Global Ship Lease, Inc. (GSL): PESTLE Analysis [Nov-2025 Updated]

You need a clear map of the landscape Global Ship Lease, Inc. (GSL) is navigating right now. Honestly, the core business is strong: high fleet utilization, near 99%, keeps cash flow predictable, supported by stable container shipping charter rates around $35,000/day for their post-Panamax vessels. But as a trend-aware realist, I see two things defining late 2025: geopolitical friction, which increases demand for GSL's 68 vessels, and the very real regulatory costs, like the estimated $1.2 million hit from the new EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) rules. This PESTLE analysis cuts through the noise, showing you exactly where the money is made-or lost-in the near term.

Global Ship Lease, Inc. (GSL) - PESTLE Analysis: Political factors

Geopolitical friction, especially in the Red Sea, forces longer routes, increasing demand for GSL's 69 vessels.

The persistent geopolitical friction, particularly the Houthi attacks in the Red Sea, is the single biggest political factor impacting shipping in 2025. This instability has forced major container lines-GSL's charterers-to divert vessels from the Suez Canal to the much longer route around the Cape of Good Hope. This isn't just a detour; it's a fundamental change to the supply-demand equation.

The longer transit times, typically adding 10-15 days to an Asia-Europe voyage, effectively removes vessel capacity from the global fleet. Here's the quick math: a longer route means each container vessel can complete fewer trips per year, so you need more ships to move the same volume of cargo. This artificial tightening of capacity is a tailwind for GSL's fleet of 69 mid-sized and smaller containerships, driving up demand for any available tonnage.

Still, this is a volatile situation. If a large-scale return to the Red Sea were to occur in the second half of 2025, global TEU-mile demand-the actual work done by the fleet-could decrease by 6%, potentially collapsing freight rates. GSL is somewhat insulated because it is a tonnage provider (lessor) and not a liner operator, but the overall market sentiment defintely matters.

US-China trade policy shifts create volatility, but GSL's long-term charters mitigate immediate rate exposure.

The ongoing shifts in US-China trade policy, including the discussion of new tariffs and fees, introduce significant volatility into global trade flows. The US is actively considering imposing fees on Chinese-built and Chinese-operated ships. This is a big deal because Chinese shipyards account for 28% of the current global container ship fleet and a staggering 71% of the global order book.

To be fair, GSL's business model protects you from the immediate impact of this trade policy uncertainty. As of late 2025, the company has locked in a substantial portion of its future revenue: 93% of its 2025 operating days and 75% of its 2026 operating days are covered by fixed-rate charters. This high contract cover, with total contracted revenue at $1.87 billion as of March 31, 2025, means GSL's cash flow is largely secured, even if spot rates for new charters fluctuate wildly due to trade tensions.

Sanctions risk on specific trade lanes pressures insurance and operating costs by an estimated 4.4% annually.

The proliferation of sanctions, particularly those related to the conflict in Ukraine and the Iranian shadow fleet, has created a complex web of compliance risks for the entire maritime sector. For GSL, this translates directly into higher operating costs, mainly through war-risk insurance premiums and increased due diligence expenses.

The Red Sea crisis alone has caused insurance premiums to spike. We see this reflected in GSL's financials: vessel operating expenses (VOE)-which primarily cover crew, maintenance, insurance, and technical management-were up 4.4% to $50.0 million in the first quarter of 2025 compared to the same period in the prior year. This increase is a concrete example of how geopolitical risk gets monetized on a company's balance sheet.

Here's a breakdown of the cost pressure points:

• War Risk Surcharges: Direct costs for vessels transiting or near high-risk areas.
• Increased Fuel Costs: Longer routes around Africa require significantly more fuel.
• Higher Insurance Premiums: Broader risk exposure for Protection and Indemnity (P&I) clubs.

Increased scrutiny from the US Treasury on maritime finance impacts capital raising for fleet expansion.

The US Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) is intensifying its focus on the maritime sector to disrupt illicit trade, especially by the so-called 'shadow fleet' of older, often uninsured tankers moving sanctioned oil. While GSL operates a modern, legitimate fleet, this heightened scrutiny has a ripple effect on all maritime finance.

Lenders are now required to conduct significantly more due diligence on vessel ownership, flag registries, and trade patterns to avoid secondary sanctions risk. This increased compliance burden can slow down and potentially increase the cost of capital raising for fleet expansion or refinancing. For instance, GSL secured an $85.0 million Credit Facility with UBS in March 2025, priced at SOFR + 2.15%. While a favorable rate, the environment requires constant, rigorous demonstration of transparency and compliance to maintain access to this institutional capital.

This scrutiny is focused on weeding out deceptive shipping practices, which is a good thing for reputable owners, but it means the bar for financial transparency is higher than ever.

Global Ship Lease, Inc. (GSL) - PESTLE Analysis: Economic factors

Container Shipping Charter Rates Remain Elevated

The economic environment for Global Ship Lease, Inc. (GSL) is defintely characterized by a high floor on charter rates, even as the market has cooled from its absolute peak. This is a critical factor for GSL, which focuses on mid-sized and smaller Post-Panamax vessels. For example, a new charter for the 11,040 TEU CMA CGM Thalassa is expected to commence in the fourth quarter of 2025 at a rate of $47,200 per day. Another Post-Panamax vessel, the 9,115 TEU ZIM Norfolk, is contracted at a rate of $65,000 per day, with its charter running until at least the second quarter of 2027. This isn't the boom of 2021, but it's a very strong market.

These high, contracted rates secure a significant revenue backlog, totaling approximately $1.92 billion as of September 30, 2025, over a weighted average remaining duration of 2.5 years. This long-term revenue visibility is what allows GSL to manage debt and increase shareholder returns, like the annualized dividend which was raised to $2.50 per Class A Common Share in Q3 2025.

Global GDP Growth Deceleration Softens Long-Term Demand

While GSL's near-term revenue is locked in, the broader macroeconomic picture suggests a deceleration that could soften long-term demand for new vessel capacity. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) projects global GDP growth to slow from 3.3% in 2024 to 3.2% in 2025. This slight moderation in global trade volume growth, combined with a significant influx of new container ship capacity across the industry, creates a supply/demand imbalance that could pressure rates once GSL's current charters expire.

Here's the quick math: slower global growth means less cargo, and more new ships mean more available space. We are seeing a structural shift where the container fleet market size is still growing, projected to reach $14.4 billion in 2025, up from $13.66 billion in 2024, but this growth is now running ahead of trade volume. This suggests that GSL's strategy of focusing on mid-sized vessels, which are more flexible for diversified trade routes, is a smart hedge against the softening demand on the main Asia-Europe and Trans-Pacific routes dominated by mega-ships.

Inflationary Pressure on Operating Expenses (OPEX)

Inflation is a real headwind, specifically on the vessel operating expenses (OPEX). For the third quarter of 2025, GSL reported that its vessel operating expenses-which primarily cover crew wages, lubricating oil, repairs, maintenance, and insurance-were up 11.8% year-over-year, rising to $52.1 million from $46.6 million in the prior year period. This increase is more aggressive than the general inflation rate and eats directly into the operating margin.

This is where GSL's charter structure provides a shield. Most of their charters are time charters, meaning the charterer (the customer) pays for the variable costs like fuel (bunker) and port charges, but GSL still bears the direct vessel OPEX. The 11.8% rise is a direct cost to the company, so managing crew and maintenance costs is crucial to maintaining the strong Adjusted EBITDA, which was $130.2 million in 3Q 2025.

High Fleet Utilization Ensures Predictable Cash Flow

The single most important economic factor for GSL is its near-perfect utilization, which translates directly into predictable cash flow. As of September 30, 2025, GSL had locked in forward contract cover for 100% of its available days for the full 2025 fiscal year. This level of certainty is rare in any capital-intensive industry.

This high utilization, which was 97.1% in Q2 2025 even with scheduled drydockings, is the bedrock of their financial stability. It provides the strong, predictable cash flow needed for debt servicing and capital returns. For instance, the company's weighted average cost of debt was only 3.99% as of March 31, 2025, which is a huge competitive advantage in a high-interest rate environment. The predictable cash flow allows for strategic deleveraging and opportunistic share repurchases.

Here is a snapshot of GSL's recent financial performance, underscoring the impact of these economic factors:

The high contract cover and strong revenue are the main story, but the rising OPEX is a clear risk to watch.

• Lock in long-term charters now.
• Monitor crew wage inflation closely.
• Use low-cost debt to fund fleet additions.

Global Ship Lease, Inc. (GSL) - PESTLE Analysis: Social factors

You're looking at Global Ship Lease, Inc. (GSL) and the social landscape is shifting the cost structure and risk profile, not just the revenue side. The biggest near-term social risk is the intensifying labor shortage, which is already translating directly into higher operating costs. But, the long-term tailwind of e-commerce demand keeps your core business-feeder vessels-defintely relevant.

Growing shortage of qualified seafarers, particularly for dual-fuel vessels, increases crew costs.

The global maritime industry is facing a severe talent crunch, particularly for the highly skilled officers needed to manage increasingly complex, next-generation vessels like those using dual-fuel technology. This shortage forces companies like Global Ship Lease to compete fiercely for a limited pool of talent, pushing up crew expenses significantly. The International Chamber of Shipping (ICS) projects a shortfall of 90,000 trained seafarers by 2026.

For GSL, this tight labor market is already visible in the financials. Vessel Operating Expenses, which primarily cover crew, maintenance, and insurance, were up 7.0% to $50.5 million in the second quarter of 2025 compared to the prior year period. That increase is a direct result of rising wages and the need to increase the number of seafarers on board to maintain vessel condition and safety. This is a clear, material impact on your bottom line.

Here's the quick math on GSL's Q2 2025 operating cost pressure:

Public and investor focus on ESG mandates transparent labor practices.

Investor scrutiny around Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) factors is no longer a niche concern; it's a core due diligence requirement. For the 'S' component, this means transparent labor practices and crew welfare are paramount. GSL has a Board-level ESG committee and publishes an annual ESG report, which is a necessary first step for institutional investors like BlackRock and Vanguard.

The industry context, however, raises flags that GSL must actively manage:

• Fatigue: A 2024 study showed 93% of surveyed seafarers cite fatigue as the most pressing safety concern.
• Welfare: Ongoing issues like crew abandonment and long contract periods make recruitment harder.
• Safety: The shortage has led to a rise in unqualified personnel, compromising safety and operational efficiency.

To be fair, GSL's focus on long-term charters with major liner companies helps, as these large charterers typically have stricter social compliance standards (like the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006) that GSL must meet. Still, this is an area of rising operational cost and reputational risk if not managed proactively.

Remote work trends for shore-based operations require a defintely higher investment in cybersecurity infrastructure.

While the ships themselves require onboard personnel, GSL's shore-based management, technical, and administrative staff are increasingly adopting remote and hybrid work models. This trend expands the attack surface for cyber threats, necessitating a higher investment in cybersecurity (protecting data, operational technology, or OT, and information technology, or IT, networks). The global remote work security market is estimated to be valued at $62.81 billion in 2025.

The risk is concrete: 47% of maritime organizations increased cybersecurity investments due to remote work, and 41% of maritime cyber incidents in 2023 involved remote access vulnerabilities. For GSL, which relies on digital systems for everything from charter party management to vessel monitoring, this means continuous capital expenditure for network segmentation, Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA) solutions, and mandatory crew training. The cost of a breach far outweighs the cost of prevention.

Consumer demand for fast, reliable e-commerce shipping maintains the underlying need for GSL's feeder vessels.

The social shift toward e-commerce-the expectation of fast, reliable delivery of physical goods-is a powerful demand driver for GSL's fleet. Your fleet includes 18 Feeder ships (vessels under 4,000 TEUs), which are the backbone of regional distribution, connecting smaller ports to the main global hubs serviced by mega-ships. Without these feeder vessels, the last mile of global container logistics breaks down.

The underlying market strength is clear: the global feeder ship market is valued at $8,260.2 million in 2025 and is projected to grow at a 5.9% Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) through 2033. This consistent demand, fueled by the consumer's click-to-door expectation, provides a strong, structural support for GSL's long-term charter strategy and revenue backlog, which stood at $1.92 billion as of September 30, 2025.

Global Ship Lease, Inc. (GSL) - PESTLE Analysis: Technological factors

Adoption of methanol and ammonia-ready engine technology requires significant capital allocation

The push for decarbonization is the biggest technological headwind, requiring massive capital expenditure (CapEx) to meet new International Maritime Organization (IMO) targets. While Global Ship Lease is a signatory to the Call to Action for Shipping Decarbonization, its current capital allocation for next-generation fuel readiness is modest relative to the total cost of fleet conversion.

For the 2025 fiscal year, GSL's Total Other CapEx-which includes capitalized expenditures for energy-saving and emissions-reducing retrofits (ESDs)-is projected at approximately $7.1 million.

This figure is small when you consider the cost of a full conversion: retrofitting a large container vessel to run on methanol can cost between $21 million and $24 million per ship. The company is managing this risk by making ESD CapEx subject to commercial agreements with charterers, but the need to transition its fleet of 69 vessels, which had an average age of 17.5 years as of March 31, 2025, remains a long-term financial challenge. GSL is also strategically investing in technologies like carbon capture, having participated in a 2022 initiative with Aqualung Carbon Capture AS to develop retrofit-able containerized carbon capture units.

Digitalization of fleet operations and maintenance (O&M) reduces dry-docking time, boosting utilization

GSL has made a defintely smart, fleet-wide investment in digitalization to optimize operations and maximize vessel uptime. This shift to real-time data is a core competitive advantage.

The company has equipped its entire fleet with IoT sensors (Internet of Things) and Starlink connectivity, creating a massive data pipeline for real-time analytics and AI-driven efficiencies.

This technology directly impacts operational efficiency and utilization, which stood at a strong 97.1% in Q2 2025. The strategic benefit is clear in dry-docking performance, where efficient planning minimizes off-hire time:

• Vessel wait times before entering shipyards averaged less than half a day in 2024.
• Voyage deviations for dry-docking averaged just over one day per vessel.

These results are well below typical industry levels and demonstrate how technology translates directly into higher revenue-earning days.

Cyber threats to operational technology (OT) systems on vessels pose a critical, high-impact risk

As GSL increases its reliance on digital systems for everything from engine monitoring to navigation, the exposure to cyber threats grows. This is not just an IT risk; it's an operational technology (OT) risk that can compromise physical assets.

Cyber attacks are now considered one of the top four high-level risks to maritime operations in 2025. The financial impact of OT cyber incidents across the industrial sector is projected to average $31.1 billion annually. For a shipping company, a breach can affect safety-critical systems like:

• Navigation equipment and voyage management tools.
• Propulsion and machinery management systems.
• Cargo handling and management systems.

Mitigation requires constant investment in multi-layered security frameworks, encrypted data protocols, and rigorous crew training to counter threats like phishing and ransomware.

Use of predictive analytics for maintenance extends vessel life and lowers unexpected repair costs

With an aging fleet, predictive maintenance is a crucial tool for extending asset life and maintaining high charter rates. The company's digitalization strategy is explicitly designed to support this.

The IoT sensors installed across the GSL fleet feed real-time data into AI-powered tools. This allows the company to move beyond scheduled maintenance to a predictive model, flagging potential equipment failures before they cause operational disruption. This minimizes costly, unexpected dry-docking and repair work.

Here's the quick math: Minimizing unscheduled downtime is key to realizing the full benefit of a high average time charter equivalent (TCE) rate. The company's Q2 2025 operating sales of $191.9 million and EBIT of $101.8 million reflect this strong utilization and cost management discipline. Predictive analytics is a direct contributor to keeping the vessels earning revenue and supporting the company's strong financial performance.

Global Ship Lease, Inc. (GSL) - PESTLE Analysis: Legal factors

Enforcement of new EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) rules adds a direct carbon cost, estimated at $1.2 million for 2025.

The European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) is the most immediate legal and financial pressure point for Global Ship Lease, Inc. (GSL) in 2025. This is no longer a theoretical risk; it is a direct operational cost. For the 2025 fiscal year, GSL is estimated to face a direct carbon cost of approximately $1.2 million, which reflects the company's specific exposure to EU/EEA port calls and voyages.

This cost is rising fast because the phase-in schedule is accelerating. For emissions generated in 2025, shipping companies must surrender allowances (EUAs) for 70% of the total verified emissions, up sharply from 40% in 2024. This compliance liability falls on GSL as the shipowner, though the cost is generally passed to the charterer under industry-standard clauses like the BIMCO ETS Clause 2024. Still, GSL is the legally responsible party, and non-compliance carries a stiff penalty of €100 per excess ton of CO₂ emitted.

Also, the new FuelEU Maritime Regulation takes effect in 2025, mandating a 2% reduction in the greenhouse gas (GHG) intensity of energy used on board compared to 2020 levels, which forces fleet-wide operational changes. This is defintely pushing GSL to prioritize its more efficient vessels, like the four high-reefer, ECO-9,000 TEU containerships delivered in January 2025, in its chartering strategy.

Complex international maritime law requires specialized legal counsel for flag state compliance and charter party disputes.

GSL's legal framework is inherently complex because it operates globally but is incorporated in the Republic of the Marshall Islands, with its principal executive office and management located in Greece. This structure subjects the company to a multi-layered legal regime, not a single one.

The company must ensure flag state compliance for its entire fleet, which does not fly the US flag. The Marshall Islands is a top-tier flag state, known for its adherence to international conventions like MARPOL and SOLAS, but GSL's operations still require constant monitoring of Port State Control (PSC) inspections across numerous jurisdictions. Plus, GSL's business is chartering, so its legal risk is heavily concentrated in the charter party agreements (the contracts with the liner companies).

The standard time charter model means GSL's legal team must negotiate and manage clauses for everything from vessel maintenance to war risk insurance and, critically now, carbon cost recovery. The widespread adoption of the BIMCO ETS Clause 2024, which legally obligates the charterer to reimburse GSL for EU Allowance costs, is a crucial legal defense for GSL's financial stability, but it still requires rigorous enforcement.

Increased regulatory focus on beneficial ownership transparency impacts corporate structuring and financing.

The global push for beneficial ownership (BOI) transparency, aimed at combating money laundering and terrorist financing, continues to evolve, but with a recent, significant twist in the US. The US Corporate Transparency Act (CTA) saw its BOI reporting requirements for U.S. companies and U.S. persons largely removed in March 2025 following an Interim Final Rule from FinCEN. That's a huge compliance relief for many US-domiciled firms.

However, GSL is a Marshall Islands corporation and a 'foreign private issuer' listed on the New York Stock Exchange. This means the CTA's BOI reporting requirement still applies to GSL as a foreign reporting company, but only for its non-U.S. beneficial owners who meet the substantial control or 25% ownership threshold. This narrowing of scope still necessitates a robust internal process to track ownership, especially for a publicly traded company with widely dispersed shareholders, to ensure compliance with the April 25, 2025 filing deadline for pre-existing foreign reporting companies.

US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) climate disclosure rules necessitate detailed reporting on fleet emissions.

You can largely take the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) climate disclosure rules off your immediate worry list for 2025. The SEC voted to end its defense of the final climate rules in March 2025, meaning the federal mandate for detailed climate reporting has effectively been shelved and has never actually gone into effect. That said, the regulatory pressure hasn't disappeared; it's just shifted its source.

As a foreign private issuer with significant EU operations, GSL must instead focus on binding international and regional mandates. The most critical is the expanded EU Monitoring, Reporting, and Verification (MRV) system, which is the legal precursor to the EU ETS. The legal requirement for GSL in 2025 is to submit verified reports that now include not just CO₂, but also methane (CH₄) and nitrous oxide (N₂O) emissions. The first reports under this expanded scope were due by March 31, 2025.

• The SEC's federal climate disclosure rules are currently paused and unlikely to be enforced in 2025.
• The EU MRV system requires GSL to report methane and nitrous oxide emissions for the first time in 2025.
• Compliance with the EU's Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) is a growing legal risk for non-EU companies like GSL with substantial EU activity.

Finance: Track and reconcile the $1.2 million estimated EU ETS cost against charterer reimbursements monthly.

Global Ship Lease, Inc. (GSL) - PESTLE Analysis: Environmental factors

IMO's Carbon Intensity Indicator (CII) regulations necessitate operational speed reductions for older vessels to maintain an acceptable 'C' rating.

The International Maritime Organization's (IMO) Carbon Intensity Indicator (CII) is forcing a fundamental shift in how your fleet operates, especially the older tonnage. This regulation, which came into force in 2023, requires a continuous reduction in carbon intensity, with a mandated 2% year-on-year reduction through 2026. If a vessel receives a 'D' rating for three consecutive years or an 'E' rating for one year, it must submit a corrective action plan for approval, which hits charter value and marketability.

To comply and avoid a poor rating, the most immediate and cost-effective operational measure is slow steaming (reducing vessel speed). Industry data shows the average global sailing speed is projected to drop by up to 10% by 2025 as a direct response to CII and the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) pressures. For Global Ship Lease, Inc. (GSL), which operates a fleet of 69 vessels, this means a trade-off: you maintain an acceptable CII rating, but your vessels deliver less cargo capacity over time, which can impact the charterers' (lessees') revenue and, subsequently, your future charter negotiations.

Compliance with the IMO 2020 sulfur cap continues, requiring the use of costly low-sulfur fuel or scrubbers.

The IMO 2020 sulfur cap (limiting fuel sulfur content to 0.50% outside of Emission Control Areas) remains a permanent cost driver. Your compliance strategy relies on two methods: using more expensive Very Low Sulfur Fuel Oil (VLSFO) or utilizing scrubbers (Exhaust Gas Cleaning Systems) installed on some vessels to continue burning cheaper High Sulfur Fuel Oil (HSFO).

While scrubbers offer a long-term fuel cost advantage, they require continuous maintenance and face increasing regional restrictions on wash water discharge, such as in certain European Union (EU) ports. The ongoing cost of compliance is a fixed operational expense (OPEX) that must be managed through disciplined maintenance and smart routing:

• Maintain scrubbers to avoid costly off-hire days.
• Monitor regional bans on open-loop scrubber discharge.
• Factor the price spread between VLSFO and HSFO into charter rate negotiations.

Investor pressure drives GSL to commit to a net-zero target, requiring a long-term capital expenditure plan exceeding $50 million.

GSL has publicly committed to achieving net-zero emissions by 2050, aligning with the International Maritime Organization's (IMO) revised strategy. This commitment, driven by investor demand for Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) compliance, requires a significant, long-term capital expenditure (CAPEX) plan. To transition a fleet of your size to commercially viable zero-emission vessels by the 2030-2040 timeframe, the required investment in energy-saving devices (ESDs) and future fuel-ready retrofits will necessitate a CAPEX plan exceeding $50 million.

This initial CAPEX focuses on optimizing the existing fleet before the next generation of zero-emission vessels (ZEVs) is commercially viable. You are currently negotiating Energy Saving Devices (ESDs) and emissions-reducing retrofits with charterers on a case-by-case basis. This strategy is financially prudent, aiming to extend the economic life of existing assets while mitigating the risk of premature obsolescence.

Ballast water management system (BWMS) maintenance and upgrade costs are a continuous expense across the entire fleet.

The IMO's Ballast Water Management Convention and stringent United States Coast Guard (USCG) rules mandate the installation and operation of Ballast Water Management Systems (BWMS) on nearly all vessels over 400 gross tonnage. For a fleet of 69 containerships, this is a continuous, fleet-wide expense that moves beyond initial installation and into ongoing maintenance, compliance testing, and potential upgrades.

While initial retrofit costs globally range from $500,000 to $5 million per vessel, the continuous expense comes from:

• Mandatory ambient commissioning testing for UV and electrochlorination systems.
• Maintenance and replacement of filters and UV lamps.
• Compliance with regional variations, such as tighter chemical residual limits in the EU.

This is a non-negotiable operational cost. The global BWMS market was valued at $8.85 billion in 2025, reflecting the scale of this necessary compliance investment across the industry.

Here's the quick math: Stable charter rates and high utilization mean strong cash flow, but the combined regulatory costs from the EU ETS and CII compliance are a direct hit to the bottom line. Finance: draft a 13-week cash view by Friday, specifically modeling the impact of a $1.2 million ETS cost increase.

The EU ETS (Emissions Trading System) is a major near-term risk. The compliance factor jumped from 40% of emissions in 2024 to 70% in 2025, significantly increasing the cost of allowances (EUAs). With EUA prices volatile (peaking around €130 per ton in early 2025), the increase in annual liability for GSL's European-trading fleet is substantial. The table below summarizes the key environmental compliance costs and their financial impact as of the 2025 fiscal year.