description of the principal objectives set out in the MPRDA. On 11 July 2024, during the Department of Mineral and Petroleum Resources ("DMPR'') 2024/25 Budget announcement following South Africa's general elections, the Minister announced that the DMPR would split into two separate ministries: the Department of Mineral and Petroleum Resources and the Department of Electricity and Energy, which split has been subsequently implemented. In addition, the Minister indicated that the DMPR was in the process of drafting amendments to the MPRDA to address certain perceived deficiencies and to bring the legislation in line with international best practice. The South African Government published the Mineral Resources Development Bill of 2025 and subsequent correction (the “MPRD Bill”) for public comment on 20 May 2025 and 9 June 2024, respectively. It invited interested and affected parties to submit their comments on the Bill on or before 13 August 2025. Among other things, the MPRD Bill, if promulgated, would achieve the following: • Black Economic Empowerment The MPRD Bill proposes regulate Black Economic Empowerment in terms of Regulations to be published pursuant to the MPRD Bill. It is unclear what requirements will be contained in these Regulations and the extent to which they will be based on or replace Mining Charter III. • Ownership of tailings created before 1 May 2004 Historic tailings are not regulated in terms of the MPRDA; however, the MPRD Bill purports to amend the MPRDA so as to render historic tailings subject to regulation under the MPRDA, resulting in the South African government gaining custodianship of historic tailings. The current owners of these historic tailings will be afforded an opportunity to apply for amendments to existing rights or new rights over the historic tailings within two years of Bill being introduced as law. • Transfers of interests in companies The MPRD Bill proposes amendments which are unclear but could suggest that a transfer of any interest in an unlisted company, where such company holds a prospecting right or mining right, requires the prior consent of the Minister. • Mineral beneficiation The MPRD Bill seeks to make it mandatory for the Minister to “initiate or promote the beneficiation of minerals and petroleum resources in the Republic of South Africa”. The MPRDA Bill affords the broad discretion over beneficiation, without providing any criteria under which such discretion should be exercised. • Strategic Minerals The Minister may, in consultation with other relevant Ministers, declare certain minerals or a class of minerals as being "strategic" to advancing Government imperatives and accordingly restrict their prospecting or mining. The MPRD Bill does not elaborate on what minerals could be declared strategic. • Penalties The MPRD Bill proposes to introduce fines of up to 10% of the offender's annual turnover in the Republic and exports from the Republic during the preceding financial year, for contraventions of the MPRDA. • Issue of a closure certificate The MPRD Bill envisages that a rights holder will remain liable for any latent or residual environmental and associated damage caused by prospecting and mining operations, even after (and notwithstanding) the issue of a closure certificate by the Minister. This means that a rights holder will no longer be indemnified from liability after the issue of a closure certificate. The definition of “This Act” will be amended to elevate status of the the Codes of Good Practice for the South African Minerals Industry (“Codes of Good Practice”) and the Housing and Living Conditions Standards for the Minerals Industry (“Living Standards”), from policy documents to law. There is a large degree of uncertainty regarding the changes that will be brought about in the event that the MPRD Bill is made law in its current form. 8 Table of contents Regulations under the MPRDA On 27 March 2020 the Minister published for implementation amendments to the regulations promulgated pursuant to the MPRDA in 2004 (the “MPRDA Regulations” and as amended the “Amended Regulations”). The Amended Regulations include the following notable changes: •Mining right applicants must “meaningfully consult” with landowners, lawful occupiers and interested and affected parties in accordance with the procedures contemplated under the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2014 (the “EIA Regulations”). The office of the Regional Manager is permitted to participate as an observer in these processes. •Mining right holders must, pursuant to their social and labour plans (“SLPs”), contribute to the socio-economic development in the areas in which they operate and labour sending areas (i.e. a local municipality which a majority of mine workers consider to be their primary residence). This requirement may impose obligations on mining right holder to effect measures in communities that are located far away from the mine and/or could give rise to some social issues. •Although most of the provisions regulating environmental matters have been deleted from the Amended Regulations, those sections dealing with mine closure have been retained but have been amended to state that mine closure must be regulated pursuant to the National Environmental Management Act, 107 of 1998 (“NEMA”), the EIA Regulations and the Financial Provision Regulations, 2015. As discussed in Item 4: “Information on the Company – Business Overview – Regulation - Laws and Regulations Pertaining to Environmental Protection – South Africa” it is anticipated that the Financial Provision Regulations, 2015 will be replaced by revised regulations following further engagement with the mining industry. •The appeal process in the MPRDA Regulations has been replaced with a more comprehensive procedure that includes specific time periods within which appellants, respondents and the competent authority must submit appeals, responses or consider appeals (as the case may be). Although there is no guarantee that the parties will comply with these time periods, the time periods are intended to hold the parties accountable and to ensure that appeals are resolved in a timely manner. The Mining Charter On 27 September 2018, the Minister published the Broad-Based Socio-Economic Empowerment Charter for the Mining and Minerals Industry, 2018 (“Mining Charter III”), on which date it also became effective, as amended by the notice published in the Government Gazette on 19 December 2018 and read with the Implementation Guidelines for the Broad Based Socio- Economic Empowerment Charter for the Mining and Minerals Industry, 2018 (“Implementation Guidelines”) published on the same date. It replaces, in their entirety, the original Mining Charter negotiated in 2002 and gazetted in 2004 (the "Original Charter") and the amended Charter gazetted in September 2010 (the “Amended Charter”). Mining Charter III imposes obligations and increased participation by historically disadvantaged persons ("HDPs") in relation to a mining company’s ownership, procurement of goods and services, enterprise and supplier development, human resource development and employment equity requirements. While the ownership requirement for HDPs in relation to existing mining rights has not increased (provided that we met the 26.0% requirement under the Amended Charter), we may be required to comply with new HDP ownership requirements in relation to any renewals, consolidations and transfers of our existing rights and any applications for new mining rights. The increased HDP requirements in relation to employment equity, procurement of goods and services and enterprise and supplier development may result in additional costs being incurred by us, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition. While Mining Charter III was effective from 27 September 2018, many of its provisions are vague and untested despite the publication of the Implementation Guidelines. See Item 4: “Information on the Company - Business Overview - Regulation - Mineral Rights - South Africa - Mining Charter”. On 26 March 2019, the Minerals Council South Africa (“MCSA”) filed an application for the judicial review and setting aside of certain clauses of Mining Charter III. The MCSA had engaged in ongoing attempts to reach a compromise with the Minister on certain provisions that are problematic for the industry, and which would be detrimental to its sustainability. The MCSA’s judicial review application was heard before a full bench of judges in May 2021. Judgment was handed down on 21 September 2021 (the "2021 Judgement") setting aside certain of the problematic provisions, while providing that the remainder of Mining Charter III should continue in force. In November 2021, the DMPR informed the National Assembly's Portfolio Committee on Mineral Resources and Energy that it did not intend to appeal the outcome of the 2021 Judgement, but instead would consider steps to achieve the empowerment objectives through legislative amendments to the MPRDA. We cannot guarantee that we will meet all the targets set out by Mining Charter III. Should we breach any obligations in complying with the MPRDA or Mining Charter III, our existing mining rights in South Africa could be suspended or cancelled by the Minister in accordance with the provisions of the MPRDA. It may also influence our ability to obtain any new mining rights. Any such suspension or cancellation could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition. Australia In Australia, mining is regulated by the laws of the State in which the deposit is situated. Presently, our only mining activity in Australia is the Eva Copper Project, located in the State of Queensland. Mining in Queensland is regulated by the Mineral Resources Act 1989 (Qld) (the "Queensland MRA"), the Mineral and Energy Resources (Common Provisions) Act 2014 as amended by the Mineral and Energy Resources and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2024 (Qld), the MQSH Act, and the regulations, practice manual, operational policies and guidelines thereunder. See Item 4: “Information on the Company - Business Overview - Regulation - Mineral Rights - Australia”. 9 Table of contents Generally, all mineral resources in Queensland are owned by the State of Queensland. These resources are managed by the Queensland Department of Resources. Under the Queensland MRA, the Department of Resources requires all large mining projects to apply for an applicable resource authority, being (as the case may be) an exploration permit ("EP"), a mining lease ("ML") or a mineral development license. An EP allows the holder to carry out exploration activities to determine what minerals exist and their quality and quantity in or under land or in the waters or sea above such land, in accordance with agreed work programs and subject to compliance with prescribed security and financial obligations. If the holder of an EP wishes to develop a mine to exploit discovered resources, application must be made for an ML. This entitles the holder to machine-mine specified minerals and carry out activities associated with mining, including infrastructure to support mining operations. The Queensland MRA, and resource authorities issued thereunder, contain provisions and conditions, the breach of which may result in the imposition of a fine, imprisonment or the cancellation of the tenement. Should we breach any obligations in complying with the Queensland MRA or any other laws and regulations relating to our exploration and mining activities in Queensland, our resource authorities in Queensland could be suspended or cancelled, or we could be subject to fines or other sanctions. Any such suspension, cancellation, fine or sanction could have a material adverse effect on our operational and financial results. Papua New Guinea In PNG, mining is primarily regulated by the PNG Mining Act 1992 (the “PNG Mining Act”) and the PNG Mining (Safety) Act and their respective Regulations. All minerals are owned by the PNG Government, which grants rights to explore for or mine such minerals under a concessionary tenement system. See Item 4: "Information on the Company – Business Overview – Regulation - Mineral Rights - Papua New Guinea" Since 2009, the mining regime in PNG has been the subject of a comprehensive ongoing review involving various PNG Government agencies and various draft revisions of the PNG mining legislation have been circulated for comment. In addition to the review of applicable legislation, PNG mineral policy and mining-specific sector policies are also being reviewed and drafted, including a biodiversity offsets policy, a national oceans policy, a sustainable development policy, an involuntary relocation policy, a national content policy, and a mine closure policy and mining project rehabilitation and closure guideline.See Item 4: "Information on the Company – Business Overview – Regulation - Mineral Rights - Papua New Guinea". Certain of the proposed revisions, such as increased royalties and equity participation by the PNG Government or the introduction of a production-sharing regime, if adopted and applied to our operations and projects in PNG could have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and financial condition. PNG mining legislation and mining tenements contain provisions and conditions, the breach of which may result in the imposition of a fine, imprisonment or the cancellation of the tenement. Should we breach any obligations in complying with the PNG Mining Act or any other laws and regulations relating to our exploration and mining activities in PNG, our existing mining rights in PNG could be suspended or cancelled, or we could be subject to fines or other sanction. Any such suspension, cancellation or sanction could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition. Our financial flexibility could be constrained by the Exchange Control Regulations of the countries in which we operate South Africa’s Exchange Control Regulations restrict the export of capital from South Africa. Transactions between South African residents (including companies) and non-residents (excluding residents of the Republic of Namibia and the Kingdoms of Lesotho and Eswatini, known collectively as the Common Monetary Area (“CMA”)) are subject to exchange controls enforced by South African Reserve Bank ("SARB"). South African companies remain subject to restrictions on their ability to deploy capital outside of South Africa. These restrictions could hinder our financial and strategic flexibility, particularly our ability to raise funds outside South Africa, deploy capital for international acquisitions or projects, and repatriate earnings, and could therefore have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and financial condition. Our operations in PNG (including the export of gold and the operation of approved offshore foreign currency accounts) are subject to the foreign exchange control and other directives of the Bank of Papua New Guinea. PNG is presently subject to severe shortages of foreign currency. The withdrawal of existing approvals or the imposition of restrictions could potentially hinder our financial and strategic flexibility, limit our ability to make offshore payments, and could have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and financial condition. 10 Table of contents Risks Related to Our Operations and Business Risks associated with pumping water inflows from closed mines adjacent to our operations, including related closure liabilities, could adversely affect our operational results Certain of our mining operations in South Africa are adjacent to the mining operations of other companies. A mine closure can affect continued operations at an adjacent mine if appropriate preventative steps are not taken. In particular, this could include the ingress of underground water when pumping operations at the closed mine are suspended. This can result in damage to property, operational disruptions and additional pumping costs, which could adversely affect any one of our adjacent mining operations and, in turn could adversely affect our business, operating results and financial condition. In connection with our acquisition in 2018 of the Moab Khotsong and Great Noligwa mines from AngloGold Ashanti Limited ("AngloGold"), together with other assets and related infrastructure (the “Moab Acquisition”), we acquired a two-thirds interest in the Margaret Water Company NPC ("Margaret Water") for all pumping and water-related infrastructure at its Margaret shaft. The shaft operates for the purpose of de-watering the Klerksdorp, Orkney, Stilfontein, Hartbeesfontein (“KOSH”) basin groundwater. This is to allow Moab Khotsong operations and the mine operated by Kopanang Gold Mining Company Proprietary Limited (the mining company holding the remaining one–third interest in Margaret Water and the only other mining company continuing to operate in the area) to remain dry and to prevent flooding of operational areas. Therefore, it remains imperative for the shaft to continue pumping water. Flooding and potential decant in the future resulting from a failure in pumping and water-related infrastructure could pose an unpredicted “force majeure” type event, which could result in financial liability for us, and could have an adverse impact on our results of operations and financial condition. Although studies indicate that we do not currently have a decant risk at our Doornkop and Kusasalethu operations, due to the interconnectivity, any long-term water management solution would require a regional strategy co-created with neighbouring and inter-connected mines. Although we have installed water treatment plants at both sites for current treatment needs, which could serve as water plants for final decant should the situation arise, there can be no assurance that such plants will be sufficient to address such risks. There is also a flooding risk at the Mponeng mine, requiring the continuous pumping arrangement with Covalent Water Company (Pty) Limited (a wholly-owned subsidiary) to stay in place. Obligations in respect of the pumping and treatment of extraneous water must also be addressed in connection with our final closure plans for each of our operations. We are responsible for these liabilities until a closure certificate is issued pursuant to the MPRDA and possibly thereafter under the NEMA. The occurrence of any of the risks discussed above could have an adverse effect on our operating results and financial condition. This liability is discussed in more details in Item 4: “Information on the Company – Business Overview – Regulation – Law and Regulations Pertaining to Environmental Protection – South Africa – NEMA”. See also “– We are subject to extensive environmental regulations in the countries in which we operate, and compliance costs, regulatory changes, and potential non-compliance could have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and financial condition” below. Infrastructure constraints and ageing infrastructure could adversely affect our operations Mining, processing, development and exploration activities depend on adequate infrastructure. Reliable rail, ports, roads, bridges, power sources, power transmission facilities and water supply are critical to the Company’s business operations and affect capital and operating costs. The infrastructure and services are often provided by third parties whose operational activities are outside the control of the Company. Interference to the maintenance or provision of infrastructure, including by extreme weather conditions, scarcity of equipment, sabotage or social unrest, could impede our ability to deliver products on time and adversely affect our business results of operations and financial condition. Once a shaft or a processing plant has reached the end of its intended lifespan, higher than normal maintenance and care is required. This applies also to terrestrial tailings and waste storage facilities. Maintaining this infrastructure requires skilled human resources, capital allocation, management and planning. Although we have implemented a comprehensive maintenance strategy, incidents resulting in production delays, increased costs or industrial accidents may occur. Such incidents may have an adverse effect on our operating results and financial condition. Disruptions to electricity supply and rising power costs: Impact on operations and financial results South Africa South Africa's mining sector, including our operations, is heavily dependent on electricity supplied by Eskom Holdings SOC Limited ("Eskom"), the state-owned utility that primarily relies on fossil fuels. Over the past decade, Eskom has faced significant challenges. Harmony’s operations in South Africa remain exposed to risks associated with electricity supply instability and escalating power costs. Systemic risks persist due to Eskom’s ageing infrastructure, financial constraints, and limited capacity for sustained maintenance and upgrades - posing ongoing threats to electricity reliability. Unstable power supply can damage equipment, disrupt production, and reduce recovery rates. Rising electricity costs continue to erode free cash flow margins, potentially impacting mine life, project viability, and overall financial performance. Given these factors, the risk of power supply disruptions remains a concern for Harmony’s South African operations and may have an adverse effect on our operational results. 11 Table of contents Papua New Guinea In PNG, our Hidden Valley mine relies on power from the state utility, PNG Power Limited ("PNG Power"). The amount of power imported from PNG Power has had a marginal increase over the last three years, with about 67% of the mine's daily power demand met by PNG Power, and the remaining 33% self-generated using the mine’s diesel power station. Risks associated with self-generation include exposure to diesel price increases, danger to road users and pedestrians in the transport of fuel to the site, and potentially higher associated greenhouse gas emissions. See Item 5: “Operating and Financial Review and Prospects – Operating Results – Key factors affecting our results - Electricity in South Africa.” and “Integrated Annual Report for the 20-F 2025 – Environment stewardship – Climate and energy management” on pages 98 to 104. Illegal mining and other criminal activity at our operations, including theft of gold and gold-bearing material, could pose a threat to the safety of employees, result in damage to property and could expose us to losses, business disruption and liability The activities of illegal and artisanal miners, which include theft, has increased over the years and had become more violent and threatens both the safety of employees and sustainability of the mining industry. South Africa In South Africa, artisanal and illegal miners are active on, or adjacent to, several of our properties, but were mostly active on the surface during fiscal 2025. Artisanal and illegal miners at times may lead to interference with our operations and results in conflict that presents a security threat to property and human life. The environmental, social, safety and health impacts of artisanal mining are frequently attributed to formal mining activity, and it is often assumed that artisanal-mined gold is channelled through large-scale mining operators, even though artisanal and large-scale miners have distinct supply chains. These misconceptions impact negatively on the reputation of the industry. The activities of the illegal miners, which include theft, can cause damage to our properties, including by way of pollution, copper cable theft, underground fires, critical infrastructure damage, operational disruption, project delays or personal injury or death, for which we could potentially be held responsible. Illegal and artisanal mining could contribute to the depletion of mineral deposits, potentially making the future mining of such deposits uneconomic. Most illegal miners are found at abandoned shafts or old work places. Illegal and artisanal mining (which may be by employees or third parties) is associated with a number of negative impacts, including environmental degradation and human rights abuse, such as forced labour, human trafficking, child labour, corruption, money laundering and other violent crimes in the communities and at the mines. Effective local government administration is often lacking in the locations where illegal and artisanal miners operate, due to rapid population growth and the lack of functioning structures, which can create a complex, unstable social environment. The disbandment of specialised South African Police Service ("SAPS") units has also left a huge gap in the apprehension of high-ranking criminals in the illicit gold trade. Without the assistance of these services, combating illegal and artisanal mining is extremely difficult and poses significant risks to Harmony including reputational risks, litigation, production losses resulting from stoppages and areas becoming unsafe as the miners encroach on active mining sites as well as increased costs to mitigate these risks. Papua New Guinea Illegal and artisanal mining poses challenges to various mines in PNG.The presence of illegal miners could lead to project delays and disputes regarding the development or operation of commercial gold deposits. In addition, illegal mining could lead to an increase in the level of organisation and funding of criminal activity around some of our operations. Criminal activities such as trespassing, illegal and artisanal mining, and related sabotage, theft and vandalism could lead to damage to, and disruptions at, our operations. Rising gold and copper prices may result in an increase in gold and copper thefts; moreover, incidences of illegal mining may escalate as a result of social and economic conditions. The occurrence of any of these events could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition on results of our operations. Actual and potential shortages of production inputs and supply chain disruptions may affect our operational results Our operational results may be affected by the availability and pricing of consumables such as fuel, chemical reagents, explosives, tires, steel and other essential production inputs. Issues with regards to availability of consumables may result from shortages, long lead times to deliver and supply chain disruptions, which could result in production delays and production shortfalls. We expect cost increases and longer lead time to continue in fiscal 2026 across our operations, including as a result of factors such as the price of oil, inflationary increases and labour costs. See “— Rising inflation, and geopolitical risks may have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and financial condition”. Shortages can be attributed to geopolitical uncertainty, including the potential impact of global trade policy shifts. In South Africa, the consequences of intermittent power outages and unplanned breakdowns have resulted in rising input costs and longer lead times. The steel and chemical industry has experienced periodic labour actions related to wage negotiations, affecting major local steelmakers and retailers, and creating supply constraints. These shortages has had an affect on numerous engineering companies within our extensive supply chain network, regardless of their size. Despite the Red Sea maritime disruptions that impacted our supply chain during fiscal 2024 having largely stabilised by mid-year, the freight rates remain elevated compared to pre-disruption levels. Current geopolitical tensions in the Middle East continue to pose risks of renewed disruptions. The port congestion at South African facilities, particularly Durban, has affected the clearance time of imported items and continues to create supply chain bottlenecks. 12 Table of contents The pricing of consumables could continue to be impacted by these challenges, particularly if shortages become more prevalent. Factors such as global supply and demand dynamics, governmental regulations including import parities on steel and chemical-related products, and industrial actions, may contribute to price fluctuations. A sustained interruption in the supply of these consumables would necessitate swift identification of alternative suppliers, potentially resulting in higher costs. Moreover, such interruptions could adversely affect our ability to pursue our development projects. Any significant increase in the prices of these consumables would escalate operating costs and have adverse effects on profitability. Consequently, this could impact our financial and operating results. Fluctuations in insurance cost and availability could adversely affect our operating results and our insurance coverage may prove inadequate to satisfy future claims Fluctuations in insurance costs and availability can significantly impact our operating results, and our current insurance coverage may not fully address future claims. We maintain global insurance policies that cover general liability, directors' and officers' liability, cyber-security, accidental loss, and material damage to our property, including resultant business interruptions. However, the costs of sustaining adequate insurance coverage continue to rise and may persist in doing so, potentially adversely affecting our financial performance. We also have comprehensive third-party liability coverage, which includes unforeseen sudden and accidental environmental liabilities. Despite this, we may still face liability for pollution or other hazards that are not insured or insurable, including those related to past mining activities. Our property and liability insurance is aligned with industry practices but, like all insurance policies, contains exclusions and limitations. Additionally, there is no guarantee that insurance will always be available at economically feasible premiums. Consequently, our insurance coverage might not protect against certain claims related to environmental or industrial accidents, pollution, public health emergencies, data protection and cybersecurity breaches, and other events that could disrupt our operations, such as the National Grid Collapse. These factors could materially and adversely affect our financial and operating results. We compete with mining and other companies for key human resources with critical skills and our inability to retain key personnel could have an adverse effect on our business The risk of losing senior management or being unable to hire and retain sufficient technically skilled employees or sufficient representation by HDPs in management positions, or sufficient gender diversity in management positions or at Board level, may materially impact on our ability to achieve our objectives. We compete with mining and other companies globally to attract and retain key human resources at all levels with the appropriate technical skills and operating and managerial experience necessary to continue operating our business. The global shortage of key mining specialists, including geologists, mining engineers, mechanical and electrical engineers, metallurgists and skilled artisans has been exacerbated by increased mining activity across the globe. Furthermore, the often remote locations of mining operations may make the mining industry unattractive to potential employees. In addition to this, the regions we operate in also have specific requirements which could affect our recruitment and retention processes. In South Africa, the need to recruit, develop and retain skilled employees is particularly critical with HDPs and women in mining in South Africa. In August 2024, the PNG Department of Commerce and Industry launched "The Papua New Guinea National Content Policy for Resource Sectors 2023". Although it is presently uncertain the extent to which, and how, the policy will be applied to our current operations and projects in PNG, if the localisation of the workforce policy provisions are introduced, we believe that they would severely restrict the utilisation of offshore-based “fly-in, fly-out” expatriate employees, and potentially also result in a tightening of legislation around the granting of work permits and visas to foreign skilled employees. This would, in turn, adversely affect our ability in PNG to engage and retain appropriately skilled human resources, and could necessitate the application of additional resources to the construction or provision of housing for residential employees and the recruiting and training of local landholders and landholder businesses, all of which may have an adverse effect on our business, operating results and financial condition. There can be no assurance that we will attract and retain skilled and experienced employees. Should we lose any of our key personnel, our business may be harmed and our operational results and financial condition could be adversely affected. See Item 4: “Information on the Company – Business Overview – Regulation – Labour Relations” and “Integrated Annual Report for the 20-F 2025 – Social stewardship – An engaged workforce” on pages 154 to 165. The use of contractors at certain operations may expose us to delays or suspensions in mining activities and increases in mining costs We use contractors at certain of our operations to mine and deliver ore to processing plants as well as for other purposes. At mines employing mining contractors, contracting costs represent a significant proportion of the total operating costs of these operations and we do not own all of the mining equipment. Our operations could be disrupted, resulting in additional costs and liabilities, if the mining contractors at affected mines have financial difficulties, if a dispute arises in renegotiating a contract, or if there is a delay in replacing an existing contractor and its operating equipment to meet business needs at expected cost levels. Increases in contract mining rates, in the absence of associated productivity increases, will also have an adverse impact on our results of operations and financial condition. 13 Table of contents Contractors can adversely affect our reputation, results of operations and financial condition by: •our reduced control over those aspects of operations which are the responsibility of contractors; •their failure to comply with applicable legal, human rights and regulatory requirements; and •their inability to manage their workforce to provide high quality services and a high level of productivity. This may result in us incurring liability to third parties due to the actions of contractors, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and financial condition. In PNG, although it is presently uncertain the extent to which, and how, the PNG Department of Commerce and Industry’s “Papua New Guinea National Content Policy for Resource Sectors 2023" will be applied to our current operations and projects in PNG, if these provisions are introduced, we believe they will prescribe increased levels of participation by locally-owned businesses in the provision of goods and services, which could adversely affect our ability in PNG to manage the costs of goods and services to our operations, which would, in turn, have an adverse effect on our business, operating results and financial condition. We are dependent on a number of highly-integrated communication and IT systems, any major disruption to which could have an adverse effect on our operations and financial results We utilise and rely on various internal and external IT systems to support our business activities. Significant damage or interruption of our IT systems, whether due to accidents, human error, natural events or malicious acts, may lead to disruptions to our business operations and/or essential data being irretrievably lost, exposed or damaged, thereby adversely affecting our business, operating results and financial condition. Estimations of our reserves are based on a number of assumptions, at a specific point in time, including mining and recovery factors, future cash costs of production, exchange rates, and the relevant commodity prices; as a result, metals produced in future may differ from current estimates The mineral reserve estimates in this annual report are estimates of the mill-delivered quantity and grade of metals in our deposits and stockpiles. They represent the amount of metals that we believe can be mined, processed and sold at prices sufficient to recover our estimated future cash costs of production, remaining investment and anticipated additional capital expenditures. Our mineral reserves are estimated based on a number of factors, which have been stated in accordance with the South African Code for the Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves, 2016 edition (“SAMREC, 2016”). For the purposes of this Harmony 2025 Form 20-F, our Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves have been classified in accordance with Item 1302(d)(1)(iii)(A) of Regulation S-K. Calculations of our mineral reserves are based on estimates of: •future cash costs; •future commodity prices; •future currency exchange rates; and •metallurgical and mining recovery rates. These factors, which significantly impact mineral reserve estimates, are beyond our control. As a result, reserve estimates in this annual report should not be interpreted as assurances of the economic life of our gold and other precious metal deposits or the future profitability of operations. Since these mineral reserves are estimates based on assumptions related to factors detailed above at a specific point in time, should there be changes to any of these assumptions, we may in future need to revise these estimates. In particular, if our cash operating and production costs increase or the gold price decreases, recovering a portion of our mineral reserves may become uneconomical. This will lead, in turn, to a reduction in estimated reserves. Any reduction in our mineral reserves estimate could materially adversely affect our business, operating results and financial condition. Our operations have limited proved and probable reserves; exploration for additional resources and reserves is speculative in nature, may be unsuccessful and involves many risks Our operations have limited proved and probable reserves, and exploration and discovery of new resources and reserves are necessary to maintain current gold production levels at these operations. Exploration for gold, other precious metals and copper is speculative in nature, may be unsuccessful and involves risks including those related to: •locating orebodies; •geological nature of the orebodies; •identifying the metallurgical properties of orebodies; •estimating the economic feasibility of mining orebodies; •developing appropriate metallurgical processes; •obtaining necessary governmental permits; and •constructing mining and processing facilities at any site chosen for mining. Our exploration efforts might not result in the discovery of mineralisation, and any mineralisation discovered might not result in an increase in resources or proved and probable reserves. To access additional resources and reserves, we will need to complete development projects successfully, including extensions to existing mines and, possibly, establishing new mines. 14 Table of contents Development projects would also be required to access any new mineralisation discovered by exploration activities around the world. We typically use feasibility studies to determine whether to undertake significant development projects. These studies often require substantial expenditure. Feasibility studies include estimates of expected or anticipated economic returns, which are based on assumptions about: •future gold and other metal prices; •anticipated tonnage, grades and metallurgical characteristics of ore to be mined and processed; •anticipated recovery rates of gold and other metals from the ore; and •anticipated total costs of the project, including capital expenditure and cash costs. All projects are subject to project study risk. There is no certainty or guarantee that a feasibility study, if undertaken, will be successfully concluded or that the project that is the subject of the study will satisfy our economic, technical, risk and other criteria in order to progress that project to development. A failure in our ability to discover new resources and reserves, enhance existing resources and reserves or develop new operations in sufficient quantities to maintain or grow the current level of our resources and reserves could negatively affect our business, operating results and financial condition. We are subject to the risk of litigation, the causes and costs of which are not always known We are subject to litigation, arbitration and other legal proceedings arising in the normal course of business, and we may be involved in disputes that may result in litigation. Potential future litigation may arise from a variety of causes, including among other things, business activities, environmental, health and safety matters, share price volatility, unlawful community protest actions and failure to comply with disclosure obligations. The results of litigation, arbitration and other legal proceedings cannot be predicted with certainty, but could include costly damage awards or settlements, fines, and the loss of licenses, concessions, or rights, among other things. In the event of a dispute, we may be subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of foreign courts or may not be successful in subjecting foreign persons to the jurisdiction of courts in South Africa. An adverse or arbitrary decision of a foreign court could have a material adverse impact on our financial performance, cash flow and results of operations. South Africa We are subject to numerous claims, including class actions or similar group claims relating to silicosis and other occupational health diseases, and could be subject to similar claims in the future. A settlement in the silicosis class action claims has been reached and a provision for silicosis has been made. A provision of R262 million has been recognised at 30 June 2025, for our potential cost to settle the silicosis and TB class actions that have been instituted against us in South Africa. Significant judgment was applied in estimating the costs that will be incurred to settle the silicosis class action claims and related expenditure and the final costs may differ from current cost estimates. Management believes the assumptions are appropriate, however changes in the assumptions may materially affect the provision and final costs of settlement. There can be no assurance that the ultimate resolution of this matter will not result in losses in excess of the recorded provision and the ultimate settlement may have a material adverse effect on our financial position. For further information, see Item 8: “Financial Information – Consolidated Statements and Other Financial Information – Legal Proceedings” and “Integrated Annual Report for the 20-F 2025 – Social stewardship – Holistic health and wellness” on pages 141 to 153 for further information. See note 25 “Other Provisions – Provision for silicosis settlement” to our consolidated financial statements set forth beginning on page F-1. It is possible that additional class actions and/or individual claims relating to silicosis and/or other occupational health diseases will be filed against us in the future. We will defend all and any subsequent claims as filed on their merits. Should we be unsuccessful in defending any such claims, or in otherwise favourably resolving perceived deficiencies in the national occupational disease compensation framework that were identified in the earlier decision by the Constitutional Court, such matters would have an adverse effect on our financial position, which could be material. Papua New Guinea In PNG, it is proposed to utilise deep sea tailings placement (“DSTP”) as the tailings management method for the Wafi- Golpu Project, which method is authorised under the environment permit issued for the project. However, the grant of the permit is currently the subject of two judicial review proceedings against the State of PNG, the first of which was instituted in March 2021 by a previous Governor of the Morobe Province in PNG who was opposed to DSTP and the second of which was instituted in December 2022 by Huon Gulf coastal villagers represented by the Centre for Environmental Law and Community Rights Inc. ("CELCOR"). With regard to the proceedings instituted in March 2021, the Governor who succeeded the instituting Governor in September 2022 was not opposed to DSTP and stated publicly his intention to withdraw the proceedings instituted by his predecessor. As at 30 June 2025, he had not yet done so. The Governor passed away in September 2025 and, to the time of filing of this report, the proceedings have not been withdrawn. With regard to the proceedings instituted in December 2022, the matter went to substantive hearing on 12 June 2025 and, as at 27 October 2025, a ruling has not been made. In addition to the judicial reviews, Harmony Gold (Australia) Pty Ltd ("HGA") and Newcrest Mining Limited (“Newcrest”), a subsidiary of Newmont Corporation (“Newmont”), have been the subject of an Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development ("OECD") complaint lodged in November 2022 by Huon Gulf coastal villagers represented by CELCOR alleging the breach (particularly regarding the plans to utilise DSTP) of various human rights and environmental requirements set out in the Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises 2011 published by the OECD. 15 Table of contents Irrespective of the outcome of the CELCOR judicial review, it is possible that a class action or individual claim relating to DSTP may be filed against us in the future, which (if successful) could have a material adverse impact on the Wafi-Golpu Project. Should we be unable to resolve disputes favourably or to enforce our rights, this may have a material adverse impact on our financial performance, cash flow and results of operations. The risk of unforeseen difficulties, delays or costs in implementing our business strategy and projects may lead to us not delivering the anticipated benefits of our strategy and projects; in addition, actual cash costs, capital expenditure, production and economic returns may differ significantly from those anticipated by feasibility studies for new development projects The successful implementation of our business strategy and projects depends upon many factors, including those outside our control. For example, the successful management of costs will depend on prevailing market prices for input costs. The ability to grow our business will depend on the successful implementation of our existing and proposed projects and continued exploration success, as well as on the availability of attractive acquisition opportunities, all of which are subject to the relevant mining and company specific risks as outlined in these risk factors. It can take a number of years from the initial feasibility study until development/construction of a project is completed and, during that time, the economic feasibility of production may change. In addition, there are a number of inherent uncertainties in project development and construction including: •the time to secure and provisions of necessary governmental and third party permits, licenses and permissions; •timing and cost of constructing mining and processing facilities; •availability and cost of skilled labour, power, water, fuel, mining equipment and other materials; •accessibility of transportation and other infrastructure, particularly in remote locations; •availability and cost of smelting and refining arrangements; •availability of funds to finance construction and development activities; and •spot and expected future commodity prices of metals including gold, silver, copper, uranium and molybdenum. All of these factors, and others, could result in our actual cash costs, capital expenditures, production and economic returns differing materially from those anticipated by feasibility studies. In order to maintain or expand our operations and reserve base, we have sought, and may continue to seek to enter into joint ventures or other alliance arrangements with third parties and make acquisitions of primarily gold and copper producing companies or assets. See “– Risks Related to Our Corporate and Financing Structure and Strategy – We may experience problems in identifying, financing and managing new acquisitions or other business combination transactions and integrating them with our existing operations, we may not have full management control over future joint venture projects”. However, there is no assurance that any future development projects will extend the life of our existing mining operations or result in any new commercial mining operations. Unforeseen difficulties, delays or costs may adversely affect the successful implementation of our business strategy and projects, and such strategy and projects may not result in the anticipated benefits, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial condition and prospects. Certain of our operations are dependent on trackless mobile machinery (“TMM”), which exposes us to interruptions, delays, and increased operational risk Specific operations face elevated risks associated with the reliability and availability of TMM, which is critical to mechanised mining and project execution. Adverse underground conditions, supply chain constraints, and skills shortages contribute to equipment downtime and operational inefficiencies. These challenges pose potential threats to production continuity, cost control, and the timely delivery of capital projects. Our recent appointment of a new independent registered public accounting firm could result in additional costs, which could adversely impact our business. We recently appointed Ernst & Young Inc. ("EY") as our independent registered public accounting firm, replacing PricewaterhouseCoopers Inc. ("PwC"). The transition to a new auditor involves inherent risks and costs, including transition and onboarding costs in the form of additional audit fees and management time required during the initial phase. Due to the complexity of our environment, this could take several years, as the new auditor establishes an understanding of our operations, systems, and accounting processes. While we do not anticipate that the auditor transition will result in changes to our previously reported financial results, the transition process may temporarily increase costs and resource demands on our teams involved in the external audit. 16 Table of contents Risks Related to ESG We may fail to meet ESG performance expectations and targets, which could result in reputational damage, loss of stakeholder confidence, and material adverse effects on our business and access to capital Harmony operates in an environment of increasing scrutiny regarding ESG performance from multiple stakeholder groups, including investors, lenders, local communities, regulatory authorities, non-governmental organisations ("NGOs"), and other parties. These stakeholders are increasingly focused on climate-related risks, governance practices, and the environmental and social impacts of mining operations and investments. Investment capital allocation decisions, lending decisions, and stakeholder engagement are increasingly driven by assessments of ESG performance, particularly regarding the safe operation of mines, mitigation of local environmental and community impacts, reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, ethical standards, workplace culture, human rights protections, regulatory compliance, and supply chain credibility. Risks related to ESG performance expectations Failure to meet internally or externally adopted ESG standards, or to satisfy stakeholder expectations regardless of legal obligation, could result in significant reputational damage, loss of social license to operate, litigation, and constrained access to capital from investors and lenders who may reallocate or decline to commit capital based on their assessment of our ESG practices. Additionally, certain financial institutions from whom we borrow may require compliance with internationally- recognised environmental, health, safety and social standards and benchmarks, and deviation from such standards could adversely affect our existing financing arrangements and ability to secure future financing. Such requirements could impose substantial compliance costs on our operations. Beyond local regulatory compliance, our operations are subject to increasingly stringent internationally-recognised standards and benchmarks, whether adopted by jurisdictions in which we operate or expected by stakeholders. For example, companies registered in OECD-member countries are subject to OECD complaint processes regarding alleged breaches of the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises occurring anywhere in the world. In November 2022, HGA and Newcrest (in relation to their participation in the Wafi-Golpu Joint Venture) were the subject of an OECD Specific Instance complaint lodged with the OECD National Contact Point in Australia, alleging breaches regarding human rights and environmental requirements, particularly concerning plans to utilise DSTP. On 29 August 2025, the OECD Examiner published its report, finding that certain activities appeared not to align with the OECD Guidelines in some areas and making a number of recommendations. Although compliance with such recommendations is voluntary, adverse findings carry reputational risk and may signal to stakeholders and financiers areas requiring remediation. Risks related to meeting ESG targets Harmony has published quantitative targets and metrics relating to ESG aspects including greenhouse gas emissions, energy use, and water management, which are subject to regular public reporting and external scrutiny. Our ability to meet these targets is dependent on our own operational actions, the regulatory policy frameworks and actions of governments in countries where we operate, clear and timely regulatory guidance to support achievement of targets, and actions of participants in our value chain and the broader society. Unforeseen factors beyond our control, including changes in regulatory regimes, unavailability of requisite technologies, economic constraints, supply chain disruptions, or slower-than-anticipated societal transitions, could impede our progress toward these targets. Failure to meet published ESG targets could result in material adverse effects on our business, operating results, and financial condition. Additionally, such failure could expose us to reputational damage, litigation risk from stakeholders, and loss of investor confidence, potentially affecting our share price and ability to access capital markets. Compounding risks from political and social controversy ESG practices, particularly regarding inclusion, diversity and equity ("ID&E"), have become increasingly subject to political controversy in the United States in recent years. Our policies and practices regarding ID&E and other ESG-related matters, including previously established goals and initiatives and any disclosures mandated by non-US laws, may expose us to legal and reputational risks, including anti-ESG and anti-ID&E-related orders, investigations, legislation, litigation, media scrutiny, boycotts, and negative publicity from investors, employees, customers, and other stakeholders. Jurisdictional differences and evolving regulatory landscapes create conflicting expectations from various stakeholder groups—including governments, NGOs, investors, customers, employees, and other third parties. The Company may be unable to satisfy the divergent or conflicting expectations of all stakeholders regarding ESG matters, ID&E initiatives, and other ESG- related aspects of our business, which could result in reputational damage and business disruption. Cumulative impact The cumulative effect of these interconnected ESG risks comprising of stakeholder expectations, regulatory developments, published targets, and political controversy could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, operating results, share price, access to capital, social license to operate, stakeholder relationships, and overall business resilience. We may be required to implement increasingly stringent ESG practices and standards to meet evolving stakeholder expectations and regulatory requirements, with associated compliance costs, management attention, and operational complexity. Failure to effectively navigate these multifaceted ESG challenges could adversely impact our reputation, brand image, ability to attract and retain capital and talent, and long-term business sustainability. 17 Table of contents Climate change may present physical and transition risks that could materially and adversely affect our operations, profitability, and long-term sustainability Climate change is widely regarded as one of the most severe global threats, with environmental risks like extreme weather and climate action failure dominating global risk outlooks across all timeframes. Climate change presents both physical and transitional risks to our operations, supply chain, and long-term financial performance. Physical climate risks are predicted to increase in frequency and intensity, posing growing threats to our mining operations and infrastructure. These risks include altered rainfall patterns and disruption to the water cycle, rising sea levels, water scarcity, higher temperatures, and more frequent extreme weather events such as fires, floods, droughts, and higher intensity storm events. Climate change intensifies floods and droughts by disrupting precipitation patterns, creating compound risks of both water scarcity and flooding damage. These events can damage critical infrastructure, disrupt mining, transport, mineral processing, and rehabilitation activities, strain energy and water resources, potentially halt production, and elevate health and safety risks with potential consequences for our workforce, nearby communities, and operational continuity. Transition risks arise from evolving climate policies, carbon pricing mechanisms, regulatory requirements, and stakeholder expectations. These include potential carbon taxes, mandatory climate disclosure requirements, emissions reduction targets, and shifting market dynamics as governments and investors accelerate decarbonisation efforts. Such measures may result in increased compliance costs, capital expenditure requirements for emissions reduction technologies, changes to our operating licenses or permits, pressure to accelerate our decarbonisation pathway, and potential impacts on the competitiveness of carbon-intensive operations. Failure to adequately respond to these transition risks could affect our access to capital, stakeholder relations, regulatory standing, and social license to operate. Together, these physical and transition risks could materially impact our operations, profitability, sustainability, and long- term resilience. Our ability to manage these interconnected climate risks will be critical to maintaining operational continuity, meeting stakeholder expectations, and ensuring the sustainability of our business model in a carbon-constrained economy. We are subject to extensive environmental regulations in the countries in which we operate, and compliance costs, regulatory changes, and potential non-compliance could have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and financial condition As a mining company, we are required to follow strict environmental regulations covering pollution prevention, water management, waste disposal, biodiversity conservation, occupational health and safety, management of toxic substances and mine closure. We expect compliance costs relating to environmental regulation to continue rising in South Africa, Australia and PNG. In addition, stakeholders increasingly pressure us to improve energy efficiency, reduce our carbon footprint, use resources responsibly and be transparent about managing climate-related risks and opportunities. South Africa In South Africa, our operations are governed by the MPRDA, the NEMA and numerous other environmental laws and regulations that are regularly updated, amended and supplemented, imposing additional and changing obligations on mining companies. See Item 4: "Information on the Company – Business Overview – Regulation – Laws and Regulations Pertaining to Environmental Protection - South Africa" for detailed discussion of the regulatory framework. Financial Provision and Rehabilitation Liabilities Under South African law, mining right holders remain responsible for environmental liabilities, pollution, ecological degradation, water treatment and sustainable mine closure until the DMPR issues a closure certificate, and under NEMA this responsibility may continue indefinitely even after closure certification. We are required to annually assess environmental liabilities and provide financial security for rehabilitation, closure and post-decommissioning management. The Financial Provision Regulations, 2015 impose significantly more stringent obligations than previous guidelines, including mandatory inclusion of preliminary costs, imposition of VAT at 15%, prohibition on withdrawal of trust funds for concurrent rehabilitation, and ceding of funds to the Minister for latent liabilities. While the compliance deadline for existing rights has been indefinitely delayed pending new regulations, the ultimate requirements remain uncertain. There are concerns about the ambiguity of current and proposed provisions, which may result in misinterpretation, mis-application and disputes with the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and Environment (the "DFFE"), any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and financial condition. Under the National Environmental Management Laws Amendment Act, 2 of 2022 ("NEMLAA"), financial provision retained by the Minister must be transferred to government-controlled accounts. We will not control how these funds are used but will remain liable for environmental impacts. If anticipated liabilities do not materialize, there is no mechanism for recovering the funds, creating potential for permanent loss of capital. Proposed amendments to the MPRDA and NEMA seek to bring pre-2004 processing residue stockpiles and deposits within the regulatory framework, which may require us to provide substantial additional financial provision for rehabilitation of these facilities. We may also face increased environmental costs if neighbouring mines fail to meet their water management obligations. The adoption of additional or more stringent requirements, particularly for hazardous waste management, groundwater protection and rehabilitation of closed mines, may result in material additional costs and liabilities. 18 Table of contents Climate Change Legislation The Climate Change Act 22 of 2024 (the "Climate Change Act") came into effect on 17 March 2025, though many key provisions remain deferred pending development of enabling regulations. The Climate Change Act confirms that sectoral emissions targets ("SETs") will be established for GHG emitting sectors and will become more stringent over time through five- year review cycles. Large emitters will be allocated carbon budgets limiting permissible GHG emissions and must submit and implement GHG mitigation plans. Failure to comply with allocated carbon budgets will require remedial action and may result in penalties. A particular concern is that government agencies must review and may amend existing administrative decisions—including environmental authorisations, atmospheric emissions licenses, and mining rights—to ensure climate change risks are considered and to give effect to the Climate Change Act's objectives. Before amending such approvals, authorities must provide notice and opportunity for representations, but the Climate Change Act provides grounds for material changes to existing operational approvals. Third parties such as NGOs may seek to compel these reviews. The proposed amendments to existing approvals may have material implications on our business and operations and may create significant investment uncertainty. Permitting and Appeals Delays The National Appeal Regulations, 2025 introduced a new category of complex appeals under NEMA and related environmental laws. The regulations allow appeal administrators to appoint advisory appeal panels without specifying timeframes, creating potential for appeals to remain unresolved for extended periods. These delays may hinder project timelines, prolong permitting uncertainty and increase operational and compliance risks, which could materially impact our ability to execute projects as planned, delay investment decisions and adversely affect our business, operating results and financial condition. Tailings management For discussion of TSF-specific environmental and safety regulations, see "— Compliance with tailings management requirements and standards, and potential liabilities in the event of a failure to timely comply or an incident involving a TSF, could adversely impact our financial condition, our operational results and our reputation." Australia In Queensland, our Eva Copper Project operations are subject to the Environmental Protection Act 1994 (Qld) (the "Queensland EP Act") and Environmental Protection Regulations 2019 governing Environmental Authorities ("EAs") for environmentally relevant activities ("ERAs"), the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 ("EPBC Act") protecting matters of national environmental significance ("MNES"), and the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Act 2007 ("NGER Act") establishing mandatory GHG and energy reporting frameworks. See Item 4: "Information on the Company – Business Overview – Regulation – Laws and Regulations Pertaining to Environmental Protection – Australia" for detailed discussion of the regulatory framework. The Eva Copper Project currently holds an EA and is pursuing further amendments expected to conclude in 2026. While self-assessments indicate the project is unlikely to significantly impact MNES under the EPBC Act, the risk of not having obtained Commonwealth approval cannot be entirely eliminated. Future project changes may require EPBC Act referrals, creating potential approval delays or conditions. The NGER Act requires facilities exceeding specified thresholds to register and report annually on GHG emissions, energy production and consumption. Non-compliance risks include enforcement action by the Clean Energy Regulator, civil penalties, public enforcement notices, audit findings, regulator scrutiny and reputational damage from inaccurate or incomplete public reporting. The Safeguard Mechanism applies additional obligations to facilities with scope 1 emissions exceeding 100,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent ("CO2-e") annually, requiring emissions to remain within declining baselines consistent with Australia's net zero trajectory (43% below 2005 levels by 2030, 62-70% by 2035, net zero by 2050). The Eva Copper Project's predicted emissions may trigger Safeguard Mechanism obligations, potentially requiring emission reduction measures or purchase of carbon credits. Under the Queensland EP Act and the Mineral and Energy Resources (Financial Provisioning) Act 2018 (the "MERFP Act"), we cannot conduct resource activities unless an Estimated Rehabilitation Cost ("ERC") decision is in effect and we have provided financial security through contributions to the scheme fund or sureties. Revised ERC applications must be prepared and approved before commencing further construction and mining activities, creating potential for delays or increased financial provision requirements as the project advances. Sustainability-related disclosures and claims are subject to prohibitions against misleading and deceptive conduct under the Australian Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) ("Corporations Act") and the Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act 2001 (Cth). The Australian Securities and Investments Commission ("ASIC") expects sustainability claims to be factually accurate, based on reasonable grounds, supported by verifiable evidence, and reflective of actual practices. Misleading claims may expose us and our officers to enforcement action, reputational damage and stakeholder litigation. We are also subject to the Australian Sustainability Reporting Standards effective as of January 2025—see "— Compliance with emerging climate change regulations could result in significant costs for us - Australia." Papua New Guinea Our PNG operations are subject to the PNG Environment Act 2000 ("PNG Environment Act") and related regulations governing discharges and requiring Environment Permits ("EPs") for prescribed activities. An Environmental Impact Statement ("EIS") is required for activities likely to have significant adverse environmental impact, and the Environment Minister's approval in principle is required before the Conservation and Environment Protection Authority ("CEPA") may grant a Level 3 EP. 19 Table of contents The Wafi-Golpu Project received its EP on 18 December 2020, including conditions relating to DSTP. Should we breach any obligations under our EP or the PNG Environment Act, our EP could be suspended or cancelled, or we could be subject to fines or other sanctions, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition. PNG is undertaking a comprehensive mining regime review that includes development of a Biodiversity Offsets Policy (anticipating mandatory biodiversity offset payments) and a National Oceans Policy. These policy developments and potential legislative changes create uncertainty regarding future compliance requirements and costs. See Item 4: "Information on the Company – Business Overview – Regulation – Laws and Regulations pertaining to Environmental Protection – Papua New Guinea" for detailed discussion of the regulatory framework. General Compliance with existing or new environmental legislation, which increases the burden of compliance or the penalties for non-compliance, may cause us to incur significant costs. Failure to comply with environmental legislation and the conditions of our mining rights in any jurisdiction in which we operate may result in fines, penalties, reputational damage, loss of existing mining rights, or inability to acquire new rights to mine, each potentially having a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and financial condition. The socio-economic landscape in the regions in which we operate may have an adverse effect on our operations and profits We have operations in South Africa, Australia and PNG. As a result, changes to or instability in the social, economic or political environment in any of these countries or in countries proximate to them could affect an investment in us. Without limitation, political risks may include the following: political instability and terrorism; nationalisation and resource nationalism; change in legislative, regulatory or fiscal frameworks; renegotiation or nullification of existing contracts, leases, permits or other agreements; restrictions on repatriation of earnings or capital; changes in laws and policy; and socio-economic risks including civil unrest and criminality. The impact of future long-term health related issues may heighten social tensions and demands, as individuals look to the mining industry for job creation opportunities and other resources and benefits. The African National Congress (“ANC”) has been the governing party in South Africa since 1994. After a national election in 2024, the ANC was unable to secure an outright majority for the first time and entered into a coalition government with various other national parties. This coalition government creates increased policy uncertainty and potential for political instability, which could adversely impact the socio-economic framework in South Africa and thus on our operating results and financial condition. Changes in the political landscape may result in shifts in mining policy, taxation, labour regulation, or other legislative and regulatory frameworks affecting our operations. In Papua New Guinea, the government of Prime Minister James Marape has advocated a policy of "Take Back PNG" since 2019, intended to increase the PNG Government’s share of the proceeds from mining, enhance landholder and provincial government equity participation in mining projects and promote direct involvement in mining and exploration by PNG Government-owned enterprises. This policy has witnessed the presentation of various proposed revisions to the mining regime which (if introduced and applied to our operations and projects) would have a materially adverse impact. In 2025, PNG experienced political volatility in the form of motions of no-confidence against the Prime Minister, however these leadership challenges failed and PNG parliamentary rules prescribe no further such motions are permissible until after the next election. Localised unrest and breakdowns of law and order, economic challenges and shortages of foreign currency are ongoing. It is difficult to predict the future political, social and economic environment in these countries, or any other country in which we operate save to state that any social, economic or political changes or instability may directly impact Harmony, adversely affecting the general business environment and our business, results of operations and financial condition. For discussion of restrictions on movement of funds and capital deployment, see "— Our financial flexibility could be constrained by the Exchange Control Regulations of the countries in which we operate". Given the nature of mining and the type of mines we operate, we face a material risk of liability, delays and increased cash costs of production from environmental and industrial accidents and pollution compliance breaches The business of gold mining involves significant risks and hazards, including environmental hazards and industrial accidents. In particular, hazards associated with underground mining include: •rock bursts; •seismic events; •underground fires; •cave-ins or fall-of-ground; •discharges of gases and toxic chemicals; •release of radioactive hazards; •flooding or droughts; •mining of pillars (integrity of shaft support structures may be compromised and cause increased seismicity); •processing plant fire and explosion; •critical equipment failures; •inability to access methane filled shafts for rehabilitation; 20 Table of contents •accidents and loss-of-life incidents; and •other conditions resulting from drilling, blasting and the removal and processing of material from a deep-level mine. Hazards associated with opencast mining (also known as open-pit mining) include: •flooding of the open-pit; •collapse of open-pit walls or slope failures; •processing plant fire and explosion; •accidents associated with operating large open-pit and rock transportation equipment; •accidents associated with preparing and igniting of large-scale open-pit blasting operations; and •major equipment failures. Hazards associated with construction and operation of waste rock dumps and TSFs include: •accidents associated with operating a waste dump and rock transportation; •production disruptions caused by natural phenomena, such as floods and droughts and weather conditions, potentially exacerbated by climate change; • dam, wall or slope failures; and •contamination of ground or surface water. We are at risk from any or all of these environmental and industrial hazards. In addition, the nature of our mining operations presents safety risks. Our operations are subject to health and safety regulations, which could impose additional costs and compliance requirements. We may face claims and liability for breaches, or alleged breaches, of such regulations and other applicable laws. Any legislative changes relating to financial provision could add to the costs. The occurrence of any of these events could disrupt production, increase cash costs and, individually or in the aggregate, have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and our financial condition. Mining companies are increasingly expected to provide benefits to affected communities; failure to comply with, and/or go beyond, our legal obligations could result in lawsuits, additional operational costs, investor divestment and impact our “social license to operate”, which could adversely impact our business, operating results and financial condition: we are finding increasing expectations on our business to provide social investment beyond our legal obligations, especially as communities demand services and basic infrastructure from companies such as Harmony (where gaps in local government services are perceived or experienced) As a result of public concern about the perceived ill effects of economic globalisation, businesses in general and large international companies such as our company, in particular, face increasing public scrutiny of their activities. Like other mining companies, we are under pressure to demonstrate that while we seek a satisfactory return on investment for shareholders, other stakeholders including employees, contractors, regulators, communities surrounding the operations and the countries in which we operate, also seek to benefit from our commercial activities. Such pressures tend to be particularly focused on companies whose activities are perceived to generate significant revenues and/or have a high impact on the social and physical environment. Stakeholder pressure takes many forms, including the loss of license to operate, lawsuits and investor withdrawal. The potential consequences of these pressures include reputational damage and increased social spending obligations. There is also increasing action by members of the general financial and investment communities, such as asset managers, sovereign wealth funds, public pension funds, universities and other groups, to promote improvements in ESG performance by us and others. Existing and proposed mining operations are often located at or near existing towns and villages and other infrastructure, or natural water courses. The impacts of dust generation, waste storage, water quality or shortages may be immediate and directly adverse to those communities; poor environmental management practices, in particular, adverse changes in the supply or quality of water can result in community protest, regulatory sanctions or ultimately in the withdrawal of community and government support. While mining operations are intended to be designed to mitigate the impact on such communities and the environment, there can be no assurance that they will do so, and the occurrence of any of these events could disrupt production, increase cash costs and, individually or in the aggregate, have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and our financial condition. Australia Mining in Australia is subject to the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) (the “Native Title Act”). Any "future act" on land or waters that will affect native title rights and cultural heritage interests is subject to native title processes intended to protect such rights and interests through a right to negotiate enabling affected parties to reach agreement on the terms of consent concerning the proposed future acts, including monetary compensation, employment and training, contracting opportunities and cultural heritage. These arrangements are captured in Indigenous Land Use Agreements, which are then registered with the National Native Title Tribunal. Changes to native title legislation, evolving interpretations of native title rights, or failure to maintain positive relationships with native title holders could result in challenges to our agreements, delays in obtaining necessary consents for future mining activities, increased costs, or restrictions on our ability to conduct operations. 21 Table of contents Papua New Guinea There is no native title or similar regime in place in PNG, however the majority of land is held under customary ownership. We are required under the PNG Mining Act and PNG Environment Act to pay landholders compensation for any loss or damage sustained by them arising from our exploration or mining activities. In certain prescribed instances, the quantum of these payments is regulated, but otherwise is negotiated (with determination by a mine warden in the event of disagreement). In addition, it is practice under the PNG mining regime for mining lease and special mining lease holders to enter into a negotiated Memorandum of Agreement (“MOA"), and also referred to as a Community Development Agreement ("CDA") with the PNG Government, the affected provincial and local level governments, the affected landholder(s) and other stakeholder organisations regarding the sharing of benefits derived from the mining operations. These shared benefits generally include a participation in royalties payable by the tenement holders to the PNG Government but may further extend to local infrastructure projects and other social performance objectives. Disruptions to operations or delays in projects attributable to a lack of community support or community actions can translate directly into a loss of production and increase in operational costs, a decrease in the value of a project or an inability to bring a project to, or maintain, production. For example, our PNG operations have on occasion been disrupted by the blockading of access routes by landholders and occupants of the land the subject of such operations. These disruptions arise from a range of operational and non-operational grievances, including non-distribution by the PNG Government to local communities of mine- derived royalties and other benefits, inter-community land ownership disputes, unhappiness with local or regional infrastructure or services delivery, and local business rivalries regarding the provision of goods and services to the operations. The cost of implementing measures to support sustainable development could increase capital expenditure and operating costs and therefore adversely impact our reputation, business, operational results and financial condition. See "Integrated Annual Report for the 20-F 2025 – Social stewardship – Empowering communities" on pages 166 to 173 and "Harmony – Stakeholder engagement” on pages 29 to 34. Compliance with emerging climate change regulations could result in significant costs for us Growing global recognition of the GHG emissions play in climate change has driven governments to introduce regulations requiring companies to disclose and reduce their emissions. Non-compliance increasingly carries financial penalties, carbon taxes, and reputational consequences. The introduction of IFRS S2 adds further complexity, requiring transparent reporting of material climate risks, opportunities, and Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions, all of which may increase our compliance burden and operational costs. Reporting GHG Emissions In South Africa, the National Greenhouse Gas Emission Reporting Regulations require entities to register any operations that involve fuel combustion activities related to mining and quarrying that exceed a thermal capacity of 10MW, along with certain other listed activities. We must report GHG emissions and activity data annually for relevant operations by 31 March of each year in line with the Technical Guidelines for Monitoring, Reporting and Verification of Greenhouse Gas Emissions by Industry ("Technical Guidelines") which align with the methodologies from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (“IPCC”). These Technical Guidelines support the South African National Greenhouse Gas Regulations issued under National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act, 39 of 2004 ("NEMAQA") and outline the reporting methodology specified in the Air Quality Act. In Papua New Guinea, there is currently no mandatory national GHG reporting framework. In Australia, we are not currently required to report under the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting (NGER) Scheme, but future obligations are expected as our operations expand, particularly with the Eva Copper Project and the CSA mine that forms part of our acquisition of MAC Copper Limited ("MAC"). Once thresholds are met, annual reporting of GHG emissions and energy use will be required in line with the NGER Act and IPCC methodologies. GHG Emissions Reductions Our operations generate GHG emissions both directly (Scope 1), through on-site fuel combustion and industrial processes, and indirectly (Scope 2) through the consumption of electricity from external utilities. While Scope 2 emissions are classified as indirect, they remain within our operational control through decisions around energy sourcing, efficiency, and supplier engagement and consequently are still attributable to our operations. In contrast, Scope 3 emissions which arise from activities across our value chain such as transportation, procurement, and downstream processing are largely outside our direct control but still represent a significant portion of our total emissions footprint. South Africa, Australia and PNG have ratified key international climate agreements, including the Paris Agreement, adopted at the UN Climate Conference in December 2015. Under this treaty, member countries must outline how and when they plan to reduce GHG emissions through nationally determined contributions ("NDC") tailored to their national circumstances: •South Africa’s NDC aims for GHG emissions to peak between 2020 and 2025, plateau from 2025 to 2035 and thereafter decline from 2036 onwards. •South Africa’s published a draft updated NDC in 2025 which introduces a new range of 320–380 MtCO₂e. The draft supports a just transition to net zero CO₂ emissions by 2050, with plans for 36 GW of renewable energy by 2035, green industrialisation, and structural economic transformation. •Australia has committed to reaching net zero emissions by 2050 and, in 2022,set a 2030 target to reduce emissions by 43% from 2005 levels. In September 2025, Australia announced a further target of 62-70% below 2005 levels by 2035. 22 Table of contents •PNG’s GHG emissions have historically been minimal. However, its NDC contemplates that economic growth will increase fuel use. PNG plans to cut fossil fuel emissions in the electricity sector and transition to 100% renewable energy by 2030, subject to procuring necessary funding. To achieve its commitments, the South African Government is implementing legislation aimed at achieving a lower carbon economy. These measures include the Carbon Tax Act, 15 of 2019 (the “Carbon Tax Act”) and the Climate Change Act. In terms of the Carbon Tax Act, any entity conducting activities in South Africa that produce GHG emissions above defined thresholds is liable for carbon tax. The tax rate is currently R309 per tonne of GHG emissions generated by burning fossil fuels, unintentionally emitting GHGs during the extraction, processing, delivery and burning of fossil fuels for energy production, including from industrial plant and pipelines, and conducting manufacturing processes that chemically and physically transform materials. Authorities determine taxable GHG emissions by multiplying the relevant GHG emission factor (set out in Schedule 1 of the Carbon Tax Act) by the quantity of fuel combusted or raw material used or produced, expressed in tonnes of CO2-equivalent. The statutory carbon tax rate increases annually in accordance with the annual tax rates published in the Taxation Laws Amendment Act, 2022 to reach R462 in 2030. The Climate Change Act, key provisions of which have yet to come into force, will impose “carbon budgets” on entities incertain high-emitting industries, such as mining. The carbon budgets are intended to operate as statutory limits for CO2 emissions. It is expected that the Carbon Tax Act will be aligned with the Climate Change Act, through higher rates of carbon tax in respect of emissions exceeding the applicable carbon budget. Moreover, it is unclear to what extent we will be able to make use of allowances that are currently embedded in the carbon tax framework under the Carbon Tax Act. To reduce the significant tax burden calculated by multiplying total GHG by R308, the Carbon Tax Act currently allows for various “allowances” that can reduce the payable carbon tax by up to 95%. These include: • allowance for fossil fuel combustion; •allowance for industrial process emissions; •allowance in respect of fugitive emissions; •a trade exposure allowance; •a performance allowance; •a carbon budget allowance; and •an offset allowance. These allowances will likely be reduced over time. These allowances currently reduce the effective carbon tax rate to between R10 and R76 per tonne of GHG. Pursuant to section 19 of the Carbon Tax Act, the South African Minister of Finance ("Minister of Finance") must make regulations regarding: the sub sector GHG emissions intensity benchmark required in order to calculate the performance allowance, the manner in which the trade exposure allowance must be determined and carbon offsets which have all now been promulgated. The South African National Treasury published amendments to the National Greenhouse Gas Emission Reporting Regulations in May 2024, extending the eligibility of carbon of offset projects to 31 December 2025, to align with the Phase 1 carbon tax period extension and confirming that companies can continue to use carbon credits issued by these projects to reduce their carbon tax liability We have provisionally estimated our carbon tax liability to 2030 and beyond. However, the full impact of the Carbon Tax Act remains uncertain. Internally, we have aligned our South African carbon price with the official tax rate. In the short term we may face pass-through costs from suppliers due to increased fuel prices. Alongside the carbon tax, a carbon fuel levy was introduced under the Customs and Excise Act 91 of 1964 ("Customs and Excise Tax"), as part of the national fuel levy regime. The carbon tax on liquid fuels is applied at the fuel source and is expected to raise fuel prices by R0.10/liter for petrol and R0.09/liter for diesel, which will increase our operational expenses. Until 31 December 2025, the carbon tax will remain a relatively low cost. However, we expect the allowances to be reduced and the tax rates to increase thereafter. It is also anticipated that carbon taxes will apply to electricity generated from fossil fuels. The cost impact of carbon tax on electricity usage could range from R100m to R600m from 2026 to 2030. Although these rates as well as the longer-term assumptions have been built into our business plans, with a 300% absolute increase in the price of carbon over the next five years, we believe it will put significant pressure on our business. Electricity-related GHG emissions represent our largest emission source. Electricity accounts for approximately 15% of our cash costs in South Africa. While cost management is clearly a strategic issue for us, the delivery of a stable and reliable energy supply is even more critical due to its direct impact on both production and health and safety. Additional energy taxes and regulations (such as emission measurement and reduction, audit processes and human resource costs) will significantly affect our operations. We have initiated several renewable energy projects to supplement our energy supply needs and reduce our reliance on electricity supplied by Eskom which is predominantly generated by coal-fired power stations. As stated above, it is anticipated that numerous regulations will be promulgated in terms of the Climate Change Act. However, the broad scope and evolving nature of South Africa’s climate policy make it difficult to assess their full impact. Such regulatory initiatives and related costs could have a material adverse effect on the business, operating results and financial condition. 23 Table of contents Climate Change legislation and policy South Africa As mentioned above, the Carbon Tax Act and Climate Change Act are the primary statutes regulating GHG emissions reduction and climate change resilience. Certain jurisdictions (like the EU) plan to implement carbon border adjustment mechanisms ("CBAMs"), effectively import levies based on the embedded GHG emissions on goods imported into their territory. Currently, this does not apply to precious metals. However, these carbon border taxes could be extended to other products (including precious metals) in the future. While the taxes would be imposed on the importer and may be reduced to reflect carbon taxes already paid in South Africa, they could nevertheless impact our competitiveness in these markets and may impose reporting and disclosure obligations regarding GHG emissions generated in producing products. We continue to monitor both the jurisdictions imposing CBAMs as well as the industries to which they apply. Australia In 2022, Australia passed the Climate Change Act 2022 (Cth) which enacts the 2030 and 2050 emission reduction targets in legislation. The Australian government has also progressed reforms in a number of sectors to align with its climate targets, including amendments to the Safeguard Mechanism through the Safeguard Mechanism (Crediting) Amendment Act 2023 (Cth), the primary tool to limit emissions from large emitting facilities. See “– We are subject to extensive environmental regulations in the countries in which we operate, and compliance costs, regulatory changes, and potential non-compliance could have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and financial condition – Australia”. The Treasury Laws Amendment (Financial Market Infrastructure and Other Measures) Act 2024 (Cth) introduced a mandatory annual sustainability report for certain entities, to be prepared alongside financial reports under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth). The sustainability report must comply with the Australian Sustainability Reporting Standard AASB S2 Climate-related Disclosures, which is substantially aligned with the IFRS S2 standard. These disclosures include governance, strategy, risk management, and metrics and targets related to climate-related risks and opportunities. The sustainability report is subject to phased assurance requirements, transitioning from limited to reasonable assurance over a four-year period, as outlined in the Auditing and Assurance Standards Board standards ASSA 5000 and ASSA 5010. The report must be lodged with ASIC and include a directors' declaration, with disclosures made on a factual and good-faith basis. Materially inaccurate or unsubstantiated reporting and other external disclosures may expose the company and its officers to regulatory action under Australian law, including enforcement by ASIC. The NGER Act establishes a mandatory framework for reporting GHG emissions, energy production and energy consumption in Australia. Thresholds apply at facility-level and corporate group level. Facilities or controlling corporations that exceed specified thresholds must register and report annually to the Australian Clean Energy Regulator. These disclosures underpin Australia's climate policy, international reporting obligations, and the Safeguard Mechanism, which imposes emissions limits on large facilities. Key risks associated with non-compliance with the NGER Act include enforcement action by the Australian Clean Energy Regulator, civil penalties (including fines and public enforcement notices), adverse audit findings and regulator scrutiny and reputational risk associated with inaccurate or incomplete reporting noting that NGER data is publicly disclosed if above the publication threshold (currently 50,000 tCO2-e). Such regulatory initiatives and related costs, while they are not expected to have significant impact in the near term, could have a material adverse effect on the business, operating results and financial condition in the future. Papua New Guinea In PNG, the PNG Climate Change (Management) Act 2015 provides the regulatory framework with respect to climate change in PNG, and establishes PNG’s Climate Change and Development Authority as the coordinating entity for climate change related policies and actions across PNG and the designated National Authority under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. Implementation actions under this policy to date have been very limited, however in January 2021 the PNG Climate Change Fees and Charges came into effect which include taxes on carbon in fuel products and a Green Fee (a departure tax for non-residents leaving PNG), and in August 2022 a draft PNG Climate Change (Management) (Carbon Markets) Regulation was circulated for discussion. Future implications of the climate change policy on our operations in PNG are still being established and while they are not expected to have significant impact in the near term, they may potentially have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and financial condition in the future. Additionally, a number of regulators are adopting or considering new environmental disclosure rules. For example, in March 2024, the SEC adopted final rules under SEC Release No.34-99678, The Enhancement and Standardisation of Climate- Related Disclosures for Investors (the “SEC Climate Disclosure Rules”), which will require registrants to provide certain climate-related information in their registration statements and annual reports. While the SEC stayed the effectiveness of the SEC Climate Disclosure Rules in April 2024 and in March 2025 announced it was ending its defence of the rules in pending litigation, meaning it is uncertain if or when compliance will be mandated. However, a number of other jurisdictions are also mandating disclosure of climate-related risks and effects. These recently enacted and proposed regulations may impose meaningful costs and demand significant attention from management, all of which could affect our business and our results of operations. See "Integrated Annual Report for the 20-F 2025 – Environment stewardship – Building a lasting positive legacy", and "Environment stewardship – Climate and energy management” on pages 88 to 90 and 98 to 104 for disclosure regarding our GHG emissions. 24 Table of contents The cost of occupational health care services and the potential liabilities related to occupational health diseases may increase in future and may be substantial Our operations are subject to health and safety legislation and regulations binding on us, which could impose significant cost burdens. South Africa In South Africa, the MHSA imposes various duties on mines and grants the Mine Health and Safety Inspectorate ("MHSI") broad powers to, among others, close mines which are unsafe or hazardous to the health of persons and order corrective action on health and safety matters. There is a risk that the cost of providing measures prescribed by the MHSA and Regulations for the protections of health and safety at mines, including complying with the health services, complying with applicable regulations, including the Compensation for Occupational Injuries and Diseases Act, 130 of 1993 ("COIDA"), and the Occupational Diseases in Mines and Works Act, 78 of 1973 ("ODMWA"), could increase in future, depending on changes to underlying legislation, legal claims and the profile of our employees. This increased cost, should it transpire, could be substantial, but is currently indeterminate. Our employees may be at risk of developing occupational health diseases. Those working underground are exposed to some level of respirable crystalline silica and may be at risk of developing occupational lung diseases, including silicosis, a progressive and potentially disabling lung condition resulting from prolonged inhalation of silica dust. The Occupational Lung Disease Working Group (“Working Group”), was formed in fiscal 2014 to address issues relating to compensation and medical care for occupational lung disease in the South African gold mining industry. The Working Group, made up of various gold mining companies has had extensive engagements with a wide range of stakeholders, including government, organised labour and the legal representatives of claimants. We have been subject to numerous claims, including class actions or similar group claims relating to silicosis and other occupational lung diseases, and could be subject to similar claims in the future. For instance, in May 2016, the High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division) certified a class action by current and former mine workers against gold mining companies in South Africa, including us. The matter was subsequently settled in May 2018. The terms of the settlement are available on our website. Accordingly, the Tshiamiso Trust was created for purposes of administering the settlement funds. On 31 January 2020, the Working Group commenced the payment of their quarterly administration and benefit contributions to the Tshiamiso Trust to enable the trustees to settle benefits of eligible claimants. See Item 8: “Financial Information – Consolidated Statements and Other Financial Information – Legal Proceedings” and "Integrated Annual Report for the 20-F 2025 – Social stewardship – Holistic health and wellness” on pages 141 to 153 for further information. See note 25 “Other Provisions – Provision for silicosis settlement” to our consolidated financial statements set forth beginning on page F-1. At 30 June 2025 the provision in our statement of financial position was R261 million. We believe that this remains a reasonable estimate of our share of the estimated cost in relation to the Working Group of the settlement of the class action claims and related costs. The final settlement costs and related expenditure may, however, be higher than the recorded provision depending on various factors, such as, among other things, differences in the number and profile of eligible claimants actually compensated compared to current estimates. Australia Operations in the State of Queensland, where our Eva Copper Project is situated, are subject to similar duties and powers, including under the following laws and regulations: the MQSH Act (as recently amended by the RSHLA Act) and the MQSH Regulations. We are not aware of any occupational health claims, including class actions or similar group claims, presently being made in relation to any of our operations in Queensland, but as a mining operator there is a risk we could be subject to such claims in the future. There is also a risk that the cost of providing health services, complying with applicable regulations, and implementing various programs could increase in future, depending on changes to underlying legislation, legal claims and the profile of our employees. This increased cost, should it transpire, could be substantial, but is currently indeterminate. Papua New Guinea Operations in PNG are subject to similar duties and powers, including under the following laws and regulations: the PNG Mining (Safety) Act, the PNG Mining Safety Regulation 1935 (updated in 2006), the PNG Mining Act, the PNG Industrial Safety, Health and Welfare Act 1961, the PNG Industrial Safety, Health and Welfare Regulations 1965 and the PNG Environment Act. In June 2021, the PNG Ministry of Mining released the draft Mine & Works (Safety & Health) Bill 2021 for industry and public consideration, which process is presently still under way. If enacted, the Bill will repeal and replace the PNG Mining (Safety) Act. We are not aware of any occupational health claims, including class actions or similar group claims, presently being made in relation to any of our operations in PNG, but as a mining operator there is a risk we could be subject to such claims in the future. There is also a risk that the cost of providing health services, complying with applicable regulations, and implementing various programs could increase in future, depending on changes to underlying legislation, legal claims and the profile of our employees. This increased cost, should it transpire, could be substantial, but is currently indeterminate. 25 Table of contents If we or any of our subsidiaries in South Africa, Australia or PNG were to face a significant number of additional such claims and the claims were suitably established against it, the payments of compensation to the claimants could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition. In addition, we may incur significant additional costs, including costs relating to the payment of fees, levies or other contributions in respect of compensatory or other funds established (if any), and expenditures arising out of our efforts to resolve any such claims or other potential actions, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition. Our operations are subject to water use and other regulatory licenses, which could impose significant compliance costs and operational constraints South Africa Under the South African National Water Act, 36 of 1998 (“NWA”) a person may only undertake a “water use” subject to a water use license, a general authorisation or in terms of a prior existing water use, such as a water permit issued under the NWA’s predecessor, Water Act, 54 of 1954 (“Water Act”). Persons undertaking water use under a general authorisation or prior existing water use must register this use with the Department of Water and Sanitation ("DWS"). Our South African operations are predominantly regulated under water permits issued pursuant to the Water Act. Notwithstanding this, we have elected to convert all prior existing water uses into water use licenses under the NWA to ensure these operations are carried out in accordance with current best practice and water quality standards. Submissions were made as early as 2003 and we have been working closely with the regional directors in the review process. Some operations have received draft licenses for review and comment before finalisation by the regional directors at the DWS. Kusasalethu, Moab, Mponeng, Mine Waste Solutions, Kareerand and Kalgold received their final water use licenses. These licenses, however, contain conditions that are impossible to meet and, as a result, we have applied to amend the relevant conditions. An appeal has been filed by a third party against the Mponeng water use license, more than two years after the license was granted. We are of the view that the appellant does not have the necessary standing to bring such an appeal and that the appeal is vexatious. While the appeal automatically suspends our water use licenses, the suspension has been uplifted by the Minister of Water and Sanitation. The appeal are set to be heard in October 2025 and in the meantime we are in discussions regarding a possible settlement. When future water licenses are issued, we may be required to implement alternate water management measures that result in significant cost implications. We intend to work collaboratively with the regional departments and catchment management agencies to reach mutually sustainable outcomes. Failure to obtain licenses on favourable terms could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition. Failing to comply with the conditions of a water use license may result in the competent authority issuing a compliance notice or directive instructing us to take measures to correct the non-compliance and, in some instances, to cease operations pending the resolution of the non-compliance. Failing to comply with a water use license is an offence that may result in prosecution. Upon conviction, the court may impose fines, damages, director and employee liability and imprisonment, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and financial condition Additionally, the NWA imposes a duty of care on us to take reasonable measures to prevent pollution or contamination of water resources. The nature and extent of the reasonable measures is determined on a case by case basis. If we fail to implement reasonable measures the competent authority may issue a directive instructing us to implement certain measures within a prescribed period. Failing to comply with a directive is an offence and may result in prosecution and the penalties contemplated above. Alternatively, the competent authority could implement the necessary measures using its own methods and resources, and recoup the costs from us. Any such environmental levy could have a material effect on our business, operating results and financial condition. In addition, the occurrence of Acid Mine Drainage at any of our mines could affect our ability to comply with our water use license requirements. Obligations to pump and treat extraneous water must be addressed with our final closure plans. We are responsible for these liabilities until a closure certificate is issued pursuant to the MPRDA and potentially thereafter under the NEMA. This liability is discussed in more details in Item 4: “Information on the Company – Business Overview – Regulation – Law and Regulations Pertaining to Environmental Protections in South Africa – NEMA”. Refer to "– Risks associated with pumping water inflows from closed mines adjacent to our operations, including related closure liabilities, could adversely affect our operational results". Australia Under the conditions of the mining leases for the Eva Copper Project, Eva Copper Mine Pty Limited is permitted to construct groundwater bores within the area subject to the mining leases. To authorise the take of groundwater from a bore/borefield, a water license is required only if the bore is in an area where groundwater is managed (i.e. within an identified groundwater unit of a relevant water plan). This has been confirmed by the Queensland Government as not applicable to the Eva Copper target groundwater sources. Should we breach any obligations in complying with the provisions of any permit or license or any laws and regulations under which they were issued, our permit or license could be suspended or cancelled, or we could be subject to fines or other sanction. Any such suspension, cancellation or sanction could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition. Papua New Guinea 26 Table of contents In PNG, a single, project-comprehensive EP is issued by the Managing Director of CEPA under the provisions of the PNG Environment Act. The permit includes provisions for both water extraction and treated waste water discharge. An annual administration fee is payable for this permit. Should we breach any obligations in complying with the provisions of our EP or the PNG Environment Act, our permit could be suspended or cancelled, or we could be subject to fines or other sanction. Any such suspension, cancellation or sanction could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition. See "Integrated Annual Report for the 20-F 2025 – Environment stewardship – Water stewardship” on pages 105 to 109. Compliance with tailings management requirements and standards, and potential liabilities in the event of a failure to timely comply or an incident involving a TSF, could adversely impact our financial condition, our operational results and our reputation Mining companies face inherent risks in their management of uneconomical milled ore residue and water, known as tailings, which includes the operation of TSFs and other tailings disposal systems, like DSTP. Tailings storage facilities are engineered structures built for the containment of tailings, and DSTP facilities are engineered pipeline and mixing infrastructure for the placement of tailings in the sea. We presently operate only TSFs, but DSTP is the approved tailings management system for the proposed Wafi-Golpu Project. The proposed use of DSTP facilities at the Wafi-Golpu Project may expose us to reputational risk or litigation by way of class action or individual claims, which (if successful) could have a material adverse impact on the Wafi-Golpu Project. In South Africa, TSFs are subject to stringent regulatory oversight due to their potential environmental and safety risks. The DWS mandates that all TSFs meeting specific criteria (such as a minimum height of five meters and a storage capacity exceeding 50,000 cubic meters) be registered as "dams with a safety risk" under the NWA. Failure to comply with registration requirements can lead to legal and operational consequences which could have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and financial condition. Additionally, the DMPR enforces the South African Code of Practice for Mine Residue Deposits, or SANS 10286, which outlines best practices for the design, operation and closure of TSFs. This code emphasises principles such as continual management, minimisation of waste and the precautionary approach to mitigate risks associated with TSFs. Recent incidents including the 2022 Jagersfontein tailings dam collapse (which is not a project owned or operated by Harmony) have underscored the critical importance of robust TSF management. In response, the DWS has intensified its regulatory efforts, conducting inspections and collaborating with the DMPR to ensure compliance and prevent future disasters. Tailings dam failures at various operations globally have prompted increased regulatory scrutiny across the industry. This may result in amended or new environmental, social, health and safety legislative frameworks. In addition, changes in laws and regulations may impose more stringent conditions in connection with the construction of tailings dams. Further, we may see changes in the permitting process of projects, implementation of financial assurance requirements, and increased criminal and civil liability for companies, officers and contractors. The use of TSFs exposes us to certain risks, including the failure of a tailings dam due to events such as high rainfall, overtopping of the dam, piping or seepage failures. The potential occurrence of a dam failure at one of our tailings storage facilities could lead to the loss of human life and extensive property and environmental damage. A failure of a TSF would lead to investigations and has the potential to result in prosecutions and/or legal proceedings for significant amounts of fines and damages. Overall, the failure of a TSF could lead to the need for a large expenditure on contingencies and on recovering the regions and people affected, extensive and permanent environmental damage and the payment of penalties, fines or other money damages. The occurrence of any of such risks could have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and financial condition. See "Integrated Annual Report for the 20-F 2025 – Environment stewardship – Tailings management” on pages 110 to 114 for further detail. We may have exposure to rehabilitate potential groundwater and land pollution, which may include salination, and radiation contamination that may exist where we have operated or continue to operate; implementation of the financial provision regulations, 2015 may require us to include provision in our financial statements for rehabilitation Due to the interconnected nature of mining operations at Doornkop, Kusasalethu, Mponeng, MWS and Moab Khotsong, any proposed solution for potential flooding and decant risk posed by deep groundwater needs to comprise a regional solution supported by all mines located in the goldfields and the government in the event of legacy issues. As a result, the DMPR and affected mining companies are involved in developing a regional mine closure strategy. In view of the status of the Financial Provision Regulations, 2015, no reliable estimate can be made for any possible obligations or liabilities, which could be material and have an adverse impact on our financial condition. See “—Risks Related to ESG - We are subject to extensive environmental regulations in the countries in which we operate, and compliance costs, regulatory changes, and potential non-compliance could have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and financial condition”. We are implementing the following steps to ensure that funds are available to top up our financial provision, if necessary: •facilitating concurrent rehabilitation; •re-purposing infrastructure and mining affected land; and •accelerating mine closure rehabilitation where operations have reached the end of its geological life. 27 Table of contents Currently, no provision for any potential liability has been made in our financial statements under the Financial Provision Regulations, 2015. If provision needs to be made, and is substantial, this could have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and financial condition. Compliance with new and changing corporate governance and public disclosure requirements adds uncertainty to our compliance policies and increases our costs of compliance Laws, regulations and standards relating to accounting, corporate governance and public disclosure, “conflict minerals” and “responsible” gold, SEC regulations and other listing regulations applicable to us are subject to change and can create uncertainty for companies like us. New or changed laws, regulations, codes and standards could lack specificity or be subject to varying interpretations. Their application in practice may evolve over time as new guidance is provided by regulatory and governing bodies. This could result in continuing uncertainty on compliance matters and higher costs of compliance as a result of ongoing revisions to such governance standards. We are committed to maintaining high standards of corporate governance and public disclosure, and our efforts to comply with evolving laws, regulations, codes and standards in this regard have resulted in, and are likely to continue to result in, increased general and administrative expenses, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and financial condition. 28 Table of contents Risks Related to Our Corporate and Financing Structure and Strategy Our inability to maintain effective disclosure controls and procedures, and an effective system of internal control over financial reporting may have an adverse effect on investors’ confidence in the reliability of our financial statements and other disclosures Internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of the Company’s financial statements for external purposes in accordance with IFRS as issued by the IASB. Disclosure controls and procedures are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by a company in reports that it files or submits under the Exchange Act, is recorded, processed, summarised and reported within the time periods specified in the rules and forms of the SEC. We have invested in resources to manage the documentation and assessment of our system of disclosure controls and our internal control over financial reporting. However, a control system, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance with respect to the reliability of financial reporting, financial statement preparation and other disclosures. In connection with the preparation of our consolidated financial statements for the year ended 30 June 2025, management identified material weaknesses in internal control over financial reporting. While these deficiencies did not result in any identified material misstatements, they represent gaps in our control environment and aggregate to multiple material weaknesses. These material weaknesses will not be considered remediated until these actions are sufficiently tested and concluded to be effective. If we are unable to successfully remediate the identified material weaknesses, or experience additional material weaknesses in the future, investors may lose confidence in the reliability of our financial statements, and/or we could become subject to SEC investigation, enforcement action, civil monetary penalties, or other sanctions, which could result in significant costs, reputational damage, and adversely affect our business, share price, and ability to access capital markets. See Item 15: “Controls and Procedures”. We may experience problems in identifying, financing and managing new acquisitions or other business combination transactions and integrating them with our existing operations; we may not have full management control over future joint venture projects In order to maintain or expand our operations and reserve base, we have sought, and may continue to seek to enter into joint ventures or other business combination transactions or to make acquisitions of selected precious metal producing companies or assets. For example, with effect on 1 October 2020, acquired the remainder of AngloGold’s South African business, including the Mponeng mine and MWS, in the Mponeng Acquisition. In December 2022, Harmony acquired its Eva Copper Project in Queensland, Australia. In addition Harmony announced the acquisition of MAC on 27 May 2025, which became effective on 24 October 2025. Acquiring new mining operations or entering into other business combination transactions involves a number of risks including: •our ability to identify appropriate assets for acquisition and/or to negotiate an acquisition or combination on favourable terms; •obtaining the financing necessary to complete future acquisitions; •difficulties in assimilating the operations of the acquired business; •the changing regulatory environment as it relates to the Mining Charter (as defined below) and the general policy uncertainty in South Africa; •difficulties in maintaining our financial and strategic focus while integrating the acquired business; •problems in implementing uniform quality, standards, controls, procedures and policies; •management capacity, and skills to supplement that capacity, to integrate new assets and operations; •increasing pressures on existing management to oversee an expanding company; and •to the extent we acquire mining operations or enter into another business combination transaction outside South Africa, Australia or PNG, encountering difficulties relating to operating in countries in which we have not previously operated. Any such acquisition or joint venture may change the scale of our business and operations and may expose us to new geographic, geological, political, social, operating, financial, legal, regulatory and contractual risks. Our ability to make successful acquisitions and any difficulties or time delays in achieving successful integration of any of such acquisitions could have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and financial condition. In addition, to the extent that we participate in the development of a project through a joint venture or other multi-party commercial structure, there could be disagreements, legal or otherwise or divergent interests or goals among the parties, which could jeopardize the success of the project, particularly if we do not have full management control over the joint venture. There can be no assurance that any joint venture will achieve the results intended and, as such, any joint venture could have a material adverse effect on our revenues, cash and other operating costs. See Item 5. “Operating and Financial Review and Prospects - Liquidity and Capital Resources - Cash flows from investing activities”. 29 Table of contents Certain factors may affect our ability to support the carrying value of our property, plant and equipment, and other assets on our balance sheet, resulting in impairments We review and test the carrying value of our assets when events or changes in circumstances suggest that this amount may not be recoverable and impairments may be recorded as a result of testing performed. Our market capitalisation on any reporting date is calculated on the basis of the price of our shares and ADSs on that date. Our shares and ADSs may trade in a wide range through the fiscal year depending on the changes in the market, including trader sentiment on various factors including gold price. Therefore, there may be times where our market capitalisation is greater than the value of our net assets, or “book value”, and other times when our market capitalisation is less than our book value. Where our market capitalisation is less than our net asset or book value, this could indicate a potential impairment and we may be required to record an impairment charge in the relevant period. At least on an annual basis for goodwill, and when there are indications that impairment of property, plant and equipment and other non-financial assets may have occurred, estimates of expected future cash flows for each group of assets are prepared in order to determine the recoverable amounts of each group of assets. These estimates are prepared at the lowest level at which identifiable cash flows are considered as being independent of the cash flows of other mining assets and liabilities. Expected future cash flows are inherently uncertain, and could materially change over time. Such cash flows are significantly affected by reserve and production estimates, together with economic factors such as spot and forward gold prices, discount rates, currency exchange rates, estimates of costs to produce reserves and future capital expenditures. As at 30 June 2025, we had substantial amounts of property, plant and equipment and other assets on our consolidated balance sheet. The impairment charges relating to property, plant and equipment, and other assets recorded in fiscal 2024 was R2.8 billion and no impairment was recorded for fiscal 2025. If management is required to recognise impairment charges in the future, this could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition. Our ability to service our debt will depend on our future financial performance and other factors Our ability to service our debt and maintain compliance with financial covenants depends on our financial performance, which in turn will be affected by our operating performance as well as by financial and other factors, and in particular the gold price, certain of which are beyond our control. Various financial and other factors may result in an increase in our indebtedness, which could adversely affect us in several respects, including: •limiting our ability to access the capital markets; •hindering our flexibility to plan for or react to changing market, industry or economic conditions; •limiting the amount of cash flow available for future operations, acquisitions, dividends, or other uses, making us more vulnerable to economic or industry downturns, including interest rate increases; •increasing the risk that we will need to sell assets, possibly on unfavourable terms, to meet payment obligations; or •increasing the risk that we may not meet the financial covenants contained in our debt agreements or timely make all required debt payments. The occurrence of any of these events could adversely affect our results of operations and our financial condition. See “ – The impact from, and measures taken to address infectious and communicable diseases, such as HIV/AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis, pose risks to us in terms of productivity and costs and may adversely affect our people, and may impact our business continuity, operating results, cash flows and financial condition.'' Our ability to service our debt also depends on the amount of our indebtedness. In May 2022 we entered into a US$400 million sustainability-linked syndicated term and revolving credit facility, a R2.5 billion sustainability-linked revolving credit facility, as well as a R1.5 billion Green term loan. At 30 June 2025, US$100 million was drawn against the US$ facility and R176 million was drawn against the Rand facilities. In June 2025 we entered into a Bridge Facility Agreement to finance the acquisition and related costs for a total amount of US$1.25 billion. At 30 June 2025 no amounts has been drawn against this facility. See Item 5: “Operating and Financial Review and Prospects - Liquidity and Capital Resources - Cash flows from financing activities” and “- Outstanding Credit Facilities and Other Borrowings”. In the near term, we expect to manage our liquidity needs from cash generated by our operations, cash on hand, committed and unutilised facilities, as well as additional funding opportunities. However, if our cost of debt were to increase or if we were to encounter difficulties in obtaining financing in the future, our sources of funding may not match our financing needs, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and financial condition. We are subject to the imposition of various regulatory costs, such as mining taxes and royalties, changes to which may have a material adverse effect on our operations and profits; our operations and financial condition could also be adversely affected by policies and legislation related to greater state intervention in the mining sector and potentially the expropriation of mining assets without compensation With increasing resource nationalism in recent years, governments, communities, non-government organisations and trade unions in several jurisdictions have sought and, in some cases, have imposed greater participatory imposts on the mining industry. In South Africa and PNG, draft legislation has been proposed that envisages greater state intervention in the mining industry, including the revision of existing royalties, the imposition of new taxes, an increase in the government’s holdings in mining companies and (in South Africa) potentially the expropriation of mining assets without compensation. Such imposts, whether in the form of taxes, royalties and levies, interference in project management, mandatory social investment requirements, local content requirements or creeping expropriation, are an increasing feature of the global mining industry and could materially adversely affect our business, operating results and financial condition. 30 Table of contents In addition, additional financial provision may be required in the future for rehabilitation purposes with restrictions on when this money may be accessed for rehabilitation. Concurrent rehabilitation needs to be funded by operational budgets without any recourse to the rehabilitation funds. The Carbon Tax Act provides for several allowances aimed at reducing the overall tax liability. These allowances are expected to be reduced overtime meaning that if operational measures are not implemented to reduce GHG emissions, the carbon tax obligations will be higher. These changes in regulation may have a negative impact on future cash flows and the viability of certain operations resulting from increased cost pressures. See Item 4 "Business Overview - Land expropriation", "- Base erosion and profit shifting" and "- Renewable energy". Since 2009, the mining regime in PNG has been the subject of a comprehensive ongoing review involving various PNG Government agencies. During this time, several draft revisions of the PNG Mining Act have been released for industry and public its comment - most notably in 2018, 2020 and February 2025 (the most recent draft, the “PNG Draft Mining Bill 2025”). The PNG Draft Mining Bill 2025 proposes substantial reforms, including empowering PNG to acquire up to 30% equity (with deferred payments) in mining projects, adjusting royalties to 5% with state equity or 10% without and expanding compensation mechanisms and environmental protections (e.g. banning riverine tailings requiring stronger mine-closure planning and financial provisioning). If enacted and applied to our operations and projects in PNG, these revisions could have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and financial condition. We continue to engage with the PNG Government and relevant regulators on these matters, indirectly through the offices of PNG Chamber of Resources and Energy ("PNG CORE"), and directly with the PNG Mineral Resources Authority ("PNG MRA"), the CEPA and the DMPGM. PNG’s National Parliament passed the Income Tax Act 2025 (“PNG Income Tax Act”) on 20 March 2025. To become law, the PNG Income Tax Act must now be certified by the Speaker of Parliament and gazetted; certification and gazettal are expected later in 2025, ahead of its planned commencement on 1 January 2026. The PNG Income Tax Act does not include specific provisions for mining capital or exploration expenditure, but provides a transitional carve-out for legacy mining-specific rules, including special mining capital and exploration expenses. Without clear guidance at this stage, we are uncertain of the potential future impacts these changes to the regulation may have on taxes for our PNG operations. The effect of the proposals, measures and developments described above, as well as the imposition of additional restrictions, obligations, operational costs, taxes or royalty payments, could have a material adverse effect on Harmony’s business, operating results and financial condition. As we have a significant number of shares that may be issued in terms of the employee share schemes, our ordinary shares are subject to dilution We have a Deferred Share Plan as part of our Total Incentive Plan that came into effect in 2020. Our shareholders have authorised up to 25,000,000 shares of the issued share capital to be used for this plan. A new Employee share ownership plan ("ESOP'') was implemented in 2024 and shares have been issued. As a result, shareholders’ equity interests in us are subject to dilution to the extent of the potential future exercises of the options through these share plans. The continued status of South Africa’s credit rating as non-investment grade, as well as the grey-listing of South Africa by the FATF, may have an adverse effect on our ability to secure financing on favourable terms Adverse credit ratings deter some investors, threatening our ability to create and protect value in the long term, and affecting our market capitalisation. Over the past several years, the slowing economy, rising sovereign debt, escalating labour disputes and the structural challenges facing the mining industry and other sectors have resulted in the downgrading of South Africa’s sovereign credit ratings. Currently, South Africa’s sovereign credit is rated as non-investment grade: Fitch has assigned South Africa a sovereign credit rating of BB-, Moody’s has assigned South Africa a sovereign credit rating of Ba2 and S&P has assigned South Africa a sovereign credit rating of BB-. Previously, •on 13 September 2024, Fitch affirmed South Africa’s sovereign credit rating as BB- and maintained the outlook as stable; •on 4 December 2024, Moody's affirmed South Africa's sovereign credit rating as Ba2 and maintained the outlook to stable; and •on 16 May 2025, S&P affirmed South Africa’s sovereign credit rating as BB- and upgraded the outlook to positive. The continued status of South Africa’s credit rating as non-investment grade and any downgrading by any of these agencies may adversely affect our business, operating results and financial condition by making it more difficult to obtain external financing or could result in any such financing being available only at greater cost or on more restrictive terms than might otherwise be available. Australia’s credit rating outlook was affirmed by S&P as stable on 13 February 2024 with long-term foreign and local currency sovereign credit ratings of AAA, and PNG’s credit rating outlook was affirmed by S&P as stable on 27 June 2025 with long-term foreign (B-) and local currency (B) sovereign credit ratings. While impact and risk is currently primarily driven by the South Africa’s sovereign risk rating, with the acquisition of MAC and once the Eva Copper Project and the Wafi-Golpu Project are completed and operational, management anticipations that reliance and dependencies on South Africa’s sovereign credit ratings may change. Throughout our fiscal year ended 30 June 2025, South Africa was on the FATF greylist (placed February 2023), subjecting the country to enhanced monitoring due to strategic deficiencies in its anti-money laundering and counter-financing of terrorism ("AML/CFT") regime. This created increased compliance costs, potential restrictions on cross-border transactions, and reputational concerns that affected investor confidence. 31 Table of contents On 24 October 2025, subsequent to our fiscal year end, South Africa successfully exited the greylist after completing all required remediation actions. This is expected to reduce elevated risk perceptions and improve access to international capital markets. However, residual risks remain. South Africa faces a new FATF mutual evaluation beginning in 2026, and failure to maintain the improvements achieved could result in re-greylisting. All domestic AML/CFT compliance obligations remain in force, and sustained effectiveness must be demonstrated through ongoing investigations, prosecutions, and institutional strengthening. Any future re-greylisting or perceived backsliding in AML/CFT effectiveness could adversely affect our business, operating results, and financial condition. We may not pay dividends or make similar payments to our shareholders in the future Our dividend policy is to pay cash dividends only if funds are available for that purpose; specifically our policy is set at 20% of net free cash subject to future major capital expenditure and meeting solvency and liquidity requirements as well as current banking covenants. Whether funds are available depends on a variety of factors, including the amount of cash available, our capital expenditures and other current or future anticipated cash requirements existing at the time. Under South African law, we are only entitled to pay a dividend or similar payment to shareholders if we meet the solvency and liquidity tests set out in the Companies Act, 71 of 2008 (as amended) including its Regulations (the “Companies Act”), and our current Memorandum of Incorporation. Cash dividends or other similar payments may not be paid in the future. It should be noted that there is currently a 20% withholding tax on dividends declared by South African resident companies to non-resident shareholders or non-resident ADS holders. As dividends are considered by investors as an important investment criteria and the importance of external investment for the continued stability of the company and potential future cash flows, the ability of Harmony to pay dividends may adversely affect future investment in the company. In addition, our foreign shareholders face investment risk from currency exchange rate fluctuations affecting the market value of any dividends or distributions paid by us. 32 Table of contents Market Risks The profitability of our operations, and cash flows generated by those operations, are affected by changes in the price of gold and other metals; a fall in the gold price below our cash cost of production and capital expenditure required to maintain production for any sustained period may lead to losses and require us to curtail or suspend certain operations Substantially all of our revenues come from the sale of gold. Historically, the market price for gold has fluctuated widely and has been affected by numerous factors, over which we have no control, including: •demand for gold for industrial uses, jewellery and investment; •international or regional social, political and economic events and trends; •strength or weakness of the US dollar (the currency in which gold prices generally are quoted) and of other currencies; •monetary policies announced or implemented by central banks, including the US Federal Reserve; •financial market expectations on the rate of inflation; •changes in the supply of gold from production, divestment, scrap and hedging; •interest rates; •speculative activities; •gold hedging or de-hedging by gold producers; •actual or expected purchases and sales of gold bullion held by central banks or other large gold bullion holders or dealers; and •production and cost levels for gold in major gold-producing nations, such as South Africa, China, the United States and Australia. Refer to Item 4B: "Business Overview – Gold Price Volatility" for further detail. While the price volatility is difficult to predict, if gold prices should fall below our cash cost of production and capital expenditure required to sustain production and remain at these levels for any sustained period, we may record losses and be forced to curtail or suspend some or all of our operations, which could materially adversely affect our business, operating results and financial condition. In addition, we would also have to assess the economic impact of low gold prices on our ability to recover any losses that may be incurred during that period and on our ability to maintain adequate reserves. The use of lower gold prices in reserve calculations and life-of-mine ("LOM") plans could also result in material impairments of our investment in gold mining properties or a reduction in our reserve estimates and corresponding restatements of our reserves and increased amortisation, reclamation and closure charges. Fluctuations in input production prices linked to commodities may adversely affect our operational results and financial condition Fuel, energy, and consumables, including diesel, heavy fuel oil, chemical reagents, explosives, tires, steel, and mining equipment, contribute a significant portion of a mining company's operating costs and capital expenditures. The prices of these critical inputs are influenced by global commodity markets, macroeconomic conditions, and supply chain dynamics that vary across our operations in South Africa, Papua New Guinea, and Australia. During the financial year ended 30 June 2025 and through to the date of this filing, global commodity and energy markets have experienced significant volatility. Energy prices have been subject to downward pressure driven by multiple factors including weakening global demand, structural changes in energy consumption patterns, particularly from major consuming nations, and increased supply from both traditional and emerging sources. Other mining consumables, including chemical inputs, explosives, tires, and steel products, have experienced mixed pricing dynamics, reflecting variations in global supply chains, transportation costs, and producer capacity utilisation. There is considerable uncertainty regarding the medium-term trajectory of input costs. Leading forecasting agencies and market participants maintain divergent views on future energy demand and supply dynamics, creating substantial uncertainty regarding future price trends. Supply chain pressures, including international logistics costs and producer investment cycles, continue to influence the pricing of mining consumables across all categories of inputs we require. Significant upside risks to input costs persist from multiple sources. Geopolitical tensions in major producing and consuming regions, including the Middle East and Eastern Europe, continue to pose potential supply disruption risks. International sanctions on major commodity producers, trade policy uncertainties, and regional conflicts could disrupt supply chains or create shipping and logistics bottlenecks. Additionally, weather-related disruptions to mining equipment supply, energy generation capacity, and production processes across our operational jurisdictions could create localised cost pressures. Fluctuations in the prices of fuel, energy, and consumables have a substantial impact on both our operating costs and capital expenditure estimates. Significant and sustained increases in these input costs, driven by supply disruptions, geopolitical events, regulatory changes, macroeconomic shifts, or producer policy changes, could materially affect project economics and the financial viability of new mining developments, expansions, or marginal operations. Such price volatility may lead to material changes in our overall cost structure and could have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results, cash flows, and financial condition. 33 Table of contents Foreign exchange fluctuations could have a material adverse effect on our operational results and financial condition Gold is priced throughout the world in US dollars and, as a result, our revenue is realised in US dollars, but most of our operating costs are incurred in Rand and other non-US currencies, including the Australian dollar and Kina. From time to time, we may implement currency hedges intended to reduce exposure to changes in the foreign currency risk, which we started doing in fiscal 2016 and will continue as long as it remains part of our risk management policy. This hedging strategy is currently implemented up to 25% of our estimated exposure, and our unhedged foreign exchange exposure will continue to be subject to market fluctuations. Any significant and sustained appreciation of the Rand and other non-US currencies against the dollar will materially reduce our Rand revenues and overall net income, which could materially adversely affect our operating results and financial condition. See Item 11 – “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk”. Fluctuations in the exchange rate of currencies may reduce the market value of our securities, as well as the market value of any dividends or distributions paid by us We have historically declared all dividends in South African Rand. As a result, exchange rate movements may have affected the US dollar value of these dividends, as well as of any other distributions paid by the Depositary to holders of ADSs. Furthermore, our Memorandum of Incorporation allows for dividends and distributions to be declared in any currency at the discretion of the board of directors or the Company’s shareholders at a general meeting. If, and to the extent that, we opt to declare dividends and distributions in US dollars, exchange rate movements will not affect the US dollar value of any dividends or distributions. Nevertheless, the value of any dividend or distribution in Australian dollars, Kina or South African Rand will continue to be affected. If, and to the extent that, dividends and distributions are declared in South African Rand in the future, exchange rate movements will continue to affect the Australian dollar, Kina and US dollar value of these dividends and distributions. This may reduce the value of the Company’s securities to investors. Additionally, the market value of our securities as expressed in Australian dollars, Kina, US dollars and South African Rand will continue to fluctuate in part as a result of foreign exchange fluctuations. Rising inflation and geopolitical risks may have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and financial condition Inflation in South Africa has fluctuated in a narrow band in recent years, remaining within or just outside the inflation range of 3% - 6% set by the SARB. Prolonged periods of inflation may impact our profitability by negatively impacting our fixed costs and expenses, including raw material, transportation and labour costs. If these increased costs are not offset by an increase in gold prices, they could have a material adverse effect on Harmony’s business, operating results and financial condition. Geopolitical risks and conflicts around the world could further disrupt supply chains and create additional inflationary pressures. Ongoing conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East may cause increased inflationary pressures and could cause general global economic conditions to deteriorate. The oil price is a driver of a number of input costs, including diesel and transport costs, while gas prices have an impact on power costs, and other commodity prices drive direct mining and processing costs. These inflationary pressures could also cause interest rates and the cost of borrowing to increase and could have a material adverse effect on the financial markets and economic conditions throughout the world. The extent and duration of the invasion, sanctions and resulting market disruptions are impossible to predict. Any inflationary impacts or disruptions caused by the invasion or resulting sanctions may have a material adverse effect on Harmony’s business, operating results and financial condition, and may magnify the impact of other risks described in this annual report. Our results of operations, profits and financial condition could be adversely affected to the extent that cost inflation is not offset by devaluation in operating currencies or an increase in the price of gold. Investors may face liquidity risk in trading our ordinary shares on the JSE Limited The primary listing of our ordinary shares is on the JSE Limited. Historically, the trading volumes and liquidity of shares listed on the JSE have been low relative to other major markets. The ability of a holder to sell a substantial number of our ordinary shares on the JSE in a timely manner, especially in a large block trade, may be restricted by this limited liquidity. See