Gewone algemene vergadering van aandeelhouders van 22 mei 2025 om 10.00 uur

NOTULEN

Het jaar 2025 op 22 mei om 10.00 uur, te 2000 Antwerpen, De Gerlachekaai 20, is de Gewone Algemene Vergadering van aandeelhouders van CMB.TECH NV (de "Vennootschap") bijeengekomen onder het voorzitterschap van de heer Patrick De Brabandere.

De Voorzitter merkt op dat, overeenkomstig het toepasselijk recht, het Nederlands de officiële werktaal is voor de vergadering. De Voorzitter stelt echter dat sommige delen in het Engels kunnen zijn, aangezien bepaalde schriftelijke vragen in het Engels werden ingediend bij de Vennootschap voorafgaand aan de vergadering. Indien een aanwezige aandeelhouder niet begrijpt wat er wordt gezegd, kan hij de secretaris verzoeken de onbegrepen delen te vertalen. De vergadering wordt niet opgenomen.

De Voorzitter merkt verder op dat de aandeelhouders zich vanaf 22 april 2025 ook online konden registreren via het Lumi Connect platform, waarop zij (i) hun aanwezigheid konden doorgeven, (ii) vooraf konden stemmen of (iii) een volmacht konden geven. De aandeelhouders die geen volmacht hebben gegeven of die niet vooraf per brief hebben gestemd, krijgen de mogelijkheid om tijdens de vergadering elektronisch te stemmen.

Mevrouw Kathleen Denoodt neemt de functie van secretaris waar.

De vergadering duidt de heer Geert Asselman en Frank Geerts aan als stemopnemers.

Naast het bureau zijn volgende leden van de Directieraad aanwezig: de heer Alexander Saverys (CEO, als vaste vertegenwoordiger van Hof ter Polder BV), de heer Ludovic Saverys (CFO, als vaste vertegenwoordiger van Succavest NV). BDO Bedrijfsrevisoren, vast vertegenwoordigd door mevrouw Veerle Catry, commissaris van de Vennootschap, is ook aanwezig op de vergadering.

De door de wet voorgeschreven oproepingsberichten werden in de volgende dagbladen gepubliceerd op 22 april 2025:

De Tijd
het Belgisch Staatsblad

De aandeelhouders op naam, de bestuurders en de commissaris werden ook per gewone brief opgeroepen op 22 april 2025.

Bovendien werden (i) de oproeping tot de algemene vergadering van aandeelhouders, (ii) een deelnemingsformulier voor aandeelhouders, (iii) een volmachtformulier, (iv) een formulier om te stemmen per brief, (v) een toelichting over de deelname aan de vergadering en (vi) de aan de gewone algemene vergadering voor te leggen stukken zoals voorzien in de agenda ter beschikking gesteld aan de aandeelhouders op de zetel en op de website van de Vennootschap. Daarnaast konden de aandeelhouders zich vanaf 22 april 2025 ook online registreren via het Lumi Connect platform, waarop zij (i) hun aanwezigheid konden doorgeven, (ii) vooraf konden stemmen of (iii) een volmacht konden geven.

Worden bij het bureau gedeponeerd, teneinde door de stemopnemers te worden nagezien:

de bewijsexemplaren van de dagbladen waarin de oproepingsberichten tot deze vergadering werden gepubliceerd;
een exemplaar van de oproepingsbrief die gericht werd aan de aandeelhouders op naam, de leden van de Raad van Toezicht en de commissaris;
de bewijzen van registratie van de aandelen van de aandeelhouders die wensen deel te nemen aan de algemene vergadering;
de volmachten, de stembrieven, en de aanwezigheidsformulieren;
de aanwezigheidslijst, met inbegrip van het register dat de identiteit en het adres van elke aandeelhouder bevat die te kennen heeft gegeven dat hij wenst deel te nemen aan de vergadering, het aantal op de registratiedatum geregistreerde aandelen alsook de stukken die een dergelijke registratie aantonen. Voor nadere informatie wordt naar de privacy statement op de website van de Vennootschap verwezen.

De secretaris verzoekt de stemopnemers deze documenten te willen paraferen.

Het register der aandeelhouders op naam is eveneens te hunner beschikking.

De Voorzitter stelt vast dat, volgens de aanwezigheidslijst, voor de gewone algemene vergadering, 23 aandeelhouders die in totaal 179.772.420 aandelen bezitten, aanwezig of vertegenwoordigd zijn.

Een aantal personen zoals bijvoorbeeld personeelsleden van de Vennootschap en derden die door de Vennootschap zijn ingeschakeld om diensten te leveren in het kader van de vergadering zoals externe adviseurs van de Vennootschap, alsook leden van de pers en personeelsleden en adviseurs van aandeelhouders zijn ook aanwezig op de vergadering zonder de toelatingsformaliteiten vervuld te hebben, alsook de gerechtsdeurwaarder Jan Wouters. De vergadering wordt eraan herinnerd dat deze personen niet kunnen deelnemen aan de beraadslaging en de stemming op deze vergadering. Deze personen hebben ook de aanwezigheidslijst ondertekend. Deze personen worden toegelaten tot de vergadering. De aanwezige aandeelhouders hebben geen bezwaar gemaakt tegen de aanwezigheid van voormelde personen.

De vergadering erkent de juistheid van voorgaande uiteenzetting, erkent zich eenparig als zijnde geldig opgeroepen en samengesteld en bekwaam om te beraadslagen, en beslist om de behandeling van de agenda van de algemene vergadering aan te vatten, als volgt:

1 Jaarverslag van de raad van toezicht en de commissaris over het boekjaar afgesloten op 31 december 2024
2 Kennisname en goedkeuring van het remuneratieverslag
3 Goedkeuring van de jaarrekening van de Vennootschap van het boekjaar afgesloten op 31 december 2024
4 Bestemming van het resultaat van het boekjaar afgesloten op 31 december 2024
5 Kwijting (ontheffing van aansprakelijkheid), bij aparte stemming, aan de leden van de raad van toezicht en de commissaris voor de uitoefening van hun mandaat tijdens het boekjaar 2024
6 Bijzondere kwijting (ontheffing van aansprakelijkheid), bij aparte stemming, aan de leden van de raad van toezicht met betrekking tot de datum van de gewone algemene vergadering
7 Einde mandaat en herbenoeming van mevrouw Julie De Nul als lid van de raad van toezicht
8 Ontslag van de heer Patrick Molis als onafhankelijk lid van de raad van toezicht
9 Benoeming van Compagnie Nationale de Navigation S.A.S., vast vertegenwoordigd door de heer Patrick Molis, tot onafhankelijk lid van de raad van toezicht
10 Bezoldiging van de leden van de raad van toezicht
11 Bezoldiging van de commissaris
12 Volmacht Kruispuntbank van Ondernemingen, ondernemingsloket, griffies van de Ondernemingsrechtbank, administraties en fiscale diensten

De schriftelijke vragen worden ingeleid door de secretaris van de Vennootschap om 10:15 uur.

De secretaris vermeldt dat de Raad van Toezicht alleen vragen kan beantwoorden over de agendapunten die tijdens deze vergadering worden besproken, en de documenten openbaar gemaakt in verband met deze vergadering. Persoonlijke dossiers, toespraken of stellingen zijn niet aan de orde tijdens deze sessie. De Vennootschap kan daarnaast ook weigeren om een vraag te beantwoorden indien dit aan de Vennootschap schade kan berokkenen of als de Vennootschap onderhevig is aan confidentialiteitsbeperkingen.

Aandeelhouder Jean-Marc Van Nypelseer vraagt het woord in de Franse taal. Hij meldt dat hij is ingeschreven voor de algemene vergadering, dat hij een badge heeft, maar niet op de aanwezigheidslijst staat. Zijn aanwezigheidsformulier werd niet overgemaakt door zijn bank.

Alexander Saverys, CEO, neemt verder het woord. De vennootschap heeft opnieuw een groot aantal vragen gekregen van FourWorld Global Opportunities Fund. Zoals bekendgemaakt door de vennootschap, heeft dit fonds een procedure aangespannen tegen de vennootschap en CMB NV. In het kader van deze procedure zoekt FourWorld naar onregelmatigheden bij de oplossing van de deadlock binnen de vennootschap zoals aangekondigd in oktober 2023 en de aankoop van CMB.TECH Enterprises in februari 2024, in de hoop daar geld uit te kunnen slaan.

De Raad van Toezicht herinnert eraan dat het vraagrecht van aandeelhouders niet onbegrensd is en niet mag worden misbruikt. Het vraagrecht mag niet van zijn eigenlijke doel worden afgewend, bijvoorbeeld om informatie te verzamelen in het kader van een hangend geschil.

De Raad van Toezicht interpreteert minstens een deel van de vragen van FourWorld als dergelijke pogingen tot informatievergaring om diens vorderingen te kunnen onderbouwen, waar vooralsnog geen bewijs van werd voorgelegd. Deze vragen lijken niet gesteld te zijn met het oog op het nemen van een geïnformeerde beslissing door deze vergadering met betrekking tot de punten op de agenda, des te meer nu een aantal van die vragen gericht zijn op transacties die reeds het voorwerp uitmaakten van eerdere algemene vergaderingen in 2023 en in 2024 en toen reeds uitvoerig beantwoord werden.

Daarnaast worden een aantal vragen voorafgegaan door insinuaties die lijken te kaderen in de door FourWorld opgestarte procedure. Het is niet de bedoeling om deze procedure in het forum van deze vergadering te voeren. Daarom zal de Raad van Toezicht zich beperken tot het beantwoorden van effectieve vragen, voor zover deze voldoen aan het wettelijk kader zoals eerder uiteengezet. De vennootschap betwist deze insinuaties integraal en behoudt zich in dit verband alle rechten voor, inclusief met betrekking tot een eventueel misbruik van het vraagrecht door FourWorld.

Alexander Saverys en Ludovic Saverys, CFO, gaan over tot de voorlezing en beantwoording van deze vragen. Vragen die in het Engels werden gesteld, worden in het Engels beantwoord:

1. The financial statements of the acquiring company record a significant adjustment of approximately \$800 million to retained earnings in connection with the acquisition of CMB.Tech for €1.15 billion. While we understand that IFRS 3 does not apply in such cases, and that book value accounting may be used, we note that nearly half of Euronav's c. € 2bn equity value has been written off as a result of this transaction in 2024. Given the materiality of this adjustment, could management please explain in detail the reasons for which it believes that a company with recently acquired assets worth 350 m\$ (whose value should not significantly depart from their original acquisition price) could be worth €1.15bn shortly after their acquisition? Has the net asset value of CMB.Tech not been a valuation criteria considered in the Degroof fairness opinion and has management questioned the complete disconnect between the price paid by Euronav for the CMB.Tech and the price paid by CMB.Tech for its assets shortly before the transaction?

De CEO antwoordde als volgt: Under IFRS an acquirer in a common control transaction can use either of the following in its consolidated financial statements:

• book value (carry-over basis) accounting on the basis that the investment has simply been moved from one part of the group to another; or

• IFRS 3 accounting on the basis that the acquirer is a separate entity in its own right and should not be confused with the economic group as a whole.

In this case the company has opted to apply book value accounting in its IFRS consolidated financial statements. In applying book value accounting, an adjustment is required in equity to reflect any difference between the consideration paid and the capital of the acquiree. This may be presented as a merger reserve or in retained earnings. In this instance it was decided to recognise the difference in retained earnings. Degroof Petercam confirmed that the price paid for CMB.TECH Enterprises was fair to the company's shareholders. This conclusion was based both on the DCF analysis and the NAV as valuation method. The equity value midpoint of both valuation methods (US\$ 1,302 billion and US\$ 1,327billion dollars respectively) considerably exceeds the acquisition price. The fairness opinion of Degroof Petercam is available on the company's website.

De raadsman van FourWorld Global Opportunities Fund onderbreekt Ludovic Saverys, CFO, bij het voorlezen van de volgende vraag. Hij stelt dat deze boekhoudkundige vraag belangrijk genoeg is om een tussenkomst te rechtvaardigen. Hij wijst erop dat volgens de financiële verslagen van voorgaande jaren Euronav als algemeen beleid de verwervingsprijs hanteert en niet de boekwaarde. Volgens hem werd ook dit jaar dit beleid bevestigd voor alle dochterondernemingen en acquisities. Hij merkt op dat voor CMB.TECH een uitzondering werd gemaakt zonder toelichting, terwijl CMB.TECH een afzonderlijke vennootschap is die voor 1,15 miljard dollar werd overgenomen, terwijl deze een jaar eerder zou zijn gewaardeerd op 700 miljoen dollar. De raadsman vraagt om uitleg over deze afwijking van het algemene beleid.

De CFO, Ludovic Saverys, antwoordde dat de toegepaste boekwaarde geen verband houdt met de actuele waarde van de entiteit en dat dit verschil essentieel is voor de beoordeling van de transactie. Hij benadrukt verder dat er geen onwettige uitzondering werd gemaakt op het boekhoudkundige beleid.

2. More generally, in the interest of transparency and good corporate governance, why did the company not provide a more detailed disclosure on a transaction that had such a profound impact on its equity position?

De CEO antwoordde als volgt: The company has been very forthcoming on the details of this transaction:

the company has published the share purchase agreement, the advice by the independent directors, the fairness opinion of Degroof Petercam and a detailed slide-deck with supporting information on its website;
the transaction was presented to shareholders and analysts during a fourhour Capital Markets Day, where all participants had the chance to ask questions;

Commented [A1]: Argo: gelieve volgende paragraaf nog te willen afstemmen met Ludovic.

• during the Special General Meeting of 7 February 2024 and again during the Annual General Meeting of 16 May 2024, questions of shareholders – including in particular from FourWorld – were answered in great detail. The answers to these questions were subsequently made available on the company's website.

De raadsman van Fourworld Global Opportunities Fund onderbreekt Alexander Saverys, CEO en zegt dat deze informatie fout is en niet eerder werd bekendgemaakt. Hij vraagt een persbericht of uittreksel van de minuten voor te leggen. De CFO antwoordt dat de boekhoudkundige behandeling transparant werd opgenomen in het jaarverslag.

3. Was there any challenge by the auditors regarding the information they received regarding the write-down and did they express any reservations in their closing procedures, and/or request any statement by management in the audit representation letter?

De CEO antwoordde als volgt: No.

De raadsman van Fourworld Global Opportunities Fund vraagt aan de commissaris om dit te bevestigen. Veerle Catry, bedrijfsrevisor van BDO, commissaris, bevestigt.

4. Did the purchase of CMB.TECH Enterprises in 2024 take place in the framework of a formal process with competing bidders? Was there a formal prospectus or similar document put together or provided for the acquisition of CMB.TECH? If so, did the document explain the assets of CMB.TECH? And did it explain specifically which added-value for Euronav from the acquisition?

De CEO antwoordde als volgt: No. Prospectus requirements do not apply to this transaction.

CMB had invested approximately USD300m in CMB.TECH Enterprises between 2020 and 2024 when it was acquired for over USD1.15bn by Euronav. How do you explain this value gap, or put otherwise, the exceptional return on investment for CMB? Is CMB.TECH likely to enjoy a similar ROI of almost 200% in the future? If not, why has this ROI in the negotiation process, if there was any, been fully attributed to seller CMB while the adjustment mentioned before shows that this will not result from tangible assets but from the monetization of unrealized gains (cash flows provided by yet unbuild vessels)? Can you mention other transactions of a new build portfolio this size, where the unrealized gain component could be fully realized?

De CEO antwoordde als volgt: The evolution of CMB.TECH Enterprises over recent years has been thoroughly discussed at the Capital Markets Day of 12 January 2024 and the Special General meeting of 7 February 2024. All of the materials presented at these meetings are available on the company's website.

6. If the acquisition of CMB.TECH Enterprises (formerly: CMB.Tech) by Euronav was annulled as a result of judicial proceedings what could be the impact on CMB.TECH's (formerly: EURONAV) operations and share value? Have you conducted this analysis in 2024 when these judicial proceedings were launched, end/or when drafting the yearly report and accounts? If so, why did you not include any contingency provisions?

De CEO antwoordde als volgt: We do not answer hypothetical questions, in particular where the probability of the scenario is deemed very low. Moreover, in addition to being factually and legally incorrect, the claims of FourWorld are very vague and at certain points simply legally impossible. Given the ambiguity of these claims and the very low probability of a negative outcome for the company, no provisions were made. The auditor agreed with this approach.

7. Why do CMB.TECH press releases consistently lack financial or strategic detail that would help investors assess the materiality of developments? Is there a deliberate policy to avoid directional language on profitability and impact on cash flow? For example in recent announcements (Fortescue charter or MOL partnership) there no indication of financial impact, strategic benefit, or performance benchmarks (e.g., pricing vs. conventional vessels, KPIs, or environmental gains)?

De CEO antwoordde als volgt: CMB.TECH provides plenty of information through its press releases, earnings conference calls, annual reports, general meetings and Capital Markets Days. If specific numbers are occasionally omitted, this is for confidentiality purposes.

8. In case full disclosure is not possible due to commercial sensitivity, why does CMB.TECH not provide ranges, relative metrics, or directional indicators to help guide investor expectations without revealing competitive details?

De CEO antwoordde als volgt: Reference is made to the answer to the preceding question.

9. Patrick Molis has a longstanding relationship with both CMB and Euronav (now CMB.TECH). How can he be considered 'independent' and able to act in the interest of all shareholders?

De CEO antwoordde als volgt: Mr. Molis satisfies the applicable independence standards established by the SEC and the NYSE and qualifies as an independent director under the Belgian corporate governance legislation.

10. Patrick Molis has recently been installed by CMB-Tech as a director at Golden Ocean after it announced its intention to merge with the company. How do you explain this contradiction regarding the independence requirements?

De CEO antwoordde als volgt: Mr. Molis was appointed as non-independent director of Golden Ocean before the announcement of the term sheet for the merger. This is not in contradiction with any of the independence requirements.

11.In the current agenda it is proposed that Patrick Molis will be discharged as an Independent Board Member. Instead Compagnie Nationale de Navigation S.A.S. permanently represented by Mr. Patrick Molis, will be elected as an Independent Board Member. To what extent does this result in a reduction of personal liability on the side of Mr Molis? Could you justify the change?

De CEO antwoordde als volgt: Pursuant to the Belgian Companies Code, the natural person acting as permanent representative is jointly and severally liable with the legal person exercising the mandate. Consequently, there is no change for Mr.  Molis in terms of directors' liability.

12.On 22 November 2023 it was announced that Grace Reksten Skaugen, John Fredriksen, Cato Stonex and Ole Henrik Bjørge resigned from Euronav's Supervisory Board which was ratified at the February 7, 2024 Special Shareholders' Meeting of Euronav. To replace them, the remaining board members Julie De Nul, Patrick De Brabandere and Marc Saverys co-opted Patrick Molis, Catharina Scheers and Bjarte Bøe to the board, a decision taken "upon recommendation of the Corporate Governance & Nomination Committee", which decision was ratified at the same February 7, 2024 SGM. Can you clarify when exactly in 2023 the Corporate Governance & Nomination Committee made its recommendation to co-opt the three directors to the board: specifically, whether this occurred before or after the resignation of Grace Reksten Skaugen and Cato Stonex from the committee?

De CEO antwoordde als volgt: The Corporate Governance & Nomination Committee made its recommendation on 15 November 2023. At that time, the committee was composed of Ms. Reksten Skaugen, Mr. Bjørge, Ms. De Nul, Mr. De Brabandere and Mr. Stonex.

13.If it happened after, how does the company justify the validity of the recommendation given that the Corporate Governance & Nomination Committee then would have consisted of only two remaining nonindependent directors, contrary to the Belgian Corporate Governance Code's requirement of a majority of independent members?

De CEO antwoordde als volgt: This question is no longer applicable given the answer to the preceding question.

14.What was the rationale for paying a significant premium (compared to list price) for the Hemen Holding stake in Golden Ocean? Was a fairness opinion or external valuation obtained to justify the price?

De CEO antwoordde als volgt: The price paid for the Hemen Holding stake was a negotiated price in line with the value buyer and seller agreed for the company. This happened to be higher than the stock price at the time of the announcement of the transaction, which is nothing unusual. No fairness opinion was required for this transaction.

15.Were other acquisition targets or opportunities considered that might have achieved similar strategic aims without such high premium? Has an assessment and comparison of those targets or opportunities been asked to an expert like EURONAV did in 2022 between the FRONTLINE and EURONAV opportunities?

De CEO antwoordde als volgt: CMB.TECH constantly looks at various opportunities and weighs different options in line with its strategy. Where the company deems this relevant, external advisors are engaged to assess these opportunities. This was the case for the Golden Ocean transaction.

16.To what extent was the premium influenced by the relationship with the seller, and how did the Supervisory Board manage any potential conflicts of interest?
De CEO antwoordde als volgt: None. There was no conflict of interest.
17.A TradeWinds article from 5 March 2025 ("Dry was never John's favourite': What has turned Fredriksen from buyer to seller?") quoted sources close to John Fredriksen saying: "The Golden Ocean buy was on the table last year for the Saverys clan during the Belgian company's buyout of Euronav." Could you confirm whether the Golden Ocean sale was ever discussed with John Fredriksen, especially by any member of the Supervisory Board, around the same time that Euronav sold 24 vessels to Frontline and settled the arbitration claim for zero compensation (meaning in the period of time extending from the negotiation of these transactions in 2023 to their confirmation and execution in 2024)?

De CEO antwoordde als volgt: No discussions about Golden Ocean took place during the Frontline-Euronav deadlock.

18.Can you explain the methodology used to evaluate the Golden Ocean assets? Was this based on NAV, discounted cash flow, or comparable transaction analysis? Which assumptions were used to project future returns from Golden Ocean assets and how sensitive are they to market volatility? Can you explain the differences in methodology, if any, with the valuation of the 24 VLCC fleet when sold to FRONTLINE (in 2023 with execution in 2024 and 2025), and the purchase of CMB.Tech Enterprises in 2024?

De CEO antwoordde als volgt: The methodology was based on favorable supply/demand parameters, historical share price, analyst recommendations and NAV. For further information, reference is made to our Capital Markets Days of 24 and 29 April 2025 and the materials presented at these meetings, which are available on the company's website.

The acquisition of a 40% stake in a publicly listed dry bulk shipping company such as Golden Ocean is fundamentally different from the sale of 24 tankers or the purchase of 100% of the shares in a diversified private company such as CMB.TECH Enterprises. However, in terms of valuation of vessels, the methodology is essentially the same: NAV based on fair market value of the vessels as assessed by independent shipping brokers.

19.How does the acquired stake enhance or diversify CMB.TECH's current portfolio in terms of risk, return, and emissions targets?

De CEO antwoordde als volgt: This has been thoroughly discussed at the Capital Markets Days of 24 and 29 April 2025. The materials presented at these meetings are available on the company's website.

20.Why did the company not use Lazard for the fairness opinion given their prior involvement, which not only would have provided background knowledge but also reduction of the cost (since Lazard would only have had to update its prior analysis)?

De CEO antwoordde als volgt: We understand that this question refers to the acquisition of CMB.TECH Enterprises in 2024. The independent members of the Supervisory Board appointed Degroof Petercam as independent expert in their sole discretion.

Degroof Petercam is a reputable advisor and has a vast past experience in fairness opinion assignments as outlined in appendix B of its report as well as significant past experience in valuation assignments as outlined in appendix C of its report. The targets of the aforementioned assignments include amongst others targets in the (marine) shipping industry.

The question overstates the prior involvement and background knowledge of Lazard in relation to the CMB.TECH Enterprises acquisition. In January 2022 Lazard had only made a report with preliminary views on CMB.TECH Enterprises which according to Lazard itself required further analysis to fully grasp the proposed valuation. Moreover, if any meaningful valuation had already been made, such valuation of a fast-growing company would in any event have been completely outdated given the evolution of CMB.TECH Enterprises over recent years, as previously discussed.

21.The fairness opinion provided by Degroof Petercam valued CMB.TECH at \$1.15bn. This valuation was considerably higher than Lazard's prior assessment of approximately \$700m plus earn-out. Several of the objections and concerns raised by financial advisors, Lazard, and the Supervisory Board of Euronav concerning a previous CMB.TECH valuation were not considered by Degroof Petercam in its fairness opinion. There are indications that Degroof Petercam may have relied significantly on CMB's internal assumptions without conducting an independent forensic examination of the assets. The valuation appears to be favourable to the seller, CMB, and disadvantageous to Euronav, the buyer. Please can you address our concerns about the independence of the report and validity of its findings? Did the board compare both valuations? Why didn't the Supervisory Board (and/or its members supposed to be independent) request an additional report from Degroof Petercam in a view to explaining the discrepancy between both valuations, and specifically address the objections and concerns raised by Lazard? Wasn't it in the corporate interest of the company to find and justify arguments in a view to lowering the purchase price?

De CEO antwoordde als volgt: This question is speculative and relies entirely on FourWorld's unsupported assumption that Degroof Petercam would not have delivered an independent fairness opinion. The company strongly disagrees with such assumption. There are no "indications" that the fairness opinion of Degroof Petercam is not independent nor that it was disadvantageous to the buyer. FourWorld has not provided any supporting evidence for these allegations.

Reference is made to the answer to the preceding question regarding the lack of relevance of Lazard's 2022 preliminary views for Degroof Petercam's 2024 fairness opinion.

Finally, note that Degroof Petercam actually valued CMB.TECH considerably higher than US\$ 1.15bn, with an equity value midpoint of US\$ 1,302m for DCF and US\$ 1,327m for NAV. The company thus effectively managed to obtain a lower purchase price than the valuation presented by the independent expert.

22.Before the sale of CMB.TECH Enterprises (ex-CMB.TECH) to Euronav, there was significant crossover in the staff at CMB and CMB.TECH. Can you with which CMB.TECH employees or managers were in charge of providing data and feedback to Degroof Petercam? Were any of them employed by CMB or it's subsidiaries before, in any capacity?

De CEO antwoordde als volgt: As previously indicated, Degroof Petercam was appointed by the independent members of the Supervisory Board. These independent members, together with members of Euronav's management team with no connection to CMB, instructed and followed up with Degroof Petercam during its assignment. In its role as independent financial expert, Degroof Petercam also requested data from the seller directly in a manner customary for a buy-side due diligence process.

23.Are you aware that there are recorded instances of fairness opinions provided by Degroof Petercam, where the latter was found in situation of conflict on interest by courts in Belgium and the Netherlands?

De CEO antwoordde als volgt: To the benefit of the general meeting, the company notes that FourWorld also alleges in its proceedings before the Antwerp Enterprise Court that fairness opinions of Degroof Petercam have been called into question in the Netherlands and in Belgium. FourWorld has made these allegations without further references or proof. It is also unclear in what way these unsupported accusations are relevant for Degroof Petercam's fairness opinion of CMB.TECH Enterprises.

De raadsman van Fourworld Global Opportunities Fund onderbreekt de CEO en vraagt waarom de Raad van Toezicht, bij het aanhalen van Degroof Petercam in de context van de algemene vergadering, verwijst naar diens goede reputatie, aangezien er informatie beschikbaar is – onder andere gepubliceerd op Nederlandse websites – waaruit blijkt dat Degroof Petercam in bepaalde gevallen schuldig werd bevonden aan schendingen van onafhankelijkheid en belangenconflicten. De vraag werd gesteld of de Raad van Toezicht voldoende onderzoek heeft gedaan naar de reputatie van Degroof Petercam in het kader van deze belangrijke transactie.

De CEO merkt op dat hij deze vraag reeds heeft beantwoord in de drie voorgaande vragen en stelt voor om verder te gaan naar de volgende vraag.

De raadsman van Fourworld Global Opportunities Fund onderbreekt opnieuw en vraagt waarom de Supervisory Board bij het rapport van Degroof Petercam geen vragen heeft gesteld over de zorgen die Lazard in zijn eerder rapport had geuit.

De CEO geeft aan dat de raadsman in wezen dezelfde vraag blijft stellen, zij het in andere bewoordingen. Hij benadrukt dat deze kwestie reeds in de drie voorgaande vragen is behandeld.

24.Did the company consider the suitability of Degroof Petercam for providing a fairness opinion given Ludwig Criel, the former chairman of Degroof Petercam's board, was previously the CFO of CMB and is currently a CMB Director and Chairman of the Executive Committee? Don't you think having recourse to Lazard in such circumstances would not only have been more efficient and cheaper (given its prior involvement in 2022 on the same topic), but would also have given more guarantees of true independence for the company and its minority shareholders?

De CEO antwoordde als volgt: Mr. Criel has not been a board member of Degroof Petercam since 2021, nearly three years before the fairness opinion. To the benefit of the general meeting, FourWorld also made this allegation before the U.S. District Court in 2024, which denied its claim in full.

As mentioned in the answers to previous questions, there were no reasons for the company to believe that the involvement of Lazard would have been "more efficient and cheaper", nor that Degroof Petercam would not have been independent.

25.Why was a different methodology used for valuing the CMB.TECH fleet during its sale to Euronav than was applied to the sale of Euronav's fleet to Frontline, both happening almost simultaneously? Would it again, not have been more consistent to have recourse to Lazard for consistency purposes?

De CEO antwoordde als volgt: As indicated earlier, while the sale of 24 tankers fundamentally differs from the purchase of 100% of the shares in a diversified company, in terms of valuation of vessels, the same methodology was used.

26.FourWorld Capital Management has taken legal action for the unwinding of CMB's mandatory takeover, Euronav's \$2.35bn fleet sale to Frontline and Euronav's decision to renounce and settle its arbitration claim against Frontline. Why has CMB.TECH not disclosed the legal action by FourWorld Capital Management scheduled to appear before the Antwerp Enterprise Court in May 2026, to which CMB.Tech (formerly Euronav) is party to? Why has the company not made contingency provisions in such respect? Doesn't the board think this impact would be material? How could the board be so confident, given the decision of the Markets' Court of Brussels which already determines that the legal organs of the company were unlawfully sidelined?

De CEO antwoordde als volgt: The company has disclosed this, including in its annual report, 20-F and press releases. In its press release of 8 April 2024, the company already stated that FourWorld's requests are without merit. The company still holds that opinion, in particular after the Brussels' Market Court largely rejected FourWorld's allegations. Hence, no provisions were taken and the auditor has not requested the company to do so.

27.While CMB has disclosed a legal challenge by FourWorld Capital Management, it has not disclosed the full extent of the financial risk for the investors in CMB.TECH. A loss in the proceedings could jeopardize the solvency of CMB.Tech's majority shareholder. Which contingency provisions has CMB-Tech made to cover this risk?

De CEO antwoordde als volgt: Reference is made to the answer to the preceding question.

28.CMB.TECH is an amalgamation of marine assets and tankers such as stainless steel, bitumen, crude oil tankers, container ships, dry bulk, and offshore wind vessels. Where does management see the synergies in having a diversified asset base? We have seen several businesses focusing on one core strategy over the last few years, Maersk being a prime example. Capital markets tend to assign higher values to companies with one line of marine assets. Is this something you consider when assessing the discount you are currently trading at to NAV?

De CEO antwoordde als volgt: Why diversification is core to our strategy has been discussed at length during the various Capital Markets Days. All of the information shared during these meetings is available on the company's website.

29.Your order-book includes a large number of Newcastlemax vessels, mainly for coal, while Euronav focuses on crude oil which are both major fossil fuels. This appears to contradict your ambitions to position CMB.TECH as green, especially through its H2 ventures. Please can you explain this contradiction in the perspective of the corporate interest, also after the sale of 24 VLCC vessels?

De CEO antwoordde als volgt: Newcastlemaxes primarily carry iron ore, not coal. We do not see any contradiction.

30.It appears you are attempting to be in two different lines of business, conventional shipping and hydrogen production, at the same time. These two industries seem to lack synergies. With such distinct lines of business and investor profiles for each industry, would it not make more sense to separate them to avoid the sub-optimal value proposition?

De CEO antwoordde als volgt: No.

31.Please provide more details on how the commercial agreement between CMB and CMB.TECH works when using the brand names of CMB's subsidiaries such as Bochem, Bocimar, Delphis, etc.? Are there any other commercial agreements between the two companies?

De CEO antwoordde als volgt: CMB has granted CMB.TECH a royalty-free license to use these brands. Please look at our annual report and 20-F for a description of all related party transactions.

32.Please detail the partnership agreements for the companies you list as partners on your webpage. Please indicate whether agreements with the following partners are formal or informal agreements and whether they have been made in writing or verbally: Boeckmans BeHydro Port of Antwerp-Bruges ATS (Antwerp Terminal Services) E-Power International DBR

Volvo Penta MAN Engines AETS (Anglo-Eastern Technical Services) JPNH2YDRO WinGD

De CEO antwoordde als volgt: Please look at our annual report and 20-F for a description of material partnerships and joint ventures.

33.How many trucks are you currently operating (under these agreements/framework)?

De CEO antwoordde als volgt: 7.

34.How many trains and locomotives are you currently operating?

De CEO antwoordde als volgt: We are currently developing 1 hydrogen powered train.

35.How many vessels did your port hydrogen service in 2024?

De CEO antwoordde als volgt: We truck our hydrogen to vessels with our mobile refueller, or they use hydrogen locally.

36.Would you be able to give us some information about your relationships with the Belgian and Namibian government, and whether you receive any subsidies for your H2 ventures? Do you expect any political contingencies, and if so, which?

De CEO antwoordde als volgt: The only subsidy that has been received is €10.2 million from the German Federal Government in Cleanergy Solutions (49% owned by CMB.TECH).

37.Can you confirm if feasibility studies, labor tests, trials or technical documentation such as FEED (Front End Engineering and Design) or FEL-1, FEL-2, FEL-3 (Front End Loading) were conducted internally by CMB.TECH Enterprises or by external advisors verifying the technical feasibility of your H2 and NH3 (ammonia) technologies and projects? (If yes) please name type of documentation and provide name of external advisors (date of mandating / issuance of study). If no such reports exist, please detail the main data sources or benchmarks you're currently using to assess the feasibility of your technology?

De CEO antwoordde als volgt: Yes, these studies have been and currently are being conducted with internationally recognized companies.

De raadsman van Fourworld Global Opportunities Fund onderbreekt en vraagt naar de naam van de expert die werd geraadpleegd. De CFO antwoordt dat het om KBR gaat.

38.How many of your vessels were operated using ammonia as their primary fuel as of December 31, 2024?
De CEO antwoordde als volgt: None, the first one will be delivered early 2026.
39.Could you provide the number of vessels that had been owned by Euronav, Bocimar, Delphis, Bochem, Windcat and Workboats, as of December 31, 2023 and December 31, 2024 (please provide number of vessels per date and per entity, respectively)?