• Insolvencies rise in fourth quarter, annual rate highest in 10 years
• Failures reflect companies weakened some time ago
• Signs of economic improvement too late for some companies
• Construction biggest insolvency group, broad hospitality second

The number of companies going broke has surged to its highest level in 10 years as past economic and commercial problems catch up with a growing number of firms, despite signs of economic recovery.

The latest report from BWA Insolvency for the December quarter showed a 31.5 percent rise in the number of insolvencies to 933 on the previous quarter, and 11 percent higher than the same period in 2024.

BWA Insolvency principal Bryan Williams said the number of insolvencies reflected old pressures coming to the surface.

“The insolvencies we are seeing today are rooted in earlier events. Old debt, thin margins and stalled projects are what ultimately undermine a company’s viability.”

“The improvements we are seeing now in interest rates, building activity and export returns arrive too late for those already in deep financial trouble,” Williams said.

There was a total of 3132 insolvencies last year, involving more liquidations, a slight rise in voluntary administration, but a fall in receiverships. It was the highest annual tally since 2015 following the global financial crisis.

Williams said the figures showed by the end of 2025 more firms had reached “terminal distress” where there was little or nothing left to save and they had accepted the inevitable.

The high level of insolvencies in the past year has been put down, in part, to a more aggressive approach by Inland Revenue in collecting unpaid tax and other payments.

Better economy won’t save the weak

Williams said there was still a reasonable number of companies to fail even as economic conditions improved.

“A bit of extra revenue can provide temporary relief, but it is rarely enough to overcome the weight of historic debt. The cost of those past problems is often greater than the benefit of any new earnings.”

Construction had the most insolvencies, but the rate of failure was slowing. There were now also substantial increases coming through in food and beverage, repair and maintenance, personal services, retail trade, transport and delivery, and manufacturing.

Williams said the high level of insolvencies should not affect the broader economic rebound currently underway, and there were some positives to be taken.

“Employees from these companies can be absorbed into sectors that are strengthening. Moving these workers into growing industries is a helpful result from what is otherwise a tough situation.”

He said directors of struggling companies should seek advice and not hope that improving sentiment will save them.

“It is natural to hope that better times will solve current problems but continuing to fight a battle that cannot be won without new capital is exhausting and often futile.”

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Casino operator Sky City’s first half profit is nearly double that of the year earlier, despite a drop in revenue associated with ongoing regulatory costs and operational changes.

Chief executive Jason Walbridge said the first half reflected a planned period of operational transition, with the second half of the year ending in June focused on ongoing work to support its long-term operating objectives.

He said strong revenue contributions from food and beverage were a highlight of the result.

The company was also looking to sell some assets, targeting proceeds of $200 million within the next 12 months, which will be used to pay down debt.

• Net profit $12.1m vs $6m
• Revenue $411.7m vs $421m
• Underlying net profit $14.4m vs $38m
• Interim dividend nil vs nil

“We are undertaking a disciplined review of our operating model to ensure our cost structures reflect the current environment, while maintaining our commitment to compliance and customer experience,” Walbridge said.

He said revenue dropped 2.4 percent reflecting the introduction of mandatory carded play and continued investment in anti-money laundering (AML) measures and host responsibility capability, as well as costs associated with the opening of the International Convention Centre (NZICC) on 11 February.

Still, he said the full year underlying profit was tracking to expectations, though no dividends were expected to be paid in the near-term. SkyCity reaffirmed its full year underlying profit guidance in a range of $190-$210m, which compared with $72m in the first half.

Remediation costs

Walbridge said total costs were higher over the first half period partly because of ongoing investment in AML host responsibility and technology, particularly in Adelaide.

“Those remediation costs will leave our business when we complete the programme in June next year.”

Walbridge said the opening of the NZICC was a major milestone for SkyCity, with a strong forward events pipeline supporting future visitors to the precinct, with more than 110,000 expected over the next few months.

He said civil legal action between construction firm Fletcher Building and SkyCity over cost over-runs will play out over the next couple of years, with no meaningful update in the near future.

Asset sales

SkyCity was also actively marketing its 99 Albert Street building in Auckland, as well as continuing to look for a buyer of its Auckland car park concession, which had so far failed to attract an acceptable offer.

While it was considering the sale of other assets, Walbridge said those had not been disclosed so far.

“Carded play was introduced to strengthen our host responsibility framework and support player welfare,” Walbridge said.

“Six months on, we are seeing some operational benefits from the additional customer data and visibility it provides.”

Walbridge said SkyCity intended to take part in the New Zealand licensing process for online gambling, with legislation expected to be put in place from 1 May 2026.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Auckland Airport has posted a steady half-year result, with the company cautiously optimistic about passenger growth in the near term.

Key numbers for the six months ended December 2025 compared with a year ago:

• Net profit $177m vs $187.3m
• Revenue $519.6m vs $499.9m
• Underlying profit $157.1m vs $148.1m
• Passenger numbers 9.64m vs 9.46m
• Interim dividend 6.5 cents per share v 6.25 cps

Its bottom line profit decreased 5 percent amid a jump in depreciation expenses reflecting new assets the airport commissioned. Stripping aside one-offs, underlying profit increased 6 percent.

Chief executive Carrie Hurihanganui said the passenger demand trend was “positive”, and singled out the China Eastern Shanghai-Auckland-Buenos Aires service as a highlight, which she said was proving popular.

“While the passenger demand trajectory is certainly positive, we expect the ongoing global fleet shortages to continue to weigh on the availability of new seat capacity supply and the pace of growth in the near term,” she said.

The airport said it had been a promising start to the 2026 financial year for international travel, with seat capacity up 1.8 percent from a year ago, lifting non-transit passenger movements to 93 percent of pre-Covid levels.

“Travellers on North American routes continue to be exceptionally well served with seven airlines competing in the market, and we’re welcoming more inbound visitors to New Zealand on these routes than ever before,” Hurihanganui said.

Temporary disruption as work continues on terminal

Hurihanganui said construction of the integrated domestic jet terminal remained on track for completion in 2029.

Construction activity at the international terminal over the next 18 months would become more visible to travellers with the opening of a temporary check-in facility.

“This next stage of the build, where we are upgrading the check-in area at the international terminal, is an essential step in delivering the long-term capacity, resilience and improved customer experience travellers have been asking for at Auckland Airport,” she said.

“Travellers can expect some temporary disruption as this complex work gets underway, particularly in international departures.”

Hurihanganui said the airport was working with airlines and government agency partners to minimise

The airport forecast full-year underlying profit of between $295 million and $320m, and forecast capital expenditure guidance of between $1 billion and $1.2b.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Emily Holdaway, or Officially Em, as she is known to her thousands of online followers, says she is running a constant type of mental tally when it comes to what is a “business” expense and what is just the cost of normal life.

While Holdaway had more recently moved her focus to offering social media workshops and building an online community, she was previously best known for her blog Raising Ziggy and related work as a social media influencer.

Some of the admin questions she had to address as part of her business highlight the complexities the influencing industry navigates when it comes to staying on the right side of the tax rules.

Generally, self-employed people could claim their business costs in their tax returns, which reduced the amount of income on which they must pay tax. But people usually cannot claim deductions for personal expenses.

When your income comes from sharing your life, that can be a problem.

Holdaway said she claimed all the business-related expenses any other type of business would. “My computer, my phone, and then we have a percentage of our living expenses that we’re allowed to claim based on the floor area ratio of our office space compared to our house space.

“But for things like when I’m in my car and I’m sharing on my [social media] stories, I’m thinking is this work or is this not?”

She said she did not claim food costs or clothing, whereas other social media influencers might.

“I don’t claim my clothes but I also shop at secondhand shops. If I’m running an event or if I’m somewhere that’s because of work or I’m going to something I’m going to create content with, then yes.

“If I’m going out and getting lunch and sharing that I went to McDonalds I’m not going to claim that because it’s still part of your everyday living. But if I have an event where I’m getting together with a whole heap of people within the community then it’s a business expense.”

She said it was complicated for self-employed people, and particularly influencers.

“Is work the influencing or what you’re getting paid to influence? Is it work when you’re showing up because you’ve got a campaign for someone… or it just the get ready with me, hey I’m having my coffee let’s go for a walk. You could argue both ways, I think. Does my coffee become a work expense if I show that on my story every morning?”

Hnry chief executive James Fuller said, based on the 2023 census, influencers in New Zealand were paying up to $50 million a year in tax but that figure was fluid and growing.

“It’s a really interesting development over the last 10 to 15 years in the economy that we have a whole group on the sole trader spectrum who are earning income in content creation and as influencers.

“That can stretch from everything from micro influencers who have a couple of thousand followers all the way through to people who have a couple of hundred thousand.

“I think often when people say ‘influencer’ they imagine someone with millions and millions of followers. But what we are seeing is actually the rise of content creators who are able to generate an audience, bring in brand deals, partnerships, sponsorships and then managing revenue effectively as a sole trader.”

He said people needed to be aware that if they were generating revenue, even if it was just from talking about life, that would come with the same obligations as any other business.

“As such there are things to consider such as the taxes, but also the expenses side of things.”

In the 2023 Census, 2646 people selected “multimedia designer” or “multimedia specialist” from the available occupation options, 228 of whom were self-employed.

“It can be quite tricky to work out, you know, actually is this my life? Am I being paid for being in business or am I being paid for being on social media? But, you know, in the eyes of IRD, it’s very clear that if you’re if you’re generating revenue from it, then it is a taxable activity and therefore you are in business and you have all of the opportunities that come from being in business when it comes to expenses, tax management, those sorts of things.”

Expenses that influencers would often be able to claim would include home office costs, travel expenses, music, the cost of giveaways or the games used by gaming creators.

Inland Revenue said people could claim expenses even in years where they spent more than they earned but there needed to be an intention to make a profit.

“If you monetise content and receive regular amounts from subscribers or platforms, then the amounts are likely income and taxable,” the department said.

Deloitte tax partner Robyn Walker said small scale social media use could sometimes be considered a hobby if there was not a clear intention of making a profit or there was not a lot of activity happening.

But there would always be a level at which it had to be treated as a business.

She said expenses claimed would need to have a sufficiently direct connection to the income-earning activity.

“The other thing to be aware of is that if you are buying assets and then you stop doing content creation that might have implications. If you bought a phone or a camera or a computer and you claim that deduction – normally as depreciation depending on the cost of the asset, if you stop doing then you will have to make tax adjustments to reverse out or effectively sell the asset back to yourself.”

Sign up for Money with Susan Edmunds, a weekly newsletter covering all the things that affect how we make, spend and invest money.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Fletcher Building has posted a smaller half-year loss as the company continues to clean up its long-list of legacy issues, while business remains challenging.

Key numbers for the six months ended December compared with a year ago:

• Net loss $11m vs $134m loss
• Revenue $3.37b vs $3.58b
• Revenue from continuing operations $2.87b vs $2.85b
• Profit from continuing operations $45m vs $88m loss
• Significant items $7m vs $177m
• No dividend

Chief executive Andrew Reding said Fletcher was making progress in difficult trading conditions.

“The first half of [financial year 2026] was another demanding period for the building industry, with subdued markets across New Zealand and Australia,” he said.

“Conditions differed between a particularly weak first quarter and a more stable second quarter,” Reding said. “In that environment, our core manufacturing businesses held up well, supported by disciplined cost control and better operational execution.”

Fletcher’s interim result last year was affected by $177 million in one-off items related to its legacy projects, compared to $7m in one-offs in the latest period.

Revenue from continuing operations was flat on the prior year, with lower New Zealand volumes and ongoing competitive pressure, which was offset by stable performances in its core manufacturing businesses.

Last month, Fletcher announced the sale of its construction division, as the company worked to simplify the business after years of pressure from delayed projects and cost overruns.

“The sale of Construction is a major step in reshaping Fletcher Building into a simpler, more focused building products manufacturing and distribution group,” Reding said.

“Combined with the cost and capital discipline we have put in place, it positions the Group well to benefit as market conditions recover.”

Reding expected market conditions to remain challenging in the near term.

“In New Zealand, residential and civil demand is likely to remain relatively subdued through [financial year 2026], with a more meaningful recovery not anticipated until calendar year 2027,” he said.

“In Australia, early signs of stabilisation are emerging in parts of the portfolio, although conditions remain uneven.”

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Infant formula maker A2 Milk showed a solid lift in first half profit on the back of double digit growth in sales allowing an increase in dividend.

Key numbers for the six months ended December compared with a year ago:

• Net profit $112.1m vs $102.5m
• Revenue $993.5m vs $836.5m
• Operating earnings $155m vs $130.9m
• Net cash $896.9m vs $1.01b
• Interim dividend 11.5 cents per share vs 8.5 cps
• Forecast mid-teens revenue growth, increased full year profit

Sales of infant milk formula (IMF) to China led an overall near 19 percent rise in revenue, boosted by its acquisition of a manufacturing plant at Pokeno, and further improvement in the fledgling US market.

“We continue to execute our growth strategy with a focus on maximising opportunities in China infant milk formula, adjacent categories and new markets,” chief executive David Bortolussi said.

“Infant milk formula remains central to our growth strategy and continues to outperform the China market, delivering 13.6 percent year-on-year revenue growth.”

Bortolussi said English label IMF sales were significantly stronger through on-line retail platforms, while there had been a stabilisation of the once important daigou channels – sales by third parties of A2 IMF.

Fresh milk sales improved in Australia and the United States, while the company looked to diversify with new nutritional products.

“Recently launched kids and seniors nutrition products have accelerated our growth in other nutritionals, strengthening our position in these growing and exciting categories.”

Bortolussi said the US operation was close to break even after posting initial big losses and the company hoped to get approval from the Food and Drug Administration to sell infant formula in the US.

He said the Pokeno manufacturing plant acquired last year was securing and diversifying its supply chain last year, and the company was shifting more production to the plant from Synlait Milk’s Canterbury plant.

Bigger sales and profits

Looking forward A2 expected double digit revenue growth, with a full year profit ahead of last year’s $202.9m.

“Our upgraded outlook means we are now on track to achieve our $2 billion medium term sales ambition in FY26, a full year ahead of plan,” Bortolussi said.

The company increased its interim dividend and reaffirmed plans for a $300m special dividend from its $897m cash holdings.

Forsyth Barr senior analyst Matt Montgomerie said the result was strong and better than analysts had been expecting, and noted the company had a track record of exceeding it forecasts.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Contact Energy’s half-year profit is up 44 percent, despite a 5 percent dip in revenue.

The company has made a first half net profit $205 million in the six months ended December, with underlying profit up 24 percent to half a billion dollars ($500m).

Contact was also in a trading halt until Tuesday, as it looked to raise $525m to advance investment into new battery, solar and geothermal developments.

Key numbers for the six months ended December 2025 compared with a year earlier:

• Net profit $205.0 vs $142.4m
• Revenue $1.62b vs $1.71b
• Underlying profit $500m vs $404m
• Interim dividend 16 cents a share vs 16 cps

Contact said the improved underlying profit result was driven by a significant lift in renewable generation, with an output of 97 percent renewable energy in the first half (1H26).

“1H26 was transformational, with the completion of the Manawa acquisition and the welcoming of its people and assets to Contact,” Fuge said, referring to last year’s near $2b takeover of the generation company.

“The strong performance of the combined entity set us up well for the year ahead as we take significant steps to execute the Contact31+ strategy.”

As part of that strategy, the company’s planned to raise $525m* with potential to increase its renewable energy generation.

This included funding for development of a Tauhara 2 steamfield, the Glenbrook battery 2.0 and its investment in the Glorit solar farm.

The proceeds were also expected to accelerate development pipeline opportunities.

“We already we have plans for another $2.4b of renewable energy projects, and we will continue to invest in building this country.”

Fuge said the company was expanding to meet future demand.

“Contact is taking significant steps to ensure its readiness to support New Zealand’s growing electricity demand, with 3-5TWh (terawatt hours) of new grid demand expected in the next five years,” Fuge said.

“We’re investing in the infrastructure required to support a more renewable, resilient and affordable energy future for New Zealand.

“I think New Zealand can be incredibly proud of where they’ve got to on the renewable energy transition,” Fuge said.

“And I think for the country, the most important thing is that we continue to build the infrastructure that keeps this country resilient, and as well as that, we look to decarbonise those areas of the economy which are nowhere near 50 percent renewable yet.

“And I think that’s where we now have to turn our focus – really focus on the big things that kind of make a real difference, rather than the last 2 or 3 percent.”

Offers to buy the rest of King Country Energy

Contact also separately announced it had made an offer to purchase the remaining 25 percent of King Country Energy from King Country Trust for $47m, which would give it full ownership if the the regional generator. The payment would be made by way of a new issue of Contact shares to the Trust.

Contact expected to make a full year underlying profit of $965m, with a full year dividend of 40 cents per share.

*Capital raise details

Contact planned to raise $450m with an issue of about 51.4m of new ordinary shares, representing about 5.2 percent of current issued capital, at a placement price of $8.75 per new share, which represented a discount of 7.2 percent of the last traded price, excluding the dividend.

Retail Offer

Contact intended to raise $75m through a non-underwritten retail offer of new shares to eligible existing shareholders in New Zealand and Australia, with the ability to scale applications, or accept over subscriptions at Contact’s.

The new shares to be issued at the lower of the placement price or a 2.5 percent discount to the five-day volume Weighted Average Price over the five-trading day period ending on the 6 March closing date of the offer.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Courier and information management company Freightways posted a strong first-half result as economic conditions improve in New Zealand, while Australia was steady.

Key numbers for the six months ended December compared with a year ago:

• Net profit $52.5m vs $44.7m
• Revenue $718.2m vs $662.1m
• Operating earnings $96.5m vs $86.0m
• Interim dividend 21 cents per share vs 19 cps

Freightways saw its bottom line profit increase by 17 percent, while revenue rose 9 percent. It said cash generation was strong and strengthened its balance sheet, while reducing net debt by 6.7 percent.

The company is seen as a bellwether stock, and owns brands including NZ Couriers, Post Haste, Big Chill Distribution and TIMG.

Its express package and business mail division saw improved earnings and margin growth.

“Performance was supported by same-customer volume growth, net market share gains and pricing actions implemented at the start of the financial year,” the company said.

Its information management and waste renewal division, which includes TIMG, saw a “mixed performance”, Freightways said.

“Revenue was broadly flat for the half year, while EBITA (operating earnings) grew modestly, reflecting lower digitisation activity and the exit of unprofitable Product Destruction revenue streams,” it said.

Freightways said cost inflation remained moderate, and its cost base had “stabilised”, particularly labour costs, amid cooling wage inflation.

“We expect a steady improvement in same-customer volumes in the second half of FY26, particularly in New Zealand, driven by a level of economic recovery.”

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

The chairman of a controversial ministerial advisory group that will disband months earlier than planned rejected advice from officials about which office it should rent, preferring a more expensive option for privacy reasons.

The Ministerial Advisory Group for Victims of Retail Crime is renting space in a Symonds Street building in central Auckland, paying $119,000 for the 2025/26 year.

The group was created in mid-2024 and correspondence obtained from that time shows officials from the Ministry of Justice, which provides the group with administrative support, initially said that option wasn’t the most-effective.

Officials recommended a shared office with Kāinga Ora, but group chairman Sunny Kaushal said this wasn’t suitable for privacy reasons.

This week Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith announced the group would disband in May, four months earlier than planned.

The announcement followed RNZ revealing that three of the group’s five members had resigned in recent weeks, leaving just Kaushal and Hamilton liquor retailer Ash Parmar.

One of the members who resigned, Retail NZ chief executive Carolyn Young, said her relationship with Kaushal became untenable.

The group has faced criticism for its spending and value for money, including over Kaushal’s fees as chairman.

But, Kaushal and Goldsmith have defended the group’s work, saying it had provided advice on a range of issues such as trespass law reform and self-defence.

Proposed office doesn’t meet chairman’s requirements – officials

Documents obtained by the New Zealand Taxpayers’ Union show a shortlist of three possible offices was developed, after Kaushal had reviewed 26 possible options.

The Symonds Street office was one of the three, but not the one officials initially favoured. That was a shared space with Kāinga Ora in Ellerslie.

However, in the documents, the Ellerslie office was described as “open plan… which isn’t appropriate for confidential conversations”.

“This option was originally our recommendation, however, the chairman has advised this doesn’t meet his requirements due to the privacy concerns.”

So instead the Symonds Street office was recommended.

“While this option is not the most cost-effective it is the recommended option due to the property being secure, minimal risk of individuals’ breach of privacy, and furniture is supplied, making the move in more seamless, as well as benefiting the environment.”

A third office, in Parnell, was considered, but the landlord there wouldn’t add a break clause to any rental agreement.

‘This isn’t the SIS’

This week the ministry confirmed the Symonds Street lease would now end in May, rather than September.

A spokesman for Goldsmith said questions about operational matters should be directed to the ministry.

Ministry deputy secretary, policy, Caroline Greaney said as at 31 December, the 389 sqm Symonds Street office was the usual place of work for three staff members and Kaushal.

“It also serves as the venue for group member meetings, and stakeholder meetings and functions.”

The ministry couldn’t immediately say how many stakeholder meetings and functions it had held.

Kaushal told RNZ he’d previously answered questions about the office.

The documents obtained by the Taxpayers’ Union show the total cost for the Symonds Street office in 2025/26 was $131,000, when other expenses such as power were factored in.

Union investigations co-ordinator Rhys Hurley said paying that much for an office of such a size was a farce.

“The original recommendation from the Ministry of Justice was to take the most cost-effective office,” he said.

“The chairman was concerned about privacy, but this isn’t the SIS. The next time a quango like this needs space, they can borrow some of ours.”

Hurley said the most cost-effective option for taxpayers should have been taken.

Labour police spokeswoman Ginny Andersen said the group had been a disaster since it began.

“[Prime Minister Chris] Luxon and Goldsmith have spent millions, a lot of which is going to Sunny Kaushal’s office space, overpriced events, and Kaushal’s lofty remuneration, only to rehash bad ideas like citizen’s arrest in return.

“Goldsmith needs to front up about why they allowed the group to spend on more expensive office options when more affordable options were available.”

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

E-Commerce and Online Travel Dual Engines Reinforce Robust Expansion. Strong Guidance Underscores Optimistic Outlook for FY26

– Published and distributed with permission of Media-Outreach.com.

Full Year 2025 Financial Results Summary

• US Tariffs wreaked havoc on industry in 2025;
• 2025 Revenues: $200.2 million down 10.2% while proactively managing down business from 2 largest clients in 2024; 2025 revenue on balance of business would have grown 2.7% when excluding these 2 clients;
• Record-high 7.9% net profit margin despite 10.2% reduction in revenue;
• Debt free with record-high US$41.5 million cash balance;
• Acquisition of activewear maker AAG’s business positions us for growth in 2026;
• Early success of digitalization and platformization helping competitiveness and profitability going forward;
• Final dividend to remain at HK$7.0 cents despite the 7.4 % reduction in net profit.

HONG KONG SAR – Media OutReach Newswire – 12 February 2026 – Lever Style Corporation (HKEX: 1346, “Lever Style”), the world’s premier apparel production platform, today reported financial results for the full year ended December 31, 2025.

For the full year 2025, Lever Style reported revenues of US$200.2 million (a decrease of 10.2% from the prior year) and a net profit of US$ 15.9 million (down 7.4% from 2024). The group also reported a record-high 7.9% net profit margin and maintained gross profit margin of 28.5%. Further, the group was debt-free once again and had a record net cash position of US$41.5 million at the end of the full year 2025.

“In a year when Trump’s Liberation Day tariffs wreaked havoc on the industry, we managed down our business to safeguard our current and future financial health. Revenues retreated 10.2% from the prior year to US$200.2 million for the 2025 reporting period, which was a result of applying stringent credit risk control on our former top two clients from 2024 rather than an across-the-board weakening of demand.” said Stanley Szeto, Executive Chairman of Lever Style.

“Against the tariff backdrop, we did well to have achieved record-high net profit margin and registered growth for the rest of our customer portfolio outside of the former two top clients from 2024. This is a testament to the strength of our versatile, asset-light business model” Mr. Szeto added.

Commenting on Lever Style’s inorganic growth strategy in 2025, Szeto said, “We put more focus on pursuing inorganic growth through acquisitions. In December 2025, we announced our largest acquisition to date, the acquisition of certain assets and businesses of Active Apparel Group (“AAG“), an Australia-based supplier of activewear such as golf shirts, running shorts and yoga leggings. This acquisition is our seventh since our 2019 IPO and will continue to strengthen our activewear capability in a segment important to our growth. As is customary from our past 6 acquisitions, we acquired AAG’s business but not its factory to safeguard our asset-light business model … By concluding the AAG acquisition in late 2025, we put ourselves back on the growth path for 2026 in spite of the challenging economic environment.

Future Prospects

On future prospects, Szeto commented “Even though US tariffs on most garment-producing countries have come down to the 20% range, the US economy remains on edge … There is a growing trend of retail bankruptcies, which have knock-on effects on brands and the supply chain.”

“Despite such headwinds, we feel confident that we’ll once again out-perform the industry due to the sustainable competitive advantage provided by our asset-light business model…We are continuing to explore other strategic merger and acquisition opportunities to further strengthen our product category portfolio, expand our production base, and gain scale that creates synergies and operating leverage…With little relief in sight from a US-tariff impacted world, we expect there will be more merger and acquisition opportunities at reasonable valuations.”

Digitalization and Platformization

Executive Chairman Stanley Szeto said Lever Style has “embarked on a new phase of digitalization,” using automation and AI for “fully automated factory invoice handling” and “reading purchase orders and translating tech packs,” “saving processing time on some mundane tasks by up to 90%.”

On platformization, he said, “Transforming into a digital two-way marketplace platform which automatically computes costing and digitally matches the optimal factory for each order is a long journey.” and noted “We are enjoying early success with more than 35 factories having joined this platform …”

For more details, please visit: https://www1.hkexnews.hk/listedco/listconews/sehk/2026/0212/2026021200299.pdf

https://www.leverstyle.com/en/home/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/lever-style-inc./
https://www.facebook.com/leverstyleofficial
https://www.instagram.com/leverstyle/
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC2xFoI4FpTh5SOU6O63nNUQ

Hashtag: #LeverStyle

The issuer is solely responsible for the content of this announcement.

– Published and distributed with permission of Media-Outreach.com.

PERTH, Australia, Feb. 11, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Paladin Energy Ltd (ASX:PDN, TSX:PDN, OTCQX:PALAF) (“Paladin” or the “Company”) advises that it has released its December 2025 Half Year Financial Accounts and Management Discussion and Analysis (MD&A) for Paladin Energy Ltd and its controlled entities for the three and six month periods ended 31 December 2025 (“FY2026 Interim Financial Results”).

Half Year Highlights

• Revenue of US$138.3M driven by strong sales of 1.96Mlb U₃O₈ at an average realised price of US$70.5/lb U₃O₈¹, reflecting the quality of the Langer Heinrich Mine (LHM) contract book and strengthening uranium pricing environment
• Cost of sales totalled US$112.3M in the period, reflecting the continued ramp up of production at LHM
• Gross profit of US$26.0M for the period, a significant increase from previous period
• Net loss after tax of US$6.6M driven by the ongoing production ramp-up at LHM, business expansion following the Fission Uranium Corp (now Paladin Canada Inc.) acquisition and TSX listing and financing activities
• Successful completion of a fully underwritten A$300M equity raising and a A$100M share purchase plan (SPP), primarily to advance the development of the Patterson Lake South (PLS) Project towards a final investment decision alongside the ongoing ramp up of the LHM
• Enhanced balance sheet following completion of the equity offering, and the restructure of the syndicated debt facility with cash and investments of US$278.4M and an undrawn US$70M Revolving Credit Facility at year end

“The first half of the year demonstrated strong and continually improving performance at Langer Heinrich Mine as our team increased its knowledge and experience of how to optimise the production process, including the mining activities that were gathering pace at the start of this financial year. With the remaining mining fleet arriving on site, the foundations are now in place to successfully complete our ramp-up at Langer Heinrich Mine during the remaining months of the year.

The half year results also highlight the robust financial position of Paladin Energy with increasing revenue from strong sales augmented by a successful equity raising and a restructure of the debt portfolio that will enable us to complete our ramp-up activities at the LHM and continue to progress the PLS Project in Canada, including our winter drilling program.”

Paul Hemburrow
Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer

Financial Performance

LHM sold 1.96Mlb of U₃O₈ at an average realised price of US$70.5/lb, generating sales revenue of US$138.3M. Cost of sales totalled US$112.3M, reflecting the continued ramp up of production, with a higher proportion of mined ore fed into the plant resulting in higher production and sales volumes.

This resulted in an increased gross profit for the period of US$26.0M (H1FY2025: US$0.9M).

Net loss after tax of US$6.6M (H1FY2025:US$15.1M) was driven by the ongoing production ramp-up at LHM, business expansion following the Fission Uranium Corp (now Paladin Canada Inc.) acquisition, TSX listing and financing activities.

Financial Position

Total unrestricted cash and investments increased by 213% during the period to US$278.4M (30 June 2025: US$89.0M), following the successful completion of a fully underwritten A$300M equity offering and a A$100M share purchase plan (SPP) (both before transaction costs).

On 19 December 2025, Paladin completed the restructure of its Debt Facility with its lenders, Nedbank Ltd (acting through its Nedbank Corporate and Investment Banking division), Nedbank Namibia Ltd and Macquarie Bank.

The restructure aimed to right-size the overall debt capacity, reducing it from US$150M to US$110M leveraging Paladin’s enhanced liquidity position following the successful completion of the equity raise and SPP. The restructure also reflects Paladin’s increasing maturity as a uranium producer as it continues to progress the ramp up at LHM, while providing greater undrawn debt capacity and balance sheet flexibility.

The restructure provides Paladin with a US$110M Debt Facility including a US$40M Term Loan Facility (following a repayment of US$39.8M as part of the restructure) and an undrawn Revolving Credit Facility of US$70M (US$50M prior to the restructure). No additional debt was drawn during the period.

Presentation of information
This announcement should be read in conjunction with the Condensed Interim Financial Report lodged on 11 February 2026 and available on Paladin’s website (https://www.paladinenergy.com.au/investors/asx-announcements/). The Condensed Interim Financial Report relates to the six month period ended 31 December 2025. This Condensed Interim Financial Report also includes information relating specifically to the three month period ended 31 December 2025, which has been included in this Condensed Interim Financial Report to comply with quarterly reporting disclosure requirements of the Toronto Stock Exchange. Further information regarding the inclusion of the 31 December 2025 quarterly information is included in Note 1 to the Condensed Interim Financial Report.

This announcement has been authorised for release by the Board of Directors of Paladin Energy Ltd.

Contacts

About Paladin

Paladin Energy Ltd (ASX:PDN TSX: PDN OTCQX:PALAF) is a globally significant independent uranium producer with a 75% ownership of the world-class long life Langer Heinrich Mine located in Namibia. In late 2024 the Company acquired Fission Uranium Corp. in Canada, resulting in a dual-listing on the both the ASX and TSX. With the integration of Fission’s operations, the Company now owns and operates an extensive portfolio of uranium development and exploration assets across Canada, which include the Patterson Lake South (PLS) Project in Saskatchewan and the Michelin project in Newfoundland and Labrador. Paladin also owns uranium exploration assets in Australia. Paladin is committed to a sustainability framework that ensures responsible, accountable and transparent management of the uranium resources the Company mines – both now and in the future. Through its Langer Heinrich Mine, Paladin is delivering a reliable uranium supply to major nuclear utilities around the world, positioning itself as a meaningful contributor to baseload energy provision in multiple countries and contributing to global decarbonisation.

Forward-looking statements

This document contains certain “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Australian securities laws and “forward-looking information” within the meaning of Canadian securities laws (collectively referred to in this document as forward-looking statements). All statements in this document, other than statements of historical or present facts, are forward-looking statements and generally may be identified by the use of forward-looking words such as “anticipate”, “expect”, “likely”, “propose”, “will”, “intend”, “should”, “could”, “may”, “believe”, “forecast”, “estimate”, “target”, “outlook”, “guidance” and other similar expressions. These forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements regarding continued development of the PLS Project; permitting approvals and community engagement; advancement of the PLS Project through to FID; development and ramp-up of operations at the LHM; LHM guidance for FY2026; the equity offering; debt and related restructurings and the receipt of all necessary regulatory approvals.

Forward-looking statements involve subjective judgment and analysis and are subject to significant uncertainties, risks and contingencies including those risk factors associated with the mining industry, many of which are outside the control of, change without notice, and may be unknown to Paladin. These risks and uncertainties include but are not limited to liabilities inherent in mine development and production, geological, mining and processing technical problems, the inability to obtain any additional mine licences, permits and other regulatory approvals required in connection with mining and third party processing operations, Indigenous Peoples’ engagement, competition for amongst other things, capital, acquisition of reserves, undeveloped lands and skilled personnel, incorrect assessments of the value of acquisitions, changes in commodity prices and exchange rates, currency and interest fluctuations, various events which could disrupt operations and/or the transportation of mineral products, including labour stoppages and severe weather conditions, the demand for and availability of transportation services, the ability to secure adequate financing and management’s ability to anticipate and manage the foregoing factors and risks. Readers are also referred to the risks and uncertainties referred to in the Company’s “2025 Annual Report” released on 28 August 2025, in Paladin’s Annual Information Form for the year ended June 30, 2025 released on 12 September 2025, and in Paladin’s Management’s Discussion and Analysis for the quarter ended December 31, 2025, released on 11 February 2026, each of which is available to view at paladinenergy.com.au and on www.sedarplus.ca.

Although as at the date of this document, Paladin believes the expectations expressed in such forward-looking statements are based on reasonable assumptions, such statements are not guarantees of future performance and actual results or developments may differ materially from the expectations expressed in such forward-looking statements due to a range of factors including (without limitation) fluctuations in commodity prices and exchange rates, exploitation and exploration successes, environmental, permitting and development issues, political risks including the impact of political instability on economic activity and uranium supply and demand, Indigenous Peoples engagement, climate risk, operating hazards, natural disasters, severe storms and other adverse weather conditions, shortages of skilled labour and construction materials, equipment and supplies, regulatory concerns, continued availability of capital and financing and general economic, market or business conditions and risk factors associated with the uranium industry generally. There can be no assurance that forward-looking statements will prove to be accurate.

Readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements, and should rely on their own independent enquiries, investigations and advice regarding information contained in this document. Any reliance by a reader on the information contained in this document is wholly at the reader’s own risk. Recipients are cautioned against placing undue reliance on such projections without conducting their own due diligence with appropriate professional support. The forward-looking statements in this document relate only to events or information as of the date on which the statements are made. Paladin does not assume any obligation to update or revise its forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. No representation, warranty, guarantee or assurance (express or implied) is made, or will be made, that any forward-looking statements will be achieved or will prove to be correct. Except for statutory liability which cannot be excluded, Paladin, its officers, employees and advisers expressly disclaim any responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of the material contained in this document and exclude all liability whatsoever (including negligence) for any loss or damage which may be suffered by any person as a consequence of any information in this document or any error or omission therefrom. Except as required by law or regulation, Paladin accepts no responsibility to update any person regarding any inaccuracy, omission or change in information in this document or any other information made available to a person, nor any obligation to furnish the person with any further information. Nothing in this document will, under any circumstances, create an implication that there has been no change in the affairs of Paladin since the date of this document. To the extent any forward-looking statement in this document constitutes “future-oriented financial information” or “financial outlooks” within the meaning of Canadian securities laws, such information is provided to demonstrate Paladin’s internal projections and to help readers understand Paladin’s expected financial results. Readers are cautioned that this information may not be appropriate for any other purpose and readers should not place undue reliance on such information. Future-oriented financial information and financial outlooks, as with forward-looking statements generally, are, without limitation, based on the assumptions, and subject to the risks and uncertainties, described above.

Non-IFRS measures
Paladin uses certain financial measures that are considered “non-IFRS financial information” within the meaning of Australian securities laws and/or “non-GAAP financial measures” within the meaning of Canadian securities laws (collectively referred to in this announcement as Non-IFRS Measures) to supplement analysis of its financial and operating performance. These Non-IFRS Measures do not have a standardised meaning prescribed by IFRS and therefore may not be comparable to similar measures presented by other issuers.

The Company believes these measures provide additional insight into its financial results and operational performance and are useful to investors, securities analysts, and other interested parties in understanding and evaluating the Company’s historical and future operating performance. However, they should not be viewed in isolation or as a substitute for information prepared in accordance with IFRS. Accordingly, readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on any Non-IFRS Measures. The Non-IFRS Measures used in this announcement are described below.

Average Realised Price
Average Realised Price (US$/lb U₃O₈) is a Non-IFRS Measure that represents the average revenue received per pound of uranium sold during a given period. It is calculated by dividing total revenue from U₃O₈ sales (before royalties and after any applicable discounts) by the total volume of U₃O₈ pounds sold. This measure provides insight into the actual pricing achieved under the Company’s uranium sales contracts and spot sales during the reporting period, taking into account the mix of base-escalated, fixed-price and market-related pricing mechanisms within contracts. The Company uses Average Realised Price to assess revenue performance relative to market prices, contractual pricing structures, and production costs. It is also a key measure used by investors and analysts to evaluate price exposure, contract performance, and profitability potential.

It is important to note that Average Realised Price is distinct from both the spot market price and the term market price for uranium, and it may vary significantly from quarter to quarter based on timing of deliveries, customer contract structures, and the prevailing market environment.

Revenue from uranium sales is reported in the Company’s financial statements under IFRS. The Average Realised Price is derived directly from IFRS revenue figures and disclosed sales volumes.

The table below reconciles the Average Realised Price for the quarters ended 31 December 2025 and 31 December 2024:

1.   Includes 85,000lb loan material delivered into existing contracts
2.   Includes 200,000lb loan material delivered into existing contracts

Cost of Production 
The Cost of Production per pound represents the total production costs divided by pounds of U₃O₈ produced. The Cost of Production is calculated as the total direct production expenditures incurred during the period (including mining, stockpile rehandling, processing, site maintenance, and mine-level administrative costs), excluding costs such as cost of ore stockpiled, deferred stripping costs, depreciation and amortisation, general and administration costs, royalties, exploration expenses, sustaining capital and the impacts of any inventory impairments or impairment reversals. This measure helps users assess Paladin’s operating efficiency.

Cost of Production per lb = Cost of Production ÷ U₃O₈ Pounds Produced.

Cost of Production is a unit cost measure that indicates the average production cost per pound of U₃O₈ produced. This is not an IFRS measure but is widely used in the mining industry as a benchmark of operational efficiency and cost competitiveness. Paladin’s Cost of Production metric is calculated as the total direct production expenditures as defined above (in US dollars) incurred during the period, divided by the volume of U₃O₈ pounds produced in the same period. The Company uses Cost of Production per pound to track progress of operational performance, to assess profitability at various uranium price points, and to identify trends in operating costs. It is also a key metric for investors and analysts to evaluate how efficiently the Company is producing uranium, independent of depreciation and accounting adjustments.

This measure allows stakeholders to monitor trends in direct production costs and to assess the Company’s operating breakeven threshold relative to uranium market prices. Investors are cautioned that our Cost of Production metric may not be comparable with similarly titled “C1 cash cost” metrics of other uranium producers, as there can be differences in methodology (e.g., treatment of royalties or certain site costs). Paladin’s Cost of Production figure as defined above, focuses strictly on the on-site cost to produce uranium concentrate in the current period. All figures are in US$/lb U₃O₈. We provide this information in good faith to enhance understanding of our operations; however, the IFRS financial statements (particularly the Cost of Sales line in the income statement) should be considered alongside this metric for a complete picture of our cost structure.

The table below reconciles the Cost of Production for the for the quarters ended 31 December 2025 and 30 December 2024:

Net Cash/(Debt)
Net Cash/(Debt) is a non-IFRS liquidity measure that represents the surplus of cash and cash equivalents over total interest-bearing debt. It is calculated by subtracting gross debt (including face value and accrued interest on borrowings) from unrestricted cash and cash equivalents. The Company uses Net Cash/(Debt) as an indicator of the Company’s net liquidity position at a point in time, providing a simple measure of financial flexibility after accounting for existing debt obligations. This measure is useful to investors and analysts because it isolates the Company’s net cash or net debt balance, enabling better assessment of balance sheet strength and funding capacity, particularly as it relates to capital allocation decisions and ability to finance operations and growth.

Net Cash/(Debt) is distinct from individual IFRS line items as it combines and offsets gross financial liabilities and cash balances into a single figure. As such, it is classified as a non-IFRS measure.

The table below reconciles the Net Cash/(Debt) at the end of the quarters ended 31 December 2025 and 30 June 2025:

^{_______________________________________
1} Average Realised Price is a Non-IFRS Measure. See “Non-IFRS Measures” for more information
² Refers to LHM’s operational results on a 100% basis
³ Cost of Production is a Non-IFRS Measure. See “Non-IFRS Measures” for more information
⁴ The percentage movement is not meaningful due to nil balance in the prior period
⁵ Excludes shareholder loans from CNNC Overseas Limited (CNOL) and capitalised transaction costs
⁶ Net Cash/(Debt) is a Non-IFRS measure. See “Non-IFRS Measures” for more information

– Published by The MIL Network

[Keynote delivered at the New Zealand Economic Forum, 12 February 2026]

Tēnā koutou katoa, and good morning.

Thank you to Professor Jennifer Kerr and the University of Waikato Management School for hosting us. 

It is great to be here in the Waikato – a region that is building capability for the future, from innovation in agritech, to world-class events in the new BNZ Theatre, and soon to producing much-needed doctors and medical research through the new Medical School.

To my parliamentary colleagues, mayors, representatives of local government, members of the diplomatic corps, business leaders, economists, academics, students, and guests from across New Zealand – thank you for being here.

It is a privilege to open the 2026 New Zealand Economic Forum.

The theme of this year’s forum is Big Choices for a Small Nation. And there is one choice I want to be clear about at the outset.

We are fixing the basics and building the future by choosing smart investments that increase performance and decrease debt.

New Zealand does not grow by taxing more and investing less, and our Government is choosing a better course.

We grow by backing ambition, cutting red tape, and rewarding success.
That is the choice this Government is making.

We are meeting at a time when that choice matters.

The global environment is unsettled. Markets are volatile. Geopolitical risks are rising. Climate events are increasing. And the economic recovery has taken time, with real pressure on hardworking Kiwis.

In moments like this, it can be tempting to drift, or to reach for higher spending as an easy answer. But after the last Government more than doubled debt to 41.8 per cent of GDP, New Zealanders know the cost of that band-aid approach – it is simply not sustainable.

Small, open economies succeed by making deliberate choices.

History shows New Zealand’s biggest gains have come from disciplined decisions at home – managing the public finances responsibly, backing investment, staying open to the world, and building institutions that support long-term growth.

That is what this Government is focused on.

This morning I want to set out three things:

• how we are managing the public finances and restate the case for why fiscal credibility matters;
• how New Zealand is positioning itself in a more volatile global environment; and
• how we are strengthening the foundations of growth – by backing ownership, investment, and productivity through a wide-ranging reform agenda.

This is about backing New Zealanders with settings that reward effort.

When we make the right choices, there is no reason New Zealand cannot grow faster, lift incomes, and build resilience – not despite our size, but because of it.

1. Fiscal positioning and economic leadership

Let me begin with the fiscal context.

New Zealand has been through a long and difficult economic adjustment. The post-Covid period brought inflation that lingered too long, interest rates that hurt too many households, and a downturn that took time to unwind.

The most recent Treasury forecasts show the economy has begun to turn a corner. Growth strengthened through the second half of last year, unemployment is stabilising, and confidence is returning. Momentum is building – but sustaining it requires discipline and focus.

At the same time, the Crown’s balance sheet remains under pressure.

Core Crown expenses are still elevated relative to pre-pandemic levels. Debt-servicing costs are significantly higher than they were five years ago. Demographic pressures, particularly in health and superannuation, continue to intensify.

That context explains the fiscal strategy we are pursuing.

Our objectives are clear and worth restating:

• to return the operating balance to surplus by 2028/29;
• to place net core Crown debt on a downward track toward 40 per cent of GDP; and
• to rebuild fiscal resilience so future governments have options when the next shock inevitably arrives.

Those are not arbitrary numbers. They reflect the hard-won credibility New Zealand has built internationally over decades. They underpin our sovereign credit ratings. They protect households from higher interest rates. And they preserve room for governments to respond when crises occur.

They are targets easily forgotten by politicians who wish to spend more in election campaigns. But if we forget those targets, New Zealand’s economic strength will be impugned. And my view here is that fiscal credibility is not ideological. It is practical – and it is essential.

That is why Budget 2026’s operating allowance is $2.4 billion per annum. This is a ceiling, not a floor. Every dollar must be justified. Every new initiative must come with a clear case for value.

Over the past two years, this Government has made decisions delivering around $11 billion a year in savings and revenue measures. Those decisions were not easy. But they have stabilised the public finances, protected frontline services, and enabled investment in long-term growth.

That approach of delivering savings will be continuing in this budget and every future budget I deliver. Fiscal discipline is not the end goal. It is, in fact, the foundation for everything else we wish to achieve, because without it, everything else – growth, investment, resilience – becomes harder.

2. New Zealand’s position in a volatile world

We are making these choices in a world that is more uncertain than at any point in recent decades.

Geopolitical competition is sharper. Supply chains are more fragile. Energy markets remain volatile. And technological change – from artificial intelligence to advanced manufacturing – is accelerating faster than policy systems typically adapt.

Yet New Zealand’s position in this environment is stronger than we sometimes allow ourselves to believe.

We are politically stable in an unstable world. We have strong institutions, high-quality regulation, low corruption, and an independent central bank. 

We produce food, fibre and energy the world genuinely needs. And we continue to generate globally competitive firms across agritech, software, advanced manufacturing and aerospace.

Our challenge is not a lack of potential.

It is whether our policy settings organise that potential, or suppress it through uncertainty, cost, and delay.

Much of what matters for New Zealand’s prosperity remains within our control: predictable policy, efficient infrastructure, credible fiscal management, secure energy supply, and settings that reward ownership and investment.

Resilience is not just about surviving shocks. It is about having the capacity to adapt, recover, and sustain growth.

3. Ownership, investment and productivity: backing growth

This global context brings us directly to the choices we are making at home to back growth 

For decades, New Zealand’s productivity growth has lagged behind comparable economies, and the consequences are clear, lower wages, less fiscal headroom for investment in public services, from medicines through to classrooms, fewer globally scaled firms, and in my view, too much reliance on population growth and house price growth rather than genuine productivity gains. 

And so, the task that our Government faces is not simply to repair the basics which were damaged post Covid, but to build foundations in our economy that allow us to address these long-standing productivity challenges. 

Our Going for Growth agenda, which I published at last year’s forum, is grounded in a simple proposition: productivity responds to incentives. Productivity is not resolved through one silver bullet, but ongoing, substantive, systemic reform.

When people are confident, they own assets, invest in capital, and earn a return without those settings being constantly reopened, they invest more – and they invest earlier.

That is why this Government is explicitly backing ownership, investment, and productivity-enhancing settings.

Not through subsidies or short-term stimulus.

But through durable policy settings that reward productive activity.

The Investment Boost tax policy introduced in Budget 2025 was designed to do just that – change investment behaviour in favour of more capital intensity in our firms. 

And it would have been easy to say at the last budget, we can’t afford a productivity-enhancing tax measure at this point, because that will require us to make difficult savings elsewhere. But the choice we made is that we can’t afford not to. We can’t afford to keep waiting to make productivity enhancing changes to our tax system. 

And so, Investment Boost is not about rewarding investment that would have happened anyway. It is about tipping decisions – bringing investment forward, increasing scale, and anchoring capital in New Zealand.

And we are already seeing that happen.

Early evidence from Inland Revenue shows that among firms that invested recently, 40 per cent say Investment Boost increased their investment spending over the past year, including 11 per cent reporting a significant increase directly because of the policy.

Looking ahead, the impact is even clearer. Nearly half – 49 per cent – of firms intending to invest over the next five years say Investment Boost is positively influencing those plans, with 14 per cent anticipating a large increase in investment as a result.

What matters is not just that businesses are investing more, but how they are investing.

More than half of firms report adjusting the timing, scale and type of investment. Projects are being brought forward. Capital is being prioritised into productivity-enhancing assets. And businesses are choosing to own capital rather than lease it.

We can see that on the ground.

Dunedin-based United Machinists has brought forward investment in robotics and automation, rather than phasing it over several years.

Foot Science International has accelerated investment in automation and renewable energy infrastructure.

Christchurch-based Vynco is investing in advanced manufacturing equipment that will lift efficiency and expand capacity.

These are not abstract policy effects.

They are real businesses making real decisions – earlier, larger, and more productively – because the incentives have changed.

That matters, because capital deepening is how productivity rises. And productivity growth is how wages grow sustainably over time.

But there is a broader issue that needs to be confronted.

Investment Boost only works in the longer term if businesses believe it will endure.

Firms do not invest in long-lived capital – plant, machinery, buildings – if they think the rules may change after the next election.

So, my question to Mr Hipkins is straightforward.

Will they commit to retaining Investment Boost as a permanent fixture of our tax settings to unlock growth or will it be sacrificed to fund higher spending and new taxes?

This Government’s position is clear.

We back ownership.

We back investment.

And we back productivity-enhancing tax settings.

Policy stability, long-term reform and the growth opportunity

I want to make a broader point about policy stability, because this is where long-term growth is won or lost.

Business investment decisions depend on confidence: confidence in the regulatory environment, confidence in the tax system, and confidence that major settings will not be reopened or rewritten after every election.

There is strong evidence, here and overseas, that uncertainty around tax policy has a chilling effect on investment. When businesses hear ongoing debate about capital gains taxes, wealth taxes, inheritance taxes, or new taxes on investment and savings, they delay decisions, reduce scale, or take capital elsewhere.

That uncertainty is not theoretical. It has been lived.

This Government is taking a different approach.

We are committed to stability where stability supports growth. Not because change is never needed, but because constant churn comes at a real economic cost.

Good economic policy is not about novelty or relitigating the same arguments every three years.

It is about credibility, consistency, and giving people the confidence to invest, train, and build for the long term.

That principle runs through our broader reform programme.

If we step back, the question is not just what grows the economy this year, but what kind of economy New Zealand becomes over the next 10 to 20 years.

We have emerging sectors with enormous potential. From agritech and advanced manufacturing to digital services, biotech, clean energy and critical minerals. Unlocking that potential requires more than one-off incentives. It requires long-term settings that endure across economic cycles.

That is why we are backing reforms that strengthen both the economic and human foundations of growth.

Our reform agenda is not Band Aid solutions or quick fixes, but systemic changes, from competition reform to procurement reform to real transformation of the public sector and its delivery of services, digitising public services, enabling housing growth through investing in new funding and financing tools in competitive land markets, infrastructure funding and financing and planning. 

This real reform doesn’t happen overnight, but it is essential, and in too many cases, overturned. Today, I want to focus on just three key areas where that reform agenda is significant. 

The first is education. Here we are lifting performance by fixing the basics, because productivity ultimately depends on skills.

That is why we are:

• refocusing the system on core skills
• strengthening curriculum clarity
• investing in structured literacy and numeracy,
• and beginning the work to replace NCEA with a more credible, coherent qualification

These reforms are essential to give New Zealanders the skills to succeed, and give employers confidence in the workforce they are investing in. And no one will argue with the fact that achievement of those who are undergoing structured literacy has increased significantly. 

According to our studies that doesn’t just mean that productivity growth, or GDP, will be increased in the next quarter, but that achieving better skills for our students is essential to our 20-year productivity goals. 

The second area where we are strengthening ownership and long-term savings is through our policy to increase KiwiSaver contributions over time. 

As Finance Minister, we made that commitment in last year’s Budget, and KiwiSaver default contributions will now increase half a per cent from this year and rise again in two years. 

As National Party’s finance spokesperson, I’ve been proud to announce our policy of increasing KiwiSaver contributions beyond that over time – lifting domestic capital, strengthening household resilience, and supporting investment in New Zealand businesses.

And the third area is our reforms to the planning system, because growth cannot happen if building is blocked.

Replacing the Resource Management Act is one of the most important economic reforms underway. The two new Bills Chris Bishop has put forward fundamentally rebalance the system by:

• reducing unnecessary delay
• clarifying decision-making pathways
• improving certainty for investors
• enabling nationally significant infrastructure to proceed, and making growth easier rather than harder

If we are serious about lifting productivity, we cannot continue with a system that makes it harder to build than to object.

And we are making strategic investments in human capital that will strengthen our workforce and our economy for decades. That includes expanding medical education right here with the University of Waikato Medical School.

From 2028, the Waikato Medical School will train an additional 120 doctors each year, focused on primary care and community health, helping reduce reliance on overseas workforce and improving access to timely care for families, especially in rural and provincial areas. 

This is a long-term investment in people – building the pipeline of doctors we need, creating new jobs, and strengthening the health workforce across this region and the country. And significantly, is occurring not just with Government funding, but with the contribution of the university and philanthropy as well.

We are also already seeing what disciplined reform can deliver.

A year into Kāinga Ora’s Turnaround Plan, performance is improving while debt is being brought under control. When this Government came into office, Kāinga Ora’s debt had grown from $2.3 billion to $16.5 billion, with forecasts showing it heading toward almost $25 billion. Clear direction and tighter discipline have changed that trajectory. Operating costs have been cut by $211 million in a single year, and peak debt has been reduced by $9.5 billion, now expected to top out much lower.

Importantly, this has occurred while outcomes have improved. Build costs are falling, renewals are accelerating, rent arrears are down by nearly 3000 households, and tenancy satisfaction has risen to 87 percent. It is a practical example of what happens when government focuses on accountability, value for money, and delivery – lifting performance, while reducing debt.

Taken together, these reforms share a common purpose.

They back ownership.

They reward investment.

They lift productivity.

And they provide the policy consistency New Zealand needs to grow with confidence over the long term.

That is what economic leadership looks like, and it is the platform on which sustainable growth is built.

Closing reflection

Let me finish where I began – with choices.

New Zealand’s future will be shaped by whether we back the people who invest, build, and create opportunity, or burden them with uncertainty and cost.

This Government has made its choice.

We are backing ownership.

We are backing investment.

We are backing productivity.

We are fixing the basics and building the future.

Others may argue for higher taxes and more spending.

But every one of those choices comes with a price – and that price is paid by hard working Kiwis.

If we make disciplined choices grounded in the simple belief: that New Zealand succeeds when people have confidence in the future, clear rules to operate within, and the freedom to invest and grow.

Then New Zealand’s future is not something to be cautious about, 

It is something to be confident in — and something to build. 

Thank you.

MIL OSI

The final stretch of the Eastern Busway in Botany can now get underway, Transport Minister Chris Bishop and Auckland Minister Simeon Brown say.

“The NZ Transport Agency (NZTA) and Auckland Council have confirmed $101 million in funding to build the Botany link route at Guys Reserve, meaning more efficient transport choices are on the way for Aucklanders living in Botany,” Mr Bishop says.
“This is the final piece of the $1.4 billion Eastern Busway project. It’s a key part of Auckland’s rapid transit network, connecting East Auckland to the wider region and providing faster, more reliable journeys.

“Connecting Botany to Pakuranga and Panmure, with largely separated busways, means travel from Botany to Auckland’s city centre will take a reliable 40 minutes by bus and train.

“By 2028 the Eastern Busway is forecasted to carry 18,000 passengers per day, with 24,000 passengers per day by 2048.

“Alongside the City Rail Link, which opens this year, these projects will reshape the way people get around Auckland. The already-open Panmure to Pakuranga busway is proof of how rapid transit can give people better access to jobs and opportunities across the city.”

“The Eastern Busway is a major joint investment by the Government and Auckland Council, delivering 7km of dedicated busway, five new bus stations, and the Reeves Road Flyover,” Minister Brown says.

“Completing the full busway through to Botany Town Centre is a key milestone. It will integrate with the future Airport to Botany Busway and improve public transport options for people living and working in East Auckland.

“Some claimed that removing Labour’s Regional Fuel Tax in Auckland would stop this project. We axed the tax, Aucklanders are saving money every time they fill up, and the Eastern Busway is being delivered in full. Actions speak louder than words.

“Construction on the final section will begin in March, with work continuing at pace along Tī Rākau Drive to deliver the rest of the corridor.

“I look forward to getting out on site in the coming months with Minister Bishop and Mayor Brown to mark the start of construction and see this important project moving forward for Auckland.“

Notes to editor:

• The Eastern Busway is delivered by an alliance of Auckland Transport with Fletcher Construction, ACCIONA, AECOM and Jacobs, in partnership with mana whenua.
• The project includes 12km of dedicated walking and cycleways, 7km of busway and 5 new stations. It will deliver wide-ranging benefits for the area, increasing access to jobs and education, and attracting investment and growth.
• In mid-February, construction along Tī Rākau Drive will move into its next milestone configuration as traffic heading towards Botany shifts temporarily onto the new busway lanes, opening up the next construction area for work to begin. As Auckland Transport continues to construct the busway along Tī Rākau Drive, two lanes will always remain open in each direction for vehicles.
• People can already use the busway between Pakūranga and Panmure Station, where they can connect to trains to the city and the south. When the City Rail Link opens in the second half of this year, people will be able to easily get to even more places on a bus and direct train such as Eden Park, New Lynn and Henderson.
• The Eastern Busway will open in 2027.

MIL OSI

Rubber goods manufacturer Skellerup has posted a record first half profit on the back of higher sales across the business.

Key numbers for the six months ended December compared with a year ago:

• Net profit $28.9m vs $24.2m
• Revenue $183.5m vs $165.3m
• Pre-tax earnings $40.6m vs $35m
• Forecast profit range $57-62m
• Interim dividend 10 cents per share vs 9 cps

Skellerup chief executive Graham Leaming called its record half year result an “excellent” start to the year, with growth in all its key divisions.

“The growth in revenue and earnings was broad-based with the most notable contributions coming from the key dairy, potable and wastewater applications.”

He said the company had met increased demand, brought new products to market and coped with the imposition of tariffs.

The industrial division, which makes products for water supplies and wastewater, foam for boats and roofing products, had a strong lift in sales to Australia and the US, as well as improved margins.

The agriculture division, which provides rubber components for dairying as well as the well known gumboots, also sold well overseas.

The company gets about 80 percent of revenue from overseas, and close to 40 percent from US sales, but revamped sources of supply and manufacture to reduce the impact of the US tariffs.

Leaming said despite continuing global uncertainty the company had a strong pipeline of work, and was expecting a full year profit between $57-$62m, compared to last year’s $54.5m.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

The Government’s Investment Boost is already changing investment behaviour, bringing projects forward, increasing scale, and lifting productivity across the economy, Minister for Economic Growth Nicola Willis says.

New Inland Revenue survey data shows the policy is working, tipping investment decisions early, increasing scale, and bringing capital forward.

“Among firms that invested in new assets and were aware of Investment Boost, 40 per cent say it increased their investment spending over the past year, including 11 per cent reporting a significant increase directly because of the policy,” Nicola Willis says.

“Looking ahead, the impact is even clearer. Nearly half of firms planning to invest over the next five years say Investment Boost is positively influencing those plans, with 14 per cent expecting a large increase in investment as a result.

More than half of firms surveyed report changing the timing, scale or type of investment they are making, including bringing projects forward and shifting toward productivity-enhancing assets.

“Inland Revenue modelling shows the policy reduces the effective marginal tax rate on new capital investment by around five to six percentage points on average, making previously marginal projects viable and encouraging more investment to proceed.”

This data underlines the importance of policy certainty to long-term growth.

“When it was launched, Inland Revenue estimated that Investment Boost would lift New Zealand’s GDP by 1 per cent, wages by 1.5 per cent and capital stock by 1.6 per cent over the next 20 years, with around half of those gains expected in the first five years – todays data shows we are well on track to reaching those marks.

“The Government has been clear it backs ownership, investment and stable productivity-enhancing tax policy.

“New Zealand does not grow by taxing more and investing less. It grows by backing ambition, rewarding success, and giving businesses the confidence to invest for the long term.”

Notes to editors:

 Investment Boost changes are already visible on the ground:

• A Dunedin manufacturer, United Machinists, has brought forward investment in robotics and automation rather than phasing it over several years;
• Foot Science International in Christchurch has accelerated investment in automation and renewable energy infrastructure, while;
• Vynco is investing in advanced manufacturing equipment to lift efficiency and expand capacity.

MIL OSI

How much of the country’s total personal tax bill is your region picking up?

If you are in Auckland or Wellington, the answer may be more than you might think.

Inland Revenue data covering personal taxable income and income tax attributable to individuals shows that Auckland pays just under 38 percent of the country’s personal tax, and has just over 33 percent of the population. This is based on information for the 2023 financial year – the data for the 2025 year is not yet available.

Wellington pays 12.7 percent and has 10.5 percent of the population.

Waikato, in contrast, has 8.8 percent of the population but pays only 8.3 percent of the tax bill. Northland has 3.5 percent of the population and 2.8 percent of the tax bill.

Whanganui/Manawatu has 4.8 percent of the population and only 4 percent of the bill.

On a per-individual basis, Wellington has the highest personal tax bill at $12,300. Auckland is just behind at $11,500 and Canterbury is in third place with $9900. Otago is fourth at $9700.

Gisborne has the lowest at $7700.

Much of the variation can be explained by different areas’ income.

Auckland and Wellington are the areas of the country with the highest incomes, followed by Canterbury and Waikato.

Infometrics chief executive Brad Olsen said Auckland and Wellington had more people in the higher tax brackets who paid more tax.

“We know, for example, that Wellington City, rather than region, has the highest personal incomes in the country. Infometrics estimates show that Wellington region average annual personal earnings were around $90,600 and about $88,600 for the Auckland region. Those were the only two regions above the national average.

“If you look at the likes of the West Coast, which has got a fairly small proportion, and smaller than its total population. Even though the West Coast actually has some reasonable average earnings, that much smaller population is showing through there in terms of where they sit.”

He said Bay of Plenty, Manawatu, Northland and Hawke’s Bay all stood out for the gap between their population proportion and the proportion of tax paid.

“The likes of Northland especially, you know, you’ve often got a high level of benefit dependency there, and potentially also more people that at the very margins might not participate quite as much with government… probably operating a little bit further away from the strict expectations of the IRD.

“Not necessarily trying to circumvent the law, just that you find some rural provincial economies that often more cash based, or operate sort of more in a community setting.”

Simplicity economist Shamubeel Eaqub said it was interesting to consider the tax paid compared to where the government spent its money.

“Last time I looked at it which was years ago, places like Auckland paid more into central government coffers than they took out in public services… large, dense places that are rich will redistribute. That’s what the redistribution mechanism is for… poverty is quite often disproportionate. We tend to have a lot more deprivation in rural New Zealand.”

Olsen said it was a hard question to contemplate.

“Transport funding, for example. That can sort of fluctuate quite a lot year on year … when the Waikato Expressway or Transmission Gully were getting built, those regions probably got quite a lot relative to otherwise, but they’re maybe not getting nearly as much now.”

He said areas where larger numbers of people were on NZ Super could also be receiving more government funding than others.

“There are a few hotspots across the country where there’s a higher average age proportionately – Thames Coromandel, the likes of Kapiti District and similar, so those areas will have more as well. And then it’s also going to be areas that have a greater government workforce concentration. The likes of Auckland and Wellington do generally have a fairly large workforce concentration, particularly Wellington, of course.

“A reasonable amount of the Wellington city economy is driven by the pay and work of the government workforce.”

How does your region compare?

Wellington

$12,300 per individual

10.5 percent of the population and 12.7 percent of tax paid

Total of more than $6.2 billion in tax paid

Auckland

$11,500 per individual

33.4 percent of the population and 37.7 percent of tax paid

Total of nearly $18.5 billion in tax paid

Canterbury

$9900 per individual

12.9 percent of the population and 12.6 percent of tax paid

Otago

$9700 per individual

4.1 percent of the population and 4 percent of tax paid

Waikato

$9500 per individual

8.8 percent of population and 8.3 percent of tax paid

Taranaki

$9300 per individual

2.5 percent of population and 2.3 percent of tax paid

Nelson

$9100 per individual

1.2 percent of population and 1.1 percent of tax paid

Bay of Plenty

$9100

6.87 percent of population and 6 percent of tax paid

Southland

$8900 per individual

2.1 percent of population and 1.8 percent of tax paid

Marlborough

$8900 per individual

1 percent of population and 0.8 percent of tax paid

Tasman

$8700 per individual

1 percent of population and 0.8 percent of tax paid

Hawke’s Bay

$8400 per individual

3.7 percent of population and 3.1 percent of tax paid

Manawatū-Whanganui

$8400 per individual

4.8 percent of population and 4 percent of tax paid

Northland

$8100 per individual

3.5 percent of population and 2.8 percent of tax paid

West Coast

$7800 per individual

0.6 percent of population and 0.5 percent of tax paid

Gisborne

$7700 percent of individual

1 percent of population and 0.8 percent of tax paid

Sign up for Money with Susan Edmunds, a weekly newsletter covering all the things that affect how we make, spend and invest money.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

The State of the Nation report released today by Better Taxes Coalition member, The Salvation Army, shows persistent inequality across most measures, from child poverty and food insecurity, to unemployment and housing affordability.

The Better Taxes campaign endorses the remarks of Dr Bonnie Robinson, Salvation Army Director Social Policy and Parliamentary Unit, at the launch that something significant is required to address inequality and poverty in Aotearoa New Zealand:

“Rebalancing our tax system to gather more revenue from those who can most afford to contribute, and to fund the things that will improve living standards for everyone in Aotearoa is critical to shifting the dial on the shocking picture painted by the Salvation Army report,” said Glenn Barclay, spokesperson for the Better Taxes campaign.

The report lays bare numerous areas where we need to do more to support the most vulnerable in our communities:

• Child poverty rates have increased and the number of children in material hardship in 2024 was higher than the in 2018 (baseline measure).
• Numbers receiving welfare assistance rose over the last year, but restricted access to hardship support meant there was less support for households at this time of greater need.
• Food insecurity remained high in 2025. Salvation Army food assistance through food parcels increased with some 90,000 food parcels distributed, 7 percent higher than in 2024 and almost 50 percent more than in 2019 pre-Covid-19. 
• Although household living cost increases eased over the last year, this was uneven and lower-income households still faced higher household costs increases compared to high earners.
• Public housing units increased, but new-builds are poised to fall off the cliff. While homelessness continued to rise and thousands remain on public housing lists, some specialised housing services for people facing homelessness actually reduced over the course of 2025.
• The data shows that structural settings continue to produce inequitable outcomes for tangata whenua and vulnerable communities.

“These are the kinds of pressures that are driving the fiscal challenges that the Treasury and Inland Revenue have identified in a number of recent reports. In order to address these pressures and enable everyone in Aotearoa New Zealand to live good lives we need to gather more revenue”, said Barclay.

The Better Taxes for a Better Future Campaign is a coalition of over 20 organisations led by Tax Justice Aotearoa.

We believe that tax reform is the only solution to the current challenges facing Aotearoa NZ.  We need the tax system to:

• be transparent
• raise more revenue to enable us address the challenges we face
• make sure people who have more to contribute make that contribution: that we gather more revenue from wealth, gains from wealth, all forms of income, and corporates
• make greater use of fair taxes to promote good health and environmental health
• address the tax impact on the least well off in our society.

MIL OSI

MIL OSI

The government wants taxpayers to pay for a new liquefied natural gas import terminal, but is promising lower power prices will come as a result.

It is estimated the new terminal, expected to be ready next year at the earliest, will save New Zealanders around $265 million a year by reducing price spikes and lowering the risk premiums.

But a new levy will be charged to get it built.

The government is touting it as a solution to New Zealand’s energy woes.

“It will mean that Kiwis will not need to suffer through an endless series of winter bill shocks,” energy minister Simon Watts said on Monday.

‘Vital part of the overall puzzle’ – Energy Resources Aotearoa

The idea is that it will reduce the risk of shortages during a dry year.

Liquefied natural gas (LNG) can be imported at large volumes, stored, and then ‘regasified’ to be sent out for use.

John Carnegie, chief executive of industry body Energy Resources Aotearoa, said the terminal would be a useful insurance policy for when the weather did not play ball.

“LNG will be useful as a vital part of the overall puzzle of New Zealand’s energy system security,” he said.

“LNG can be expected to take the heat out of the electricity market when renewable fuels like wind, water, and the sun don’t turn up when they’re needed. It will place downward pressure on wholesale electricity prices and reduce the risk premium in the out years.”

Last year’s Frontier Report – commissioned to review the performance of the electricity market – warned it should only be used as a last resort.

The report said using it just to meet dry year risk made no economic sense, as the large fixed costs would be spread over a relatively small amount of output.

But Carnegie said LNG provided a “virtuous circle” to support the development of more renewables, and pointed the finger at the previous government’s ban on offshore oil and gas exploration as a reason why power prices were spiking in dry years.

“More wind and solar and batteries are great, but also the conundrum is their growth exacerbates the problem of being too weather dependent. So we need a reliable fuel to fill the gaps which domestic gas previously filled. And so New Zealand’s energy system, I believe, will be at its most effective when renewable generation and firming fuels like LNG and domestic gas work in harmony.”

A separate study by gas company Clarus, along with the four gentailers, found it was feasible but would likely be costly, and only needed occasionally.

Following the announcement, Clarus’ chief executive Paul Goodeve said it would increase New Zealand’s energy resilience and increase the range of markets it could draw from.

“At the moment, the coal that we import is relatively restricted where it comes from. The global market in LNG is vast and diverse, and appears to be continuing as we speak.”

Goodeve was confident it could be financially sustainable, and the government’s involvement in the procurement system made sense.

“It appears as though they’ve got work done by financial advisors who pointed out the benefits to the overall New Zealand energy system, but particularly the electricity system, of having LNG in the mix.”

Details on the shortlist of six were being kept under wraps, but all were in Taranaki.

Port of Taranaki chief executive Simon Craddock said it was a great opportunity for the region, and while the port was not an LNG developer, it was keen to support it.

“The current terminal developments, as I understand it, are all focused on the Taranaki region, and the reason for that is largely proximity to the Maui gas pipeline. But the developers are international companies who may or may not partner with local interests.”

Craddock said there was nothing the port had seen that could have major adverse effects on its current trade.

“The port has a number of advantages… the proximity to the pipeline, we’re the only deep water port on the West Coast. So this is the sort of thing we do day to day, where our main customer to-date has been Methanex. We also have other petrochemical customers on the port, so it really is within our core business suite.”

ACT’s energy spokesperson Simon Court said it was a “sad but necessary bookend” to the oil and gas exploration ban.

“Labour promoted the view that gas is something to be ashamed of. It’s not. Gas is a practical, reliable option when hydro lakes are low. Gas keeps factories running, heaters humming, and lights buzzing. And the environmental case for gas is strong too, because when we can’t burn gas, we burn coal,” he said.

‘It’s cooked’ – Green Party

On Monday, Watts said discussions were commercially sensitive but it would cost “north of a billion dollars” to build.

To pay for those infrastructure costs, the government will charge users an electricity levy of $2 to $4 per megawatt hour.

But Watts was keen to point to the net benefit, with advice showing the facility was expected to cut future prices by at least $10 per megawatt hour.

“So straight away, we’re in the money in regards to benefits versus costs, and our expectation of having that certainty of supply takes away the price spikes that we saw, for example, in 2024.”

That has not convinced the Green Party.

Co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick said the government was guaranteeing added costs to New Zealanders, while relying on “hopes, wishes, and prayers” for future savings.

“I think it’s absolutely bonkers for power bills, for the planet, for our country’s energy resilience. The only people who want this are the fossil fuel industry and seemingly the National Party. Whatever claim, whatever remaining claim the Nats have to being economic managers is now, frankly, up in flames,” she said.

“Honestly, it’s cooked. Christopher Luxon has once again chosen to throw New Zealanders’ money at fossil fuels, which is bad for power bills, energy security and the planet. This is Christopher Luxon’s New Zealand. Profits are flowing offshore, while New Zealanders are paying handsomely for it.”

‘Gas tax’ – Labour

Labour, meanwhile, is calling it a “gas tax”.

Leader Chris Hipkins said households were already struggling with the cost of living, and he did not believe it would reduce power prices.

“I think, if anything, they’re trying to make the argument that this will decrease the rate of increase in power prices. There are other ways to do that. A billion dollars would buy you a hell of a lot of solar panels and batteries, which would save households a significant amount of money.”

Hipkins dismissed questions over whether Labour would terminate any agreements, or put the costs onto the energy companies and take away the levy on households, as “hypothetical.”

The prime minister’s assertion it was a levy, and not a tax, was criticised by the Taxpayers’ Union.

“You don’t make electricity bills cheaper by taxing them. Dancing on the head of a pin over what is a tax and what is a levy is a Labour Party talking point. Luxon should spare us the spin and abandon this folly,” said spokesperson James Ross.

Climate change advocacy group 350 Aotearoa was previously one of twenty signatories that sent an open letter to Luxon and Watts, urging against the new terminal when it was first signalled in October.

Following the confirmation, co-director Alva Feldmeier said while she agreed with the government that New Zealanders were feeling the squeeze with their power bills, the terminal was not the solution.

“Essentially, what they’re doing now is putting a new tax on every New Zealander’s power bill to subsidise an expensive sunset industry,” she said.

Feldmeier said LNG-generated electricity was double the price of new renewable electricity, and the risk of importing and being reliant on international fossil fuels was that New Zealand could also import international price shocks.

“This is a political choice this government is making. They’d rather kowtow to the fossil fuel and the gas lobbies and keep us hooked on gas for longer, than explore how we’re going to get off it, and how we’re going to make some tough decisions in the next few months and years.”

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

MIL OSI

Neither the right or left bloc would be able to govern if an election were held today, according to the latest Taxpayers’ Union-Curia Poll.

The Labour Party has dropped 0.3 points to 34.1 percent, while National dropped 0.2 points to 31.3 percent.

New Zealand First dropped 1.4 points to 10.5 percent, while the Greens jumped 2.6 points to 10.3 percent.

The ACT Party dropped 0.3 points to 6.7 percent, while Te Pāti Māori dropped 0.1 points to 2.9 percent.

The combined projected seats for the centre-right bloc was down 3 seats to 60, while the combined seats for the centre-left block rose 3 seats to 60.

On these numbers, there would be a hung Parliament.

For parties outside of Parliament, TOP was on 1.4 percent (+0.7 points), NZ Outdoors and Freedom was on 1.2 percent (+0.6 points), Vision NZ was on 0.4 percent (+0.1 points), and New Conservatives were on 0.1 percent (-0.2 points).

Cost of living remained the most important issue, jumping 7.4 points to 34.9 percent; the highest result since May 2024.

The economy more generally sat as the second most important issue on 12.0 percent (-2.8 points), followed by health on 9.2 percent (+0.4 points).

The poll was conducted by Curia Market Research Ltd for the NZ Taxpayers’ Union. It is a random poll of 1000 adult New Zealanders and is weighted to the overall adult population. It was conducted by phone (landlines and mobile) and online between Sunday 1 February and Tuesday 3 February 2026. It has a maximum margin of error of +/- 3.1 percent.

Curia is a long-running and established pollster in New Zealand. In 2024 it resigned its membership from the Research Association New Zealand (RANZ) industry body.

Polls compare to the most recent poll by the same polling company, as different polls can use different methodologies. They are intended to track trends in voting preferences, showing a snapshot in time, rather than be a completely accurate predictor of the final election result.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

$3.6bn GPU Financing Secured for Microsoft Contract¹

Targeted 140k GPU Expansion on Track to Deliver $3.4bn ARR by End of CY26²

New 1.6GW Data Center Campus in Oklahoma

NEW YORK, Feb. 05, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — IREN Limited (NASDAQ: IREN) (“IREN” or “the Company”) today reported its financial results for the three months ended December 31, 2025.

Highlights

• $3.6bn GPU financing secured for Microsoft contract¹
  • Interest rate of
  • Together with Microsoft prepayment ($1.9bn) covers 95% of GPU-related capex
• Targeted 140k GPU expansion on track to deliver $3.4bn ARR by end of CY26²
  • Horizon 1-4 construction progressing to schedule
  • British Columbia AI Cloud expansion ongoing, with ~$0.4bn ARR now under contract for Prince George and remaining contract negotiations supporting >$0.5bn ARR³
• New 1.6GW data center campus in Oklahoma
  • Increases secured grid-connected power to >4.5GW
  • Grid-studies complete, with power scheduled to ramp from 2028
  • Large scale site (2,000 acres) with low latency network connectivity

Financing

• IREN continues to strengthen its capital structure and fund growth through diversified sources:
  • Cash and cash equivalents were $2.8bn as of January 31, 2026⁴
  • >$9.2bn funding secured financial year to date across customer prepayments, convertible notes, GPU leasing and GPU financing
• Ongoing financing workstreams include:
  • GPU financing
  • Data center financing
  • Select corporate level initiatives

Q2 FY26 Financial Results

• Results reflected continued progress in the transition from Bitcoin mining to AI Cloud, with capacity increasingly allocated to higher-value AI workloads and AI Cloud revenues accelerating as deployments ramped:
  • Total revenue decreased to $184.7m (vs. Q1 FY26 $240.3m)
  • Net income (loss) of $(155.4)m (vs. Q1 FY26 $384.6m)
  • Adj. EBITDA decreased to $75.3m (vs. Q1 FY26 $91.7m)⁵
  • EBITDA of $(243.9)m (vs. Q1 FY26 $662.7m)⁵
• Net income (loss) and EBITDA were impacted by significant non-cash and non-recurring items, primarily:
  • Unrealized losses related to prepaid forwards and capped calls associated with convertible notes (vs. significant unrealized gains on such positions in Q1 FY26), together with a one-time debt conversion inducement expense, totaling $(219.2)m
  • Mining hardware impairments of $(31.8)m related to the ongoing ASIC-to-GPU transition across British Columbia
  • Stock-based compensation expense of $(58.2)m, including $(22.3)m of accelerated amortization on performance-based restricted stock units and stock options, driven by materially higher share prices exceeding defined performance thresholds
  • Partially offset by an income tax benefit primarily on the release of previously recognized deferred tax liabilities relating to the unrealized gain on financial instruments of $182.5m

Management Commentary

“Last quarter marked meaningful progress across capacity expansion, customer engagement, and capital formation, reflecting IREN’s progress as a scaled AI Cloud platform,” said Daniel Roberts, Co-Founder and Co-CEO of IREN.

“We are seeing the strongest demand environment to date, and importantly, that demand is being met by a proven execution capability. Over several years, we have consistently delivered data center capacity on time and at scale, and that delivery track record continues to resonate with customers who value reliability alongside performance.

“With more than 4.5GW of secured power, we are able to advance a broad set of opportunities in our pipeline and support the next phase of growth. Our $3.4bn ARR target represents an early stage of monetization relative to the size of our secured power portfolio, highlighting the scale of the platform we are building.”

Q2 FY26 Results Webcast & Conference Call

IREN will host its Q2 FY26 results webcast and conference call at the following time:

The webcast will be recorded, and the replay will be accessible shortly after the event at https://iren.com/investor/events-and-presentations

About IREN

IREN is a leading AI Cloud Service Provider, delivering large-scale GPU clusters for AI training and inference. IREN’s vertically integrated platform is underpinned by its expansive portfolio of grid-connected land and data centers in renewable-rich regions across the U.S. and Canada.

Contacts

Investors
ir@iren.com

Media
media@iren.com

Assumptions and Notes

1. GPU financing and applicable interest rate is subject to agreed pricing parameters, level of base interest rates, execution of definitive long form documentation and customary conditions precedent.
2. ARR of $3.4bn represents expected $1.94bn average annual revenue under Microsoft contract plus estimated $1.5bn ARR from ~63k GPU deployment at British Columbia sites, based on internal company assumptions regarding GPU models, utilization and pricing. It is not fully contracted, there can be no assurance that it will be achieved, and actual revenue may differ materially. Assumes on time delivery and commissioning of GPUs.
3. ARR under contract of $0.4bn at Prince George is calculated as GPU/hour pricing for contracted GPUs as of February 5, 2026 multiplied by 8,760 hours per year and includes annualized revenue for storage and ancillaries. ARR under contract includes amounts that are not yet revenue-generating until the relevant GPUs are delivered, commissioned, and in service. There can be no assurance that contracted GPUs will result in such hours or pricing, and actual revenue may vary materially.
4. Reflects USD equivalent, unaudited preliminary cash and cash equivalents as of January 31, 2026.
5. EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA are non-GAAP financial measures. Refer to page 12 for a reconciliation to the nearest comparable GAAP financial measure.

Forward-Looking Statements

This press release includes “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (“Securities Act”), and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (“Exchange Act”), that involve substantial risks and uncertainties. Forward-looking statements include information concerning possible or assumed future results of operations, including descriptions of our business plan and strategies and trends we expect to affect our business. These statements often include words such as “anticipate,” “expect,” “suggest,” “plan,” “believe,” “intend,” “estimate,” “target,” “project,” “should,” “potential,” “could,” “would,” “may,” “will,” “forecast,” and other similar expressions Forward-looking statements may also be made, verbally or in writing, by members of our Board or management team. Such statements are subject to the same limitations, uncertainties, assumptions and disclaimers set out in this press release.

We base these forward-looking statements or projections on our current expectations, plans and assumptions that we have made in light of our experience in the industry, as well as our perceptions of historical trends, current conditions, expected future developments and other factors we believe are appropriate under the circumstances and at such time. The forward-looking statements are subject to and involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions and you should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements. Although we believe that these forward-looking statements are based on reasonable assumptions at the time they are made, you should be aware that many factors could affect our actual financial results or results of operations, and could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in the forward-looking statements. Factors that may materially affect such forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to: Bitcoin price and foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations; our ability to obtain additional capital on commercially reasonable terms and in a timely manner to meet our capital needs and facilitate our expansion plans; the terms of any future financing or any refinancing, restructuring or modification to the terms of any existing or future financing, which could require us to comply with onerous covenants, restrictions or guarantees, and our ability to service our debt obligations; our ability to successfully execute on our growth strategies and operating plans, including our ability to continue to develop our existing data center sites, design and deploy direct-to-chip liquid cooling systems, and diversify and expand into the market for high-performance computing (“HPC”) solutions (including the market for AI Cloud Services and potential colocation services such as powered shell, build-to-suit and turnkey data centers (collectively “HPC and AI services”)); our limited experience with respect to new markets we have entered or may seek to enter, including the market for HPC and AI services; our ability to remain competitive in dynamic and rapidly evolving industries; expectations with respect to the ongoing profitability, viability, operability, security, popularity and public perceptions of the Bitcoin network; expectations with respect to the useful life and obsolescence of hardware (including GPUs, hardware for Bitcoin mining and any current or future HPC and AI services we offer); delays, increases in costs or reductions in the supply of equipment used in our operations including as a result of tariffs and duties, and certain equipment (including GPUs, hardware for Bitcoin mining and any other hardware for any current or future HPC and AI services we offer) being in high demand due to global supply chain constraints, and our ability to secure additional hardware (including GPUs, hardware for Bitcoin mining and any other hardware for any current or future HPC and AI services we offer), on commercially reasonable terms or at all; expectations with respect to the profitability, viability, operability, security, popularity and public perceptions of any current and future HPC and AI services we offer; our ability to secure and retain customers on commercially reasonable terms or at all, particularly as it relates to our strategy to expand into markets for HPC and AI services; our ability to establish and maintain a customer base for our HPC and AI services business and customer concentration; our ability to manage counterparty risk (including credit risk) associated with any current or future customers, including customers of our HPC and AI services and other counterparties; the risk that any current or future customers, including customers of our HPC and AI services or other counterparties, may terminate, default on or underperform their contractual obligations; our ability to perform under, and observe our obligations pursuant to, contractual obligations with counterparties, including customers of our HPC and AI services; changing political and geopolitical conditions, including changing international trade policies and the implementation of wide-ranging, reciprocal and retaliatory tariffs, surtaxes and other similar import or export duties, or trade restrictions; Bitcoin global hashrate fluctuations; our ability to secure renewable energy, renewable energy certificates, power capacity, timely grid connections, facilities and sites on commercially reasonable terms or at all; delays and costs associated with, or failure to obtain or complete, permitting approvals, grid connections and other development activities customary for greenfield or brownfield infrastructure projects, including as a result of the Electric Reliability Council of Texas’s (“ERCOT”) announced amendments to the approval process for large load interconnection requests; our reliance on power, network and utilities providers, third party mining pools, exchanges, banks, insurance providers and our ability to maintain relationships with such parties; expectations regarding availability and pricing of electricity; our participation and ability to successfully participate in demand response products and services and other load management programs run, operated or offered by electricity network operators, regulators or electricity market operators; the availability, reliability and/or cost of electricity supply, hardware and electrical and data center infrastructure, including with respect to any electricity outages and any laws and regulations that may restrict the electricity supply available to us; any variance between the actual operating performance of our miner hardware achieved compared to the nameplate performance including hashrate; electricity market risks relating to changes in laws, regulations and requirements of market operators, network operators and/or regulatory bodies, including with respect to interconnection of facilities of large electrical loads to the ERCOT grid (for example, via a process that may batch multiple large load interconnection requests), grid stability, voltage ride-through, frequency ride-through and curtailment obligations; heightened complexity and additional constraints in energy markets including load ramp requirements by utilities or grid operators which may not align with our planned data center development and commissioning timelines; our ability to curtail our electricity consumption and/or monetize electricity depending on market conditions, including changes in Bitcoin mining economics and prevailing electricity prices; actions undertaken or inaction by electricity network and market operators, regulators, governments or communities in the regions in which we operate, including such actions that could result in the estimated power availability at secured sites being materially less than initially expected, available too late, delayed, conditioned upon technical or operational requirements or not available in each case whether at sustainable cost or at all; the availability, suitability, reliability and cost of internet connections at our facilities; our ability to operate in an evolving regulatory environment; our ability to successfully operate and maintain our property and infrastructure; reliability and performance of our infrastructure compared to expectations; malicious attacks on our property, infrastructure or IT systems; our ability to secure connection agreements to access power sources and permits or to maintain in good standing the operating and other permits, approvals and/or licenses required for our operations, construction activities and business which could be delayed by regulatory approval processes, may not be successful or may be cost prohibitive; our ability to obtain, maintain, protect and enforce our intellectual property rights and confidential information; any intellectual property infringement and product liability claims; whether the secular trends we expect to drive growth in our business materialize to the degree we expect them to, or at all; any pending or future acquisitions, dispositions, joint ventures or other strategic transactions, including our ability to consummate any such transactions on terms favorable to the Group or at all; the occurrence of any environmental, health and safety incidents at our sites, and any material costs relating to environmental, health and safety requirements or liabilities; damage to our property and infrastructure and the risk that any insurance we maintain may not fully cover all potential exposures; settlement and termination of proceedings relating to the default under certain equipment financing facilities, ongoing securities litigation, and any future litigation, claims and/or regulatory investigations, and the costs, expenses, use of resources, diversion of management time and efforts, liability and damages that may result therefrom; our failure to comply with any laws including the anti-corruption laws of the United States and various international jurisdictions; any failure of our compliance and risk management methods; any laws, regulations and ethical standards that may relate to our business, including those that relate to data centers, HPC and AI services, Bitcoin and the Bitcoin mining industry and those that relate to any other services we offer, including laws and regulations related to data privacy, cybersecurity and the storage, use or processing of information and consumer laws; our ability to attract, motivate and retain senior management and qualified employees; increased risks to our global operations including, but not limited to, political instability, acts of terrorism, theft and vandalism, cyberattacks and other cybersecurity incidents and unexpected regulatory and economic sanctions changes, among other things; climate change, severe weather conditions and natural and man-made disasters that may materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations; public health crises, including an outbreak of an infectious disease and any governmental or industry measures taken in response; damage to our brand and reputation; evolving stakeholder expectations and requirements relating to environmental, social or governance (“ESG”) issues or reporting, including actual or perceived failure to comply with such expectations and requirements; volatility with respect to the market price of our ordinary shares (“Ordinary shares”); that we do not currently pay any cash dividends on our Ordinary shares, and may not in the foreseeable future and, accordingly, your ability to achieve a return on your investment in our Ordinary shares will depend on appreciation, if any, in the price of our Ordinary shares; and other important factors discussed under “Part 1. Item 1.A. Risk Factors” in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended June 30, 2025 and “Part II. Item 1A. Risk Factors” in our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2025, as such factors may be updated from time to time in our other filings with the SEC, accessible on the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov and the Investor Relations section of IREN’s website at https:// investors.iren.com.

The foregoing list of factors is not exhaustive and does not necessarily include all of the important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in any of our forward-looking statements.

These and other important factors could cause actual results to differ materially by the forward-looking statements made in this press release. Any forward-looking statement that IREN makes in this press release speaks only as of the date of such statement. Except as required by law, IREN disclaims any obligation to update or revise, or to publicly announce any update or revision to, any of the forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

Non-GAAP Financial Measures

This press release refers to certain measures that are not recognized under GAAP and do not have a standardized meaning prescribed by GAAP. IREN uses non-GAAP measures including “EBITDA” and “Adjusted EBITDA,” and “Adjusted EBITDA margin,” (each as defined below) as additional information to complement GAAP measures by providing further understanding of the Company’s operations from management’s perspective.

EBITDA is defined as net income (loss), excluding income tax (expense) benefit, finance expense, interest income and depreciation and amortization, which are important components of our net income (loss). Further, “Adjusted EBITDA” also excludes stock based compensation, foreign exchange gain (loss), impairment of assets, certain other non-recurring income, gain (loss) on disposal of property, plant and equipment, unrealized fair value gain (loss) on financial instruments, debt conversion inducement expense, gain (loss) on partial extinguishment of financial liabilities, increase (decrease) in fair value of assets held for sale and certain other expense items. “Adjusted EBITDA margin” is defined as Adjusted EBITDA divided by revenue.

Beginning in the fiscal year ended June 30, 2026, the Company has changed its definition of Adjusted EBITDA to exclude debt conversion inducement expense. This is a change from the presentation of Adjusted EBITDA in prior periods, and these adjustments did not have any impact on the calculation of Adjusted EBITDA in prior periods.

The reconciliations of these non-GAAP financial measures to the most directly comparable GAAP financial measures are shown in the Appendix hereto.

1) For further detail, see our unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements for the quarter ended December 31, 2025, included in our Form 10-Q filed with the SEC on February 5, 2026.

1)  For further detail, see our unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements for the quarter ended December 31, 2025, included in our Form 10-Q filed with the SEC on February 5, 2026.

1)  For further detail, see our unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements for the quarter ended December 31, 2025, included in our Form 10-Q filed with the SEC on February 5, 2026.

1)  Net Income Margin is calculated as Net Income divided by Total Revenue.
2)  Debt conversion inducement expense relating to the induced conversion of a portion of the 2030 Convertible Notes and 2029 Convertible Notes.
3)  Other expenses include a one-time liquidation payment incurred in August 2024 resulting from the transition to spot pricing at the Group’s site at Childress, the reversal of the unrealized loss recorded on fixed price contracted amounts outstanding at June 30, 2024, a litigation related settlement provision, loss on theft of mining hardware in transit, one-off professional fees incurred in relation to litigation matters, and transaction costs incurred on entering the capped call transactions in conjunction with the issuance of the convertible notes.
4)  Adjusted EBITDA Margin is calculated as Adjusted EBITDA divided by Total Revenue.

– Published by The MIL Network

Oklahoma energy asset acquisition, UAE digital asset mining MOU with Greenbelt Industries, and equity financing from Aegis Capital advance integrated energy and infrastructure strategy

IBG and BlockFuel continue to progress toward completion of previously announced merger, expected to close by end of Q1 2026 pending Nasdaq listing approval

SYDNEY, Jan. 20, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Innovation Beverage Group Ltd (“IBG” or “the Company”) (Nasdaq: IBG), an innovative developer, manufacturer, and marketer of a growing beverage portfolio of 60 formulations across 13 alcoholic and non-alcoholic brands, today provided a business update highlighting progress across several strategic initiatives tied to its proposed merger with BlockFuel Energy Inc. (“BlockFuel”). These developments include energy asset acquisitions, international digital infrastructure development, financing activity, and merger-related milestones.

“Today’s business update reflects continued momentum as we work toward completing our proposed combination with BlockFuel Energy,” said Sahil Beri, Chief Executive Officer of Innovation Beverage Group. “We believe the recent operational and strategic developments at BlockFuel underscore the opportunity to create a publicly traded platform with exposure to energy production and digital infrastructure. We remain focused on navigating the remaining regulatory and closing steps to finalize the transaction.”

“Over the past several months, we have made meaningful progress executing on our strategy across energy production, power infrastructure and digital asset development,” said Daniel Lanskey, Chief Executive Officer of BlockFuel Energy. “The completion of the Oklahoma asset acquisition and the signing of our joint venture MOU in the UAE reflect our focus on building a diversified, vertically integrated energy platform as we advance toward the completion of our proposed merger with Innovation Beverage Group.”

Acquisition of Oil and Gas Production Assets in Oklahoma
BlockFuel has completed the acquisition of oil and gas production assets located in the state of Oklahoma, marking a key step in the execution of its vertically integrated energy strategy. The acquired portfolio includes forty-six (46) previously producing horizontal oil and gas wells and eight (8) saltwater disposal wells with surface facilities. The wells are situated across approximately 30,000 acres, with BlockFuel Energy now owning the majority working interest (~86%) and net revenue interest (~70%) in the wells.

The aggregate purchase price was $12.5 million, comprised of cash paid at closing, seller-financed considerations payable under an amortized note bearing interest, and $3.7 million payable in shares of the Company’s common stock. The shares are to be issued on or before April 1, 2026, at a price equal to a 15% discount to the five-day volume-weighted average price prior to issuance.

Following the closing on December 24, 2025, BlockFuel assumed operational control of the oil field assets on December 26 and initiated the process of restoring production. Initial oil sales are underway, and assets generated from these sales are expected to play an important role in supporting BlockFuel’s energy-backed digital infrastructure initiatives while generating near-term operational activity.

An update on production and well status will be made at the end of February 2026.

Natural Gas Power Generation and Launch of Digital Asset Mining Initiative in Oklahoma
BlockFuel has started planning and initial deployment activities are underway to integrate on-site natural gas–fueled power generation with digital asset mining operations across BlockFuel’s Oklahoma asset base. As natural gas production is progressively brought back online, BlockFuel is evaluating the phased commissioning of approximately 6 megawatts of modular generation capacity at select well sites.

This infrastructure is designed to utilize associated natural gas at the wellhead – including stranded, flared, and saleable gas – to support the development of energy-backed digital infrastructure alongside ongoing oil and natural gas liquids production. BlockFuel believes this strategy has the potential to enhance revenue and improve asset-level economics by monetizing natural gas through on-site power generation, with the capacity to mine up to approximately 4.5 bitcoin per month.

Joint Venture MOU with Greenbelt Industries for UAE Digital Asset Mining Project
BlockFuel has entered a binding memorandum of understanding with Greenbelt Industries LLC, a UAE-based energy generation company with proprietary biofuel manufacturing technology and integrated core production plants, to develop and operate a digital asset mining facility in Sharjah, United Arab Emirates.

The parties intend to form a three-year project-specific joint venture combining Greenbelt’s regulatory licenses, infrastructure, and biofuel-based power generation systems with BlockFuel’s ASIC mining equipment and operational expertise. The project is designed to deliver scalable, energy-efficient and fully compliant digital asset mining operations in the Middle East.

Ownership of the joint venture will be split 50.75% to Greenbelt and 49.25% to BlockFuel, with shared governance through a six-member board of directors. Per the agreement, BlockFuel will be responsible for installation, commission and maintenance of all mining equipment and operations at the site, while Greenbelt will manage business administration and provide power supply and generation services.

Equity Financing Activity with Aegis Capital Corp.
BlockFuel has completed an equity financing led by Aegis Capital Corp., providing $2.0 million in working capital to support near-term operational and strategic initiatives. Proceeds are expected to be used primarily to advance BlockFuel’s energy operations and broader corporate objectives.

The Company notes that certain aspects of the financing are subject to customary disclosure considerations, and additional details will be provided as appropriate and in accordance with applicable securities regulations.

Update on Proposed Merger with BlockFuel Energy
IBG and BlockFuel continue to advance toward completion of their previously announced merger, which is expected to result in BlockFuel Energy becoming the operating business of the combined public company listed on the Nasdaq under the ticker symbol “FUEL”. The transaction is expected to close by the end of the first quarter of 2026.

The proposed transaction remains subject to customary closing conditions, including approval from Nasdaq on the listing application of the combined public company. Both companies continue to work collaboratively with advisors and regulators to complete the required processes and advance toward closing. Management believes the combination positions the Company to participate in the intersection of energy production, power generation, and digital infrastructure, while providing IBG shareholders with exposure to a diversified and scalable operating platform.

If you have a question or would like to schedule a meeting with IBG or BlockFuel management, please contact BlockFuel@KCSA.com.

About Innovation Beverage Group
Innovation Beverage Group is a developer, manufacturer, marketer, exporter, and retailer of a growing beverage portfolio of 60 formulations across 13 alcoholic and non-alcoholic brands for which it owns exclusive manufacturing rights. Focused on premium and super premium brands and market categories where it can disrupt age old brands, IBG’s brands include Australian Bitters, BITTERTALES, Drummerboy Spirits, Twisted Shaker, and more. IBG’s most successful brand to date is Australian Bitters, which is a well-established and favored bitters brand in Australia. Established in 2018, IBG’s headquarters, manufacturing and flavor innovation center are located in Sydney, Australia with a U.S. sales office located in California. For more information visit: https://www.innovationbev.com/

About BlockFuel Energy
BlockFuel Energy is involved in the acquisition, exploration and development of proven oil fields onshore in North America. By turning natural gas at the source, including stranded and flared gas, into a potent resource for the digital era, BlockFuel Energy intends to redefine the energy industry. BlockFuel Energy combines state-of-the-art power generation with oil and gas exploration to power bitcoin mining operations and high-performance data centers. Our vertically integrated concept allows us to use co-location and modular power generation techniques to optimize efficiency and investment returns. Our cutting-edge solutions for energy optimization and extraction will enable us to transform underdeveloped resources into high-margin, scalable, and sustainable revenue streams. For more information visit: https://blockfuelenergy.com/

Forward Looking Statement
This press release contains “forward-looking statements” and “forward-looking information.” These statements include, but are not limited to, statements about the final terms of the potential merger transaction, the structure of such transaction, benefits of the contemplated transaction between IBG and BlockFuel Energy, expected closing conditions and the parties’ ability to complete the transaction, should definitive documentation be reached as well as other statements that are not historical facts. This information and these statements, which can be identified by the fact that they do not relate strictly to historical or current facts, are made as of the date of this press release or as of the date of the effective date of information described in this press release, as applicable.

The forward-looking statements herein relate to predictions, expectations, beliefs, plans, projections, objectives, assumptions, or future events or performance (often, but not always, using words or phrases such as “expects,” “anticipates,” “plans,” “projects,” “estimates,” “envisages,” “assumes,” “intends,” “strategy,” “goals,” “objectives” or variations thereof or stating that certain action events or results “may,” “can,” “could,” “would,” “might,” or “will” be taken, occur or be achieved, or the negative of any of these terms and similar expressions) and include, without limitation, statements with respect to projected financial targets that the Company is looking to achieve.

All forward-looking statements are based on current beliefs as well as various assumptions made by and information currently available to the Company’s management team. By their very nature, forward-looking statements involve inherent risks and uncertainties, both general and specific, and risks exist that estimates, forecasts, projections, and other forward-looking statements will not be achieved or that assumptions do not reflect future experience. Such factors include, among others, (1) delays in finalizing definitive documentation for the contemplated transaction, (2) the risk that definitive documentation will reflect different terms than the non-binding terms described herein, (3) the risk of delays in consummating the contemplated transaction, including as a result of required regulatory and stockholder approvals, which may not be obtained on the expected timeline, or at all, (4) the risk of any event, change or other circumstance that could cause the parties to terminate the transaction prior to closing, (5) disruption to the parties’ businesses as a result of the announcement and pendency of the transaction, including potential distraction of management from current plans and operations of IBG or BlockFuel Energy and the ability of IBG and BlockFuel Energy to retain and hire key personnel, (6) reputational risk and the reaction of each company’s customers, suppliers, employees or other business partners to the transaction, (7) the possibility that the transaction may be more expensive to complete than anticipated, including as a result of unexpected factors or events, (8) the outcome of any legal or regulatory proceedings that may be instituted against IBG or BlockFuel Energy related to the transaction or merger agreement, should definitive documentation be executed, (9) the risks associated with third party contracts containing consent and/or other provisions that may be triggered by the contemplated transaction, (10) legislative, regulatory, political, market, economic and other conditions, developments and uncertainties affecting IBG’s or BlockFuel Energy’s businesses; (11) the evolving legal, regulatory and tax regimes under which IBG or BlockFuel Energy operate; (12) any restrictions during the pendency of the contemplated transaction that may impact the parties’ ability to pursue certain business opportunities or strategic transactions; and (13) unpredictability and severity of catastrophic events, including, but not limited to, extreme weather, natural disasters, acts of terrorism or outbreak of war or hostilities. We caution any person reviewing this press release not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements as several important factors could cause the actual outcomes to differ materially from the beliefs, plans, objectives, expectations, anticipations, estimates, assumptions, and intentions expressed in such forward-looking statements. These risk factors may be generally stated as the risk that the assumptions and estimates expressed above do not occur.

The Company does not undertake to update any forward-looking statement, whether written or oral, that may be made from time to time by Company or on behalf of the Company except as may be required by law.

Contact:
Innovation Beverage Group Limited
Sahil Beri
CEO
sahil@innovationbev.com 
www.innovationbev.com

BlockFuel Energy Inc.
Daniel Lanskey
President and CEO
dan.lanskey@blockfuelenergy.com 
www.blockfuelenergy.com

Investor Relations:
KCSA Strategic Communications
Phil Carlson, Managing Director
BlockFuel@KCSA.com

– Published by The MIL Network

SonicWall Proudly Honours 113 Global Partners Recognized for Driving Innovation, Fueling Growth and Delivering Cybersecurity Excellence, Including 34 in Asia-Pacific and Japan (APJ)

– Published and distributed with permission of Media-Outreach.com.