Risk Factors Dashboard

Once a year, publicly traded companies issue a comprehensive report of their business, called a 10-K. A component mandated in the 10-K is the ‘Risk Factors’ section, where companies disclose any major potential risks that they may face. This dashboard highlights all major changes and additions in new 10K reports, allowing investors to quickly identify new potential risks and opportunities.

View risk factors by ticker

Search filings by term

Risk Factors - PANL

-New additions in green
-Changes in blue
-Hover to see similar sentence in last filing

Item 1A. Risk Factors for further details of our plan for compliance and potential costs.

The amended Annex VI also established new tiers of stringent nitrogen oxide emissions standards for marine diesel engines, depending on their date of installation. Tier III Nitrogen Oxide, or NOx, standards were designed for the control of NOx produced by vessels and apply to ships that operate in the North American and U.S. Caribbean Sea ECAs with marine diesel engine installed and constructed on or after January 1, 2016. At MEPC 70 and MEPC 71, the MEPC approved the North Sea and Baltic Sea as ECAs for nitrogen oxide for ships built on or after January 1, 2021. The Canadian-Arctic ECA for NOx will also be effective starting from March 1, 2026 for ships built on or after January 1, 2025. For the Norwegian Sea ECA, the NOx Tier III engine certification requirement will apply to ships (i) with building contracts placed on or after March 1, 2026, (ii) in the absence of a building contract, constructed on or after September 1, 2026, or (iii) delivered on or after March 1, 2030. For the North-East Atlantic ECA, the requirement is expected to apply to ships (i) contracted on or after January 1, 2027, (ii) in the absence of a building contract, constructed on or after July 1, 2027, or (iii) delivered on or after January 1, 2031. The EPA promulgated equivalent (and in some senses stricter) emissions standards in 2010 and we are compliant with the Tier I and Tier II requirements for NOx emissions under the EPA standards and Annex VI. We do not currently own any vessels subject to the Tier III requirements, although we may acquire such vessels in the future. In April 2025, MEPC 83 also adopted amendments (expected to enter into force late 2026 and early 2027) to the NOx Technical Code 2008, which allows ships to optimize fuel consumption based on their operational profile, thus improving energy efficiency, while ensuring compliance with NOx emission requirements. As a result of these designations or similar future designations, we may be required to incur additional operating or other costs.

At MEPC 70, Regulation 22A of MARPOL Annex VI became effective as of March 1, 2018 and requires ships above 5,000 gross tonnage to collect and report annual data on fuel oil consumption to an IMO database, with the first year of data collection having commenced on January 1, 2019. The IMO used such data as part of its initial roadmap (through 2023) for developing its strategy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from ships, as discussed further below. MEPC 83 approved draft amendments to make the IMO's data collection system more accessible to the public through an anonymized database.

As of January 1, 2013, MARPOL made mandatory certain measures relating to energy efficiency for ships. All ships are now required to develop and implement Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plans (“SEEMP”), and new ships must be designed in compliance with minimum energy efficiency levels per capacity mile as defined by the Energy Efficiency Design Index (“EEDI”). Under these measures, by 2025, all new ships built will be 30% more energy efficient than those built in 2014. MEPC 75 adopted amendments to MARPOL Annex VI which brings forward the effective date of the EEDI’s “phase 3” requirements from January 1, 2025 to April 1, 2022 for several ship types, including gas carriers, general cargo ships, and LNG carriers.

Additionally, in 2022, MEPC amended Annex VI to impose new regulations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from ships. These amendments introduce requirements to assess and measure the energy efficiency of all ships and set the required attainment values, with the goal of reducing the carbon intensity of international shipping. The requirements include (1) a technical requirement to reduce carbon intensity based on a new Energy Efficiency Existing Ship Index (“EEXI”), and (2) operational carbon intensity reduction requirements, based on a new operational carbon intensity indicator (“CII”). The attained EEXI is required to be calculated for ships of 400 gross tonnage and above, in accordance with different values set for ship types and categories. With respect to the CII, the draft amendments would require ships of 5,000 gross tonnage to document and verify their actual annual operational CII achieved against a determined required annual operational CII. All ships above 400 gross tonnage must also have an approved SEEMP on board. For ships above 5,000 gross tonnage, the SEEMP needs to include certain mandatory content. That same year, MEPC 75 amended MARPOL Annex I to prohibit the use and carriage for use as fuel of heavy fuel oil (“HFO”) by ships in Arctic waters on and after July 1, 2024. In 2021, MEPC 77 adopted a non-binding resolution which urges Member States and ship operators to voluntarily use distillate or other cleaner alternative fuels or methods of propulsion that are safe for ships and could contribute to the reduction of Black Carbon emissions from ships when operating in or near the Arctic.

In late 2022, MEPC 79 adopted amendments to MARPOL Annex VI, Appendix IX to include the attained and required CII values, the CII rating and attained EEXI for existing ships in the required information to be submitted to the IMO Ship Fuel Oil Consumption Database. MEPC 79 also revised the EEDI calculation guidelines to include a CO2 conversion factor for ethane, a reference to the updated ITCC guidelines, and a clarification that in case of a ship with multiple load line certificates, the maximum certified summer draft should be used when determining the deadweight. The amendments entered into force on May 1, 2024. In July 2023, MEPC 80 approved the plan for reviewing CII regulations and guidelines, and in April 2025, MEPC 83 adopted amendments to 2021 Guidelines on operational carbon intensity reduction factors, which outline methods for determining CII reduction factors from 2023 and now includes newly defined factors from 2027 to 2030. MEPC 83 also approved a work plan on the development of a regulatory framework for the use of onboard carbon capture and storage systems, which will capture carbon produced by a ship before it is emitted into the air.

We may incur costs to comply with these revised standards. Additional or new conventions, laws and regulations may be adopted that could require the installation of expensive emission control systems and could adversely affect our business, results of operations, cash flows and financial condition. The Company plans to continue to invest in its existing fleet to improve fuel efficiency and comply with these revised standards through its comprehensive IMO 2023 plan.

Safety Management System Requirements

The SOLAS Convention was amended to address the safe manning of vessels and emergency training drills. The Convention of Limitation of Liability for Maritime Claims (the “LLMC”) sets limitations of liability for a loss of life or personal injury claim or a property claim against ship owners. We believe that our vessels are in substantial compliance with SOLAS and LLMC standards.

Under Chapter IX of the SOLAS Convention, or the International Safety Management Code for the Safe Operation of Ships and for Pollution Prevention (the “ISM Code”), our operations are also subject to environmental standards and requirements. We rely upon the safety management system that we and our technical management team have developed for compliance with the ISM Code.

The ISM Code requires that vessel operators obtain a safety management certificate for each vessel they operate. This certificate evidences compliance by a vessel’s management with the ISM Code requirements for a safety management system. No vessel can obtain a safety management certificate unless its manager has been awarded a document of compliance, issued by each flag state, under the ISM Code. GSSM has valid documents of compliance for our offices and safety management certificates for all of our vessels for which the certificates are required by the IMO. The document of compliance and safety management certificate are renewed as required.

Regulation II-1/3-10 of the SOLAS Convention governs ship construction and stipulates that ships over 150 meters in length must have adequate strength, integrity and stability to minimize risk of loss or pollution. Goal-based standards amendments in SOLAS regulation II-1/3-10 entered into force in 2012, with July 1, 2016 set for application to new oil tankers and bulk carriers. The SOLAS Convention regulation II-1/3-10 on goal-based ship construction standards for bulk carriers and oil tankers, which entered into force on January 1, 2012, requires that all oil tankers and bulk carriers of 150 meters in length and above, for which the building contract is placed on or after July 1, 2016, satisfy applicable structural requirements conforming to the functional requirements of the International Goal-based Ship Construction Standards for Bulk Carriers and Oil Tankers (“GBS Standards”).

Amendments to the SOLAS Convention Chapter VII apply to vessels transporting dangerous goods and require those vessels be in compliance with the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code (“IMDG Code”). Effective January 1, 2018, the IMDG Code includes (1) the provisions for radioactive material, reflecting the latest provisions from the International Atomic Energy Agency, (2) marking, packing and classification requirements for dangerous goods, and (3) mandatory training requirements. Amendments that took effect on January 1, 2020, also reflect the latest material from the UN Recommendations on the Transport of Dangerous Goods, including (1) provisions regarding IMO type 9 tank, (2) abbreviations for segregation groups, and (3) special provisions for carriage of lithium batteries and of vehicles powered by flammable liquid or gas. Additional amendments, which came into force on June 1, 2022, include (1) addition of a definition of dosage rate, (2) additions to the list of high consequence dangerous goods, (3) new provisions for medical/clinical waste, (4) addition of various ISO standards for gas cylinders, (5) a new handling code, and (6) changes to stowage and segregation provisions. The newest edition of the IMDG Code took effect on January 1, 2024, although the changes are largely incremental.

The IMO has also adopted the International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers (“STCW”). As of February 2017, all seafarers are required to meet the STCW standards and be in possession of a valid STCW certificate. Flag states that have ratified SOLAS and STCW generally employ the classification societies, which have incorporated SOLAS and STCW requirements into their class rules, to undertake surveys to confirm compliance.

The IMO's Maritime Safety Committee and MEPC, respectively, each adopted relevant parts of the International Code for Ships Operating in Polar Water (the “Polar Code”). The Polar Code, which entered into force on January 1, 2017, covers design, construction, equipment, operational, training, search and rescue as well as environmental protection matters relevant to ships operating in the waters surrounding the two poles. It also includes mandatory measures regarding safety and pollution prevention as well as recommendatory provisions. The Polar Code applies to new ships constructed after January 1, 2017, and after January 1, 2018, ships constructed before January 1, 2017 are required to meet the relevant requirements by the earlier of their first intermediate or renewal survey.

Furthermore, cybersecurity guidance and regulations have been developed in the near future in an attempt to combat cybersecurity threats. For new ships and offshore installations contracted for construction on or after January 1, 2024, the International Association of Classification Societies, or IACS, now requires vessel owners, yard and suppliers to build cybersecurity barriers into their systems and vessels, requiring compliance across the full spectrum of critical on-board control and navigation systems. On July 16, 2025, the U.S. Coast Guard’s final rule, Cybersecurity in the Martine Transportation System, went into effect. Under this rule, all regulated entities are required to develop Cybersecurity and Cyber Incident Response Plans, designate a Cybersecurity Officer to implement plans, and to report certain cyber incidents to the National Response Center The impact of these regulations is hard to predict at this time.

Pollution Control and Liability Requirements

The IMO has negotiated international conventions that impose liability for pollution in international waters and the territorial waters of the signatories to such conventions. For example, the IMO adopted an International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships’ Ballast Water and Sediments (the “BWM Convention”) in 2004. The BWM Convention entered into force on September 8, 2017. The BWM Convention requires ships to manage their ballast water to remove, render harmless, or avoid the uptake or discharge of new or invasive aquatic organisms and pathogens within ballast water and sediments. The BWM Convention’s implementing regulations call for a phased introduction of mandatory ballast water exchange requirements, to be replaced in time with mandatory concentration limits, and require all ships to carry a ballast water record book and an international ballast water management certificate.

The MEPC maintains guidelines for approval of ballast water management systems (G8). Ships over 400 gross tons generally must comply with a “D-1 standard,” requiring the exchange of ballast water only in open seas and away from coastal waters. The “D-2 standard” specifies the maximum amount of viable organisms allowed to be discharged, and compliance dates vary depending on the IOPP renewal dates. The standards have been in force since 2019, and for most ships, compliance with the D-2 standard involved installing on-board systems to treat ballast water and eliminate unwanted organisms. Ballast water management systems, which include systems that make use of chemical, biocides, organisms or biological mechanisms, or which alter the chemical or physical characteristics of the ballast water, must be approved in accordance with IMO Guidelines (Regulation D-3). Since September 8, 2024, all ships have been required to meet the D-2 standard. Costs of compliance with these regulations may be substantial. Additionally, in November 2020, MEPC 75 adopted amendments to the BWM Convention which would require a commissioning test of the ballast water management system for the initial survey or when performing an additional survey for retrofits. This analysis will not apply to ships that already have an installed BWM system certified under the BWM Convention. These amendments entered into force on June 1, 2022. In December 2022, MEPC 79 agreed that it should be permitted to use ballast tanks for temporary storage of treated sewage and grey water. MEPC 79 also established that ships are expected to return to D-2 compliance after experiencing challenging uptake water and bypassing a BWM system should only be used as a last resort.

In addition to the BWM Convention, many countries already regulate the discharge of ballast water carried by vessels from country to country to prevent the introduction of invasive and harmful species via such discharges. The U.S., for example, requires vessels entering its waters from another country to conduct mid-ocean ballast exchange, or undertake some alternate measure, and to comply with certain reporting requirements. The system specification requirements for trading in the U.S. have been formalized and we have been installing ballast water treatment systems on our vessels as their special survey deadlines come due. These ballast water treatment systems range in cost from $0.5 million to $0.7 million each, primarily dependent on the size of the vessel. The cost of compliance could increase for ocean carriers and may have a material effect on our operations. Refer to “Capital Expenditures” section for further information.

The IMO adopted the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage of 1969, as amended by different Protocols in 1976, 1984, and 1992, and amended in 2000, or the CLC. Under the CLC and depending on whether the country in which the damage results is a party to the 1992 Protocol to the CLC, a vessel’s registered owner may be strictly liable for pollution damage caused in the territorial waters of a contracting state by discharge of persistent oil, subject to certain exceptions. The 1992 Protocol changed certain limits on liability expressed using the International Monetary Fund currency unit, the Special Drawing Rights. The limits on liability have since been amended so that the compensation limits on liability were raised. The right to limit liability is forfeited under the CLC where the spill is caused by the shipowner’s actual fault and under the 1992 Protocol where the spill is caused by the shipowner’s intentional or reckless act or omission where the shipowner knew pollution damage would probably result. The CLC requires ships over 2,000 tons covered by it to maintain insurance covering the liability of the owner in a sum equivalent to an owner’s liability for a single incident. We have protection and indemnity insurance for environmental incidents. P&I Clubs in the International Group issue the required Bunkers Convention “Blue Cards” to enable signatory states to issue certificates. All of our vessels are in possession of a CLC State issued certificate attesting that the required insurance coverage is in force.

The IMO also adopted the International Convention on Civil Liability for Bunker Oil Pollution Damage (the “Bunker Convention”) to impose strict liability on ship owners (including the registered owner, bareboat charterer, manager or operator) for pollution damage in jurisdictional waters of ratifying states caused by discharges of bunker fuel. The Bunker Convention requires registered owners of ships over 1,000 gross tons to maintain insurance for pollution damage in an amount equal to the limits of liability under the applicable national or international limitation regime (but not exceeding the amount calculated in accordance with the LLMC). With respect to non-ratifying states, liability for spills or releases of oil carried as fuel in ship’s bunkers typically is determined by the national or other domestic laws in the jurisdiction where the events or damages occur.

Ships are required to maintain a certificate attesting that they maintain adequate insurance to cover an incident. In jurisdictions, such as the United States where the CLC or the Bunker Convention has not been adopted, various legislative schemes or common law govern, and liability is imposed either on the basis of fault or on a strict-liability basis.

Anti-Fouling Requirements

In 2001, the IMO adopted the International Convention on the Control of Harmful Anti-fouling Systems on Ships, or the “Anti-fouling Convention.” The Anti-fouling Convention, which entered into force on September 17, 2008, prohibits the use of organotin compound coatings to prevent the attachment of mollusks and other sea life to the hulls of vessels. Vessels of over 400 gross tons engaged in international voyages will also be required to undergo an initial survey before the vessel is put into service or before an International Anti-fouling System Certificate, or the “IAFS Certificate,” is issued for the first time; and subsequent surveys when the anti-fouling systems are altered or replaced. Vessels of 24 meters in length or more but less than 400 gross tonnage engaged in international voyages will have to carry a Declaration on Anti-fouling Systems signed by the owner or authorized agent.

In November 2020, MEPC 75 approved draft amendments to the Anti-fouling Convention to prohibit anti-fouling systems containing cybutryne, which would apply to ships from January 1, 2023, or, for ships already bearing such an anti-fouling system, at the next scheduled renewal of the system after that date, but no later than 60 months following the last application to the ship of such a system. In addition, the IAFS Certificate has been updated to address compliance options for anti-fouling systems to address cybutryne. Ships which are affected by this ban on cybutryne must receive an updated IAFS Certificate no later than two years after the entry into force of these amendments. Ships which are not affected (i.e. with anti-fouling systems which do not contain cybutryne) must receive an updated IAFS Certificate at the next Anti-fouling application to the vessel. These amendments were formally adopted at MEPC 76 in June 2021, and entered into force on January 1, 2023.

We have obtained Anti-fouling System Certificates for all of our vessels that are subject to the Anti-fouling Convention.

Compliance Enforcement

Noncompliance with the ISM Code or other IMO regulations may subject the ship owner or bareboat charterer to increased liability, may lead to decreases in available insurance coverage for affected vessels and may result in the denial of access to, or detention in, some ports. The USCG and European Union authorities prohibit vessels not in compliance with the ISM Code by applicable deadlines from trading in U.S. and European Union ports, respectively. As of the date of this report, each of our vessels is ISM Code certified. However, there can be no assurance that such certificates will be maintained in the future. The IMO continues to review and introduce new regulations. It is impossible to predict what additional regulations, if any, may be passed by the IMO and what effect, if any, such regulations might have on our operations.

The U.S. Oil Pollution Act of 1990 and Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act

The Oil Pollution Act of 1990, or OPA, established an extensive regulatory and liability regime for the protection and cleanup of the environment from oil spills. OPA affects all “owners and operators” whose vessels trade or operate within the United States, its territories and possessions or whose vessels operate in United States waters, which includes the United States’ territorial sea and its 200 nautical mile exclusive economic zone around the United States. The United States has also enacted the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, or CERCLA, which applies to the discharge of hazardous substances other than oil, whether on land or at sea. OPA and CERCLA both define “owner and operator” in the case of a vessel as any person owning, operating or chartering by demise, the vessel. Both OPA and CERCLA impact the Company’s operations.

Under OPA, vessel owners and operators are “responsible parties” and are jointly, severally and strictly liable (unless the spill results solely from the act or omission of a third party, an act of God or an act of war) for all containment and clean-up costs and other damages arising from discharges or threatened discharges of oil from their vessels. OPA defines these other damages broadly to include:

•injury to, destruction or loss of, or loss of use of, natural resources and related assessment costs;

•injury to, or economic losses resulting from, the destruction of real and personal property;

•net loss of taxes, royalties, rents, fees or net profit revenues resulting from injury, destruction or loss of real or personal property, or natural resources;

•loss of subsistence use of natural resources that are injured, destroyed or lost;

•lost profits or impairment of earning capacity due to injury, destruction or loss of real or personal property or natural resources; and

•net cost of increased or additional public services necessitated by removal activities following a discharge of oil, such as protection from fire, safety or health hazards, and loss of subsistence use of natural resources.

OPA contains statutory caps on liability and damages; such caps do not apply to direct cleanup costs. Effective March 23, 2023, the new adjusted limits of OPA liability for non-tank vessels, edible oil tank vessels, and any oil spill response vessels, to the greater of $1,300 per gross ton or $1,076,000 (subject to periodic adjustment for inflation).

These limits of liability do not apply if an incident was proximately caused by the violation of an applicable U.S. federal safety, construction or operating regulation by a responsible party (or its agent, employee or a person acting pursuant to a contractual relationship), or a responsible party’s gross negligence or willful misconduct. The limitation on liability similarly does not apply if the responsible party fails or refuses to (i) report the incident as required by law where the responsible party knows or has reason to know of the incident; (ii) reasonably cooperate and assist as requested in connection with oil removal activities; or (iii) without sufficient cause, comply with an order issued under the Federal Water Pollution Act (Section 311 (c), (e)) or the Intervention on the High Seas Act.

CERCLA contains a similar liability regime whereby owners and operators of vessels are liable for cleanup, removal and remedial costs, as well as damages for injury to, or destruction or loss of, natural resources, including the reasonable costs associated with assessing the same, and health assessments or health effects studies. There is no liability if the discharge of a hazardous substance results solely from the act or omission of a third party, an act of God or an act of war. Liability under CERCLA is limited to the greater of $300 per gross ton or $5.0 million for vessels carrying a hazardous substance as cargo and the greater of $300 per gross ton or $500,000 for any other vessel. These limits do not apply (rendering the responsible person liable for the total cost of response and damages) if the release or threat of release of a hazardous substance resulted from willful misconduct or negligence, or the primary cause of the release was a violation of applicable safety, construction or operating standards or regulations. The limitation on liability also does not apply if the responsible person fails or refused to provide all reasonable cooperation and assistance as requested in connection with response activities where the vessel is subject to OPA.

OPA and CERCLA each preserve the right to recover damages under existing law, including maritime tort law. OPA and CERCLA both require owners and operators of vessels to establish and maintain with the U.S. Coast Guard evidence of financial responsibility sufficient to meet the maximum amount of liability to which the particular responsible person may be subject. Vessel owners and operators may satisfy their financial responsibility obligations by providing a proof of insurance, a surety bond, qualification as a self-insurer or a guarantee.

Incidents such as the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico may result in additional regulatory initiatives or statutes, including the raising of liability caps under OPA (which were raised on December 31, 2015). Compliance with any new requirements of OPA may substantially impact the Company’s cost of operations or require it to incur additional expenses to comply with any new regulatory initiatives or statutes. Additional legislation or regulations applicable to the operation of its vessels that may be implemented in the future could adversely affect its business.

The Company currently maintains pollution liability coverage insurance in the amount of $1.0 billion per incident for each of the Company’s vessels. If the damages from a catastrophic spill were to exceed the Company’s insurance coverage it could have an adverse effect on its business and results of operation.

OPA specifically permits individual states to impose their own liability regimes with regard to oil pollution incidents occurring within their boundaries, provided they accept, at a minimum, the levels of liability established under OPA. Some states have enacted legislation providing for unlimited liability for oil spills, and many U.S. states that border a navigable waterway have enacted environmental pollution laws that impose strict liability on a person for removal costs and damages resulting from a discharge of oil or a release of a hazardous substance. Moreover, some states have enacted legislation providing for unlimited liability for discharge of pollutants within their waters, although in some cases, states which have enacted such legislation have not yet issued implementing regulations defining vessel owners’ responsibilities under these laws. These laws may be more stringent than U.S. federal law. The Company intends to comply with all applicable state regulations in the ports where its vessels call. The Company believes that it is in substantial compliance with all applicable existing state requirements. In addition, the Company intends to comply with all future applicable state regulations in the ports where its vessels call.

Other United States Environmental Initiatives

The U.S. Clean Water Act, or CWA, prohibits the discharge of oil, hazardous substances and ballast water in U.S. navigable waters unless authorized by a duly-issued permit or exemption, and imposes strict liability in the form of penalties for any unauthorized discharges. The CWA also imposes substantial liability for the costs of removal, remediation and damages, and complements the remedies available under OPA and CERCLA.

The EPA and the USCG have also enacted rules relating to ballast water discharge, compliance with which requires the installation of equipment on our vessels to treat ballast water before it is discharged or the implementation of other port facility disposal arrangements or procedures at potentially substantial costs, and/or otherwise restrict our vessels from entering U.S. Waters. The EPA will regulate these ballast water discharges and other discharges incidental to the normal operation of certain vessels within United States waters pursuant to the Vessel Incidental Discharge Act, or VIDA, which was signed into law on December 4, 2018 and replaces the 2013 Vessel General Permit, or VGP program (which authorizes discharges incidental to operations of commercial vessels and contains numeric ballast water discharge limits for most vessels to reduce the risk of invasive species in U.S. waters, stringent requirements for exhaust gas scrubbers, and requirements for the use of environmentally acceptable lubricants) and current Coast Guard ballast water management regulations adopted under the U.S. National Invasive Species Act, or NISA, such as mid-ocean ballast exchange programs and installation of approved USCG technology for all vessels equipped with ballast water tanks bound for U.S. ports or entering U.S. waters. VIDA establishes a new framework for the regulation of vessel incidental discharges under Clean Water Act, or CWA, requires the EPA to develop performance standards for those discharges within two years of enactment, and requires the U.S. Coast Guard to develop implementation, compliance, and enforcement regulations within two years of EPA’s promulgation of standards. In October 2024, the EPA finalized its rule on Vessel Incidental Discharge Standards of Performance, which means that the USCG must now develop corresponding regulations regarding ballast water within two years of that date. Under VIDA, all provisions of the 2013 VGP and USCG regulations regarding ballast water treatment remain in force and effect until the EPA and U.S. Coast Guard regulations are finalized. Non-military, non-recreational vessels greater than 79 feet in length must continue to comply with the requirements of the VGP, including submission of a Notice of Intent, or NOI or retention of a PARI form and submission of annual reports. We have submitted NOIs for our vessels where required. Compliance with the EPA, U.S. Coast Guard and state regulations could require the installation of ballast water treatment equipment on our vessels or the implementation of other port facility disposal procedures at potentially substantial cost, or may otherwise restrict our vessels from entering U.S. waters.

European Union Regulations

In October 2009, the European Union amended a directive to impose criminal sanctions for illicit ship-source discharges of polluting substances, including minor discharges, if committed with intent, recklessly or with serious negligence and the discharges individually or in the aggregate result in deterioration of the quality of water. Aiding and abetting the discharge of a polluting substance may also lead to criminal penalties. The directive applies to all types of vessels, irrespective of their flag, but certain exceptions apply to warships or where human safety or that of the ship is in danger. Criminal liability for pollution may result in substantial penalties or fines and increased civil liability claims. Regulation (EU) 2015/757 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2015 (amending EU Directive 2009/16/EC) governs the monitoring, reporting and verification of carbon dioxide emissions from maritime transport, and, subject to some exclusions, requires companies with ships over 5,000 gross tonnage to monitor and report carbon dioxide emissions annually, which may cause us to incur additional expenses.

The European Union has adopted several regulations and directives requiring, among other things, more frequent inspections of high-risk ships, as determined by type, age, and flag as well as the number of times the ship has been detained. The European Union also adopted and extended a ban on substandard ships and enacted a minimum ban period and a definitive ban for repeated offenses. The regulations also provided the European Union with greater authority and control over classification societies, by imposing more requirements on classification societies and providing for fines or penalty payments for organizations that failed to comply. Furthermore, the EU has implemented regulations requiring vessels to use reduced sulfur content fuel for their main and auxiliary engines. The EU Directive 2005/33/EC (amending Directive 1999/32/EC) introduced requirements parallel to those in Annex VI relating to the sulfur content of marine fuels. In addition, the EU imposed a 0.1% maximum sulfur requirement for fuel used by ships at berth in the Baltic, the North Sea and the English Channel (the so-called “SOx-Emission Control Area”). As of January 2020, EU member states must also ensure that ships in all EU waters, except the SOx-Emission Control Area, use fuels with a 0.5% maximum sulfur content.

On September 15, 2020, the European Parliament voted to include greenhouse gas emissions from the maritime sector in the European Union’s carbon market, the EU Emissions Trading System (“EU ETS”) as part of its “Fit-for-55” legislation to reduce net greenhouse gas emissions by at least 55% by 2030 as compared to 1990 levels. This will require shipowners to buy permits to cover these emissions. On December 18, 2022, the Environmental Council and European Parliament agreed to include maritime shipping emissions within the scope of the EU ETS on a gradual introduction of obligations for shipping companies to surrender allowances equivalent to a portion of their carbon emissions: 40% for verified emissions from 2024, 70% for 2025 and 100% for 2026. Most large vessels will be included in the scope of the EU ETS from the start. Big offshore vessels of 5,000 gross tonnage and above will be included in the 'MRV' on the monitoring, reporting and verification of CO2 emissions from maritime transport regulation from 2025 and in the EU ETS from 2027. General cargo vessels and off-shore vessels between 400-5,000 gross tonnage will be included in the MRV regulation from 2025 and their inclusion in EU ETS will be reviewed in 2026. Furthermore, starting from January 1, 2026, the ETS regulations will expand to include emissions of two additional greenhouse gases: nitrous oxide and methane. Compliance with the Maritime EU ETS will result in additional compliance and administration costs to properly incorporate the provisions of the Directive into our business routines. A

Additionally, on July 25, 2023, the European Council of the European Union adopted the Maritime Fuel Regulation under the Fuel EU Initiative of its “Fit-for-55” package which sets limitations on the acceptable yearly greenhouse gas intensity of the energy used by covered vessels. Among other things, the Maritime Fuel Regulation requires that greenhouse gas emissions from covered vessels are reduced by 2% starting January 1, 2025, with additional reductions contemplated every five years (up to 80% from January 1, 2050).

Additional EU regulations which are part of the EU’s "Fit-for-55," could also affect our financial position in terms of compliance and administration costs when they take effect.

Greenhouse Gas Regulation

Our industry currently is heavily dependent on the consumption of fossil fuels, which has been linked by certain experts to greenhouse gas emissions and the warming of the global climate system. We are committed to working to reduce our carbon footprint, including by transitioning to low-carbon fuels while continuing to deliver for our customers. Our governance, strategy, risk management and performance monitoring efforts with respect to managing this challenge continue to evolve.

Currently, the emissions of greenhouse gases from international shipping are not subject to the Kyoto Protocol of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, which entered into force in 2005 and pursuant to which adopting countries have been required to implement national programs to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. International negotiations are continuing with respect to a successor to the Kyoto Protocol, and restrictions on shipping emissions may be included in any new treaty. In December 2009, more than 27 nations, including the U.S. and China, signed the Copenhagen Accord, which includes a non-binding commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The 2015 United Nations Climate Change Conference in Paris resulted in the Paris Agreement, which entered into force on November 4, 2016 and does not directly limit greenhouse gas emissions from ships. The U.S. is not party to the Paris Agreement.

At MEPC 70 and MEPC 71, a draft outline of the structure of the initial strategy for developing a comprehensive IMO strategy on reduction of greenhouse gas, or GHG, emissions from ships was approved. In accordance with this roadmap, in April 2018, nations at the MEPC 72 adopted an initial strategy to reduce GHG emissions from ships. The initial strategy identifies “levels of ambition” to reduce GHG emissions, and notes that technological innovation, alternative fuels and/or energy sources for international shipping will be integral to achieve the ambitions. At MEPC 77, the Member States agreed to initiate the revision of the Initial IMO Strategy on Reduction of GHG emissions from ships, recognizing the need to strengthen the “levels of ambition.” In July 2023, MEPC 80 adopted the 2023 IMO Strategy on Reduction of GHG Emissions from Ships, or the 2023 IMO Strategy, which builds upon the initial strategy’s levels of ambition. The revised levels of ambition include (1) further decreasing the carbon intensity from ships through improvement of energy efficiency; (2) reducing carbon intensity of international shipping; (3) increasing adoption of zero or near-zero emissions technologies, fuels, and energy sources; and (4) achieving net zero GHG emissions from international shipping. Furthermore, the following indicative checkpoints were adopted in order to reach net zero GHG emissions from international shipping: i) reduce the total annual GHG emissions from international shipping by at least 20%, striving for 30%, by 2030, compared to 2008 levels; and ii) reduce the total annual GHG emissions from international shipping by at least 70%, striving for 80%, by 2040, compared to 2008 levels. As part of the 2023 IMO Strategy, MPEC also created the IMO Net-zero Framework, which will combine mandatory emissions limits and GHG pricing across the industry. The IMO Net-zero Framework was approved at MEPC 83 (Spring 2025) for potential adoption in Spring 2026 and will eventually be included in Annex VI. Under these draft regulations, ships will be required to reduce their annual greenhouse gas fuel intensity, (“GFI”), calculated using the well-to-wake approach and ships emitting above GFI thresholds will have to acquire remedial units to balance its deficit emissions, while those using zero or near-zero GHG technologies will be eligible for financial rewards.

The EU made a unilateral commitment to reduce overall greenhouse gas emissions from its member states from 20% of 1990 levels by 2020. The EU also committed to reduce its emissions by 20% under the Kyoto Protocol’s second period from 2013 to 2020. As of January 2018, large ships over 5,000 gross tonnage calling at EU ports are required to collect and publish data on carbon dioxide emissions and other information. Under the European Climate Law, the EU committed to reduce its net greenhouse gas emissions by at least 55% by 2030 through its “Fit-for-55” legislation package. As part of this initiative, the European Union’s carbon market, EU ETS has been extended to cover CO2 emissions from all large ships entering EU ports starting January 2024..

In the United States, the EPA issued a finding that greenhouse gases endanger the public health and safety, adopted regulations to limit greenhouse gas emissions from certain mobile sources, and proposed regulations to limit greenhouse gas emissions from large stationary sources. However, in March 2017, the Trump administration issued an executive order to review and possibly eliminate the EPA’s plan to cut greenhouse gas emissions, and on August 13, 2020, the EPA released rules rolling back standards to control methane and volatile organic compound emissions from new oil and gas facilities. In early 2021, the Biden administration directed the EPA to publish a proposed rule suspending, revising, or rescinding certain of these rules, which was finalized in December 2023. However, the current administration is delaying these requirements limiting methane emissions and is considering repealing the measure altogether. Therefore, it is unclear how such environmental regulations could affect our operations.

Any passage of climate control legislation or other regulatory initiatives by the IMO, the EU, the U.S. or other countries where we operate, or any treaty adopted at the international level to succeed the Kyoto Protocol or Paris Agreement, that restricts emissions of greenhouse gases could require us to make significant financial expenditures which we cannot predict with certainty at this time. Even in the absence of climate control legislation, our business may be indirectly affected to the extent that climate change may result in sea level changes or certain weather events.

International Labor Organization

The International Labour Organization, or ILO, is a specialized agency of the UN that has adopted the Maritime Labor Convention 2006, or MLC 2006. A Maritime Labor Certificate and a Declaration of Maritime Labor Compliance is required to ensure compliance with the MLC 2006 for all ships that are 500 gross tonnage or over and are either engaged in international voyages or flying the flag of a Member and operating from a port, or between ports, in another country. We believe that all of our vessels are in substantial compliance with and are certified to meet MLC 2006.

Vessel Security Regulations

Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 in the United States, there have been a variety of initiatives intended to enhance vessel security such as the U.S. Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002, or MTSA. To implement certain portions of the MTSA, the USCG issued regulations requiring the implementation of certain security requirements aboard vessels operating in waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and at certain ports and facilities, some of which are regulated by the EPA.

Similarly, Chapter XI-2 of the SOLAS Convention imposes detailed security obligations on vessels and port authorities and mandates compliance with the International Ship and Port Facility Security Code, or the ISPS Code.. The ISPS Code is designed to enhance the security of ports and ships against terrorism. To trade internationally, a vessel must attain an International Ship Security Certificate, or the ISSC, from a recognized security organization approved by the vessel’s flag state. Ships operating without a valid certificate may be detained, expelled from, or refused entry at port until they obtain an ISSC.

The USCG regulations, intended to align with international maritime security standards, exempt non-U.S. vessels from MTSA vessel security measures, provided such vessels have on board a valid ISSC that attests to the vessel’s compliance with the SOLAS Convention security requirements and the ISPS Code. Future security measures could have a significant financial impact on us. We intend to comply with the various security measures addressed by MTSA, the SOLAS Convention and the ISPS Code.

The cost of vessel security measures has also been affected by the escalation in the frequency of acts of piracy against ships, notably off the coast of Somalia, including the Gulf of Aden and Arabian Sea area, as well as off the coast of Western Africa. Substantial loss of revenue and other costs may be incurred as a result of detention of a vessel or additional security measures, and the risk of uninsured losses could significantly affect our business. Costs are incurred in taking additional security measures in accordance with Best Management Practices to Deter Piracy, notably those contained in the BMP5 industry standard.

Inspection by Classification Societies

Every oceangoing vessel must be “classed” by a classification society. The classification society certifies that the vessel is “in class,” signifying that the vessel has been built and maintained in accordance with the rules of the classification society and complies with applicable rules and regulations of the vessel's country of registry and the international conventions of which that country is a member. In addition, where surveys are required by international conventions and corresponding laws and ordinances of a flag state, the classification society will undertake them on application or by official order, acting on behalf of the authorities concerned.

The classification society also undertakes, as requested, other surveys that may be required by the vessel's flag state. These surveys are subject to agreements made with the vessel owner and/or to the regulations of the country concerned.

For maintenance of the class certification, annual, intermediate and special surveys of hull and machinery, including the electrical plant, and any special equipment, are required to be performed as follows:

•Annual Surveys: For seagoing ships, annual surveys are conducted within three months, before or after each anniversary of the class period indicated in the certificate.

•Intermediate Surveys: Extended surveys are referred to as intermediate surveys and are typically conducted two and one-half years after commissioning, and two and one-half years after each class renewal. Intermediate surveys are to be carried out at or between the occasion of the second or third annual survey.

•Class Renewal Surveys: Class renewal surveys, also known as special surveys, are carried out at the intervals indicated by the character of classification for the hull. At the special survey, the vessel is thoroughly examined, including audio-gauging to determine the thickness of the steel structures. If the steel thickness is found to be less than class requirements, the classification society would prescribe steel renewals which require drydocking of the vessel. The classification society may grant a one-year grace period for completion of the special survey. Substantial costs may be incurred for steel renewal in order to pass a special survey if the vessel experiences excessive wear and tear. In lieu of the special survey every four or five years, depending on whether a grace period was granted, a shipowner has the option of arranging with the classification society for the vessel’s hull or machinery to be on a continuous survey cycle, in which case every part of the vessel would be surveyed on a continuous five-year cycle. This process is referred to as continuous class renewal.

All areas subject to survey, as defined by the classification society, are required to be surveyed at least once per class period unless shorter intervals between surveys are prescribed elsewhere. The period between two subsequent surveys of each area must not exceed five years.

Most vessels undergo regulatory inspection of the underwater parts every 30 to 36 months. If any defects are found, the classification surveyor will issue a recommendation which must be rectified by the ship owner within prescribed time limits.

The Company expects to perform thirteen special surveys in 2026 at an aggregate total cost of approximately $15.7 million. The Company expects to perform two intermediate surveys in 2026 at an aggregate total cost of approximately $3.0 million. The Company estimates that offhire related to the surveys and related repair work is ten to twenty days per vessel, depending on the size and condition of the vessel.

Most insurance underwriters make it a condition for insurance coverage that a vessel be certified as “in class” by a classification society which is a member of the International Association of Classification Societies. All of the Company’s vessels are certified by Det Norske Veritas, Nippon Kaiji Kiokai or Bureau Veritas. All new and second-hand vessels that the Company purchases must be certified prior to delivery under its standard purchase contracts, referred to as the memorandum of agreement or ship building contracts. Certification of second-hand vessels must be verified by a Class Maintenance Certificate issued within 72 hours prior to delivery. If the vessel is not certified on the date of closing, the Company has the option to cancel the agreement on the basis of Seller’s default, and not take delivery of the vessel.

Risk of Loss and Insurance

General

The operation of any dry bulk vessel includes risks such as mechanical failure, collision, property loss, cargo loss or damage, and business interruption due to political circumstances in foreign countries, hostilities and labor strikes. In addition, there is an inherent possibility of marine disaster, including oil spills (e.g. fuel oil) and other environmental incidents, and the liabilities arising from owning and operating vessels in international trade. OPA, which imposes virtually unlimited liability for certain oil pollution accidents upon owners, operators and demise charterers of vessels trading in the United States exclusive economic zone, has made liability insurance more expensive for ship owners and operators trading in the U.S. market.

The Company maintains hull and machinery insurance, war risks insurance, protection and indemnity cover and freight, demurrage and defense cover for its owned fleet at amounts it believes address the normal risks of its operations. The Company may not be able to maintain this level of coverage throughout a vessel’s useful life. Furthermore, while the Company believes that its current insurance coverage is adequate, not all risks can be insured, and there can be no guarantee that any specific claim will be paid, or that the Company will always be able to obtain adequate insurance coverage at reasonable rates.

Hull & Machinery and War Risks Insurance

The Company maintains marine hull and machinery and war risks insurances, which cover the risk of actual or constructive total loss, for all of its vessels. Vessels are insured for their fair market value, at a minimum, with a deductible of $100,000 per vessel per incident.

Protection and Indemnity Insurance

Protection and indemnity insurance is a form of mutual indemnity insurance provided by mutual protection and indemnity associations, or P&I Associations, which insure the Company’s third-party liabilities in connection with its shipping activities. This includes third-party liability and other related expenses resulting from the injury, illness or death of crew, passengers and other third parties, the loss or damage to cargo, claims arising from collisions with other vessels, damage to other third-party property, pollution arising from oil or other substances and salvage, towing and other related costs, including wreck removal. Subject to the “capping” discussed below, the Company’s coverage, except for pollution, is unlimited.

The Company’s current protection and indemnity insurance coverage for pollution is $1.0 billion per vessel per incident. The 12 P&I Associations that comprise the International Group insure approximately 90% of the world’s commercial tonnage and have entered into a pooling agreement to reinsure each association’s liabilities. As a member of a P&I Association, which is a member of the International Group, the Company is subject to calls payable to the associations based on the group’s claim records as well as the claim records of all other members of the individual associations and members of the pool of P&I Associations comprising the International Group.

Exchange Controls

The Company is an exempted company organized under the Bermuda Companies Act. The Bermuda Companies Act differs in some material respects from laws generally applicable to United States companies and their stockholders. However, a general permission issued by the Bermuda Monetary Authority, or BMA, results in the Company’s common shares being freely transferable among persons who are residents and non-residents of Bermuda. Each shareholder, whether a resident or non-resident of Bermuda, is entitled to one vote for each share of stock held by the shareholder.

Although the Company is incorporated in Bermuda, the Company is classified as a non-resident of Bermuda for exchange control purposes by the BMA. Other than transferring Bermuda Dollars out of Bermuda, there are no restrictions on its ability to transfer funds into and out of Bermuda or to pay dividends in currency other than Bermuda Dollars to U.S. residents (or other non-residents of Bermuda) who are holders of its common shares.

In accordance with Bermuda law, share certificates may be issued only in the names of corporations, individuals or legal persons. In the case of an applicant acting in a special capacity (for example, as an executor or trustee), certificates may, at the request of the applicant, record the capacity in which the applicant is acting. Notwithstanding the recording of any such special capacity, the Company is not bound to investigate or incur any responsibility in respect of the proper administration of any such estate or trust.

The Company will take no notice of any trust applicable to any of its shares or other securities whether or not the Company had notice of such trust.

INDUSTRY AND MARKET CONDITIONS

Market Overview

Ocean going vessels represent the most efficient and often the only means of transporting large volumes of dry cargo over long distances. Dry bulk cargo includes both major and minor commodities such as coal, iron ore, grain, bauxite, cement clinker, and limestone. Dry bulk trade is influenced by the underlying demand for the dry bulk commodities which in turn is influenced by the level of global economic activity.

The world’s fleet of vessels dedicated to carrying dry bulk cargoes is traditionally divided into six major categories, based on a vessel’s cargo carrying capacity. These categories are: Handysize, Supramax, Ultramax, Panamax, Capesize and Very Large Ore Carrier. Certain routes and geographies are less accessible to certain vessel sizes. For example, Panamax and Supramax vessels are the main dry bulk vessel types deployed in the Baltic due to draft restrictions.

Dry bulk vessels are employed through a number of different chartering options. The most common are time charters, spot charters, and voyage charters. Historically, charter rates have been volatile as they are driven by the underlying balance between vessel supply and demand. Ice class vessels, when operating in ice-bound areas, usually command a rate premium to conventional trades.

Dry Bulk Shipping — the Main Participants

In the dry bulk shipping industry there are multiple functions, with individual parties carrying out one or more of such functions. In general, the principal functions within dry bulk shipping are as follows:

•Ship Owner or Registered Owner — Generally, this is an entity retaining the legal title of ownership over a vessel.

•Ship Operator — Generally, this is an entity seeking to generate profit either through the chartering of ships (owned or chartered-in) to others, or from the transportation of cargoes. Entities focusing on the transportation of cargoes may engage in chartering of ships to other entities, but those companies focusing on chartering ships to other entities rarely act to carry cargoes for customers.

•Shipmanager/Commercial Manager — This is an entity designated to be responsible for the day to day commercial management of the ship and the best contact for the ship regarding commercial matters, including post fixture responsibilities, such as laytime, demurrage, insurance and charter clauses. These companies undertake the activities of ship operators but, unlike a ship operator, they do not own or charter-in the vessels at their own risk.

•Technical Manager — This is an entity specifically responsible for the technical operation and technical superintendence of a ship. This company may also be responsible for hiring, training and supervising ship officers and crew, and for all aspects of the day to day operation of the fleet, including repair work, spare parts inventory, re-engineering, surveys and dry-docking.

•Cargo Owner — This is normally a producer (e.g., a miner), consumer (e.g., a steel mill) or trading house who requires transportation of cargo by a cargo focused ship operator.

The Company participates in each of these capacities with the exception of cargo owner, although at rare opportunistic times the Company may purchase cargo for resale after completion of a voyage.

The Freight Market

Dry bulk vessels are employed in the market through a number of different chartering options. The general terms typically found in these types of contracts are described below.

•Time Charter. A charter under which the vessel owner or operator is paid charterhire on a per-day basis for a specified period of time. Typically, the shipowner receives semi-monthly charterhire payments on a U.S. dollar-per-day basis and is responsible for providing the crew and paying vessel operating expenses, while the charterer is responsible for paying the voyage expenses and additional voyage insurance. The ship owner is also responsible for the vessel’s intermediate and special survey (heavy mandatory maintenance) costs. Under time charters, including trip charters, the charterer pays all voyage expenses including port, canal and bunker (fuel) costs.

•Trip Charter. A time charter for a trip to carry a specific cargo from a load port to a discharge port at a set daily rate.

•Voyage Charter. A charter to carry a specific amount and type of cargo on a load-port to discharge-port basis, subject to various cargo handling terms. Most of these charters are of a single voyage nature, as trading patterns do not encourage round trip voyage trading. The ship operator receives payment based on a price per ton of cargo loaded on board the vessel. The ship operator is responsible for the payment of all voyage expenses, as well as the costs of owning or hiring the vessel.

•Contract of Affreightment. A contract of affreightment, or COA, relates to the carriage of multiple cargoes over the same route and enables the service provider to nominate different vessels to perform the individual voyages. Essentially, it constitutes a series of voyage charters to carry a specified amount of cargo during the term of the COA, which usually spans a number of months or years. Freight normally is agreed on a U.S. dollar-per-ton carried basis with bunker cost escalation or de-escalation adjustments.

•Bareboat Charter. A bareboat charter involves the use of a vessel, usually over longer periods of time (several years). In this case, all voyage expenses and vessel operating expenses, including maintenance, crewing and insurance, are paid for by the charterer. The owner of the vessel receives monthly charterhire payments on a U.S. dollar per day basis and is responsible only for the payment of capital costs related to the vessel. A bareboat charter is also known as a “demise charter” or a “time charter by demise.”

The Company primarily employs its vessels under voyage charters together with COAs and time charters.

Rates

In the time charter (period) market, rates vary depending on the length of the charter period and vessel specific factors such as age, speed, size and fuel consumption. In the voyage charter market, rates are influenced by cargo size, commodity, port dues, bunker prices, and canal transit fees, as well as delivery and redelivery regions. In general, a larger cargo size is quoted at a lower rate per ton than a smaller cargo size. Routes with costly ports or canals generally command higher rates. Voyages loading from a port where vessels usually discharge cargo, or discharging at a port where vessels usually load cargo, are generally quoted at lower rates. These voyages are known as “backhaul” voyages.

In some cases, charters will include an additional payment known as a ballast bonus. A ballast bonus is a lump sum payment made to a shipowner or operator (by the charterer) as compensation for delivering a ship in a particular loading region of the world. For a ship to enter a loading region, an empty (ballast) leg may be required because there are no inbound cargoes. The ballast bonus should reflect the cost of the empty ballast in terms of time and fuel. A typical fixture that involves a ballast bonus might be expressed as “freight hire of $10,000 per day, plus a ballast bonus of $100,000 lump sum”.

Within the dry bulk shipping industry, the freight rate indices issued by the Baltic Exchange in London are the references most likely to be monitored. These references are based on actual charter hire rates under charters entered into by market participants as well as daily assessments provided to the Baltic Exchange by a panel of major shipbrokers. The Baltic Exchange, an independent organization comprised of shipbrokers, shipping companies and other shipping players, provides daily independent shipping market information and has created freight rate indices reflecting the average freight rates for the major bulk vessel trading routes. The Baltic Dry Index, or BDI, is a composite of the Capesize, Panamax and Supramax timecharter averages. It is considered a proxy for dry bulk shipping stocks as well as a general shipping market bellwether.

Dry Bulk Trades Requiring Ice Class Tonnage

Ice class vessels are required to serve ports accessed by routes crossing seasonal or year-round ice-covered oceans, lakes, seas or rivers. Ice class vessels are mainly deployed in the Baltic Sea, the Northern Sea Route (NSR) and the Great Lakes/St. Lawrence Seaway. These regions have experienced strong trade growth in dry bulk cargoes, driven in particular by increased mining activities supported by strong commodity demand in Asia, decreased level of ice, and technology advancement in shipping. The Company's ice class vessels also serve a long-term customers requirement in the Canadian Arctic.

TAXATION

U.S. Taxation

The following discussion is based upon the provisions of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code, existing and proposed U.S. Treasury Department regulations, or the Treasury Regulations, administrative rulings and pronouncements and judicial decisions, all as of the date of this annual report. Unless otherwise noted, references to the “Company” include the Company’s Subsidiaries. This discussion assumes that we do not have an office or other fixed place of business in the United States.

Taxation of the Company’s Shipping Income: In General

The Company anticipates that it will derive a significant portion of its gross income from the use and operation of vessels in international commerce and that this income will principally consist of freights from the transportation of cargoes, hire or lease from time or voyage charters and the performance of services directly related thereto, which the Company refers to as “shipping income”. Shipping income that is attributable to transportation that begins or ends, but that does not both begin and end, in the United States will be considered to be 50% derived from sources within the United States. Shipping income attributable to transportation that both begins and ends in the United States will be considered to be 100% derived from sources within the United States. The Company is not permitted by law to engage in transportation that gives rise to 100% U.S. source income.

Shipping income attributable to transportation exclusively between non-U.S. ports will be considered to be 100% derived from sources outside the United States. Shipping income derived from sources outside the United States will not be subject to U.S. federal income tax.

Based upon the Company’s anticipated shipping operations, the Company’s vessels will operate in various parts of the world, including to or from U.S. ports. Unless exempt from U.S. federal income taxation under Section 883 of the Code, the Company will be subject to U.S. federal income taxation, in the manner discussed below, to the extent its shipping income is considered derived from sources within the United States.

Application of Section 883 of the Code

Under the relevant provisions of Section 883 of the Code, or Section 883, the Company will be exempt from U.S. federal income taxation on its U.S. source shipping income if:

(i) It is organized in a “qualified foreign country,” which is one that grants an equivalent exemption from tax to corporations organized in the United States in respect of the shipping income for which exemption is being claimed under Section 883, and which the Company refers to as the Country of Organization Requirement; and

(ii) It can satisfy any one of the following two stock ownership requirements for more than half the days during the taxable year:

•the Company’s stock is “primarily and regularly traded on an established securities market” located in the United States or a “qualified foreign country,” which the Company refers to as the Publicly-Traded Test; or

•more than 50% of the Company’s stock, in terms of value, is beneficially owned by any combination of one or more individuals who are residents of a “qualified foreign country” or foreign corporations that satisfy the Country of Organization Requirement and the Publicly-Traded Test, which the Company refers to as the 50% Ownership Test.

The U.S. Treasury Department has recognized Bermuda, the country of incorporation of the Company and certain of its subsidiaries, as a “qualified foreign country”. In addition, the U.S. Treasury Department has recognized Denmark, Canada, Greece, the Marshall Islands, Singapore, British Virgin Islands and Cyprus, the countries of incorporation of certain of the Company’s vessel-owning subsidiaries, as “qualified foreign countries”. Accordingly, the Company and its vessel-owning subsidiaries satisfy the Country of Organization Requirement. Therefore, the Company’s eligibility to qualify for exemption under Section 883 is wholly dependent upon being able to satisfy one of the stock ownership requirements.

As discussed below, for the 2025 taxable year we believe the Company satisfied the Publicly-Traded Test, since on more than half the days in the taxable year we believe the Company’s common shares were primarily and regularly traded on Nasdaq, an established securities market in the United States.

As to the Publicly-Traded Test, the Treasury Regulations under Section 883 provide, in pertinent part, that stock of a foreign corporation will be considered to be “primarily traded” on an established securities market in a country if the number of shares of each class of stock that is traded during any taxable year on all established securities markets in that country exceeds the number of shares in each such class that is traded during that year on established securities markets in any other single country.

The Publicly-Traded Test also requires our common shares be “regularly traded” on an established securities market. Under the Treasury Regulations, our common shares are considered to be “regularly traded” on an established securities market if shares representing more than 50% of our outstanding common shares, by both total combined voting power of all classes of stock entitled to vote and total value, are listed on the market, referred to as the “listing threshold”. The Treasury Regulations further require that with respect to each class of stock relied upon to meet the listing threshold (i) such class of stock is traded on the market, other than in minimal quantities, on at least 60 days during the taxable year or 1/6 of the days in a short taxable year, which is referred to as the “trading frequency test”, and (ii) the aggregate number of shares of such class of stock traded on such market during the taxable year is at least 10% of the average number of shares of such class of stock outstanding during such year (as appropriately adjusted in the case of a short taxable year), which is referred to as the “trading volume test”. Even if we do not satisfy both the trading frequency and trading volume tests, the Treasury Regulations provide that the trading frequency and trading volume tests will be deemed satisfied if our common shares are traded on an established securities market in the United States and such stock is regularly quoted by dealers making a market in our common shares, such the Nasdaq Capital Market, on which our common shares are listed.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, our common shares will not be considered to be regularly traded on an established securities market for any taxable year in which 50% or more of the vote and value of the outstanding common shares are owned, actually or constructively under certain stock attribution rules, on more than half the days during the taxable year by persons who each own 5% or more of the value of our common shares, which we refer to as the 5 Percent Override Rule.

In order to determine the persons who actually or constructively own 5% or more of our common shares, or 5% Shareholders, we are permitted to rely on those persons that are identified on Schedule 13G and Schedule 13D filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission as having a 5% or more beneficial interest in our common shares. In addition, an investment company identified on a Schedule 13G or Schedule 13D filing which is registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended, will not be treated as a 5% Shareholder for such purposes.

For our 2025 taxable year, we do not believe that we were subject to the 5 Percent Override Rule and, therefore, we believe that we satisfied the Publicly-Traded Test. There are, however, factual circumstances beyond our control that could cause the Company to lose the benefit of the Section 883 exemption and thereby become subject to U.S. federal income tax on its U.S. source shipping income. There is, therefore, a risk that the Company could no longer qualify for exemption under Section 883 for a particular taxable year if 5% Shareholders were to own 50% or more of the outstanding common shares of the Company on more than half the days during the taxable year. Due to the factual nature of the issues involved, there can be no assurances as to the tax-exempt status of the Company or any of its subsidiaries.

In the event the 5 Percent Override Rule is triggered, the 5 Percent Override Rule will nevertheless not apply if we can establish that among the closely-held group of 5% Shareholders, there are sufficient 5% Shareholders that are considered to be “qualified shareholders” for purposes of Section 883 to preclude non-qualified 5% Shareholders in the closely-held group from owning 50% or more of our common shares for more than half the number of days during the taxable year.

In any year that the 5 Percent Override Rule is triggered with respect to us, we are eligible for the exemption from tax under Section 883 only if we can nevertheless satisfy the Publicly-Traded Test (which requires, among other things, showing that the exception to the 5 Percent Override Rule applies) or if we can satisfy the 50% Ownership Test. In either case, certain substantiation and reporting requirements regarding the identity of our shareholders must be satisfied in order to qualify for the Section 883 exemption.

Taxation in Absence of the Section 883 Exemption To the extent the benefits of Section 883 are unavailable with respect to any item of U.S. source income, the Company’s U.S. source shipping income, to the extent not considered to be “effectively connected” with the conduct of a U.S. trade or business, as described below, would be subject to a 4% tax imposed by Section 887 of the Code on a gross basis, without the benefit of deductions, which we refer to as the “4% gross basis tax regime”. Since, under the sourcing rules described above, no more than 50% of the Company’s shipping income would be treated as being derived from U.S. sources, the maximum effective rate of U.S. federal income tax on the Company’s shipping income, to the extent not considered to be “effectively connected” with the conduct of a U.S. trade or business, would never exceed 2% under the 4% gross basis tax regime.

To the extent the benefits of the Section 883 exemption are unavailable and our U.S. source shipping income is considered to be “effectively connected” with the conduct of a U.S. trade or business, as described below, any such “effectively connected” U.S. source shipping income, net of applicable deductions, would be subject to the U.S. federal corporate income tax imposed at rate of 21%. In addition, we may be subject to the 30% “branch profits” tax on earnings “effectively connected” with the conduct of such U.S. trade or business, as determined after allowance for certain adjustments, and on certain interest paid or deemed paid attributable to the conduct of such U.S. trade or business. Our U.S. source shipping income would be considered “effectively connected” with the conduct of a U.S. trade or business only if:

•we have, or are considered to have, a fixed place of business in the United States involved in the earning of U.S. source shipping income; and

•substantially all of our U.S. source shipping income were attributable to regularly scheduled transportation, such as the operation of a vessel that followed a published schedule with repeated sailings at regular intervals between the same points for voyages that begin or end in the United States, or, in the case of income from the chartering of a vessel, were attributable to a fixed place of business in the United States.

We do not have, nor will we permit circumstances that would result in having, any vessel sailing to or from the United States on a regularly scheduled basis. Based on the foregoing and on the expected mode of our shipping operations and other activities, we believe that none of our U.S. source shipping income is or will be “effectively connected” with the conduct of a U.S. trade or business.

Gain on Sale of Vessels

Regardless of whether we qualify for exemption under Section 883, we will not be subject to U.S. federal income taxation with respect to gain realized on a sale of a vessel, provided the sale is considered to occur outside of the United States under U.S. federal income tax principles. In general, a sale of a vessel will be considered to occur outside of the United States for this purpose if title to the vessel, and risk of loss with respect to the vessel, pass to the buyer outside of the United States. It is expected that any sale of a vessel by us will be considered to occur outside of the United States.

Taxation of U.S. Holders

The following is a discussion of the material U.S. federal income tax considerations relevant to an investment decision by a U.S. Holder, as defined below, with respect to our common shares. This discussion does not purport to deal with the tax consequences of owning our common shares to all categories of investors, some of which may be subject to special rules. You are encouraged to consult your own tax advisors concerning the overall tax consequences arising in your own particular situation under U.S. federal, state, local or foreign law of the ownership of our common shares.

As used herein, the term U.S. Holder means a beneficial owner of our common shares that (i) is a U.S. citizen or resident, a U.S. corporation or other U.S. entity taxable as a corporation, an estate, the income of which is subject to U.S. federal income taxation regardless of its source, or a trust if (a) a court within the United States is able to exercise primary jurisdiction over the administration of the trust and one or more U.S. persons have the authority to control all substantial decisions of the trust or (b) the trust has in effect a valid election to be treated as a United States person for U.S. federal income tax purposes, (ii) owns our common shares as a capital asset, generally, for investment purposes, and (iii) owns less than 10% of our common shares for U.S. federal income tax purposes.

If a partnership holds our common shares, the tax treatment of a partner will generally depend upon the status of the partner and upon the activities of the partnership. If you are a partner in a partnership holding our common shares, you are encouraged to consult your own tax advisor regarding this issue.

Distributions

Subject to the discussion below of passive foreign investment companies, or PFICs, any distributions made by us with respect to our common shares to a U.S. Holder will generally constitute dividends, which may be taxable as ordinary income or “qualified dividend income” as described in more detail below, to the extent of our current or accumulated earnings and profits, as determined under U.S. federal income tax principles. Distributions in excess of our earnings and profits will be treated first as a nontaxable return of capital to the extent of the U.S. Holder’s tax basis in his common shares on a dollar-for-dollar basis and thereafter as capital gain. Because we are not a U.S. corporation, U.S. Holders that are corporations will generally not be entitled to claim a dividends-received deduction with respect to any distributions they receive from us.

Dividends paid on our common shares to a U.S. Holder who is an individual, trust or estate, which we refer to as a U.S. Individual Holder, will generally be treated as “qualified dividend income” that is taxable to such U.S. Individual Holders at preferential tax rates provided that (1) the common shares are readily tradable on an established securities market in the United States (such as the Nasdaq Capital Market, on which our common shares are listed); (2) we are not a PFIC for the taxable year during which the dividend is paid or the immediately preceding taxable year (see discussion below); and (3) the U.S. Individual Holder has owned the common shares for more than 60 days in the 121-day period beginning 60 days before the date on which the common shares become ex-dividend.

There is no assurance that any dividends paid on our common shares will be eligible for these preferential rates in the hands of a U.S. Individual Holder. Any dividends paid by the Company which are not eligible for these preferential rates will be taxed as ordinary income to a U.S. Individual Holder.

Sale, Exchange or other Disposition of Common Shares

Assuming we do not constitute a PFIC for any taxable year, a U.S. Holder generally will recognize taxable gain or loss upon a sale, exchange or other disposition of our common shares in an amount equal to the difference between the amount realized by the U.S. Holder from such sale, exchange or other disposition and the U.S. Holder’s tax basis in such common shares. Such gain or loss will be treated as long-term capital gain or loss if the U.S. Holder’s holding period in the common shares is greater than one year at the time of the sale, exchange or other disposition. Otherwise, it will be treated as short-term capital gain or loss. A U.S. Holder’s ability to deduct capital losses is subject to certain limitations.

Passive Foreign Investment Company Status and Significant Tax Consequences

Special U.S. federal income tax rules apply to a U.S. Holder that holds stock in a foreign corporation classified as a PFIC for U.S. federal income tax purposes. In general, we will be treated as a PFIC with respect to a U.S. Holder if, for any taxable year in which such holder held our common shares, either at least 75% of our gross income for such taxable year consists of “passive income” (e.g., dividends, interest, capital gains and rents derived other than in the active conduct of a rental business), or at least 50% of the average value of the assets held by the corporation during such taxable year produce, or are held for the production of, “passive income”. For purposes of determining whether we are a PFIC, we will be treated as earning and owning our proportionate share of the income and assets, respectively, of any of our subsidiary corporations in which we own at least 25% of the value of the subsidiary’s stock. Income earned, or deemed earned, by us in connection with the performance of services would not constitute passive income. By contrast, rental income would generally constitute “passive income” unless we were treated under specific rules as deriving our rental income in the active conduct of a trade or business.

Although there is no legal authority directly on point, we believe that, for purposes of determining whether we are a PFIC, the gross income we derive or are deemed to derive from the time chartering activities of our wholly-owned subsidiaries more likely than not constitutes services income, rather than rental income. Correspondingly, we believe that such income does not constitute “passive income”, and the assets that we or our wholly-owned subsidiaries own and operate in connection with the production of such income, in particular, the vessels, do not constitute passive assets for purposes of determining whether we are a PFIC. We believe there is substantial legal authority supporting our position consisting of case law and Internal Revenue Service, or IRS, pronouncements concerning the characterization of income derived from time charters and voyage charters as services income for other tax purposes. This position is principally based upon the positions that our time charter income will constitute services income, rather than rental income for other tax purposes. Based on our current and anticipated chartering activities, we do not believe that we will be treated as a PFIC for the current or future taxable years, although no assurance can be given in this regard. We intend to take the position that we were not treated as a PFIC for our 2025 taxable year.

We note that there is no direct legal authority under the PFIC rules addressing our current and proposed method of operation. In addition, although we intend to conduct our affairs in a manner to avoid being classified as a PFIC with respect to any taxable year, we cannot assure you that the nature of our operations will not change in the future.

As discussed more fully below, if we were to be treated as a PFIC for any taxable year, a U.S. Holder would be subject to different taxation rules depending on whether the U.S. Holder makes an election to treat us as a “Qualified Electing Fund”, which election we refer to as a QEF Election. As an alternative to making a QEF election, a U.S. Holder should be able to make a “mark-to-market” election with respect to our common shares, as discussed below, and which election we refer to as a Mark-to-Market Election.

Taxation of U.S. Holders Making a Timely QEF Election

If we were to be treated as a PFIC for any taxable year and a U.S. Holder makes a timely QEF Election, which U.S. Holder we refer to as an Electing Holder, the Electing Holder must report each year for U.S. federal income tax purposes its pro rata share of our ordinary earnings and our net capital gain, if any, for our taxable year that ends with or within the taxable year of the Electing Holder, regardless of whether or not distributions were received from us by the Electing Holder. The Electing Holder’s adjusted tax basis in the common shares will be increased to reflect taxed but undistributed earnings and profits. Distributions of earnings and profits that had been previously taxed will result in a corresponding reduction in the adjusted tax basis in the common shares and will not be taxed again once distributed. A U.S. Holder would make a QEF Election with respect to any taxable year that we are a PFIC by filing one copy of IRS Form 8621 with its U.S. federal income tax return. To make a QEF Election, a U.S. Holder must receive annually certain tax information from us. There can be no assurances that we will be able to provide such information annually. An Electing Holder would generally recognize capital gain or loss on the sale, exchange or other disposition of our common shares.

Taxation of U.S. Holders Making a Mark-to-Market Election

Alternatively, if we were to be treated as a PFIC for any taxable year and, as we anticipate, our common shares are treated as “marketable stock”, a U.S. Holder would be permitted to make a Mark-to-Market Election with respect to our common shares, provided the U.S. Holder completes and files IRS Form 8621 in accordance with the relevant instructions and related Treasury Regulations. If that election is made, the U.S. Holder generally would include as ordinary income in each taxable year the excess, if any, of the fair market value of the common shares at the end of the taxable year over such holder’s adjusted tax basis in the common shares. The U.S. Holder would also be permitted an ordinary loss in respect of the excess, if any, of the U.S. Holder’s adjusted tax basis in the common shares over its fair market value at the end of the taxable year, but only to the extent of the net amount previously included in income as a result of the Mark-to-Market Election. A U.S. Holder’s tax basis in its common shares would be adjusted to reflect any such income or loss amount. Gain realized on the sale, exchange or other disposition of our common shares would be treated as ordinary income, and any loss realized on the sale, exchange or other disposition of the common shares would be treated as ordinary loss to the extent that such loss does not exceed the net mark-to-market gains previously included in income by the U.S. Holder.

Taxation of U.S. Holders Not Making a Timely QEF or Mark-to-Market Election

Finally, if we were to be treated as a PFIC for any taxable year, a U.S. Holder who does not make either a QEF Election or a Mark-to-Market Election for that year, whom we refer to as a Non-Electing Holder, would be subject to special rules with respect to (1) any excess distribution (i.e., the portion of any distributions received by the Non-Electing Holder on our common shares in a taxable year in excess of 125% of the average annual distributions received by the Non-Electing Holder in the three preceding taxable years, or, if shorter, the Non-Electing Holder’s holding period for the common shares), and (2) any gain realized on the sale, exchange or other disposition of our common shares. Under these special rules:

•the excess distribution or gain would be allocated ratably over the Non-Electing Holders’ aggregate holding period for the common shares;

•the amount allocated to the current taxable year and any taxable years before the Company became a PFIC would be taxed as ordinary income; and

•the amount allocated to each of the other taxable years would be subject to tax at the highest rate of tax in effect for the applicable class of taxpayer for that year, and an interest charge for the deemed deferral benefit would be imposed with respect to the resulting tax attributable to each such other taxable year.

These penalties would not apply to a pension or profit-sharing trust or other tax-exempt organization that did not borrow funds or otherwise utilize leverage in connection with its acquisition of our common shares. If we were a PFIC, and a Non-Electing Holder who is an individual died while owning our common shares, such holder’s successor generally would not receive a step-up in tax basis with respect to such common shares.

Taxation of Non-U.S. Holders

A beneficial owner of common shares (other than a partnership) that is not a U.S. Holder is referred to herein as a Non-U.S. Holder.

Dividends on Common Shares

Non-U.S. Holders generally will not be subject to U.S. federal income or withholding tax on dividends received from us with respect to our common shares, unless that dividend is effectively connected with the Non-U.S. Holder’s conduct of a trade or business in the United States. If the Non-U.S. Holder is entitled to the benefits of a U.S. income tax treaty with respect to those dividends, that income is taxable, or taxable at the full rate, only if it is attributable to a permanent establishment maintained by the Non-U.S. Holder in the United States.

Sale, Exchange or Other Disposition of Common Shares

Non-U.S. Holders generally will not be subject to U.S. federal income or withholding tax on any gain realized upon the sale, exchange or other disposition of our common shares, unless:

•the gain is effectively connected with the Non-U.S. Holder’s conduct of a trade or business in the United States (and, if the Non-U.S. Holder is entitled to the benefits of an income tax treaty with respect to that gain, that gain is attributable to a permanent establishment maintained by the Non-U.S. Holder in the United States); or

•the Non-U.S. Holder is an individual who is present in the United States for 183 days or more during the taxable year of disposition and other conditions are met.

If the Non-U.S. Holder is engaged in a U.S. trade or business for U.S. federal income tax purposes, the income from the common shares, including dividends and the gain from the sale, exchange or other disposition of the common shares, that is effectively connected with the conduct of that trade or business will generally be subject to regular U.S. federal income tax in the same manner as discussed in the previous section relating to the taxation of U.S. Holders. In addition, if you are a corporate Non-U.S. Holder, your earnings and profits that are attributable to the effectively connected income, subject to certain adjustments, may be subject to an additional branch profits tax at a rate of 30%, or at a lower rate as may be specified by an applicable income tax treaty.

Backup Withholding and Information Reporting

In general, dividend payments, or other taxable distributions, made within the United States to you will be subject to information reporting requirements. Such payments will also be subject to “backup withholding” if you are a non-corporate U.S. Holder and you:

•fail to provide an accurate taxpayer identification number;

•are notified by the IRS that you have failed to report all interest or dividends required to be shown on your

U.S. federal income tax returns; or

•in certain circumstances, fail to comply with applicable certification requirements.

•Non-U.S. Holders may be required to establish their exemption from information reporting and backup

withholding by certifying their status on an applicable IRS Form W-8.

If you are a Non-U.S. Holder and you sell your common shares to or through a U.S. office of a broker, the payment of the proceeds is subject to both U.S. backup withholding and information reporting unless you certify that you are a non-U.S. person, under penalties of perjury, or otherwise establish an exemption. If you sell your common shares through a non-U.S. office of a non-U.S. broker and the sales proceeds are paid to you outside the United States, then information reporting and backup withholding generally will not apply to that payment. However, U.S. information reporting, but not backup withholding, will apply to a payment of sales proceeds, including a payment made to you outside the United States, if you sell your common shares through a non-U.S. office of a broker that is a U.S. person or has some other contacts with the United States. Such information reporting requirements will not apply, however, if the broker has documentary evidence that you are a non-U.S. person and certain other conditions are met, or you otherwise establish an exemption.

Backup withholding is not an additional tax. Rather, you generally may obtain a refund of any amounts withheld under backup withholding rules that exceed your income tax liability by filing a refund claim with the IRS.

Other U.S. Information Reporting Obligations

Individuals who are U.S. Holders (and to the extent specified in applicable Treasury regulations, certain individuals who are Non-U.S. Holders and certain U.S. entities) who hold “specified foreign financial assets” (as defined in Section 6038D of the Code) are required to file IRS Form 8938 with information relating to the asset for each taxable year in which the aggregate value of all such assets exceeds $75,000 at any time during the taxable year or $50,000 on the last day of the taxable year (or such higher dollar amount as prescribed by applicable Treasury regulations). Specified foreign financial assets would include, among other assets, our common shares, unless the shares are held through an account maintained with a U.S. financial institution. Substantial penalties apply to any failure to timely file IRS Form 8938, unless the failure is shown to be due to reasonable cause and not due to willful neglect. Additionally, in the event an individual U.S. Holder (and to the extent specified in applicable Treasury regulations, an individual Non-U.S. Holder or a U.S. entity) that is required to file IRS Form 8938 does not file such form, the statute of limitations on the assessment and collection of U.S. federal income taxes of such holder for the related tax year may not close until three years after the date that the required information is filed. U.S. Holders (including U.S. entities) and Non-U.S. Holders are encouraged to consult their own tax advisors regarding their reporting obligations under this legislation.

Changes in Global Tax Laws

Long-standing international tax initiatives that determine each country’s jurisdiction to tax cross-border international trade and profits are evolving as a result of, among other things, initiatives such as the Anti-Tax Avoidance Directives, as well as the Base Erosion and Profit Shifting reporting requirements, mandated and/or recommended by the EU, G8, G20 and Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, including the imposition of a minimum global effective tax rate for multinational businesses regardless of the jurisdiction of operation and where profits are generated (Pillar Two). As these and other tax laws and related regulations change (including changes in the interpretation, approach and guidance of tax authorities), our financial results could be materially impacted. Given the unpredictability of these possible changes and their potential interdependency, it is difficult to assess whether the overall effect of such potential tax changes would be cumulatively positive or negative for our earnings and cash flow, but such changes could adversely affect our financial results.

On December 12, 2022, the European Union member states agreed to implement the OECD’s Pillar Two global corporate minimum tax rate of 15% on companies with revenues of at least €750 million effective from 2024. Various countries have either adopted implementing legislation or are in the process of drafting such legislation. Any new tax law in a jurisdiction where we conduct business or pay tax could have a negative effect on our company.

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

An investment in our securities involves a high degree of risk. You should consider carefully the material risks described below, which we believe represent the material risks related to our business and our securities, together with the other information contained in this Form 10-K, before making a decision to invest in our securities. This Form 10-K also contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. In connection with such forward looking statements, you should also carefully review the cautionary statements referred to under “Special Note Regarding Forward Looking Statements.” Our actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in the forward-looking statements as a result of specific factors, including the risks described below.

Summary of Risk Factors

•The cyclical and volatile nature of the seaborne drybulk transportation industry may lead to significant decreases in charter and freight rates, which may have an adverse effect on our revenues, earnings and profitability and our ability to comply with our loan covenants.

•Our business is affected by macroeconomic conditions, including rising inflation, interest rates, market volatility, economic uncertainty, and supply chain constraints, and global economic conditions may negatively impact the drybulk shipping industry.

•The invasion of Ukraine by Russia and the resulting sanctions imposed by the United States, the European Union and other countries have contributed to inflation, market disruptions and increased volatility in commodity prices and global financial markets. Escalating geopolitical tensions in the Middle East, including the crisis involving Iran, may further disrupt global trade routes, increase energy and fuel costs, and adversely affect global economic conditions.

•The market values of our owned vessels may decrease, which could limit the amount of funds that we can borrow or cause us to breach certain covenants in our credit facilities and we may incur impairment or a loss if we sell vessels following a decline in their market value.

•The state of the global financial markets and economic conditions may adversely impact our ability to obtain additional financing on acceptable terms and otherwise negatively impact our business.

•Changes in the economic and political environment in China and policies adopted by the government to regulate its economy may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

•Our revenues are subject to seasonal fluctuations, which could affect our operating results and our ability to pay dividends, if any, in the future.

•If our vessels call on ports located in countries or territories or carry cargo that is the subject of sanctions or embargoes imposed by the U.S., the European Union, the United Nations, or other governmental authorities, it could lead to monetary fines or penalties and may adversely affect our reputation and the market for our securities.

•We are subject to complex laws and regulations, including environmental regulations that can adversely affect the cost, manner or feasibility of doing business.

•Changes in fuel prices, that may result from increased oil prices, may adversely affect our profitability.

•In the highly competitive international shipping industry, we may not be able to compete successfully for chartered-in vessels or for vessel employment and, as a result, we may be unable to charter-in vessels at reasonable rates or employ our vessels profitably.

•Increasing scrutiny and changing expectations from investors, lenders and other market participants with respect to our Environmental, Social and Governance (“ESG”) policies may impose additional costs on us or expose us to additional risks.

•We depend upon a few significant customers for a large part of our revenues and cash flow, and the loss of one or more of these customers could adversely affect our financial performance.

•We are subject to certain risks with counterparties on contracts and the failure of such counterparties to meet their obligations could cause us to suffer losses or otherwise adversely affect our business and ability to comply with covenants in our loan agreements, which could impose operating and financial restrictions on us.

•Obligations associated with being a public company require significant company resources and management attention, and we incur increased costs as a result of being a public company.

•Because we purchase and operate secondhand vessels, we may be exposed to increased operating costs which could adversely affect our earnings and, as our fleet ages, the risks associated with older vessels could adversely affect our ability to obtain profitable charters.

•Our ability to obtain additional debt financing, or to refinance existing indebtedness, may be dependent on the performance and length of our charter contracts and the creditworthiness of our contract counterparties.

•We depend on our Chief Executive Officer, Chief Operating Officer, Chief Financial Officer and other key employees, and the loss of their services would have a material adverse effect on our business, results and financial condition.

•Exposure to currency exchange rate fluctuations will result in fluctuations in our cash flows and operating results.

•United States tax authorities could treat us as a “passive foreign investment company,” which could have adverse United States federal income tax consequences to U.S. holders.

•Volatility in the broader securities markets and trading volume of our common shares could adversely impact the trading price of our common shares.

•Because we are a foreign corporation, you may not have the same rights that a shareholder in a U.S. corporation may have, and it may not be possible for our investors to enforce U.S. judgments against us.

Risks Relating to our Industry

The seaborne drybulk transportation industry is cyclical and volatile, and this may lead to reductions in our charter hire rates, vessel values and results of operations.

The degree of charter and freight rate volatility for vessels has varied widely and is due to various factors, including changing crude oil prices, economic activity in the largest economies, including China, a strong U.S. Dollar and the associated weakening of other world currencies and the supply of available tonnage. A worsening of current global economic conditions may cause dry bulk charter rates to decline and thereby adversely affect our ability to charter or re-charter our vessels and any renewal or replacement charters that we enter into, may not be sufficient to allow us to operate our vessels profitably. In addition, the conflict in Ukraine has continued disrupting energy production grain exports and trade patterns, including shipping in the Black Sea and elsewhere, and its impact on such markets remains uncertain. Fluctuations in charter hire rates result from changes in the supply of and demand for vessel capacity and changes in the supply of and demand for energy resources, commodities, semi-finished and finished consumer and industrial products internationally carried at sea. If we enter into a charter when charter hire rates are low, our revenues and earnings will be adversely affected. In addition, a decline in charter hire rates is likely to cause the market value of our vessels to decline. We cannot assure you that we will be able to successfully charter our vessels in the future or renew our existing charters at rates sufficient to allow us to operate our business profitably, meet our obligations or pay dividends to our shareholders.

Although our operating fleet is primarily chartered-in on a short-term basis and lower charter rates result in lower charter hire costs, changes in charter and freight rates in the drybulk market affect vessel values and earnings on our owned fleet, and may affect our cash flows, liquidity and ability to comply with the financial covenants in our loan agreements. The value of our common shares could be substantially reduced under these circumstances.

We employ our vessels under a mix of voyage charters and time charters and COA’s which typically extend for varying lengths of time, from one month to ten years. As a result, we are exposed to changes in market rates for drybulk carriers and such changes may affect our earnings and the value of our owned drybulk carriers at any given time. A COA relates to the carriage of multiple cargoes over the same route and enables the COA holder to nominate different vessels to perform individual voyages. We may not be able to successfully employ our vessels in the future or renew existing contracts at rates sufficient to allow us to meet our obligations. We are also exposed to volatility in the market rates we pay to charter-in vessels. Fluctuations in charter and freight rates result from changes in the supply of and demand for vessel capacity and changes in the demand for seaborne carriage of commodities. Because the factors affecting the supply of and demand for vessels are outside of our control and are unpredictable, the nature, timing, direction and degree of changes in industry conditions are also unpredictable.

Factors that influence demand for vessel capacity include:

•supply of and demand for energy resources, commodities, semi-finished and finished consumer and industrial products;

•changes in the exploration or production of energy resources, commodities, semi-finished and finished consumer and industrial products;

•the location of regional and global exploration, production and manufacturing facilities;

•the location of consuming regions for energy resources, commodities, semi-finished and finished consumer and industrial products;

•availability of credit to finance international trade;

•the globalization of production and manufacturing;

•global and regional economic and political conditions, including armed conflicts, terrorist activities, sanctions, embargoes and strikes;

•natural disasters and other disruptions in international trade;

•disruptions and developments in international trade;

•changes in seaborne and other transportation patterns, including the distance cargo is transported by sea;

•changes in government or maritime self-regulatory organizations' rules and regulations or actions taken by regulatory authorities;

•environmental and other regulatory developments;

•currency exchange rates;

•international sanctions, embargoes, strikes, import and export restrictions, nationalizations, piracy, terrorist attacks and armed conflicts, including the ongoing Ukrainian-Russian and Israeli-Hamas conflicts;

•developments in international trade, including those relating to the imposition of tariffs;

•economic slowdowns, business disruptions, including supply chain issues due to natural, health, or other disasters, or otherwise;

•bunker (fuel) prices; and

•weather.

Demand for our vessels is dependent upon economic growth in the world’s economies, seasonal and regional changes in demand, changes in the capacity of the global drybulk fleet and the sources and supply of drybulk cargo transported by sea. Although the current newbuilding orderbook (as a percentage of the on-the-water fleet) is at a historically low level, a pickup in new ordering could increase global capacity and there can be no assurance that economic growth will continue in order to absorb this higher supply. Adverse economic, political, social or other developments could have a material adverse effect on our business and operating results.

The factors that influence the supply of vessel capacity include:

•the number and size of newbuilding orders and deliveries, including slippage in deliveries;

•the number of shipyards and ability of shipyards to deliver vessels;

•port and canal congestion, including as the result of restrictions or reductions in the capacity of the Panama and Suez Canals due to environmental or geopolitical factors,

•bunker prices;

•the scrapping rate of older vessels;

•vessel casualties;

•speed of vessels being operated;

•technological advances in vessel design and capacity;

•the number of vessels that are out of service, namely those that are laid-up, dry-docked, awaiting repairs or otherwise not available for hire;

•availability of financing for new vessels;

•the price of steel and vessel equipment;

•national or international regulations that may effectively cause reductions in the carrying capacity of vessels or early obsolescence of tonnage;

•the imposition of expansion of sanctions;

•business disruptions, including supply chain disruptions, those related to the imposition of tariffs and congestion, and those related to natural or other disasters, and disruption of shipping routes due to accidents, political events or armed conflicts;

•product imbalances (affecting level of trading activity) and developments in international trade;

•changes in national or international regulations that may effectively cause reductions in the carrying capacity of vessels or early obsolescence of tonnage; and

•changes in environmental and other regulations that may limit the useful lives of vessels or requires technological developments not yet perfected for commercialization.

Furthermore, the conflict in Ukraine combined with inflationary pressures and/or supply chain disruptions across most major economies have negatively impacted certain of the countries in which we operate in and may lead to a global economic slowdown, which might in turn adversely affect demand for our vessels. In particular, the conflict in Ukraine and related sanctions measures imposed against Russia has continued to disrupt energy production and trade patterns, including shipping in the Black Sea and elsewhere, and has impacted the price of certain dry bulk goods, such as grain, as well as energy and fuel prices. Notably, various jurisdictions have imposed sanctions against Russia directly targeting the maritime transport of goods originating from Russia, such as of oil products and agricultural commodities such as potash. Such measures, and the response of targeted jurisdictions to them, have disrupted trade patterns of certain of the goods which we transport and have correspondingly impacted charter rates for the transport of such goods.

The ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas, which commenced in October 2023, has resulted in a surge in acts of piracy and assaults on vessels in the Red Sea. According to reports from the U.S. military, three commercial vessels have been targeted in international waters in the southern Red Sea. Yemen's Houthi group has claimed responsibility for drone and missile strikes on two vessels near the Cape of Good Hope in southern Africa. These incidents have significantly extended the duration and expenses of voyages from east to west. While we cannot currently determine the immediate consequences of this conflict, the continued occurrence of attacks or piracy attempts, as well as the response from the United States, Great Britain, and other governments, or the continued diversion of vessels from the Suez Canal, may have an adverse impact on our business, financial condition, and operational outcomes.

In addition to the prevailing and anticipated charter and freight rates, factors that affect the rate of newbuilding, scrapping and laying-up include newbuilding prices, secondhand vessel values in relation to scrap prices, costs of bunker fuels and other operating costs, costs associated with classification society surveys, normal maintenance and insurance coverage, the efficiency and age profile of the existing drybulk fleet in the market and government and industry regulation of maritime transportation practices, particularly environmental protection laws and regulations. These factors influencing the supply of and demand for shipping capacity are outside of our control, and we may not be able to correctly assess the nature, timing and degree of changes in industry conditions.

We anticipate that the future demand for our drybulk carriers and our logistics services will be dependent upon economic growth in world economies and its associated industrial production, seasonal and regional changes in demand, changes in the capacity of the global drybulk carrier fleet and the sources and supply of drybulk cargoes to be transported by sea.

Our business is affected by macroeconomic conditions, including rising inflation, interest rates, market volatility, economic uncertainty, and supply chain constraints, and global economic conditions may negatively impact drybulk shipping industry.

Various macroeconomic factors could adversely affect our business and the results of our operations and financial condition, including changes in inflation, interest rates and overall economic conditions and uncertainties such as those resulting from the current and future conditions in the global financial markets. For instance, inflation has negatively impacted us by increasing our labor costs, through higher wages and higher interest rates, and operating costs. Supply chain constraints have led to higher inflation, which if sustained could have a negative impact on our operations. If inflation or interest rates were to significantly increase, our business operations may be negatively affected. Interest rates, the liquidity of the credit markets and the volatility of the capital markets could also affect the operation of our business and our ability to raise capital on favorable terms, or at all, in order to fund our operations.

Chinese dry bulk imports have accounted for the majority of global dry bulk transportation growth annually over the last decade. In recent years China and India have been among the world’s fastest growing economies in terms of gross domestic product, and any economic slowdown in the Asia Pacific region particularly in China or India may adversely affect demand for seaborne transportation of our products and our results of operations. Moreover, any deterioration in the economy of the United States or the European Union, may further adversely affect economic growth in Asia.

Economic growth is uncertain but any slowdown, including due to supply-chain disruption, high energy process and a surge in inflation and related actions by central banks and geopolitical conditions, could result in a risk of recession in many parts of the world. In particular, an adverse change in economic conditions affecting China, Japan, India or Southeast Asia generally could have a negative effect on the drybulk market.

Variable rate indebtedness could subject us to interest rate risk, which could cause our debt service obligations to increase significantly.

Our credit facilities use variable interest rates and expose us to interest rate risk. If interest rates increase and we are unable to effectively hedge our interest rate risk, our debt service obligations on the variable rate indebtedness would increase even if the amount borrowed remained the same, and our profitability and cash available for servicing our indebtedness would decrease.

The invasion of Ukraine by Russia and resulting sanctions by the United States, European Union and other countries have contributed to inflation, market disruptions and increased volatility in commodity prices in the United States and a slowdown in global economic growth.

The invasion by Russia and resulting sanctions have had a broad range of adverse impacts on global business and financial markets some of which have had and may continue to have adverse impacts on our business. These include increased inflation, significant market disruptions and increased volatility in commodity prices such as corn, oil and natural gas. Although the duration and extent of the ongoing military conflict is highly unpredictable, and the magnitude of the potential economic impact is currently unknown, Russian military actions and resulting sanctions could have a negative effect on our financial condition and operating results.

The ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine poses a risk for global economic growth. Major economic sanctions against Russia are having a considerable impact on oil and gas prices, given the dependence of the EU on oil and gas exports out of Russia combined with limited spare capacity of such commodities globally. Energy prices have increased significantly, leading to major inflationary pressures in the major developed countries that rely heavily on oil and gas exports out of Russia. In addition, the combined Russia/Ukraine region account for approximately one quarter of global grain production, one of the main cargoes transported by dry bulk vessels, while coal and iron ore exports out of the region have also been reduced. The above factors can have a material negative impact on demand for dry bulk transportation, while slower economic growth could also negatively affect demand for dry bulk commodities in the rest of the world, leading to lower dry bulk freight rates.

Moreover, the conflict between Russia and Ukraine is having a profound impact on global commodities prices including grain and coal, two of the most important commodities for dry bulk shipping. Given the importance of the region in export volumes for both grains and coal, a prolonged stoppage could lead to significantly lower freight rates and thus a decline in freight futures prices. Although coal supplies could potentially be sourced from elsewhere partly mitigating the negative impact of the lost volumes, global grain production capacity is limited, and thus the impact of the lost volumes could not be easily mitigated. In addition, the recent geopolitical turmoil has led to an increase in government protectionism when it comes to commodities, and if such a trend continues, it could lead to lower bulk commodities trading globally over the long term. The impact of such a scenario on dry bulk shipping will be negative, leading to lower spot rates and as a result lower freight futures prices.

Any change in drybulk carrier capacity in the future may result in lower charter and freight rates which, in turn, will adversely affect our profitability.

The global drybulk fleet has increased significantly over the past 10 years as a result of the large number of newbuilding orders placed throughout this period. Scrapping of older ships has helped curtail some of this new supply growth, but it has not been enough to materially offset the large net growth in the fleet.

The market values of our owned vessels may decrease, which could limit the amount of funds that we can borrow or cause us to breach certain covenants in our credit facilities and we may incur impairment or a loss if we sell vessels following a decline in their market value.

The fair market values of our owned dry bulk vessels have generally experienced high volatility, and you should expect the market values of our vessels to fluctuate depending on a number of factors including:

•prevailing level of charter and freight rates;

•general economic and market conditions affecting the shipping industry;

•the balance between the supply of and demand for ships of a certain type;

•competition from other shipping companies and other modes of transportation;

•types, sizes and ages of vessels;

•supply of and demand for vessels;

•cost of newbuildings;

•scrap values;

•shipyard capacity;

•governmental and other regulations, including those that may limit the useful life of vessels;

•the prevailing level of charter rates;

•the need to upgrade secondhand and previously owned vessels as a result of environmental, safety, regulatory or charterer requirements; and

•technological advances.

In addition, as vessels grow older, they generally decline in value. If the market values of our owned vessels decrease, we may not be in compliance with certain covenants in our credit facilities secured by mortgages on our drybulk vessels unless we provide additional collateral or prepay a portion of the loan to a level where we are again in compliance with our loan covenants. We were in compliance with all covenants for the years ended December 31, 2025 and 2024. If we are not able to comply with the covenants in our loan facilities we may not be able to refinance our debt or obtain additional financing or incur debt on terms that are acceptable to us or at all. If we are not able to comply with the covenants in our loan facilities or are unable to obtain waivers or amendments or otherwise remedy the relevant breach, our lenders could accelerate our debt and foreclose on our vessels.

If we sell one or more of our vessels at a time when vessel prices have fallen and before we have recorded an impairment adjustment to our consolidated financial statements, the sale proceeds may be less than the vessel’s carrying amount, resulting in a loss and a reduction in earnings. Conversely, if vessel values are elevated at a time when we wish to acquire additional vessels, the cost of acquisition may increase and this could adversely affect our business, results of operations, cash flow and financial condition.

The carrying amounts of vessels held and used by us are reviewed for potential impairment when events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of a particular vessel may not be fully recoverable. In such instances, an impairment charge would be recognized if the estimate of the undiscounted future cash flows expected to result from the use of the vessel and its eventual disposition is less than the vessel’s carrying amount. This assessment is made at the asset group level which represents the lowest level for which identifiable cash flows are largely independent of other groups of assets. The asset groups are defined by vessel size and classification.

In recent years, operating businesses in the global economy have faced weakening demand for goods and services, deteriorating international liquidity conditions, and declining markets which lead to a general decline in the willingness of banks and other financial institutions to extend credit, particularly in the shipping industry. As the shipping industry is highly dependent on the availability of credit to finance and expand operations, it may be negatively affected by such changes and volatility.

Also, as a result of concerns about the stability of financial markets generally, and the solvency of counterparties specifically, the cost of obtaining money from the credit markets may increase if lenders increase interest rates, enact tighter lending standards, refuse to refinance existing debt at all or on terms similar to current debt, and reduce, or cease to provide funding to borrowers. Due to these factors, additional financing may not be available to the extent required, on acceptable terms or at all. If additional financing is not available when needed, or is available only on unfavorable terms, we may be unable to expand or meet our obligations as they come due or we may be unable to enhance our existing business, complete additional vessel acquisitions or otherwise take advantage of business opportunities as they arise.

Credit markets in the United States and Europe have in the past experienced significant contraction, deleveraging and reduced liquidity, and there is a risk that the U.S. federal government and state governments and European authorities continue to implement a broad variety of governmental action and/or new regulation of the financial markets. Global financial markets and economic conditions have been, and continue to be, disrupted and volatile.

As of December 31, 2025, our total outstanding indebtedness amounted to $375.6 million across our credit facilities, financing obligations and finance lease liabilities.

Changes in the economic and political environment in China and policies adopted by the government to regulate its economy may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The Chinese economy differs from the economies of western countries in such respects as structure, government involvement, level of development, growth rate, capital reinvestment, allocation of resources, bank regulation, currency and monetary policy, rate of inflation and balance of payments position. Prior to 1978, the Chinese economy was a “planned economy”. Since 1978, increasing emphasis has been placed on the utilization of market forces in the development of the Chinese economy. Annual and five-year State Plans are adopted by the Chinese government in connection with the development of the economy. Although state-owned enterprises still account for a substantial portion of the Chinese industrial output, in general, the Chinese government is reducing the level of direct control that it exercises over the economy through State Plans and other measures. There is an increasing level of freedom and autonomy in areas such as allocation of resources, production, pricing and management and a gradual shift in emphasis to a “market economy” and enterprise reform. Limited price reforms were undertaken with the result that prices for certain commodities are principally determined by market forces. In addition, economic reforms may include reforms to the banking and credit sector and may produce a shift away from the export-driven growth model that has characterized the Chinese economy over the past few decades. Many of the reforms are unprecedented or experimental and may be subject to revision, change or abolition based upon the outcome of such experiments. The Chinese government may not continue to pursue a policy of economic reform.

In recent years, China and the United States have implemented certain increasingly protective trade measures with continuing trade tensions, including significant tariff increases, between these countries. A decrease in the level of imports to and exports from China could adversely affect our business, operating results and financial condition.

In addition, in September 2020 President Xi Jinping committed his country to achieving carbon neutrality by 2060 at the UN General Assembly, despite that carbon emissions are currently a prominent part of China’s economic and industrial structure as it relies heavily on renewable energy sources, generally lacks energy efficiency, and has a rapidly growing energy demand. Depending on how China attempts to achieve carbon neutrality by 2060, including through the reduction in the use of coal, an overall increase in the use of renewable energy as part of the energy consumption mix and through other means and any reduction in the demand for coal and related products could have a material adverse effect on our business, cash flows and results of operations.

Acts of piracy on ocean-going vessels could adversely affect our business.

Acts of piracy have historically affected ocean-going vessels trading in regions of the world such as the South China Sea, the Indian Ocean and in the Gulf of Aden off the coast of Somalia and, in particular, the Gulf of Guinea region off Nigeria, which experienced increased incidents of piracy in recent years. Sea piracy incidents continue to occur, increasingly in the Sulu Sea and the Gulf of Guinea, with drybulk vessels particularly vulnerable to such attacks. Commercial vessels have been attacked in international waters in the southern Red Sea, according to statements by the U.S. military, with Yemen’s Houthi group claiming drone and missile attacks on two Israeli vessels in the area, in response to the ongoing conflict in the region. The perception that our vessels are a potential piracy or terrorist target could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Further, if these piracy attacks occur in regions in which our vessels are deployed that insurers characterize as “war risk” zones or by the Joint War Committee as “war and strikes” listed areas, premiums payable for such coverage could increase significantly and such insurance coverage may be more difficult to obtain, if available at all. In addition, crew costs, including costs that may be incurred to the extent we employ on-board security guards, could increase in such circumstances. We may not be adequately insured to cover losses from these incidents, which could have a material adverse effect on us. In addition, detention hijacking as a result of an act of piracy against our vessels, or an increase in cost, or unavailability of insurance for our vessels, could have a material adverse impact on our business, results of operations, cash flows and financial condition, and this may result in loss of revenues, increased costs and decreased cash flows to our customers, which could impair their ability to make payments to us under our charters.

The smuggling of drugs or other contraband onto our vessels may lead to governmental claims against us.

We expect that our vessels will call in ports in areas where smugglers attempt to hide drugs and other contraband on vessels, with or without the knowledge of crew members. To the extent our vessels are found with contraband or stowaways, whether inside or attached to the hull of our vessel and whether with or without the knowledge of any of our crew, we may face governmental or other regulatory claims which could have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows and financial condition. Under some jurisdictions, vessels used for the conveyance of illegal drugs could result in forfeiture of the subject vessel to the government of such jurisdiction.

Our operations outside the United States expose us to global risks, such as political instability, terrorist attacks, international hostilities. economic sanctions or other trade restrictions, and global public health concerns, which may affect the seaborne transportation industry and adversely affect our business.

We conduct most of our operations outside of the United States, and our business, results of operations, cash flows, financial condition and ability to pay dividends, if any, in the future may be adversely affected by changing economic, political and government conditions in the countries and regions where our vessels are employed or registered. Terrorist attacks as well as the frequent incidents of terrorism in the Middle East, and the continuing response of the United States and others to these attacks, as well as the threat of future terrorist attacks around the world, continues to cause uncertainty in the world's financial markets and may affect our business, operating results and financial condition. As a result of the above, insurers have increased premiums and reduced or restricted coverage for losses caused by terrorist acts generally. These uncertainties could also adversely affect our ability to obtain additional financing on terms acceptable to us or at all. Any of these occurrences could have a material adverse impact on our operating results, revenues and costs.

Beginning in February of 2022, the United States, the United Kingdom and the European Union, among other countries, announced various economic sanctions against Russia in connection with the conflict in Ukraine. The ongoing conflict could result in the imposition of further economic sanctions or new categories of export restrictions against individuals or entities to Russia. While in general much uncertainty remains regarding the global impact of the conflict in Ukraine, and any potential resolution thereof, it is possible that such tensions could adversely affect the Company’s business, financial condition, operating results and cash flows.

The United States has issued several Executive Orders that prohibit certain transactions relating to Russia, including prohibitions on the importation of certain Russian energy products into the United States, (including crude oil, petroleum, petroleum fuels, oils, liquefied natural gas and coal), and all new investments in Russia by U.S. persons, among other prohibitions and export controls, and has issued numerous determinations authorizing the imposition of sanctions on persons who operate or have operated in the energy, metals and mining, and marine sectors of the Russian Federation economy, among others. Increased restrictions on these sectors, or the expansion of sanctions to new sectors, may pose additional risks that could adversely affect our business and operations.

Furthermore, the United States, in conjunction with the G7, have implemented a Russian petroleum “price cap policy” which prohibits a variety of specified services related to the maritime transport of Russian Federation origin crude oil and petroleum products, including trading/commodities brokering, financing, shipping, insurance (including reinsurance and protection and indemnity), flagging, and customs brokering. An exception exists to permit such services when the price of the seaborne Russian oil does not exceed the relevant price cap; but implementation of this price exception relies on a recordkeeping and attestation process that requires each party in the supply chain of seaborne Russian oil to demonstrate or confirm that oil has been purchased at or below the price cap. Further, effective as of February 27, 2025, the United States has also prohibited the provision of petroleum services by U.S. persons to persons located in Russia. An exception exists for the provision of petroleum services in certain specified circumstances, including for the provision of services for products purchased at or below the aforementioned price caps. As of September 2025, the EU, UK and Canada also agreed to lower their price cap on Russian crude oil from $60 to $47.60 per barrel, and which was further reduced to $44.10 effective February 1, 2026, based on an automatic dynamic pricing adjustment setting the cap at 15% below the average market price for Russian crude oil during the relevant reference period. Violations of the petroleum services or the price cap policy, including the risk that information, documentation, or attestations provided by parties in the supply chain are later determined to be false may pose additional risks adversely affecting our business. While much uncertainty remains, the potential that the EU, in conjunction with the G7, might replace the price cap policy in favor of a full maritime services ban for Russian crude oil exports and/or other petroleum products may also pose further risks that could adversely affect our business.

Our business could also be adversely impacted by trade tariffs, trade embargoes or other economic sanctions that limit trading activities between the United States or other countries and countries in the Middle East, Asia or elsewhere as a result of terrorist attacks, hostilities or diplomatic or political pressures, including as a result of ongoing tensions involving Russia, Iran, and China and the current conflicts in the Middle East.

Protectionist developments, or the perception that they may occur, may have a material adverse effect on global economic conditions, and may significantly reduce global trade. Such increases may significantly affect the quantity of goods to be shipped, shipping time schedules, voyage costs and other associated costs, which could have an adverse impact on our charterers’ business, operating results and financial condition and could thereby affect their ability to make timely charter hire payments to us.

In particular, there is significant uncertainty about the future relationship between the United States and China and other exporting countries, such as Canada, Mexico, and the European Union, among others, with respect to trade policies, treaties, government regulations, and tariffs, some of which remain subject to legal challenge. For example, in April 2025, the Office of the USTR enacted vessel service fees under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 which were imposed as scheduled beginning on October 14, 2025, but were suspended for one year as of November 10, 2025 as a result of broader trade negotiations between the United States and China, after China’s Ministry of Transport had announced retaliatory port fees applicable to certain vessels calling at Chinese ports that were built or flagged in the United States or owned or operated by certain U.S.-linked persons. China’s retaliatory service fees on United States vessels were also suspended for a period of one year on the same date. On February 20, 2026, President Trump invoked a flat tariff of 10%, which was subsequently increased to 15% the following day, on almost all U.S. imports under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, which allows for temporary import surcharges. The temporary import surcharge took effect on February 24, 2026.

Given the magnitude of these port-related fees and the many uncertainties surrounding their implementation, it is not possible at this time to fully predict the ultimate financial impact to the Company. However, if these fees continue to be levied, port fees for our vessels or vessels we charter and our operating costs for voyages calling at United States or Chinese ports could materially increase, which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

In addition, public health threats and highly communicable disease or virus outbreaks in various parts of the world in which we operate, could adversely impact our operations, the timing of completion of scheduled dry-dockings and ballast water treatment system installation projects, as well as the operations of our customers.

Any of these occurrences could have a material adverse impact on our future performance, results of operations, cash flows and financial position.

Our revenues are subject to seasonal fluctuations, which could affect our operating results and our ability to pay dividends, if any, in the future.

We operate our drybulk vessels in markets that have historically exhibited seasonal variations in demand and, as a result, in charter and freight rates. This seasonality may result in quarter-to-quarter volatility in our operating results, which could affect our ability to pay dividends, if any, in the future. The drybulk carrier market is typically stronger in the fall and winter months due to demand increases arising from agricultural harvest and increased coal demand in preparation for winter in the Northern Hemisphere. In addition, unpredictable weather patterns in these months tend to disrupt vessel scheduling and supplies of certain commodities. This seasonality may adversely affect our operating results and our ability to pay dividends, if any, in the future.

Risks associated with operating ocean-going vessels could affect our business and reputation, which could adversely affect our revenues and the price of our common shares.

The operation of ocean-going vessels carries inherent risks. These risks include the possibility of:

•a marine accident or disaster;

•environmental accidents and pollution;

•cargo and property losses or damage;

•damage to the environment, including through spillage of fuel, lubricants or other chemicals and substances used in operations;

•business interruptions caused by mechanical failure, grounding, fire, explosions and collisions, human error, war, terrorism, diseases, political action in various countries, labor strikes or adverse weather conditions; and

•piracy.

These hazards may result in death or injury to persons, loss of revenues or property, the payment of ransoms, environmental damage, higher insurance rates, damage to our customer relationships and market disruptions, delay or rerouting, any of which may subject us to litigation. As a result, we could be exposed to substantial liabilities not recoverable under our insurances. Any of these circumstances or events could increase our costs or lower our revenues.

If our vessels suffer damage, they may need to be repaired at a drydocking facility. The costs of drydock repairs are unpredictable and may be substantial. We may have to pay drydocking costs that our insurance does not cover at all or in full. The loss of revenues while these vessels are being repaired and repositioned, as well as the actual cost of these repairs, may adversely affect our business and financial condition. In addition, space at drydocking facilities is sometimes limited and not all drydocking facilities are conveniently located. We may be unable to find space at a suitable drydocking facility or our vessels may be forced to travel to a drydocking facility that is not conveniently located relative to our vessels' positions. The loss of earnings while these vessels are forced to wait for space or to travel to more distant drydocking facilities may adversely affect our business and financial condition.

The operation of drybulk carriers entails certain unique operational risks.

The operation of certain ship types, such as drybulk carriers, has certain unique risks. With a drybulk carrier, the cargo itself and its interaction with the ship can be a risk factor. By their nature, drybulk cargoes are often heavy, dense, easily shifted, and react badly to water exposure. In addition, drybulk carriers are often subjected to battering treatment during unloading operations with grabs, jackhammers (to pry encrusted cargoes out of the hold), and small bulldozers. This treatment may cause damage to the vessel. Vessels damaged due to treatment during unloading procedures may be more susceptible to breach at sea. Furthermore, any defects or flaws in the design of a drybulk carrier may contribute to vessel damage. Hull breaches in drybulk carriers may lead to the flooding of the vessels holds. If a drybulk carrier suffers flooding in its holds, the bulk cargo may become so dense and waterlogged that its pressure may buckle the vessel's bulkheads, leading to the loss of the vessel. If we are unable to adequately maintain our vessels, we may be unable to prevent these events. Any of these circumstances or events could negatively impact our business, financial condition, results of operations and our ability to pay dividends, if any, in the future. In addition, the loss of any of our vessels could harm our reputation as a safe and reliable vessel owner and operator.

Although we intend to maintain compliance with all applicable sanctions and embargo laws, and we endeavor to take precautions reasonably designed to mitigate such risk, it is possible that, in the future, our vessels may call on ports located in sanctioned countries or territories, or engage in other such transactions or dealings that would be violative of applicable sanctions, on our charterers’ instructions and/or without our consent. If such activities result in a violation of sanctions or embargo laws, we could be subject to monetary fines, penalties, or other sanctions, and our reputation and the market for our common shares could be adversely affected.

U.S. sanctions exist under a strict liability regime. Accordingly, a party need not know it is violating sanctions and need not intend to violate sanctions to be liable. We could be subject to monetary fines, penalties, or other sanctions for violating applicable sanctions or embargo laws even in circumstances where our conduct, or the conduct of a charterer, is consistent with our sanctions-related policies, unintentional or inadvertent.

In addition, the sanctions and embargo laws and regulations of each jurisdiction may be amended to increase or reduce the restrictions they impose over time, and the lists of persons and entities designated under these laws and regulations are amended frequently. Moreover, most sanctions regimes provide that entities owned or controlled by the persons or entities designated in such lists are also subject to sanctions. The U.S., U.K., and EU have enacted new sanctions programs in recent years. Additional countries or territories, as well as additional persons or entities within or affiliated with those countries or territories, have, and in the future will, become the target of sanctions. These require us to be diligent in ensuring our compliance with sanctions laws. Further, the U.S. has increased its focus on sanctions enforcement with respect to the shipping sector.

Current or future counterparties of ours may be affiliated with persons or entities that are or may be in the future the subject of sanctions or embargoes imposed by the U.S., U.K., EU, and/or other international bodies. The Company, or its respective counterparty, have cancelled certain voyages due to countries around the world imposing sanctions against Russia over its invasion of Ukraine. The Company might be subject to litigation regarding canceled voyages. Although the current market remains strong, and the Company expects to deploy vessels on other voyage and time charter arrangements, the rates achieved may not be at the same levels as the cancelled voyages.

As a result of Russia’s actions in Ukraine and the war between Israel and Hamas, the U.S., EU and United Kingdom, together with numerous other countries, have imposed significant economic sanctions which may adversely affect our ability to operate in these regions and also restrict parties whose cargo we may carry. Sanctions against Russia have also placed significant prohibitions on the maritime transportation of seaborne Russian oil, the importation of certain Russian energy products and other goods, and new investments in the Russian Federation. These sanctions further limit the scope of permissible operations and cargo we may carry.

Although we believe that we have been in compliance with all applicable sanctions and embargo laws and regulations, and intend to maintain such compliance, there can be no assurance that we will be in compliance in the future, particularly as the scope of certain laws may be unclear and may be subject to changing interpretations. Any such violation could result in fines, penalties or other sanctions that could negatively impact our ability to access U.S. capital markets and conduct our business, and could result in some investors deciding, or being required, to divest their interest, or not to invest, in us. In addition, certain institutional investors may have investment policies or restrictions that prevent them from holding securities of companies that have contracts with countries identified by the U.S. government as state sponsors of terrorism. Additionally, some investors may decide to divest their interest, or not to invest, in our company simply because we do business with companies that do business in sanctioned countries or territories. Moreover, our charterers may violate applicable sanctions and embargo laws and regulations as a result of actions that do not involve us or our vessels, and those violations could in turn negatively affect our reputation. In addition, our reputation and the market for our securities may be adversely affected if we engage in certain other activities, such as lawfully entering into charters with individuals or entities that are not controlled by the governments of countries or territories that are the subject of certain U.S. sanctions or embargo laws, or engaging in operations associated with those countries or territories pursuant to contracts with third parties that are unrelated to those countries or territories or entities controlled by their governments.

We are subject to international safety regulations and the failure to comply with these regulations may subject us to increased liability, may adversely affect our insurance coverage and may result in a denial of access to, or detention in, certain ports.

The operation of our vessels is affected by the requirements set forth in the United Nations’ International Maritime Organization’s International Management Code for the Safe Operation of Ships and Pollution Prevention, or ISM Code. The ISM Code requires ship owners and ship managers to develop and maintain an extensive “Safety Management System” that includes the adoption of a safety and environmental protection policy setting forth instructions and procedures for safe operation for dealing with emergencies. The failure of a shipowner to comply with the ISM Code may subject it to increased liability, may invalidate existing insurance or decrease available insurance coverage for the affected vessels and may result in a denial of access to, or detention in, certain ports.

In addition, vessel classification societies impose significant safety and other requirements on our vessels. In complying with current and future environmental requirements, vessel owners and operators may incur significant additional costs for maintenance and inspection requirements, in developing contingency arrangements for potential spills and in obtaining insurance coverage. Government regulation of vessels, particularly in the areas of safety and environmental protection requirements, can be expected to become stricter in the future and may require us to incur significant capital expenditures to keep our vessels in compliance.

On July 14, 2021, the European Commission formally proposed its plan to gradually include the maritime sector in the EU Emissions Trading System, or EU ETS, from 2024 by phasing the sector into the EU ETS requirements over a three-year period. Effective January 1, 2024, the scope of ETS has been expanded to include maritime transport emissions, with a two-year phase-in period. This will require shipowners to buy permits to cover greenhouse gas emissions and is expected to affect our vessels from January 1, 2024. The European Commission’s plan will permit vessel owners to pass the costs of compliance with the EU ETS onto charterers for vessel emissions during on-hire periods. If we are unable to pass on these additional costs to our customers during on-hire periods, this could have a material adverse effect on our financial position. During off-hire periods, we will need to develop a strategy for purchasing EU ETS allocations at favorable rates. If we are unable to obtain favorable rates or are unable to implement adequate processes to manage the purchasing and surrendering of EU ETS allocations, it could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial position.

We are subject to complex laws and regulations, including environmental regulations that can adversely affect the cost, manner or feasibility of doing business.

Our operations are subject to numerous laws and regulations in the form of international conventions and treaties, national, state and local laws and national and international regulations in force in the jurisdictions in which our vessels operate or are registered, which can significantly affect the ownership cost and operation of our vessels. These requirements include, but are not limited to, European Union Regulations, the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships of 1975, the International Maritime Organization, or IMO, International Convention for the Prevention of Marine Pollution of 1973, the IMO International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea of 1974, the International Convention on Load Lines of 1966, the U.S. Oil Pollution Act of 1990, or OPA, the U.S. Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980, or CERCLA, the U.S. Clean Air Act, U.S. Clean Water Act, the U.S. Marine Transportation Security Act of 2002 and the International Code for Ships Operating in Polar Waters.

Compliance with such laws, regulations and standards, where applicable, may require installation of costly equipment or operational changes and may affect the resale value or useful lives of our vessels. We may also incur additional costs in order to comply with other existing and future regulatory obligations, including, but not limited to, costs relating to air emissions including greenhouse gases, the management of ballast waters, maintenance and inspection, development and implementation of emergency procedures and insurance coverage or other financial assurance of our ability to address pollution incidents. These costs could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows and financial condition. A failure to comply with applicable laws and regulations may result in administrative and civil penalties, criminal sanctions or the suspension or termination of our operations. Environmental laws often impose strict liability for remediation of spills and releases of oil and hazardous substances, which could subject us to liability without regard to whether we were negligent or at fault.

We are required to satisfy insurance and financial responsibility requirements for potential oil (including marine fuel) spills and other pollution incidents. Although we have arranged insurance to cover certain environmental risks, there can be no assurance that such insurance will be sufficient to cover all such risks or that any claims will not have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows and financial condition and our ability to pay dividends.

Regulations relating to ballast water discharge may adversely affect our revenues and profitability.

The UN International Maritime Organization has imposed updated guidelines for ballast water management systems specifying the maximum amount of viable organisms allowed to be discharged from a vessel’s ballast water. The standards have been in force since 2019, and for most ships, compliance with the D-2 standard involved installing on-board systems to treat ballast water and eliminate unwanted organisms. Since September 8, 2024, D-2 standards and the costs of compliance may be substantial and adversely affect our revenues and profitability.

Furthermore, United States regulations are currently changing. Although the 2013 VGP program and NISA are currently in effect to regulate ballast discharge, exchange and installation, the VIDA, which was signed into law on December 4, 2018, requires that the EPA develop national standards of performance for approximately 30 discharges, similar to those found in the VGP within two years. On October 26, 2020, the EPA published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for Vessel Incidental Discharge National Standards of Performance under VIDA. In October 2024, the EPA finalized its rule on Vessel Incidental Discharge Standards of Performance. USCG must develop corresponding implementation, compliance and enforcement regulations regarding ballast water within two years. The new regulations could require the installation of new equipment, which may cause us to incur substantial costs.

Increased inspection procedures and tighter import and export controls could increase costs and disrupt our business.

International shipping is subject to various security and customs inspections and related procedures in countries of origin, destination and trans-shipment points. Inspection procedures may result in the seizure of the contents of our vessels, delays in the loading, offloading or delivery of our vessels and the levying of customs duties, fines or other penalties against us.

It is possible that changes to inspection procedures could impose additional financial and legal obligations on us. Changes to inspection procedures could also impose additional costs and obligations on our customers and may, in certain cases, render the shipment of certain types of cargo uneconomical or impractical. Any such changes or developments may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Maritime claimants could arrest one or more of our vessels, which could interrupt our cash flow.

Crew members, suppliers of goods and services to a vessel, shippers of cargo and other parties may be entitled to a maritime lien against a vessel for unsatisfied debts, claims or damages. In many jurisdictions, a claimant may seek to obtain security for its claim by arresting a vessel through foreclosure proceedings. The arrest or attachment of one or more of our vessels could interrupt our cash flow and require us to pay large sums of money to have the arrest or attachment lifted. In addition, in some jurisdictions, such as South Africa, under the “sister ship” theory of liability, a claimant may arrest both the vessel which is subject to the claimant's maritime lien and any “associated” vessel, which is any vessel owned or controlled by the same owner. Claimants could attempt to assert “sister ship” liability against a vessel in our fleet for claims relating to another of our vessels.

Governments could requisition our vessels during a period of war or emergency, resulting in a loss of earnings.

A government could requisition one or more of our vessels for title or for hire. Requisition for title occurs when a government takes control of a vessel and becomes her owner, while requisition for hire occurs when a government takes control of a vessel and effectively becomes her charterer at dictated charter rates. Generally, requisitions occur during periods of war or emergency, although governments may elect to requisition vessels in other circumstances. Although we would be entitled to compensation in the event of a requisition of one or more of our vessels, the amount and timing of payment would be uncertain. Although none of our vessels have been requisitioned by a government for title or hire, government requisition of one or more of our vessels may negatively impact our revenues and reduce the amount of dividends, if any, in the future.

Changes in fuel prices may adversely affect profits.

Fuel, or bunkers, is typically the largest expense of our operating business and therefore, changes in the price of fuel may adversely affect our profitability. When we operate vessels under COAs or voyage charters, we are responsible for all voyage costs, including bunkers. Furthermore, fuel may become significantly more expensive in the future, which may reduce our profitability.

In addition, the entry into force, on January 1, 2020, of the 0.5% global sulfur cap in marine fuels used by vessels that are not equipped with sulfur oxide, orSOx, exhaust gas cleaning systems, or scrubbers, under the International Convention for Prevention of Pollution from Ships, or MARPOL, Annex VI may lead to changes in the production quantities and prices of different grades of marine fuel by refineries and introduces an additional element of uncertainty in fuel markets, which could result in additional costs and adversely affect our cash flows, earnings and results from operations.

Furthermore, since the implementation of the IMO’s sulfur oxide emission limits on January 1, 2020, we have been using compliant low sulfur fuels for some of our vessels that have not yet been retrofitted with scrubbers or that are trading in regions where the use of scrubbers is not permitted, the price of which has increased as a result of increased demand. Fuel may continue to become much more expensive in the future, which may adversely affect the competitiveness of our business compared to other forms of transportation and reduce our profitability.

In addition, if the increase in crude oil prices and widening of the spread between the prices of high sulfur fuel and low sulfur fuel resulting from conflict between Russia and Ukraine and Israel and Hamas continues, this might lead to a decrease in the economic viability of older vessels that lack fuel efficiency and a reduction of useful lives of these vessels.

Upon redelivery of vessels at the end of a period time or trip time charter, we may be obligated to repurchase bunkers on board at prevailing market prices, which could be materially higher than fuel prices at the inception of the charter period. We may also be obligated to value our bunkers inventories on board at the end of a period time or trip time charter, at a lower value than the acquisition value, if prevailing market prices are significantly lower at the time of the vessel redelivery from the charterer.

Please see “The Company’s Management and Discussion Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations - Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risks - Fuel Swap Contracts.”

In the highly competitive international shipping industry, we may not be able to compete successfully for chartered-in vessels or for vessel employment and, as a result, we may be unable to charter-in vessels at reasonable rates or employ our vessels profitably.

We charter-in and employ vessels in a highly competitive market that is capital intensive and highly fragmented. Competition arises primarily from other vessel owners and operators, some of whom have substantially greater resources than we do. Competition for seaborne transportation of drybulk cargo by sea is intense and depends on the charter or freight rate and on the location, size, age, condition and acceptability of a vessel and its operators. Due to the highly fragmented market, competitors with greater resources are able to operate larger fleets and may be able to offer lower charter or freight rates and higher quality vessels than we are able to offer. If we are unable to successfully compete with other drybulk shipping operators, we may be unable to retain customers or attract new customers, which would have an adverse impact on our results of operations.

Labor interruptions could disrupt our business.

Our vessels are manned by masters, officers and crews that are contracted by our technical managers.

An increased focus and activism related to ESG and similar matters may hinder access to capital, as investors and lenders may decide to reallocate capital or to not commit capital as a result of their assessment of a company’s ESG practices. Companies which do not adapt to or comply with investor, lender or other industry shareholder expectations and standards, which are evolving, or which are perceived to have not responded appropriately to the growing concern for ESG issues, regardless of whether there is a legal requirement to do so, may suffer from reputational damage and the business, financial condition, and/or stock price of such a company could be materially and adversely affected.

We may face increasing pressures from investors, lenders and other market participants, who are increasingly focused on climate change, to prioritize sustainable energy practices, reduce our carbon footprint and promote sustainability. As a result, we may be required to implement more stringent ESG procedures or standards so that our existing and future investors and lenders remain invested in us and make further investments in us, especially given the highly focused and specific trade of drybulk transportation in which we are engaged. If we do not meet these standards, our business and/or our ability to access capital could be harmed.

These limitations in both the debt and equity capital markets may affect our ability to grow as our plans for growth may include accessing the equity and debt capital markets. Further, it is likely that we will incur additional costs and require additional resources to monitor, report and comply with wide ranging ESG requirements.

Our insurance may not be adequate to cover our losses that may result from our operations due to the inherent operational risks of the seaborne transportation industry.

We carry insurance to protect us against most of the accident-related risks involved in the conduct of our business, including marine hull and machinery insurance, protection and indemnity insurance, which include pollution risks, crew insurance and war risks insurance. However, we may not be adequately insured to cover all of our potential losses, which could have a material adverse effect on us. Additionally, our insurers may refuse to pay particular claims, and our insurance may be voidable by the insurers if we take, or fail to take, certain action, such as failing to maintain certification of our vessels with the applicable maritime regulatory organizations. Any significant uninsured or under-insured loss or liability could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows and our ability to pay dividends. In addition, we may not be able to obtain adequate insurance coverage at reasonable rates in the future during adverse insurance market conditions.

In addition, we do not carry loss-of-hire insurance, which covers the loss of revenues during extended vessel off-hire periods, such as those that occur during an unscheduled drydocking due to damage to the vessel from accidents. Accordingly, any loss of a vessel or extended vessel off-hire, due to an accident or otherwise, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and our ability to pay dividends.

The logistics industry has its own set of risks, including infrastructure issues, operational efficiencies, lack of digital culture and training, labor relations and operational costs. We may not be able to provide logistics solutions to our customers in the face of obstacles created as a result of one of these factors.

The Company has dedicated resources to developing logistics solutions for our customers. These solutions may depend on infrastructure quality and improvement, the ability to hire qualified personnel, the ability to coordinate operations, development of digital integration and collaboration with suppliers and customers, and the ability to contain costs. If we are unable to facilitate these solutions due to any of these factors, we will not be able to continue developing such solutions.

Failure to comply with the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act could result in fines, criminal penalties, charter terminations and an adverse effect on our business.

We may operate in a number of countries throughout the world, including countries known to have a reputation for corruption. We are committed to doing business in accordance with applicable anti-corruption laws and have adopted a code of business conduct and ethics which is consistent and in full compliance with the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977, as amended, or the FCPA. We are subject, however, to the risk that we, our affiliated entities or our or their respective officers, directors, employees and agents may take actions determined to be in violation of such anti-corruption laws, including the FCPA. Any such violation could result in substantial fines, sanctions, civil and/or criminal penalties and curtailment of operations in certain jurisdictions, and might adversely affect our business, results of operations or financial condition. In addition, actual or alleged violations could damage our reputation and ability to do business. Furthermore, detecting, investigating and resolving actual or alleged violations is expensive and can consume significant time and attention of our senior management.

Risks Relating to Our Company

Our business strategy includes chartering-in vessels, and we may not be able to charter-in suitable vessels.

Our business strategy depends, in large part, on our ability to charter-in vessels. If we are not able to find suitable vessels to charter-in, or to charter-in vessels at what we deem to be a reasonable rate, we may not be able to operate profitably or perform our contractual obligations. As a result, we may need to adjust our business strategy, and we may experience material adverse effects on our business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, if we charter-in a vessel and shipping rates subsequently decrease, or we are unable to secure employment for such a vessel, our obligation under the charter may adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

We depend upon a few significant customers for a large part of our revenues and cash flow, and the loss of one or more of these customers could adversely affect our financial performance.

We expect to derive a significant part of our revenue and cash flow from a relatively small number of repeat customers. If one or more of our significant customers is unable to perform under one or more charters or COAs and we are not able to find a replacement charter or COA; or if a customer exercises certain rights to terminate the charter or COA, we could suffer a loss of revenues that could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash available for distribution as dividends to our shareholders.

We could lose a customer or the benefits of a charter or COA if, among other things:

•the customer fails to make charter payments because of its financial inability, disagreements with us or otherwise; or

•the customer terminates the charter because we do not perform in accordance with such charter and do not cure such failures within a specified period.

If we lose a key customer, we may be unable to obtain replacement charters or COAs on comparable terms or at all. The loss of any of our customers, COAs, charters or vessels, or a decline in payments under our agreements, could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition and our ability to pay dividends to our shareholders.

We are a holding company, and depend on the ability of our subsidiaries, through which we operate our business, to distribute funds to us in order to satisfy our financial obligations or to make dividend payments.

We are a holding company, and our subsidiaries conduct all of our operations and own all of our operating assets. The equity interests in our vessel-owning subsidiaries represent a significant portion of our operating assets. As a result, our ability to satisfy our financial obligations and to pay dividends to our shareholders depends on the ability of our subsidiaries to generate profits available for distribution to us and, to the extent that they are unable to generate profits, we will be unable to pay dividends to our shareholders.

We are subject to certain risks with counterparties on contracts and the failure of such counterparties to meet their obligations could cause us to suffer losses or otherwise adversely affect our business and ability to comply with covenants in our loan agreements.

We enter into various contracts that are material to the operation of our business, including COAs, time charters and voyage charters under which we employ our vessels, and charter agreements under which we charter-in vessels. We also enter into loan agreements and hedging agreements, such as bunker swap agreements and forward freight agreements, or FFAs. Such agreements subject us to counterparty risks. The ability and willingness of each of our counterparties to perform its obligations under a contract with us will depend on a number of factors that are beyond our control, including, among other things, general economic conditions, the condition of the drybulk shipping industry, the overall financial condition of our counterparty, prevailing prices for drybulk cargoes, rates received for specific types of vessels and voyages, and various expenses. In addition, in depressed market conditions, our customers may no longer need us to carry a cargo that is currently under contract or may be able to obtain carriage at a lower rate. If our customers fail to meet their obligations to us or attempt to renegotiate our agreements, it may be difficult to secure suitable substitute employment for the vessel, and any new charter arrangements we secure may be at lower rates or, if our counterparties fail to deliver a vessel we have agreed to charter-in, or if a counterparty otherwise fails to honor its obligations to us under a contract, we could sustain significant losses, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows, ability to pay dividends to holders of our common shares in the amounts anticipated or at all and compliance with covenants in our secured loan agreements.

Charterers are sensitive to the commodity markets and may be impacted by market forces affecting commodities and/or uncertain industry conditions. In depressed market conditions, charterers may have incentive to renegotiate their charters or default on their obligations under charters. Should a charterer in the future fail to honor its obligations under agreements with us, it may be difficult to secure substitute employment for such vessel, and any new charter arrangements we secure on the spot market or on charters may be at lower rates, depending on the then existing charter rate levels, compared to the rates currently being charged for our vessels. In addition, if the charterer of a vessel in our fleet that is used as collateral under one or more of our loan agreements defaults on its charter obligations to us, such default may constitute an event of default under our loan agreements, which may allow the bank to exercise remedies under our loan agreements.

Although we assess the creditworthiness of our counterparties, a prolonged period of difficult industry conditions could lead to changes in a counterparty’s liquidity and increase our exposure to credit risk and bad debts. In addition, we may offer extended payment terms to our customers in order to secure contracts, which may lead to more frequent collection issues and adversely affect our financial results and liquidity.

Additionally, we are subject to certain risks as a result of using our vessels as collateral. If we are in breach of financial covenants contained in our loan agreements, we may not be successful in obtaining waivers and amendments. If our indebtedness is accelerated, it may be difficult in the current financing environment for us to refinance our debt or obtain additional financing and we could lose our vessels if our lenders foreclose on their liens.

We may be unable to comply with covenants in our credit facilities or any financial obligations that impose operating and financial restrictions on us.

Our credit facilities, financing obligations and finance leases, which are secured by mortgages on our vessels, impose certain operating and financial restrictions on us, mainly to ensure that the market value of the mortgaged vessel under the applicable credit facility does not fall below a certain percentage of the outstanding amount of the loan, which we refer to as the collateral maintenance or loan to value ratio. In addition, certain of our credit facilities include other financial covenants, which require us to, among other things, maintain:

•a consolidated leverage ratio of not more than 200%;

•a consolidated debt service coverage ratio of not less than 120%;

•minimum consolidated net worth of $45 million plus, with respect to any vessel purchased or leased by the Guarantor or its subsidiaries, for so long as such vessels are legally or economically owned, 25% of the purchase price or (finance) lease amount of such vessels;

•consolidated minimum liquidity of not less than $18 million.

In general, the operating restrictions that are contained in our credit facilities may prohibit or otherwise limit our ability to, among other things:

•effect changes in management of our vessels;

•sell or dispose of any of our assets, including our vessels;

•declare and pay dividends;

•incur additional indebtedness;

•mortgage our vessels; and

•incur and pay management fees or commissions.

Therefore, we will need to seek permission from our lenders in order to engage in some corporate actions. Our lenders’ interests may be different from ours and we may not be able to obtain our lenders’ permission when needed. This may limit our ability to pay dividends to our shareholders if we determine to do so in the future, finance our future operations or capital requirements, make acquisitions or pursue business opportunities.

Non-compliance with any of our financial covenants or operating restrictions contained in our credit facilities may constitute an event of default under our credit facilities, which, unless cured within the grace period set forth under the applicable credit facility, if applicable, or waived or modified by our lenders, provides our lenders with the right to, among other things, require us to post additional collateral, enhance our equity and liquidity, increase our interest payments, pay down our indebtedness to a level where we are in compliance, sell vessels in our fleet, reclassify our indebtedness as current liabilities, accelerate our indebtedness, or foreclose their liens on our vessels and the other assets securing the credit facilities, which would impair our ability to continue to conduct our business. As of December 31, 2025, we are in compliance with covenants contained in our debt agreements. Please read “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations - Liquidity and Capital Resources - Borrowing Activities.”

Furthermore, certain of our credit facilities contain a cross-default provision that may be triggered by a default under one of our other credit facilities. A cross-default provision means that a default on one loan would result in a default on certain other loans. Because of the presence of cross-default provisions in certain of our credit facilities, the refusal of any one lender under our credit facilities to grant or extend a waiver could result in certain of our indebtedness being accelerated. If our secured indebtedness is accelerated in full or in part, it would be very difficult in the current financing environment for us to refinance our debt or obtain additional financing and we could lose our vessels and other assets securing our credit facilities if our lenders foreclose their liens, which would adversely affect our ability to conduct our business.

We may be unable to effectively manage our growth strategy.

Our primary strategy is to expand capacity by increasing our owned fleet as demand for our services grows. This strategy depends on factors such as:

- Securing new cargo transportation contracts

- Developing logistics solutions for dry bulk trades

- Acquiring vessels at attractive prices

- Obtaining necessary financing

- Integrating new vessels into our operations

- Expanding our customer base

- Hiring and retaining qualified personnel

- Identifying new markets

- Improving our systems and controls

Future growth may require additional financing, and failure to effectively manage acquisitions could negatively impact our business and financial condition. Our current systems and personnel may not be sufficient to support fleet expansion, and we may need to hire more employees and improve systems. Acquisitions may also require issuing equity or debt, affecting our financial flexibility.

Business growth involves risks such as obtaining qualified personnel and managing customer and supplier relationships. Growing any business by acquisition presents numerous risks, such as undisclosed liabilities and obligations, the possibility that indemnification agreements will be unenforceable or insufficient to cover potential losses and difficulties associated with imposing common standards, controls, procedures and policies, obtaining additional qualified personnel, managing relationships with customers, suppliers and integrating newly acquired assets and operations into existing infrastructure. Expanding our fleet, may increase responsibilities for management and staff. We cannot guarantee successful execution of our growth plans without incurring significant expenses and losses.

Investment in forward freight agreements and other derivative instruments could result in losses.

We manage our market exposure using forward freight agreements, or FFAs, and other derivative instruments, such as bunker hedging contracts. FFAs are cash-settled derivative contracts based on future freight delivery rates and other derivative instruments. FFAs may be used to hedge exposure to the changing rates by providing for the purchase or sale of a contracted charter rate along a specified route or combination of routes and over a specified period of time. Upon settlement, if the contracted charter rate is less than the settlement rate, the seller of the FFA is required to pay the buyer an amount equal to the difference between the contracted rate and the settlement rate, multiplied by the number of days in the specified period. Conversely, if the contracted rate is greater than the settlement rate, the buyer is required to pay the seller the settlement sum. If we take positions in FFAs and do not correctly anticipate rate movements for the specified vessel route or routes and relevant time period or our assumptions regarding the relative relationships of certain vessels’ earnings, routes and other factors relevant to the FFA markets are incorrect, we could suffer losses in settling or terminating our FFAs. In addition, we normally do not designate our FFAs for special hedge accounting and, as such, our use of such derivatives may lead to material fluctuations in our results of operations.

We also seek to manage our exposure to volatility in the market price of bunkers by entering into bunker hedging contracts. There can be no assurance that we will be able to successfully limit our risks, leaving us exposed to unprofitable contracts and we may suffer significant losses from these hedging activities.

Our long-term COAs, single charter bookings and time-charter agreements may result in significant fluctuations in our quarterly results, which may adversely affect our liquidity, as well as our ability to satisfy our financial obligations.

As part of our business strategy, we enter into long-term COAs, single charter bookings and time-charter agreements. We evaluate entering into long-term positions based on the expected return over the full term of the contract. However, long-term contracts that we believe provide attractive returns over their full term may produce losses over portions of the contract period. We may be required to provide additional margin collateral in connection with FFA positions that are settled through clearinghouses, depending upon movements in the FFA markets. These interim losses, fluctuations in our quarterly results or incremental collateral requirements may adversely affect our financial liquidity, as well as our ability to satisfy our financial obligations.

We depend on COAs, which could require us to operate at unfavorable rates for a certain amount of time or subject us to other operating risks.

A significant portion of our revenues are derived from COAs. While COAs provide a relatively stable and predictable source of revenue, they typically fix the rate we are paid for our drybulk shipping services. Once we have entered into a COA, if we have not correctly anticipated vessel rates, location and availability for our owned or chartered-in fleet to fulfill the COA, we could suffer losses. Moreover, factors beyond our control may cause a COA to become unprofitable. Nevertheless, we would be obligated to continue to perform for the term of the COA. In addition, factors beyond our control, such as vessel availability, port delays, changes in government or industry rules or regulation, industrial actions or acts of terrorism or war, could affect our ability to perform our obligations under our COAs, which could result in breach of contract or other claims by our COA counterparties. Any of these occurrences could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations and financial condition.

We are a “smaller reporting company” and an "accelerated filer" and we cannot be certain if the reduced disclosure requirements applicable to smaller reporting companies will make our common shares less attractive to investors.

The scaled disclosure requirements for smaller reporting companies permit us to include less extensive narrative disclosure than required of other reporting companies, particularly in the description of executive compensation and to provide audited financial statements for two fiscal years, in contrast to other reporting companies, which must provide audited financial statements for three fiscal years.

Investors may find our common shares and the price of our common shares less attractive because we rely, or may rely, on these exemptions. If some investors find our common shares less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our common shares and the price of our common shares may be more volatile.

Obligations associated with being a public company require significant company resources and management attention, and we incur increased costs as a result of being a public company.

These requirements and rules may place a strain on our systems and resources. For example, the Exchange Act requires that we file annual, quarterly and current reports with respect to our business and financial condition and Sarbanes-Oxley requires that we document and maintain effective disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting. While we did not identify any material weaknesses or significant deficiencies in our internal controls under the current assessment for the year ended December 31, 2025, we cannot be certain at this time that our internal controls will be considered effective in future assessments and that our independent registered public accounting firm would reach a similar conclusion. These reporting and other obligations place significant demands on our management, administrative, operational and accounting resources and we incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses as a result. The expenses incurred by public companies, generally, for reporting and corporate governance purposes have been increasing and the costs we incur for such purposes may strain our resources. We may implement additional financial and management controls and procedures, reporting and business intelligence systems, create or outsource an internal audit function, or hire additional accounting and finance staff. If we are unable to accomplish these objectives in a timely and effective fashion, our ability to comply with the financial reporting requirements and other rules that apply to reporting companies could be impaired. In addition, our limited management resources may exacerbate the difficulties in complying with these reporting and other requirements while focusing on executing our business strategy. Our incremental general and administrative expenses as a publicly traded corporation include costs associated with preparing reports to shareholders, tax returns, investor relations, registrar and transfer agent’s fees, incremental director and officer liability insurance costs and director compensation. Any failure to maintain effective internal control over financial reporting could have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, liquidity, results of operations and financial condition. Furthermore, if we are unable to satisfy our obligations as a public company, we could be subject to delisting of our common shares, fines, sanctions and other regulatory action.

A failure to pass inspection by classification societies could result in vessels being unemployable until they pass inspection, resulting in a loss of revenues from such vessels for that period.

The hull and machinery of every commercial vessel must be classed by a classification society authorized by its country of registry. The classification society certifies that a vessel is safe and seaworthy in accordance with the applicable rules and regulations of the country of registry of the vessel and the United Nations Safety of Life at Sea Convention.

A vessel must undergo annual surveys, intermediate surveys and special surveys. In lieu of a special survey, a vessel’s machinery may be on a continuous survey cycle, under which the machinery would be surveyed periodically over a five-year period. Our vessels are on special survey cycles for hull inspection and continuous survey cycles for machinery inspection. Every vessel must undergo regulatory surveys of its underwater parts every 30 to 60 months.

If a vessel fails any annual survey, intermediate survey or special survey, the vessel may be unable to trade between ports and, therefore, would be unemployable, potentially causing a negative impact on our revenues due to the loss of revenues from such vessel until it was able to trade again.

Because we purchase and operate secondhand vessels, we may be exposed to increased operating costs which could adversely affect our earnings and, as our fleet ages, the risks associated with older vessels could adversely affect our ability to obtain profitable charters.

As part of our current business strategy to increase our owned fleet, we may acquire new and secondhand vessels. While we rigorously inspect previously owned or secondhand vessels prior to purchase, this does not provide us with the same knowledge about their condition and cost of any required (or anticipated) repairs that we would have had if these vessels had been built for and operated exclusively by us. Generally, we do not receive the benefit of warranties from the builders for the secondhand vessels that we acquire. Accordingly, we may not discover defects or other problems with secondhand vessels prior to purchasing or chartering-in, or may incur costs to terminate a purchase agreement. Any such hidden defects or problems may require us to put a vessel into drydock, which would reduce our fleet utilization and increase our operating costs. If a hidden defect or problem is not detected, it may result in accidents or other incidents for which we may become liable to third parties. The market prices of secondhand vessels also tend to fluctuate with changes in charter rates and the cost of newbuild vessels, and if we sell the vessels, the sales prices may not equal and could be less than their carrying values at that time.

In general, the costs to maintain a vessel in good operating condition increase with the age of the vessel. Older vessels are typically less fuel-efficient than more recently constructed vessels due to improvements in engine technology. Cargo insurance rates increase with the age of a vessel, making older vessels less desirable to charterers. As of the date of this annual report, our fleet consists of 39 owned vessels having a combined carrying capacity of 2.3 million dead weight tons, or dwt, and a weighted average age of 11 years.

Furthermore, governmental regulations, safety or other equipment standards related to the age of vessels may require expenditures for alterations, or the addition of new equipment and may restrict the type of activities in which the vessel may engage. As our vessels age, market conditions may not justify those expenditures or enable us to operate our vessels profitably during the remainder of their useful lives. As a result, regulations and standards could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and ability to pay dividends.

Unless we set aside reserves or are able to borrow funds for vessel replacement, we will be unable to replace the vessels in our fleet at the end of their useful lives.

Effective January 1, 2026, the Company revised its estimate of the useful lives of its vessels to 25 years from the date of initial delivery from the shipyard. The remaining estimated useful lives of the Company’s vessels range from approximately 5 to 20 years, depending on the age and type of vessel.

A portion of the Company’s cash flows and earnings is dependent upon revenues generated from the employment of its vessels. The Company does not currently maintain reserves for vessel replacements and intends to finance future vessel acquisitions through internally generated cash flows, borrowings under its credit facilities, or additional equity or debt offerings.

Our ability to obtain additional debt financing, or to refinance existing indebtedness, may be dependent on the performance and length of our COAs and charters, and the creditworthiness of our contract counterparties.

The performance and length of our COAs and charters and the actual or perceived credit quality of our contract counterparties, and any defaults by them, may materially affect our ability to obtain the additional capital resources required to purchase additional vessels or may significantly increase our costs of obtaining such capital. Our inability to obtain additional financing on acceptable terms or at all may materially affect our results of operations and our ability to implement our business strategy.

We have and may continue to partially finance the acquisition of vessels with borrowings drawn under credit facilities, financing obligations or finance leases. While we may refinance amounts drawn under our credit facilities with the net proceeds of future debt and equity offerings, we cannot assure you that we will be able to do so at interest rates and on terms that are acceptable to us or at all. If we are not able to refinance these amounts with the net proceeds of debt and equity offerings at an interest rate or on terms acceptable to us or at all, we will have to dedicate a larger portion of our cash flow from operations to pay the principal and interest of this indebtedness. If we are not able to satisfy these obligations, we may have to undertake alternative financing plans or sell vessels. The actual or perceived credit quality of our contract counterparties, any defaults by them and the market value of our fleet, among other things, may materially affect our ability to obtain alternative financing. If we are unable to meet our debt obligations, or if we otherwise default under our credit facilities or alternative financing arrangements, our lenders could declare the debt, together with accrued interest and fees, to be immediately due and payable and foreclose on our fleet, which could result in the acceleration of other indebtedness that we may have at such time and the commencement of similar foreclosure proceedings by other lenders.

We depend on our Chief Executive Officer, Chief Operating Officer, Chief Financial Officer and other key employees, and the loss of their services would have a material adverse effect on our business, results and financial condition.

Accordingly, our success will depend on the continued service of these individuals. We do not have employment agreements with our executive officers or employees. We may experience departures of senior executive officers and other key employees, and we cannot predict the impact that any of their departures would have on our ability to achieve our financial objectives. The loss of the services of any of them could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. We do not maintain “key man” life insurance on any of our key employees.

Exposure to currency exchange rate fluctuations will result in fluctuations in our cash flows and operating results.

We may generate our revenues and incur some of our operating expenses and general and administrative expenses in currencies other than the U.S. dollar. This difference could lead to fluctuations in our revenues and vessel operating expenses, which would affect our financial results. Expenses incurred in foreign currencies increase when the value of the U.S. dollar falls, which would reduce our profitability. Our operating results could suffer as a result.

Historically, our revenue has been generated in U.S. Dollars, but we incur capital, operating and administrative expenses in multiple currencies, including, among others, the Euro. If the U.S. Dollar weakens significantly, we would be required to convert more U.S. Dollars to other currencies to satisfy our obligations, which may cause us to have less or no cash available for distribution to our unitholders. Because we report our operating results in U.S. Dollars, changes in the value of the U.S. Dollar may also result in fluctuations in our reported revenues and earnings. In addition, under U.S. GAAP, all foreign currency-denominated monetary assets and liabilities, such as cash and accounts payable, are revalued and reported based on the prevailing exchange rate at the end of the reporting period. This revaluation may cause us to report significant non-monetary foreign currency exchange gains and losses in certain periods.

We may be subject to litigation, arbitration and other proceedings that could have an adverse effect on our business

Though there is no pending litigation against us as of the date of this report we may be, from time to time, involved in various litigation matters arising in the ordinary course of business, or otherwise. These matters may include, among other things, contract disputes, personal injury claims, environmental matters, governmental claims for taxes or duties, securities, or maritime matters. Although we intend to defend these matters vigorously, we cannot predict with certainty the outcome or effect of any claim or other litigation matter, and the potential costs to resolve any claim or other litigation matter, or a combination of these, may have a material adverse effect on us because of potential negative outcomes, the costs associated with asserting our claims or defending such lawsuits, and the diversion of management's attention to these matters. Insurance may not be applicable or sufficient in all cases and/or insurers may not remain solvent which may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and operating cash flows.

United States tax authorities could treat us as a “passive foreign investment company,” which could have adverse United States federal income tax consequences to U.S. holders

A foreign corporation will be treated as a “passive foreign investment company,” or a PFIC, for United States federal income tax purposes if either (1) at least 75% of its gross income for any taxable year consists of certain types of “passive income” or (2) at least 50% of the average value of the corporation's assets produce or are held for the production of those types of “passive income.” For purposes of these tests, “passive income” includes dividends, interest, and gains from the sale or exchange of investment property and rents and royalties other than rents and royalties which are received from unrelated parties in connection with the active conduct of a trade or business. For purposes of these tests, income derived from the performance of services does not constitute “passive income.” United States shareholders of a PFIC are subject to a disadvantageous United States federal income tax regime with respect to the income derived by the PFIC, the distributions they receive from the PFIC and the gain, if any, they derive from the sale or other disposition of their shares in the PFIC.

In this regard, we intend to treat the gross income we derive or are deemed to derive from our time chartering activities as services income, rather than rental income.

Accordingly, in the absence of any legal authority specifically relating to the United States Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the “Code,” provisions governing PFICs, the IRS or a court could disagree with our position. Moreover, although we intend to conduct our operations in such a manner as to avoid being classified as a PFIC, there can be no assurance that we would not constitute a PFIC for any future taxable year if there were to be changes in the nature and extent of our operations.

If the IRS were to find that we are or have been a PFIC for any taxable year, our United States shareholders will face adverse United States tax consequences. Under the PFIC rules, unless those shareholders make an election available under the Code (which election could itself have adverse consequences for such shareholders, such shareholders would be liable to pay United States federal income tax at the then prevailing income tax rates on ordinary income plus interest upon excess distributions and upon any gain from the disposition of our common shares, as if the excess distribution or gain had been recognized ratably over the shareholder’s holding period of our common shares.

Based on our current and expected composition of assets and income, it is not anticipated that we will be treated as a PFIC. Actual PFIC status for any taxable year, however, will not be determinable until after the end of such taxable year. Accordingly, there can be no assurances regarding our status as a PFIC for the current taxable year or any future taxable year. United States Shareholders are urged to consult with their own tax advisors regarding the possible application of the PFIC rules.

We may have to pay tax on United States source income, which would reduce our earnings.

Under sections 863(c)(3) and 887(a) of the Code, 50% of the gross shipping income of a vessel owning or chartering corporation, such as ourselves and our subsidiaries, that is attributable to transportation that begins or ends, but that does not both begin and end, in the United States may be subject to a 4% United States federal income tax without allowance for deduction, unless that corporation qualifies for exemption from tax under section 883 of the Code and the applicable Treasury Regulations promulgated thereunder.

The imposition of this taxation would have a negative effect on our business and would result in decreased earnings available for distribution to our shareholders.

Changes in tax laws and unanticipated tax liabilities could materially and adversely affect the taxes we pay, results of operations and financial results.

We are subject to income and other taxes in the United States and foreign jurisdictions, and our results of operations and financial results may be affected by tax and other initiatives around the world. For instance, there is a high level of uncertainty in today’s tax environment stemming from global initiatives put forth by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s, or OECD, two-pillar base erosion and profit shifting project. In October 2021, members of the OECD put forth two proposals: (i) Pillar One reallocates profit to the market jurisdictions where sales arise versus physical presence; and (ii) Pillar Two compels multinational corporations with €750 million or more in annual revenue to pay a global minimum tax of 15% on income received in each country in which they operate. The reforms aim to level the playing field between countries by discouraging them from reducing their corporate income taxes to attract foreign business investment. Over 140 countries agreed to enact the two-pillar solution to address the challenges arising from the digitalization of the economy and, in 2024, these guidelines were declared effective and must now be enacted by those OECD member countries. It is possible that these guidelines, including the global minimum corporate tax rate measure of 15%, could increase the burden and costs of our tax compliance, the amount of taxes we incur in those jurisdictions and our global effective tax rate, which could have a material adverse impact on our results of operations and financial results.

Information technology failures and data security breaches, including as a result of cybersecurity attacks, could negatively impact our results of operations and financial condition, subject us to increased operating costs, and expose us to litigation.

We rely on our computer systems and network infrastructure across our operations, including on our vessels. Despite our implementation of security and back-up measures, all of our technology systems are vulnerable to damage, disability or failures due to physical theft, fire, power loss, telecommunications failure, operational error, or other catastrophic events. Our technology systems are also subject to cybersecurity attacks including malware, other malicious software, phishing email attacks, attempts to gain unauthorized access to our data, the unauthorized release, corruption or loss of our data, loss or damage to our data delivery systems, and other electronic security breaches.

Additionally, there continues to be significant evolution and developments in the use of artificial intelligence, or AI, technologies, including generative artificial intelligence. While we have integrated the use of artificial intelligence in our business, we cannot, at this time, fully determine the impact of such evolving technology to our industry or business. As part of services provided by third-party application providers the risks are assessed as part of the normal risk assessments. We deploy Microsoft CoPilot to employees following a thorough training program to ensure awareness and knowledge on the use of artificial intelligence. We have established an AI team to govern and integrate AI into our operations and implemental technical security protocols as part of the overall security setup. At this stage, we do not expect AI to cause increased risk to our industry or business.

Despite our efforts to ensure the integrity of our systems and prevent future cybersecurity attacks, it is possible that our business, financial and other systems could be compromised, especially because such attacks can originate from a wide variety of sources including persons involved in organized crime or associated with external service providers. A successful cyber-attack could materially disrupt our operations, including the safety of our vessel operations. We do not maintain cyber-liability insurance at this time to cover such losses. Past and future occurrences of such attacks could damage our reputation and our ability to conduct our business, impact our credit and risk exposure decisions, cause us to lose customers or revenues, subject us to litigation and require us to incur significant expense to address and remediate or otherwise resolve these issues, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Cyber-attacks could lead to potential unauthorized access and disclosure of confidential information and data loss and corruption. Further, data protection laws apply to us in certain countries in which we do business. Specifically, the EU General Data Protection Regulation, or GDPR, which was applicable beginning May 2018, increases penalties up to a maximum of 4% of global annual turnover for breach of the regulation. The GDPR requires mandatory breach notification, the standard for which is also followed outside the EU (particularly in Asia). Non-compliance with data protection laws could expose us to regulatory investigations, which could result in fines and penalties. In addition to imposing fines, regulators may also issue orders to stop processing personal data, which could disrupt operations. We could also be subject to litigation from persons or corporations allegedly affected by data protection violations. Violation of data protection laws is a criminal offense in some countries, and individuals can be imprisoned or fined. Any violation of these laws or harm to our reputation could have a material adverse effect on our earnings, cash flows and financial condition.

Moreover, our risk of cyber-attack and other sources of security breaches and incidents may be elevated as a result of the ongoing global conflicts. To the extent such conflicts have collateral effects on global critical infrastructure or financial institutions, such developments could adversely affect our business, operating results and financial condition. At this time, it is difficult to assess the likelihood of such threat and any potential impact.

Further, in July 2023, the SEC adopted amendments to its rules on cybersecurity risk management, strategy, governance, and incident disclosure. The amendments require us to report material cybersecurity incidents involving our information systems and periodic reporting regarding our policies and procedures to identify and manage cybersecurity risks, amongst other disclosures. As of the date of this annual report we have not experienced any material cybersecurity incident which would be disclosable under SEC guidelines.

For more information on our cybersecurity policies and procedures, please see Item 1C “Cybersecurity.”

Risks Related To Our Common Shares

Future sales of our common shares could cause the market price of our common shares to decline and could dilute our shareholders’ interests in our company.

The market price of our common shares could decline due to sales of a large number of shares in the market, including sales of shares by our large shareholders, or the perception that these sales could occur.

We may, from time to time, issue additional common shares to support our growth strategy, reduce debt or provide us with capital for other purposes that our Board of Directors believes to be in our best interest.

We may need to raise additional capital in the future, which may not be available on favorable terms or at all or which may dilute our common shares or adversely affect its market price.

We may require additional capital to expand our business and increase revenues, add liquidity in response to negative economic conditions, meet unexpected liquidity needs caused by industry volatility or uncertainty and reduce our outstanding indebtedness under our existing facilities. To the extent that our existing capital and borrowing capabilities are insufficient to meet these requirements and cover any losses, we will need to raise additional funds through debt or equity financings, including offerings of our common shares, securities convertible into our common shares, or rights to acquire our common shares, or curtail our growth and reduce our assets or restructure arrangements with existing security holders. Any equity or debt financing, or additional borrowings, if available at all, may be on terms that are not favorable to us. Equity financings could result in dilution to our shareholders, as described further below, and the securities issued in future financings may have rights, preferences and privileges that are senior to those of our common shares. If our need for capital arises because of significant losses, the occurrence of these losses may make it more difficult for us to raise the necessary capital. If we cannot raise funds on acceptable terms if and when needed, we may not be able to take advantage of future opportunities, grow our business or respond to competitive pressures or unanticipated requirements.

Volatility in the market price and trading volume of our common shares could adversely impact the trading price of our common shares.

The stock market in recent years has experienced significant price and volume fluctuations that have often been unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of companies like us. These broad market factors may materially reduce the market price of our common shares, regardless of our operating performance. The market price of our common shares, which has experienced significant price fluctuations in the past twelve months, could continue to fluctuate significantly for many reasons, including in response to the risks described herein or for reasons unrelated to our operations, such as reports by industry analysts, investor perceptions or negative announcements by our competitors or suppliers regarding their own performance, as well as industry conditions and general financial, economic and political instability. Other factors that may influence the market price of our common shares includes, but is not limited to:

•investor reaction to our business strategy;

•our continued compliance with the listing standards of Nasdaq;

•mergers and strategic alliances in the shipping industry;

•regulatory or legal developments in the United States and other countries, especially changes in laws or regulations applicable to our industry;

•variations or fluctuations in our financial results or those of companies that are perceived to be similar to us;

•our ability or inability to raise additional capital and the terms on which we raise it;

•declines in the market prices of stocks generally;

•trading volume of our common stock;

•sales of our common stock by us or our stockholders;

•the loss of any of our key management personnel;

•general economic, industry and market conditions, including inflationary pressures; and

•other events or factors, including those resulting from such events, or the prospect of such events, including war, terrorism and other international conflicts, public health issues, adverse weather and climate conditions could disrupt our operations or result in political or economic instability.

Since the stock price of our common shares has fluctuated in the past, has been recently volatile and may be volatile in the future, investors in our common shares could incur substantial losses. In the past, following periods of volatility in the market, securities class-action litigation has often been instituted against companies. Such litigation, if instituted against us, could result in substantial costs and diversion of management’s attention and resources, which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects. There can be no guarantee that our stock price will remain at current prices.

Additionally, securities of certain companies might experience significant and extreme volatility in stock price due to short sellers of shares of common shares, known as a “short squeeze”. These short squeezes have caused extreme volatility in those companies and in the market and have led to the price per share of those companies to trade at a significantly inflated rate that is disconnected from the underlying value of the company. Many investors who have purchased shares in those companies at an inflated rate face the risk of losing a significant portion of their original investment as the price per share has declined steadily as interest in those stocks has abated. While we have no reason to believe our shares would be the target of a short squeeze, there can be no assurance that we will not be in the future, and you may lose a significant portion or all of your investment if you purchase our shares at a rate that is significantly disconnected from our underlying value.

We are thus unable to predict when such instances of trading volatility will occur or how long such dynamics may last. Therefore, we cannot assure you that you will be able to sell any of our common shares you may have purchased at a price greater than or equal to its original purchase price, or that you will be able to sell our common shares at all.

Our organizational documents contain anti-takeover provisions that may discourage, delay or prevent (1) our merger or acquisition and/or (2) the removal of incumbent directors and officers and (3) the ability of public stockholders to benefit from a change in control.

Our Board of Directors is divided into three classes serving staggered, three-year terms. This classified board provision could discourage a third party from making a tender offer for our shares or attempting to obtain control of us.

We are incorporated in Bermuda and it may not be possible for our investors to enforce U.S. judgments against us.

We are incorporated in Bermuda and substantially all of our assets are located outside the United States. In addition, one of our directors is a non-resident of the United States, and all or a substantial portion of such director’s assets are located outside the United States. As a result, it may be difficult or impossible for U.S. investors to serve process within the United States, upon us or our directors and executive officers, or to enforce a judgment against us for civil liabilities in United States courts.

In addition, you should not assume that courts in the countries in which we are incorporated or where our assets are located would enforce judgments of United States courts obtained in actions against us based upon the civil liability provisions of applicable United States federal and state securities laws or would enforce, in original actions, liabilities against us based on those laws.

Because we are a foreign corporation, you may not have the same rights that a shareholder in a U.S. corporation may have.

We are a Bermuda exempted company. Our memorandum of association and bye-laws and the Companies Act, 1981 of Bermuda, or the Companies Act, govern our affairs. The Companies Act does not as clearly establish your rights and the fiduciary responsibilities of our directors as do statutes and judicial precedent in some United States jurisdictions. Therefore, you may have more difficulty in protecting your interests as a shareholder in the face of actions by the management, directors or controlling shareholders than would shareholders of a corporation incorporated in a United States jurisdiction. There is a statutory remedy under Section 111 of the Companies Act which provides that a shareholder may seek redress in the courts as long as such shareholder can establish that our affairs are being conducted, or have been conducted, in a manner oppressive or prejudicial to the interests of some part of the shareholders, including such shareholder. However, you may not have the same rights that a shareholder in a United States corporation may have.

ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

Not applicable.

ITEM 1C. CYBERSECURITY

1. Board and Audit Committee Oversight

Our Board of Directors oversees our risk management process, including risks from cybersecurity threats. The Board administers its cybersecurity risk oversight function directly and through the Audit Committee. The Board and Audit Committee receive quarterly updates from management, including reports from our Global IT Director, regarding cybersecurity risks, mitigation efforts, and any significant incidents or vulnerabilities identified. These updates include assessments of the effectiveness of our cybersecurity controls and recommendations for improvements.

Our Chief Financial Officer and Information Technology department are primarily responsible for assessing and managing material risks from cybersecurity threats and overseeing key cybersecurity policies and processes. Our Global IT Director leads the day-to-day management of cybersecurity risk and has over 20 years of experience in the design, implementation, and support of information technology infrastructure and security systems. Management regularly evaluates cybersecurity risks and reports significant findings to senior management and the Board of Directors.

Network and information systems and other technologies play an important role in our business activities. We also obtain certain confidential, proprietary and personal information about our charterers, personnel, and vendors. To protect our data, we have employed cybersecurity protocols which are designed to work in tandem with internal controls to safeguard our information technology environment. Our information technology infrastructure is designed with commercial flexibility, data integrity, and safety in mind. We utilize a layered approach of systems and policies intended to provide a secure operating environment and promote business continuity. Our hardware and software systems are equipped with technology intended to offer access and intrusion protection, software and communications systems protections, and mitigate cybersecurity threats.

2. Incident Response and Materiality Assessment

We maintain a formal incident response plan that outlines procedures for detecting, containing, investigating, and remediating cybersecurity incidents. This plan includes escalation protocols to senior management and the Board, as appropriate. We assess the materiality of any cybersecurity incident based on its potential impact on our operations, financial condition, and reputation, in accordance with SEC guidance. To date, no cybersecurity incidents have had a material impact on the Company’s business, operations, or financial results.

3. Risk Management Processes

We utilize industry standard software packages such as RSA and Cisco Firepower to secure our networks. We also hold online cybersecurity training for our employees. Our cybersecurity risk management processes are integrated into our enterprise risk management framework and include regular risk assessments, vulnerability scans, and penetration testing. We prioritize risks based on their likelihood and potential impact, and implement mitigation strategies accordingly. Management reviews the results of these assessments and reports significant findings and remediation actions to the Board and Audit Committee.

4. Third-Party Risk Management

We evaluate cybersecurity risks associated with third-party service providers through initial and ongoing security assessments, contractual requirements for data protection, and continuous monitoring of their cybersecurity practices. Any significant risks or incidents involving third-party providers are promptly reported to management and, if material, to the Board and Audit Committee.

5. Reference to Risk Factors

For a more detailed discussion of risks related to cybersecurity threats, including potential impacts and mitigation strategies, please refer to Item 1A, ‘Risk Factors.

Recently Filed

Click on a ticker to see risk factors

Ticker *	File Date
COPR	2 hours ago
GAP	3 hours ago
MGTI	4 hours ago
CHCI	7 hours ago
LWAY	8 hours ago
XPON	8 hours ago
LSBK	8 hours ago
STIM	9 hours ago
ABEO	9 hours ago
PSQH	9 hours ago
BCYC	9 hours ago
GLUE	10 hours ago
CLNN	10 hours ago
XFOR	10 hours ago
MCHB	19 hours ago
LIFE	21 hours ago
MUX	21 hours ago
XRX	22 hours ago
MBVI	23 hours ago
BSVN	23 hours ago
PCAP	23 hours ago
BMOK	23 hours ago
FRST	23 hours ago
FLYYQ	23 hours ago
MVST	23 hours ago
ITIC	23 hours ago
PANL	23 hours ago
AGEN	23 hours ago
GDOT	23 hours ago
RLYB	23 hours ago
MCBS	23 hours ago
MYPS	23 hours ago
CAEP	1 day ago
TAVI	1 day ago
CWCO	1 day ago
ARTNA	1 day ago
QSEA	1 day ago
EGY	1 day ago
AP	1 day ago
APT	5 days, 23 hours ago
IBO	5 days, 23 hours ago
DAIC	5 days, 23 hours ago
AEAQ	5 days, 23 hours ago
NUWE	5 days, 23 hours ago
KDK	5 days, 23 hours ago
SKYT	6 days ago
CRWE	6 days ago
CWBC	6 days ago
EXOD	6 days ago
DMRC	6 days ago

OTHER DATASETS

House Trading

Dashboard

Corporate Flights

Dashboard

App Ratings

Dashboard

Strategies

Alerts

Browse Data

Risk Factors Dashboard

View risk factors by ticker

Search filings by term

Risk Factors - PANL

-New additions in green
-Changes in blue
-Hover to see similar sentence in last filing

Recently Filed

OTHER DATASETS

House Trading

Corporate Flights

App Ratings

TRADE SMARTER

TRADE SMARTER

Strategies

Alerts

Browse Data

Risk Factors Dashboard

View risk factors by ticker

Search filings by term

Risk Factors - PANL

-New additions in green-Changes in blue-Hover to see similar sentence in last filing

Recently Filed

OTHER DATASETS

House Trading

Corporate Flights

App Ratings

TRADE SMARTER

TRADE SMARTER

-New additions in green
-Changes in blue
-Hover to see similar sentence in last filing