Classification is based on semantic text similarity scoring and may include approximations. “No match” means no high-confidence textual match was found — not necessarily that a section was removed.

🟡 Modified Disclosure change7/10

Investor and public perception related to the Company's ESG performance as well as current and future ESG reporting requirements may affect our business and our operating results.

medium match confidence

Sentence-level differences:

Reworded sentence: "In recent years, companies across all industries are facing increasing scrutiny from a variety of stakeholders, including investor advocacy groups, proxy advisory firms, certain institutional investors and lenders, investment funds and other influential investors and rating agencies, related to their ESG and sustainability practices."
Reworded sentence: "These organizations provide information to investors on corporate governance and related matters and have developed ratings processes for evaluating companies on their approach to ESG matters."
Reworded sentence: "In addition, geopolitical instability has increased energy prices compared to the prior year and raised energy security concerns, which may result in many governments reassessing energy transition strategies, extending the timeline to ensure adequate and reasonably priced energy supplies."
Reworded sentence: "Our failure or perceived failure to pursue or fulfill our reductions and elimination of carbon equivalent emissions commitments within the timelines we announce, or changes to these commitments or related timelines could have a negative impact on investor sentiment, ratings outcomes for evaluating our approach to ESG matters, our stock price and cost of capital and expose us to government enforcement actions and private litigation, among other material adverse impacts."

Current (2024):

Read full text

In recent years, companies across all industries are facing increasing scrutiny from a variety of stakeholders, including investor advocacy groups, proxy advisory firms, certain institutional investors and lenders, investment funds and other influential investors and rating agencies, related to their ESG and sustainability practices. If we do not adapt to or comply with investor or other stakeholder expectations and standards on ESG matters (or meet sustainability goals and targets that we have set), as they continue to evolve, or if we are perceived to have not responded appropriately or quickly enough to growing concern for ESG and sustainability issues, regardless of whether there is a regulatory or legal requirement to do so, we may face increased litigation risk, reputational damage and our business, financial condition and/or stock price could be materially and adversely affected.

In addition, our continuing efforts to research, establish, accomplish and accurately report on the implementation of our ESG strategy, including our emissions reduction commitments, may also create additional operational risks and expenses and expose us to reputational, legal and other risks. While we create and publish voluntary disclosures regarding ESG matters from time to time, some of the statements in those voluntary disclosures may be based on hypothetical expectations and assumptions that may or may not be representative of current or actual risks or events or forecasts of expected risks or events, including the costs associated therewith. Such expectations and assumptions are necessarily uncertain and may be prone to error or subject to misinterpretation given the long timelines involved and the lack of an established single approach to identifying, measuring and reporting on many ESG matters.

Our voluntary disclosures of ESG data are evaluated and rated by various organizations that assess corporate ESG performance. These organizations provide information to investors on corporate governance and related matters and have developed ratings processes for evaluating companies on their approach to ESG matters. Unfavorable ESG ratings, or our inability to meet the ESG standards set by specific investors, may lead to negative investor sentiment and reputational damage, which could have an adverse impact, among other things, on our stock price and cost of capital.

Regulatory requirements related to ESG or sustainability reporting have been adopted and may continue to be introduced in various jurisdictions. For example, the EU Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive became effective in 2023 and applies to both EU and certain non-EU entities. In October 2023, California enacted the Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act and the Climate Related Financial Risk Act that will require large public and private companies that do business within the state to disclose their Scopes 1, 2 and 3 greenhouse gas ("GHG") emissions, with third party assurance of GHG emissions information for certain entities, and issue public

reports on their climate-related financial risk and related mitigation measures. In 2023, California also enacted the Voluntary Carbon Market Disclosures Act, which requires companies that operate within the state and make certain climate-related claims to provide enhanced disclosures around the achievement of such claims. We expect regulatory disclosure requirements related to ESG matters to continue to expand globally, which has and may continue to increase our cost and burden of compliance and subject us to increased legal and reputational risk.

To achieve our stated emission reduction goals, we have implemented internal decarbonization projects and may also need to rely on external factors, such as the greater deployment of carbon reduction and removal technologies and adoption of government policies that we expect would accelerate the adoption of energy transition technologies. There have been policy responses to support the energy transition in the U.S. with the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act. In addition, geopolitical instability has increased energy prices compared to the prior year and raised energy security concerns, which may result in many governments reassessing energy transition strategies, extending the timeline to ensure adequate and reasonably priced energy supplies. It is difficult to predict with certainty how these policy, economic, and energy security issues will impact the energy transition. Our failure or perceived failure to pursue or fulfill our reductions and elimination of carbon equivalent emissions commitments within the timelines we announce, or changes to these commitments or related timelines could have a negative impact on investor sentiment, ratings outcomes for evaluating our approach to ESG matters, our stock price and cost of capital and expose us to government enforcement actions and private litigation, among other material adverse impacts.

View prior text (2023)

Increasing focus on ESG factors has led to enhanced interest in, and review of performance results by investors and other stakeholders, and the potential for litigation and reputational risk. We are committed to transparent and comprehensive reporting of our sustainability performance and report under standards such as the Global Reporting Initiative, the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board ("SASB"), and recommendations issued by the Financial Stability Board's Task Force for Climate-related Financial Disclosures ("TCFD"). Our voluntary disclosures of ESG data are evaluated and rated by various organizations that assess corporate ESG performance. Over the past few years there has also been increased investor demand for ESG investing opportunities, and the ESG ratings are used by some stakeholders to inform their investment and voting decisions. Unfavorable ESG ratings, or our inability to meet the ESG standards set by specific investors, may lead to unfavorable sentiment toward Baker Hughes, which could have a negative impact, among other things, on our stock price and cost of capital.

Regulatory requirements related to ESG or sustainability reporting have been adopted in the EU that apply to financial market participants. In the U.S., such regulations have been issued related to pension investments in California, and for the responsible investment of public funds in Illinois. Additional regulation is pending at the SEC and in other states. We expect regulatory requirements related to ESG matters to continue to expand globally. We may be affected by our ability to meet evolving and expanding emissions reporting requirements and by investor and public perception of our reporting and performance related to voluntary climate standards.

To achieve our stated emission reduction goals, we have implemented internal decarbonization projects and may also need to rely on external factors, such as the greater deployment of carbon reduction and removal technologies and adoption of government policies that we expect would accelerate the adoption of energy transition technologies. There have been policy responses to support the energy transition in the U.S. with the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act. In addition, the 2022 energy disruptions have increased energy prices and raised energy security concerns, which may force many governments to reassess energy transition strategies, extending the timeline to ensure adequate and reasonably priced energy supplies. It is difficult to predict with certainty how these policy, economic, and energy security issues will impact the energy transition. Our failure or perceived failure to pursue or fulfill our reductions and elimination of carbon equivalent emissions commitments within the timelines we announce could have a negative impact on investor sentiment, ratings outcomes for evaluating our approach to ESG matters, our stock price and cost of capital and expose us to government enforcement actions and private litigation, among other material adverse impacts.