Golden Minerals Co 10-K

ITEM 3: LEGAL PROCEEDINGS Claims Related to Shutdown or Reduction of Operations Ten former employees of some of the Company’s Mexican subsidiaries filed labor claims in 2024 against the subsidiary companies claiming the companies had not compensated them properly for their termination. As at December 31, 2024, a severance accrual was estimated and recorded in connection with these lawsuits for $230,000. All such claims were settled during 2025 as part of the sale of our Mexican subsidiaries. As at December 31, 2025, there was no severance accrual recorded in our consolidated financial statements. One supplier of some of the Mexican subsidiaries filed a lawsuit in 2024 against the subsidiary companies for non-payment for services rendered. In total, the supplier is seeking approximately $55,000 and this amount was recorded in accounts payable as of December 31, 2024. As with labor claims, all liabilities related to suppliers was settled as part of the sale of our Mexican subsidiaries in 2025. In 2025, we received three labor claims against our Argentina subsidiary from former employees seeking compensation. As of December 31, 2025, we have accrued $250,000 for these matters, representing our best estimate of a probable loss. We intend to vigorously defend these claims. As a result of the Company’s reduced or ceased operations in the US, Mexico, and Argentina, the Company has been and may in the future be exposed to claims from former employees, labor unions, suppliers, consultants or contractors and tax and environmental claims, which may individually or in the aggregate be material. Mexican Mining Concession In July 2025, the Company was notified by the Mexican Mining Registry of an outstanding balance of approximately $403,000 in fees, penalties, and late fees related to the Rucio mining concession, originally requested by Minera de Cordilleras, a subsidiary that was sold earlier in 2025. Under the terms of the sale the Company would be responsible for this claim. Based on the Mining Registry files, the Rucio concession was originally requested in 2011 by a former manager of Minera de Cordilleras. The concession was not issued until 2018, and the Company was never notified of its issuance or of any associated payment obligations. The Company elected not to make payment pending further investigation, and the concession has since been cancelled by the Mining Registry. The Mining Registry has not commenced an enforcement action related to the alleged fees. If filed, the Company plans to challenge the validity of the claim, citing irregularities in the timing of the concession’s issuance and notification. The Company initiated a concession annulment action during November 2025. Unifin Lawsuit During April 2021, the Company became aware of a lawsuit in Mexico against one of the Company’s Mexican subsidiaries, Minera William, S.A. de C.V. (“Minera William”). The plaintiff in the matter was Unifin Financiera, S.A.B de C.V. (“Unifin”). The lawsuit was assigned to the Fifth Specialized Commercial District Court. In November 2022, the 32 Company was formally served with the complaint in connection with the lawsuit and in December 2022 the Company filed its answer to the complaint. As a preemptive measure, Unifin obtained a preliminary court order freezing Minera William’s bank accounts in Mexico, which limited the Company’s and Minera William’s ability to access approximately $153,000. The Company and Unifin agreed to settle the dispute in late 2023. During the first quarter of 2024, the Court unfroze the Minera William bank accounts, and the bank remitted the funds to Unifin as per the settlement agreement. The court also published a writ stating that the parties had complied with the settlement agreement and declared that Unifin has withdrawn the lawsuit against Minera William. On June 13, 2024, the Trial Court published the judgment in the commercial oral proceeding initiated by Unifin against Minera William, Procesadora de Minerales de Durango, and Jorge Alberto Samaniego Mota. Since Unifin and Minera William had previously settled the dispute and Unifin desisted or withdrew its action against Minera William, the company was not condemned in the judgment. Procesadora de Minerales de Durango and Jorge Alberto Samaniego Mota were ordered to pay all the amounts claimed by Unifin. However, the judgment states that Minera William, Procesadora de Minerales de Durango, and Jorge Samaniego Mota are jointly and severally liable to Unifin. The Company believes the Judge should not have ruled on whether or not Minera William was jointly and severally liable. Moreover, the Judge did not assess Minera William’s arguments that it was not jointly and severally liable to Unifin. Minera William appealed that ruling as it is clearly contrary to the settlement agreement between Unifin and Minera William. On June 11, 2025, the Appellate Court dismissed Minera Williams appeal, on the grounds that it lacks legal standing, as the judgment issued in the original proceeding does not cause it any harm. Regarding the risk raised by Minera William concerning a potential repetition action by the co-defendants Procesadora and Samaniego, the Appellate Court found such risk to be unfounded, as it is merely a hypothetical scenario that, to date, has not resulted in any harm to Minera William. The Company currently believes that it is unlikely any future liability will arise from this judgement. ITEM 4: MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES Not applicable.