SOUTHERN COPPER CORP/ Commitments Disclosure

​

NOTE 13—COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES:

​

Environmental matters:

​

The Company has established comprehensive environmental conservation programs at its mining facilities in Peru and Mexico. The Company’s environmental programs include water recovery systems to conserve water and minimize the impact on nearby streams, reforestation programs to stabilize the surface of the tailings dams and the implementation of scrubbing technology in the mines to reduce dust emissions, among others.

​

Environmental capital investments in years 2025, 2024 and 2023 were as follows (in millions):

​

​

Peruvian operations: The Company’s operations are subject to applicable Peruvian environmental laws and regulations. The Peruvian government, through the Ministry of Environment (“MINAM”) conducts annual audits of the Company’s Peruvian mining and metallurgical operations. Through these environmental audits, matters relating to environmental and legal compliance, atmospheric emissions, effluent monitoring and waste management are reviewed. The Company believes that it is in material compliance with applicable Peruvian environmental laws and regulations. Peruvian law requires that companies in the mining industry provide assurances for future mine closure and remediation. In accordance with the requirements of this law, the Company’s closure plans were approved by MINEM. See Note 10 “Asset retirement obligation” for further discussion of this matter.

​

Air Quality Standards (“AQS”): In June 2017, MINAM enacted a supreme decree which defined new AQS for daily sulfur dioxide in the air. As of December 31, 2025, the Company maintains the daily average level of µg/m3 of SO2, which falls below the requirement of the AQS.

​

In November 2023, MINAM enacted a new AQS for Cadmium, Arsenic and Chromium in particulate matter less than ten microns (PM₁₀). A review of the Company´s chemical monitoring results has determined that the Company´s operations will not be significantly impacted by the new standards and concentration values in place. Our results are expected to continue to fall below regulatory AQS.

​

Soil Environmental Quality Standards (“SQS”): In 2013, the Peruvian government enacted Soil Quality Standards. In accordance with the regulatory requirements of the law, the Company prepared Soil Decontamination Plans (“SDP”) for environmentally impacted sites at each of its operation units (Toquepala, Cuajone and Ilo) with the assistance of consulting companies. The costs of these SDPs are not material, either individually or in aggregated form, for the financial statements of the Company.

​

Climate change: On April 17, 2018, the Peruvian government enacted Law N. 30754, which promotes public and private investments in climate change management and establishes a Climate Change Framework. The law proposes creating an institutional framework to address climate change in Peru and outlines new measures for climate change mitigation, such as provisions to address an increase in carbon capture and use of carbon sinks; afforestation and reforestation practices; land use changes; sustainable systems of transportation, solid waste management, and energy systems. This climate change framework law incorporates obligations from the Paris Agreement. Supreme Decree 013-2019 published on December 31, 2019, enacted statutory regulations, which are applicable to all Peruvian institutions and agencies. It is expected that additional Peruvian regulations will be applicable to non-governmental entities. However, no carbon pricing mechanism is currently applicable to the Company’s operations in Peru.

​

Mexican operations: The Company’s operations are subject to applicable Mexican federal, state and municipal environmental laws, to Mexican official standards, and to regulations for the protection of the environment, including regulations relating to water supply, water quality, air quality, noise levels and hazardous and solid waste.

​

The principal legislation applicable to the Company’s Mexican operations is the Federal General Law of Ecological Balance and Environmental Protection (the “General Law”), which is enforced by the Federal Bureau of Environmental Protection (“PROFEPA”). PROFEPA monitors compliance with environmental legislation and enforces Mexican environmental laws, regulations and official standards. It may also initiate administrative proceedings against companies that violate environmental laws, which in the most extreme cases may result in the temporary or permanent shutdown of non-complying facilities, the revocation of operating licenses and/or other sanctions or fines.

​

In 2011, the General Law was amended to provide an individual or entity the ability to contest administrative acts, including environmental authorizations, permits or concessions granted, without the need to demonstrate the actual existence of harm to the environment as long as it can be argued that the harm may be caused. Additionally, amendments to the Civil Federal Procedures Code (“CFPC”) were enacted in 2011 and established three categories of collective actions under which a group of 30 or more individuals can be considered sufficient to prove a “legitimate interest” to file civil actions for injuries arising out of alleged violations of environmental, consumer protection, financial services and Antitrust laws. The group can seek restitution or economic compensation for the alleged injuries or suspension of the activities which allegedly caused the injuries in question. The amendments to the CFPC may result in more litigation, with plaintiffs seeking remedies, including suspension of the activities alleged to cause harm.

​

In 2013, the Environmental Liability Federal Law was enacted. The law establishes general guidelines for actions considered likely to cause environmental harm. If a possible determination regarding harm occurs, environmental clean-up and remedial actions sufficient to restore the environment to a pre-existing condition must be taken. If restoration is not possible, compensation measures should be provided. Criminal penalties and monetary fines can be imposed under this law.

​

Guaymas sulfuric acid spill: In July 2019, there was an incident at the Company´s Marine Terminal in Guaymas, Sonora, that caused the discharge of approximately three cubic meters of sulfuric acid into the sea in the industrial port area. PROFEPA, after two inspections, declared a partial shutdown of the storage process and transportation of sulfuric acid at the terminal arguing the absence of an authorization of environmental impact, despite the fact that the Company’s exempt to the permit because these facilities have been in operation since 1979, prior to the 1988 Mexican General Law of Ecological Balance and the Protection of the Environment. The Company has resolved this issue and expects to restart operations in the future.

​

Climate change: Several taxes are applicable to the Company’s mining operations in Mexico, including federal and state fossil fuel taxes, and the requirements associated with Mexico’s emission trading scheme. These taxes range from $US9/tCO2 to $US18/tCO2 in 2023, approximately. These regional taxes are applicable in the States of Baja California, Zacatecas and San Luis Potosí, as well as a federal tax linked to the import of fuels. In addition, an emission trading scheme (ETS) in Mexico is currently available to the Company which is only applicable to two business units, the metallurgic and lime plants in Sonora, which both generate annual GHG emissions levels above the threshold of 100,000 tCO2 per year contemplated by the scheme. These two units are required to report and verify their emissions once a year with average costs of less than $6,000 per unit. Units that emit more than 25,000 tonnes CO2 equivalent per year (all our Mexican units) are required to report their emissions to the National Emissions Registry (RENE) annually and to verify the reported emissions every three years. Total expenses to ensure annual compliance with climate change regulations in Mexico are not material to the Company.

​

On May 9, 2023, Mexican Congress approved several changes effective immediately to the Mining Law, National Waters Law, the General Law of Ecological Balance and Environmental Protection, and the General Law for the Prevention and Integral Management of Waste. The main changes are reducing mining concession terms from 50 to 30 years; new restrictions and conditions on water use; requirements to provide guarantees for closure and remediation of operations; and a requirement to contribute 5% of net earnings to indigenous communities for new projects and significant changes to exploration rules.

​

These amendments to the law have been challenged and are being reviewed by the Supreme Court. The Company is not expecting any negative impacts on its operations.

​

The Company believes that all of its facilities in Peru and Mexico are in material compliance with environmental, mining and other applicable laws and regulations. The Company also believes that continued compliance with environmental laws of Mexico and Peru will have no material adverse effects on the Company’s business, properties, or operating results.

​

Litigation matters:

​

Peruvian operations:

​

Peruvian Labor Shares

​

In 1996, Edgardo García Ataucuri and other former employees filed a lawsuit against the Company seeking the delivery of “labor shares” (acciones laborales), which were issued by the Peruvian Branch pursuant to the legal requirements of a Peruvian Law issued in 1979 (which has since been repealed), which mandated that mining workers receive a 10% share of their employer enterprises’ pre-tax profits. This participation was distributed 40% in cash and 60% in equity interest in the enterprise. The Twenty-Second Civil Court of Lima ruled in favor of the plaintiffs and ordered the delivery of labor share certificates. The ruling was upheld by the Civil Chamber Court in 2000 and by the Supreme Court in 2009.

​

The proceedings are currently in the judgment execution stage. The Court ordered a registered lien on 10,501,857 “investment shares” (formerly referred to as “Labor Shares”) held by the Peruvian Branch and by its Peruvian affiliate, Compañía Minera Los Tolmos S.A. At this stage, the Civil Chamber Court annulled the expert report that underpinned the execution of the judgment and ordered a new appraisal report that must consider the investment share account, capital increases and contributions, and the current value of the total shares, setting a technical prerequisite before any physical delivery can occur.

​

On December 22, 2025, the Company learned through the Judicial Branch's online case file consultation system that the First Civil Court of Lima had issued Resolutions No. 739, 740, 742, and 743, which ordered the physical delivery of 8,488,383 investment shares held by Compañía Minera Los Tolmos and instructing the Securities and Settlement Registry (“CAVALI”) to register the ownership of the investment shares in favor of the plaintiffs. The rulings

determined that a labor share’s current value is equivalent to an investment share prior to the finalization of the appraisal ordered by the Civil Chamber Court, which is essential to determine the current value of the labor shares.

​

Consequently, on December 30, 2025, the Company filed appeals against these rulings, seeking an injunction to prevent a title transfer prior to the finalization of the expert appraisal report, and filed a lawsuit seeking constitutional protection challenging the Court’s interpretation of the value of the labor share. It is estimated that the Superior Court of Lima will rule on the appeals filed by the Company during 2026. At this time, the Company cannot predict the outcome of these appeals.

​

In relation to the writ of protection filed by the Company to challenge the interpretation adopted at the enforcement stage (i.e., the automatic assimilation between “labor shares” and “investment shares”), such action was resolved by a Ruling (Resolution No. 4) dated February 11, 2026, issued by the 9th Constitutional Court of Lima in Case No. 11956‑2025‑0‑1801‑JR‑DC‑09, which declared the claim well‑founded. Accordingly, the ruling declared the nullity of the resolutions issued in the civil enforcement proceedings: (i) Resolution No. 505 (September 23, 2015), (ii) Resolution No. 518 (October 23, 2015), and (iii) Resolution No. 08 (May 16, 2025), which ordered the attachment by registration over shares held by Compañia Minera Los Tolmos S.A. and the Peruvian Branch and served as the basis for the order to deliver investment shares. The Company requested the immediate enforcement of the first‑instance judgment, which was resolved by Resolution No. 01, notified on February 24, 2026, declaring the request well‑founded and ordering the First Civil Court to provisionally refrain from executing any acts of registration, transfer, or change of ownership based on the attachment ordered by Resolutions No. 505 and No. 518, as well as by Appellate Resolution No. 08.

​

The Tia Maria Mining Project

​

There are seven lawsuits filed against the Peruvian Branch of the Company related to the Tia Maria project. The lawsuits seek (i) to declare null and void the resolution that approved the Environmental Impact Assessment of the project; (ii) the cancellation of the project and the withdrawal of mining activities in the area; (iii) to annul the mining concession application for the Tia Maria project; (iv) to annul the resolution that approved the construction license; (v) to suspend construction work on the project; and (vi) to declare the expiration of the Environmental Impact Assessment. The lawsuits were filed by Messrs. Ernesto Mendoza Padilla (filed May 26, 2015), Juan Alberto Guillen Lopez (filed June 18, 2015), Junta de Usuarios del Valle del Tambo (filed April 30, 2015), Gobierno Regional de Arequipa (filed December 16, 2019), Municipalidad Distrital de Dean Valdivia (filed January 24, 2020), Cristhian Torres Quispe et al. (filed March 20, 2025) and Juan Miguel Meza Igme et al. (filed March 28, 2025).

​

It should be noted that the Supreme Court of Justice of Peru has already issued a final ruling on the Carpio Lazo case challenging the approval of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) of the Tía Maria project (notified on February 22, 2022), which ratified the legality of said Environmental Impact Assessment. The Judiciary recognized SPCC's strict compliance with all applicable environmental regulations during the approval stages of the Tía María EIA. This decision should have a favorable impact on the cases described below:

​

The Mendoza Padilla case was initially rejected by the lower court on July 8, 2015. This ruling was confirmed by the Superior Court on June 14, 2016. On July 12, 2016, the case was appealed before the Constitutional Court. On November 20, 2018, the Constitutional Court reversed the previous decisions and remanded the case to the lower court for further action. In the third quarter of 2020, the Company was notified that the complaint had been reinstated. The Company answered the complaint on September 15, 2020. On December 2, 2020, the lower court issued a resolution, considering the complaint answered. On September 27, 2021, the Court ordered to temporarily archive the case. As of December 31, 2025, the case remains pending resolution.

​

The Guillen Lopez case is currently before the lower court. Oral arguments took place on July 19, 2019. On January 7, 2020, the Judge decided to suspend the proceedings until the del Carpio Lazo case is concluded. On March 8, 2022, the Peruvian Branch informed the Court that the del Carpio Lazo case had concluded. On September 7, 2023, the Judge cancelled the suspension and declared the case ready for a resolution. On May 18, 2024, the Judge declared, once again, that the case was ready for resolution. As of December 31, 2025, the case remains pending resolution.

​

The Junta de Usuarios del Valle del Tambo case is currently before the lower court. In May 2016, the Company was included in the process after the Ministry of Energy and Mines filed a civil complaint. On March 6, 2019, the Company was formally notified of the lawsuit and answered the complaint on March 20, 2019. On July 8, 2019, the Company requested the suspension of the proceeding until the del Carpio Lazo case is concluded. On March 11, 2022, the Peruvian Branch informed the Court that the del Carpio Lazo case had concluded. On January 5, 2024, the Peruvian Branch reiterated its petition to continue the process given that a final decision has already been handed down in Carpio Lazo case. As of December 31, 2025, the case remains pending resolution.

​

The Gobierno Regional de Arequipa case is currently before the Superior court. The Company answered the complaint on September 15, 2020. On February 8, 2021, the Judge decided to suspend the proceeding until the del Carpio Lazo case was concluded. On March 24, 2022, SCC’s Peruvian Branch informed the Court that the del Carpio Lazo case had concluded. On March 28, 2022, the Judge cancelled the suspension. On May 24, 2022, the parties presented their closing arguments. On March 15, 2023, the Judge dismissed the lawsuit. The plaintiff missed the chance to appeal the ruling, therefore, the Judge declared the case had concluded in favor of the Peruvian Branch. On April 20, 2023 the plaintiff appealed this ruling. On October 20, 2023, the Superior Court declared that the plaintiff had not been properly informed of the ruling and ordered issuance of a new notification of the First Instance ruling. The Superior Court instructed the First Instance Court to inform the Gobierno Regional de Arequipa that it must establish a new address to ensure proper notification. On April 16, 2024, the Gobierno Regional de Arequipa filed an appeal against the first instance decision. The Superior Court notified the Company of the appeal, and the Peruvian Branch responded on June 10, 2024. On August 7, 2024, an oral hearing took place. On May 30, 2025, the Superior court vacated the ruling that dismissed the lawsuit and remanded for a new judgment. On January 23, 2026, the lower court ruled in favor of SPCC. The Company expects the other party to file an appeal. As of January 29, 2026, the case was pending resolution.

​

The Municipalidad Distrital de Dean Valdivia case is currently before the lower court. On August 17, 2022, the Company was formally notified of the lawsuit and answered the complaint on September 2, 2022. The Peruvian Branch informed the Court the result of the del Carpio Lazo case. As of December 31, 2025, the case is pending resolution.

​

The Torres Quispe case is currently before the lower court. On May 20, 2025, the Company was formally served with the lawsuit and filed and answered the complaint on June 2, 2025. On July 11, 2025, the Court ruled in favor of SPCC. The plaintiff filed an appeal. As of December 31, 2025, the case was pending resolution.

​

The Juan Miguel Meza Igme case is currently before the lower court. On August 28, 2025, SPCC was formally served with the lawsuit. On September 10, 2025, the Company answered the complaint. As of December 31, 2025, the case was pending resolution.

​

The Company asserts that these lawsuits are without merit and is vigorously defending against them. The potential contingency amount for these cases cannot be reasonably estimated by management at this time.

​

Special Regional Pasto Grande Project (“Pasto Grande Project”)

​

In 2012, the Pasto Grande Project, an entity of the Regional Government of Moquegua, filed a lawsuit against SCC’s Peruvian Branch alleging property rights over a certain area used by the Peruvian Branch and seeking the demolition of the tailings dam where SCC’s Peruvian Branch has deposited its tailings from the Toquepala and Cuajone operations since 1995. The Peruvian Branch has had title to use the area in question since 1960 and has constructed and operated the tailings dams with proper governmental authorization since 1995. Following a motion filed by the Peruvian Branch, the lower court included MINEM as a defendant in this lawsuit. MINEM has answered the complaint and denied the validity of the claim. On July 2, 2022, the case was temporarily archived. On May 26, 2023, the Judge ordered termination of the proceeding due to the lack of interest of the plaintiff. On June 2, 2023, the plaintiff appealed the termination of the proceeding. On September 18, 2023, the Superior Court reversed the termination and ordered the Judge to continue the proceeding. As of December 31, 2025, the case was pending resolution.

​

The Peruvian Branch asserts that the lawsuit is without merit and is vigorously defending against it. The amount of this contingency cannot be reasonably estimated by management at this time.

​

Mexican operations

​

The Accidental Spill at Buenavista Mine of 2014

​

Regarding the 2014 accidental spill of copper sulfate solution at a leaching pond in the Buenavista mine, the following legal procedures are pending against the Company:

​

On August 19, 2014, PROFEPA, as part of the administrative proceeding initiated after the spill, announced the filing of a criminal complaint against Buenavista del Cobre S.A. de C.V. (“BVC”), a subsidiary of the Company to determine those responsible for environmental damages. During the second quarter of 2018, the criminal complaint was dismissed. This decision was appealed and was pending resolution as of December 31, 2025.

​

On October 12, 2023, SEMARNAT publicly announced the filing of another criminal complaint regarding the Sonora River spill, arguing that remediation of damages to the river was incomplete and compensation for said damages was insufficient. The Company has been directed to provide information regarding remediation activities and compensation for damages. The Company strongly believes that it has duly completed all remediation and compensation-related activities as required by the competent Mexican authorities and as such, this new complaint lacks merit.

​

Through the first half of 2015, six collective action lawsuits were filed in federal courts in Mexico City and Sonora against two subsidiaries of the Company seeking economic compensation, clean up and remedial activities in order to restore the environment to its pre-existing conditions. Three of the collective action lawsuits have been dismissed by the court. The remaining three lawsuits are still pending: two were filed by Acciones Colectivas de Sinaloa, A.C. and one, by Defensa Colectiva, A.C.; requesting precautionary measures about construction of facilities for monitoring public health services and prohibiting the closure of the Rio Sonora Trust. As of December 31, 2025, these cases remain in the same stage.

​

Similarly, during 2015, eight civil action lawsuits were filed against BVC in the state courts of Sonora seeking damages for alleged injuries and for moral damages as a consequence of the spill. The plaintiffs in the state court lawsuits are: Jose Vicente Arriola Nunez et al; Santana Ruiz Molina et al; Andres Nogales Romero et al; Teodoro Javier Robles et al; Gildardo Vasquez Carvajal et al; Rafael Noriega Souffle et al; Grupo Banamichi Unido de Sonora El Dorado, S.C. de R.L. de C.V; and Marcelino Mercado Cruz. In 2016, three additional civil action lawsuits, claiming similar damages, were filed by Juan Melquicedec Lebaron; Blanca Lidia Valenzuela Rivera et al and Ramona Franco Quijada et al. In 2017, BVC was served with thirty-three additional civil action lawsuits, claiming similar damages. The lawsuits were filed by Francisco Javier Molina Peralta et al; Anacleto Cohen Machini et al; Francisco Rafael Alvarez Ruiz et al; Jose Alberto Martinez Bracamonte et al; Gloria del Carmen Ramirez Duarte et al; Flor Margarita Sabori et al; Blanca Esthela Ruiz Toledo et al; Julio Alfonso Corral Dominguez et al; Maria Eduwiges Bracamonte Villa et al; Francisca Marquez Dominguez et al; Jose Juan Romo Bravo et al; Jose Alfredo Garcia Leyva et al; Gloria Irma Dominguez Perez et al; Maria del Refugio Romero et al; Miguel Rivas Medina et al; Yolanda Valenzuela Garrobo et al; Maria Elena Garcia Leyva et al; Manuel Alfonso Ortiz Valenzuela et al; Francisco Alberto Arvayo Romero et al; Maria del Carmen Villanueva Lopez et al; Manuel Martin Garcia Salazar; Miguel Garcia Arguelles et al; Dora Elena Rodriguez Ochoa et al; Honora Eduwiges Ortiz Rodriguez et al; Francisco Jose Martinez Lopez et al; Maria Eduwiges Lopez Bustamante; Rodolfo Barron Villa et al, Jose Carlos Martinez Fernandez et al, Maria de los Angeles Fabela et al; Rafaela Edith Haro et al; Luz Mercedes Cruz et al; Juan Pedro Montaño et al; and Juana Irma Alday Villa. In the first quarter of 2018, BVC was served with another civil action lawsuit, claiming similar damages. The lawsuit was filed by Alma Angelina Del Cid Rivera et al. On October 3, 2024, BVC was served with another civil action lawsuit, claiming similar damages. The lawsuit was filed by María Lourdes Martínez Navarro et al. As of December 31, 2025, all these cases were pending resolution.

​

In 2015, four constitutional lawsuits (juicios de amparo) were filed before Federal Courts against various authorities and against a subsidiary of the Company, arguing; (i) the alleged lack of a waste management program approved by SEMARNAT; (ii) the alleged lack of a remediation plan approved by SEMARNAT with regard to the August 2014 spill; (iii) the alleged lack of community approval regarding the environmental impact authorizations granted by SEMARNAT to one subsidiary of the Company; and (iv) the alleged inactivity of the authorities with regard of the spill in August 2014. The plaintiffs of these lawsuits are: Francisca Garcia Enriquez, et al filed two lawsuits, Francisco Ramon Miranda,

et al and Jesus David Lopez Peralta et al. In the third quarter of 2016, four additional constitutional lawsuits, claiming similar damages were filed by Mario Alberto Salcido et al; Maria Elena Heredia Bustamante et al; Martin Eligio Ortiz Gamez et al; and Maria de los Angeles Enriquez Bacame et al. In the third quarter of 2017, BVC was served with another constitutional lawsuit filed by Francisca García Enriquez et al. In 2018, BVC was served with two additional constitutional lawsuits that were filed against SEMARNAT by Norberto Bustamante et al. With regard to the constitutional lawsuit filed by Maria Elena Heredia Bustamante et al; in which it was claimed the lack of community approval regarding the authorization granted by SEMARNAT to build the new BVC tailings dam, on September 5, 2018, the Supreme Court of Justice issued a resolution establishing that such authorization was granted to BVC in compliance with the applicable legislation. However, SEMARNAT must carry out a public meeting to inform the community of the technical aspects required to build the dam, potential impacts and prevention measures. This public meeting will have no material effects to BVC’s operations. SEMARNAT has carried out the consultation ordered by the Supreme Court. As a result, it has informed the corresponding Judge about its compliance with the resolution, in which BVC was required to implement additional measures of environmental impact prevention, such as: (i) the building of at least three monitoring wells downstream from the curtain of the contingency dam in a period of six months; (ii) monitoring of the groundwater level and water quality every six months; (iii) carrying out rain collection work in order to restore water to the Sonora River basin, with six months granted to present the execution program; (iv) determine the location of wildlife conservation and protection areas and define the need to establish biological corridors; (v) obtain photographic or videographic evidence every six months; (vi) submitting to SEMARNAT two years before the closure and abandonment of the site, or earlier if necessary, the closure program that includes the cleaning and restoration of the soil including Mexican regulation NOM-141; (vii) include the measures in the Environmental Monitoring Program according to the environmental components impacted; and (viii) hiring an external environmental consultant to validate compliance with the current and new conditions imposed. The foregoing does not impact BVC’s operations. Additionally, the lawsuits filed by Maria de los Angeles Enriquez Bacame and Norberto Bustamante have been dismissed and closed without prejudice to the Company. As of December 31, 2025, the remaining cases were pending resolution.

​

It is currently not possible to determine the extent of the damages sought in these state and federal lawsuits but the Company believes that these lawsuits are without merit. Accordingly, the Company is vigorously defending against them. Nevertheless, the Company believes that none of the legal proceedings resulting from the spill, individually or in the aggregate, would have a material effect on its financial position or results of operations.

​

Labor matters:

​

Peruvian operations: 50.8% of the Company's 5,432 Peruvian employees were unionized as of December 31, 2025. Currently, there are six separate unions, none of which represents the majority of workers, as defined by current Peruvian labor legislation.

​

In the fourth quarter of 2024, the Company signed long-term extensions of the collective bargaining agreements with five of its six unions, each lasting six years and commencing on the day after the expiration of the prior agreements, in accordance with the law. As a result of these agreements, the Company made a signing payment to each worker, totaling $62 million approximately.

​

In February 2025, the Company signed a three-year extension of the collective bargaining agreement with the remaining union. The Company made a signing payment to each worker of the union, totaling approximately $6.3 million. This allows the Company to ensure that economic benefits and working conditions are consistently applied to all unionized workers. Additionally, the Company reached agreements with the six unions to ensure uninterrupted operation of its facilities, preventing stoppages by the unions and workers during extension periods for collective bargaining.

​

In the second quarter of 2025, the Company began implementing the collective bargaining agreements with the six unions. Meetings have been held with the unions to coordinate the execution of the agreed provisions as well as additional agreements, ensuring that operations can develop normally until at least 2027.

​

The Company maintains regular dialogue with union representatives to ensure labor harmony and proper management of labor relations. SPCC Peru Branch has collective bargaining agreements with each of the six unions, the earliest of

which expires in 2027 and the latest, in 2033. These agreements regulate benefits related to compensation and working conditions.

​

Mexican operations: In recent years, the Mexican operations have experienced a positive improvement in their labor environment, as workers opted to change their affiliation from the Sindicato Nacional de Trabajadores Mineros, Metalurgicos y Similares de la Republica Mexicana (the “National Mining Union”) to other less politicized unions.

​

The workers of the San Martin mine were on strike since July 2007. On February 28, 2018, the striking workers of the San Martín mine of IMMSA held an election to vote on the union that would hold the collective bargaining agreement at the San Martin mine. The Federacion Nacional de Sindicatos Independientes (the National Federation of Independent Unions) won the vote by a majority. Nevertheless, the vote was challenged by the National Mining Union. On June 26, 2018, the Federal Mediation and Arbitration Board issued a ruling recognizing the election results. Due to the agreement between workers and the Company to end the protracted strike, on August 22, 2018, the Federal Mediation and Arbitration Board authorized the restart of operations of the San Martin mine. Such authorization was challenged by the National Mining Union. On April 4, 2019, the Federal Mediation and Arbitration Board recognized, once again, the election results from February 28, 2018, by which the National Federation of Independent Unions won by a majority. In the last quarter of 2019, a Federal Court issued a resolution that established that the Labor Court should analyze the list of workers with the right to vote in the union election. The Company and the National Federation of Independent Unions challenged such determination before the Supreme Court of Justice. Such challenges were dismissed by the Supreme Court. Consequently, on September 6, 2021, the Federal Mediation and Arbitration Board issued a new resolution determining that, based on the documents submitted by the National Federation of Independent Unions and given the status of the strike until 2018, it was not possible to create a registry of workers holding a right to vote. Therefore, in case of a strike, any collective bargaining proceedings shall remain suspended. On June 9, 2023, the Federal Mediation and Arbitration Board, in a ruling that veered from its previous stance, did not recognize the common representatives of the coalition workers and consequently ruled that the agreement which such representatives had made with the Company to lift the strike in 2018 lacked validity. Notwithstanding, on June 14, 2023, in an arbitration proceeding initiated at IMMSA's request, the Federal Mediation and Arbitration Board handed down a ruling that terminated the strike and ordered workers to resume activities within 15 days. The Mining Union filed a protective action (Amparo) against this resolution, which was pending resolution as of December 31, 2025.

​

Additionally, the Mining Union has filed a complaint before the Government of the United States of America under the rules of the Rapid Response Mechanism contained in the Mexico-United States-Canada Treaty (“T-MEC”), alleging denial of free association rights. On April 26, 2024, the arbitration panel of the Labor Rapid Response Mechanism ruled in favor of the Government of Mexico, determining that they did not have jurisdiction to rule on the denial of union rights at the mine. The Company collaborated by providing background information on the case and followed up every stage of the arbitration.

​

The Company´s operations at the San Martin unit continue to evolve normally and the conflict is expected to be resolved in accordance with the legal framework set by labor authorities; any actions taken will respect the will of the workers.

In the case of the Taxco mine, its workers have been on strike since July 2007. After several legal procedures, in August 2015, the Supreme Court decided to assert jurisdiction over the case and to rule on it directly. As of December 31, 2025, the case was pending resolution without further developments.

​

It is expected that operations at the Taxco mine will remain suspended until the labor issues are resolved. In view of the lengthy strike, the Company has reviewed the carrying value of the Taxco mine to ascertain whether impairment exists. The Company concluded that there is a non-material impairment of the assets located at this mine.

​

Other legal matters:

​

The Company is involved in various other legal proceedings incidental to its operations, but the Company does not believe that decisions adverse to it in any such proceedings, individually or in the aggregate, would have a material effect on its financial position or results of operations.

​

Other commitments:

​

Peruvian Operations:

​

Michiquillay:

​

In June 2018, the Company signed a contract for the acquisition of the Michiquillay copper project in Cajamarca, Peru, at a purchase price of $400 million. Michiquillay is a world-class mining project with estimated inferred mineral resources of 2,288 million tonnes with an estimated copper grade of 0.43%. It is expected to produce 225,000 tonnes of copper per year (along with by-products of molybdenum, gold and silver) for an initial mine life of more than 25 years.

​

In 2021, the Company signed social agreements with the Michiquillay and La Encañada communities. In addition, in October 2021, the Peruvian Ministry of Energy and Mines approved the semi-detailed environmental impact study for the project. In the last quarter of 2022, the Company informed MINEM that exploration activities had begun and that it initiated an in-depth assessment of existing mineral resources. In 2023, in accordance with the social agreements with the Michiquillay and La Encañada communities, the Company has hired unskilled labor and is paying for the use of surface land. The Company is supporting social programs in both communities. Additionally, the Company will use the geological information employed to estimate of the project’s mineral resources to estimate mineral reserves and develop the corresponding mine plan. Hydrological, hydrogeological, and geotechnical studies, which will provide data for feasibility studies, are ongoing.

​

Social agreements with the Michiquillay and La Encañada communities represent an opportunity to improve quality of life for their residents through the Company´s strong social programs, backed by a solid framework for technical work at the project level. The main commitments signed by the Company regarding the social agreements are related to providing support for agricultural and livestock activities, financial support for local initiatives, and social programs in favor of education, water management, waste disposal, and healthcare for vulnerable groups.

​

As per the purchase agreement, the Company paid $12.5 million at the signing of the contract and $12.5 million in June 2021. The remaining balance of $375.0 million will be paid if the Company decides to develop the project. Therefore, it is not a present obligation. In June 2022, the Company notified the Peruvian authorities of the end of the suspension period and the start of the preoperational period that lasts 12 years, but can be automatically extended for three more years, provided that the Feasibility Study of the project has been approved. The start of the preoperational period does not imply a payment obligation, but the Company must support an investment of $20 million during the first five years of this period, which includes exploration activities as well as the development of social programs.

​

In April 2025, considering the challenges of the development of the Michiquillay Project, the Company entered into an agreement with the Peruvian authorities to extend the preoperational period by three additional years, without prejudice of the Company’s right to extend it for three more years, as initially established in the Contract. This extension also deferred by three years the payment term to pay the $375.0 million outstanding balance of the purchase price. The Company was required to pay $21.0 million cash consideration for this extension and commit an additional $15 million in social investments between the fourth and sixth years of the preoperational period.

​

Corporate Social Responsibility:

​

The Company has a corporate social responsibility policy to maintain and promote the continuity of its mining operations while obtaining the best results. The main objective of this policy is to integrate the Company´s operations with local communities in the areas of influence of its operations by creating permanent positive relationships to develop optimum social conditions and promote sustainable development in the area. Accordingly, the Company has made the following commitments:

​

Tacna Region: In connection with the Toquepala concentrator expansion, the Company has committed to fund various social and infrastructure improvement projects in Toquepala’s neighboring communities. The total amount committed for these purposes is S/445.0 million (approximately $132.1 million as of December 31, 2025). In relation to this commitment, the Company has completed the construction of a school with an investment of S/18.8 million

(approximately $5.6 million as of December 31, 2025) and agricultural infrastructure projects and studies with an investment of S/112.4 million (approximately $33.4 million as of December 31, 2025). Among the most important projects are the construction of the Cularjahuira dam for S/15.6 million (approximately $4.6 million as of December 31, 2025) and the engineering study for the Callazas dam for S/2.6 million (approximately $0.8 million as of December 31, 2025). Aditionally, the Company has committed S/60.4 million ($17.9 million as of December 31, 2025) to basic infrastructure projects, including a drinking water project for S/9.6 million (approximately $2.9 million as of December 31, 2024).

​

As the Toquepala expansion project was completed, the Company considers that these commitments constitute present obligations of the Company and consequently has recorded a liability of $30.3 million in its consolidated financial statements as of December 31, 2025.

​

In addition, the Company has allocated S/102.1 million (approximately $30.3 million as of December 31, 2025) for the construction of a high-achievement school, and has allocated S/ 81.9 million (approximately $24.3 million as of December 31, 2025) for four infrastructure projects in the Tacna region under the “Works for Taxes” (obras por impuestos) program, which allows the Company to use these amounts as an advance payment of taxes.

​

Moquegua Region: In the Moquegua region, the Company participates in a “development roundtable” with local municipal authorities and community representatives to discuss social needs to determine how the Company can contribute to sustainable development in the region. Although the development roundtable is not currently meeting, during previous sessions it discussed the possibility of creating a Moquegua Region Development Fund, for which the Company has offered a contribution of S/1,000 million (approximately $296.9 million as of December 31, 2025). While the final funding agreement has yet to be signed, the Company has already committed to contributing S/256.9 million (approximately $76.3 million as of December 31, 2025) to different projects, including S/108.8 million (approximately $32.3 million as of December 31, 2025) to fund an educational project for which S/108.4 million (approximately $32.2 million as of December 31, 2025) has already been invested; this project already has approved resolutions from the provinces of Ilo and Sánchez Cerro. Additionally, construction of the water treatment plant in Ilo continues, which entails a total investment of S/105.5 million (approximately $31.3 million as of December 31, 2025). As of December 31, 2025, the project had advanced 64%. On the education front, S/18.2 million (approximately $5.4 million as of December 31, 2025) has been executed to build three schools in Moquegua, all of which have been completed, and S/3.4 million (approximately $1.0 million as of December 31, 2025) has been committed for two additional schools. On the agricultural front, S/6.9 million (approximately $2.0 million as of December 31, 2025) has been invested to develop two infrastructure projects.

​

In addition, the Company has allocated S/229 million (approximately $68.0 million as of December 31, 2025) to build four educational infrastructure projects and one basic sanitation project, and has allocated S/3.9 million (approximately $1.2 million as of December 31, 2025) to conduct pre-investment studies in the Moquegua region, all of that under the “Works for Taxes” (obras por impuestos) program, which allows the Company to use these amounts as an advance payment of taxes.

​

Apurimac Region: The Company has allocated S/84.7 million (approximately $25.1 million as of December 31, 2025) to build two educational infrastructure projects and S/38.0 million (approximately $11.3 million as of December 31, 2025) to build one health infrastructure project, all of that under the “Works for Taxes” (obras por impuestos) program, which allows the Company to use these amounts as an advance payment of taxes.

​

Arequipa Region: The Company has allocated S/168.2 million (approximately $49.9 million as of December 31, 2025) to build three educational infrastructure projects and S/6.3 million (approximately $1.9 million as of December 31, 2025) to finance previous studies for infrastructure projects, under the “Works for Taxes” (obras por impuestos) program, which allows the Company to use these amounts as an advance payment of taxes.

​

Cajamarca Region: The Company has allocated S/0.7 million (approximately $0.2 million as of December 31, 2025) to finance the pre-investment studies of a health project under the “Works for Taxes” (obras por impuestos) program, which allows the Company to use these amounts as an advance payment of taxes.

​

Power purchase agreements:

​

​

​

Mexican operations

​

Solidarity contribution for social and development programs in Sonora, Mexico:

​

In January 2026, the Board of Directors of SCC approved a voluntary and solidarity contribution of up to 1.5 billion Mexican pesos (approximately $87 million) with the aim of strengthening and supporting government plans and programs for the economic progress and wellbeing of the population of the state of Sonora, Mexico, to be made through Minera Mexico and its subsidiaries. In accordance with this, on February 9, 2026, the Company contributed 500 million Mexican pesos (approximately $29 million) to the Mexican Institute of Social Security in Sonora, Mexico.

​

Power purchase agreements:

​

​

​

​

Corporate operations

​

Commitment for Capital projects:

​

As of December 31, 2025, the Company has committed approximately $1,310.5 million for the development of its capital investment projects.

​

Tax contingency matters:

​

Tax contingencies are provided for under ASC 740-10-50-15 Uncertain tax position (see Note 7 “Income taxes”).