COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2026
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES.	NOTE 8—COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES Environmental Liabilities—Environmental liabilities are recognized when the expenditures are considered probable and can be reasonably estimated. Measurement of liabilities is based on currently enacted laws and regulations, existing technology, and undiscounted site-specific costs. Generally, such recognition would coincide with a commitment to a formal plan of action. No amounts have been recognized for environmental liabilities. Surety Bond—In accordance with state laws, we are required to post reclamation bonds to assure that reclamation work is completed. We also have a smaller amount of surety bonds that secure performance obligations. Bonds outstanding at March 31, 2026 totaled approximately $38.2 million. Coal Leases and Associated Royalty Commitments—We lease coal reserves under agreements that require royalties to be paid as the coal is mined and sold. Many of these agreements require minimum annual royalties to be paid regardless of the amount of coal mined and sold. Total royalty expenses were $5.1 million and $5.7 million for the three months ended March 31, 2026 and March 31, 2025, respectively. These agreements generally have terms running through exhaustion of all the mineable and merchantable coal covered by the respective lease. Royalties or throughput payments are based on a percentage of the gross selling price received for the coal we mine. Contingent Transportation Purchase Commitments—We secure the ability to transport coal through rail contracts and export terminals that are sometimes funded through take-or-pay arrangements. As of March 31, 2026, the Company’s remaining commitments under take-or-pay arrangements totaled $21.8 million, the majority of which relates to a multi-year contract with total remaining commitments of $14.7 million until the terms expire in the first quarter of 2028. The level of these commitments will generally be reduced at a per ton rate as such rail and export terminal services are utilized against the required minimum tonnage amounts over the contract term stipulated in such rail and export terminal contracts. However, as of March 31, 2026, the Company had no expected volume shortfall resulting in a need for an accrued liability. Litigation—From time to time, we are subject to various litigation and other claims in the normal course of business. Losses related to such contingencies are accrued when/if loss is probable and the amount is reasonably estimable. No losses have been accrued in the consolidated financial statements with respect to such matters. Losses from certain injury-related matters are reasonably possible of occurring; however, an estimate of the possible range of loss cannot be made at this time as no litigation has progressed sufficiently through discovery and development of important facts and legal issues at this time. While it is possible that liability will be assessed against us in the preparation plant purchase matter discussed below, we deem that possibility to be remote. Preparation Plant Purchase In February 2024, we purchased a Preparation Plant (the “Plant”) from EMCOAL, Inc. for $3 million. After this purchase, the Plant was disassembled and transported to the Maben Complex for reassembly. On November 15, 2024, Justice Coal of Alabama, LLC (the “Plaintiff”) filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, Beckley Division, against Ramaco Resources, Inc., Ramaco Development, LLC, and Maben Coal LLC. On May 5, 2025, the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia granted our Motion to Transfer Venue to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama. On June 3, 2025 Plaintiff amended its Complaint to add EMCOAL, Inc. as a Defendant. Plaintiff claims their sale of the Plant to EMCOAL, Inc. was not completed and thus EMCOAL, Inc. did not have the right to sell the Plant to us. As a result of Ramaco purchasing the Plant from EMCOAL, Inc., Plaintiff claims in the complaint we are liable for conversion, unjust enrichment, and negligence. Plaintiff has sought damages for these alleged claims. We filed a motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint against us on June 24, 2025 and that motion was subsequently denied. We filed our Answer to the Amended Complaint on November 21, 2025. The court has directed the Parties to be ready for trial “by December 2026” with the trial date to be set in a subsequent Scheduling Order. We believe we have meritorious defenses to all claims in this matter. Storage Silo Partial Failure On November 5, 2018, one of our three raw coal storage silos that fed our Elk Creek plant experienced a partial structural failure. A temporary conveying system completed in late-November 2018 restored approximately 80% of our plant capacity. We completed a permanent belt workaround and restored the preparation plant to its full processing capacity in mid-2019. Our insurance carrier, Federal Insurance Company, disputed our claim for coverage based on certain exclusions to the applicable policy and, therefore, on August 21, 2019, we filed suit against Federal Insurance Company and Chubb INA Holdings, Inc. in Logan County Circuit Court in West Virginia seeking a declaratory judgment that the partial silo collapse was an insurable event and to require coverage under our policy. Defendants removed the case to the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, and upon removal, we substituted ACE American Insurance Company as a defendant in place of Chubb INA Holdings, Inc. The trial in the matter commenced on June 29, 2021, in Charleston, West Virginia. On July 15, 2021, the jury returned a verdict in our favor for $7.7 million in contract damages and on July 16, 2021, made an additional award of $25.0 million for damages for wrongful denial of the claim under Hayseeds, Inc. v. State Farm Fire & Cas., 177 W. Va. 323, 352 S.E. 2d 73 (W. Va. 1986), including inconvenience and aggravation. On August 12, 2021, the defendants filed a post-trial motion for judgment as a matter of law or in the alternative to alter or amend the judgment or for a new trial. On March 4, 2022, the court entered its memorandum opinion and order on the motion reducing the jury award to a total of $1.8 million, including pre-judgment interest, and also vacated and set aside, in its entirety, the jury award of Hayseeds damages. The same day, the court entered the judgment in accordance with the memorandum opinion and order. On April 1, 2022, we filed a notice of appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. On July 20, 2023, the court rendered a decision reinstating the jury’s $7.7 million contract damages verdict. The court further determined that we are entitled to attorney’s fees in an amount to be determined on remand. Finally, the court held that we are entitled to Hayseeds damages for wrongful denial of the claim but remanded for a new trial on the amount of such damages after affirming that the original $25 million award was excessive. On August 3, 2023, the Defendants-Appellees filed a Petition of Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc with the Fourth Circuit. The petition was denied by order dated August 15, 2023. On August 29, 2023, the court clarified that the amount of attorney’s fees to be determined on remand included appellate fees. On September 8, 2023, the court entered its amended judgment, which awarded post-judgment interest on the previously awarded and reinstated verdict related to contract (compensatory) damages and the Fourth Circuit thereafter issued its mandate on October 2, 2023. On August 19, 2024, the Court issued a Memorandum Opinion and Order that the Hayseeds damages to be considered in the new trial would include annoyance and inconvenience up to October 2, 2023 with new discovery permitted for the time period of July 15, 2021 through October 2, 2023. The Court also ordered Hayseeds damages to be considered for net economic loss caused by the defendant’s delay in settlement be allowed for the time period of July 15, 2021 through October 2, 2023 with new discovery to be permitted for that time period. During 2023, the defendants fully paid the portion of the judgment related to contract (compensatory) damages in the court’s order and that portion of the matter is considered closed. On April 24, 2024, the Court stated Ramaco is entitled to reasonable attorney fees for both the appeal and the first trial, adding there will be a full Hayseeds trial under the timelines set forth above. Regarding the court’s determination and award of attorney’s fees, the Company accrued an additional loss recovery asset of less than $0.1 million during the first quarter of 2026, bringing the total loss recovery asset to approximately $4.7 million in Prepaid expenses and other on the Consolidated Balance Sheet as of March 31, 2026. The corresponding reduction of less than $0.1 million during the first quarter of 2026 was to Selling, general, and administrative expense on the Consolidated Statements of Operations. The Company considers that it is probable to recover at least this amount of previously recognized attorneys’ fees expenses based upon the developments above. The matter is now pending before the District Court for a new trial for Hayseeds damages, as well as the court’s determination and award of attorney’s fees. The trial date originally set for July 15, 2025 has been continued and we are currently awaiting a new scheduling order from the court. Class Action Complaint Alleging Violations of the Federal Securities Laws On January 30, 2026, a putative class action complaint was filed against the Company, Randall Atkins, our Chief Executive Officer, and Jeremy Sussman, our Chief Financial Officer, alleging violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder arising from allegedly materially false and/or misleading statements concerning the development and active mining status of the Company's Brook Mine rare earth and other critical minerals project in Wyoming during the class period of July 31, 2025 through October 23, 2025. The plaintiff seeks determination of class action status under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, an award of compensatory damages against all defendants jointly and severally for all damages sustained (including interest), reasonable costs and expenses including counsel fees and expert fees, and such other relief as the court deems just and proper. The case is pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York and was originally captioned Lynn Henning, Individually And On Behalf Of All Others Similarly Situated v. Ramaco Resources, Inc., Randall W. Atkins, And Jeremy R. Sussman, (Case No. 1:26-cv-00846). On April 22, 2026, the court appointed Andrew Clark, Phil McBride, and Edward Van Vliet as Co-Lead Plaintiffs. The case was also ordered to be styled as In Re Ramaco Resources, Inc. Securities Litigation. On May 5, 2026, the court entered a Scheduling Stipulation and Order requiring Co-Lead Plaintiffs to file an amended complaint within 45 days and establishing procedures for Defendants to seek a pre-motion conference in advance of any motion to dismiss thereafter. We believe we have meritorious defenses to all claims in this matter. Trade Secret Misappropriation and Breach of Contract Action Against Former Employee On March 16, 2026, the Company and its subsidiary, Ramaco Carbon, LLC, filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the District of Wyoming naming as the defendant former employee Alex J. Moyes (“Moyes”) alleging (1) Misappropriation of Trade Secrets under the Defend Trade Secrets Act pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1832; (2) Misappropriation of Trade Secrets under the Wyoming Uniform Trade Secrets Act pursuant to Wyoming Statute §40-24, et seq.; (3) Breach of Contract under Moyes’ non-disclosure agreement; (4) Breach of Contract under Moyes’ employment offer letter; and (5) seeking injunctive relief. Ramaco seeks preliminary and permanent injunctive relief, compensatory damages, exemplary and/or punitive damages, its attorneys’ fees and costs, and such other relief that the court deems appropriate. The court subsequently denied our Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order and/or Preliminary Injunction. The Parties are now working to complete a Joint Case Management Plan in preparation for a June 16, 2026 Initial Pretrial Conference. The case number is 1:26-cv-104.

COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

3 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2026

NOTE 8—COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Environmental Liabilities—Environmental liabilities are recognized when the expenditures are considered probable and can be reasonably estimated. Measurement of liabilities is based on currently enacted laws and regulations, existing technology, and undiscounted site-specific costs. Generally, such recognition would coincide with a commitment to a formal plan of action. No amounts have been recognized for environmental liabilities.

Surety Bond—In accordance with state laws, we are required to post reclamation bonds to assure that reclamation work is completed. We also have a smaller amount of surety bonds that secure performance obligations. Bonds outstanding at March 31, 2026 totaled approximately $38.2 million.

Coal Leases and Associated Royalty Commitments—We lease coal reserves under agreements that require royalties to be paid as the coal is mined and sold. Many of these agreements require minimum annual royalties to be paid regardless of the amount of coal mined and sold. Total royalty expenses were $5.1 million and $5.7 million for the three months ended March 31, 2026 and March 31, 2025, respectively. These agreements generally have terms running through exhaustion of all the mineable and merchantable coal covered by the respective lease. Royalties or throughput payments are based on a percentage of the gross selling price received for the coal we mine.

Contingent Transportation Purchase Commitments—We secure the ability to transport coal through rail contracts and export terminals that are sometimes funded through take-or-pay arrangements. As of March 31, 2026, the Company’s remaining commitments under take-or-pay arrangements totaled $21.8 million, the majority of which relates to a multi-year contract with total remaining commitments of $14.7 million until the terms expire in the first quarter of 2028. The level of these commitments will generally be reduced at a per ton rate as such rail and export terminal services are utilized against the required minimum tonnage amounts over the contract term stipulated in such rail and export terminal contracts. However, as of March 31, 2026, the Company had no expected volume shortfall resulting in a need for an accrued liability.

Litigation—From time to time, we are subject to various litigation and other claims in the normal course of business. Losses related to such contingencies are accrued when/if loss is probable and the amount is reasonably estimable. No losses have been accrued in the consolidated financial statements with respect to such matters. Losses from certain injury-related matters are reasonably possible of occurring; however, an estimate of the possible range of loss cannot be made at this time as no litigation has progressed sufficiently through discovery and development of important facts and legal issues at this time. While it is possible that liability will be assessed against us in the preparation plant purchase matter discussed below, we deem that possibility to be remote.

Preparation Plant Purchase

In February 2024, we purchased a Preparation Plant (the “Plant”) from EMCOAL, Inc. for $3 million. After this purchase, the Plant was disassembled and transported to the Maben Complex for reassembly. On November 15, 2024, Justice Coal of Alabama, LLC (the “Plaintiff”) filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, Beckley Division, against Ramaco Resources, Inc., Ramaco Development, LLC, and Maben Coal LLC. On May 5, 2025, the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia granted our Motion to Transfer Venue to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama. On June 3, 2025 Plaintiff amended its Complaint to add EMCOAL, Inc. as a Defendant.

Plaintiff claims their sale of the Plant to EMCOAL, Inc. was not completed and thus EMCOAL, Inc. did not have the right to sell the Plant to us. As a result of Ramaco purchasing the Plant from EMCOAL, Inc., Plaintiff claims in the complaint we are liable for conversion, unjust enrichment, and negligence. Plaintiff has sought damages for these alleged claims. We filed a motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint against us on June 24, 2025 and that motion was subsequently denied. We filed our Answer to the Amended Complaint on November 21, 2025. The court has directed the Parties to be ready for trial “by December 2026” with the trial date to be set in a subsequent Scheduling Order. We believe we have meritorious defenses to all claims in this matter.

Storage Silo Partial Failure

On November 5, 2018, one of our three raw coal storage silos that fed our Elk Creek plant experienced a partial structural failure. A temporary conveying system completed in late-November 2018 restored approximately 80% of our plant capacity. We completed a permanent belt workaround and restored the preparation plant to its full processing capacity in mid-2019. Our insurance carrier, Federal Insurance Company, disputed our claim for coverage based on certain exclusions to the applicable policy and, therefore, on August 21, 2019, we filed suit against Federal Insurance Company and Chubb INA Holdings, Inc. in Logan County Circuit Court in West Virginia seeking a declaratory judgment that the partial silo collapse was an insurable event and to require coverage under our policy. Defendants removed the case to the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, and upon removal, we substituted ACE American Insurance Company as a defendant in place of Chubb INA Holdings, Inc. The trial in the matter commenced on June 29, 2021, in Charleston, West Virginia.

On July 15, 2021, the jury returned a verdict in our favor for $7.7 million in contract damages and on July 16, 2021, made an additional award of $25.0 million for damages for wrongful denial of the claim under Hayseeds, Inc. v. State Farm Fire & Cas., 177 W. Va. 323, 352 S.E. 2d 73 (W. Va. 1986), including inconvenience and aggravation. On August 12, 2021, the defendants filed a post-trial motion for judgment as a matter of law or in the alternative to alter or amend the judgment or for a new trial. On March 4, 2022, the court entered its memorandum opinion and order on the motion reducing the jury award to a total of $1.8 million, including pre-judgment interest, and also vacated and set aside, in its entirety, the jury award of Hayseeds damages. The same day, the court entered the judgment in accordance with the memorandum opinion and order.

On April 1, 2022, we filed a notice of appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. On July 20, 2023, the court rendered a decision reinstating the jury’s $7.7 million contract damages verdict. The court further determined that we are entitled to attorney’s fees in an amount to be determined on remand. Finally, the court held that we are entitled to Hayseeds damages for wrongful denial of the claim but remanded for a new trial on the amount of such damages after affirming that the original $25 million award was excessive. On August 3, 2023, the Defendants-Appellees filed a Petition of Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc with the Fourth Circuit. The petition was denied by order

dated August 15, 2023. On August 29, 2023, the court clarified that the amount of attorney’s fees to be determined on remand included appellate fees. On September 8, 2023, the court entered its amended judgment, which awarded post-judgment interest on the previously awarded and reinstated verdict related to contract (compensatory) damages and the Fourth Circuit thereafter issued its mandate on October 2, 2023. On August 19, 2024, the Court issued a Memorandum Opinion and Order that the Hayseeds damages to be considered in the new trial would include annoyance and inconvenience up to October 2, 2023 with new discovery permitted for the time period of July 15, 2021 through October 2, 2023. The Court also ordered Hayseeds damages to be considered for net economic loss caused by the defendant’s delay in settlement be allowed for the time period of July 15, 2021 through October 2, 2023 with new discovery to be permitted for that time period.

During 2023, the defendants fully paid the portion of the judgment related to contract (compensatory) damages in the court’s order and that portion of the matter is considered closed. On April 24, 2024, the Court stated Ramaco is entitled to reasonable attorney fees for both the appeal and the first trial, adding there will be a full Hayseeds trial under the timelines set forth above. Regarding the court’s determination and award of attorney’s fees, the Company accrued an additional loss recovery asset of less than $0.1 million during the first quarter of 2026, bringing the total loss recovery asset to approximately $4.7 million in Prepaid expenses and other on the Consolidated Balance Sheet as of March 31, 2026. The corresponding reduction of less than $0.1 million during the first quarter of 2026 was to Selling, general, and administrative expense on the Consolidated Statements of Operations. The Company considers that it is probable to recover at least this amount of previously recognized attorneys’ fees expenses based upon the developments above.

The matter is now pending before the District Court for a new trial for Hayseeds damages, as well as the court’s determination and award of attorney’s fees. The trial date originally set for July 15, 2025 has been continued and we are currently awaiting a new scheduling order from the court.

Class Action Complaint Alleging Violations of the Federal Securities Laws

On January 30, 2026, a putative class action complaint was filed against the Company, Randall Atkins, our Chief Executive Officer, and Jeremy Sussman, our Chief Financial Officer, alleging violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder arising from allegedly materially false and/or misleading statements concerning the development and active mining status of the Company's Brook Mine rare earth and other critical minerals project in Wyoming during the class period of July 31, 2025 through October 23, 2025. The plaintiff seeks determination of class action status under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, an award of compensatory damages against all defendants jointly and severally for all damages sustained (including interest), reasonable costs and expenses including counsel fees and expert fees, and such other relief as the court deems just and proper.

The case is pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York and was originally captioned Lynn Henning, Individually And On Behalf Of All Others Similarly Situated v. Ramaco Resources, Inc., Randall W. Atkins, And Jeremy R. Sussman, (Case No. 1:26-cv-00846). On April 22, 2026, the court appointed Andrew Clark, Phil McBride, and Edward Van Vliet as Co-Lead Plaintiffs. The case was also ordered to be styled as In Re Ramaco Resources, Inc. Securities Litigation. On May 5, 2026, the court entered a Scheduling Stipulation and Order requiring Co-Lead Plaintiffs to file an amended complaint within 45 days and establishing procedures for Defendants to seek a pre-motion conference in advance of any motion to dismiss thereafter. We believe we have meritorious defenses to all claims in this matter.

Trade Secret Misappropriation and Breach of Contract Action Against Former Employee

On March 16, 2026, the Company and its subsidiary, Ramaco Carbon, LLC, filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the District of Wyoming naming as the defendant former employee Alex J. Moyes (“Moyes”) alleging (1) Misappropriation of Trade Secrets under the Defend Trade Secrets Act pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1832; (2) Misappropriation of Trade Secrets under the Wyoming Uniform Trade Secrets Act pursuant to Wyoming Statute §40-24, et seq.; (3) Breach of Contract under Moyes’ non-disclosure agreement; (4) Breach of Contract under Moyes’ employment offer letter; and (5) seeking injunctive relief. Ramaco seeks preliminary and permanent injunctive relief, compensatory damages, exemplary and/or punitive damages, its attorneys’ fees and costs, and such other relief that the

court deems appropriate. The court subsequently denied our Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order and/or Preliminary Injunction. The Parties are now working to complete a Joint Case Management Plan in preparation for a June 16, 2026 Initial Pretrial Conference. The case number is 1:26-cv-104.