TKO Group Holdings, Inc. Commitments Disclosure

21. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

The Company enters into long-term commercial partnership arrangements and other executory contracts in the ordinary course of business. Accordingly, as of December 31, 2025, the Company has no material unconditional purchase obligations required to be disclosed in accordance with ASC 440, Commitments.

The Company’s future commitments related to its debt obligations and its operating and finance leases are separately disclosed in Note 8, Debt, and Note 20, Leases, respectively.

Legal Proceedings

The Company is involved in legal proceedings, claims and governmental investigations arising in the normal course of business. The types of allegations that arise in connection with such legal proceedings vary in nature, but can include, among others, contract, employment, tax and intellectual property matters. The Company evaluates all cases and records liabilities for losses from legal proceedings when the Company determines that it is probable that the outcome will be unfavorable and the amount, or potential range, of loss can be reasonably estimated. While any outcome related to litigation or such governmental proceedings cannot be predicted with certainty, management believes that the outcome of these matters, except as otherwise may be discussed below, individually or in the aggregate, will not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

UFC Legal Proceedings

Five related class-action lawsuits were filed against Zuffa between December 2014 and March 2015 by a total of eleven former UFC fighters. The lawsuits, which were substantially identical, were transferred to the United States District Court for the District of Nevada and consolidated into a single action in June 2015, captioned Le et al. v. Zuffa, LLC, No. 2:15-cv-1045-RFB-BNW (D. Nev.) (the “Le” case). The lawsuit alleged that Zuffa violated Section 2 of the Sherman Act by monopsonizing an alleged market for the services of elite professional MMA athletes. The fighter plaintiffs claimed that Zuffa’s alleged conduct injured them by artificially depressing the compensation they received for their services. The plaintiffs sought treble damages under the antitrust laws, as well as attorneys’ fees and costs, and, in some instances, injunctive relief. On August 9, 2023, the district court certified the lawsuit as a damages class action, encompassing the period from December 16, 2010 to June 30, 2017. The fighter plaintiffs in the Le case abandoned their claim for injunctive relief, so the only relief the fighter plaintiffs would have sought at trial was damages. On September 26, 2024, following the court’s denial of an earlier proposed settlement agreement, the Company reached an agreement with the plaintiffs to settle all claims asserted in the Le case for an aggregate amount of $375.0 million payable in installments over an agreed-upon period of time by the Company (the “Updated Settlement Agreement”). The terms of the Updated Settlement Agreement were preliminarily approved by the district court on October 22, 2024. The Updated Settlement Agreement was granted final approval by the district court on February 6, 2025. In connection with the Updated Settlement Agreement, the Company recorded charges of $375.0 million during the year ended December 31, 2024, which are included as a component of selling, general and administrative expenses in the consolidated statements of operations. The Company paid $125.0 million of the aggregate $375.0 million settlement amount into escrow in late October 2024, shortly following receipt of preliminary approval, and another $125.0 million into escrow in February 2025 shortly following receipt of final approval, in accordance with the terms of the Updated Settlement Agreement. The Company made the third and final payment covering the remaining $125.0 million in June 2025. The Company anticipates that the settlement amount will be deductible for tax purposes.

On June 24, 2021, another lawsuit, Johnson et al. v. Zuffa, LLC et al., No. 2:21-cv-1189-RFB-BNW (D. Nev.) (the “Johnson” case), was filed by a putative class of former UFC fighters and covering the period from July 1, 2017, to the present. The Johnson case alleges substantially similar claims to the Le case and seeks injunctive relief. No trial date has been set in the Johnson action and the

parties are in the midst of the discovery process.

On May 23, 2025, Cirkunovs v. Zuffa, LLC et al., No. 2:25-cv-00914-RFB-BNW (D. Nev.) (the “Cirkunovs” case), was filed by a putative class of former UFC fighters who signed contracts with arbitration clauses and class action waiver agreements during the period July 1, 2017, to the present. The complaint in Cirkunovs contains nearly identical allegations to Johnson and further alleges that the arbitration clauses and class action waivers contained in the fighters’ contracts are unenforceable. The Cirkunovs complaint seeks injunctive relief invalidating these arbitration clauses and class action waivers, as well as treble damages under the antitrust laws and attorneys’ fees and costs. Zuffa filed a motion to compel arbitration, and the Court has allowed Plaintiffs to seek discovery regarding the arbitration clause before ruling on Zuffa’s motion. No trial date has been set in the Cirkunovs action.

On May 29, 2025, a similar complaint was filed by a current Professional Fighters League fighter named Phil Davis. Davis v. Zuffa, LLC et al., No. 2:25-cv-00946-RFB-BNW (D. Nev.) (the “Davis” case). The Davis complaint also asserts nearly identical allegations as in Johnson and Cirkunovs, except Davis seeks to represent a class of fighters who competed in U.S.-bouts for non-UFC promotions from May 29, 2021, onward, excluding all currently contracted UFC fighters, as well as the Johnson and Cirkunovs class members. The Davis case alleges UFC’s alleged anticompetitive conduct impairs the ability of non-UFC fighters to advance their careers and artificially suppresses non-UFC fighter pay. The Davis case does not seek monetary damages and instead seeks injunctive relief. No trial date has been set in the Davis action, and discovery has not yet begun. Zuffa has filed a motion to dismiss which argues, among other things, that Davis’ claims are released because of his prior affiliation with UFC and his membership in a class of fighters who have settled and released the same claims against Zuffa as those raised in Davis. While no official order has been entered, the district court has indicated its intention to deny Zuffa’s motion to dismiss Davis.

WWE Legal Proceedings

As announced in June 2022, a Special Committee of independent members of WWE’s board of directors (the “Special Committee”) was formed to investigate alleged misconduct by WWE’s then-Chief Executive Officer, Vincent K. McMahon (the “Special Committee investigation”). Mr. McMahon initially resigned from all positions held with WWE on July 22, 2022 but remained a stockholder with a controlling interest and served as Executive Chairman of WWE’s board of directors from January 9, 2023 through September 12, 2023, at which time Mr. McMahon became Executive Chair of the Company's board of directors. Although the Special Committee investigation is complete and, in January 2024, Mr. McMahon resigned from his position as Executive Chair and member of the Company's board of directors, as well as other positions, employment and otherwise, at TKO and its subsidiaries, WWE has received, and may receive in the future, regulatory, investigative and enforcement inquiries, subpoenas, demands, claims and/or complaints arising from, related to, or in connection with these matters. On July 17, 2023, federal law enforcement agents executed a search warrant and served a federal grand jury subpoena on Mr. McMahon. On January 10, 2025, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission settled charges against Mr. McMahon for failing to disclose certain settlement agreements to WWE’s board of directors, legal department, accountants, financial reporting personnel, or auditor, and in so doing, circumventing WWE’s system of internal accounting controls and causing material misstatements in WWE’s 2018 and 2021 financial statements. No charges have been brought against the Company.

On January 25, 2024, a former WWE employee filed a lawsuit against WWE, Mr. McMahon and another former WWE executive, John Laurinaitis, in the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut alleging, among other things, that she was sexually assaulted by Mr. McMahon and Mr. Laurinaitis and asserting claims under the Trafficking Victims Protection Act. On May 30, 2025, Mr. Laurinaitis was dismissed from the matter with prejudice pursuant to a stipulation of dismissal. WWE has moved to compel the matter to arbitration.

On October 23, 2024, five unnamed plaintiffs filed a lawsuit against Mr. McMahon, Linda McMahon, WWE, and TKO in Maryland court, alleging sexual abuse by a former World Wrestling Federation ring announcer during the 1980s. On April 28, 2025, plaintiffs filed an amended complaint adding three unnamed plaintiffs, but no new defendants. Defendants WWE and TKO, as well as Mr. McMahon and Linda McMahon, each moved to dismiss all claims on June 11, 2025. On December 10, 2025, the court dismissed the claims asserted by one of the unnamed plaintiffs (and certain other claims asserted against Ms. McMahon) but otherwise denied the motions to dismiss.

On November 17, 2023, a purported former stockholder of WWE, Laborers’ District Council and Contractors’ Pension Fund of Ohio (“Laborers”), filed a verified class action complaint on behalf of itself and similarly situated former WWE stockholders in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware (“Delaware Court”), captioned Laborers District Council and Contractors’ Pension Fund of Ohio v. McMahon, C.A. No. 2023-1166-JTL (“Laborers Action”). On November 20, 2023, another purported former WWE stockholder, Dennis Palkon, filed a verified class action complaint on behalf of himself and similarly situated former WWE stockholders in the Delaware Court, captioned Palkon v. McMahon, C.A. No. 2023-1175-JTL (“Palkon Action”). The Laborers and Palkon Actions allege breach of fiduciary duty claims against former WWE directors Mr. McMahon, Nick Khan, Paul Levesque, George A. Barrios, Steve Koonin, Michelle D. Wilson, and Frank A. Riddick III (collectively, the “Individual Defendants”), arising out of the TKO Transactions. On April 24, 2024, the City of Pontiac Reestablished General Employees’ Retirement System (“Pontiac”), a purported former stockholder of WWE, filed another verified class action complaint on behalf of itself and similarly situated former WWE stockholders in the Delaware Court captioned City of Pontiac Reestablished General Employees’ Retirement System v. McMahon, C.A.

No. 2024-0432 (“Pontiac Action”). The Pontiac Action similarly alleges breach of fiduciary duty claims against the Individual Defendants and added claims against WWE and TKO for denying stockholders their appraisal rights under DGCL § 262, as well as claims against EGH for aiding and abetting the alleged breaches of fiduciary duties and for civil conspiracy to violate DGCL § 262. On May 2, 2024, the Court entered an order consolidating the Laborers, Palkon and Pontiac Actions under the caption In re World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc. Merger Litigation, C.A. No. 2023-1166-JTL (“Consolidated Action”). On August 8, 2024, the Delaware Court appointed the Laborers and Palkon plaintiffs as co-lead plaintiffs, and the co-lead plaintiffs subsequently designated the Palkon complaint as operative. As a result, WWE, TKO and EGH are no longer defendants. On October 24, 2024, the Delaware Court entered a stipulation dismissing all claims against Messrs. Koonin and Riddick, who, therefore, are no longer defendants. The remaining Individual Defendants filed answers to the complaint on October 28, 2024 and fact discovery closed on December 19, 2025. Trial is scheduled for June 2026.

IMG Legal Proceedings

As set forth in the Endeavor Asset Acquisition Agreement and pursuant to other agreements between the Company and Endeavor Group Holdings, Inc., Endeavor Group Holdings, Inc. is obligated to indemnify the Company for, and pay directly, any judgment entered against IMG or settlement entered into with respect to IMG, including with respect to claims or actions brought by other parties, in each case, to the extent related to the proceedings described below.

In July 2017, the Italian Competition Authority (“ICA”) issued a decision opening an investigation into alleged breaches of competition law in Italy, involving inter alia IMG, and relating to bidding for certain media rights of the Serie A and Serie B football leagues. In April 2018, the European Commission conducted on-site inspections at a number of companies that are involved with sports media rights, including IMG. The inspections were part of an ongoing investigation into the sector and into potential violations of certain antitrust laws that may have taken place within it. IMG investigated these ICA matters, as well as other regulatory compliance matters. In May 2019, the ICA completed its investigation and fined IMG approximately EUR 0.3 million. As part of its decision, the ICA acknowledged IMG's cooperation and ongoing compliance efforts since the investigation commenced. In July 2019, three football clubs (the “Original Plaintiffs”) and in June 2020, the Serie A football league (Lega Nazionale Professionisti Serie A or “Lega Nazionale,” and together with the Original Plaintiffs, the “Plaintiffs”) each filed separate claims against IMG and certain other unrelated parties in the Court of Milan, Italy, alleging that IMG engaged in anti-competitive practices with regard to bidding for certain media rights of the Serie A and Serie B football leagues. The Plaintiffs seek damages from all defendants deriving from the lower value of the media rights in amounts totaling EUR 554.6 million in the aggregate relating to the Original Plaintiffs and EUR 1,750 million relating to Lega Nazionale, along with attorneys’ fees and costs. Since December 2020, four additional clubs have each filed requests to intervene in the Lega Nazionale proceedings and individually seek to claim damages deriving from the lower value of the media rights in amounts in the aggregate totaling EUR 251.5 million. The Original Plaintiffs and these four additional clubs are also seeking additional damages relating to alleged lost profits and additional charges, quantified in the fourth quarter of 2022 in amounts totaling EUR 1,675 million. Ten other clubs also filed requests to intervene in support of Lega Nazionale’s claim or alternatively to individually claim damages deriving from the lower value of the media rights in the amount of EUR 284.9 million, in the case of five clubs, and unspecified amounts (to be quantified as a percentage of the total amount sought by Lega Nazionale) in the other five cases. Collectively, the interventions of these 14 clubs are the “Interventions.” By judgment issued on May 8, 2024, the Court of Milan ruled that the clubs have a concurrent right to bring a claim, and Lega Nazionale is entitled to retain only 10% of the aggregate loss suffered (if any) by the clubs deriving from the lower value of the media rights. IMG reserved the right to appeal the partial ruling. In December 2022, one further football club filed a separate claim against IMG and certain other unrelated parties seeking damages from all defendants deriving from the lower value of the media rights in the amount of EUR 326.9 million, in addition to alleged additional damages relating to lost profits and additional charges which the club, with defensive brief on May 13, 2024, quantified in amounts totaling EUR 513.5 million. On December 3, 2024, this latter lawsuit was consolidated with the one brought by the Plaintiffs. During April to June 2025, two additional clubs intervened in the proceedings in support of Lega Nazionale’s claims. Such clubs did not bring new claims but only supported those of the Lega Nazionale. In July 2025, a third-party purchased the claim of one of the intervening clubs in support of Lega Nazionale and intervened into the proceedings. This third-party purchaser has merely taken over an existing claim. During December 2025 to January 2026, two additional clubs intervened in the proceedings in support of Lega Nazionale’s claims. Such clubs request alternatively to individually claim damages deriving from the lower value of the media rights in the amount of EUR 277.8 million. Currently, the total number of Interventions amounts to 18 clubs. IMG has defended in its submissions to date, and intends to continue to defend, against all of the damages claims, Interventions and any related claims, and management believes that IMG has meritorious defenses to these claims, including the absence of actual damage. In the event of a negative outcome of the case, any amount awarded to the Lega Nazionale or the clubs (as plaintiffs or intervening clubs) will also need to account for accrued interest and reimbursement of legal costs. IMG may also be subject to regulatory and other claims and actions with respect to these ICA and other regulatory matters.