Nordic American Tankers Limited
A shipping company that operates a fleet of Suezmax crude oil tankers—oversized vessels that haul crude oil for major international oil companies and traders. Incorporated in Bermuda in 1995, it sold shares to the public that year and used the proceeds to buy its first three double-hulled tankers, which it chartered to oil giant BP. Its fleet is deliberately uniform, all Suezmax-sized ships, a quirk that simplifies hiring and maintenance.
20-F · Fiscal year ended Dec 31, 2025 · SEC filing ↗
The original filing sections are available below.
The Company is exposed to market risk from changes in interest rates related to the variable rate of the Company’s borrowings under our $150 million Senior Secured Credit Facility, amended and restated and our eight vessels financed with Ocean Yield. The Company is also exposed…
The Company is exposed to market risk from changes in interest rates related to the variable rate of the Company’s borrowings under our $150 million Senior Secured Credit Facility, amended and restated and our eight vessels financed with Ocean Yield. The Company is also exposed to foreign exchange risk, primarily related to fluctuations in currency exchange rates that may affect the cost of operating expenses and certain capital expenditures denominated in currencies other than the U.S. dollar. The Senior Secured Credit Facility, amended and restated carrying an interest rate based on Federal Funds Rate, plus a margin. The other financing agreements have interest at a rate equal to a term SOFR and a margin and a Credit Adjustment Spread, or CAS, of 26 basis points. Increasing interest rates could affect our future profitability. In certain situations, the Company may enter into financial instruments to reduce the risk associated with fluctuations in interest rates. A 100 basis point increase in term SOFR or the Federal Funds Rate would have resulted in an increase of approximately $4.22 million in our interest expense for the year ended December 31, 2025. The Company is exposed to the spot Suezmax tanker market. Historically, the tanker markets have been volatile as a result of the many conditions and factors that can affect the price, supply and demand for tanker capacity. Changes in demand for transportation of oil over longer distances and supply of tankers to carry that oil may materially affect our revenues, profitability and cash flows. The majority of our vessels are operated in the spot market with three vessels on longer-term time charter agreements. We believe that over time, spot employment generates premium earnings compared to longer-term employment. 82 Table of Contents We estimate that during 2025, a $1,000 per day decrease per vessel in the spot market rate would have decreased our voyage revenue by approximately $7.88 million.
Read original filing text →Throughout this annual report, all references to “Nordic American Tankers,” “NAT,” the “Company,” “the Group,” “we,” “our,” and “us” refer to Nordic American Tankers Limited and its subsidiaries. Unless otherwise indicated, all references to “U.S. dollars,” “USD,” “dollars,” “US…
Throughout this annual report, all references to “Nordic American Tankers,” “NAT,” the “Company,” “the Group,” “we,” “our,” and “us” refer to Nordic American Tankers Limited and its subsidiaries. Unless otherwise indicated, all references to “U.S. dollars,” “USD,” “dollars,” “US$” and “$” in this annual report are to the lawful currency of the United States of America and references to “Norwegian Kroner” or “NOK” are to the lawful currency of Norway. A. [Reserved] B. Capitalization and Indebtedness Not applicable. C. Reasons for the offer and use of Proceeds Not applicable. D. Risk Factors The following constitutes a summary of the material risks relevant to an investment in our company. The occurrence of any of the events described in this section could significantly and negatively affect our business, financial condition, operating results or cash available for dividends or the trading price of our common stock. Summary of Risk Factors • If the Suezmax tanker industry, which historically has been cyclical and volatile, is depressed in the future, our revenues, earnings and available cash flow may decrease. • Conducting business in certain jurisdictions, including Venezuela, as well as exposure to geopolitical tensions in other regions, such as Iran and the Strait of Hormuz, may subject us to legal, regulatory, political and other risks that could have an adverse effect on our operations and financial results. • We are dependent on spot charters and any decrease in spot charter rates in the future may adversely affect our earnings, our ability to pay dividends and our ability to repay our financial liabilities. • Changes in the price of fuel and regulations may adversely affect our profits. • Inability to renew the fleet would adversely affect our business, results of operations, financial condition and ability to pay dividends. • The international Suezmax tanker industry has experienced volatile charter rates and vessel values and there can be no assurance that these charter rates and vessel values will not decrease in the near future. • Our results of operations are subject to seasonal fluctuations, which may adversely affect our financial condition. • A shift in consumer demand from oil towards other energy sources or changes to trade patterns for crude oil or refined oil products may have a material adverse effect on our business. • The value of our vessels may be depressed at the time we decide to sell a vessel. • Delays or defaults by the shipyards in the construction of newbuildings could increase our expenses and diminish our net income and cash flows. 1 Table of Contents • Terrorist attacks and international hostilities and instability can affect the tanker industry, which could adversely affect our business. • We rely on our information systems to conduct our business, and failure to protect these systems against security breaches could adversely affect our business and results of operations. Additionally, if these systems fail or become unavailable for any significant period of time, our business could be harmed. • If we do not manage relationships with customers or successfully integrate any acquired Suezmax tankers, we may not be able to grow or effectively manage our growth. • Because some of our expenses are incurred in foreign currencies, we are exposed to exchange rate fluctuations, which could negatively affect our results of operations. • The operation of Suezmax tankers involves certain unique operational risks. • We operate our Suezmax tankers worldwide and as a result, our vessels are exposed to international risks which may reduce revenue or increase expenses. • The smuggling of drugs or other contraband onto our vessels may lead to governmental claims against us. • Failure to comply with the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act could result in fines, criminal penalties and an adverse effect on our business. • Acts of piracy on ocean-going vessels could adversely affect our business. • Maritime claimants could arrest our vessels, which could interrupt our cash flow. • Governments could requisition our vessels during a period of war or emergency resulting in a loss of earnings. • Technological developments which affect global trade flows and supply chains may affect the demand for our vessels. • If we purchase secondhand vessels, we may not receive warranties from the builder and operating cost may increase as a result of aging of the fleet. • Our insurance may not be adequate to cover our losses that may result from our operations due to the inherent operational risks of the tanker industry. • An increase in operating costs would decrease earnings and dividends per share. • We may be unsuccessful in competing in the highly competitive international Suezmax tanker market. • We are subject to laws and regulations which can adversely affect our business, results of operations, cash flows and financial condition, and our ability to pay dividends. • Regulations relating to ballast water discharge may adversely affect our revenues and profitability. • Climate change and greenhouse gas restrictions may adversely impact our operations and markets. • If we fail to comply with international safety regulations, we may be subject to increased liability, which may adversely affect our insurance coverage and may result in a denial of access to, or detention in, certain ports. • Developments in safety and environmental requirements relating to the recycling of vessels may result in escalated and unexpected costs. • Servicing our debt limits funds available for other purposes and if we cannot service our debt, we may lose our vessels. • Our borrowing facilities, contains restrictive covenants which could negatively affect our growth, cause our financial performance to suffer and limit our ability to pay dividends. • Variable rate indebtedness could subject us to interest rate risk, which could cause our debt service obligations to increase significantly. • We may not be able to finance our future capital commitments. • The current state of the global financial markets and current economic conditions may adversely impact our results of operation, financial condition, cash flows and ability to obtain financing or refinance our existing and future credit facilities on acceptable terms. • We cannot assure you that we will be able to refinance our indebtedness. • We are subject to certain risks with respect to our counterparties on contracts, and failure of such counterparties to meet their obligations could cause us to suffer losses or negatively impact our results of operations and cash flows. • Our share price may continue to be highly volatile, which could lead to a loss of all or part of a shareholder’s investment. 2 Table of Contents • We operate in a cyclical and volatile industry and cannot guarantee that we will continue to make cash distributions. • Future sales of our common stock could cause the market price of our common stock to decline. • Ineffective internal controls could impact the Company’s business and financial results. • Increasing scrutiny and changing expectations from investors, lenders and other market participants with respect to our Environmental, Social and Governance, or ESG, policies may impose additional costs on us or expose us to additional risks. • We have antitakeover protections which could prevent a change of control. • If our vessels call on ports located in countries or territories that are subject to sanctions or embargoes imposed by the U.S. government, the European Union, the United Nations or other governmental authorities, it could result in monetary fines or other penalties and may adversely affect our reputation and the market and trading price of our common stock. • Because we are a foreign corporation, you may not have the same rights that a shareholder in a U.S. corporation may have. • We are incorporated in Bermuda, and it may not be possible for our investors to enforce U.S. judgments against us. • We may have to pay tax on United States source income, which would reduce our earnings. • If the United States Internal Revenue Service were to treat us as a “passive foreign investment company,” that could have adverse tax consequences for United States shareholders. • Changes in tax laws and unanticipated tax liabilities could materially and adversely affect the taxes we pay, results of operations and financial results. • We may become subject to taxation in Bermuda or in other jurisdictions which would negatively affect our results. • As a Bermuda exempted company incorporated under Bermuda law with subsidiaries in another offshore jurisdiction, our operations may be subject to economic substance requirements. Risks Related to Our Business and Financial Condition If the Suezmax tanker industry, which historically has been cyclical and volatile, is depressed in the future, our revenues, earnings and available cash flow may decrease. We specialize in Suezmax tankers. Historically, the tanker industry has been highly cyclical, with volatility in profitability, charter rates and asset values resulting from changes in the supply of and demand for tanker capacity. Fluctuations in charter rates and tanker values result from changes in the supply of and demand for tanker capacity and changes in the supply of and demand for oil and oil products. These factors may adversely affect the rates payable and the amounts we receive in respect of our vessels. The armed conflicts in Ukraine and in the Middle East have continued to disrupt energy production and trade patterns, including shipping in the Black Sea, Red Sea and elsewhere, and its impact on energy demand and costs is expected to remain uncertain. Our ability to re-charter our vessels on the expiration or termination of their current spot and time charters and the charter rates payable under any renewal or replacement charters will depend upon, among other things, economic conditions in the tanker market and we cannot guarantee that any renewal or replacement charters we enter into will be sufficient to allow us to operate our vessels profitably. The factors affecting the supply and demand for tankers are outside of our control, and the nature, timing and degree of changes in industry conditions are unpredictable. The factors that influence demand for tanker capacity include: • supply of and demand for increased use of renewable and alternative energy resources and oil products, and competition from other shipping companies and other modes of transportation; • global and regional economic and political conditions and developments, including developments and disruptions in international trade, including the imposition of tariffs and fees, the increased vessel attacks and piracy in the Red Sea, national oil reserves policies, refinery additions and closures, work stoppages, fluctuations in industrial and agricultural production and armed conflicts; • the price of oil; 3 Table of Contents • regional availability of refining capacity and inventories compared to geographies of oil production regions; • environmental issues and concerns and other legal and regulatory developments; • the distance oil and oil products are to be moved by sea; • changes in seaborne and other transportation patterns, including changes in the distances over which tanker cargoes are transported by sea; • increases in the production of oil in areas linked by pipelines to consuming areas, the extension of existing, or the development of new, pipeline systems in markets we may serve, or the conversion of existing non-oil pipelines to oil pipelines in those markets; • currency exchange rates; • availability of financing and changes in interest rates; • weather and acts of God, natural disasters and health disasters; • changes in consumption of oil and petroleum products due to competition from supply and demand for new, alternative sources of energy and from other shipping companies and other modes of transport; • international sanctions, embargoes, import and export restrictions, nationalizations, piracy, terrorist attacks and armed conflicts, and other international hostilities, strikes, and potential physical disruption of shipping routes as a result thereof; • any restrictions on crude oil production imposed by the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, or OPEC, and non-OPEC oil producing countries; and • regulatory changes including regulations adopted by supranational authorities and/or industry bodies, such as safety and environmental regulations and requirements by major oil companies. The factors that influence the supply of tanker capacity include: • the demand for alternative energy resources; • supply of and demand for energy resources and oil and petroleum products; • current and expected purchase orders for tankers; • the number of tanker newbuilding deliveries; • the number of vessel casualties; • any potential delays in the delivery of newbuilding vessels and/or cancellations of newbuilding orders; • the number of shipyards and ability of shipyards to deliver vessels; • availability of financing and interest rates on financing for new vessels and shipping activity; • the price of oil; • the recycling and scrapping rates of older tankers; 4 Table of Contents • technological advances in tanker design and capacity, propulsion technology and fuel consumption efficiency; • tanker charter rates, which are affected by factors that may affect the rate of newbuilding, swapping and laying up of tankers; • the number of vessels used for floating storage; • the number of vessels under sanctions and hence not able to trade on the mainstream market; • prevailing and expected future freight and charter hire rates; • costs of bunkers and fuel oil and their impact on vessel speed; • the efficiency, age, and sophistication of the world tanker fleet; • potential disruption, including supply chain disruptions, of shipping route due to accidents, political events and armed conflicts; • the age of the world tanker fleet; • port and canal congestion; • speed of vessel operation; • price of steel and vessel equipment; • conversion of tankers to other uses or conversion of other vessels to tankers; • the number of product tankers trading crude or “dirty” oil products (such as fuel oil); • product imbalances (affecting the level of trading activity) and developments in international trade; • developments in international trade, including refinery additions and closures; • the phasing of maritime shipping into the EU Emission Trading Scheme, or the ETS, which applies to all large ships of 5,000 gross tonnage or above; • the number of tankers that are out of service, namely those that are laid up, drydocked, undergoing surveys, awaiting repairs or upgrades or otherwise not available for hire; and • changes in environmental and other regulations that may limit the useful lives of tankers, and environmental concerns and regulations, including ballast water management, low sulfur fuel consumption regulations, and reductions in carbon dioxide, or CO2, emissions. The geopolitical development, including the potential disruption or near closure of the Strait of Hormuz amid escalating conflict in the Middle East, have resulted in significant rerouting of tanker traffic and disruption to shipping flows. These conditions have led to shifts in alternative routes, increased transportation costs, and higher insurance and risk premiums, which could adversely affect our operations and financial results. The Company has vessels located within the Persian Gulf that are currently unable to operate on normal commercial schedules due to the disruption in the area. The factors affecting the supply and demand for tankers have been volatile and are outside of our control, and the nature, timing and degree of changes in industry conditions are unpredictable, including those discussed above. Continued volatility may adversely affect the availability and cost of capital. Disruptions in global financial markets, increased risk perception among lenders, and volatility in credit conditions may limit the Company’s ability to obtain financing on acceptable terms, or at all. This could impact the Company’s ability to refinance existing indebtedness, fund capital expenditures, or support ongoing operations. Any weakening in financing conditions could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s liquidity, financial condition, and results of operations. 5 Table of Contents The market supply of Suezmax tankers is affected by a number of factors such as demand for energy resources, including oil and petroleum products, as well as overall economic growth in parts of the world economy, including Asia. If the supply of tanker capacity increases and if the demand for tanker capacity does not increase correspondingly, charter rates and vessel values could materially decline. A reduction in charter rates and the value of our vessels could have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations, ability to pay dividends, and financial position. We anticipate that the future demand for our tankers will be dependent upon economic growth in the world’s economies, seasonal and regional changes in demand, changes in the capacity of the global tanker fleet and the sources and supply of oil and petroleum products to be transported by sea. Given the number of new tankers currently on order with shipyards in combination with the age profile of the existing world tanker fleet, the capacity of the global tanker fleet seems likely to be muted, but there can be no assurance as to the timing or extent of future economic growth. Adverse economic, political, social or other developments could have a material adverse effect on our business and operating results, including possible impairment charges against our earnings. Declines in oil and natural gas prices or decreases in demand for oil and natural gas for an extended period of time, or market expectations of potential decreases in these prices and demand, could negatively affect our future growth in the tanker and offshore sector. Sustained periods of low oil and natural gas prices typically result in reduced exploration and extraction because oil and natural gas companies’ capital expenditure budgets are subject to cash flow from such activities and are therefore sensitive to changes in energy prices. Sustained periods of high oil prices on the other hand may be destructive for demand. These changes in commodity prices can have a material effect on demand for our services, and periods of low demand can cause excess vessel supply and intensify the competition in the industry, which often results in vessels, particularly older and less technologically advanced vessels, being idle for long periods of time. We cannot predict the future level of demand for our services or future conditions of the oil and natural gas industry. Any decrease in exploration, development or production expenditures by oil and natural gas companies or decrease in the demand for oil and natural gas could reduce our revenues and materially harm our business, results of operations and cash available for distribution. Conducting business in Venezuela may subject us to legal, regulatory, political and other risks that could have an adverse effect on our operations and financial results. Conducting business in Venezuela may subject us to legal, regulatory, political, currency, security, and/or nationalization of assets and economic risks. Venezuela is extremely well endowed with natural resources such as petroleum, natural gas, iron ore, gold, bauxite, diamonds and other minerals, and its economy is heavily dependent on export of natural resources to key trading partners. According to the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, or OPEC, 2025 Annual Statistical Bulletin (60th edition), Venezuela had the world’s largest proven crude oil reserves in 2024. Political, economic, and geopolitical developments in Venezuela could alter crude oil supply, trade flows, and shipping routes, generating volatility in prices, port disruptions, logistics costs, and insurance costs, among other effects. Following the arrest and extradition of Venezuela’s former President Nicolás Maduro in January of 2026, the Trump Administration has indicated a likely shift in U.S. sanctions policy concerning the sale and transportation of Venezuelan oil, and the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control, or OFAC, has subsequently issued general licenses authorizing certain activities and transactions involving Venezuelan-origin oil and the sale of U.S.-origin diluents to Venezuela. Notwithstanding these recent measures, it remains unknown to what extent Venezuelan sanctions will be retained, expanded or otherwise modified by the U.S., or the effect that any such actions or any actions taken by other countries in response will have on us or our industry, but such measures along with continuing political uncertainty could have an adverse effect on our business, financial conditions, and results of operations. 6 Table of Contents We are dependent on spot charters and any decrease in spot charter rates in the future may adversely affect our earnings, our ability to pay dividends and our ability to repay our financial liabilities. The 17 vessels that we currently operate are primarily employed in the spot market with five vessels currently employed on time charter contracts. We are therefore highly dependent on spot market charter rates. The spot market remains highly volatile, with extreme rate spikes driven by the near closure of the Strait of Hormuz and associated geopolitical risks, followed by sharp corrections as trade flows adjust. Freight rates have reached record highs amid disrupted tanker availability, elevated war-risk premiums, and longer alternative routing, but underlying demand dislocation and voyage uncertainty may also lead to sudden declines below operating costs. As spot charters are fixed per voyage, often lasting several weeks, there is typically a lag in capturing upward rate movements during rapidly rising markets. We will be exposed to prevailing charter rates in the crude tanker sectors when these vessels’ existing charters expire, and to the extent the counterparties to our fixed-rate charter contracts fail to honor their obligations to us. We will also enter into spot charters in the future. The spot charter market may fluctuate significantly based upon tanker and oil supply and demand. The successful operation of our vessels in the competitive spot charter market depends on, among other things, obtaining profitable spot charters and minimizing, to the extent possible, time spent waiting for charters and time spent traveling in ballast to pick up cargo. When the current charters for our fleet expire or are terminated, it may not be possible to re-charter these vessels at similar rates, or at all, or to secure charters for any vessels we agree to acquire at similarly profitable rates, or at all. As a result, we may have to accept lower rates or experience off hire time for our vessels, which would adversely impact our revenues, results of operations, including impairment charges against our earnings, and financial condition. If an excess of vessels is available on the spot or short-term market at the time we are seeking to fix new longer-term charters, we may have difficulty entering into such charters at all or at profitable rates and for any term other than short term and, as a result, our cash flow may be subject to instability in the mid to long-term. In addition, it would be more difficult to fix relatively older vessels should there be an oversupply of younger vessels on the market. A depressed spot market may require us to enter into short-term spot charters based on prevailing market rates, which could result in a decrease in our cash flow. Changes in the price of fuel and regulations may adversely affect our profits. Fuel, including bunkers, is a significant, if not the largest, expense in our shipping operations, and changes in the price of fuel may adversely affect our profitability. The cost of fuel, including the fuel efficiency or capability to use lower priced fuel, can also be an important factor considered by charterers in negotiating charter rates. Upon redelivery of vessels at the end of a time charter, we may be obliged to repurchase the fuel on board at prevailing market prices, which could be materially higher than fuel prices at the inception of the time charter period. The price and supply of fuel is unpredictable and fluctuates based on events outside our control, including geopolitical developments, such as the ongoing conflict in the Middle-East, Russia and Ukraine and between Israel and Hamas, supply and demand for oil and gas, actions by OPEC and other oil and gas producers, war and unrest in oil producing countries and regions, regional production patterns and environmental concerns, which may reduce our profitability and have a material adverse effect on our future performance, results of operations, cash flows and financial position. Effective January 1, 2020, the International Maritime Organization, or IMO, implemented a regulation for a 0.50% global sulfur cap on emissions from vessels. Under this new global cap, vessels must use marine fuels with a sulfur content of no more than 0.50% or use an exhaust gas cleaning system, against the former regulations specifying a maximum of 3.50% sulfur in an effort to reduce the emission of sulfur oxide into the atmosphere. All our vessels are complying with all global regulations imposed by IMO or EU. The vessels use the fuel required as per the vessel design, either with or without an exhaust gas cleaning system. Further to that there is a combination of biofuel when available and favorable based on price. This is as a result of the EU requirements to reduce CO2 emissions, FUEL EU Maritime and EU ETS will impact the income as part of voyage costs. Regarding fuel prices, they fluctuate a lot depending on fuel grade, oil prices, geographic locations, and availability. 7 Table of Contents Our operations and the performance of our vessels, and as a result our results of operations, cash flows and financial position, may be negatively affected to the extent that compliant fuel oils are of low or inconsistent quality, or upon occurrence of any of the other foregoing events. Costs of compliance with these and other related regulatory changes may be significant and may have a material adverse effect on our future performance, results of operations, cash flows and financial position. As a result, an increase in the price of compliance beyond our expectations may adversely affect our profitability at the time of charter negotiation. Further, fuel may become much more expensive in the future, which may reduce the profitability and competitiveness of our business versus other forms of transportation. Inability to renew the fleet would adversely affect our business, results of operations, financial condition and ability to pay dividends. If we do not set aside funds or are unable to borrow or raise funds for vessel replacement, we will be unable to replace the vessels in our fleet upon the expiration of their useful lives. We estimate that our vessels have a useful life of up to 25 years from the date of their initial delivery from the shipyard. In case we acquire secondhand vessels, they are depreciated from the date of their acquisition through their remaining estimated useful life. Our cash flows and income are dependent on the revenues earned by the chartering of our vessels. If we are unable to replace the vessels in our fleet upon the expiration of their useful lives, our business, results of operations, financial condition and ability to pay dividends would be adversely affected. Any funds set aside for vessel replacement will not be available for dividends. The international Suezmax tanker industry has experienced volatile charter rates and vessel values and there can be no assurance that these charter rates and vessel values will not decrease in the near future. The Baltic Dirty Tanker Index, or the BDTI, a U.S. dollar daily average of charter rates issued by the Baltic Exchange that takes into account input from brokers around the world regarding crude oil fixtures for various routes and oil tanker vessel sizes, is volatile. The pattern in 2025 and 2024, BDTI was highly influenced by geopolitical events and the highs of 2025 were reached towards the end of the year. In contrast to 2024 which saw its highs at the beginning of the year. The average for 2025 came in at 1068, slightly lower than the 1093 reached in 2024. During 2025, the BDTI reached a high of 1468 and a low of 799 compared to a high of 1,552 and a low of 860 in 2024. The Baltic Clean Tanker Index, or BCTI, a comparable index to the BDTI, saw a high of 885 and a low of 534 in 2025. This compares to a high of 1,411 and a low of 460 in 2024. The BCTI saw slightly higher volatility and higher levels in 2024 compared to 2025. So far in 2026 markets have reached historic high levels, and the BDTI and BCTI were at 2831 and 2123, respectively, as of April 17, 2026. There can be no assurance that the crude oil and petroleum products charter market will increase or continue at the current levels, and the market could again decline. This volatility in charter rates depends, among other factors, on changes in the supply and demand for tanker capacity and changes in the supply and demand for oil and oil products, the demand for crude oil and petroleum products, the inventories of crude oil and petroleum products in the United States and in other industrialized nations, oil refining volumes, oil prices, and any restrictions on crude oil production imposed by OPEC and non-OPEC oil producing countries as well as seasonal variations and geopolitical events. Charter rates in the Suezmax tanker industry are volatile. We anticipate that future demand for our vessels, and in turn our future charter rates, will be dependent upon economic growth in the world’s economies, as well as seasonal and regional changes in demand and changes in the capacity of the world’s fleet. There can be no assurance that economic growth will not stagnate or decline leading to a decrease in vessel values and charter rates. A decline in vessel values and charter rates would have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operation and ability to pay dividends. 8 Table of Contents Our results of operations are subject to seasonal fluctuations, which may adversely affect our financial condition. We operate our vessels in markets that have historically exhibited seasonal variations in demand and, as a result, charter rates. Seaborne trading and distribution patterns are primarily influenced by the relative advantage of the various sources of production, locations of consumption, pricing differentials and seasonality. Changes to the trade patterns of oil and oil products may have a significant negative or positive impact on the ton-mile and therefore the demand for our tankers. Peaks in tanker demand quite often precede seasonal oil consumption peaks, as refiners and suppliers anticipate consumer demand. Charter rates for tankers are typically higher in the fall and winter months as a result of increased oil consumption in the Northern Hemisphere. Unpredictable weather patterns and variations in oil reserves disrupt tanker scheduling. Because many of the Company’s vessels trade in the spot market, seasonality may affect operating results on a quarter-to-quarter basis and could continue to do so in the future. Such seasonality may be outweighed in any period by then current economic conditions or tanker industry fundamentals. This could have a material adverse effect on our future performance, results of operations, cash flows and financial position. A shift in consumer demand from oil towards other energy sources or changes to trade patterns for crude oil or refined oil products may have a material adverse effect on our business. A significant portion of our earnings are related to the oil industry. A shift in or disruption of consumer demand from oil towards other energy sources such as wind energy, solar energy, nuclear energy, electricity, natural gas, liquified natural gas or LNG, renewable energy, hydrogen or ammonia will potentially affect the demand for our vessels. A shift from the use of internal combustion engine vehicles may also reduce the demand for oil. While the International Energy Agency, or the IEA, forecasts “peak oil”, the year when the maximum volume of oil is consumed, to be around 2030 based on countries’ stated energy policies and targets, in the IEA’s latest World Energy Outlook report from November 2025, the agency introduced a scenario where oil demand would not peak at least before 2050. Nevertheless, a shift in consumer demand away from oil and oil products could have a material adverse effect on our future performance, results of operations, cash flows and financial position. Seaborne trading and distribution patterns are primarily influenced by the relative advantage of the various sources of production, locations of consumption, pricing differentials and seasonality, and, more recently, government sanctions. Changes to the trade patterns of crude oil or refined oil products may have a significant negative or positive impact on the ton-mile and therefore the demand for our tankers. This could have a material adverse effect on our future performance, results of operations, cash flows and financial position. The value of our vessels may be depressed at the time we decide to sell a vessel. Tanker values have historically experienced high volatility. Investors can expect the fair market value of our tankers to fluctuate, depending on general economic and market conditions affecting the tanker industry and competition from other shipping companies, types, ages and sizes of vessels, availability of or developments in other modes of transportation, competition from other tanker companies, cost of newbuildings, applicable governmental or other regulations and technological advances. In addition, as vessels age, they generally decline in value. These factors will affect the value of our vessels for purposes of covenant compliance under our borrowing facilities and at the time of any vessel sale. If for any reason we sell a tanker at a time when tanker prices have fallen, the sale may be at less than the tanker’s carrying amount in our financial statements, with the result that we would also incur a loss on the sale and a reduction in earnings from impairment charges, which could reduce our ability to pay dividends and negatively affect our business, financial condition and operating results. The carrying values of our vessels may not represent their charter-free market value at any point in time. Furthermore, if vessel values fall significantly, this could indicate a decrease in the recoverable amount for the vessel which may result in an impairment adjustment in our financial statements, which could adversely affect our financial results and condition. We did not record an impairment charge during the year ended December 31, 2025. Conversely, if vessel values are elevated at a time when we wish to acquire additional vessels, the cost of acquisition may increase and this could adversely affect our business, results of operations, cash flow and financial condition. 9 Table of Contents Delays or defaults by the shipyards in the construction of newbuildings could increase our expenses and diminish our net income and cash flows. We may enter into contracts for newbuilding vessels in the future. Vessel construction projects are generally subject to risks of delay that are inherent in any large construction project, which may be caused by numerous factors, including shortages of equipment, materials or skilled labor, unscheduled delays in the delivery of ordered materials and equipment or shipyard construction, failure of equipment to meet quality and/or performance standards, financial or operating difficulties experienced by equipment vendors or the shipyard, unanticipated actual or purported change orders, inability to obtain required permits or approvals, design or engineering changes and work stoppages and other labor disputes, adverse weather conditions, pandemics or any other events of force majeure. Significant delays could adversely affect our financial position, results of operations and cash flows. Shipbuilding contracts require installment and delivery payments and the ability to meet these obligations depends on access to financing and capital market. If the Company is unable to secure financing, we may be required to delay or cancel vessel deliveries. Additionally, failure to complete a project on time may result in the delay of revenue from that vessel, and we will continue to incur costs and expenses related to delayed vessels, such as supervision expense and interest expense for the issued and outstanding debt. If we already committed to a third party the use of the vessel upon construction completion, then we may breach such commitment and be subject to pay related damages, such as any increased costs the counterparty pays to secure an alternate vessel to use. As of December 31, 2025, we had no Suezmax vessels on order. After the year end, we have entered into a firm order for two Suezmax vessels to be built at South Korean shipyard, Daehan Shipbuilding. The two ships are scheduled for delivery in 2028 and as such, we are exposed to risks related to construction of newbuildings. Measures have been taken to supervise the quality of the work completed at the shipyard where our newbuildings are being constructed. In the past we have obtained refund guarantees for the pre-delivery installments as security for pre-delivery installment payments paid. We can provide no assurance that these, or any other measures we may take, will fully mitigate these risks, and any failure by a counterparty to meet its obligations in relation to the newbuildings may result in delays or cancellations of the delivery of the newbuildings, renegotiation of terms, delayed renewal of our tanker fleet and consequent deterioration of our competitive position, any of which may result in significant losses for us which could have a material adverse effect on our future performance, results of operations, cash flows and financial position. Terrorist attacks and international hostilities and instability can affect the tanker industry, which could adversely affect our business. We conduct most of our operations outside of the United States, and our business, results of operations, cash flows, financial condition and ability to pay dividends, if any, in the future may be adversely affected by changing economic, political and government conditions in the countries and regions where our vessels are employed or registered. Moreover, we operate in a sector of the economy that is likely to be adversely impacted by the effects of political conflicts. Currently, the world economy continues to face a number of actual and potential challenges, including the war between the United States and Israel, and Iran and between Ukraine and Russia, current trade tension between the United States and China, among other countries, political instability in Venezuela, the Middle East, and the South China Sea region and other geographic countries and areas, terrorist or other attacks, war (or threatened war) or international hostilities, such as those between the United States and China or, North Korea, epidemics or pandemics, and banking crises or failures. In the past, political instability has also resulted in attacks on vessels, mining of waterways and other efforts to disrupt international shipping, particularly in the Arabian Gulf region, the Black Sea and in the Red. Acts of terrorism and piracy have also affected vessels trading in regions such as the South China Sea and the Gulf of Aden off the coast of Somalia, among others. . In addition, the recent armed conflict between the U.S. and Israel, and Iran has caused a de facto closure of the Strait of Hormuz and further disruption of trade routes in the Red Sea, which could have significant impacts in the Middle East region and on the global oil markets. Indeed, as a result of the conflict in Iran and the resultant volatility in the global oil markets, on March 12, 2026, the United States Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control, or OFAC, issued a general license authorizing, through 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time on April 11, 2026, the sale, delivery, or offloading of Russian Federation origin crude oil or petroleum products loaded on any vessel on or before 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time on March 12, 2026, including vessels previously blocked by OFAC under several existing sanctions programs. Any of these occurrences could have a material adverse impact on our future performance, results of operation, cash flows and financial position. These factors could also increase the costs to the Company of conducting its business, particularly crew, insurance and security costs, and prevent or restrict the Company from obtaining insurance coverage, all of which have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. 10 Table of Contents We rely on our information systems to conduct our business, and failure to protect these systems against security breaches could adversely affect our business and results of operations. Additionally, if these systems fail or become unavailable for any significant period of time, our business could be harmed. We rely on our computer systems and network infrastructure across our operations, including IT systems on our vessels operated by our technical managers. The safety and security of our vessels and efficient operation of our business, including processing, transmitting and storing electronic and financial information, are dependent on computer hardware and software systems, which are increasingly vulnerable to security breaches and other disruptions and may be susceptible to damage, disruptions or shutdowns, hardware or software failures, power outages, computer viruses, cyberattacks, telecommunication failures, user errors or catastrophic events. Any significant interruption or failure of our information systems or any significant breach of security could adversely affect our business and results of operations. Our vessels rely on information systems for a significant part of their operations, including navigation, provision of services, propulsion, machinery management, power control, communications and cargo management. We have in place safety and security measures on our vessels and onshore operations to secure our vessels against cyber-security attacks and any disruption to their information systems. However, these measures and technology may not adequately prevent security breaches despite our continuous efforts to upgrade and address the latest known threats. A disruption to the information system of any of our vessels could lead to, among other things, wrong routing, collision, grounding and propulsion failure. Beyond our vessels, we rely on industry accepted security measures and technology to securely maintain confidential and proprietary information maintained on our information systems. However, these measures and technology may not adequately prevent security breaches. The technology and other controls and processes designed to secure our confidential and proprietary information, detect and remedy any unauthorized access to that information were designed to obtain reasonable, but not absolute, assurance that such information is secure and that any unauthorized access is identified and addressed appropriately. Such controls may in the future fail to prevent or detect, unauthorized access to our confidential and proprietary information. In addition, the foregoing events could result in violations of applicable privacy and other laws. If confidential information is inappropriately accessed and used by a third party or an employee for illegal purposes, we may be responsible to the affected individuals for any losses they may have incurred as a result of misappropriation. In such an instance, we may also be subject to regulatory action, investigation or liable to a governmental authority for fines or penalties associated with a lapse in the integrity and security of our information systems. Our operations, including our vessels, and business administration could be targeted by individuals or groups seeking to sabotage or disrupt such systems and networks, or to steal data, and these systems may be damaged, shutdown or cease to function properly (whether by planned upgrades, force majeure, telecommunications failures, hardware or software break-ins or viruses, other cyber-security incidents or otherwise). For example, the information systems of our vessels may be subject to threats from hostile cyber or physical attacks, phishing attacks, human errors of omission or commission, structural failures of resources we control, including hardware and software, and accidents and other failures beyond our control. The threats to our information systems are constantly evolving and have become increasingly complex and sophisticated. Furthermore, such threats change frequently and are often not recognized or detected until after they have been launched, and therefore, we may be unable to anticipate these threats and may not become aware in a timely manner of such a security breach, which could exacerbate any damage we experience. We do not maintain cyber-liability insurance at this time to cover such losses. As a result, a cyber-attack or other breach of any such information technology systems could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. As of the date of this annual report, we have not experienced any material cybersecurity incident which would be disclosable under SEC guidelines. We may be required to expend significant capital and other resources to protect against and remedy any potential or existing security breaches and their consequences. As cyberattacks become increasingly sophisticated, and as tools and resources become more readily available to malicious third parties, there can be no guarantee that our actions, security measures and controls designed to prevent, detect or respond to intrusion, to limit access to data, to prevent destruction or alteration of data or to limit the negative impact from such attacks, can provide absolute security against compromise. A cyber-attack on us could result in significant expenses to investigate and repair security breaches or system damages and could lead to litigation, fines, other remedial action, heightened regulatory scrutiny and diminished customer confidence. In addition, our remediation efforts may not be successful, and we may not have adequate insurance to cover these losses. 11 Table of Contents The unavailability of the information systems or the failure of these systems to perform as anticipated for any reason could disrupt our business and could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows and financial condition. Moreover, cyber-attacks against the Ukrainian government and other countries in the region have been reported in connection with the ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine. To the extent such attacks have collateral effects on global critical infrastructure or financial institutions or us, such developments could adversely affect our business, operating results and financial condition. It is difficult to assess the likelihood of such threat and any potential impact at this time. The EU has adopted a comprehensive overhaul of its data protection regime from the current national legislative approach to a single European Economic Area Privacy Regulation, the General Data Protection Regulation, or GDPR. The GDPR came into force on May 25, 2018, and applies to organizations located within the EU, as well as to organizations located outside of the EU if they offer goods or services to, or monitor the behavior of, EU data subjects. It imposes a strict data protection compliance regime with significant penalties and includes new rights such as the “portability” of personal data. It applies to all companies processing and holding the personal data of data subjects residing in the EU, regardless of the company’s location. Implementation of the GDPR could require changes to certain of our business practices, thereby increasing our costs. Our failure to adhere to or successfully implement processes in response to changing regulatory requirements in this area could result in legal liability or impairment to our reputation in the marketplace, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Additionally, there continues to be significant evolution and developments in the use of artificial intelligence, or AI, technologies, including generative AI. While we have not integrated the use of artificial intelligence in our business currently, we could integrate it in the future and, at this time, cannot fully determine the impact of such evolving technology to our industry or business. As part of services provided by third-party application providers the risks are assessed as part of the normal risk assessments. At this stage, we do not expect AI to cause increased risk to our industry or business. Further, the SEC, on July 26, 2023, adopted amendments requiring the prompt public disclosure of certain cybersecurity breaches. If we fail to comply with the relevant laws and regulations, we could suffer financial losses, a disruption of our businesses, liability to investors, regulatory intervention or reputational damage. For more information on our cybersecurity risk management and strategy, please see “Item 16K. Cybersecurity”. If we do not manage relationships with customers or successfully integrate any acquired Suezmax tankers, we may not be able to grow or effectively manage our growth. Our future growth will depend upon a number of factors, some of which may not be within our control. Some of these factors include our ability to: • identify suitable tankers and/or shipping companies for acquisitions at attractive prices, which may not be possible if asset prices rise too quickly, • obtain newbuild contracts at acceptable prices, • manage relationships with customers and suppliers, • identify businesses engaged in managing, operating or owning tankers for acquisitions or joint ventures, • integrate any acquired tankers or businesses successfully with our then-existing operations, 12 Table of Contents • hire, train and retain qualified personnel and crew to manage and operate our growing business and fleet, • identify additional new markets and expand or enlarge our customer base, • improve our operating, financial and accounting systems and controls, and • obtain required financing for our existing and new operations. Our failure to effectively identify, purchase, manage customer relationships and integrate any tankers or businesses could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. We may incur unanticipated expenses as an operating company. It is possible that the number of employees employed by the company, or current operating and financial systems may not be adequate as we implement our plan to expand the size of our fleet. Finally, acquisitions may require additional equity issuances or debt issuances (with amortization payments), both of which could lower dividends per share. If we are unable to expand or execute certain aspects of our business or events noted above, our financial condition and dividend rates may be adversely affected. Growing any business by acquisition presents numerous risks such as undisclosed liabilities and obligations, difficulty in obtaining additional qualified personnel, and integrating newly acquired operations into existing infrastructures. The expansion of our fleet may impose significant additional responsibilities on our management and staff, and the management and staff of our commercial and technical managers, and may necessitate that we, and they, increase the number of personnel. We cannot give any assurance that we will be successful in executing our growth plans or that we will not incur significant expenses and losses in connection with our future growth. Because some of our expenses are incurred in foreign currencies, we are exposed to exchange rate fluctuations, which could negatively affect our results of operations. The charterers of our vessels pay us primarily in U.S. dollars. While we mostly incur our expenses in U.S. dollars, we may incur expenses in other currencies, most notably the Norwegian Kroner. Declines in the value of the U.S. dollar relative to the Norwegian Kroner, or the other currencies in which we may incur expenses in the future, would increase the U.S. dollar cost of paying these expenses and thus would affect our results of operations. Risks Related to the Operations of Our Vessels and Regulations The operation of Suezmax tankers involves certain unique operational risks. The operation of Suezmax tankers has unique operational risks associated with the transportation of oil. An oil spill may cause significant environmental damage, and a catastrophic spill could exceed the insurance coverage available. Compared to other types of vessels, tankers are exposed to a higher risk of damage and loss by fire or explosion, whether ignited by a terrorist attack, collision, or other cause, due to the high flammability and high volume of the oil transported in tankers. These hazards may result in death or injury to persons, loss of revenues or property, governmental fines, penalties or restrictions on conducting business, the payment of ransoms, environmental damage, higher insurance rates, damage to our customer relationships and reputation and market disruptions, delay or rerouting, governmental fines, penalties or restrictions, any of which may reduce our revenue or increase our expenses and also subject us to litigation. We operate our Suezmax tankers worldwide and as a result, our vessels are exposed to international risks which may reduce revenue or increase expenses. The international shipping industry is an inherently risky business involving global operations. The operations of ocean-going vessels in international trade are affected by a number of risks. Our vessels are at a risk of damage or loss because of events such as marine and environmental disasters, bad weather and other acts of God, business interruptions caused by mechanical failures, grounding, collision, human error, war, terrorism, piracy, robbery, diseases, crew strikes and/or boycotts, cargo loss and other circumstances or events. In addition, changing economic, regulatory and political conditions in some countries, including political and military conflicts, have from time to time resulted in attacks on vessels, mining of waterways, piracy, terrorism, labor strikes and boycotts. For example, there have been threats, including piracy and drone and missile attacks on commercial vessels transiting the Red Sea and surrounding waterways, which are believed to be led by the Yemen-based Houthi rebel group purportedly in response to the armed conflict between Israel and Hamas. These sorts of events could interfere with shipping routes and result in market disruptions which may reduce our revenue or increase our expenses. 13 Table of Contents If our vessels suffer damage, they may need to be repaired at a drydocking facility. The costs of drydock repairs are unpredictable and may be substantial. We may have to pay drydocking costs that our insurance does not cover at all or in full. The loss of revenues while these vessels are being repaired and repositioned, as well as the actual cost of these repairs, may be material. In addition, space at drydocking facilities is sometimes limited and not all drydocking facilities are conveniently located. We may be unable to find space at a suitable drydocking facility or our vessels may be forced to travel to a drydocking facility that is not conveniently located relative to our vessels’ positions. The loss of earnings while these vessels are forced to wait for space or to travel to more distant drydocking facilities may also be material. Further, the total loss of any of our vessels could harm our reputation as a safe and reliable vessel owner and operator. If we are unable to adequately maintain or safeguard our vessels, we may be unable to prevent any such damage, costs or loss which could negatively impact our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and ability to pay dividends. International shipping is subject to various security and customs inspections and related procedures in countries of origin and destination and trans-shipment points. Inspection procedures can result in the seizure of the cargo and/or our vessels, delays in loading, offloading or delivery, and the levying of customs duties, fines or other penalties against us. It is possible that changes to inspection procedures could impose additional financial and legal obligations on us. Furthermore, changes to inspection procedures could also impose additional costs and obligations on our customers and may, in certain cases, render the shipment of certain types of cargo uneconomical or impractical. Any such changes or developments may have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows, financial condition and available cash. The smuggling of drugs or other contraband onto our vessels may lead to governmental claims against us. We expect that our vessels will call in ports where smugglers attempt to hide drugs and other contraband on vessels, with or without the knowledge of crew members. To the extent our vessels are found with contraband or stowaways, whether inside or attached to the hull of our vessel and whether with or without the knowledge of any of our crew, we may face governmental or other regulatory claims or restrictions, and our vessels may be detained for a prolonged period of time, which could have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows, financial condition and ability to pay dividends. Under some jurisdictions, vessels used for the conveyance of illegal drugs could be subject to forfeiture, resulting in forfeiture of the vessel to the government of such jurisdiction. Failure to comply with the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act could result in fines, criminal penalties and an adverse effect on our business. We may operate in a number of countries throughout the world, including countries suspected to have a risk of corruption. We are committed to doing business in accordance with applicable anti-corruption laws. We are subject to the risk that we, our service providers, or their respective officers, directors, employees and agents may take actions determined to be in violation of such anti-corruption laws, including the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977, as amended, or the FCPA. Any such violation could result in substantial fines, sanctions, civil and/or criminal penalties, curtailment of operations in certain jurisdictions, and might adversely affect our business, earnings or financial condition. In addition, actual or alleged violations could damage our reputation and ability to do business. Furthermore, detecting, investigating, and resolving actual or alleged violations is expensive and can consume significant time and attention of our senior management. 14 Table of Contents Acts of piracy on ocean-going vessels could adversely affect our business. Acts of piracy have historically affected ocean-going vessels trading in regions of the world such as the South China Sea, the Red Sea, the Gulf of Aden off the Coast of Somalia, and particularly the Gulf of Guinea region, off of Nigeria, which experienced increased incidents of piracy in recent years. Acts of piracy and war like conditions could result in harm or danger to the crews onboard our vessels. In addition, if piracy attacks occur in regions in which our vessels are deployed that insurers characterized as “war risk” zones or by the Joint War Committee as “war and strikes” listed areas, premiums payable for such coverage could increase significantly and such insurance coverage may be more difficult to obtain. Furthermore, the Houthi seizures and attacks on commercial vessels in the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden have impacted the global economy as some companies, including Nordic American Tankers Limited, have decided to reroute vessels to avoid the Suez Canal and Red Sea. In addition, crew costs, including costs which may be incurred to the extent we employ onboard security guards, could increase in such circumstances. We may not be adequately insured to cover losses from these incidents, which could have a material adverse effect on us. In addition, detention or hijacking as a result of an act of piracy against our vessels, or an increase in cost, or unavailability of insurance for our vessels, could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Maritime claimants could arrest our vessels, which could interrupt our cash flow. Crew members, suppliers of goods and services to a vessel, shippers of cargo and other parties may be entitled to a maritime lien against a vessel for unsatisfied debts, claims or damages. In many jurisdictions, a maritime lienholder may enforce its lien by “arresting” or “attaching” a vessel through foreclosure proceedings. The arrest or attachment of one or more of our vessels could result in a significant loss of earnings for the related off-hire period. In addition, in jurisdictions where the “sister ship” theory of liability applies, a claimant may arrest the vessel which is subject to the claimant’s maritime lien and any “associated” vessel, which is any vessel owned or controlled by the same owner. In countries with “sister ship” liability laws, claims might be asserted against us or any of our vessels for liabilities of other vessels that we own. Any of those events could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows, financial condition and ability to pay dividends. Governments could requisition our vessels during a period of war or emergency resulting in a loss of earnings. A government of a vessel’s registry could requisition for title or hire or seize one or more of our vessels. Requisition for title occurs when a government takes control of a vessel and becomes the owner. Requisition for hire occurs when a government takes control of a vessel and effectively becomes the charterer at dictated charter rates. Generally, requisitions occur during a period of war or emergency. Although we would be entitled to compensation in the event of a requisition of one or more of our vessels, the amount and timing of payment would be uncertain. Although none of our vessels have been requisitioned by a government for title or hire, a government requisition of one or more of our vessels could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows, financial condition and ability to pay dividends. Technological developments which affect global trade flows and supply chains may affect the demand for our vessels. By reducing the cost of labor through automation and digitization and empowering consumers to demand goods whenever and wherever they choose, technology is changing the business models and production of goods in many industries. Consequently, supply chains are being pulled closer to the end-customer and are required to be more responsive to changing demand patterns. As a result, fewer intermediate and raw inputs are traded, which could lead to a decrease in shipping activity. If automation and digitization become more commercially viable and/or production becomes more regional or local, total containerized trade volumes would decrease, which would adversely affect demand for maritime fuels and hence demand for our services. Supply chain disruptions caused by geopolitical events, rising tariff barriers and environmental concerns may also accelerate these trends. If we purchase secondhand vessels, we may not receive warranties from the builder and operating cost may increase as a result of aging of the fleet. Following a rigorous physical inspection of secondhand vessels prior to purchase, we do not have the same knowledge about their condition and cost of any required (or anticipated) repairs that we would have had if these vessels had been built for and operated exclusively by us. Accordingly, we may not discover defects or other problems with such vessels prior to purchase. Any such hidden defects or problems, when detected may be expensive to repair, and may require us to put a vessel into drydock, which would reduce our fleet utilization and increase our operating costs, and if not detected, may result in accidents or other incidents for which we may become liable to third parties. Also, when purchasing previously owned vessels, we do not receive the benefit of any builder warranties if the vessels we buy are older than one year. Cargo insurance rates increase with the age of a vessel, as older vessels may be less desirable to charterers and may be restricted in the type of activities in which the vessels can engage. 15 Table of Contents In general, the costs to maintain a vessel in good operating condition increase with the age of the vessel. Older vessels are typically less fuel efficient than more recently constructed vessels due to improvements in engine technology. Governmental regulations, safety and other equipment standards related to the age of vessels may require expenditures for alterations or the addition of new equipment to some of our vessels and may restrict the type of activities in which these vessels may engage. Future repairs and maintenance costs for secondhand vessels are difficult to predict and may be substantially higher than those for equivalent vessels of which we have had direct experience. These additional costs could decrease our cash flow and reduce our liquidity. We cannot assure you that, as our vessels age, market conditions will justify those expenditures or enable us to operate our vessels profitably during the remainder of their useful lives. As a result, regulations and standards could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and ability to pay dividends. Our insurance may not be adequate to cover our losses that may result from our operations due to the inherent operational risks of the tanker industry. We carry insurance to protect us against most of the accident-related risks involved in the conduct of our business, including marine hull and machinery insurance, protection and indemnity insurance (which includes pollution risks), crew insurance and war risk insurance. However, we may not be adequately insured to cover losses from our operational risks, which could have a material adverse effect on us. Even if our insurance coverage is adequate to cover our losses, we may not be able to timely obtain a replacement vessel in the event of a loss. Additionally, our insurers may refuse to pay particular claims, and our insurance may be voidable by the insurers if we take, or fail to take, certain action, such as failing to maintain certification of our vessels with applicable maritime regulatory organizations. We may also be subject to calls, or premiums, in amounts based not only on our own claim records but also the claim records of all other members of the protection and indemnity associations through which we receive indemnity insurance coverage for tort liability. Our insurance policies also contain deductibles, limitations and exclusions which, although we believe are standard in the shipping industry, may nevertheless increase our costs. In addition, insurers typically charge additional premiums if vessels transit certain “excluded areas,” which may be subject to higher risk of piracy, war or terrorism. We cannot be certain that our insurers will continue to provide such cover, or that we will be able to recover these increased costs from our charterers. Any significant uninsured or under-insured loss or liability could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows and financial condition and our ability to pay dividends. In addition, we may not be able to obtain adequate insurance coverage at reasonable rates in the future during adverse insurance market. Any loss of a vessel or extended vessel off-hire, due to an accident or otherwise, could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition and our ability to pay dividends. In addition, we carry loss-of-hire insurance for those vessels on time-charter contracts, financed through Ocean Yield, which covers the loss of revenue during extended vessel off-hire periods, such as those that might occur during an unscheduled drydocking due to damage to the vessel from a major accident. Accordingly, any vessel that is off hire for an extended period of time, due to an accident or otherwise, could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. An increase in operating costs would decrease earnings and dividends per share. Under the charters of all of our operating vessels, we are responsible for vessel operating expenses. Our vessel operating expenses include the costs of crew, lube oil, provisions, deck and engine stores, insurance and maintenance and repairs, which depend on a variety of factors, many of which are beyond our control. If our vessels suffer damage, they may need to be repaired at a drydocking facility. The costs of drydock repairs are unpredictable and can be substantial. Increases in any of these expenses would decrease earnings and dividends per share. 16 Table of Contents We may be unsuccessful in competing in the highly competitive international Suezmax tanker market. The operation of Suezmax tankers and transportation of crude and petroleum products is extremely competitive, and our industry is capital intensive and highly fragmented. Demand for transportation of oil and oil products has declined in the past, and could continue to decline, which could lead to increased competition. Competition arises primarily from other tanker owners, including major oil companies as well as independent tanker companies. Competition for the transportation of oil and oil products can be intense and depends on price, location, size, age, condition and the acceptability of the tanker and its operators to the charterers. Competitors with greater resources could enter and operate larger tanker fleets through consolidations or acquisitions and may be able to offer more competitive prices and fleets. This competition may cause our market share to decrease in the future and we may not find profitable employment for our vessels, which could adversely affect our financial condition and our ability to expand our business. We are subject to laws and regulations which can adversely affect our business, results of operations, cash flows and financial condition, and our ability to pay dividends. Our operations are subject to numerous laws and regulations in the form of international conventions and treaties, national, state and local laws and national and international regulations in force in the jurisdictions in which our vessels operate or are registered, which can significantly affect the ownership and operation of our vessels. These requirements include, but are not limited to, the United States Oil Pollution Act of 1990, or OPA, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, generally referred to as CERCLA, the U.S. Clean Water Act, or CWA, the U.S. Clean Air Act, or CAA, the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, European Union Regulations, such as the FuelEU Maritime regulation, the IMO, International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage of 1969, as from time to time amended and generally referred to as CLC, the IMO International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships of 1973, as from time to time amended and generally referred to as MARPOL, including the designation of emission control areas, or ECAs thereunder), the IMO International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea of 1974, as from time to time amended and generally referred to as SOLAS, the IMO International Convention on Load Lines of 1966 (as from time to time amended), the International Convention on Civil Liability for Bunker Oil Pollution Damage, generally referred to as the Bunker Convention, the IMO’s International Management Code for the Safe Operation of Ships and for Pollution Prevention, generally referred to as the ISM Code, the International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships’ Ballast Water and Sediments Discharge, generally referred to as the BWM Convention, International Ship and Port Facility Security Code, or ISPS, and the U.S. Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002, generally referred to as the MTSA. Compliance with such laws, regulations and standards, where applicable, may require installation of costly equipment or operational changes and may affect the resale value or useful lives of our vessels. We may also incur additional costs in order to comply with other existing and future regulatory obligations, including, but not limited to, costs relating to air emissions, including greenhouse gases, the management of ballast waters, maintenance and inspection, development and implementation of emergency procedures and insurance coverage or other financial assurance of our ability to address pollution incidents. These costs could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows and financial condition and our ability to pay dividends. A failure to comply with applicable laws and regulations may result in administrative and civil penalties, criminal sanctions or the suspension or termination of our operations. Environmental laws often impose strict liability for remediation of spills and releases of oil and hazardous substances, which could subject us to liability without regard to whether we were negligent or at fault. Under OPA, for example, owners, operators and bareboat charterers are jointly and severally strictly liable for the discharge of oil within the 200-nautical mile exclusive economic zone around the U.S. (unless the spill results solely from the act or omission of a third party, an act of God or an act of war). An oil spill could result in significant liability, including fines, penalties, criminal liability and remediation costs for natural resource damages under other international and U.S. federal, state and local laws, as well as third-party damages, including punitive damages, and could harm our reputation with current or potential charterers of our tankers. We are required to satisfy insurance and financial responsibility requirements for potential oil (including marine fuel) spills and other pollution incidents. Although we have arranged insurance to cover certain environmental risks, and risk of environmental damages and impacts there can be no assurance that such insurance will be sufficient to cover all such risks or that any claims will not have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows and financial condition, and our ability to pay dividends. Additional legislation, regulations, or other requirements applicable to the operation of our vessels that may be implemented in the future could adversely affect our business. 17 Table of Contents It should be noted that the U.S. is currently experiencing changes in its environmental policy, the results of which have yet to be fully determined. For example, in March 2017, the Trump administration issued an executive order to review and possibly eliminate the EPA’s plan to cut greenhouse gas emissions. On August 13, 2020, the EPA released rules rolling back standards to control methane and volatile organic compound emissions from new oil and gas facilities. In early 2021, the Biden administration directed the EPA to publish a proposed rule suspending, revising, or rescinding certain of these rules, and the resulting final rule was issued in December 2023. However, the current administration is delaying these requirements limiting methane emissions and is considering repealing the measure altogether. Therefore, it is unclear how such environmental regulations could affect our operations. The EPA or individual states could enact these or other environmental regulations that could affect our operations. These numerous and sometimes conflicting laws and regulations include, among others, data privacy requirements (in particular the European General Data Protection Regulation, enforceable as from May 25, 2018 and the EU-US Privacy Shield Framework, as adopted by the European Commission on July 12, 2016), labor relations laws, tax laws, anti-competition regulations, import and trade restrictions, export requirements, U.S. laws such as the FCPA and other U.S. federal laws and regulations established by the office of Foreign Asset Control, local laws such as the UK Bribery Act 2010 or other local laws which prohibit corrupt payments to governmental officials or certain payments or remunerations to customers. Given the high level of complexity of these laws, there is a risk that we, our agent or other intermediaries may inadvertently breach certain provisions thereunder. Violations of these laws and regulations could result in fines, criminal sanctions against us, our officers or our employees, requirements to obtain export licenses, cessation of business activities in sanctioned countries, implementation of compliance programs, and prohibitions on the conduct of our business. Violations of laws and regulations also could result in prohibitions on our ability to operate in one or more countries and could materially damage our reputation, our ability to attract and retain employees, or our business, results of operations and financial condition. Furthermore, detecting, investigating and resolving actual or alleged violations is expensive and can consume significant time and attention of our senior management. Though we have implemented monitoring procedures and policies, guidelines, contractual terms and audits, these measures may not prevent or detect failures by our agents or intermediaries regarding compliance. In addition, many environmental requirements are designed to reduce the risk of pollution, such as from oil spills, and our compliance with these requirements could be costly. To comply with these and other regulations, including: (i) the sulfur emission requirements of Annex VI of MARPOL, which instituted a global 0.5% (lowered from 3.5% as of January 1, 2020) sulfur cap on marine fuel consumed by a vessel, unless the vessel is equipped with a scrubber, (ii) the BWM Convention of the IMO, which requires vessels to install expensive ballast water treatment systems, we may be required to incur additional costs to meet new maintenance and inspection requirements, develop contingency plans for potential spills, and obtain insurance coverage, and (iii) the FuelEU Maritime regulation, which starting from January 2025, sets requirements on the annual average greenhouse gas intensity of energy used by ships trading with the EU or European Economic Area. The increased demand for low sulfur fuels may increase the costs of fuel for our vessels, none of which have scrubbers. Additional conventions, laws and regulations may be adopted that could limit our ability to do business or increase the cost of doing business and which may materially and adversely affect our operations. Regulations relating to ballast water discharge may adversely affect our revenues and profitability. The IMO has imposed updated guidelines for ballast water management systems specifying the maximum amount of viable organisms allowed to be discharged from a vessel’s ballast water. The standards have been in force since 2019, and for most vessels, compliance with the D-2 standard involved installing on-board systems to treat ballast water and eliminate unwanted organisms. Ships constructed on or after September 8, 2017, are to comply with the D-2 standards on or after September 8, 2017. All our vessels have installed ballast water management systems and as such we are compliant with these guidelines. Furthermore, United States regulations are currently changing. Although the 2013 Vessel General Permit, or VGP, program and U.S. National Invasive Species Act, or NISA, are currently in effect to regulate ballast discharge, exchange and installation, the Vessel Incidental Discharge Act, or VIDA, which was signed into law on December 4, 2018, requires that the EPA develop national standards of performance for approximately 30 discharges, similar to those found in the VGP within two years. On October 26, 2020, the EPA published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for Vessel Incidental Discharge National Standards of Performance under VIDA. In October 2024, the EPA finalized its rule on Vessel Incidental Discharge Standards of Performance, which means that the USCG must now develop corresponding regulations regarding ballast water within two years of that date. The new regulations will require the installation of new equipment, which may cause us to incur substantial costs. 18 Table of Contents Climate change and greenhouse gas restrictions may adversely impact our operations and markets. Due to concern over the risk of climate change, a number of countries and the IMO have adopted, or are considering the adoption of, regulatory frameworks to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. These regulatory measures may include, among others, adoption of cap-and-trade regimes, carbon taxes, increased efficiency standards and incentives or mandates for renewable energy. In April 2018, nations at the MEPC 72 adopted an initial strategy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from ships, which identifies levels of ambition to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. In July 2023, MEPC 80 adopted the 2023 IMO Strategy on Reduction of GHG Emissions from Ships, which builds upon the initial strategy’s levels of ambition. The European Union on the other hand has indicated that it intends to accelerate its plans to include shipping into the emissions trading scheme. For more information on MEPC’s GHG strategy, please see Item 4: Environmental Section, Greenhouse Gas Regulations. The European Commission has proposed adding shipping to the EU Emission Trading Scheme, or EU ETS, as of 2023 with a phase-in period. It is expected that shipowners will need to purchase and surrender a number of emission allowances that represent their recorded carbon emission exposure for a specific reporting period and shipowners will need to purchase and surrender a number of emission allowances that represent their Monitoring, Reporting and Verification, or MRV, -recorded carbon emission exposure for a specific reporting period. Compliance with the Maritime EU ETS will result in additional compliance and administration costs to properly incorporate the provisions of the Directive into our business routines. Additional EU regulations which are part of the EU’s Fit-for-55, could also affect our financial position in terms of compliance and administration costs when they take effect. For more information on the EU ETS, please see Item 4: Environmental Section, European Union Regulations. Since January 1, 2020, ships have to either remove sulfur from emissions or buy fuel with low sulfur content, which may lead to increased costs and supplementary investments for ship owners. The interpretation of “fuel oil used on board” includes use in main engine, auxiliary engines and boilers. Shipowners may comply with this regulation by (i) using 0.5% sulfur fuels on board, which are available around the world but at a higher cost; (ii) installing scrubbers for cleaning of the exhaust gas; or (iii) by retrofitting vessels to be powered by liquefied natural gas or other alternative energy sources, which may not be a viable option due to the lack of supply network and high costs involved in this process. Costs of compliance with these regulatory changes may be significant and may have a material adverse effect on our future performance, results of operations, cash flows and financial position. In addition, although the emissions of greenhouse gases from international shipping currently are not subject to the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, which required adopting countries to implement national programs to reduce emissions of certain gases, or the Paris Agreement (discussed further below), a new treaty may be adopted in the future that includes restrictions on shipping emissions. Compliance with changes in laws, regulations and obligations relating to climate change affects the propulsion options in subsequent vessel designs and could increase our costs related to acquiring new vessels, operating and maintaining our existing vessels and require us to install new emission controls, acquire allowances or pay taxes related to our greenhouse gas emissions or administer and manage a greenhouse gas emissions program. Revenue generation and strategic growth opportunities may also be adversely affected. In 2022, MEPC amended Annex VI to impose new regulations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from ships. These amendments introduce requirements to assess and measure the energy efficiency of all ships and set the required attainment values, with the goal of reducing the carbon intensity of international shipping. To achieve a 40% reduction in carbon emissions by 2023 compared to 2008, shipping companies are required to include: (i) a technical requirement to reduce carbon intensity based on a new Energy Efficiency Existing Ship Index, or EEXI, and (ii) operational carbon intensity reduction requirements, based on a new operational carbon intensity indicator, or CII. For more information on requirements around EEXI and CII, please see Item 4: Environmental Section, Air Emissions. MEPC 76 also adopted amendments to the International Convention on the Control of Harmful Anti-Fouling Systems on Ships, 2001, or the AFS Convention, which have been entered into force on January 1, 2023. From this date, all ships shall not apply or re-apply anti-fouling systems containing cybutryne on or after January 1, 2023; all ships bearing an anti-fouling system that contains cybutryne in the external coating layer of their hulls or external parts or surfaced on January 1, 2023 shall either: remove the anti-fouling system or apply a coating that forms a barrier to this substance leaching from the underlying non-compliance anti-fouling system. 19 Table of Contents On November 13, 2021, the Glasgow Climate Pact was announced following discussions at the 2021 United Nations Climate Change Conference, or COP26. The Glasgow Climate Pact calls for signatory states to voluntarily phase out fossil fuels subsidies. A shift away from these products could potentially affect the demand for our vessels and negatively impact our future business, operating results, cash flows and financial position. COP26 also produced the Clydebank Declaration, in which 22 signatory states (including the United States and United Kingdom) announced their intention to voluntarily support the establishment of zero-emission shipping routes. Governmental and investor pressure to voluntarily participate in these green shipping routes could cause us to incur significant additional expenses to “green” our vessels. In March 2022, the SEC announced proposed rules with respect to climate-related disclosures, including with respect to greenhouse gas emissions and certain climate-related financial statement metrics, which would apply to foreign private issuers listed on US national securities exchanges, such as us. Compliance with such reporting requirements or any similar requirements may impose substantial obligations and costs on us. The SEC adopted final rules regarding such disclosures on March 6, 2024, which are currently subject to a voluntary stay by the SEC until the resolution of legal challenges. If we are unable to accurately measure and disclose required climate-related data in a timely manner, we could be subject to penalties in certain jurisdictions. Adverse effects upon the oil and gas industry relating to climate change, including growing public concern about the environmental impact of climate change, may also adversely affect demand for our services. For example, increased regulation of greenhouse gases or other concerns relating to climate change may reduce the demand for oil and gas in the future or create greater incentives for use of alternative energy sources. In addition to the peak oil risk from a demand perspective, the physical effects of climate change, including changes in weather patterns, extreme weather events, rising sea levels, scarcity of water resources, may negatively impact our operations. Any long-term material adverse effect on the oil and gas industry could have a significant financial and operational adverse impact on our business that we cannot predict with certainty at this time. If we fail to comply with international safety regulations, we may be subject to increased liability, which may adversely affect our insurance coverage and may result in a denial of access to, or detention in, certain ports. The SOLAS Convention was amended to address the safe manning of vessels and emergency training drills. The Convention of Limitation of Liability for Maritime Claims, or the LLMC, sets limitations of liability for a loss of life or personal injury claim or a property claim against ship owners. We believe that all of our vessels are in substantial compliance with SOLAS and LLMC standards. Under Chapter IX of the SOLAS Convention, or the International Safety Management Code for the Safe Operation of Ships and for Pollution Prevention or the ISM Code, our operations are also subject to environmental standards and requirements. The ISM Code requires that vessel operators obtain a safety management certificate for each vessel they operate. This certificate evidences compliance by a vessel’s management with the ISM Code requirements for a safety management system. No vessel can obtain a safety management certificate unless its manager has been awarded a document of compliance, issued by each flag state, under the ISM Code. We have obtained applicable documents of compliance for our offices and safety management certificates for all of our vessels for which the certificates are required by the IMO. The documents of compliance and safety management certificates are renewed as required. Regulation II-1/3-10 of the SOLAS Convention governs ship construction and stipulates that ships over 150 meters in length must have adequate strength, integrity and stability to minimize risk of loss or pollution. Goal-based standards amendments in SOLAS regulation II-1/3-10 entered into force in 2012, with July 1, 2016, set for application to new oil tankers and bulk carriers. The SOLAS Convention regulation II-1/3-10 on goal-based ship construction standards for bulk carriers and oil tankers, which entered into force on January 1, 2012, requires that all oil tankers and bulk carriers of 150 meters in length and above, for which the building contract is placed on or after July 1, 2016, satisfy applicable structural requirements conforming to the functional requirements of the International Goal-based Ship Construction Standards for Bulk Carriers and Oil Tankers (GBS Standards). 20 Table of Contents Amendments to the SOLAS Convention Chapter VII apply to vessels transporting dangerous goods and require those vessels be in compliance with the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code, or IMDG Code. Effective January 1, 2018, the IMDG Code includes (1) the provisions for radioactive material, reflecting the latest provisions from the International Atomic Energy Agency, (2) marking, packing and classification requirements for dangerous goods, and (3) mandatory training requirements. The IMO has also adopted the International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, or STCW. As of February 2017, all seafarers are required to meet the STCW standards and be in possession of a valid STCW certificate. Flag states that have ratified SOLAS and STCW generally employ the classification societies, which have incorporated SOLAS and STCW requirements into their class rules, to undertake surveys to confirm compliance. Furthermore, cybersecurity guidance and regulations for the maritime industry have been developed in an attempt to combat cybersecurity threats. For example, cyber-risk management systems must be incorporated by ship-owners and managers by 2021. This might cause companies to create additional procedures for monitoring cybersecurity, which could require additional expenses and/or capital expenditures. The impact of such regulations is hard to predict at this time. Developments in safety and environmental requirements relating to the recycling of vessels may result in escalated and unexpected costs. The 2009 Hong Kong International Convention for the Safe and Environmentally Sound Recycling of Ships, or the Hong Kong Convention, which entered into force in June 2025, aims to ensure ships, being recycled once they reach the end of their operational lives, do not pose any unnecessary risks to the environment, human health and safety. As such, each ship sent for recycling is required to carry an inventory of its hazardous materials. The hazardous materials, whose use or installation are prohibited in certain circumstances, are listed in an appendix to the Hong Kong Convention. Ships are required to have surveys to verify their inventory of hazardous materials initially, throughout their lives and prior to the ship being recycled. MEPC 81 approved reporting formats and future development of a Global Integrated Shipping Information System (GISIS) model, to provide electronic reporting facilities, to assist with the implementation of the Hong Kong Convention. MEPC 82 also approved a provisional guidance on the interplay between the Hong Kong Convention and the Basel Convention (which is aimed to protect human protect human health and the environment against the adverse effects of hazardous wastes, including among others, waste from ship dismantling) with respect to the transboundary movement of ships intended for recycling. In April 2025, MEPC 83 adopted amendments to the 2023 Guidelines for the development of the Inventory of Hazardous Materials, clarifying the relevant threshold in respect to cybutryne (chemical compound) when samples are taken directly from the hull or from wet paint containers. On November 20, 2013, the European Parliament and the Council of the EU adopted the Ship Recycling Regulation, which retains the requirements of the Hong Kong Convention and requires that certain commercial seagoing vessels flying the flag of an EU Member State may be recycled only in facilities included on the European list of permitted ship recycling facilities. These regulatory developments, when implemented, may lead to cost escalation by shipyards, repair yards and recycling yards. This may then result in a decrease in the residual scrap value of a vessel, and a vessel could potentially not cover the cost to comply with latest requirements, which may have an adverse effect on our future performance, results of operations, cash flows and financial position. 21 Table of Contents Risks Related to our Indebtedness Servicing our debt limits funds available for other purposes and if we cannot service our debt, we may lose our vessels. Borrowing under our credit facilities and financing arrangements requires us to dedicate a part of our cash flow from operations to paying interest and installments on our indebtedness. These payments limit funds available for working capital, capital expenditures and other purposes, including making distributions to shareholders and further equity or debt financing in the future. Amounts borrowed under the credit facilities bear interest at variable rates. Increases in prevailing rates could increase the amounts that we would have to pay to our lenders, even though the outstanding principal amount remains the same, and our net income and cash flows would decrease. We expect our earnings and cash flow to vary from year to year due to the cyclical nature of the tanker industry. In addition, our current policy is not to accumulate cash, but rather to distribute our available cash to shareholders. If we do not generate or reserve enough cash flow from operations to satisfy our debt obligations, we may have to undertake alternative financing plans, such as: • seeking to raise additional capital; • refinancing or restructuring our debt; • selling vessels or other assets; or • reducing or delaying capital investments. However, these alternative financing plans, if necessary, may not be sufficient to allow us to meet our debt obligations. If we are unable to meet our debt obligations or if some other default occurs under our credit facilities, the lenders could elect to declare that debt, together with accrued interest and fees, to be immediately due and payable and proceed against the collateral securing that debt, which constitutes our entire fleet. As of December 31, 2025, we had $424.1 million of outstanding indebtedness. Our borrowing facilities contain restrictive covenants, which could negatively affect our growth, cause our financial performance to suffer and limit our ability to pay dividends. Our outstanding debt requires us or our subsidiaries to maintain financial covenants. Because some of these ratios are dependent on the market value of vessels, should charter rates or vessel values materially decline in the future, we may seek to obtain waivers or amendments from our lenders with respect to such financial ratios and covenants, or we may be required to take action to reduce our debt or to act in a manner contrary to our business objectives to meet any such financial ratios and satisfy any such financial covenants. Our lenders’ interests may be different from ours, and we cannot guarantee that we will be able to obtain their permission when needed. This may prevent us from taking actions that we believe are in our or our shareholders’ best interest. Events beyond our control, including changes in the economic and business conditions in the shipping markets in which we operate, interest rate developments, changes in the funding costs of our banks, changes in vessel earnings and asset valuations and outbreaks of diseases, may affect our ability to comply with these covenants. We cannot assure you that we will meet these ratios or satisfy our financial or other covenants or that our lenders will waive any failure to do so. These financial and other covenants may adversely affect our ability to finance future operations or limit our ability to pursue certain business opportunities or take certain corporate actions. The covenants may also restrict our flexibility in planning for changes in our business and the industry and make us more vulnerable to economic downturns and adverse developments. A breach of any of the covenants in, or our inability to maintain the required financial ratios under the borrowing facilities would prevent us from borrowing additional money under our credit facilities or lease financing arrangements and could result in a default under our credit facilities and would prevent us from paying dividends to our shareholders and could result in a default under our borrowing facilities. If a default occurs under our borrowing facilities, the lenders could elect to declare the issued and outstanding debt, together with accrued interest and other fees, to be immediately due and payable and foreclose on the collateral securing that debt, which could constitute all or substantially all of our assets. Moreover, in connection with any waivers or amendments to our credit facilities or lease financing arrangements that we may obtain, our lenders may impose additional operating and financial restrictions on us or modify the terms of our existing credit facilities or lease financing arrangements. These restrictions may further restrict our ability to, among other things, pay dividends, repurchase our common shares, make capital expenditures, or incur additional indebtedness. 22 Table of Contents Furthermore, our debt and lease financing agreements contain cross-default provisions that may be triggered if we default under the terms of any one of our financing agreements. In the event of default by us under one of our debt agreements, the lenders under our other debt or lease financing agreements could determine that we are in default under such other financing agreements. Such cross defaults could result in the acceleration of the maturity of such indebtedness under these agreements and the lenders thereunder may foreclose upon any collateral securing that indebtedness, including our vessels, even if we were to subsequently cure such default. In addition, our credit facilities and lease financing arrangements contain subjective acceleration clauses under which the debt could become due and payable in the event of a material adverse change in our business. In the event of such acceleration or foreclosure, we might not have sufficient funds or other assets to satisfy all of our obligations, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. As of December 31, 2025, and as of the date of this annual report, we were in compliance with the financial covenants contained and other restrictions in our debt agreements. Variable rate indebtedness could subject us to interest rate risk, which could cause our debt service obligations to increase significantly. Our credit facilities use variable interest rates and expose us to interest rate risk. If interest rates rise further, our debt service obligations on the variable rate indebtedness would increase even if the amount borrowed remained the same, and our profitability and cash available for servicing our indebtedness would decrease. We may not be able to finance our future capital commitments. We cannot guarantee that we will be able to obtain financing at all or on terms acceptable to us. If adequate funds are not available, we may be required to reduce or delay expenditures for investments in new and existing projects, including our vessel construction contracts, which could hinder our growth and prevent us from realizing potential revenues from prior and planned investments, adversely affecting our cash flow and results of operations. which will have a negative impact on our cash flows and results of operations. The current state of the global financial markets and current economic conditions may adversely impact our results of operation, financial condition, cash flows and ability to obtain financing or refinance our existing and future credit facilities on acceptable terms. Major market disruptions and adverse changes in market conditions and regulatory climate in China, the United States, the European Union and worldwide may adversely affect our business or impair our ability to raise equity or borrow amounts under credit facilities or any future financial arrangements. Continuing concerns over inflation, rising interest rates, energy costs, geopolitical issues, including acts of war and the availability and cost of credit have contributed to increased volatility and diminished expectations for the economy and the markets going forward. These factors, combined with volatile oil prices, declining business and consumer confidence, have precipitated fears of a possible economic recession. Domestic and international equity markets continue to experience heightened volatility and turmoil. The weakness in the global economy has caused, and may continue to cause, a decrease in worldwide demand for certain goods and, thus, shipping. The occurrence or continued occurrence of any of the foregoing events could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows, financial condition, value of our vessels and ability to pay dividends. We cannot assure you that we will be able to refinance our indebtedness. In the event that we are unable to service or repay our debt obligations out of our operating activities, we may need to refinance our indebtedness, and we cannot assure you that we will be able to do so on terms that are acceptable to us or at all. The actual or perceived tanker market rate environment and prospects and the market value of our fleet, among other things, may materially affect our ability to obtain new debt financing. If we are unable to refinance our indebtedness, we may choose to issue securities or sell certain of our assets in order to satisfy our debt obligations. If we are unable to meet our debt obligations, or if we otherwise default under our loan facilities or an alternative financing arrangement, our lenders could declare the debt, together with accrued interest and fees, to be immediately due and payable and foreclose on our fleet, which could result in the acceleration of other indebtedness that we may have at such time and the commencement of similar foreclosure proceedings by other lenders. 23 Table of Contents We are subject to certain risks with respect to our counterparties on contracts, and failure of such counterparties to meet their obligations could cause us to suffer losses or negatively impact our results of operations and cash flows. We have entered into various contracts, including charter agreements with our customers, our borrowing facilities, and from time to time we may enter into newbuilding contracts. Such agreements subject us to counterparty risks. The ability of each of our counterparties to perform its obligations under a contract with us will depend on a number of factors that are beyond our control and may include, among other things, general economic conditions, the condition of the maritime and offshore industries, the overall financial condition of the counterparty, charter rates received for specific types of vessels, work stoppages and other labor disturbances. For example, the combination of a reduction of cash flow resulting from declines in world trade, a reduction in borrowing bases under reserve-based credit facilities and the lack of availability of debt or equity financing may result in a significant reduction in the ability of our charterers to make charter payments to us. Charterers are sensitive to the commodity markets and may be impacted by market forces affecting commodities and/or uncertain industry conditions. In addition, in depressed market conditions, our charterers and customers may no longer need a vessel that is currently under charter or contract or may be able to obtain a comparable vessel at lower rates. As a result, charterers and customers may seek to renegotiate the terms of their existing charter parties or avoid their obligations under those contracts. Should a counterparty fail to honor its obligations under agreements with us, we could sustain significant losses which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. As a result, we could sustain significant losses which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows, as well as our ability to pay dividends, if any, in the future, and comply with covenants in our borrowing facilities. Risks Relating to Investing in Our Common Shares Our share price may continue to be highly volatile, which could lead to a loss of all or part of a shareholder’s investment. The market price of our common shares has fluctuated widely since our common shares began trading in on the NYSE. Over the last few years, the stock market has experienced price and volume fluctuations, due to factors such as actual or anticipated fluctuations in our quarterly and annual results and those of other public companies in our industry, any reductions in the payment of our dividends or changes in our dividend policy, mergers and strategic alliances in the shipping and offshore industries, market conditions in the shipping and offshore industries, changes in government regulation, shortfalls in our operating results from levels forecast by securities analysts, perceived or actual inability by our chartering counterparts to fully perform under the charter parties, including third party announcements concerning us or our competitors and the general state of the securities market. The shipping industries have been highly unpredictable and volatile. The market for common shares in these industries may be equally volatile. This volatility has sometimes been unrelated to the operating performance of particular companies. During 2025, the price of our common shares experienced a high of $3.90 in November and a low of $2.21 in April. As of April 17, 2026, the price of our common shares was $6.03. The market price of our common shares is affected by a variety of factors, including: • Investor reaction to the execution of our business strategy, including mergers and acquisitions; • Shareholder activism; • Our continued compliance with the listing standards of NYSE; • Regulatory or legal developments in the United States and other countries, especially changes in laws or regulations applicable to our industry, including those related to climate change; 24 Table of Contents • Variations or fluctuations in our financial results or those of companies that are perceived to be similar to us; • Our ability or inability to raise additional capital and the terms on which we raise it; • Declines in the market prices of stocks generally; • Trading volume of our common shares; • Shorting activity in relation to our share; • Sales of our common shares by us or our stockholders; • The loss of any of our key management personnel; • General economic, industry and market conditions; and • Other events or factors, including those resulting from such events, or the prospect of such events, including war, terrorism and other international conflicts, public health issues, adverse weather and climate conditions could disrupt our operations or result in political or economic instability. These broad market and industry factors may seriously harm the market price of our common shares, regardless of our operating performance, and may be inconsistent with any improvements in actual or expected operating performance, financial condition or other indicators of value. Since the stock price of our common shares has fluctuated in the past, has been recently volatile and may be volatile in the future, investors in our common shares could incur substantial losses. In the past, following periods of volatility in the market, securities class-action litigation has often been instituted against companies. Such litigation, if instituted against us, could result in substantial costs and diversion of management’s attention and resources, which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects. There can be no guarantee that our stock price will remain at current prices. The market price of our common stock could decline due to sales of our shares in the market or the perception that such sales could occur. This could depress the market price of our common stock and make it more difficult for us to sell equity securities in the future at a time and price that we deem appropriate, or at all. Additionally, recently, securities of certain companies have experienced significant and extreme volatility in stock price due short sellers of shares of common shares, known as a “short squeeze”. These short squeezes have caused extreme volatility in those companies and in the market and have led to the price per share of those companies to trade at a significantly inflated rate that is disconnected from the underlying value of the company. Many investors who have purchased shares in those companies at an inflated rate face the risk of losing a significant portion of their original investment as the price per share has declined steadily as interest in those stocks have abated. While we have no reason to believe our shares would be the target of a short squeeze, there can be no assurance that we will not be in the future, and you may lose a significant portion or all of your investment if you purchase our shares at a rate that is significantly disconnected from our underlying value. We are thus unable to predict when such instances of trading volatility will occur or how long such dynamics may last. Therefore, we cannot assure you that you will be able to sell any of our common shares you may have purchased at a price greater than or equal to its original purchase price, or that you will be able to sell our common shares at all. 25 Table of Contents We operate in a cyclical and volatile industry and cannot guarantee that we will continue to make cash distributions. Our Board of Directors may, in its sole discretion, from time to time, declare and pay cash dividends in accordance with our organizational documents and applicable law including compliance with Bermuda law, and such distributions may be dependent, among other things, upon our having sufficient available distributable reserves. Our Board of Directors makes determinations regarding the payment of dividends in its sole discretion, and there is no guarantee that we will continue to pay dividends in the future. The timing and amount of any dividends declared will depend on, among other things, our earnings, financial condition and cash requirements and availability, our ability to obtain debt and equity financing on acceptable terms as contemplated by our growth strategy. We have made cash declarations quarterly since October 1997. It is possible that our revenues could be reduced as a result of decreases in charter rates or that we could incur other expenses or contingent liabilities that would reduce or eliminate the cash available for distribution as dividends. Further, our credit facilities limit our ability to distribute dividends. For more information, please see “Item 5. Operating and Financial Review and Prospectus—B. Liquidity and Capital Resources—Our Borrowing Activities.” We may not continue to pay dividends at rates previously paid or at all. If we do not pay dividends, the market price for our common shares must appreciate for investors to realize a gain on their investment. This appreciation may not occur, and our common shares may in fact depreciate in value, in part because of any future decreases in or elimination of our dividend payments. Ineffective internal controls could impact the Company’s business and financial results. Under Section 404 of Sarbanes-Oxley, we are required to include in each of our annual reports on Form 20-F a report containing our management’s assessment of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. If, in such annual reports on Form 20-F, our management cannot provide a report as to the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as required by Section 404, investors could lose confidence in the reliability of our financial statements, which could result in a decrease in the value of our common stock. Effective internal control over financial reporting is necessary for us to provide reliable financial reports and, together with adequate disclosure controls and procedures, are designed to prevent fraud. Any failure to implement required new or improved controls, or difficulties encountered in their implementation, could cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations. The cost of compliance with the foregoing requirement may have a material adverse effect on our future performance, results of operations, cash flows and financial condition. The Company’s internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements because of its inherent limitations, including the possibility of human error, the circumvention or overriding of controls, or fraud. Even effective internal controls can provide only reasonable assurance with respect to the preparation and fair presentation of financial statements. If the Company fails to maintain the adequacy of its internal controls, including any failure to implement required new or improved controls, or if the Company experiences difficulties in their implementation, the Company’s business and financial results could be harmed and the Company could fail to meet its financial reporting obligations. Increasing scrutiny and changing expectations from investors, lenders and other market participants with respect to our Environmental, Social and Governance, or ESG, policies may impose additional costs on us or expose us to additional risks. Companies across all industries are facing increasing scrutiny relating to their ESG policies. Investor advocacy groups, certain institutional investors, investment funds, lenders and other market participants are increasingly focused on ESG practices, especially as they relate to the environment health and safety, diversity, labor conditions and human rights in recent years, and have placed increasing importance on the implications and social cost of their investments. In March 2024, the SEC adopted final rules requiring certain climate-related disclosures by registrants. However, in April 2025, the SEC announced that it would stay the implementation of these rules and refrain from defending them in ongoing legal proceedings, introducing further uncertainty around the regulatory landscape for climate-related disclosures in the United States. While we are a foreign private issuer and may not be subject to all aspects of these rules, the evolving expectations of regulators, investors, and other stakeholders regarding transparency in climate-related risks and emissions data may increase our disclosure and compliance obligations over time. Additionally, voluntary climate disclosures or those made to comply with other jurisdictions’ regulations (such as the EU’s CSRD or California’s climate rules) may still expose us to litigation or reputational risks. We continue to monitor regulatory developments closely, but future changes to climate-related disclosure obligations in the U.S. or elsewhere may result in increased costs, changes to our reporting systems, or increased scrutiny of our environmental performance. 26 Table of Contents The increased focus and activism related to ESG, and similar matters may hinder access to capital, as investors and lenders may decide to reallocate capital or to not commit capital as a result of their assessment of a company’s ESG practices. Failure to adapt to or comply with evolving investor, lender or other industry shareholder expectations and standards, or the perception of not responding appropriately to the growing concern for ESG issues, regardless of whether there is a legal requirement to do so, may damage such a company’s reputation or stock price, resulting in direct or indirect material adverse effects on the company’s business and financial condition. The increase in shareholder proposals submitted on environmental matters and, in particular, climate-related proposals in recent years indicates that we may face increasing pressures from investors, lenders and other market participants, who are increasingly focused on climate change, to prioritize sustainable energy practices, reduce our carbon footprint and promote sustainability. As a result, we may be required to implement more stringent ESG procedures or standards so that our existing and future investors and lenders remain invested in us and make further investments in us, especially given the highly focused and specific trade of crude oil transportation in which we are engaged. If we do not meet these standards, our business and/or our ability to access capital could be harmed. We may face increasing pressures from investors, lenders, customers and other market participants, who are increasingly focused on climate change, to prioritize sustainable energy practices, reduce our carbon footprint and promote sustainability. As a result, we may be required to implement more stringent ESG procedures or standards so that our existing and future investors and lenders remain invested in us and make further investments in us. If we do not meet these standards, our business and/or our ability to access capital could be harmed. Additionally, certain investors and lenders may exclude shipping companies, such as us, from their investing portfolios altogether due to environmental, social and governance factors. These limitations in both the debt and equity capital markets may affect our ability to grow as our plans for growth may include accessing the equity and debt capital markets. If those markets are unavailable, or if we are unable to access alternative means of financing on acceptable terms, or at all, we may be unable to implement our business strategy, which would have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations and impair our ability to service our indebtedness. Further, it is likely that we will incur additional costs and require additional resources to implement, monitor, report and comply with wide ranging ESG requirements. The occurrence of any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition. Moreover, from time to time, in alignment with our sustainability priorities, we aim at establishing and publicly announce goals and commitments in respect of certain ESG items, such as shipping decarbonization. While we may create and publish voluntary disclosures regarding ESG matters from time to time, many of the statements in those voluntary disclosures are based on hypothetical expectations and assumptions that may or may not be representative of current or actual risks or events or forecasts of expected risks or events, including the costs associated therewith. Such expectations and assumptions are necessarily uncertain and may be prone to error or subject to misinterpretation given the long timelines involved and the lack of an established standardized approach to identifying, measuring and reporting on many ESG matters. If we fail to achieve or improperly report on our progress toward achieving our environmental goals and commitments, the resulting negative publicity could adversely affect our reputation and/or our access to capital. In the future there may be additional sustainability reporting requirements that the Company becomes subject to that may require us to incur additional expenditures in the future. When effective, we will focus on monitoring, managing and securing compliance with any new directives. Finally, organizations that provide information to investors on corporate governance and related matters have developed ratings processes for evaluating companies on their approach to ESG matters. Such ratings are used by some investors to inform their investment and vote decisions. Unfavorable ESG ratings and recent activism directed at shifting funding away from companies with fossil fuel-related assets could lead to increased negative investor sentiment toward us and our industry and to the diversion of investment to other, non-fossil fuel markets, which could have a negative impact on our access to and costs of capital. 27 Table of Contents We have antitakeover protections which could prevent a change of control. We have antitakeover protections which could prevent a third party to acquire us without the consent of our Board of Directors. On June 16, 2017, our Board adopted a shareholders’ rights agreement. This shareholders’ rights plan was designed to enable us to protect shareholder interests in the event that an unsolicited attempt is made for a business combination with, or a takeover of, the Company. Our shareholders’ rights plan is not intended to deter offers that our Board of Directors determines are in the best interests of our shareholders. These antitakeover provisions, including provisions of our shareholders’ rights agreement, could make it more difficult for a third party to acquire us, even if the third party’s offer may be considered beneficial by many shareholders. As a result, shareholders may be limited in their ability to obtain a premium for their shares. If our vessels call on ports located in countries or territories that are subject to sanctions or embargoes imposed by the U.S. government, the European Union, the United Nations or other governmental authorities, or engage in other such transactions or dealings that would be violative of applicable sanctions, it could result in monetary fines or other penalties, and may adversely affect our reputation and the market and trading price of our common stock. Although we intend to maintain compliance with all applicable sanctions and embargo laws, and we endeavour to take precautions reasonably designed to mitigate such risks, it is possible that in the future our vessels may call on ports located in sanctioned countries or territories, or engage in other such transactions or dealings that would be violative of applicable sanctions, on charterers’ instructions and/or without consent. Our contracts with our charterers may prohibit them from causing our vessels to call on ports located in sanctioned countries or territories or carrying cargo for entities that are the subject of sanctions. Although our charterers may, in certain cases, control the operation of our vessels, we have monitoring processes in place reasonably designed to ensure our compliance with applicable economic sanctions and embargo laws. Nevertheless, it remains possible that our charterers may cause our vessels to trade in violation of sanctions provisions without our consent. If such activities result in a violation of applicable sanctions or embargo laws, we could be subject to monetary fines, penalties, or other sanctions, and our reputation and the price at which our common stock trades might be adversely affected. Applicable sanctions and embargo laws and regulations vary in their application, and by jurisdiction, as they do not all apply to the same covered persons or proscribe the same activities, and such sanctions and embargo laws and regulations may be amended or expanded over time, and the lists of persons and entities designed under these laws and regulations are amended frequently, as is the case with the war in Ukraine. Moreover, many sanctions regimes, including the United States, provide that entities owned by the persons or entities designated in such lists are also subject to sanctions. The U.S., U.K., and EU have enacted new sanctions programs in recent years. Additional countries or territories, as well as additional persons or entities within or affiliated with those countries or territories, have, and in the future will, become the target of sanctions. These require us to be diligent in ensuring our compliance with sanctions laws. Further, the U.S. has increased its focus on sanctions enforcement with respect to the shipping sector. Accordingly, current or future counterparties of ours, including charterers, may be affiliated with persons or entities that are or may be in the future the subject of sanctions or embargoes imposed by the U.S., U.K., the EU, and/or other international bodies. If we determine that such sanctions require us to terminate existing or future contracts to which we, or our subsidiaries, are party, or if we are found to be in violation of such applicable sanctions or embargoes, we could be subject to monetary fines, penalties, or other sanctions, as well as suffer reputational harm, and our operations and/or the price at which our common stock trades might be adversely affected. As a result of Russia’s actions in Ukraine, the U.S., EU and United Kingdom, together with numerous other countries, have imposed significant sanctions on persons and entities associated with Russia and Belarus, as well as comprehensive sanctions on certain areas within the Donbas region of Ukraine, and such sanctions apply to entities owned and/or controlled by such designated persons or entities. These sanctions adversely affect our ability to operate in the region and also restrict parties whose cargo we may carry. Sanctions against Russia have also placed significant prohibitions on the maritime transportation of seaborne Russian oil, the importation of certain Russian energy products and other goods, and new investments in the Russian Federation. These sanctions further limit the scope of permissible operations and cargo we may carry. 28 Table of Contents Beginning in February of 2022, the United States, the United Kingdom, and the European Union, among other countries, announced various economic sanctions against Russia in connection with the aforementioned conflicts in the Ukraine region, which may adversely impact our business, given Russia’s role as a major global exporter of crude oil and natural gas. The ongoing conflict could result in the imposition of further economic sanctions or new categories of export restrictions against individuals or entities in or connected to Russia. While in general much uncertainty remains regarding the global impact of the continuation of the conflict in Ukraine, and any potential resolution thereof, it is possible that such tensions could adversely affect our business, financial condition, operations results, and cash flows. The United States has issued several Executive Orders that prohibit certain transactions related to Russia, including prohibitions on importation of certain Russian energy products into the United States (including crude oil, petroleum, petroleum fuels, oils, liquefied natural gas and coal), and all new investments in Russia by U.S. persons, among other prohibitions and export controls, and has issued numerous determinations authorizing the imposition of sanctions on persons wo operate or have operated in the energy, metals and mining, and marine sectors of the Russian Federation economy, among others. Furthermore, the United States, in conjunction with the G7, have implemented a Russian petroleum “price cap policy” which prohibits a variety of specified services related to the maritime transport of Russian Federation origin crude oil and petroleum products, including trading/commodities brokering, financing, shipping, insurance (including reinsurance and protection and indemnity), flagging, and customs brokering. An exception exists to permit such services when the price of the seaborne Russian oil does not exceed the relevant price cap; but implementation of this price exception relies on a recordkeeping and attestation process that requires each party in the supply chain of seaborne Russian oil to demonstrate or confirm that oil has been purchased at or below the price cap. Further, effective as of February 27, 2025, the United States has also prohibited the provision of petroleum services by U.S. persons to persons located in Russia. An exception exists for the provision of petroleum services in certain specified circumstances, including for the provision of services for products purchased at or below the aforementioned price caps. As of September 2025, the EU, UK and Canada also agreed to lower their price cap on Russian crude oil from $60 per barrel to $47.60 per barrel. Violations of the price cap policy or the risk that information, documentation, or attestations provided by parties in the supply chain are later determined to be false may pose additional risks adversely affecting our business. While much uncertainty remains, the potential that the EU, in conjunction with the G7, might replace the price cap policy in favor of a full maritime services ban for Russian oil exports may also pose further risks that could adversely affect our business. At the same time, it is unknown whether the United States, and/or the European Union and United Kingdom, will ease, retain, expand, or otherwise further modify the foregoing Russia sanctions due to the impact of the conflict in Iran on global energy markets. Our business could also be adversely impacted by trade tariffs, trade embargoes or other economic sanctions that limit trading activities between countries. Governments may also turn to trade barriers to protect their domestic industries against foreign imports, thereby depressing shipping demand. Protectionist developments, or the perception that they may occur, may have a material adverse effect on global economic conditions, and may significantly reduce global trade. Moreover, increasing trade protectionism may cause an increase in (a) the cost of goods exported from regions globally, (b) the length of time required to transport goods and (c) the risks associated with exporting goods. Such increases may significantly affect the quantity of goods to be shipped, shipping time schedules, voyage costs and other associated costs, which could have an adverse impact on our charterers’ business, operating results and financial condition and could thereby affect their ability to make timely charter hire payments to us and to renew and increase the number of their charters with us. This could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations or financial condition. In particular, leaders in the United States recently implemented more protective trade measures. There is significant uncertainty about the future relationship between the United States and China and other exporting countries, such as Canada and Mexico, and the European Union, among others, including with respect to trade policies, treaties, government regulations, and tariffs.For example, following the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling on February 20, 2026 in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act does not authorize the President to impose tariffs, the President imposed a temporary import duty of 10 percent, subject to limited exceptions, pursuant to Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 and effective as of February 24, 2026, which remains subject to legal challenge. In addition, on March 11 and March 12, 2026 the United States Trade Representative commenced new Section 301 investigations concerning (i) structural excess capacity and production in certain manufacturing sectors against China, the European Union (EU), Singapore, Switzerland, Norway, Indonesia, Malaysia, Cambodia, Thailand, Korea, Vietnam, Taiwan, Bangladesh, Mexico, Japan, and India; and (ii) against 60 countries related to the failure to impose and effectively enforce a prohibition on the importation of goods produced with forced labor. These investigations also may result in the imposition of additional tariffs or other restrictions on commerce. It is unknown whether and to what extent such tariffs will be retained, expanded, or otherwise modified by the U.S., or the effect that any such actions or any actions taken by other countries in response will have on us or our industry, but such measures could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations. 29 Table of Contents Although we believe that we have been in compliance with applicable sanctions and embargo laws and regulations in 2025, and intend to maintain such compliance, there can be no assurance that we will be in compliance in the future, particularly as the scope of certain laws may be unclear and may be subject to changing interpretations. Any such violation could result in fines, penalties or other sanctions that could severely impact our ability to access U.S. capital markets and conduct our business, and could result in some investors deciding, or being required, to divest their interest, or not to invest, in us. Additionally, some investors may decide not to invest in our company simply because we do business with companies that do business in sanctioned countries. The determination by these investors not to invest in, or to divest from, our common stock may adversely affect the price at which our common stock trades. While the terms of our charters require our charterers to operate our vessels in compliance with all applicable sanctions and embargo laws, the failure of our charterers to comply with such provisions may result in the violation of such applicable sanctions and embargo laws and regulations which could in turn negatively affect our reputation. Further, our reputation and the market for our securities may be adversely affected if, for example, we enter into charters with individuals or entities who, pursuant to contracts with third parties, provide services to or engage in operations associated with countries or territories that are the subject of certain U.S. sanctions or embargo laws. Investor perception of the value of our common stock may be adversely affected by the consequences of war, the effects of terrorism, civil unrest and governmental actions in the countries or territories that we operate in. Because we are a foreign corporation, you may not have the same rights that a shareholder in a U.S. corporation may have. We are incorporated in the Islands of Bermuda. Our memorandum of association, bye-laws and the Companies Act, 1981 of Bermuda, or the Companies Act, govern our affairs. The Companies Act does not as clearly establish your rights and the fiduciary responsibilities of our directors as do statutes and judicial precedent in some U.S. jurisdictions. Therefore, you may have more difficulty in protecting your interests as a shareholder in the face of actions by the management, directors or controlling shareholders than would shareholders of a corporation incorporated in a United States jurisdiction. There is a statutory remedy under Section 111 of the Companies Act which provides that a shareholder may seek redress in the courts as long as such shareholder can establish that our affairs are being conducted, or have been conducted, in a manner oppressive or prejudicial to the interests of some part of the shareholders, including such shareholder. However, you may not have the same rights that a shareholder in a United States corporation may have. We are incorporated in Bermuda and it may not be possible for our investors to enforce U.S. judgments against us. We are incorporated in the Islands of Bermuda. Substantially all of our assets are located outside the U.S. In addition, most of our directors and officers are non-residents of the U.S., and all or a substantial portion of the assets of these non-residents are located outside the U.S. As a result, it may be difficult or impossible for U.S. investors to serve process within the U.S. upon us, or our directors and officers or to enforce a judgment against us for civil liabilities in U.S. courts. In addition, you should not assume that courts in the countries in which we are incorporated or where our vessels are located (1) would enforce judgments of U.S. courts obtained in actions against us based upon the civil liability provisions of applicable U.S. federal and state securities laws or (2) would enforce, in original actions, liabilities against us based on those laws. 30 Table of Contents We may have to pay tax on United States source income, which would reduce our earnings. Under the United States Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code, 50% of the gross shipping income of a vessel owning or chartering corporation, such as ourselves, attributable to transportation that begins or ends, but that does not both begin and end, in the United States will be characterized as U.S. source shipping income and such income is subject to a 4% United States federal income tax, without the benefit of deductions, unless that corporation is entitled to a special tax exemption under the Code which applies to income derived by certain non-United States corporations from the international operations of ships. We believe that we currently qualify for this statutory tax exemption, and we have taken, and will continue to take, this position on the Company’s United States federal income tax returns. However, there are several risks that could cause us to become subject to tax on our United States source shipping income. Due to the factual nature of the issues involved, we can give no assurances as to our tax-exempt status for our future taxable years. If we are not entitled to this statutory tax exemption for any taxable year, we would be subject for any such year to a 4% U.S. federal income tax on our U.S. source shipping income, without the benefit of deductions. The imposition of this tax could have a negative effect on our business and would result in decreased earnings available for distribution to our shareholders. If the United States Internal Revenue Service were to treat us as a “passive foreign investment company,” that could have adverse tax consequences for United States shareholders. A foreign corporation is treated as a “passive foreign investment company,” or PFIC, for United States federal income tax purposes, if either (1) at least 75% of its gross income for any taxable year consists of certain types of “passive income” or (2) at least 50% of the average value of the corporation’s assets produce or are held for the production of those types of passive income. For purposes of these tests, cash is treated as an asset that produces passive income, and passive income includes dividends, interest, and gains from the sale or exchange of investment property and rents and royalties other than rents and royalties which are received from unrelated parties in connection with the active conduct of a trade or business. Income derived from the performance of services does not constitute passive income. United States shareholders of a PFIC may be subject to a disadvantageous United States federal income tax regime with respect to the distributions they receive from the PFIC and the gain, if any, they derive from the sale or other disposition of their shares in the PFIC. We believe that we ceased to be a PFIC beginning with the 2005 taxable year. Based on our current and expected future operations, we believe that we are not currently a PFIC, nor do we anticipate that we will become a PFIC for any future taxable year. As a result, non-corporate United States shareholders should be eligible to treat dividends paid by us in 2006 and thereafter as “qualified dividend income” which is subject to preferential tax rates. We expect to derive more than 25% of our income each year from our spot chartering or time chartering activities. We also expect that more than 50% of the value of our assets will be devoted to our spot chartering and time chartering. Therefore, since we believe that such income will be treated for relevant United States federal income tax purposes as services income, rather than rental income, we have taken, and will continue to take, the position that such income should not constitute passive income, and that the assets that we own and operate in connection with the production of that income, in particular our vessels, should not constitute assets that produce or are held for the production of passive income for purposes of determining whether we are a PFIC in any taxable year. There is, however, no direct legal authority under the PFIC rules addressing our method of operation. We believe there is substantial legal authority supporting our position consisting of case law and United States Internal Revenue Service, or IRS, pronouncements concerning the characterization of income derived from time charters and voyage charters as services income rather than rental income for other tax purposes. However, there is also authority which characterizes time charter income as rental income rather than services income for other tax purposes. Accordingly, no assurance can be given that the IRS or a court of law will accept our position, and there is a risk that the IRS or a court of law could determine that we are a PFIC. Moreover, no assurance can be given that we would not constitute a PFIC for any future taxable year if there were to be changes in the nature and extent of our operations. 31 Table of Contents If the IRS or a court of law were to find that we are or have been a PFIC for any taxable year beginning with the 2005 taxable year, our United States shareholders who owned their shares during such year would face adverse United States federal income tax consequences and certain information reporting obligations. Under the PFIC rules, unless those United States shareholders made or make an election available under the Code (which election could itself have adverse consequences for such United States shareholders), such United States shareholders would be subject to United States federal income tax at the then highest income tax rates on ordinary income plus interest upon excess distributions (i.e., distributions received in a taxable year that are greater than 125% of the average annual distributions received during the shorter of the three preceding taxable years or the United States shareholder’s holding period for our common shares) and upon any gain from the disposition of our common shares, as if the excess distribution or gain had been recognized ratably over the United States shareholder’s holding period of our common shares. In addition, non-corporate United States shareholders would not be eligible to treat dividends paid by us as “qualified dividend income” if we are a PFIC in the taxable year in which such dividends are paid or in the immediately preceding taxable year. Changes in tax laws and unanticipated tax liabilities could materially and adversely affect the taxes we pay, results of operations and financial results. We are subject to income and other taxes in several jurisdictions, and our results of operations and financial results may be affected by tax and other initiatives around the world. For instance, there is a high level of uncertainty in today’s tax environment stemming from global initiatives put forth by the Economic Co-operation and Development’s, or OECD, two-pillar base erosion and profit shifting project. In October 2021, members of the OECD put forth two proposals: (i) Pillar One reallocates profit to the market jurisdictions where sales arise versus physical presence; and (ii) Pillar Two compels multinational corporations with €750 million or more in annual revenue to pay a global minimum tax of 15% on income received in each country in which they operate. The reforms aim to level the playing field between countries by discouraging them from reducing their corporate income taxes to attract foreign business investment. Over 140 countries agreed to enact the two-pillar solution to address the challenges arising from the digitalization of the economy and, in 2024, these guidelines were declared effective and must now be enacted by those OECD member countries. It is possible that these guidelines, including the global minimum corporate tax rate measure of 15%, could increase the burden and costs of our tax compliance, the amount of taxes we incur in those jurisdictions and our global effective tax rate, which could have a material adverse impact on our results of operations and financial results. We may become subject to taxation in Bermuda which would negatively affect our results. Except as described under “Bermuda Tax Considerations”, there is no Bermuda income or profits tax, withholding tax, capital gains tax, capital transfer tax, estate duty or inheritance tax payable by us or by our shareholders in respect of our shares. We have obtained an assurance from the Minister of Finance of Bermuda under the Exempted Undertakings Tax Protection Act 1966 that, in the event that any legislation is enacted in Bermuda imposing any tax computed on profits or income, or computed on any capital asset, gain or appreciation or any tax in the nature of estate duty or inheritance tax, such tax shall not, until March 31, 2035, be applicable to us or to any of our operations or to our shares, debentures or other obligations except insofar as such tax applies to persons ordinarily resident in Bermuda or is payable by us in respect of real property owned or leased by us in Bermuda. We cannot assure you that a future Minister would honor that assurance, which is not legally binding, or that after such date we would not be subject to any such tax. If we were to become subject to taxation in Bermuda, our results of operations could be adversely affected. As a Bermuda exempted company incorporated under Bermuda law with subsidiaries in another offshore jurisdiction, our operations may be subject to economic substance requirements. On December 5, 2017, following an assessment of the tax policies of various countries by the Code of Conduct Group for Business Taxation of the European Union, or the COCG, the Council of the European Union approved and published Council conclusions containing a list of non-cooperative jurisdictions for tax purposes, or the Conclusions. Although at that time not considered “non-cooperative jurisdictions,” certain countries, including Bermuda and the Marshall Islands were listed as having “tax regimes that facilitate offshore structures which attract profits without real economic activity.” In connection with the Conclusions, and to avoid being placed on the list of “non-cooperative jurisdictions,” the government of Bermuda, among others, committed to addressing COCG proposals relating to economic substance for entities doing business in or through their respective jurisdictions and to pass legislation to implement any appropriate changes by the end of 2018. 32 Table of Contents The Economic Substance Act 2018 and the Economic Substance Regulations 2018 of Bermuda, or the Economic Substance Act, and the Economic Substance Regulations, respectively, became operative on 31 December 2018. The Economic Substance Act applies to every registered entity in Bermuda that engages in a relevant activity and requires that every such entity shall maintain a substantial economic presence in Bermuda. A relevant activity for the purposes of the Economic Substance Act is banking business, insurance business, fund management business, financing and leasing business, headquarters business, shipping business, distribution and service centre business, intellectual property business and conducting business as a holding entity, which means acting as a pure equity holding entity. The Economic Substance Act provides that a registered entity that carries on a relevant activity complies with economic substance requirements if (a) it is directed and managed in Bermuda, (b) its core income-generating activities (as may be prescribed) are undertaken in Bermuda with respect to the relevant activity, (c) it maintains adequate physical presence in Bermuda, (d) it has adequate full time employees in Bermuda with suitable qualifications and (e) it incurs adequate operating expenditure in Bermuda in relation to the relevant activity. A registered entity that carries on a relevant activity is obliged under the Economic Substance Act to file a declaration in the prescribed form, or the Declaration, with the Registrar of Companies, or the Registrar, on an annual basis. The Economic Substance Regulations provide that minimum economic substance requirements shall apply in relation to an entity if the entity is a pure equity holding entity whose sole function is to acquire and hold shares or an equitable interest in other entities, and the shares or equitable interest are controlling stakes in other entities. The minimum economic substance requirements include a) compliance with applicable corporate governance requirements set forth in the Bermuda Companies Act 1981 including keeping records of account, books and papers and financial statements and b) submission of a Declaration. Additionally, the Economic Substance Regulations provide that a pure equity holding entity complies with economic substance requirements where it also has adequate people for holding and managing equity participations, and adequate premises in Bermuda. Certain of our subsidiaries may from time to time be organized in other jurisdictions identified by the COCG based on global standards set by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development with the objective of preventing low-tax jurisdictions from attracting profits from certain activities. These jurisdictions, including the Marshall Islands, have also enacted economic substance laws and regulations which we may be obligated to comply with. If we fail to comply with our obligations under the Economic Substance Act or any similar law applicable to us in any other jurisdiction, we could be subject to financial penalties and spontaneous disclosure of information to foreign tax officials in related jurisdictions and may be struck from the register of companies in Bermuda or such other jurisdiction. Any of these actions could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. As a Bermuda exempted company incorporated under Bermuda law, we are subject to the Bermuda PIPA requirements. The Bermuda Personal Information Protection 2016 Act, or PIPA, regulates how any organization in Bermuda may use personal information. PIPA became fully operative on January 1, 2025, and applies to all of our Bermuda entities. From this date, organizations in Bermuda are required to comply with a combination of principle-based and prescriptive rules for the use of personal information. Prescriptive rules for in scope organizations (i.e., those that use personal information, noting “use” is broadly defined) include a requirement to only use personal information where a legal condition applies, a requirement to appoint a data privacy officer, a requirement to provide all individuals with a privacy notice that must contain at a minimum certain required information and requirement to understand and comply with individual rights around access, rectification and erasure. 33 Table of Contents
A. History and Development of the Company Nordic American Tankers Limited was formed on June 12, 1995, and organized under the laws of the Islands of Bermuda as an exempted company limited by shares pursuant to the Companies Act. We maintain our principal office and registered o…
A. History and Development of the Company Nordic American Tankers Limited was formed on June 12, 1995, and organized under the laws of the Islands of Bermuda as an exempted company limited by shares pursuant to the Companies Act. We maintain our principal office and registered office at Par La Ville Place, 14 Par La Ville Street, Hamilton HM 08, Bermuda. Our telephone number at such address is (441) 292-7202 and we maintain an internet site at www.nat.bm. The SEC maintains an Internet site that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC. The address of the SEC’s internet site is www.sec.gov. None of the information contained on these websites is incorporated into or forms a part of this annual report. Our common shares trade under the symbol “NAT” on the New York Stock Exchange, or the NYSE. NAT’s shares were admitted for listing on the NYSE in November 2004 and were traded on the American Stock Exchange, or AMEX, before that. NYSE Euronext acquired the AMEX in 2008 and is now known as the NYSE American. NAT also had a dual listing on the Oslo Stock Exchange until early 2005 when the listing in Oslo was terminated. We are an international tanker company focusing solely on owning, operating and chartering of Suezmax tankers. In 2022, we sold five vessels built in 2002 and 2003, and we took delivery of two newbuildings, Nordic Harrier and Nordic Hunter, built at Samsung shipyard in South Korea. In 2023, we acquired the 2016-built Nordic Hawk. In 2025 we sold off the 2003-built Nordic Apollo and the 2004-built Nordic Castor and we took delivery of two 2016-built vessels Nordic Galaxy and Nordic Moon. Our fleet counted 20 vessels as of December 31, 2025. After 2025, we signed an agreement to build two new suezmax tankers with a South-Korean yard, with delivery in the second half of 2028. Under the commercial terms, the first installment fell due in the second quarter of 2026, with subsequent installment payable through the delivery of the vessel. No payments have been capitalized in 2025. The vessels will be financed well in advance of delivery in 2028. We plan to pay the first instalments with cash. So far in 2026 we have sold and delivered the 2004-built Nordic Luna and the 2005-built Nordic Sprinter. Both these vessels were classified as held for sale as of December 31, 2025. Also, after year-end, we have entered into firm agreements to sell the 2005-built Nordic Skier and the 2003-built Nordic Pollux. Following these transactions, our fleet will count 16 suezmax tankers (excluding newbuildings). The vessels in our fleet are homogenous and interchangeable, which is a business strategy we refer to as the “Nordic American System”. The Nordic American System is transparent and predictable with the key elements of ships, people and capital. Further, we are a dividend company with the objective of having a strong balance sheet and low general and administrative costs. Under the “Nordic American System”, we are focusing on close customer relationships and serving the “Big Oil” companies with a top-quality fleet. 34 Table of Contents All tankers in our fleet are Suezmax vessels, which have a carrying capacity of one million barrels of oil. The vessels are highly versatile. They can be utilized on most long-haul trade routes. A homogenous fleet streamlines maintenance, operating and administration costs, which helps keep our cash break-even low. We have an operating cash break-even level of about $10,000 per day per vessel, which we consider low in the industry. The cash break-even rate is the amount of average daily revenue our vessels would need to earn in order to cover our vessel operating expenses (excluding general and administrative expenses, interest expenses and all other cash charges). Recent Developments Cash dividends are our priority, and we have, as of this date, declared quarterly dividends for 114 consecutive quarters. In 2025, we declared dividends in total of $0.36 per share and we have paid dividends in the first quarter of 2026 of $0.17 per share. On December 17, 2025, a Memorandum of Agreement (MoA) was signed for the sale of Nordic Luna and Nordic Sprinter, with both vessels delivered in January 2026. On March 16, 2026, the MoA was signed for the sale of Nordic Skier, which was subsequently delivered in April 2026. On March 9, 2026, the MoA was signed for the sale of Nordic Pollux, which has not yet been delivered. On January 15, 2025, and on May 8, 2025, we sold the 2003-built Nordic Apollo and the 2004-built Nordic Castor respectively. The Nordic Apollo was delivered to the buyers on February 26, 2025, and the buyers of Nordic Castor received the vessel on June 16, 2025. A gain on sale of vessels of $9.5 million for the Nordic Apollo and $7.1 million for the Nordic Castor was recorded in the Consolidated statement of operations of 1Q2025 and 2Q2025 respectively. Both vessels were unencumbered and the sales therefore strengthened our free liquidity with an aggregate of about $46 million. On February 6, 2025, we renegotiated and amended the loan agreement with Beal Bank/CLMG effectively replacing our senior secured credit facility of $306.1 million, entered into on February 12, 2019, as well as an accordion loan of $30 million, entered into on December 16, 2020. The amended and restated five-year Senior Secured Credit Agreement with new terms is in the amount of $150 million and is a single loan. In addition to improved terms and flexibility, the new loan is secured in 7 of our Suezmax vessels and provided an immediate positive liquidity effect of $78 million. All other vessels that were secured under the February 12, 2019, facility is no longer part of the collateral. The loan has an annual amortization equal to a twenty-year maturity profile, carries a floating interest rate plus a margin and matures on February 13, 2030. On February 14, 2025, we cancelled the equity distribution agreement with B.Riley Securities, Inc, dated February 14, 2022, under which the Company could, from time to time, offer and sell common stock through an At-the-Market Offering up to an aggregate of $60 million (the $60 million 2022 ATM). In 2022, we raised gross and net proceeds of $33.6 million and $32.7 million, respectively, by issuing and selling 14,337,258 common shares under this agreement. No shares were issued under this agreement during 2023. During 2024, we issued 2,954,219 shares and the remaining available balance after this was $17.2 million gross. This ATM (the $60 million 2022 ATM) was subsequently cancelled and the remaining balance not utilized, upon the 3-year expiry of the Shelf F-3 registration statement on February 14, 2025. On March 11, 2025, we filed a new equity distribution agreement with B.Riley Securities, Inc, under which the Company could, from time to time, offer and sell common stock through an At-the-Market Offering up to an aggregate of $60 million (the $60 million 2025 ATM) that was a part of the F-3 filing of the same date. The F-3 filing and subsequently the $60 million 2025 ATM was made effective on March 31, 2025. This ATM has not been utilized till this date. Based on the share price of the Company of $6.03 as of April 17, 2026, a full utilization of the ATM would have resulted in 9,950,249 new shares being issued now. On April 4, 2025, and on April 28, 2025, we took delivery of the 2016-built suezmax vessels Nordic Galaxy and Nordic Moon, purchased at a price of $66 million each. At the same time, we entered into a final agreement with Ocean Yield AS for an eight-year sale-leaseback financing of these two vessels. The financing was done at 50% of the purchase price against an eight-year bareboat charter agreement on both ships. 35 Table of Contents On May 28, 2025 we entered into an amended financing agreement on our three 2018-built Suezmax tankers; Nordic Aquarius, Nordic Cygnus and Nordic Tellus with Ocean Yield AS. Our three 2018-built vessels from Samsung shipyard were financed through a Sale-leaseback agreement in 2017 and took effect upon delivery of the ships during 2018. Under the terms of the original financing agreement, the lender provided financing of 77.5% of the purchase price for each of the three 2018-built vessels. After delivery of each of the vessels we entered into a ten-year bareboat charter agreement with pre-agreed options to re-purchase the vessels by settling the outstanding financing amount at the time of each purchase option, and a final purchase obligation at the end of the 10-year bareboat charter. In conjunction with the 7-year purchase option we entered into an amended financing agreement dated May 28, 2025, with Ocean Yield, for all three vessels. The new agreement increased the lease amount to $40 million on each vessel and subsequently released about $15 million for each ship in free liquidity. In addition to providing us with increased liquidity, the new and amended sale-lease back agreement offered us better terms and flexibility than the old agreement, with a new tenure of 8 years from May 28, 2025, for all the three vessels. On December 17, 2025, we entered into a firm sales agreement for the 2004-built Nordic Luna and the 2005-built Nordic Sprinter. The vessels were delivered to the buyers in January 2026 and given that the vessels were unencumbered they provided $50 million of aggregate free liquidity. Both vessels were classified as Held for Sale in December 31, 2025, financial statements, and a gain on disposal of vessels will be recognized in the consolidated statement of operations in 1Q2026. After year-end 2025 we have entered into the following 2 sales agreements; March 9, 2026 for the sale of the 2003-built Nordic Pollux and March 16, 2026, for the sale of the 2005-built Nordic Skier. One vessel was delivered to the buyers in April and the remaining transaction is yet to be completed. For more information, please see “Item 5.B. Liquidity and Capital Resources” with regard to the above described transactions. As of the date of this report, we have 211,750,663 common shares issued and outstanding. B. Business Overview Our Fleet Our fleet as of December 31, 2025, consisted of 20 Suezmax crude oil tankers, of which the vast majority have been built in South Korea. During 2025 we disposed of Nordic Apollo and Nordic Castor and acquired Nordic Galaxy and Nordic Moon. The majority of our vessels are employed in the spot market. As of December 31, 2025, we have two vessels Nordic Harrier and Nordic Hunter chartered out on six-year time charter agreements that expire in 2028. Further, as of December 31, 2025, we have one vessel chartered out on a five-year time charter agreement expiring in late 2029 and one vessel on a time charter that expires in November 2026. Two vessels finished expiring in the fourth quarter of 2025. Occasionally, we also charter out vessels in our fleet on shorter term time charter agreements. The vessels in our fleet are considered homogenous and interchangeable as they have approximately the same freight capacity and ability to transport the same type of cargo. The company have two vessels classified as “Held for Sale” as of December 31, 2025. 36 Table of Contents As of December 31, 2025, our fleet was as follows: Vessel Built in Deadweight Tons Nordic Pollux 2003 150,103 Nordic Luna 2004 150,037 Nordic Freedom 2005 159,331 Nordic Sprinter 2005 159,089 Nordic Skier 2005 159,089 Nordic Vega 2010 163,940 Nordic Light 2010 158,475 Nordic Cross 2010 158,475 Nordic Breeze 2011 158,597 Nordic Zenith 2011 158,645 Nordic Galaxy 2016 157,781 Nordic Moon 2016 157,718 Nordic Hawk 2016 157,594 Nordic Star 2016 157,738 Nordic Space 2017 157,582 Nordic Aquarius 2018 157,338 Nordic Cygnus 2018 157,526 Nordic Tellus 2018 157,407 Nordic Hunter 2022 157,037 Nordic Harrier 2022 157,094 Employment of Our Fleet It is our policy to operate the majority of our vessels either in the spot market or on shorter-term time charters. Large international oil companies, oil traders and independent oil companies both in the Western and the Eastern parts of the world are important customers. Spot Charters: Tankers operating in the spot market are typically chartered for a single voyage which may last up to several weeks. Under a voyage charter, we are responsible for paying voyage expenses and the charterer is responsible for any delay at the loading or discharging ports. When our tankers are operating on spot charters, the vessels are traded fully at the risk and reward of the Company. Revenues are recognized in a manner to reflect the transfer of the services to our customers over the duration of the voyage and freight is generally billed to the customer upon discharge of the cargo. The Company considers it appropriate to present this type of arrangement on a gross basis in the Statements of Operations. For further information concerning our accounting policies, please see Note 2 to our financial statements. The tanker industry has historically been stronger in the fall and winter months in anticipation of increased oil consumption in the norther hemisphere during the winter months. Seasonal variations in tanker demand normally result in seasonal fluctuations in the spot market charters. Time Charters: Under a time charter, the charterer is responsible and pays for the voyage expenses, such as port, canal and fuel costs, while the shipowner is responsible and pays for vessel operating expenses, including, among other costs, crew costs, provisions, deck and engine stores, lubricating oil, insurance, maintenance and repairs and costs relating to a vessel’s intermediate and special surveys. Revenue from time charter contracts is recognized daily over the term of the charter. Time charter agreements with profit-sharing are recognized when the contingency related to it is resolved. As of December 31, 2025, we did not have any time charter agreements with profit-sharing. Technical Management The technical management of our vessels is handled by companies under direct instructions from NAT. The ship management firms V.Ships Norway AS, Columbia Shipmanagement Ltd and Hellespont Ship Management GmbH & Co KG, provide the technical management services. The compensation paid under the technical management agreements is in accordance with industry standards. The International Tanker Market International seaborne oil and petroleum products transportation services are mainly provided by two types of operators: major oil company captive fleets (both private and state-owned) and independent shipowner fleets. Both types of operators transport oil under short-term contracts (including single-voyage “spot charters”) and long-term time charters with oil companies, oil traders, large oil consumers, petroleum product producers and government agencies. The oil companies own, or control through long-term time charters, a substantial part of the world tanker fleet. The oil companies use their fleets not only to transport their own oil, but also to transport oil for third-party charterers in direct competition with independent owners and operators in the tanker charter market. 37 Table of Contents The oil transportation industry has historically been subject to regulation by national authorities and through international conventions. Over recent years, however, an environmental protection regime has evolved which may have a significant impact on the operations of participants in the industry in the form of increasingly more stringent inspection requirements, closer monitoring of pollution-related events, and generally higher costs and potential liabilities for the owners and operators of tankers. In order to benefit from economies of scale, tanker charterers typically charter the largest possible vessel to transport oil or products, consistent with port and canal dimensional restrictions and optimal cargo lot sizes. A tanker’s carrying capacity is measured in deadweight tons, or dwt, which is the amount of crude oil measured in metric tons that the vessel is capable of loading but also in barrels of oil. VLCCs that can carry 2 million barrels of crude oil typically transport oil in long-haul trades, such as from the Arabian Gulf to Far East and Rotterdam via the Cape of Good Hope or from West Africa and US Gulf to the Far East via Cape of Good Hope. Suezmax tankers that carry 1 million barrels of crude oil also engage in long-haul as well as in medium-haul trades, such as from the Mediterranean, Black Sea, West Africa, South America and Arabian Gulf towards a variety of destinations such as India, Far East, Europe and US. Aframax-size vessels generally engage in both medium-and short-haul trades of less than 1,500 miles and carry crude oil or petroleum products. Smaller tankers mostly transport petroleum products in short-haul to medium-haul trades. The 2025 Tanker Market (Source; Fearnleys) Suezmax earnings in 2025, basis fixture date for forward loading averaged $51,800/day, up from $38,100/day in 2024. The average rate on the West Africa – UK/Continent route averaged 45,900/day. Earnings in the highly correlated VLCC and Aframax segments averaged $60,500/day and $37,500/day in 2025, respectively. After a lackluster end to 2024, 2025 started off strongly following a massive sanctions package from the outgoing Biden administration. It was another volatile year for geopolitics and tanker rates. In the first half, rates were arguably softer than fundamentals suggested, while in the last few months they were stronger. A combination of solid volume growth, at times more long-haul trade, extensive sanctions on ships and oil infrastructure and exogenous events caused a very tight tanker market balance with correspondingly high rates nearly until the end of the year. Global crude oil production rose by 4.1 mbpd between Q4’24 and Q4’25 according to the IEA, and seaborne crude volumes at most rose by nearly 4 mbpd. In September/October there was very high Atlantic-East crude fixture activity, when fear of sanctions drove Asian crude buyers to look West, tying up tonnage for longer periods. Total compliant tonne-miles were up 2.9% y/y in 2025, and VLCCs up by 5.5% on longer sailing distances. Compliant Suezmax tonne-miles rose by 2.3%, after having risen by 5.7% the preceding year. Strong overall volume growth from the Americas and OPEC+ cut unwinds took effect in the second half of the year, lifting demand for all segments. Key demand growth drivers for Suezmax were Kazakhstan, Brazil, Guyana and Argentina, all of which increased crude oil production and exports. Overall net tanker fleet growth remained relatively low at 2.1% in 2025. This was up from the 0.8% growth seen in 2024. Fleet growth remained below the ten-year average total tanker fleet growth of 3.0%. The real effective fleet growth rate was likely closer to zero as 16.9% of the fleet was sanctioned, with utilization for those vessels lower than in the compliant market. As a result of sanctions, more compliant tankers were sold into the shadow markets, and also some more for demolition. Suezmax fleet growth of 2.9% was well above the two years before at 1%. The preceding ten-year average fleet growth was 3.2%. 24 vessels were delivered and five demolished in 2025 vs. seven and one respectively in both 2023 and 2024. This took the total fleet at the end of 2025 to 632 vessels. By the end of the year 41% of the fleet were modern, fuel-efficient vessels, marginally up from a year earlier. 38 Table of Contents At the beginning of 2026 the Suezmax orderbook stood at 126 vessels, or 19.9% vs. the fleet. This compares to 96 vessels (15.6%) at the beginning of 2025, up from 9.5% a year earlier. The total crude oil and product tanker orderbook for vessels above 25,000 dwt at the beginning of 2026 stood at 16.7% vs. the fleet. The average orderbook to fleet ratio the last 20 years is 19%. The delivery schedule for 2026 implies approximately 6% gross fleet growth overall (4.7% crude, 9.1% products). Through the year, Suezmax secondhand values declined marginally in 2025, on average by 1%, although by the end of the year there was an increasing trend. Similarly, newbuild prices declined marginally. The Tanker Market 2026 Reported spot rates in the first quarter of 2026 were significantly higher compared to the very solid levels seen in the fourth quarter of 2025, reported by Clarkson Research. The average Suezmax earnings per day in fourth quarter 2025 was $78,235 per day while the number for the first quarter of 2026 came in at $167,360 per day based on the indicated rates published by Clarkson Research. The indicated rates are an average of observations and routes. From the time a voyage is booked, and the rate is reported to the market, until the vessel loads the cargo and commences the voyage, there can be a delay of up to 30 days. As such, from an accounting perspective, a voyage booked at the end of a quarter may see the majority of its revenues being recorded in the following quarter’s results. The earnings for vessel operators are, for this reason, not necessarily expected to fluctuate in an identical manner as the indicative rates reported by Clarkson Research on a quarter-by-quarter basis. Historically, geopolitical uncertainty has increased demand for oil tankers. Entering 2026 there is no lack of geopolitical turmoil and several of these events have had significant effect on oil trade flows. Towards the end of 2025 the increased pressure on Venezuela from the US effectively blocking out the shadow fleet from loading oil from the Country and a few days after New Year, they arrested the sitting president Maduro. This action taken by the US can probably bring Venezuelan oil back to the legit market, also for tankers. Currently the Iran War and the closure of the Strait of Hormuz is the main event of attention for shipping and tankers in particular. The increased pressure on the shadow fleet of tankers, as well as the US pressure on buyers of sanctioned oil has shifted a lot more oil volume into the compliant fleet of tankers. Wars, sanctions, and uncertainty in general very often changes the energy logistics and increases demand for transportation services. This time is no exception. The supply of new tankers into the Tanker Market is increasing, but considering the current geopolitical events, it seems like the legitimate fleet of tankers are finally benefiting at the cost of the shadow fleet. The supply of tanker vessels is still not excessive for at least the next two or three years. Early February 2026, the orderbook for conventional Suezmax tankers stood at 132 vessels in total, which represents 22% of the existing Suezmax fleet. This historic average for the orderbook in percentage of the existing world fleet is 20%. Environmental regulations, increased steel and production costs, and higher interest rates make investing in new ships challenging and a moderate order book for new tankers has always helped the tanker industry. The fundamentals in the tanker market looked promising before the geopolitical landscape started changing in 2022. What is now unfolding is of historic proportions and the Suezmax spot market is setting records not seen in history before. Environmental and Other Regulations in the Shipping Industry Government regulation and laws significantly affect the ownership and operation of our fleet. We are subject to international conventions and treaties, national, state and local laws and regulations in force in the countries in which our vessels may operate or are registered relating to safety and health and environmental protection including the storage, handling, emission, transportation and discharge of hazardous and non-hazardous materials, and the remediation of contamination and liability for damage to natural resources. Compliance with such laws, regulations and other requirements entails significant expense, including vessel modifications and implementation of certain operating procedures. 39 Table of Contents A variety of government and private entities subject our vessels to both scheduled and unscheduled inspections. These entities include the local port authorities (applicable national authorities such as the United States Coast Guard, or USCG, harbor master or equivalent), classification societies, flag state administrations (countries of registry) and charterers, particularly terminal operators. Certain of these entities require us to obtain permits, licenses, certificates and other authorizations 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 the operation of one or more of our vessels. Increasing environmental concerns have created a demand for vessels that conform to stricter 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 United States and international regulations. We believe that the operation of our vessels is in substantial compliance with applicable environmental laws and regulations and that our vessels have all material permits, licenses, certificates or other authorizations necessary for the conduct of our operations. However, because such laws and regulations frequently change and may impose increasingly stricter requirements, we cannot predict the ultimate cost of complying with these requirements, or the impact of these requirements on the resale value or useful lives of our vessels. In addition, a serious future marine incident that causes significant adverse environmental impact could result in additional legislation or regulation that could negatively affect our profitability. International Maritime Organization The International Maritime Organization, the United Nations agency for maritime safety and the prevention of pollution by vessels, or the IMO, has adopted the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973, as modified by the Protocol of 1978 relating thereto, collectively referred to as MARPOL 73/78 and herein as “MARPOL,” the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea of 1974, or SOLAS Convention, and the International Convention on Load Lines of 1966, or the LL Convention. MARPOL establishes environmental standards relating to oil leakage or spilling, garbage management, sewage, air emissions, handling and disposal of noxious liquids and the handling of harmful substances in packaged forms. MARPOL is applicable to drybulk, tanker and LNG carriers, among other vessels, and is broken into six Annexes, each of which regulates a different source of pollution. Annex I relates to oil leakage or spilling; Annexes II and III relate to harmful substances carried in bulk in liquid or in packaged form, respectively; Annexes IV and V relate to sewage and garbage management, respectively; and Annex VI, lastly, relates to air emissions. Annex VI was separately adopted by the IMO in September of 1997; new emissions standards, titled IMO-2020, took effect on January 1, 2020. In 2013, the IMO’s Marine Environmental Protection Committee, or the “MEPC,” adopted a resolution amending MARPOL Annex I Condition Assessment Scheme, or “CAS.” These amendments became effective on October 1, 2014, and require compliance with the 2011 International Code on the Enhanced Program of Inspections during Surveys of Bulk Carriers and Oil Tankers, or “ESP Code,” which provides for enhanced inspection programs. We may need to make certain financial expenditures to comply with these amendments. Air Emissions In September of 1997, the IMO adopted Annex VI to MARPOL to address air pollution from vessels. Effective May 2005, Annex VI sets limits on sulfur oxide and nitrogen oxide emissions from all commercial vessel exhausts and prohibits “deliberate emissions” of ozone depleting substances (such as halons and chlorofluorocarbons), emissions of volatile compounds from cargo tanks and the shipboard incineration of specific substances. Annex VI also includes a global cap on the sulfur content of fuel oil and allows for special areas to be established with more stringent controls on sulfur emissions, as explained below. Emissions of “volatile organic compounds” from certain vessels, and the shipboard incineration (from incinerators installed after January 1, 2000) of certain substances (such as polychlorinated biphenyls, or PCBs are also prohibited. We believe that all our vessels are currently compliant in all material respects with these regulations. 40 Table of Contents The Marine Environment Protection Committee, or “MEPC,” adopted amendments to Annex VI regarding emissions of sulfur oxide, nitrogen oxide, particulate matter and ozone depleting substances, which entered into force on July 1, 2010. The amended Annex VI seeks to further reduce air pollution by, among other things, implementing a progressive reduction of the amount of sulfur contained in any fuel oil used on board ships. On October 27, 2016, MEPC 70 agreed to implement a global 0.5% m/m sulfur oxide emissions limit (reduced from 3.50%) starting from January 1, 2020. This limitation can be met by using low-sulfur compliant fuel oil, alternative fuels or certain exhaust gas cleaning systems. Ships are now required to obtain bunker delivery notes and International Air Pollution Prevention, or IAPP, Certificates from their flag states that specify sulfur content. Additionally, at MEPC 73, amendments to Annex VI to prohibit the carriage of bunkers above 0.5% sulfur on ships were adopted and took effect March 1, 2020, with the exception of vessels fitted with exhaust gas cleaning equipment, or “scrubbers”, which can carry fuel of higher sulfur content. These regulations subject ocean-going vessels to stringent emissions controls and may cause us to incur substantial costs. Sulfur content standards are even stricter within certain “Emission Control Areas,” or, or ECAs. As of January 1, 2015, ships operating within an ECA were not permitted to use fuel with sulfur content in excess of 0.1% m/m. Currently, the IMO has designated five ECAs, including specified portions of the Baltic Sea area, Mediterranean Sea area, North Sea area, North American area and United States Caribbean area. Ocean-going vessels in these areas will be subject to stringent emission controls and may cause us to incur additional costs. Other areas in China are subject to local regulations that impose stricter emission controls. In July 2023, MEPC 80 announced three new ECA proposals, including the Canadian Arctic waters and the Norwegian Sea, which should take effect in March 2027. MEPC 83 also approved the Northeast Atlantic Ocean as an ECA and is expected to take effect in 2028. If other ECAs are approved by the IMO, or other new or more stringent requirements relating to emissions from marine diesel engines or port operations by vessels are adopted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, or the EPA, or the states where we operate, compliance with these regulations could entail significant capital expenditures or otherwise increase the costs of our operations. The amended Annex VI also established new tiers of stringent nitrogen oxide emissions standards for marine diesel engines, depending on their date of installation. Tier III NOx standards were designed for the control of NOx produced by vessels and apply to ships that operate in the North American and U.S. Caribbean Sea ECAs with marine diesel engines installed and constructed on or after January 1, 2016At MEPC 70 and MEPC 71, the MEPC approved the North Sea and Baltic Sea as ECAs for nitrogen oxide for ships built on or after January 1, 2021. The Canadian-Arctic ECA for NOx will also be effective starting from March 1, 2026 for ships built on or after January 1, 2025. For the Norwegian Sea ECA, the NOx Tier III engine certification requirement will apply to ships (i) with building contracts placed on or after March 1, 2026, (ii) in the absence of a building contract, constructed on or after September 1, 2026, or (iii) delivered on or after March 1, 2030. For the North-East Atlantic ECA, the requirement is expected to apply to ships (i) contracted on or after January 1, 2027, (ii) in the absence of a building contract, constructed on or after July 1, 2027, or (iii) delivered on or after January 1, 2031. The EPA promulgated equivalent (and in some senses stricter) emissions standards in 2010. Tier III requirements could apply to additional areas designated for Tier III NOx in the future. In April 2025, MEPC 83 also adopted amendments (expected to enter into force late 2026 and early 2027) to the NOx Technical Code 2008, which allows ships to optimize fuel consumption based on their operational profile, thus improving energy efficiency, while ensuring compliance with NOx emission requirements. As a result of these designations or similar future designations, we may be required to incur additional operating or other costs. At MEPC 70, Regulation 22A of MARPOL Annex VI became effective as of March 1, 2018, and requires ships above 5,000 gross tonnages to collect and report annual data on fuel oil consumption to an IMO database, with the first year of data collection having commenced on January 1, 2019. The IMO used such data as part of its initial roadmap (through 2023) for developing its strategy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from ships, as discussed further below. MEPC 83 approved draft amendments to make the IMO’s data collection system more accessible to the public through an anonymized database. As of January 1, 2013, MARPOL made mandatory certain measures relating to energy efficiency for ships. All ships are now required to develop and implement Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plans, or SEEMP, and new ships must be designed in compliance with minimum energy efficiency levels per capacity mile as defined by the Energy Efficiency Design Index, or EEDI. MEPC 75 adopted amendments to MARPOL Annex VI which brings forward the effective date of the EEDI’s “phase 3” requirements from January 1, 2025, to April 1, 2022, for several ship types, including gas carriers, general cargo ships, and LNG carriers. 41 Table of Contents Additionally, in 2022, MEPC amended Annex VI to impose new regulations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from ships. These amendments introduce requirements to assess and measure the energy efficiency of all ships and set the required attainment values, with the goal of reducing the carbon intensity of international shipping. The requirements include (1) a technical requirement to reduce carbon intensity based on a new Energy Efficiency Existing Ship Index, or EEXI, and (2) operational carbon intensity reduction requirements, based on a new operational carbon intensity indicator, or CII. The attained EEXI is required to be calculated for ships of 400 gross tonnage and above, in accordance with different values set for ship types and categories. With respect to the CII, the draft amendments would require ships of 5,000 gross tonnage to document and verify their actual annual operational CII achieved against a determined required annual operational CII. All ships above 400 gross tonnage must also have an approved SEEMP on board. For ships above 5,000 gross tonnages, the SEEMP needs to include certain mandatory content. MEPC 75 also approved draft amendments to MARPOL Annex I to prohibit the use and carriage for use as fuel of heavy fuel oil, or HFO, by ships in Arctic waters on and after July 1, 2024. In late 2022, MEPC 79 adopted amendments to MARPOL Annex VI, Appendix IX to include the attained and required CII values, the CII rating and attained EEXI for existing ships in the required information to be submitted to the IMO Ship Fuel Oil Consumption Database. MEPC 79 also revised the EEDI calculation guidelines to include a CO2 conversion factor for ethane, a reference to the updated ITCC guidelines, and a clarification that in case of a ship with multiple load line certificates, the maximum certified summer draft should be used when determining the deadweight. These amendments entered into force on May 1, 2024. In July 2023, MEPC 80 approved the plan for reviewing CII regulations and guidelines, and in April 2025, MEPC 83 adopted amendments to 2021 Guidelines on operational carbon intensity reduction factors, which outline methods for determining CII reduction factors from 2023 and now includes newly defined factors from 2027 to 2030.MEPC 83 also approved a work plan on the development of a regulatory framework for the use of onboard carbon capture and storage systems, which will capture carbon produced by a ship before it is emitted into the air. We may incur costs to comply with these revised standards. Additional or new conventions, laws and regulations may be adopted that could require the installation of expensive emission control systems and could adversely affect our business, results of operations, cash flows and financial condition. Safety Management System Requirements The SOLAS Convention was amended to address the safe manning of vessels and emergency training drills. The Convention of Limitation of Liability for Maritime Claims, or the LLMC, sets limitations of liability for a loss of life or personal injury claim or a property claim against ship owners. We believe that our vessels are in substantial compliance with SOLAS and LLMC standards. Under Chapter IX of the SOLAS Convention, or the International Safety Management Code for the Safe Operation of Ships and for Pollution Prevention, or the ISM Code, our operations are also subject to environmental standards and requirements. The ISM Code requires the party with operational control of a vessel to develop an extensive safety management system that includes, among other things, the adoption of a safety and environmental protection policy setting forth instructions and procedures for operating its vessels safely and for responding to emergencies. We rely upon the safety management system that our technical management teams have developed for compliance with the ISM Code. The failure of a vessel owner or bareboat charterer to comply with the ISM Code may subject such party to increased liability, may decrease available insurance coverage for the affected vessels and may result in a denial of access to, or detention in, certain ports. The ISM Code requires that vessel operators obtain a safety management certificate for each vessel they operate. This certificate evidence compliance by a vessel’s management with the ISM Code requirements for a safety management system. No vessel can obtain a safety management certificate unless its manager has been awarded a document of compliance, issued by each flag state, under the ISM Code. We have obtained applicable documents of compliance for our offices and safety management certificates for all of our vessels for which the certificates are required by the IMO. The documents of compliance and safety management certificates are renewed as required. 42 Table of Contents Regulation II-1/3-10 of the SOLAS Convention governs ship construction and stipulates that ships over 150 meters in length must have adequate strength, integrity and stability to minimize risk of loss or pollution. Goal-based standards amendments in SOLAS regulation II-1/3-10 entered into force in 2012, with July 1, 2016, set for application to new oil tankers and bulk carriers. The SOLAS Convention regulation II-1/3-10 on goal-based ship construction standards for bulk carriers and oil tankers, which entered into force on January 1, 2012, requires that all oil tankers and bulk carriers of 150 meters in length and above, for which the building contract is placed on or after July 1, 2016, satisfy applicable structural requirements conforming to the functional requirements of the International Goal-based Ship Construction Standards for Bulk Carriers and Oil Tankers, or the GBS Standards. Amendments to the SOLAS Convention Chapter VII apply to vessels transporting dangerous goods and require those vessels be in compliance with the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code, or IMDG Code. Effective January 1, 2018, the IMDG Code includes (1) the provisions for radioactive material, reflecting the latest provisions from the International Atomic Energy Agency, (2) marking, packing and classification requirements for dangerous goods and (3) mandatory training requirements. Amendments which took effect on January 1, 2020, also reflect the latest material from the UN Recommendations on the Transport of Dangerous Goods, including (1) provisions regarding IMO type 9 tank, (2) abbreviations for segregation groups, and (3) special provisions for carriage of lithium batteries and of vehicles powered by flammable liquid or gas. Additional amendments, which came into force on June 1, 2022, include (1) addition of a definition of dosage rate, (2) additions to the list of high consequence dangerous goods, (3) provisions for medical/clinical waste, (4) addition of various ISO standards for gas cylinders, (5) a handling code, and (6) changes to stowage and segregation provisions. The IMO has also adopted the International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, or STCW. As of February 2017, all seafarers are required to meet the STCW standards and be in possession of a valid STCW certificate. Flag states that have ratified SOLAS and STCW generally employ the classification societies, which have incorporated SOLAS and STCW requirements into their class rules, to undertake surveys to confirm compliance. The IMO’s Maritime Safety Committee and MEPC, respectively, each adopted relevant parts of the International Code for Ships Operating in Polar Water, or the Polar Code. The Polar Code, which entered into force on January 1, 2017, covers design, construction, equipment, operational, training, search and rescue as well as environmental protection matters relevant to ships operating in the waters surrounding the two poles. It also includes mandatory measures regarding safety and pollution prevention as well as recommendatory provisions. The Polar Code applies to ships constructed after January 1, 2017, and after January 1, 2018, ships constructed before January 1, 2017, are required to meet the relevant requirements by the earlier of their first intermediate or renewal survey. Furthermore, cybersecurity guidance regulations have been developed in an attempt to combat cybersecurity threats. For new ships and offshore installations contracted for construction on or after January 1, 2024, the International Association of Classification Societies, or IACS, now requires vessel owners, yard and suppliers to build cybersecurity barriers into their systems and vessels, requiring compliance across the full spectrum of critical on-board control and navigation systems. On July 16, 2025, the U.S. Coast Guard’s final rule, Cybersecurity in the Maritime Transportation System, went into effect. Under this rule, all regulated entities are required to develop Cybersecurity and Cyber Incident Response Plans, designate a Cybersecurity Officer to implement plans, and to report certain cyber incidents to the National Response Centre. This might cause companies to create additional procedures for monitoring cybersecurity, which could require additional expenses and/or capital expenditures. The impact of these regulations is hard to predict at this time. 43 Table of Contents Pollution Control and Liability Requirements The IMO has negotiated international conventions that impose liability for pollution in international waters and the territorial waters of the signatories to such conventions. For example, the IMO adopted an International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships’ Ballast Water and Sediments, or the BWM Convention, in 2004. The BWM Convention entered into force on September 8, 2017. The BWM Convention requires ships to manage their ballast water to remove, render harmless or avoid the uptake or discharge of new or invasive aquatic organisms and pathogens within ballast water and sediments. The BWM Convention’s implementing regulations call for a phased introduction of mandatory ballast water exchange requirements, to be replaced in time with mandatory concentration limits, and require all ships to carry a ballast water record book and an international ballast water management certificate. The MEPC maintains guidelines for approval of ballast water management systems (G8). Ships over 400 gross tons generally must comply with a “D-1 standard,” requiring the exchange of ballast water only in open seas and away from coastal waters. The “D-2 standard” specifies the maximum amount of viable organisms allowed to be discharged, and compliance dates vary depending on the IOPP renewal dates. The standards have been in force since 2019, and for most ships, compliance with the D-2 standard involved installing on-board systems to treat ballast water and eliminate unwanted organisms. Ballast water management systems, which include systems that make use of chemical, biocides, organisms or biological mechanisms, or which alter the chemical or physical characteristics of the ballast water, must be approved in accordance with IMO Guidelines (Regulation D-3). Since September 8, 2024, all ships must meet the D-2 standard. Costs of compliance with these regulations may be substantial. Additionally, in November 2020, MEPC 75 adopted amendments to the BWM Convention which would require a commissioning test of the ballast water management system for the initial survey or when performing an additional survey for retrofits. This analysis will not apply to ships that already have an installed BWM system certified under the BWM Convention. These amendments have entered into force on June 1, 2022. In December 2022, MEPC 79 agreed that it should be permitted to use ballast tanks for temporary storage of treated sewage and grey water. MEPC 79 also established that ships are expected to return to D-2 compliance after experiencing challenging uptake water and bypassing a BWM system should only be used as a last resort. In addition to the BWM Convention, many countries already regulate the discharge of ballast water carried by vessels from country to country to prevent the introduction of invasive and harmful species via such discharges. The U.S., for example, requires vessels entering its waters from another country to conduct mid-ocean ballast exchange, or undertake some alternate measure, and to comply with certain reporting requirements. The IMO adopted the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage of 1969, as amended by different Protocols in 1976, 1984 and 1992, and amended in 2000, or the CLC. Under the CLC and depending on whether the country in which the damage results is a party to the 1992 Protocol to the CLC, a vessel’s registered owner may be strictly liable for pollution damage caused in the territorial waters of a contracting state by discharge of persistent oil, subject to certain exceptions. The 1992 Protocol changed certain limits on liability expressed using the International Monetary Fund currency unit, the Special Drawing Rights. The limits on liability have since been amended so that the compensation limits on liability were raised. The right to limit liability is forfeited under the CLC where the spill is caused by the shipowner’s actual fault and under the 1992 Protocol where the spill is caused by the shipowner’s intentional or reckless act or omission where the shipowner knew pollution damage would probably result. The CLC requires ships over 2,000 tons covered by it to maintain insurance covering the liability of the owner in a sum equivalent to an owner’s liability for a single incident. We have protection and indemnity insurance for environmental incidents. P&I Clubs in the International Group issue the required Bunkers Convention “Blue Cards” to enable signatory states to issue certificates. All of our vessels are in possession of a CLC State issued certificate attesting that the required insurance coverage is in force. The IMO also adopted the International Convention on Civil Liability for Bunker Oil Pollution Damage, or the Bunker Convention, to impose strict liability on ship owners (including the registered owner, bareboat charterer, manager or operator) for pollution damage in jurisdictional waters of ratifying states caused by discharges of bunker fuel. The Bunker Convention requires registered owners of ships over 1,000 gross tons to maintain insurance for pollution damage in an amount equal to the limits of liability under the applicable national or international limitation regime (but not exceeding the amount calculated in accordance with the LLMC). With respect to non-ratifying states, liability for spills or releases of oil carried as fuel in ship’s bunkers typically is determined by the national or other domestic laws in the jurisdiction where the events or damages occur. Ships are required to maintain a certificate attesting that they maintain adequate insurance to cover an incident. In jurisdictions, such as the United States where the CLC or the Bunker Convention has not been adopted, various legislative schemes or common law govern, and liability is imposed either on the basis of fault or on a strict-liability basis. 44 Table of Contents AntiFouling Requirements In 2001, the IMO adopted the International Convention on the Control of Harmful Antifouling Systems on Ships, or the “Antifouling Convention.” The Antifouling Convention, which entered into force on September 17, 2008, prohibits the use of organotin compound coatings to prevent the attachment of mollusks and other sea life to the hulls of vessels. Vessels of over 400 gross tons engaged in international voyages will also be required to undergo an initial survey before the vessel is put into service or before an International Antifouling System Certificate, or the IAFS Certificate, is issued for the first time; and subsequent surveys when the antifouling systems are altered or replaced. Vessels of 24 meters in length or more but less than 400 gross tonnage engaged in international voyages will have to carry a Declaration on Anti-fouling Systems signed by the owner or authorized agent. In November 2020, MEPC 75 approved draft amendments to the Anti-fouling Convention to prohibit anti-fouling systems containing cybutryne, which would apply to ships from January 1, 2023, or, for ships already bearing such an anti-fouling system, at the next scheduled renewal of the system after that date, but no later than 60 months following the last application to the ship of such a system. In addition, the IAFS Certificate has been updated to address compliance options for anti-fouling systems to address cybutryne. Ships which are affected by this ban on cybutryne must receive an updated IAFS Certificate no later than two years after the entry into force of these amendments. Ships which are not affected (i.e. with anti-fouling systems which do not contain cybutryne) must receive an updated IAFS Certificate at the next Anti-fouling application to the vessel. These amendments were formally adopted at MEPC 76 in June 2021 and entered into force on January 1, 2023. We have obtained Antifouling System Certificates for all of our vessels that are subject to the Antifouling Convention. Compliance Enforcement Noncompliance with the ISM Code or other IMO regulations may subject the ship owner or bareboat charterer to increased liability, may lead to decreases in available insurance coverage for affected vessels and may result in the denial of access to, or detention in, some ports. The USCG and European Union authorities prohibit vessels not in compliance with the ISM Code by applicable deadlines from trading in U.S. and European Union ports, respectively. As of the date of this report, each of our vessels is ISM Code certified. However, there can be no assurance that such certificates will be maintained in the future. The IMO continues to review and introduce new regulations. It is impossible to predict what additional regulations, if any, may be passed by the IMO and what effect, if any, such regulations might have on our operations. United States Regulations The U.S. Oil Pollution Act of 1990 and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act The U.S. Oil Pollution Act of 1990, or OPA, established an extensive regulatory and liability regime for the protection and cleanup of the environment from oil spills. OPA affects all “owners and operators” whose vessels trade or operate within the U.S., its territories and possessions or whose vessels operate in U.S. waters, which includes the U.S.’s territorial sea and its 200-nautical mile exclusive economic zone around the U.S. The U.S. has also enacted the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, or CERCLA, which applies to the discharge of hazardous substances other than oil, except in limited circumstances, whether on land or at sea. OPA and CERCLA both define “owner and operator” in the case of a vessel as any person owning, operating or chartering by demise, the vessel. Both OPA and CERCLA impact our operations. Under OPA, vessel owners and operators are “responsible parties” and are jointly, severally and strictly liable (unless the spill results solely from the act or omission of a third party, an act of God or an act of war) for all containment and clean-up costs and other damages arising from discharges or threatened discharges of oil from their vessels, including bunkers (fuel). OPA defines these other damages broadly to include: 45 Table of Contents (i) injury to, destruction or loss of, or loss of use of, natural resources and related assessment costs; (ii) injury to, or economic losses resulting from, the destruction of real and personal property; (iii) loss of subsistence use of natural resources that are injured, destroyed or lost; (iv) net loss of taxes, royalties, rents, fees or net profit revenues resulting from injury, destruction or loss of real or personal property, or natural resources; (v) lost profits or impairment of earning capacity due to injury, destruction or loss of real or personal property or natural resources; and (vi) net cost of increased or additional public services necessitated by removal activities following a discharge of oil, such as protection from fire, safety or health hazards, and loss of subsistence use of natural resources. OPA contains statutory caps on liability and damages; such caps do not apply to direct clean-up costs. On December 23, 2022, the USCG issued a final rule to adjust the limitation of liability under the OPA. Effective March 23, 2023, the new adjusted limits of OPA liability for a tank vessel, other than a single-hull tank vessel, over 3,000 gross tons liability to the greater of $2,500 per gross ton or $21,521,300 (subject to periodic adjustment for inflation). These limits of liability do not apply if an incident was proximately caused by the violation of an applicable U.S. federal safety, construction or operating regulation by a responsible party (or its agent, employee or a person acting pursuant to a contractual relationship) or a responsible party’s gross negligence or willful misconduct. The limitation on liability similarly does not apply if the responsible party fails or refuses to (i) report the incident as required by law where the responsible party knows or has reason to know of the incident; (ii) reasonably cooperate and assist as requested in connection with oil removal activities; or (iii) without sufficient cause, comply with an order issued under the Federal Water Pollution Act (Section 311 (c), (e)) or the Intervention on the High Seas Act. CERCLA contains a similar liability regime whereby owners and operators of vessels are liable for clean-up, removal and remedial costs, as well as damages for injury to, or destruction or loss of, natural resources, including the reasonable costs associated with assessing the same, and health assessments or health effects studies. There is no liability if the discharge of a hazardous substance results solely from the act or omission of a third party, an act of God or an act of war. Liability under CERCLA is limited to the greater of $300 per gross ton or $5.0 million for vessels carrying a hazardous substance as cargo and the greater of $300 per gross ton or $500,000 for any other vessel. These limits do not apply (rendering the responsible person liable for the total cost of response and damages) if the release or threat of release of a hazardous substance resulted from wilful misconduct or negligence, or the primary cause of the release was a violation of applicable safety, construction or operating standards or regulations. The limitation on liability also does not apply if the responsible person fails or refuses to provide all reasonable cooperation and assistance as requested in connection with response activities where the vessel is subject to OPA. OPA and CERCLA each preserve the right to recover damages under existing law, including maritime tort law. OPA and CERCLA both require owners and operators of vessels to establish and maintain with the USCG evidence of financial responsibility sufficient to meet the maximum amount of liability to which the particular responsible person may be subject. Vessel owners and operators may satisfy their financial responsibility obligations by providing a proof of insurance, a surety bond, qualification as a self-insurer or a guarantee. We comply and plan to comply going forward with the USCG’s financial responsibility regulations by providing applicable certificates of financial responsibility. 46 Table of Contents OPA specifically permits individual states to impose their own liability regimes with regard to oil pollution incidents occurring within their boundaries, provided they accept, at a minimum, the levels of liability established under OPA. Some states have enacted legislation providing for unlimited liability for oil spills, and many U.S. states that border a navigable waterway have enacted environmental pollution laws that impose strict liability on a person for removal costs and damages resulting from a discharge of oil or a release of a hazardous substance. Moreover, some states have enacted legislation providing for unlimited liability for discharge of pollutants within their waters, although in some cases, states which have enacted this type of legislation have not yet issued implementing regulations defining vessel owners’ responsibilities under these laws. These laws may be more stringent than U.S. federal law. The Company intends to comply with all applicable state regulations in the ports where the Company’s vessels call. We currently maintain pollution liability coverage insurance in the amount of $1.0 billion per incident for each of our vessels. If the damage from a catastrophic spill were to exceed our insurance coverage, it could have an adverse effect on our business and results of operation. Other United States Environmental Initiatives. The U.S. Clean Air Act of 1970 (including its amendments of 1977 and 1990), or CAA, requires the EPA to promulgate standards applicable to emissions of volatile organic compounds and other air contaminants. Our vessels are subject to vapor control and recovery requirements for certain cargoes when loading, unloading, ballasting, cleaning and conducting other operations in regulated port areas. The CAA also requires states to draft State Implementation Plans, or “SIPs,” designed to attain national health-based air quality standards in each state. Although state-specific, SIPs may include regulations concerning emissions resulting from vessel loading and unloading operations by requiring the installation of vapor control equipment. Our vessels operating in such regulated port areas with restricted cargoes are equipped with vapor recovery systems that satisfy these existing requirements. The U.S. Clean Water Act, or CWA, prohibits the discharge of oil, hazardous substances and ballast water in U.S. navigable waters unless authorized by a duly issued permit or exemption and imposes strict liability in the form of penalties for any unauthorized discharges. The CWA also imposes substantial liability for the costs of removal, remediation and damages and complements the remedies available under OPA and CERCLA. The EPA and the USCG have also enacted rules relating to ballast water discharge, compliance with which requires the installation of equipment on our vessels to treat ballast water before it is discharged or the implementation of other port facility disposal arrangements or procedures at potentially substantial costs, and/or otherwise restrict our vessels from entering U.S. Waters. The EPA will regulate these ballast water discharges and other discharges incidental to the normal operation of certain vessels within United States waters pursuant to the Vessel Incidental Discharge Act, or VIDA, which was signed into law on December 4, 2018 and replaces the 2013 Vessel General Permit, or VGP, program (which authorizes discharges incidental to operations of commercial vessels and contains numeric ballast water discharge limits for most vessels to reduce the risk of invasive species in U.S. waters, stringent requirements for exhaust gas scrubbers, and requirements for the use of environmentally acceptable lubricants) and current Coast Guard ballast water management regulations adopted under the U.S. National Invasive Species Act, or NISA, such as mid-ocean ballast exchange programs and installation of approved USCG technology for all vessels equipped with ballast water tanks bound for U.S. ports or entering U.S. waters. VIDA establishes a new framework for the regulation of vessel incidental discharges under Clean Water Act (CWA), requires the EPA to develop performance standards for those discharges within two years of enactment, and requires the U.S. Coast Guard to develop implementation, compliance and enforcement regulations within two years of EPA’s promulgation of standards. In October 2024, the EPA finalized its rule on Vessel Incidental Discharge Standards of Performance, which means that the USCG must now develop corresponding regulations regarding ballast water within two years of that date. Under VIDA, all provisions of the 2013 VGP and USCG regulations regarding ballast water treatment remain in force and effect until the EPA and U.S. Coast Guard regulations are finalized. Non-military, non-recreational vessels greater than 79 feet in length must continue to comply with the requirements of the VGP, including submission of a Notice of Intent, or NOI, or retention of a PARI form and submission of annual reports. We have submitted NOIs for our vessels where required. Compliance with the EPA, U.S. Coast Guard and state regulations could require the installation of ballast water treatment equipment on our vessels or the implementation of other port facility disposal procedures at potentially substantial cost or may otherwise restrict our vessels from entering U.S. waters. 47 Table of Contents European Union Regulations In October 2009, the European Union amended a directive to impose criminal sanctions for illicit ship-source discharges of polluting substances, including minor discharges, if committed with intent, recklessly or with serious negligence and the discharges individually or in the aggregate result in deterioration of the quality of water. Aiding and abetting the discharge of a polluting substance may also lead to criminal penalties. The directive applies to all types of vessels, irrespective of their flag, but certain exceptions apply to warships or where human safety or that of the ship is in danger. Criminal liability for pollution may result in substantial penalties or fines and increased civil liability claims. Regulation (EU) 2015/757 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2015 (amending EU Directive 2009/16/EC) governs the monitoring, reporting and verification of carbon dioxide emissions from maritime transport, and, subject to some exclusions, requires companies with ships over 5,000 gross tonnage to monitor and report carbon dioxide emissions annually, which may cause us to incur additional expenses. The European Union has adopted several regulations and directives requiring, among other things, more frequent inspections of high-risk ships, as determined by type, age and flag as well as the number of times the ship has been detained. The European Union also adopted and extended a ban on substandard ships and enacted a minimum ban period and a definitive ban for repeated offenses. The regulation also provided the European Union with greater authority and control over classification societies, by imposing more requirements on classification societies and providing for fines or penalty payments for organizations that failed to comply. Furthermore, the EU has implemented regulations requiring vessels to use reduced sulfur content fuel for their main and auxiliary engines. The EU Directive 2005/33/EC (amending Directive 1999/32/EC) introduced requirements parallel to those in Annex VI relating to the sulfur content of marine fuels. In addition, the EU imposed a 0.1% maximum sulfur requirement for fuel used by ships at berth in the Baltic, the North Sea and the English Channel (the so called “SOx-Emission Control Area. As of January 2020, EU member states must also ensure that ships in all EU waters, except the SOx-Emission Control Area, use fuels with a 0.5% maximum sulfur content. On September 15, 2020, the European Parliament voted to include greenhouse gas emissions from the maritime sector in the European Union’s carbon market, the EU Emissions Trading System, or EU ETS, as part of its “Fit-for-55” legislation to reduce net greenhouse gas emissions by at least 55% by 2030. This will require shipowners to buy permits to cover these emissions. On December 18, 2022, the Environmental Council and European Parliament agreed on a gradual introduction of obligations for shipping companies to surrender allowances equivalent to a portion of their carbon emissions: 40% for verified emissions from 2024, 70% for 2025 and 100% for 2026. Most large vessels will be included in the scope of the EU ETS from the start. Big offshore vessels of 5,000 gross tonnage and above will be included in the ‘MRV’ on the monitoring, reporting and verification of CO2 emissions from maritime transport regulation from 2025 and in the EU ETS from 2027. General cargo vessels and off-shore vessels between 400-5,000 gross tonnage will be included in the MRV regulation from 2025 and their inclusion in EU ETS will be reviewed in 2026. Furthermore, starting from January 1, 2026, the ETS regulations will expand to include emissions of two additional greenhouse gases: nitrous oxide and methane. The EU also adopted the FuelEU Maritime regulation, a proposal included in the “Fit-for-55” legislation. Starting from January 2025, FuelEU Maritime sets requirements on the annual average GHG intensity of energy used by ships trading within the EU or European Economic Area (EEA). This intensity is measured as GHG emissions per energy unit (gCO2e/MJ) and, in turn, GHG emissions are calculated in a well-to-wake perspective. The calculation takes into account emissions related to the extraction, cultivation, production and transportation of fuel, in addition to emissions from energy used on board the ship. The baseline for the calculation is the average well-to-wake GHG intensity of the fleet in 2020: 91.16 gCO2e/MJ. This will start at a 2% reduction in 2025, increasing to 6% in 2030, and accelerating from 2035 to reach an 80% reduction by 2050. Compliance with the EU ETS and the FuelEU Maritime regulations will result in additional compliance and administration costs to properly incorporate the provisions of the Directive into our business routines. Additional EU regulations which are part of the EU’s “Fit-for-55,” could also affect our financial position in terms of compliance and administration costs when they take effect. International Labour Organization The International Labour Organization, or the ILO, is a specialized agency of the UN that has adopted the Maritime Labor Convention 2006, or MLC 2006. A Maritime Labor Certificate and a Declaration of Maritime Labor Compliance is required to ensure compliance with the MLC 2006 for all ships that are 500 gross tonnage or over and are either engaged in international voyages or flying the flag of a Member and operating from a port, or between ports, in another country. We believe that all our vessels are in substantial compliance with and are certified to meet MLC 2006. 48 Table of Contents Greenhouse Gas Regulation Currently, the emissions of greenhouse gases from international shipping are not subject to the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, which entered into force in 2005 and pursuant to which adopting countries have been required to implement national programs to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. International negotiations are continuing with respect to a successor to the Kyoto Protocol, and restrictions on shipping emissions may be included in any new treaty. In December 2009, more than 27 nations, including the U.S. and China, signed the Copenhagen Accord, which includes a non-binding commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The 2015 United Nations Climate Change Conference in Paris resulted in the Paris Agreement, which entered into force on November 4, 2016, and does not directly limit greenhouse gas emissions from ships. The U.S. is no longer a party to the Paris Agreement. At MEPC 70 and MEPC 71, a draft outline of the structure of the initial strategy for developing a comprehensive IMO strategy on reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from ships was approved. In accordance with this roadmap, in April 2018, nations at the MEPC 72 adopted an initial strategy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from ships. The initial strategy identifies “levels of ambition” to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and notes that technological innovation, alternative fuels and/or energy sources for international shipping will be integral to achieve the ambitions. At MEPC 77, the Member States agreed to initiate the revision of the Initial IMO Strategy on Reduction of GHG emissions from ships, recognizing the need to strengthen the “levels of ambition.” In July 2023, MEPC 80 adopted the 2023 IMO Strategy on Reduction of GHG Emissions from Ships, or the 2023 IMO Strategy, which builds upon the initial strategy’s levels of ambition. The revised levels of ambition include (1) further decreasing the carbon intensity from ships through improvement of energy efficiency; (2) reducing carbon intensity of international shipping; (3) increasing adoption of zero or near-zero emissions technologies, fuels, and energy sources; and (4) achieving net zero GHG emissions from international shipping. Furthermore, the following indicative checkpoints were adopted in order to reach net zero GHG emissions from international shipping: i). reduce the total annual GHG emissions from international shipping by at least 20%, striving for 30%, by 2030, compared to 2008 levels; and ii). reduce the total annual GHG emissions from international shipping by at least 70%, striving for 80%, by 2040, compared to 2008 levels. As part of the 2023 IMO Strategy, MPEC also created the IMO Net-zero Framework, which will combine mandatory emissions limits and GHG pricing across the industry. The IMO Net-zero Framework was approved at MEPC 83 (Spring 2025) for potential adoption in Spring 2026 and will eventually be included in Annex VI. Under these draft regulations, ships will be required to reduce their annual greenhouse gas fuel intensity, or GFI, calculated using the well-to-wake approach and ships emitting above GFI thresholds will have to acquire remedial units to balance its deficit emissions, while those using zero or near-zero GHG technologies will be eligible for financial rewards. These regulations could cause us to incur additional substantial expenses. The EU made a unilateral commitment to reduce overall greenhouse gas emissions from its member states from 20% of 1990 levels by 2020. The EU also committed to reduce its emissions by 20% under the Kyoto Protocol’s second period from 2013 to 2020. As of January 2018, large ships over 5,000 gross tonnage calling at EU ports are required to collect and publish data on carbon dioxide emissions and other information. Under the European Climate Law, the EU committed to reduce its net greenhouse gas emissions by at least 55% by 2030 through its “Fit-for-55” legislation package. As part of this initiative, the European Union’s carbon market, EU ETS, has been extended to cover CO2 emissions from all large ships entering EU ports starting January 2024. In the United States, the EPA issued a finding that greenhouse gases endanger the public health and safety, adopted regulations to limit greenhouse gas emissions from certain mobile sources and proposed regulations to limit greenhouse gas emissions from large stationary sources. However, in March 2017, the Trump administration issued an executive order to review and possibly eliminate the EPA’s plan to cut greenhouse gas emissions, and on August 13, 2020, the EPA released rules rolling back standards to control methane and volatile organic compound emissions from new oil and gas facilities. In early 2021, the Biden administration directed the EPA to publish a proposed rule suspending, revising, or rescinding certain of these rules, which was finalized in December 2023. However, the current administration is delaying these requirements limiting methane emissions and is considering repealing the measure altogether. Therefore, it is unclear how such environmental regulations could affect our operations. 49 Table of Contents Any passage of climate control legislation or other regulatory initiatives by the IMO, the EU, the U.S. or other countries where we operate, or any treaty adopted at the international level to succeed the Kyoto Protocol or Paris Agreement, that restricts emissions of greenhouse gases could require us to make significant financial expenditures which we cannot predict with certainty at this time. Even in the absence of climate control legislation, our business may be indirectly affected to the extent that climate change may result in sea level changes or certain weather events. Vessel Security Regulations Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, in the United States, there have been a variety of initiatives intended to enhance vessel security such as the U.S. Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002, or MTSA. To implement certain portions of the MTSA, the USCG issued regulations requiring the implementation of certain security requirements aboard vessels operating in waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and at certain ports and facilities, some of which are regulated by the EPA. Similarly, Chapter XI-2 of the SOLAS Convention imposes detailed security obligations on vessels and port authorities and mandates compliance with the International Ship and Port Facility Security Code, or the ISPS Code. The ISPS Code is designed to enhance the security of ports and ships against terrorism. To trade internationally, a vessel must attain an International Ship Security Certificate, or ISSC, from a recognized security organization approved by the vessel’s flag state. Ships operating without a valid certificate may be detained, expelled from or refused entry at port until they obtain an ISSC. The USCG regulations, intended to align with international maritime security standards, exempt non-U.S. vessels from MTSA vessel security measures, provided such vessels have on board a valid ISSC that attests to the vessel’s compliance with the SOLAS Convention security requirements and the ISPS Code. Future security measures could have a significant financial impact on us. We intend to comply with the various security measures addressed by MTSA, the SOLAS Convention and the ISPS Code. The cost of vessel security measures has also been affected by the escalation in the frequency of acts of piracy against ships, notably off the coast of Somalia, including the Gulf of Aden and Arabian Sea area. Substantial loss of revenue and other costs may be incurred as a result of detention of a vessel or additional security measures, and the risk of uninsured losses could significantly affect our business. Costs are incurred in taking additional security measures in accordance with Best Management Practices to Deter Piracy, notably those contained in the BMP5 industry standard. Inspection by Classification Societies The hull and machinery of every commercial vessel must be classed by a classification society authorized by its country of registry. The classification society certifies that a vessel is safe and seaworthy in accordance with the applicable rules and regulations of the country of registry of the vessel and SOLAS. Most insurance underwriters make it a condition for insurance coverage and lending that a vessel be certified “in class” by a classification society which is a member of the International Association of Classification Societies, the IACS. The IACS has adopted harmonized Common Structural Rules, or “the Rules,” which apply to oil tankers and bulk carriers contracted for construction on or after July 1, 2015. The Rules attempt to create a level of consistency between IACS Societies. All of our vessels are certified as being “in class” by all the applicable Classification Societies (e.g., American Bureau of Shipping, Lloyd’s Register of Shipping). A vessel must undergo annual surveys, intermediate surveys, drydockings and special surveys. In lieu of a special survey, a vessel’s machinery may be on a continuous survey cycle, under which the machinery would be surveyed periodically over a five-year period. Every vessel is also required to be drydocked every 30 to 36 months for inspection of the underwater parts of the vessel. If any vessel does not maintain its class and/or fails any annual survey, intermediate survey, drydocking or special survey, the vessel will be unable to carry cargo between ports and will be unemployable and uninsurable which could cause us to be in violation of certain covenants in our loan agreements. 50 Table of Contents Any such inability to carry cargo or be employed, or any such violation of covenants, could have a material adverse impact on our financial condition and results of operations. Risk of Loss and Liability Insurance General The operation of any cargo vessel includes risks such as mechanical failure, physical damage, collision, property loss, cargo loss or damage and business interruption due to political circumstances in foreign countries, war, piracy incidents, hostilities and labor strikes. In addition, there is always an inherent possibility of marine disaster, including oil spills and other environmental mishaps, and the liabilities arising from owning and operating vessels in international trade. OPA, which imposes virtually unlimited liability upon shipowners, operators and bareboat charterers of any vessel trading in the exclusive economic zone of the United States 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 carry insurance coverage as customary in the shipping industry. However, not all risks can be insured, specific claims may be rejected, and we might not be always able to obtain adequate insurance coverage at reasonable rates. Hull and Machinery Insurance We procure marine hull and machinery and war risk insurance, which cover the risk of particular average and actual or constructive total loss for all of the vessels in our fleet. The vessels in our fleet are each covered up to at least fair market value, with deductibles of $500,000 per vessel per incident. We also arranged increased value coverage (Total Loss Insurance) for each vessel. Under this increased value coverage, in the event of total loss of a vessel, we will be able to recover for amounts insured, in addition to sums insured under the hull and machinery policy, up to the total value of the vessel. We generally do not maintain insurance against loss of hire (except for certain charters for which we consider it appropriate), which covers business interruptions as a result of loss of use of a vessel caused by a particular average claim. Protection and Indemnity Insurance Protection and indemnity insurance is provided by mutual protection and indemnity associations, or “P&I Associations,” and covers our third-party liabilities in connection with our shipping activities. This includes third-party liability and other related expenses of injury or death of crew, passengers and other third parties, loss or damage to cargo, claims arising from collisions with other vessels, damage to other third-party property, pollution arising from oil or other substances and salvage, towing and other related costs, including wreck removal. Protection and indemnity insurance is a form of mutual indemnity insurance, extended by protection and indemnity mutual associations, or “clubs.” Our current protection and indemnity insurance coverage for pollution is $1.0 billion per vessel per incident. The 12 P&I Associations that comprise the International Group insure approximately 90% of the world’s commercial tonnage and have entered into a pooling agreement to reinsure each association’s liabilities. The International Group’s website states that the Pool provides a mechanism for sharing all claims in excess of US$ 10 million up to, currently, approximately $8.9 billion. As a member of a P&I Association, which is a member of the International Group, we are subject to calls payable to the associations based on our claim records as well as the claim records of all other members of the individual associations and members of the shipping pool of P&I Associations comprising the International Group. Competition We operate in what we refer to as the Nordic American System, which describes our operation of our homogenous Suezmax tanker fleet in markets that are highly competitive and based primarily on supply and demand. We currently operate the majority of our vessels in the spot market. We compete for charters on the basis of price, vessel location, size, age and condition of the vessel, as well as on our reputation as an operator. For more information on the “Nordic American System”, please see “Item 4.A. History and Development of the Company.” 51 Table of Contents Permits and Authorizations We are required by various governmental and quasi-governmental agencies to obtain certain permits, licenses and certificates with respect to our vessels. The kinds of permits, licenses and certificates required depend upon several factors, including the commodity transported, the waters in which the vessel operates, the nationality of the vessel’s crew and the age of a vessel. We have been able to obtain all permits, licenses and certificates currently required to permit our vessels to operate. Additional laws and regulations, environmental or otherwise, may be adopted which could limit our ability to do business or increase our cost of doing business. Seasonality Historically, oil trade and, therefore, charter rates increased in the winter months and eased in the summer months as demand for oil in the Northern Hemisphere rose in colder weather and fell in warmer weather. The tanker industry, in general, has become less dependent on the seasonal transport of heating oil than a decade ago as new uses for oil and oil products have developed, spreading consumption more evenly over the year. This is most apparent from the higher seasonal demand during the summer months due to energy requirements for air conditioning and motor vehicles. C. Organizational Structure See Exhibit 8.1 to this Form 20-F for a list of our significant subsidiaries. D. Property, Plant and Equipment Please see “Item 4. Information on the Company B. Business Overview—Our Fleet”, for a description of our vessels. The vessels are mortgaged as collateral under the 2025 Senior Secured Credit Facility of $150 million and the financing agreements with Ocean Yield AS. Other than our interests in the vessels described above, we do not own any material physical properties.
The following management’s discussion and analysis should be read in conjunction with our historical financial statements and notes thereto included elsewhere in this report. This discussion contains forward-looking statements that reflect our current views with respect to futur…
The following management’s discussion and analysis should be read in conjunction with our historical financial statements and notes thereto included elsewhere in this report. This discussion contains forward-looking statements that reflect our current views with respect to future events and financial performance. Our actual results may differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of certain factors, such as those set forth in the section entitled “Item 3. Key Information—D. Risk Factors” and elsewhere in this annual report. A. Operating Results Business overview Our fleet as of December 31, 2025, consisted of 20 Suezmax crude oil tankers. In 2023, we acquired the 2016 built Nordic Hawk. There were no changes to our fleet during 2024. In 2025 we took delivery of two 2016 build vessels Nordic Galaxy and Nordic Moon. We entered into firm sales agreements for the 2003 built Nordic Apollo, the 2004 built Nordic Castor, the 2004 built Nordic Luna and the 2005 built Nordic Sprinter, but the latter two vessels were only delivered to the buyers in January 2026. Subsequent to December 31, 2025, we also entered into an agreement to purchase two new build suezmax tankers from a South Korean shipyard with delivery in 2028. We have sold two more vessels in 2026, the 2003 build Nordic Pollux and the 2005 build Nordic Skier, where one has been delivered to the new buyer, the other is still pending delivery. 52 Table of Contents The vessels in our fleet are considered homogenous and interchangeable as they have approximately the same freight capacity and ability to transport the same type of cargo. YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2025, COMPARED TO YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2024 Years Ended December 31, All figures in USD ‘000 2025 2024 Variance Voyage Revenues 291,690 349,742 -16.60 % Other Income 730 0 NA Voyage Expenses (109,880 ) (124,646 ) -11.85 % Vessel Operating Expenses (66,938 ) (62,809 ) 6.57 % Depreciation Expenses (57,735 ) (56,151 ) 2.82 % Gain on Disposal of Vessels 16,621 - NA General and Administrative Expenses (28,143 ) (28,825 ) -2.37 % Net Operating Income 46,345 77,311 -40.03 % Interest Income 1,608 731 119.97 % Interest Expenses (35,752 ) (30,739 ) 16.32 % Other Financial Income (Expenses) 118 (670 ) 117.61 % Net Income Before Income Taxes 12,319 46,633 -73.58 % Income Tax Expense (Benefit) (48 ) 10 -580 % Net Income 12,271 46,643 -73.69 % Management believes that net voyage revenue, a non-GAAP financial measure, provides additional meaningful information because it enables us to compare the profitability of our vessels that are employed under bareboat charters, spot related time charters and spot charters. Net voyage revenues divided by the number of days on the charter provides the Time Charter Equivalent, or TCE, Rate. Net voyage revenues and TCE rates are widely used by investors and analysts in the tanker shipping industry to compare the financial performance of companies and for preparing industry averages. We believe that our method of calculating net voyage revenue is consistent with industry standards. The table below reconciles our net voyage revenues to voyage revenues. Years Ended December 31, All figures in USD ‘000, except TCE rate per day 2025 2024 Variance Voyage Revenues 291,690 349,742 -16.60 % Less Voyage expenses (109,880 ) (124,646 ) -11.85 % Net Voyage Revenue 181,810 225,096 -19.23 % Vessel Calendar Days (1) 7,312 7,320 -0.11 % Less off-hire days 744 197 277.66 % Total TCE days 6,568 7,123 -7.79 % TCE Rate per day (2) 27,681 31,603 -12.41 % (1) Vessel Calendar Days is the total number of days the vessels were in our fleet. (2) Time Charter Equivalent, or TCE, Rate, results from Net Voyage Revenue divided by total TCE days. 53 Table of Contents Voyage Revenues decreased by $58.1 million, or 16.60%, from $349.7 million in 2024 to $291.7 million in 2025 as a result of decreased tanker rates in 2025 compared to 2024. The change in Net Voyage Revenue is due to two main factors: i) The number of TCE days ii) The change in the TCE rate achieved. Number of vessel calendar days decreased by 0.11%. Two vessels were sold and two vessels were added to the fleet in 2025 and these additional vessels commenced operations from May 2025. With regards to i), the increase of 565 days in offhire was a result of 6 of our vessels undergoing planned maintenance in 2025 compared to 3 vessels in 2024. With regards to ii), the TCE rate per day decreased by $3,922 or 12.4%, from $31,603 in 2024 to $27,681 in 2025. The indicative rates presented by Clarkson Research increased by 15.2% for the twelve months of 2025 compared to the same twelve months in 2024 to $54,709 from $47,473, respectively. Our TCE rate per day decreased in the same period on a year-over-year basis, as some voyages with lowered rates booked in the fourth quarter of 2024 materialized in the first quarter of 2025 before the rates increased in the fourth quarter of 2025. Further, in the same manner as in 2024, the indicative rates presented by Clarkson Research for 2025 are an average of observations and routes, and some of the trade routes going into the average are routes involving Russian oil trade and as such not routes representing an average for all market participants. As a result of i) and ii) net voyage revenues decreased by 16.6% from $349.742 million for the year ended December 31, 2024, to $291.690 million for the year ended December 31, 2025. Voyage expenses decreased to $109.9 million from $124.6 million, or -11.8%. Voyage expenses mainly consist of bunkers, port charges, canal passages and commissions and the most influential cost is the cost of bunkers. Cost of bunkers is influenced by actual consumption in a year and the price of the fuel. With an 18.9% reduction in revenue, one might have expected a corresponding decrease in costs. However, with the implementation of the EU Emission Trading System (EU ETS), together with the implementation of Fuel EU Maritime, this has resulted in increased costs of $5.7 million, which represents 5.2% of the total costs. Vessel operating expenses increased by $4.1 million, or 6.5%, from $62.8 million in 2024 to $66.9 million in 2025, and reflects that the number of dry-docking days increased for our fleet in 2025 compared to 2024. In cooperation with our technical managers, we maintain our focus on keeping the fleet in top technical condition whilst keeping costs low. General and administrative expenses decreased by $0.7 million from $28.8 million to $28.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2024, to December 31, 2025. Employee compensation costs, including bonuses, continued to represent a significant component of these expenses, however, there were changes in the composition and timing of bonus payments, including increased employee retention bonuses which were deferred over the contractual retention period deferrals, compared to the prior year. Depreciation expenses increased by $1.6 million, or 2.9%, from $56.1 million in 2024 to $57.7 million in 2025. The increase was primarily driven by higher capitalized expenditures on steel and a greater number of vessels undergoing dry-docking in 2025 compared to 2024, which elevated depreciation per quarter. The addition of two new vessels in April 2025, which carry a higher depreciation rate than the two vessels that exited the fleet, further contributed to the overall increase. Gain on disposal of vessels amounted to $16.6 million in 2025, compared to no gain in 2024. The gain in 2025 relates to the sale of two vessels, Nordic Apollo and Nordic Castor. There were no corresponding vessel sales in 2024. Interest income increased from $0.7 million in 2024 to $1.6 million in 2025, or 120.0%, as we earned more interest on bank deposits during 2024 than in 2025. 54 Table of Contents Interest expenses increased by $5.0 million, or 16.3%, from $30.7 million in 2024 to $35.7 million in 2025. The increase was primarily driven by the acquisition of an additional vessels in April 2025, financed with Ocean Yield, as well as the refinancing of the 2018-built vessels with the same lender. The refinancing of the 2018-built vessels generated additional cash proceeds of $46.0 million. In February we refinanced the facility we had with Beal Bank, provided further $78.5 million in additional liquidity. Together, these transactions resulted in higher interest expenses in 2025 compared to 2024. YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2024, COMPARED TO YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2023 Years Ended December 31, All figures in USD ‘000 2024 2023 Variance Voyage Revenues 349,742 391,687 -10.7 % Voyage Expenses (124,646 ) (129,507 ) -3.8 % Vessel Operating Expenses (62,809 ) (60,003 ) 4.7 % Impairment Loss on Vessels - - N/A Depreciation Expenses (56,151 ) (51,397 ) 9.2 % Gain on Disposal of Vessels - - N/A General and Administrative Expenses (28,825 ) (22,890 ) 25.9 % Net Operating Income 77,311 127,890 -39.5 % Interest Income 731 1,302 -43.9 % Interest Expenses (30,739 ) (30,498 ) 0.8 % Other Financial Income (Expenses) (670 ) 137 589.1 % Net Income Before Income Taxes 46,633 98,831 -52.7 % Tax Income (Expenses) 10 (120 ) -107.5 % Net Income 46,643 98,711 -52.8 % Management believes that net voyage revenue, a non-GAAP financial measure, provides additional meaningful information because it enables us to compare the profitability of our vessels that are employed under bareboat charters, spot related time charters and spot charters. Net voyage revenues divided by the number of days on the charter provides the Time Charter Equivalent, or TCE, Rate. Net voyage revenues and TCE rates are widely used by investors and analysts in the tanker shipping industry to comparing the financial performance of companies and for preparing industry averages. We believe that our method of calculating net voyage revenue is consistent with industry standards. The table below reconciles our net voyage revenues to voyage revenues. Years Ended December 31, All figures in USD ‘000, except TCE rate per day 2024 2023 Variance Voyage Revenues 349,742 391,687 -10.7 % Less Voyage expenses (124,646 ) (129,507 ) -3.8 % Net Voyage Revenue 225,096 262,180 -14.1 % Vessel Calendar Days (1) 7,320 6,917 5.8 % Less off-hire days 197 447 -55.9 % Total TCE days 7,123 6,470 10.1 % TCE Rate per day (2) $ 31,603 $ 40,522 -22.0 % (1) Vessel Calendar Days is the total number of days the vessels were in our fleet. (2) Time Charter Equivalent, or TCE, Rate, results from Net Voyage Revenue divided by total TCE days. 55 Table of Contents Voyage Revenues decreased by $42.0 million, or 10.7%, from $391.7 million in 2023 to $349.7 million in 2024 as a result of decreased tanker rates in 2024 compared to 2023. The change in Net Voyage Revenue is due to two main factors: i) The number of TCE days ii) The change in the TCE rate achieved. Number of vessel calendar days increased by 5.8%. One vessel was added to the fleet in late 2023 and this additional vessel has come in with full effect in 2024. With regards to i), the decrease of 250 days in offhire days was a result of less vessels undergoing planned maintenance in 2024 compared to 2023. With regards to ii), the TCE rate per day decreased by $8,919, or 22.0%, from $40,522 in 2023 to $31,603 in 2024. The indicative rates presented by Clarkson Research decreased by 15.5.% for the twelve months of 2024 compared to the same twelve months in 2023 to $47,188 from $55,847, respectively. Our TCE rate per day decreased more in percentage than the indicative rates presented by Clarkson Research on a year-over-year basis, as some voyages with lowered rates booked in the fourth quarter of 2023 materialized in the first quarter of 2024. Further, in the same manner as in 2023, the indicative rates presented by Clarkson Research for 2024 are an average of observations and routes, and some of the trade routes going into the average are routes involving Russian oil trade and as such not routes representing an average for all market participants. As a result of i) and ii) net voyage revenues decreased by 14.1% from $262.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2023, to $225.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2024. Voyage expenses decreased to $124.6 million from $129.5 million, or 3.8%. Voyage expenses mainly consist of bunkers, port charges and commissions and the most influential cost is the cost of bunkers. Cost of bunkers is influenced by actual consumption in a year and the price of the fuel. The decrease in voyage expenses in 2024 was primarily due to a decrease of $6.0 million in port charges and a decrease in commission of $1.3 million. With a 10.7% reduction in revenue, one might have expected a corresponding decrease in costs. However, with the implementation of the EU ETS, this has resulted in increased costs of $2.5 million, which represents 2% of the total costs. Vessel operating expenses increased by $2.8 million, or 4.7%, from $60.0 million in 2023 to $62.8 million in 2024, and reflects that the number of vessel calendar days for our fleet were increased in 2024 compared to 2023. In cooperation with our technical managers, we maintain our focus on keeping the fleet in top technical condition whilst keeping costs low. General and administrative expenses increased by $5.9 million, or 25.9%, from $22.9 million in 2023 to $28.8 million in 2024. This increase was primarily driven by higher employee compensation costs, particularly bonuses. Bonuses paid to management and staff rose by $5.7 million, or 937.5%, from $0.6 million in 2023 to $6.3 million in 2024, accounting for the substantial majority of the overall increase in general and administrative expenses. Depreciation expenses increased by $4.8 million, or 9.2%, from $51.4 million in 2023 to $56.2 million in 2024. The increase in 2024 compared to 2023 is primarily a result of the addition of one vessel in December 2023 that is depreciated for the full year in 2024. Interest income decreased from $1.3 million in 2023 to $0.7 million in 2024, or 43.9%, as we earned more interest on bank deposits during 2023 than in 2024. Interest expenses increased by $0.2 million, or 0.8%, from $30.5 million in 2023 to $30.7 million in 2024. The increase is due to purchase of on additional vessel December 2023, financed with Ocean Yield. 56 Table of Contents Inflation Construction cost and periodical maintenance costs for oil tankers tend to fluctuate with the cyclicality in raw material costs, especially the price of steel and copper, and the general demand for shipbuilding services. Newbuilding prices for oil tankers have increased further in 2025 as a result of full orderbooks at the shipyards for the coming years and an optimistic outlook for many shipping segments. Operating costs for oil tankers have been stable with little or moderate inflation over the years, and our operating cost in 2025 have been in line with previous years. However, there is currently inflationary pressure in most parts of the world, and we are monitoring this closely. The shipping industry has historically been able to absorb and neutralize significant cost increases related to operation of the vessels. However, oil transportation is a specialized area and if number of vessels where to increase significantly, increased demand for qualified crew can be expected, potentially putting pressure on crew cost. A general cost inflation in the world could impact the shipping industry and put inflationary pressure on cost items such as, but not limited to crew costs, spare parts, maintenance, insurance etc. B. Liquidity and Capital Resources We operate in a cyclical and capital-intensive industry. Our fleet of Suezmax tankers are financed through a combination of earnings generated from operations, equity and borrowings. Our main liquidity requirements are related to voyage cost and operating cost for our vessels, repayments of loans and related interest charges, general and administration cost, capital expenditure for our vessels including an equity portion on investment in newbuildings and second-hand vessels from time to time and working capital needs. We believe our working capital is sufficient to cover our short-term/present requirements. We have a policy of distributing dividends on a quarterly basis and we have distributed dividends for 114 consecutive quarters. Our dividend distributions are normally a reflection of the earnings taking into account other capital commitments and working capital needs. We refer to the description of our Dividend Policy in Item 8. Financial Information, A. Consolidated Statements and other Financial Information. We refer to further information below and in “Item 5. Operating and Financial Review and Prospects—F. Tabular Disclosure of Contractual Obligations” for disclosure of Contractual Obligations and Financing Agreements. Our Borrowing Activities On February 12, 2019, we entered into the $306 million 2019 Senior Secured Credit Facility using twenty of our vessels at that time, built before year 2017, as collateral. On December 16, 2020, we entered into a loan agreement for $30.0 million that is considered an accordion loan under the 2019 Senior Secured Credit Facility loan agreement. Six of the vessels used as collateral have been sold and as of December 31, 2024, there were 14 vessels built from 2003 to 2017 used as collateral for the outstanding loan balance as of that date. The three 2018-built vessels, the two newbuildings delivered to us in 2022 and the 2016-built Nordic Hawk that was delivered to us in December 2023, are all financed through Ocean Yield AS. We refer to further description of the financing arrangements below. 2019 Senior Secured Credit Facility and $30 million Accordion Loan On February 12, 2019, we entered into a five-year senior secured credit facility for $306.1 million, or the 2019 Senior Secured Credit Facility. Borrowings under the 2019 Senior Secured Credit Facility are secured by first-priority mortgages over fourteen vessels built in the period from 2003 to 2017 and assignments of earnings and insurance. The loan is amortizing with a twenty-year maturity profile and carries a floating interest rate. The loan had an original maturity date in February 2024 that was extended to February 2025. 57 Table of Contents On December 16, 2020, we entered into a new loan agreement for the borrowing of $30.0 million, or the $“$30 million Accordion Loan. The loan is considered an accordion loan to the 2019 Senior Secured Credit Facility loan agreement and has the same amortization profile, carries a floating interest rate and matures in February 2025. Excess cash flow payments as described above are applied to the balance of the 2019 Senior Secured Credit Facility before being applied to the $30 million Accordion Loan. The security of the loan is attached to the security of the 2019 Senior Secured Credit Facility and has equal priority, same financial covenants and repayment clauses. On February 6, 2025, we signed a new agreement for a five-year Senior Secured Credit Agreement with new terms, referred to as the Amended and Restated Agreement. Termination date was set to February 13, 2029. The Amended and Restated Facility is in the amount of $150 million and is a single loan with security in 7 suezmax vessels, referred to as “the Revised Collateral”. Other vessels that were secured under the old facility is no longer part of the lender`s collateral. There is also a delayed draw facility incorporated into the facility in the amount of $100 million to be used for additional fleet expansion on a 50% Loan to Value ratio “LTV” basis which gives the company flexibility going forward with mandatory prepayments unless waived by lender. The Amended and Restated Agreement includes a minimum liquidity covenant of $20.0 million and a loan-to-vessel value ratio of maximum 70%. Further, on a half year basis the agreement contains an Excess Cash mechanism that will be calculated based as the total aggregate revenue from the Vessels, less: (i) amounts due to the Lenders/Agent, and (ii) fixed amounts agreed upon by the Borrowers and the Lenders on the Closing Date expressed on a per Vessel, per day basis, which fixed amount represents the estimated direct operating expenses, capital expenditures, and G&A in respect of the Vessels. The actual percentage of Excess Cash to be a Mandatory Prepayment shall be determined at the time of such Excess Cash sweep based upon the then LTV. We have repaid $8.2 million on the facilities in the twelve months ended December 31, 2025, and we had $142.8million and $72.6 million borrowed under our Amended and Restated Agreement as of December 31, 2025, and December 31, 2024, respectively. As of December 31, 2025, we have presented $0.9 million, net of deferred financing costs of $0.07 million, under Current Portion of Long-Term Debt. The Excess Cash Flow payment generated from the earnings in the fourth quarter of 2025 has been waived by the lender due to immaterial amount. Subsequent to December 31, 2025, we have repaid in total $2.5 million and the total outstanding balance as of the date of this report is $140.33 million. Financing of 2018-built Vessels We have three 2018-built vessels delivered from Samsung shipyard. Under the original terms of the financing agreements for these vessels, the lender provided financing of 77.5% of the purchase price for each vessel. Upon delivery, we commenced ten-year bareboat charter agreements, and we were obligated to purchase each vessel for a consideration of $13.6 million upon completion of the ten-year charter period, with an option to purchase the vessels after eighty-four months. These purchase options must be declared six months prior to each vessel’s anniversary, and the eighty-four-month options expired during 2025. The original financing agreements included interest charges based on a floating Secured Overnight Financing Rate, or (SOFR, element that is), subject to annual adjustment, plus a margin of 4.52% and a credit adjustment spread of 0.26%. These agreements also contain financial covenants requiring us to maintain, on a consolidated basis, minimum value adjusted equity of $175.0 million, a minimum value adjusted equity ratio of 25%, minimum liquidity of $20.0 million, and compliance with a minimum vessel value to outstanding lease ratio. In May 2025, we entered into an amendment to the existing loan agreements for these three vessels, which had an outstanding balance of approximately $75 million at the time. The amendment provided for an increase in principal of approximately $15 million per vessel and extended the maturity of the loans by 60 months from the original due dates. Under the amended agreement dated May 28, 2025, the interest margin was reduced to 3.70%, the maturity profile extended to 2023, and the final balloon payment adjusted accordingly, thereby improving the overall debt profile and liquidity position related to these vessels. The financing agreement contains certain financial covenants requiring us to on a consolidated basis to maintain a minimum liquidity of $20.0 million and a minimum vessel value to outstanding lease clause. 58 Table of Contents The outstanding amounts under this financing arrangement were $113.4 million and $78.1 million as of December 31, 2025, and 2024, respectively, where $10.7 million and $9.3 million, net of deferred financing costs, have been presented as Current Portion of Long-Term Debt, respectively. Financing of 2022-built Vessels The two vessels, Nordic Harrier and Nordic Hunter, were delivered to us in 2022. Under the terms of the financing agreements, the lender provided financing of 80.0% of the purchase price for each of the two vessels. Upon delivery of each of the vessels, we commenced ten-year bareboat charter agreements. We have obligations to purchase the vessels upon the completion of the ten-year bareboat charter agreements for a consideration of $16.5 million for each vessel, and we also have the option to purchase the vessels after sixty and eighty-four months. The financing agreements include interest charges composed of a floating SOFR element that is subject to quarterly adjustment, plus a margin of 4.50% and a credit adjustment spread of 0.26%. The financing agreements contain certain financial covenants requiring us to on a consolidated basis to maintain a minimum liquidity of $20.0 million and a minimum vessel value to outstanding lease clause. The outstanding amounts under this financing arrangement were $68.3 million and $73.8 million as of December 31, 2025, and 2024, respectively, where $5.4 million and $5.4 million, net of deferred financing costs, have been presented as Current Portion of Long-Term Debt, respectively. Financing of Nordic Hawk The 2016-built vessel, Nordic Hawk, was delivered to us in December 2023. Under the terms of the financing agreement, the lender provided financing of 75.0% of the purchase price. Upon delivery of the vessel, we entered into an eight-year bareboat charter agreement. We have an obligation to purchase the vessel for $5.9 million upon the completion of the eight-year bareboat charter agreement and we have the option to purchase the vessel after sixty and eighty-four months. The financing agreement has an interest rate as of December 31, 2024, that is composed of a floating term SOFR element subject to quarterly adjustments and a margin of 4.76%. The financing agreement contains certain financial covenants requiring us on a consolidated basis to maintain a minimum liquidity of $20.0 million and a minimum vessel value to outstanding lease clause. The outstanding amounts under this financing arrangement were $41.5 million and $47.5 million as of December 31, 2025, and 2024, respectively, where $5.9 million and $5.9 million, net of deferred financing costs, have been presented as Current Portion of Long-Term Debt, respectively. Financing of Nordic Galaxy and Nordic Moon (2016 build vessels) The 2016-build vessels, Nordic Galaxy and Nordic Moon, were delivered to us in April 2025. Under the terms of the financing agreement, the lender provided financing of 50% of the purchase price. Upon delivery of the vessel, we entered into an eight-year bareboat charter agreement. We have an obligation to purchase the vessels for $8.7 million upon the completion of the eight-year bareboat charter agreement and we have the option to purchase the vessel after sixty and eighty-four months. The financing agreement has an interest rate as of December 31, 2025, that is composed of a floating term SOFR element subject to quarterly adjustments and a margin of 3.70%. The financing agreement contains certain financial covenants requiring us on a consolidated basis to maintain a minimum liquidity of $20.0 million and a minimum vessel value to outstanding lease clause. The outstanding amounts under this financing arrangement were $61.7 million as of December 31, 2025, where $6.0 million, net of deferred financing costs, have been presented as Current Portion of Long-Term Debt, respectively. 59 Table of Contents Financing of the two newbuildings on order for delivery in 2028 We have not yet entered into any financing agreement for these two vessels ordered after year-end 2025. We expect to have financing in place well in time of delivery in 2028. Equity On September 29, 2021, we entered into an equity distribution agreement with B. Riley Securities, Inc, acting as sales agent, under which the Company may, from time to time, offer and sell common stock through an At-the-Market Offering, or the $60 million 2021 ATM, program having an aggregate offering price of up to $60,000,000. In the year ended December 31, 2021, we raised gross and net proceeds (after deducting sales commissions and other fees and expenses) of $22.3 million and $21.7 million, respectively, by issuing and selling 10,222,105 common shares. In 2022, we raised gross and net proceeds of $16.9 million and $16.5 million, respectively, by issuing and selling 10,764,990 common shares. The $60 million 2021 ATM was terminated on February 14, 2022, after having utilized $39.2 million of the program. On February 14, 2022, we entered into a new equity distribution agreement with B. Riley Securities, Inc, acting as sales agent, under which the Company may, from time to time, offer and sell common stock through an At-the-Market Offering, or the $60 million 2022 ATM, program having an aggregate offering price of up to $60,000,000. In the year ended December 31, 2022, we raised gross and net proceeds of $33.6 million and $32.7 million, respectively, by selling and issuing 14,337,258 commons shares. No shares were issued in 2023. During 2024, we have issued 2,954,219 shares and the remaining available balance after this was $17.3 million under this ATM. This ATM was subsequently cancelled and the available balance not utilized, upon the 3-year expiry of the Shelf F-3 registration statement on February 14, 2025. On March 11, 2025, we filed a new $60 million ATM that was a part of the F-3 filing of the same date. The F-3 filing and subsequently the ATM was made effective on March 31, 2025. No shares have been issued under this new ATM. Liquidity and covenant compliance Cash, restricted cash and cash equivalents are predominantly held in U.S. Dollars and cash and cash equivalents was $45.9 million and $44.4 million as of December 31, 2025, and December 31, 2024, respectively. Minor cash balances are held in NOK and EUR. Restricted cash was nil million and $5.2 million as of December 31, 2025, and December 31, 2024, respectively. The restricted cash deposit was nominated and available for use for drydocking and other capex commitments related to the vessels used as collateral under the 2019 Senior Secured Credit Facility and we will no longer report this amount, as it is no longer a requirement under the 2025 Senior Secured Credit Facility – as amended and restated. We monitor compliance with our financial covenants on a regular basis and as of December 31, 2025, we were in compliance with the financial covenants in our debt facilities. Historically, our financial minimum liquidity covenant of $20.0 million is the most sensitive covenant. We had a cash balance as of December 31, 2025, of $45.9 million. On a regular basis, the Company performs cash flow projections to evaluate whether it will be in a position to cover the liquidity needs for the next 12-month period and the compliance with financial and security ratios under its existing and future financing agreements. In developing estimates of future cash flows, the Company makes assumptions about the vessels’ future performance, market rates, operating expenses, capital expenditure, fleet utilization, general and administrative expenses, loan repayments and interest charges. The assumptions applied are based on historical experience and future expectations. We prepare cash flow projections for different scenarios and a key input factor to the cash flow projections is the estimated freight rates. We apply an average of several broker estimates in combination with own estimates for the coming 12-months’ period. The average freight rates achieved in 2025 have been strong compared to the historical long-term average freight rates achieved by the Company. As such, the Company has generated significant positive cash flows from operations that could be used for dividends, investments, or repayment of outstanding loan balances. 60 Table of Contents Given the strong market conditions, the availability of secured financing, a number of unencumbered vessels, and the renewed at-the-market (ATM) program, the Company believes it is well-positioned financially to meet its obligations and support future growth. Contractual Obligations The Company’s contractual obligations as of December 31, 2025, consisted mainly of our obligations as borrower under the 2025 Senior Secured Credit Facility, amended and restated and our obligations related to financing of our eight vessels with Ocean Yield. The following table sets out financing and contractual obligations outstanding as of December 31, 2025. Contractual Obligations in $’000s Total Less than 1 year 1-3 years 3-5 years More than 5 years Senior Secured Credit Facility Amended and restated $150 million (1) 142,781 7,500 15,000 120,281 - Interest Payments (2) 35,581 12,120 22,195 1,266 - Financing of 2018-build Vessels (3) 113,394 11,061 22,151 22,121 58,061 Interest Payments (4) 40,214 8,139 13,718 10,397 7,961 Financing of 2022-built Vessels (5) 68,344 5,500 11,015 11,000 40,830 Interest Payments (6) 27,816 5,658 9,885 7,997 4,276 Financing of Nordic Hawk (7) 41,524 6,000 12,016 12,000 11,508 Interest Payments (8) 12,362 3,360 5,159 3,102 740 Financing of Nordic Galaxy/Moon (9) 61,667 6,083 12,183 12,166 31,235 Interest Payments (10) 21,778 4,444 7,503 5,668 4,196 Operating Lease Liabilities (11) 325 325 - - - Total 565,821 70,190 130,825 205,999 158,807 Notes: (1) Refers to obligation to repay indebtedness outstanding under the 2025 Amended and restated Senior Secured Credit Facility. (2) Refers to the estimated interest payments over the term of indebtedness outstanding under the 2025Amended and restated Senior Secured Credit Facility of December 31, 2025. Estimate is based on applicable interest rate, agreed amortization and balance outstanding as of December 31, 2025. (3) Refers to obligation to repay indebtedness outstanding as of December 31, 2025, for three 2018-built vessels. (4) Refers to estimated interest payments over the term of the indebtedness outstanding as of December 31, 2025, for the amended financing of the three 2018-built vessels. Estimate is based on applicable interest rate as of December 31, 2025. The SOFR element included in the interest rates are adjusted on a quarterly basis. (5) Refers to obligation to repay indebtedness outstanding as of December 31, 2025, for the two 2022-built Vessels. (6) Refers to estimated interest payments over the term of the indebtedness outstanding as of December 31, 2025, for the financing of the two 2022-built Vessels. Estimate is based on applicable interest rate as of December 31, 2025. The SOFR element included in the interest rates are adjusted on a quarterly basis. (7) Refers to obligation to repay indebtedness outstanding as of December 31, 2025, for the 2016-built vessel, Nordic Hawk. (8) Refers to estimated interest payments over the term of the indebtedness outstanding as of December 31, 2025, for the financing of the 2016-built vessel, Nordic Hawk. Estimate is based on applicable interest rate as of December 31, 2025. The SOFR element included in the interest rates is adjusted on a quarterly basis. (9) Refers to obligation to repay indebtedness outstanding as of December 31, 2025, for the 2016-built vessel, Nordic Galaxy and Nordic Moon. (10) Refers to estimated interest payments over the term of the indebtedness outstanding as of December 31, 2025, for the financing of the 2016-built vessel, Nordic Galaxy and Nordic Moon. Estimate is based on applicable interest rate as of December 31, 2025. The SOFR element included in the interest rates is adjusted on a quarterly basis. (11) Refers to the future obligation as of December 31, 2025, to pay for operating lease liabilities at nominal values. 61 Table of Contents As of December 31, 2025, we do not have any liabilities, contingent or otherwise, that we would consider to be off-balance sheet arrangements. Cash Flows The following table shows our net cash flows from operating, investing and financing activities for the periods ended December 31, 2025, 2024 and 2023. All figures in USD ‘000 2025 2024 2023 Net Cash Provided by Operating Activities 19,824 128,158 139,445 Net Cash Used in Investing Activities (87,699 ) (2,620 ) (73,670 ) Net Cash Provided by / (Used In) Financing Activities 68,993 (115,051 ) (95,672 ) Net Increase / (Decrease) in Cash, Cash Equivalents and Restricted cash 1,118 10,487 (29,897 ) Cash, Cash Equivalents and Restricted Cash at Beginning of Year 44,384 33,361 63,302 Effect of Exchange Rate Changes on Cash and Cash Equivalents 361 536 (44 ) Cash, Cash Equivalents and Restricted Cash at End of Year 45,863 44,384 33,361 YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2025, COMPARED TO YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2024 Cash flows provided by operating activities decreased to $19.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2025, from $128.22 million for the year ended December 31, 2024. The change in cash flows provided by operating activities was primarily due to decreases in market rates achieved in 2025 compared to 2024. Cash flows used in investing activities increased to $87.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2025, compared to $2.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2024. The increase of cash flow used in investing activities was primarily due to the acquisition of two 2016 build vessels. Cash flows provided by financing activities increased to $68.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2025, compared to cash flow used in financing activities of $115.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2024. The increase was primarily due to proceeds from borrowing activities received in 2025 related to refinancing of the Senior Secured Credit Facility with Beal Bank and the refinancing of the three 2018-build vessels financed through Ocean Yield. The cash, restricted cash and cash equivalents was $45.9 million as of December 31, 2025. YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2024, COMPARED TO YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2023 Cash flows provided by operating activities decreased to $128.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2024, from $139.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2023. The change in cash flows provided by operating activities was primarily due to decreases in market rates achieved in 2024 compared to 2023. Cash flows used in investing activities decreased to $2.62 million for the year ended December 31, 2024, compared to $73.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2023. The decrease of cash flows used in investing activities was primarily due to the acquisition of one new vessel in 2023 and no additions to the fleet during 2024. Cash flows used in financing activities increased to ($115.1) million for the year ended December 31, 2024, compared to cash flow provided by financing activities of ($95.7) million for the year ended December 31, 2023. The increase was primarily due to proceeds from borrowing activities received in 2023 related to acquisition of one new vessel in 2023, compared to no new borrowings in 2024. 62 Table of Contents The cash, restricted cash and cash equivalents was $44.4 million including $5.2 million in restricted cash as of December 31, 2024. C. Research and Development, Patents and Licenses, Etc. Not applicable. D. Trend Information The oil tanker industry has been highly cyclical, experiencing volatility in charter hire rates and vessel values resulting from changes in the supply of and demand for crude oil and tanker capacity. See “Item 4. Information on the Company—B. Business Overview –The International Tanker Market.” E. Critical Accounting Estimates We prepare our financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States, or U.S. GAAP. On a regular basis, management reviews the accounting policies, assumptions, estimates and judgments to ensure that our consolidated financial statements are presented fairly and in accordance with U.S. GAAP. However, because future events and their effects cannot be determined with certainty, actual results could differ from our assumptions and estimates, and such differences could be material. For a description of our material accounting policies, please read Item 18. Financial Statements Note 2 - Summary of Significant Accounting Policies. Revenues and voyage expenses Revenues are recognized on an accrual’s basis over the duration of each spot charter. For vessels operating on spot charters, voyage revenues are recognized ratably over the estimated length of each voyage, calculated on a load-to-discharge basis under ASC 606 and, therefore, are allocated between reporting periods based on the relative transit time in each period, and revenue is therefore recognized on a pro-rata basis commencing on the date that the cargo is loaded and concluded on the date of discharge of the cargo. Voyage expenses are capitalized between the discharge port of previous cargo, or contract date if later, and the load port of the cargo to be chartered if they qualify as fulfilment costs. Incremental cost to obtain a contract is capitalized and amortized on a straight-line basis over the estimated length of each voyage, calculated on a load-to-discharge basis, in line with fulfilment of the performance obligation. Voyage expenses are recognized when such costs are incurred. We do not capitalize fulfilment cost or recognize revenue when a charter has not been contractually committed to by a customer. Vessels – Depreciation, Impairment, Useful life and Residual values The carrying value of the Company’s vessels reflects each vessel’s original cost price at the time it was acquired less accumulated depreciation calculated using an estimated useful life of 25 years from the date of delivery from the shipyard. Depreciation is calculated based on cost less estimated residual value using the straight-line method. The carrying values of the Company’s vessels may not represent their fair value at any point in time since the market prices of second-hand vessels tend to fluctuate with changes in charter rates and the cost of newbuildings. Historically, both charter rates and vessel values tend to be cyclical. Our vessels are evaluated for possible impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of a vessel may not be recoverable. Undiscounted future cash flows are estimated on a vessel-by-vessel basis if events or circumstances indicate that carrying amounts may not be recoverable. If the estimated undiscounted future cash flows expected from continued use of the vessel and its eventual disposal is less than the carrying amount of the vessel, the vessel is deemed to be impaired. When applicable, we also consider if there are other factors that impact the probability for disposal of a vessel at its fair value before the end of its useful life. If a vessel is deemed to be impaired, the impairment charge is recognized based on the difference between the fair value of the vessel and its carrying value. Fair value is based on broker estimates that could be adjusted if there are actual entity-specific comparable transactions available. A new cost basis is established if the vessel’s carrying value is reduced after impairment charge is recorded. 63 Table of Contents As of December 31, 2025, we have considered as a first step whether there were events or changes in circumstances that may indicate that the carrying value of our vessels may not be recoverable including a consideration of whether any of the key forward-looking assumptions applied in an impairment analysis, which include preparing estimates of future undiscounted cash flows, have developed negatively. There are several positive factors identified in the areas we closely monitor, such as (1) the improved freight rates that materialized in the second half of 2025 have continued in 2026, (2) broker estimates for the coming years predict freight rates significantly above historical earnings, (3) an order book for Suezmax tankers that is still considered muted and (4) vessel values experienced a decline during the period but has continued to uphold at solid levels that do not trigger impairment under applicable accounting standards. As a result, no indicators of impairment were identified in 2025. When impairment indicators are identified, we develop estimates of future undiscounted cash flows, where we make assumptions and estimates about the vessels’ future performance, with the significant assumptions being related to charter rates, fleet utilization, operating expenses, capital expenditures/periodical maintenance, residual value and the estimated remaining useful life of each vessel. Many of these assumptions are relatively stable over time. However, charter rates are volatile and require management to apply significant judgment when assessing if impairment indicators are present, and when they are, for estimating future charter rates when preparing estimates of undiscounted cash flows. The assumptions used to develop estimates of future undiscounted cash flows, when necessary, are based on historical trends as well as future expectations. The estimated net operating revenues are determined by considering an estimated daily time charter equivalent for the remaining operating days over the useful life of the vessel. The daily time charter equivalent rates are converted to annual forecasted revenues by multiplying the daily rate by the number of days in the year less days for expected off-hire and dry-docking. Although the Company believes that the assumptions used to evaluate potential impairment are reasonable and appropriate, such assumptions are subjective. There can be no assurance whether the actual outcome will be close to the estimates and assumptions applied, as the tanker market is volatile in respect of both vessel values and charter rates, and we might experience changes in demand for transportation services, oil production, regulations and the size of the global tanker fleet. The most important assumption in determining undiscounted cash flows, when necessary, is the estimated charter rates. Charter rates are volatile, and the analyses have in prior periods been based on market rates obtained from third parties, in combination with historical rates achieved by us. We have historically applied an estimated daily time charter equivalent based on an average of several broker estimates for the first two years of our analysis. For the remaining period from year three and to the end of the useful life of each vessel, we have historically applied a daily time charter equivalent equaling the trailing fifteen-year historical company-specific average spot market rate. The broker estimates applied in year one and two are considered a more precise forecast as it captures the shorter-term expected market development of our business. The broker estimates are normally not available for a period exceeding two years. For year 3 and beyond, we believe that the 15-year historical company-specific average is a reasonable proxy for our expected cash flows as this average is most likely to encompass the charter rate cycles that our vessels will experience. We also monitor other external and internal factors including, but not limited to, our market capitalization, industry regulations, cost of operating the vessels and technological developments. When we calculate the expected undiscounted net cash flows for the vessels, we deduct operating expenses and expected cost of dry-docking and other expected capital expenditures from the operating revenues before adding an estimated residual value of the vessel at the end of its useful life. The operating expenses applied are based on the forecasted operating cost for the vessels, which is adjusted in subsequent periods for expected growth. We have historically applied a compounded growth factor to the operating expenses, which is calculated based on the average increase in our operating expenses over the last fifteen years. Estimated cash outflows for dry-docking are based on historical and forecasted expenditure. Vessel utilization is based on historical average levels achieved. The residual value applied is a long-term estimate based on an estimated market price of scrap per ton multiplied by lightweight tonnage of the vessel, less estimated cost associated with scrapping the vessel. The scrap price applied is less than the prevailing scrap price for steel and is based on observation over a longer period of time to capture both peaks and troughs in metal prices. A residual value of $8.0 million has been applied for depreciation purposes in the financial year ended December 31, 2025. All vessels are maintained for and assumed to have a useful life of 25 years. 64 Table of Contents Further, we consider if there are present factors that impact the probability of disposal of a vessel before the end of its estimated useful life. These factors could include the current price of second-hand vessels, expected capital expenditure, prevailing freight rates and the price of oil. As of December 31, 2025, two vessels were classified as held for sale, with the remaining vessels classified as held for use. Our fleet of Suezmax vessels has experienced a positive valuation trend over the past several years, with values at the end of 2025 exceeding those observed in 2024 and 2023. The increase in vessel values has been primarily driven by strong freight rates in the Suezmax tanker market, increased tonne-mile, demand linked to ongoing geopolitical developments, and a relatively constrained supply of modern tonnage. In addition, higher newbuilding costs, including increased steel prices and shipyard capacity have supported secondhand vessel values. Market activity has continued to be robust, reflecting sustained investor interest in tanker assets. Estimates of market value assume that vessels are in good and seaworthy condition without need for repair and would be certified in class without notations of any kind. Most oil companies require CAP 2 notation or better. All relevant vessels in our fleet have CAP1 notation for Hull, as well as Machinery & Cargo. CAP is an abbreviation for Condition Assessment Program. The quality of the NAT fleet is at the top as evidenced by our vetting statistics, that is, inspections of our ships by clients. In such vetting processes, safety for our crew, the environment and our assets are main considerations. We believe that our fleet should be valued as a transportation system as it is not meaningful under our strategy to solely assess the value of each individual vessel and view the valuation of the Company solely based upon net asset value, or NAV, a measure that only is linked to the steel value of our ships. We have our own ongoing system value with a large and homogenous fleet allowing us to offer our transportation services to our clients across the globe, well-functioning processes and established customer relationships with oil majors and other reputable customers. The carrying value of our vessels as of December 31, 2025, is $784.22 million, including the two vessels classified as held for sale as of December 31, 2025. We have obtained broker estimates from two independent shipbrokers indicating a fair market value of our vessels held and used on a charter free basis to be $1,096.00 million, based on an average of the two estimates including the inherent uncertainty in such estimates. Vessel Built Deadweight Tons Carrying Value $ (millions) Dec 31, 2025 Carrying Value $ (millions) Dec 31, 2024 Nordic Pollux 2003 150,103 24.4 13.9 Nordic Luna* 2004 150,037 26.1 16.3 Nordic Freedom 2005 159,331 29.5 23.3 Nordic Sprinter* 2005 159,089 29.5 18.5 Nordic Skier 2005 159,089 29.5 19.2 Nordic Light 2010 158,475 44.3 35.6 Nordic Cross 2010 158,475 44.3 35.7 Nordic Vega** 2010 163,940 39.8 44.7 Nordic Breeze 2011 158,597 48.3 36.9 Nordic Zenith 2011 158,645 48.3 37.4 Nordic Hawk 2016 157,594 66.5 68.0 Nordic Star 2016 157,738 66.9 46.6 Nordic Galaxy 2016 157,781 68.6 - Nordic Moon 2016 157,718 68.6 - Nordic Space 2017 157,582 69.9 47.1 Nordic Tellus 2018 157,407 73.0 46.6 Nordic Aquarius 2018 157,338 73.0 45.2 Nordic Cygnus 2018 157,526 73.0 45.6 Nordic Hunter 2022 157,037 86.4 52.0 Nordic Harrier 2022 157,094 86.4 51.6 * The vessel marked with an asterisk are classified as “Held for Sale” as of December 31, 2025. ** The vessel has a fair value that is lower than the carrying value. 65 Table of Contents Events and circumstances which could impact assumptions related to future cash flows of our vessels include: • Declines in prevailing market charter rates • Changes in behaviors and attitudes of our charterers towards actual and preferred technical, operational and environmental standards • Changes in regulations over the requirements for the technical and environmental capabilities of our vessels • Unexpected changes in the levels of Suezmax tanker newbuilding orders or recycling • Increased inflation as a result of factors outside our control • Changes in steel prices • Political uncertainty including changes in trading routes and demand