Risk Factors Dashboard

Item 1A. Risk Factors herein. These risks include, but are not limited to, the following:

Risks Related to Our Digital Asset Trading Strategy and Cryptocurrencies

Risks Related to Our Use of Derivatives on BERA

Risks Related to Our Business and Industry

Risks Related to Our Organizational Structure

●

The Tax Receivable Agreement (the “TRA”) may require us to make cash payments to the members of the Operating Company in respect of certain tax benefits to which we may become entitled.

Risks Related to Ownership of Our Class A Common Stock

PART I

ITEM 1. BUSINESS

Overview

Founded in 2005, Greenlane is a public company whose primary strategic focus is a digital asset treasury strategy centered on BERA. We also continue to operate a reduced-scale wholesale and distribution business through an asset-light drop-ship model.

In October 2025, we undertook a substantial strategic transition from a traditional wholesale and distribution operating model to a digital asset treasury strategy centered on BERA, the native digital asset of the layer-1 blockchain protocol known as Berachain (“Berachain”). While we continue to operate a scaled-down wholesale / distribution business, our primary capital allocation focus has shifted to the acquisition, staking, validator participation and strategic deployment of digital assets. We are a Berachain ecosystem participant focused on supporting the development and operation of blockchain-based infrastructure, including assets and applications built on Berachain. We engage in network staking, validator participation, liquidity provisioning, and strategic initiatives intended to contribute to the long-term sustainability of decentralized protocols within its portfolio.

Our BERA Treasury Strategy

Adoption of a BERA Treasury Policy

In October 2025, we adopted a treasury policy (the “Treasury Policy”) under which a significant portion of treasury assets may be on the balance sheet is allocated to digital assets, of which BERA is currently the principal digital asset holding. In October 2025, our Board of Directors (the “Board”) created a Digital Assets Committee to oversee our Treasury Policy.

In addition to operating a reduced-scale legacy wholesale / distribution business through an asset-light drop-ship model, our management has focused its resources in accordance with the Treasury Policy and a significant portion of the balance sheet has been allocated to holding BERA in our digital asset treasury.

Currently, BERA is our principal digital asset holding under our Treasury Policy. As a result, our assets are highly concentrated in a single digital asset. Adverse developments specific to BERA, its protocol, or its ecosystem could have a disproportionate impact on our financial condition and results of operations. To mitigate price risk, we may from time to time hedge our BERA exposure in whole or in part using a combination of call options, put options, total return swaps, futures, or other derivative instruments executed through regulated or institutional-grade counterparties. However, there can be no assurance that such hedging strategies will be available at favorable terms, executed without market impact, or sufficient to offset adverse price movements in BERA.

Our Treasury Policy is intended to support treasury management, liquidity, and capital allocation through the following:

Berachain and the Berachain Ecosystem

Berachain is a decentralized, open-source, EVM-compatible layer-1 blockchain engineered for high throughput, low latency, and full compatibility with Ethereum tooling, smart contracts, and infrastructure. This design enables seamless porting of Ethereum decentralized applications (“dApps”) and allows Berachain to adopt major Ethereum upgrades with minimal friction, providing developers immediate access to a growing, high-performance alternative network.

Berachain utilizes a novel proof of liquidity consensus mechanism (“PoL”) that integrates network security with active liquidity provisioning. The network revolves around three core participant groups:

The PoL consensus model utilizes a dual-token model, each as described below:

	●	BERA is the native gas and staking token on the Berachain protocol. It is used to pay transaction fees and execute smart contracts. Validators stake BERA to participate in the PoL consensus mechanism, with the top 69 validators holding the highest staked amount of BERA forming the set of active validators eligible to earn block rewards.
	●	BGT is a non-transferable token on the Berachain protocol. It is emitted only to validators as part of block rewards and is earned solely through on-chain participation in PoL. Validators must stake BGT to specific dApps’ reward vaults in order to direct the allocation of future BGT emissions by the Berachain protocol. A dApp reward vault that receives delegated BGT may distribute that BGT to users in exchange for predefined actions, such as providing liquidity, executing trades, or interacting with protocol features. Any holder of BGT may burn it on a 1:1 basis to mint an equivalent amount of BERA.

Using these two tokens, PoL is designed to create a network incentive flywheel whereby validators stake BERA to secure the blockchain and earn BGT through block production, then stake or delegate BGT to dApps to direct future emissions. dApps in turn award BGT to users for liquidity provisioning or protocol usage, and users can burn BGT 1:1 for BERA.

BERA holders may stake their BERA tokens to participate in the PoL consensus mechanism. By staking BERA, participants contribute to network security, and earn yield from PoL incentive redirections, thereby reinforcing the economic foundation of the Berachain network.

Thousands of digital assets have been developed since the inception of Bitcoin, which is currently the most developed digital asset because of the length of time it has been in existence, the investment in the infrastructure that supports it, and the network of individuals and entities that are using Bitcoin in transactions. While BERA has enjoyed some success in its limited history, the aggregate value of outstanding BERA is much smaller than that of Bitcoin and many other digital assets and may be further eclipsed by the more rapid development of other digital assets. We operate in a competitive environment and compete against other companies and other entities with similar strategies, including companies with significant holdings in other digital assets.

Custody of BERA

We currently intend to self-custody our BERA, utilizing secure multi-party computational (“MPC”) wallets offered by Fireblocks, an institutional digital assets platform that allows users the ability to build custody workflows with embedded maker/checker steps, enforceable trade limits, and recovery capabilities. In light of the significant amount of BERA tokens we intend to accumulate, we expect to continually evaluate and implement self-custody best practices as well as, if deemed desirable, third-party digital asset custody solutions.

On-chain Activities

We may increase our BERA position over time through purchases, staking, validator activities, and other permitted treasury activities. Under our Treasury Policy, a portion of our BERA may be allocated to select DeFi protocols, subject to legal, compliance, and control requirements. We may also delegate a portion of our BERA to Berachain’s native staking protocol, through which we may earn rewards that can be used for general corporate purposes. Further, we may from time to time operate one or more validators to help secure the network. As a validator, we will be entitled to (1) earn gas fees and priority fees; (2) collect incentives provided by dApp and protocol developers for directing BGT rewards to their respective rewards vaults; and (3) receive a base block reward anytime we successfully propose a block.

Regulations

BERA and other digital assets are relatively novel and the application of state and federal securities laws, taxes and other laws and regulations to digital assets is unclear in certain respects. Depending on the regulatory characterization of BERA, the markets for cryptocurrency in general, and our activities in particular, our business and our BERA acquisition strategy may be subject to regulation by one or more regulators in the United States and globally. The U.S. federal government, states, regulatory agencies, and foreign countries may also enact new laws and regulations, or pursue regulatory, legislative, enforcement or judicial actions related to digital assets. For example, the U.S. executive branch, the SEC, the European Union’s Markets in Crypto Assets Regulation, among others, have been active in recent years, and in the U.K., the Financial Services and Markets Act 2023, or FSMA 2023, became law. Moreover, the regulatory status of digital asset treasury companies like us is currently uncertain. We will continue to monitor laws and regulations related to digital assets to determine any compliance changes that we need to make. Ongoing and future regulatory actions may alter, to a materially adverse extent, the nature of digital assets markets, the participation of industry participants, including service providers and financial institutions in these markets, and our ability to pursue our BERA strategy in line with our Treasury Policy.

Governments around the world have reacted differently to digital assets; certain governments have deemed them illegal, and others have allowed their use and trade without restriction, while in some jurisdictions, such as the U.S., digital assets are subject to overlapping, uncertain and evolving regulatory requirements. For example, within the past few years:

As digital assets have grown in both popularity and market size, there has been increasing focus on the operations of digital asset networks, digital asset users and digital asset exchanges, with particular focus on the extent to which digital assets can be used to launder the proceeds of illegal activities, fund criminal or terrorist activities, or circumvent sanctions regimes, including those sanctions imposed in response to the ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine. Many U.S. state, federal and international agencies have issued consumer advisories regarding the risks posed by digital assets to investors. In addition, federal and state agencies, and other countries have issued rules or guidance regarding the treatment of digital asset transactions and requirements for businesses engaged in activities related to digital assets. If we are found to have purchased or sold any of our BERA to or from bad actors that have used BERA to launder money or persons subject to sanctions, we may be subject to regulatory proceedings and any further transactions or dealings in BERA by us may be restricted or prohibited.

The CFTC takes the position that some digital assets fall within the definition of a “commodity” under the Commodities Exchange Act of 1936, as amended (the “CEA”). Under the CEA, the CFTC has broad enforcement authority to police market manipulation and fraud in spot digital assets markets in which we may transact. Beyond instances of fraud or manipulation, currently, the CFTC generally does not oversee cash or spot market exchanges or transactions involving digital asset commodities that do not utilize margin, leverage, or financing.

However, the U.S. Congress is contemplating multiple bills related to digital assets and the digital assets market, including by specifying the regulatory oversight authority for the applicable regulators and defining key concepts related to digital assets. In particular, the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act of 2025 (“Clarity Act”), previously passed by the U.S. House of Representatives, is expected to, if promulgated into law, define a digital asset that is intrinsically linked to and derives value from use in a blockchain system as a “digital commodity”, and provide for certain exclusions or exemptions for digital commodities from being treated or regulated as a “security.” Under the CLARITY Act, the CFTC will have primary regulatory oversight authority over spot digital commodities. Similarly, the Responsible Financial Innovation Act currently under discussions in the U.S. Senate would give the CFTC jurisdiction over any agreement, contract or transaction involving certain qualifying digital assets. Neither the CLARITY Act nor the Responsible Financial Innovation Act have been passed or signed into law, and will require further rules to be promulgated to implement. In addition, CFTC regulations and CFTC oversight and enforcement authority continue to apply with respect to futures, swaps, other derivative products and certain retail leveraged transactions involving digital assets.

On July 18, 2025, the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins Act of 2025 (“GENIUS Act”) was enacted, establishing a federal regulatory framework for payment stablecoins. The GENIUS Act will become effective on July 18, 2028. The GENUIS Act prohibits the issuance or use of payment stablecoins unless the issuer obtains a qualifying license and complies with a range of regulatory requirements, including reserve backing with liquid assets, redemption rights, governance standards, and operational transparency. The GENIUS Act also restricts the payment of interest on stablecoins and imposes oversight on both bank and nonbank issuers. The enactment of the GENIUS Act, or the removal or migration of prominent stablecoins from the BERA network, could reduce the willingness of market participants to engage in digital asset transactions that rely on stablecoins, diminish liquidity in the BERA market, and adversely affect the price of BERA. Any such developments could, in turn, materially and adversely impact our value.

Our activities involving BERA and other digital assets may fall within the jurisdiction of more than one financial regulator and various courts and such laws and regulations are rapidly evolving and increasing in scope.

Digital asset treasury strategy and BERA treasury policy

On October 23, 2025, the Board approved a treasury policy that designates BERA, the native digital asset of the Berachain network, as the principal digital asset within our treasury strategy. The Board formed a Digital Assets Committee, chaired by Bruce Linton and including director Billy Levy, to oversee this policy, and appointed Benjamin Isenberg as Chief Investment Officer to manage the BERA strategy and related controls. Our asset treasury strategy consists of acquiring, holding, and managing exposure to BERA as a primary treasury reserve asset.

In connection with the October 2025 PIPE transaction, we agreed to certain contractual transfer restrictions on a portion of its BERA holdings. As of December 31, 2025, while these contractual provisions were in place, no operational lockup mechanism had been implemented, and we retained the ability to utilize such BERA, including for staking activities. An operational lockup mechanism was implemented in mid-February 2026, with restrictions scheduled to expire on April 23, 2026. Management concluded that, as of December 31, 2025, these contractual provisions did not impact the fair value measurement or classification of the Company’s BERA holdings.

In addition, we hold U.S. dollar-denominated stablecoins classified as cash equivalents and used for liquidity management and working capital purposes. We may deploy BERA into validator infrastructure, staking arrangements, or other ecosystem activities, subject to governance approval, risk management protocols, and market conditions. We may acquire and hold BERA as a primary digital asset as part of the treasury strategy, subject to liquidity needs, market conditions, and Board-approved risk parameters; near-term plans do not include allocating treasury assets to other digital assets, which increases concentration risk.

Governance and controls include a two-tier custody model (cold reserve with a small operational wallet), policy-based approvals with two-person release, allowlists, limits, recovery procedures, and expanded reporting aligned to public-company controls. The Audit Committee oversees related-party considerations and reviews policy compliance. The Digital Assets Committee charter authorizes, among other things: (i) review and approval of digital-asset strategy (including staking, validator, and limited decentralized-finance participation); (ii) monitoring of market and protocol developments; (iii) evaluation of partnerships and protocol changes; (iv) review of related-party matters; (v) oversight of internal controls and reporting for digital assets; (vi) risk oversight for market volatility, cybersecurity, and compliance; (vii) approval of wallet-access, segregation-of-duties, and operational thresholds; and (viii) validation of valuation methods and fair-value classifications.

To manage treasury risk, we may selectively use hedging instruments such as options, swaps, or futures with institutional-grade counterparties, subject to availability and cost. We may engage in on-chain activities in a controlled manner, including staking, limited validator operations, and measured decentralized finance participation, subject to legal, compliance, and control requirements.

Beginning in the fourth quarter of 2025, in-scope crypto assets are measured at fair value with changes recognized in earnings under Accounting Standards Update 2023-08. Fair value measurement follows Accounting Standards Codification Topic 820, including principal-market determinations, pricing controls, and fair-value hierarchy disclosures. These requirements may introduce earnings volatility.

A more detailed description of risks related to pricing volatility, custody, valuation, and regulation appears in Part II, Item 1A “Risk Factors.” Additional information about post-quarter activity and policy governance is provided in Note 14, “Subsequent Events,” and in our Current Report on Form 8-K filed October 20, 2025.

Legacy Business Overview and Strategic Transition

Historically, we operated a wholesale and distribution platform focused on the sale of premium accessories, vape devices, and related lifestyle products through a combination of warehouse-based fulfillment and direct-to-consumer channels.

During fiscal year 2025, we materially reduced this legacy operating footprint, substantially exited warehouse inventory as of December 31, 2025, and transitioned the remaining commerce business to an asset-light, drop-ship model. We exited our warehouse operations by the end of February 2026 and reduced headcount associated with legacy operations through March 2026. As a result, the wholesale and distribution segment continues to operate at a significantly reduced scale and is no longer the primary driver of our financial performance.

In the fourth quarter of 2025, we completed a private investment in public equity (“PIPE”) financing with digital asset-focused investors and deployed the proceeds into digital assets, including BERA and U.S. dollar-denominated stablecoins.

Accordingly, our business and capital allocation strategy is focused on a digital asset treasury model focused on acquisition, staking, validator participation, and strategic deployment of digital assets.

As of December 31, 2025, a substantial majority of our assets consisted of digital assets and cash equivalents, including U.S. dollar-denominated stablecoins. Our financial condition, liquidity, and results of operations are therefore significantly influenced by digital asset market conditions and fair value remeasurement.

Our financial results primarily reflect digital asset-related activities, with legacy wholesale and distribution operations representing a reduced and non-core component of the business.

Restructuring Activities

We executed a series of restructuring initiatives during 2024 and 2025 in connection with our transition away from a warehouse-based distribution model and ultimately toward a digital asset treasury strategy. These actions were focused on eliminating working capital intensity, reducing fixed costs, and repositioning the business.

Our key initiatives include:

We believe these actions have significantly reduced operating costs, eliminated working capital requirements associated with inventory, and repositioned the Company to execute on our digital asset treasury strategy.

During 2024 and 2025, we received capital from various sources that supported the restructuring of legacy operations and the establishment of its digital asset treasury strategy.

Fiscal year 2025 reflects a substantial strategic transition. As a result, comparisons to prior periods are affected by the reduction of legacy warehouse and inventory activity, the monetization and write-off of inventory, the reserve of certain legacy receivables, and the introduction of fair value accounting for digital assets.

Organization

Greenlane Holdings, Inc. (“Greenlane” and, collectively with the Operating Company (as defined below) and its consolidated subsidiaries, the “Company”, “we”, “us”, and “our”) was formed as a Delaware corporation on May 2, 2018. We are a holding company that was formed for the purpose of completing an underwritten initial public offering (“IPO”) of shares of our Class A common stock, $0.01 par value per share (“Class A common stock”), in order to carry on the business of Greenlane Holdings, LLC (the “Operating Company”). (“Greenlane” and, collectively with the Operating Company (as defined below) and its consolidated subsidiaries, the “Company”, “we”, “us” and “our”) was formed as a Delaware corporation on May 2, 2018. We are a holding company that was formed for the purpose of completing an underwritten initial public offering (“IPO”) of shares of our Class A common stock on April 23, 2019 and other related transactions in order to carry on the business of Greenlane Holdings, LLC (the “Operating Company”). The Operating Company was organized under the laws of the state of Delaware on September 1, 2015, and is based in Boca Raton, Florida. Refer to “Note 1—Business Operations and Organization” within Item 8 for further information on the Company’s organization and the IPO and related transactions. We are the sole manager of the Operating Company and we own a 100% interest in the Operating Company. We are the sole manager of the Operating Company and, as of December 31, 2023, owned a 100% interest in the Operating Company.

Our Operating Priorities

Our near-term operating priorities are:

The Company does not currently operate a warehouse-based wholesale model and no longer maintains material inventory. Legacy commerce activities are managed for efficiency, customer continuity, and liquidity rather than growth.

The Company’s remaining legacy commerce operations are conducted primarily through vapor.com and related channels using a drop-ship model. Third-party partners handle inventory, fulfillment, and shipping, while the Company retains control over customer relationships, digital marketing, and certain sales activities. This business is non-core and significantly smaller than in prior periods.

In 2025, the Company completed capital raises that supported both the restructuring of legacy operations and the establishment of its digital asset treasury strategy. Additional information regarding these financings is included in Item 7 and the notes to the consolidated financial statements.

On February 19, 2025, we consummated a private placement (the “Private Placement”) pursuant to a securities purchase agreement (“Purchase Agreement”) with institutional investors (the “Purchasers”) for the purchase and sale of approximately $25.0 million of shares of the Company’s Class A common stock (the “Common Stock”) and investor warrants at a price of $892.50 per Common Unit. The entire transaction was priced at the market under Nasdaq rules. The offering consisted of the sale of Common Units (or Pre-Funded Units), each consisting of (i) one (1) share of Common Stock or one (1) Pre-Funded Warrant, (ii) one (1) Series A PIPE Common Warrant to purchase one (1) share of Common Stock per warrant at an exercise price of $2,231.25 (the “Series A Warrant”) and (iii) one (1) Series B PIPE Common Warrant to purchase one (1) share of Common Stock per warrant at an exercise price of $2,231.25 (the “Series B Warrant” and together with the Series A Warrant, the “Warrants”). The offering consisted of the sale of Common Units (or Pre-Funded Units), each consisting of (i) one (1) share of Common Stock or one (1) Pre-Funded Warrant, (ii) one (1) Series A PIPE Common Warrant to purchase one (1) share of Common Stock per warrant at an exercise price of $1.4875 (the “Series A Warrant”) and (iii) one (1) Series B PIPE Common Warrant to purchase one (1) share of Common Stock per warrant at an exercise price of $2.975 (the “Series B Warrant” and together with the Series A Warrant, the “Warrants”).

The initial exercise price of each Series A Warrant is $2,231.25 per share of Common Stock. The Series A Warrants are exercisable following stockholder approval and expire five (5) years thereafter. The number of securities issuable under the Series A Warrant is subject to adjustment as described in more detail in the Series A Warrant. The initial exercise price of each Series B Warrant is $2,231.25 per share of Common Stock or pursuant to an alternative cashless exercise option. The Series B Warrants are exercisable following stockholder approval and expire two and one-half (2.5) years thereafter. The number of securities issuable under the Series B Warrant is subject to adjustment as described in the Series B Warrant.

In connection with the Private Placement, we entered into a registration rights agreement with the Purchasers on February 18, 2025 (the “Registration Rights Agreement”), pursuant to which we are required to file a registration statement covering the resale of the Securities within 30 calendar days of the closing of the offering.

On October 20, 2025, we also entered into subscription agreements (the “Cryptocurrency Subscription Agreements”) with certain accredited investors (the “Cryptocurrency Subscribers”) pursuant to which the Company agreed to sell and issue to the Cryptocurrency Subscribers in a private placement offering (the “Cryptocurrency Offering”) pre-funded warrants (the “Cryptocurrency Pre-Funded Warrants”) to purchase 15,504,902 shares of Common Stock which the native digital asset of the Berachain blockchain, BERA, will be valued for purposes of the Cryptocurrency Subscription Agreements at $1.9477 for Cryptocurrency Subscribers (based on the seven day trailing VWAP using Binance 1-hour Kline data), or $0.9836 in the case of the Berachain Foundation (representing a 49.5% discount). The Pre-Funded Warrants have an exercise price of $0.01 per share. In the Cryptocurrency Offering, the Cryptocurrency Subscribers tendered either Unlocked BERA tokens or Locked BERA tokens to the Company as consideration for the Cryptocurrency Pre-Funded Warrants. Certain of the Cryptocurrency Pre-Funded Warrants are subject to lock-up agreements and become exercisable on April 18, 2026.

On October 23, 2025, we closed a $110 million private placement consisting of cash subscriptions and crypto denominated subscriptions in support of a BERA focused treasury strategy ( the “BERA Private Placement”). The closing delivered approximately $24.3 million of net cash proceeds and approximately $19.0 million of stablecoin proceeds in USDT and USDC, and held approximately 54.2 million BERA at closing. As compensation to the placement agent, we paid the placement agent a commission equal to 2% of the BERA Private Placement (or 1.0% placement commission for any investors introduced by the Company, Polychain Capital LP or the Berachain Foundation (or any affiliate of any of the foregoing) to the placement agent), plus an additional $5 million. Beginning with periods after October 23, 2025, in-scope crypto assets will be measured at fair value with changes recognized in net income. Advisory warrants totaling 5,264,752 shares of common stock were also issued in connection with our transition to a digital asset treasury strategy and board service. These advisory warrants become exercisable on April 23, 2026.

We used the majority of proceeds to acquire BERA and to establish digital asset treasury operations, with approximately $3.0 million earmarked for legacy operations.

In connection with the October 2025 private placement, the Company paid customary placement agent fees and expense allowances and issued placement agent warrants to Aegis Capital Corp. or its designees.

Human Capital Resources

As of March 17, 2026, we had eleven full-time employees. Approximately ten were employed in the U.S., and one was employed in the Bahamas. None of our employees are represented by a labor union. We have never experienced a labor-related work stoppage.

The Company has significantly reduced headcount in connection with the restructuring of its legacy wholesale and distribution operations. As of the filing date, the workforce is concentrated in treasury, finance, compliance, technology, and limited e-commerce support functions.

Trademarks

We own a number of registered trademarks and service marks, including without limitation, trademarks in the relevant classes of goods for Greenlane, Higher Standards, Aerospaced, Groove, and Pollen Gear. We also license certain trademarks and other intellectual property, most notably those associated with our Marley Natural and Keith Haring brands. Solely for convenience, trademarks and trade names referred to in this Annual Report may appear without the ® or TM symbols, but such references are not intended to indicate, in any way, that we will not assert, to the fullest extent under applicable law, our rights or the rights of the applicable licensor to these trademarks and trade names. Solely for convenience, trademarks and trade names referred to in this Form 10-K may appear without the ® or TM symbols, but such references are not intended to indicate, in any way, that we will not assert, to the fullest extent under applicable law, our rights or the rights of the applicable licensor to these trademarks and trade names. In addition, this Annual Report contains trade names, trademarks and service marks of other companies that we do not own. In addition, this Form 10-K contains trade names, trademarks and service marks of other companies that we do not own. We do not intend our use or display of other companies’ trade names, trademarks or service marks to imply a relationship with, or endorsement or sponsorship of us by, these other companies. We believe certain of our trademarks have continuing value. The duration of trademark registrations varies from country to country. However, trademarks are generally valid and may be renewed indefinitely as long as they are in use and/or their registrations are properly maintained.

Recent Developments

Delisting Notice

On March 25, 2026, we received a notification letter from the Listing Qualifications Department of Nasdaq (the “Delisting Notice”), notifying us that we were not in compliance with the minimum bid price requirement for continued listing on The Nasdaq Capital Market and its staff has determined to delist our securities pursuant to its discretionary authority under Listing Rule 5550(a)(2). Due to having effected two reverse stock splits over the prior two-year period, we are not eligible for the 180-day period to regain compliance under Rule 4810(c)(3)(A). Pursuant to the Delisting Notice, we plan to appeal this determination before a Nasdaq Hearings Panel, staying the suspension of our common stock.

Reverse Stock Split

On March 25, 2026, our stockholders approved an amendment to our amended and restated certificate of incorporation to effect a reverse stock split of our issued and outstanding Common Stock at a ratio within a range of 1-for-5 to 1-for-15, with the final ratio and timing to be determined at the discretion of our Board of Directors. As of the date of issuance of these financial statements, the reverse stock split has not been effected. Accordingly, our financial statements, including share and per share amounts, have not been adjusted to reflect the reverse stock split.

We expect to effect the reverse stock split shortly following the issuance of these financial statements.

BERA Holdings

As of February 27, 2026, following the adoption of the new digital asset treasury strategy, we held approximately 70.4 million units of BERA pursuant to the strategic acquisition of approximately 9 million units of BERA between December 4, 2025 and February 27, 2026. At the same time, we also announced plans to deploy up to 50 million units of BERA into validator infrastructure on the Berachain network, comprising approximately 20 million units of BERA across two independently operated validators and up to 30 million units of BERA through a previously announced partnership with Infrared Finance.

Token Transaction Agreements

On February 4, 2026, Greenlane Subsidiary Inc. (the “Subsidiary”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company, entered into (a) a Token Purchase and Sale Agreement (the “Purchase and Sale Agreement”) and (b) a Token Lending Agreement (the “Lending Agreement,” and together with the Purchase and Sale Agreement, the “Transaction Agreements”) with Berachain Operations Corporation, a British Virgin Islands Business Company (the “Counterparty”).

Pursuant to the Lending Agreement, the Subsidiary (as Lender) may agree to lend to the Counterparty (as Borrower) an amount of USDC and/or USDT stablecoins (the “Lent Tokens”) pursuant to loan confirmation agreements to be agreed between the parties from time to time, accruing interest at a rate to be determined in such agreements. The Counterparty intends to use the Lent Tokens to acquire BERA tokens in the open market or in privately negotiated transactions from various counterparties.

Pursuant to the Purchase and Sale Agreement, the Subsidiary (as Buyer) may request to purchase tranches of BERA tokens from the Counterparty (as Seller), pursuant to tranche notices to be agreed between the parties from time to time. The purchase price for each tranche is determined through a combination of time-weighted average price and other pricing mechanics, including protective “market out” provisions. Furthermore, the Purchase and Sale Agreement permits flexible transaction sizing set within a pre-negotiated percentage range.

The Counterparty subsequently informed the Company that it may, from time to time, conduct significant transactions with BSQD Corp. (“BSQD”) to source BERA to fulfill its obligations under the Purchase and Sale Agreement. BSQD is an entity that is wholly owned by Ben Isenberg, Greenlane’s Chief Investment Officer. Any such transactions with BSQD would be conducted on an arm’s-length basis at prevailing market prices and conditions. Mr. Isenberg is considered a related party and the transactions described herein constitute a “related party transaction” as defined by Item 404 of Regulation S-K.

Appointment of Chief Executive Officer

On February 11, 2026, the Board of Directors unanimously appointed Jason Hitchcock as Chief Executive Officer of the Company. Mr. Hitchcock brings over 15 years of experience building and scaling revenue engines across SaaS, blockchain infrastructure, and decentralized finance. He joins Greenlane as we continue to execute our Berachain-focused Digital Asset Treasury strategy.

ATM Offering

On January 7, 2026, we entered into a Sales Agreement (the “Sales Agreement”) with Yorkville Securities, LLC (“Yorkville”) pursuant to which we may, from time to time, offer and sell shares (the “ATM Shares”) of our Common Stock through or to Yorkville, acting as sales agent or principal (the “ATM Offering”). On January 7, 2026, we filed a prospectus supplement in connection with the ATM Offering for up to $5,355,687 of shares of Common Stock (the “Prospectus Supplement”).

Subject to the terms and conditions of the Sales Agreement, Yorkville will use its commercially reasonable efforts consistent with its normal trading and sales practices to sell the ATM Shares from time to time, based upon our instructions. We have provided Yorkville with customary indemnification and contribution rights, and Yorkville will be entitled to a commission of up to 3.0% of the gross proceeds from each sale of the ATM Shares pursuant to the Sales Agreement.

Corporate Information

Our executive offices are located at 4800 N Federal Hwy, Suite B200, Boca Raton, Florida 33487. Our telephone number at our executive offices is (877) 292-7660.

Available Information

Our Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K, and amendments to reports filed pursuant to Sections 13(a) and 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), are filed with the SEC. We are subject to the informational requirements of the Exchange Act and file or furnish reports, proxy statements and other information with the SEC. Such reports and other information filed by us with the SEC are available free of charge at investor.gnln.com/financial-information/sec-filings when such reports are available on the SEC’s website. The SEC maintains an Internet site that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC at www.sec.gov. We periodically provide other information for investors on our corporate website, www.gnln.com, and our investor relations website, investor.gnln.com. This includes press releases and other information about financial performance, information on corporate governance and details related to our annual meeting of shareholders. The information contained on the websites referenced in this Form 10-K is not incorporated by reference into this filing. Further, our references to website URLs are intended to be inactive textual references only.

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

Our operations and financial results are subject to various risks and uncertainties, including but not limited to those described below, which could harm our business, reputation, financial condition, and operating results. The following is a description of what we consider the key challenges and material risks to our business and an investment in our Class A common stock.

Risks Related to Our Digital Asset Trading Strategy and Cryptocurrencies

We have recently adopted a digital asset treasury strategy with a focus on BERA, and we may be unable to successfully implement this new strategy.

We have recently adopted our Treasury Policy primarily dedicated to BERA, including potential investments in BERA, including through staking, validator activities and engaging in other DeFi strategies. There is no assurance that we will be able to successfully implement our Treasury Policy or operate BERA-related activities at the scale or profitability currently anticipated. BERA operates with a proof-of-liquidity consensus mechanism, which differs significantly from other consensus mechanisms, and will require specialized employee skillsets and novel treasury management practices tailored to the Berachain network. Further, there is ongoing scrutiny and limited formal guidance from regulatory agencies, including Nasdaq and the SEC, with respect to the treatment of public company digital asset strategies. Our inability to implement the Treasury Policy for whatever reason, could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition.

Our shift towards a BERA-focused strategy requires substantial changes in our day-to-day operations and exposes us to significant operational risks.

Our shift towards a BERA-focused strategy exposes us to significant operational risks. In connection with the implementation of our Treasury Policy, we intend to operate a validator to help secure the Berachain network, and we expect to allocate a portion of our BERA holdings to other onchain activities, including staking and certain DeFi strategies. If we serve as a validator, we may suffer slashing or forfeiture of rewards due to downtime, misconfiguration, or malicious software, materially reducing the number of BERA held in our treasury. In addition, the Berachain protocol is rapidly evolving, with frequent upgrades and protocol changes that may require significant adjustments to our operational setup and allocation strategy. The upgrades and protocol changes may require that we incur unanticipated costs and could cause temporary service disruptions. We may also need to employ third-party service providers in our operations, which may introduce risks outside of our control, including significant cybersecurity risks. In connection with our proposed activities, we intend to operate a validator to secure the Berachain network. If we choose to serve as a validator, we may suffer slashing or forfeiture of rewards due to downtime, misconfiguration, or malicious software, materially reducing the number of BERA held in our treasury. Any of these operational risks could materially and adversely affect our ability to execute our Treasury Policy, prevent us from realizing positive returns and severely hurt our financial condition.

A disruption of the internet may affect the operation of blockchain networks, which may adversely affect the digital asset industry and an investment in us.

Blockchain protocols rely on the internet. A significant disruption of internet connectivity could disrupt blockchain networks’ functionality until such disruption is resolved. A disruption in the internet could adversely affect an investment in us. In particular, some variants of blockchain protocols have experienced denial-of-service attacks, which have led to temporary delays in block creation and digital asset transfers.

Digital assets are also susceptible to border gateway protocol hijacking (“BGP hijacking”). Such an attack can be a very effective way for an attacker to intercept traffic en route to a legitimate destination. BGP hijacking impacts the way different nodes are connected to one another to isolate portions of them from the remainder of the network, which could lead to a risk of the network allowing double-spending and other security issues.

Any internet failures or internet connectivity-related attacks that impact the ability to transfer or secure digital assets could have a material adverse effect on the price of digital assets generally, and BERA’s value specifically, and the value of an investment in us.

Blockchain technologies are based on theoretical conjectures as to the impossibility of solving certain cryptographical puzzles quickly. These premises may be incorrect or may become incorrect due to technological advances.

Blockchain technologies are premised on theoretical conjectures as to the impossibility, in practice, of solving certain mathematical problems quickly. Those conjectures remain unproven, however, and mathematical or technological advances could conceivably prove them to be incorrect. Blockchain technology companies may also be negatively affected by cryptography or other technological or mathematical advances, such as the development of quantum computers with significantly more power than computers presently available, that undermine or vitiate the cryptographic consensus mechanism underpinning Berachain and other blockchain protocols. If either of these events were to happen, markets that rely on blockchain technologies could quickly collapse, and an investment in our Common Stock may be adversely affected.

Technical shortcomings or defects in the BERA network, including changes to its validator structure, governance model, or core software, could diminish the utility and value of BERA and harm our business.

The BERA network is a public, open-source and decentralized blockchain protocol that is not under our or any single party’s control. Its ongoing viability depends on the continued consensus and cooperation of independent developers, validators, tokenholders, and other ecosystem participants. The existing Berachain protocol may be subject to significant alterations, including by way of community governance votes, and any such changes may have a material adverse effect on BERA and the viability of the Berachain protocol. If Berachain experiences a successful cyber-attack, a material software bug, a “hard fork” that fragments the network, or a prolonged outage, market confidence in BERA could be severely undermined. Similarly, decisions by influential validators to adopt protocol changes, modify transaction-fee structures, or alter other existing practices or network governance could adversely affect BERA’s economics and, therefore, the value of our holdings. Further, because the governance of decentralized networks, such as Berachain, is by voluntary consensus, a single party could gain majority control of the network, and enact changes or amendments to the network that are otherwise undesirable to other participants. Unless and until the US Government changes the law with respect to cannabis, and particularly if Congress does not extend the protection of state medical cannabis programs, there is a risk that federal authorities could enforce current federal cannabis law. Were this to happen, it could harm the value of BERA and therefore the value of the Common Stock.

If validators exit the BERA network, it could increase the likelihood of a malicious actor obtaining control.

Validators exiting the network could make BERA more vulnerable to a malicious actor obtaining control of a large percentage of staked BERA, which might enable them to manipulate the BERA network by censoring or manipulating specific transactions, or undermining the economic incentives underlying the Berachain ecosystem. If the BERA network suffers such an attack, the price of BERA could be negatively affected, and a loss of confidence in the BERA network could result. Any reduction in confidence in the transaction confirmation process or staking power of the BERA network may adversely affect an investment in the Common Stock.

Berachain may not be able to compete with other blockchain networks. If Berachain is not able to compete successfully, the value of BERA would be significantly affected.

Berachain faces intense competition from a large number of established layer-1 blockchains, including Ethereum, Solana, and Binance Smart Chain, layer-2 scaling solutions, and emerging protocols, many of which currently maintain significantly larger active user bases, higher total value locked (“TVL”), more extensive developer communities, broader third-party tooling and wallet support, deeper liquidity across centralized and decentralized exchanges, and more robust cross-chain interoperability frameworks. These competing networks may offer lower transaction fees, faster finality, superior virtual machine performance, more advanced smart-contract languages, or more effective incentive programs that attract users, liquidity providers, dApp developers, and other participants away from Berachain. If Berachain fails to generate sufficient user interest relative to these alternatives, the network could experience reduced protocol adoption and diminished liquidity. Such outcomes may lead to lower user and transaction volumes, reduced fee revenue, impaired ability to fund ongoing development, and a downward spiral in token valuation, ultimately jeopardizing the long-term viability of the Berachain ecosystem.

The economic design underlying PoL may be flawed, may fail to gain adoption, or may be exploited. Any such events could undermine the growth and development of the Berachain network.

Berachain’s network security, incentive alignment, and ecosystem growth depend entirely on the proper functioning of its novel PoL consensus mechanism, including the recently introduced PoLv2 framework. Under this design, validators stake BERA to secure the network and earn BGT emissions through block production, then stake or delegate BGT to dApps to direct future reward allocation; dApps distribute BGT to users for providing liquidity or engaging in protocol activity; and users may burn BGT for BERA. As a new consensus mechanism, users may be reluctant or unable to understand the technical underpinnings and benefits of PoL, and may favor a more traditional consensus mechanism, such as proof of stake or proof of work. If validators delegate BGT to low-performing or malicious dApps, dApps distribute rewards inefficiently or in ways that favor short-term speculation over sustained usage, or liquidity suffers due to lack of actual or perceived alignment between different ecosystem parties, the intended incentive loop may break. Such failures could result in misaligned emissions, and if rewards are capture by a limited set of participants, or if there is insufficient liquidity in core DeFi primitives or declining BERA staking participation, the network effect intended by the PoL consensus mechanism may fail to be achieved. From time to time, the Berachain community may also make additional changes to the PoL mechanism, such as via the PoLv2 update, which introduces increased complexity through dynamic emission schedules, delegation weighting mechanisms, and customizable reward modules, any of which may contain latent design flaws, unintended economic consequences, or vulnerabilities not identified during testing or early deployment. Future iterations of PoL may introduce additional changes that disrupt existing incentives, and even a well-designed system remains susceptible to coordinated exploitation, front-running of reward signals, or sybil attacks. A breakdown in PoL functionality or adoption could lead to declining network activity, erosion of economic security, loss of developer and user confidence, and a decline of the Berachain ecosystem, any of which could have significant adverse consequences for BERA.

We and other users may suffer losses due to staking or validator slashing, which could make Berachain less attractive.

Berachain’s native staking protocol is relatively new and requires users to place BERA in a smart contract that is not under anyone’s control. Users who serve as validators also risk losing some or all of their BERA if they intentionally or unintentionally perform their duties poorly, for example, by double-signing a transaction or experiencing downtime, in a process known as slashing. Any cybersecurity attacks, security issues, hacks, penalties, slashing events, or other problems could damage validators’ willingness to participate in validation and stakers’ willingness to participate in staking, and this could further discourage existing and future validators and stakers from serving as such, thereby adversely impacting Berachain’s adoption and the price of BERA. Any disruption of validation on Berachain could interfere with network operations and cause Berachain to be less attractive to users and application developers than competing blockchain networks, which could cause the price of BERA to decrease. Further, the limited liquidity during the unbonding period of the staking process could cause Berachain to be less attractive to users and application developers than competing blockchain networks, which could cause the price of BERA to decrease. Any decrease in the price of BERA could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition.

We face risks relating to the potential compromise of Berachain’s and other blockchains’ network security by emerging technologies, including artificial intelligence and quantum computing, which may materially and adversely impact our operations and financial condition.

The security and integrity of Berachain and other blockchains’ network are fundamentally dependent on the robustness of its cryptographic algorithms. BERA and other cryptocurrencies’ protocol relies heavily on public key cryptography and hashing algorithms to secure transactions, safeguard private keys, and prevent double-spending. Advances in emerging technologies, particularly artificial intelligence (“AI”) and quantum computing may pose significant risks to Berachain and other blockchains’ network’s security and operational stability.

Quantum computing, in particular, presents a long-term threat to the cryptographic assumptions underpinning BERA and other digital assets. Should quantum computing achieve sufficient maturity, it could undermine the effectiveness of the cryptographic algorithms used to secure the blockchain. A sufficiently powerful quantum computer could potentially reverse-engineer private keys from public addresses or compromise the blockchain’s consensus mechanism, leading to the theft of digital assets, double-spending, and other forms of fraud. Although current quantum computing capabilities are not yet at this level, advancements in quantum technologies could materialize more rapidly than anticipated, creating significant systemic risks for the Berachain protocol and the BERA token.

AI may also pose indirect security risks. AI-driven cyberattacks, including advanced phishing schemes, autonomous malware, and intelligent blockchain analysis tools, could increase the sophistication and success rate of attacks targeting Berachain and other blockchains’ users, exchanges, custodians, and node operators. The use of AI to exploit vulnerabilities in software, hardware, or network protocols could threaten the stability and reliability of Berachain and other blockchains’ ecosystems.

There can be no assurance that Berachain’s and other blockchains’ current cryptographic safeguards will be sufficient to protect against future technological advances. While research and development efforts are ongoing to develop quantum-resistant cryptographic protocols, Berachain’s and other blockchains’ networks may face challenges in adopting such technologies at scale, particularly given their decentralized governance structure. Any successful attack or perceived vulnerability arising from AI or quantum computing could materially and adversely affect the price, liquidity, and adoption of BERA and other digital assets and could negatively impact our business, financial condition and results of operations.

BERA is created and transmitted through the operations of the Berachain network, a decentralized network of computers running software following the Berachain protocol. If the Berachain network is disrupted or encounters any unanticipated difficulties, the value of BERA could be negatively impacted.

If the Berachain network is disrupted or encounters any unanticipated difficulties, then the processing of transactions on the Berachain network may be disrupted, which in turn may prevent us from depositing or withdrawing BERA from our accounts or otherwise effecting BERA transactions. Such disruptions could include, for example: the price volatility of BERA; the insolvency, business failure, interruption, default, failure to perform, security breach, or other problems of network participants, custodians or others; the closing of trading platforms on which BERA is transacted due to fraud, failures, security breaches or otherwise; or network outages or congestion, power outages, or other problems or disruptions affecting the Berachain network.

We face risks relating to the custody of our BERA or other digital assets, including the loss or destruction of private keys required to access our BERA or other digital assets and cyberattacks or other data loss relating to our BERA or other digital assets.

We expect to self-custody our BERA using, in part, the Fireblocks Vault service. If we lose access to our private keys, we may not be able to recover all or any portion of our BERA, or any value thereof. BERA is controllable only by the possessor of both the unique public key and private key(s) relating to the local or online digital wallet in which the BERA is held. While the blockchain ledger requires a public key relating to a digital wallet to be published when used in a transaction, private keys must be safeguarded and kept private in order to prevent a third party from accessing the BERA held in such wallet. To the extent the private key(s) for a digital wallet are lost, destroyed, or otherwise compromised and no backup of the private key(s) is accessible, we will not be able to access the BERA held in the related digital wallet and such BERA will be irretrievably lost. While Fireblocks Vault service may be able to initiate a recovery if certain keys remain available, there can be no guarantee that not all keys will be lost or that a catastrophic error won’t occur that would prevent recovery. Furthermore, we cannot provide assurance that our digital wallets will not be compromised as a result of a cyberattack. Blockchain ledgers and blockchain technologies have been, and may in the future be, subject to security breaches, cyberattacks or other malicious activities.

Exploits, including those stemming from admin key misuse, admin key compromise, or protocol flaws, have occurred in the past and may occur in the future. Certain employees or vendors may also be vulnerable to physical or psychological coercion, commonly referred to as “wrench attacks,” as well as scams and social engineering tactics intended to obtain access to passwords or private cryptographic keys, in order to then effectuate the unauthorized transfer or theft of digital assets. A successful security breach or cyberattack could result in:

Attacks upon systems across a variety of industries, including industries related to BERA, are increasing in frequency, persistence, and sophistication, and, in many cases, are being conducted by sophisticated, well-funded and organized groups and individuals, including state actors. The techniques used to obtain unauthorized, improper or illegal access to systems and information (including personal data and digital assets), disable or degrade services, or sabotage systems are constantly evolving, may be difficult to detect quickly, and often are not recognized or detected until after they have been launched against a target. These attacks may occur on our systems or those of our third-party service providers or partners. We may experience breaches of our security measures due to human error, malfeasance, insider threats, system errors or vulnerabilities or other irregularities. In particular, we expect that unauthorized parties will attempt to gain access to our systems and facilities, as well as those of our partners and third-party service providers, through various means, such as hacking, social engineering, phishing and fraud. Threats can come from a variety of sources, including criminal hackers, hacktivists, state-sponsored intrusions, industrial espionage, and insiders. In addition, certain types of attacks could harm us even if our systems are left undisturbed. For example, in October 2021 it was reported that hackers exploited a flaw in the account recovery process and stole from the accounts of at least 6,000 customers of the Coinbase exchange, although the flaw was subsequently fixed and Coinbase reimbursed affected customers. Similarly, in November 2022, hackers exploited weaknesses in the security architecture of the FTX Trading digital asset exchange and reportedly stole over $400 million in digital assets from customers. More recently, Bybit was hacked by the Lazarus Group, a North Korean state-sponsored organization, resulting in the loss of $1.5 billion of customer assets. Further, there has been an increase in such activities due to the increase in work-from-home arrangements. The risk of cyberattacks could also be increased by cyberwarfare in connection with the ongoing Russia-Ukraine and Israel-Hamas conflicts, or other future conflicts, including potential proliferation of malware into systems unrelated to such conflicts. Any future breach of our operations or those of others in the Berachain ecosystem, including third-party services on which we rely, could materially and adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

We intend to deploy our BERA into DeFi applications, which are subject to a variety of risks and vulnerabilities.

As part of our treasury management strategy, we also intend to engage in staking, validating, and other permitted activities that involve the use of “smart contracts”, DeFi or dApps. DeFi protocols, wallets, and bridges have been frequent targets of sophisticated cyberattacks, including flash-loan attacks, cross-chain bridge exploits, and private key compromises. Losses from such incidents are often immediate, irreversible, and may not be covered by insurance or contractual recourse.

The use of smart contracts or dApps entails certain risks including risks stemming from the existence of an “admin key” or coding flaws that could be exploited, potentially allowing a bad actor to issue or otherwise compromise the smart contract or dApp, potentially leading to a loss of our BERA. Vulnerabilities or flaws in a smart contract could allow attackers to drain assets, prevent us from accessing our holdings, or manipulate protocol operations. Once deployed, smart contracts are difficult to amend, and in many cases cannot be modified at all without widespread validator or governance consensus.

Like all software code, smart contracts are exposed to risk that the code contains a bug or other security vulnerability, which can lead to loss of assets that are held on or transacted through the smart contract or dAPP. Smart contracts and dApps may contain bugs, security vulnerabilities or poorly designed permission structures that could result in the irreversible loss of BERA or other digital assets.

Certain DeFi protocols are also governed by decentralized communities through on-chain voting mechanisms, which may be subject to capture by a small number of participants. Protocol governance decisions could adversely affect our ability to use or recover assets. Additionally, protocols may change rules, fees, or parameters without advance notice. Moreover, the legal and regulatory treatment of DeFi remains highly uncertain. Regulators could impose restrictions or obligations on participants or on protocols themselves, which could adversely affect our ability to use, access or withdraw such platforms or the value of assets held in them.

If we lose key personnel, including our Chief Investment Officer and Strategic Advisors, or if we fail to recruit additional highly skilled personnel, our ability to operate and manage our digital asset treasury strategy will be impaired.

Our ability to operate and manage our digital asset treasury strategy depends upon our ability to attract and retain highly qualified personnel, including our Chief Investment Officer and members of our executive team, and other key personnel, including the Strategic Advisors. The loss of the services of any of our executive officers, key employees, and the Strategic Advisors, and our inability to find suitable replacements, could result in significant disruption in our operations and management of our digital assets.

Despite our efforts to retain valuable members of our management, employees and consultants, such key personnel may terminate their employment with us on short notice. Although we have agreements with our key employees and consultants, these agreements provide for at-will employment, which means that any of our employees or consultants could leave our employment at any time, with or without notice. We do not maintain “key man” insurance policies on any of our employees or consultants.

If we are unable to raise additional capital on acceptable terms, our ability to implement and sustain our Treasury Policy may be compromised.

Our strategy contemplates the discretionary purchase of BERA and related yield-generating instruments. The capital required to acquire, stake, and actively manage BERA may exceed our existing cash resources and cash flows from operations. Market conditions, our share price performance, the volatility of digital assets, and regulatory uncertainties could impair our ability to access debt or equity capital on terms acceptable to us, or at all. Failure to obtain necessary financing could force us to curtail or abandon our digital asset strategy, which could materially harm our growth prospects and the value of our securities.

Our BERA holdings are less liquid than our existing cash and cash equivalents and may not be able to serve as a source of liquidity for us to the same extent as cash and cash equivalents.

Historically, the digital asset markets have been characterized by significant volatility in price, limited liquidity and trading volumes compared to sovereign currencies markets, relative anonymity, a developing regulatory landscape, potential susceptibility to market abuse and manipulation, compliance and internal control failures at exchanges, and various other risks inherent in its entirely electronic, virtual form and decentralized network. During times of market instability, we may not be able to sell our BERA at favorable prices or at all. Further, BERA we stake or otherwise deposit into dApps and DeFi protocols does not enjoy the same protections as are available to cash or securities deposited with or transacted by institutions subject to regulation by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or the Securities Investor Protection Corporation. Further, any BERA staked or otherwise deployed in DeFi protocols could be subject to partial or total loss if any third-party developer or recipient of the staked or deployed BERA is subject to a cyberattack of any sort or is otherwise unable to repay the assets we’ve deployed. In addition, Berachain’s native staking protocol currently requires a 7-day unbonding period for withdrawing staked BERA tokens. During this period, staked BERA will not earn rewards and will not be liquid. The unbonding period may be subject to change with or without notice to us. Moreover, we may be unable to enter into term loans or other capital raising transactions collateralized by our unencumbered BERA or otherwise generate funds using our BERA holdings, including in particular during times of market instability or when the price of BERA has declined significantly. Furthermore, a certain portion of our BERA are under a contractual lockup from the Berachain Foundation (the “Foundation”), and we may continue to acquire locked BERA at a discount to market prices of unlocked BERA in order to generate value for stockholders. These locked BERA are significantly less liquid than cash and our unlocked BERA holdings. If we are unable to sell our locked or unlocked BERA, enter into additional capital raising transactions using locked or unlocked BERA as collateral, or otherwise generate funds using our locked or unlocked BERA holdings, or if we are forced to sell our locked or unlocked BERA at a significant loss, in order to meet our working capital requirements, our business and financial condition could be negatively impacted.

We may be subject to regulatory developments related to digital assets and digital asset markets, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

As BERA and other digital assets are relatively novel and the application of state and federal securities laws and other laws and regulations to digital assets is unclear in certain respects, it is possible that regulators in the United States or foreign countries may interpret or apply existing laws and regulations in a manner that adversely affects the price of BERA, The U.S. federal government, states, regulatory agencies, and foreign countries may also enact new laws and regulations, or pursue regulatory, legislative, enforcement or judicial actions, that could materially impact the price of BERA or the ability of individuals or institutions such as us to own or transfer BERA. Increased regulatory scrutiny may result in additional costs for us and may require our management team to devote increased time and attention to regulatory matters, change aspects of our business, or result in limits on the utility of digital assets. Due to the risk of a changing regulatory environment, we may be required to comply with new laws, regulations, or interpretations, which may result in heightened regulatory and compliance related costs, litigation, regulatory investigations, and enforcement or other actions. Adverse changes to, or our failure to comply with applicable laws may have an adverse effect on our reputation, brand, our business, operating results, and financial condition. Future regulatory developments regarding the treatment of digital assets, staking rewards, or digital asset treasury strategies for U.S. federal, state, or international tax purposes could materially affect the liquidity or value of BERA, or the way we account for, recognize, and report our BERA holdings and related income. The liquidity of digital assets may also be impacted to the extent that changes in applicable laws and regulatory requirements negatively impact the ability of exchanges and trading venues to provide services for digital assets. The effect of any future regulatory change on the Company is impossible to predict, but such change could be substantial and adverse.

Moreover, the implementation of our Treasury Policy has created, and could continue to create complications due to the lack of experience that third parties have with companies engaging in such a strategy, such as increased costs of director and officer liability insurance or the potential inability to obtain such coverage on acceptable terms in the future.

The U.S. federal government, states, regulatory agencies, and foreign countries may also enact new laws and regulations, or pursue regulatory, legislative, enforcement or judicial actions, that could materially impact the price of BERA or the ability of individuals or institutions such as us to own or transfer BERA. Regulatory authorities have been evolving in their approach to digital assets. It is not possible to predict whether, or when, any of these developments will lead to U.S. Congress granting additional authorities to the SEC or other regulators, or whether any other federal, state, or foreign legislative bodies will take any similar actions. It is also not possible to predict the nature of any such additional authorities, how additional legislation or regulatory oversight might impact the ability of digital asset markets to function or the willingness of financial and other institutions to continue to provide services to the digital assets industry, nor how any new regulations or changes to existing regulations might impact the value of digital assets generally and any BERA we hold specifically. The consequences of increased regulation of digital assets and digital asset-related activities could adversely affect the market price of any BERA we hold and in turn adversely affect the market price of our common stock.

There is a possibility that BERA tokens may be classified as a “security” under U.S. federal securities laws. If BERA tokens are classified as a “security,” that would subject us to additional regulation and could materially impact the operations of our treasury strategy and our business.

Neither the SEC nor any other U.S. federal or state regulator has publicly stated whether they agree that BERA tokens are a “security,” and BERA tokens have not yet been classified with respect to the U.S. federal securities laws. Although we believe that BERA tokens are not a “security” within the meaning of the U.S. federal securities laws, we acknowledge the uncertainty that a regulatory body or federal court may determine otherwise in the future. If BERA is deemed a security, we may face legal or regulatory action, even if our beliefs were reasonable under the circumstances.

As part of our ongoing review of applicable securities laws, we take into account a number of factors, including the various definitions of “security” under such laws, including but not limited to federal court decisions interpreting the elements of these definitions, such as the U.S. Supreme Court’s decisions in the Howey and Reves cases. We also consider court rulings, reports, orders, press releases, public statements, and speeches by the SEC Commissioners and SEC Staff providing guidance on when a digital asset or a transaction to which a digital asset may relate may be a security for purposes of U.S. federal securities laws. We acknowledge, however, that the SEC, a federal court or another relevant entity could take a different view. The application of securities laws to the specific facts and circumstances of digital assets is complex and subject to change. Our conclusion, even if reasonable under the circumstances, would not preclude legal or regulatory action based on a finding that BERA tokens, or any other digital asset we might hold, are a “security.” Therefore, we are at risk of enforcement proceedings against us, which could result in potential injunctions, cease-and-desist orders, fines, penalties or other damages if BERA tokens were determined to be a security by a regulatory body or a court.

Further, if BERA tokens are viewed as a security, it may become more difficult to purchase and sell BERA tokens, as they could only be traded through SEC-registered broker-dealers or exchanges. This would make it more difficult for us to continue our BERA treasury strategy, or to monetize BERA tokens that we hold in the event we need to do so for working capital purposes. Such developments could adversely affect the fair value of BERA, our business, results of operations, financial condition, treasury operations and prospects.

Regulatory change reclassifying BERA as a security could lead to our falling within the definition of “investment company” under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”), and could adversely affect the market price of BERA and the market price of our Common Stock.

Under Sections 3(a)(1)(A) and (C) of the 1940 Act, a company generally will be deemed to be an “investment company” for purposes of the 1940 Act if (1) it is, or holds itself out as being, engaged primarily, or proposes to engage primarily, in the business of investing, reinvesting or trading in securities or (2) it is engaged, or proposes to engage, in the business of investing, reinvesting, owning, holding or trading in securities and it owns or proposes to acquire investment securities having a value exceeding 40% of the value of its total assets (exclusive of U.S. government securities and cash items) on an unconsolidated basis. We do not believe that we are an “investment company,” as such term is defined in the 1940 Act, and are not registered as an “investment company” under the 1940 Act as of the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. We do not believe that we are an “investment company,” as such term is defined in either of those sections of the 1940 Act.

While the SEC has not stated a view as to whether BERA is or is not a “security” for purposes of the federal securities laws, a determination by the SEC or a court of competent jurisdiction that BERA is a security could lead to our meeting the definition of “investment company” under the 1940 Act, if the portion of our assets that consists of investments in BERA exceeds the 40% limit prescribed in the 1940 Act, which would subject us to significant additional regulatory requirements that could have a material adverse effect on our business and operations and may also require us to change the manner in which we conduct our business.

We monitor our assets and income in order to conduct our business activities in a manner such that we do not fall within the definition of “investment company” under the 1940 Act or would qualify under one of the exemptions or exclusions provided by the 1940 Act and corresponding SEC rules. If BERA is determined to be a security for purposes of the federal securities laws, we would take steps to reduce our holdings of BERA as a percentage of our total assets. These steps may include, among others, selling BERA that we might otherwise hold for the long term and deploying our cash in assets that are not considered to be investment securities under the 1940 Act, in which case we may be forced to sell our BERA at unattractive prices. We may also seek to acquire additional assets that are not considered to be investment securities under the 1940 Act, and we may need to incur debt, issue additional equity or enter into other financing arrangements that are not otherwise attractive to our business. Any of these actions could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition. Such a contamination event could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. Moreover, we can make no assurance that we would successfully be able to take the necessary steps to avoid meeting the definition of “investment company” under the 1940 Act and becoming subject to its requirements. If BERA is determined to constitute a security for purposes of the federal securities laws, and if we are not able to come within an available exemption or exclusion under the 1940 Act, then we would have to register as an investment company and require us to change the manner in which we conduct our business. In addition, such a determination could adversely affect the market price of BERA and in turn adversely affect the market price of our Common Stock.

We are not subject to legal and regulatory obligations that apply to investment companies such as mutual funds and exchange-traded funds, or to obligations applicable to investment advisers.

Mutual funds, exchange-traded funds and their directors and management are subject to extensive regulation as “investment companies” and “investment advisers” under U.S. federal and state law; this regulation is intended for the benefit and protection of investors. We are not subject to, and do not otherwise voluntarily comply with, these laws and regulations. This means, among other things, that the execution of or changes to our Treasury Reserve Policy or our BERA strategy, our use of leverage, the manner in which our BERA is custodied, our ability to engage in transactions with affiliated parties and our operating and investment activities generally are not subject to the extensive legal and regulatory requirements and prohibitions that apply to investment companies and investment advisers. While the Cannabis Act provides for the regulation by the federal government of, among other things, the commercial cultivation and processing of cannabis for recreational purposes, it provides the provinces and territories of Canada with the authority to regulate with respect to the other aspects of recreational cannabis, such as distribution, sale, minimum age requirements, places where cannabis can be consumed, and a range of other matters. For example, although a significant change to our Treasury Reserve Policy would require the approval of our Board, no stockholder or regulatory approval would be necessary. Consequently, our Board has broad discretion over the investment, leverage and cash management policies it authorizes, whether in respect of our BERA holdings or other activities we may pursue, and has the power to change our current policies, including our strategy of acquiring and holding BERA, See “Use of Proceeds.”

Changes in regulatory interpretations could require us to register as a money services business or money transmitter, leading to increased compliance costs or operational shutdowns.

The regulatory regime for digital assets in the U.S. and elsewhere is uncertain. We may be unable to effectively react to proposed legislation and regulation of digital assets, which could adversely affect our business.

FinCEN regulates providers of certain services with respect to “convertible virtual currency,” including BERA tokens. Businesses engaged in the transfer of convertible virtual currencies are subject to registration and licensure requirements at the U.S. federal level and also under U.S. state laws. There is a risk that if we decide to provide validator services to third parties, FinCEN or other regulators could view such services as the provision of money transmission activities subject to regulations.

If regulatory changes or interpretations require us to register as a money services business with FinCEN under the U.S. Bank Secrecy Act, or as a money transmitter under state laws, we may be subject to extensive regulatory requirements, resulting in significant compliance costs and operational burdens. In such a case, we may incur extraordinary expenses to meet these requirements or, alternatively, may determine that continued operations are not viable. If we decide to cease certain operations in response to new regulatory obligations, such actions could occur at a time that is unfavorable to investors.

Multiple states have implemented or proposed regulatory frameworks for digital asset businesses. Compliance with such state-specific regulations may increase costs or impact our business operations. Further, if we or our service providers are unable to comply with evolving federal or state regulations, we may be forced to dissolve or liquidate certain operations, which could materially impact our investors.

Litigation, regulatory enforcement actions, or legal proceedings against key participants in the Berachain ecosystem could materially harm network activity, token demand, and the value of an investment in our Common Stock.

Key participants in the Berachain ecosystem including the Foundation, core contributors, validators, dApp developers, liquidity providers, and token holders may become subject to litigation, regulatory investigations, or enforcement actions in the United States or other jurisdictions. Such legal proceedings could arise from various allegations, including that BERA or BGT constitutes an unregistered security, that PoL incentive mechanisms are illegal, or that ecosystem activities breach anti-money laundering, know-your-customer, sanctions, or consumer protection or other regulations. If any such participant is named in a lawsuit, subpoenaed in a regulatory inquiry, or subjected to an enforcement action, whether by U.S. state, federal or foreign authorities, it may be required to expend significant resources on legal defense, modify or cease operations, restrict user access, or face monetary penalties, disgorgement, or injunctive relief. Adverse outcomes could damage the reputation of the affected participant and, by association, the broader Berachain network, leading to reduced validator participation, declining user confidence, lower transaction volume, and reduced demand for BERA, any of which could materially and adversely affect the price of BERA and the value of our Common Stock.

Berachain provides base layer infrastructure that can be used for multiple types of applications, including applications that may be unregulated or face significant regulatory risks.

Berachain operates as a general-purpose layer-1 blockchain that provides base-layer infrastructure capable of supporting a wide range of dApps, including but not limited to DeFi protocols, liquid staking platforms, decentralized exchanges, lending markets, derivatives platforms, and other smart-contract-based services. Many of these applications may operate in regulatory gray areas or involve activities that are subject to evolving, unclear, or restrictive regulatory frameworks in the United States, European Union, United Kingdom, and other jurisdictions.

For instance, regulatory treatment of liquid staking derivatives remains uncertain and varies by jurisdiction. In the United States, the SEC has taken enforcement actions against certain staking-as-a-service providers, asserting that staked assets or derivative tokens may constitute unregistered securities under the Howey test. While the SEC has recently released a statement stating that, in the views of its Division of Trading and Markets, it will not consider certain qualifying staking services to constitute an offering of securities, this statement is not a rule, regulation, guidance, or statement of the SEC and does not alter applicable law. Given the evolving regulatory framework in the United States, there can be no guarantees that the SEC will not pursue additional enforcement actions against such services in the future. Similarly, regulators in other jurisdictions have expressed concerns that liquid staking tokens could be classified as securities, collective investment schemes, or derivatives requiring licensing.

Beyond liquid staking, other DeFi applications on Berachain—such as leveraged yield farming, perpetual futures, synthetic assets, or algorithmic stablecoins—may trigger regulatory oversight under securities, commodities, stablecoin, money transmission, anti-money laundering (AML), or know-your-customer (KYC) laws. If any application is deemed to violate applicable regulations, authorities may impose fines, require registration, mandate operational changes, restrict user access (including geo-blocking), or pursue enforcement actions against the protocol’s developers, governance participants, or associated entities.

Such regulatory actions could materially reduce user participation in the affected application, leading to a decline in transaction volume, TVL, and BGT reward delegation to that protocol. Since network fees and BERA demand are directly tied to on-chain activity, a significant reduction in usage of one or more major applications could decrease overall demand for BERA. This, in turn, may result in lower BERA staking participation, reduced network security under PoL, diminished validator revenue, and downward pressure on the market price of BERA, which would adversely affect the value of the Common Stock.

Additional sales, distributions, or issuances of BERA could cause the price of BERA to decline significantly

BERA was created with an initial supply of 500 million BERA, of which 16.8% was allocated to initial core contributors, 34.3% was allocated to investors, and 48.9% was allocated to community programs, including an airdrop (15.8%), future community initiatives to incentivize applications, developers, and users (13.1%), and ecosystem development (20%) to support growth initiatives and the operations of the Foundation. Unlock schedules applicable to these allocations will periodically release additional BERA into circulation, which may create sustained or concentrated selling pressure and adversely affect the market price of BERA. Further, approximately 10% new BERA is generated annually through the protocol’s built-in inflation mechanism via BGT emissions, the rate of which may be adjusted from time to time by community governance. Although BERA used to pay transaction fees is currently burned and removed from circulating supply, there can be no assurance that this burn mechanism will offset inflationary issuances or vesting releases. Sales, distributions, or secondary market transfers of a substantial number of BERA by core contributors, investors, the Foundation, airdrop recipients, or any other holders—whether pursuant to scheduled unlocks, governance-approved initiatives, or otherwise—or the market perception that such transfers are occurring or imminent, could cause the price of BERA to decline significantly, resulting in a partial or complete loss of your investment.

Our BERA holdings may amplify market volatility.

As of February 27, 2026, we hold approximately 70.4 million BERA, representing more than 10% of the total initial BERA supply of 500 million tokens. A substantial portion of the Company’s assets consists of BERA. As a result, the Company is exposed to concentration risk associated with a single digital asset, and changes in the market value, liquidity, utility, or regulatory treatment of BERA could materially adversely affect the Company. This significant concentration means that any future sale, transfer, staking, delegation, or other disposition of BERA by us, whether to fund operations, provide liquidity, or for any other purpose, could substantially increase the circulating supply and exert downward pressure on the market price of BERA, regardless of the underlying performance or adoption of the Berachain network. Additionally, our large holdings may create actual or perceived conflicts of interest in governance decisions, validator delegation strategies, or protocol upgrade proposals, particularly if such actions could directly or indirectly benefit our token position at the expense of other BERA holders. The market may also react negatively to the mere possibility of future dispositions by the Company, leading to increased price volatility, reduced investor confidence, and a material decline in the value of BERA, which could adversely affect our financial condition and the value of an investment in our Common Stock.

Digital asset trading platforms on which BERA trades are relatively new and largely unregulated or may not be complying with existing regulations.

Digital asset markets, including spot markets for BERA, are growing rapidly. The digital asset trading platforms through which BERA and other digital assets trade are new and largely unregulated or may not be complying with existing regulations. These markets are local, national and international and include a broadening range of digital assets and participants. Significant trading may occur on systems and platforms with minimum predictability. Spot markets may impose daily, weekly, monthly or customer-specific transaction or withdrawal limits or suspend withdrawals entirely, rendering the exchange of BERA for fiat currency difficult or impossible.

Digital asset trading platforms may not be subject to, or may not comply with, regulation in a manner similar to other regulated trading platforms, such as national securities exchanges or designated contract markets. Many digital asset trading platforms are unlicensed, are unregulated, operate without extensive supervision by governmental authorities, and do not provide the public with significant information regarding their ownership structure, management team, corporate practices, cybersecurity, and regulatory compliance. In particular, those located outside the United States may be subject to significantly less stringent regulatory and compliance requirements in their local jurisdictions. Digital asset trading platforms may be out of compliance with existing regulations.

As a result, trading activity on or reported by these digital asset trading platforms may reflect behavior that would be prohibited in regulated U.S. trading venues. Furthermore, many digital asset trading platforms lack certain oversight and safeguards put in place by more traditional exchanges to enhance the stability of trading on the platform and prevent market manipulation. As a result, the prices of digital assets such as BERA on digital asset trading platforms may be subject to larger and/or more frequent sudden declines than assets traded on more traditional exchanges. Tools to detect and deter fraudulent or manipulative trading activities (such as market manipulation, front-running of trades, and wash-trading) may not be available to or employed by digital asset trading platforms or may not exist at all. Consequently, the marketplace may lose confidence in, or may experience problems relating to, these venues.

No digital asset trading platform on which BERA trades is immune from these risks. The closure or temporary shutdown of digital asset trading platforms due to fraud, business failure, hackers or malware, or government-mandated regulation may reduce confidence in Berachain and can slow down the mass adoption of Berachain as a base layer protocol. Further, digital asset trading platform failures or the failure of any other major component of the overall Berachain ecosystem can have an adverse effect on the price of BERA, and could therefore have a negative impact on our financial condition and the value of our Common Stock.

Negative perception, a lack of stability in the digital asset trading platforms, manipulation of BERA on trading platforms by customers and/or the closure or temporary shutdown of such trading platforms due to fraud, business failure, hackers or malware, or government-mandated regulation may reduce confidence in digital assets generally or BERA specifically, and result in greater volatility in the market price of digital assets, including BERA, and negatively impact the price of our Common Stock.

Digital assets represent a new and rapidly evolving industry, and the value of our Common Stock may depend, in large part, on the acceptance of Berachain and applications built on the Berachain protocol.

The first digital asset, bitcoin, was launched in 2009. The Berachain protocol launched its mainnet in February 2025. In general, digital asset networks, including Berachain and other cryptographic and algorithmic protocols governing the issuance of digital assets, represent a new and rapidly evolving industry that is subject to a variety of factors that are difficult to evaluate. For example, the realization of one or more of the following risks could materially adversely affect the value of our Common Stock:

● Berachain and Berachain-based applications today have limited use. As a result, the price of BERA may be influenced to a significant extent by speculators, thus contributing to price volatility.

● Users, protocol and application developers and validators may otherwise switch to or adopt certain digital assets at the expense of their engagement with other digital asset networks, which may negatively impact those networks, including Berachain.

● Digital asset networks, including networks and networks utilizing Berachain, are in the early stages of development. Given the recentness of the development of digital asset networks, digital assets may not function as intended and parties may be unwilling to use digital assets, which would dampen the growth, if any, of digital asset networks. Because BERA is a digital asset, the value of the Common Stock is subject to a number of factors relating to the fundamental investment characteristics of digital assets, including the fact that digital assets are bearer instruments and loss, theft, compromise, or destruction of the associated private keys could result in permanent loss of the asset.

● Digital asset networks are dependent upon the internet. A disruption of the internet or a digital asset network, such as Berachain, would affect the ability to transfer digital assets, including BERA, and, consequently, a disruption may impact BERA’s value.

● Although unlikely, the acceptance of software patches or upgrades by a significant, but not overwhelming, percentage of the users and validators in a digital asset network, such as Berachain, could result in a “fork” in such network’s blockchain, including Berachain, resulting in the operation of multiple separate networks.

● Governance of the Berachain protocol is by voluntary consensus. As a result, there may be a lack of consensus or clarity on the governance of the Berachain protocol, which may stymie Berachain’s utility and ability to grow and face challenges. In particular, it may be difficult to find solutions or marshal sufficient effort to overcome any future problems on Berachain, especially long-term problems.

● In the past, flaws in the source code for digital assets have been exposed and exploited, including flaws that disabled some functionality for users, exposed users’ personal information and/or resulted in the theft of users’ digital assets. The cryptography underlying Berachain or other blockchain networks could prove to be flawed or ineffective, or developments in mathematics and/or technology, including advances in digital computing, algebraic geometry and quantum computing, could result in such cryptography becoming ineffective. In any of these circumstances, a malicious actor may be able to compromise the security of Berachain or take our BERA, which would adversely affect the value of the Common Stock. Moreover, functionality of Berachain may be negatively affected such that it is no longer attractive to users, thereby dampening demand for BERA. Even if another digital asset other than BERA were affected by similar circumstances, any reduction in confidence in the source code or cryptography underlying digital assets generally could negatively affect the demand for digital assets and therefore adversely affect the value of the Common Stock.

Moreover, because digital assets, including BERA, have been in existence for a relatively short period of time and are continuing to develop, there may be additional risks in the future that are impossible to predict as of the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Berachain is a relatively new technological innovation with a limited operating history.

Berachain has a limited history of existence and operations. The Berachain protocol launched in early 2025, with BERA first becoming tradable on major global cryptocurrency exchanges in February 2025. As a result, there is only a brief performance record regarding the technical stability, security, scalability, and economic behavior of the Berachain protocol under real-world conditions. The network has not yet been tested through prolonged periods of high transaction volume, sustained validator participation, adverse market conditions, or significant stress on the PoL incentive system, including PoLv2 mechanics such as dynamic emissions, delegation weighting, and reward module execution. As such, there is only limited historical data to assess the resilience of core Berachain protocol components—such as BERA staking dynamics, BGT governance efficiency, or dApp reward distribution—during network congestion, token price volatility, or coordinated economic attacks. Although past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results, a longer operational track record might provide greater insight into the protocol’s ability to maintain PoL consensus stability, sustain liquidity in key markets, or adapt to evolving user and validator behavior. Accordingly, based upon the timing of our marketing and promotional initiatives, we have and may continue to experience significant variability in our month-to-month results, which could affect our ability to formulate strategies that allow us to maintain our market presence across volatile months. The absence of such history increases uncertainty regarding the long-term viability of the Berachain network and the value of an investment in our Common Stock.

If we or our counterparties suffer losses as a result of DeFi protocol failures, hacks, or exploits, we may be unable to recover some or all of our assets. Such an event could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, and the market price of our Common Stock.

As of the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K we have not engaged a significant portion of our assets with DeFi protocols yet.

We face other risks related to our BERA treasury reserve business model.

Our BERA treasury reserve business model exposes us to various risks, including the following:

●

BERA and other digital assets are subject to significant legal, commercial, regulatory, and technical uncertainty, and our BERA strategy subjects us to enhanced regulatory oversight;

Blockchain technology may expose us to sanctioned or blocked persons or may result in unintentional or inadvertent violations of economic sanctions and anti-money laundering laws and regulations.

We are subject to the rules enforced by the Office of Foreign Assets Control of the U.S. Department of the Treasury (“OFAC”), including prohibitions on conducting direct or indirect business with persons named on, or owned by persons named on, OFAC’s various sanctions lists, including the Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons list (“SDN List”). We are also prohibited from direct or indirect dealings with persons located, organized, or resident in jurisdictions subject to comprehensive U.S. economic sanctions (as of today, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, the so-called Donetsk People’s Republic, the so-called Luhansk People’s Republic, and the Crimea region of Ukraine), and may be prohibited from dealing with persons in other jurisdictions subject to targeted U.S. sanctions such as Venezuela, Russia, and Belarus.

U.S. sanctions compliance obligations apply to all U.S. persons and cover transactions in digital assets. U.S. sanctions authorities and law enforcement have, in recent years, directed significant attention to sanctions compliance among the digital assets industry. For example, OFAC has issued updated advisories regarding the use of virtual currencies, added a number of digital asset exchanges and service providers to the SDN List, and engaged in several enforcement actions, including a series of enforcement actions that have either shut down or significantly curtailed the operations of several smaller digital asset exchanges associated with Russian and/or North Korean nationals.

Because of the pseudonymous nature of blockchain transactions and decentralized applications, we may inadvertently and without knowledge, directly or indirectly engage in transactions with or for the benefit of prohibited persons under U.S. sanctions regulations, especially when engaging in DeFi activities where it may be impossible for us to determine the identity of our counterparties. OFAC may impose civil penalties for sanctions violations on a “strict liability” basis, meaning we may be held responsible for transacting with prohibited parties even if we have no knowledge that a particular counterparty is a prohibited person under U.S. sanctions regulations. In addition, we may be subject to non-U.S. economic sanctions laws and regulations to the extent we conduct activity within the jurisdiction of other sanctions regimes, including those of the European Union and United Kingdom.

OFAC and other governmental authorities have significant discretion in the interpretation and enforcement of U.S. economic sanctions laws and regulations. Moreover, economic sanctions laws and regulations continue to evolve, often with little or no notice, which could raise operational or compliance challenges. If it is determined that we have transacted with prohibited persons under U.S. sanctions regulations, even inadvertently, this could result in substantial reputational harm, fines or penalties, and costs associated with governmental inquiries and investigations. Despite our compliance efforts and activities we cannot assure compliance by our employees or representatives for which we may be held responsible, and any or all of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, operations or financial condition.

In addition, there has been increasing focus on the extent to which digital assets can be used to launder the proceeds of illegal activities or fund criminal or terrorist activities. This misuse, or the perception of such misuse, could lead to greater regulatory oversight of BERA and BERA platforms, and there is the possibility that law enforcement agencies could close or blacklist BERA platforms or other BERA-related infrastructure with little or no notice and prevent users from accessing or retrieving BERA held via such platforms or infrastructure.

BERA held by us are not subject to FDIC or SIPC protections.

We will not hold our BERA with a banking institution or a member of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) or the Securities Investor Protection Corporation (“SIPC”), and, therefore, our BERA holdings are not subject to the protections enjoyed by depositors with FDIC or SIPC member institutions. As a result, we may suffer a loss with respect to our BERA that is not covered by insurance, and we may not be able to recover any of our carried value in our BERA holdings if they are lost or stolen or suffer significant and sustained reduction in conversion spot price. If we are not otherwise able to recover damages from a malicious actor in connection with these losses, our business and results of operations may suffer, which may have a material negative impact on our stock price.

Risks Related to Our Use of Derivatives on BERA

We plan to engage in derivatives transactions, including call options and put options on BERA, and such transactions may expose us to material risks that could adversely impact our business, operating results and financial condition.

We may from time to time utilize call options and put options on BERA as part of our treasury reserve strategy. These derivatives are intended to (i) hedge downside exposure to BERA price volatility and (ii) accelerate our accumulation of BERA in a capital-efficient manner. While these option strategies may enhance our risk-adjusted returns, they expose us to additional risks, including the following:

Any of these risks could materially and adversely affect the value of our BERA treasury, our financial condition, and the market price of our Common Stock.

We face market, liquidity, and concentration risks.

Prices of digital assets, including BERA and stablecoins, can be volatile and may experience rapid declines, thin liquidity, trading halts, forks, or network outages. If active markets deteriorate or become unavailable, we may be unable to liquidate positions or may be required to use less observable inputs to measure fair value, which would increase earnings volatility and valuation uncertainty. Beginning with periods after October 2025, in-scope crypto assets are measured at fair value with changes recognized in earnings, which may significantly increase quarterly volatility.

We face custody, security, and operational risks.

Self-custody and third-party custody arrangements expose us to loss from cyberattacks, key compromise, operational error, or vendor failure. Our controls include dual-authorization wallet policies and Board-level oversight through a Digital Assets Committee. Crypto assets are not legal tender, are not backed by any government, and are not insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or the Securities Investor Protection Corporation. Custody arrangements, whether self-custody or with a third-party custodian, are not bank deposits. Losses may occur due to cyberattack, key compromise, protocol failure, operational error, or custodian insolvency. In an insolvency of a third-party custodian, we could be treated as a general unsecured creditor and may not recover all assets.

We face legal, regulatory, and sanctions risks.

Digital-asset activities are subject to uncertain and evolving United States and foreign legal requirements, including securities, commodities, money transmission, and sanctions laws. The Securities and Exchange Commission has emphasized clear disclosure of crypto exposures, counterparties, liquidity impacts, and regulatory developments. Failure to comply with sanctions screening, including screening of counterparties and addresses, may result in penalties under strict-liability regimes. New rules, enforcement actions, or interpretations could restrict activities, require changes to controls, or increase compliance costs.

We face financial reporting and valuation risks.

New fair-value accounting requires daily pricing controls, principal-market assessments, fair-value hierarchy classification, and expanded disclosures. Weaknesses in new processes could lead to control deficiencies or a material weakness. We will measure in-scope crypto assets at fair value with changes recognized in earnings beginning in the fourth quarter of 2025. Market price swings could cause material variability in reported results in periods when we hold crypto assets.

We face counterparty, stablecoin, and protocol risks.

Stablecoins may lose their pegs, face redemption stress, or be subject to issuer or reserve-asset risk. On-chain protocols and bridges can fail or be exploited, causing loss of value or inaccessibility of assets. Dependencies on exchanges, market-makers, analytics vendors, or custodians introduce additional counterparty risk that may not be diversifiable. Our ability to hedge these risks is limited and may be costly or unavailable during market stress.

We face governance, controls, and key-person risks.

The digital-asset strategy relies on specialized expertise and new governance, including dual-authorization wallet policies and Board-level oversight. If key personnel are unavailable or if controls are not designed and operated effectively, we could experience losses, reporting errors, or control deficiencies and may incur increased audit and compliance costs.

We face related-party and conflicts risks.

The Chief Investment Officer has industry relationships in the digital-asset ecosystem, including with Berachain-affiliated entities. Transactions or arrangements with related parties could create actual or perceived conflicts of interest. We may determine that certain transactions require disclosure under accounting standards or the federal securities laws, and any failure to identify, approve, and disclose such transactions could result in regulatory scrutiny or reputational harm.

We face stablecoin classification risks.

The classification of U.S. dollar-pegged stablecoins as cash equivalents involves judgment and may be subject to challenge.

The Company classifies certain U.S. dollar-denominated stablecoins as cash equivalents for financial reporting purposes based on management’s assessment that such instruments are readily convertible to known amounts of U.S. dollars and present an insignificant risk of changes in value. Stablecoins are not legal tender and may be subject to issuer credit risk, reserve adequacy risk, redemption limitations, de-pegging events, cybersecurity incidents, or regulatory restrictions and are issued by private entities. Regulatory, accounting, or market developments could result in stablecoins being deemed not to meet the definition of cash equivalents. If such classification were required to change, the Company’s reported liquidity metrics, working capital, and presentation of financial position could be materially affected.

We Face Stablecoin Liquidity and DeFi Deployment Risk.

Stablecoins deployed into decentralized finance protocols may not be immediately liquid and may be subject to additional risks. To the extent the Company deploys stablecoins into DeFi protocols for yield generation, such assets may be subject to smart contract risk, liquidity risk, withdrawal restrictions, or protocol governance changes. Stablecoins deposited into such protocols may not be immediately redeemable at par value and could experience losses in the event of a protocol exploit, de-pegging event, or counterparty failure. To the extent the Company deploys stablecoins or digital assets into decentralized finance protocols, such assets may become subject to smart contract risk, withdrawal restrictions, liquidity constraints, counterparty risk, or protocol-level losses. Such risks could materially affect liquidity and financial condition.

Risks Related to Our Business and Industry

Global economic conditions, including global conflicts, inflation and supply chain disruptions, could materially and adversely our business, prospects, results of operations, financial condition, or cash flows.

Our business and operations are sensitive to global economic conditions. General global economic downturns and macroeconomic trends, including heightened inflation, volatility in the capital markets, interest rate and currency rate fluctuations, the ongoing war in Ukraine, recent and ongoing military conflicts between the U.S.-Israel alliance and Iran and its proxies, and economic slowdown or recession, may result in unfavorable conditions that could negatively affect demand for our products and exacerbate some of the other risks that affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. Both domestic and international markets experienced significant inflationary pressures in 2025 and inflation rates in the U.S. are currently expected to continue at elevated levels for the near-term. In addition, the Federal Reserve has raised, and is expected to continue to raise, interest rates in response to concerns about inflation, which, coupled with reduced government spending and volatility in financial markets, may have the effect of further increasing economic uncertainty and heightening these risks. Interest rate increases or other government actions taken to reduce inflation could also result in an economic recession.

The global economy, including credit and financial markets, has experienced extreme volatility and disruptions, including severely diminished liquidity and credit availability, declines in consumer confidence, declines in economic growth, increases in unemployment rates, increases in inflation rates and uncertainty about economic stability. Global conflicts, such as those described above, have created extreme volatility in the global capital markets and may continue to have further global economic consequences, including disruptions of the global supply chain and energy markets. Any such volatility and disruptions may have adverse consequences on us or the third parties on whom we rely. If the equity and credit markets deteriorate, including as a result of geopolitical unrest or war, it may make any necessary debt or equity financing more difficult to obtain in a timely manner or on favorable terms, more costly or more dilutive. As such, changes in the political environment and other factors beyond our control could result in a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We have incurred significant operating and net losses and anticipate that we will continue to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future.

The Company has incurred net losses of $85.6 million and $17.7 million for the years ended December 31, 2025 and 2024, and the Company used $16.3 million and $6.8 million in operating activities, respectively.

Our ability to continue as a going concern is contingent upon successful execution of management’s intended plan over the next twelve months to improve our liquidity and profitability, which includes, without limitation:

There can be no assurance that any such measures will be successful. If we are not successful in improving our liquidity position and the profitability of our operations, we may need to consider all strategic alternatives, including seeking additional debt or equity capital, reducing or delaying our business activities and strategic initiatives, or selling assets, other strategic transactions and/or other measures, including receivership or, to the extent available, bankruptcy protection. In addition, the perception that we may not be able to continue as a going concern may cause vendors and customers to choose not to do business with us due to concerns about our ability to meet our contractual obligations. If we seek additional financing to fund our operations and there remains substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern, our financing sources may be unwilling to provide additional funding to us on commercially reasonable terms or at all. The consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments that may result from the outcome of this going concern uncertainty. Such adjustments could be material.

If we are required to seek additional financing sources, they may not be available to us on attractive terms if at all and could restrict our ability to engage in certain business activities.

Due to limited access to the debt markets, we have been required to issue equity at prices that are dilutive to stockholders. We may be forced to continue to seek equity capital at dilutive prices through other means if other financing is not available to us to fund our working capital needs. In the past, because of the nature of our industry, we have had difficulties establishing relationships with certain financial institutions and may continue to face such difficulties. As a result, indebtedness or other forms of financing may not be available to us on attractive terms or at all. Furthermore, we may have to seek financing from non-traditional sources such as private equity and hedge funds, which may require us to give up significant governance or other rights or agree to economic and other terms that are not favorable.

In addition, future financing agreements we may enter into in the future may contain customary negative covenants and other financial and operating covenants that, among other things:

We had cash and cash equivalents available as of December 31, 2025, of $32.5 million. In addition, our revenue for the year ended December 31, 2025, was down from prior years and has declined in recent quarters. If we are unable to access additional liquidity through successful execution of our cost cutting strategic initiatives and revenue goals, we may have significant cash constraints, which would have a material adverse impact on our business, results of operations and ability to pay our debts as they come due.

Our financial results and the market price of our Common Stock may be affected by the prices of BERA.

As part of our capital allocation strategy for assets that are not required to provide working capital for our ongoing operations, we have invested and will continue to invest in BERA. As of February 27, 2026, we hold approximately 70.4 million BERA. The price of BERA has historically been subject to dramatic price fluctuations and is highly volatile. In addition, because our Treasury Policy is currently primarily concentrated in BERA, adverse developments specific to BERA, including protocol-level failures, governance decisions, validator network instability, or ecosystem contraction, could disproportionately impact our financial condition.

Any decrease in the fair value of BERA below our carrying value for such assets could require us to incur a loss due to the decrease in fair market value, and such charge could be material to our financial results for the applicable reporting period, which may create significant volatility in our reported earnings. Any decrease in reported earnings or increased volatility of such earnings could have a material adverse effect on the market price of our Common Stock. In addition, the application of generally accepted accounting principles in the United States, with respect to BERA, may change in the future and could have a material adverse effect on our financial results and the market price of our Common Stock.

In addition, if investors view the value of our Common Stock as dependent upon or linked to the value or change in the value of our BERA holdings, the price of BERA may significantly influence the market price of our Common Stock.

Our Common Stock may trade at a substantial premium or discount to the value of the BERA tokens we hold, and our stock price may be more volatile than the price of BERA.

The market price of our Common Stock reflects many factors that do not affect the spot price of BERA and may therefore diverge materially — positively or negatively — from the per-share value of our BERA token holdings (net of cash, other assets and liabilities). These factors include, among others: our corporate-level expenses; taxes; the timing, size and pricing of equity or debt financings (including at-the-market offerings, equity line financings or convertible securities), equity awards and other sources of dilution; expectations about our future purchases or sales of BERA tokens or our onchain activities, including staking, validator or other DeFi initiatives; our liquidity and public float; differences in trading hours and market microstructure between our Common Stock and spot markets for BERA tokens; changes in index inclusion, analyst coverage or investor sentiment toward us as an operating company; our corporate governance, financial reporting, and any actual or perceived operational, custody, technology or regulatory risks specific to us; and broader equity-market conditions independent of digital asset markets. As a result, our Common Stock may trade at a premium or discount to the value of our BERA token holdings for extended periods, and may be more volatile than the price of BERA tokens. Accordingly, investors could lose all or a substantial part of their investment even if the market price of BERA does not decline, and may not benefit commensurately from increases in the market price of BERA tokens.

Our historical financial statements do not reflect the potential variability in earnings that we may experience in the future relating to our BERA token holdings.

Our historical financial statements do not reflect the potential variability in earnings that we may experience in the future from holding or selling significant amounts of BERA tokens.

The price of BERA tokens is subject to dramatic price fluctuations and is highly volatile. For example, from February 6, 2025 (the date BERA tokens first became available on digital asset trading platforms) through March 28, 2026, the price of BERA tokens, as reported by CoinGecko.com, ranged from a high of approximately $14.99to a low of $0.34. We are required to measure our BERA token holdings at fair value in our statement of financial position, and to recognize gains and losses from changes in the fair value of our BERA tokens in net income each reporting period, which may create significant volatility in our reported earnings and decrease the carrying value of our digital assets, which in turn could have a material adverse effect on the market price of our common stock. Conversely, any sale of BERA tokens at prices above our carrying value for such assets creates a gain for financial reporting purposes even if we would otherwise incur an economic or tax loss with respect to such transaction, which also may result in significant volatility in our reported earnings.

Because we intend to purchase additional BERA tokens in future periods and increase our overall holdings of BERA tokens, we expect that the proportion of our total assets represented by our BERA token holdings will increase in the future. As a result, volatility in our earnings may be significantly more than what we experienced in prior periods.

For many reasons, including those described below, our operating results, revenues, and expenses may vary significantly in the future from quarter to quarter. These fluctuations could have an adverse effect on the market price of our Common Stock.

The trading prices of many digital assets, including BERA, have experienced extreme volatility in recent periods and may continue to do so. Extreme volatility in the future, including further declines in the trading prices of BERA, could have a material adverse effect on the value of the Common Stock.

The trading prices of many digital assets, including BERA, have experienced extreme volatility in recent periods and may continue to do so, including as a result of shifts in market sentiment, speculative trading, macroeconomic trends, technology-related disruptions, and regulatory announcements. Digital asset trading markets, including the BERA network, are relatively new, largely unregulated, and, at times, subject to limited liquidity. As a result, trading activity on or reported by these digital asset trading platforms, including BERA, is generally significantly less regulated than trading in regulated U.S. securities and commodities markets and may reflect behavior that would be prohibited in regulated U.S. trading venues. Furthermore, many digital asset trading platforms lack certain safeguards put in place by more traditional exchanges to enhance the stability of trading on the platform. The digital asset markets may also be experiencing a bubble or may experience a bubble in the future, which may undermine confidence and affect liquidity of the digital asset markets. A rapid decrease in the price of BERA —whether as a result of negative perception, a lack of stability in the digital asset trading platforms, market manipulation of cryptocurrency trading platforms by customers, a cyber-security incident, regulatory action, or other factors—could materially reduce the value of any BERA we hold, force us to recognize impairment charges, trigger defaults or covenant breaches in any future financing arrangements, and could have a material adverse effect on the value of our Common Stock that may result in the loss of all or substantially all of its value.

If we fail to manage our business and growth effectively, we may be unable to execute our business plan, maintain high levels of service or address competitive challenges adequately.

Our success will depend, in part, on our ability to manage our business and its growth, both domestically and internationally. Any growth in, expansion of, or shift in the focus of our business, is likely to continue to place a strain on our management and administrative resources, infrastructure and systems. As with other businesses, we expect that we will need to further refine and expand our business development capabilities, our systems and processes and our access to financing sources. We will also need to hire, train, supervise, and manage new employees. These processes are time consuming and expensive and will increase management responsibilities and divert management attention. We cannot assure that we will be able to:

Our inability or failure to manage our business and its growth effectively could harm our business and materially adversely affect our operating results and financial condition. In addition, we believe that an important contributor to our success has been and will continue to be our corporate culture, which we believe fosters innovation, teamwork and a passion for our products and customers. As a result of our rapid growth, we may find it difficult to build and maintain our strong corporate culture, which could limit our ability to innovate and operate effectively. Any failure to preserve our culture could also negatively affect our ability to retain current and recruit new personnel, continue to perform at current levels or execute on our business strategy.

Management and employee turnover creates uncertainties and could harm our business.

We have experienced significant turnover in our executive leadership in recent years. Changes to strategic or operating goals, which oftentimes occur with the appointment of new executives and board members, can create uncertainty, may negatively impact our ability to execute quickly and effectively, and may ultimately be unsuccessful. In addition, executive leadership transition periods are often difficult as the new executives gain detailed knowledge of our operations, and friction can result from changes in strategy and management style. Management turnover inherently causes some loss of institutional knowledge, which can negatively affect strategy and execution. Until we integrate new personnel, and unless they are able to succeed in their positions, we may be unable to successfully manage and grow our business, and our financial condition and profitability may suffer.

Further, to the extent we experience additional management turnover, competition for top management is high and it may take months to find a candidate that meets our requirements. If we are unable to attract and retain qualified management personnel, our business could suffer. Our future success will also depend on our ability to identify, recruit and retain additional qualified technical and managerial personnel. We operate in several geographic locations where labor markets are particularly competitive, where demand for personnel with these skills is extremely high and is likely to remain high. As a result, competition for qualified personnel is intense, particularly in the areas of general management, finance, engineering and science, and the process of hiring suitably qualified personnel is often lengthy and expensive and may become more expensive in the future. If we are unable to hire and retain a sufficient number of qualified employees, our ability to conduct and expand our business could be seriously reduced.

The market for vaporizer products and related items is a niche market, subject to a great deal of uncertainty and is still evolving.

Vaporizer products comprise a significant portion of our product portfolio. Many of these products have only recently been introduced to the market and are at an early stage of development. These products represent core components of a niche market that is evolving rapidly, is characterized by a number of market participants and is subject to regulatory oversight and a potentially fluctuating regulatory framework. Rapid growth in the use of, and interest in, vaporizer products is recent and may not continue on a lasting basis. The demand and market acceptance for these products is subject to a high level of uncertainty, including, but not limited to, changes in governmental regulation, developments in product technology, perceived safety and efficacy of our products, perceived advantages of competing products and sale and use of materials that can be vaporized, including in the expanding legal state cannabis markets. Therefore, we are subject to many of the business risks associated with a new enterprise in a niche market. Continued technical evolution, market uncertainty, evolving regulation and the resulting risk of failure of our new and existing product offerings in this market could have a material adverse effect on our ability to build and maintain market share and on our business, results of operations and financial condition. Further, there can be no assurance that we will be able to continue to compete effectively in this marketplace.

We depend on third-party suppliers for our products and may experience supply shortages which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

We depend on third-party suppliers for our vaporization products and consumption accessories product offerings. Our customers associate certain characteristics of our products, including the weight, feel, draw, flavor, packaging and other unique attributes, to the brands we market, distribute and sell. In the future, we may have difficulty obtaining the products we need from our suppliers as a result of unexpected demand or production difficulties that might extended lead times, as well as due to constraints relating to our low cash position. Also, products may not be available to us in quantities sufficient to meet our customer demand. Any interruption in supply and/or consistency of these products may adversely impact our ability to deliver products to our customers, may harm our relationships and reputation with our customers, and may have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. Interruptions in supply or consistency of products could arise for a number of reasons, including but not limited to economic and civil unrest, public health crises, embargoes, and sanctions.

There is uncertainty related to the regulation of vaporization products and certain other consumption accessories. Increased regulatory compliance burdens, no matter how they arise, could have a material adverse impact on our business development efforts and our operations.

United States

There is uncertainty regarding whether, in what circumstances, how and when the FDA will seek to enforce the tobacco-related provisions of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (“FFDCA”) relative to vaporizer hardware and accessories that can be used to vaporize cannabis and other material, including electronic cigarettes, rolling papers and glassware, in light of the potential for dual use with tobacco.

Through amendments to the FFDCA, the Tobacco Control Act established, by statute, that the FDA has oversight over specific types of tobacco products (cigarettes, cigarette tobacco, roll-your-own (“RYO”) tobacco, and smokeless tobacco) and granted the FDA the authority to “deem” other types of tobacco products as subject to the statutory requirements. In addition to establishing authority, defining key terminology, and setting adulteration and misbranding standards, the Tobacco Control Act established FDA’s authority over tobacco products in a number of areas such as: submission of health information to the FDA; registration with the FDA; premarket authorization requirements; good manufacturing practice requirements; tobacco product standards; notification, recall, corrections, and removals; records and reports; marketing considerations and restrictions; post-market surveillance and studies; labeling and warnings; and recordkeeping and tracking. Although the vast majority of our vaporizer products are not subject to these regulations because they are not intended for use with tobacco or nicotine, changes in law, regulation, or policy that subject a greater portion of our products to these regulations could occur.

In a final rule effective August 8, 2016 (“Deeming Rule”), the FDA deemed all products that meet the Tobacco Control Act’s definition of “tobacco product,” including components and parts but excluding accessories, to be subject to the tobacco control requirements of the FFDCA and the FDA’s implementing regulations. Accordingly, as of the Deeming Rule’s effective date, deemed tobacco products that are “new” (i.e., those that were not commercially marketed in the United States as of February 15, 2007) are subject to the premarket authorization requirements. Deemed new tobacco products that remain on the market without authorization are marketed unlawfully.

Deemed new tobacco products include, among other things: products such as electronic cigarettes, electronic cigars, electronic hookahs, vape pens, certain vaporizers and e-liquids and their components or parts (such as tanks, coils and batteries) (“ENDS”). The FDA’s interpretation of components and parts of a tobacco product includes any assembly of materials intended or reasonably expected to be used with or for the human consumption of a tobacco product. In a 2017 decision of the D.C. Circuit court, the court upheld the FDA’s authority to regulate ENDS even though they do not actually contain tobacco, and even if the products could be used with nicotine-free e-liquids.

The Tobacco Control Act and FDA’s implementation of regulations require regulatory approvals before certain products may be sold and restrict the way tobacco product manufacturers, retailers, and distributors can advertise and promote tobacco products, including a prohibition against free samples or the use of vending machines, requirements for presentation of warning information, and age verification of purchasers.

Newly-deemed tobacco products are also subject to the other requirements of the Tobacco Control Act, such as that they not be adulterated or misbranded. The FDA has been directed under the Tobacco Control Act to establish specific good manufacturing practice (“GMP”) regulations for tobacco products, and could do so in the future, which could have a material adverse impact on the ability of some of our suppliers to manufacture, and the cost to manufacture, certain of our products. Even in the absence of specific GMP regulations, a facility’s failure to maintain sanitary conditions or to prevent contamination of products could result in the FDA deeming the products produced there adulterated.

The FDA has announced its intention to take enforcement measures related to ENDS products offered for sale after September 9, 2020, for which the manufacturers had not submitted a PMTA. Following that date, the FDA did in fact take actions against certain manufacturers of ENDS products for which a PMTA had not been submitted. Accordingly, and in light of the laws noted above, premarket authorizations will be necessary for us to continue our distribution of any vaporizer hardware and accessories that meet the FDA’s definition of ENDS. While we do not believe vaporizers intended for use with non-tobacco substances meet the FDA’s definition of ENDS, it is possible that the FDA could require premarket authorization for such products.

Our suppliers who make vaporizers that are currently, or in the future become, subject to FDA regulation must timely file applications for the appropriate authorizations so that we may continue selling their products in the United States. We have no control over the content of those applications, and we have no assurances that the outcome of the FDA’s review will result in authorization of the marketing of these products. If the FDA establishes or applies review standards or processes that our suppliers are unable or unwilling to comply with, our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects would be adversely affected.

The anticipated costs to our suppliers of complying with future FDA regulations will be dependent on the rules issued by the FDA, the timing and clarity of any new rules or guidance documents accompanying these rules, the reliability and simplicity (or complexity) of the electronic systems utilized by the FDA for information and reports to be submitted, and the details required by the FDA for such information and reports with respect to each regulated product. Any failure to comply with existing or new FDA regulatory requirements could result in significant financial penalties to us or our suppliers, which could ultimately have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and ability to market and sell our products. Compliance and related costs could be substantial and could significantly increase the costs of operating in the vaporization products and certain other consumption accessories markets.

In addition, failure to comply with the Tobacco Control Act and with FDA regulatory requirements could result in litigation, criminal convictions or significant financial penalties and could impair our ability to market and sell some of our vaporizer products. At present, we are not able to predict whether the Tobacco Control Act will impact our business to a greater degree than competitors in the industry, thus affecting our competitive position.

As discussed elsewhere in these Risk Factors and under the heading Regulatory Developments, a number of states and cities have implemented bans or restrictions on the sale of vaporizers and accessories, as well as flavored tobacco products, including vaping liquids and menthol cigarettes. There may, in the future, also be increased regulation of additives in smokeless products and internet sales of vaporization products and certain other consumption accessories. The application of either or both of current federal, state, and local, laws, and of any new laws or regulations which may be adopted in the future at the federal, state, or local level, to vaporization products, consumption accessories or such additives could result in additional expenses and require us to change our advertising and labeling, and methods of marketing and distribution of our products, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Canada

On May 23, 2018, the Tobacco and Vaping Products Act (“TVPA”) became effective, and now governs the manufacture, sale, labeling and promotion of vaping products sold in Canada. The TVPA replaced the former Tobacco Act (Canada) and established a legislative framework that applies to vaping products, whether or not they contain nicotine. The TVPA prescribes high-level requirements in relation to vaping products, with regulations governing specific topics such as nicotine concentration and the promotion of vaping products. Other regulations remain forthcoming and there remains a high degree of uncertainty with respect to the compliance landscape for vaping products. As such, there can be no assurance that we will initially be in total compliance, remain competitive, or financially able to meet future requirements administered pursuant to the TVPA. Prior to the TVPA becoming effective, Health Canada had taken the position that electronic smoking products (i.e., electronic products for the vaporization and administration of inhaled doses of nicotine, including electronic cigarettes, cigars, cigarillos and pipes, as well as cartridges of nicotine solutions and related products) fell within the scope of the Food and Drugs Act (Canada) (“Food and Drugs Act”). Vaping products with therapeutic or health-related claims are subject to the Food and Drugs Act and related regulations. Finally, the TVPA provides the authority to make regulations to collect information from industry about vaping products, their emissions and any research and development (e.g., sales data and information on market research, product composition, ingredients, materials, health effects, hazardous properties and brand elements). Health Canada is currently developing proposed regulations in this area.

On December 21, 2019, Health Canada issued a Regulatory Impact Analysis Statement titled “Vaping Products Promotion Regulations.” The Impact Analysis addressed two proposed new regulations that would place stricter limits on the advertising and promotion of nicotine vaping products and make health warnings on nicotine vaping products mandatory (the “Proposed Regulations”). The Proposed Regulations would: (1) prohibit the promotion of nicotine vaping products and nicotine vaping product-related brand elements by means of advertising that is done in a manner that can be seen or heard by youth, including the display of nicotine vaping products a points of sale where can be seen by youth; and (2) require that all nicotine vaping advertising convey a health warning about the health hazards of nicotine vaping product use.

On July 1, 2020, Health Canada’s “Vaping Products Labeling and Packaging Regulations” (the “VPLPR”) came into effect; requiring (1) all vaping products containing nicotine to display a standardized nicotine concentration statement and health warning about the addictiveness of nicotine; (2) products containing nicotine to be packaged in child-resistant containers and display a toxicity warning and first aid treatment statement; and (3) the display of a list of ingredients contained in the vaping substances, regardless of nicotine content. On July 14, 2020, Health Canada issued a guidance document on vaping products titled, “Industry Guide to vaping products subject to the Canada Consumer Product Safety Act” (the “CCPA Guidance”). The CCPA Guidance provided clarity on requirements under the Canada Consumer Product Safety Act (“CCPSA”) for vaping products that are manufactured, imported, advertised, or sold in Canada. The CCPA Guidance provided clarity on the requirements of the VPLPR and the authority of the CCPSA to address safety issues posed by a vaping product not marketed for therapeutic use or by a cannabis accessory (such as a vaporizer represented to be used in the consumption of cannabis) not marketed for a therapeutic use.

In addition to federal regulations, several provinces, including Alberta, British Columbia, Nova Scotia, Ontario, Prince Edward Island (“PEI”), Quebec, and Saskatchewan, have passed regulations fully restricting or limiting the advertising and sales of certain types of nicotine vaping products. Many provinces have focused their tobacco and vaping control efforts on retail access and have taken action to go beyond the minimum requirements in the TVPA. For example, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland and Labrador, and the Northwest Territories, have increased the minimum age of sale to 19. Notably, in Prince Edward Island, as of March 1, 2020, the minimum age for purchasing nicotine products increased to age 21. In 2019. British Columbia, Saskatchewan, and Ontario limited the sales of flavored vaping products with exceptions for some flavors to specialty stores, whereas some provinces have banned flavored vaping products, with the exception of tobacco flavor (Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island). By way of example, on August 11, 2020, PEI adopted a regulation to ban the sale of all flavored vaping products, effective March 1, 2021. Quebec is currently considering a ban on flavored products and effective as of March 25, 2022, the sale of flavored vapor products was banned in the Northwest Territories.

Moreover, certain provinces (British Columbia, Newfoundland and Labrador, Saskatchewan, Quebec, Nova Scotia) have implemented an e-cigarette retail licensing system or have guidelines for retailers in order to prevent sales to minors (Alberta, British Columbia, Newfoundland and Labrador, Prince Edward Island, Saskatchewan).

Finally, with respect to the taxation of vaping products, the Canadian government introduced amendments to the Excise Act, 2001 to implement a new excise duty framework on vaping products. These amendments became law on June 23, 2022. The new framework applies to vaping products that are manufactured in Canada or imported, and that are intended for use in a vaping device in Canada. Manufacturers of vaping products are required to get a vaping product license from the Canada Revenue Agency (“CRA”). Importers are required to apply for registration from the CRA. Manufacturers and importers are also required to register for the vaping stamping regime. All vaping products entering the Canadian duty-paid market are required to be packaged with an excise stamp affixed to the product. The excise stamps shows that duties have been paid.

These developments, together with the passed and proposed federal and provincial regulations may have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

We may be unable to identify or contract with new suppliers in the event of a disruption to our supply.

In the event of a disruption to our supply of products, we would have to identify new suppliers that can meet our needs. Only a limited number of suppliers may have the ability to produce certain products we sell at the volumes we need, and it could be costly or time-consuming to locate and approve such alternative sources. Moreover, it may be difficult or costly to find suppliers to produce small volumes of products in the event we are looking only to supplement our current supply as suppliers may impose minimum order requirements. In addition, we may be unable to negotiate pricing or other terms with our existing or new suppliers as favorable as those we currently enjoy. We cannot guarantee that a failure to adequately replace or supplement our existing suppliers would not have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Demand for the products we distribute could decrease if the trend of our suppliers selling products directly to consumers or retailers continues or accelerates.

Retailers and consumers of vaporization products and consumption accessories have historically purchased certain amounts of these products directly from suppliers. Recently, direct to consumer sales of vaporization products and consumption accessories have accelerated, consistent with broader sales trends. If our customers were to increase their purchases of products directly from suppliers, or if suppliers further increase their efforts to sell such products directly to consumers or retailers, we could experience a significant decrease in our business, results of operations and financial condition. These, or other developments that remove us from, or limit our role in, the distribution chain, may harm our competitive position in the marketplace and reduce our sales and earnings and adversely affect our business.

We are vulnerable to third-party transportation risks, including governmental laws and common carriers’ policies that prevent the shipment of the types of products we sell.

We depend on fast and efficient shipping services to distribute our products. Any prolonged disruption of these services may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Rising costs associated with transportation services used by us to receive or deliver our products, including tariffs, as well as delays as a results of factors outside of our control have had and may continue to have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, which was signed into law on December 27, 2020, contains provisions that prohibit the mailing of ENDS through the United States Postal Service (“USPS”) and place certain regulatory requirements on shipment of ENDS through other carriers. Certain private carriers, including UPS and FedEx, also have policies restricting or prohibiting the shipment of certain vaporization products we sell, requiring us to occasionally rely upon smaller carriers that are more expensive and serve fewer geographic areas. Although we received USPS approval in December 2021 for a business and regulatory exception to the PACT Act (the “PACT Act Exception”) permitting us to ship ENDS to other PACT Act compliant businesses, there can be no assurances that we will be able to maintain the PACT Act Exception or that the USPS will not elect to rescind the PACT Act Exception. Additional legal or policy changes concerning the shipment of vaporizers could increase our costs materially and deprive us of our ability to timely deliver certain products to certain types of customers. Additionally, rising costs associated with transportation services used by us to receive or deliver our products (including tariffs) and prohibitions on the use of certain shipping services for specified products, may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We do not have long-term agreements or guaranteed price or delivery arrangements with most of our suppliers. The loss of a significant supplier would require us to rely more heavily on our other existing suppliers or to develop relationships with new suppliers. Such a loss may have an adverse effect on our product offerings and our business.

While we have long-term distribution agreements with certain of our suppliers, consistent with industry practice, we do not have guaranteed price or delivery arrangements with most of our suppliers. We generally make our purchases through purchase orders. As a result, we have experienced and may in the future experience inventory shortages or price increases on certain products. Furthermore, our industry occasionally experiences significant product supply shortages, and we sometimes experience customer order backlogs due to the inability of certain suppliers to make available to us certain products as needed. We cannot provide assurances that suppliers will maintain an adequate inventory of products to fulfill our orders on a timely basis, or at all, or that we will be able to obtain particular products on favorable terms, or at all. Additionally, we cannot provide assurances that product lines currently offered by suppliers will continue to be available to us. A decline in the supply or continued availability of the products of our suppliers, or a significant increase in the price of those products, could reduce our sales and negatively affect our operating results.

In addition, some of our suppliers have the ability to terminate their relationships with us at any time, or to decide to sell, or increase their sales of, their products through other resellers or channels. Although we believe there are numerous suppliers with the capacity to supply the products we distribute, the loss of one or more of our major suppliers could have an adverse effect on our product offerings and our business. Such a loss would require us to rely more heavily on our other existing suppliers, develop relationships with new suppliers or undertake our own manufacturing, which may cause us to pay higher prices for products due to, among other things, a loss of volume discount benefits currently obtained from our major suppliers. Any termination, interruption or adverse modification of our relationship with a key supplier or a significant number of other suppliers would likely adversely affect our operating income, cash flow and future prospects.

If we fail to maintain proper inventory levels, our business could be harmed.

We often purchase key products from suppliers prior to the time we receive purchase orders from customers. We do this to minimize purchasing costs, the time necessary to fill customer orders, and the risk of non-delivery. However, we may be unable to sell the products we have purchased in advance. Inventory levels in excess of customer demand have previously and may in the future, result in inventory write-downs, and the sale of excess inventory at discounted prices could significantly impair our brand image and have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. Conversely, if we underestimate demand for our products or if we fail to acquire the products that we require at the time we need them, we may experience inventory shortages. Inventory shortages might delay shipments to customers, reduce revenue, negatively impact customer relationships and diminish brand loyalty, which in turn could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Our success is dependent in part upon our ability to distribute popular products from new suppliers, as well as the ability of our existing suppliers to develop and market products that meet changes in market demand or regulatory requirements.

Many of the products we sell are generally subject to rapid changes in marketplace demand and regulatory requirements. For example, recent laws and regulations have prohibited the sale of certain types of ENDS products that we previously sold. Our success is dependent, in part, upon the ability of our suppliers to develop and market products that meet these changes. Our success is also dependent on our ability to develop relationships with and sell products from new suppliers that address these changes in market demand or regulatory requirements. To the extent products that address recent changes are not available to us, or are not available to us in sufficient quantities or on acceptable terms, we could encounter increased competition, which would likely adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We do not have long-term contracts with many of our customers. The agreements that we do have generally do not commit our customers to any minimum purchase volume. The loss of a significant customer may have a material adverse effect on us.

Our customers generally place orders on an as-needed basis. Consistent with industry practice, we do not have long-term contracts with most of our customers, other than certain retail chains or distributors in Canada and abroad and certain state-licensed cannabis businesses in the United States. In addition, our agreements generally do not commit our customers to any minimum purchase volume. Accordingly, we are exposed to risks from potential adverse financial conditions in the vaporization products and consumption accessories industry, a potentially shifting legal landscape, the general economy, a competitive landscape, a changing technological landscape or changing customer needs or any other change that may affect the demand for our products. We cannot assure you that our customers will continue to place orders with us in similar volumes, on the same terms, or at all. Our customers may terminate their relationships with us or reduce their purchasing volume at any time. Our ten largest customers, in the aggregate, represented approximately 22.1% and 51.1% of our net sales for the years ended December 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively. Our ten largest customers, in the aggregate, represented approximately 51.1 and 39.0% of our net sales for the years ended December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively. The loss of a significant number of customers, or a substantial decrease in a significant customer’s orders, may have an adverse effect on our revenue.

Changes in our customer, product or competition mix could cause our product margin and results of operations to fluctuate.

From time to time, we may experience changes in our customer mix, our product mix or our competition mix. Changes in our customer mix may result from geographic expansion or contractions, mergers and acquisitions among our customer base, legislative, regulatory or enforcement priority changes affecting the products we distribute, selling activities within current geographic markets and targeted selling activities to new customer sectors. For example, our merger with Kushco has shifted our customer mix to include a greater concentration of customers who engage in the cultivation, processing, and/or sale of cannabis. Changes in our product mix may result from marketing activities to existing customers, the needs of existing and prospective customers and from regulatory and legislative changes. Changes in our competition mix may result from new competitors entering into our business segment or existing competitors growing their operations. If customer demand for lower-margin products increases and demand for higher-margin products decreases, our business, results of operations and financial condition may suffer.

Because a material portion of our revenues are derived from sales to consumers indirectly through third-party retailers who operate traditional brick-and-mortar locations, the shift of sales to more online retail business could harm our market share and our revenues in certain sectors.

Our current model for consumer goods includes selling our products through third-party retailers. These third-party retailers operate physical brick-and-mortar locations to sell our product to consumers. The current shift in purchasing demographics due to many factors and the changing preferences of consumers who are moving from in-store purchases to online purchases creates the additional risks of our current revenue streams being impacted negatively and an overall decrease of market share.

We have experienced and may continue to experience difficulty collecting receivables.

If our customers begin or continue to experience financial challenges, they may not have sufficient funds to pay all amounts owed to us. Additionally, laws in some jurisdictions in which we operate make collection of receivables difficult, time consuming or expensive. We generally do not require collateral in support of our trade receivables. While we maintain reserves for expected credit losses, we cannot assure these reserves will be sufficient to meet write-offs of uncollectible receivables or that our losses from such receivables will be consistent with our historical performance. Significant write-offs may affect our business, results of operations and financial condition. As we begin selling our products indirectly through large retailers, customer credit risks will expand.

Our ability to distribute certain licensed brands and to use or license certain trademarks may be terminated or not renewed.

We are reliant upon brand recognition in the markets in which we compete, as the industry is characterized by a high degree of brand loyalty and a reluctance of consumers to switch to substitute or unrecognizable brands. Some of the brands we distribute and the trademarks under which products are sold are licensed for a fixed period of time with regard to specified markets.

In the event that the licenses to use the brand names and trademarks for the products we distribute are terminated or are not renewed after the end of the term, there is no guarantee we or our suppliers will be able to find suitable replacement brands or trademarks, or that if a replacement is found, that it will be on favorable terms. Any loss in brand-name appeal to our existing customers as a result of the lapse or termination of our licenses or the licenses of our suppliers could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We may not be successful in maintaining the consumer brand recognition and loyalty of our products.

We compete in a market that relies on innovation and the ability to react to evolving consumer preferences. The vaporization products and consumption accessories industry is subject to changing consumer trends, demands and preferences. Therefore, products once favored may, over time, become disfavored by consumers or no longer perceived as the best option. Consumers in the vaporizer market have demonstrated a degree of brand loyalty, but suppliers must continue to adapt their products in order to maintain their status among customers as the market evolves. Our continued success depends in part on our ability and our supplier’s ability to continue to differentiate the brand names we represent, own or license and maintain similarly high levels of recognition with target consumers. Trends within the vaporization products and consumption accessories industry change often and our failure to anticipate, identify or react to changes in these trends could, among other things, lead to reduced demand for our products. Factors that have previously and may continue to affect consumer perception of our products include health trends and attention to health concerns associated with herbs, oils, cannabis or other materials used with vaporizers, price-sensitivity in the presence of competitors’ products or substitute products and trends in favor of new vaporization products or technology consumption accessories products that are currently being researched and produced by participants in our industry. For example, in recent years, we have witnessed a shift in consumer purchases from vaporizers designed for dry herbs to those designed for liquids or wax type concentrates. A failure to react to similar trends in the future could enable our competitors to grow or establish their brands’ market share in these categories before we have a chance to respond.

Regulations have recently been and are likely to continue to be enacted in the future that would make it more difficult to appeal to consumers or to leverage the brands that we distribute, own or license. Furthermore, even if we are able to continue to distinguish our products, there can be no assurance that the sales, marketing and distribution efforts of our competitors will not be successful in persuading consumers of our products to switch to their products. Some of our competitors have greater access to resources than we do, which better positions them to conduct market research in relation to branding strategies or costly marketing campaigns. Any loss of consumer brand loyalty to our products or in our ability to effectively brand our products in a recognizable way will have a material effect on our ability to continue to sell our products and maintain our market share, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We may not be able to establish sustainable relationships with large retailers or regional or national chains.

In connection with efforts to enter new sales channels, including large retailers and chains, we may not be able to develop these relationships or continue to maintain relationships with these large retailers or national chains. Our inability to develop and sustain relationships with large retailers and chains may impede our ability to develop brand and product recognition and increase sales volume and, ultimately, require us to continue to rely on local and more fragmented sales channels, which may have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. In addition, if we are unable to develop or maintain relationships with large retailers and national chains and such large retailers or chains take market share from the smaller local and more fragmented sales channels, our business, results of operations and financial condition will be adversely impacted.

New products face intense media attention and public pressure.

Many of our vaporizers and other products are new to the marketplace. Since their introduction, certain members of the media, politicians, government regulators and advocacy groups, including independent doctors, have called for and driven the adoption of stringent regulation of the sale of certain products and in some cases, an outright ban of such products pending increased regulatory review and a further demonstration of safety. For example, local and state governments have banned certain types of vaporization products, such as those containing flavored liquid nicotine and flavored hemp-derived CBD. Additional bans of this type would likely have the effect of terminating our sales and marketing efforts of certain products in jurisdictions in which we may currently market or have plans to market such products. Such bans would also likely cause public confusion as to which products are the subject of bans, which confusion could also have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Our success depends, in part, on the quality and safety of our products, as well as the perception of quality and safety in the vaporization products and consumption accessories industry generally.

Our success depends, in part, on the quality and safety of the products we sell, including manufacturing issues, health concerns about the substances consumed using the products we sell, and unforeseen product misuse. Even a single incident of product defect or misuse, whether relating to products sold by us or just to our industry generally, could result in significant harm to our reputation. For example, incidents of EVALI have, by some metrics, negatively impacted demand for vaporizers. If any of our products are found to be, or are perceived to be, defective or unsafe, or if they otherwise fail to meet our customers’ standards, our relationship with our customers could suffer, our reputation or the appeal of our brands could be diminished, and we could lose market share and/or become subject to liability claims, any of which could result in a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Damage to our reputation, or that of any of our key suppliers or their brands, could affect our business performance.

The success of our business depends in part upon the positive image that consumers have of the third-party brands we distribute. Incidents, publicity or events arising accidentally or through deliberate third-party action that harm the integrity or consumer support of the products we sell could affect the demand for those products. Unfavorable media, whether accurate or not, related to our industry, to us, to our customers, or to the products we sell could negatively affect our corporate reputation, stock price, ability to attract high-quality talent, or the performance of our business. Additional negative publicity or commentary on social media outlets also could cause consumers to react rapidly by avoiding our products and brands or by choosing brands offered by our competitors, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We are subject to substantial and increasing regulation regarding the vaporization industry.

In addition to the FDA regulations concerning vaporizer products discussed elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, we are subject to regulation by numerous other federal agencies, including the Federal Trade Commission, the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, the Federal Communications Commission, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Customs and Border Protection and the U.S. Center for Disease Control and Prevention’s Office on Smoking and Health. There have also been adverse legislative and political decisions and other unfavorable developments concerning cigarette smoking and the tobacco industry, which have received widespread public attention. There can be no assurance as to the ultimate content, timing or effect of any regulation of vaporizer products by governmental bodies, nor can there be any assurance that potential corresponding declines in demand resulting from negative media attention would not have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Significant increases in state and local regulation of our vaporizer products have been proposed and enacted, and are likely to continue to be proposed and enacted in numerous jurisdictions.

As discussed under the heading “Regulatory Developments” above, there has been increasing activity on the state, provincial and local levels with respect to scrutiny of vaporizer products. State and local governmental bodies across the United States have indicated that vaporization products and certain other consumption accessories may become subject to new laws and regulations at the state and local levels. For example, in January 2015, the California Department of Health declared electronic cigarettes and certain other vaporizer products a health threat that should be strictly regulated like tobacco products. Further, many states and cities have enacted regulations that require retailers to obtain a tobacco retail license in order to sell electronic cigarettes and vaporizer products. Many states, provinces and some cities have passed laws restricting the sale of electronic cigarettes and certain other vaporizer products. In March 2023, new federal legislation granted the FDA regulatory authority over synthetic nicotine, making all synthetic nicotine products without a marketing order from the FDA illegal as of July 13th, 2022. If one or more states or provinces from which we generate or anticipate generating significant sales of vaporizer products bring actions that prevent us from selling certain or all of our vaporizer products, we would be required to cease sales and distribution of certain products to those states, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. Additionally, if one or more states or provinces from which we generate or anticipate generating significant sales of vaporizer products bring actions that require us to obtain certain licenses, approvals or permits, and if we are not able to obtain the necessary licenses, approvals or permits for financial reasons or otherwise and/or any such license, approval or permit is determined to be overly burdensome to us, then we may be required to cease sales and distribution of our products to those states, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Certain states, provinces and cities have already restricted the use of electronic cigarettes and vaporizer products in smoke free venues. Additional city, state, provincial or federal regulators, municipalities, local governments and private industry may enact rules and regulations restricting the use of electronic cigarettes and vaporizer products in those same places where cigarettes cannot be smoked. Because of these restrictions, our customers may reduce or otherwise cease using our vaporization products or certain other consumption accessories, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

The Canadian federal government, as well as certain provincial governments have passed or propose to pass legislation which will restrict the extent to which e-cigarettes, e-liquid and other vaping products may be displayed or sold. Additionally, Canadian laws require health warnings to be placed on certain vaporizer products, which could reduce the appeal of these products. These regulations and future regulations could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Based on regulations surrounding health-related concerns related to the use of some of our vaporizer products, possible new or increased taxes by government entities intended to reduce use of our products or to raise revenue, additional governmental regulations concerning the marketing, labeling, packaging or sale of some of our products, negative publicity resulting from actual or threatened legal actions against us or other companies in our industry, all may reduce demand for, or increase the cost of, certain of our products, which could adversely affect our profitability and ultimate success.

Our business depends partly on continued purchases by businesses and individuals selling or using cannabis pursuant to state laws in the United States or Canadian and provincial laws.

Because some of our B2C customers use some of the items that we sell to consume cannabis and some of our B2B customers operate in the legal national and state cannabis industry, our business depends partly on federal, state, provincial and local laws, regulations, guidelines and enforcement pertaining to cannabis. In both the United States and Canada, those factors are in flux.

United States

Currently, in the United States, 47 states and the District of Columbia permit some form of cannabis cultivation, sales, and use for certain medical purposes (“medical states”). Twenty-four of those states and the District of Columbia have also legalized cannabis for adults for non-medical purposes (sometime referred to as recreational use). Several medical states may extend legalization to adult use.

States’ cannabis programs have proliferated and grown even though the cultivation, sale and possession of cannabis is considered illegal under U.S. federal law. Under the CSA, cannabis is a Schedule I drug, meaning that the Drug Enforcement Administration recognizes no accepted medical use for cannabis, and the substance is considered illegal under federal law.

In an effort to provide guidance to U.S. Attorneys’ offices regarding the enforcement priorities associated with cannabis in the United States, the U.S. Department of Justice (the “DOJ”) has issued a series of memoranda detailing its suggested enforcement approach. During the administration of former President Obama, each memorandum acknowledged the DOJ’s authority to enforce the CSA in the face of state laws, but noted that the DOJ was more committed to using its limited investigative and prosecutorial resources to address the most significant threats associated with cannabis in the most effective, consistent, and rational way.

On August 29, 2013, the DOJ issued what came to be called the “Cole Memorandum,” which gave U.S. Attorneys the discretion not to prosecute federal cannabis cases that were otherwise compliant with applicable state law that had legalized medical or adult-use cannabis and that have implemented strong regulatory systems to control the cultivation, production, and distribution of cannabis. The eight federal priorities were preventing:

Accordingly, the Cole Memorandum provided lawful cannabis-related enterprises a tacit federal go-ahead in states with legal cannabis programs, provided that the state had adopted and was enforcing strict regulations and oversight of the medical or adult-use cannabis program in accordance with the specific directives of the Cole Memorandum.

On January 4, 2018, Attorney General Jeff Sessions issued a memorandum that rescinded previous DOJ guidance on the state legal cannabis industry, including the Cole Memorandum. Attorney General Sessions wrote that the previous guidance on cannabis law enforcement was unnecessary, given the well-established principles governing federal prosecution that are already in place. As a result, federal prosecutors could and still can use their prosecutorial discretion to decide whether to prosecute even state-legal cannabis activities.

Since the Cole Memorandum was rescinded, however, U.S. Attorneys have generally refrained from prosecuting state law compliant marijuana businesses. Current Attorney General Merrick Garland during his confirmation hearings expressed that “It does not seem to me useful the use of limited resources that we have to be pursuing prosecutions in states that have legalized and are regulating the use of marijuana, either medically or otherwise.”

Since December 2014, companies that are strictly complying with state medical cannabis laws have been protected against enforcement for that activity by an amendment (originally called the Rohrabacher-Blumenauer Amendment, now called the Joyce Amendment) to the Omnibus Spending Bill, which prevents federal prosecutors from using federal funds to impede the implementation of medical cannabis laws enacted at the state level. Federal courts have interpreted the provision to bar the DOJ from prosecuting any person or entity in strict compliance with state medical cannabis laws.

While the protection of the Joyce Amendment prevents prosecutions of state law compliant medical cannabis activities, it does not make cannabis legal. The protection of the Joyce Amendment depends on its continued inclusion in the federal omnibus spending bill, or in some other legislation, and entities’ strict compliance with the state medical cannabis laws. While industry observers expect Congress to extend the protection in future Omnibus Spending Bills, there can be no assurance that it will do so.

Although several cannabis law reform bills are pending in the U.S. Congress, passage of any of them and ultimately the Biden Administration’s support and approval remain uncertain. Unless and until the U.S. Government changes the law with respect to cannabis, and particularly if Congress does not extend the protection of state medical cannabis programs, there is a risk that federal authorities could enforce current federal cannabis law. An increase in federal enforcement against companies licensed under state cannabis laws would negatively impact the state cannabis industries and, in turn, our revenues, profits, financial condition, and business model.

Canada

On April 13, 2017, the Government of Canada introduced Bill C-45, which proposed the enactment of the Cannabis Act to legalize and regulate access to cannabis. The Cannabis Act proposed a strict legal framework for controlling the production, distribution, sale and possession of medical and recreational adult-use cannabis in Canada. On June 21, 2018, the Government of Canada announced that Bill C-45, received Royal Assent. On July 11, 2018, the Government of Canada published the Cannabis Regulations under the Cannabis Act. The Cannabis Regulations provide more detail on the medical and recreational regulatory regimes for cannabis, including regarding licensing, physical security requirements, product practices, outdoor growing, security, packaging and labelling (including for cannabis accessories), cannabis-containing drugs, document retention requirements, reporting and disclosure requirements, the new access to cannabis for medical purposes regime and industrial hemp. The majority of the Cannabis Act and the Cannabis Regulations came into force on October 17, 2018; additional Cannabis Regulations took effect on October 17, 2019.

As of December 2022, the Minister of Health and the Minister of Mental Health and Addictions has launched the legislative review of the Cannabis Act. The review is being conducted by a five-member independent, expert panel, who will report their final conclusions and advice to the Ministers by Spring 2024. In addition, Health Canada announced that amendments to the Cannabis Act and its regulations concerning cannabis research and testing. Notably, these amendments increase the public possession limit for cannabis beverages to a level that is similar to other forms of cannabis, such as solid edible cannabis products (i.e. gummies or chocolate) and the amendments change how Health Canada regulates non-therapeutic cannabis research with human participants. As for proposed amendments, Health Canada is proposing amendments to the Cannabis Regulations to protect public health and safety, in particular by protecting young persons and others from inducements to use inhaled cannabis extracts. The proposed amendments would restrict the production, sale, promotion, packaging, or labelling of inhaled cannabis extracts with certain flavors, other than the flavor of cannabis.

While the Cannabis Act provides for the regulation by the federal government of, among other things, the commercial cultivation and processing of cannabis for recreational purposes, it provides the provinces and territories of Canada with the authority to regulate with respect to the other aspects of recreational cannabis, such as distribution, sale, minimum age requirements, places where cannabis can be consumed, and a range of other matters.

The governments of every Canadian province and territory have implemented regulatory regimes for the distribution and sale of cannabis for recreational purposes. In most provinces and territories, the minimum age is 19 years old, except for Québec, where the minimum age is 18. Certain provinces, such as Ontario, have legislation in place that restricts the packaging of vapor products and the manner in which vapor products are displayed or promoted in stores.

The Cannabis Act is a relatively new regime that has no close precedent in Canadian law. The effect of relevant governmental authorities’ administration, application and enforcement of their respective regulatory regimes and delays in obtaining, or failure to obtain, applicable regulatory approvals which may be required may significantly delay or impact the development of markets, products and sales initiatives and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The federal and state regulatory landscape regarding products containing hemp-derived CBD and other cannabinoids is uncertain and evolving, and new or changing laws or regulations relating to hemp and hemp-derived products could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

In December 2018, the U.S. government changed the legal status of hemp and its derivatives, including hemp-derived CBD and other cannabinoids. The 2018 Farm Bill, which was signed into law by former President Trump on December 20, 2018 (Pub.L. 115-334), established a new framework for the regulation of hemp production (defined in the Farm Bill as Cannabis sativa L. with a THC concentration of not more than 0.3 percent on a dry weight basis) and extracts of hemp, including CBD. The law also removed hemp and extracts of hemp from the federal controlled substances schedules. The section of the Farm Bill establishing a framework for hemp production, however, makes clear explicitly that it does not affect or modify the United States Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the “FDCA”), section 351 of the Public Health Service Act (addressing the regulation of biological products), the authority of the Commissioner of the FDA under those laws, or the Commissioner’s authority to regulate hemp production and sale under those laws.

Since passage of the Farm Bill, the FDA has expressed multiple times its position that any cannabis product, whether derived from hemp or otherwise, marketed with a disease claim (e.g., a claim of therapeutic benefit or disease prevention) must be approved by the FDA for its intended use through one of the drug approval pathways prior to it being introduced into interstate commerce. The FDA has also repeatedly stated its position that introducing food or dietary supplements with added CBD (or THC), regardless of source, into interstate commerce is illegal under the FDCA. Although enforcement under the FDCA may be civil or criminal in nature, the FDA has thus far limited its recent enforcement against companies selling CBD products to warning letters alleging various violations of the FDCA, including that the products bear claims that render the products unapproved and misbranded new drugs, that CBD is excluded from the FDCA’s definition of “dietary supplement,” and that the FDCA prohibits the addition of CBD to food. The FDA also tested some of the products, and found that many did not contain the levels of CBD they claimed to contain, which could be the basis for a separate violation of the FDCA. In addition, some states have taken actions to restrict or prohibit the sale of CBD products under state law. On January 26, 2023, the FDA issued a statement that after careful review, the FDA concluded that a new regulatory pathway for CBD is needed that balances individuals’ desire for access to CBD products with the regulatory oversight needed to manage risks. The agency is prepared to work with Congress on this matter.

We currently distribute very limited products containing hemp-derived CBD and other cannabinoids. Although the Farm Bill removed hemp and its derivatives from the definition of “marijuana” under the CSA, uncertainties remain regarding the cultivation, sourcing, production and distribution of hemp and products containing hemp derivatives. Certain states prohibit the sale of all or certain types of products containing hemp. The laws and regulations of states that permit the sale of products containing hemp derivatives, such as CBD, impose various requirements, including requirements to obtain certain permits or licenses, related to the marketing, packaging, safety, and sale of products containing hemp derivatives. These laws and regulations are rapidly developing. We may have to quickly adapt our operations to comply with forthcoming and rapidly-shifting federal and state regulations. These regulations could require significant changes to our business, plans or operations concerning hemp-derived products, and could adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations. Additionally, while we believe our current operations with respect to hemp derived products such as CBD comply with existing federal and state laws relating to hemp and hemp-derived products in all material respects, legal proceedings alleging violations of such laws could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We are subject to legislative uncertainty that could slow or halt the legalization and use of cannabis, which could materially and adversely affect our business.

Continued development of the cannabis industry is dependent upon continued legislative authorization of cannabis at the state level, as well as the U.S. government’s continued non-enforcement of federal cannabis laws against state-law-compliant cannabis businesses. Any number of factors could slow or halt progress in this area. Further, progress, while generally expected, is not assured. Well-funded interests, including businesses in the tobacco, alcohol beverage and the pharmaceutical industries, may have a strong economic opposition to the continued legalization of cannabis. The pharmaceutical industry, for example, is well funded with a strong and experienced lobby that eclipses the funding of the cannabis movement. Any inroads legalization opponents could make in halting the impending cannabis industry could have a detrimental impact on our business. While there may be ample public support for legislative action, numerous factors impact the legislative process. Any one of those factors could slow or halt the continued legalization and use of cannabis, which would negatively impact our business.

While we believe that our business and sales do not violate the Federal Paraphernalia Law, legal proceedings alleging violations of such law or changes in such law or interpretations thereof could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations.

Under U.S. Code Title 21 Section 863 (the “Federal Paraphernalia Law”), the term “drug paraphernalia” means “any equipment, product or material of any kind which is primarily intended or designed for use in manufacturing, compounding, converting, concealing, producing, processing, preparing, injecting, ingesting, inhaling, or otherwise introducing into the human body a controlled substance.” That law exempts “(1) any person authorized by local, State, or Federal law to manufacture, possess, or distribute such items” and “(2) any item that, in the normal lawful course of business, is imported, exported, transported, or sold through the mail or by any other means, and traditionally intended for use with tobacco products, including any pipe, paper, or accessory.” Any nonexempt drug paraphernalia offered or sold by any person in violation of the Federal Paraphernalia Law can be subject to seizure and forfeiture upon the conviction of such person for such violation, and a convicted person can be subject to fines under the Federal Paraphernalia Law and even imprisonment.

We believe our sales do not violate the Federal Paraphernalia Law in any material respect. First, we understand that a substantial majority of the products we offer and sell were and are not primarily intended or designed for any purpose not permitted by the Federal Paraphernalia Law. Indeed, many of the manufacturers whose products we sell disclaim that the products are for use with cannabis. Second, we restrict the sale of certain products — those that may have been primarily intended or designed for use with cannabis — to comply with the Federal Paraphernalia Law’s exemption for sales authorized by state law. In particular, we (a) do not sell those products at all into the states that have maintained complete or near complete cannabis prohibition and (b) limit the sale of those products to licensed cannabis businesses, such as dispensaries, cultivators, and manufacturers, in the states that authorize sales of cannabis paraphernalia only through state-licensed cannabis businesses. Third, we have been in business for many years without facing even threatened legal action under the Federal Paraphernalia Law.

While we believe that our business and sales are legally compliant with the Federal Paraphernalia Law in all material respects, any legal action commenced against us under such law could result in substantial costs and could have an adverse impact on our business, financial condition or results of operations. In addition, changes in cannabis laws or interpretations of such laws are difficult to predict, and could materially and adversely affect our business.

Officials of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency (“CBP”) have broad discretion regarding products imported into the United States, and the CBP has on occasion seized imported products on the basis that such products violate the Federal Paraphernalia Law. While we believe the products that we import do not violate such law, any such seizure of the products we sell could have a material adverse effect on our business operations or our results of operations.

Officials of the CBP have broad discretion regarding products imported into the United States. Individual shipments of imported products we distribute, as well as similar products, have been detained or seized by the CBP for a variety of reasons, including because the CBP officials inspecting the goods believed such goods were marketed as drug paraphernalia and therefore violated the Federal Paraphernalia Law. Although we and other suppliers or distributors of such products have at times successfully contested such actions of the CBP, such challenges are costly and time consuming. While we would disagree with any conclusion of the CBP that our product sales violate the Federal Paraphernalia Law, we cannot give any assurance that the CBP will not make additional seizures of our imports, or that if the CBP seizes any of our goods that the CBP would not seek to impose penalties related to such imports. Should we elect to contest any such seizure, the costs of doing so could be substantial and there are no assurances we would prevail in a contested proceeding. Additionally, the cost and/or results of any such contest could adversely impact our business, financial condition or results of operations. Additionally, if the CBP fails to release seized products, we may no longer be able to ensure a sellable supply of some of our products, which could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Because our business is dependent, in part, upon continued market acceptance of cannabis by consumers, any negative trends could materially and adversely affect our business, financial conditions or results of operations.

We are dependent on public support, continued market acceptance and the proliferation of consumers in the legal cannabis markets. While we believe that the market and opportunity in the space continue to grow, we cannot predict the future growth rate or size of the market. Any downturns in, or negative outlooks on, the cannabis industry may materially and adversely affect our business and financial condition.

We and our customers may have difficulty accessing the service of banks, which may make it difficult for us and for them to sell our products.

Financial transactions involving proceeds generated by cannabis-related activities can form the basis for prosecution under the U.S. federal money laundering statutes, unlicensed money transmitter statutes and the U.S. Bank Secrecy Act. Guidance issued by the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”) clarifies how financial institutions can provide services to cannabis-related businesses consistent with their obligations under the Bank Secrecy Act. Furthermore, since the rescission by former U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions on January 4, 2018 of the Cole Memorandum, U.S. federal prosecutors have had greater discretion when determining whether to charge institutions or individuals with any of the financial crimes described above based upon cannabis-related activity. As a result, given these risks and their own related disclosure requirements, many banks remain hesitant to offer banking services to cannabis-related businesses. Consequently, those businesses involved in the cannabis industry continue to encounter difficulty establishing banking relationships. Indeed, we have been asked to close bank accounts due to our activity in the cannabis industry. We may become unable maintain stable banking relationships, which would create significant challenges in operating our business, increase our operating costs, pose additional operational, logistical and security challenges, and result in our inability to implement our business plan. Additionally, if our more significant customers to are unable maintain their current banking relationships, we might not be able to continue transacting with such customers.

Our payments system and the payment systems of our customers depend on third-party providers and are subject to evolving laws and regulations.

We and our retail customers have engaged third-party service providers to perform underlying credit and debit card processing, currency exchange, identity verification and fraud analysis services. If these service providers do not perform adequately or if our relationships, or the relationships of our retail customers with these service providers, were to terminate, our ability or the ability of such retail customers to process payments could be adversely affected and our business would be harmed.

The laws and regulations related to payments are complex and are potentially impacted by tensions between federal and state treatment of the vaporization, tobacco, nicotine and cannabis industries. These laws and regulations also vary across different jurisdictions in the United States, Canada and globally. As a result, we are required to spend significant time and effort to comply with those laws and regulations. Any failure or claim of our failure to comply, or any failure by our third-party service providers to comply, could cost us substantial resources, could result in liabilities, or could force us to stop offering our customers the ability to pay with credit cards, debit cards and bank transfers. As we expand the availability of these payment methods or offer new payment methods to our customers in the future, we may become subject to additional regulations and compliance requirements.

Further, through our agreement with our third-party credit card processors, we are indirectly subject to payment card association operating rules and certification requirements, including restrictions on product mix and the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard, 02 PCIDSS. We also are subject to rules governing electronic funds transfers. Any change in these rules and requirements could make it difficult or impossible for us to comply.

Due to our acceptance of credit cards in our e-commerce business, we are subject to the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard, designed to protect the information of credit card users. We have had a security incident in the past, which we do not believe reached the level of a breach, that would be reportable under state laws or our other obligations; however there can be no assurance that our determination was correct. In the event our determination is challenged and found to have been incorrect, we may be subject to claims by one or more state attorney generals, federal regulators, or private plaintiffs and we may additionally be subject to claims or fines from credit associations.

We are subject to certain U.S. federal regulations relating to cash reporting.

The U.S. Bank Secrecy Act, enforced by FinCEN, a division of the U.S. Department of the Treasury, requires a party in trade or business to file with the U.S. Internal Revenue Service (the “IRS”) a Form 8300 report within 15 days of receiving a cash payment of over $10,000. While we receive very few cash payments for the products we sell, if we fail to comply with these laws and regulations, the imposition of a substantial penalty could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

If countries, states, and provinces continue the trend of imposing, expanding, and increasing taxes on vaporizer products, it could materially and adversely affect our business.

Supply to our customers is sensitive to increased sales taxes and economic conditions affecting their disposable income. Discretionary consumer purchases, such as of vaporization products and consumption accessories, may decline during recessionary periods or at other times when disposable income is lower and taxes may be higher.

As discussed under “Regulatory Developments” above, the sale of vaporization products and certain other consumption accessories is, in certain jurisdictions, subject to federal, state, provincial and local excise taxes like the sale of conventional cigarettes or other tobacco products, all of which generally have high tax rates and have faced significant increases in the amount of taxes collected on their sales. Other jurisdictions are contemplating similar legislation and other restrictions on electronic cigarettes and certain other vaporizer products. Should federal, state, provincial and local governments and/or other taxing authorities continue to impose excise taxes similar to those levied against conventional cigarettes and tobacco products on vaporization products or consumption accessories, it may have a material adverse effect on the demand for those products, as consumers may be unwilling to pay the increased costs, which in turn could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We could be required to collect additional sales taxes or be subject to other tax liabilities that may increase the costs our B2C customers would have to pay for our product offering, which could materially and adversely affect our operating results.

An increasing number of states have considered or adopted laws that attempt to impose tax collection obligations on out-of-state companies. Additionally, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in South Dakota v. Wayfair, Inc. et al, or Wayfair, that online sellers can be required to collect sales and use tax despite not having a physical presence in the buyer’s state. In response to Wayfair, or otherwise, states or local governments may adopt, or begin to enforce, laws requiring us to calculate, collect, and remit taxes on sales in their jurisdictions. A successful assertion by one or more states requiring us to collect taxes where we presently do not do so, or to collect more taxes in a jurisdiction in which we currently do collect some taxes, could result in substantial tax liabilities, including taxes on past sales, as well as penalties and interest. The imposition by state governments or local governments of sales tax collection obligations on out-of-state sellers could also create additional administrative burdens for us, put us at a competitive disadvantage if they do not impose similar obligations on our competitors and decrease our future sales, which could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We may become involved in regulatory or agency proceedings, investigations, prosecutions, and audits.

Our business, and the businesses of the suppliers from which we acquire products we sell, requires compliance with many laws and regulations in many jurisdictions globally across multiple product categories and regulatory regimes. Failure to comply with these laws and regulations could subject us or such suppliers to regulatory or agency proceedings, investigations, or prosecutions, and could also lead to damage awards, fines and penalties. We or such suppliers may become involved in a number of government proceedings, investigations and audits. The outcome of any government proceedings, investigations, prosecutions, audits, and other contingencies could harm our reputation or the reputations of the brands that we sell, require us to take, or refrain from taking, actions that could harm our operations or require us to pay substantial amounts of money, harming our financial condition. There can be no assurance that any pending or future regulatory or agency proceedings, investigations and audits will not result in substantial costs or a diversion of management’s attention and resources or have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We are subject to increasing international control and regulation.

The World Health Organization’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (“FCTC”) is the first international public health treaty that establishes a global agenda to reduce initiation of tobacco use and regulate tobacco in an effort to encourage tobacco cessation. Over 180 governments worldwide have ratified the FCTC, including Canada. The FCTC has led to increased efforts to reduce the supply of and demand for tobacco products and to encourage governments to further regulate the tobacco industry. The tobacco industry and others expect significant regulatory developments to take place over the next few years, driven principally by the FCTC.

If the United States ratifies the FCTC and/or national laws are enacted in the United States that reflect the major elements of the FCTC, our business, results of operations and financial condition could be materially and adversely affected. In addition, if any of our vaporization products or consumption accessories become subject to one or more of the significant regulatory initiatives proposed under the FCTC or any other international treaty, our business, results of operations and financial condition may also be materially adversely affected.

Countries’ laws implementing the European Union Tobacco Products Directive (“TPD”) impose strict regulations on the approval, sale, and advertising of e-cigarettes. Although we do not sell or market any material quantities of products classified as e-cigarettes in Europe, countries could enact new laws implementing the TPD or other laws or regulations that re-classify and/or restrict the products we may sell or market in Europe. Any future measures that limit our ability to market or sell vaporization products or other consumption accessories in Europe may have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

To the extent our existing or future products become subject to international regulatory regimes that we are unable to comply with or fail to comply with, they may have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Changes in our credit profile may affect our relationship with our suppliers, which could have a material adverse effect on our liquidity.

Changes in our credit profile may affect the way our suppliers view our ability to make payments and may induce them to shorten the payment terms of their invoices. Given the large dollar amounts and volume of our purchases from suppliers, a change in payment terms may have a material adverse effect on our liquidity and our ability to make payments to our suppliers and, consequently, may have a material adverse effect on us.

We face intense competition and may fail to compete effectively.

The vaporization products and consumption accessories industry is characterized by brand recognition and loyalty, with product quality features, price, marketing and packaging constituting the primary methods of competition. Substantial marketing support, merchandising display, competitive pricing and other financial incentives generally are required to introduce a new brand or to improve or maintain a brand’s market position. Our principal competitors may be significantly larger than us and aggressively seek to limit the distribution or sale of our products.

Competition in the vaporization products and consumption accessories industry is particularly intense, and the market is highly fragmented.

We experience variability in our net sales and net income on a quarterly basis as a result of many factors.

We experience variability in our net sales and net income on a quarterly basis as a result of many factors. These factors include:

Our planned operating expenditures each quarter are based on sales forecasts for the quarter. If our sales do not meet expectations in any given quarter, our operating results for that quarter may be materially adversely affected. We believe that period-to-period comparisons of our operating results are not necessarily a good indication of our future performance. In addition, our results in any quarterly period are not necessarily indicative of results to be expected for a full fiscal year. In future quarters, our operating results may be below the expectations of public market analysts or investors and, as a result, the market price of our Class A common stock could be materially adversely affected.

Product defects could increase our expenses, damage our reputation or expose us to liability.

We may not be able to adequately address product defects. Product defects in vaporizers and other accessories may harm the health or safety of our end-consumers. In addition, remedial efforts could be particularly time-consuming and expensive if product defects are only found after we have sold the defective product in volume. Any actual or perceived defects in our products could result in unsold inventory, product recalls, repairs or replacements, damage to our reputation, increased customer service costs and other expenses, as well as divert management attention and expose us to liabilities. Furthermore, a product liability claim brought against us by our customers or end-consumers could be time-consuming and costly to defend and, if successful, could require us to make significant payments.

Contamination of, or damage to, our products could adversely impact sales volume, market share and profitability.

Our market position may be affected through the contamination of our products, as well as the material used during the manufacturing processes of the products we sell, or at different points in the entire supply chain. For example, we have previously detected low levels of contaminants in certain extraction gasses sold by us. We keep significant amounts of inventory of our products in warehouses and it is possible that this inventory could become contaminated prior to arrival at our premises or during the storage period. If contamination of our inventory or packaged products occurs, whether as a result of a failure in quality control by us or by one of our suppliers, we may incur significant costs in replacing the inventory and recalling products. We may be unable to meet customer demand and may lose customers who purchase alternative brands or products. In addition, consumers may lose confidence in the affected product.

Under the terms of our contracts, we generally impose requirements on our suppliers to maintain quality and comply with product specifications and requirements, and with all federal, state and local laws. Our suppliers, however, may not continue to produce products that are consistent with our standards or that are in compliance with applicable laws, and we cannot guarantee that we will be able to identify instances in which our suppliers fail to comply with our standards or applicable laws. A loss of sales volume from a contamination event may occur, and such a loss may affect our ability to supply our current customers and to recapture their business in the event they are forced to switch products or brands, even if on a temporary basis. We may also be subject to legal action as a result of a contamination, which could result in negative publicity and affect our sales. During this time, our competitors may benefit from an increased market share that could be difficult and costly to regain. Such a contamination event could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We may not have adequate insurance for potential liabilities, including liabilities arising from litigation.

In the ordinary course of business, we have and in the future may become the subject of various claims, lawsuits and governmental proceedings seeking damages or other remedies concerning our commercial operations, the products we distribute, our employees and other matters, including potential claims by individuals alleging injury or other harm caused by the products we distribute. Some of these claims may relate to the activities of businesses that we have acquired, even though these activities may have occurred prior to our acquisition of the businesses. The products we distribute may contain lithium ion or similar type batteries that can explode or release hazardous substances. In addition, defects in the products we distribute could result in death, personal injury, property damage, pollution, release of hazardous substances or damage to equipment and facilities. Actual or claimed defects in the products we distribute may give rise to claims against us for losses and expose us to claims for damages.

We maintain insurance to cover certain of our potential losses, and we are subject to various self-retentions, deductibles and caps under our insurance. We face the following risks with respect to our insurance coverage:

Even a partially uninsured claim, if successful and of significant size, could have a material adverse effect on us. Finally, even in cases where we maintain insurance coverage, our insurers may raise various objections and exceptions to coverage that could make uncertain the timing and amount of any possible insurance recovery.

Due to our position in the supply chain of vaporization products and consumption accessories, we are subject to personal injury, product liability and environmental claims involving allegedly defective products.

Our customers use certain products we distribute in potentially hazardous applications that can result in personal injury, product liability and environmental claims. A catastrophic occurrence at a location at which consumers use the products we distribute may result in our company being named as a defendant in lawsuits asserting potentially large claims, even though we did not manufacture such products or even if such products were not used in the manner recommended by the manufacturer. Applicable law may render us liable for damages without regard to negligence or fault. Certain of these risks are reduced by the fact that we are, in many instances, a distributor of products that third-party manufacturers produce, and, thus, in certain circumstances, we may have third-party warranty or other claims against the manufacturer of products alleged to have been defective. However, there is no assurance that these claims could fully protect us or that the manufacturer would be financially able to provide protection. There is no assurance that our insurance coverage will be adequate to cover the underlying claims. Our insurance does not provide coverage for all liabilities (including liability for certain events involving pollution or other environmental claims).

We may become subject to significant product liability litigation.

The tobacco and e-cigarette industries have experienced and continue to experience significant product liability litigation and other claims, such as those related to marketing of tobacco and e-cigarettes to minors. As a result of their relative novelty, electronic cigarette, vaporizer product and other consumption product manufacturers, suppliers, distributors and sellers have only recently become subject to litigation. While we have not been a party to any product liability litigation, several lawsuits have been brought against other manufacturers and sellers of smokeless products for injuries to health allegedly caused by use of smokeless products. We may be subject to similar claims in the future relating to our vaporizer products. We may also be named as a defendant in product liability litigation against one of our suppliers by association, including in class action lawsuits. In addition, we may see increasing litigation over our vaporizer products or the regulation of our products as the regulatory regimes surrounding these products develop. For example, California’s Proposition 65 (“Prop 65”) requires the State of California to identify chemicals that could cause cancer, birth defects, or reproductive harm, and businesses selling products in California are then required to warn consumers of any possible exposure to the chemicals on the list. The State of California and private plaintiffs have been active in enforcing Prop 65 against companies in the tobacco, nicotine, cannabis, and vaporization industries. We may face substantial costs due to increased product liability litigation relating to new regulations or other potential defects associated with our vaporizer and other consumption products, including litigation arising out of faulty devices or improper usage, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

There can be no assurances that we will be able to obtain or maintain product liability insurance on acceptable terms or with adequate coverage against potential liabilities. Such insurance is expensive and may not be available in the future on acceptable terms, or at all. The inability to obtain sufficient insurance coverage on reasonable terms or to otherwise protect against potential product liability claims could prevent or inhibit the commercialization of products.

The scientific community has not yet extensively studied the long-term health effects of the use of vaporizers, electronic cigarettes or e-liquids products.

Vaporizers, electronic cigarettes and related products were recently developed and therefore the scientific community has not had a sufficient period of time to study the long-term health effects of their use. Currently, there is no way of knowing whether these products are safe for their intended use. If the scientific community were to determine conclusively that use of any or all of these products poses long-term health risks, market demand for these products and their use could materially decline. Such a determination could also lead to litigation and significant regulation. Loss of demand for our product, product liability claims and increased regulation stemming from unfavorable scientific studies on these products could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Reliance on information technology means a significant disruption could affect our communications and operations.

We increasingly rely on information technology systems for our internal communications, controls, reporting and relations with customers, vendors and suppliers, and information technology is becoming a significantly important tool for our sales staff. Our marketing and distribution strategy is dependent upon our ability to closely monitor consumer and market trends on a highly specified level, for which we are reliant on our sophisticated data tracking systems, which are susceptible to disruption or failure. In addition, our reliance on information technology exposes us to cyber-security risks, which could have a material adverse effect on our ability to compete. Security and privacy breaches may expose us to liability and cause us to lose customers, or may disrupt our relationships and ongoing transactions with other entities with whom we contract throughout our supply chain. The failure of our information systems to function as intended, or the penetration by outside parties intent on disrupting business processes, could result in significant costs, loss of revenue, assets or personal or other sensitive data and reputational harm.

Internet security poses a risk to our e-commerce sales.

At present, we generate a portion of our sales through e-commerce sales on our own websites. We manage our websites and e-commerce platform internally and, as a result, any compromise of our security or misappropriation of proprietary information could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. We rely on encryption and authentication technology licensed from third parties to provide the security and authentication necessary to effect secure Internet transmission of confidential information, such as credit and other proprietary information. Advances in computer capabilities, new discoveries in the field of cryptography or other events or developments may result in a compromise or breach of the technology used by us to protect client transaction data. Anyone who is able to circumvent our security measures could misappropriate proprietary information or cause material interruptions in our operations. We may be required to expend significant capital and other resources to protect against security breaches or to minimize problems caused by security breaches. To the extent that our activities or the activities of others involve the storage and transmission of proprietary information, security breaches could damage our reputation and expose us to a risk of loss and/or litigation. Our security measures may not prevent security breaches. Our failure to prevent these security breaches may result in consumer distrust and may adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Security and privacy breaches may expose us to liability and cause us to lose customers.

Federal, provincial and state laws require us to safeguard our customers’ financial information, including credit information, as well as our employees’ information. Although we have established security procedures to protect against identity theft and the theft of information of our customers, distributors, consumers, and employees, our security and testing measures may not prevent security breaches and breaches of privacy may occur, which would harm our business. Typically, we rely on encryption and authentication technology licensed from third parties to enhance transmission security of confidential information in relation to financial and other sensitive information that we have on file. Advances in computer capabilities, new discoveries in the field of cryptography, inadequate facility security or other developments may result in a compromise or breach of the technology used by us to protect customer data. Any compromise of our security could harm our reputation or financial condition and therefore, our business. In addition, a party who is able to circumvent our security measures or exploit inadequacies in our security measures, could, among other effects, misappropriate proprietary information, cause interruptions in our operations or expose customers and other entities with which we interact to computer viruses or other disruptions. Actual or perceived vulnerabilities may lead to claims against us. To the extent the measures we have taken prove to be insufficient or inadequate, we may become subject to litigation or administrative sanctions, which could result in significant fines, penalties or damages and harm to our reputation.

If the methodologies of internet search engines are modified, traffic to our websites and corresponding consumer origination volumes could decline.

We depend in part on various internet search engines, including Google® and others to direct a significant amount of traffic to our websites. Our ability to maintain the number of visitors directed to our websites by search engines through which we distribute our content is not entirely within our control. Our competitors’ search engine optimization (“SEO”) efforts may result in their websites receiving a higher search result page ranking than ours, or Internet search engines could revise their methodologies, which could adversely affect the placement of our search result page ranking. If search engine companies modify their search algorithms in ways that are detrimental to our consumer growth or in ways that make it harder for our customers to access or use our websites, or if our competitors’ SEO efforts are more successful than ours, our consumer engagement and number of consumers could decline. Any reduction in the number of consumers directed to our websites could negatively affect our ability to earn revenue. If traffic on our websites declines, we may need to employ more costly resources to replace lost traffic, and such increased expense could adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We are a holding company and depend upon our subsidiaries for our cash flow.

We are a holding company. Our subsidiaries conduct all of our operations and own substantially all of our tangible assets. Consequently, our cash flow and our ability to meet our obligations or to make other distributions in the future will depend upon the cash flow of our subsidiaries and our subsidiaries’ payment of funds to us in the form of distributions, dividends, tax sharing payments or otherwise.

The ability of our subsidiaries to make any payments to us will depend on their earnings and cash flow, the terms of their current and future indebtedness, tax considerations and legal and contractual restrictions on their ability to make distributions.

Our subsidiaries are separate and distinct legal entities. Any right that we have to receive any assets of or distributions from any of our subsidiaries upon the bankruptcy, dissolution, liquidation or reorganization, or to realize proceeds from the sale of their assets, will be junior to the claims of that subsidiary’s creditors, including trade creditors and holders of debt that the subsidiary issued.

Our intellectual property may be infringed and we may be unable to secure or maintain all the intellectual property required to sell all of our offerings.

We currently rely on trademark and other intellectual property rights to establish and protect the brand names and logos we own or license on the products we distribute. Third parties have in the past infringed, and may in the future infringe, on these trademarks and our other intellectual property rights. Our ability to maintain and further build brand recognition is dependent on the continued use of these trademarks, service marks and other proprietary intellectual property, including the names and logos we own or license. Despite our attempts to ensure these intellectual property rights are protected, third parties may take actions that could materially and adversely affect our rights or the value of this intellectual property. Any litigation concerning our intellectual property rights or the intellectual property rights of our suppliers, whether successful or unsuccessful, could result in substantial costs to us and diversions of our resources. Expenses related to protecting our intellectual property rights or the intellectual property rights of our suppliers, the loss or compromise of any of these rights or the loss of revenues as a result of infringement could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition, and may prevent the brands we own or license, or are owned or licensed by our suppliers, from growing or maintaining market share. There can be no assurance that any trademarks or common marks that we own or license, or are owned or licensed by our suppliers, will not be challenged in the future, invalidated or circumvented or that the rights granted thereunder or under licensing agreements will provide us or our suppliers competitive advantages. We are dependent on the validity, integrity and intellectual property of our suppliers and their efforts to appropriately register, maintain and enforce intellectual property in all jurisdictions in which their products are sold.

We devote significant resources to the registration and protection of our trademarks and to anti-counterfeiting efforts. Despite these efforts, we regularly discover products that infringe on our proprietary rights or that otherwise seek to mimic or leverage our intellectual property or the intellectual property of our suppliers. Counterfeiting and other infringing activities typically increase as brand recognition increases, especially in markets outside the United States and Canada. Counterfeiting and other infringement of our intellectual property could divert away sales, and association of our brands with inferior counterfeit reproductions or third party labels could adversely affect the integrity and reputation of our brands.

Although we currently hold a number of patents on our products, we generally rely on patents on the products of our suppliers as well as their efforts in successfully defending third-party challenges to such products. Third parties have in the past infringed, and may in the future infringe, on our patents and our suppliers’ patents. Our ability to maintain and enforce our patent rights, and the ability of our suppliers, licensors, collaborators and manufacturers to maintain and enforce their patent rights, against third-party challenges to their validity, scope or enforceability plays an important role in determining our future. There can be no assurances that we will ever successfully file or receive any patents in the future, and changes in either the patent laws or in interpretations of patent laws in the United States or other countries may diminish the value of the intellectual property rights of the products we distribute, license or own. Accordingly, we cannot predict with any certainty the range of claims that may be allowed or enforced concerning the products that we sell.

In addition, there can be no assurance that standard intellectual property confidentiality and assignment agreements with employees, consultants and other advisors will not be breached, that we will have adequate remedies for any breach, or that our trade secrets will not otherwise become known to or independently developed by competitors. Furthermore, there can be no assurance that our efforts to protect our intellectual property will prevent others from unlawfully using our trademarks, trade secrets, copyrights and other intellectual property. Our success depends in part, on our continued ability to maintain our intellectual property and those of our suppliers, and to protect our trade secrets. An inability to continue to preserve and protect our intellectual property would likely have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We are subject to the risks of exchange rate fluctuations.

Currency movements and suppliers’ price increases relating to currency exchange rates are significant factors affecting our cost of sales. Many of our products are purchased from suppliers located in foreign countries and we make payments for our products in numerous currencies. Thus, we bear certain foreign exchange rate risk for certain of our inventory purchases. In addition, and as part of our strategy, we may undertake further international expansion. As a result, in the future, we may be more sensitive to the risks of exchange rate fluctuations, which may have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

There are conflicts of interest among certain of our executive officers and our stockholders.

Certain of our executive officers are engaged in other activities and have interests in other entities on their own behalf or on behalf of other persons. Neither we, nor our stockholders will have any rights in these ventures or their income or profits.

On October 24, 2025, the Company appointed its Chief Investment Officer to manage digital-asset treasury activities. The Chief Investment Officer has relationships within the Berachain ecosystem. As of December 31, 2025, there were no related-party transactions to disclose.

We do not allow a conflicted shareholder, director or executive officer to vote on matters wherein a conflict may be perceived. The conflicted person or entity is not allowed to nominate an alternate person to vote for them either. Other than this safeguard, we do not current have any policy in place, should such a conflict arise.

In particular:

	●	our executive officers or directors or their affiliates may have an economic interest in, or other business relationship with, entities that compete in the same businesses as us; and
	●	our executive officers or directors or their affiliates have interests in entities that we sell products or services to.

In any of these cases:

We are required to comply with laws and regulations in other countries and are exposed to business risks associated with our international operations.

For the year ended December 31, 2025, we derived 0.11% of our net sales from outside the United States, primarily in Canada. For the year ended December 31, 2024, we derived 17.9% of our net sales from outside the United States, primarily in Canada and certain European countries. As a result, we are subject to numerous evolving and complex laws and regulations which apply, among other things, to financial reporting standards, corporate governance, data privacy, tax, trade regulations, export controls, competitive practices, labor, health and safety laws, laws regarding controlled substances, laws regarding drug paraphernalia, and regulations in each jurisdiction in which we operate. We are also required to obtain permits and other authorizations or licenses from governmental authorities for certain of our operations and we or our suppliers must protect our intellectual property worldwide. In the jurisdictions in which we operate, we need to comply with various standards and practices of different regulatory, tax, judicial and administrative bodies.

There are a number of risks associated with international business operations, including political instability (e.g., the threat of war, terrorist attacks or civil unrest), inconsistent regulations across jurisdictions, unanticipated changes in the regulatory environment, and import and export restrictions. Any of these events may affect our employees, reputation, business or financial results as well as our ability to meet our objectives, including the following international business risks:

We may not be in full compliance at all times with the laws and regulations to which we are subject. Likewise, we may not have obtained or may not be able to obtain the permits and other authorizations or licenses that we need. If we violate or fail to comply with laws, regulations, permits, labor, health and safety regulations or other authorizations or licenses, we could be fined or otherwise sanctioned by regulators. In such a case, or if any of these international business risks were to materialize, our business, results of operations and financial condition could be adversely affected.

New tariffs and the evolving trade policy dispute between the United States, China and other nations may adversely affect our business.

In 2018, the United States imposed significant tariffs on steel and aluminum imports from a number of countries, including China. These tariffs and the evolving trade policy dispute between the United States and China may have a significant impact on the industries in which we participate. Many of the products we sell, including without limitation, certain vaporizer products, aluminum grinders, paper products and plastic products, are subject to tariffs and such tariffs, along with resultant price increases, may negatively impact our pricing and customer demand for these products. Many of the products we sell, including without limitation, certain vaporizer products, aluminum grinders, paper products and plastic products, are subject to the 25 percent tariff and such tariff, along with resultant price increases, may negatively impact our pricing and customer demand for these products. In March and April 2025, the US announced a series of additional special tariffs. The additional special tariffs coupled with tariffs already in effect as of the date of this filing include at least a 145% tariff on substantially all products of Chinese origin. Some of these special tariffs on products of Chinese origin have been temporarily paused at 30%. A “trade war” between the United States and China or other governmental action related to tariffs or international trade agreements or policies has the potential to adversely impact demand for our products, our costs, customers, suppliers and/or the United States economy or certain sectors thereof and, thus, to adversely impact our businesses and results of operations. A “trade war” between the United States, China and other nations or other governmental action related to tariffs or international trade agreements or policies has the potential to adversely impact demand for our products, our costs, customers, suppliers and/or the United States economy or certain sectors thereof and, thus, to adversely impact our businesses and results of operations.

Our failure to comply with certain environmental, health and safety regulations could materially and adversely affect our business.

The storage, distribution and transportation of some of the products that we sell are subject to a variety of federal, state, provincial and local environmental regulations. We are also subject to operational, health and safety laws and regulations. Our failure to comply with these laws and regulations could cause a disruption in our business, an inability to maintain our warehousing resources, additional and potentially significant remedial costs and damages, fines, sanctions or other legal consequences that could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. In addition, changes in environmental, employee health and safety or other laws, more vigorous enforcement thereof or other unanticipated events could require extensive changes to our operations or give rise to material liabilities, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We are transitioning our business and have engaged, and may continue in engage in, dispositions via sales of our assets or other exit activities and other strategic initiatives and we may face risks related to such transactions.

We have engaged in, and expect to continue to pursue, strategic dispositions and initiatives, as we transition our business. Dispositions present significant challenges and risks relating the separation of disposed businesses. Such risks include: (i) we may incur unanticipated costs or expenses, (ii) we may not be able to successfully separate divested businesses and related obligations from our operations as planned, and (iii) we may not be able to realize anticipated reductions in costs attributable to divested businesses or assets. Divestitures may also involve continued financial involvement in, or liability with respect to, the divested businesses. As a result of divestiture transactions, we could incur severance charges for personnel and payments for lease and other commitments, charges from the impairment or write-off of assets, and other financial loss due to the transaction. Furthermore, there is the risk that we might lose customers. In addition, we may not realize the degree or timing of benefits we anticipate when we first enter into a transaction. There can be no assurances that we will manage dispositions or other strategic initiatives successfully, that strategic opportunities will be available to us on acceptable terms or at all, or that we will be able to consummate desired transactions. Any of the foregoing could materially adversely affect our competitive position, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. For more information on the disposition activities we have undertaken to date, please see “Item 7 — Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations”.

Our operations are subject to natural disasters, adverse weather conditions, operating hazards, environmental incidents and labor disputes.

We may experience earthquakes, floods, typhoons, power outages, labor and trade disputes or similar events beyond our control that would affect our warehousing and distribution operations. The occurrences of such events could result in shutdowns or periods of reduced operations, which could significantly disrupt our business operations, cause us to incur additional costs and affect our ability to deliver our products to our customers as scheduled, which may adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition. Moreover, such events could result in severe damage to property, personal injuries, fatalities, regulatory enforcement proceedings or in us being named as a defendant in lawsuits asserting claims for large amounts of damages, which in turn could lead to significant liabilities.

We are subject to risks associated with public health crises, such as pandemics and epidemics, which may have a material adverse effect on our business. The nature and extent of future impacts are highly uncertain and unpredictable.

We are subject to risks associated with public health crises, such as pandemics and epidemics and the emergence of new viruses may result in new governmental lockdowns, quarantine requirements or other restrictions to slow the spread of the virus. In addition, any such measures could also impact the global economy more broadly, for example by leading to further economic slowdowns. If we or any of the third parties with whom we engage, including the suppliers, manufacturers and other third parties in our global supply chain, were to experience shutdowns or other significant business disruptions, our ability to conduct our business in the manner presently planned could be materially and negatively impacted.

The scope and duration of any future public health crisis, the pace at which government restrictions are imposed and lifted, the scope of additional actions taken to mitigate the spread of disease, global vaccination and booster rates, the speed and extent to which global markets and utilization rates for our products fully recover from the disruptions caused by such a public health crisis, and the impact of these factors on our business, financial condition and results of operations, will depend on future developments that are highly uncertain and cannot be predicted with confidence.

To the extent a new pandemic or other public health crises adversely affect our operations and global economic conditions more generally, it may also have the effect of heightening many of the other risks described herein.

Risks Related to Our Organizational Structure

Our principal asset is our interest in the Operating Company, and, accordingly, we depend on distributions from the Operating Company to pay our taxes and expenses. The Operating Company’s ability to make such distributions may be subject to various limitations and restrictions.

We are a holding company and have no material assets other than our ownership of all of the Common Units of the Operating Company. As such, we have no independent means of generating revenue or cash flow. Our ability to pay our operating expenses or declare and pay dividends in the future, if any, will be dependent upon the financial results and cash flows of the Operating Company and its subsidiaries and distributions we receive from the Operating Company. There can be no assurance that the Operating Company and its subsidiaries will generate sufficient cash flow to distribute funds to us or that applicable state law and contractual restrictions, including negative covenants, in any future debt instruments, will permit such distributions. In addition, because we are a holding company, our stockholders’ claims as a stockholder will be structurally subordinated to all existing and future liabilities and obligations of the Operating Company. Therefore, in the event of a bankruptcy, liquidation or reorganization, our assets and those of the Operating Company and its subsidiaries will be available to satisfy the claims of our stockholders only after all of our and Greenlane Holdings, LLC’s and its subsidiaries’ liabilities and obligations have been paid in full.

The Operating Company is treated as a partnership for U.S. federal income tax purposes and, as such, is not subject to any entity-level U.S. federal income tax. Instead, taxable income is allocated to holders of Common Units. As of December 31, 2025 and 2024, we hold all of the outstanding Common Units. Accordingly, we will incur income taxes on any net taxable income of the Operating Company. Under the terms of the Fourth Amended and Restated Agreement of the Operating Company (the “Operating Agreement”), the Operating Company is obligated to make tax distributions to holders of Common Units. In addition to tax expenses, we will also incur expenses related to our operations which we expect could be significant. We intend, as its manager and sole member, to cause the Operating Company to make cash distributions to us in an amount sufficient to (i) fund our tax obligations in respect of taxable income allocated to us and (ii) cover our operating expenses. However, the Operating Company’s ability to make such distributions may be subject to various limitations and restrictions, such as restrictions on distributions that would either violate any contract or agreement to which the Operating Company is then a party, including debt agreements, or any applicable law, or that would have the effect of rendering the Operating Company insolvent. If we do not have sufficient funds to pay tax or other liabilities or to fund our operations, we may have to borrow funds, which could materially adversely affect our liquidity and financial condition and subject us to various restrictions imposed by any such lenders.

The Tax Receivable Agreement (the “TRA”) may require us to make cash payments to the members of the Operating Company in respect of certain tax benefits to which we may become entitled.

Under the TRA we entered into with the Operating Company and its members, we are required to make cash payments to the members of the Operating Partnership equal to 85% of the tax benefits, if any, that we actually realize, or in certain circumstances are deemed to realize, as a result of (i) the increases in the tax basis of assets of the Operating Company resulting from any redemptions or exchanges of Common Units from the members and (ii) certain other tax benefits related to our making payments under the TRA. Although we held all of the outstanding Common Units as of December 31, 2025 and 2024, payments under the TRA are not conditioned on any member’s continued ownership of Common Units or our Class A common stock.

The actual amount and timing of any payments under the TRA will vary depending upon a number of factors, including the amount of gain recognized by prior holders of Common Units, the amount and timing of the taxable income we generate in the future, and the federal tax rates then applicable.

Fluctuations in our tax obligations and effective tax rate and realization of our deferred tax assets may result in volatility of our operating results.

We are subject to taxes by the U.S. federal, state, local and foreign tax authorities, and our tax liabilities will be affected by the allocation of expenses to differing jurisdictions. We record tax expense based on our estimates of future earnings, which may include reserves for uncertain tax positions in multiple tax jurisdictions, and valuation allowances related to certain net deferred tax assets. At any one time, many tax years may be subject to audit by various taxing jurisdictions. The results of these audits and negotiations with taxing authorities may affect the ultimate settlement of these matters. We expect that throughout the year there could be ongoing variability in our quarterly tax rates as events occur and exposures are evaluated. Our future effective tax rates could be subject to volatility or adversely affected by a number of factors, including:

In addition, our effective tax rate in a given financial statement period may be materially impacted by a variety of factors including but not limited to changes in the mix and level of earnings, varying tax rates in the different jurisdictions in which we operate, fluctuations in valuation allowances, deductibility of certain items, or by changes to existing accounting rules or regulations. Further, tax legislation may be enacted in the future which could negatively impact our current or future tax structure and effective tax rates. We may be subject to audits of our income, sales, and other transaction taxes by U.S. federal, state, local, and foreign taxing authorities. Outcomes from these audits could have an adverse effect on our operating results and financial condition.

Risks Related to Ownership of Our Class A Common Stock

Our failure to meet the continued listing requirements of the Nasdaq Capital Market could result in a delisting of our Class A common stock.

If we fail to satisfy the continued listing requirements of Nasdaq, such as the corporate governance or public float requirements, or the minimum closing bid price requirement, Nasdaq will take steps to de-list our Class A common stock. As a result of several factors, including but not limited to our financial performance, volatility in cryptocurrency, volatility in the financial markets generally due to the tightening of monetary policy by the Board of Governors of the United States Federal Reserve Bank (the “Federal Reserve”) and other geopolitical events, events such as the ongoing wars around the world, the per share price of our Class A common stock has declined below the minimum bid price threshold required for continued listing. Such a de-listing would likely have a negative effect on the price of our Class A common stock and would impair your ability to sell or purchase our Class A common stock when you wish to do so, as well as adversely affect our ability to issue additional securities and obtain additional financing in the future.

On March 25, 2026, we received a notification letter from the Listing Qualifications Department of Nasdaq (the “Delisting Notice”), stating that based on its review of the Company’s public filings with the SEC, its staff has determined to delist our securities pursuant to its discretionary authority under Listing Rule 5550(a)(2). Nasdaq Listing Rule 5810(c)(3)(A)(iv) states that any listed company that fails to meet the Minimum Bid Price Requirement and has effected a reverse stock split over the prior one-year period, or has effected one or more reverse stock splits over the prior two-year period with a cumulative ratio of 250 shares or more to one, will not be eligible for an automatic 180-day grace compliance period and the Nasdaq Listing Qualifications Department is obligated to immediately issue a delisting determination. Due to having effected a 1-for-11 reverse stock split on August 5, 2024, and a 1-for-750 reverse stock split on June 27, 2025, resulting in a cumulative 1-for-8,250 reverse stock split ratio over the last two years, we are not eligible for the 180-day period to regain compliance under Rule 4810(c)(3)(A). Pursuant to the Delisting Notice, we plan to appeal this determination before a Nasdaq Hearings Panel, staying the suspension of our common stock. Such a delisting would likely have a negative effect on the price of our Class A common stock and would impair your ability to sell or purchase our Class A common stock when you wish to do so, as well as adversely affect our ability to issue additional securities and obtain additional financing in the future.

There can be no assurances that the Nasdaq Hearings Panel will grant our request for reconsideration, that any appeal will be successful with the Panel, or that we will be able meet the continued listing requirements if we are permitted to continue trading on Nasdaq. In connection with the Delisting Notice, Nasdaq will complete the delisting by filing a Notification of Removal from Listing and/or Registration on Form 25 with the SEC after applicable appeal periods have lapsed. Even if the Panel approves our appeal and we meet all parameters of any compliance plan afforded by the Panel, there can be no assurance that we will meet continued listing requirements in the future. In determining whether to afford a company a cure period prior to commencing suspension or delisting procedures, Nasdaq analyzes all relevant facts including any past history of bid price compliance issues, and our repeated bid price compliance issues in 2025 and 2026 could be used as a factor by Nasdaq in any future decision to delist our securities from trading on its exchange.

If Nasdaq delists our securities from trading on its exchange and we are not able to list our securities on another national securities exchange, we expect our securities could be quoted on an over-the-counter market. If this were to occur, we could face significant material adverse consequences, including:

●

a limited availability of market quotations for our securities;

●

reduced liquidity for our securities;

●

a determination that our Class A common stock is a “penny stock” which will require brokers trading in our Class A common stock to adhere to more stringent rules and possibly result in a reduced level of trading activity in the secondary trading market for our securities;

●

a limited amount of news and analyst coverage; and

●

a decreased ability to issue additional securities or obtain additional financing in the future.

There are risks related to Nasdaq’s proposed rule regarding minimum market value of listed securities.

In January 2026, Nasdaq proposed to strengthen its continued listing standards by requiring all companies listed on the Nasdaq Global or Capital Markets to maintain a minimum Market Value of Listed Securities (“MVLS”) of at least $5 million. If a company’s MVLS falls below this threshold for 30 consecutive business days, Nasdaq will immediately suspend trading and delist the company’s securities, with no compliance or cure period. While companies may request a hearing to challenge a delisting determination, trading will remain suspended throughout the appeals process, and the hearing panel can only reverse the decision if Nasdaq staff made a factual error. If this proposed rule is approved and adopted, any sustained decline in our MVLS below $5 million could result in the immediate suspension and delisting of our securities from Nasdaq, which would materially and adversely affect the liquidity and market price of our shares and could negatively impact our ability to raise capital or attract investors. Our inability to develop and sustain relationships with large retailers and chains may impede our ability to develop brand and product recognition and increase sales volume and, ultimately, require us to continue to rely on local and more fragmented sales channels, which may have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. Our MVLS over the 30 consecutive business days as of March 31, 2026 has been under $5 million.

The market price of our Class A common stock has been volatile and has declined significantly since our initial public offering and may face more volatility and price declines in the future. As a result, you may not be able to resell your shares at or above the price at which you have acquired or will acquire shares of our Class A common stock.

The market price of our Class A common stock has been volatile and has declined significantly since our initial public offering and could face more volatility and price declines in the future as a result of a number of factors, many of which are beyond our control. Furthermore, volatility in our stock price may occur regardless of our operating performance. As a result, you may not be able to sell your shares at or above the price you paid and you could lose a substantial part or all of your investment in our Class A common stock. The following factors could affect our stock price:

The stock markets in general have experienced extreme volatility, particularly recently, that has often been unrelated to the operating performance of particular companies. These broad market fluctuations may adversely affect the trading price of our Class A common stock.

Your percentage ownership will be diluted in the future.

Your percentage ownership will be diluted in the future as a result of equity awards that we expect will be granted to our directors, officers and employees, as well as any shares of our Class A common stock, or securities convertible into shares of our Class A common stock, we issue in connection with future capital raising or strategic transactions at prices that are dilutive to shareholders. Our Second Amended and Restated 2019 Equity Incentive Plan provides for the grant of equity-based awards to our directors, officers and employees. The issuance of any shares of Class A common stock will dilute the proportionate ownership and voting power of existing security holders.

Future securities issuances could result in significant dilution to our stockholders and impair the market price of our common stock.

Future issuances of shares of our common stock could depress the market price of our common stock and result in dilution to existing holders of our common stock. Also, to the extent outstanding options and warrants to purchase our shares of our common stock are exercised or options or other equity-based awards are issued or become vested, there will be further dilution. The amount of dilution could be substantial depending upon the size of the issuances or exercises. Furthermore, we may issue additional equity securities that could have rights senior to those of our common stock.

We have a significant number of pre-funded and advisory warrants that are or will be exercisable into shares of our Class A common stock. As of March 27, 2026, there were Cryptocurrency Pre-Funded Warrants exercisable for 25,084,068 shares of Class A common stock, with certain Cryptocurrency Pre-Funded Warrants becoming exercisable on April 18, 2026, and Advisory Warrants exercisable for 5,264,752 shares of Class A common stock, which become exercisable on April 23, 2026. As of March 27, 2026, we had 5,039,563 shares of Class A common stock issued and outstanding. Accordingly, upon the exercise of some or all of the pre-funded warrants or advisory warrants, as well as the exercise of stock options and other equity-based awards that have been or will be issued and/or granted by us, the percentage ownership and voting power held by our existing stockholders will be significantly reduced and our stockholders could experience significant dilution. In the ordinary course of business, we have and in the future may become the subject of various claims, lawsuits and governmental proceedings seeking damages or other remedies concerning our commercial operations, the products we distribute, our employees and other matters, including potential claims by individuals alleging injury or other harm caused by the products we distribute.

Substantial sales and issuances of our Class A common stock have and may continue to occur, or may be anticipated, which have and could continue to cause our stock price to decline.

The market price of shares of our Class A common stock could decline further as a result of substantial sales of our Class A common stock, issuances of Class A common stock at prices that are dilutive to stockholders, a large number of shares of our Class A common stock becoming available for sale or the perception in the market that holders of a large number of shares intend to sell their shares. Additionally, we expect that we will seek to raise additional capital from time to time in the future, which may involve the issuance of additional shares of our Class A common stock, or securities convertible into shares of our Class A common stock in subsequent public or private offerings at dilutive prices if debt is not available to us to fund our working capital needs.

We cannot predict the effect, if any, that these sales, or anticipation of such sales, will have on the market price of our common stock or the timing of any redemption of Common Units. Sales or issuances of substantial amounts of our Class A common stock (including shares issued in connection with an acquisition), or the perception that such sales could occur, may adversely affect prevailing market price of our Class A common stock.

The requirements of being a public company may strain our resources and distract our management, which could make it difficult to manage our business, particularly now that we are no longer an “emerging growth company.”

As a public company, we are required to comply with various regulatory and reporting requirements, including those required by the SEC. Complying with these reporting and other regulatory requirements is time-consuming and expensive and could have a negative effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. As a public company, we are subject to the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and the requirements of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (“SOX”). The cost of complying with these requirements may place a strain on our systems and resources. The Exchange Act requires that we file annual, quarterly and current reports with respect to our business and financial condition. SOX requires that we maintain effective disclosure controls and procedures and internal controls over financial reporting. To maintain and improve the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures, we must commit significant resources, may be required to hire additional staff and need to continue to provide effective management oversight. Sustaining our growth also will require us to commit additional management, operational and financial resources to identify new professionals to join our company and to maintain appropriate operational and financial systems to adequately support expansion. These activities may divert management’s attention from other business concerns, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.

In connection with becoming a public company, we obtained Side A directors’ and officers’ insurance coverage, which increased our annual insurance costs. In the future, it may be more expensive for us to obtain director and officer liability insurance, and we may be required to accept reduced coverage or incur substantially higher costs to obtain coverage. These factors could also make it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified members to our Board in the future, particularly to serve on our audit committee, and qualified executive officers.

As we are no longer an “emerging growth company” as defined in the JOBS Act, we must now comply with various reporting requirements. With these new requirements, we expect to incur additional expenses and devote increased management effort toward ensuring compliance with them. We cannot predict or estimate the amount of additional costs we may incur as a result of becoming a public company or the timing of such costs.

As a public reporting company, we are subject to rules and regulations established from time to time by the SEC regarding our internal control over financial reporting. In connection with our assessment of the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures, we identified material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2025, which caused our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer to determine that our internal control over financial reporting, as well as our disclosure controls and procedures, were not effective as of December 31, 2025.

As a public reporting company, we are subject to the rules and regulations established from time to time by the SEC. These rules and regulations require that, among other things, we establish and periodically evaluate procedures with respect to our internal control over financial reporting. Reporting obligations as a public company are likely to place a considerable strain on our financial and management systems, processes and controls, as well as on our personnel.

Our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act). Internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with U.S. GAAP. Our internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that: (i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of our assets; (ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with U.S. GAAP, and that our receipts and expenditures are being made only in accordance with authorizations of our management and directors; and (iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of our assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, we conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2025. Based on this evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that as of December 31, 2025, the Company had not maintained effective internal control over financial reporting as a result of the existence of material weaknesses. Consequently, management, with the participation of our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, also concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were not effective as of December 31, 2025 to provide reasonable assurance that information required to be disclosed by the Company in the reports filed or submitted by it under the Exchange Act were recorded, processed, summarized, and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms, and to provide reasonable assurance that information required to be disclosed by the Company in such reports was accumulated and communicated to the Company’s management, including, our Chief Executive Officer and our Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.

A “material weakness” is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of our financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. Although we are implementing measures to remediate the material weaknesses, we cannot give any assurances that the identified material weaknesses will be remediated on a timely basis or at all or that additional material weaknesses will not be identified in the future in connection with our compliance with the provisions of Section 404 of SOX. Our management has devoted and expects to continue to devote significant time and expense to remediate these material weaknesses and any other material weaknesses that may be discovered in the future and may not be able to remediate such material weaknesses in a timely manner. Our management may be required to devote significant time and expense to remediate these material weaknesses and any other material weaknesses that may be discovered in the future and may not be able to remediate such material weaknesses in a timely manner. The existence of any future material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting could also result in errors in our financial statements that could require us to restate our financial statements, cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations, and cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information, any of which could lead to a decline in the per share trading price of our common stock.

As described in Item 9A of Part II of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, we are continuing to implement our remediation plan to address the identified material weaknesses, and our management continues to be actively engaged in the remediation efforts. The material weaknesses will not be considered remediated until the applicable controls operate for a sufficient period of time and management has concluded, through testing, that these controls are operating effectively.

The identified material weaknesses primarily relate to deficiencies in the Company’s control environment, including limitations in personnel and segregation of duties, ineffective information technology general controls, including user access controls, insufficient review and approval controls over financial reporting processes, and controls over digital asset transactions, valuation, and reconciliation. These material weaknesses were not yet remediated as of December 31, 2025.

We have not paid dividends in the past and have no current plans to pay dividends in the future, and any return on investment may be limited to the value of our common stock.

We do not anticipate paying cash dividends in the foreseeable future. The payment of dividends will depend on our earnings, capital requirements, financial condition, prospects and other factors our Board may deem relevant. If we do not pay dividends, our stock may be less valuable because a return on your investment will only occur if you sell our Class A common stock after our stock price appreciates above the price at which you acquired such shares.

If securities analysts do not publish research or publish inaccurate or unfavorable research about our business, our stock price and trading volume could decline.

The trading market for our stock depends in part on the research and reports that securities or industry analysts publish about us or our industry. While there are currently securities analysts covering us, we can provide no assurances that the analysts will continue to publish report or that other securities analysts will initiate coverage. If no securities analysts cover our company, the trading price for our stock could be negatively impacted. In addition, if one or more of the analysts who cover us downgrade our stock or publish inaccurate or unfavorable research about our business, our stock price could decline as a result. If one or more of these analysts cease coverage of our company or fail to publish reports on us regularly, demand for our Class A stock could decrease, which might cause the market price and trading volume of our Class A common stock to decline.

We have a large number of authorized but unissued shares of stock, which could negatively impact a potential investor if they purchase our Class A common stock.

On August 5, 2024 and June 26, 2025, we effected reverse stock splits. The reverse stock splits did not change the par value of our Class A common stock or the number of shares of Class A common stock or preferred shares authorized by our amended and restated certificate of incorporation. Because the number of authorized shares of our Class A common stock was not reduced proportionally, the reverse stock splits increased our Board’s ability to issue authorized and unissued shares without further stockholder action. As of December 31, 2025, our amended and restated certificate of incorporation provides for 1,800,000,000 shares of authorized Class A common stock, 30,000,000 shares of authorized Class B common stock and 10,000,000 shares of authorized preferred stock and we have approximately 5,039,563 shares of Class A common stock outstanding, 30,380,354 shares reserved for exercise or vesting of outstanding warrants and options to purchase shares of Class A common stock and 3,000,000 shares of Class A common stock reserved for future grant under the Company’s equity incentive plan. As of December 31, 2023, our amended and restated certificate of incorporation provides for 600,000,000 shares of authorized Class A common stock, 30,000,000 shares of authorized Class B common stock and 10,000,000 shares of authorized preferred stock and we have approximately 3,726,926 shares of Class A common stock outstanding, 11,860,201 shares reserved for exercise or vesting of outstanding warrants and options to purchase shares of Class A common stock and 203,022 shares of Class A common stock reserved for future grant under the Company’s equity incentive plan. No shares of Class B common stock or preferred stock are outstanding.

With respect to authorized but unissued and unreserved shares, we could also use such shares to oppose a hostile takeover attempt or delay or prevent changes in control or changes in or removal of management. The issuance of additional shares of Class A common stock or securities convertible into Class A common stock may have a dilutive effect on earnings per share and relative voting power and may cause a decline in the trading price of our Class A common stock. We could use the shares that are available for future issuance in dilutive equity financing transactions, or to oppose a hostile takeover attempt or delay or prevent changes in control or changes in or removal of management, including transactions that are favored by a majority of the stockholders or in which the stockholders might otherwise receive a premium for their shares over then-current market prices or benefit in some other manner.

Anti-takeover provisions in our certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws and Delaware law could discourage a takeover.

Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and our amended and restated bylaws contain provisions that might enable our management to resist a takeover. These provisions include:

These provisions might discourage, delay or prevent a change in control of our company or a change in our Board. The existence of these provisions could adversely affect the voting power of holders of Class A common stock and limit the price that investors might be willing to pay in the future for shares of our Class A common stock. In addition, because we are incorporated in Delaware, we are governed by the provisions of Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law, which generally prohibits a Delaware corporation from engaging in any of a broad range of business combinations with any “interested” stockholder for a period of three years following the date on which the stockholder became an “interested” stockholder.

We may issue shares of preferred stock in the future, which could make it difficult for another company to acquire us or could otherwise adversely affect holders of our Class A common stock, which could depress the market price of our Class A common stock.

Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation authorizes us to issue one or more series of preferred stock. Our Board has the authority to determine the preferences, limitations and relative rights of the shares of preferred stock and to fix the number of shares constituting any series and the designation of such series, without any further vote or action by our stockholders. Our preferred stock can be issued with voting, liquidation, dividend and other rights superior to the rights of our Class A common stock. The potential issuance of preferred stock may delay or prevent a change in control of us, discourage bids for our Class A common stock at a premium to the market price, and materially and adversely affect the market price and the voting and other rights of the holders of our Class A common stock.

Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and bylaws provide that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware is the sole and exclusive forum for substantially all disputes between us and our stockholders, which could limit our stockholders’ ability to obtain a favorable judicial forum for disputes with us or our directors, officers or employees.

Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and our amended and restated bylaws provide that, unless we consent to the selection of an alternative forum, the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware is the sole and exclusive forum for (i) any derivative action or proceeding brought on our behalf, other than any action or proceeding that, under applicable law, may only be commenced or prosecuted in another forum, (ii) any action asserting a claim of breach of fiduciary duty owed by any of our directors, officers or other employees to us or to our stockholders, (iii) any action asserting a claim arising pursuant to the Delaware General Corporation Law or our amended and restated certificate of incorporation or bylaws (iv) any action to interpret, apply, enforce or determine the validity of our amended and restated certificate of incorporation.

We are a “smaller reporting company” under federal securities laws and we cannot be certain whether the reduced reporting requirements applicable to such companies will make our Class A common stock less attractive to investors.

We are a “smaller reporting company” under federal securities laws. For as long as we continue to be a smaller reporting company, we may take advantage of exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable to other public companies, including reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in our periodic reports and proxy statements. Generally, we will remain a smaller reporting company so long as our public float remains less than $250 million as of the last business day of our most recently completed second fiscal quarter. We cannot predict if investors will find our Class A common stock less attractive because we may rely on these exemptions. If some investors find our Class A common stock less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our Class A common stock and our stock price may decline or be more volatile.

ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

None.

ITEM 1C. CYBERSECURITY

Cybersecurity Risk Management and Strategy

The Company maintains processes designed to assess, identify, and manage material risks from cybersecurity threats to its systems, networks, and data. These processes include ongoing monitoring of information systems, periodic risk assessments, and implementation of security controls aligned with the Company’s operational scale and risk profile.

The Company’s cybersecurity program includes access controls, network monitoring, and incident response procedures intended to detect, mitigate, and respond to potential cybersecurity threats. The Company may engage third-party service providers from time to time to assist in evaluating and enhancing its cybersecurity posture, including through risk assessments and testing of controls.

The Company’s digital asset treasury introduces additional cybersecurity considerations, including custody, access control, and transaction authorization risks. The Company maintains its digital assets, including BERA and U.S. dollar-denominated stablecoins, with third-party custodians and through Company-controlled wallets subject to defined access controls. Access to private keys and transaction authorization processes is restricted through multi-party approval mechanisms and segregation of duties. The Company employs layered security measures, including authentication controls and monitoring of wallet activity, to reduce the risk of unauthorized access, loss, or transfer of digital assets.

Governance