Financial position, financial performance and cash flows

Index: 15(a)–(b), 16(a), 16(b) and 16(d) map to section 14.2; 16(c) to section 12.1.

Each risk and opportunity in 14.2 (pp.117–130) has tables of potential and current financial effects by line item. No significant risk has been identified for the carrying value of assets and liabilities for FY27 (p.117). Quantification is described as illustrative. Quantified potential effects:

• Access to capital (p.119): a 50 to 200 bps rise in the cost of debt could raise average annual interest expense by approximately $10–$50 million (short term), $20–$80 million (medium), $20–$90 million (long).
• Portfolio transition delay (p.120): a 1–2 year delay could reduce NPAT by $30–50 million p.a. (short) and $20–40 million p.a. (medium), and raise it by $50–100 million p.a. (long).
• Changing customer preferences (p.122): EBITDA impact $50–$80 million (medium), $70–$100 million (long).
• Drought (p.125): impacts of up to $150 million, $200 million and $250 million to EBITDA over two years (short, medium, long).
• Customer decarbonization (p.128): EBITDA $40 million p.a. (short), $90–120 million p.a. (medium), $200+ million p.a. (long).
• Energy portfolio transition (p.129): EBITDA around $400 million (short), $700 million (medium), $1,300 million (long); about $10 billion of balance sheet capital, funded by operating cash flows and debt. Current effects: Nil for six of the seven risks (pp.118–126); FY26 capital expenditure in renewable and firming assets was $632 million (p.130).

Current financial effects

AMP has undertaken an assessment of the financial implications of climate‑related risks and opportunities identified in the preceding section. Based on this assessment, climate‑related risks and opportunities have not had a material impact on AMP's financial position, financial performance, or cash flows for the current reporting period. Furthermore, we have not identified any significant risk of material adjustment to the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities in the next annual reporting period.

At this stage, AMP has presented the anticipated effects mostly on a qualitative basis informed by a selective quantitative analysis. Significant complexities within AMP's value chain requires development of additional processes, data infrastructure and third‑party arrangements, in order to undertake a more fulsome and granular quantitative analysis. AMP is currently developing such processes and requirements to enable AMP to transition into more quantitative analysis in future periods. Accordingly, our initial focus this year primarily has been on providing meaningful qualitative insights, with a view to expanding our disclosures in future periods as our processes mature.

Anticipated financial effects

Risk (physical): Physical climate‑related events impacting value of assets due to geographical location – Time horizon: Medium and long

The nature of AMP's business as a financial services organisation does not directly expose our business operations to industries, sectors or locations that are considered highly exposed to climate‑related physical risks.

Our Platforms, S&I and New Zealand Wealth Management businesses manage diversified and single sector investment portfolios on behalf of members that may have exposure to climate-related physical risks through underlying investments. AMP does not own these investments, hence the underlying assets are not recognised on our balance sheet and do not have a direct impact on our financial position. However, to understand the potential financial implications to AMP's financial performance arising from underlying investments' exposure to such risks, an analysis utilising third party datasets was undertaken on selected asset classes¹ in AMP Super Fund. The analysis indicates there is no material revenue or profit impact to AMP arising from such physical climate risks.

Our banking business does not provide business financing to potentially high‑risk industries such as energy generation, mining or agriculture, thereby limiting any direct exposure arising from those areas. To understand AMP's exposure from residential mortgages, we undertook an analysis of mortgages located in areas considered to be in the elevated climate risk zone² utilising third party datasets. For this analysis two physical risks (bushfire and flooding) were considered relevant. The analysis indicates less than 0.5% of AMP's residential mortgage book as at 31 December 2025 is located in the elevated climate risk zone. Given the immaterial exposure of the mortgage portfolio, any revenue or profit impact arising from such physical climate risks are not considered material.

¹ Asset classes selected for this analysis covers approximately 75% of AMP Super Fund's FUM (funds under management) of $56.8 billion as at 31 December 2024. Asset classes not included primarily consist of investments in private markets, cash and term deposits and government bonds. For the avoidance of doubt, this analysis does not include the Wealth Personal Superannuation and Pension Fund. ² For the purpose of this analysis, the elevated climate risk zone identified by AMP included approximately 100 suburbs across Australia. These suburbs were selected based on our analysis of third party datasets. The impact identified reflects AMP's exposure within this zone, which is limited to a subset of these suburbs.

Risk (transition): Emerging climate regulations and compliance obligations – Time horizon: Short and medium

The impacts from these risks are expected to evolve as regulatory frameworks mature and become more defined. Based on the current estimation, the impact, without consideration of mitigating actions, includes elevated provisioning and compliance costs driven by policy changes. Additionally, increased capital and operational expenditure to meet regulatory requirements could result in higher costs, although these will be aimed at enhancing long‑term resilience and regulatory alignment. AMP's enhanced focus on regulatory compliance, and continuing monitoring of changes in the regulatory landscape for future compliance obligations are expected to mitigate any potential material impact. On current assessment, impact from these risks is not expected to be material.

Risk (transition): Investee companies and sectors fail to adapt to clean technology disruption and decarbonisation trends – Time horizon: Medium and long

In the medium to long term, AMP could be exposed to reduced returns as carbon‑intensive assets underperform in response to accelerating clean technology adoption and decarbonisation policies. The risk of stranded assets could potentially increase, leading to portfolio devaluation and lower overall returns if investment strategies do not adapt to these structural market shifts. AMP's ongoing review and monitoring of ESG‑ and sustainability‑themed investment options as well as continuing integration of sustainability inputs into investment management processes are expected to mitigate any potential material impact. On current assessment, impact from this risk is not expected to be material.

Opportunity: Increased demand for climate‑linked products – Time horizon: Medium

Growing demand for climate‑linked products could support revenue growth through offering sustainability themed investment options/products, resulting in improved customer acquisition and retention. Over time, this opportunity could enhance AMP's market share and provide investment opportunities to strengthen portfolio resilience, supporting long‑term value creation and competitive positioning in sustainable investments.

Opportunity: Diversification into climate transition and resilient assets – Time horizon: Medium

Diversifying into assets with embedded climate mitigation or adaptation strategies–those positioned to benefit from the climate and energy transition, as well as resilient assets–can help protect and potentially enhance portfolio returns and reduce return volatility. Allocating to such assets also mitigates exposure to carbon‑intensive sectors and supports stable, long‑term value creation through increased investment in resilient industries.

Current financial effects

Risk 1: Reduced demand for traditional fuel products

Main items potentially impacted: Financial Performance – Revenue, Operating Expenses, Depreciation; Financial Position – Non-current Assets, Provisions; Cashflows – Operating Cashflows. Ampol experienced no material impacts in 2025 to its business model and value chain or financial performance, financial position or cashflow due to this climate-related risk. Total transport fuel demand in Australia grew by 0.7% in 2025 compared to 2024 (jet fuel demand growth of 7.7%, diesel demand growth of 0.3%, gasoline demand decreased by 2.6%). Transport fuel demand in New Zealand increased by 0.4% for the 12 months to September 2025 compared with the prior corresponding period, as gasoline demand decreased 0.8% but diesel and jet fuel demand grew 1.1% and 0.6% respectively.

Risk 2: Climate policy and regulatory uncertainty

Main items potentially impacted: Financial Performance – Operating Expenses; Financial Position – Non-current Assets, Provisions; Cashflows – Operating Cashflows, Investing Cashflows. Ampol experienced no material impacts in 2025 to its business model and value chain or financial performance, financial position or cashflows. During the reporting period in New Zealand, lower than expected EV uptake following removal of subsidies reduced utilisation of Z Energy's public charging network and led Ampol to slow rollout of new EV chargers compared to 2024.

Opportunity 1: EV charging solutions

Main items potentially impacted: Financial Performance – Revenue, Operating Expenses; Financial Position – Property, Plant and Equipment, Provisions; Cashflows – Operating Cashflows, Investing Cashflows. For 2025, BEVs comprised 8.3% of all light vehicle sales in Australia (2024: 7.4%) and 5.5% in New Zealand (2024: 5.4%). As at 31 December 2025, BEVs comprised approximately 2-3% of the light vehicle fleet in Australia and New Zealand. Ampol has deployed 494 EV charging bays across 148 sites. EV charging revenue was $7.0 million, a 119% increase from 2024. Adjacent revenues from convenience retail have high estimation uncertainty and have not been reported separately. As at 31 December 2025, Ampol has recognised assets of $59.1 million in the Statement of Financial Position related to its public EV charging network. Ampol owns the freehold on 167 sites and retains a controlling interest in 285 premium retail forecourt sites plus numerous others on long-dated leases.

Opportunity 2: Co-processed and lower carbon liquid fuels

Main items potentially impacted: Financial Performance – Revenue, Operating Expenses; Financial Position – Non-current Assets, Provisions; Cashflows – Operating Cashflows, Investing Cashflows. In 2025, Ampol supplied 2.3 million litres of imported lower carbon liquid fuel to customers in Australia and New Zealand, compared with approximately 18 billion litres of traditional fuels. Ampol incurred $9.7 million for costs associated with investigations of a potential co-processing facility and lower carbon liquid fuels manufacturing facility at Lytton refinery. As at 31 December 2025, Ampol had invested approximately $9 million into BRF across capital and operational expenditure since inception (disclosed under Risk 2 potential effects).

Physical risk event

In 2025, during Cyclone Alfred, Lytton refinery was proactively placed into a safe recirculation mode. Extreme weather after the cyclone caused damage to a crude storage tank resulting in a crude leak into a purpose-built bunded area. The cost for clean-up, repairs and additional demurrage incurred was $12.1 million net of insurance recoveries to date of $15.0 million. Additional repair costs, demurrage and recoveries for this event are expected in future years while the damaged tank remains out of service.

Anticipated financial effects

Risk 1: Reduced demand for traditional fuel products

There is a high degree of uncertainty associated with the effects of declining traditional fuel demand. Ampol has determined that the level of uncertainty involved in estimating the projected financial effects of this climate-related risk is such that the resulting quantitative information would be unreliable or not useful at this time. In the short and medium terms, financial modelling of the higher warming scenario using the House View suggests gasoline sales volumes decline (partially offset by population growth), while diesel and jet fuel demand remain robust. The Group's modelling of potential financial impacts to 2030 (medium term), based on both lower and higher warming scenarios, suggests no material impact to the Group's financial performance, financial position, cashflows or business model and value chain. Beyond 2030 (longer term to 2050), demand is highly uncertain; under the higher warming scenario financial modelling suggests earnings can remain resilient in real terms as declines in traditional fuels earnings are partially replaced by EV charging, lower carbon liquid fuels and non-fuel income, supporting sustained free cashflow generation. As the refinery approaches expected closure, its carrying value may reduce to align with residual recoverable cashflows; when closed and converted to an import terminal, free cashflows temporarily decline during conversion investment before increasing again. Under the lower warming scenario, decline in traditional fuels earnings is likely more rapid with high uncertainty on growth of replacement earnings streams; Ampol modelled a high growth case and a risk-adjusted moderate growth case (50% of high growth case) – even under the moderate case, the Group remains profitable, maintains a strong financial position and maintains free cashflow, albeit lower than in the higher warming scenario.

Risk 2: Climate policy and regulatory uncertainty

There is higher measurement uncertainty regarding effects of climate policy and regulation over the medium to longer term. Ampol has determined the level of uncertainty is such that resulting quantitative information would be unreliable or not useful at this time. Notwithstanding this: while Lytton is subject to an emissions reduction profile under the Safeguard Mechanism to 2030, absence of clarity on post-2030 requirements creates heightened risk that additional capital investment could be poorly timed or stranded; omission, repeal or easing of climate policies could reduce confidence in capital allocation to decarbonisation and opportunities (e.g. BRF, in which Ampol had invested approximately $9 million since inception as at 31 December 2025); higher cost of or reduced access to capital for emerging lower carbon investments; and fluctuation in growth/decline rates for traditional fuels due to changing policy. In the medium to longer term, earnings from lower carbon products are likely lower due to policy uncertainty or reduced access to capital; across both scenarios, in real terms the Group should maintain strong financial performance, but the carrying value of prior investments may not be supported should policies change.

Opportunity 1: EV charging solutions

In the short, medium and longer term, revenue from and investment into EV charging solutions is anticipated to grow as customers transition to EVs. Ampol has determined that the level of uncertainty involved in estimating projected financial effects is such that resulting quantitative information would be unreliable or not useful at this time. In the medium and longer term, heavy transport customers are anticipated to transition to electric alternatives for some applications, providing additional revenue opportunities. Increasing EV penetration is expected to support increased EV charging earnings to partially offset reduced traditional fuel earnings across both scenarios; financial modelling shows Ampol remains free cashflow positive as cashflow generation supports debt reduction, investment in traditional fuels and growth businesses, and dividend distribution.

Opportunity 2: Co-processed and lower carbon liquid fuels

In the long term, Ampol anticipates demand for lower carbon liquid fuels will grow to support decarbonisation of hard-to-abate sector emissions. There is high measurement uncertainty given the uncertain role Ampol may play in the value chain, margins associated with lower carbon liquid fuel products, and uptake rate. Ampol has determined the level of uncertainty is such that resulting quantitative information would be unreliable or not useful at this time and has not attempted to model financial outcomes. The supply chain infrastructure does not need to be modified in any material way to support supply and distribution of lower carbon liquid fuels, requiring minimal investment.

Ampol has relied on the exemption from disclosure of commercially sensitive information under clauses B34-B36 of AASB S2 as it pertains to information about climate-related opportunities not already publicly available (noted for both EV charging investment levels and lower carbon liquid fuels initiatives).

FY26 effects. Physical Risk 1 (page 45): Cooper Basin flooding resulted in $17.1 million of increased tariffs, tolls and other operating costs (cost of sales) and $12.5 million of additional capital expenditure (Petroleum assets), with an initial $11.4 million of insurance recoveries (other income). Offshore weather delays added $17.2 million of restoration expenditure (restoration provision), $22.6 million of capital expenditure (Petroleum assets) and $9.7 million of exploration expenditure (other expenses). Transition Risks 1 to 3 (pages 46–49): no material financial effects; Transition Risk 1 notes $1.6 million of carbon liabilities settled under the NZ ETS. Transition Risks 4 and 5 and Opportunity 1 (pages 50–53): no financial effects.

Anticipated, long term. Physical Risk 1 (STEPS as reference scenario): if extreme weather events become more frequent or severe and longer-term sustained changes in climate patterns are evident, the overall anticipated impact, assuming both capital and operating cost increases, is in the range of $14 million to $55 million per annum increased cashflow, noting significant uncertainty (page 45). Transition Risk 1: assuming the current Safeguard Mechanism threshold, baseline and decline rate, an increase in carbon price could increase operating cost by $4 million to $11 million per annum (page 47). Unless stated otherwise, there is no significant risk of material adjustment due to climate-related risks in FY27 (page 43).

Current effects, FY2026 (pp. 66–71). No impairment recognized for transition risk 1 or BMA. Safeguard Mechanism (SGM) obligation US$23 million (BHP share); incremental operational emissions reduction spend US$65 million; copper capital expenditure US$4.6 billion. No material financial effects identified from weather events or climate litigation.

Anticipated effects.

• SGM liability under US$75 million a year (BHP share), FY2027 to FY2030.
• Operational emissions reduction capital expenditure and lease payments: about US$50 million in FY2027 and US$0.5 billion over FY2028 to FY2031.
• Copper growth capital expenditure: about US$1.4 billion in FY2027, US$1.9 billion in FY2028, US$3 billion a year on average (nominal) over FY2029 to FY2031.
• No material adjustment to carrying amounts expected within the next annual reporting period (p. 65).

Not quantified (pp. 66–71). BHP cites measurement uncertainty or lack of decision usefulness for not quantifying the SGM after FY2030, decarbonization spend from FY2032, long-term carbon credit use, longer-term copper expenditure and combined physical risk effects. It sees no reasonable basis to estimate litigation effects and says reputational effects cannot be reliably estimated.

Commercial sensitivity relief (pp. 69, 88). BHP says it applied the relief to certain copper demand opportunity information (p. 69), including the approval requirements, timing and quantum of potential further NOJV investment in copper.

Unless otherwise stated, effects are described at the level of the consolidated financial statements, expressed as effects on Earnings before Income Tax (EBIT); current effects are for FY2026 (p. 181). Based on information to date and where separately identifiable, none of the identified climate-related risks and opportunities (CRROs) is expected to result in a material adjustment to the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities within the next annual reporting period (p. 181).

Current effects (p. 45). The CRROs had no material impact on financial position, financial performance or cash flows in the period. Approximately $112 million of separately identified capital expenditure was deployed on managing climate-related risks. No significant risk of material adjustment to carrying amounts of assets or liabilities is expected in the next 12 months.

Anticipated effects (Tables 1 and 2, pp. 46–52). Each item is set out under current period, FY27, short- to medium-term, long-term, and mitigation and adaptation financial effects.

• Refrigeration (p. 49): capital expenditure of $109 million in FY26, approximately $111 million in FY27, approximately $115 million per annum in the short term, $131 million per annum in the medium term and approximately $163 million per annum over the long term, within existing capital planning.
• Energy costs, carbon price, agricultural supply and store and supply chain disruption (pp. 46, 47, 50, 51): no material impact in FY26 or anticipated in FY27, and none expected in the short to medium term. No material long-term effect is expected for the other three; long-term energy cost effects are described as too uncertain for quantitative information to be useful.
• Supplier dependency (p. 48) and the sustainable products opportunity (p. 52): significant measurement uncertainty, so quantitative information is not disclosed. Affected line items are named, such as cost of sales and administration expenses (p. 46).

Current effects (p.123). Climate-related risks did not have a material effect on financial performance, position or cash flows this year. Note 9.2 Credit risk (p.278, cross-referenced on pp.97 and 123) states no additional overlays for climate-related risks were required to impairment provisions at 30 June 2026.

Anticipated effects (pp.123–127). Quantification is limited to modeled credit risk impacts, citing data and modeling availability; other effects are described qualitatively.

• Physical risk: five-year loss rate could rise by less than 0.2% above historical levels in the short-to-medium term and less than 0.4% in the long term; elevated losses are possible in any given year, potentially requiring provision adjustments (p.124).
• Transition risk: less than 0.4% above the historical five-year loss rate in the medium term (p.125).
• Severe cyclone scenario: total credit losses of $1.5 billion over five years, not assessed as financially material (p.127).
• Qualitative: reduced lending volumes in affected regions, business disruption, and higher operating expenses (customer support, legal, compliance, remediation).

Overall (p.127). Across the scenarios, financial performance is expected to hold, with stable operating margins and limited increases in average loan impairment expenses. Financials were modeled assuming no change in current market dynamics (p.374); results are potential outcomes, not forecasts (p.123).

Each risk table has a "Financial effects" row (pp. 146–149). For all four, current effects are stated as no material impact on financial position, financial performance or cash flows for financial year 2026, and management concluded that no material adjustment to carrying amounts of assets and liabilities is expected within the next financial year.

Where effects could be quantified, the report says they are not, individually or in aggregate, financially material across any time horizon (p. 145).

Company index: 15(a)–(b), pp. 146–149; 16(a)–(d), pp. 150–151.

Approach (p. 81). From FY2026 the Group initiated an annual process to assess the impact of climate related risks and opportunities on its current and anticipated future financial position, business prospects, financial performance and cash flows, to be refined over future reporting periods. The initial high level assessment, based on best estimates, available data and current analysis, is noted in the table.

Anticipated financial effects are subject to significant measurement uncertainty: with limited data to forecast the effects of the transition plan on consumer behavior, there is a wide range of potential outcomes over the medium to long term (p. 78).

Current effects (pp. 61–65). No specifically or separately identifiable material FY26 effect on Group carrying amounts, cash flows or financial performance for energy price volatility, technology investment risk or increased customer spending on infrastructure. Prolonged exposure to rain and severe weather events lost FY26 revenue (no amount). Customer renewable infrastructure, electrification and decarbonization projects resulted in approximately $270 million in revenues.

Anticipated effects (pp. 61–65). Energy price volatility: no material impact currently expected (2030, 2040, 2050). Technology investment risk: none expected at 2030; at 2040 and 2050 assessed qualitatively because data was not sufficiently complete, consistent or reliable, with a material increase expected in plant and equipment and inventory costs and cost of goods sold. Extreme weather: rainfall and flooding impacts quantified (no figure printed), described as not material under all scenarios; severe weather events assessed qualitatively. Both opportunities: no impacts disclosed due to measurement uncertainty.

Other (pp. 60, 65). None of the risks and opportunities poses a significant risk of a material adjustment in FY27 to carrying amounts in the FY26 financial statements. Combined financial effects are not quantified because combining across horizons and scenarios would not produce useful information. Capital deployment and funding integration is cross-referred to pages 39 and 74.

Anticipated effects are assessed over the short, medium and long term, on a residual basis after existing mitigation and adaptation (p. 39).

No climate-related risks are expected to result in a significant risk of material adjustment in the 2027 financial year (p. 39).

Current effects, FY26 (pp. 76 to 84). The three risk items report no material impact in FY26; carbon compliance costs were US$9 million (p. 77). The opportunity items report expenditure (pp. 79, 80), tabulated on p. 84.

Anticipated effects (pp. 76 to 80). Each item names the financial statement areas affected and shows an impact band where one is given. Physical risk: low (US$100m to US$500m), indicative, from about seven more days of average annual downtime by 2050 in a high emissions scenario, absent mitigation and adaptation (p. 76). Policy and regulatory uncertainty: assessed as low although modeled exposures are US$53 million and US$142 million per annum (Safeguard Mechanism), about US$249 million per annum (Diesel Fuel Tax Credit removal) and US$300-400 million per annum by 2035 (IMO pricing) (p. 77). Market exposure: not disclosed because of uncertainty in long-term price projections; a US$5/dmt change in realized price is about US$917 million of annual revenue (p. 78). Industrial decarbonization and electrification: indicative moderate, about US$500 million to US$1 billion per annum; revenue not quantified (p. 79). Critical minerals: not disclosed (p. 80).

Current financial effects

For the 2025 reporting period, GPT did not identify any climate-related risks or opportunities that met the thresholds for material impacts on financial position or cash flows. Climate-related variables and scenario outcomes are incorporated into our existing analysis and form part of our asset management practices.

Climate considerations form part of GPT's capital allocation and operating budgets. We integrate both the costs and benefits of decarbonisation and resilience measures into forward-looking planning so that climate-related issues are not treated as separate overlays but as core elements of our financial management.

In practice, for capital expenditure considerations at an asset level, adaptation and mitigation measures are aligned with asset lifecycle triggers such as major equipment upgrades or asset development and other capital expenditure requirements. Development planning incorporates long-term climate modelling to assess foreseeable risks, while acquisitions undergo due diligence to understand key risks and opportunities.

Operating costs are also directly affected. Renewable electricity procurement under long-term contracts seek to mitigate GPT from volatility in wholesale energy markets by providing a stable base for operating expenses.

Offsets have been purchased at an effective carbon price of approximately $30 per tonne through to 2027, with the associated costs budgeted as a recurring property operating expense for properties under management.

The costs and savings associated with our climate response activities are included within GPT's financial statements and asset valuations, where relevant. While some costs are flagged as delivering climate-related benefits, they are not tracked in isolation, as they can also deliver wider operational advantages such as improved durability, quality, efficiency and safety.

Anticipated financial effects

Offsets have been purchased at an effective carbon price of approximately $30 per tonne through to 2027, with the associated costs budgeted as a recurring property operating expense for properties under management.

Quantification (pp. 63, 71–72). The report "has not disclosed a quantified financial amount because the anticipated financial effects are subject to significant measurement uncertainty and cannot currently be estimated with a level of reliability that would provide decision-useful information". It attributes this to the forward-looking nature of scenario analysis, sensitivity to key assumptions, the timing and extent of future physical and transition impacts, evolving policy and market conditions, and limits on granular operational, asset-level, supplier and consumer behavior data. It gives qualitative disclosure of the nature of the effects, time horizons and parts of the business model and value chain affected, and "continues to enhance its data collection, financial modelling, methodology documentation and internal review processes".

Current and next-year effects (pp. 64–68, 72). For each of the seven risks and opportunities: "There was no material impact on the consolidated entity's financial position, financial performance or cash flows in FY26. There is no anticipated material adjustment to the FY27 financial results". Section 4.2.3 (p. 72): no identified risk or opportunity is currently expected to have a material effect on financial performance for the year ending 30 June 2027.

Anticipated effects (pp. 63–68). Described qualitatively by horizon, for example extreme weather: short-term business interruption and lost retail and rental income.

Current financial effects

(R) Increased energy costs: In 2025, Iluka incurred a total of $74 million in respect of coal, diesel, natural gas and electricity consumption. Iluka acquired coal in 2025 at total cost of $67 million to underpin processing requirements at North Capel for the short-term. Significant risk of material adjustment in 2026: expected to be materially aligned with 2025.

(R) Increased safeguard compliance costs: In 2025, Iluka purchased 30,376 ACCUs at total cost of $1.1 million and surrendered 18,431 units to offset excess emissions associated with its obligations under the Safeguard Mechanism for the period 1 July 2023 to 30 June 2024, with a total cost of $0.6 million recognised using a weighted average cost methodology. ACCUs surrendered were recognised as expenses to Iluka's income statement. Significant risk of material adjustment in 2026: Iluka has idled the operation of SR kiln 2 (SR2) for 2026, effective 1 December 2025, with the kiln restart timing dependent on market conditions; this will result in reduced emissions and hence lower carbon cost offset required under the Safeguard Mechanism. SR1 remains idled.

(R) Decarbonisation technology not commercially feasible: In 2025, Iluka incurred $0.2 million as part of its Climate Change Work Program on progressing the feasibility studies for NewGenSR® as a long-term solution to displace the use of coal (FY24: $1.3 million). Significant risk of material adjustment in 2026: expected to be materially aligned with 2025.

(R) Increased severity and frequency of extreme rainfall events / extreme temperature days: No material financial effects occurred from extreme rainfall/storm events and/or from extreme temperature days in 2025. Iluka also had no related insurance claims. Significant risk of material adjustment in 2026: expected to be materially aligned with 2025.

(O) Increased demand for rare earth oxides: Capital expenditure on the Eneabba refinery committed and/or spent to date in this business unit is $1,134 million, with $443 million spent during 2025. Significant risk of material adjustment in 2026: the refinery is scheduled to be commissioned in 2027; the expected materiality in 2026 is expected to be materially aligned with 2025.

(O) Increased deployment of renewable energy generation: At the end of 2025, Iluka had two operational solar farms in place: one at Jacinth-Ambrosia and the other at Cataby (commissioned in Q1 2025). Both solar farms operate under a PPA with third parties, with Iluka paying an agreed monthly charge. Total fees incurred for both PPAs in 2025 were $6 million. In 2025, Cataby and Jacinth-Ambrosia solar farms contributed 29% and 12% of the respective operation's energy requirements. Significant risk of material adjustment in 2026: expected to be materially aligned with 2025.

Anticipated financial effects

(R) Increased energy costs: Applying the high transition risk price scenario assumptions, energy costs represent 24% of operating expenditure on annual average over the short-term (at an estimated average annual cost increase of approximately $34 million from corporate plan cash flow assumptions), decreasing to 17% average (approximately $15 million increase) in the medium-term and 12% in the long-term (with no average net increase to corporate plan cash flow assumptions). Resilience assessment outcomes will be dependent on future decisions relating to asset mix and profile.

(R) Increased safeguard compliance costs: In the short-term, safeguard compliance costs on average increase to represent 0.8% of operating expenditure per year, resulting in an increase to annual average cost of approximately $3 million from corporate plan cash flow assumptions. This increases to 3.6% of operating expenditure in the medium-term with an increase to annual average cost of $12 million. No long-term effects were considered based on the current operating life of Iluka's North Capel facility assumed in current cash flow assumptions.

(R) Decarbonisation technology not commercially feasible: The MACC analysis reveals that even with higher carbon price assumptions derived from the NGFS Net Zero scenario, most technologies investigated to date are marginal or commercially unviable as they do not yet show a net saving. Due to the inherent uncertainty in commercial viability, no anticipated investment is currently included in Iluka's corporate plan for investment in decarbonisation technologies including NewGenSR®.

(O) Increased demand for rare earth oxides: The climate-related impact on demand assumptions for rare earth oxides (REOs) cannot be separately identified and the potential impact on future revenue cannot yet be determined; however, demand for REOs and associated revenue is likely to increase under both low and high transition risk scenarios.

(O) Increased deployment of renewable energy generation: Iluka's cash flows for the short- and medium-terms anticipate a renewable energy mix based on committed renewable energy projects (Cataby, Jacinth-Ambrosia and Balranald) and reflect the terms of its PPAs. It does not include renewable energy for projects under evaluation (Eneabba).

(R) Physical risks: Given the limited financial impacts from physical climate risk events to date, there is a high degree of measurement uncertainty associated with the long-term potential anticipated financial effects from these events. Iluka will continue to reassess the Group's exposure to these events on an annual basis.

Current and anticipated effects (p. 43). Estimated effects of the two material risks on financial performance, financial position and cash flow:

Basis (p. 44). No material current financial impacts are assessed for the two risks. The estimates represent the annual net impact of foregone insurance margin (against an FY26 baseline) from a modeled reduction in domestic property portfolios in high-risk natural peril zones, presented as the annual impact in FY 2050. They assume in-place mitigation measures continue to be effective, that reinsurance capital is likely to remain available with reduced capacity and at higher cost, and that rational repricing continues, preserving margin while increasing prices. The report states a high degree of measurement uncertainty, particularly over medium- to long-term horizons, and that simplifying assumptions were adopted to avoid undue additional cost or effort.

Overall (p. 58). The Group does not expect any CRRO to have a material impact on its financial position, financial performance or cash flow over the short, medium or long term. Each CRRO table names the financial statement lines affected, such as sales revenue, other expenses, cost of sales, receipts from customers and payments to suppliers (pp. 60–66).

In FY2026 less than 0.02% of total trading hours were disrupted by severe weather; the impacts were not material and, where applicable, losses were covered by insurance (p. 61). No financially material capital or operational expenditure is planned to address CRROs (p. 69).

The Paris Pledges scenario was used as the guide to assess current and anticipated financial effects (p. 76). Each CRRO page lists the Statement of Comprehensive Income, Statement of Financial Position and Statement of Cash Flows items potentially impacted (pp. 77–84).

Current effects (pp. 62–65). Extreme weather events in FY26 did not have a material impact on financial position, financial performance or cash flows; flooding from significant rainfall in Queensland caused some operational disruptions and stock losses, not considered material. Higher electricity and fuel costs contributed to marginally higher operating expenses, not considered material. No material financial effects from the resilience opportunity were identified.

Anticipated effects (pp. 62–65). Physical risks: the assessment considered inventory values, owned property, plant and equipment, and reduced sales from delayed delivery and unfulfilled orders, and indicates no material impact in the short, medium and long-term; only supply route disruption in and around Mega DCs was assessed (p. 63). Energy and fuel costs: Metcash has determined that a quantitative disclosure is too uncertain to estimate; qualitatively, sustained increases could adversely affect revenue where mitigation and pass-through do not fully offset them. Opportunity: quantitative information has not been disclosed because of measurement uncertainty; a material impact would increase revenues, cash flows and net profit.

Other (pp. 65, 67). None of the climate-related risks or opportunities is expected to present a significant risk of material misstatement in the next reporting period. The funding required for additional mitigation or adaptation is not expected to be material.

Current effects (p. 79). Mirvac did not identify any material impact on the Group's financial statements for the year ended 30 June 2026 arising solely from CRROs, or any matter with a significant risk of a material adjustment to carrying amounts within the next annual reporting period. For six of the seven material CRROs the pages (pp. 80–86) report no material current-year impact or, for physical risk to assets, no significant asset damage; several say the effect cannot be reliably isolated. For carbon offsets, Mirvac retired 9,337 offsets at a cost of $0.3m (p. 82).

Anticipated effects (pp. 79–86). Qualitative only. Examples: costs of lower-carbon materials expected to rise over the medium to long term; offset costs expected to increase once Scope 3 is in the net positive target; greater physical damage to assets possible over the medium and long term. For each material CRRO the report says the impact cannot be reliably quantified or estimated.

Basis (p. 79). A key judgment sets the criteria for qualitative disclosure: whether impacts can be isolated from other drivers, availability of reliable data, and reliance on external factors outside Mirvac's control.

Line items. Each CRRO page lists the financial statement items potentially affected under financial performance, financial position and cash flows (for example investment properties, inventories, revenue, payments to suppliers and employees).

Current effects (pages 98, 107). The Group has not identified any financial impacts from climate-related risks or opportunities that would pose a significant risk of material adjustment to carrying amounts (page 98). It reports no material current or anticipated effects from transition risks and opportunities, or material impacts from extreme weather events (page 107).

Anticipated effects (pages 109, 115). CR1 (long term): effects could be reflected in revenue, operating expenses, inventories, trade receivables and cash flows but cannot currently be quantified with sufficient reliability; measurement uncertainty is so high that a quantitative amount or range would not result in useful information. CR4: an estimated ACCU requirement of approximately 220,000 a year on average in the short term (no material financial effect expected) and a minimum average of approximately 115,000 a year in the medium term.

Scenario effects (page 123). The table (transition risks only, no amounts) rates revenue from coal sales as significant consequence under low warming in the short and medium term. Potential consequence: coal pricing (low warming, both horizons); in the medium term, saleable production (low warming) and the Safeguard Mechanism target (low warming, base case); other cells are limited. The Group sees potential for effects on financial position under low warming in the short term, to be addressed through capital management and financial resources.

Approach (pp. 67, 76). Quantitative information is given where it can be separately identified or reasonably estimated without undue cost or effort; otherwise qualitative information is given, naming the financial statement items affected. Management identified no significant risk of a material adjustment to carrying amounts of assets or liabilities in the next annual reporting period. Pro forma available liquidity was approximately $8.7 billion at 30 June 2026 (p. 76).

The only financial amounts in these tables are totals with no climate-related component separated: approximately $3.2 billion capital expenditure and $2.7 million insurance expense (CRR1), and over $90 million gross electricity costs (CRR3).

Current financial effects

In March 2025, extreme rainfall (~870 mm that month, including ~96.5 mm in 9 hours) led to an overflow from the main IMIP tailings storage which is not owned or operated by the Group, but is within the same IMIP as some of the Group's assets and facilities. There were impacts across the IMIP and wider area because of the overflow, however it only impacted the Group's Oracle Nickel RKEF refinery, which stopped production for two days given the inundation of contaminated water which damaged equipment. This caused approximately US$5.8 million in lost production and damage/repairs. Other impacts related to the overflow of the IMIP tailings storage were outside of the Group's assets and, given the tailings dam is not owned or operated by the Group, fall outside of the Group's obligations. This is an example of the short-term impact of the extreme weather risks identified in the risk table.

Significant risk of material adjustment in the next reporting period: No impact to the carrying amount of assets and liabilities reported in the related financial statements.

Anticipated financial effects

The estimation and measurement of anticipated financial impacts are subjective and based on various estimates and assumptions which are forward looking, long term, and are inherently uncertain by nature, based on the Group's current expectations of the impacts of climate risks and opportunities, which may change over time.

Rising temperatures, extreme heat, solar radiation and heatwaves are anticipated to reduce thermal and chemical efficiency across refining operations, increasing energy intensity and operating costs. Cost impacts are estimated at a single-year rise of approximately US$11.7 million by 2030, to US$20.0 million by 2040, and US$26.2 million by 2050, driven by higher cooling requirements, lost productivity, production downtime, and increased health and insurance costs.

Extreme rainfall and flooding present potential single-year costs of approximately US$8.3 million in 2030, rising to US$9.4 million in 2040 and US$10.5 million by 2050. Sea level rise, especially combined with storm surge or tsunami events, has estimated costs of around US$5.1 million in 2030, increasing to US$5.8 million in 2040 and US$6.5 million by 2050, most attributable to low-probability, high-impact events.

Extreme weather events (tropical cyclones) are projected to result in costs of approximately US$1.3 million in 2030, rising to US$1.6 million by 2050. Landslide risk is not currently quantifiable due to uncertainty and data limitations but has the potential to materially affect operating costs, revenues, asset values and capital expenditure through unplanned stabilisation works, production interruptions and potential impairments. Downstream value chain risk does not sit within the Group's operations or control and is not currently quantifiable due to uncertainty and data limitations, but has the potential to materially affect revenues and asset values.

Adaptation and resilience mitigations identified (heat-resilient/energy-efficient infrastructure upgrades, improved tailings facilities, raised infrastructure/flood protections, enhanced weather warning systems, operational controls) have not been reliably quantified financially but are expected to reduce costs of sales through lower energy intensity and fewer unplanned shutdowns, protect asset values, improve safety outcomes, and support more stable revenues and customer relationships.

The most material quantified transition risk relates to carbon pricing: under an NDC-aligned scenario, potential single-year carbon pricing costs are estimated at approximately US$283 million in 2030, rising to US$341 million in 2040 and US$411 million by 2050.

Energy cost transition risk: modelling under the same NDC scenario indicates an increase in net energy costs of approximately US$32 million by 2030, followed by a decline of around US$43 million in 2040 and US$61.4 million by 2050, reflecting assumed structural shifts in energy markets and potential efficiency improvements over time.

Other transition risks (global regulatory change, reputation and financing risk) have been assessed qualitatively due to significant measurement uncertainty and downstream impacts; could influence customer demand, pricing and margins, increase compliance and reporting costs, and raise capital expenditure requirements for decarbonisation, electrification and low-emissions processing. Reputational impacts and tighter ESG expectations may also affect revenue, cost of capital and access to financing if transition plans are not perceived as credible.

Strategic opportunities from the transition (implementation of the Net Zero Roadmap, green financing, market positioning) are identified but not considered material at this point; financial impacts have not yet been quantified.

Cumulative risk impact

(All figures in Estimated Annual Loss, US$million)

Anticipated effects are shown by horizon, on a real, average annualized, before tax basis, mitigated and modeled to FY50 (p.160). Low is $50 million to $100 million, Moderate $100 million to $200 million and High more than $200 million, with no upper bound disclosed for High because of measurement uncertainty (p.160).

For the two items not quantified, Origin says measurement uncertainty is too high for the information to be decision-useful, and lists the line items affected (pp.167–169). Current effects: no material financial impacts for Transition Risks 1, 2, 3 and 5, though Risk 2 lists regulatory costs (certificate expenses, Safeguard Mechanism Credits) without amounts (p.162); Transition Risk 4/Opportunity 1 and Opportunity 3 cannot be quantified in isolation; Physical Risk 1 is not material (about $50 million). Each item states no significant risk of material adjustment is anticipated in FY27.

Current financial effects

Physical risk: For the year ended 31 December 2025, one Asset Finance customer was impacted by a flood event, which resulted in $0.1 million residual loss to Pepper Money. The Group has not identified any other matters that are expected to result in a material adjustment to the current year's carrying values of assets or liabilities, nor any matters that are expected to have a material impact on the Group's income statement within the current annual reporting period.

Transition risk: For the year ended 31 December 2025, Pepper Money did not experience any material impact on its financial position, financial performance, or cash flows directly attributable to transition risks. There is insufficient evidence to indicate that the carrying amounts of the Group's assets were subject to material adjustment during the current reporting period as a result of transition risk factors.

Current and anticipated financial effects from physical risk ($ million)

Pepper Money has elected to disclose these outcomes as a range, where the probability of loss arising from severe weather events extends from zero up to the estimated expected credit loss (gross loss before income tax).

Current and anticipated financial effects from transition risk ($ million, gross impact before income tax)

Short term macro-economic assumptions are aligned with Pepper Money's Expected Credit Loss ("ECL") models as represented in the financial statements (Note 8(B)(c)). The results have a marginal positive impact on financial performance and cash flow, however deemed immaterial.

Anticipated financial effects

Australian Residential Mortgages (physical risk): Using the RCP4.5 scenario, which represents the anticipated case, Pepper Money has assessed the potential exposure of its portfolio to physical climate-related risks caused by severe weather events. Based on this analysis, a very small proportion of properties are expected to be at high risk and vulnerable to physical impacts in the medium to long term. The financial effect in the short term is immaterial. In the medium to long term the pre-tax loss experience in the high range is estimated to be $(1.3) million.

Asset Finance (physical risk): Based on the small proportion of assets in very high risk areas and the low likelihood of severe damage, Pepper Money estimates the current and anticipated financial effects from the Asset Finance portfolio exposure to severe weather events to be immaterial. Whilst hail, which is covered under storm risk assessment, is expected to cause damage, the Group has not received any hardship requests due to hail events. There is insufficient evidence to suggest that a credit loss should be anticipated.

Transition risk: Under the NDC scenario adopted from the NGFS, transition risk is assessed as low due to gradual implementation of climate policies and slower technological change. This results in relatively stable macro-economic conditions, especially in the short term with inflation and unemployment remaining relatively benign. In the medium to long term, there is moderate to severe physical risk that results in reductions in economic growth. The modelling indicates: inflationary pressure increases marginally over the medium to long term which directly impacts other Operating expenses; cash rate target increases marginally over the medium to long term, which directly increases Corporate interest expense and is negatively correlated to Net interest income through increased cost of funding; short term financial impacts are immaterial; medium to long term impacts are primarily driven by modest uplift in inflation and cash rate targets thus increasing Operating expenses and Corporate interest expense. The high range of impact incorporates the additional effect from Net interest margin compression arising from cash rate target increase, based on historical sensitivities applied adjusted for rate of change.

Key assumptions and limitations (physical risk)

• Forward-looking assessments present challenges due to uncertainty of climate models and inherent limitations in data quality, coverage and reliability.
• Physical risk assessment was conducted on approximately 98.3% of Australian Residential loans, based on available and valid GNAF ID.
• RCP4.5 reflects moderate emissions and policy action, consistent with anticipated climate pathways.
• Estimates are based on current property exposure data and scenario assumptions; actual outcomes may vary.
• Due to the variable nature of extreme weather events these results are subject to significant uncertainty.

Key assumptions (transition risk)

• NDC scenario reflects gradual policy adoption and limited disruption to economic fundamentals.
• Physical risks embedded in the scenario cannot be separately excluded.
• Estimates rely on historical correlations and scenario assumptions, which may not fully capture future market dynamics.

Physical risks (p. 14). No material financial effects from physical climate events were identified in the 2026 Consolidated Financial Statements or 12-month projections. Anticipated effects are not quantified: the Group judges the measurement uncertainty too wide for the results to be meaningful or useful. It lists the income statement lines (including passenger and freight revenue, fuel and insurance costs) and balance sheet items (impairments to property, plant and equipment and right-of-use assets) that may be affected.

Transition risks (pp. 18–20). Effects are quantified through two cost pathways, carbon credits and the Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) price premium, because individual risk drivers cannot be costed separately.

Costs sit in the 'Fuel' line of the Consolidated Income Statement, before mitigation; net exposure is expected to be materially lower. Carbon and SAF costs beyond 2026/27 are judged not practicable to estimate and too uncertain to be useful. Capital deployed in 2025/26 through the Climate Fund: $36 million (p. 19).

Fleet renewal opportunity (p. 21). Not quantified: the Group relies on the exemption for commercially sensitive information and says the benefits cannot be isolated from wider commercial outcomes.

Current financial effects

Physical risk: In 2025, net catastrophe claims of $751 million were below the Group's allowance of $1,160 million. Net catastrophe claims included $715 million attributable to climate-related natural events, such as the Californian Wildfires, Hurricane Melissa and a series of storms and floods in Australia, including Cyclone Alfred.

Transition risk (underwriting): There were no identifiable transition-specific impacts in the current period for either the Marine, Energy & Aviation product segment or the Group's gross written premium more broadly. Group premium movements primarily reflected targeted organic growth and the lower strain from exited lines.

Transition risk (investment): There were no specifically identifiable transition-related impacts on the Group's investment assets or investment performance in the current reporting period.

Opportunities - climate solutions investments: The carrying value of the Group's investments at 31 December 2025 included $2,359 million of climate solutions investments which represented 7% of QBE's total assets under management.

Opportunities - growth: The climate-related opportunities identified did not have a material effect on the Group's financial position, financial performance or cash flows in the current period.

Anticipated financial effects

Physical risk: Short-term claims volatility is expected to continue to be influenced by natural variability in weather and catastrophe activity, in addition to the effects of climate change. In the short term, potential impacts of physical risks are incorporated into the Group's business planning process, primarily through the catastrophe allowance, and implicitly considered in other planning assumptions relating to premium rates and reinsurance, but are not separately identifiable from other factors. The Group's net catastrophe allowance for 2026 is set at $1,130 million. Plan net catastrophe claims as a percentage of net insurance revenue is not expected to change materially from 2026 levels over the three-year plan period. Scenario analysis of property exposures indicates that under the RCP4.5 pathway, the increase in catastrophe AAL before reinsurance due to climate change across key peril regions is not currently expected to be significant by 2030, and is not expected to result in claims costs that materially exceed the Group's catastrophe allowance on an annualised basis. Over the long term, the financial effects of physical climate risks are expected to become more significant, with a projected increase in gross AAL of around 20% at the Group level by 2090 under the RCP4.5 pathway.

Transition risk (underwriting): Analysis of medium to long-term transition risk was focused on lines of business with the most significant exposures to transition-sensitive sectors. Current available data does not support the reliable quantification of transition-specific effects; work underway to improve sectoral mapping and data quality is expected to enable more detailed analysis over time. In scenarios where decarbonisation accelerates, customers in carbon-intensive industries such as oil and gas extraction and certain transport segments are expected to face higher compliance costs, technology investment requirements and, in some cases, stranded asset risk. These pressures could influence premium volumes and claims experience of exposed product lines, with possible resulting impacts to the Group's insurance operating result and net insurance contract liabilities. In a delayed transition pathway, these effects are expected to be deferred but more concentrated post-2030. QBE's exposures are expected to be mitigated by a considered approach to customer selection and engagement, ongoing demand for coverage, portfolio agility and underwriting discipline.

Transition risk (investment): At a total investments level, the anticipated financial effects of transition risk are expected to be limited based on the current portfolio mix, investment strategy and policies. No material anticipated financial impacts are expected from transition risk in infrastructure assets, as these exposures are actively considered and managed by external managers. While scenario analysis indicates that certain industries and issuers within passively held developed and emerging market equity portfolios may experience more significant climate-adjusted value changes under a Net Zero 2050 scenario, the overall impact is mitigated by the diversified nature of these investments.

Opportunities - climate solutions investments: Effective from 2026, QBE has set a target to invest $200 million in climate solutions annually through to 2030. The financial effects of these investments will be reflected over time through investment income and the composition of assets under management. At this stage, QBE does not expect the returns generated by these investments to be materially different from those of other equivalent assets from the same issuer, as all investments are selected in line with QBE's investment return and risk appetite criteria.

Opportunities - growth: QBE has applied the exemption permitted by AASB S2 and has not disclosed information about the anticipated financial effects of growth opportunities driven by market and technology shifts, as they are considered commercially sensitive.

Current financial effects

At the end of 2025, closure provisions on our balance sheet totalled $17.8 billion (2024: $15.7 billion).

Based on information to date, and where separately identifiable, none of the identified climate-related risks or opportunities are expected to result in a material adjustment to the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities disclosed in the financial statements within the next annual reporting period.

Any material current physical climate-related impacts are disclosed in our financial statements as, among other line items, physical damage or disruption could primarily affect asset carrying values and cash flows. No such instances were noted in FY2025. Separately, costs to enhance asset resilience are embedded within our operational and capital expenditure processes and therefore cannot be separately identified.

Currently, carbon costs (real terms, 2025 prices) are <$0.1 billion. Currently, 82% of our global Scope 1 GHG emissions (19.6 Mt CO2e) are covered by emissions-limiting frameworks. Currently, 59% of our Scope 1 and 2 emissions (18.5 Mt CO2e) are classified as hard-to-abate, with $0.56 billion spent/committed co-investment in industrial scale R&D to support solutions for hard-to-abate emissions. Our total decarbonisation spend for 2025 was $612 million (2024: $589 million).

Financial statement impact references given for each CRO include: transition materials metrics (consolidated sales revenue, capital expenditure, operating assets); estimation of asset lives; decarbonisation spend and decarbonisation capital commitments; carbon abatement spend on procurement of carbon units and renewable energy certificates; additions to property, plant and equipment with a primary purpose of reducing carbon emissions; carbon tax sensitivity on impairment charge; useful economic lives of power generating assets; renewable PPAs accounted for as derivatives; close-down, restoration and environmental cost.

Anticipated financial effects

Underlying EBITDA is projected to increase by around 40–50% from the 2024 baseline to 2030 (based on long-run consensus prices, consolidated volume growth, and unit cost reductions) as a result of volume growth supported by the diversification of our portfolio. Aluminium demand is forecast to grow by ~1.2x by 2035, lithium by ~3.4x, copper by ~1.3x, and steel by ~1.1x. Our production outlook on a CuEq basis shows a 3% CAGR to 2030, supported by the addition of Simandou and our lithium assets at Arcadium and Rincon.

Annual penalties from carbon costs could potentially reach $0.3 billion by 2030 and $2.6 billion by 2040 without further emissions reductions. 7% of our operating costs ($3.1 billion) are attributable to fossil fuels.

Our updated capital expenditure forecast for decarbonisation is now $1–2 billion to 2030, a reduction from the previously issued range of $5–6 billion, including $0.6 billion in the period 2025–2027. In the medium term, we will invest up to $10 billion (in real terms) annually in sustaining, replacement and growth capital. Long-term PPAs are expected to underwrite up to $8.5 billion in competitive greenfield energy projects, subject to final approvals and successful delivery.

Relief and explanation for unquantified effects

Quantitative financial impacts have not been disclosed for the following CROs, with qualitative narrative provided instead:

• Energy transition commodity demand: As demand drivers (energy transition, macroeconomic conditions, supply availability, commodity prices) are interrelated, it is not possible to separately identify or quantify the financial impact of demand attributable to the energy transition from general market demand.
• Global technology development (opportunity): While these technologies are already informing strategic positioning, most remain in development or pilot stages and their short-term impact on competitiveness is still emerging, so has not yet been quantified.
• Social licence to operate and access orebodies: The impact is difficult to isolate, being inherently qualitative and dependent on factors such as stakeholder trust, community relationships and permitting processes, which cannot be consistently expressed in monetary or numerical terms.
• Physical risks: Given the variability of physical hazards, modelling approaches and inherent uncertainty in outcomes, we are unable to produce precise quantitative estimates of anticipated financial impacts under each scenario. Instead, we assess potential exposure and impact using our Value at Risk (VaR) analysis, supplemented with qualitative assessments.

Anticipated portfolio impacts derived from scenario analysis are subject to inherent uncertainty due to multiple interdependent estimates and assumptions. Our macroeconomic modelling incorporates a range of variables and, as a result, isolating and measuring the anticipated impact of specific CROs can be challenging.

Current financial effects

For each identified transition and physical risk, the report states 'Current financial impact: Not material' and 'Quantification methodology: We have not identified any material financial impacts in the current reporting period that are directly attributable to this risk' (applies to Transition risks 1-7, 9 in various forms).

Exception: Physical risk 1 (Flooding in the Cooper Basin) - Current financial impact: Santos’ flood related costs in 2025 were $21.9 million, related to flood preparations and response, well and facility re-instatement, road repair, logistics and operations support. An insurance claim related to these flood costs has been submitted by Santos. In 2025, an initial $4 million payment was received.

Transition risk 8 (Transition technologies not scalable) / risk 9 / opportunities 1 and 2: In 2025, Santos’ CTAP activities and associated capital expenditure was $136 million. Santos’ CTAP represents the combined financial impact across multiple climate-related risks and opportunities (cross-over with Transition risk 8, Transition risk 9, Transition opportunity 1 and Transition opportunity 2). It is not possible to reliably allocate Santos’ CTAP investments to individual climate-related risks and opportunities in a way that would be meaningful to users of this report. Santos’ CTAP capital expenditure represents actual costs incurred in the reporting period.

Transition risk 1 (Climate policy): A nominal short-term net SGM (Safeguard Mechanism) liability is estimated at approximately $24 million in 2026, based on a carbon price of $37.33 per tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent (tCO2e).

Anticipated financial effects

For most risks, 'Anticipated financial impact: Not quantifiable' with quantification methodology explaining significant uncertainty (e.g. variety of asset developments and jurisdictions, complexity of stakeholder priorities, uncertainty in future demand).

Exception - Transition risk 1 (Climate policy): the theoretical cost of Santos’ anticipated medium-term net SGM liability is estimated to range from approximately $21 million to $65 million per annum. This range reflects the inherent uncertainty in future carbon price assumptions. The upper end applies Santos’ 2030 carbon price assumption of $71.19 per tCO2e, consistent with the Commonwealth Government’s Cost Containment Measure. The lower end uses the average ACCU spot price for December 2025 of $23.44 per tCO2e.

Transition risk 7 (Reduced demand for products): 2025 Brent price sensitivity: ~$400 million in free cash flow from operations for every $10 increase in Brent oil prices.

Transition risk 8/9 and opportunities 1/2: Over the short to medium term, we anticipate $500 million to $1 billion could be invested in operational efficiency projects, other CCS and low carbon fuels hubs and nature-based projects with the potential to generate carbon credits, depending on working interest, customer demand and value accretion.

Significant judgements, estimates and assumptions (Section 1): The identification and assessment of climate-related risks and opportunities was considered using all reasonable and supportable information available without undue cost or effort. Where management has made significant judgements, estimates and assumptions this has been disclosed within the report. The estimation of anticipated financial effects is influenced by the assumptions and investments underpinning Santos’ long-term plans. We expect this information to evolve over time in line with Santos’ strategy. Where Santos has not been able to quantify the anticipated financial effect due to measurement uncertainty then an explanation is provided and qualitative information is provided about those financial effects, including identifying line items, totals and subtotals within the related financial statements that are likely to be affected, or have been affected, by that climate-related risk or opportunity.

Quantification approach: Anticipated financial impact is based on our five year plan and long-term plan where financial quantification can be measured with reasonable certainty. These plans form part of our corporate planning process and provide a reasonable basis for reporting anticipated financial impact. In contrast, the potential financial impact of climate scenarios is assessed and reported as part of our resilience testing. Where Santos has been unable to disclose quantitative information, the reasons for this are detailed and qualitative information provided where available. Where quantification is not separately identifiable we have provided quantitative information about the combined financial effects of that climate-related risk and opportunity with other climate-related risks and opportunities, unless the combined financial effects are considered not useful as measurement uncertainty is too high.

Current financial effects

The Group identified four climate-related risks and two climate-related opportunities reasonably expected to affect the Group's prospects. During the current reporting period there was no material impact associated with these risks or opportunities on the Group's financial position, financial performance or cash flows. Further, there is no significant risk of material adjustment to the carrying amount of assets or liabilities reported in the financial statements expected in the next 12 months.

In the current 2025 reporting period, the Group deployed $0.7 million of capital for the direct management of the climate-related risks, and $0.2 million of capital towards the implementation of the climate-related opportunities.

• Rainfall, hailstorms and flooding and Bushfire: did not have a material impact on the Group's financial position, financial performance or cash flows in 2025.
• Policy and regulatory change and Stakeholder expectations: there was no material impact on the Group's financial position, financial performance or cash flows in 2025.
• Enhance engagement with customers and communities: the current financial impact of EV charging infrastructure is aligned to the Group's car parking income which in the current year is limited to the trial phase; the opportunity is considered commercially sensitive.
• Support business partner transition to a low-carbon economy: there was no material impact to the Group's financial position, financial performance or cash flows in 2025 as a result of this opportunity.

There is no anticipated material adjustment to the 2026 financial results from any of these risks or opportunities based on current information.

Anticipated financial effects

Rainfall, hailstorms and flooding / Bushfire: Insurance policies are relied upon to assist in mitigating the potential financial impacts. Existing insurance policies provide varying levels of protection against significant property damage, business interruption (including loss of revenue) and liability claims. The cost of insurance specifically relating to these risks cannot be separately identified. It is assumed existing insurance coverage will be maintained across the short and medium time horizons; there is no indication insurance will become unavailable, though premiums could increase in the medium to long term due to a range of market influences. Current mitigation measures are expected to continue over the short and medium term at non-material cost; additional actions may be required at the most vulnerable destinations over the long term, with scale and cost dependent on future climate conditions. Increases in the severity of weather events could impact supply chain costs, including construction materials.

Policy and regulatory change: Current policy settings in Australia and New Zealand do not indicate regulatory changes affecting gas infrastructure over the short to medium term; this may evolve over the long term. Building codes (National Construction Code, NZ Building Code) are expected to be updated in 2028; if the historical trend of increasing sustainability requirements continues, future updates could result in higher building costs in the medium to long term. Australia has the Safeguard Mechanism and New Zealand has the Emissions Trading Scheme, but the Group is not currently impacted under either scheme; there is no indication a carbon pricing scheme will be introduced in the short to medium term, though this could result in higher energy and building material costs over the long term if introduced. The Australian National Waste Policy Action Plan 2024 established a national target to reduce organic waste by 50% by 2030; New South Wales requires compliance by July 2026, with other states possibly introducing mandates before 2030. Current mitigation measures are expected to continue over the short and medium term at non-material cost; additional actions may be required over the long term.

Stakeholder expectations: Ongoing engagement from investors, lenders and joint venture partners seeking information about climate-related initiatives and progress against the net zero target is expected over the short to medium term, and joint venture partners are expected to continue requesting environmental data. Current mitigation measures are expected to continue over all time horizons.

Enhance engagement with customers and communities: The EV trial assesses customer engagement and operational requirements without committing large-scale capital expenditure and provides insights into the long-term financial potential of EV infrastructure. The rate of EV adoption across Australia and New Zealand could influence financial opportunities over the long term, impacting charging revenue, customer dwell times and business partnerships within the EV ecosystem.

Support business partner transition to a low-carbon economy: The financial impact is subject to a high degree of uncertainty and may be influenced by the level of government action and incentives, the strategy and ambition of business partners, and the extent of future business partner participation. This is assessed as a medium to long term opportunity, with timing and scope of government assistance and business partner appetite remaining uncertain.

Financial categories impacted

Quantitative estimates have not been disclosed as the impact is not separately identifiable, is commercially sensitive, or is subject to a high level of measurement uncertainty. The financial statement line items that may be affected are:

• Financial performance/income statement: property revenue, property expenses, outgoings and other costs, property revaluations.
• Financial position/balance sheet: plant, equipment and intangible assets, investment properties.
• Cash flow statement: net cash inflow from operating activities and capital expenditure.

There is considerable uncertainty in estimating the potential financial impacts of climate-related physical events, policy and regulatory changes, stakeholder expectations, and the climate-related opportunities, arising from the difficulty in determining the frequency, severity, timing and scope of such events/opportunities across the short, medium and long-term time horizons.

For all four items the report states that there were no material financial effects in the current period and that no material adjustment to the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities is expected within the next annual reporting period (pp. 169–176).

Line items named for Risk 3: energy and utilities expense, cost of purchased goods and services, property, plant and equipment, and operating and investing cash flows (p. 174).

Given the inherent uncertainties arising from both external and internal factors, the Group has adopted a qualitative approach to disclosing financial effects, informed by scenario analysis that incorporates quantitative inputs. Translating these inputs into precise financial metrics, such as revenue, operating costs, asset values and cash flows, remains subject to a high degree of measurement uncertainty. This reflects not only the inherent variability of climate projections, policy developments and market dynamics, but also the interaction with strategic and operational decisions. The Group will continue to adapt its business model and investment priorities in response to emerging risks and opportunities as they evolve over time.

Current financial effects

CR1: The financial impact associated with the surrender of ACCUs for the 2025 reporting period is estimated as A$9.5 million.

CR2: For the 2025 reporting period, there have been no associated costs outside the costs of the ACCUs themselves, as the Group has successfully surrendered all required credits without needing to rely on the CCM or incur penalties.

CR3: For the current reporting period, no costs have been incurred, and no projects have been delayed due to delayed receipt of approvals. Furthermore, all environmental approval extension applications lodged for the upcoming reporting year are anticipated to proceed as scheduled.

Anticipated financial effects

CR1: For the year ending 31 December 2027, costs are projected to increase as reporting shifts to Method 2 for fugitive emissions, therefore likely increasing the number of ACCUs required for surrender. Additional costs are expected in the long-term horizon, with ACCU prices forecast to rise under both Scenario 1 and Scenario 2. Under Scenario 1, the maximum total cost of marginal abatement is projected to remain below $35.0 million in the long term, reflecting a more moderated regulatory pathway. Under Scenario 2, the expected marginal cost is projected to exceed $70.0 million in the long term. This risk may have a potential material impact to the Group in the long term, where rising carbon prices and reduced emissions baselines combine to amplify financial exposure. The financial implications may include sustained increases in ACCU liabilities, placing continued pressure on cash flows by diverting capital to compliance obligations, elevating operating costs and decreasing cash flows. In high-cost scenarios, this could require greater reliance on external financing, raising gearing levels and increasing the cost of capital which could be partially mitigated through the effective implementation of the Group's decarbonisation initiatives.

CR2: The CCM, introduced in the 2023–2024 reporting period, sets an indexed ceiling on ACCU prices, starting at A$75 per unit, and increasing annually by CPI plus 2%. This, combined with progressively reducing emissions baselines, is expected to drive up overall compliance costs over time. Under Scenario 1, where baselines tighten more aggressively, the Group may be required to purchase ACCUs at penalty prices, projected to rise to around A$394 per tCO₂-e, a substantial premium over traditional market prices of about A$61 per tCO₂-e. Under Scenario 2, reliance on the CCM limits potential long-term costs, with the CCM price projected to rise to around A$144 per tCO₂-e. Quantitative analysis indicates that the time horizon with the most significant exposure for this risk is the long-term. Increased surrender obligations would create recurring compliance outflows, diverting capital away from growth investments or operational improvements and placing increased pressure on cash flows. Higher ACCU purchase requirements or penalties will elevate operating costs and decrease cash flows.

CR3: The financial implications of deferred approvals include deferral of capital expenditure schedules and project revenue streams and reduced near to medium-term cash flows. Higher annualised costs associated with delays may compress margins and have the potential to reduce profitability, particularly in periods of strong demand. Extended delays may also affect the Group's financial position by creating imbalances in capital allocation, potentially leading to underutilised assets and higher carrying costs. Over time, repeated or prolonged delays have the potential to increase reliance on debt to bridge funding gaps, elevate gearing ratios, and place upward pressure on the cost of capital.

Accordingly, our disclosures focus on providing an analysis of how climate-related risks and opportunities may influence the Group's financial position, performance, and cash flows across the short, medium, and long-term. These disclosures are designed to provide our stakeholders with information on the direction and nature of potential financial impacts, while acknowledging the variables which impact the assessments.

Asset and business activity vulnerability table (per Section 5.2):

Current effects (pp. 192–194). For the four risks and the opportunity the report says no material financial effects were identified for the year ended 30 June 2026. Material financial effects are impacts on balance sheet, profit and loss or cash flow line items that exceed financial materiality as applied in the financial report. Current physical-risk effects are measured from insurance-related claims on weather-related events (p. 199).

Anticipated effects. Qualitative only. No material short-term effects are anticipated for the physical, delayed decarbonization and lower-carbon demand risks, and none at any horizon for regulation. Over the medium and long term, physical risk may bring higher insurance and operating costs, increased resilience-related capital expenditure and construction disruptions or project delays, which may affect cash flows and asset values (p. 192); delayed decarbonization may slow progress on targets and affect stakeholder confidence and access to capital, and lower-carbon demand may increase operating and development expenses and capital required (p. 193); failure to respond to regulatory developments may bring financial penalties, compliance costs and constraints on access to capital (p. 194); circularity may bring avoided waste costs and lower whole-of-life costs (p. 194).

Basis. Medium- and long-term effects are qualitative because of measurement uncertainty (pp. 192–194); quantified effects beyond 2030 are not disclosed (p. 200).

Current effects (pp. 26, 29, 32). FY26 natural hazard claims costs were $2,024 million (FY25: $1,355 million), 19.8% of total claims expenses and $254 million above the $1,770 million natural hazard allowance, within the insurance services expense line item. FY26 reinsurance premium was $40.2 million; its climate-related share cannot be separately identified. Transition growth is reflected in motor portfolios ($6.6 billion, 42.5% of Group GWP); $1,188 million was invested in lower-carbon impact investments.

Anticipated effects (pp. 26–29). The FY27 natural hazard allowance is $1,850 million. Relative to the FY26 net natural hazard allowance for weather-related perils, climate change is expected to raise net natural hazard costs by 3% (low warming) to 7% (high warming) around 2040 and by 3% to 11% around 2050, excluding inflation and unit growth. A five-year aggregate reinsurance cover ($800 million per annum, up to $2.4 billion in total) is expected to cap natural hazard costs at $1.85 billion in FY27 in approximately 90% of scenarios.

Not quantified. Claims capability and capacity: not separately identifiable (p. 28). Home insurance market intervention: high measurement uncertainty (p. 30). Disaster management: no material effect in FY26 or readjustment expected in FY27 (p. 31). Transition opportunities: reliable quantification not supported by available data (p. 32). Combined effects: quantitative information would not be useful at this time (p. 32).

Index (p. 215): Financial position, financial performance and cash flows, p. 198.

Climate-related financial impacts (p. 198), $m, Telstra Group including Digicel Pacific

FY25 is restated (footnote 11). The medium term uses a three-year rolling average and a 'climate uplift' factor (p. 197). Climate-linked spend is budgeted in financial plans, and additional spend is managed through reprioritization within existing budgets. The impacts are not significant to the FY26 financial statements and are not projected to be significant in the medium term; long-term cash flow impacts may exceed $75m on average per annum, but overall financial statement impacts are not projected to become significant. Climate is not considered an impairment indicator at this stage (Note 3.1).

Under the Base Case scenario, the Group assessed the potential effects of climate-related risks and opportunities on its future performance, including their current and anticipated impacts (taking into account existing mitigation measures) on its financial position, financial performance and cash flows. Unless otherwise stated, the current and anticipated impacts to financial position, performance and cash flows have been quantified and disclosed as ranges of the Group's 2025 Underlying EBITDA, with reference to the Group's Risk Management Framework. Underlying EBITDA is considered the most appropriate metric for assessing financial impacts given the nature of the Group's operations; it is also the primary metric used for internal management reporting and is linked to key financing covenants.

The identified climate-related risks and opportunities are not expected to result in an adjustment with impact of Moderate or above in 2026 to the carrying amount of assets and liabilities as at 31 December 2025 as reported in the Group's Consolidated Financial Statements.

Certain estimates of anticipated impacts on the Group's financial position, financial performance and cash flows involve a high degree of uncertainty, particularly over the medium to long term, especially where outcomes are heavily influenced by factors such as future policy developments, technology developments and patterns of severe weather events. Where this uncertainty limits the reliability or usefulness of quantitative disclosures, the Group provides qualitative explanations of the anticipated impacts.

Current financial effects

Disruption risk (Physical): The aggregate impact on the Group's EBITDA, cash flow and net assets from acute and chronic weather disruption in 2025 was Minor, mainly due to delays caused by severe weather events like Cyclone Alfred in March 2025.

Transition risk: The Group provides a range of services for customers in fossil-fuel-related industries. While the volume of work may naturally fluctuate over contract terms, the Group has not identified any current impact greater than Negligible on the Group's EBITDA, cash flow and net assets caused by climate transition risk in FY25.

Supply chain disruption: The impact on the Group's EBITDA, cash flow and net assets from climate-related supply chain disruption in 2025 was Negligible. The Group directly procures limited quantities of carbon-intensive products and typically manages price increases and delays through commercial arrangements.

Energy transition opportunity: In 2025, the Group expanded its work on energy transition projects, resulting in a Moderate EBITDA growth from energy and renewables services reported under the Infrastructure Services operating segment. On 1 July 2025, the Group acquired PowerNet Holding Company Pty Ltd (PowerNet) for cash consideration, net of cash acquired, of $18.8 million, resulting in recognition of goodwill of $11.6 million and intangible assets of $8.1 million.

Customer decarbonisation/adaptation opportunity: In 2025, the Group performed recovery work in response to weather events for clients across all sectors, realising a Minor improvement of the Group's EBITDA, cash flow and net assets from additional climate-related adaptation and disaster response work.

Anticipated financial effects

Disruption risk (Physical): Short term (2026–2028) – Minor impact annually on EBITDA, cash flow and net assets expected, with the risk remaining stable within existing commercial arrangements (Schedule of Rates or Cost Reimbursable profiles). Medium term (2028–2035) – Minor impact annually anticipated, with potential for risk transfer from asset owners to service providers considered in contract negotiations. Long term (2035–2050) – potential financial impacts may increase further, but the Group is unable to quantify its exposure or provide a useful range due to significant uncertainty in commercial terms (e.g. entitlement to cost and time relief due to extreme weather becoming normalised).

Transition risk: Short term (2026–2028) – Negligible impact annually anticipated given diversified customer base and industries, and the Group's climate transition plan being in step with expected policy/customer requirements. Medium term (2028–2035) – Minor impact annually anticipated as cumulative policy actions may reshape some markets; growth in renewables/energy infrastructure presents an offsetting opportunity. Long term (2035–2050) – unable to quantify to a useful range due to significant uncertainty; fossil-fuel-related services represent 8% of the Group's FY25 Underlying EBITDA and contribution is not anticipated to increase given growth in other service offerings.

Supply chain disruption: Short term (2026–2028) – Negligible impact annually anticipated given continuing commercial arrangements and stable climate policy. Medium term (2028–2035) – Negligible impact annually anticipated, as the Group is a services business with less reliance on procurement of major products/materials. Long term (2035–2050) – unable to quantify exposure or likely long-term financial impacts to a useful range due to uncertainties in the supply chain and future contract terms.

Energy transition opportunity: Short term (2026–2028) – Minor annual impact on EBITDA, net assets and cash flow expected, driven by growth in transmission/distribution and electrical generation maintenance addressable markets (Oxford Economics Australia CAGR estimates 4.9% and 11.3% FY25–FY29 respectively). Medium term (2028–2035) – Minor annual impact expected, in line with the 2035 Australian emissions reduction target and associated energy/renewable demand. Long term (2035–2050) – could become a major growth driver but the Group was unable to quantify financial impacts due to uncertainty of contract values, delivery model, long-term government policy and technological developments.

Customer decarbonisation/adaptation opportunity: Short term (2026–2028) – continues to expect Minor impacts on EBITDA, cash flow and net assets from proactive resilience and recovery work. Medium term (2028–2035) – continues to expect Minor impact from proactive adaptation and reactive recovery services. Long term (2035–2050) – could be a major growth driver but the Group was unable to quantify financial impacts due to uncertainty regarding timing, frequency and severity of events, and potential change in commercial models on recovery services.

Current financial effects

The Group incurred net compliance costs under the SGM in FY2025 amounting to $3.5 million. The Geelong Refinery currently holds Trade-Exposed Baseline-Adjusted (TEBA) status under the SGM, which reduced our cost exposure in 2025. While the current financial impact of the SGM is not considered material to the Group's financial statements, it is the risk of increasingly demanding climate-related regulations and policies (and the resulting rise in compliance costs) in addition to the current SGM regulations that is regarded as a material anticipated risk for the Group.

In 2025 the Company continued to see resilience in the Australian fuel market. There continues to be growth in fuel usage despite signs of increased uptake of low-carbon liquid fuels (LCLFs) and EVs. The Australian fuel pool grew from 58.1 billion litres in 2024 to 58.9 billion litres in 2025. The total number of registered passenger vehicles in Australia has increased from 15.6 million vehicles in 2024 to 15.99 million vehicles in 2025. Petrol and diesel vehicles remain at 94% of the market share, with the remaining made up of hybrids (4%) and EVs (2%). This risk did not have a material impact on the Group's financial position, performance and cash flows in 2025.

The opportunity presented by LCLFs remains in its early stages, with current investment limited in scale and financial contributions still minor, $2.2 million in 2025. Our supply, together with volumes identified through publicly available information, represented less than 0.05% of the total fuel market in Australia in 2025.

Anticipated financial effects

The Federal Government is scheduled to review the SGM in FY2026–27, creating uncertainty regarding potential changes to the scheme. The financial implications of the future SGM and how these compliance costs will impact the Group's income statement, balance sheet and cash flows in the future is currently unknown. Any estimates for future SGM cost consider three major factors – the eligibility of the Group's TEBA status, the forecast increases to future ACCU prices, and the impact of any future direct abatement initiatives at the refinery. The level of measurement uncertainty involved in estimating the effects of these factors on our cost of SGM compliance is so high that the resulting quantitative information would not be useful. In addition, the cost to the Group of any future climate policy is unknown, and therefore currently unable to be quantified. The risk of heightened climate-related regulatory requirements is expected to lead to increases in our compliance costs in the medium to long term, as well as potentially large capital expenditures to reduce emissions which may not be recoverable from the market. In the medium to long term, the level of capital investment capable of generating positive returns is expected to decline.

While the current financial impact of the decline in demand for fuel is not currently considered material, it is the risk of increasing fuel displacement in the medium to long term that is regarded as a potential material risk for the Group. With the average age of passenger vehicles at over 11 years, it will take time for the combined effects of improved fuel efficiency and EVs to materially impact the gasoline pool. While there remains a level of measurement uncertainty involved in quantifying the financial impacts of this risk in the medium to long term, analysis suggests that these trends will have a material impact on the Group's revenue from hydrocarbon fuel sales, future product mix, infrastructure investment, and asset planning decisions over the medium to long term. As a result of these uncertainties and the interdependencies between fuel demand and broader economic drivers, it is not currently possible to quantify a range that reliably supports the anticipated financial impacts of this transition risk.

With existing investments in the processing, distribution and sale of LCLFs, the Group is well positioned to benefit from this opportunity as supporting infrastructure continues to mature. Future government policy settings and evolving customer demand will play a key role in shaping the growth trajectory of LCLFs. Given the current uncertainty in both areas, the potential future financial impact of this opportunity cannot yet be reliably quantified. At this stage, we are unable to reliably estimate capital expenditure for anticipated investments in supply chains or LCLF manufacturing. Given the current uncertainty in market uptake, policy settings, and funding pathways, capital requirements cannot yet be quantified with reasonable accuracy.

The financial impact of future weather events at the Geelong Refinery is difficult to estimate due to uncertainty in climate projections beyond 2030 and the variability of key factors such as prevailing refining margins, lost throughput during shutdowns, and the duration and timing of the interruption. These factors can fluctuate significantly, limiting the ability to forecast future financial impacts with any certainty. As a result, no sustained or cumulative deterioration in earnings, balance-sheet values or cash-flow forecasts has been identified in relation to physical climate risks.

Approach (pp. 62–63, 65–73). The Group assessed current and anticipated effects of CRROs on its financial position, performance and cash flows, screening at divisional level against a threshold of approximately 5% of Group profit before tax. It has not identified any significant risk of a material adjustment within the next annual reporting period to carrying amounts of assets and liabilities arising from CRROs. Each CRRO table names the income statement, balance sheet and cash flow statement lines that may be affected.

Combined effects (p. 63). Where combined quantitative information is not given, the Group determined combined effects are not separately identifiable or too uncertain to be useful.

Quantified (pages 69, 72). Policy risk: FY25 Safeguard Mechanism liability of $7m on an equity basis; FY26 liability estimated at $9m (based on an ACCU price of $40); medium-term liability estimated at $24m to $40m per annum. Access to capital: the FY26 refinance reduced annual interest expense by $50m to $55m per annum, lowered cost of debt to 6.3% from 9.5% and increased average term to maturity to 5.8 years from 2.5 years.

Not quantified (pages 69–74). Long-term Safeguard Mechanism effects (uncertainty around legislative outcomes); project approvals (uncertainty; projects have not achieved final investment decision); reduced demand in the medium and long term (not separately identifiable from other price drivers; not expected to be material); long-term cost of capital (measurement uncertainty); physical risks (mitigation costs not separately identifiable; long-term impacts immaterial); the opportunity (climate-related benefits not separately identifiable).

Current effects and carrying values (pages 70, 83). FY26 capital expenditure of $47m related to the Vickery, Winchester South, Narrabri Stage 3 and Maules Creek Continuation projects; the portion attributable to climate-related drivers cannot be separately identified. The identified risks are not expected to result in a material adjustment to carrying values of assets and liabilities within the next annual reporting period (page 83).

Each item (names shortened) carries three statements, on the current year, carrying amounts and the short, medium and long term (pp. 214–216).

Modeling of the potential financial effects of the risks across the low (1.5°C) and high (>3°C) emissions scenarios led WiseTech to conclude that all fall below its materiality threshold of 5% variance to baseline financial forecasts (p. 214). For the opportunity, combined quantitative information would not be possible or decision useful (p. 216). WiseTech funds all software development out of operating cash flow (p. 216).

Current financial effects

For the year ended 31 December 2025, there were no material quantifiable financial impacts to the financial performance, position and cash flow arising from these climate-related risks and opportunities. In addition, Woodside did not identify any material adjustments and there were no requirements to adjust resourcing. The cost of responding to these material climate-related risks and opportunities are inherently built into our current business processes and systems, resourcing and work plans and budgets.

Woodside took a decision to exit the H2OK Project during 2025 due to ongoing challenges facing the lower-carbon hydrogen industry, including cost escalation and lower than anticipated hydrogen demand. Woodside recognised an impairment loss of $143 million pre-tax ($113 million post-tax) in the profit and loss statement relating to the H2OK Project.

Anticipated financial effects

Quantification is defined as Low = US$0–US$195 million; Moderate = US$195 million–US$1 billion; High = More than US$1 billion. Woodside identified and subsequently quantified several CRROs within the High category, at or over US$1 billion. An upper limit on the High range is not provided because the level of measurement uncertainty involved in estimating such a limit is so high that the information would not be useful. Quantification is an aggregate amount with the potential to occur across the time horizon identified, i.e. not an annually reoccurring amount, and is presented on a mitigated basis.

Extreme weather intensification: Quantification basis assessed impact on financial performance from an increase in extreme heat days upon Australian operations in the Pilbara region of WA, assessed as "Moderate", over the long-term.

Reputation: The level of measurement uncertainty was sufficiently high such that the resulting quantitative information would not be useful. No quantification has been calculated.

Climate litigation: Misleading or deceptive conduct claims in the short and medium term were quantified in the "low" range, based on an estimate of external legal costs of defending one to two proceedings in any given year. For challenges to regulatory approvals which may result in project delays, quantified based on a hypothetical project delay of up to 12 months, contemplating an impact on financial position from a delay of a single major project, assessed as being in the "high" category in the medium and long-term. Due to lack of precedent in the long-term for climate attribution cases, no quantification has been provided.

Higher than expected cost to reduce emissions at operations: Quantified by applying a 50% premium to Woodside's current carbon cost assumptions for emissions currently covered by the Australian SGM, with impact to the financial position in the "high" category in the long-term.

Lower than expected product demand: Quantified by assessing the impact to financial position (net asset carrying values) using Woodside's lowest long-term price assumption on a risk-weighted basis; potential financial impact in the long term assessed as "high".

Increased demand for LNG (opportunity): Quantified by assessing potential increase to financial performance (revenue) should Woodside maintain its current market share of a larger total addressable market for LNG emerging from 2035 to 2050; assessed as "moderate" to "high" in the medium to long-term.

Increased demand for new energy products and lower-carbon services (opportunity): Quantified through the potential impact to financial position (net present value of current equity in Australian CCS projects), and the potential for additional projects in response to policy conditions; quantified as "moderate" in the long-term.

Lower than expected decarbonisation costs (opportunity): Quantified by applying a 50% discount to current carbon cost assumptions for emissions currently covered by the Australian SGM, with impact potentially rising into the "high" category in the long-term.

Woodside modelled a hypothetical average annual adjusted free cash flow (FCF) for its portfolio of producing assets and sanctioned projects in five-year increments from 2026 to 2040 under IEA NZE, S&P 1.5, IEA STEPS and IEA CPS scenarios:

If the 1.5°C scenarios used in this analysis were to eventuate, management action would be required to maintain positive cashflow. These management actions may include acquisitions, divestments, production curtailment or cost reduction. It is not possible to model such actions in sufficient detail to present reliable quantitative data.

In determining the financial impact of each individual CRRO, financial information that is not publicly available and is considered by Woodside to be commercially sensitive, such that disclosure of the information would prejudice the economic benefits from the CRRO, was excluded from the quantification.

Current effects. In F26, acute weather events caused 104 days of disruption to operations and damage to stores, with an identified earnings impact of $9 million (three-year average $21 million) (p. 61). Disruption to food production was limited and not financially material (p. 62). There is no material financial impact from the economic cost of carbon (p. 63), and the cost of compliance with AASB and other climate regulations is not material (p. 64).

Anticipated effects (pp. 60–63). Shown as ranges of impact on annual sales in basis points (bps): Low <20 bps, Moderate 20–150 bps, High >150 bps. For F26, one basis point (0.01% of annual sales) is approximately $7 million. Reference years are 2030, 2040 and 2050. No cost pass-through assumptions are applied.

The regulation risk and both opportunities are not expected to have a material financial impact (pp. 64–65).

Investment and funding (p. 74). $111 million invested in F26 on initiatives driving the overall strategy and progress toward Scope 1 and 2 targets; $100 million to $120 million a year (capex and opex) from F27 to F30, funded from operational cash flows and debt facilities.

Approach (p. 41). Current effects are those recognized in the FY2026 consolidated financial statements. The report says CRROs are not expected to result in a material adjustment to the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities within the next annual reporting period. Anticipated effects are assessed against the internal business plan (base case), with sensitivities under the 1.5°C and >3°C scenarios given for each CRRO, and are expressed as ranges, mainly as changes in aggregated revenue. EBITA, cash flow and net assets are expected to change in proportion to revenue. The report says quantitative disclosures focus on the short to medium term, with longer-term impacts described qualitatively only. Impact ratings: Insignificant below $10m; Minor $10m to $100m; Moderate $100m to $500m; Major $500m to $2b; Critical $2b to $5b.

Current financial effects

In 2025, the value of our direct economic contribution was $5.2 billion ($5.5 billion in 2024). This reduction is due to lower coal prices impacting revenues, royalties and tax payments. Overall contribution to state and federal government revenues in 2025 decreased by 30% compared to 2024, totalling $0.9 billion.

Yancoal has surrendered sufficient ACCUs to meet its compliance obligations under the Safeguard Mechanism for FY25. In FY25, with the exception of Moolarben, all Yancoal-managed Safeguard facilities exceeded their baselines, resulting in total exceedances of: Ashton: 488,761 tCO2-e; Premier: 6,030 tCO2-e; Warkworth: 301,673 tCO2-e; Yarrabee: 40,317 tCO2-e. Moolarben generated 39,794 SMCs, which may be used to offset future emissions obligations or sold to other Safeguard entities.

Anticipated financial effects

Our approach to reserves valuation and capital expenditures reflects a commitment to balancing economic opportunity with the evolving dynamics of global markets and climate policy. Coal price trends, demand fluctuations and climate-related regulations influence our strategies for exploration, development and asset planning.

During 2025, we enhanced this process through the use of a carbon-pricing analytics platform, which provides market data and forward-looking insights to support Life of Mine planning and internal project evaluation. This information is considered alongside scenario-based price projections, including those that incorporate a carbon price.

Carbon market data and forward-looking pricing insights continue to inform long-term planning. In 2025, Yancoal's adopted carbon price prediction was informed by data from a leading carbon pricing platform and considered within Life-of-Mine Planning models. This information, including current ACCU market prices, forward curves, and high/mid/low pricing scenarios, supported carbon cost considerations and was applied in project and cost evaluation processes.

We also estimate the GHG emissions embedded in our proven coal reserves for internal evaluation, recognising the environmental context and its implications for long-term resource management.