Trane Technologies (TT) Risk Analysis

Our indirect wholly-owned subsidiaries Aldrich and Murray have each filed a voluntary petition for reorganization under the Bankruptcy Code in the Bankruptcy Court. The goal of these Chapter 11 filings is to resolve equitably and permanently all current and future asbestos-related claims in a manner beneficial to claimants, Aldrich and Murray through court approval of a plan of reorganization that would create a trust pursuant to section 524(g) of the Bankruptcy Code, establish claims resolution procedures for all current and future asbestos-related claims against Aldrich and Murray and channel such claims to the trust for resolution in accordance with those procedures. Such a resolution, if achieved, would likely include a channeling injunction to enjoin asbestos claims resolved in the Chapter 11 cases from being filed or pursued against us or our affiliates. The Chapter 11 cases remain pending as of February 6, 2025. There are a number of risks and uncertainties associated with these Chapter 11 cases, including, among others, those related to: - the ability to consummate the agreement in principle reached with the court appointed legal representative of future asbestos claimants (the FCR);- the outcome of negotiations with the committee representing current asbestos claimants (ACC) and other participants in the Chapter 11 cases, including insurers, concerning the terms of a plan of reorganization, including the size and structure of a potential section 524(g) trust to pay the asbestos liability of Aldrich and Murray and the means for funding that trust, and the risk that the ACC will object to, and the risk that insurers will not support, a plan of reorganization having terms acceptable to Aldrich and Murray;- the actions of representatives of the asbestos claimants, including the ACC's pursuit of certain causes of action against us, following the Bankruptcy Court's grant of the ACC's motion seeking standing to investigate and pursue certain causes of action at a hearing held on January 27, 2022, and other potential actions by the ACC in opposition to, or otherwise inconsistent with, the efforts by Aldrich and Murray to diligently prosecute the Chapter 11 cases and ultimately seek Bankruptcy Court approval of a plan of reorganization;- the decisions of the Bankruptcy Court relating to numerous substantive and procedural aspects of the Chapter 11 cases, including in connection with a proceeding by Aldrich and Murray to estimate their aggregate liability for asbestos claims, following the Bankruptcy Court's grant of their motion seeking such a proceeding, and other efforts by Aldrich and Murray to diligently prosecute the Chapter 11 cases and ultimately seek Bankruptcy Court approval of a plan of reorganization, whether such decisions are in response to actions of representatives of the asbestos claimants or otherwise;- the ultimate determination of the asbestos liability of Aldrich and Murray to be satisfied under a plan of reorganization pursuant to the court-approved estimation proceeding;- the ability of Aldrich and Murray to obtain the necessary approvals of the Bankruptcy Court or the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina (the District Court) of a plan of reorganization;- the decisions of the appellate courts regarding any orders of the Bankruptcy Court or the District Court that may be appealed, including the Bankruptcy Court's order dated December 28, 2023 denying the motions to dismiss the Chapter 11 cases brought by the ACC and certain individual claimants and any orders of the Bankruptcy Court or District Court approving a plan of reorganization;- any orders approving a plan of reorganization and issuing the channeling injunction not becoming final and non-appealable;- the terms and conditions of any plan of reorganization that is ultimately confirmed in the Chapter 11 cases;- delays in the confirmation or effective date of a plan of reorganization due to factors beyond the Company's control; and - the risk that the ultimate amount required under any final plan of reorganization may exceed the amounts agreed to with the FCR in the Plan. The ability of Aldrich and Murray to successfully reorganize and resolve their asbestos liabilities will depend on various factors, including their ability to reach agreements with representatives of the asbestos claimants on the terms of a plan of reorganization that satisfies all applicable legal requirements and to obtain the requisite court approvals of such plan, and remains subject to the risks and uncertainties described above. We cannot ensure that Aldrich and Murray can successfully reorganize, nor can we give any assurances as to the amount of the ultimate obligations under the Funding Agreements or any plan of reorganization, or the resulting impact on our financial condition, results of operations or future prospects. We also are unable to predict the timing of any of the foregoing matters or the timing for a resolution of the Chapter 11 cases, all of which could have an impact on us. It also is possible that, in the Chapter 11 cases, various parties will be successful in bringing claims against us and other related parties, including by successfully challenging the 2020 corporate restructuring, consolidating entities and/or raising allegations that we are liable for the asbestos-related liabilities of Aldrich and Murray as set forth in certain pleadings filed by the ACC in the Chapter 11 cases. Although we believe we have no such responsibility for liabilities of Aldrich and Murray, except indirectly through our obligation to provide funding to Aldrich and Murray under the terms of the Funding Agreements, we cannot provide assurances that such claims will not be successful. In sum, the outcome of the Chapter 11 cases is uncertain and there is uncertainty as to what extent we may have to contribute to a section 524(g) trust under the Funding Agreements. For detailed information on the bankruptcy cases of Aldrich and Murray, see Part I, Item 1, "Business - Asbestos-Related Matters," Part I, Item 3, "Legal Proceedings," Part II, Item 7, "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations - Significant Matters," and Part II, Item 8, Consolidated Financial Statements, and Note 20, "Commitments and Contingencies."

At the time of the Distribution, we received an opinion from our U.S. tax counsel Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP (Paul Weiss) substantially to the effect that, for U.S. federal income tax purposes, the Distribution together with certain related transactions undertaken in anticipation of the Distribution and taking into account the merger of Ingersoll Rand Industrial with the wholly-owned subsidiary of Ingersoll Rand will qualify as a tax-free transaction under Sections 368(a), 361 and 355 of the Internal Revenue Code (the Code), with the result that we and the Spin-off Shareholders will not recognize any gain or loss for U.S. federal income tax purposes as a result of the spin-off. The opinion of our counsel was based on, among other things, certain representations and assumptions as to factual matters made by Ingersoll Rand, Ingersoll Rand Industrial and the Company. The failure of any factual representation or assumption to be true, correct and complete in all material respects could adversely affect the validity of the opinion of counsel. An opinion of counsel represents counsel's best legal judgment, is not binding on the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) or the courts, and the IRS or the courts may not agree with the opinion. In addition, an opinion will be based on current law, and cannot be relied upon if current law changes with retroactive effect. If the Distribution, and/or related internal transactions in anticipation of the Distribution ultimately are determined to be taxable, we could incur significant U.S. federal income tax liabilities, which could cause a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows in future reporting periods, although if this determination resulted from certain actions taken by Ingersoll Rand Industrial or Ingersoll Rand, Ingersoll Rand would be required to bear the cost of any resultant tax liability pursuant to the terms of the Tax Matters Agreement dated February 29, 2020, among Ingersoll-Rand Plc, Ingersoll-Rand Lux International Holding Company S.à r.l, Ingersoll-Rand Services Company, Ingersoll-Rand U.S. HoldCo, Inc., and Gardner Denver Holdings, Inc. (Tax Matters Agreement). The Distribution will be taxable to the Company pursuant to Section 355(e) of the Code if there is a 50% or greater change in ownership of either the Company or Ingersoll Rand Industrial, directly or indirectly (including through such a change in ownership of Ingersoll Rand), as part of a plan or series of related transactions that include the Distribution. A Section 355(e) change of ownership would not make the Distribution taxable to the Spin-off Shareholders, but instead may result in corporate-level taxable gain to certain of our subsidiaries. Because the Spin-off Shareholders will collectively be treated as owning more than 50% of the Ingersoll Rand common stock following the merger, the merger alone should not cause the Distribution to be taxable to our subsidiaries under Section 355(e). However, Section 355(e) might apply if other acquisitions of stock of the Company before or after the merger, or of Ingersoll Rand before or after the merger, are considered to be part of a plan or series of related transactions that include the Distribution together with certain related transactions. If Section 355(e) applied, certain of our subsidiaries might recognize a very substantial amount of taxable gain, although if this applied as a result of certain actions taken by Ingersoll Rand Industrial, Ingersoll Rand or certain specified Ingersoll Rand stockholders, Ingersoll Rand would be required to bear the cost of any resultant tax liability under Section 355(e) pursuant to the terms of the Tax Matters Agreement.

Climate change presents immediate and long-term risks to our Company and to our customers, with the risks expected to increase over time, including, among others, acute physical risks (such as flooding, hurricanes, or wildfires) or chronic physical risks (such as droughts, heat waves, or sea level changes). Our products and operations are subject to and affected by environmental regulation by federal, state and local authorities in the U.S. and regulatory authorities with jurisdiction over our international operations, including with respect to the use, storage, and dependence upon refrigerants which are considered greenhouse gases. Refrigerants are essential to many of our products and there is concern regarding the global warming potential of such materials. As such, national, regional and international regulations and policies have been implemented to curtail the use of certain refrigerants. Some of these regulations could have a negative competitive impact on our company by requiring us to make costly changes to our products, or could make some of our existing HVAC and refrigeration products non-compliant or obsolete. As regulations reduce the use and potential availability of the current class of widely used refrigerants, we are developing and selling our next generation products that utilize lower global warming potential solutions. There can be no assurance that climate change or environmental regulation or deregulation will not have a negative competitive impact on our ability to sell our products or that economic returns will match the investment that we are making in new product development. We face increasing complexity related to product design, the availability and use of materials, the associated energy consumption and efficiency related to the use of products, the transportation and shipping of products, climate change regulations, and the reuse, recycling and/or disposal of products and their components at end-of-use or useful life as we adjust to new and future requirements relating to our transition to a more circular economy. There continues to be a lack of consistent climate legislation, which creates economic and regulatory uncertainty. Such regulatory uncertainty extends to future incentives for energy efficient buildings and vehicles and costs of compliance, which may impact the demand for our products, obsolescence of our products and our results of operations. We are on track with our climate commitment to offer a full line of next generation products by 2030 without compromising safety or energy efficiency. Additionally, in 2019, we announced our 2030 commitment which targets reducing one gigaton – one billion metric tons – of carbon emissions (CO2e) from our customers' footprint by 2030. While we are committed to pursuing these sustainability objectives, our ability to achieve our sustainability objectives is subject to numerous risks and uncertainties, including increased operation costs and future changes in regulation, and there can be no assurance that we will successfully achieve our commitments. Failure to meet these commitments could result in reputational and other harm to our company. Changes regarding climate risk management and practices may result in higher regulatory, compliance risks and costs.