Commitments and Contingencies	3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2026
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Note 5—Commitments and Contingencies Guarantees: In connection with the Pre-capitalized Trust Securities agreement signed on July 1, 2025, Globe Life Inc. is required to purchase any treasury securities in default. Management believes it is unlikely the Company will have to make any material payments under this agreement due to default. In addition, Globe Life Inc. has guaranteed letters of credit in connection with its credit facility with a group of banks as disclosed in Note 11—Debt. The letters of credit were issued by TMK Re, Ltd., a wholly-owned subsidiary ("TMK Re"), to secure TMK Re's obligation for claims on certain policies reinsured by TMK Re that were sold by other Globe Life Inc. insurance subsidiaries. These letters of credit facilitate TMK Re's ability to reinsure the business of Globe Life Inc.'s insurance subsidiaries. The credit facility expires in 2029. The maximum amount of letters of credit available is $250 million. Globe Life Inc. would be liable to the extent that TMK Re does not pay the reinsured party. The amount of letters of credit outstanding at March 31, 2026 was $115 million. Litigation: The Company, as is common with the insurance industry in general, is subject to litigation, including: putative class action litigation; alleged breaches of contract; torts, including bad faith and fraud claims based on alleged wrongful or fraudulent acts of agents of Globe Life Inc.'s insurance subsidiaries; alleged employment discrimination; alleged worker misclassification; and miscellaneous other causes of action. Based upon information presently available, and in light of legal and other factual defenses available to the Company, management does not believe that it is reasonably possible that such litigation will have a material adverse effect on Globe Life Inc.'s financial condition, future operating results or liquidity; however, assessing the eventual outcome of litigation necessarily involves forward-looking speculation as to judgments to be made by judges, juries and appellate courts in the future. This bespeaks caution, particularly in states with reputations for high punitive damage verdicts. On April 30, 2024, a putative securities class action was filed against Globe Life Inc. and six of its current/former executives and directors in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas (City of Miami Gen. Emp. & Sanitation Emp. Ret. Trust, et al. v. Globe Life Inc., et al., Case No. 4:24-cv-00376). On July 24, 2024, the Court appointed Lead Plaintiffs and Lead Counsel for the putative class of shareholders. The Lead Plaintiffs filed a Consolidated Complaint on October 4, 2024 that asserts claims under §§ 10(b), 20(a), and 20(A) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and SEC Rules 10b-5(a), 10b-5(b), and 10b-5(c) promulgated thereunder, on behalf of a putative class of purchasers of Globe Life Inc.'s securities from May 8, 2019 through April 10, 2024. The Consolidated Complaint added four additional executives as defendants and alleges that certain of Globe Life Inc.'s disclosures about financial performance and certain other public statements during the putative class period were materially false or misleading. Pursuant to Globe Life Inc.'s Restated Certificate of Incorporation and indemnification agreements with the individual defendants, Globe Life Inc. has agreed to indemnify the individual director and executive officer defendants for all expenses and losses related to the litigation, subject to the terms of those indemnification agreements. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the litigation on December 3, 2024, which motion was denied on September 29, 2025. Globe Life Inc. plans to vigorously defend against the lawsuit. The outcome of litigation of this type is inherently uncertain, and there is always the possibility that a court rules in a manner that is adverse to the interests of Globe Life Inc. and the individual defendants. However, the amount of any such loss in that outcome cannot be reasonably estimated at this time. Also pending in the Eastern District of Texas is a consolidated shareholder derivative suit that is closely related to the putative securities class action disclosed above (the “City of Miami Matter”). On November 7, 2024, Globe Life Inc. shareholder Jui Cheng Hsiao (“Hsiao”) filed a shareholder derivative complaint against Globe Life Inc. as a nominal defendant, as well as certain current and former Globe Life Inc. executives and members of its Board of Directors. On November 14, 2024, Globe Life Inc. shareholder Gautam Jadhav (“Jadhav”) filed a shareholder derivative complaint against the same set of defendants. Each shareholder derivative complaint asserts one claim for breach of fiduciary duty against the individual defendants and alleges that the individual defendants breached their fiduciary duties to Globe Life Inc. by causing or permitting Globe Life Inc. to make misleading statements about its performance and financial results. The allegations are substantially similar to those made in the City of Miami Matter and derive from certain short seller reports. Pursuant to Globe Life Inc.'s Restated Certificate of Incorporation and indemnification agreements with the individual defendants, Globe Life Inc. has agreed to indemnify the individual director and executive officer defendants for all expenses and losses related to the litigation, subject to the terms of those indemnification agreements. On January 3, 2025, the Court consolidated the two actions and appointed Hsiao and Jadhav as Lead Plaintiffs and their counsel as Lead Counsel for the consolidated derivative action (In re Globe Life Inc. Stockholder Derivative Litigation, Lead Case No. 4:24-cv-00993-ALM (E.D. Tex.)). On January 25, 2025, the Court granted the parties’ joint motion to stay such proceedings pending the Court’s resolution of the motion to dismiss filed by Globe Life Inc. in the City of Miami Matter. On October 14, 2025, the parties informed the Court that the motion to dismiss in the City of Miami Matter was denied and of their agreement for the terms of the stay to remain in place as they coordinated a schedule. On October 27, 2025 and December 5, 2025, the parties again notified the Court of their continued agreement for the terms of the stay to remain in place and further notified the Court of two related derivative cases filed in the Eastern District of Texas by Globe Life Inc. shareholders, as referenced below. On November 19, 2025, Globe Life Inc. shareholder Plymouth County Retirement Association (“Plymouth”) filed a Verified Shareholder Derivative Action Complaint in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas against Globe Life Inc. as a nominal defendant, as well as certain current and former Globe Life Inc. executives and members of its Board of Directors (Plymouth County Retirement Association v. Darden, et al., No. 4:25-cv-01246-ALM (E.D. Tex.)). On November 21, 2025, Globe Life Inc. shareholder Catherine M. Sugarbaker Family Trust (“Sugarbaker”) filed a Verified Shareholder Derivative Action Complaint against Globe Life Inc. as a nominal defendant, as well as certain current and former Globe Life Inc. executives and members of its Board of Directors (Catherine M. Sugarbaker Family Trust v. Gary L. Coleman, et al., No. 4:25-cv-01274-ALM (E.D. Tex.)). Both the Plymouth and the Sugarbaker shareholder derivative complaints assert a claim for breach of fiduciary duty against the individual defendants and allege that the individual defendants breached their fiduciary duties to Globe Life Inc. by causing or permitting Globe Life Inc. to make misleading statements about its performance and financial results, as well as a claim against the individual defendants under Section 14(A) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and SEC Rule 14a-9 promulgated thereunder, for allegedly causing Globe Life Inc. to make false and misleading statements in its 2024 Proxy Statement and Notice of Annual Meeting of Shareholders. In addition, Plymouth’s shareholder derivative complaint asserts claims for violation of § 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and SEC Rule 10b-5(b) promulgated thereunder, on behalf of a putative class of purchasers of Globe Life Inc.'s securities from January 1, 2022 through April 11, 2024, alleging that certain of Globe Life Inc.'s disclosures about financial performance and certain other public statements during the putative class period were materially false or misleading, and that certain individuals traded in Globe Life Inc.’s securities while in possession of material non-public information. The allegations in both complaints are substantially similar to those made in the City of Miami Matter and the consolidated federal derivative action and derive from certain short seller reports. Pursuant to Globe Life Inc.'s Restated Certificate of Incorporation and indemnification agreements with the individual defendants, Globe Life Inc. has agreed to indemnify the individual director and executive officer defendants for all expenses and losses related to the Plymouth and Sugarbaker litigation, subject to the terms of those indemnification agreements. On December 11, 2025, defendants filed a notice of related case in the action filed by Plymouth to inform the Court that the matter should be consolidated with the consolidated federal derivative action. On December 9, 2025, Sugarbaker filed notices of related case in its own action and in the consolidated federal derivative action to inform the respective courts that Sugarbaker’s action should be consolidated with the consolidated federal derivative action. Plymouth and Sugarbaker have motioned the In re Globe Life Inc. Stockholder Derivative Litigation Court to vacate the current lead counsel structure. A hearing on the motion was held on March 25, 2026, but the Court has not yet decided on the motion. In the meantime, the case remains stayed. On September 19, 2025, a shareholder filed a derivative lawsuit in the Business Court for Dallas County, Texas, against Globe Life Inc. as a nominal defendant, as well as certain current and former Globe Life Inc. executives and members of its Board of Directors (James E. Walker v. Gary L. Coleman, et al., Case No. 25-BC01B-0041). Like the consolidated shareholder derivative lawsuit disclosed above, this litigation is largely similar to the City of Miami Matter and derives in part from certain short seller reports. The petition asserts three causes of action relating to the 2019 through 2024 time period, including: (i) a breach of fiduciary duty claim for failing to provide adequate oversight to prevent purportedly widespread corporate misconduct including fraud, discrimination and harassment; (ii) a breach of fiduciary duty claim against certain individual defendants who allegedly engaged in insider trading; and (iii) a claim for wasting corporate assets by paying excessive compensation and/or bonuses to certain of its executive officers. The petition alleges that Globe Life Inc. was thus exposed to potential legal liability and costs, and that Globe Life Inc. repurchased shares at an artificially inflated price. The petition seeks monetary damages as well as restitution, governance reforms, and accountability for executives and board members. Pursuant to Globe Life Inc.'s Restated Certificate of Incorporation and indemnification agreements with the individual defendants, Globe Life Inc. has agreed to indemnify the individual director and executive officer defendants for all expenses and losses related to the litigation, subject to the terms of those indemnification agreements. Globe Life Inc. intends to mount a robust defense against the litigation. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the petition on November 20, 2025 for failure to plead demand futility, and a motion to stay the proceedings in the Texas Business Court pending final resolution of the related City of Miami Matter if the Court determines that demand futility is satisfied. On November 19, 2025, Plymouth filed a motion to intervene in the matter and requested that the Court stay the action in favor of the consolidated derivative action in the Eastern District of Texas, or in the alternative, to limit the preclusive effect of the Court’s order on the motion to dismiss for lack of demand futility. On December 1, 2025, the Lead Plaintiffs in the consolidated federal derivative action (Hsiao and Jadhav) also filed a motion to intervene and stay the Texas Business Court proceedings in favor of their consolidated federal derivative action, or in the alternative, to limit the preclusive effect of the Court’s order on the motion to dismiss the petition for lack of demand futility. On December 4, 2025, plaintiff James E. Walker Jr. (“Walker”) filed a motion to strike Plymouth’s motion to intervene. On December 15, 2025, Walker filed a motion to strike the motion to intervene filed by the Lead Plaintiffs in the consolidated federal derivative action. On February 5, 2026, the Court cancelled the hearing it had scheduled for February 6, 2026 to hear all of the above motions and stayed the case pending further order of the Court. Walker has filed a motion to intervene in the In re Globe Life Inc. Stockholder Derivative Litigation case discussed above. A hearing on the motion was held on March 25, 2026, but the Court has not yet decided on the motion. In the meantime, the case remains stayed.

Guarantees: In connection with the Pre-capitalized Trust Securities agreement signed on July 1, 2025, Globe Life Inc. is required to purchase any treasury securities in default. Management believes it is unlikely the Company will have to make any material payments under this agreement due to default. In addition, Globe Life Inc. has guaranteed letters of credit in connection with its credit facility with a group of banks as disclosed in Note 11—Debt. The letters of credit were issued by TMK Re, Ltd., a wholly-owned subsidiary ("TMK Re"), to secure TMK Re's obligation for claims on certain policies reinsured by TMK Re that were sold by other Globe Life Inc. insurance subsidiaries. These letters of credit facilitate TMK Re's ability to reinsure the business of Globe Life Inc.'s insurance subsidiaries. The credit facility expires in 2029. The maximum amount of letters of credit available is $250 million. Globe Life Inc. would be liable to the extent that TMK Re does not pay the reinsured party. The amount of letters of credit outstanding at March 31, 2026 was $115 million.

Litigation: The Company, as is common with the insurance industry in general, is subject to litigation, including: putative class action litigation; alleged breaches of contract; torts, including bad faith and fraud claims based on alleged wrongful or fraudulent acts of agents of Globe Life Inc.'s insurance subsidiaries; alleged employment discrimination; alleged worker misclassification; and miscellaneous other causes of action. Based upon information presently available, and in light of legal and other factual defenses available to the Company, management does not believe that it is reasonably possible that such litigation will have a material adverse effect on Globe Life Inc.'s financial condition, future operating results or liquidity; however, assessing the eventual outcome of litigation necessarily involves forward-looking speculation as to judgments to be made by judges, juries and appellate courts in the future. This bespeaks caution, particularly in states with reputations for high punitive damage verdicts.

On April 30, 2024, a putative securities class action was filed against Globe Life Inc. and six of its current/former executives and directors in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas (City of Miami Gen. Emp. & Sanitation Emp. Ret. Trust, et al. v. Globe Life Inc., et al., Case No. 4:24-cv-00376). On July 24, 2024, the Court appointed Lead Plaintiffs and Lead Counsel for the putative class of shareholders. The Lead Plaintiffs filed a Consolidated Complaint on October 4, 2024 that asserts claims under §§ 10(b), 20(a), and 20(A) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and SEC Rules 10b-5(a), 10b-5(b), and 10b-5(c) promulgated thereunder, on behalf of a putative class of purchasers of Globe Life Inc.'s securities from May 8, 2019 through April 10, 2024. The Consolidated Complaint added four additional executives as defendants and alleges that certain of Globe Life Inc.'s disclosures about financial performance and certain other public statements during the putative class period were materially false or misleading. Pursuant to Globe Life Inc.'s Restated Certificate of Incorporation and indemnification agreements with the individual defendants, Globe Life Inc. has agreed to indemnify the individual director and executive officer defendants for all expenses and losses related to the litigation, subject to the terms of those indemnification agreements. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the litigation on December 3, 2024, which motion was denied on September 29, 2025. Globe Life Inc. plans to vigorously defend against the lawsuit. The outcome of litigation of this type is inherently uncertain, and there is always the possibility that a court rules in a manner that is adverse to the interests of Globe Life Inc. and the individual defendants. However, the amount of any such loss in that outcome cannot be reasonably estimated at this time.

Also pending in the Eastern District of Texas is a consolidated shareholder derivative suit that is closely related to the putative securities class action disclosed above (the “City of Miami Matter”). On November 7, 2024, Globe Life Inc. shareholder Jui Cheng Hsiao (“Hsiao”) filed a shareholder derivative complaint against Globe Life Inc. as a nominal defendant, as well as certain current and former Globe Life Inc. executives and members of its Board of Directors. On November 14, 2024, Globe Life Inc. shareholder Gautam Jadhav (“Jadhav”) filed a shareholder derivative complaint against the same set of defendants. Each shareholder derivative complaint asserts one claim for breach of fiduciary duty against the individual defendants and alleges that the individual defendants breached their fiduciary duties to Globe Life Inc. by causing or permitting Globe Life Inc. to make misleading statements about its performance and financial results. The allegations are substantially similar to those made in the City of Miami Matter and derive from certain short seller reports. Pursuant to Globe Life Inc.'s Restated Certificate of Incorporation and indemnification agreements with the individual defendants, Globe Life Inc. has agreed to indemnify the individual director and executive officer defendants for all expenses and losses related to the litigation, subject to the terms of those indemnification agreements. On January 3, 2025, the Court consolidated the two actions and

appointed Hsiao and Jadhav as Lead Plaintiffs and their counsel as Lead Counsel for the consolidated derivative action (In re Globe Life Inc. Stockholder Derivative Litigation, Lead Case No. 4:24-cv-00993-ALM (E.D. Tex.)). On January 25, 2025, the Court granted the parties’ joint motion to stay such proceedings pending the Court’s resolution of the motion to dismiss filed by Globe Life Inc. in the City of Miami Matter. On October 14, 2025, the parties informed the Court that the motion to dismiss in the City of Miami Matter was denied and of their agreement for the terms of the stay to remain in place as they coordinated a schedule. On October 27, 2025 and December 5, 2025, the parties again notified the Court of their continued agreement for the terms of the stay to remain in place and further notified the Court of two related derivative cases filed in the Eastern District of Texas by Globe Life Inc. shareholders, as referenced below.

On November 19, 2025, Globe Life Inc. shareholder Plymouth County Retirement Association (“Plymouth”) filed a Verified Shareholder Derivative Action Complaint in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas against Globe Life Inc. as a nominal defendant, as well as certain current and former Globe Life Inc. executives and members of its Board of Directors (Plymouth County Retirement Association v. Darden, et al., No. 4:25-cv-01246-ALM (E.D. Tex.)). On November 21, 2025, Globe Life Inc. shareholder Catherine M. Sugarbaker Family Trust (“Sugarbaker”) filed a Verified Shareholder Derivative Action Complaint against Globe Life Inc. as a nominal defendant, as well as certain current and former Globe Life Inc. executives and members of its Board of Directors (Catherine M. Sugarbaker Family Trust v. Gary L. Coleman, et al., No. 4:25-cv-01274-ALM (E.D. Tex.)). Both the Plymouth and the Sugarbaker shareholder derivative complaints assert a claim for breach of fiduciary duty against the individual defendants and allege that the individual defendants breached their fiduciary duties to Globe Life Inc. by causing or permitting Globe Life Inc. to make misleading statements about its performance and financial results, as well as a claim against the individual defendants under Section 14(A) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and SEC Rule 14a-9 promulgated thereunder, for allegedly causing Globe Life Inc. to make false and misleading statements in its 2024 Proxy Statement and Notice of Annual Meeting of Shareholders. In addition, Plymouth’s shareholder derivative complaint asserts claims for violation of § 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and SEC Rule 10b-5(b) promulgated thereunder, on behalf of a putative class of purchasers of Globe Life Inc.'s securities from January 1, 2022 through April 11, 2024, alleging that certain of Globe Life Inc.'s disclosures about financial performance and certain other public statements during the putative class period were materially false or misleading, and that certain individuals traded in Globe Life Inc.’s securities while in possession of material non-public information. The allegations in both complaints are substantially similar to those made in the City of Miami Matter and the consolidated federal derivative action and derive from certain short seller reports. Pursuant to Globe Life Inc.'s Restated Certificate of Incorporation and indemnification agreements with the individual defendants, Globe Life Inc. has agreed to indemnify the individual director and executive officer defendants for all expenses and losses related to the Plymouth and Sugarbaker litigation, subject to the terms of those indemnification agreements. On December 11, 2025, defendants filed a notice of related case in the action filed by Plymouth to inform the Court that the matter should be consolidated with the consolidated federal derivative action. On December 9, 2025, Sugarbaker filed notices of related case in its own action and in the consolidated federal derivative action to inform the respective courts that Sugarbaker’s action should be consolidated with the consolidated federal derivative action. Plymouth and Sugarbaker have motioned the In re Globe Life Inc. Stockholder Derivative Litigation Court to vacate the current lead counsel structure. A hearing on the motion was held on March 25, 2026, but the Court has not yet decided on the motion. In the meantime, the case remains stayed.

On September 19, 2025, a shareholder filed a derivative lawsuit in the Business Court for Dallas County, Texas, against Globe Life Inc. as a nominal defendant, as well as certain current and former Globe Life Inc. executives and members of its Board of Directors (James E. Walker v. Gary L. Coleman, et al., Case No. 25-BC01B-0041). Like the consolidated shareholder derivative lawsuit disclosed above, this litigation is largely similar to the City of Miami Matter and derives in part from certain short seller reports. The petition asserts three causes of action relating to the 2019 through 2024 time period, including: (i) a breach of fiduciary duty claim for failing to provide adequate oversight to prevent purportedly widespread corporate misconduct including fraud, discrimination and harassment; (ii) a breach of fiduciary duty claim against certain individual defendants who allegedly engaged in insider trading; and (iii) a claim for wasting corporate assets by paying excessive compensation and/or bonuses to certain of its executive officers. The petition alleges that Globe Life Inc. was thus exposed to potential legal liability and costs, and that Globe Life Inc. repurchased shares at an artificially inflated price. The petition seeks monetary damages as well as restitution, governance reforms, and accountability for executives and board members. Pursuant to Globe

Life Inc.'s Restated Certificate of Incorporation and indemnification agreements with the individual defendants, Globe Life Inc. has agreed to indemnify the individual director and executive officer defendants for all expenses and losses related to the litigation, subject to the terms of those indemnification agreements. Globe Life Inc. intends to mount a robust defense against the litigation. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the petition on November 20, 2025 for failure to plead demand futility, and a motion to stay the proceedings in the Texas Business Court pending final resolution of the related City of Miami Matter if the Court determines that demand futility is satisfied. On November 19, 2025, Plymouth filed a motion to intervene in the matter and requested that the Court stay the action in favor of the consolidated derivative action in the Eastern District of Texas, or in the alternative, to limit the preclusive effect of the Court’s order on the motion to dismiss for lack of demand futility. On December 1, 2025, the Lead Plaintiffs in the consolidated federal derivative action (Hsiao and Jadhav) also filed a motion to intervene and stay the Texas Business Court proceedings in favor of their consolidated federal derivative action, or in the alternative, to limit the preclusive effect of the Court’s order on the motion to dismiss the petition for lack of demand futility. On December 4, 2025, plaintiff James E. Walker Jr. (“Walker”) filed a motion to strike Plymouth’s motion to intervene. On December 15, 2025, Walker filed a motion to strike the motion to intervene filed by the Lead Plaintiffs in the consolidated federal derivative action. On February 5, 2026, the Court cancelled the hearing it had scheduled for February 6, 2026 to hear all of the above motions and stayed the case pending further order of the Court. Walker has filed a motion to intervene in the In re Globe Life Inc. Stockholder Derivative Litigation case discussed above. A hearing on the motion was held on March 25, 2026, but the Court has not yet decided on the motion. In the meantime, the case remains stayed.