COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2025
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES General Estimated losses from contingencies are accrued by a charge to income when information available prior to issuance of the financial statements indicates that it is probable that a liability could be incurred, and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. Legal expenses associated with the contingency are expensed as incurred. If a loss contingency is not probable or reasonably estimable, disclosure of the contingency and estimated range of loss, if determinable, is made in the financial statements when it is at least reasonably possible that a material loss could be incurred. Operating Segments The Company’s operating and reportable segments are identified in Note 4. Except as noted in this paragraph, all of the Company’s commitments and contingencies specifically described herein are included in the non-operating segment Corporate and Other. The Yanacocha matters relate to the Yanacocha reportable segment. The Cadia matter relates to the Cadia reportable segment. The Newmont Ghana Gold and Newmont Golden Ridge matters relate to the Ahafo reportable segment and Akyem, which was divested in the second quarter of 2025, respectively. The CC&V matter relates to CC&V, which was divested in the first quarter of 2025. Environmental Matters Refer to Note 6 for further information regarding reclamation and remediation. Details about certain significant matters are discussed below. Minera Yanacocha S.R.L. - 100% Newmont Owned In early 2015 and again in June 2017, the Peruvian government agency responsible for certain environmental regulations, MINAM, issued proposed modifications to water quality criteria for designated beneficial uses which apply to mining companies, including Yanacocha. These criteria modified the in-stream water quality criteria pursuant to which Yanacocha has been designing water treatment processes and infrastructure. In December 2015, MINAM issued the final regulation that modified the water quality standards. These Peruvian regulations allow time to formulate a compliance plan and make any necessary changes to achieve compliance. In February 2017, Yanacocha submitted a modification to its previously approved compliance achievement plan to the MINEM. In May 2022, Yanacocha submitted a proposed modification to this plan requesting an extension of time for coming into full compliance with the new regulations to 2027. In June 2023, Yanacocha received approval of its updated compliance plan from MINEM and was granted an extension to June 2026 to achieve compliance. The Company appealed this approval to the Mining Council requesting the regulatory extension until 2027, and in April 2024, MINEM approved the compliance schedule. The Company currently operates five water treatment plants at Yanacocha that have been and currently meet all currently applicable water discharge requirements. The Company’s current asset retirement obligation includes the construction of two new water treatment plants expected to be in operation during 2027 and post-closure management. The Company is conducting detailed studies to better estimate water management and other closure activities that will ensure water quality and quantity discharge requirements, including the modifications promulgated by MINAM, as referenced above, will be met. This also includes performing a comprehensive update to the Yanacocha reclamation plan to address changes in closure activities and estimated closure costs while preserving optionality for potential future projects at Yanacocha. These ongoing studies, which will extend beyond the current year, continue to evaluate and revise assumptions and estimated costs of changes to the reclamation plan. The ultimate water treatment costs remain uncertain as studies and opportunity assessments continue. These and other additional risks and contingencies that are the subject of ongoing studies, including, but not limited to, a comprehensive review of the Company's tailings storage facility management, review of Yanacocha’s water balance and water management system, and review of post-closure management costs, could result in future material increases to the reclamation obligation at Yanacocha. Cripple Creek & Victor Gold Mining Company LLC - 100% Newmont owned through February 28, 2025 In December 2021, Cripple Creek & Victor Gold Mining Company LLC (“CC&V”) entered into a Settlement Agreement (“Settlement Agreement”) with the Water Quality Control Division of the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (the “Division”) with a mutual objective of resolving issues associated with the new discharge permits issued by the Division in January 2021 for the Carlton Tunnel. The Carlton Tunnel was a historic tunnel completed in 1941 with the purpose of draining the southern portion of the mining district, subsequently consolidated by CC&V. CC&V has held discharge permits for the Carlton Tunnel since 1983, primarily to focus on monitoring, with the monitoring data accumulated since the mid-1970s indicating consistency in the water quality discharged from the Carlton Tunnel over time. In 2006, legal proceedings and work with the regulator confirmed that the water flowing out of the Carlton Tunnel portal is akin to natural spring water and did not constitute mine drainage. However, when the Division issued new discharge permits in January 2021, the Division imposed new water quality limits. The Settlement Agreement involves the evaluation of a reasonable and achievable timeline for treatment and permit compliance, acknowledging the lack of readily available technology, and the need to spend three years to study and select the technological solution, with three additional years to construct, bringing full permit compliance to the November 2027 timeframe. In 2022, the Company studied various interim passive water treatment options, reported the study results to the Division, and based on an evaluation of additional semi-passive options that involve the usage of power at the portal, updated the remediation liability to $20 in 2022. CC&V continues to study alternative long-term remediation plans for water discharged from the Carlton Tunnel, while also continuing to work with regulators to identify and implement the highest feasible alternative treatments, including the site specific standards and a Discharger Specific Variance ("DSV"). CC&V formally submitted a proposal for the site specific standards and DSV to the Water Quality Control Commission in a June 2025 rulemaking hearing. As a result of the hearing, the Commission agreed to site specific standards for CC&V for certain water quality standards, and CC&V will continue to work with Division on a proposal for the DSV and an extension request for compliance with certain other standards. Depending on the plans that may ultimately be agreed with the Division, a material adjustment to the remediation liability may be required. On February 28, 2025, the Company completed the sale of the CC&V reportable segment to SSR. Under the terms of the agreement with SSR, Newmont expects to receive deferred cash contingent consideration upon certain regulatory approvals, one of which being resolution of regulatory applications relating to the Carlton Tunnel. In addition, upon completion of an updated regulator-approved closure plan and in the event aggregate closure costs at CC&V exceed $500, Newmont will be responsible for funding 90% of the incremental closure costs exceeding $500 in such updated closure plan, either on an as-incurred basis or pursuant to a net present value lump sum payment option. Dawn Mining Company LLC (“Dawn”) - 58.19% Newmont Owned Midnite mine site and Dawn mill site. Dawn previously leased an open pit uranium mine, currently inactive, on the Spokane Indian Reservation in the State of Washington. The mine site is subject to regulation by agencies of the U.S. Department of Interior (the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Bureau of Land Management), as well as the EPA. As per the Consent Decree approved by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington on January 17, 2012, the following actions were required of Newmont, Dawn, the Department of the Interior and the EPA: (i) Newmont and Dawn would design, construct and implement the cleanup plan selected by the EPA in 2006 for the Midnite mine site; (ii) Newmont and Dawn would reimburse the EPA for its past costs associated with overseeing the work; (iii) the Department of the Interior would contribute a lump sum amount toward past EPA costs and future costs related to the cleanup of the Midnite mine site; (iv) Newmont and Dawn would be responsible for all future EPA oversight costs and Midnite mine site cleanup costs; and (v) Newmont would post a surety bond for work at the site. During 2012, the Department of Interior contributed its share of past EPA costs and future costs related to the cleanup of the Midnite mine site. In 2016, Newmont completed the remedial design process, with the exception of the new WTP design which was awaiting the approval of the new NPDES permit. Subsequently, the new NPDES permit was received in 2017 and the WTP design commenced in 2018. The EPA approved the WTP design in 2021. Construction of the effluent pipeline began in 2021, and construction of the new WTP began in 2022. The WTP and effluent pipeline are expected to be operating in 2026. The Dawn mill site is regulated by the Washington Department of Health (the "WDOH") and is in the process of being closed in accordance with the federal Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act, and associated Washington state regulations. Remediation at the Dawn mill site began in 2013. The Tailing Disposal Area 1-4 reclamation earthworks component was completed during 2017 with the embankment erosion protection completed in the second quarter of 2018. The remaining closure activities consist primarily of finalizing an Alternative Concentration Limit application (the "ACL application") submitted in 2020 to the WDOH to address groundwater issues, and also evaporating the remaining balance of process water at the site. In the fourth quarter of 2022, the WDOH provided comments on the ACL application, which Newmont is evaluating and conducting studies to better understand and respond to the comments provided by the WDOH. These studies and the related comment process will extend beyond the current year and could result in future material increases to the remediation obligation. The remediation liability for the Midnite mine site and Dawn mill site is approximately $149, assumed 100% by Newmont, at June 30, 2025. Cadia Holdings Pty Ltd. - 100% Newmont Owned Cadia mine site. Cadia Holdings Pty Ltd. (“Cadia Holdings”) is a wholly owned subsidiary of Newcrest, which was acquired by Newmont in November 2023. The mine site is subject to regulations by the New South Wales Environment Protection Authority (the “NSW EPA”). In October 2023, the NSW EPA commenced proceedings in the NSW Land and Environment Court against Cadia Holdings, alleging two contraventions related to alleged air pollution from tailings storage facilities on October 13 and 31, 2022. In 2024, Cadia Holdings entered a plea of not guilty to the charges related to the allegations. These proceedings are listed for a liability hearing from February 16, 2026 to February 27, 2026. Other Legal Matters Newmont Corporation, as well as Newmont Canada Corporation, and Newmont Canada FN Holdings ULC – 100% Newmont Owned Kirkland Lake Gold Inc., which was acquired by Agnico Eagle Mines Limited in 2022 (still referred to herein as “Kirkland” for ease of reference), owns certain mining and mineral rights in northeastern Ontario, Canada, referred to here as the Holt-McDermott property, on which it suspended operations in April 2020. A subsidiary of the Company has a retained royalty obligation (“Holt royalty obligation”) to Royal Gold, Inc. (“Royal Gold”) for production on the Holt-McDermott property. In August 2020, the Company and Kirkland signed a Strategic Alliance Agreement (the “Kirkland Agreement”). As part of the Kirkland Agreement, the Company purchased an option (the “Holt option”) for $75 from Kirkland for the mining and mineral rights subject to the Holt royalty obligation. The Company has the right to exercise the Holt option and acquire ownership to the mineral interests subject to the Holt royalty obligation in the event Kirkland intends to resume operations and process material subject to the obligation. Kirkland has the right to assume the Company’s Holt royalty obligation at any time, in which case the Holt option would terminate. On August 16, 2021, International Royalty Corporation (“IRC”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Royal Gold, filed an action in the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia against Newmont Corporation, Newmont Canada Corporation, Newmont Canada FN Holdings ULC (collectively "Newmont"), and certain Kirkland defendants (collectively "Kirkland"). IRC alleges the Kirkland Agreement is oppressive to the interests of Royal Gold under the Nova Scotia Companies Act and the Canada Business Corporations Act, and that, by entering into the Kirkland Agreement, Newmont breached its contractual obligations to Royal Gold. IRC seeks declaratory relief, and $350 in alleged royalty payments that it claims Newmont expected to pay under the Holt royalty obligation, but for the Kirkland Agreement. Kirkland filed a motion seeking dismissal of the case against it, which the court granted in October 2022. Newmont submitted its statement of defense on February 27, 2023, and a motion for summary judgment on January 12, 2024. The motion for summary judgment was denied on May 27, 2024, and the parties are now engaged in the discovery phase of the case. Newmont intends to vigorously defend this matter but cannot reasonably predict the outcome. Newmont Ghana Gold Limited - 100% Newmont Owned (and Newmont Golden Ridge Limited owned by Newmont through April 15, 2025) On December 24, 2018, two individual plaintiffs, who are members of the Ghana Parliament (“Plaintiffs”), filed a writ to invoke the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of Ghana. On January 16, 2019, Plaintiffs filed the Statement of Plaintiff’s Case outlining the details of the Plaintiff’s case and subsequently served Newmont Ghana Gold Limited (“NGGL”) and Newmont Golden Ridge Limited (“NGRL”) along with the other named defendants, the Attorney General of Ghana, the Minerals Commission of Ghana and 33 other mining companies with interests in Ghana. The Plaintiffs allege that under article 268 of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana, the mining company defendants are not entitled to carry out any exploitation of minerals or other natural resources in Ghana, unless their respective transactions, contracts or concessions are ratified or exempted from ratification by the Parliament of Ghana. Newmont’s current mining leases are both ratified by Parliament; NGGL June 13, 2001 mining lease, ratified by Parliament on October 21, 2008, and NGRL January 19, 2010 mining lease; ratified by Parliament on December 3, 2015. The writ alleges that any mineral exploitation prior to Parliamentary ratification is unconstitutional. The Plaintiffs seek several remedies including: (i) a declaration as to the meaning of constitutional language at issue; (ii) an injunction precluding exploitation of minerals for any mining company without prior Parliamentary ratification; (iii) a declaration that all revenue as a result of violation of the Constitution shall be accounted for and recovered via cash equivalent; and (iv) an order that the Attorney General and Minerals Commission submit all un-ratified mining leases, undertakings or contracts to Parliament for ratification. Newmont intends to vigorously defend this matter but cannot reasonably predict the outcome. On April 15, 2025, the Company completed the sale of the Akyem reportable segment, including NGRL. In the case of an adverse final judgment against NGRL pursuant to a non-appealable governmental order, if any, the Company would be required to indemnify the buyer for certain fines, penalties and disgorgements attributable to the period from the date of the Company’s commencement of commercial production under the mining leases in October 2013 to the date on which the mining leases were ratified by Parliament on December 3, 2015. Newmont Capital Limited and Newmont Canada FN Holdings ULC – 100% Newmont Owned The Australian Taxation Office (“ATO”) is conducting a limited review of the Company’s prior year tax returns. The ATO is reviewing an internal reorganization executed in 2011 when Newmont completed a restructure of the shareholding in the Company’s Australian subsidiaries. To date, the Company has responded to inquiries from the ATO and provided them with supporting documentation for the transaction and the Company’s associated tax positions. One aspect of the ATO review relates to an Australian capital gains tax that applies to sales or transfers of stock in certain types of entities. In the fourth quarter of 2017, the ATO notified the Company that it believed the 2011 reorganization was subject to capital gains tax of approximately $85 (including interest and penalties). The Company disputed this conclusion and is vigorously defending its position that the transaction is not subject to this tax. In the fourth quarter of 2017, the Company made a $24 payment to the ATO and lodged an appeal with the Australian Federal Court. The court proceedings were held during the third quarter of 2024 and the Company is currently awaiting the judgement, which is expected during the third quarter of 2025. The Company cannot reasonably predict the outcome. Newmont Corporation Karas v. Newmont Corp., et al. On January 31, 2025, a putative class action lawsuit was filed against Newmont and Newmont’s Chief Executive Officer, Chief Operating Officer and Chief Financial Officer in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado. The action was brought on behalf of an alleged class of Newmont stockholders who owned stock between February 22, 2024 and October 23, 2024 (the alleged class period). The Court appointed Lead Plaintiffs on May 6, 2025 who filed an amended complaint on July 14, 2025 adding Newmont Corporation's Chief Development Officer as a defendant and shortening the alleged class period to July 24, 2024 through October 23, 2024. Plaintiffs allege that the defendants made a series of materially false and misleading statements and/or omissions during the alleged class period regarding the Company’s operations, production, and costs in violation of federal securities laws. Plaintiffs further allege that the purported class members suffered losses and damages resulting from declines in the market value of Newmont’s common stock after the Company announced its third quarter 2024 results and updated guidance on October 23, 2024. Plaintiffs seek unspecified monetary damages and other relief. Gunderson v. Palmer et al.; Levin v. Palmer et al.; Chin v. Palmer et al.; and Harris v. Palmer et al. On February 21, February 28, March 20, and April 4, 2025, respectively, purported Newmont stockholders filed putative derivative complaints nominally on behalf of Newmont against Newmont’s Chief Executive Officer, Chief Operating Officer, Chief Financial Officer, and members of Newmont’s Board of Directors, naming Newmont as a nominal defendant, in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado. While the allegations and asserted claims vary among the actions, the complaints, taken collectively, generally raise similar allegations as the complaint in Karas. The complaints allege, among other things, that the defendants made a series of materially false and misleading statements and/or omissions beginning on February 22, 2024 regarding the Company's operations, production, and costs, that the Company lacked adequate internal controls and oversight over risk management, that the defendants made materially false and misleading statements in the Company’s 2024 proxy statement, and that there were improper share repurchases by the Company and stock sales by the Company’s Chief Executive Officer during the period February 22, 2024 to October 23, 2024, and assert claims under federal securities law (other than in the Chin case) and Delaware state law. Plaintiffs seek unspecified monetary damages, restitution, disgorgement and other relief, including reforms to the Company’s corporate governance. On March 19, 2025, on motion from plaintiffs in Gunderson and Levin, the court consolidated Levin into Gunderson, and appointed lead plaintiffs in the consolidated case. On May 1, 2025, on motion from plaintiffs in Gunderson, Levin, Chin, and Harris, the court consolidated Chin and Harris into Gunderson. On May 7, 2025, upon joint motion from the parties in Gunderson, the court stayed the consolidated action pending the resolutions of all motions to dismiss the operative complaint in Karas. Willis v. Palmer et al. On May 9, 2025, a purported Newmont stockholder filed a putative derivative complaint nominally on behalf of Newmont against Newmont’s Chief Executive Officer, Chief Operating Officer, Chief Financial Officer, and members of Newmont’s Board of Directors, naming Newmont as a nominal defendant, in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. The complaint generally raises similar allegations and requests similar relief as the complaints in the District of Colorado consolidated derivative actions, described above. On May 28, 2025, upon stipulation and agreement by the parties, the court stayed the action pending the resolution of all motions to dismiss the operative complaint in Karas. Newmont intends to vigorously defend these matters, but cannot reasonably predict the outcome of any matter. Other Commitments and Contingencies As part of its ongoing business and operations, the Company and its affiliates are required to provide surety bonds, bank letters of credit, and bank guarantees as financial support for various purposes, including environmental remediation, reclamation, exploration permitting, workers compensation programs and other general corporate purposes. At June 30, 2025 and December 31, 2024, there were $2,083 and $2,086, respectively, of outstanding letters of credit, surety bonds and bank guarantees. The obligations associated with these instruments are generally related to performance requirements that the Company addresses through its ongoing operations. As the specific requirements are met, the beneficiary of the associated instrument cancels and/or returns the instrument to the issuing entity. Certain of these instruments are associated with operating sites with long-lived assets and will remain outstanding until closure. Generally, bonding requirements associated with environmental regulation are becoming more restrictive. However, the Company believes it is in compliance with all applicable bonding obligations and will be able to satisfy future bonding requirements through existing or alternative means, as they arise. Newmont is from time to time involved in various legal proceedings related to its business. Except in the above-described proceedings, management does not believe that adverse decisions in any pending or threatened proceeding or that amounts that may be required to be paid by reason thereof will have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition or results of operations. In connection with the Company's investment in Galore Creek, Newmont will owe NovaGold Resources Inc. $75 upon the earlier of approval to construct a mine, mill and all related infrastructure for the Galore Creek project or the initiation of construction of a mine, mill or related infrastructure. The amount due is non-interest bearing. The decision for an approval and commencement of construction is contingent on the results of a prefeasibility study which is currently under way and feasibility study which has not yet occurred. Refer to Note 25 of the Consolidated Financial Statements included in Part II, Item 8, of the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024, as filed with the SEC on February 21, 2025, for information on the Company's contingent payments.

Estimated losses from contingencies are accrued by a charge to income when information available prior to issuance of the financial statements indicates that it is probable that a liability could be incurred, and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. Legal expenses associated with the contingency are expensed as incurred. If a loss contingency is not probable or reasonably estimable, disclosure of the contingency and estimated range of loss, if determinable, is made in the financial statements when it is at least reasonably possible that a material loss could be incurred.

The Company’s operating and reportable segments are identified in Note 4. Except as noted in this paragraph, all of the Company’s commitments and contingencies specifically described herein are included in the non-operating segment Corporate and Other. The Yanacocha matters relate to the Yanacocha reportable segment. The Cadia matter relates to the Cadia reportable segment. The Newmont Ghana Gold and Newmont Golden Ridge matters relate to the Ahafo reportable segment and Akyem, which was divested in the second quarter of 2025, respectively. The CC&V matter relates to CC&V, which was divested in the first quarter of 2025.

In early 2015 and again in June 2017, the Peruvian government agency responsible for certain environmental regulations, MINAM, issued proposed modifications to water quality criteria for designated beneficial uses which apply to mining companies, including Yanacocha. These criteria modified the in-stream water quality criteria pursuant to which Yanacocha has been designing water treatment processes and infrastructure. In December 2015, MINAM issued the final regulation that modified the water quality standards. These Peruvian regulations allow time to formulate a compliance plan and make any necessary changes to achieve compliance.

In February 2017, Yanacocha submitted a modification to its previously approved compliance achievement plan to the MINEM. In May 2022, Yanacocha submitted a proposed modification to this plan requesting an extension of time for coming into full compliance with the new regulations to 2027. In June 2023, Yanacocha received approval of its updated compliance plan from MINEM and was granted an extension to June 2026 to achieve compliance. The Company appealed this approval to the Mining Council requesting the regulatory extension until 2027, and in April 2024, MINEM approved the compliance schedule.

The Company is conducting detailed studies to better estimate water management and other closure activities that will ensure water quality and quantity discharge requirements, including the modifications promulgated by MINAM, as referenced above, will be met. This also includes performing a comprehensive update to the Yanacocha reclamation plan to address changes in closure activities and estimated closure costs while preserving optionality for potential future projects at Yanacocha. These ongoing studies, which will extend beyond the current year, continue to evaluate and revise assumptions and estimated costs of changes to the reclamation plan. The ultimate water treatment costs remain uncertain as studies and opportunity assessments continue. These and other additional risks and contingencies that are the subject of ongoing studies, including, but not limited to, a comprehensive review of the Company's tailings storage facility management, review of Yanacocha’s water balance and water management system, and review of post-closure management costs, could result in future material increases to the reclamation obligation at Yanacocha.

In December 2021, Cripple Creek & Victor Gold Mining Company LLC (“CC&V”) entered into a Settlement Agreement (“Settlement Agreement”) with the Water Quality Control Division of the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (the “Division”) with a mutual objective of resolving issues associated with the new discharge permits issued by the Division in January 2021 for the Carlton Tunnel. The Carlton Tunnel was a historic tunnel completed in 1941 with the purpose of draining the southern portion of the mining district, subsequently consolidated by CC&V. CC&V has held discharge permits for the Carlton Tunnel since 1983, primarily to focus on monitoring, with the monitoring data accumulated since the mid-1970s indicating consistency in the water quality discharged from the Carlton Tunnel over time. In 2006, legal proceedings and work with the regulator confirmed that the water flowing out of the Carlton Tunnel portal is akin to natural spring water and did not constitute mine drainage. However, when the Division issued new discharge permits in January 2021, the Division imposed new water quality limits. The Settlement Agreement involves the evaluation of a reasonable and achievable timeline for treatment and permit compliance, acknowledging the lack of readily available technology, and the need to spend three years to study and select the technological solution, with three additional years to construct, bringing full permit compliance to the November 2027 timeframe. In 2022, the Company studied various interim passive water treatment options, reported the study results to the Division, and based on an evaluation of additional semi-passive options that involve the usage of power at the portal, updated the remediation liability to $20 in 2022. CC&V continues to study alternative long-term remediation plans for water discharged from the Carlton Tunnel, while also continuing to work with regulators to identify and implement the highest feasible alternative treatments, including the site specific standards and a Discharger Specific Variance ("DSV"). CC&V formally submitted a proposal for the site specific standards and DSV to the Water Quality Control Commission in a June 2025 rulemaking hearing. As a result of the hearing, the Commission agreed to site specific standards for CC&V for certain water quality standards, and CC&V will continue to work with Division on a proposal for the DSV and an extension request for compliance with certain other standards. Depending on the plans that may ultimately be agreed with the Division, a material adjustment to the remediation liability may be required.

On February 28, 2025, the Company completed the sale of the CC&V reportable segment to SSR. Under the terms of the agreement with SSR, Newmont expects to receive deferred cash contingent consideration upon certain regulatory approvals, one of which being resolution of regulatory applications relating to the Carlton Tunnel. In addition, upon completion of an updated regulator-approved closure plan and in the event aggregate closure costs at CC&V exceed $500, Newmont will be responsible for funding 90% of the incremental closure costs exceeding $500 in such updated closure plan, either on an as-incurred basis or pursuant to a net present value lump sum payment option.

As per the Consent Decree approved by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington on January 17, 2012, the following actions were required of Newmont, Dawn, the Department of the Interior and the EPA: (i) Newmont and Dawn would design, construct and implement the cleanup plan selected by the EPA in 2006 for the Midnite mine site; (ii) Newmont and Dawn would reimburse the EPA for its past costs associated with overseeing the work; (iii) the Department of the Interior would contribute a lump sum amount toward past EPA costs and future costs related to the cleanup of the Midnite mine site; (iv) Newmont and Dawn would be responsible for all future EPA oversight costs and Midnite mine site cleanup costs; and (v) Newmont would post a surety bond for work at the site.

During 2012, the Department of Interior contributed its share of past EPA costs and future costs related to the cleanup of the Midnite mine site. In 2016, Newmont completed the remedial design process, with the exception of the new WTP design which was awaiting the approval of the new NPDES permit. Subsequently, the new NPDES permit was received in 2017 and the WTP design commenced in 2018. The EPA approved the WTP design in 2021. Construction of the effluent pipeline began in 2021, and construction of the new WTP began in 2022. The WTP and effluent pipeline are expected to be operating in 2026.

The Dawn mill site is regulated by the Washington Department of Health (the "WDOH") and is in the process of being closed in accordance with the federal Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act, and associated Washington state regulations. Remediation at the Dawn mill site began in 2013. The Tailing Disposal Area 1-4 reclamation earthworks component was completed during 2017 with the embankment erosion protection completed in the second quarter of 2018. The remaining closure activities consist primarily of finalizing an Alternative Concentration Limit application (the "ACL application") submitted in 2020 to the WDOH to address groundwater issues, and also evaporating the remaining balance of process water at the site. In the fourth quarter of 2022, the WDOH provided comments on the ACL application, which Newmont is evaluating and conducting studies to better understand and respond to the comments provided by the WDOH. These studies and the related comment process will extend beyond the current year and could result in future material increases to the remediation obligation.

Cadia mine site. Cadia Holdings Pty Ltd. (“Cadia Holdings”) is a wholly owned subsidiary of Newcrest, which was acquired by Newmont in November 2023. The mine site is subject to regulations by the New South Wales Environment Protection Authority (the “NSW EPA”). In October 2023, the NSW EPA commenced proceedings in the NSW Land and Environment Court against Cadia Holdings, alleging two contraventions related to alleged air pollution from tailings storage facilities on October 13 and 31, 2022. In 2024, Cadia Holdings entered a plea of not guilty to the charges related to the allegations. These proceedings are listed for a liability hearing from February 16, 2026 to February 27, 2026.

Kirkland Lake Gold Inc., which was acquired by Agnico Eagle Mines Limited in 2022 (still referred to herein as “Kirkland” for ease of reference), owns certain mining and mineral rights in northeastern Ontario, Canada, referred to here as the Holt-McDermott property, on which it suspended operations in April 2020. A subsidiary of the Company has a retained royalty obligation (“Holt royalty obligation”) to Royal Gold, Inc. (“Royal Gold”) for production on the Holt-McDermott property. In August 2020, the Company and Kirkland signed a Strategic Alliance Agreement (the “Kirkland Agreement”). As part of the Kirkland Agreement, the Company purchased an option (the “Holt option”) for $75 from Kirkland for the mining and mineral rights subject to the Holt royalty obligation. The Company has the right to exercise the Holt option and acquire ownership to the mineral interests subject to the Holt royalty obligation in the event Kirkland intends to resume operations and process material subject to the obligation. Kirkland has the right to assume the Company’s Holt royalty obligation at any time, in which case the Holt option would terminate.

On August 16, 2021, International Royalty Corporation (“IRC”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Royal Gold, filed an action in the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia against Newmont Corporation, Newmont Canada Corporation, Newmont Canada FN Holdings ULC (collectively "Newmont"), and certain Kirkland defendants (collectively "Kirkland"). IRC alleges the Kirkland Agreement is oppressive to the interests of Royal Gold under the Nova Scotia Companies Act and the Canada Business Corporations Act, and that, by entering into the Kirkland Agreement, Newmont breached its contractual obligations to Royal Gold. IRC seeks declaratory relief, and $350 in alleged royalty payments that it claims Newmont expected to pay under the Holt royalty obligation, but for the Kirkland Agreement. Kirkland filed a motion seeking dismissal of the case against it, which the court granted in October 2022. Newmont submitted its statement of defense on February 27, 2023, and a motion for summary judgment on January 12, 2024. The motion for summary judgment was denied on May 27, 2024, and the parties are now engaged in the discovery phase of the case. Newmont intends to vigorously defend this matter but cannot reasonably predict the outcome.

On December 24, 2018, two individual plaintiffs, who are members of the Ghana Parliament (“Plaintiffs”), filed a writ to invoke the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of Ghana. On January 16, 2019, Plaintiffs filed the Statement of Plaintiff’s Case outlining the details of the Plaintiff’s case and subsequently served Newmont Ghana Gold Limited (“NGGL”) and Newmont Golden Ridge Limited (“NGRL”) along with the other named defendants, the Attorney General of Ghana, the Minerals Commission of Ghana and 33 other mining companies with interests in Ghana. The Plaintiffs allege that under article 268 of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana, the mining company defendants are not entitled to carry out any exploitation of minerals or other natural resources in Ghana, unless their respective transactions, contracts or concessions are ratified or exempted from ratification by the Parliament of Ghana. Newmont’s current mining leases are both ratified by Parliament; NGGL June 13, 2001 mining lease, ratified by Parliament on October 21, 2008, and NGRL January 19, 2010 mining lease; ratified by Parliament on December 3, 2015. The writ alleges that any mineral exploitation prior to Parliamentary ratification is unconstitutional. The Plaintiffs seek several remedies including: (i) a declaration as to the meaning of constitutional language at issue; (ii) an injunction precluding exploitation of minerals for any mining company without prior Parliamentary ratification; (iii) a declaration that all revenue as a result of violation of the Constitution shall be accounted for and recovered via cash equivalent; and (iv) an order that the Attorney General and Minerals Commission submit all un-ratified mining leases, undertakings or contracts to Parliament for ratification. Newmont intends to vigorously defend this matter but cannot reasonably predict the outcome. On April 15, 2025, the Company completed the sale of the Akyem reportable segment, including NGRL. In the case of an adverse final judgment against NGRL pursuant to a non-appealable governmental order, if any, the Company would be required to indemnify the buyer for certain fines, penalties and disgorgements attributable to the period from the date of the Company’s commencement of commercial production under the mining leases in October 2013 to the date on which the mining leases were ratified by Parliament on December 3, 2015.

The Australian Taxation Office (“ATO”) is conducting a limited review of the Company’s prior year tax returns. The ATO is reviewing an internal reorganization executed in 2011 when Newmont completed a restructure of the shareholding in the Company’s Australian subsidiaries. To date, the Company has responded to inquiries from the ATO and provided them with supporting documentation for the transaction and the Company’s associated tax positions. One aspect of the ATO review relates to an Australian capital gains tax that applies to sales or transfers of stock in certain types of entities. In the fourth quarter of 2017, the ATO notified

the Company that it believed the 2011 reorganization was subject to capital gains tax of approximately $85 (including interest and penalties). The Company disputed this conclusion and is vigorously defending its position that the transaction is not subject to this tax. In the fourth quarter of 2017, the Company made a $24 payment to the ATO and lodged an appeal with the Australian Federal Court. The court proceedings were held during the third quarter of 2024 and the Company is currently awaiting the judgement, which is expected during the third quarter of 2025. The Company cannot reasonably predict the outcome.

Karas v. Newmont Corp., et al. On January 31, 2025, a putative class action lawsuit was filed against Newmont and Newmont’s Chief Executive Officer, Chief Operating Officer and Chief Financial Officer in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado. The action was brought on behalf of an alleged class of Newmont stockholders who owned stock between February 22, 2024 and October 23, 2024 (the alleged class period). The Court appointed Lead Plaintiffs on May 6, 2025 who filed an amended complaint on July 14, 2025 adding Newmont Corporation's Chief Development Officer as a defendant and shortening the alleged class period to July 24, 2024 through October 23, 2024. Plaintiffs allege that the defendants made a series of materially false and misleading statements and/or omissions during the alleged class period regarding the Company’s operations, production, and costs in violation of federal securities laws. Plaintiffs further allege that the purported class members suffered losses and damages resulting from declines in the market value of Newmont’s common stock after the Company announced its third quarter 2024 results and updated guidance on October 23, 2024. Plaintiffs seek unspecified monetary damages and other relief.

Gunderson v. Palmer et al.; Levin v. Palmer et al.; Chin v. Palmer et al.; and Harris v. Palmer et al. On February 21, February 28, March 20, and April 4, 2025, respectively, purported Newmont stockholders filed putative derivative complaints nominally on behalf of Newmont against Newmont’s Chief Executive Officer, Chief Operating Officer, Chief Financial Officer, and members of Newmont’s Board of Directors, naming Newmont as a nominal defendant, in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado. While the allegations and asserted claims vary among the actions, the complaints, taken collectively, generally raise similar allegations as the complaint in Karas. The complaints allege, among other things, that the defendants made a series of materially false and misleading statements and/or omissions beginning on February 22, 2024 regarding the Company's operations, production, and costs, that the Company lacked adequate internal controls and oversight over risk management, that the defendants made materially false and misleading statements in the Company’s 2024 proxy statement, and that there were improper share repurchases by the Company and stock sales by the Company’s Chief Executive Officer during the period February 22, 2024 to October 23, 2024, and assert claims under federal securities law (other than in the Chin case) and Delaware state law. Plaintiffs seek unspecified monetary damages, restitution, disgorgement and other relief, including reforms to the Company’s corporate governance. On March 19, 2025, on motion from plaintiffs in Gunderson and Levin, the court consolidated Levin into Gunderson, and appointed lead plaintiffs in the consolidated case. On May 1, 2025, on motion from plaintiffs in Gunderson, Levin, Chin, and Harris, the court consolidated Chin and Harris into Gunderson. On May 7, 2025, upon joint motion from the parties in Gunderson, the court stayed the consolidated action pending the resolutions of all motions to dismiss the operative complaint in Karas.

Willis v. Palmer et al. On May 9, 2025, a purported Newmont stockholder filed a putative derivative complaint nominally on behalf of Newmont against Newmont’s Chief Executive Officer, Chief Operating Officer, Chief Financial Officer, and members of Newmont’s Board of Directors, naming Newmont as a nominal defendant, in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. The complaint generally raises similar allegations and requests similar relief as the complaints in the District of Colorado consolidated derivative actions, described above. On May 28, 2025, upon stipulation and agreement by the parties, the court stayed the action pending the resolution of all motions to dismiss the operative complaint in Karas.

As part of its ongoing business and operations, the Company and its affiliates are required to provide surety bonds, bank letters of credit, and bank guarantees as financial support for various purposes, including environmental remediation, reclamation, exploration permitting, workers compensation programs and other general corporate purposes. At June 30, 2025 and December 31, 2024, there were $2,083 and $2,086, respectively, of outstanding letters of credit, surety bonds and bank guarantees. The obligations associated with these instruments are generally related to performance requirements that the Company addresses through its ongoing operations. As the specific requirements are met, the beneficiary of the associated instrument cancels and/or returns the instrument to the issuing entity. Certain of these instruments are associated with operating sites with long-lived assets and will remain outstanding until closure. Generally, bonding requirements associated with environmental regulation are becoming more restrictive. However, the Company believes it is in compliance with all applicable bonding obligations and will be able to satisfy future bonding requirements through existing or alternative means, as they arise.

In connection with the Company's investment in Galore Creek, Newmont will owe NovaGold Resources Inc. $75 upon the earlier of approval to construct a mine, mill and all related infrastructure for the Galore Creek project or the initiation of construction of a mine, mill or related infrastructure. The amount due is non-interest bearing. The decision for an approval and commencement of construction is contingent on the results of a prefeasibility study which is currently under way and feasibility study which has not yet occurred.