A. History and Development of the Company Costamare Inc. was incorporated in the Republic of the Marshall Islands on April 21, 2008 under the BCA. We are majority owned by members of the Konstantakopoulos family, which has a long history of operating and investing in the international shipping industry, including a long history of vessel ownership. We were founded in 1974 and initially owned and operated dry bulk vessels. In 1984, we became the first Greek-owned company to enter the containership market, and from 1992 until our acquisition of dry bulk vessels in June 2021 and the subsequent expansion of our dry bulk platform in 2022, we focused exclusively on containerships. Since assuming management of our company in 1998, Konstantinos Konstantakopoulos has concentrated on building a large, modern and reliable fleet run and supported by highly skilled, experienced and loyal personnel. Under the leadership of Konstantinos Konstantakopoulos, we have continued to foster a company culture focusing on excellent customer service, industry leadership and innovation. In November 2010, we completed an initial public offering of our common stock in the United States and our common stock began trading on the NYSE on November 4, 2010 under the ticker symbol “CMRE”. On March 27, 2012, October 19, 2012, December 5, 2016 and May 31, 2017, we completed four follow-on public offerings of our common stock. On July 6, 2016, we implemented a Dividend Reinvestment Plan that offers holders of our common stock the opportunity to purchase additional shares by having their cash dividends automatically reinvested in our common stock at a discount to current market price. On August 7, 2013, we completed a public offering of our Series B Preferred Stock, on January 21, 2014, we completed a public offering of our Series C Preferred Stock, on May 13, 2015, we completed a public offering of our Series D Preferred Stock and on January 30, 2018, we completed a public offering of our Series E Preferred Stock. On July 15, 2024, the Company completed the full redemption of all of its 4,574,100 outstanding shares of Series E Preferred Stock. The Company funded the redemption with cash on hand. Under the Framework Deed entered into in May 2013, as amended and restated in May 2015 and as further amended in June 2018, (the “Framework Deed”) we agreed with York Capital Management Global Advisors LLC and an affiliated fund (collectively, “York Capital”) to invest in newbuild and secondhand container vessels through jointly held entities in which we hold a minority equity interest (any such entity, referred to as a “Joint Venture entity”). After acquiring a number of both newbuild and secondhand container vessels, the Framework Deed was terminated on December 31, 2024 upon the winding up of the last remaining Joint Venture entity. In June 2021, we decided to expand into the dry bulk shipping sector and invest in dry bulk vessels, and in November 2022, we established a dry bulk operating platform under CBI. CBI charters-in/out dry bulk vessels, enters into contracts of affreightment, forward freight agreements and may also utilize hedging solutions. In March 2023, we entered into an amended and restated subscription and shareholders’ agreement with the existing Neptune shareholders at the time (the “Neptune Shareholders’ Agreement”) pursuant to which we agreed to invest in the Neptune leasing business and acquired the controlling interest of Neptune. Neptune was originally established in 2021 to acquire, own and bareboat charter out vessels through wholly-owned subsidiaries. Neptune’s strategy is to build a portfolio of long-term contracts through sale and leaseback transactions in the maritime sector. Pursuant to the Neptune Shareholders’ Agreement, we received a special share in Neptune which carries 75% of the voting rights and agreed to invest up to $200 million in exchange for up to 40% of the ordinary shares and up to 79.05% of the preferred shares. On January 26, 2026, we entered into a second amended and restated subscription and shareholders’ agreement with the Neptune shareholders (the “Amended and Restated Neptune Shareholders’ Agreement”), whereby we agreed to increase our investment commitment to $247.8 million. As of February 24, 2026, we have invested in Neptune the amount of $182.2 million and own 39.0% of Neptune’s ordinary shares and 78.1% of its preferred shares. As of February 24, 2026, Neptune is currently funding or committed to funding 52 shipping assets, and Neptune’s portfolio of sale and leaseback arrangements and commitments includes 22 dry bulk vessels, three tanker vessels, 24 offshore vessels and three container vessels. 41 Table of Contents On April 17, 2025, our board of directors approved the Spin-Off. In connection therewith, the Company undertook a series of transactions and entered into various agreements effecting the separation of its dry bulk business (including the dry bulk owned fleet and CBI) as provided in the Separation and Distribution Agreement. See “Item 7. Major Shareholders and Related Party Transactions—B. Related Party Transactions—Separation and Distribution Agreement.” The Company had previously contributed to Costamare Bulkers the shares of 67 wholly-owned companies, out of which 38 companies owned dry bulk vessels, 17 companies had previously owned and sold or had agreed to sell their dry bulk vessels and 12 companies were to be used for future dry bulk vessel acquisitions. On May 6, 2025, Costamare completed the Spin-Off of Costamare Bulkers, distributing to Costamare shareholders of record on April 29, 2025, on a pro rata basis, one common share of Costamare Bulkers for every five Costamare common shares (24,022,218 Costamare Bulkers shares were distributed to the Costamare shareholders). On the same day, following the distribution of Costamare Bulkers’ shares, Costamare Bulkers acquired the shares of CBI from Costamare and a minority shareholder. The shares of Costamare Bulkers began “regular way” trading separately from the Company shares on the NYSE on May 7, 2025. For more information on the Company’s capital expenditures and divestitures, see Note 13 to our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this annual report. We maintain our principal executive offices at 7 rue du Gabian, MC 98000 Monaco. Our telephone number at that address is +377 93 25 09 40. Our registered address in the Marshall Islands is Trust Company Complex, Ajeltake Road, Ajeltake Island, Majuro, Marshall Islands MH96960. The name of our registered agent at such address is The Trust Company of the Marshall Islands, Inc. We are subject to the informational requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). In accordance with these requirements, we file reports and other information as a foreign private issuer with the SEC. You may inspect reports and other information regarding registrants, such as us, that file electronically with the SEC without charge at a website maintained by the SEC at http://www.sec.gov. These documents and other important information on our governance are posted on our website and may be viewed at http//www.costamare.com. The information contained on or connected to our website is not part of this annual report. B. Business Overview General We are an international owner and operator of containerships. We charter our containerships to some of the world’s largest liner companies, providing worldwide transportation of containerized cargoes. As of February 24, 2026, we had a fleet of 79 containerships with an aggregate capacity of approximately 551,000 TEU, including 10 vessels under construction. See “Item 4. Information on the Company—B. Business Overview—Our Fleet”. Our strategy is to time charter our containerships to a geographically diverse, financially strong and loyal group of leading liner companies. We aim to operate our containerships under long-term, fixed-rate time charters, to the extent available, to avoid seasonal variations in demand. Our containerships have low unscheduled off-hire days, with fleet utilization levels, excluding scheduled dry-dockings, of 99.0%, 99.8% and 99.6% in 2023, 2024 and 2025, respectively. Over the last three years, our largest customers by revenue were A.P. Moller-Maersk, MSC, Evergreen, Hapag Lloyd, ZIM and COSCO. As of February 24, 2026, the average (weighted by TEU capacity) remaining time charter duration for our fleet of 79 containerships, including the 10 vessels under construction, was approximately 4.4 years, based on the remaining fixed terms and assuming the exercise of any owner’s options and the non-exercise of any charterer’s options under our containerships’ charters. Our fixed-term charters for our fleet of 79 vessels represented an aggregate of approximately $3.6 billion of contracted revenue, assuming the earliest redelivery dates possible and 365 revenue days per annum per containership. As described below, our vessels are managed by Costamare Shipping which is controlled by our chairman and chief executive officer. Costamare Shipping may subcontract certain services to other affiliated managers, or to V.Ships Greece or, subject to our consent, to other third-party managers. We believe that having several management companies, both affiliates and third-party, provides us with a deep pool of operational management in multiple locations with market-specific experience and relationships, as well as the geographic flexibility needed to manage and crew our large and diverse fleet so as to provide a high level of service, while remaining cost-effective. 42 Table of Contents In March 2023, we agreed to invest in the Neptune leasing business and acquired the controlling interest of Neptune. Neptune was originally established in 2021 to acquire, own and finance (via bareboat charter agreements) vessels through its wholly-owned subsidiaries. As described below, Neptune’s strategy is to build a portfolio of long-term financing contracts through sale and leaseback transactions in the maritime sector while also utilizing bank financing. Our Fleet Our Containership Fleet The tables below provide additional information about our fleet of containerships, including the vessels under construction, as of February 24, 2026. Some of our vessels are subject to sale and leaseback transactions as indicated here below. Each vessel is a cellular containership, meaning it is a dedicated container vessel. Current Containership Fleet Vessel Name Charterer Year Built Capacity (TEU) Average Daily Charter Rate(1) (U.S. dollars) TEU-weighted duration(2) (in years) Expiration of Charter(3) 1 TRITON Evergreen/(*) 2016 14,424 40,613 6.9 March 2036 2 TITAN Evergreen/(*) 2016 14,424 April 2036 3 TALOS Evergreen/(*) 2016 14,424 July 2036 4 TAURUS Evergreen/(*) 2016 14,424 August 2036 5 THESEUS Evergreen/(*) 2016 14,424 August 2036 6 YM TRIUMPH Yang Ming 2020 12,690 May 2030 7 YM TRUTH Yang Ming 2020 12,690 May 2030 8 YM TOTALITY(i) Yang Ming 2020 12,690 July 2030 9 YM TARGET(i) Yang Ming 2021 12,690 November 2030 10 YM TIPTOP(i) Yang Ming 2021 12,690 March 2031 11 CAPE AKRITAS MSC 2016 11,010 August 2031 12 CAPE TAINARO MSC 2017 11,010 April 2031 13 CAPE KORTIA MSC 2017 11,010 August 2031 14 CAPE SOUNIO MSC 2017 11,010 April 2031 15 CAPE ARTEMISIO MSC 2017 11,010 September 2030 16 SHANGHAI COSCO 2006 9,469 34,881 3.2 August 2028 17 YANTIAN I COSCO 2006 9,469 July 2028 18 YANTIAN COSCO/(*) 2006 9,469 May 2028 19 COSCO HELLAS COSCO/(*) 2006 9,469 August 2028 20 BEIJING COSCO/(*) 2006 9,469 July 2028 21 MSC AZOV MSC/(*) 2014 9,403 December 2029 22 MSC AMALFI MSC/(*) 2014 9,403 January 2030 23 MSC AJACCIO MSC/(*) 2014 9,403 December 2029 24 MSC ATHENS MSC/(*) 2013 8,827 January 2029 25 MSC ATHOS MSC/(*) 2013 8,827 February 2029 26 VALOR MSC 2013 8,827 May 2030 27 VALUE MSC 2013 8,827 June 2030 28 VALIANT MSC 2013 8,827 August 2030 43 Table of Contents Vessel Name Charterer Year Built Capacity (TEU) Average Daily Charter Rate(1) (U.S. dollars) TEU-weighted duration(2) (in years) Expiration of Charter(3) 29 VALENCE MSC 2013 8,827 August 2030 30 VANTAGE MSC 2013 8,827 November 2030 31 NAVARINO MSC 2010 8,531 March 2029 32 KLEVEN MSC/(*) 1996 8,044 April 2028 33 KOTKA MSC/(*) 1996 8,044 September 2028 34 KOWLOON (ex. MAERSK KOWLOON) MSC 2005 7,471 January 2029 35 KURE MSC/(*) 1996 7,403 August 2028 36 METHONI Maersk/(*) 2003 6,724 29,966 2.6 June 2029 37 PORTO CHELI Maersk/(*) 2001 6,712 April 2029 38 TAMPA I COSCO 2000 6,648 September 2028 39 ZIM VIETNAM ZIM 2003 6,644 December 2028 40 ZIM AMERICA ZIM 2003 6,644 December 2028 41 MAERSK PUELO Maersk 2006 6,541 October 2026(4) 42 ARIES ONE/(*) 2004 6,492 March 2029 43 ARGUS ONE /(*) 2004 6,492 May 2029 44 PORTO KAGIO Maersk 2002 5,908 July 2026 45 GLEN CANYON OOCL 2006 5,642 September 2028 46 PORTO GERMENO Maersk 2002 5,570 August 2026 47 LEONIDIO Maersk/(*) 2014 4,957 August 2029 48 KYPARISSIA Maersk/(*) 2014 4,957 August 2029 49 MEGALOPOLIS Maersk/(*) 2013 4,957 May 2030 50 MARATHOPOLIS Maersk/(*) 2013 4,957 May 2030 51 GIALOVA ONE/(*) 2009 4,578 25,975 2.0 April 2029 52 DYROS Maersk 2008 4,578 April 2027 53 NORFOLK OOCL 2009 4,259 March 2028 54 VULPECULA ZIM 2010 4,258 May 2028 55 VOLANS COSCO 2010 4,258 July 2027 56 VIRGO Maersk 2009 4,258 April 2027 57 VELA ZIM 2009 4,258 April 2028 58 ANDROUSA OOCL/(*) 2010 4,256 April 2029 59 NEOKASTRO CMA CGM 2011 4,178 21,523 2.1 April 2030 60 ULSAN Maersk/(*) 2002 4,132 January 2029 61 POLAR BRASIL Maersk 2018 3,800 March 2027(5) 62 LAKONIA COSCO 2004 2,586 February 2027 63 SCORPIUS Hapag Lloyd/Maersk 2007 2,572 March 2028 64 ETOILE MSC/(*) 2005 2,556 July 2028 65 AREOPOLIS COSCO 2000 2,474 March 2027 66 ARKADIA Evergreen 2001 1,550 October 2026 67 MICHIGAN MSC 2008 1,300 October 2027 68 TRADER MSC/(*) 2008 1,300 October 2028 69 LUEBECK MSC/(*) 2001 1,078 April 2028 44 Table of Contents Containerships Under Construction Vessel Name Capacity (TEU) Estimated Delivery(6) Employment 1 Newbuilding 1 3,100 Q2 2027 Long-term employment upon delivery from shipyard 2 Newbuilding 2 3,100 Q3 2027 Long-term employment upon delivery from shipyard 3 Newbuilding 3 3,100 Q4 2027 Long-term employment upon delivery from shipyard 4 Newbuilding 4 3,100 Q4 2027 Long-term employment upon delivery from shipyard 5 Newbuilding 5 3,100 Q4 2027 Medium-term employment upon delivery from shipyard 6 Newbuilding 6 3,100 Q1 2028 Long-term employment upon delivery from shipyard 7 Newbuilding 7 3,100 Q1 2028 Long-term employment upon delivery from shipyard 8 Newbuilding 8 3,100 Q2 2028 Medium-term employment upon delivery from shipyard 9 Newbuilding 9 3,100 Q3 2028 Medium-term employment upon delivery from shipyard 10 Newbuilding 10 3,100 Q4 2028 Medium-term employment upon delivery from shipyard (1) Daily charter rates are gross, unless stated otherwise. Amounts set out for current daily charter rate are the amounts contained in the charter contracts. (2) Charter terms and expiration dates are based on the earliest date charters (unless otherwise noted) could expire. (3) Charterer has the option to extend the current time charter for an additional period of two years. (4) Maersk Puelo is currently chartered to Maersk until October 2026 (earliest redelivery) – September 2031 (latest redelivery). (5) Charter has the option to extend the current time charter for an additional one-year period. (6) Based on the shipbuilding contract, subject to change. (i) Denotes vessels subject to a sale and leaseback transaction. (*) Denotes charterer’s identity and/or current daily charter rates and/or charter expiration dates, which are treated as confidential. Framework Deed Under the Framework Deed we agreed with York to jointly invest in newbuild and secondhand container vessels. During 2023, we acquired York Capital’s 51% equity interest in each of the 2018-built, 3,800 TEU capacity containership Polar Brasil and the 2001-built, 1,550 TEU capacity containership Arkadia and, as a result, we obtained 100% of the equity interests in each vessel. The Framework Deed was terminated on December 31, 2024 upon the winding up of the last remaining Joint Venture entity. 45 Table of Contents Chartering of Our Fleet We aim to deploy our containership fleet principally under long-term, fixed-rate time charters with leading liner companies that operate on regularly scheduled routes between large commercial ports. As of February 24, 2026, the average (weighted by TEU capacity) remaining time charter duration for our fleet of 79 containerships (including the 10 vessels under construction) was approximately 4.4 years, based on the remaining fixed terms and assuming the exercise of any owner’s options and the non-exercise of any charterer’s options under our containerships’ charters. A time charter is a contract to charter a vessel for a fixed period of time at a set daily rate and can last from a few days up to several years. Under our time charters the charterer pays for most voyage expenses, which generally include, among other things, fuel costs, port and canal charges, pilotages, towages, agencies, commissions, extra war risks insurance and any other expenses related to the cargoes, and we pay for vessel operating expenses, which generally include, among other costs, costs for crewing, provisions, stores, lubricants, insurance, maintenance and repairs, dry-docking and intermediate and special surveys. Our Customers For our containership fleet, our customers include many of the leading international liner companies, including, among others, A.P. Moller-Maersk, COSCO, Evergreen, Hapag Lloyd, MSC, Yang Ming, ZIM, ONE, OOCL and CMA CGM. A.P. Moller-Maersk, MSC, Evergreen, Hapag Lloyd and ZIM together represented 75%, 76% and 74% of our containership revenue in 2023, 2024 and 2025, respectively. Management of Our Fleet Costamare Shipping serves as the manager for our containerships and provides us with commercial, technical and other services pursuant to the Framework Agreement and separate ship management agreements with the relevant vessel-owning subsidiaries. Costamare Shipping is a ship management company established in 1974 and is controlled by our chairman and chief executive officer. Costamare Shipping has more than 50 years of experience in managing vessels of various types and sizes, developing specifications for newbuild containerships and supervising the construction of such newbuild vessels in reputable shipyards in the Far East. Costamare Shipping has long established relationships with major liner companies, financial institutions and suppliers and we believe is recognized in the international shipping industry as a leading containership manager. Costamare Shipping may subcontract certain of its obligations to affiliated managers or to V.Ships Greece or, subject to our consent, to other third-party managers or direct that such affiliated or third-party managers enter into a direct ship-management contract with the relevant vessel-owning subsidiary. Additionally, our sub-managers may, at our request or subject to our consent, subcontract certain services to certain of their affiliates having regard, for instance, to the nationality of the crew or the area of operations of our vessels. As discussed below, these arrangements will not result in any increase in the aggregate amount of management fees we pay. In return for these services, we pay the management fees described below in this section. Costamare Shipping, itself or together with our sub-managers, V.Ships Greece, Navilands, Navilands (Shanghai), Vinnen and HanseContor, provide our fleet with technical, crewing, commercial, provisioning, bunkering, sale and purchase, accounting and insurance services pursuant to separate ship-management agreements between each of our vessel-owning subsidiaries and Costamare Shipping and, where applicable, the relevant sub-manager. Navilands and Navilands (Shanghai) are controlled by our chairman and chief executive officer Konstantinos Konstantakopoulos. On December 30, 2025, Navilands Maritime, a company controlled by our chairman and chief executive officer, Konstantinos Konstantakopoulos, entered into a Representation Agreement (the “Representation Agreement”) with our vessel-owning subsidiaries, to provide purchasing services and support services in relation to repairs, maintenance and drydocking as requested in exchange for a monthly fee and certain ad hoc fees to cover any additional services as requested. Blue Net provides under the Brokerage Agreement chartering brokerage services to our containerships, as well as to other third-party containerships. Our chairman and chief executive officer, Konstantinos Konstantakopoulos, controls 50% of Blue Net. We believe that the appointment of Blue Net allows us to improve the charter rates at which we charter our containerships. In addition, on March 31, 2020, Costamare Shipping agreed, on behalf of the owners of five containerships it manages, to pay Blue Net Asia, a company 50% controlled by our chairman and chief executive officer, a commission of 1.25% of the gross daily hire earned from the charters arranged by Blue Net Asia for those five vessels. Blue Net does not provide its services to the five vessels for which charter brokerage services are being provided by Blue Net Asia. 46 Table of Contents Costamare Services is a service provider which was established in May 2015 and is controlled by our chairman and chief executive officer and a member of his family. Costamare Services builds on the long-running relationships established by Costamare Shipping with our charterers. Costamare Services provides our vessel-owning subsidiaries with chartering, sale and purchase, insurance and certain representation and administrative services pursuant to the Services Agreement. Our chairman and chief executive officer and our chief financial officer supervise, in conjunction with our board of directors, the services provided by Costamare Shipping and Costamare Services. Costamare Shipping and Costamare Services report to our board of directors through our chairman and chief executive officer and our chief financial officer, each of whom is appointed by our board of directors. Having multiple management companies provides us with a deep pool of operational management in multiple locations with market-specific experience and relationships, as well as the geographic flexibility needed to manage and crew our large and diverse fleet so as to provide a high level of service, while remaining cost-effective. For example, Navilands (Shanghai) mostly employs Chinese nationals with the language skills and local knowledge we believe are necessary to establish and grow meaningful relationships with Chinese Charterers and suppliers. We believe that our managers are well regarded in the industry and use state-of-the-art practices and technological advancement to maximize the efficiency of the operation of our fleet of containerships. ISM certification is in place for our fleet of containerships as well as our managers. Our affiliated managers, together with V.Ships Greece, maintain full certification under internationally recognized management system standards. These include ISO 9001:2018 (Quality Management Systems), which governs the consistent delivery of high quality services in accordance with our expectations and applicable regulatory requirements; ISO 14001:2015 (Environmental Management Systems), which ensures structured and effective environmental stewardship; ISO 50001:2018 (Energy Management Systems), supporting the efficient use of energy and continuous improvement in energy performance across our operations; and ISO 45001:2018 (Occupational Health and Safety Management Systems), demonstrating a commitment to maintaining safe working environments and safeguarding the well being of our personnel. In 2013, the Company received the Lloyd’s List Greek shipping award for Dry Cargo Company of the Year. Costamare Shipping received that same award in 2004. Additionally, in 2014, the Company received the Lloyd’s List Company of the Year award. In 2025, the captain of our containership Theseus received the Lloyd’s List Greek shipping award for the Seafarer of the Year for rescuing seven crew members of a disabled fishing vessel adrift in the middle of the South Atlantic. As of February 24, 2026, • Costamare Shipping provided commercial and insurance services to all of our containerships, as well as technical, crewing, provisioning, bunkering, sale and purchase and accounting services to 25 of our containerships; • V.Ships Greece provided technical, crewing, provisioning, bunkering, sale and purchase and accounting services to 18 of our containerships; • Vinnen provided technical, crewing, provisioning, bunkering, sale and purchase and accounting services to five of our containerships; • HanseContor provided technical, crewing, provisioning, bunkering, sale and purchase and accounting services to six of our containerships; • Navilands provided technical, crewing, provisioning, bunkering, sale and purchase and accounting services to six of our containerships; and • Navilands (Shanghai) provided technical, crewing, provisioning, bunkering, sale and purchase and accounting services to nine of our containerships. 47 Table of Contents Costamare Shipping has agreed that during the term of the Framework Agreement, it will not provide any management services to any entity other than our subsidiaries, Costamare Bulkers and its subsidiaries and entities affiliated with our chairman and chief executive officer or his family, without our prior written approval, which we may provide under certain circumstances. Currently, Costamare Shipping provides management services to all of Costamare Bulkers’ dry bulk vessels and five vessels privately owned or controlled by or affiliated with our chairman and chief executive officer, Konstantinos Konstantakopoulos. Costamare Services has agreed that during the term of the Services Agreement, it will not provide services to any entity other than our subsidiaries, Costamare Bulkers and its subsidiaries and entities affiliated with our chairman and chief executive officer or his family, without our prior written approval. Currently, Costamare Services provides services to all of Costamare Bulkers’ vessel owning subsidiaries and post fixture services in respect of one container vessel partly owned by our chairman and chief executive officer, Konstantinos Konstantakopoulos. V.Ships Greece, Navilands, Navilands (Shanghai), HanseContor and Vinnen provide and/or may provide services to third parties. Under the restrictive covenant agreement between the Company and Konstantinos Konstantakopoulos, during the period of his employment or service with the Company and for six months thereafter, he has agreed to restrictions on his ownership of any containerships or the acquisition, investment in or control of any business involved in the ownership or operation of containerships, subject to certain exceptions. Konstantinos Konstantakopoulos has also agreed that if one of our vessels and a vessel majority owned by him are both available and meet the criteria for an available charter, our vessel will receive such charter. See “Item 7. Major Shareholders and Related Party Transactions—B. Related Party Transactions—Restrictive Covenant Agreements”. In the event that Costamare Shipping or Costamare Services decide to delegate certain or all of the services they have agreed to perform under the Framework Agreement or the Services Agreement, respectively, either through (i) subcontracting to a sub-manager or sub-provider or (ii) by directing such sub-manager or sub-provider to enter into a direct agreement with the relevant vessel-owning subsidiary, then, in the case of subcontracting under (i), Costamare Shipping or Costamare Services, as applicable, will be responsible for paying the fee charged by the relevant sub-manager or sub-provider for providing such services and, in the case of a direct agreement under (ii), the fee received by Costamare Shipping or Costamare Services, as applicable, will be reduced by the fee payable to the sub-manager or sub-provider under the relevant direct agreement. As a result, these arrangements will not result in any increase in the aggregate management fees and services fees that we pay. In addition to management fees, we pay for any capital expenditures, financial costs, operating expenses and any general and administrative expenses, including payments to third parties, including specialist providers, in accordance with the Framework Agreement and the relevant separate ship-management agreements or supervision agreements. Costamare Shipping received in 2025 and 2024 a fee of $1,020 per day pro-rated for the calendar days we own each vessel. This fee is reduced to $510 per day in the case of any vessel subject to a bareboat charter. We will also pay to Costamare Shipping a flat fee of $839,988 per newbuild vessel for the supervision of the construction of any newbuild vessel that we may contract. Costamare Shipping received in 2025 and 2024 a fee of 0.15% on all gross freight, demurrage, charter hire and ballast bonus or other income earned with respect to each vessel in our fleet. Costamare Services received in 2025 and 2024 a fee of 1.10%, on all gross freight, demurrage, charter hire and ballast bonus or other income earned with respect to each vessel in our fleet and a quarterly fee of (i) $666,737 and (ii) an amount equal to the value of 149,600 shares, based on the average closing price of our common stock on the NYSE for the 10 days ending on the 30th day of the last month of each quarter; provided that Costamare Services may elect to receive 149,600 shares instead of the fee under (ii). We have reserved a number of shares of common stock to cover the fees to be paid to Costamare Services under (ii) through December 31, 2030. For the years ended December 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024, Costamare Shipping and Costamare Services charged aggregate fees of $44.4 million and $47.2 million, respectively, including $5.7 million and $6.3 million for the years ended December 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively, charged by third-party managers. The aforementioned fees include the value of the 598,400 shares we issued within each year pursuant to the Services Agreement, to Costamare Services. Additionally, during the years ended December 31, 2025 and 2024, Costamare Shipping charged, in aggregate, to the vessels privately owned or controlled by or affiliated with our chairman and chief executive officer, Konstantinos Konstantakopoulos, $1.9 million and $1.7 million, respectively, for services provided in accordance with the relevant agreements. 48 Table of Contents On December 31, 2025, the terms of the Framework Agreement and the Services Agreement automatically renewed for another one-year period and will automatically renew for nine more consecutive one-year periods until December 31, 2035. The daily fee for each vessel and the supervision fee in respect of each vessel under construction payable to Costamare Shipping under the Framework Agreement and the quarterly fee payable to Costamare Services under the Services Agreement (other than the portion of the fee in clause (ii) above which is calculated on the basis of our share price) will be annually adjusted to reflect any strengthening of the Euro against the U.S. dollar of more than 5% per year and/or material unforeseen cost increases. We are able to terminate the Framework Agreement or the Services Agreement, subject to a termination fee, by providing written notice to Costamare Shipping or Costamare Services, as applicable, at least 12 months before the end of the subsequent one-year term. The termination fee is equal to (a) the number of full years remaining prior to December 31, 2035, times (b) the aggregate fees due and payable to Costamare Shipping or Costamare Services, as applicable, during the 12-month period ending on the date of termination (without taking into account any reduction in fees under the Framework Agreement to reflect that certain obligations have been delegated to a sub-manager or a sub-provider, as applicable); provided that the termination fee will always be at least two times the aggregate fees over the 12-month period described above. Information about other termination events under the Management Agreements is set forth in “Item 7. Major Shareholders and Related Party Transactions—B. Related Party Transactions—Management Agreements—Term and Termination Rights”. Pursuant to the terms of the Framework Agreement, the separate ship-management agreements, the supervision agreements and the Services Agreement, liability of Costamare Shipping and Costamare Services to us is limited to instances of gross negligence or willful misconduct on the part of Costamare Shipping or Costamare Services. Further, we are required to indemnify Costamare Shipping and Costamare Services for liabilities incurred by them in performance of the Framework Agreement, separate ship-management agreements, supervision agreements and the Services Agreement respectively, in each case except in instances of gross negligence or willful misconduct on the part of Costamare Shipping or Costamare Services. Competition We operate in markets that are highly competitive and based primarily on supply and demand. Generally, we compete for charters based upon charter rate, customer relationships, operating expertise, professional reputation and vessel specifications, size, age and condition. Competition for providing containership services comes from a number of experienced shipping companies. In addition, in recent years, there have been other entrants in the market, such as leasing companies and private equity firms who have significant capital to invest in vessel ownership, which has provided for additional competition in both sectors. Participants in the container shipping industry include “liner” shipping companies, which operate container shipping services and own containerships, containership owners, often known as “charter owners”, who own containerships and charter them out to liner companies, and shippers who require the seaborne movement of containerized goods. Historically, a significant share of the world’s containership capacity has been owned by the liner companies, with the mix of owned vessels and chartered-in vessels varying, depending on market conditions and each liner’s company strategy and business requirements. We believe that the containership sector of the international shipping industry is characterized by the significant time required to develop the operating expertise and professional reputation necessary to obtain and retain customers. Our large and diversified fleet, comprised of containerships of varying TEU capacities, enables us to act as a one-stop solution for our charterers. This flexibility allows us to meet over time the changing operational needs of our clients across a broad spectrum of trade routes—ranging from East-West to North-South and Intraregional—which depend on, among other things, the availability of vessels for chartering at any given time, geopolitical developments such as changes to trade policies, the closure of the Suez Canal or sanctions, port congestion, infrastructure constraints such as limits on Panama Canal crossings, and regulatory changes such as changes to regulations regarding emissions or fuel types. Our versatile fleet allows us to offer commercial solutions that align with the shifting logistical and commercial requirements of different routes, enabling us to support our clients in optimizing their network and responding effectively to shifting market conditions; however, given the interplay of the aforementioned variables, the impact of rate environments on our results may vary significantly over time. In the past decade, we have had successful chartering relationships with the majority of the top 10 liner companies by TEU capacity. In the past, we have been able to address the periodic scarcity of secondhand containerships available for acquisition in the open market through the acquisition of containerships mainly from our liner company customers in privately negotiated sales. In connection with these acquisitions, we then typically charter back the vessels to these customers. We believe we have been able to pursue these privately negotiated acquisitions because of our long-standing customer relations, which we do not believe new entrants have. 49 Table of Contents Crewing and Shore Employees We have three shore-based officers, our chairman and chief executive officer, our chief financial officer and our general counsel and secretary. We do not pay any compensation to our officers for their services as officers. Our officers are employed by and receive compensation for their services from Costamare Shipping and/or Costamare Services. As of December 31, 2025, Costamare Shipping, Costamare Services and the Neptune Manager employed in the aggregate approximately 220 shore-based employees and approximately 1,660 seafarers were serving on our vessels. Our managers are responsible for recruiting, either directly or through manning agents, the officers and crew for our containerships that they manage. We believe the streamlining of crewing arrangements through our managers ensures that all of our vessels will be crewed with experienced crews that have the qualifications and licenses required by international regulations and shipping conventions. We have not experienced any material work stoppages due to labor disagreements during the past three years. Seasonality We operate our vessels in markets that have historically exhibited seasonal variations in demand and, as a result, in charter hire rates. This seasonality may result in quarter to quarter volatility in our operating results. In particular, the containership market is typically stronger in the third quarter of the year in anticipation of the holiday season. Permits and Authorizations We are required by various governmental and other agencies to obtain certain permits, licenses, certificates and financial assurances with respect to each of our vessels. The kinds of permits, licenses, certificates and financial assurances required by governmental and other agencies depend upon several factors, including the commodity being transported, the waters in which the vessel operates, the nationality of the vessel’s crew and the type and age of the vessel. All permits, licenses, certificates and financial assurances currently required to operate our vessels have been obtained (exclusive of cargo-specific documentation, for which charterers or shippers are responsible). Additional laws and regulations, environmental or otherwise, may be adopted which could limit our ability to do business or increase the cost of doing business. Our Lease Financing Platform Neptune was established in 2021 to acquire and bareboat charter out vessels through wholly-owned subsidiaries. In March 2023, we entered into an agreement with Neptune and its shareholders pursuant to which we agreed to invest in Neptune’s ship sale and leaseback business up to $200 million in exchange for up to 40% of its ordinary shares and up to 79.05% of its preferred shares. In addition, we received a special ordinary share in Neptune which carries 75% of the voting rights of the ordinary shares providing control over Neptune. On January 26, 2026, we entered into the Amended and Restated Neptune Shareholders’ Agreement, whereby we agreed to increase our investment commitment to $247.8 million. Neptune’s strategy is to build a portfolio of long-term contracts through sale and leaseback transactions in the maritime sector. Neptune endeavors to obtain bank financing to finance on a back to back basis part of the financing it extends to its clients. As of February 24, 2026, we have invested in Neptune the amount of $182.2 million and own 39.0% of Neptune’s ordinary shares and 78.1% of its preferred shares. As of February 24, 2026, Neptune is currently funding or committed to funding 52 shipping assets and Neptune’s portfolio of sale and leaseback arrangements and commitments includes 22 dry bulk vessels, three tanker vessels, 24 offshore vessels and three container vessels. Our Counterparties Our lease financing platform endeavors to finance diverse vessels types, that meet its financing criteria and to develop long-lasting relationships both with shipowners and financiers, in order to help maintain continuous access to dealflow. 50 Table of Contents Neptune Manager Neptune receives administrative, strategic, accounting and tax as well as insurance arrangements and vessel related services in respect of vessels being financed or to be financed from the Neptune Manager. The Neptune Manager is majority owned by our chairman and chief executive officer, Konstantinos Konstantakopoulos, with the general manager and member of the board of directors of Neptune holding a minority stake in the Neptune Manager. Risk of Loss and Liability Insurance General The operation of any vessel includes risks such as mechanical failure, collision, property loss or damage, cargo loss or damage and business interruption due to a number of reasons, including political circumstances in foreign countries, hostilities and labor strikes. In addition, there is always an inherent possibility of marine disaster, including oil spills and other environmental incidents, as well as other liabilities arising from owning and operating vessels in international trade. The U.S. Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (“OPA 90”), which imposes under certain circumstances, unlimited liability upon owners, operators and demise charterers of vessels trading in the United States exclusive economic zone for certain oil pollution accidents in the United States, has made liability insurance more expensive for shipowners and operators trading in the United States market. We maintain hull and machinery marine risks insurance and hull and machinery and loss of hire war risks insurance for our fleet of containerships to cover normal risks in our operations and in amounts that we believe to be prudent to cover such risks. In addition, we maintain coverage for liabilities associated with the operations of our vessels up to the customary limits provided by Protection and Indemnity (“P&I”) clubs. While we believe that our insurance coverage will be adequate, not all risks can be insured, and there can be no guarantee that we will always be able to obtain adequate insurance coverage at reasonable rates or at all, or that any specific claim we may make under our insurance coverage will be paid. In addition, our insurers may not be contractually obligated or may be prohibited from posting security or covering costs or losses associated with certain incidents (for example, casualties in sanctioned locations like Iran). Hull & Machinery Marine Risks Insurance, Hull & Machinery War Risks Insurance and Loss of Hire Insurance We maintain hull and machinery marine risks insurance and hull and machinery war risks insurance, which cover the risk of particular average, general average, 4/4ths collision liability and actual or constructive total loss in accordance with the Institute Time Clauses - Hulls – 1.10.83, except for the war risk insurance, which is in accordance with the rules of the Hellenic Mutual War Risks Association (Bermuda) Ltd. Each of our vessels is insured up to what we believe to be at least its fair market value, after meeting certain deductibles. We do not and will not obtain loss of hire insurance (or any other kind of business interruption insurance) covering the loss of revenue during off-hire periods, other than due to war risks, for any of our vessels because we believe that this type of coverage is not economical and is of limited value to us, in part because historically our vessels have had a very limited number of off-hire days. Protection and Indemnity Insurance—Pollution Coverage Protection and indemnity insurance is usually provided by a P&I association and covers third-party liability, crew liability and other related expenses resulting from the injury or death of crew, passengers and other third parties, the loss or damage to cargo, third-party claims arising from collisions with other vessels (to the extent not recovered by the hull and machinery policies), damage to other third-party property, pollution arising from oil or other substances and salvage, towing and other related costs, including wreck removal. Our protection and indemnity insurance is provided by a P&I association which is a member of the International Group of P&I Clubs (“International Group”). The 12 P&I associations that comprise the International Group insure approximately 90% of the world’s commercial blue-water tonnage and have entered into a pooling agreement to reinsure each association’s liabilities. Insurance provided by a P&I association is a form of mutual indemnity insurance. 51 Table of Contents Our protection and indemnity insurance coverage is currently subject to a limit of about $1 billion per vessel per incident for pollution. As a member of a P&I association, which is a member of the International Group, we will be subject to calls payable to the P&I association based on the International Group’s claim records as well as the claim records of all other members of the P&I association of which we are a member. Inspection by Classification Societies Every seagoing vessel must be “classed” by a classification society. The classification society certifies that the vessel is “in class”, signifying that the vessel has been built and maintained in accordance with the rules of the classification society and complies with applicable rules and regulations of the vessel’s country of registry and the international conventions of which that country is a member. In addition, where surveys are required by international conventions and corresponding laws and ordinances of a flag state, the classification society will undertake them on application or by official order, acting on behalf of the authorities concerned. The classification society also undertakes on request other surveys and checks that are required by regulations and requirements of the flag state. These surveys are subject to agreements made in each individual case and/or to the regulations of the country concerned. For maintenance of the class, regular and occasional surveys of hull and machinery, including the electrical plant and any special equipment classed, are required to be performed as follows: Annual Surveys. For seagoing ships, annual surveys are conducted for the hull and the machinery, including the electrical plant, and where applicable, on special equipment classed at intervals of 12 months from the date of commencement of the class period indicated in the certificate. Intermediate Surveys. Extended annual surveys are referred to as intermediate surveys and typically are conducted two and one-half years after commissioning and each class renewal. Intermediate surveys may be carried out on the occasion of the second or third annual survey. According to the type and age of the ship, the examinations of the hull may be supplemented by thickness measurements as specified in the classification society’s rules and as deemed necessary by the attending surveyor. Class Renewal Surveys. Class renewal surveys, also known as special surveys, are carried out on the ship’s hull and machinery, including the electrical plant, and on any special equipment classed at the intervals indicated by the character of classification for the ship. During the special survey, the vessel is thoroughly examined, including ultrasonic gauging to determine the thickness of the steel structures. Should the thickness be found to be less than class requirements, the classification society would prescribe steel renewals. Class renewal surveys/special surveys are carried out at five-year intervals. The special survey may be commenced at the fourth annual survey or between the fourth and fifth annual surveys. Consideration may be given by class, in exceptional circumstances, to granting an extension for a maximum period of three months after the due date. Substantial amounts of funds may have to be spent for steel renewals to pass a special survey if the vessel experiences excessive wear and tear. In lieu of the special survey arrangement at which ship’s hull and structure, equipment and systems are surveyed at five-year intervals, a shipowner has the option of arranging with the classification society for the vessel’s hull or machinery to be on a continuous survey cycle, in which survey items of the vessel are subject to separate surveys. This process is referred to as continuous class renewal. All areas subject to surveys as defined by the classification society are required to be surveyed at least once per class period, unless shorter intervals between surveys are otherwise prescribed. The period between two consecutive surveys of each area must not exceed five years. All vessels are also required to be subject to bottom surveys and dry-docking for inspection of their underwater parts and for repairs related to such inspections. Two bottom surveys are required during each five-year period of the classification certificate and the interval between any two successive bottoms surveys is in no case to exceed 36 months. One bottom survey (dry-docking) shall be carried out in conjunction with the special survey. Every alternate bottom survey may be permitted afloat, provided certain design conditions are met, in conjunction with the main class intermediate and the special surveys. If any defects are found, the classification surveyor will issue a “condition of class or memorandum” which must be rectified by the shipowner within prescribed time limits and at the latest during the next special survey. 52 Table of Contents Insurance underwriters make it a condition for insurance coverage that a vessel be certified as “in class” by a classification society which is a member of the International Association of Classification Societies (“IACS”). All of our vessels are certified as being “in class” by members of IACS. The following table lists the dates by which we expect to carry out the next dry-dockings and special surveys for the vessels in our current vessel fleets: Dry-docking Schedule 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Number of Containerships 20 8 15 9 10 Environmental and Other Regulations Government regulation significantly affects the ownership and operation of our vessels. We are subject to international conventions and national, port state and local laws and regulations applicable to international waters and/or territorial waters of the countries in which our vessels may operate or are registered, including laws and regulations governing the management and disposal of hazardous substances and wastes, the cleanup of oil spills and the management of other contamination, air emissions, grey water and ballast water management and climate change. These laws and regulations include OPA 90, the U.S. Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (“CERCLA”), the U.S. Clean Water Act (“CWA”), the U.S. Clean Air Act (“CAA”) and regulations adopted by the IMO, including MARPOL and the International Convention for Safety of Life at Sea (“SOLAS”), as well as regulations enacted by the European Union and other international, national and local regulatory bodies. Compliance with these laws, regulations and other requirements necessitates significant expense, including vessel modifications and implementation of certain operating procedures. A variety of governmental and private entities subject our vessels to both scheduled and unscheduled inspections. These entities include the local port authorities Port State Control (such as the U.S. Coast Guard, harbor master or equivalent), classification societies, flag state administration (country of registry) and charterers. Several of these entities require us to obtain permits, licenses, financial assurances and certificates for the operation of our vessels. Failure to maintain necessary permits or approvals could require us to incur substantial costs or result in the temporary suspension of operation of one or more of our vessels in one or more ports. Increasing environmental concerns have created a demand for vessels that conform to the strictest environmental standards. We are required to maintain operating standards for all of our vessels that emphasize operational safety, quality maintenance, continuous training of our officers and crews and compliance with U.S. and international regulations. Our affiliated managers, together with V.Ships Greece, maintain full certification under internationally recognized management system standards. These include ISO 9001:2018 (Quality Management Systems), which governs the consistent delivery of high quality services in accordance with our expectations and applicable regulatory requirements; ISO 14001:2015 (Environmental Management Systems), which ensures structured and effective environmental stewardship; ISO 50001:2018 (Energy Management Systems), supporting the efficient use of energy and continuous improvement in energy performance across our operations; and ISO 45001:2018 (Occupational Health and Safety Management Systems), demonstrating a commitment to maintaining safe working environments and safeguarding the well-being of our personnel. We believe that operations of our vessels are in substantial compliance with applicable environmental laws and regulations and that our vessels have all material permits, licenses, certificates and other authorizations necessary for their operation. 53 Table of Contents IMO Requirements Our vessels are subject to standards imposed by the IMO, the United Nations agency for maritime safety and the prevention of pollution by ships. The IMO has adopted regulations that are designed to reduce pollution in international waters and in the atmosphere, both from accidents and from routine operations, and has negotiated international conventions that impose liability for oil pollution in international waters and a signatory’s territorial waters. For example, Annex VI to MARPOL sets limits on sulphur oxide and nitrogen oxide emissions from vessel exhausts and prohibits deliberate emissions of ozone depleting substances, such as chlorofluorocarbons. Annex VI also includes a global cap on the sulphur content of fuel oil and requirements for ships to collect data on fuel oil consumption and carbon dioxide emissions. Amendments to Annex VI effective from January 1, 2020, seek to reduce air pollution from vessels by, among other things, establishing a series of progressive requirements to further limit the sulphur content of fuel oil and by establishing new tiers of nitrogen oxide emission standards for new marine diesel engines, depending on their date of installation. These requirements include a global sulphur cap of 0.5% m/m which became effective in 2020, and is a significant reduction from the 3.5% m/m global limit previously in place. Vessels must either be equipped with exhaust gas scrubbers, which allow the vessel to use the existing, less expensive, high sulphur content fuel, or have undertaken fuel system modification and tank cleaning, which allows the vessel to use more expensive, low sulphur fuel. Vessels that are not equipped with exhaust gas scrubbers cannot have high sulphur content fuel on board. We currently have exhaust gas scrubbers in 15 of our vessels in the water. In addition, all our newbuild vessels under construction will be equipped with scrubbers. Vessels that do not have exhaust gas scrubbers installed are using low sulphur content fuel in compliance with applicable regulations. Annex VI also provides for the establishment of special areas, known as Emission Control Areas (“ECAs”), where more stringent controls on sulphur and other emissions apply. Currently, the Baltic Sea area, the North Sea area, the Mediterranean Sea, certain coastal areas of North America (off of the United States and Canada) and the U.S. Caribbean Sea area (around Puerto Rico and the United States Virgin Islands) are designated as ECAs. Within the ECAs, the use of fuel oil with a sulphur content not exceeding 0.10% or the use of an exhaust gas cleaning system is mandatory. At MEPC 82, the IMO adopted amendments to Annex VI to designate the Canadian Arctic and Norwegian Sea as two new ECAs for nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides and particulate matter. The amendments will enter into force on March 1, 2026. At MEPC 83, the IMO approved a proposal to designate the North-East Atlantic Ocean as an ECA, although the proposal has not yet been adopted. Additional ECAs may be established in the future. IMO NOx Tier III requirements took effect in North American and U.S. Caribbean ECAs in 2016 for vessels with a keel-laying date on or after January 1, 2016 and an engine output in excess of 130kW. For vessels constructed (keel-laying) on or after January 1, 2021 and operating in the Baltic Sea ECA or the North Sea ECA, any marine diesel engine installed with output in excess of 130 kW must comply with the NOx Tier III standard. However, in newly designated NOx ECAs, the NOx Tier III requirements are not retroactive and the Tier III emission limits are applicable to vessels with keel-laying as of the date that the NOx ECAs goes into effect. Amendments to MARPOL Annex VI, which entered into force in 2018, require ships of 5,000 gross tonnage and above to collect consumption data for each type of fuel they use, as well as additional data, including proxies for transport work. The aggregated data must be reported to the ship’s flag state (“Flag Administration”) on an annual basis. At MEPC 81, the IMO adopted amendments to Appendix IX of MARPOL Annex VI, which introduced increased data granularity requirements, including, among other things, the reporting of fuel consumption per consumer type and data on transport work. These amendments went into effect on August 1, 2025. All our vessels are compliant in all material respects with current Annex VI requirements, however, if new ECAs are approved by the IMO or other new or more stringent air emission requirements are adopted by the IMO or the states where we expect to operate, compliance with these requirements could entail significant additional capital expenditures, operational changes or otherwise increase the costs of our operations. Amendments to MARPOL Annex V (regulation for the prevention of pollution by garbage from ships) entered into force in 2018. The changes included criteria for determining whether cargo residues are harmful to the marine environment, and a new Garbage Record Book format with a new garbage category for e-waste. Although all our existing vessels are compliant with MARPOL Annex V requirements, the amendments could cause us to incur additional operational costs for the handling of garbage produced on our fleet. In 2011, MEPC adopted two initial sets of mandatory requirements to address GHG emissions from ships that entered into force in 2013. New ships became required to determine their Energy Efficiency Design Index (“EEDI”), which obligated them to achieve a minimum energy efficiency level per capacity mile, and all operating vessels became required to maintain and follow a Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plan (“SEEMP”). 54 Table of Contents At MEPC 76, MEPC finalized and adopted amendments to the MARPOL Annex VI that also require ships to reduce their GHG emissions. Beginning in 2023, all existing ships became required to calculate their Energy Efficiency Existing Ship Index (“EEXI”) and establish their annual operational carbon intensity indicator (“CII”) and CII rating. Attained EEXI must be calculated for ships of 400 gross tonnage and above, in accordance with the different values set for ship types and size categories and verified by class. EEXI indicates the energy efficiency of the ship compared to a baseline. Ships are required to meet a specific required EEXI (the “Required EEXI”), which is based on a mandated reduction factor (expressed as a percentage relative to the EEDI baseline). When a ship’s attained EEDI does not meet the Required EEXI threshold, technical modification options may be considered for compliance (e.g., engine/ shaft power limitation, retrofit of energy saving technologies, alternative fuels). A ship’s CII determines the annual reduction factor needed to ensure continuous improvement of the ship’s operational carbon intensity within a specific rating level. The actual annual operational CII achieved must be documented and verified against the required annual operational CII, which determines the operational carbon intensity rating. The rating is given on a scale–operational carbon intensity rating A, B, C, D, or E–indicating a major superior, minor superior, moderate, minor inferior, or inferior performance level. The performance level is recorded in the ship’s SEEMP. A ship rated D for three consecutive years, or E, will have to submit a corrective action plan, to show how the required index (C or above) will be achieved. As a result of the IMO’s desire to contribute to global efforts against climate change, it adopted an initial GHG reduction strategy in April 2018. This strategy established levels of ambition for emissions reductions subject to ongoing reviews by the organization. The ambition levels considered potential improvements on vessel design and operational performance as well as the immediate need to introduce low/zero carbon fuels, and introduced a list of candidate short-term, mid-term and long-term measures to support the IMO’s ambition levels. Short-term measures included the evaluation and improvement of vessel energy efficiency requirements, the application of technical efficiency measures for existing ships and the introduction and regulation of carbon intensity for ships in operation. Mid-term and long-term measures included development of an implementation program for alternative low/zero carbon fuels, adoption of other possible innovative emission reduction mechanism(s) and market-based measures to incentivize GHG emissions reductions. The levels of ambition and indicative checkpoints consider the Well-to-Wake (WtW) GHG emissions of marine fuels, as addressed in the Guidelines on life-cycle GHG intensity of marine fuels life-cycle analysis (LCA) Guidelines, with the overall objective of reducing GHG emissions of international shipping without shifting such emissions to other sectors. In July 2023, the IMO adopted the 2023 IMO Strategy on Reduction of GHG Emissions from Ships, which provided new mid-term emissions reduction goals and built upon the initial strategy’s levels of ambition. The revised levels of ambition include (1) further decreasing the carbon intensity from ships through improvement of energy efficiency; (2) reducing carbon intensity of international shipping; (3) increasing adoption of zero or near-zero emissions technologies, fuels, and energy sources to represent at least 5%, striving for 10%, of the energy used by international shipping by 2030 and (4) achieving net zero GHG emissions from international shipping. In April 2025 at MEPC 83, MEPC approved the draft legal text of the NZF to be included as a new chapter in MARPOL Annex VI. The NZF includes a marine fuel standard that requires ships to gradually phase in fuels with lower GHG emissions intensity and a global GHG emissions pricing mechanism, and is scheduled for further discussions and possible adoption in October 2026. The NZF, if adopted, would enter into force no earlier than 2028 and require compliance no earlier than 2029. Potential long-term emissions reduction measures may be finalized and agreed by MEPC beyond 2030. Implementation of the framework through existing and potential future regulatory measures may require additional capital expenditures to achieve compliance with new emissions reduction targets across the shipping sector and increased use of zero or near-zero GHG emission technologies, among other obligations. We are unable to accurately predict the ultimate scope of such measures and their potential impact on our operations once implemented. Emissions monitoring and varying emission requirements present significant challenges for vessel owners and operators. To address the potential compliance challenges for some of the existing vessels, particularly the older ones, while keeping in line with the IMO strategy’s levels of ambition, the EU ETS and the FuelEU Maritime Regulation, we may incur significant capital expenditures to apply efficiency improvement measures and meet the Required EEXI threshold, for example with respect to shaft/engine power limitation (power optimization), fuel change, energy saving devices and ship replacement. The EEXI regulatory framework may also accelerate the scrapping of older tonnage, while the adoption of shaft/engine power limitation as measures to comply with the amendments may lead to the continuing prevalence of slow steaming to even lower speeds which could result in contracting/ building of new ships to replace any reduction in capacity. 55 Table of Contents The impact of these requirements on our business and operations, including any necessary capital expenditures, is difficult to accurately predict at this time. The Hong Kong International Convention for the Safe and Environmentally Sound Recycling of Ships (the “Hong Kong Convention”) went into effect on June 26, 2025. The Hong Kong Convention introduced regulations covering the design, construction, operation and preparation of ships in order to facilitate recycling and the operation of ship recycling facilities and established an enforcement mechanism for ship recycling, incorporating certification and reporting requirements. Pursuant to the Hong Kong Convention, ships must have an Inventory of Hazardous Materials specific to each ship on board, which must be prepared and verified in line with IMO guidelines. In addition to that initial verification, ships will be subject to additional surveys during the life of the ship, and a final survey prior to recycling. In 2024, MARPOL Annex I began to prohibit the use of Heavy Fuel Oil, or “HFO,” in Artic waters. This ban applies to oils with a density at 15°C higher than 900 kg/m3 or a kinematic viscosity at 50°C higher than 180 mm2/s. Parties to MARPOL with coastlines bordering Arctic waters may temporarily waive the requirements for ships flying their flags while operating in waters subject to that Party’s sovereignty or jurisdiction until July 1, 2029. Our vessels are required to adhere to this prohibition. Other International Requirements Concerns surrounding climate change may lead certain international or multinational bodies or individual countries to propose and/or adopt new climate change initiatives. For example, in 2015, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change adopted the Paris Agreement, which entered into force and established a framework for reducing global GHG emissions, with the goal of holding the increase in global average temperature to well below 2 degrees Celsius and pursuing efforts to limit the increase to 1.5 degrees Celsius. Although the Paris Agreement does not specifically require controls on shipping or other industries, it is possible that countries or groups of countries will seek to impose such controls as they implement the Paris Agreement, which may cause us to incur capital expenditures and/or increase our operating costs in the future. The International Convention on Civil Liability for Bunker Oil Pollution Damage (the “Bunker Convention”), imposes strict liability on vessel owners for pollution damage in jurisdictional waters of ratifying states caused by discharges of bunker fuel. The Bunker Convention also requires registered owners of vessels over 1,000 gross tons to maintain insurance in specified amounts to cover liability for bunker fuel pollution damage. Each of our containerships has been issued a certificate attesting that insurance is in force in accordance with the Bunker Convention. The International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships’ Ballast Water and Sediments (the “BWM Convention”) requires each vessel to have on board a valid International Ballast Water Management Certificate, a Ballast Water Management Plan and a Ballast Water Record Book. Compliance with the standards pertaining to the treatment of the ballast water (“D-2 Standard”) requires most existing ships to install a ballast water treatment system by the ship’s first International Oil Pollution Prevention Certificate (“IOPPC”) renewal survey after September 8, 2019, while vessels constructed (keel laying performed) after September 8, 2017 must have an approved BWM system installed on delivery. This implementation schedule was designed to ensure full global implementation by September 8, 2024. All our vessels comply with the D-2 Standard or have an approved BWM system installed. The MEPC is currently reviewing the provisions of the BWM Convention and may adopt amendments by MEPC 85. The operation of our vessels is based on the requirements set forth in the ISM Code. The ISM Code requires vessel managers to develop and maintain an extensive SMS that includes the adoption of a safety and environmental protection policy, sets forth instructions and procedures for safe vessel operation and describes procedures for dealing with emergencies. The ISM Code requires that vessel operators obtain an SMC for each vessel they operate from the government of the vessel’s flag state. The certificate verifies that the vessel operates in compliance with its approved SMS. No vessel can obtain a certificate unless the flag state has issued a document of compliance with the ISM Code to the vessel’s manager. Failure to comply with the ISM Code may lead to withdrawal of the permit to manage or operate the vessels, subject such party to increased liability, decrease or suspend available insurance coverage for the affected vessels, or result in a denial of access to, or detention in, certain ports. Each vessel in our fleet and each of our affiliated managers and third-party managers are ISM Code-certified. 56 Table of Contents United States Requirements OPA 90 established an extensive regulatory and liability regime for the protection of the environment from oil spills and cleanup of oil spills. OPA 90 applies to discharges of any oil from a vessel, including discharges of fuel and lubricants. OPA 90 affects all owners and operators whose vessels trade in the United States, its territories and possessions or whose vessels operate in U.S. waters, which include the United States’ territorial sea and its two hundred nautical mile exclusive economic zone. While we do not carry oil as cargo, we do carry fuel in our containerships, making them subject to the requirements of OPA 90. Under OPA 90, vessel owners, operators and bareboat charterers are “responsible parties” and are jointly, severally and strictly liable (unless the discharge of pollutants results solely from the act or omission of a third party, an act of God or an act of war) for all containment and clean-up costs and other damages arising from discharges or threatened discharges of pollutants from their vessels, including bunkers. OPA 90 defines these other damages broadly to include: • natural resource damages and the costs of assessment thereof; • real and personal property damage; • net loss of taxes, royalties, rents, fees and other lost revenues; • lost profits or impairment of earning capacity due to property or natural resource damages; and • net cost of public services necessitated by a spill response, such as protection from fire, safety or health hazards, and loss of subsistence use of natural resources. OPA 90 preserves the right to recover damages under other existing laws, including maritime tort law. Effective March 23, 2023, the OPA liability limitation under U.S. Coast Guard regulations was increased to the greater of $1,300 per gross ton or $1,076,000 per incident for non-tank vessels, subject to periodic future adjustments of such limits. These limitations of liability do not apply if an incident was directly caused by violation of applicable U.S. safety, construction or operating regulations or by a responsible party’s gross negligence or willful misconduct, or if the responsible party fails or refuses to report the incident or to cooperate and assist in connection with oil removal activities. The U.S. Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (“CERCLA”) applies to spills or releases of hazardous substances other than petroleum or petroleum products whether on land or at sea. CERCLA imposes joint and several liability, without regard to fault, on the owner or operator of a vessel, vehicle or facility from which there has been a release, along with other specified parties. Costs recoverable under CERCLA include cleanup and removal costs, natural resource damages and governmental oversight costs. Liability under CERCLA is generally limited to the greater of $300 per gross ton or $5.0 million for vessels carrying any hazardous substances, such as cargo or residue, or $0.5 million for any other vessel, per release of or incident involving hazardous substances. These limits of liability do not apply if the incident is caused by gross negligence, willful misconduct or a violation of certain regulations, in which case liability is unlimited. All owners and operators of vessels over 300 gross tons are required to establish and maintain with the U.S. Coast Guard evidence of financial responsibility sufficient to meet their potential liabilities under OPA 90 and CERCLA. Under the U.S. Coast Guard regulations, vessel owners and operators may evidence their financial responsibility by providing proof of insurance, surety bond, guarantee, letter of credit or self-insurance. An owner or operator of a fleet of vessels is required only to demonstrate evidence of financial responsibility in an amount sufficient to cover the vessel in the fleet having the greatest maximum liability under OPA 90 and CERCLA. Under the self-insurance provisions, the vessel owner or operator must have a net worth and working capital that exceeds the applicable amount of financial responsibility, measured in assets located in the United States against liabilities located anywhere in the world. 57 Table of Contents U.S. Coast Guard regulations concerning certificates of financial responsibility provide, in accordance with OPA 90, that claimants may bring suit directly against an insurer or guarantor that furnishes certificates of financial responsibility. In the event that such insurer or guarantor is sued directly, it is prohibited from asserting any contractual defense that it may have had against the responsible party and is limited to asserting those defenses available to the responsible party and the defense that the incident was caused by the willful misconduct of the responsible party. Certain organizations, which had typically provided certificates of financial responsibility under pre-OPA 90 laws, including the major P&I associations, have declined to furnish evidence of insurance for vessel owners and operators if they are subject to direct actions or required to waive insurance policy defenses. OPA 90 specifically permits individual states to impose their own liability regimes with regard to oil pollution incidents occurring within their borders, coasts and territorial seas, and some states have enacted legislation providing for unlimited liability for entities found responsible for oil spills. In some cases, states which have enacted such legislation have not yet issued implementing regulations defining vessels owners’ responsibilities under these laws. We intend to comply with all applicable state regulations in the ports where our vessels call. We currently maintain, for each of our vessels, oil pollution liability coverage insurance in the amount of $1.0 billion per vessel per incident. In addition, we carry hull and machinery protection and indemnity insurance to cover the risks of fire and explosion. Although our vessels only carry bunker fuel, a spill of oil from one of our vessels could be catastrophic under certain circumstances. Losses as a result of fire or explosion could also be catastrophic under some conditions. While we believe that our present insurance coverage is adequate, not all risks can be insured, and if the damages from a catastrophic spill exceeded our insurance coverage, the payment of those damages could have an adverse effect on our business or the results of our operations. Title VII of the Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2004 (the “CGMTA”) amended OPA 90 to require the owner or operator of any non-tank vessel of 400 gross tons or more that carries oil of any kind as a fuel for main propulsion, including bunker fuel, to prepare and submit a response plan for each vessel. These vessel response plans include detailed information on actions to be taken by vessel personnel to prevent or mitigate any discharge or substantial threat of such a discharge of oil from the vessel due to operational activities or casualties. Where required, each of our vessels has an approved response plan. The Clean Water Act (“CWA”) prohibits the discharge of oil or hazardous substances in navigable waters and imposes liability in the form of penalties for any unauthorized discharges. It also imposes substantial liability for the costs of removal, remediation and damages and complements the remedies available under the more recently enacted OPA 90 and CERCLA, discussed above. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (the “EPA”) regulates the discharge of ballast water and other substances under the CWA. EPA regulations require vessels 79 feet in length or longer (other than commercial fishing vessels) to obtain coverage under a Vessel General Permit (“VGP”) authorizing discharges of ballast waters and other wastewaters incidental to the operation of vessels when operating within the three-mile territorial waters or inland waters of the United States. The VGP requires vessel owners and operators to comply with a range of best management practices and reporting and other requirements for a number of incidental discharge types. The most recent VGP, which became effective in December 2013, expired in December 2018. It contained stringent requirements, including numeric ballast water discharge limits (that generally align with the most recent U.S. Coast Guard standards issued in 2012), to ensure that the ballast water treatment systems are functioning correctly and more stringent effluent limits for oil to sea interfaces and exhaust gas scrubber wastewater. The Vessel Incidental Discharge Act (“VIDA”) enacted December 4, 2018, required the EPA and Coast Guard to develop new performance standards and enforcement regulations and extends the 2013 VGP provisions until new regulations are final and enforceable. On October 9, 2024, the EPA issued Vessel Incidental Discharge National Standards of Performance, new final regulations pursuant to VIDA which set discharge standards that are as least as stringent as the VGP. These new standards are enforceable through U.S. Coast Guard regulations, which must be promulgated within two years. Until the Coast Guard’s regulations are final and enforceable, vessels will continue to be subject to the existing discharge requirements under the VGP. On December 2, 2016, the Marine Safety Center announced the approval of the first Coast Guard type approved Ballast Water Management System (“BWMS”). Since the approved BWMS became available, vessels calling at U.S. ports have been required to have such systems installed by their first regular dry-docking after January 1, 2016. Vessel owners and operators are alternatively permitted to meet the discharge standard without the use of a BWMS or, apply for an individual, justified extension to the compliance date. We comply with the most recent version of the VGP for all of our vessels that operate in U.S. waters or have received permission from the Coast Guard to perform ballast exchange operations in U.S. waters for a maximum of five years after the compliance date for each vessel. We do not believe that any costs associated with meeting the requirements under the VGP or the Vessel Incidental Discharge National Standards of Performance will be material. 58 Table of Contents U.S. Coast Guard regulations adopted under the 1996 U.S. National Invasive Species Act (“NISA”) also impose mandatory ballast water management practices for all vessels equipped with ballast water tanks entering or operating in U.S. waters. Amendments to these regulations, which became effective in June 2012, established maximum acceptable discharge limits for various invasive species and/or requirements for active treatment of ballast water. The U.S. Coast Guard ballast water standards are consistent with requirements under the BWM Convention. Several states, including Michigan and California, have adopted legislation or regulations relating to the permitting and management of ballast water discharges. California has extended its ballast water management program to the regulation of “hull fouling” organisms that attach to vessels and adopted regulations limiting the number of organisms in ballast water discharges. Other states could adopt similar requirements that could increase the costs of operation in state waters. The EPA has adopted standards under the Clean Air Act (“CAA”) that pertain to emissions from vessel vapor control and recovery and other operations in regulated port areas and emissions from the large marine diesel engines from model year 2004 or later. Several states also regulate emissions from vapor control and recovery under authority of State Implementation Plans adopted under the CAA. In April 2010, the EPA promulgated regulations that impose more stringent standards for emissions of particulate matter, sulphur oxides and nitrogen oxides from new Category 3 marine diesel engines on vessels constructed on or after January 1, 2016 and registered or flagged in the U.S. and implement the new MARPOL Annex VI requirements for U.S. and foreign flagged ships entering U.S. ports or operating in U.S. internal waters. California has adopted emission limits for diesel engines of ocean-going vessels operating within 24 miles of the California coast and requires operators to use low sulphur content fuel. California has also mandated that ships, instead of relying on their shipboard power, must use shore power while berthed through a process known as Cold Ironing or Alternative Maritime Power or use other CAECS (CARB Approved Emission Control Strategies) such as emission capture systems. The regulation was phased in starting in 2014 and the compliance start date for containerships, refrigerated cargo vessels and passenger vessel began on January 1, 2023. Our vessels currently affected by California regulations have made the necessary modifications. It is expected that the cost of modifications needed for other vessels in our fleet that may call to California in the future will be borne in part by the charterers of each vessel, but it is difficult to predict the exact impact on our operations. If new or more stringent regulations relating to emissions from marine diesel engines or port operations by ocean-going vessels are adopted by the EPA or states, these requirements could require significant capital expenditures or otherwise increase the costs of our operations. European Union Requirements The European Union has adopted legislation that (1) requires member states to refuse access to their ports to certain substandard vessels, according to vessel type, flag and number of previous detentions; (2) obliges member states to inspect at least 25% of foreign vessels using their ports annually and provides for increased surveillance of vessels posing a high risk to maritime safety or the marine environment; (3) provides the European Union with greater authority and control over classification societies, including the ability to seek to suspend or revoke the authority of negligent societies and (4) requires member states to impose criminal sanctions for certain pollution events, such as the unauthorized discharge of tank washings. The European Union has also adopted Regulation (EU) No. 1257/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of November 2013 on ship recycling in alignment with the requirements of the Hong Kong Convention (the “EU Recycling Regulation”). Since 2018, seagoing vessels flying the flag of an EU Member State must be recycled solely in ship recycling facilities within the EU or in countries which comply with a number of safety and environmental requirements and are included in the European List of ship recycling facilities published by the European Commission. In addition, all ships calling to European ports, whether flying the flag of an EU Member State or not, must have an inventory of hazardous materials on board, such as asbestos and ozone-depleting substances, that specifies the location and approximate quantities of those materials certified by the relevant administration or authority. 59 Table of Contents The European Union has also adopted Regulation (EU) 2015/757 of the European Parliament and of the Council of April 29, 2015 on the monitoring, reporting and verification of carbon dioxide emissions from maritime transport (the “EU MRV Regulation”) and Regulation (EU) 2023/1805 of the European Parliament and of the Council of September 13, 2023 on the use of renewable and low-carbon fuels in maritime transport (the “FuelEU Maritime Regulation”). The EU MRV Regulation requires large vessels entering European Union ports to monitor, report and verify their carbon dioxide emissions. Since June 2019, all vessels calling to ports in the European Union must carry onboard a document of compliance with said requirements. Data collected is open to the public, as provided for by the regulations. The provisions of the EU MRV Regulation are similar to MARPOL Annex VI. On September 16, 2020, the European Parliament voted in favor of amending the EU MRV Regulation to require shipping companies to reduce their annual average CO2 emissions relative to transport work on a linear basis for all their ships by at least 40% by 2030, with penalties for non-compliance. In May 2023, EU ETS regulations were amended in order to include emissions from maritime transport activities in the EU ETS and to require the monitoring, reporting and verification of emissions of additional greenhouse gases and emissions from additional ship types. In January 2024, the EU ETS was extended to cover CO2 emissions from all large ships (of 5,000 gross tonnage and above) entering EU ports, and as of 2026, the EU ETS was further tightened by applying to 100% of the CO2 in scope and extended to apply to methane and nitrous oxide emissions. Shipping companies will need to buy allowances that correspond to the emissions covered by the system. Additional jurisdictions may adopt similar GHG emissions monitoring and reduction schemes in the future. While the inclusion of shipping in the EU ETS formalized a market-based GHG emissions reduction measure that promotes improvements in energy efficiency, European regulators recognized that a mechanism establishing increasing levels of demand for renewable and low-carbon maritime fuels would drive additional emissions reductions. As a result, the EU adopted the FuelEU Maritime Regulation, which was designed to enable the EU to reduce its net GHG emissions by at least 55% by 2030 compared to 1990 levels and to achieve climate neutrality by 2050. The FuelEU Maritime Regulation incentivizes the production and uptake of sustainable low carbon and renewable fuels for ships over 5,000 gt operating in European territorial waters. The regulation entered into force on January 1, 2025 and established uniform rules imposing a limit on the GHG intensity of the energy used onboard ships arriving at, staying within or departing from ports under the jurisdiction of an EEA country. It also established that from January 1, 2030, containerships and passenger ships will be required to connect to onshore power supply (OPS) or use zero-emission technology while at berth in a port of call under the jurisdiction of a member state. The GHG intensity of energy consumed by vessels on European voyages is measured on a Well-to-Wake (WtW) basis, and the Regulation requires reductions in the lifecycle GHG intensity of fuel which will gradually increase every five years, beginning with a 2% reduction in 2025 (compared to 2020 levels), up to 80% by 2050. This progressive reduction is designed to incentivize the development and uptake of biofuels and renewable fuels of non-biological origin (RFNBOs) with higher decarbonization potential. The upper limit of GHG intensity is calculated based on the EU MRV data from 2020, and ships with a higher GHG intensity than the applicable upper limit must pay a remedial penalty proportional to their compliance deficit. The compliance deficit is the difference between the maximum permissible GHG intensity and the actual GHG intensity, multiplied by the ship’s energy consumption. FuelEU also includes a voluntary pooling mechanism, under which ships will be allowed to pool their compliance balance with one or more other ships. Both the EU ETS and FuelEU schemes have significant impacts on the management of the vessels calling to EU ports, by increasing the complexity and monitoring of, and costs associated with the operation of vessels and affecting the relationships with our time charterers. Ultimately, vessels chartered in the future may be subject to discount rates compared to more technologically advanced vessels that are better equipped to comply with such schemes, such as vessels using dual fuels. Marshall Islands Requirements On January 1, 2019, the Economic Substance Regulations, 2018 (the “ESRs”) adopted by the Republic of the Marshall Islands came into force. The ESRs apply to all Marshall Islands non-resident domestic entities and foreign maritime entities registered in the Marshall Islands that meet the definition of “relevant entity” and which derive income from a “relevant activity.” “Relevant entity” is defined in the ESRs to include a non-resident domestic entity or foreign maritime entity formed under Marshall Islands law that is centrally managed and controlled outside the Marshall Islands and is a tax resident of a jurisdiction other than the Marshall Islands. “Relevant activity” is limited under the ESRs to certain enumerated activities including “shipping business” and “holding company business” which the Company has determined may be applicable to it and its Marshall Islands subsidiaries and affiliates. 60 Table of Contents Under the ESRs, for each yearly reporting period, a relevant entity that derives income from a relevant activity must satisfy an economic substance test whereby the entity must show that it (i) is directed and managed in the Marshall Islands in relation to that relevant activity, (ii) carries out core income-generating activity in relation to that relevant activity in the Marshall Islands (although it is understood and acknowledged by the regulators that income-generated activities for shipping companies will generally occur in international waters) and (iii) has (a) an adequate amount of expenditures in the Marshall Islands, (b) adequate physical presence in the Marshall Islands and (c) an adequate number of qualified employees in the Marshall Islands, considering the level of relevant activity carried out in the Marshall Islands. All Marshall Islands non-resident domestic entities and foreign maritime entities are required to submit an Economic Substance Declaration to the Registrar of Corporations (the “Registrar”) on a yearly basis. If the Registrar determines that a relevant entity has not met the economic substance test for the relevant reporting period, the Registrar will issue a notice of non-compliance and assess penalties as disclosed in the notice. Penalties can range from fines up to $100,000 and/or revocation of formation documents and dissolution. Other Regional Requirements The environmental protection regimes in certain other countries, such as Canada, resemble those of the United States. To the extent we operate in the territorial waters of such countries or enter their ports, our containerships would typically be subject to the requirements and liabilities imposed in such countries. Other regions of the world also have the ability to adopt requirements or regulations that may impose additional obligations on our containerships and may entail significant expenditures on our part and may increase the costs of our operations. These requirements, however, would apply to the industry operating in those regions as a whole and would also affect our competitors. Of particular importance, due to the trade intensity in these areas, are four Chinese domestic ECAs created in Hong Kong and in China (Pearl River Delta, the Yangtze River Delta and Bohai Sea), which are regulated in order to reduce the levels of ship-generated air pollution and restrict the sulphur content of fuels. Vessels at berth in a core port within the ECAs are required to use fuel with a maximum sulphur content of 0.5% m/m—except one hour after arrival and one hour before departure. As of January 1, 2019, vessels must use fuel with a sulphur content not exceeding 0.5% m/m prior to entering China’s territorial sea, in defined areas. Vessels capable of receiving shore power must use shore power if they berth for more than three hours in ports in the coastal ECA that have shore power capabilities (or more than two hours in ports with such capabilities in the inland ECAs). Furthermore, ships of 400 gross tonnage or over, or ships powered by main propulsion machinery greater than 750 kW of propulsion power, calling at a port in China must report energy consumption data of their last voyage to the China Maritime Safety Administration before leaving port (pursuant to the China Regulation on Data Collection for Energy Consumption of Ships). Ships operating in Hong Kong waters are required to burn fuel with a sulphur content not exceeding 0.5% m/m. In Taiwan, ships not equipped with exhaust gas scrubbers must burn fuel with a sulphur content not exceeding 0.5% m/m when entering its international commercial port areas. In connection with the introduction of the ban of high sulphur fuel for vessels not equipped with exhaust gas scrubbers, countries are introducing rules as to the type of exhaust gas scrubber that may be acceptable to be operated on vessels, in effect prohibiting the operation in their waters of open loop-type exhaust gas scrubbers and forcing vessels to use the more expensive Diesel Oil fuel when sailing in their waters. Vessel Security Regulations A number of initiatives have been introduced in recent years intended to enhance vessel security. On November 25, 2002, the Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002 (the “MTSA”) was signed into law. To implement certain portions of the MTSA, the U.S. Coast Guard issued regulations in July 2003 requiring the implementation of certain security requirements aboard vessels operating in waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. Similarly, in December 2002, amendments to SOLAS created a new chapter of the convention dealing specifically with maritime security. This new chapter came into effect in July 2004 and imposes various detailed security obligations on vessels and port authorities, most of which are contained in the newly created ISPS Code. Among the various requirements are: 61 Table of Contents • on-board installation of automatic information systems to enhance vessel-to-vessel and vessel-to-shore communications; • on-board installation of ship security alert systems; • the development of ship security plans; and • compliance with flag state security certification requirements. The U.S. Coast Guard regulations, intended to align with international maritime security standards, exempt non-U.S. vessels from MTSA vessel security measures; provided such vessels have on board a valid “International Ship Security Certificate” that attests to the vessel’s compliance with SOLAS security requirements and the ISPS Code. We have implemented the various security measures required by the IMO, SOLAS and the ISPS Code and have approved ISPS certificates and plans certified by the applicable flag state on board all our vessels. C. Organizational Structure Costamare Inc. is a holding company incorporated in the Republic of the Marshall Islands which, as of February 24, 2026, has 92 wholly-owned subsidiaries incorporated in the Republic of Liberia and 15 wholly-owned subsidiaries incorporated in the Republic of the Marshall Islands. As of that date, 57 of our Liberian subsidiaries own container vessels in the water, 10 have container vessels under construction, eight are engaged in litigation concerning the termination certain shipbuilding contracts due to builder’s failure to provide the agreed refund guarantees within the set deadline, and the remaining subsidiaries relate to vessels that were previously sold or newbuild and secondhand vessels that may be acquired in the future. Of our Marshall Islands subsidiaries, 12 own container vessels in the water, two are intermediate holding companies, and the remaining subsidiary is inactive. In addition, as of February 24, 2026, Costamare controlled one company incorporated under the laws of Jersey, which had 53 subsidiaries incorporated in the Republic of the Marshall Islands and six incorporated in the Republic of Liberia. A list of our subsidiaries as of February 24, 2026 is set forth in Exhibit 8.1 to this annual report. D. Property, Plant and Equipment We have no freehold or material leasehold interest in any real property. We occupy office space at 7 rue du Gabian, MC 98000 Monaco. Other than our vessels, we do not have any material property. Our vessels are subject to priority mortgages, which secure our obligations under our various credit facilities. For further details regarding our credit facilities, refer to “Item 5. Operating and Financial Review and Prospects—B. Liquidity and Capital Resources—Credit Facilities and Other Financing Arrangements”.