Supporting Statement Long-term shareholders of AMT support transparency and accountability in corporate electoral spending. This includes any activity considered intervention in a political campaign under the Internal Revenue Code, such as direct and indirect contributions to political candidates, parties, or organizations, and independent expenditures or electioneering communications on behalf of federal, state, or local candidates. A company’s reputation, value, and bottom line can be adversely impacted by political spending. The risk is especially serious when giving to trade associations, Super PACs, 527 committees, and “social welfare” organizations – groups that routinely pass money to or spend on behalf of candidates and political causes that a company might not otherwise wish to support. A recent poll of retail shareholders by Mason-Dixon Polling & Research found that 83% of respondents said they would have more confidence investing in companies that have adopted reforms that provide for transparency and accountability in political spending. AMT scored 31% out of a possible score of 100% in the 2025 CPA-Zicklin Index of Corporate Political Disclosure and Accountability <https://www.politicalaccountability.net/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/2025-CPA-Zicklin-Index.pdf> This proposal asks AMT to disclose all of its electoral spending, including payments to Trade Associations and 501(c)(4) social welfare organizations, which may be used for electoral purposes— and are otherwise undisclosed. This would bring our Company in line with a growing number of leading companies, including Fortive, Marvell Technology, and Micron Technology, which present this information on their websites. Without knowing the recipients of our company’s political dollars AMT directors and shareholders cannot sufficiently assess whether our Company’s election-related spending aligns with or conflicts with its policies on climate change and sustainability and other areas of concern.