AGNT, Inc. Commitments Disclosure

Contingencies

The Company is subject to various legal proceedings and claims that have arisen in the ordinary course of business and that have not been fully resolved. The outcome of litigation is inherently uncertain. In the opinion of management, and except as set forth below, there was not at least a reasonable possibility the Company may have incurred a material loss, or a material loss greater than a recorded accrual, concerning loss contingencies for asserted legal and other claims.

Litigation and other legal matters are inherently unpredictable and subject to substantial uncertainties and adverse resolutions could occur. In addition, litigation and other legal matters, including class-action lawsuits, government investigations and regulatory proceedings can be costly to defend and, depending on the class size and claims, could be costly to settle. The Company believes that its defenses and assertions in pending legal proceedings have merit and the Company believes that it has adequately and appropriately accrued for legal matters that are estimable. However, substantial unanticipated judgments, penalties, sanctions, and fines do occur. As a result, the Company could from time to time incur judgments, enter into settlements, or revise its expectations regarding the outcome of certain matters, and such developments could have a material adverse effect on its results of operations in the period in which the amounts are accrued and/or its cash flows in the period in which the amounts are paid.

Antitrust Litigation

​

The Company and its affiliated brokerage entities were among several defendants in eight U.S. and one Canadian putative class action lawsuits alleging that the Company participated in a system that resulted in sellers of residential property paying inflated buyer broker commissions in violation of U.S. federal and state antitrust laws and federal Canadian antitrust laws, as applicable, and one U.S. putative class action lawsuit alleging that the Company participated in a system that resulted in buyers of residential property paying inflated home prices as a result of sellers paying inflated buyer broker commissions in violation of federal and Illinois antitrust laws (collectively, the “antitrust litigation”). On December 9, 2024, the Company and certain of its subsidiaries entered into a Settlement Agreement (the “Settlement”) with plaintiffs in the U.S. antitrust lawsuit 1925 Hooper LLC, et al. v. The National Association of Realtors et al., Case No. 1:23-cv-05392- SEG (United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, Atlanta Division), which was filed on November 22, 2023 against the Company and other U.S. brokerage defendants (the “Hooper Action”). The Settlement resolves all claims set forth in the Hooper Action and similar claims on a nationwide basis against the Company (collectively, the “Claims”) and releases the Company, its subsidiaries and affiliates, and their independent contractor real estate agents in the U.S. from the Claims. By the terms of the Settlement, the Company agreed to make certain changes to

its business practices and to pay a total settlement amount of $34.0 million (not in thousands) (the “Settlement Amount”) into a qualified settlement escrow fund (the “Settlement Fund”). The Settlement Amount is expected to be deposited into the Settlement Fund in installments, of which 50% of the settlement (or $17.0 million (not in thousands)) is to be deposited into the Settlement Fund within 30 business days after preliminary court approval of the Settlement and the final 50% (or $17.0 million (not in thousands)) is to be deposited on or before the one-year anniversary of the initial settlement payment. On May 23, 2025, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia granted preliminary approval of the Settlement. In accordance with the Settlement terms, the Company funded the first $17.0 million (not in thousands) installment into the Settlement Fund during the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2025. The Company intends to use available cash to pay the remaining Settlement Amount. While management has determined that loss in excess of the Settlement Amount is reasonably possible, it is currently unable to reasonably estimate the possible additional loss or range of possible additional loss because, among other reasons, (i) the settlement is subject to court approval and appeals processes, (ii) further developments in the legal proceedings, including but not limited to motions or rulings, could impact the Company’s exposure; and/or (iii) potential changes in law or precedent could affect the final determination of liability.

​

The Settlement remains subject to final court approval and will become effective following any appeals process, if applicable. The Settlement and any actions taken to carry out the Settlement are not an admission or concession of liability, or of the validity of any claim, defense, or point of fact or law on the part of any party. The Company continues to deny the material allegations of the complaints in the antitrust litigation. The Company entered into the Settlement after considering the risks and costs of continuing the litigation.

The Company continues to vigorously defend against the claims in the Canadian putative class action antitrust lawsuit Kevin McFall v. Canadian Real Estate Association, et al., Case No. T-119-24-ID 1 (Federal Court of Canada), filed on January 18, 2024. Management is currently unable to reasonably estimate the possible loss or range of possible loss for the Canadian antitrust litigation because, among other reasons, (i) the proceeding is in preliminary stages, (ii) specific damage amounts have not been sought, (iii) damages sought are, in our opinion, unsupported and/or exaggerated, (iv) there are significant factual issues to be resolved; and/or (v) there are novel legal issues or unsettled legal theories presented. For the Canadian antitrust litigation, we have not recorded any accruals as of December 31, 2025. While the Company does not expect such litigation to have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows or financial condition, due to the complexities inherent in such litigation, including the uncertainty of legal processes and potential developments in the cases, the ultimate liability may differ from current expectations.

Derivative Litigation

​

Certain current and former directors and officers of the Company were named as defendants, and the Company was named as a nominal defendant, in a derivative lawsuit in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, first filed on September 25, 2024, entitled Los Angeles City Employees’ Retirement System, on behalf of eXp World Holdings, Inc. v. Glenn Sanford, et al. (C.A. No. 2024-0998-KSJM). The lawsuit alleges that certain current and former directors and officers breached fiduciary duties related to the Company’s response to reports of alleged sexual misconduct involving independent contractor real estate agents affiliated with the Company’s subsidiaries and that certain defendants had improper compensation arrangements allowing them to profit from the Company’s revenue share program in connection therewith. The complaint seeks a court declaration of fiduciary duty breaches, disgorgement of profits, damages with interest, injunctive relief for improved oversight of sexual misconduct allegations, and reimbursement of plaintiffs’ costs, including expert and attorney fees. Although the Company does not anticipate that the outcome of such litigation will have a material adverse effect on its business, results of operations, cash flows, or financial condition, the inherent complexities and uncertainties of legal proceedings may result in a liability that differs from current expectations. Management is currently unable to reasonably estimate the possible loss or range of possible loss for this matter because, among other reasons, (i) the proceeding is progressing through preliminary stages, (ii) specific damage amounts have not been sought, (iii) there are significant factual issues to be resolved; and/or (iv) there are novel legal issues or unsettled legal theories presented.

​

Capital Maintenance Agreements

An indirect subsidiary and unconsolidated joint venture of the Company, SUCCESS^® Lending, is a party to Mortgage Warehouse Agreements and related ancillary agreements (the “Credit Agreements”) with JPMorgan Chase Bank and Texas Capital Bank, which each provide SUCCESS^® Lending with a revolving warehouse credit line of up to $25 million. It is customary for mortgage businesses like SUCCESS^® Lending to obtain warehouse credit lines in order to enable them to close and fund residential mortgage loans for subsequent sale to investors. SUCCESS^® Lending will use the borrowing capacity under the Credit Agreements exclusively for such purposes and borrowings will generally be repaid with the proceeds received from the sale of mortgage loans.

In connection with the Credit Agreements, the Company has entered into Capital Maintenance Agreements with each of JPMorgan Chase Bank and Texas Capital Bank whereby the Company agrees to provide certain funds necessary to ensure that SUCCESS^® Lending is at all times in compliance with its financial covenants under the Credit Agreements. The Company’s capital commitment

liability under the Capital Maintenance Agreement with JPMorgan Chase Bank is limited to $2.0 million. The Company’s capital commitment liability under the Capital Maintenance Agreement with Texas Capital Bank is limited to $1.25 million. The Credit Agreements represent off-balance sheet arrangements for the Company.