DORIAN LPG LTD. [LPG] Filings

Table of Contents

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

​

FORM 10-K

​

☒ ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended March 31, 2023

​

or

​

☐ TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

​

​

Commission file number: 001-36437

​

Dorian LPG Ltd.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

​

​

​

​

​

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (203) 674-9900

​

SECURITIES REGISTERED PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(b) OF THE ACT:

​

​

​

​

SECURITIES REGISTERED PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(g) OF THE ACT:

None

​

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes ☐ No ☒   

​

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes ☐ No ☒    

​

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes ☒    No ☐

​

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T

(§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files). Yes ☒    No ☐

​

​

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, a smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company,” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

​

​

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ☐

​

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed a report on and attestation to its management’s assessment of the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (15 U.S.C. 7262(b)) by the registered public accounting firm that prepared or issued its audit report. ☒

​

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes ☐ No ☒    

​

The aggregate market value of the registrant’s common stock held by non-affiliates, based upon the closing price of common stock as reported on the New York Stock Exchange as of September 30, 2022, was approximately $519,083,561. For this purpose, all outstanding shares of common stock have been considered held by non-affiliates, other than the shares beneficially owned by directors, officers and shareholders of 10% or more of the registrant’s outstanding common shares, without conceding that any of the excluded parties are "affiliates" of the registrant for purposes of the federal securities laws. As of May 25, 2023, there were 40,382,730 shares of the registrant’s common stock outstanding.

​

​

Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

​

​

​

​

​

Table of Contents

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

​

This report contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (the “PSLRA”), including analyses and other information based on forecasts of future results and estimates of amounts not yet determinable and statements relating to our future prospects, developments and business strategies. We intend for these forward-looking statements are intended to be covered by the safe harbor provided for under the sections referenced in the immediately preceding sentence and the PSLRA. Forward-looking statements are identified by their use of terms and phrases such as “anticipate,” “believe,” “continue,” “could,” “estimate,” “expect,” “forecast,” “intend,” “likely,” “may,” “might,” “pending,” “plan,” “possible,” “potential,” “predict,” “project,” “seeks,” “should,” “targets,” “will,” “would,” and similar expressions, terms and phrases, including references to assumptions.

​

The forward-looking statements in this report are based upon various assumptions, many of which are based, in turn, upon further assumptions. These assumptions include, without limitation, management’s examination of historical operating trends, data contained in our records and other data available from third parties. Although we believe that these assumptions were reasonable when made, because these assumptions are inherently subject to significant uncertainties and contingencies that are difficult or impossible to predict and are beyond our control, we cannot assure you that we will achieve or accomplish these expectations, beliefs or projections.

​

In addition to important factors and matters discussed elsewhere in this report, and in the documents incorporated by reference herein, important factors that, in our view, could cause our actual results to differ materially from those discussed in the forward-looking statements include:

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Table of Contents

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Table of Contents

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Table of Contents

​

​

​

​

Actual results could differ materially from expectations expressed in the forward-looking statements if one or more of the underlying assumptions or expectations proves to be inaccurate or is not realized. You should thoroughly read this report with the understanding that our actual future results may be materially different from and worse than what we expect. Other sections of this report include additional factors that could adversely impact our business and financial performance. Moreover, we operate in an evolving environment. New risk factors and uncertainties emerge from time to time and it is not possible for our management to predict all risk factors and uncertainties, nor can we assess the impact of all factors on our business or the extent to which any factor, or combination of factors, may cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statements. We qualify all of the forward-looking statements by these cautionary statements.

We caution readers of this report not to place undue reliance on forward-looking statements. Any forward-looking statements contained herein are made only as of the date of this report, and we undertake no obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by law.

​

​

​

Table of Contents

PART I

​

ITEM 1.  BUSINESS

​

Unless otherwise indicated, references to "Dorian," the "Company," "we," "our," "us," or similar terms refer to Dorian LPG Ltd. and its subsidiaries. We use the term "VLGC" to refer to very large gas carriers. We use the term "LPG" to refer to liquefied petroleum gas and we use the term "cbm" to refer to cubic meters in describing the carrying capacity of our vessels. Unless otherwise indicated, all references to "U.S. dollars," "USD," and "$" in this report are to the lawful currency of the United States of America and references to "Norwegian Krone" and "NOK" are to the lawful currency of Norway.

​

Overview

​

Dorian was incorporated on July 1, 2013 under the laws of the Republic of the Marshall Islands, is headquartered in the United States and is engaged in the transportation of LPG. Specifically, Dorian and its subsidiaries are focused on owning and operating VLGCs in the LPG shipping industry. Our founding executives have managed vessels in the LPG shipping market since 2002. Our fleet currently consists of twenty-five VLGCs, including one dual-fuel 84,000 cbm ECO-design VLGC, or our Dual-fuel ECO VLGC; nineteen fuel-efficient 84,000 cbm ECO-design VLGCs, or our ECO VLGCs; one 82,000 cbm modern VLGC; two time chartered dual fuel Panamax size VLGCs; and two time chartered-in ECO VLGCs. The twenty-five VLGCs in our fleet, including the four time chartered-in vessels, as of May 25, 2023, have an aggregate carrying capacity of approximately 2.1 million cbm and an average age of 7.2 years. Currently, thirteen of our ECO VLGCs, including one of our time chartered-in ECO-VLGCs, are fitted with exhaust gas cleaning systems (commonly referred to as “scrubbers”) to reduce sulfur emissions. An additional three of our technically-managed VLGCs had contractual commitments to be equipped with scrubbers as of March 31, 2023. Installation of scrubbers on two of the vessels is expected to be completed during our fiscal year 2024 and one during our fiscal year 2025. We provide in-house commercial and technical management services for all of our vessels, including our vessels deployed in the Helios Pool, which may also receive commercial management services from Phoenix (defined below). Excluding our time chartered-in vessels, we provide in-house technical management services for all of our vessels, including our vessels deployed in the Helios Pool.

​

On April 1, 2015, we and Phoenix Tankers Pte. Ltd., or Phoenix, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Mitsui OSK Lines Ltd., an unaffiliated third party, began operation of Helios LPG Pool LLC, or the Helios Pool, a joint venture owned 50% by us and 50% by Phoenix. We believe that the operation of certain of our VLGCs in this pool allows us to achieve better market coverage and utilization. Vessels entered into the Helios Pool are commercially managed jointly by Dorian LPG (UK) Ltd., our wholly-owned subsidiary, and Phoenix. The members of the Helios Pool share in the net pool revenues generated by the entire group of vessels participating in the pool, weighted according to certain technical vessel characteristics, and net pool revenues are distributed as variable rate time charter hire to each participant. The vessels entered into the Helios Pool may operate either in the spot market, pursuant to contracts of affreightment, or COAs, or on time charters of two years' duration or less. We and Phoenix have agreed that the Helios Pool will have a right of first refusal to undertake any time charter with an original duration greater than two years. As of May 25, 2023, the Helios Pool operated twenty-seven VLGCs, including twenty-three vessels from our fleet and four Phoenix vessels.

​

1

Table of Contents

Our Fleet

​

The following table sets forth certain information regarding our fleet as of May 25, 2023:

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

2

Table of Contents

The LPG Shipping Industry

​

International seaborne LPG transportation services are generally provided by two types of operators: LPG distributors and traders and independent shipowners. Traditionally the main trading route in our industry has been the transport of LPG from the Arabian Gulf to Asia. With the emergence of the United States as a major LPG export hub, the United States Gulf to Asia and United States to Europe have become important trade routes. Vessels are generally operated under time charters, bareboat charters, spot charters, or COAs. LPG distributors and traders use their fleets not only to transport their own LPG, but also to transport LPG for third-party charterers in direct competition with independent owners and operators in the tanker charter market. We operate in markets that are highly competitive and based primarily on supply and demand of available vessels. Generally, we compete for charters based upon charter rate, customer relationships, operating expertise, professional reputation and vessel specifications (size, age and condition). We also believe that our in-house technical and commercial management allows us to provide superior customer service and reliability that enhances our relationships with our charterers. Our industry is subject to strict environmental regulation, including the treatment of ballast water and greenhouse gas emissions regulations, and we believe our modern, ECO-class fleet and our high level of crew training and vessel maintenance make us a preferred provider of VLGC tonnage. For more information with respect to the aforementioned environmental regulations, please see “Item 1. Business—Environmental and Other Regulation in the Shipping Industry.”

Our Customers

​

Our customers, either directly or through the Helios Pool, include or have included global energy companies such as Exxon Mobil Corp., Chevron Corp., China International United Petroleum & Chemicals Co., Ltd., Royal Dutch Shell plc, Equinor ASA, Total S.A., and Sunoco LP, commodity traders such as Glencore plc, Itochu Corporation, Bayegan Group, and the Vitol Group and importers such as E1 Corp., Indian Oil Corporation, SK Gas Co. Ltd., and Astomos Energy Corporation, or subsidiaries of the foregoing. See “Item 7. Management Discussion and Analysis—Overview” for a discussion of our customers that accounted for more than 10% of our total revenues and “Item 1A. Risk Factors—We expect to be dependent on a limited number of customers for a material part of our revenues, and failure of such customers to meet their obligations could cause us to suffer losses or negatively impact our results of operations and cash flows.” For the years ended March 31, 2023, 2022 and 2021 approximately 94%, 90% and 93% of our revenues, respectively, were generated through the Helios Pool as net pool revenues—related party. See “Item 1A. Risk Factors—We and the Helios Pool operate exclusively in the VLGC segment of the LPG shipping industry. Due to the general lack of industry diversification, adverse developments in the LPG shipping industry may adversely affect our business, financial condition and operating results.”

​

We intend to continue to pursue a balanced chartering strategy by employing our vessels on a mix of multi-year time charters, some of which may include a profit-sharing component, shorter-term time charters, spot market voyages and COAs. Two of our vessels are currently on fixed time charters outside of the Helios Pool with an average remaining term of 1.1 years as of May 25, 2023, and six of our VLGCs are on Pool-TCO within the Helios Pool. See “Our Fleet” above for more information.

​

Further, each of our vessels serves the same type of customer, has similar operations and maintenance requirements, and operates in the same regulatory environment. Based on this, we have determined that we operate in one reportable segment, the international transportation of LPG. Furthermore, when we charter a vessel to a charterer, the charterer is free to trade the vessel worldwide (subject to applicable laws and sanctions regimes) and, as a result, the disclosure of geographic information is impracticable.

​

Competition

​

LPG carrier capacity is primarily a function of the size of the existing world fleet, the number of newbuildings being delivered and the scrapping of older vessels. According to industry sources, in the VLGC sector in which we operate as of May 22, 2023, there were 372 vessels with an aggregate carrying capacity of 18.0 million cbm in the world fleet and 74 vessels with 6.6 million cbm of capacity on order for delivery by the end of 2027.

​

3

Table of Contents

Our largest competitors for VLGC shipping services include BW LPG Ltd., or BWLPG; Avance Gas Holding Ltd., or Avance; Petredec Pte. Ltd., or Petredec; and KSS Line Limited. According to industry sources, there were approximately 104 owners in the worldwide VLGC fleet as of May 22, 2023, with the top ten owners possessing 41% of the total fleet on a vessel count basis. Competition for the transportation of LPG depends on the price, vessel position, size, age, condition and acceptability of the vessel to the charterer. We believe we own and operate one of the youngest and the second largest fleet in the VLGC size segment, which, in our view, enhances our position relative to that of our competitors. Our twenty-one VLGCs (excluding the four-time chartered-in vessels) have an average age of 8.0 years compared to the global VLGC fleet’s average age of 10.8 years. Refer to “Item 1A. Risk Factors—We face substantial competition in trying to expand relationships with existing customers and obtain new customers.”

​

Seasonality

​

Liquefied gases are primarily used for industrial and domestic heating, as chemical and refinery feedstock, as transportation fuel and in agriculture. The LPG shipping market historically has been stronger in the spring and summer months in anticipation of increased consumption of propane and butane for heating during the winter months. In addition, unpredictable weather patterns in these months tend to disrupt vessel scheduling and the supply of certain commodities. Demand for our vessels therefore may be stronger in our quarters ending June 30 and September 30 and relatively weaker during our quarters ending December 31 and March 31, although 12-month time charter rates tend to smooth out these short-term fluctuations and recent LPG shipping market activity has not yielded the typical seasonal results. The increase in pertochemical industry buying has contributed to less marked seasonality than in the past, but there can no guarantee that this trend will continue. To the extent any of our time charters expire during the typically weaker fiscal quarters ending December 31 and March 31, it may not be possible to re-charter our vessels at similar rates. As a result, we may have to accept lower rates or experience off-hire time for our vessels, which may adversely impact our business, financial condition and operating results.

​

Human Capital

​

As of March 31, 2023, we employed 82 shore-based persons in our offices in the United States, Greece, and Denmark, and had approximately 511 seafaring staff serving on our technically-managed vessels. Seafarers are sourced from seafarer recruitment and placement service agencies and are employed with short-term employment contracts.

​

We recognize that the success of our Company is dependent upon the talents and dedication of our staff, and we are committed to investing in their success. We focus on attracting, developing and retaining a team of highly talented and motivated individuals. We conduct periodic assessments of our pay and benefit practices to help ensure that staff members are compensated fairly and competitively. The Company provides competitive compensation and benefits. In addition to salaries for our shore-based employees, our compensation programs typically include annual bonuses, stock-based compensation awards, company-sponsored retirement savings plans with employer matching opportunities, healthcare and insurance benefits, flexible spending accounts, life insurance, paid time off, family leave, and employee assistance programs.

​

The health and safety of our staff is of paramount importance to us. Following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in early 2020, we responded by prioritizing the safety and well-being of our staff through the implementation of strict COVID-19 safety checks and medical support to mitigate the related health risks on our vessels. For the Company’s shoreside offices and operations, we implemented various health and safety measures intended to address COVID-19 and other public health concerns. In spite of the end of the COVID-19 public health crisis, we continue to maintain be vigilant of the health of our seafarers and have resources in place to respond to any outbreaks of COVID 19.

​

We support meaningful learning and development opportunities. We have formal and informal training programs available and offer reimbursement for qualified advanced education programs, workshops, conferences, forums and certifications, and other classes.

​

In February 2022, Russia invaded Ukraine. We employ Ukrainian and Russian seafarers and, as stated above in our discussion about COVID-19, the health and safety of our staff and seafarers is of paramount importance to us. During

4

Table of Contents

the conflict we began providing our Ukrainian and Russian seafarers, if they choose, with safe accommodation outside of Ukraine and Russia for both them and their families.

​

We attempt to honor the dignity of each person by fostering a culture of inclusion. We do this by embracing diverse voices and experiences, supporting programs and resources that build an authentic and respectful workplace, and providing fair and equitable opportunities for each person to contribute meaningfully. We believe our workforce needs to be diverse, which, in turn, enables us to innovate, collaborate and better deliver to our customers. Additionally, we have joined the All Aboard Alliance and, together with other industry leaders, we are committed to have a sustainable, progressive, and innovative maritime industry that we can all be proud of with increased diversity, equity, and inclusion throughout organizations across the sector both at sea and onshore.

​

Classification, Inspection and Maintenance

​

Every large commercial seagoing vessel must be “classed” by a classification society. A classification society certifies that a vessel is “in class,” signifying that the vessel has been built and maintained in accordance with the rules of the classification society and the vessel’s country of registry and the international conventions of which that country is a member. In addition, where surveys are required by international conventions and corresponding laws and ordinances of a flag state, the classification society will undertake them on application or by official order, acting on behalf of the authorities concerned.

​

For maintenance of the class certificate, regular and special surveys of hull, machinery, including the electrical plant and any special equipment classed, are required to be performed by the classification society, to ensure continuing compliance. The classification societies provide guidelines applicable to LPG vessels relating to extended intervals for drydocking. Every vessel is required to be drydocked every 30 to 36 months for inspection of the underwater parts of the vessel. However, for vessels not exceeding 15 years that have means to facilitate underwater inspection in lieu of drydocking, the drydocking can be skipped and be conducted concurrently with the special survey. Certain cargo vessels that meet the system requirements set by classification societies may qualify for extended drydocking, which extends the 5-year period to 7.5 years, by replacing certain dry-dockings with in-water surveys. If any defects are found, the classification surveyor will issue a "recommendation" which must be rectified by the shipowner within prescribed time limits. The classification society also undertakes on request of the flag state other surveys and checks that are required by the regulations and requirements of that flag state. These surveys are subject to agreements made in each individual case and/or to the regulations of the country concerned. If any vessel does not maintain its class and/or fails any annual survey, intermediate survey, drydocking or special survey, the vessel will be unable to carry cargo between ports and will be unemployable and uninsurable which could cause us to be in violation of certain covenants in our loan agreements and financing arrangements. Any such inability to carry cargo or be employed, or any such violation of covenants, could have a material adverse impact on our financial condition and results of operations.

​

Most insurance underwriters make it a condition for insurance coverage and lending that a vessel be certified as “in class” by a classification society, which is a member of the International Association of Classification Societies, or the IACS. In December 2013, the IACS adopted harmonized Common Structure Rules, or “the Rules,” that align with International Maritime Organization, the United Nations agency for maritime safety and the prevention of pollution by vessels, or the IMO, goal standards and apply to oil tankers and bulk carriers contracted for construction on or after July 1, 2015. The Rules attempt to create a level of consistency between IACS Societies. Our VLGCs are currently classed with either Lloyd’s Register, the American Bureau of Shipping, or ABS, or Det Norske Veritas, all members of the IACS. All of the vessels in our fleet have been awarded International Safety Management, or ISM, certification and are currently “in class.”

​

We also carry out inspections of the ships, including with a view towards compliance under the Ship Inspection Report Programme (“SIRE”) and United States Coast Guard (“USCG”) requirements, as applicable, on a regular basis; both at sea and while the vessels are in port. The results of these inspections are documented in a report containing recommendations for improvements to the overall condition of the vessel, maintenance, safety and crew welfare. Based in part on these evaluations, we create and implement a program of continual maintenance and improvement for our vessels and their systems.

​

5

Table of Contents

Safety, Management of Ship Operations and Administration

​

Safety is our top operational priority. Our vessels are operated in a manner intended to protect the safety and health of the crew, the general public and the environment. We actively manage the risks inherent in our business and are committed to preventing incidents that threaten safety, such as groundings, fires and collisions. We are also committed to reducing emissions and waste generation. We have established key performance indicators to facilitate regular monitoring of our operational performance. We set targets on an annual basis to drive continuous improvement, and we review performance indicators every three months to determine if remedial action is necessary to reach our targets. Our shore staff performs a full range of technical, commercial and business development services for us. This staff also provides administrative support to our operations in finance, accounting and human resources.

​

Risk of Loss and Insurance

​

The operation of any vessel, including LPG carriers, has inherent risks. These risks include mechanical failure, personal injury, crew negligence, human error, collision, property loss, vessel or cargo loss or damage, cyber-attacks, and business interruption due to political circumstances in foreign countries, hostilities or piracy. In addition, there is always an inherent possibility of marine disaster, including explosions, spills and other environmental mishaps, and the liabilities arising from owning and operating vessels in international trade. OPA 90, which imposes virtually unlimited liability upon shipowners, operators and bareboat charterers of any vessel trading in the exclusive economic zone of the United States for certain oil pollution accidents in the United States, has made liability insurance more expensive for shipowners and operators trading in the United States market. Having said that, we believe that our present insurance coverage is adequate to protect us against the accident-related risks involved in the conduct of our business and that we maintain appropriate levels of environmental damage and pollution insurance coverage consistent with standard industry practice. Additionally, we maintain other insurance policies we believe are customary and are in amounts we believe to be adequate to protect us against material loss. The policies principally provide coverage for general liability, directors and officers, workers’ compensation, and insurance against the consequences of a cyber-attack. However, not all risks can be insured against, and there can be no guarantee that any specific claim will be paid, or that we will always be able to obtain adequate insurance coverage at acceptable rates.

​

The types of insurances we have purchased can be categorized as follows:

​

​

We have procured insurances on all our vessels against marine and war risks, both of which include the risks of damage to our vessels, salvage or towing costs, and actual or constructive total loss. The insured value of the ships is fixed and will adequately compensate for repair to a damaged ship or replacement of a lost ship. However, our insurance policies contain deductible amounts for which we are responsible.  

​

To supplement these insurances, we have also obtained loss of hire insurance to protect against loss of income in the event one of our vessels cannot be employed due to damage that is covered under the terms of our hull and machinery insurance (marine and war risks). Under our loss of hire policies, our insurers will pay us an agreed daily amount for the time that the vessel is out of service as a result of damage, for a maximum of 180 days following a 7 days deductible period.

​

We have procured protection and indemnity insurance (“P&I”), which covers legal liabilities to third-parties in connection with operating our ships, and is provided by mutual protection and indemnity associations, or P&I clubs. This insurance includes third-party liability and other expenses related to the injury or death of crew members, passengers and

6

Table of Contents

other third parties, loss or damage to cargo, claims arising from collisions with other vessels or from contact with jetties or wharves and other damage to other third-party property, including pollution arising from oil or other substances, and other related costs, including wreck removal. Subject to the capping discussed below, our coverage, except for pollution, is unlimited.

​

Our current P&I coverage for pollution liability is $1.0 billion per vessel per incident. The thirteen P&I clubs that comprise the International Group of Protection and Indemnity Clubs, or the International Group, insure approximately 90% of the world's commercial tonnage and have entered into a pooling agreement to reinsure each association's liabilities. We are a member of four P&I clubs: The Standard Club Ireland DAC, The United Kingdom Mutual Steamship Assurance Association Limited, Assuranceforeningen Gard and The London Steam‑Ship Owners' Mutual Insurance Association Limited. All four P&I clubs are members of the International Group of P&I Clubs. As a member of these P&I clubs, we are – in addition to the annual premiums (called “advanced calls”) - subject to potential additional premiums (called “supplemental calls”), based on each club’s over-all claims record, as well as – due to the mutual reinsurance arrangement between the clubs - the claims record of the other members of the P&I clubs comprising the International Group. However, the International Group of P&I Clubs has reinsured part of the risk of additional premium calls to limit additional exposure.

​

We believe that our present insurance coverage is adequate, but not all risks can be insured, and there is the possibility that any specific claim may not be paid, or that we will not always be able to obtain adequate insurance coverage at reasonable rates. If the damages from a catastrophic spill exceeded our insurance coverage, the effect on our business would be severe and could possibly result in our insolvency.

​

Our Environmental, Social and Governance Efforts

​

As one of the leaders in the international transportation of LPG, we are committed to delivering cleaner-burning energy in a safe, reliable and environmentally efficient manner. LPG is a clean, efficient and readily available source of energy, with positive benefits to the environment relative to other fuels. While extending the economic and social benefits of delivering LPG to consumers across the globe, we recognize that the shipping industry is heavily dependent on the burning of fossil fuels, contributing to the warming of the world’s climate system. In providing our services, we are committed to reducing our carbon footprint and greenhouse gas emissions. We welcome and support efforts to increase transparency and to promote investors’ understanding of how we and our industry peers are addressing the climate change-related risks and opportunities. We have disclosed certain ESG-related information on our website, including our first ESG Report, aligned with the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) Marine Transportation standard, additionally taking into account recommendations provided by the Taskforce on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures (TCFD). The report includes information on how we monitor, manage and perform on material ESG issues in the face of increasing expectations and regulations. Our ESG Report may be found on our website at www.dorianlpg.com. The information on our website is not incorporated by reference into this annual report on Form 10-K (“Annual Report”).

​

Dorian’s ESG strategies, risks and initiatives are overseen by our board of directors (the “Board of Directors”), which includes independent members and experts in shipping and compliance matters. Our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee monitors progress of ESG efforts and together with management ensures integrity of reporting. The Company’s executive leadership team, led by our Chief Executive Officer, President and Chairman of the Board of Directors, Mr. John C. Hadjipateras, formulates ESG strategies and drives initiatives, while the members of our management set targets, assesses risks, develops policies and procedures and executes the ESG efforts. Some of the ESG initiatives that we have undertaken include:

​

​

​

7

Table of Contents

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Environmental and Other Regulation in the Shipping Industry

​

General

​

Government regulations and laws significantly affect the ownership and operation of our fleet. We are subject to international conventions and treaties, national, state and local laws and regulations in force in the countries in which our vessels may operate or are registered relating to safety and health and environmental protection including the storage, handling, emission, transportation and discharge of hazardous and non-hazardous materials, and the remediation of contamination and liability for damage to natural resources. Compliance with such laws, regulations and other requirements entails significant expense, including vessel modifications and implementation of certain operating procedures.

​

A variety of government and private entities subject our vessels to both scheduled and unscheduled inspections. These entities include the local port authorities (applicable national authorities such as the USCG, harbor master or equivalent), classification societies, flag state administrations (countries of registry) and charterers, particularly terminal operators. Certain of these entities require us to obtain permits, licenses, certificates and other authorizations for the operation of our vessels. Failure to maintain necessary permits or approvals could require us to incur substantial costs or result in the temporary suspension of the operation of one or more of our vessels.

​

Increasing environmental concerns have created a demand for vessels that conform to stricter environmental standards. We are required to maintain operating standards for all of our vessels that emphasize operational safety, quality maintenance, continuous training of our officers and crews and compliance with United States and international regulations. We believe that the operation of our vessels is in substantial compliance with applicable environmental laws and regulations and that our vessels have all material permits, licenses, certificates or other authorizations necessary for the conduct of our operations. However, because such laws and regulations frequently change and may impose increasingly stricter requirements, we cannot predict the ultimate cost of complying with these requirements, or the impact of these requirements on the resale value or useful lives of our vessels. In addition, a future serious marine incident that causes

8

Table of Contents

significant adverse environmental impact could result in additional legislation or regulation that could negatively affect our profitability.

​

International Maritime Organization

The International Maritime Organization, the United Nations agency for maritime safety and the prevention of pollution by vessels (the “IMO”), has adopted the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973, as modified by the Protocol of 1978 relating thereto, collectively referred to as MARPOL 73/78 and herein as “MARPOL,” the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea of 1974 (“SOLAS Convention”), and the International Convention on Load Lines of 1966 (the “LL Convention”). MARPOL establishes environmental standards relating to oil leakage or spilling, garbage management, sewage, air emissions, handling and disposal of noxious liquids and the handling of harmful substances in packaged forms. MARPOL is applicable to LPG carriers as well as other vessels, and is broken into six Annexes, each of which regulates a different source of pollution. Annex I relates to oil leakage or spilling; Annexes II and III relate to harmful substances carried in bulk in liquid or in packaged form, respectively; Annexes IV and V relate to sewage and garbage management, respectively; and Annex VI, lastly, relates to air emissions. Annex VI was separately adopted by the IMO in September of 1997; new emissions standards, titled IMO-2020, took effect on January 1, 2020.

Vessels that transport gas, including LPG carriers, are also subject to regulation under the International Code for the Construction and Equipment of Ships Carrying Liquefied Gases in Bulk, or the “IGC Code,” published by the IMO. The IGC Code provides a standard for the safe carriage of LPG and certain other liquid gases by prescribing the design and construction standards of vessels involved in such carriage. The completely revised and updated IGC Code entered into force in 2016, and the amendments were developed following a comprehensive five-year review and are intended to take into account the latest advances in science and technology. Compliance with the IGC Code must be evidenced by a Certificate of Fitness for the Carriage of Liquefied Gases in Bulk. Non-compliance with the IGC Code or other applicable IMO regulations may subject a shipowner or a bareboat charterer to increased liability, may lead to decreases in available insurance coverage for affected vessels and may result in the denial of access to, or detention in, some ports. We believe that each of our vessels is in compliance with the IGC Code.

​

Our LPG vessels may also become subject to the 2010 HNS Convention, if it is entered into force. The Convention creates a regime of liability and compensation for damage from hazardous and noxious substances (“HNS”), including liquefied gases. The 2010 HNS Convention establishes that the polluter pays by ensuring that the shipping and HNS industries provide compensation for those who have suffered loss or damage resulting from an HNS incident. The following types of damage will be covered by the 2010 HNS Convention: loss of life or personal injury on board or outside the ship carrying the HNS; loss of or damage to property outside the ship; economic losses resulting from contamination, e.g. in the fishing, mariculture and tourism sectors; costs of preventive measures, e.g. clean-up operations at sea and onshore; and costs of reasonable measures of reinstatement of the environment. Shipowners will be held strictly liable up to a maximum limit of liability for the cost of an HNS incident and are required to have insurance that is State certified. The 2010 HNS Convention sets up a two-tier system of compensation composed of compulsory insurance taken out by shipowners and an HNS Fund which comes into play when the insurance is insufficient to satisfy a claim or does not cover the incident. Under the 2010 HNS Convention, if damage is caused by bulk HNS, claims for compensation will first be sought from the shipowner up to a maximum of 100 million Special Drawing Rights (“SDR”). If the damage is caused by packaged HNS or by both bulk and packaged HNS, the maximum liability is 115 million SDR. Once the limit is reached, compensation will be paid from the HNS Fund up to a maximum of 250 million SDR. The 2010 HNS Convention will enter into force 18 months after the date on which it is ratified by at least twelve States, four of which must each have a merchant have a merchant shipping fleet of no less than 2 million units of gross tonnage, and having received during the preceding calendar year a total quantity of at least 40 million tons of cargo that would be contributing to the general account. To date, six states (South Africa, Canada, Denmark, Estonia, Norway and Turkey) have ratified and consented to be bound by the 2010 HNS Convention. Although the 2010 HNS Convention has not been ratified by a sufficient number of countries to enter into force, we cannot estimate the costs that may be needed to comply with any such requirements that may be adopted with any certainty at this time.

​

In June 2015 the IMO formally adopted the International Code of Safety for Ships using Gases or Low flashpoint Fuels, or the “IGF Code,” which is designed to minimize the risks involved with ships using low flashpoint fuels. The IGF

9

Table of Contents

Code will be mandatory under SOLAS through the adopted amendments. The IGF Code and the amendments to SOLAS became effective January 1, 2017. In June 2022, the IGF Code was amended to address cofferdams for fire protection, safe fuel distribution outside machinery spaces, fire protection between spaces with fuel with fuel containment systems, and fixed fire-extinguishing systems in LNG fuel preparation spaces. These amendments will enter into force on January 1, 2024.

​

Air Emissions

​

In September of 1997, the IMO adopted Annex VI to MARPOL to address air pollution from vessels. Effective May 2005, Annex VI sets limits on sulfur oxide and nitrogen oxide emissions from all commercial vessel exhausts and prohibits “deliberate emissions” of ozone depleting substances (such as halons and chlorofluorocarbons), emissions of volatile compounds from cargo tanks and the shipboard incineration of specific substances. Annex VI also includes a global cap on the sulfur content of fuel oil and allows for special areas to be established with more stringent controls on sulfur emissions, as explained below. Emissions of “volatile organic compounds” from certain vessels, and the shipboard incineration (from incinerators installed after January 1, 2000) of certain substances (such as polychlorinated biphenyls, or “PCBs”) are also prohibited. We believe that all our vessels are currently compliant in all material respects with these regulations.

The Marine Environment Protection Committee, or “MEPC,” adopted amendments to Annex VI regarding emissions of sulfur oxide, nitrogen oxide, particulate matter and ozone depleting substances, which entered into force on July 1, 2010. The amended Annex VI seeks to further reduce air pollution by, among other things, implementing a progressive reduction of the amount of sulfur contained in any fuel oil used on board ships. On October 27, 2016, at its 70th session, the MEPC agreed to implement a global 0.5% m/m sulfur oxide emissions limit (reduced from 3.50%) starting from January 1, 2020 (the “IMO 2020 Cap”). This limitation can be met by using low-sulfur compliant fuel oil, alternative fuels or certain scrubbers. Ships are now required to obtain bunker delivery notes and International Air Pollution Prevention (“IAPP”) Certificates from their flag states that specify sulfur content. Additionally, at MEPC 73, amendments to Annex VI to prohibit the carriage of bunkers above 0.5% sulfur on ships were adopted and took effect March 1, 2020, with the exception of vessels fitted with scrubbers which can carry fuel of higher sulfur content. These regulations subject ocean-going vessels to stringent emissions controls and may cause us to incur substantial costs.

Sulfur content standards are even stricter within certain “Emission Control Areas,” or (“ECAs”). As of January 1, 2015, ships operating within an ECA were not permitted to use fuel with sulfur content in excess of 0.1% m/m. Amended Annex VI establishes procedures for designating new ECAs. Currently, the IMO has designated four ECAs, including specified portions of the Baltic Sea area, North Sea area, North American area and United States Caribbean area. Ocean-going vessels in these areas will be subject to stringent emission controls and may cause us to incur additional costs. Other areas in China are subject to local regulations that impose stricter emission controls. In December 2021, the member states of the Convention for the Protection of the Mediterranean Sea Against Pollution agreed to support the designation of a new ECA in the Mediterranean. On December 15, 2022, MEPC 79 adopted the designation of a new ECA in the Mediterranean, with an effective date of May 1, 2025. If other ECAs are approved by the IMO, or other new or more stringent requirements relating to emissions from marine diesel engines or port operations by vessels are adopted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) or the states where we operate, compliance with these regulations could entail significant capital expenditures or otherwise increase the costs of our operations.

Amended Annex VI also establishes new tiers of stringent nitrogen oxide emissions standards for marine diesel engines, depending on their date of installation. At the MEPC meeting held from March to April 2014, amendments to Annex VI were adopted which address the date on which Tier III Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) standards in ECAs will go into effect. Under the amendments, Tier III NOx standards apply to ships that operate in the North American and U.S. Caribbean Sea ECAs designed for the control of NOx produced by vessels with a marine diesel engine installed and constructed on or after January 1, 2016. Tier III requirements could apply to areas that will be designated for Tier III NOx in the future. At MEPC 70 and MEPC 71, the MEPC approved the North Sea and Baltic Sea as ECAs for nitrogen oxide for ships built on or after January 1, 2021. The EPA promulgated equivalent (and in some senses stricter) emissions standards in 2010. As a result of these designations or similar future designations, we may be required to incur additional operating or other costs.

10

Table of Contents

As determined at the MEPC 70, the new Regulation 22A of MARPOL Annex VI became effective as of March 1, 2018 and requires ships above 5,000 gross tonnage to collect and report annual data on fuel oil consumption to an IMO database, with the first year of data collection having commenced on January 1, 2019. The IMO intends to use such data as the first step in its roadmap (through 2023) for developing its strategy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from ships, as discussed further below.

As of January 1, 2013, MARPOL made mandatory certain measures relating to energy efficiency for ships. All ships are now required to develop and implement Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plans (“SEEMP”), and new ships must be designed in compliance with minimum energy efficiency levels per capacity mile as defined by the Energy Efficiency Design Index (“EEDI”). Under these measures, by 2025, all new ships built will be 30% more energy efficient than those built in 2014. MEPC 75 adopted amendments to MARPOL Annex VI which brings forward the effective date of the EEDI’s “phase 3” requirements from January 1, 2025 to April 1, 2022 for several ship types, including gas carriers, general cargo ships, and LNG carriers.

Additionally, MEPC 75 introduced draft amendments to Annex VI which impose new regulations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from ships. These amendments introduce requirements to assess and measure the energy efficiency of all ships and set the required attainment values, with the goal of reducing the carbon intensity of international shipping. The requirements include (1) a technical requirement to reduce carbon intensity based on a new Energy Efficiency Existing Ship Index (“EEXI”), and (2) operational carbon intensity reduction requirements, based on a new operational carbon intensity indicator (“CII”). The attained EEXI is required to be calculated for ships of 400 gross tonnage and above, in accordance with different values set for ship types and categories. With respect to the CII, the draft amendments would require ships of 5,000 gross tonnage to document and verify their actual annual operational CII achieved against a determined required annual operational CII. Additionally, MEPC 75 proposed draft amendments requiring that, on or before January 1, 2023, all ships above 400 gross tonnage must have an approved SEEMP on board. For ships above 5,000 gross tonnage, the SEEMP would need to include certain mandatory content. The draft amendments introduced at MEPC 75 were adopted at the MEPC 76 session on June 2021 and have entered into force in November 2022, with the requirements for EEXI and CII certification coming into effect from January 1, 2023. MEPC 77 adopted a non-binding resolution which urges Member States and ship operators to voluntarily use distillate or other cleaner alternative fuels or methods of propulsion that are safe for ships and could contribute to the reduction of Black Carbon emissions from ships when operating in or near the Arctic. MEPC 79 adopted amendments to MARPOL Annex VI, Appendix IX to include the attained and required CII values, the CII rating and attained EEXI for existing ships in the required information to be submitted to the IMO Ship Fuel Oil Consumption Database. The amendments will enter into force on May 1, 2024.

We may incur significant costs to comply with these revised standards, including the need to modify our vessels or engines to consume alternative fuels. Additional or new conventions, laws and regulations may be adopted that could require the installation of expensive emission control systems or engine power limitation (EPL) systems to reduce fuel use and carbon emissions, each of which could adversely affect our business, results of operations, cash flows and financial condition.

Safety Management System Requirements

The SOLAS Convention was amended to address the safe manning of vessels and emergency training drills. The Convention of Limitation of Liability for Maritime Claims (the “LLMC”) sets limitations of liability for a loss of life or personal injury claim or a property claim against ship owners. We believe that our vessels are in substantial compliance with SOLAS and LLMC standards.

Under Chapter IX of the SOLAS Convention, or the International Safety Management Code for the Safe Operation of Ships and for Pollution Prevention (the “ISM Code”), our operations are also subject to environmental standards and requirements. The ISM Code requires the party with operational control of a vessel to develop an extensive safety management system that includes, among other things, the adoption of a safety and environmental protection policy setting forth instructions and procedures for operating its vessels safely and describing procedures for responding to emergencies. We rely upon the safety management system that we and our technical management team have developed

11

Table of Contents

for compliance with the ISM Code. The failure of a vessel owner or bareboat charterer to comply with the ISM Code may subject such party to increased liability, may decrease available insurance coverage for the affected vessels and may result in a denial of access to, or detention in, certain ports.

The ISM Code requires that vessel operators obtain a safety management certificate for each vessel they operate. This certificate evidences compliance by a vessel’s management with the ISM Code requirements for a safety management system. No vessel can obtain a safety management certificate unless its manager has been awarded a document of compliance, issued by each flag state, under the ISM Code. We have obtained applicable documents of compliance for our offices and safety management certificates for all of our vessels for which the certificates are required by the IMO. The documents of compliance and safety management certificates are renewed as required.

Amendments to the SOLAS Convention Chapter VII apply to vessels transporting dangerous goods and require those vessels be in compliance with the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code (“IMDG Code”). Effective January 1, 2018, the IMDG Code includes (1) updates to the provisions for radioactive material, reflecting the latest provisions from the International Atomic Energy Agency, (2) new marking, packing and classification requirements for dangerous goods and (3) new mandatory training requirements. Amendments which took effect on January 1, 2020 also reflect the latest material from the UN Recommendations on the Transport of Dangerous Goods, including (1) new provisions regarding IMO type 9 tank, (2) new abbreviations for segregation groups, and (3) special provisions for carriage of lithium batteries and of vehicles powered by flammable liquid or gas. Additional amendments, which came into force on June 1, 2022, include (1) addition of a definition of dosage rate, (2) additions to the list of high consequence dangerous goods, (3) new provisions for medical/clinical waste, (4) addition of various ISO standards for gas cylinders, (5) a new handling code, and (6) changes to stowage and segregation provisions.

The IMO has also adopted the International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers (“STCW”). As of February 2017, all seafarers are required to meet the STCW standards and be in possession of a valid STCW certificate. Flag states that have ratified SOLAS and STCW generally employ the classification societies, which have incorporated SOLAS and STCW requirements into their class rules, to undertake surveys to confirm compliance.

Furthermore, recent action by the IMO’s Maritime Safety Committee and United States agencies indicates that cybersecurity regulations for the maritime industry are likely to be further developed in the near future in an attempt to combat cybersecurity threats By IMO resolution, administrations are encouraged to ensure that cyber-risk management systems are incorporated by ship-owners and managers by their first annual Document of Compliance audit after January 1, 2021. In February 2021, the U.S. Coast Guard published guidance on addressing cyber risks in a vessel’s safety management system. This might cause companies to create additional procedures for monitoring cybersecurity, which could require additional expenses and/or capital expenditures. The impact of future regulations is hard to predict at this time.

In June 2022, SOLAS also set out new amendments that will take effect January 1, 2024, which include new requirements for: (1) the design for safe mooring operations, (2) the Global Maritime Distress and Safety System (“GMDSS”), (3) watertight integrity, (4) watertight doors on cargo ships, (5) fault-isolation of fire detection systems, (6) life-saving appliances, and (7) safety of ships using LNG as fuel. These new requirements may impact the cost of our operations.

​

Pollution Control and Liability Requirements

The IMO has negotiated international conventions that impose liability for pollution in international waters and the territorial waters of the signatories to such conventions. For example, the IMO adopted an International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships’ Ballast Water and Sediments (the “BWM Convention”) in 2004. The BWM Convention entered into force on September 8, 2017. The BWM Convention requires ships to manage their ballast water to remove, render harmless, or avoid the uptake or discharge of new or invasive aquatic organisms and pathogens within ballast water and sediments. The BWM Convention’s implementing regulations call for a phased introduction of

12

Table of Contents

mandatory ballast water exchange requirements, to be replaced in time with mandatory concentration limits, and require all ships to carry a ballast water record book and an international ballast water management certificate.

On December 4, 2013, the IMO Assembly passed a resolution revising the application dates of the BWM Convention so that the dates are triggered by the entry into force date and not the dates originally in the BWM Convention. This, in effect, makes all vessels delivered before the entry into force date “existing vessels” and allows for the installation of ballast water management systems on such vessels at the first International Oil Pollution Prevention (“IOPP”) renewal survey following entry into force of the convention. The MEPC adopted updated guidelines for approval of ballast water management systems (G8) at MEPC 70. At MEPC 71, the schedule regarding the BWM Convention’s implementation dates was also discussed and amendments were introduced to extend the date existing vessels are subject to certain ballast water standards. Those changes were adopted at MEPC 72. Ships over 400 gross tons generally must comply with a “D-1 standard,” requiring the exchange of ballast water only in open seas and away from coastal waters. The “D-2 standard” specifies the maximum amount of viable organisms allowed to be discharged, and compliance dates vary depending on the IOPP renewal dates. Depending on the date of the IOPP renewal survey, existing vessels must comply with the D-2 standard on or after September 8, 2019. For most ships, compliance with the D-2 standard will involve installing on-board systems to treat ballast water and eliminate unwanted organisms. Ballast water management systems, which include systems that make use of chemical, biocides, organisms or biological mechanisms, or which alter the chemical or physical characteristics of the ballast water, must be approved in accordance with IMO Guidelines (Regulation D-3). As of October 13, 2019, MEPC 72’s amendments to the BWM Convention took effect, making the Code for Approval of Ballast Water Management Systems, which governs assessment of ballast water management systems, mandatory rather than permissive, and formalized an implementation schedule for the D-2 standard. Under these amendments, all ships must meet the D-2 standard by September 8, 2024. Costs of compliance with these regulations may be substantial. Additionally, in November 2020, MEPC 75 adopted amendments to the BWM Convention which would require a commissioning test of the ballast water management system for the initial survey or when performing an additional survey for retrofits. This analysis will not apply to ships that already have an installed BWM system certified under the BWM Convention. These amendments have entered into force on June 1, 2022. In December 2022, MEPC 79 agreed that it should be permitted to use ballast tanks for temporary storage of treated sewage and grey water. MEPC 79 also established that ships are expected to return to D-2 compliance after experiencing challenging uptake water and bypassing a BWM system should only be used as a last resort. Guidance will be developed at MEPC 80 (in July 2023) to set out appropriate actions and uniform procedures to ensure compliance with the BWM Convention.

Once mid-ocean exchange ballast water treatment requirements become mandatory under the BWM Convention, the cost of compliance could increase for ocean carriers and may have a material effect on our operations. However, many countries already regulate the discharge of ballast water carried by vessels from country to country to prevent the introduction of invasive and harmful species via such discharges. The U.S., for example, requires vessels entering its waters from another country to conduct mid-ocean ballast exchange, or undertake some alternate measure, and to comply with certain reporting requirements.

The IMO adopted the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage of 1969, as amended by different Protocols in 1976, 1984 and 1992, and amended in 2000 (“the CLC”). Under the CLC and depending on whether the country in which the damage results is a party to the 1992 Protocol to the CLC, a vessel’s registered owner may be strictly liable for pollution damage caused in the territorial waters of a contracting state by discharge of persistent oil, subject to certain exceptions. The 1992 Protocol changed certain limits on liability expressed using the International Monetary Fund currency unit, the Special Drawing Rights. The limits on liability have since been amended so that the compensation limits on liability were raised. The right to limit liability is forfeited under the CLC where the spill is caused by the shipowner’s actual fault and under the 1992 Protocol where the spill is caused by the shipowner’s intentional or reckless act or omission where the shipowner knew pollution damage would probably result. The CLC requires ships over 2,000 tons covered by it to maintain insurance covering the liability of the owner in a sum equivalent to an owner’s liability for a single incident. We have P&I for environmental incidents. P&I Clubs in the International Group issue the required Bunkers Convention “Blue Cards” to enable signatory states to issue certificates. All of our vessels are in possession of a CLC State issued certificate attesting that the required insurance coverage is in force.

13

Table of Contents

The Protocol Relating to Intervention on the High Seas in Cases of Pollution by Substances other than Oil 1973 (the “Intervention Protocol”) applies if there is a casualty involving a ship carrying LNG or LPG. The Intervention Protocol grants coastal states the right to intervene to prevent, mitigate or eliminate the danger of ‘substances other than oil’, including LNG and LPG, after consulting with other states affected and independent IMO-approved experts. The cost of such measures can usually be recovered by the governmental authority against the shipowner under national law.

Ships are required to maintain a certificate attesting that they maintain adequate insurance to cover an incident. In jurisdictions, such as the United States where the Bunker Convention has not been adopted, various legislative schemes or common law govern, and liability is imposed either on the basis of fault or on a strict-liability basis.

​

Anti-Fouling Requirements

In 2001, the IMO adopted the International Convention on the Control of Harmful Anti-fouling Systems on Ships, or the “Anti-fouling Convention.” The Anti-fouling Convention, which entered into force on September 17, 2008, prohibits the use of organotin compound coatings to prevent the attachment of mollusks and other sea life to the hulls of vessels. Vessels of over 400 gross tons engaged in international voyages will also be required to undergo an initial survey before the vessel is put into service or before an International Anti-fouling System Certificate, or the “IAFS Certificate,” is issued for the first time; and subsequent surveys when the anti-fouling systems are altered or replaced. Vessels of 24 meters in length or more but less than 400 gross tonnage engaged in international voyages will have to carry a Declaration on Anti-fouling Systems signed by the owner or authorized agent.

​

In November 2020, MEPC 75 approved draft amendments to the Anti-fouling Convention to prohibit anti-fouling systems containing cybutryne, which would apply to ships from January 1, 2023, or, for ships already bearing such an anti-fouling system, at the next scheduled renewal of the system after that date, but no later than 60 months following the last application to the ship of such a system. In addition, the IAFS Certificate has been updated to address compliance options for anti-fouling systems to address cybutryne. Ships which are affected by this ban on cybutryne must receive an updated IAFS Certificate no later than two years after the entry into force of these amendments. Ships which are not affected (i.e. with anti-fouling systems which do not contain cybutryne) must receive an updated IAFS Certificate at the next Anti-fouling application to the vessel. These amendments were formally adopted at MEPC 76 in June 2021.

​

We have obtained Anti-fouling System Certificates for all of our VLGCs that are subject to the Anti-fouling Convention.

Compliance Enforcement

Noncompliance with the ISM Code or other IMO regulations may subject the ship owner or bareboat charterer to increased liability, may lead to decreases in available insurance coverage for affected vessels and may result in the denial of access to, or detention in, some ports. The USCG and European Union authorities have indicated that vessels not in compliance with the ISM Code by applicable deadlines will be prohibited from trading in U.S. and European Union ports, respectively. As of the date of this report, each of our vessels is ISM Code certified. However, there can be no assurance that such certificates will be maintained in the future. The IMO continues to review and introduce new regulations. It is impossible to predict what additional regulations, if any, may be passed by the IMO and what effect, if any, such regulations might have on our operations.

Hazardous Substances

In 1996, the International Convention on Liability and Compensation for Damages in Connection with the Carriage of Hazardous and Noxious Substances by Sea, or HNS, was adopted and subsequently amended by the 2010 Protocol, or the 2010 HNS Convention. Our LPG vessels may also become subject to the HNS Convention if it is entered into force. The Convention creates a regime of liability and compensation for damage from hazardous and noxious substances, including liquefied gases. The 2010 HNS Convention sets up a two-tier system of compensation composed of compulsory insurance taken out by shipowners and an HNS Fund which comes into play when the insurance is insufficient to satisfy a claim or does not cover the incident. Under the 2010 HNS Convention, if damage is caused by bulk HNS,

14

Table of Contents

claims for compensation will first be sought from the shipowner up to a maximum of 100 million SDR. If the damage is caused by packaged HNS or by both bulk and packaged HNS, the maximum liability is 115 million SDR. Once the limit is reached, compensation will be paid from the HNS Fund up to a maximum of 250 million SDR. The 2010 HNS Convention has not been ratified by a sufficient number of countries to enter into force, and we cannot estimate the costs that may be needed to comply with any such requirements that may be adopted with any certainty at this time.

In 2012, MEPC adopted a resolution amending the International Code for the Construction of Equipment of Ships Carrying Dangerous Chemicals in Bulk, or the IBC Code. The provisions of the IBC Code are mandatory under MARPOL and the SOLAS Convention. These amendments, which entered into force in June 2014 and took effect on January 1, 2021, pertain to revised international certificates of fitness for the carriage of dangerous chemicals in bulk and identifying new products that fall under the IBC Code. In May 2014, additional amendments to the IBC Code were adopted that became effective in January 2016. These amendments pertain to the installation of stability instruments and cargo tank purging. Our ECO VLGCs and Dual-fuel ECO VLGC are equipped with stability instruments and cargo tank purging. We may need to make certain minor financial expenditures to comply with these amendments for our modern 82,000 cbm VLGC.

United States Regulations

The U.S. Oil Pollution Act of 1990 and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act

The U.S. Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (“OPA”) established an extensive regulatory and liability regime for the protection and cleanup of the environment from oil spills. OPA affects all “owners and operators” whose vessels trade or operate within the U.S., its territories and possessions or whose vessels operate in U.S. waters, which includes the U.S.’s territorial sea and its 200 nautical mile exclusive economic zone around the U.S. The U.S. has also enacted the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (“CERCLA”), which applies to the discharge of hazardous substances other than oil, except in limited circumstances, whether on land or at sea. OPA and CERCLA both define “owner and operator” in the case of a vessel as any person owning, operating or chartering by demise, the vessel. Both OPA and CERCLA impact our operations.

Under OPA, vessel owners and operators are “responsible parties” and are jointly, severally and strictly liable (unless the spill results solely from the act or omission of a third party, an act of God or an act of war) for all containment and clean-up costs and other damages arising from discharges or threatened discharges of oil from their vessels, including bunkers (fuel). OPA defines these other damages broadly to include:

​

​

​

​

​

OPA contains statutory caps on liability and damages; such caps do not apply to direct cleanup costs. Effective November 12, 2019, the USCG adjusted the limits of OPA liability for a tank vessel, other than a single-hull tank vessel, over 3,000 gross tons liability to the greater of $2,300 per gross ton or $19,943,400 (subject to periodic adjustment for

15

Table of Contents

inflation). On December 23, 2022, the USCG issued a final rule to adjust the limitation of liability under the OPA. Effective March 23, 2023, the new adjusted limits of OPA liability for a tank vessel, other than a single-hull tank vessel, over 3,000 gross tons liability to the greater of $2,500 per gross ton or $21,521,300) (subject to periodic adjustment for inflation). These limits of liability do not apply if an incident was proximately caused by the violation of an applicable U.S. federal safety, construction or operating regulation by a responsible party (or its agent, employee or a person acting pursuant to a contractual relationship) or a responsible party's gross negligence or willful misconduct. The limitation on liability similarly does not apply if the responsible party fails or refuses to (i) report the incident as required by law where the responsible party knows or has reason to know of the incident; (ii) reasonably cooperate and assist as requested in connection with oil removal activities; or (iii) without sufficient cause, comply with an order issued under the Federal Water Pollution Act (Section 311 (c), (e)) or the Intervention on the High Seas Act.

CERCLA contains a similar liability regime whereby owners and operators of vessels are liable for cleanup, removal and remedial costs, as well as damages for injury to, or destruction or loss of, natural resources, including the reasonable costs associated with assessing the same, and health assessments or health effects studies. There is no liability if the discharge of a hazardous substance results solely from the act or omission of a third party, an act of God or an act of war. Liability under CERCLA is limited to the greater of $300 per gross ton or $5.0 million for vessels carrying a hazardous substance as cargo and the greater of $300 per gross ton or $500,000 for any other vessel. These limits do not apply (rendering the responsible person liable for the total cost of response and damages) if the release or threat of release of a hazardous substance resulted from willful misconduct or negligence, or the primary cause of the release was a violation of applicable safety, construction or operating standards or regulations. The limitation on liability also does not apply if the responsible person fails or refuses to provide all reasonable cooperation and assistance as requested in connection with response activities where the vessel is subject to OPA.

OPA and CERCLA each preserve the right to recover damages under existing law, including maritime tort law. OPA and CERCLA both require owners and operators of vessels to establish and maintain with the USCG evidence of financial responsibility sufficient to meet the maximum amount of liability to which the particular responsible person may be subject. Vessel owners and operators may satisfy their financial responsibility obligations by providing proof of insurance, a surety bond, qualification as a self-insurer or a guarantee. We comply and plan to comply going forward with the USCG’s financial responsibility regulations by providing applicable certificates of financial responsibility.

The 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico resulted in additional regulatory initiatives or statutes, including higher liability caps under OPA, new regulations regarding offshore oil and gas drilling and a pilot inspection program for offshore facilities. However, several of these initiatives and regulations have been or may be revised. For example, the U.S. Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement’s (“BSEE”) revised Production Safety Systems Rule (“PSSR”), effective December 27, 2018, modified and relaxed certain environmental and safety protections under the 2016 PSSR. Additionally, the BSEE amended the Well Control Rule, effective July 15, 2019, which rolled back certain reforms regarding the safety of drilling operations, and former U.S. President Trump had proposed leasing new sections of U.S. waters to oil and gas companies for offshore drilling. In January 2021, current U.S. President Biden signed an executive order temporarily blocking new leases for oil and gas drilling in federal waters. However, attorney generals from 13 states filed suit in March 2021 to lift the executive order, and in June 2021, a federal judge in Louisiana granted a preliminary injunction against the Biden administration, stating that the power to pause offshore oil and gas leases “lies solely with Congress.” In August 2022, a federal judge in Louisiana sided with Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, along with the other 12 plaintiff states, by issuing a permanent injunction against the Biden Administration’s moratorium on oil and gas leasing on federal public lands and offshore waters. With these rapid changes, compliance with any new requirements of OPA and future legislation or regulations applicable to the operation of our vessels could impact the cost of our operations and adversely affect our business.

OPA specifically permits individual states to impose their own liability regimes with regard to oil pollution incidents occurring within their boundaries, provided they accept, at a minimum, the levels of liability established under OPA and some states have enacted legislation providing for unlimited liability for oil spills. Many U.S. states that border a navigable waterway have enacted environmental pollution laws that impose strict liability on a person for removal costs and damages resulting from a discharge of oil or a release of a hazardous substance. These laws may be more stringent than U.S. federal law. Moreover, some states have enacted legislation providing for unlimited liability for discharge of

16

Table of Contents

pollutants within their waters, although in some cases, states which have enacted this type of legislation have not yet issued implementing regulations defining vessel owners’ responsibilities under these laws. We intend to comply with all applicable state regulations in the ports where our vessels call.

We currently maintain pollution liability coverage insurance in the amount of $1.0 billion per incident for each of our vessels. If the damages from a catastrophic spill were to exceed our insurance coverage, it could have an adverse effect on our business and results of operation.

Other United States Environmental Initiatives

The U.S. Clean Air Act of 1970 (including its amendments of 1977 and 1990) (“CAA”) requires the EPA to promulgate standards applicable to emissions of volatile organic compounds and other air contaminants. Our vessels are subject to vapor control and recovery requirements for certain cargoes when loading, unloading, ballasting, cleaning and conducting other operations in regulated port areas. The CAA also requires states to draft State Implementation Plans, or “SIPs”, designed to attain national health-based air quality standards in each state. Although state-specific, SIPs may include regulations concerning emissions resulting from vessel loading and unloading operations by requiring the installation of vapor control equipment. Our vessels operating in such regulated port areas with restricted cargoes are equipped with vapor recovery systems that satisfy these existing requirements.

The U.S. Clean Water Act (“CWA”) prohibits the discharge of oil, hazardous substances and ballast water in U.S. navigable waters unless authorized by a duly-issued permit or exemption, and imposes strict liability in the form of penalties for any unauthorized discharges. The CWA also imposes substantial liability for the costs of removal, remediation and damages and complements the remedies available under OPA and CERCLA. In 2015, the EPA expanded the definition of “waters of the United States” (“WOTUS”), thereby expanding federal authority under the CWA. Following litigation on the revised WOTUS rule, in December 2018, the EPA and Department of the Army proposed a revised, limited definition of WOTUS. In 2019 and 2020, the agencies repealed the prior WOTUS rule and promulgated the Navigable Waters Protection Rule (“NWPR”), which significantly reduced the scope and oversight of EPA and the Department of the Army in traditionally non-navigable waterways. On August 30, 2021, a federal district court in Arizona vacated the NWPR and directed the agencies to replace the rule. On December 7, 2021, the EPA and Department of the Army proposed a rule that would reinstate the pre-2015 definition. On December 30, 2022, the EPA and the Department of Army announced the final WOTUS rule that largely reinstated the pre-2015 definition.

The EPA and the USCG have also enacted rules relating to ballast water discharge, compliance with which requires the installation of equipment on our vessels to treat ballast water before it is discharged or the implementation of other port facility disposal arrangements or procedures at potentially substantial costs, and/or otherwise restrict our vessels from entering U.S. Waters. The EPA will regulate these ballast water discharges and other discharges incidental to the normal operation of certain vessels within United States waters pursuant to the Vessel Incidental Discharge Act (“VIDA”), which was signed into law on December 4, 2018 and replaced the 2013 Vessel General Permit (“VGP”) program (which authorizes discharges incidental to operations of commercial vessels and contains numeric ballast water discharge limits for most vessels to reduce the risk of invasive species in U.S. waters, stringent requirements for scrubbers, and requirements for the use of environmentally acceptable lubricants) and current Coast Guard ballast water management regulations adopted under the U.S. National Invasive Species Act (“NISA”), such as mid-ocean ballast exchange programs and installation of approved USCG technology for all vessels equipped with ballast water tanks bound for U.S. ports or entering U.S. waters. VIDA establishes a new framework for the regulation of vessel incidental discharges under Clean Water Act (CWA), requires the EPA to develop performance standards for those discharges within two years of enactment, and requires the U.S. Coast Guard to develop implementation, compliance and enforcement regulations within two years of EPA’s promulgation of standards. Under VIDA, all provisions of the 2013 VGP and USCG regulations regarding ballast water treatment remain in force and effect until the EPA and U.S. Coast Guard regulations are finalized. Non-military, non-recreational vessels greater than 79 feet in length must continue to comply with the requirements of the VGP, including submission of a Notice of Intent (“NOI”) or retention of a PARI form and submission of annual reports. We have submitted NOIs for our vessels where required. Compliance with the EPA, U.S. Coast Guard and state regulations could require the installation of ballast water treatment equipment on our vessels or the implementation of other port facility disposal procedures at potentially substantial cost, or may otherwise restrict our vessels from entering U.S. waters.

17

Table of Contents

European Union Regulations

In October 2009, the European Union amended a directive to impose criminal sanctions for illicit ship-source discharges of polluting substances, including minor discharges, if committed with intent, recklessly or with serious negligence and the discharges individually or in the aggregate result in deterioration of the quality of water. Aiding and abetting the discharge of a polluting substance may also lead to criminal penalties. The directive applies to all types of vessels, irrespective of their flag, but certain exceptions apply to warships or where human safety or that of the ship is in danger. Criminal liability for pollution may result in substantial penalties or fines and increased civil liability claims. Regulation (EU) 2015/757 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2015 (amending EU Directive 2009/16/EC) governs the monitoring, reporting and verification of carbon dioxide emissions from maritime transport, and, subject to some exclusions, requires companies with ships over 5,000 gross tonnage to monitor and report carbon dioxide emissions annually, which may cause us to incur additional expenses.

The European Union has adopted several regulations and directives requiring, among other things, more frequent inspections of high-risk ships, as determined by type, age, and flag as well as the number of times the ship has been detained. The European Union also adopted and extended a ban on substandard ships and enacted a minimum ban period and a definitive ban for repeated offenses. The regulation also provided the European Union with greater authority and control over classification societies, by imposing more requirements on classification societies and providing for fines or penalty payments for organizations that failed to comply. Furthermore, the EU has implemented regulations requiring vessels to use reduced sulfur content fuel for their main and auxiliary engines. The EU Directive 2005/33/EC (amending Directive 1999/32/EC) introduced requirements parallel to those in Annex VI relating to the sulfur content of marine fuels. In addition, the EU imposed a 0.1% maximum sulfur requirement for fuel used by ships at berth in the Baltic, the North Sea and the English Channel (the so called “SOx-Emission Control Area”). As of January 2020, EU member states must also ensure that ships in all EU waters, except the SOx-Emission Control Area, use fuels with a 0.5% maximum sulfur content.

On September 15, 2020, the European Parliament voted to include greenhouse gas emissions from the maritime sector in the European Union’s carbon market, the EU Emissions Trading System (“EU ETS”). The Environment Council adopted a general approach on the proposal in June 2022. On December 18, 2022, the Environmental Council and  European Parliament agreed to include maritime shipping emissions within the scope of the EU ETS on a gradual introduction of obligations for shipping companies to surrender allowances: 40% for verified emissions from 2024, 70% for 2025 and 100% for 2026. Most large vessels will be included in the scope of the EU ETS from the start. Big offshore vessels of 5,000 gross tonnage and above will be included in the 'MRV' on the monitoring, reporting and verification of CO2 emissions from maritime transport regulation from 2025 and in the EU ETS from 2027. General cargo vessels and off-shore vessels between 400-5,000 gross tonnage will be included in the MRV regulation from 2025 and their inclusion in EU ETS will be reviewed in 2026.

International Labour Organization

The International Labour Organization (the “ILO”) is a specialized agency of the UN that has adopted the Maritime Labor Convention 2006 (“MLC 2006”). A Maritime Labor Certificate and a Declaration of Maritime Labor Compliance is required to ensure compliance with the MLC 2006 for all ships that are 500 gross tonnage or over and are either engaged in international voyages or flying the flag of a member and operating from a port, or between ports, in another country. We believe that all our vessels are in substantial compliance with and are certified to meet MLC 2006.

Greenhouse Gas Regulation

Currently, the emissions of greenhouse gases from international shipping are not subject to the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, which entered into force in 2005 and pursuant to which adopting countries have been required to implement national programs to reduce greenhouse gas emissions with targets extended through 2020. International negotiations are continuing with respect to a successor to the Kyoto Protocol, and restrictions on shipping emissions may be included in any new treaty. In December 2009, more than 27 nations, including the U.S. and China, signed the Copenhagen Accord, which includes a non-binding commitment to reduce greenhouse gas

18

Table of Contents

emissions. The 2015 United Nations Climate Change Conference in Paris resulted in the Paris Agreement, which entered into force on November 4, 2016 and does not directly limit greenhouse gas emissions from ships. The U.S. initially entered into the agreement, but on June 1, 2017, former U.S. President Trump announced that the United States intends to withdraw from the Paris Agreement, and the withdrawal became effective on November 4, 2020. On January 20, 2021, U.S. President Biden signed an executive order to rejoin the Paris Agreement, which the U.S. officially rejoined on February 19, 2021. On April 22, 2021, U.S. President Biden also announced a new target for the U.S. to achieve a 50-52% reduction from 2005 levels in economy-wide net greenhouse pollution by 2030.

At MEPC 70 and MEPC 71, a draft outline of the structure of the initial strategy for developing a comprehensive IMO strategy on reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from ships was approved. In accordance with this roadmap, in April 2018, nations at the MEPC 72 adopted an initial strategy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from ships. The initial strategy identifies “levels of ambition” to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, including (1) decreasing the carbon intensity from ships through implementation of further phases of the EEDI for new ships; (2) reducing carbon dioxide emissions per transport work, as an average across international shipping, by at least 40% by 2030, pursuing efforts towards 70% by 2050, compared to 2008 emission levels; and (3) reducing the total annual greenhouse emissions by at least 50% by 2050 compared to 2008 while pursuing efforts towards phasing them out entirely. The initial strategy notes that technological innovation, alternative fuels and/or energy sources for international shipping will be integral to achieve the overall ambition. These regulations could cause us to incur additional substantial expenses. At MEPC 77, the Member States agreed to initiate the revision of the Initial IMO Strategy on Reduction of GHG emissions from ships, recognizing the need to strengthen the ambition during the revision process. MEPC 79 revised the EEDI calculation guidelines to include a CO2 conversion factor for ethane, a reference to the updated ITCC guidelines, and a clarification that in case of a ship with multiple load line certificates, the maximum certified summer draft should be used when determining the deadweight. A final draft Revised IMO GHG Strategy would be considered by MEPC 80 (scheduled to meet in July 2023), with a view to adoption.

The EU made a unilateral commitment to reduce overall greenhouse gas emissions from its member states from 20% of 1990 levels by 2020. The EU also committed to reduce its emissions by 20% under the Kyoto Protocol’s second period from 2013 to 2020. Starting in January 2018, large ships over 5,000 gross tonnage calling at EU ports are required to collect and publish data on carbon dioxide emissions and other information. As previously discussed, regulations relating to the inclusion of greenhouse gas emissions from the maritime sector in the European Union’s carbon market, EU ETS, are also forthcoming.

In the United States, the EPA issued a finding that greenhouse gases endanger the public health and safety, adopted regulations to limit greenhouse gas emissions from certain mobile sources and proposed regulations to limit greenhouse gas emissions from large stationary sources. However, in March 2017, former U.S. President Trump signed an executive order to review and possibly eliminate the EPA’s plan to cut greenhouse gas emissions, and in August 2019, the Administration announced plans to weaken regulations for methane emissions. On August 13, 2020, the EPA released rules rolling back standards to control methane and volatile organic compound emissions from new oil and gas facilities. However, U.S. President Biden directed the EPA to publish a proposed rule suspending, revising, or rescinding certain of these rules. On November 2, 2021, the EPA issued a proposed rule under the CAA designed to reduce methane emissions from oil and gas sources. The proposed rule would reduce 41 million tons of methane emissions between 2023 and 2035 and cut methane emissions in the oil and gas sector by approximately 74 percent compared to emissions from this sector in 2005. EPA also issued a supplemental proposed rule in November 2022 to include additional methane reduction measures following public input and anticipates issuing a final rule in 2023. If these new regulations are finalized, they could affect our operations.

Any passage of climate control legislation or other regulatory initiatives by the IMO, the EU, the U.S. or other countries where we operate, or any treaty adopted at the international level to succeed the Kyoto Protocol or Paris Agreement, that restricts emissions of greenhouse gases could require us to make significant financial expenditures which we cannot predict with certainty at this time. As of March 31, 2023, thirteen of our ECO-VLGCs, including one of our chartered-in ECO-VLGCs, are equipped with scrubbers and we have contractual commitments related to scrubbers on an additional three VLGCs as of March 31, 2023. In addition to the added costs, the concern over climate change and

19

Table of Contents

regulatory measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions may reduce global demand for oil and oil products, which would have an adverse effect on our business, financial results and cash flows.

Even in the absence of climate control legislation, our business may be indirectly affected to the extent that climate change may result in sea level changes or certain weather events. In addition, there may be significant physical effects of climate change from greenhouse gas emissions that have the potential to negatively impact our customers, personnel, and physical assets any of which could adversely impact the demand for our services or our ability to recruit personnel.

Vessel Security Regulations

Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 in the United States, there have been a variety of initiatives intended to enhance vessel security such as the U.S. Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002 (“MTSA”). To implement certain portions of the MTSA, the USCG issued regulations requiring the implementation of certain security requirements aboard vessels operating in waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and at certain ports and facilities, some of which are regulated by the EPA.

Similarly, Chapter XI-2 of the SOLAS Convention imposes detailed security obligations on vessels and port authorities and mandates compliance with the International Ship and Port Facility Security Code (“the ISPS Code”). The ISPS Code is designed to enhance the security of ports and ships against terrorism. To trade internationally, a vessel must attain an International Ship Security Certificate (“ISSC”) from a recognized security organization approved by the vessel’s flag state. Ships operating without a valid certificate may be detained, expelled from, or refused entry at port until they obtain an ISSC. The various requirements, some of which are found in the SOLAS Convention, include, for example, on-board installation of automatic identification systems to provide a means for the automatic transmission of safety-related information from among similarly equipped ships and shore stations, including information on a ship’s identity, position, course, speed and navigational status; on-board installation of ship security alert systems, which do not sound on the vessel but only alert the authorities on shore; the development of vessel security plans; ship identification number to be permanently marked on a vessel’s hull; a continuous synopsis record kept onboard showing a vessel's history including the name of the ship, the state whose flag the ship is entitled to fly, the date on which the ship was registered with that state, the ship's identification number, the port at which the ship is registered and the name of the registered owner(s) and their registered address; and compliance with flag state security certification requirements

The USCG regulations, intended to align with international maritime security standards, exempt non-U.S. vessels from MTSA vessel security measures, provided such vessels have on board a valid ISSC that attests to the vessel’s compliance with the SOLAS Convention security requirements and the ISPS Code. Future security measures could have a significant financial impact on us. We intend to comply with the various security measures addressed by MTSA, the SOLAS Convention and the ISPS Code.

The cost of vessel security measures has also been affected by the escalation in the frequency of acts of piracy against ships, notably off the coast of Somalia, including the Gulf of Aden and Arabian Sea area. In addition, certain state actors in the Arabian Gulf have recently seized ships for alleged violations of law, though the veracity of such claims has been doubted. Substantial loss of revenue and other costs may be incurred as a result of detention of a vessel or additional security measures, and the risk of uninsured losses could significantly affect our business. Costs are incurred in taking additional security measures in accordance with Best Management Practices to Deter Piracy, notably those contained in the BMP5 industry standard.

​

We seek to manage exposure to losses from the above-described environmental and vessel security laws through our development of appropriate risk management programs, including compliance programs, safety management systems and insurance programs, as applicable.

20

Table of Contents

Taxation

​

The following is a discussion of the material Marshall Islands and United States federal income tax considerations relevant to a United States Holder and a Non-United States Holder, each as defined below, with respect to the common shares. This discussion does not purport to deal with the tax consequences of owning our common shares to all categories of investors, some of which, such as financial institutions, regulated investment companies, real estate investment trusts, tax exempt organizations, insurance companies, persons holding our common stock as part of a hedging, integrated, conversion or constructive sale transaction or a straddle, traders in securities that have elected the mark to market method of accounting for their securities, persons liable for alternative minimum tax, persons subject to the “base erosion and anti-avoidance” tax, persons who are investors in partnerships or other pass through entities for United States federal income tax purposes or hold our common shares through an applicable partnership interest, dealers in securities or currencies, United States Holders whose functional currency is not the United States dollar, investor that are required to recognize income for U.S. federal income tax purposes no later than when such income is included on an “applicable financial statement” and investors that own, actually or under applicable constructive ownership rules, 10% or more of our shares of common stock, may be subject to special rules. This discussion deals only with holders who purchase and hold the common shares as a capital asset. You are encouraged to consult your own tax advisors concerning the overall tax consequences arising in your own particular situation under United States federal, state, local or non-United States law of the ownership of common shares.

​

Marshall Islands Tax Considerations

​

In the opinion of Seward & Kissel LLP, the following are the material Marshall Islands tax consequences of our activities to us and of our common shares to our shareholders. We are incorporated in the Marshall Islands. Under current Marshall Islands law, we are not subject to tax on income or capital gains, and no Marshall Islands withholding tax will be imposed upon payments of dividends by us to our shareholders.

​

United States Federal Income Tax Considerations

​

In the opinion of Seward & Kissel LLP, the following are the material United States federal income tax consequences to us of our activities and to United States Holders and Non-United States Holders, each as defined below, of the common shares. The following discussion of United States federal income tax matters is based on the United States Internal Revenue Code of 1986 as in effect as of the date hereof, or the Code, judicial decisions, administrative pronouncements, and existing and proposed regulations issued by the United States Department of the Treasury, or the Treasury Regulations, all of which are subject to change, possibly with retroactive effect. The discussion below is based, in part, on the description of our business as described in this report and assumes that we conduct our business as described herein.

​

United States Federal Income Taxation of Operating Income: In General

​

Unless we qualify for an exemption from United States federal income taxation under the rules of Section 883 of the Code, or Section 883, as discussed below, a foreign corporation such as the Company will be subject to United States federal income taxation on its “shipping income” that is treated as derived from sources within the United States, to which we refer as “United States source shipping income.” For United States federal income tax purposes, "United States source shipping income" includes 50% of shipping income that is attributable to transportation that begins or ends, but that does not both begin and end, in the United States.

​

Shipping income attributable to transportation exclusively between non-United States ports will be considered to be 100% derived from sources entirely outside the United States. Shipping income derived from sources outside the United States will not be subject to any United States federal income tax.

​

Shipping income attributable to transportation exclusively between United States ports is considered to be 100% derived from United States sources. However, we are not permitted by United States law to engage in the transportation of cargoes that produces 100% United States source shipping income.

​

21

Table of Contents

Unless we qualify for the exemption from tax under Section 883, our gross United States source shipping income would be subject to a 4% tax imposed without allowance for deductions as described below.

​

Exemption of Operating Income from United States Federal Income Taxation

​

Under Section 883 and the Treasury Regulations thereunder, a foreign corporation will be exempt from United States federal income taxation of its United States source shipping income if:

​

​

​

​

​

The Republic of the Marshall Islands, the jurisdiction where we and our ship-owning subsidiaries are incorporated, has been officially recognized by the United States Internal Revenue Service, or the IRS, as a qualified foreign country that grants the requisite “equivalent exemption” from tax in respect of each category of shipping income we earn and currently expect to earn in the future. Therefore, we will be exempt from United States federal income taxation with respect to our United States source shipping income if we satisfy either the 50% Ownership Test or the Publicly-Traded Test.

​

We believe that we satisfy the Publicly-Traded Test, a factual determination made on an annual basis, with respect to our taxable year ended March 31, 2023, and we expect to continue to do so for our subsequent taxable years, and we intend to take this position for United States federal income tax reporting purposes. We do not currently anticipate circumstances under which we would be able to satisfy the 50% Ownership Test.

​

Publicly-Traded Test

​

The Treasury Regulations under Section 883 provide, in pertinent part, that shares of a foreign corporation will be considered to be “primarily traded” on an established securities market in a country if the number of shares of each class of stock that are traded during any taxable year on all established securities markets in that country exceeds the number of shares in each such class that are traded during that year on established securities markets in any other single country. The Company’s common shares, which constitute its sole class of issued and outstanding stock is “primarily traded” on the New York Stock Exchange, or the NYSE, an established securities market for these purposes.

​

Under the Treasury Regulations, our common shares will be considered to be “regularly traded” on an established securities market if one or more classes of our shares representing more than 50% of our outstanding stock, by both total combined voting power of all classes of stock entitled to vote and total value, are listed on such market, to which we refer as the “listing threshold.” Since all of our common shares are listed on the NYSE, we expect to satisfy the listing threshold.

​

The Treasury Regulations also require that with respect to each class of stock relied upon to meet the listing threshold, (i) such class of stock traded on the market, other than in minimal quantities, on at least 60 days during the taxable year or one-sixth of the days in a short taxable year, which we refer to as the “trading frequency test”; and (ii) the aggregate number of shares of such class of stock traded on such market during the taxable year must be at least 10% of the average number of shares of such class of stock outstanding during such year or as appropriately adjusted in the case of a short taxable year, which we refer to as the “trading volume” test. We anticipate that we will satisfy the trading frequency and trading volume tests. Even if this were not the case, the Treasury Regulations provide that the trading

22

Table of Contents

frequency and trading volume tests will be deemed satisfied if, as is expected to be the case with our common shares, such class of stock is traded on an established securities market in the United States and such shares are regularly quoted by dealers making a market in such shares.

​

Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Treasury Regulations provide, in pertinent part, that a class of shares will not be considered to be “regularly traded” on an established securities market for any taxable year in which 50% or more of the vote and value of the outstanding shares of such class are owned on more than half the days during the taxable year by persons who each own 5% or more of the vote and value of such class of outstanding stock, to which we refer as the "5% Override Rule."

​

For purposes of being able to determine the persons who actually or constructively own 5% or more of the vote and value of our common shares, or “5% Shareholders,” the Treasury Regulations permit us to rely on those persons that are identified on Schedule 13G and Schedule 13D filings with the Commission, as owning 5% or more of our common shares. The Treasury Regulations further provide that an investment company which is registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended, will not be treated as a 5% Shareholder for such purposes.

​

In the event the 5% Override Rule is triggered, the Treasury Regulations provide that the 5% Override Rule will nevertheless not apply if we can establish that within the group of 5% Shareholders, qualified shareholders (as defined for purposes of Section 883) own sufficient number of shares to preclude non-qualified shareholders in such group from owning 50% or more of our common shares for more than half the number of days during the taxable year.

​

We believe that we satisfy the Publicly-Traded Test and will not be subject to the 5% Override Rule for taxable year ended March 31, 2023 and we also expect to continue to do so for our subsequent taxable years. However, there are factual circumstances beyond our control that could cause us to lose the benefit of the Section 883 exemption. For example, we may no longer qualify for Section 883 exemption for a particular taxable year if 5% Shareholders were to own, in the aggregate, 50% or more of our outstanding common shares on more than half the days of the taxable year, unless we could establish that within the group of 5% Shareholders, qualified shareholders own sufficient number of our shares to preclude the non-qualified shareholders in such group from owning 50% or more of our common shares for more than half the number of days during the taxable year. Under the Treasury Regulations, we would have to satisfy certain substantiation requirements regarding the identity of our shareholders. These requirements are onerous and there is no assurance that we would be able to satisfy them. Given the factual nature of the issues involved, we can give no assurances in regards of our or our subsidiaries' qualification for the Section 883 exemption.

​

Taxation in Absence of Section 883 Exemption

​

If the benefits of Section 883 are unavailable, our United States source shipping income would be subject to a 4% tax imposed by Section 887 of the Code on a gross basis, without the benefit of deductions, or the “4% gross basis tax regime,” to the extent that such income is not considered to be “effectively connected” with the conduct of a United States trade or business, as described below. Since under the sourcing rules described above, no more than 50% of our shipping income would be treated as being United States source shipping income, the maximum effective rate of United States federal income tax on our shipping income would never exceed 2% under the 4% gross basis tax regime.

​

To the extent our United States source shipping income is considered to be “effectively connected” with the conduct of a United States trade or business, as described below, any such "effectively connected" United States source shipping income, net of applicable deductions, would be subject to United States federal income tax, currently imposed at a rate of 21%. In addition, we would generally be subject to the 30% "branch profits" tax on earnings effectively connected with the conduct of such trade or business, as determined after allowance for certain adjustments, and on certain interest paid or deemed paid attributable to the conduct of our United States trade or business.

​

Our United States source shipping income would be considered “effectively connected” with the conduct of a United States trade or business only if:

​

23

Table of Contents

​

​

We do not intend to have, or permit circumstances that would result in having, any vessel sailing to or from the United States on a regularly scheduled basis. Based on the foregoing and on the expected mode of our shipping operations and other activities, it is anticipated that none of our United States source shipping income will be “effectively connected” with the conduct of a United States trade or business.

​

United States Taxation of Gain on Sale of Vessels

​

Regardless of whether we qualify for exemption under Section 883, we will not be subject to United States federal income tax with respect to gain realized on a sale of a vessel, provided the sale is considered to occur outside of the United States under United States federal income tax principles. In general, a sale of a vessel will be considered to occur outside of the United States for this purpose if title to the vessel, and risk of loss with respect to the vessel, pass to the buyer outside of the United States. It is expected that any sale of a vessel by us will be considered to occur outside of the United States.

​

United States Federal Income Taxation of United States Holders

​

As used herein, the term “United States Holder” means a holder that for United States federal income tax purposes is a beneficial owner of common shares and is an individual United States citizen or resident, a United States corporation or other United States entity taxable as a corporation, an estate the income of which is subject to United States federal income taxation regardless of its source, or a trust if a court within the United States is able to exercise primary jurisdiction over the administration of the trust and one or more United States persons have the authority to control all substantial decisions of the trust.

​

If a partnership holds the common shares, the tax treatment of a partner will generally depend upon the status of the partner and upon the activities of the partnership. If you are a partner in a partnership holding the common shares, you are encouraged to consult your tax advisor.

​

Distributions

​

Subject to the discussion of passive foreign investment companies below, any distributions made by us with respect to our common shares to a United States Holder will generally constitute dividends to the extent of our current or accumulated earnings and profits, as determined under United States federal income tax principles. Distributions in excess of such earnings and profits will be treated first as a nontaxable return of capital to the extent of the United States Holder’s tax basis in its common shares and thereafter as capital gain. Because we are not a United States corporation, United States Holders that are corporations will generally not be entitled to claim a dividends-received deduction with respect to any distributions they receive from us. Dividends paid with respect to our common shares will generally be treated as foreign source dividend income and will generally constitute “passive category income” for purposes of computing allowable foreign tax credits for United States foreign tax credit purposes.

​

Dividends paid on our common shares to certain non-corporate United States Holders will generally be treated as “qualified dividend income” that is taxable to such United States Holders at preferential tax rates provided that (1) the common shares are readily tradable on an established securities market in the United States (such as the NYSE, on which our common shares will be traded), (2) the shareholder has owned the common stock for more than 60 days in the 121-day period beginning 60 days before the date on which the common stock becomes ex-dividend, and (3) we are not a passive foreign investment company for the taxable year during which the dividend is paid or the immediately preceding taxable year.

​

There is no assurance that any dividends paid on our common shares will be eligible for these preferential rates in the hands of such non-corporate United States Holders, although, as described above, we expect such dividends to be so eligible provided an eligible non-corporate United States Holder meets all applicable requirements and we are not a

24

Table of Contents

passive foreign passive investment company in the taxable year during which the dividend is paid or the immediately preceding taxable year. Any dividends paid by us which are not eligible for these preferential rates will be taxed as ordinary income to a non-corporate United States Holder.

​

Special rules may apply to any “extraordinary dividend”—generally, a dividend in an amount which is equal to or in excess of 10% of a shareholder’s adjusted tax basis or dividends received within a one-year period that, in the aggregate, equal or exceed 20% of a shareholder's adjusted tax basis (or fair market value upon the shareholder's election) in a common share—paid by us. If we pay an “extraordinary dividend” on our common shares that is treated as “qualified dividend income,” then any loss derived by certain non-corporate United States Holders from the sale or exchange of such common shares will be treated as long-term capital loss to the extent of such dividend.

​

Sale, Exchange or Other Disposition of Common Shares

​

Assuming we do not constitute a passive foreign investment company for any taxable year, a United States Holder generally will recognize taxable gain or loss upon a sale, exchange or other disposition of our common shares in an amount equal to the difference between the amount realized by the United States Holder from such sale, exchange or other disposition and the United States Holder’s tax basis in such shares. Such gain or loss will be treated as long-term capital gain or loss if the United States Holder’s holding period is greater than one year at the time of the sale, exchange or other disposition. Such capital gain or loss will generally be treated as United States source income or loss, as applicable, for United States foreign tax credit purposes. Long-term capital gains of certain non-corporate United States Holders are currently eligible for reduced rates of taxation. A United States Holder’s ability to deduct capital losses is subject to certain limitations.

​

Passive Foreign Investment Company Status and Significant Tax Consequences

​

Special United States federal income tax rules apply to a United States Holder that holds shares in a foreign corporation classified as a “passive foreign investment company,” or a PFIC, for United States federal income tax purposes. In general, we will be treated as a PFIC with respect to a United States Holder if, for any taxable year in which such holder holds our common shares, either:

​

​

​

For purposes of determining whether we are a PFIC, we will be treated as earning and owning our proportionate share of the income and assets, respectively, of any of our ship-owning subsidiaries in which we own at least 25% of the value of the subsidiary's stock. Income earned, or deemed earned, by us in connection with the performance of services would not constitute passive income. By contrast, rental income would generally constitute "passive income" unless we were treated under specific rules as deriving our rental income in the active conduct of a trade or business.

​

We believe that income we earn from the voyage charters, and also from time charters, for the reasons discussed below, will be treated as active income for PFIC purposes and as a result, we intend to take the position that we satisfy the 75% income test for our taxable year ended March 31, 2023.

​

Based on our current and anticipated operations, we do not believe that we will be treated as a PFIC for our taxable year ended March 31, 2023 or subsequent taxable years, and we intend to take such position for our United States federal income tax reporting purposes. Our belief is based principally on the position that the gross income we derive from our voyage or time chartering activities should constitute services income, rather than rental income. Accordingly, such income should not constitute passive income, and the assets that we own and operate in connection with the production of such income, in particular, the vessels, should not constitute passive assets for purposes of determining whether we are a PFIC. There is substantial legal authority supporting this position consisting of case law and IRS pronouncements concerning the characterization of income derived from time charters as services income for other tax purposes. However,

25

Table of Contents

there is also authority which characterizes time charter income as rental income rather than services income for other tax purposes. Accordingly, no assurance can be given that the IRS or a court of law will accept this position, and there is a risk that the IRS or a court of law could determine that we are a PFIC. In addition, although we intend to conduct our affairs in a manner to avoid being classified as a PFIC with respect to any taxable year, we cannot assure you that the nature of our operations will not change in the future.

​

As discussed more fully below, for any taxable year in which we are, or were to be treated as, a PFIC, a United States Holder would be subject to different taxation rules depending on whether the United States Holder makes an election to treat us as a "Qualified Electing Fund," which election we refer to as a “QEF election.” As an alternative to making a QEF election, a United States Holder should be able to make a “mark-to-market” election with respect to our common shares, as discussed below. A United States holder of shares in a PFIC will be required to file an annual information return containing information regarding the PFIC as required by applicable Treasury Regulations. We intend to promptly notify our shareholders if we determine we are a PFIC for any taxable year.

​

Taxation of United States Holders Making a Timely QEF Election

​

If a United States Holder makes a timely QEF election, which United States Holder we refer to as an “Electing Holder,” the Electing Holder must report for United States federal income tax purposes its pro rata share of our ordinary earnings and net capital gain, if any, for each of our taxable years during which we are a PFIC that ends with or within the taxable year of the Electing Holder, regardless of whether distributions were received from us by the Electing Holder. No portion of any such inclusions of ordinary earnings will be treated as “qualified dividend income.” Net capital gain inclusions of certain non-corporate United States Holders would be eligible for preferential capital gains tax rates. The Electing Holder's adjusted tax basis in the common shares will be increased to reflect any income included under the QEF election. Distributions of previously taxed income will not be subject to tax upon distribution but will decrease the Electing Holder's tax basis in the common shares. An Electing Holder would not, however, be entitled to a deduction for its pro rata share of any losses that we incur with respect to any taxable year. An Electing Holder would generally recognize capital gain or loss on the sale, exchange or other disposition of our common shares. A United States Holder would make a timely QEF election for our common shares by filing one copy of IRS Form 8621 with his United States federal income tax return for the first year in which he held such shares when we were a PFIC. If we take the position that we are not a PFIC for any taxable year, and it is later determined that we were a PFIC for such taxable year, it may be possible for a United States Holder to make a retroactive QEF election effective for such year. If we determine that we are a PFIC for any taxable year, we will provide each United States Holder with all necessary information required for the United States Holder to make the QEF election and to report its pro rata share of our ordinary earnings and net capital gain, if any, for each of our taxable years during which we are a PFIC that ends with or within the taxable year of the Electing Holder as described above.

​

Taxation of United States Holders Making a "Mark-to-Market" Election

​

Alternatively, for any taxable year in which we determine that we are a PFIC, and, assuming as we anticipate will be the case, our shares are treated as "marketable stock," a United States Holder would be allowed to make a “mark-to-market” election with respect to our common shares, provided the United States Holder completes and files IRS Form 8621 in accordance with the relevant instructions and related Treasury Regulations. If that election is made, the United States Holder generally would include as ordinary income in each taxable year the excess, if any, of the fair market value of the common shares at the end of the taxable year over such Holder's adjusted tax basis in the common shares. The United States Holder would also be permitted an ordinary loss in respect of the excess, if any, of the United States Holder’s adjusted tax basis in the common shares over its fair market value at the end of the taxable year, but only to the extent of the net amount previously included in income as a result of the mark-to-market election. A United States Holder's tax basis in his common shares would be adjusted to reflect any such income or loss amount recognized. In a year when we are a PFIC, any gain realized on the sale, exchange or other disposition of our common shares would be treated as ordinary income, and any loss realized on the sale, exchange or other disposition of the common shares would be treated as ordinary loss to the extent that such loss does not exceed the net mark-to-market gains previously included by the United States Holder.

​

26

Table of Contents

Taxation of United States Holders Not Making a Timely QEF or Mark-to-Market Election

​

For any taxable year in which we determine that we are a PFIC, a United States Holder who does not make either a QEF election or a “mark-to-market” election for that year, whom we refer to as a “Non-Electing Holder,” would be subject to special rules with respect to (i) any excess distribution (i.e., the portion of any distributions received by the Non-Electing Holder on the common shares in a taxable year in excess of 125% of the average annual distributions received by the Non-Electing Holder in the three preceding taxable years, or, if shorter, the Non-Electing Holder’s holding period for the common shares), and (ii) any gain realized on the sale, exchange or other disposition of our common shares. Under these special rules:

​

​

​

​

United States Federal Income Taxation of “Non-United States Holders”

​

As used herein, the term “Non-United States Holder” means a holder that, for United States federal income tax purposes, is a beneficial owner of common shares (other than a partnership) that is not a United States Holder.

​

If a partnership holds our common shares, the tax treatment of a partner will generally depend upon the status of the partner and upon the activities of the partnership. If you are a partner in a partnership holding our common shares, you are encouraged to consult your tax advisor.

​

Dividends on Common Shares

​

Subject to the discussion of backup withholding below, a Non-United States Holder generally will not be subject to United States federal income or withholding tax on dividends received from us with respect to our common shares, unless:

​

​

​

Sale, Exchange or Other Disposition of Common Shares

​

Subject to the discussion of backup withholding below, a Non-United States Holder generally will not be subject to United States federal income or withholding tax on any gain realized upon the sale, exchange or other disposition of our common shares, unless:

​

​

​

27

Table of Contents

Income or Gains Effectively Connected with a United States Trade or Business

​

If the Non-United States Holder is engaged in a United States trade or business for United States federal income tax purposes, dividends on our common shares and gain from the sale, exchange or other disposition of our common shares, that are effectively connected with the conduct of that trade or business (and, if required by an applicable income tax treaty, is attributable to a United States permanent establishment), will generally be subject to regular United States federal income tax in the same manner as discussed in the previous section relating to the taxation of United States Holders. In addition, in the case of a corporate Non-United States Holder, its earnings and profits that are attributable to the effectively connected income, which are subject to certain adjustments, may be subject to an additional branch profits tax at a rate of 30%, or at a lower rate as may be specified by an applicable United States income tax treaty.

​

Backup Withholding and Information Reporting

​

In general, dividend payments, or other taxable distributions, and the payment of the gross proceeds on a sale of our common shares, made within the United States to a non-corporate United States Holder will be subject to information reporting. Such payments or distributions may also be subject to backup withholding if the non-corporate United States Holder:

​

​

​

​

Non-United States Holders may be required to establish their exemption from information reporting and backup withholding with respect to dividends payments or other taxable distribution on our common shares by certifying their status on an appropriate IRS Form W-8. If a Non-United States Holder sells our common shares to or through a United States office of a broker, the payment of the proceeds is subject to both United States backup withholding and information reporting unless the Non-United States Holder certifies that it is a non-United States person, under penalties of perjury, or it otherwise establish an exemption. If a Non-United States Holder sells our common shares through a Non-United States office of a Non-United States broker and the sales proceeds are paid outside the United States, then information reporting and backup withholding generally will not apply to that payment. However, United States information reporting requirements, but not backup withholding, will apply to a payment of sales proceeds, even if that payment is made outside the United States, if a Non-United States Holder sells our common shares through a Non-United States office of a broker that is a United States person or has some other contacts with the United States. Such information reporting requirements will not apply, however, if the broker has documentary evidence in its records that the Non-United States Holder is not a United States person and certain other conditions are met, or the Non-United States Holder otherwise establishes an exemption.

​

Backup withholding is not an additional tax. Rather, a refund may generally be obtained of any amounts withheld under backup withholding rules that exceed the taxpayer's United States federal income tax liability by filing a timely refund claim with the IRS.

​

Individuals who are United States Holders (and to the extent specified in applicable Treasury regulations, Non-United States Holders and certain United States entities) who hold “specified foreign financial assets” (as defined in Section 6038D of the Code) are required to file IRS Form 8938 with information relating to the asset for each taxable year in which the aggregate value of all such assets exceeds $75,000 at any time during the taxable year or $50,000 on the last day of the taxable year (or such higher dollar amount as prescribed by applicable Treasury Regulations). Specified foreign financial assets would include, among other assets, our common shares, unless the common shares are held in an account maintained with a United States financial institution. Substantial penalties apply to any failure to timely file IRS Form 8938, unless the failure is shown to be due to reasonable cause and not due to willful neglect. Additionally, in the event an individual United States Holder (and to the extent specified in applicable Treasury Regulations, a Non-United States Holder or a United States entity) that is required to file IRS Form 8938 does not file such form, the statute of limitations

28

Table of Contents

on the assessment and collection of United States federal income taxes of such holder for the related tax year may not close until three years after the date that the required information is filed. United States Holders (including United States entities) and Non-United States Holders are encouraged consult their own tax advisors regarding their reporting obligations in respect of our common shares.

​

Available Information

​

Our website is located at www.dorianlpg.com. Information on our website does not constitute a part of this Annual Report. Our goal is to maintain our website as a portal through which investors can easily find or navigate to pertinent information about us, including our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, proxy statements, and any other reports, after we file them with the Commission. The public may obtain a copy of our filings, free of charge, through our corporate internet website as soon as reasonably practicable after we have electronically filed such material with, or furnished it to, the Commission. Additionally, these materials, including this Annual Report and the accompanying exhibits are available from the Commission’s website http://www.sec.gov.

​

ITEM 1A.  RISK FACTORS

​

The following risks relate principally to us and our business and the industry in which we operate. Other risks relate principally to the securities markets and ownership of our common shares. Any of the risk factors described below could significantly and negatively affect our business, financial condition and results of operations and our ability to pay dividends, and lower the trading price of our common shares.

​

Summary of Risk Factors

​

The following is a summary of the risk factors you should be aware of before making a decision to invest in our common stock. This summary does not address all the risks we face. Additional discussion of the risks summarized in this risk factor summary, and other risks we face, can be found below in this risk factor section and should be carefully considered, together with other information in this Annual Report and other filings with the Commission, before making an investment decision regarding our common stock.

​

Risks Relating to Our Company

​

29

Table of Contents

​

Risks Relating to Our Industry

​

​

30

Table of Contents

Risks Relating to Our Common Shares

​

​

Risks Relating to Our Company

​

We, and the Helios Pool, operate exclusively in the VLGC segment of the LPG shipping industry. Due to the general lack of industry diversification, adverse developments in the VLGC segment of the LPG shipping industry may adversely affect our business, financial condition and operating results.

​

We currently rely almost exclusively on the cash flow generated from the vessels in our fleet, all of which are VLGCs operating in the LPG shipping industry (including through the Helios Pool). Unlike some other shipping companies, which have vessels of varying sizes that can carry different cargoes, such as containers, dry bulk, crude oil and oil products, we focus and may continue to focus exclusively on VLGCs transporting LPG. Similarly, the Helios Pool also depends exclusively on the cash flow generated from VLGCs operating in the LPG shipping industry. General lack of industry diversification makes us vulnerable to adverse developments in the LPG shipping industry, which would have a significantly greater impact on our business, financial condition and operating results than such lack of diversification would if we or the Helios Pool owned and operated more diverse assets or engaged in more diverse lines of business.

​

Seasonal and other fluctuations in respect of spot market charter rates have had in the past and may have in the future a negative effect on our revenues, results of operations and cash flows.

As of the date of this Annual Report, twenty-three vessels from our fleet, including our four time chartered-in vessels, operate in the Helios Pool, which employs vessels on short-term time charters, COAs, or in the spot market, the latter of which exposes us to fluctuations in spot market charter rates. We also employ two of our VLGCs on fixed time charters outside of the Helios Pool. As these fixed time charters expire, we may employ these vessels in the spot market.

Generally, VLGC spot market rates are highly seasonal, typically demonstrating strength in the second and third calendar quarters as suppliers build inventory for high consumption during the northern hemisphere winter. However, 12-month time charter rates tend to smooth out these short-term fluctuations and recent LPG shipping market activity has not yielded the expected seasonal results. The successful operation of our vessels in the competitive and highly volatile spot charter market depends on, among other things, obtaining profitable spot charters, which depends greatly on vessel supply and demand and minimizing, to the extent possible, time spent waiting for charters and time spent traveling unladen to retrieve cargo.

The spot charter market may fluctuate significantly based upon LPG and LPG vessel supply and demand. The successful operation of our vessels in the competitive spot charter market depends on, among other things, obtaining profitable spot charters and minimizing, to the extent possible, time spent waiting for charters and time spent traveling in ballast to pick up cargo. The spot market is very volatile and there have been and will be periods when spot charter rates decline below the operating cost of vessels. If future spot charter rates decline, we may be unable to operate our vessels trading in the spot market profitably, meet our obligations, including payments on indebtedness, or pay dividends in the future. Furthermore, as charter rates for spot charters are fixed for a single voyage which may last up to several weeks, during periods in which spot charter rates are rising, we will generally experience delays in realizing the benefits from such increases. If spot charter rates decline in the future, then we may not be able to profitably operate our vessels trading

31

Table of Contents

in the spot market or participating in the Helios Pool; meet our obligations, including payments on indebtedness; or pay dividends.

​

Further, although our two fixed time charters outside of the Helios Pool generally provide reliable revenues, they also limit the portion of our fleet available for spot market voyages during an upswing in the market, when spot market voyages might be more profitable. Conversely, when the current charters for the two vessels in our fleet on fixed time charters outside of the Helios Pool expire (or if such charters are terminated early), we may not be able to re-charter these vessels at similar or higher rates, or at all. As a result, we may have to accept lower rates or experience off hire time for our vessels, which would adversely impact our revenues, results of operations and financial condition.

​

We and/or our pool managers may not be able to successfully secure employment for our vessels or vessels in the Helios Pool, which could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

As of May 25, 2023, twenty-three of our vessels, including our four time chartered-in vessels, are operating within the Helios Pool, which employs vessels on short-term time charters, COAs, or in the spot market, and two of our vessels are on fixed time charters outside of the Helios Pool that expire between the first calendar quarter of 2024 and the fourth calendar quarter of 2024. We cannot assure you that we will be successful in finding employment for our vessels in the spot market, on time charters or otherwise, or that any employment will be at profitable rates. Moreover, as vessels entered into the Helios Pool are commercially managed by our wholly-owned subsidiary and Phoenix, we also cannot assure you that we or they will be successful in finding employment for the vessels in the Helios Pool or that any employment will be profitable. Any inability to locate suitable employment for our vessels or the vessels in the Helios Pool could affect our general financial condition, results of operation and cash flow as well as the availability of financing.

​

We face substantial competition in trying to expand relationships with existing customers and obtain new customers.

​

The process of obtaining new charter agreements is highly competitive and generally involves an intensive screening and competitive bidding process, which, in certain cases, extends for several months. Contracts in the time charter market are awarded based upon a variety of factors, including:

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Contracts in the spot market are awarded based upon a variety of factors as well, and include:

​

​

​

Our vessels, and the vessels operating in the Helios Pool, operate in a highly competitive market and we expect substantial competition for providing transportation services from a number of companies (both LPG vessel owners and

32

Table of Contents

operators). We anticipate that an increasing number of maritime transport companies, including many with strong reputations and extensive resources and experience, has entered or will enter the LPG shipping market. Our existing and potential competitors may have significantly greater financial resources than us. In addition, competitors with greater resources may have larger fleets, or could operate larger fleets through consolidations, acquisitions, newbuildings or pooling of their vessels with other companies, and, therefore, may be able to offer a more competitive service than us or the Helios Pool, including better charter rates. We expect competition from a number of experienced companies providing contracts for gas transportation services to potential LPG customers, including state-sponsored entities and major energy companies affiliated with the projects requiring shipping services. As a result, we (including the Helios Pool) may be unable to expand our relationships with existing customers or to obtain new customers on a profitable basis, if at all, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and operating results.

​

We and the Helios Pool are subject to risks with respect to counterparties, and failure of such counterparties to meet their obligations could cause us to suffer losses or negatively impact our results of operations and cash flows.

​

We have entered into, and expect to enter into in the future, various contracts that are material to the operation of our business, including charter agreements, COAs, shipbuilding contracts, credit facilities and financing arrangements, including leasing arrangements, that subject us to counterparty risks. Similarly, the Helios Pool has entered into, and expects to enter into in the future, various contracts, including charters and COAs, that subject it to counterparty risks. The ability and willingness of our and the Helios Pool’s counterparties to perform their obligations under any contract will depend on a number of factors that are beyond our control and may include, among other things, general economic conditions, the condition of the maritime and LPG industries, the overall financial condition of the counterparty, charter rates for specific types of vessels, and various expenses. For example, a reduction of cash flow resulting from declines in world trade or the lack of availability of debt or equity financing may result in a significant reduction in the ability of our charterers or the Helios Pool’s charterers to make required charter payments. In addition, in depressed market conditions, charterers and customers may no longer need a vessel that is then under charter or contract or may be able to obtain a comparable vessel at lower rates. As a result, charterers and customers may seek to renegotiate the terms of their existing charter agreements or avoid their obligations under those contracts. Should a counterparty fail to honor its obligations under agreements with us or the Helios Pool, we could sustain significant losses and a significant reduction in the charter hire we earn from the Helios Pool, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and our ability to pay dividends to our shareholders in the amounts anticipated or at all.

​

Although we assess the creditworthiness of our counterparties, a prolonged period of difficult industry conditions could lead to changes in a counterparty’s liquidity and increase our exposure to credit risk and bad debts. In addition, we may offer extended payment terms to our customers in order to secure contracts, which may lead to more frequent collection issues and adversely affect our financial results and liquidity.

​

We expect to be dependent on a limited number of customers for a material part of our revenues, and failure of such customers to meet their obligations could cause us to suffer losses or negatively impact our results of operations and cash flows.

​

For the year ended March 31, 2023, the Helios Pool accounted for 94% of our total revenues. No other individual charterer accounted for more than 10%. Within the Helios Pool, two charterers represented more than 10% of net pool revenues—related party for the year ended March 31, 2023. We expect that a material portion of our revenues will continue to be derived from a limited number of customers. The ability of each of our customers to perform their obligations under a contract with us will depend on a number of factors that are beyond our control. Should the aforementioned customers fail to honor their obligations under agreements with us or the Helios Pool, we could sustain material losses that could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

​

Restrictions on VLGC transits and increased toll charges at the Panama Canal may have an adverse effect on our results of operations.

​

In June 2016, the expansion of the Panama Canal, or the Canal, was completed. The new locks allow the Canal to accommodate significantly larger vessels, including VLGCs, which we operate. Since the completion of the Canal, transit from the United States Gulf to Asia, an important trade route for our customers, has been shortened by

33

Table of Contents

approximately 15 days compared to transiting via the Cape of Good Hope. According to industry sources, over 90% of the US-to-Asia LPG voyages had switched to the Canal by November 2016 and the majority of USA-to-Asia LPG voyages continue to utilize the Panama Canal as of the date of this Annual Report. With increased traffic, the toll has been increased over time. The Panama Canal Authorities decreed that the slots for transit by VLGCs could only be reserved up to 14 days in advance of a proposed transit. This change has resulted in longer wait times and resales of slots among VLGC operators at significantly higher rates than those charged by the Panama Canal Authority. These restrictions have added waiting time to transits, which is typically not paid for by charterers. In April 2022 the Panama Canal Authority proposed a comprehensive restructuring of its toll structure, which would increase rates charged on cargo, including the LPG that crosses the waterway, result in increased rates or additional waiting time for our VLGCs to cross the Canal. Such factors are not generally reflected in charter rates. This proposal was approved in July 2022 and began its phase-in period in January 2023, which will continue until January 2025. Our vessels and voyages could be impacted as phase-in continues, which could have an adverse effect on our results of operations and cash flows. Our latest two long-term time chartered-in Dual-fuel ECO VLGCs are Panamax vessels and can transit the old Panama Canal locks, which are not currently affected by the toll restructuring referenced above.

​

Our indebtedness and financial obligations may adversely affect our operational flexibility and financial condition.

​

As of March 31, 2023, we had outstanding indebtedness of $663.6 million, of which $491.6 million is hedged or fixed. Amounts owed under our current credit facility and financing arrangements, and any future credit facilities or financing arrangements, will require us to dedicate a part of our cash flow from operations to paying interest and principal payments, as applicable. These payments will limit funds available for working capital, capital expenditures, acquisitions, dividends, stock repurchases and other purposes and may also limit our ability to undertake further equity or debt financing in the future. Our indebtedness and obligations under our financing arrangements also increase our vulnerability to general adverse economic and industry conditions, limits our flexibility in planning for and reacting to changes in the industry, and places us at a disadvantage to other, less leveraged, competitors.

Our credit facility and several of our Japanese financing arrangements bear interest at variable rates and we anticipate that any future credit facilities will also bear interest at variable rates. Increases in prevailing rates could increase the amounts that we would have to pay to our lenders or financing counterparties, even though the outstanding principal amount remains the same, and our net income and available cash flows would decrease as a result.

We expect our earnings and cash flow to vary from year to year mainly due to the cyclical nature of the LPG shipping industry. If we do not generate or reserve enough cash flow from operations to satisfy our debt or financing obligations, we may have to undertake alternative financing plans, such as:

​

​

However, these alternative financing plans, if necessary, may not be sufficient to allow us to meet our debt or financing obligations. If we are unable to meet our debt or financing obligations and we default on our obligations under our debt agreement or financing arrangements, our lenders could elect to declare our outstanding borrowings and certain other amounts owed, together with accrued interest and fees, to be immediately due and payable and foreclose on the vessels securing that debt, and our counterparties may seek to repossess the vessels subject to our debt agreement or financing arrangements.

​

Our existing and future debt and financing agreements contain and are expected to contain restrictive covenants that may limit our liquidity and corporate activities, which could have an adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

​

Our debt agreement and financing arrangements contain, and any future debt agreements or financing arrangements are expected to contain, customary covenants and event of default clauses, including cross-default provisions that may be triggered by a default under one of our other contracts or agreements and restrictive covenants and performance

34

Table of Contents

requirements, which may affect operational and financial flexibility. Such restrictions could affect, and in many respects limit or prohibit, among other things, our ability to pay dividends or repurchase stock, incur additional indebtedness, create liens, sell assets, or engage in mergers or acquisitions. These restrictions could limit our ability to plan for or react to market conditions or meet extraordinary capital needs or otherwise restrict corporate activities. There can be no assurance that such restrictions will not adversely affect our ability to finance our future operations or capital needs.

​

Our agreements relating to the debt facility that we entered into in July 2022 with a group of banks and financial institutions(the “2022 Debt Facility”), which were secured by, among other things, ten of our VLGCs, require us to maintain specified financial ratios and satisfy financial covenants.

​

Our agreements relating to the $83.4 million debt facility that we entered into in December 2021 with Banc of America Leasing & Capital, LLC, Pacific Western Bank, Raymond James Bank, a Florida chartered bank and City National Bank of Florida, as lenders (“BALCAP Facility”), which are secured by, among other things, two of our VLGCs, require us to maintain specified financial ratios and satisfy financial covenants.  

​

As of March 31, 2023, we were in compliance with the financial and other covenants contained in the 2022 Debt Facility and the BALCAP Facility. As of May 25, 2023, approximately $225.0 million remains outstanding under the 2022 Debt Facility and approximately $73.5 million remains outstanding under the BALCAP Facility.

​

The 2022 Debt Facility conditions payments of dividends by us to our shareholders and by our subsidiaries to us on the absence of an event of default and such payments not creating an event of default.

​

As a result of the restrictions in our debt agreement and financing arrangements, or similar restrictions in our future debt agreements or financing arrangements, we may need to seek permission from our lenders or counterparties in order to engage in certain corporate actions. Our lenders’ or counterparties’ interests may be different from ours and we may not be able to obtain their permission when needed or at all. This may prevent us from taking actions that we believe are in our best interest, which may adversely impact our revenues, results of operations and financial condition.

​

A failure by us to meet our payment and other obligations, including our financial and value to loan covenants, could lead to defaults under our current or future secured loan agreements. In addition, a default under one of our current or future credit facilities could result in the cross-acceleration of our other indebtedness. Our lenders could then accelerate our indebtedness and foreclose on our fleet.

​

The market values of our vessels may decrease, which could cause us to breach covenants in our loan agreements or record an impairment loss, or negatively impact our ability to enter into future financing arrangements, and as a result could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

​

The 2022 Debt Facility and BALCAP Facility, which are secured by, among other things, liens on the vessels in our fleet contain various financial covenants, including requirements relating to our financial condition, financial performance and liquidity. For example, we are required to maintain a minimum ratio of the market value of the vessels securing a loan to the principal amount outstanding under such loan. The market value of LPG carriers is sensitive to, among other things, changes in the LPG carrier charter markets, with vessel values deteriorating when LPG carrier charter rates are anticipated to fall and improving when charter rates are anticipated to rise. LPG vessel values remain subject to significant fluctuations. A decline in the fair market values of our vessels could result in us not being in compliance with certain of these loan covenants. Furthermore, if the value of our vessels deteriorates and our estimated future cash flows decrease, we may have to record an impairment adjustment in our financial statements or we may be unable to enter into future financing arrangements acceptable to us or at all, which would adversely affect our financial results and further hinder our ability to raise capital.

​

If we are unable to comply with any of the restrictions and covenants in our 2022 Debt Facility and BALCAP Facility, financing arrangements, or in future debt financing agreements, and we are unable to obtain a waiver or amendment from our lenders or counterparties for such noncompliance, a default could occur under the terms of those agreements. Our ability to comply with these restrictions and covenants, including meeting financial ratios and tests, is dependent on our future performance and may be affected by events beyond our control. If a default occurs under these

35

Table of Contents

agreements, lenders could terminate their commitments to lend or in some circumstances accelerate the outstanding loans and declare all amounts borrowed due and payable. Our vessels serve as security under our debt agreement. If our lenders were to foreclose with respect to their liens on our vessels in the event of a default, such foreclosure could impair our ability to continue our operations. In addition, our current debt agreement contains, and future debt agreements are expected to contain, cross-default provisions, meaning that if we are in default under certain of our current or future debt obligations, amounts outstanding under our current or other future debt agreements may also be in default, accelerated and become due and payable. If any of these events occur, we cannot guarantee that our assets will be sufficient to repay in full all of our outstanding indebtedness, and we may be unable to find alternative financing. Even if we could obtain alternative financing, that financing might not be on terms that are favorable or acceptable to us. In addition, if we find it necessary to sell our vessels at a time when vessel prices are low, we will recognize losses and a reduction in our earnings, which could affect our ability to raise additional capital necessary for us to comply with our debt agreement.

​

We may be adversely affected by developments in the SOFR market, changes in the methods by which SOFR is determined or the use of alternative reference rates.

In 2017, the U.K. Financial Conduct Authority announced that it intended to phase out LIBOR, and in 2021, it announced that all LIBOR fixings will either cease to be provided by any administrator or no longer be representative immediately after December 31, 2021, in the case of one-week and two-month U.S. Dollar settings, and immediately after June 30, 2023, in the case of the remaining U.S. Dollar settings. The Federal Reserve also has advised banks to cease entering into new contracts that use U.S. Dollar LIBOR as a reference rate.

The Alternative Refinance Rate Committee, a committee convened by the Federal Reserve that includes major market participants, has identified SOFR, an index calculated by short-term repurchase agreements, backed by U.S. Treasury securities, as its preferred alternative rate for LIBOR in the United States.

Although SOFR appears to be the preferred replacement rate for U.S. Dollar LIBOR and has been adopted as the benchmark interest rate for our debt arrangements, it is unclear if other benchmarks may emerge. The consequences of these developments cannot be entirely predicted, and there can be no assurance that they will not result in financial market disruptions, significant increases in benchmark interest rates, substantially higher financing costs or a shortage of available debt financing, any of which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial position and results of operations, and our ability to pay dividends.

We have and we intend to selectively enter into derivative contracts, which can result in higher than market interest rates and charges against our income.

We have entered into and may selectively in the future enter into derivative contracts to hedge our overall exposure to interest rate risk related to our credit facility. Entering into swaps and derivatives transactions is inherently risky and presents various possibilities for incurring significant expenses. The derivatives strategies that we employ currently and, in the future, may not be successful or effective, and we could, as a result, incur substantial additional interest costs or losses.

​

We are exposed to volatility in the Secured Overnight Financing Rate (“SOFR”), which has only been published since April 2018.

Due to the planned phase out of the London Interbank Offered Rate, or LIBOR, as a benchmark for floating rate loans entered into after 2021, all loans and financing agreements into which we have entered since the beginning of 2022 have been based on the one or three month Secured Overnight Financing Rate, or SOFR. However, since we entered into both the Cresques and the Captain Markos Japanese financing arrangements in 2021, we amended the applicable floating interest rate on both financings in accordance with guidance given by the Alternative Reference Rate Committee, a committee convened by the Federal Reserve that includes major market participants. The guidelines suggest adding a credit adjustment spread, or CAS, to the previously agreed floating rate margin based on the floating rate reset interval because SOFR is based on secured loans, while LIBOR was an unsecured rate. In accordance with these recommendations, the applicable margin on the Cresques Japanese financing arrangement and the Captain Markos Japanese financing arrangement, which are now both based on the one-month SOFR, have been increased by the CAS of 0.11448%.

​

36

Table of Contents

The amounts outstanding under our 2022 Facility and certain of our existing Japanese financing arrangements were originally advanced or were modified to be priced on the basis of a floating rate based on SOFR. Changes in SOFR could affect the amount of interest payable on our debt, and, in turn, could have an adverse effect on our earnings and cash flow. Until recent years, global interest rates, including SOFR, have been at relatively low levels, but they have risen recently and may continue to rise in the future. SOFR has only been published by the Federal Reserve since April 2018, and therefore there is limited history with which to assess how changes in SOFR rates may differ from other rates during different macroeconomic and monetary policy conditions.  

​

We have and may in the future selectively enter into derivative contracts, which can result in higher than market interest rates and charges against our income.

Our financial condition could be materially adversely affected at any time that we have not entered into interest rate hedging arrangements to hedge our exposure to the interest rates applicable to our credit facilities and any other financing arrangements we may enter into in the future. We have entered into and may selectively in the future enter into derivative contracts to hedge our overall exposure to interest rate risk related to our credit facility. Entering into swaps and derivatives transactions is inherently risky and presents various possibilities for incurring significant expenses. Moreover, even if we have entered into interest rate swaps or other derivative instruments for purposes of managing our interest rate exposure, our hedging strategies may not be effective and we may incur substantial losses. As of May 25, 2023, $170.1 million of our total debt of $658.9 million, or 25.9%, is unhedged or unfixed and a significant change in SOFR could materially adversely affect our financial condition, although we note that a theoretical 20 basis point increase or decrease in SOFR would only result in a $0.4 million over the next 12 months.

​

Investments in forward freight derivative instruments could result in losses.

From time to time, we may take hedging or speculative positions in derivative instruments, including freight forward agreements, or FFAs. Upon settlement, if an FFA contracted charter rate is less than the average of the rates, as reported by an identified index, for the specified route and period, the seller of the FFA is required to pay the buyer an amount equal to the difference between the contracted rate and the settlement rate, multiplied by the number of days in the specified period. Conversely, if the contracted rate is greater than the settlement rate, the buyer is required to pay the seller the settlement sum. If we do not correctly anticipate charter rate movements over the specified route and time period when we take positions in FFAs or other derivative instruments, we could suffer losses in the settling or termination of the FFA. This could adversely affect our results of operations and cash flows. As of March 31, 2023, we had no FFAs in our portfolio.

​

Because we generate all of our revenues in U.S. dollars but incur a portion of our expenses in other currencies, exchange rate fluctuations could adversely affect our results of operations.

​

We generate all of our revenues in U.S. dollars and the majority of our expenses are also in U.S. dollars. However, a portion of our overall expenses is incurred in other currencies, particularly Euro, Singapore Dollar, Danish Krone, Japanese Yen, British Pound Sterling, and Norwegian Krone. Changes in the value of the U.S. dollar relative to the other currencies, in particular the Euro, or the amount of expenses we incur in other currencies could cause fluctuations in our net income. See “Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk—Foreign Currency Exchange Rate Risk.”

​

If we fail to manage our growth properly, we may incur significant expenses and losses.

​

As and when market conditions permit, we may prudently grow our fleet. Acquisition opportunities may arise from time to time, and any such acquisition could be significant. Successfully consummating and integrating acquisitions will depend on:

​

​

​

37

Table of Contents

​

​

​

​

Certain acquisition and investment opportunities may not result in the consummation of a transaction and the incurrence of certain advisory costs. Any acquisition could involve the payment by us of a substantial amount of cash, the incurrence of a substantial amount of debt or the issuance of a substantial amount of equity. In addition, we may not be able to obtain acceptable terms for the required financing for any such acquisition or investment that arises.

​