Tenaris is from time to time subject to various claims, lawsuits and other legal proceedings, including customer, employee, tax and environmental-related claims, in which third parties are seeking payment for alleged damages, reimbursement for losses, or indemnity. Management with the assistance of legal counsel, periodically reviews the status of each significant matter and assesses potential financial exposure.

Some of these claims, lawsuits and other legal proceedings involve highly complex issues, and often these issues are subject to substantial uncertainties and, therefore, the probability of loss and an estimation of damages are difficult to ascertain. Accordingly, with respect to a large portion of such claims, lawsuits and other legal proceedings, the Company is unable to make a reliable estimate of the expected financial effect that will result from ultimate resolution of the proceeding. In those cases, the Company has not accrued a provision for the potential outcome of these cases.

If a potential loss from a claim, lawsuit or other proceeding is considered probable and the amount can be reasonably estimated, a provision is recorded. Accruals for loss contingencies reflect a reasonable estimate of the losses to be incurred based on information available to management as of the date of preparation of the financial statements and take into consideration litigation and settlement strategies. In a limited number of ongoing cases, the Company was able to make a reliable estimate of the expected loss or range of probable loss and, depending on the likelihood of occurrence, in some of such cases has accrued a provision for such loss but believes that publication of this information on a case-by-case basis would seriously prejudice the Tenaris’s position in the ongoing legal proceedings or in any related settlement discussions. Accordingly, in these cases, the Company has disclosed information with respect to the nature of the contingency but has not disclosed its estimate of the range of potential loss.

Below is a summary description of Tenaris’s material legal proceedings which are outstanding as of the date of these Consolidated Financial Statements. In addition, the Company is subject to other legal proceedings, none of which is believed to be material.

In 2013, the Company was notified of a lawsuit filed in Brazil by Companhia Siderúrgica Nacional (“CSN”), and various entities affiliated with CSN against the Company’s Brazilian subsidiary Confab and three subsidiaries of Ternium, all of which compose the T/T Group under the Usiminas shareholders agreement. The entities named in the CSN lawsuit had acquired a participation in Usiminas in January 2012. The CSN lawsuit alleges that, under applicable Brazilian laws and rules, the acquirers were required to launch a tag-along tender offer to all non-controlling holders of Usiminas ordinary shares for a price per share equal to 80% of the price per share paid in such acquisition, or BRL 28.8, and seeks an order to compel the acquirers to launch an offer at that price plus interest. If so ordered, the offer would need to be made to 182,609,851 ordinary shares of Usiminas not belonging to Usiminas’ control group. Confab’s share in the offer would be 17.9%.

On September 23, 2013, the first instance court dismissed the CSN lawsuit, and on February 8, 2017, the court of appeals maintained the understanding of the first instance court. On August 18, 2017, CSN filed an appeal to the Superior Court of Justice (“SCJ”) seeking the review and reversal of the decision issued by the Court of Appeals. On September 10, 2019, the SCJ declared CSN’s appeal admissible. On March 7, 2023, the SCJ, by majority vote, rejected CSN’s appeal. CSN made several submissions in connection with the SCJ decision, including a motion for clarification that challenged the merits of the SCJ decision. Decisions at the SCJ are adopted by majority vote and, at the date of these financial statements, voting at the SCJ with respect to the motion for clarification is ongoing. At an October 17, 2023 session, two justices voted in favor of remanding the case to the first instance for it to be retried following production and assessment of the new evidence, and two justices voted, without requiring any further evidence, in favor of granting CSN’s motion for clarification and reversing the March 7, 2023 decision that rejected CSN’s appeal; because the fifth member of SCJ excused himself from voting, a justice from another panel at the SCJ will be summoned to produce the tie-breaking vote. There are no specified deadlines for voting to be resumed or the SCJ decision to be issued. In any event, either party may appeal against a SCJ decision.

According to the views of the two justices that voted in favor of CSN’s motion, Confab and the other members of the T/T Group should be ordered to pay to CSN an indemnification amount equal to the difference between the price paid by the T/T Group in its acquisition and the market value of the Usiminas shares at signing, plus monetary adjustment and interest (at a rate of 1% per month) through the date of payment, plus legal costs equal to 10% of the compensation payable to CSN, with CSN retaining ownership of the Usiminas ordinary shares it currently owns. If that unprecedented view were to prevail, and depending on how the indemnification is calculated by other courts, as of the date of these financial statements the potential aggregate indemnification payable by Confab could reach up to BRL900.4 million (approximately $186.0 million at the BRL/$ rate as of such date).

The Company continues to believe that all of CSN’s claims and allegations are groundless and without merit, as confirmed by several opinions of Brazilian legal counsel, two decisions issued by the Brazilian securities regulator in February 2012 and December 2016, the first and second instance court decisions and the March 7, 2023 SCJ decision referred to above. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in light of the votes already issued by two members of the SCJ on CSN’s motion for clarification, the Company cannot predict the ultimate resolution on the matter.

On September 21, 2007, an accident occurred in the premises of Veracel Celulose S.A. (“Veracel”) in connection with a rupture in one of the tanks used in an evaporation system manufactured by Confab. The Veracel accident allegedly resulted in material damages to Veracel. Itaú Seguros S.A. (“Itaú”), Veracel’s insurer at the time of the Veracel accident and then replaced by Chubb Seguros Brasil S/A (“Chubb”), initiated a lawsuit against Confab seeking reimbursement of damages paid to Veracel in connection with the Veracel accident. Veracel initiated a second lawsuit against Confab seeking reimbursement of the amount paid as insurance deductible with respect to the Veracel accident and other amounts not covered by insurance. Itaú and Veracel claimed that the Veracel accident was caused by failures and defects attributable to the evaporation system manufactured by Confab. Confab believes that the Veracel accident was caused by the improper handling by Veracel’s personnel of the equipment supplied by Confab in violation of Confab’s instructions. The two lawsuits were consolidated and are considered by the 6th Civil Court of São Caetano do Sul. However, each lawsuit will be adjudicated separately.

On September 28, 2018, Confab and Chubb entered into a settlement agreement pursuant to which on October 9, 2018, Confab paid an amount of approximately $3.5 million to Chubb, without assuming any liability for the accident or the claim.

On October 10, 2018, Confab was notified that the court had issued rulings for both lawsuits. Both decisions were unfavorable to Confab:

•	With respect to Chubb’s claim, the court subsequently homologated the above-mentioned settlement and, accordingly, the claim was finalized.

•	With respect to Veracel’s claim, Confab was ordered to pay the insurance deductible and other concepts not covered by insurance, currently estimated to amount to BRL100.6 million (approximately $20.8 million) including interest, fees and expenses. Both parties filed motions for clarification against the court’s decision, which were partially granted. Although the contract between Confab and Veracel expressly provided that Confab would not be liable for damages arising from lost profits, the court award would appear to include BRL86.4 million (approximately $17.8 million) of damages arising therefrom. Confab has additional defense arguments in respect of a claim for lost profits. On December 18, 2018, Confab filed an appeal against the first instance court decision, and on April 30, 2019, Veracel filed its response to the appeal. In June 2022, the court resolved that it lacked jurisdiction to decide on the appeal, which was re-allocated to another court. The parties are currently waiting for the trial of the appeal to be scheduled. At this stage the Company cannot predict the outcome of the claim or the amount or range of loss in case of an unfavorable outcome.

Upon learning that Brazilian, Italian and Swiss authorities were investigating whether certain payments were made prior to 2014 from accounts of entities presumably associated with affiliates of the Company to accounts allegedly linked to individuals related to Petróleo Brasileiro S.A. (“Petrobras”) and whether any such payments were intended to benefit the Company’s Brazilian subsidiary Confab, the Audit Committee of the Company's Board of Directors engaged external counsel in connection with the Company’s review of these matters. In addition, the Company voluntarily notified the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) and the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) in October 2016. The Company conducted, with the assistance of external counsel, an internal investigation and found no evidence corroborating any involvement by the Company or its directors, officers or employees in respect of improper payments. An internal investigation commissioned by Petrobras also found no evidence that Confab obtained any unfair commercial benefit or advantage from Petrobras in return for payments, including improperly obtained contracts. On June 2, 2022, the Company resolved the investigation by the SEC, and the DOJ informed that it had closed its parallel inquiry without taking action. Under the settlement with the SEC, the Company neither admits nor denies the SEC’s findings and on June 24, 2022, paid $53.1 million in disgorgement and prejudgment interest and $25 million for a civil penalty to conclude the matter.

In July 2019, the Company learned that the public prosecutors’ office of Milan, Italy, had completed a preliminary investigation into the same alleged payments and had included in the investigation, among other persons, the Company’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, two other board members, Gianfelice Rocca and Roberto Bonatti, and the Company’s controlling shareholder, San Faustin. The Company is not a party to the proceedings. On March 22, 2022, upon completion of the evidentiary phase of the trial, the acting prosecutor requested the first-instance court in Milan in charge of the case to impose sanctions on our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, on the other two board members, and on San Faustin. The Company’s outside counsel in Italy advised the Company that neither the case file nor the prosecutor’s request contain or identify any evidence of involvement in, or knowledge of, the alleged wrongdoing by any of the three directors. On May 26, 2022, the first-instance court dismissed the case brought by the public prosecutor against the defendants for lack of jurisdiction and stated that the criminal proceeding should not have been initiated. On October 7, 2022, the public prosecutor filed an appeal against the first-instance court’s decision. On February 22, 2024, the court of appeals referred the case to the court of cassation, which will be in charge of determining whether or not the Italian courts have jurisdiction over the matter.

In June 2020, the Brazilian public prosecutors’ office requested the indictment of several individuals, including three executives or former executives of Confab and a former agent of Confab, charging them with the alleged crimes of corruption in relation to contracts executed between 2007 and 2010, and money laundering in relation to payments between 2009 and 2013. These criminal proceedings are underway. Neither the Company nor Confab is a party to these criminal proceedings.

In addition, Petrobras and the Brazilian public prosecutors filed civil claims for damages against, among others, Confab and the Confab executives named in the criminal proceedings referred to above. Confab became aware of these civil claims in September 2022. As of December 31, 2023, the aggregate amount of these claims was estimated at BRL322.2 million (or approximately $66.6 million). The plaintiffs also seek that Confab be prohibited from contracting with, or receiving benefits or exemptions from, the Brazilian state for an unspecified term. Confab believes these claims do not address either the defense arguments or the evidence available to the plaintiffs in Brazil and presented in other jurisdictions and is vigorously contesting them. At this stage, the Company cannot predict the outcome of these civil proceedings.

Following the Company’s November 27, 2018, announcement that its Chairman and CEO Paolo Rocca had been included in an Argentine court investigation known as the Notebooks Case (a decision subsequently reversed by a higher court), two putative class action complaints were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York. On April 29, 2019, the court consolidated the complaints into a single case, captioned “In re Tenaris S.A. Securities Litigation”, and appointed lead plaintiffs and lead counsel.

On July 19, 2019, the lead plaintiffs filed an amended complaint purportedly on behalf of purchasers of Tenaris securities during the putative class period of May 1, 2014, through December 5, 2018. The individual defendants named in the complaint are Tenaris’s Chairman and CEO and Tenaris’s former CFO. The complaint alleges that during the class period, the Company and the individual defendants inflated the Tenaris share price by failing to disclose that the nationalization proceeds received by Ternium (in which the Company held an 11.46% stake) when Sidor was expropriated by Venezuela were received or expedited as a result of allegedly improper payments made to Argentine officials. The complaint does not specify the damages that plaintiff is seeking.

On October 9, 2020, the court granted in part and denied in part the defendants’ motions to dismiss. The court partially granted and partially denied the motion to dismiss the claims against the Company and its Chairman and CEO. In addition, the court granted the motions to dismiss as to all claims against San Faustin, Techint, and Tenaris’s former CFO.

On November 11, 2022, the parties filed a joint notice of settlement announcing a settlement in principle of all claims in the action, subject to finalizing the settlement agreements and court approval. The parties’ agreement in principle provides that, in exchange for dismissal of the action and customary releases from class members and with no admission of liability by Tenaris or Mr. Rocca, Tenaris will pay to the class $9.5 million (inclusive of legal fees to lead plaintiff’s counsel).

On April 10, 2023, the court granted preliminary approval to the class settlement. The final settlement approval hearing was set for October 19, 2023, and on that date the court ordered that, prior to granting final settlement approval, the lead plaintiffs submit on or before March 29, 2024, an update letter advising the court of the status of the claims processing.

Confab is a party to an administrative proceeding concerning the recognition and transfer of tax credits for an amount allegedly exceeding the amount that Confab would have been entitled to recognize and / or transfer. The proceeding resulted in the imposition of a fine against Confab representing approximately 75% of the allegedly undue credits, which was appealed by Confab. On January 21, 2019, Confab was notified of an administrative decision denying Confab’s appeal, thereby upholding the tax determination and the fine against Confab. On January 28, 2019, Confab challenged such administrative decision. Special appeals were filed by Confab in July 2023 and by the Brazilian General Tax Attorney (“PGFN”) in September 2023. The parties are currently awaiting a resolution. In case of an unfavorable resolution, Confab may appeal before the courts. The estimated amount of this claim is BRL60.7 million (approximately $12.5 million). At this stage, the Company cannot predict the outcome of this claim.

Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC (“TCT”), a U.S. subsidiary of the Company, was sued in 2017 by its competitor Global Tubing, alleging defamatory conduct by TCT and seeking a declaration that certain Global Tubing products do not infringe patents held by TCT. TCT counterclaimed that certain Global Tubing products did infringe patents held by TCT, and Global Tubing has since sought to invalidate such patents. On December 13, 2019, Global Tubing filed an amended complaint (including the Company as defendant), alleging, among other things, that TCT and the Company had misled the patent office. On March 20, 2023, the judge granted summary judgment in favor of Global Tubing, concluding that the patents at issue are unenforceable due to inequitable conduct during the patent prosecution process. TCT appealed this judgment, and Global Tubing appealed a previous ruling of the judge. Global Tubing also filed a brief seeking to recover attorneys’ fees, without specifying the amount of those fees. Although it is not possible to predict the final outcome of this matter, the Company believes that any potential losses arising from this case will not be material.

On October 27, 2021, the U.S. Department of Commerce (“DOC”) initiated antidumping duty investigations of oil country tubular goods (“OCTG”) from Argentina, Mexico, and Russia. After the DOC issued affirmative preliminary and final antidumping determinations with respect to imports from Argentina, Mexico and Russia on October 27, 2022, the International Trade Commission (“ITC”) determined that the imports under investigation caused injury to the U.S. OCTG industry. Tenaris and other parties have appealed the agency determinations from the investigation to the Court of International Trade. In addition, in response to a request from the Government of Argentina, the World Trade Organization (“WTO”) established a panel of experts to consider whether the DOC’s antidumping order applicable to Argentina is consistent with the international obligations of the United States. As a result of the investigation, and unless overturned on appeal, Tenaris is required to pay antidumping duty deposits (at a rate of 78.30% for imports from Argentina and 44.93% for imports from Mexico) until such time the imports are reviewed by the DOC to determine whether final duties are necessary for the specific period under review. Tenaris has been paying such deposits since May 11, 2022, reflecting the amount of such deposits in its costs. The deposit rates may be reset periodically based on the results of the review process. It is possible that, through the periodic review process, the deposits may be either returned to Tenaris in whole or in part, or may be increased.

Consistent with local practice in certain Middle East countries, Tenaris Global Services S.A. (“TGSU”), a Uruguayan subsidiary of the Company, sells materials to a local agent, and the agent then resells the materials to customers in the region. Tenaris is not a party to the contracts between the agent and each customer. In one such contract entered into in mid-2021, with pending obligations of approximately $520 million and deliveries until 2025, the agent agreed to supply Tenaris-produced casing and tubing of different sizes to the customer. Subsequent events led to onerous increases in prices and delays to supply the materials and led to lengthy discussions between the parties. The customer eventually paid a significant portion of such increased costs and, as a result, the dispute was settled.

•	Certain subsidiaries of the Company entered into a contract with Praxair S.A. for the service of oxygen and nitrogen supply. As of December 31, 2023, the aggregate amount to take or pay the committed volumes for an original 14-year term totaled approximately $32.7 million.

•	A subsidiary of the Company entered into a 25-year contract (effective as of December 1, 2016, through December 1, 2041) with Techgen for the supply of 197 MW (which represents 22% of Techgen’s capacity). Monthly payments are determined on the basis of capacity charges, operation costs, back-up power charges, and transmission charges. As of the seventh contract year (as long as Techgen’s existing or replacing bank facility has been repaid in full), the Company’s subsidiary has the right to suspend or early terminate the contract if the rate payable under the agreement is higher than the rate charged by the Comisión Federal de Electricidad (“CFE”) or its successors. The Company’s subsidiary may instruct Techgen to sell to any affiliate, to CFE, or to any other third party all or any part of unused contracted energy under the agreement and the Company’s subsidiary will benefit from the proceeds of such sale.

•	A U.S. subsidiary of the Company is a party to a contract with Nucor Steel Memphis Inc. under which it is committed to purchase on a monthly basis a specified minimum volume of steel bars, at prices subject to quarterly adjustments. The contract became effective upon delivery of the first purchase order, which occurred in April 2021, with an original duration of 3 years. In September 2023, the parties agreed to extend its term until December 31, 2024. As of December 31, 2023, the estimated aggregate contract amount calculated at current prices, was approximately $73.7 million. The contract gives the subsidiary of the Company the right to temporarily reduce the quantities to be purchased thereunder to 75% of the agreed-upon minimum volume in cases of material adverse changes in prevailing economic or market conditions.

•	In connection with the closing of the acquisition of IPSCO, a U.S. subsidiary of the Company entered into a 6-year master distribution agreement (the “MDA”) with PAO TMK (“TMK”) whereby, since January 2, 2020, Tenaris became the exclusive distributor of TMK’s OCTG and line pipe products in United States and Canada. At the end of the MDA’s 6-year term, TMK would have the option to extend the duration of its term for an additional 12-month period. Under the MDA, the Company is required to purchase specified minimum volumes of TMK-manufactured OCTG and line pipe products, based on the aggregate market demand for the relevant product category in the United States in the relevant year. In February 2022, however, the Company and TMK agreed that there would be no minimum yearly purchase requirement for the OCTG product category for the year ended December 31, 2022, and there would be no minimum yearly purchase requirement for TMK line pipe products under the MDA neither for the contract year ended December 31, 2022, nor for any subsequent contract year until expiration of the MDA’s term. In addition, no purchases of TMK products were made during 2023. The parties are currently discussing the termination of the MDA.

•	A Brazilian subsidiary of the Company entered into a contract with Usiminas and Gerdau from which it committed to purchase steel coils for a remaining amount of approximately $109.6 million to use for manufacturing welded pipes for the Raia fields project in Brazil.

•	A subsidiary of the Company entered into a contract with the supplier JFE Steel Corporation for the purchase of tubular material, including 13 Chrome alloy products following the closure of NKKTubes. Such contract foresees a penalty for a maximum amount of $30.9 million in case of early termination.

In addition, Tenaris (i) applied for stand-by letters of credit as well as corporate guarantees covering certain obligations of Techgen as described in note 14 (c) and (ii) issued performance guarantees mainly related to long-term commercial contracts with several customers and parent companies for approximately $3.6 billion as of December 31, 2023.

In accordance with Luxembourg Law, the Company is required to transfer a minimum of 5% of its net profit for each financial year to a legal reserve until such reserve equals 10% of the issued share capital.

As of December 31, 2023, this reserve is fully allocated and additional allocations to the reserve are not required under Luxembourg law. Dividends may not be paid out of the legal reserve.

The Company may pay dividends to the extent, among other conditions, that it has distributable retained earnings calculated in accordance with Luxembourg law and regulations.