Trump Media & Technology Group Corp. Commitments Disclosure

NOTE 16 - COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

We are involved in various legal proceedings arising in the normal course of business. Although the outcomes of these legal proceedings are inherently difficult to predict, management does not expect the resolution of these legal proceedings to have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.

We have entered into, indemnity agreements with our executive officers and certain members of our Board. These indemnity agreements broadly provide for us to advance expenses (including attorneys’ fees) incurred in connection with any legal proceeding, as well as indemnification for all expenses incurred, in connection with the investigation, defense, settlement or appeal of such a proceeding, in connection with matters related to their position. These indemnity agreements provide that the indemnitee shall repay all amounts advanced if it shall ultimately be determined that the indemnitee is not entitled to be indemnified.

On February 29, 2024, ARC filed a lawsuit in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware (C.A. No. 2024-0186-LWW) against Digital World and its directors, alleging an impending violation of the Digital World Charter. ARC alleged that Digital World failed to commit to issue conversion shares to ARC that ARC claims it is owed upon the consummation of the Initial Business Combination pursuant to the Charter. ARC claimed a conversion ratio of 1.81:1 and sought specific performance and damages for the alleged breach of the Charter, a declaratory judgment that the certain derivative securities of Digital World should be included in the calculation of the conversion ratio, a finding that the directors of Digital World breached their fiduciary duties, and a preliminary injunction to enjoin the Initial Business Combination until Digital World “corrected” the conversion ratio. TMTG defended Digital World’s calculation of the conversion ratio and related rights. In addition to its complaint, ARC also filed a motion with the Court of Chancery requesting that the case schedule be expedited to enable the Court of Chancery to conduct an injunction hearing prior to the March 22, 2024, shareholder vote. On March 5, 2024, the Court of Chancery denied ARC’s motion, stating that it would not conduct a merits or injunction hearing before March 22, 2024. Consequently, the Court of Chancery also denied ARC’s request to postpone the Initial Business Combination vote until after a merits hearing. The Court of Chancery ruled that Digital World’s proposal to deposit disputed shares into an escrow account at the close of the Initial Business Combination was adequate to prevent potential irreparable harm related to ARC’s share conversion. The Court of Chancery also found that Digital World’s public disclosures about ARC’s claims and possible conversion scenarios at the close of the Initial Business Combination further mitigated the risk of irreparable harm due to insufficient disclosure for the March 22, 2024 vote. As a result, on March 21, 2024, Digital World entered into two escrow agreements with Odyssey, as follows: (i) an escrow agreement for the benefit of ARC (the “ARC Escrow Agreement”), pursuant to which DWAC deposited into escrow 3,579,480 shares of TMTG shares of common stock (“Common Stock”), and (ii) an escrow agreement for the benefit of the Non-ARC Class B Shareholders (the “Non-ARC Class B Shareholders Escrow Agreement,” and together with the ARC Escrow Agreement, the “Disputed Shares Escrow Agreements”), pursuant to which TMTG deposited into escrow 1,087,553 shares of TMTG Common Stock, which amounts represent the difference between the actual conversion ratio, determined by Digital World’s board of directors upon closing of the Initial Business Combination (which was determined to be 1.348:1), and a conversion ratio of 2.00:1. On September 16, 2024, the Court of Chancery issued its order in this matter setting the conversion ratio at 1.4911:1. The Court of Chancery ruled against ARC on a substantial majority of its claims, reducing ARC’s proposed calculation of the conversion ratio of 1.81:1 by approximately 70% and holding that the former board members of Digital World did not breach any fiduciary duties in setting the conversion ratio calculation or in their public disclosures of the same. As a result of the Court of Chancery’s order, a portion of the disputed shares of Common Stock held in escrow were released to ARC. The release of Common Stock is subject to the terms and conditions of the ARC Escrow Agreement with the Escrow Agent and TMTG. Accordingly, 785,825 shares of TMTG Common Stock, which represents the Court’s calculation for the difference between a ratio of 1.348:1 and 1.4911:1, were released from escrow (the “Court Ratio”). Both parties still retain the option to file an appeal within 30 days after the Court of Chancery’s final order. In connection with the Court of Chancery’s final order, 238,692 Common Shares deposited in the Non-ARC Class B Shareholders Escrow Agreement, representing the Court Ratio, were released to the applicable holders, subject to the terms and conditions of the Non-ARC Class B Shareholders Escrow Agreement and the Securities Act of 1933, as amended. On October 23, 2024, ARC filed a motion for a $1,000,000 fee award. On July 14, 2025, the Court adjusted the fee award downward, awarding ARC $75,000—less than 10% of the amount initially sought. On August 25, 2025, the Court entered a final order and judgment. On September 10, 2025, ARC filed an appeal to the Delaware Supreme Court (No. 375, 2025). On September 23, 2025, Digital World filed a cross-appeal. On February 11, 2026, the Delaware Supreme Court heard oral argument as to both the appeal and cross appeal.

On March 15, 2024, Plaintiff Patrick Orlando brought a lawsuit against Digital World in the Court of Chancery seeking advancement of legal fees associated with Mr. Orlando’s involvement in civil litigation against Digital World in Florida and certain other matters (the “Advancement Lawsuit”) (C.A. No. 2024-0264-CDW). Mr. Orlando’s allegations relate to certain provisions in the Digital World Charter, Digital World’s bylaws, and an indemnity agreement allegedly entered into between Mr. Orlando and Digital World. Mr. Orlando alleges that those certain provisions require Digital World to pay the legal fees Mr. Orlando incurred and will incur in connection with legal proceedings in which he is involved by reason of the fact that he is or was a director or officer of Digital World. Mr. Orlando seeks a court order that (i) declares that he is entitled to legal fees for certain proceedings described in the complaint, (ii) requires Digital World to pay for legal fees incurred and future legal fees to be incurred for those proceedings, (iii) requires Digital World to pay the fees incurred to bring the Advancement Lawsuit, and (iv) requires Digital World to pay pre- and post-judgment interest on the amounts owed to Mr. Orlando. On April 3, 2024, the Court of Chancery entered a Stipulation and Advancement Order (“Stipulation”) stating that Mr. Orlando is entitled to advancement of attorneys’ fees and costs incurred with legal proceedings described in the Stipulation, subject to Digital World’s right to challenge the reasonableness of those attorneys’ fees and costs. The Stipulation further states that Mr. Orlando is entitled to fees incurred in connection with enforcement of advancement rights and sets forth procedures that will govern future requests for advancement of attorneys’ fees and costs. As of February 23, 2026, TMTG had paid or agreed to pay approximately $22 million to Mr. Orlando’s attorneys pursuant to such Stipulation and TMTG’s other advancement obligations to Mr. Orlando. On April 23, 2024, Mr. Orlando filed a motion for leave to supplement the Advancement Lawsuit to add a claim for advancement of legal fees and expenses Mr. Orlando had incurred and would incur in connection with his defense of an action for declaratory judgment brought by members of ARC regarding Mr. Orlando’s removal as the managing member of ARC (the “ARC Removal Action”). Mr. Orlando also sought reimbursement for the legal fees and expenses incurred in connection with his supplement to the Advancement Lawsuit, and he sought pre-judgment and post-judgment interest on the amounts he claimed were owed to him. On August 1, 2024, plaintiffs in the ARC Removal Action dismissed their complaint without prejudice. On August 8, 2024, Mr. Orlando dismissed his supplemental claims in the Advancement Lawsuit without prejudice.

On December 31, 2025, Mr. Orlando filed another motion seeking advancement of certain disputed fees, which is fully briefed.

Litigation with ARC in the Third Circuit

On November 26, 2025, Odyssey filed a notice in the Third Circuit Court of Appeals (C.A. No. 25-cv-03324) seeking review of the District of Delaware’s October 23 Order dismissing the District Court action (C.A. No. 24-cv-00729).