LYB: 10-K Risk Factor Changes

There has been a broad range of proposed or promulgated international, national and state laws focusing on GHG emission reduction and global climate change. These proposed or promulgated laws apply or could apply in countries where we have interests or may have interests in the future. Laws and regulations in this field continue to evolve and, at this stage it is not possible to accurately estimate either a timetable for implementation or our future compliance costs relating to implementation. Jurisdictions in which we operate, including, in particular, the European Union (“EU”), have prepared national legislation and protection plans to implement their emission reduction commitments under the 2015 Paris Agreement. Our operations in Europe participate in the EU Emissions Trading System (“ETS”) and we meet our obligations through a combination of free and purchased emission allowances. We anticipate that climate regulation in the EU will result in an accelerated reduction of our free allowances, and higher market prices for purchased allowances. In addition, it remains uncertain whether the EU will implement a carbon border adjustment mechanism for organic chemicals and polymers, and, if so, how such a mechanism would affect the competitiveness of our products and our exposure to higher carbon costs. Although the U.S. announced its intent to withdraw from international climate agreements and has taken steps to roll back climate regulations, several state governments have promulgated regulations directed at GHG emissions reductions from certain types of facilities, and additional regulations could be promulgated in the future, that could result in increased operating costs for compliance, required acquisition or trading of emission allowances, or other costs. Non-Governmental Organizations have been active in filing lawsuits against governments and private parties in various jurisdictions around the world seeking enforcement of existing laws and new requirements to reduce GHG emissions. In one case decided in The Netherlands in November 2024, the court held that, although there was no basis to support an order for a specific emission reduction target, Royal Dutch Shell had an obligation to take measures to combat climate change. These types of laws, regulations, and litigation results could increase the cost of purchased energy and increase costs of compliance in various locations. Compliance with climate regulations may result in increased permitting necessary for the operation of our business or for any of our growth plans. Difficulties in obtaining such permits could have an adverse effect on our future growth. In addition, any future potential climate regulations, legislation, or litigation results could impose additional operating restrictions or delays in implementing growth projects or other capital investments, require us to incur increased costs, and could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations. 26 26 26 Table of Contents Table of Contents

There has been a broad range of proposed or promulgated international, national and state laws focusing on greenhouse gas (“GHG”) emission reduction and global climate change. These proposed or promulgated laws apply or could apply in countries where we have interests or may have interests in the future. Laws and regulations in this field continue to evolve and, while they are likely to be increasingly widespread and stringent, at this stage it is not possible to accurately estimate either a timetable for implementation or our future compliance costs relating to implementation. Under the 2015 Paris Agreement, parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change agreed to undertake ambitious efforts to reduce GHG emissions and strengthen adaptation to the effects of climate change. Jurisdictions in which we operate, including, in particular, the European Union (EU), have prepared national legislation and protection plans to implement their emission reduction commitments under the Paris Agreement. Our operations in Europe participate in the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) and we meet our obligations through a combination of free and purchased emission allowances. We anticipate that climate regulation in the EU will result in an accelerated reduction of our free allowances, and higher market prices for purchased allowances. These and other future regulations could result in increased costs, additional capital expenditures, or restrictions on operations. 26 26 26 Table of Contents Table of Contents Although the U.S. announced its intent to withdraw from the Paris Agreement and roll back climate regulations in January 2025, several state governments have promulgated regulations directed at GHG emissions reductions from certain types of facilities, and additional regulations could be forthcoming, that could result in increased operating costs for compliance, required acquisition or trading of emission allowances, or other costs. For example, the states of Vermont and New York have enacted ‘climate superfund’ laws that attempt to impose strict liability on companies that have extracted or refined hydrocarbons that led to emissions of GHG over certain thresholds. Additionally, demand for the products we produce may be reduced. Non-Governmental Organizations have been active in filing lawsuits against governments and private parties in various jurisdictions around the world seeking enforcement of existing laws and new requirements to reduce GHG emissions. In one case decided in The Netherlands in November 2024, the court held that, although there was no basis to support an order for a specific emission reduction target, Royal Dutch Shell had an obligation to take measures to combat climate change. These types of laws, regulations, and litigation results could increase the cost of purchased energy and increase costs of compliance in various locations. Compliance with climate regulations may result in increased permitting necessary for the operation of our business or for any of our growth plans. Difficulties in obtaining such permits could have an adverse effect on our future growth. In addition, any future potential climate regulations, legislation, or litigation results could impose additional operating restrictions or delays in implementing growth projects or other capital investments, require us to incur increased costs, and could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.