Environment

Introduction to Environmental Topics at argenx (ESRS 2 SBM-3)

We recognize our responsibility to act as good stewards of the planet we all share. Our approach is centered on understanding and addressing our impact on the environment, from energy and greenhouse gas emissions to waste.

Climate Change Mitigation

Climate Risk Assessment (ESRS 2 IRO-1, ESRS 2 SBM-3)

Physical Risks Overview

In 2024, we conducted our first scenario-based climate assessment to evaluate exposure to climate-related physical risks. This assessment screened forty-three key locations across our value chain, including offices, contract manufacturers, and suppliers, selected based on their strategic importance. Out of 43 locations, 12 locations were office sites, 28 locations were supplier sites, and three locations were customer sites. These locations were globally distributed (across North America, Europe, UK, and Asia Pacific).

Eight hazards – extreme heat, coastal flooding, pluvial flooding, riverine flooding, wildfires, water stress, drought, and cyclones – were analyzed across three-time horizons (historical, 2030s, and 2050s) and three climate scenarios (SSP1, SSP2, and SSP5) using IPCC AR6-aligned datasets. Final results were reported considering which hazards are the most impactful in the short, medium, and long term (i.e., baseline, 2030, and 2050-time horizons) for the SSP5 scenario.

As a quantitative iteration, the assessment was conducted at the inherent level, without considering existing adaptations or mitigations. Future assessments will incorporate existing adaptations and mitigations to refine our understanding of climate risks. Sensitivity to hazards was evaluated based on past experiences and potential impacts on our assets.

Scenario analysis results can be used to inform strategic and risk management decisions regarding resilience measures, such as enhancing contingency plans, diversifying supply sources, and relocating from high-risk areas to low-risk areas. For instance, our offices are less sensitive to climate hazards, as business interruption is less likely to occur if an office is impacted by a hazard, while a higher impact could be felt if our contract manufacturers were impacted by climate events.

Transition Risks Overview

In 2024, we conducted our first scenario-based climate transition risk assessment. The assessment took a qualitative approach to examining transition risk exposure levels regarding four transition risk categories: policy and legal, market, technology, and reputation. For each of these categories, several sub-categories of risk were assessed in order to gain further insight into specific risks that might impact us. In total, 13 subcategories of risk were assessed. Related to policy and legal risks, four were assessed: greenhouse gas emissions pricing, enhanced emissions reporting obligations, mandates on and regulation of existing products and services, and exposure to litigation. For the market risk category, three subcategories were assessed: changing customer behavior, increased cost of raw materials, and uncertainty in market signals. Under the technology risk category, three subcategories were assessed: substitution of existing products and services, unsuccessful investment in new technologies, and costs to transition to lower emissions technology. Finally, under the reputation risk category, three subcategories were assessed: shift in consumer preferences, stigmatization of sector, and increased shareholder concern. These risk categories and sub-categories were drawn from the Taskforce on Climate-Related Disclosures’ (TCFD) framework.

The assessment used data and information regarding argenx emissions, revenue, market presence, and stakeholder priorities combined with scenarios and data from the International Energy Agency (IEA) to gauge inherent transition risk exposure levels across IEA scenarios and three-time horizons – 2030, 2040, and 2050. The three IEA scenarios used were the Stated Policies Scenario (STEPS), Announced Pledges Scenario (APS), and the Net Zero Emissions by 2050 Scenario (NZE). Of these scenarios, the Net Zero Scenario is recommended to inform company strategy and is often required to comply with climate disclosures, so particular attention was paid to the results under this scenario.

This transition risk assessment provided high level climate risk exposure levels, which may inform future analyses and provide a foundation for argenx to build understanding of climate-related risks. This and future assessments may be able to inform our broader risk management strategy and enable argenx to put measures in place to monitor and manage these risks effectively.

Time Horizons

Scenario analysis was used in our climate risk assessments to inform how exposure could evolve over time. Both physical and transition risk screenings used three different warming scenarios to assess potential exposure across various futures. Time horizons have been defined as part of the analysis for both physical and transition risks. The short-term time horizon has been defined as up to five years in the future. The medium-term time horizon is between five to 15 years, while the long-term time horizon is more than 15 years.

The time horizons identified for climate risk assessment differ from those defined for the rest of the IROs and are based on climate scenario data and timelines as recommended by TCFD.

Physical Risks Screening

The physical risk screening used three scenarios from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) – SSP1 (below 2°C), SSP2 (2°C-4°C), and SSP5 (3.3°C-5.7°C), with the main focus on SSP5 as this is the scenario under which the world would be expected to see the highest impacts from climate change. Models from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) were used to complete this analysis. The analysis looked at three-time horizons, assessing baseline exposure based on historical observations, and projecting possible exposure in the future by 2030 and 2050. Both the projected exposure to the risk in different time horizons and the change in exposure from baseline were considered when determining whether a climate hazard could have a substantive impact on argenx.

Transition Risks Screening

The transition risk screening used three scenarios from the IEA – Stated Policies scenario, Announced Pledges scenario, and Net Zero scenario, with the main focus on the Net Zero scenario because this is the scenario under which the highest transition risks are expected to be seen. These scenarios provide a range of assumptions that were used in the screening to inform the magnitude of potential impacts that we could see in the future. These scenarios provide medium to long-term energy trend projections, which allows argenx to explore the potential implications of various policy choices, investment trends, and technology dynamics. The assessment undertook a structured approach that included assigning a baseline score for each risk reflecting our current exposure based on our current climate actions, business model, and the industry we operate in. To project this exposure into the future, risks were assigned proxy indicators from the IEA to assess how exposure could evolve over time by 2030, 2040, and 2050 under different possible scenarios based on the change in these proxies.

Results

On the basis of the foregoing assessment and our understanding of our business, we identified the following climate-related physical and transition risks as the most relevant to our operations among the risks that were screened. Given their likelihood to affect our business, these risks were not identified as material according to our double materiality assessment

• Climate-Related Regulations: Emissions reporting standards are emerging globally. There is an increased risk of regulations that we will be exposed to, which requires additional resources and costs to address. In Europe, the CSRD regulation mandates that companies report on their social and environmental impacts from a double materiality perspective. Similar regulations are being considered and adopted in other regions. For instance, in the US, California’s SB 219 bill is asking companies to report their emissions and climate risks, and in Australia the Climate-related Reporting Bill is asking companies to report climate impacts. Non-compliance poses potential risks, including litigation and reputational damage. The risks associated with climate-related regulations could also increasingly impact argenx through increased costs for compliance.
• Increased Costs of Raw Materials: The risk of increased cost and decreased availability of raw materials was identified as relevant and could potentially emerge in the short to medium term as fossil fuel-based materials could be taxed, which would raise the price of such materials that we use in operations and increase procurement costs. Moreover, supply chain disruptions due to climate events could result in decreased availability of raw materials, which could make it more difficult for argenx to procure these materials. For a limited number of our raw materials, we rely on a single source of supply. We try to mitigate the risk of scarcity by avoiding single-source suppliers to ensure we can source our materials from alternative suppliers if needed. This allows us to have access to different suppliers who are impacted by climate events to varying degrees and at different times based on their geographies.

The following risks were identified as potentially relevant to argenx at an inherent level, as exposure to these risks was found to be higher.

• Physical Risk (Acute): Certain sites are expected to face extreme heat under a high warming scenario starting in 2030 and increasing by 2050. However, the sensitivity of our operations to extreme heat is low due to existing measures, so the impact is not expected to be significant. For example, our offices have HVAC systems to address heat and ensure employee well-being, and our R&D facility has backup generators to prevent product spoilage during power outages that may occur due to grid overloads.
• Physical Risk (Chronic): Water stress relating to water withdrawal, which includes domestic, industrial, irrigation and livestock uses, is expected to impact certain sites under a high warming scenario, but this exposure is not expected to change significantly over time. Our sites are already adapted to this level of exposure as they were designed to be suitable for existing water withdrawal conditions. Water stress relating to water withdrawal could increase water utility costs, but this impact would be minimal for our offices, where water is mainly used for sanitation. Our contract manufacturers who are directly exposed would bear most of the increased costs, with likely only part of the cost increase passed down to argenx due to indirect exposure.

argenx is applying the phase-in relief outlined in ESRS 1 Appendix C which allows the omission of information relating to the anticipated financial effects associated with each identified material physical and transition risk. We will however, continue to refine the existing analysis to better understand these potential risks to argenx by addressing the requirements to disclose associated financial effect in future sustainability statements.

Transition Plan for Climate Change Mitigation (E1-1, E1-2, E1-3, E1-4)

As we are required to expressly note under paragraph 17 of ESRS E1-1, we have not yet developed a climate transition plan for climate change mitigation, nor have we developed policies, actions and targets in this respect.

Emissions

Material E1 impacts are described in this section include:

• Indirect emissions from upstream and downstream activities, including manufacturing, purchased goods and services, transportation and distribution of raw materials and products (to Europe, Japan, and the USA), waste generated in operations, and end-of-life treatment of products. These processes also require substantial energy, often sourced from fossil fuels, which amplifies the carbon footprint associated with the reporting company’s supply chain (Impact).
• Direct operational emissions and energy usage from company-owned sources (i.e., facilities and fleet) contribute to the negative effects of climate change (Impact).

At argenx, we define our organizational boundaries using the Operational Control approach per the World Resource Institute (WRI)/World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) GHG Protocol. Under this approach, we account for 100% of the GHG emissions from operations that we control. Emissions from our joint venture, OncoVerity, have been included in our Scope 3, Category 15 Investments emissions.

Scope 1 Emissions

Scope 1 emissions include all direct GHG emissions associated with sources owned or controlled by the company. argenx Scope 1 emissions are associated with leased employee vehicles. All our sites are leased, so purchased heating and cooling are captured under Scope 2 as defined within GHG Protocol Scope 2 Guidance, the Identifying Scope 2 Emissions and Setting the Scope 2 Boundary section.

Scope 2 Emissions

Scope 2 emissions include indirect GHG emissions that result from the consumption of purchased or acquired energy, such as electricity, heating, cooling, and electricity purchased to charge leased electric vehicles used by employees. These emissions are classified as indirect because the emissions do not occur in our assets, but rather at the location where the electricity is generated from input fuels. Although argenx does not own or control the sources, these emissions are a consequence of our activities.

We gather actual invoiced utility data for its properties for which we have operational control. In instances where data is not available, consumption is estimated using floor area and energy intensities from the Better Building Partnership (BBP) and the World Bank. For facilities using actual data, consumption data is obtained by facility personnel from landlords. utility bills, or supplier invoices.

Electricity emissions are calculated using the total energy consumption per site multiplied by the appropriate region- or country-specific emission factor. The location-based calculation uses factors from sources such as IEA, CO₂emissiefactoren, EPA eGRID, and others. We do not currently procure renewable energy; therefore, the market-based electricity emissions reflect the residual mix where available and utilize the location-based factors where a residual factor is not available following the GHG Protocol market-based emission factor hierarchy.

Emissions from heating and cooling such as those from HVAC equipment or a basement boiler are calculated using the annual facility consumption for these sources and appropriate emission factors from sources such as the UK Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) and global warming potentials from the IPCC Assessment Report 6.

Scope 2 Accounting Principles

Location-based emissions represent the average emissions from energy generated and consumed within the geographic regions where argenx operates, primarily using grid-average emission factors. Market-based emissions, on the other hand, reflect the emissions associated with argenx’s electricity purchasing decisions. Emissions are calculated using actual data when available and estimates when data is not available. These estimates are sourced from the International Energy Agency (IEA) and the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (DEFRA). Residual factors are used for market-based calculations where available.

Scope 3 Emissions

Scope 3 emissions allow for the accounting of all other indirect emissions.

In line with GHG best practices as defined by WBCSD and GHG Protocol, we engaged partners to produce an emissions inventory for Scope 3 data through primary data collection. This resulted in 35% of emissions across Scope 3 coming from supplier specific data.

Our Scope 3 emissions include the following categories and methodologies:

• Category 1 – Purchased Goods and Services: We utilize a hybrid approach pulling in supplier specific data where available, where a supplier specific spend-based emissions factor was used. 42% of emissions for PG&S came from supplier specific data. Where supplier data was not available cash-out categories were are matched to appropriate Environmentally Extended Input-Output (EEIO) emission factors. Emissions are calculated by multiplying the annual category spend data by the appropriate inflation adjusted Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Supply Chain Emissions Factors.
• Category 2 – Capital Goods: Capital Goods covers all upstream (i.e., cradle-to-gate) emissions from the production of capital goods purchased or acquired by argenx in the reporting year. We utilize a spend-based EEIO analysis to calculate emissions.
• Category 3 – Fuel- and Energy-Related Activities Not Included in Scope 1 or Scope 2: Fuel- & Energy-Related Activities (FERA) emissions represent the upstream emissions of fuels and energy used in our Scope 1 and 2. Data collected for FERA includes all fuel and electricity data gathered for Scope 1 and 2 and utilizes an average data approach to calculate emissions.
• Category 4 – Upstream Transportation and Distribution: As required by the Science-Based Targets Initiative (SBTi), these transportation emissions are calculated on a well-to-wheel (WTW) basis. This includes the extraction, refinement, and distribution of fuels as well as the combustion of that fuel. We utilize a hybrid methodology, relying on supplier provided emission data where available, distance-based approach when primary supplier data is not available, and spend data if neither of those are available. 14% of emissions for Category 4 came from supplier specific data.
• Category 5 – Waste Generated in Operation: To calculate emissions from Waste Generated in Operations, we utilize a waste-type-specific approach. Where available, we provide total weight of waste broken down by material type and disposal method per facility. If the data is not available, facility waste is estimated by the number of employees tied to that location and regional waste intensities. If the disposal method is not known, EU average disposal patterns are used.
• Category 6 – Business Travel: Our employee business travel data is provided for air, personal car mileage reimbursement, rail, and other modes such as ride-share/rental car/taxi. As required by the SBTi, these transportation emissions are calculated on a WTW basis. This includes the extraction, refinement, and distribution of fuels as well as the combustion of that fuel for travel. Where available, we utilize a distance-based approach and a spend-based approach if distance is not available. Emissions from hotel stays are an optional portion of this category and have been included using a spend-based approach. argenx exports air travel data from Business Travel Insights, detailing the distance per flight and cabin class. To calculate emissions, we categorize individual flights by haul length (short, medium, long) based on the total distance traveled. The mileage for each haul type and cabin class is then multiplied by the corresponding DEFRA emissions factors for well-to-tank (WTT) and tank-to-wheel (TTW) emissions.
• Category 7 – Employee Commute and Work from Home (WFH): Employee Commute is calculated using a distance-based methodology based on location information and assumed modes of transport from regional transportation patterns. As required by the SBTi, these transportation emissions are calculated on a WTW basis. This includes the extraction, refinement, and distribution of fuels as well as the combustion of that fuel for travel. Emissions from teleworking (work from home) are an optional portion of this category and have been included by estimating the incremental increase in energy consumption associated with working from home and employee frequency of remote work. Emissions from employee use of leased vehicles for commuting is excluded as this is already captured in Scope 1.
• Category 8 – Upstream Leased Assets: Our use of shared workspaces falls within this category. Data is gathered and emissions are calculated following the approach outlined in the sections for Scopes 1 & 2.
• Category 9 – Downstream Transportation and Distribution: This category represents emissions from outbound transportation that is not paid for by argenx. This is calculated using a distance-based approach. As required by the SBTi, these transportation emissions are calculated on a WTW basis. This includes the extraction, refinement, and distribution of fuels as well as the combustion of that fuel.
• Category 12– End-of-Life Treatment of Sold Products: End-of-Life Treatment includes emissions from the disposal of sold products. Sales and product & packaging weight data is gathered. Since we sell a regulated medical product, it is assumed that all the drug is used, but the packaging data utilizes regional assumptions of disposal patterns.
• Category 14 – Franchises: We granted a license to Zai Lab to sell and distribute VYVGART in the Chinese market in return for sales-based royalties and a one-time sales-based milestone. The franchise-specific method is utilized by gathering Zai Lab Scope 1 & 2 emissions allocated to argenx.
• Category 15 – Investments: This includes a joint venture with OncoVerity calculated using the average data method. In addition, this also includes investment in Zai Lab calculated using the investment-specific method. In addition, this also includes investment in Zai Lab calculated using the investment-specific method.

The following categories have been excluded:

• Category 10 – Processing of Sold Products: We do not sell intermediate products.
• Category 11 – Use of Sold Products: We do not sell products that consume energy.
• Category 13 – Downstream Leased Assets: We do not have assets that have been leased to other entities.

Scope 3 Accounting Principles

The following accounting principles describe the methodology used to calculate scope 3 emissions by applicable category:

• Category 1 – Purchased Goods and Services: We used a hybrid approach, combining supplier-specific and spend-based. Spend emissions were sourced from the EPA Supply Chain Emission Factors. Our spend-based methodology relies upon cash-based and cost-incurred financial data as the underlying source for these calculations.
• Category 2 – Capital Goods: We used a spend based approach using factors from the EPA Supply Chain Emission Factors.
• Category 3 – Fuel and Energy Related Activities: We used calculations based on our Scope 1 and 2 consumption, with fuel factors from DEFRA and electricity factors sourced from the IEA and country-specific sources where available.
• Category 4– Upstream Transport: We used a hybrid approach that incorporated supplier data including distance data and transportation cost. Calculations are WTW, with distance emission factors from DEFRA and spend factors from the EPA Supply Chain Emission Factors.
• Category 5 – Waste in Operations: We used actual waste data by stream where available, and estimated where data was not available, with emission factors from DEFRA.
• Category 6 – Business Travel: We used a distance-based approach where data was available and a spend-based approach where data was not available. Calculations are WTW. Our spend-based methodology relies upon our cash-out financial data as the underlying source for these calculations.
• Category 7 – Employee Commute: We used average calculated distance and regional commute patterns, as well as WTW calculations and emission factors from DEFRA.
• Category 8 – Upstream Leased Assets: We used actual activity data where available, and used estimates where data was not available. We used emission factors primarily from the IEA and DEFRA. Residual factors were used for market-based calculations where available.
• Category 9 – Downstream Transport: We used a distance-based method, with WTW calculations and emission factors from DEFRA.
• Category 12 – End of Life Treatment of Sold Products: We used an average data approach with assumed disposal patterns and DEFRA emission factors.
• Category 14 – Franchises: We used a franchise-specific method using primary allocated emission data.
• Category 15 – Investments: We used an average data method with factors from the EPA Supply Chain Emission Factors.

Gross Scopes 1, 2, 3 and Total GHG emissions (GHG Intensity Based on Net Revenue) (E1-6)

Energy

Energy Consumption and Mix (E1-5)

Resource Use and Circular Economy

Material E5 impacts are described in this section include:

• The disposal of single-use products, disposable medical devices, and hazardous waste (e.g., expired medications, chemical solvents, contaminated packaging, laboratory waste, and manufacturing byproducts) contributes to significant waste generation, resource depletion, and environmental and health risks when improperly managed. (Impact)

Waste Management (E5-3, E5-2)

At argenx, we recognize the importance of responsible waste management in our operations. The disposal of single-use products in research, development, and pharmaceutical administration, along with associated hazardous waste (e.g., expired medications, chemical solvents, contaminated packaging, laboratory waste, and manufacturing by-products), significantly contributes to waste generation, resource depletion, and environmental and health risks when improperly managed.

While resource use and circular economy impacts emerged in our climate risk assessment of our facilities and supply chain partners, we will not disclose financial effects or data from our value chain in the first year, in accordance with CSRD transitional reliefs.

Currently, we do not have a formal policy addressing material impacts, risks, and opportunities related to resource use and the circular economy. The actions described in E5-2-17 are not currently tracked. Recognizing the importance of addressing these issues, we are considering drafting and socializing a policy in 2025, to tackle the material impacts identified in our 2024 double materiality assessment and future IRO refinement. This policy would focus on reducing overall waste generation, improving waste diversion from landfills and incineration, and supporting suppliers in decreasing waste in their operations.

Three key business units were identified as central to resource use and circular economy impacts, risks, and opportunities related to our products and services, and the waste they generate:

• Facilities and EH&S: This includes argenx-owned and operated facilities such as offices and labs, as well as the procurement of new facility space and office and lab supplies.
• Supply Chain – Logistics and Transportation: Encompasses transportation, warehousing, and distribution activities contracted by argenx and executed by third-party suppliers.
• Supply Chain – Products and Packaging: Involves the development and manufacturing of drug substances and products, also contracted by argenx and conducted by third-party suppliers.

Additionally, we are evaluating business-critical activities, including material sourcing, through a Business Impact Assessment. This ongoing process aims to identify potential risks and ensure business continuity, guided by insights from internal stakeholder surveys.

While material inflows were not calculated during this reporting cycle, we have data on packaging weights for products sold for 2024 as follows:

• Packaging: 8,922 kilograms of fiber-based packaging and paper leaflets
• Glass Vials: 8,723 kilograms, including labels, flip tops, and stoppers

Waste Impacts (ESRS 2 SBM-3)

In 2024, argenx identified a negative impact associated with resource use and circularity, including single use products (i.e., disposal of single-use products, disposable medical devices, and hazardous waste) contributes to waste generation, resource depletion and environmental and health risks when improperly managed. We are committed to supporting the efficient use of resources through various initiatives across our operations. The manufacturing, transportation, warehousing, and distribution of our products and packaging are managed by contracted suppliers, limiting our direct control over these processes. Our single lab in Ghent, Belgium, ensures waste is managed according to strict national laws, with all lab employees receiving waste segregation training. Most of our facilities are office spaces, many of which are leased coworking spaces where waste management is handled by the landlord, generating minimal non-hazardous office waste. Specific initiatives across our operations include:

• Facilities and Ways of Working: At our Ghent lab, employees are trained in the proper segregation of bio-contaminated, hazardous, and non-hazardous waste, ensuring compliance with legal standards, and minimizing associated risks. Additionally, we recycle polystyrene for reuse in the building industry, improving downstream waste diversion. We offer refillable beverage stations to reduce single-use waste and work with a partner to recycle cups, improving diversion. Our employee-led Ghent Campus Team proposes and implements ESG initiatives across four key areas: innovation, facilities, people, and energy.
• Supply Chain – Logistics and Transportation: All drug substances are shipped in TOPA boxes, which are reusable up to ten times and returned to vendors after use. Drug products are shipped in TOPA boxes (46% of total shipments), Va-Q-tainers (50% of total shipments) with an indefinite lifespan, or unpackaged in temperature-controlled vehicles (4% of total shipments). This practice supports waste reduction and efficient resource use in our upstream value chain for distribution and transportation. Reusable containers have always been used in our drug substance and drug product transportation.
• Supply Chain – Products and Packaging: In Japan, we have replaced instructional paper leaflets with details online, reducing downstream waste from our products.

Resource Outflows (E5-5)

We produce two pharmaceutical products: Vyvgart (IV) and Vyvgart SC. Both products are packaged similarly, with the drug contained in a glass vial featuring a label, flip tops, and stopper. These vials are then placed in a paperboard box along with a paper leaflet that provides administration instructions. Due to the nature of these products, considerations such as durability, reusability, repairability, disassembly, and refurbishment are not applicable. While the paperboard box, paper leaflet, and glass vial are technically recyclable, they are often not recycled in clinical settings due to limited segregation and collection, particularly concerning bio-contaminated waste.

The data gathered on our operational footprint was gathered from various sources:

• Actual waste data for argenx labs and offices at the Ghent campus, provided by waste service providers, represents the largest waste footprint among all argenx facilities.
• For the US and Tokyo offices, waste data was supplied by the building landlords, with the proportion of argenx waste calculated based on square footage.
• For smaller offices, waste estimates were derived using existing waste data and calculations based on headcount or desk count, supplemented by publicly available figures on waste generation and composition.

EU Taxonomy

Introduction to the EU Taxonomy Regulation

The EU Taxonomy is a classification system for environmentally sustainable economic activities. By setting out the overarching conditions and criteria for an activity to be considered sustainable, EU Taxonomy seeks to direct investments into sustainable activities, increase transparency and improve comparability.

The EU Taxonomy Regulation identifies six environmental objectives:

1. Climate change mitigation
2. Climate change adaptation
3. Sustainable use and protection of water and marine resources
4. Transition to a circular economy
5. Pollution prevention and control
6. Protection and restoration of biodiversity and ecosystems

As a non-financial undertaking, argenx is required to disclose the proportion of its turnover, capital expenditure and operational expenditure associated with Taxonomy-eligible or Taxonomy-aligned economic activities listed under these six environmental objectives.

Compliance with the EU Taxonomy Regulation

In 2024, argenx progressed its efforts towards developing an EU Taxonomy framework that aligned with regulatory disclosures and market best practices. We took a comprehensive approach to evaluating eligibility and alignment for the reported KPIs, allowing us to enhance our insights and drive greater clarity and precision in our outcomes. As a result, we adjusted the methodology applied in 2023 to align with the approach used in 2024, ensuring consistency and comparability across periods.

Eligibility and Alignment

Eligibility

In 2024, argenx conducted the Taxonomy assessment by reviewing all activities listed under the six environmental objectives – covering the Climate, Environmental and Complementary Climate Delegated Acts. Potentially eligible activities were identified through an initial screening process of all activities and finalized based on the activity descriptions in the Delegated Acts.

Two environmental objectives and two activities were identified as relevant to argenx, 1.2. Manufacture of medicinal products (Pollution prevention and control) and 6.5. Transport by motorbikes, passenger cars and light commercial vehicles (Climate Change Mitigation). These correspond to argenx’s turnover derived from sales of medicinal products (associated with 1.2. Manufacture of medicinal products), R&D activities (associated with 1.2. Manufacture of medicinal products), and leases of vehicles (associated with activity 6.5. Transport by motorbikes, passenger cars and light commercial vehicles).

Alignment

The Taxonomy assessment was conducted in co-operation with legal, financial, and ESG experts at argenx, with additional support from external specialists.

In 2024, argenx conducted a stringent assessment of whether it meets the Minimum Safeguards criteria as laid out in the Final Report on Minimum Safeguards published by the EU Platform on Sustainable Finance in October 2022. argenx is considered compliant with criteria related to corruption, taxation, and fair competition as per its Global Tax Policy and Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, which covers human rights, anti-corruption, and bribery as well as fair competition. argenx has not been found in breach of the Minimum Safeguards.

Whilst argenx currently does not have a Human Rights Due Diligence Process that would be fully aligned with the six steps of UNGPs and OECD guidelines, as required by the Minimum Safeguards criteria, we remain fully committed to respecting human rights and to selecting partners who share the same vision.

Based on this outcome, full alignment with Taxonomy requirements for turnover and OpEx associated with activity 1.2. Manufacture of medicinal products, or CapEx associated with activity 6.5. Transport by motorbikes, passenger cars and light commercial vehicles could not be proved at this time. Thus, argenx has reported 0% alignment for Turnover, CapEx and OpEx KPIs.

Accounting Policy

Turnover

Turnover consists of net turnover derived from products or services.

In 2024, argenx revised its approach to assessing taxonomy eligibility for turnover based on additional guidance from the Commission regarding the consideration of subcontractor revenue. Based on the guidance, if the entity controls the economic activity performed by a subcontractor and recognizes the revenue as its own, it can be considered eligible.

While third-party contract manufacturers (CMs) are engaged to produce the medicinal products, argenx controls the economic activity performed and therefore fully recognizes the revenue from sales of the manufactured products under the principles set out in IFRS 15. As such, contract manufacturing is included in the KPI calculation and all net product sales are considered eligible under activity 1.2. Manufacture of medicinal products. Thus, the numerator consists of the external product net sales (associated with activity 1.2. Manufacture of medicinal products) and totals $2.2 billion.

Our denominator for calculation of turnover KPI, covering product net sales and collaboration revenue (as listed in Annex I, point 1.1.1 of Disclosures Delegated Act), totals $2.2 billion. Refer to “Note 17 Segment Reporting” and “Note 15 Collaboration Revenue” in the consolidated financial statements.

CapEx

CapEx covers additions to tangible and intangible assets including right-of-use assets during the fiscal year considered before depreciation, amortization, and any re-measurements.

argenx has considered leased vehicles that result in the recognition of a right-of-use of asset and are recognized under IFRS 16 Leases as eligible CapEx per the definition in Taxonomy Disclosures Delegated Act. All leased vehicles are considered eligible under 6.5. Transport by motorbikes, passenger cars and light commercial vehicles. Thus, the numerator for the CapEx KPI consists of additions to leased vehicles (associated with activity 6.5. Transport by motorbikes, passenger cars and light commercial vehicles), and totals $5.5 million.

The denominator for the CapEx KPI calculation covers additions to tangible and intangible assets during the fiscal year (as listed in Annex I, point 1.1.2.1 of Disclosures Delegated Act), totaling $94.7 million. Refer to “Note 4 Property, Plant and Equipment” and “Note 5 Intangible Assets” in the consolidated financial statements.

OpEx

OpEx covers direct non-capitalized costs related to research and development, building renovation measures, short-term lease, maintenance and repair, and any other direct expenditures relating to the day-to-day servicing of assets of property, plant, and equipment.

argenx has considered its direct costs related to research and development associated with activity 1.2. Manufacture of medicinal products as eligible OpEx. Research and development are a key activity in argenx’s strategic business model and value chain. It consists of multi-phase clinical trials, regulatory approval processes, research of pre-clinical stage product candidates, and discovery stage programs, all with the eventual goal to manufacture medicinal products and treat patients globally.

For 2024, specifically, R&D related to evaluating the use of efgartigimod in 15 severe autoimmune diseases (including MG, CIDP, and ITP), empasiprubart is currently being evaluated in four diseases, proof-of-concept studies in ARGX-119, and other pre-clinical research, were considered eligible OpEx. Thus, the numerator for OpEx consists of direct research and development expenses related to VYVGART, ARGX-117, ARGX-119 and other pre-clinical candidates (associated with activity 1.2. Manufacture of medicinal products) and totals $605.1 million

Our denominator for calculation of OpEx KPI, covering research and development, maintenance, and repair (as listed in Annex I, point 1.1.3.1 of Disclosures Delegated Act), totals $605.8 million. Refer to “Note 18 Research and development expenses”  in the consolidated financial statements. Maintenance and repair are included under “Note 18 Research and development expenses’’ and ‘‘Note 19 Selling, general, and administrative expenses” in the consolidated financial statements.

Double counting is avoided as none of the eligible activities contribute to multiple environmental objectives and each KPI only includes one eligible activity.

Nuclear and fossil gas related activities