IDT (IDT) Risk Analysis

NRS competes in the POS market that is characterized by vigorous competition, changing technology, evolving industry standards, changing customer needs, and frequent introductions of new products and services. We expect competition to intensify in the future as existing and new competitors introduce new services or enhance existing services. NRS competes against many companies to attract customers, and some of these companies have greater financial resources and substantially larger bases of customers than NRS does, which may provide them with significant competitive advantages. These companies may devote greater resources to the development, promotion, and sale of products and services, may achieve economies of scale due to the size of their customer bases, and may more effectively introduce their own innovative products and services that adversely impacts NRS' growth. If some or all of NRS' competitors focus additional resources on NRS' target markets, NRS' growth may slow, or we may lose customers due to the competition. NRS may also face pricing pressures from competitors, which may result in the need for NRS to alter the pricing that it offers and could reduce our profitability.

net2phone's customers generally have initial service periods of between two and three years and may discontinue their subscriptions for services after the expiration of their initial subscription period. In addition, net2phone's customers may renew for lower subscription amounts or for shorter contract lengths. net2phone may not accurately predict cancellation rates for its customers. net2phone's cancellation rates may increase or fluctuate because of several factors, including customer needs, pricing changes, number of applications used by its customers, customer satisfaction with its service, the acquisition of net2phone's customers by other companies, and deteriorating general economic conditions. If net2phone's customers do not renew their subscriptions for its service or decrease the amount they spend with net2phone, its revenue will decline, and our business will suffer.

Our customers can use our services to store contact and other personal or identifying information, and to process, transmit, receive, store, and retrieve a variety of communications and messages, including information about their own customers and other contacts. In addition, customers may use our services to store protected health information, or PHI, that is protected under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, or HIPAA. We have sold and will continue to attempt to sell to certain customer segments which may have requirements for additional privacy or security. In addition, sales may be made to customers that are subject to additional security requirements. Selling into segments with additional requirements increases potential liability that in some instances may be unlimited. While we believe we meet or exceed all requirements for sales to such segments, there is no assurance that our systems fully comply with all requirements. Noncompliance with laws and regulations relating to privacy and HIPAA may lead to significant fines, penalties, or civil liability.

Howard S. Jonas, our Chairman and Chairman of the Board of Directors, controls a majority of the voting power of our capital stock. As of September 24, 2025, Mr. Jonas has voting power over 1,574,326 shares of our Class A common stock (which are convertible into shares of our Class B common stock on a 1-for-1 basis) and 2,630,045 shares of our Class B common stock, representing approximately 70.3% of the combined voting power of our outstanding capital stock. Mr. Jonas will be able to control all matters requiring approval by our stockholders, including the election of all the directors and the approval of significant corporate matters, including any merger, consolidation or sale of all or substantially all of our assets. As a result, the ability of any of our other stockholders to influence our management is limited.

We are required by the Securities and Exchange Commission to establish and maintain adequate internal control over financial reporting that provides reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of our financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. We are likewise required, on a quarterly basis, to evaluate the effectiveness of our internal controls and to disclose any changes and material weaknesses in those internal controls. A material weakness is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the company's annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. We cannot be certain that we will continue to maintain an effective system of internal control over our financial reporting in future periods. Any failure to maintain such internal controls could adversely impact our ability to report our financial results on a timely and accurate basis. If our financial statements are not accurate, investors may not have a complete understanding of our operations. Likewise, if our financial statements are not filed on a timely basis as required by the Securities and Exchange Commission and The New York Stock Exchange, we could face severe consequences from those authorities. In either case, there could be a material adverse effect on our business. Inferior internal controls could also cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information, which could have a negative effect on the trading price of our stock.

We currently incorporate AI into certain existing and planned products, as well as our internal operations. For example, some of our marketing, customer service and anti-fraud efforts are currently enhanced by AI. Further, our internal technology development efforts are utilizing AI in expanding ways, and other internal operational functions are beginning to use AI to improve effectiveness and efficiency. Achieving consistent, secure, and compliant AI adoption across departments-including Product & Engineering, Marketing, Trust & Safety, Customer Support, Finance, and Legal/Compliance-requires ongoing investment in training, governance, and change management. Failure by any function to adopt or appropriately use these tools or failure to monitor and control the results of the adoption of the tools could reduce profitability, productivity, impair product quality, or cause compliance or security issues. AI technologies are complex, resource-intensive, and rapidly evolving. Market demand and acceptance of AI-driven customer-facing offerings, such as n2p AI Agent and n2p Coach AI, remain uncertain, and our product development efforts may not achieve widespread adoption or may be outpaced by competitors. Competitors with greater financial, technical, data, or distribution resources may gain an advantage in attracting and retaining AI talent and in acquiring training data and compute capacity, which could impair our ability to maintain competitive AI capabilities. If our AI solutions, or those of others in our industry, draw controversy due to their perceived or actual societal impact-such as generating biased, harmful, or misleading content-we may experience brand or reputational harm, competitive harm, or legal liability, which could slow user adoption of our products. The use of AI also raises ethical, reputational, and legal concerns. AI-based or AI-enhanced systems can generate or amplify content that is inaccurate, misleading, biased, discriminatory, harmful, or otherwise controversial, or be misused by third parties. If our AI tools produce, or are perceived to produce, such outputs, or if we fail to implement adequate human oversight, testing, and safeguards (including data governance, evaluation, and post-deployment monitoring), our brand and competitive standing could be harmed and we could face complaints, investigations, or litigation. Potential litigation or government regulation related to AI may increase the burden and cost of research and development, further subjecting us to reputational harm, competitive harm, or legal liability. Failure to address perceived or actual technical, legal, compliance, privacy, security, or ethical issues could undermine public confidence in AI, slowing customer adoption of our AI-driven products and services. Laws and regulations focused on the development, use, and provision of AI technologies and other digital products and services are proliferating in many jurisdictions around the world. Staying compliant with evolving laws, regulations, and industry standards pertaining to AI may impose significant operational costs and constrain our ability to develop, deploy, or employ AI technologies profitably or at all. Failing to adapt appropriately to this evolving regulatory environment could result in legal liability, regulatory actions, monetary penalties and damage to our brand and reputation. Operationally, AI models depend on the quality, provenance, and security of data and on reliable third-party infrastructure. Inadequate, outdated, biased, or compromised datasets can produce flawed outputs and "model drift." Our reliance on third-party models, APIs, datasets, and cloud providers exposes us to outages, cost volatility, performance degradation, or changes in licensing or acceptable-use terms, which could disrupt our operations if these services become unavailable or are no longer offered on commercially reasonable terms. Integrating AI introduces new cybersecurity risks, including prompt-injection, data exfiltration, model poisoning, and supply-chain vulnerabilities, as well as the risk that employees inadvertently input confidential or personal data into external systems. Intellectual property ownership surrounding AI technologies has not been fully addressed by U.S. or foreign courts or federal, state or foreign laws, nor by international legal frameworks. Our ongoing development and use of generative AI tools may result in copyright infringement claims, disputes over ownership and licensing, and potential patent infringement claims, among other things. These legal challenges could be costly to defend against, leading to substantial financial obligations and reputational damage. The evolving regulatory environment and uncertain legal precedents in this field further increase our exposure to litigation risks, which could materially affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations. Additionally, laws and regulations focused on the development and use of AI are proliferating globally and continue to evolve (for example, comprehensive AI frameworks in the EU and emerging federal and state guidance in the United States). Compliance may require significant documentation, transparency and record-keeping, risk assessments, model governance, content provenance or watermarking, impact assessments, vendor oversight, and restrictions on certain use cases. Noncompliance could result in investigations, fines, injunctions, remediation obligations, or other sanctions. Cross-border data transfer rules, sanctions, and export controls may affect access to datasets, models, or compute resources in some jurisdictions. Further, our use of generative AI in aspects of our platforms may present risks and challenges that could increase as AI solutions become more prevalent. AI algorithms may be flawed. Datasets may be insufficient or contain biased information. These deficiencies and other failures of AI systems could have negative impacts on our users' experience and subject us to competitive harm, regulatory action, legal liability, and brand or reputational harm. Contractual indemnities from vendors may be unavailable or insufficient. We may also face claims related to privacy (including the processing of personal or biometric information), publicity rights, deceptive practices, or content moderation failures. Defending such claims can be costly and time-consuming, could require changes to our products or processes, and could harm our reputation and financial results. Finally, AI-related development and inference can increase energy consumption and costs, and investor or regulatory focus on sustainability may impose additional constraints. If we fail to implement robust AI governance, align employee practices with our policies, maintain sufficient human oversight, and continuously evaluate and improve our systems, the risks described above could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, and reputation.

Companies in the telecommunications industry and other industries in which we compete own large numbers of patents, copyrights and trademarks and frequently enter into litigation based on allegations of infringement or other violations of intellectual property rights. As we face increasing competition, the possibility of intellectual property claims against us grows. Although we do not believe that we infringe upon the intellectual property rights of others, our technologies may not be able to withstand any third-party claims or rights against their use. From time to time, we may be subject to claims and legal proceedings from third parties regarding alleged infringement by us of trademarks, copyrights, patents, and other intellectual property rights. Such lawsuits can be expensive and time-consuming and could distract us and our management from focusing on our businesses. Further, the loss of such lawsuits could result in financial burdens and the requirement to modify our modes of operation, which could materially adversely affect our business.

We rely upon our carrier agreements with partners to provide our telecommunications services to our customers. These carrier agreements are for finite terms and, therefore, there can be no guarantee that these agreements will be renewed at all or on favorable terms to us. Our ability to compete would be adversely affected if our carrier agreements were terminated or we were unable to enter into carrier agreements in the future to provide our telecommunications services to our customers, which could result in a reduction of our revenues and profits.

Most of our telecommunications' traffic is terminated through third-party providers. To support our minutes of use demand and geographic footprint, we may need to obtain additional termination capacity or destinations. We may not be able to obtain sufficient termination capacity from high-quality carriers to particular destinations or may have to pay significant amounts to obtain such capacity. This could result in our not being able to support our minutes of use demands or in higher cost-per-minute to particular destinations, which could adversely affect our revenues and profits.

In January 2025, the global tariff landscape began to quickly change with the United States implementing tariffs on goods from various foreign countries, either generally or with respect to certain products, and certain of those foreign countries implementing rebalancing tariffs on goods from the United States, either generally or with respect to certain products. In certain circumstances the United States and certain foreign countries temporarily suspended tariffs they had recently implemented, either in whole or in part. Since then, the United States has continued to impose tariffs on imported goods, and affected countries have often responded by imposing tariffs on U.S. goods. In April 2025, the U.S. announced a baseline tariff of 10% on goods from all countries and instituted additional individualized reciprocal tariffs for countries with which the United States has significant trade deficits. The United States continues to implement new, reinstated or adjusted tariffs, and we expect that it will continue with this practice. Foreign countries subject to these U.S. tariffs continue to implement new, reinstated or adjusted rebalancing tariffs, and we expect that foreign countries will continue with that practice. The U.S. tariffs and rebalancing tariffs that were recently enacted or that may be enacted have contributed to uncertainty about current global economic conditions. Sustained uncertainty could result in a global economic slowdown and long-term changes to global trade. Such changes could lead to negative sentiments towards us, potentially depressing economic activity or restricting access to suppliers or customers and thereby have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and outlook.