel.

The Company received dividends of $4.6 million from Puren during the year ended December 31, 2015 (year ended December 31, 2014 — $nil).

Key management personnel

Compensation of key management personnel of the Company is as follows:

	Years ended December 31,
	2015		2014
Cash compensation - Salaries, short-term incentives, and other benefits	$	8.0	$	9.4
Long-term incentives, including share-based payments	10.6		11.8
Termination and post-retirement benefits	3.5		4.8
Total compensation paid to key management personnel	$	22.1	$	26.0

Key management personnel are defined as the Senior Leadership Team and members of the Board of Directors.

21.CONSOLIDATING FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

The obligations of the Company under the senior notes are guaranteed by the following 100% owned subsidiaries of the Company (the “guarantor subsidiaries”): Round Mountain Gold Corporation, Kinross Brasil Mineração S.A., BGO (Bermuda) Ltd., Crown Resources Corporation, Fairbanks Gold Mining, Inc., Melba Creek Mining, Inc., Compania Minera Mantos de Oro, Compania Minera Maricunga, Red Back Mining Inc., and Red Back Mining Mauritania No. 2 Ltd.  All guarantees by the guarantor subsidiaries are joint and several, and full and unconditional; subject to certain customary release provisions contained in the indenture governing the senior notes. On December 17, 2014, the Company sold all of its interest in Aurelian Resources Inc., previously a guarantor of the notes. As a result, Aurelian Resources Inc. was released in December 2014 as a guarantor, in accordance with release provisions of the Indenture.

The following tables contain separate financial information related to the guarantor subsidiaries as set out in the consolidating balance sheets as at December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014 and the consolidating statements of operations, statements of comprehensive loss and statements of cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014.  For purposes of this information, the financial statements of Kinross Gold Corporation and of the guarantor subsidiaries reflect investments in subsidiary companies on an equity accounting basis.

57

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

Consolidating balance sheet as at December 31, 2015

	Guarantors
	Kinross Gold			Guarantor			Guarantor			Total			Non-
	Corp.			Subsidiaries			Adjustments			Guarantors			guarantors			Eliminations			Consolidated
Assets
Current assets
Cash and cash equivalents	$	113.8		$	171.0		$	—		$	284.8		$	759.1		$	—		$	1,043.9
Restricted cash	—			3.0			—			3.0			7.5			—			10.5
Accounts receivable and other assets	6.3			33.7			—			40.0			69.2			—			109.2
Intercompany receivables	541.2			1,045.4			(203.2		)	1,383.4			4,737.9			(6,121.3		)	—
Current income tax recoverable	—			75.0			—			75.0			48.3			—			123.3
Inventories	1.5			397.0			—			398.5			606.7			—			1,005.2
	662.8			1,725.1			(203.2		)	2,184.7			6,228.7			(6,121.3		)	2,292.1
Non-current assets
Property, plant and equipment	29.3			2,527.4			—			2,556.7			2,037.0			—			4,593.7
Goodwill	—			—			—			—			162.7			—			162.7
Long-term investments	82.7			—			—			82.7			0.4			—			83.1
Investments in associate and joint venture	—			79.3			—			79.3			77.8			—			157.1
Intercompany investments	3,306.1			172.3			(2,884.3		)	594.1			10,064.1			(10,658.2		)	—
Other long-term assets	10.2			138.2			—			148.4			221.8			—			370.2
Long-term intercompany receivables	3,056.2			260.0			(181.7		)	3,134.5			5,438.6			(8,573.1		)	—
Deferred tax assets	—			7.3			—			7.3			69.2			—			76.5
Total assets	$	7,147.3		$	4,909.6		$	(3,269.2	)	$	8,787.7		$	24,300.3		$	(25,352.6	)	$	7,735.4
Liabilities
Current liabilities
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities	$	65.9		$	137.6		$	—		$	203.5		$	176.1		$	—		$	379.6
Intercompany payables	196.6			593.7			(203.2		)	587.1			5,534.2			(6,121.3		)	—
Current income tax payable	—			3.0			—			3.0			3.4			—			6.4
Current portion of long-term debt	249.5			—			—			249.5			—			—			249.5
Current portion of provisions	—			25.1			—			25.1			25.2			—			50.3
Current portion of unrealized fair value of derivative liabilities	3.8			10.3			—			14.1			1.9			—			16.0
	515.8			769.7			(203.2		)	1,082.3			5,740.8			(6,121.3		)	701.8
Non-current liabilities
Long-term debt	1,731.9			—			—			1,731.9			—			—			1,731.9
Provisions	9.9			467.7			—			477.6			243.2			—			720.8
Other long-term liabilities	—			81.2			—			81.2			67.5			—			148.7
Long-term intercompany payables	1,000.4			437.6			(181.7		)	1,256.3			7,316.8			(8,573.1		)	—
Deferred tax liabilities	—			269.1			—			269.1			229.9			—			499.0
Total liabilities	3,258.0			2,025.3			(384.9		)	4,898.4			13,598.2			(14,694.4		)	3,802.2
Equity
Common shareholders’ equity
Common share capital	$	14,603.5		$	1,894.2		$	(1,894.2	)	$	14,603.5		$	17,964.8		$	(17,964.8	)	$	14,603.5
Contributed surplus	239.2			59.6			(59.6		)	239.2			3,237.1			(3,237.1		)	239.2
Accumulated deficit	(10,922.1		)	947.2			(947.2		)	(10,922.1		)	(10,525.3		)	10,525.3			(10,922.1		)
Accumulated other comprehensive loss	(31.3		)	(16.7		)	16.7			(31.3		)	(18.4		)	18.4			(31.3		)
Total common shareholders’ equity	3,889.3			2,884.3			(2,884.3		)	3,889.3			10,658.2			(10,658.2		)	3,889.3
Non-controlling interest	—			—			—			—			43.9			—			43.9
Total equity	3,889.3			2,884.3			(2,884.3		)	3,889.3			10,702.1			(10,658.2		)	3,933.2
Total liabilities and equity	$	7,147.3		$	4,909.6		$	(3,269.2	)	$	8,787.7		$	24,300.3		$	(25,352.6	)	$	7,735.4

58

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

Consolidating balance sheet as at December 31, 2014

	Guarantors
	Kinross Gold			Guarantor			Guarantor			Total			Non-
	Corp.			Subsidiaries			Adjustments			Guarantors			guarantors			Eliminations			Consolidated
Assets
Current assets
Cash and cash equivalents	$	315.1		$	131.0		$	—		$	446.1		$	537.4		$	—		$	983.5
Restricted cash	—			3.5			—			3.5			37.8			—			41.3
Accounts receivable and other assets	6.5			50.8			—			57.3			113.1			—			170.4
Intercompany receivables	492.4			1,038.3			(190.1		)	1,340.6			4,852.3			(6,192.9		)	—
Current income tax recoverable	—			76.3			—			76.3			38.9			—			115.2
Inventories	3.7			458.1			—			461.8			814.9			—			1,276.7
	817.7			1,758.0			(190.1		)	2,385.6			6,394.4			(6,192.9		)	2,587.1
Non-current assets
Property, plant and equipment	20.6			2,891.6			—			2,912.2			2,497.2			—			5,409.4
Goodwill	—			—			—			—			162.7			—			162.7
Long-term investments	109.4			0.1			—			109.5			1.5			—			111.0
Investments in associate and joint venture	—			17.2			—			17.2			139.6			—			156.8
Intercompany investments	4,705.7			(1,029.5		)	(2,703.0		)	973.2			7,954.0			(8,927.2		)	—
Other long-term assets	6.5			186.4			—			192.9			225.0			—			417.9
Long-term intercompany receivables	2,403.3			2,610.7			(1,744.8		)	3,269.2			4,599.3			(7,868.5		)	—
Deferred tax assets	—			6.7			—			6.7			99.8			—			106.5
Total assets	$	8,063.2		$	6,441.2		$	(4,637.9	)	$	9,866.5		$	22,073.5		$	(22,988.6	)	$	8,951.4
Liabilities
Current liabilities
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities	$	74.7		$	160.1		$	—		$	234.8		$	187.1		$	—		$	421.9
Intercompany payables	201.4			598.1			(190.1		)	609.4			5,646.2			(6,255.6		)	—
Current income tax payable	—			5.5			—			5.5			13.7			—			19.2
Current portion of long-term debt	—			—			—			—			60.0			—			60.0
Current portion of provisions	—			23.4			—			23.4			19.7			—			43.1
Current portion of unrealized fair value of derivative liabilities	23.0			26.8			—			49.8			10.4			—			60.2
	299.1			813.9			(190.1		)	922.9			5,937.1			(6,255.6		)	604.4
Non-current liabilities
Long-term debt	1,978.8			—			—			1,978.8			19.3			—			1,998.1
Provisions	11.2			506.6			—			517.8			263.1			—			780.9
Other long-term liabilities	9.2			125.2			—			134.4			72.8			—			207.2
Long-term intercompany payables	921.9			2,109.3			(1,744.8		)	1,286.4			6,519.4			(7,805.8		)	—
Deferred tax liabilities	—			183.2			—			183.2			285.8			—			469.0
Total liabilities	3,220.2			3,738.2			(1,934.9		)	5,023.5			13,097.5			(14,061.4		)	4,059.6
Equity
Common shareholders’ equity
Common share capital	$	14,587.7		$	3,221.0		$	(3,221.0	)	$	14,587.7		$	16,431.8		$	(16,431.8	)	$	14,587.7
Contributed surplus	239.0			82.8			(82.8		)	239.0			2,401.1			(2,401.1		)	239.0
Accumulated deficit	(9,937.6		)	(582.0		)	582.0			(9,937.6		)	(9,878.4		)	9,878.4			(9,937.6		)
Accumulated other comprehensive loss	(46.1		)	(18.8		)	18.8			(46.1		)	(27.3		)	27.3			(46.1		)
Total common shareholders’ equity	4,843.0			2,703.0			(2,703.0		)	4,843.0			8,927.2			(8,927.2		)	4,843.0
Non-controlling interest	—			—			—			—			48.8			—			48.8
Total equity	4,843.0			2,703.0			(2,703.0		)	4,843.0			8,976.0			(8,927.2		)	4,891.8
Total liabilities and equity	$	8,063.2		$	6,441.2		$	(4,637.9	)	$	9,866.5		$	22,073.5		$	(22,988.6	)	$	8,951.4

59

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

Consolidating statement of operations for the year ended December 31, 2015

		Guarantors
	`	Kinross Gold			Guarantor			Guarantor			Total			Non-
		Corp.			Subsidiaries			Adjustments			Guarantors			guarantors			Eliminations			Consolidated
Revenue
Metal sales		$	1,603.8		$	1,470.4		$	(1,457.8	)	$	1,616.4		$	1,435.8		$	—		$	3,052.2
Cost of sales
Production cost of sales		1,572.5			987.4			(1,458.1		)	1,101.8			733.0			—			1,834.8
Depreciation, depletion and amortization		6.8			350.5			0.3			357.6			540.1			—			897.7
Impairment charges		—			348.6			—			348.6			350.4			—			699.0
Total cost of sales		1,579.3			1,686.5			(1,457.8		)	1,808.0			1,623.5			—			3,431.5
Gross profit (loss)		24.5			(216.1		)	—			(191.6		)	(187.7		)	—			(379.3		)
Other operating expense		4.6			44.8			—			49.4			26.8			—			76.2
Exploration and business development		20.8			19.9			—			40.7			67.3			—			108.0
General and administrative		127.8			2.9			—			130.7			48.7			—			179.4
Operating loss		(128.7		)	(283.7		)	—			(412.4		)	(330.5		)	—			(742.9		)
Other income (expense) - net		246.3			4.4			—			250.7			958.6			(1,229.6		)	(20.3		)
Equity in earnings (losses) of associate, joint venture and intercompany investments		(1,076.3		)	(318.4		)	705.5			(689.2		)	(3.0		)	695.4			3.2
Finance income		41.0			8.5			(31.9		)	17.6			85.1			(94.4		)	8.3
Finance expense		(65.0		)	(53.2		)	31.9			(86.3		)	(104.1		)	94.4			(96.0		)
Earnings (loss) before tax		(982.7		)	(642.4		)	705.5			(919.6		)	606.1			(534.2		)	(847.7		)
Income tax recovery (expense) - net		(1.8		)	(63.1		)	—			(64.9		)	(76.8		)	—			(141.7		)
Earnings (loss) from continuing operations after tax		(984.5		)	(705.5		)	705.5			(984.5		)	529.3			(534.2		)	(989.4		)
Earnings (loss) from discontinued operations after tax		—			—			—			—			—			—			—
Net (loss) earnings		$	(984.5	)	$	(705.5	)	$	705.5		$	(984.5	)	$	529.3		$	(534.2	)	$	(989.4	)
Net (loss) earnings from continuing operations attributable to:
Non-controlling interest		$	—		$	—		$	—		$	—		$	(4.9	)	$	—		$	(4.9	)
Common shareholders		$	(984.5	)	$	(705.5	)	$	705.5		$	(984.5	)	$	534.2		$	(534.2	)	$	(984.5	)
Net (loss) earnings attributable to:
Non-controlling interest		$	—		$	—		$	—		$	—		$	(4.9	)	$	—		$	(4.9	)
Common shareholders		$	(984.5	)	$	(705.5	)	$	705.5		$	(984.5	)	$	534.2		$	(534.2	)	$	(984.5	)

60

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

Consolidating statement of operations for the year ended December 31, 2014

		Guarantors
	`	Kinross Gold			Guarantor			Guarantor			Total			Non-
		Corp.			Subsidiaries			Adjustments			Guarantors			guarantors			Eliminations			Consolidated
Revenue
Metal sales		$	1,341.9		$	1,672.5		$	(1,174.5	)	$	1,839.9		$	1,626.4		$	—		$	3,466.3
Cost of sales
Production cost of sales		1,323.2			1,089.9			(1,174.5		)	1,238.6			732.6			—			1,971.2
Depreciation, depletion and amortization		7.3			350.2			—			357.5			517.2			—			874.7
Impairment charges		26.8			242.8			—			269.6			981.8			—			1,251.4
Total cost of sales		1,357.3			1,682.9			(1,174.5		)	1,865.7			2,231.6			—			4,097.3
Gross profit (loss)		(15.4		)	(10.4		)	—			(25.8		)	(605.2		)	—			(631.0		)
Other operating expense		1.8			24.6			—			26.4			85.4			—			111.8
Exploration and business development		22.3			16.5			—			38.8			66.8			—			105.6
General and administrative		108.4			5.3			—			113.7			65.1			—			178.8
Operating loss		(147.9		)	(56.8		)	—			(204.7		)	(822.5		)	—			(1,027.2		)
Other income (expense) - net		(0.9		)	(27.0		)	—			(27.9		)	325.0			(512.6		)	(215.5		)
Equity in earnings (losses) of associate, joint venture and intercompany investments		(1,251.0		)	(938.1		)	1,102.1			(1,087.0		)	(5.4		)	1,086.6			(5.8		)
Finance income		29.0			2.2			(2.2		)	29.0			59.3			(77.1		)	11.2
Finance expense		(40.5		)	(25.5		)	2.2			(63.8		)	(93.4		)	77.1			(80.1		)
Earnings (loss) before tax		(1,411.3		)	(1,045.2		)	1,102.1			(1,354.4		)	(537.0		)	574.0			(1,317.4		)
Income tax recovery (expense) - net		11.3			(56.9		)	—			(45.6		)	(64.1		)	—			(109.7		)
Earnings (loss) from continuing operations after tax		(1,400.0		)	(1,102.1		)	1,102.1			(1,400.0		)	(601.1		)	574.0			(1,427.1		)
Earnings (loss) from discontinued operations after tax		233.5			(3.3		)	3.3			233.5			(0.2		)	0.2			233.5
Net (loss) earnings		$	(1,166.5	)	$	(1,105.4	)	$	1,105.4		$	(1,166.5	)	$	(601.3	)	$	574.2		$	(1,193.6	)
Net (loss) earnings from continuing operations attributable to:
Non-controlling interest		$	—		$	—		$	—		$	—		$	(27.1	)	$	—		$	(27.1	)
Common shareholders		$	(1,400.0	)	$	(1,102.1	)	$	1,102.1		$	(1,400.0	)	$	(574.0	)	$	574.0		$	(1,400.0	)
Net (loss) earnings attributable to:
Non-controlling interest		$	—		$	—		$	—		$	—		$	(27.1	)	$	—		$	(27.1	)
Common shareholders		$	(1,166.5	)	$	(1,105.4	)	$	1,105.4		$	(1,166.5	)	$	(574.2	)	$	574.2		$	(1,166.5	)

61

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

Consolidating statement of comprehensive income (loss) for the year ended December 31, 2015

		Guarantors
	`	Kinross Gold			Guarantor			Guarantor			Total			Non-
		Corp.			Subsidiaries			Adjustments			Guarantors			guarantors			Eliminations			Consolidated
Net earnings (loss)		$	(984.5	)	$	(705.5	)	$	705.5		$	(984.5	)	$	529.3		$	(534.2	)	$	(989.4	)
Other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax:
Other comprehensive income (loss) to be reclassified to profit or loss in subsequent periods:
Change in fair value of investments (a)		(28.3		)	0.2			—			(28.1		)	—			—			(28.1		)
Reclassification to earnings for impairment charges		7.6			—			—			7.6			—			—			7.6
Accumulated other comprehensive loss related to investments sold (b)		—			—			—			—			—			—			—
Changes in fair value of derivative financial instruments designated as cash flow hedges (c)		(8.2		)	(29.6		)	—			(37.8		)	(0.3		)	—			(38.1		)
Accumulated other comprehensive income related to derivatives settled (d)		24.8			43.8			—			68.6			4.8			—			73.4
		(4.1		)	14.4			—			10.3			4.5			—			14.8
Equity in other comprehensive income (loss) of intercompany investments		18.9			—			(14.4		)	4.5			—			(4.5		)	—
Total comprehensive income (loss)		$	(969.7	)	$	(691.1	)	$	691.1		$	(969.7	)	$	533.8		$	(538.7	)	$	(974.6	)
Comprehensive income (loss) from continuing operations		$	(969.7	)	$	(691.1	)	$	691.1		$	(969.7	)	$	533.8		$	(538.7	)	$	(974.6	)
Comprehensive income (loss) from discontinued operations		—			—			—			—			—			—			—
Total comprehensive income (loss)		$	(969.7	)	$	(691.1	)	$	691.1		$	(969.7	)	$	533.8		$	(538.7	)	$	(974.6	)
Attributable to non-controlling interest		$	—		$	—		$	—		$	—		$	(4.9	)	$	—		$	(4.9	)
Attributable to common shareholders		$	(969.7	)	$	(691.1	)	$	691.1		$	(969.7	)	$	538.7		$	(538.7	)	$	(969.7	)

(a) Net of tax of	$	—	$	—		$	—	$	—		$	—	$	—	$	—
(b) Net of tax of	$	—	$	—		$	—	$	—		$	—	$	—	$	—
(c) Net of tax of	$	—	$	(13.3	)	$	—	$	(13.3	)	$	0.2	$	—	$	(13.1	)
(d) Net of tax of	$	—	$	19.7		$	—	$	19.7		$	1.6	$	—	$	21.3

62

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

Consolidating statement of comprehensive income (loss) for the year ended December 31, 2014

	Guarantors
	Kinross Gold			Guarantor			Guarantor			Total			Non-
	Corp.			Subsidiaries			Adjustments			Guarantors			guarantors			Eliminations		Consolidated
Net earnings (loss)	$	(1,166.5	)	$	(1,105.4	)	$	1,105.4		$	(1,166.5	)	$	(601.3	)	$	574.2	$	(1,193.6	)
Other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax:
Other comprehensive income (loss) to be reclassified to profit or loss in subsequent periods:
Change in fair value of investments (a)	9.7			(0.2		)	—			9.5			(2.5		)	—		7.0
Reclassification to earnings for impairment charges	1.3			0.2			—			1.5			—			—		1.5
Accumulated other comprehensive loss related to investments sold (b)	(6.1		)	—			—			(6.1		)	—			—		(6.1		)
Changes in fair value of derivative financial instruments designated as cash flow hedges (c)	(22.8		)	(8.5		)	—			(31.3		)	(9.0		)	—		(40.3		)
Accumulated other comprehensive income related to derivatives settled (d)	8.3			17.3			—			25.6			2.7			—		28.3
	(9.6		)	8.8			—			(0.8		)	(8.8		)	—		(9.6		)
Equity in other comprehensive income (loss) of intercompany investments	—			—			(8.8		)	(8.8		)	—			8.8		—
Total comprehensive income (loss)	$	(1,176.1	)	$	(1,096.6	)	$	1,096.6		$	(1,176.1	)	$	(610.1	)	$	583.0	$	(1,203.2	)
Comprehensive income (loss) from continuing operations	$	(1,409.6	)	$	(1,093.3	)	$	1,093.3		$	(1,409.6	)	$	(609.9	)	$	582.8	$	(1,436.7	)
Comprehensive income (loss) from discontinued operations	233.5			(3.3		)	3.3			233.5			(0.2		)	0.2		233.5
Total comprehensive income (loss)	$	(1,176.1	)	$	(1,096.6	)	$	1,096.6		$	(1,176.1	)	$	(610.1	)	$	583.0	$	(1,203.2	)
Attributable to non-controlling interest	$	—		$	—		$	—		$	—		$	(27.1	)	$	—	$	(27.1	)
Attributable to common shareholders	$	(1,176.1	)	$	(1,096.6	)	$	1,096.6		$	(1,176.1	)	$	(583.0	)	$	583.0	$	(1,176.1	)

(a) Net of tax of	$	—	$	—		$	—	$	—		$	—		$	—	$	—
(b) Net of tax of	$	—	$	—		$	—	$	—		$	—		$	—	$	—
(c) Net of tax of	$	—	$	(1.9	)	$	—	$	(1.9	)	$	(3.0	)	$	—	$	(4.9	)
(d) Net of tax of	$	—	$	8.2		$	—	$	8.2		$	0.9		$	—	$	9.1

63

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

Consolidating statement of cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2015

	Guarantors
	Kinross Gold			Guarantor			Guarantor			Total			Non-
	Corp.			Subsidiaries			Adjustments			Guarantors			guarantors			Eliminations			Consolidated
Net inflow (outflow) of cash related to the following activities:
Operating:
Net earnings (loss) from continuing operations	$	(984.5	)	$	(705.5	)	$	705.5		$	(984.5	)	$	529.3		$	(534.2	)	$	(989.4	)
Adjustments to reconcile net earnings (loss) from continuing operations to net cash provided from (used in) operating activities:
Depreciation, depletion and amortization	6.8			350.5			0.3			357.6			540.1			—			897.7
Impairment charges	—			348.6			—			348.6			350.4			—			699.0
Impairment of investments	6.6			0.1			—			6.7			0.9			—			7.6
Equity in losses (earnings) of associate, joint venture and intercompany investments	1,076.3			318.4			(705.5		)	689.2			3.0			(695.4		)	(3.2		)
Non-hedge derivative (gains) losses - net	(17.7		)	(0.2		)	—			(17.9		)	16.4			—			(1.5		)
Share-based compensation expense	17.1			—			—			17.1			—			—			17.1
Finance Expense	65.0			53.2			(31.9		)	86.3			104.1			(94.4		)	96.0
Deferred tax expense (recovery)	—			80.0			—			80.0			(27.0		)	—			53.0
Foreign exchange losses (gains) and other	(229.0		)	12.0			—			(217.0		)	235.2			—			18.2
Reclamation expense (recovery)	—			—			—			—			(7.9		)	—			(7.9		)
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
Accounts receivable and other assets	2.0			53.4			—			55.4			35.6			—			91.0
Inventories	2.1			27.5			(0.3		)	29.3			34.2			—			63.5
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities	(16.1		)	(52.1		)	—			(68.2		)	96.1			—			27.9
Cash flow provided from (used in) operating activities	(71.4		)	485.9			(31.9		)	382.6			1,910.4			(1,324.0		)	969.0
Income taxes recovered (paid)	—			15.2			—			15.2			(152.6		)	—			(137.4		)
Net cash flow of continuing operations provided from (used in) operating activities	(71.4		)	501.1			(31.9		)	397.8			1,757.8			(1,324.0		)	831.6
Net cash flow of discontinued operations used in operating activities	—			—			—			—			—			—			—
Investing:
Additions to property, plant and equipment	(16.8		)	(341.4		)	—			(358.2		)	(251.8		)	—			(610.0		)
Net proceeds from (additions to) long-term investments and other assets	(0.3		)	(28.8		)	—			(29.1		)	(30.6		)	—			(59.7		)
Net proceeds from the sale of property, plant and equipment	—			0.8			—			0.8			1.5			—			2.3
Decrease in restricted cash	—			0.5			—			0.5			30.3			—			30.8
Interest received and other	0.3			2.5			—			2.8			1.2			—			4.0
Net cash flow of continuing operations used in investing activities	(16.8		)	(366.4		)	—			(383.2		)	(249.4		)	—			(632.6		)
Net cash flow of discontinued operations provided from investing activities	1.0			—			—			1.0			—			—			1.0
Financing:
Issuance of common shares on exercise of options	—			—			—			—			—			—			—
Proceeds from issuance of debt	—			22.5			—			22.5			—			—			22.5
Repayment of debt	—			(22.5		)	—			(22.5		)	(80.0		)	—			(102.5		)
Interest paid	(47.6		)	—			—			(47.6		)	(1.2		)	—			(48.8		)
Dividends received from (paid to) common shareholders and subsidiaries	—			(16.3		)	—			(16.3		)	(1,213.3		)	1,229.6			—
Settlement of derivative instruments	—			—			—			—			—			—			—
Intercompany advances	(63.6		)	(78.4		)	31.9			(110.1		)	15.7			94.4			—
Other	(2.9		)	—			—			(2.9		)				—			(2.9		)
Net cash flow of continuing operations provided from (used in) financing activities	(114.1		)	(94.7		)	31.9			(176.9		)	(1,278.8		)	1,324.0			(131.7		)
Net cash flow of discontinued operations used in financing activities	—			—			—			—			—			—			—
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents of continuing operations	—			—			—			—			(7.9		)	—			(7.9		)
Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents	(201.3		)	40.0						(161.3		)	221.7			—			60.4
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period	315.1			131.0			—			446.1			537.4			—			983.5
Cash and cash equivalents, end of period	$	113.8		$	171.0		$	—		$	284.8		$	759.1		$	—		$	1,043.9

64

KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(Tabular amounts in millions of United States dollars)

Consolidating statement of cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2014

	Guarantors
	Kinross Gold			Guarantors			Guarantor			Total			Non-
	Corp.			Subsidiaries			Adjustments			Guarantor			Guarantors			Eliminations			Consolidated
Net inflow (outflow) of cash related to the following activities:
Operating:
Net earnings (loss) from continuing operations	$	(1,400.0	)	$	(1,102.1	)	$	1,102.1		$	(1,400.0	)	$	(601.1	)	$	574.0		$	(1,427.1	)
Adjustments to reconcile net earnings (loss) from continuing operations to net cash provided from (used in) operating activities:
Depreciation, depletion and amortization	7.3			350.2			—			357.5			517.2			—			874.7
Impairment charges	26.8			242.8			—			269.6			981.8			—			1,251.4
Impairment of investments	1.3			0.2			—			1.5			156.6			—			158.1
Equity in losses (earnings) of associate, joint venture and intercompany investments	1,251.0			938.1			(1,102.1		)	1,087.0			5.4			(1,086.6		)	5.8
Non-hedge derivative (gains) losses - net	14.7			1.2			—			15.9			(10.8		)	—			5.1
Share-based compensation expense	26.2			—			—			26.2			—			—			26.2
Finance expense	40.5			25.5			(2.2		)	63.8			93.4			(77.1		)	80.1
Deferred tax expense (recovery)	—			61.9			—			61.9			(75.7		)	—			(13.8		)
Foreign exchange losses (gains) and other	(0.3		)	(3.7		)	—			(4.0		)	49.8			—			45.8
Reclamation expense (recovery)	—			—			—			—			17.5			—			17.5
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
Accounts receivable and other assets	(1.9		)	15.6			—			13.7			13.2			—			26.9
Inventories	(3.7		)	(21.2		)	—			(24.9		)	(34.5		)	—			(59.4		)
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities	(34.1		)	(9.9		)	—			(44.0		)	96.1			—			52.1
Cash flow provided from (used in) operating activities	(72.2		)	498.6			(2.2		)	424.2			1,208.9			(589.7		)	1,043.4
Income taxes recovered (paid)	—			(11.4		)	—			(11.4		)	(173.9		)	—			(185.3		)
Net cash flow of continuing operations provided from (used in) operating activities	(72.2		)	487.2			(2.2		)	412.8			1,035.0			(589.7		)	858.1
Net cash flow of discontinued operations used in operating activities	(1.2		)	(3.8		)	—			(5.0		)	(3.8		)	—			(8.8		)
Investing:
Additions to property, plant and equipment	(29.9		)	(279.7		)	—			(309.6		)	(322.2		)	—			(631.8		)
Net proceeds from (additions to) long-term investments and other assets	8.0			(33.4		)	—			(25.4		)	(30.1		)	—			(55.5		)
Net proceeds from the sale of property, plant and equipment	—			1.8			—			1.8			28.7			—			30.5
Decrease in restricted cash	15.5			0.6			—			16.1			1.6			—			17.7
Interest received and other	0.5			2.1			—			2.6			1.9			—			4.5
Net cash flow of continuing operations used in investing activities	(5.9		)	(308.6		)	—			(314.5		)	(320.1		)	—			(634.6		)
Net cash flow of discontinued operations provided from (used in) investing activities	150.0			(0.8		)	—			149.2			(1.0		)	—			148.2
Financing:
Issuance of common shares on exercise of options	0.1			—			—			0.1			—			—			0.1
Proceeds from issuance of debt	492.9			420.1			—			913.0			—			—			913.0
Repayment of debt	(500.0		)	(420.1		)	—			(920.1		)	(60.0		)	—			(980.1		)
Interest paid	(17.4		)	(0.1		)	—			(17.5		)	(3.1		)	—			(20.6		)
Dividends received from (paid to) common shareholders and subsidiaries	96.7			(44.6		)	—			52.1			(564.7		)	512.6			—
Settlement of derivative instruments	(2.0		)	—			—			(2.0		)	—			—			(2.0		)
Intercompany advances	(40.7		)	(113.2		)	2.2			(151.7		)	74.6			77.1			—
Other	(3.5		)	(4.0		)	—			(7.5		)	2.9			—			(4.6		)
Net cash flow of continuing operations provided from (used in) financing activities	26.1			(161.9		)	2.2			(133.6		)	(550.3		)	589.7			(94.2		)
Net cash flow of discontinued operations used in financing activities	—			—			—			—			—			—			—
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents of continuing operations	—			—			—			—			(19.7		)	—			(19.7		)
Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents	96.8			12.1			—			108.9			140.1			—			249.0
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period	218.3			118.9			—			337.2			397.3			—			734.5
Cash and cash equivalents, end of period	$	315.1		$	131.0		$	—		$	446.1		$	537.4		$	—		$	983.5

65

EX-99.4

EXHIBIT 99.4

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To the Board of Directors of Kinross Gold Corporation

We have audited the accompanying consolidated financial statements of Kinross Gold Corporation, which comprise the consolidated balance sheets as at December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014, the consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive loss, cash flows and equity for the years then ended, and notes, comprising a summary of significant accounting policies and other explanatory information.

Management’s Responsibility for the Consolidated Financial Statements

Management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of these consolidated financial statements in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board, and for such internal control as management determines is necessary to enable the preparation of consolidated financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error.

Auditors’ Responsibility

Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these consolidated financial statements based on our audits. We conducted our audits in accordance with Canadian generally accepted auditing standards and the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we comply with ethical requirements and plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the consolidated financial statements are free from material misstatement.

An audit involves performing procedures to obtain audit evidence about the amounts and disclosures in the consolidated financial statements. The procedures selected depend on our judgment, including the assessment of the risks of material misstatement of the consolidated financial statements, whether due to fraud or error. In making those risk assessments, we consider internal control relevant to the entity’s preparation and fair presentation of the consolidated financial statements in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances. An audit also includes evaluating the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of accounting estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the consolidated financial statements.

We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained in our audits is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our audit opinion.

Opinion

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated financial position of Kinross Gold Corporation as at December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014, and its consolidated financial performance and its consolidated cash flows for the years then ended in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board.

Other Matter

We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), Kinross Gold Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2015, based on the criteria established in Internal Control — Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO), and our report dated February 10, 2016 expressed an unqualified (unmodified) opinion on the effectiveness of Kinross Gold Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting.

/s/ KPMG LLP

Chartered Professional Accountants, Licensed Public Accountants

February 10, 2016

Toronto, Canada

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

The Board of Directors

Kinross Gold Corporation

We have audited Kinross Gold Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2015, based on criteria established in Internal Control — Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Kinross Gold Corporation’s management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in management’s report on internal control over financial reporting in Form 40-F for the year ended December 31, 2015. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our audit.

We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our audit also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

In our opinion, Kinross Gold Corporation maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2015, based on criteria established in Internal Control — Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO).

We also have audited, in accordance with Canadian generally accepted auditing standards and the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated balance sheets of Kinross Gold Corporation as at December 31, 2015 and 2014, and the related consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive loss, cash flows and equity for each of the years then ended, and our report dated February 10, 2016 expressed an unmodified (unqualified) opinion on those consolidated financial statements.

/s/ KPMG LLP

Chartered Professional Accountants, Licensed Public Accountants

February 10, 2016

Toronto, Canada

EX-99.5

EXHIBIT 99.5

MANAGEMENT’S REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING

The management of Kinross Gold Corporation (“Kinross”) is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting, and have designed such internal control over financial reporting to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”) as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board.

Management has used the Internal Control—Integrated Framework (2013) to evaluate the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, which is a recognized and suitable framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations for the Treadway Commission (COSO).

Because of inherent limitations, internal controls over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements.  Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

Management has evaluated the design and operation of Kinross’ internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2015, and has concluded that such internal control over financial reporting is effective.  There are no material weaknesses that have been identified by management in this regard.

/s/ J. Paul Rollinson	/s/ Tony S. Giardini
J. Paul Rollinson	Tony S. Giardini
President and Chief Executive Officer	Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

Toronto, Canada

February 10, 2016

EX-99.6

EXHIBIT 99.6

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

The Board of Directors of Kinross Gold Corporation

We consent to the inclusion in this annual report on Form 40-F of:

·our Report of Registered Public Accounting Firm dated February 10, 2016 addressed to the shareholders of Kinross Gold Corporation (the “Company”), on the consolidated financial statements of the Company comprising the consolidated balance sheets of the Company as at December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014, the consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive loss, cash flows and equity for the years then ended, and notes, comprising a summary of significant accounting policies and other explanatory information,

·our Report of Registered Public Accounting Firm dated February 10, 2016 addressed to the Board of Directors of the Company, on the consolidated financial statements of the Company comprising the consolidated balance sheets of the Company as at December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014, the consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive loss, cash flows and equity for the years then ended, and notes, comprising a summary of significant accounting policies and other explanatory information, and

·our Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm dated February 10, 2016 on the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2015,

each of which is contained in this annual report on Form 40-F of the Company for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015.

We also consent to the incorporation by reference of such reports in the Registration Statements (No. 333-180824, No. 333-180823 and No. 333-180822) on Form S-8 and the Registration Statement (No. 333-208906) on Form F-10 of Kinross Gold Corporation.

/s/ KPMG LLP

Chartered Professional Accountants, Licensed Public Accountants

March 30, 2016

Toronto, Canada

EX-99.7

EXHIBIT 99.7

INFORMATION CONCERNING MINE SAFETY VIOLATIONS OR OTHER REGULATORY MATTERS REQUIRED BY SECTION 1503(A) OF THE DODD-FRANK WALL STREET REFORM AND CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, FILED HEREWITH

The following disclosures are provided by Kinross Gold Corporation in accordance with the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Act”) and Item 104 of Regulation S-K.  These provisions require the following disclosures from companies that operate mines regulated under the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (the “Mine Act”) and that are required to file periodic reports under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.  The disclosures referenced in the table below identify the number of administrative citations, orders and proposed penalty assessments that were issued to a Kinross U.S. mine by the federal Mine Safety and Health Administration (“MSHA”) during the year ending December 31, 2015.  Certain citations, orders and penalty assessments are contested and appealed by the Company in legal actions before the Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission (“Review Commission”).  The Review Commission is an independent adjudicative agency that reviews disputes between MSHA and the Company concerning the validity of certain citations and orders (referred to as “Subtitle B” legal actions) and concerning the validity of proposed penalty assessments (referred to as “Subtitle C” legal actions) under the Mine Act.  The table below lists the number of Subtitle B and Subtitle C legal actions initiated, resolved and pending as of December 31, 2015.  These disclosure requirements pertain only to the Kinross U.S. mining operations and do not apply to mines operated outside the United States.

Mine or Operating Name /MSHA Identification Number	Section 104 S&S Citations (#)	Section 104 (b) Orders (#)	Section 104 (d)Citations and Orders (#)	Section 110(b)(2) Violations (#)	Section 107(a) Orders (#)	Total Dollar Value of MSHA Assessments Proposed (#)			Total Number of Mining- Related Fatalities (#)	Received Notice of Pattern of Violations under Section 104(e) (yes/no)	Received Notice of Potential to have Pattern under Section 104(e) (yes/no)	Legal Actions(2)Pending as of Last Day of Period(3) Subtitle B/Subtitle C	Legal Actions Initiated During Period Subtitle B/Subtitle C	Legal Actions Resolved During Period Subtitle B/Subtitle C
26-00594 Round Mtn	6	0	0	0	0	$	32,138.00		0	No	No	20/2	7/2	0/0
50-01616 Fort Knox	0	0	0	0	0	$	100.00		0	No	No	0/0	0/0	6/3
4503615 Buckhorn	6(1)	0	0	0	0	$	84,663.00	(1)	0	No	No	7/3	7/3	0/0
4503383 Kettle River	0	0	0	0	0	$	638.00		0	No	No	0/0	0/0	0/0
TOTAL	12(1)	0	0	0	0	$	117,539.00	(1)	0	No	No	27/5	14/5	6/3

(1)  A number of the citations, alleged violations and proposed penalties issued by MSHA comprising these values are currently being contested.

(2)  Legal action as used above means a single proceeding before the Review Commission addressing one or more citations, orders, penalty assessments or related claims.
(3)  Reported as legal actions under Subtitle B of 29 CFR Part 2700 contesting citations and orders / legal actions under Subtitle C contesting proposed penalty assessments (i.e., 0/2)

Notes:

·This sheet includes all assessed and not assessed Significant & Substantial (S&S) citations and orders issued during calendar year 2015.

·Total dollar value of MSHA assessments proposed includes all citations/orders assessed during 2015.

·Total dollar value of MSHA assessments taken from MSHA.gov and Predictive compliance.

EX-99.8

EXHIBIT 99.8

CONSENT OF JOHN SIMS

TO BEING NAMED AS A QUALIFIED PERSON

March 30, 2016

I hereby consent to being named and identified as a “qualified person” in connection with the mineral reserve and mineral resource estimates and the property descriptions in the Annual Information Form for the year ended December 31, 2015 (the “AIF”) and the related annual report on Form 40-F of Kinross Gold Corporation.

I also hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of the information contained in the AIF and annual report on Form 40-F, into the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (No. 333-180824, 333-180823 and 333-180822) and Form F-10 (No. 333-208906) of Kinross Gold Corporation.

Sincerely,

/s/ John Sims

EX-99.9

EXHIBIT 99.9

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13A-14

OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES - OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, J. Paul Rollinson certify that:

1.I have reviewed this annual report on Form 40-F of Kinross Gold Corporation;

2.Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.The issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the issuer and have:

a)Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b)Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;

c)Evaluated the effectiveness of the issuer’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

d)Disclosed in this report any change in the issuer’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the issuer’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5.The issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the issuer’s auditors and the audit committee of the issuer’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a)All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the issuer’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

b)Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the issuer’s internal control over financial reporting.

March 30, 2016	/s/ J. Paul Rollinson
	J. Paul Rollinson
	President and Chief Executive Officer
	(principal executive officer)

EX-99.10

EXHIBIT 99.10

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13A-14

OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES - OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Tony S. Giardini, certify that:

1.I have reviewed this annual report on Form 40-F of Kinross Gold Corporation;

2.Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.The issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the issuer and have:

a)Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b)Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;

c)Evaluated the effectiveness of the issuer’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as to the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

d)Disclosed in this report any change in the issuer’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the issuer’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5.The issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the issuer’s auditors and the audit committee of the issuer’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a)All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the issuer’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

b)Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the issuer’s internal control over financial reporting.

March 30, 2016	/s/ Tony S. Giardini
	Tony S. Giardini
	Executive Vice President & Chief Financial Officer
	(principal financial and accounting officer)

EX-99.11

EXHIBIT 99.11

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES - OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the annual report of Kinross Gold Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 40-F for the year ended December 31, 2015, J. Paul Rollinson hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of his knowledge:

1.The annual report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2.The information contained in the annual report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

March 30, 2016	/s/ J. Paul Rollinson
	J. Paul Rollinson
	President and Chief Executive Officer
	(principal executive officer)

EX-99.12

EXHIBIT 99.12

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES - OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the annual report of Kinross Gold Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 40-F for the year ended December 31, 2015, Tony S. Giardini hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of his knowledge:

1.The annual report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2.The information contained in the annual report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

March 30, 2016	/s/ Tony S. Giardini
	Tony S. Giardini
	Executive Vice President & Chief Financial Officer
	(principal financial and accounting officer)