DEF 14A of First Solar, Inc., Apr 2, 2026

DEF 14A of First Solar, Inc.

Filed Apr 2, 2026 · FY20250001274494-26-000096

Open on EDGAR

  1. NOTICE OF ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS

    | | Page | | QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT THE ANNUAL MEETING | 1 | | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE | 6 | | DIRECTORS | 18 | | NON-ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR COMPENSATION | 25 | | SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS | 27 | | CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS | 28 | | PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES | 30 | | COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS | 31 | | COMPENSATION COMMITTEE REPORT | 46 | | EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION | 47 | | PROPOSAL NO. 1: ELECTION OF DIRECTORS | 66 | | PROPOSAL NO. 2: RATIFICATION OF THE APPOINTMENT OF PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP | 67 | | PROPOSAL NO. 3: ADVISORY VOTE ON EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION | 68 | | PROPOSAL NO. 4: STOCKHOLDER PROPOSAL – TO IMPROVE SHAREHOLDER ABILITY TO CALL FOR A SPECIAL SHAREHOLDER MEETING | 69 | | DELINQUENT SECTION 16(a) REPORTS | 74 | | OTHER MATTERS | 74 | | HOUSEHOLDING | 74 | | STOCKHOLDER PROPOSALS AND DIRECTOR NOMINATIONS | 75 | | REPORT OF THE AUDIT COMMITTEE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS | 76 |

  2. DIRECTORS

    DIRECTORS Members of the board of directors are elected at each annual meeting of stockholders and serve until the next annual meeting or until their respective successors have been elected and qualified. The following information provided with respect to the principal occupation, affiliations, and business experience for each of the candidates for election to the board of directors has been furnished to us by such candidates. The name of and certain information regarding each director is set forth below as of March 19, 2026. Each of the persons is a candidate for election to the board of directors at the 2026 annual meeting. In concluding that each of the following persons should serve as a director, the board of directors considered such person’s qualifications as described below and determined that each individual would provide the contributions to the board of directors as specified. There are no family relationships among directors or executive officers of the Company.

  3. DIRECTORS

    | Name | Age | Current Position with First Solar | Director Since | | Michael J. Ahearn | 69 | Chair of the Board | 2000 | | Anita Marangoly George | 65 | Director | 2021 | | Lisa A. Kro | 60 | Director | 2022 | | Curtis A. Morgan | 65 | Director Nominee | — | | William J. Post | 75 | Lead Independent Director | 2010 | | Venkata “Murthy” Renduchintala | 60 | Director | 2024 | | Paul H. Stebbins | 69 | Director | 2006 | | Michael Sweeney | 68 | Director | 2003 | | Mark R. Widmar | 60 | Chief Executive Officer and Director | 2016 | | Norman L. Wright | 61 | Director | 2022 |

  4. DIRECTORS

    Michael J. Ahearn, Chair of the Board, Technology Committee. Mr. Ahearn previously served as the Company’s chief executive officer from August 2000 to September 2009; interim chief executive officer from October 2011 to May 2012; executive chair from October 2009 to December 2010 and May 2012 to July 2012; and non-executive chair from January 2011 to October 2011 and July 2012 to present. Mr. Ahearn is currently Chair and Managing Partner of True North Venture Partners, L.P., a venture capital firm he launched in 2011 to invest primarily in early-stage companies in the energy, water, agriculture, and waste sectors. Prior to First Solar, he was partner and president of an equity investment firm, JWMA (formerly True North Partners, LLC). Prior to joining JWMA, Mr. Ahearn practiced law as a partner in the firm of Gallagher & Kennedy. Mr. Ahearn currently serves as a member of the board of directors of Cox Enterprises, Inc., and a member of the Global Advisory Board of Beijing Climate Policy Initiative. Mr. Ahearn holds a B.A. in Finance and a J.D. from Arizona State University. During his tenure as chief executive officer of First Solar, Mr. Ahearn led the development and expansion of First Solar from a small, privately held company to a successful multinational, industry-leading public company. Mr. Ahearn’s experience and insight are critical resources to the board of directors. His service as a former CEO of First Solar, including leading the transition of the Company from a start-up to one of the industry’s major solar technology companies and global providers of PV solar energy solutions, provides him with essential institutional knowledge and vital insight into our organization, history, and industry. He possesses a deep financial knowledge and maintains expertise in strategic planning, capital formation and value creation. Anita Marangoly George, Technology Committee. Ms. George is a co-founder of a growth equity climate fund, Prosperete. Ms. George has held key leadership positions at la Caisse de Dépôt et Placement du Québec (“CDPQ”), a global investment group and Canada’s second-largest pension fund manager, managing funds for public retirement and insurance plans. Ms. George served CDPQ from 2016 to 2017 as Managing Director South Asia; from 2017 to 2020 as Executive Vice President and Head of Emerging Markets and Strategic Partnerships; and from 2020 until June 2021 as Executive Vice President, Deputy Head of CDPQ Global. Prior to joining CDPQ, Ms. George spent 22 years with the World Bank Group leading both public and private sector investments in sustainable infrastructure across various geographies. From June 2014 until 2016, she headed the global Energy, Oil and Gas, and Mining practice for the World Bank Group as Senior Director, Global Practice Energy and Extractives; and from 2000 to 2014, at the World Bank Group’s International Finance Corporation (“IFC”). During her tenure at IFC, she served as Global Co-Director Infrastructure and Regional Director Asia Pacific, Infrastructure and Natural Resources. Ms. George is known for her expertise in infrastructure finance, especially renewable energy finance. She led global agreements addressing climate change during her tenure at the World Bank Group and has a distinguished track record in sustainable investments across the globe. In July 2022, Ms. George was appointed as an Independent Non-Executive Director on the Board of Tata Sons, the holding company of the Tata Group, where she currently serves on several committees, including Chair of the Audit Committee and Chair of the Group Risk Management Committee. Ms. George also serves on the boards of the Indo-Canadian Business Chamber, a not-for-profit promoting trade and investment relations between India and Canada where she served as President between 2020 to 2022, and TalentNomics India, a not-for-profit focused on empowerment of women. Formerly, she served on the World Economic Forum Global Future Council on Infrastructure for two terms, and currently serves on the following nonprofit advisory boards and councils: The Resilience Recovery Fund of the Self Employed Women’s Association (SEWA), Women in Private Equity (an industry association for women in private equity), the Advisory Council of the Chandrakanta Kesavan Center for Energy Transition at the Indian Institute of Technology at Kanpur, the India Energy and Climate Center at the Goldman School of Public Policy, UC Berkeley (an affiliate of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory), and the Financial Advisory Council of the International Solar Alliance (a multilateral institution that promotes solar world-wide). Ms. George holds a master’s degree in Economic Policy and a Master of Business Administration from Boston University, and a Bachelor of Arts from Smith College. In recognition of her work in sustainability, Ms. George has been awarded Honorary Doctorate degrees (LLD) from Huron University and Concordia University, Canada. Ms. George’s experience working in climate finance and infrastructure across key global markets, combined with her experience and passion for human capital development and sustainability, are valuable resources to the board of directors and the Company. Through her expertise as a financial sector executive, she brings a command of credit, banking, and equity investments. She has also served in a number of international organizations, providing vital insight relevant for First Solar’s expanding international operations, including as we commenced operations of the Company’s first manufacturing facility in India. Lisa A. Kro, Audit Committee (Chair), Nominating and Governance Committee. Ms. Kro has served as the Chief Financial & Administrative Officer of Ryan Companies since 2019, overseeing their speculative industrial sector, accounting, finance, human resources, legal, and information technology departments. From 2011 to 2018, Ms. Kro was a founding partner of Mill City Capital, L.P., a private equity firm, where she was Chief Financial Officer and Managing Director. From September 2004 to March 2011, Ms. Kro was the Chief Financial Officer and a Managing Director of Goldner Hawn Johnson & Morrison, a private equity firm. She began her career in public accounting with a 17-year tenure at KPMG, including spending a year at KPMG’s Munich office and serving as the Practice Leader for the Retail, Food & Manufacturing practice in the Midwest. Ms. Kro is a director of MillerKnoll, Inc. (d/b/a Herman Miller, Inc.), a publicly traded company. She has previously served on the board of eight private companies, one public company, and five not-for-profit organizations. Ms. Kro is a member of the National Association of Corporate Directors and the Minnesota chapter of Women Corporate Directors. Ms. Kro has a Bachelor of Science degree from Minnesota State University Moorhead and is a Certified Public Accountant (retired). Ms. Kro’s accounting background, as well as her work in finance, public accounting, capital markets, and public company audit committee experience provides valuable oversight to the Company's financial accounting controls and reporting and strategic planning and risk management. Her tenure on the boards of both public and non-public companies, along with her executive-level roles, enables Ms. Kro to offer insight into corporate governance practices and leadership.

  5. DIRECTORS

    Curtis A. Morgan, Director Nominee. Mr. Morgan was nominated for election to the board of directors upon the recommendation of the nominating and governance committee as a result of a search process conducted by the Company and the board of directors. Mr. Morgan has over 42 years in the broader energy business with approximately 20 years as a CEO. He is currently Chairman and CEO of Alpha Generation since 2024, one of the largest privately owned competitive power generation companies in the U.S. with over 14,000 megawatts primarily in the northeast and mid-Atlantic markets. Mr. Morgan was previously CEO of Vistra Corp, an integrated retail electricity and power generation company from 2016 to 2022. During his tenure, Mr. Morgan established Vistra as a power and energy transition leader while transforming it from a single-state provider into one of the largest power producers and retailers in the country. During his career, Mr. Morgan has held leadership responsibilities in nearly every major U.S. power market. Mr. Morgan also served as the President and CEO of EquiPower Resources Corp. and FirstLight Power Resources, Inc., and has held leadership positions at NRG Energy, Mirant Corporation, Reliant Energy, and BP Amoco. He received his undergraduate degree in accounting from Western Illinois University and an MBA from The University of Chicago. Relevant Skills and Experience Mr. Morgan brings to the board of directors executive-level experience, including a deep understanding of the power generation and retail electricity sectors within the United States. He possesses considerable technical experience and expert knowledge on the growth needs of large power producers, provides critical insight into the viewpoints of the customers we seek to serve. His tenure within the broader energy business, together with his CEO-level experience, allows Mr. Morgan to provide an in-depth corporate leadership perspective. William J. Post, Lead Independent Director, Compensation Committee, Nominating and Governance Committee, Technology Committee. Mr. Post retired as chair and chief executive officer of Pinnacle West Capital Corporation (“Pinnacle West”) in April 2009. He joined Arizona Public Service (the largest subsidiary of Pinnacle West) in 1973 and joined the boards of Arizona Public Service in 1995 and Pinnacle West in 1997. Mr. Post became chair of both boards in 2001 and retired in April 2010. He is currently on the board of directors of Blue Cross Blue Shield of Arizona and the Translational Genomics Research Institute. Mr. Post has served as chair of Swift Transportation, Stagg Information Systems, Nuclear Assurance Corporation, Nuclear Electric Insurance Limited, the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations, and El Dorado Investment Company. He also served as a director of Phelps Dodge Corporation and U.S. Airways. Mr. Post has a Bachelor of Science degree from Arizona State University. Mr. Post brings to the board of directors executive-level utility-sector experience, including a deep understanding of the utility sector within the southwestern United States, a key market for the Company. He possesses considerable technical experience and expert knowledge on how to grow utility markets, provides critical insight into the viewpoints of the customers we seek to serve, and has deep ties within communities in which we have a presence. His tenure on public company boards, together with his CEO-level experience, allows Mr. Post to provide an in-depth corporate leadership perspective. Venkata “Murthy” Renduchintala, Technology Committee (Chair), Audit Committee. Dr. Renduchintala was chief engineering officer at Intel Corporation (“Intel”) from November 2015 to August 2020. He also served as group president of Intel’s Technology, Manufacturing, and Systems Architecture group. Prior to joining Intel in 2015, Dr. Renduchintala held various senior positions at Qualcomm Incorporated, where he last served as executive vice president of Qualcomm Technologies (“Qualcomm”) and as co-president of Qualcomm CDMA Technologies from 2012 to 2015. Dr. Renduchintala joined Qualcomm in 2004 from Skyworks Solutions, Inc. (“Skyworks”), where he was vice president and general manager of the Cellular Systems division from 2000 to 2004. Prior to Skyworks, he spent a decade with Philips Electronics, Inc., (“Philips Electronics”) progressing to become vice president of engineering for its consumer communications business. Dr. Renduchintala has served as a member of the board of directors of Accenture plc since 2018. Dr. Renduchintala holds a Bachelor of Engineering in Electrical Engineering, a Master's degree in Business Administration and a Ph.D. in Digital Communication from the University of Bradford in England. He subsequently was awarded the honorary degree of Doctor of Technology by his alma mater for his contributions to science and technology and also appointed as an Honorary Visiting Professor. Dr. Renduchintala brings to the board of directors global experience through his tenure as an executive at Intel and his other prior positions at Qualcomm, Skyworks, and Philips Electronics. Dr. Renduchintala also brings deep technology expertise that enables Dr. Renduchintala to offer insight into our technology and R&D roadmap. As chief engineering officer at Intel, he also gained expertise in strategic technology-related investments and, as a member of Intel’s executive committee, oversaw the implementation of cybersecurity and risk management policy. His tenure on the board of Accenture plc and participation on both the audit and finance committees enables Dr. Renduchintala to help oversee our financial and accounting functions. Paul H. Stebbins, Audit Committee, Compensation Committee, Nominating and Governance Committee (Chair). Mr. Stebbins has served as chair emeritus and as a non-employee director of World Kinect Corporation (“World Kinect”) since May 2014. Previously, Mr. Stebbins served as the chair and chief executive officer of World Kinect from July 2002 to January 2012 and as executive chair from January 2012 to May 2014. He has served as a director of World Kinect since June 1995. Between July 2000 and 2002, Mr. Stebbins also served as president and chief operating officer of World Kinect. In 1985, Mr. Stebbins co-founded Trans-Tec Services, a global marine fuel service company acquired by World Kinect in 1995. Mr. Stebbins is a founding member of the FixUSNow.org initiative on civic reform hosted by the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB.org). He is a member of the Advisory Council of Amigos International, a youth leadership development program based in Houston, Texas, a member of the Advisory Board of The Silk Road Project, Inc., a musical ensemble and cultural innovation organization founded by renowned cellist Yo-Yo Ma, and a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. Relevant Skills and Experience Mr. Stebbins brings to the board of directors significant CEO-level experience in managing a large global energy-related publicly traded company. His experience as an energy executive and wealth of knowledge regarding the energy industry provides him with insight about strategic, solution-oriented innovation and growth. He has significant, recent public policy expertise, which is beneficial given our Company’s industry, and his insights into recent corporate governance and risk management developments provide critical perspective to the board of directors and the Company’s management.

  6. DIRECTORS

    Michael T. Sweeney, Compensation Committee (Chair), Nominating and Governance Committee. Mr. Sweeney served as President and Chief Executive Officer of Steinway Musical Instruments, Inc. from October 2011 until August 2016, director since April 2011, and chair of the board from July 2011 through September 2013. Mr. Sweeney served as chair of the board of Star Tribune Media Holdings, the holding company for the Minneapolis Star Tribune, from September 2009 to September 2014, and as a director of Carlson Companies, Inc. Mr. Sweeney served as managing partner in Goldner Hawn Johnson & Morrison, Inc., a private equity firm, from 2001 through 2008. He had previously served as president of Starbucks Coffee Company (UK) Ltd. in London and held various operating management and corporate finance roles. Mr. Sweeney’s background in investment banking and private equity, as well as his operational business acumen, are valuable resources to the board of directors and the Company, particularly with respect to consideration of compensation, financial matters, and strategic investments. His direct responsibility for business operations in a number of industries, including his service as a CEO, brings experience that is valuable to the board of directors, especially when it comes to corporate strategy and business development. Mark R. Widmar was appointed Chief Executive Officer of First Solar in July 2016. He joined First Solar in April 2011 as Chief Financial Officer and also served as First Solar’s Chief Accounting Officer from February 2012 through June 2015. From March 2015 to June 2016, Mr. Widmar served as the Chief Financial Officer and through June 2018, served as a director on the board of the general partner of 8point3 Energy Partners LP, the joint yieldco formed by First Solar and SunPower Corporation in 2015 to own and operate a portfolio of selected solar generation assets. Prior to joining First Solar, Mr. Widmar served as Chief Financial Officer of GrafTech International Ltd., a leading global manufacturer of advanced carbon and graphite materials, from May 2006 through March 2011. Prior to joining GrafTech, Mr. Widmar served as Corporate Controller of NCR Inc. from 2005 to 2006 and was a Business Unit Chief Financial Officer for NCR from November 2002 to his appointment as Controller. He also served as a Division Controller at Dell, Inc. from August 2000 to November 2002. Mr. Widmar also held various financial and managerial positions with Lucent Technologies Inc., Allied Signal, Inc., and Bristol Myers/Squibb, Inc. He began his career in 1987 as an accountant with Ernst & Young. He holds a Bachelor of Science in business accounting and a Master of Business Administration from Indiana University. He serves as a member of the board of directors of Albemarle Corporation. Relevant Skills and Experience Mr. Widmar has significant public company experience, having served in a number of senior level executive positions. He has extensive knowledge of the solar energy sector, which is essential to his position as CEO of the Company and enables him to steer First Solar towards long-term strategic growth. He has demonstrated proven leadership and expertise throughout his tenure at First Solar, exhibiting a balanced approach and delivering superior results and value creation. Norman L. Wright, Compensation Committee, Nominating and Governance Committee. From May 2022 to August 2023, Mr. Wright served as Executive Vice President, Health Equity Strategy of UnitedHealth Group, where he had previously served as Executive Vice President & Chief Customer Officer. He previously served as Executive Vice President & Chief Marketing and Customer Officer and as Executive Vice President & Chief of Global Operations at Optum, a subsidiary of UnitedHealth Group. From 2007 to 2013, Mr. Wright was Managing Director, Client Experience for Citigroup Inc.’s Consumer Operations in North America and led the Retail Bank Call Centers. Prior to this, Mr. Wright served as an executive at a number of companies. He was Executive Partner, Customer Contact Transformation at Accenture plc. from 2004 to 2007, Senior Vice President, HSN Customer Care at HSN from 1999 to 2004, Senior Vice President and General Manager at Fidelity Investments Inc. from 1996 to 1999, Vice President, Customer Service at G.E. Capital from 1994 to 1996, and Vice President, Customer Service at JPMorganChase & Co. from 1986 to 1994. Mr. Wright currently serves on the boards of Option Care Health, the largest independent provider of infusion services in the U.S., and the YMCA of Arizona. He has previously served as a director of UnitedHealth Foundation and YMCA of the North, both non-profits, as well as The Brighton Center, Inc., the Tampa Bay Performing Arts Center, 1st Tee of San Antonio, and the University of Texas at San Antonio. Mr. Wright has a Bachelor of Arts from Swarthmore College. Mr. Wright has nearly 40 years of experience as an executive in sales and customer service, contact centers, operations, marketing, consumer digital, and business consulting supporting a number of industries. He brings valuable leadership skills and business acumen to the board of directors. His skills and experience leading large-scale equity and community engagement strategies and his training in domestic and international arenas to conceptualize and implement strategic plans, drive consumer focused outcomes, and maximize value for organizations are valuable to the Company’s strategic planning efforts.

  7. NON-ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR COMPENSATION

    NON-ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR COMPENSATION We use a combination of cash and stock-based compensation to attract and retain qualified candidates to serve on the board of directors. When reviewing non-associate director compensation, we are guided by three goals, as provided in our corporate governance guidelines: (i) compensation should fairly pay directors for work required for a company of our size and scope; (ii) compensation should align directors’ interests with the long-term interests of our stockholders; and (iii) the structure of the compensation should be clearly disclosed to our stockholders. The table below summarizes our 2025 non-associate director compensation:

  8. NON-ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR COMPENSATION

    | 2025 Non-Associate Director Compensation | | | Annual Retainer for All Non-Associate Directors | $100,000 cash and $180,000 stock | | | Additional Chair Retainers | | Non-Executive Board Chair | +$50,000 cash and $75,000 stock | | Audit Committee Chair | +$35,000 cash | | Lead Independent Director | +$30,000 cash | | Compensation Committee Chair | +$25,000 cash | | Other Committee Chairs | +$15,000 cash |

  9. NON-ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR COMPENSATION

    All cash compensation is payable quarterly in four equal installments. The annual equity compensation is granted quarterly in four equal installments in the form of fully vested stock. We issue the stock to our non-associate directors at the end of the quarter and do not time the grant date of these awards to take advantage of announcements of undisclosed material facts. Non-associate directors are also subject to a share ownership guideline of five times the cash component of the annual retainer, which currently represents a value of $500,000. Non-associate directors have five years from the date they join the board to attain the share ownership guideline value. As of December 31, 2025, all non-associate directors either met or were on track to meet the share ownership guideline. In addition to cash and equity compensation, we reimburse all non-associate directors for reasonable and necessary expenses they incur in performing their duties as our non-associate directors. We do not provide our non-associate directors with perquisites. From time to time, non-associate directors may be asked to serve on special committees for which they may receive additional compensation. For 2025, the components and amounts of our non-associate director compensation were substantially the same as for 2024. In 2026, the compensation committee’s consultant, WTW, reviewed our 2025 non-associate director compensation program and found our equity compensation levels to be slightly below the peer group median market average. For 2026, considering the recommendation of WTW, the compensation committee recommended to the board of directors to (i) increase non-associate director equity compensation by $30,000; (ii) increase the annual equity grant value for the Non-Executive Board Chair by $10,000; (iii) increase the retainer for the Chair of the Nominating and Governance Committee and the Chair of the Technology Committee by $5,000; and (iv) increase the retainer for the Lead Independent Director by $5,000.

  10. Non-Associate Director Compensation Table

    Non-Associate Director Compensation Table The following table sets forth information with respect to compensation earned by our non-associate directors for the year ended December 31, 2025:

  11. Non-Associate Director Compensation Table

    | Name | Fees Earned or Paid in Cash ($) | Stock Awards ($)(1)(2) | Total ($) | | Michael J. Ahearn | 150,000 | 255,701 | 405,701 | | Anita Marangoly George | 100,000 | 180,437 | 280,437 | | Molly E. Joseph (3) | 50,000 | 90,036 | 140,036 | | Lisa A. Kro | 135,000 | 180,437 | 315,437 | | William J. Post | 130,000 | 180,437 | 310,437 | | Venkata “Murthy” Renduchintala | 115,000 | 180,437 | 295,437 | | Paul H. Stebbins | 115,000 | 180,437 | 295,437 | | Michael Sweeney | 125,000 | 180,437 | 305,437 | | Norman L. Wright | 100,000 | 180,437 | 280,437 |

  12. Non-Associate Director Compensation Table

    —————————— (1)The amounts in this column represent the aggregate grant date fair value of fully vested common stock granted during the year ended December 31, 2025. See “Compensation Discussion and Analysis – Other Executive Compensation Information – Tax and Accounting Implications” for more information. (2)The grant date fair value of shares issued on March 31, 2025 was $63,847 for Mr. Ahearn and $45,009 for each of the other non-associate directors. The grant date fair value of shares issued on June 30, 2025 was $63,898 for Mr. Ahearn and $45,027 for each of the other non-associate directors. The grant date fair value of shares issued on September 30, 2025 was $63,954 for Mr. Ahearn and $45,209 for each of the other non-associate directors. The grant date fair value of shares issued on December 31, 2025 was $64,001 for Mr. Ahearn and $45,193 for each of the other non-associate directors. The dollar values of the stock awards do not equal exactly $63,750 per quarter for Mr. Ahearn or $45,000 per quarter for each of the other non-associate directors because we issue whole shares to our non-associate directors and not fractional shares. (3)Ms. Joseph served as a non-associate director until May 14, 2025 (she did not stand for re-election upon expiration of her current term as of the date of the 2025 annual meeting of stockholders). Therefore, Ms. Joseph was issued stock awards on March 31, 2025, and June 30, 2025.

  13. Compensation Philosophy

    Compensation Philosophy Our compensation philosophy rests on certain foundational principles that inform the way we design our compensation programs and pay our named executive officers. Such principles include the following: First Solar Pay Is Simple and Is Designed to Align the Interests of Executive Management and Stockholders. Our approach to compensation is straightforward, and this fact is reflected in the components of our executives’ aggregate annual pay. The three primary components of our executive compensation are (i) base salary, (ii) cash incentive compensation (short-term incentive), and (iii) equity compensation (long-term incentive). Our named executive officers have a large percentage of total compensation that is performance-based and “at risk” (i.e., compensation that is not payable to such executives unless certain performance targets are achieved), and a high percentage of our named executive officers’ total compensation is weighted towards equity compensation to align their interests with those of our stockholders. We do not maintain any supplemental executive retirement programs or other deferred compensation arrangements, and generally no perquisites are available for the named executive officers that are not available to our other associates. Our Compensation Levels Are Generally Consistent with Market Levels and May Reflect Certain Discretion to Conform to, or Reward, Actual Performance. We believe that our named executive officers should be compensated at a level that ensures their continued dedication to the Company and creates potential rewards for extraordinary results when advancing the goals and strategies of the Company. Our compensation committee works with WTW, an independent compensation consultant, which regularly compiles and analyzes market data to determine the pay practices of relevant segments of the talent market and our peer group (as described below), which our compensation committee considers in determining the level and components of our named executive officers’ pay. In determining compensation for our named executive officers for 2025, our compensation committee considered a market study of relevant industries and our peer group at the end of 2024. In relation to our peer group and other companies of relevant size and complexity, the compensation committee generally considers target total direct compensation (“TDC,” consisting of base salary, target cash bonus, and long-term incentive compensation) around the 50th percentile in the aggregate as a useful reference in determining the competitiveness of our named executive officers’ target TDC. However, the total compensation (as well as individual components, such as base salary and target cash bonus) for an individual executive may fall within a range above or below the 50th percentile based on factors such as tenure in position, individual performance, and criticality of role. In 2025, the compensation committee targeted equity-based compensation values at the 50th to 75th percentiles, based on market analysis conducted by WTW. For senior executive officers, the value of such equity-based awards was composed of approximately 25% in the form of PUs and 75% in the form of restricted stock units (“RSUs”). This split between PUs and RSUs was changed in 2025 from prior years due to the complexity of setting equity performance goals in the changing regulatory environment. This change in mix is not intended to be long-term, and the compensation committee intends to move in a direction to position the split of the equity awards to be more heavily weighted to PUs in 2026. These awards, including the PUs that are performance-based and vest subject to and based on the Company’s performance over an approximately three-year period, were determined by the compensation committee to be critical to executive retention and focus on the Company’s long-term strategic objectives during a critical time in the solar industry. We Pay for Performance. Our choice of metrics (both financial and operational) related to our short- and long-term incentive plans, and the compensation committee’s discretion to modify certain awards granted under the annual incentive plans, are meant to ensure that (i) our named executive officers are not rewarded unless performance goals are achieved and (ii) operational metrics are not achieved at the expense of financial performance.

  14. Selection of Peer Companies

    Selection of Peer Companies In 2024, the compensation committee asked WTW, its independent consultant, to provide (i) data and analysis regarding the selection of companies in our executive compensation peer group and (ii) a comparison of each of the components of the compensation of our named executive officers against the comparable compensation paid to executives in similarly situated positions at our peer group companies. WTW compared each element of compensation for a particular position against similar elements as disclosed by members of our peer group and as reported in a compensation survey of companies of similar size and relevant talent-competitor industries. The compensation committee routinely analyzes our peer group to determine if it represents comparable companies and industries, and we have made certain changes to our peer group over the years to include companies similar in size and revenue and with which we compete for talent. To inform decisions about 2025 compensation, our peer group comprised U.S.-based public companies, generally with expected annual revenues between $2 billion and $20 billion, that are (i) part of the semiconductors, renewable energy/independent power production, and electrical components and equipment industries; (ii) based in the U.S., with similar complexity and/or geographic reach; and/or (iii) companies with which we compete for executive talent. Additionally, electric utilities engaged in renewable energy generation (e.g. Xcel Energy Inc. and Pinnacle West Capital Corporation) were included to ensure that this critical and relevant element of our business is also captured. When approved by the compensation committee in July 2024, the peer group had approximate median revenues of $5.0 billion and included 28 companies that were generally reflective of a company of our size. The peer group consisted of:

  15. Selection of Peer Companies

    | Ameresco, Inc. | Amkor Technology, Inc. | Analog Devices, Inc. | | Array Technologies, Inc. | Avangrid, Inc. | Cirrus Logic, Inc. | | Diodes Incorporated | EnerSys | Enphase Energy, Inc. | | Entegris, Inc. | Generac Holdings Inc. | KLA Corporation | | Lam Research Corporation | Marvell Technology, Inc. | Microchip Technology Incorporated | | MKS Instruments, Inc. | Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. | NextEra Energy, Inc. | | Nextracker Inc. (1) | ON Semiconductor Corporation | Pinnacle West Capital Corporation | | Qorvo, Inc. | Skyworks Solutions, Inc. | SunPower Corporation (2) | | Sunrun Inc. | Teradyne, Inc. | The AES Corporation | | Xcel Energy Inc. | | |

  16. Selection of Peer Companies

    —————————— (1) Nextracker Inc. was rebranded to Nextpower Inc. in November 2025. (2) SunPower Corporation filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in August 2024 and was subsequently removed from the peer group and the analysis of peer company data.

  17. Review of Peer Company Data

    Review of Peer Company Data The compensation committee evaluates the compensation of our named executive officers against data regarding the pay practices of companies in our peer group and relevant compensation survey data, looking at individual components of pay, including total amounts paid or payable. In addition, the compensation committee annually reviews the payments to our named executive officers that would be required under various severance scenarios. When conducting this review, the compensation committee also considers information and recommendations from management regarding past, present, and future compensation of our named executive officers under various payment scenarios. Based on its review and analysis, WTW concluded, and our compensation committee agreed, that the compensation paid to our named executive officers was consistent with our stated compensation objectives regarding our target pay as compared to our peer group and was thus reasonable in the aggregate as compared to the peer group above. See “Executive Compensation Principles – Evaluating the Market.”

  18. Cash Incentive Compensation

    Cash Incentive Compensation Our cash incentive compensation consists primarily of our annual bonus program (which is adopted pursuant to our 2020 Omnibus Incentive Compensation Plan (“2020 Omnibus Plan”)), which we use to incentivize achievement of certain Company goals. We also use cash incentive compensation to create incentives for individuals to join our Company, including to compensate such individuals for payments forfeited by leaving their prior employment to join us or to offset relocation costs. Annual Bonus Plan. We use our annual bonus plan to encourage the achievement of specified strategic, financial, and operational objectives to help us achieve our mission to provide cost-advantaged solar technology through innovation, customer engagement, industry leadership, and operational excellence. In February 2025, the compensation committee adopted the 2025 Bonus Plan for all associates, including our named executive officers. With a single overall threshold performance metric and additional performance metrics, the 2025 Bonus Plan was designed to strengthen the connection between executive performance and incentive pay, which is one of our core executive compensation principles. The compensation committee selected the metrics and weighting applicable to the 2025 Bonus Plan considering our long-term strategic plans. Upon achievement of the threshold performance metric described below, the maximum bonus pool was eligible to be funded, but the amount of each participant’s actual bonus was determined based on the achievement of the various additional performance metrics, which could result in actual payout less than the maximum bonus pool. Furthermore, the Chief Executive Officer (or the compensation committee, in the case of the Chief Executive Officer) retained discretion to adjust any award achieved under the program to the extent appropriate. Specifically, each participant’s actual bonus was determined as follows: •Company performance determined the participant’s award as a percentage of his or her target bonus percentage. Of the resulting award that was determined by company performance, 60% was considered earned; then •Individual performance represented the other 40% of the resulting award. Our 2025 Bonus Plan required that all associates be employed on the bonus payout date with certain exceptions for retirement, death, or long-term disability. These exceptions allowed for eligibility of a pro-rated award based on days of service completed during the performance year. Target Bonus Percentage and Threshold and Maximum Award Opportunities. Target bonus percentages are established based on job responsibilities, internal pay equity, and peer group data and are evaluated during our annual pay cycle on the same basis as base salary (as discussed above in “2025 Compensation Decisions – Base Salary”). For 2025, the target bonus percentages of our named executive officers were as follows (expressed as a percentage of base salary): •Mr. Widmar – 140% (increased from 135%); •Mr. Bradley – 100% (increased from 90%); •Mr. Verma – 85% (increased from 80%); •Mr. Antoun – 90%; and •Mr. Dymbort – 90% (increased from 80%). Expressed as a percentage of target bonus percentage, the range of award opportunities for each named executive officer was: •0% for below-threshold performance; •50% for threshold performance; •100% for target performance; and •200% for maximum performance. 2025 Bonus Plan Threshold Metric and Performance Result. The 2025 threshold metric and performance result were as follows: •Threshold metric (must be achieved for any bonus payout to occur): Adjusted net operating income. We selected adjusted net operating income as the threshold metric to our 2025 Bonus Plan to enhance our executives’ focus on core operating decisions that would position the company for future success. •Performance result: Set at the beginning of the year, the minimum target adjusted net operating income was $1.0 billion, and the year-end performance result was $1.8 billion, thereby enabling company performance to fund awards. Company Performance Metrics and Weightings, and Selected Company Performance Goals and Performance Results. Established based on the goals set forth in our confidential annual operating plan for 2025, company performance metrics and target performance goals were as follows (with additional details provided in the table further below): •Corporate: Year-end net cash 2025 (10% weighted) and safety metrics (10% weighted), which collectively accounted for 20% of the Company 2025 Bonus Plan payout level. •R&D / Manufacturing: Core Cost per Watt (“CpW”) produced (30% weighted) and copper replacement (“CuRe”) R&D progress and manufacturability (30% weighted), which collectively accounted for 60% of the Company 2025 Bonus Plan payout level. •Commercial: U.S. made volume sold in 2025 accounted for 20% of the Company 2025 Bonus Plan payout level. We believe the above company performance metrics are key short-term drivers of our long-term success, align with our long-term strategic plans, and are critical measures of success with respect to our annual operating plan. The relative achievement of these performance metrics is linked to enhancing our competitive position in the marketplace by reducing our operating and manufacturing costs, increasing our sales, and advancing certain important corporate objectives related to safety and R&D progress. We designed the metrics to encourage selling modules at a reasonable gross margin profile, which is expected to increase our profitability while acknowledging the intense pricing competition within the solar industry. By establishing such performance metrics, we believe we aligned our 2025 Bonus Plan with our overall goals. Selected company performance goals and performance results under the 2025 Bonus Plan were as follows (others are considered confidential or competitive information or have been intentionally omitted from disclosure): •The year-end net cash target was achieved with a 2.0 payout factor; we finished the year with $2.4 billion of net cash. •The safety target was 300 “good catch” incidents per 100 employees. Even though we did meet this metric for good catches, we voluntarily reduced the payout factor to zero to reinforce the importance of a safety-first culture in a year where we had a serious safety incident in one of our plants. Based on an assessment of our 2025 results against the criteria described above, the 2025 Bonus Plan results were as presented below:

  19. Cash Incentive Compensation

    | 2025 Bonus Plan Threshold Metric Results | | | | | Threshold Metric | Minimum Threshold Level | | Result | | Adjusted net operating income (1) | > $1,000 million | | Meets | | 2025 Bonus Plan Performance Metrics Results | | | | | Metric | Weighting | Focus | Payout Factor | | Corporate | | | | | Net cash - 2025 year-end | 10% | Profitability | 2.00 | | Safety (2) | 10% | Operations | 0.00 | | R&D / Manufacturing | | | | | CpW produced | 30% | Profitability | 1.00 | | CuRe R&D progress and manufacturability | 30% | Technology | 1.00 | | Commercial | | | | | U.S. made volume sold in 2025 | 20% | Growth/Profitability | 1.76 | | 2025 Bonus Plan Payout Level | 1.15 | | | | 2025 Bonus Plan Payout Allocation | | | | | Payout based on Company performance | 60% | | | | Payout based on individual performance | 40% | | |

  20. Cash Incentive Compensation

    —————————— (1)Adjusted net operating income is defined as operating income as reported in our consolidated statement of operations for the year ended December 31, 2025 included in our 2025 Annual Report on Form 10-K, adjusted to exclude production start-up expense, underutilization, and costs associated with the initial ramp of our manufacturing lines. (2)Our safety metric during 2025 related to “good catch” incidents, which are recorded observations of any unsafe behaviors, conditions, or opportunities for safety improvement. Each company performance metric was weighted in accordance with its importance in achieving the goals laid out in our confidential annual operating plan. Targets are set based on levels proposed by management prior to the beginning of the year. Performance goals developed by management are reviewed internally by our Financial Planning & Analysis (“FP&A”) department using a rigorous process to determine the range of potential performance for each measure based on a review of the historical levels of achievement for each metric, and are also reviewed by our Chief Executive Officer, before being presented to the compensation committee for approval. Every year, in determining performance targets, our FP&A department focuses on continuous improvement of Company performance and conducts an analysis for each metric by projecting the cost saved and value added by the achievement of each performance goal to determine whether the performance levels required to achieve certain performance goals should be adjusted upward. The performance goals were set at levels that our FP&A department, our management, and the compensation committee believed would require strong performance for a target payout (1.0 multiplier). A threshold payout (0.5 multiplier) was assigned to performance at a level that, while not certain at the time targets were set, we considered likely that such performance would be achieved by the end of the year. Maximum payout (2.0 multiplier) is a stretch performance goal that requires superior performance that delivers meaningful value to our stockholders. If the threshold level of performance was not achieved for a specific metric, the multiplier for that metric would be zero. Additionally, most performance metrics were subject to a related governing metric, which precluded the performance metric from exceeding a target payout (1.0 multiplier) if the governing metric was not achieved. For instance, the safety metric could not exceed the target payout (1.0 multiplier) if any serious or life-altering incidents occurred over the relevant period. Individual Performance. Individual performance determined 40% of each participant’s resulting award. The Chief Executive Officer, with the approval of the compensation committee, (or the compensation committee, in the case of the Chief Executive Officer), elected to apply slight differing downward discretionary adjustments to the 2025 payout for each of our named executive officers due to certain operating misses during 2025; namely downward discretion to Messrs. Widmar, Bradley, Verma, Antoun and Dymbort. See “Summary Compensation Table – Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation” for specific payout levels for each named executive officer.

  21. Equity-Based Compensation

    Equity-Based Compensation We have always been a firm proponent of equity-based compensation and continue to grant time-based RSUs with longer vesting schedules to address retention concerns, while tying realizable compensation to the returns of our stockholders. We also grant PUs to incentivize performance over an approximately three-year performance period. In 2025, we granted such RSUs and PUs to each of our named executive officers, with an intended long-term incentive mix of approximately 25% PUs (down from 60% in 2024) and 75% RSUs (up from 40% in 2024), assuming target performance levels are achieved for the PUs. This split between PUs and RSUs was changed in 2025 from prior years due to the complexity of setting equity performance goals in the changing regulatory environment. This change in mix is not intended to be long-term, and the compensation committee intends to move in a direction to position the split of the equity awards to be more heavily weighted to PUS in 2026. The compensation committee continues to believe that granting such equity-based compensation furthers our goal of aligning executive and stockholder interests and mitigating certain distractions that our executives may feel because of the ongoing volatility in the solar industry. See “Compensation Philosophy” for further information regarding the process the compensation committee used to determine the value of equity awards granted to our named executive officers in 2025. Our general practice is to grant our equity awards relatively early in the year. We do not time our grants specifically to avoid any internal “blackouts” or other periods during which our executives and directors may be prohibited by our Insider Trading Compliance Policy or applicable law from trading in our securities, or otherwise to provide any preferential benefit to our executives and directors. Although we do not currently grant stock options, if we decided to grant stock options in the future, we may adopt an applicable policy covering the timing of option award grants. Details of the equity grants to our named executive officers are contained in the “Grants of Plan-Based Awards” table and the “Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End” table. EPEP. We believe that a long-term incentive program provides significant benefit to the Company and we routinely reevaluate the components of our equity-based long-term incentive programs. Awards under such programs (i) are typically expected to represent the largest component of executives’ potential compensation (see “Compensation Philosophy” and “Components of 2025 Executive Compensation”), (ii) serve as a retention tool, and (iii) ensure that our executives’ compensation is linked to the long-term interests of our stockholders and our Company performance, consistent with our compensation philosophy. For the 2025 PU grants to be earned over an approximately three-year performance period ending in December 2027, the target performance metrics include (1) module sales backlog for delivery after 2027 (50% weighting) and (2) achievement of certain milestones that relate to the performance and scaling readiness of new perovskite technology initiatives. Each performance metric of the EPEP ranges from a threshold level of 0.5 in cases of weaker performance to 2.0 in cases of stronger performance. A 0.5 multiplier was assigned to performance at a level that, while not certain at the time targets were set, we considered likely that such performance would be achieved by the end of the performance period. A 1.0 multiplier was assigned to performance at a level that, while not certain at the time targets were set, aligned with the goals in our confidential long-term operating plan, and thus was at a level that we expected we could achieve by the end of the performance period. A 2.0 multiplier was assigned to a performance level that was more uncertain. If the minimum threshold level of performance is not achieved for a specific metric, the multiplier for that metric will be zero. Unvested EPEP awards are forfeited upon termination of employment, other than a termination due to death, disability, or a qualifying retirement after the end of the first calendar year of the performance period, in which case the executive would be eligible for a prorated settlement of any PUs following the end of the performance period, based on actual achievement of the applicable performance goals, and prorated based on the length of the period the executive was employed by the Company during the performance period. Retirement is defined as the executive’s voluntary termination of employment after attaining age 55 and completing at least ten years of service. Upon a change in control of the Company in which the acquirer assumes or substitutes such PUs, the PUs will vest in accordance with the provisions described above, unless the executive’s employment is terminated without “cause” or the executive resigns for “good reason.” In such circumstances, the vesting of the PUs will accelerate based on the greater of (i) target level of performance or (ii) actual achievement. Upon the occurrence of a change in control of the Company in which the acquirer does not assume or substitute such PUs, the PUs would be deemed immediately vested at the greater of (i) the target level of performance or (ii) the actual achievement of the applicable performance goals as of the last day of the calendar quarter preceding the change in control. The grant date fair value of the 2025 PUs granted on May 1, 2025 for our named executive officers was $1,374,930 for Mr. Widmar, $437,426 for Mr. Bradley, $399,961 for Mr. Verma, $312,375 for Mr. Antoun, and $349,966 for Mr. Dymbort. RSUs. On March 6, 2025 and May 1, 2025, each of our named executive officers received time-based RSUs, vesting at a rate of 25% on each of the first four anniversaries of the grant date, subject to the individual’s continued employment through such dates. The vesting schedule of the RSUs is designed to complement the EPEP incentive program to maximize retentive value. Upon an executive’s termination without cause or a termination due to death or disability, the executive would receive one year of service credit for any outstanding RSUs in accordance with his or her employment agreement terms. In the event of a change in control of the Company, any RSUs would accelerate vesting in accordance with his or her employment agreement terms. See “Executive Compensation – Employment Agreements and Arrangements.” The grant date fair value of RSUs granted on March 6, 2025 for our named executive officers was $2,200,099 for Mr. Widmar, $700,103 for Mr. Bradley, $640,046 for Mr. Verma, $250,065 for Mr. Antoun, and $560,056 for Mr. Dymbort. The grant date fair value of RSUs granted on May 1, 2025 for our named executive officers was $1,925,003 for Mr. Widmar, $612,599 for Mr. Bradley, $560,072 for Mr. Verma, $687,528 for Mr. Antoun, and $490,079 for Mr. Dymbort.

  22. Employment Agreements and Related Arrangements

    Employment Agreements and Related Arrangements We have entered into employment, confidentiality, non-competition, non-solicitation, and director and officer indemnification agreements with each of our named executive officers. The compensation committee believes these contracts are fair, reasonable, appropriate, and necessary to attract and retain the executives who are party to these agreements. Severance Benefits. Our executive employment agreements generally provide that if an individual’s employment is terminated without “cause” (as defined therein), then the executive shall be eligible for (i) salary continuation for a severance period subject to the execution of a release of claims in favor of the Company during the severance period, (ii) health benefits coverage for the severance period, subject to certain contingencies, and (iii) an additional 12 months’ service credit for purposes of determining vesting of equity-based compensation awards (this additional service credit does not apply to PUs). The additional service credit described by the preceding sentence also applies in the event employment terminates due to the executives’ death or disability (as defined therein). Severance benefits, by their nature, require compensation payments without the receipt of corresponding services. We believe that our executive employment agreements set a proper balance between providing sufficient protection on employment termination and ensuring the executive has sufficient security with respect to his or her employment with the Company and generally provide severance benefits consistent with market practice. We consistently review the employment agreements we enter into with our named executive officers to address market changes, and our compensation committee has adopted a number of changes to be applied prospectively when entering into agreements with executives to more closely align with market practice. Such changes include the elimination of severance benefits upon a resignation for “good reason” (except in connection with a change in control of the Company), the addition of provisions that make clear that all payments and awards to our executives under such agreements other than base salary are subject to our Clawback Policy and related clawback provisions, conditions all severance payments and benefits to the execution of an irrevocable release of claims in favor of the Company, and making sign-on bonuses subject to recoupment in the event of a termination for “cause” within one year of the executive’s start date. Restrictive Covenants. Our executive confidentiality agreements describe our expectations of the executives regarding our proprietary and confidential information. The non-competition and non-solicitation agreements establish a “protected period” that generally matches the severance period. During the protected period, the senior executives are subject to restrictive covenants as provided in the agreements. For more details on these employment agreements and the compensation and benefits payable or to be provided in the event of a termination of employment, see “Executive Compensation – Employment Agreements and Arrangements” and “Executive Compensation – Potential Payments upon Termination or Change in Control – Potential Payments upon Termination of Employment (Other than in the Context of a Change in Control).”

  23. Change-in-Control Severance Agreements

    Change-in-Control Severance Agreements We have entered into CIC Agreements with each of our named executive officers. These agreements are intended to align the interests of the executives with our stockholders in a potential change in control situation by mitigating the uncertainty and questions a potential change in control may raise among such executives, allowing them to focus their continued attention and dedication to their assigned duties. Equity Vesting. The CIC Agreements provide for (a) a double-trigger acceleration of Messrs. Widmar’s, Bradley’s, Verma’s, and Dymbort’s outstanding equity awards, in each case in the event their employment is terminated without “cause” or they resign for “good reason” within two years following a change in control; and (b) single trigger acceleration of vesting of outstanding equity awards (other than PUs, which provide for double trigger vesting) for Mr. Antoun. A resignation for “good reason” includes any material reduction in the authority, duties, or responsibilities held by the executive immediately prior to the change in control date, any material reduction in the annual base salary or annual incentive opportunity of the executive as in effect immediately prior to the change in control date, any change of the executive’s principal place of employment to a location more than 50 miles from the executive’s principal place of employment immediately prior to the change in control date, failure to pay compensation when due, delivery of written notice of the intent to terminate the executive for any reason other than cause, death, or disability, or failure of a successor to assume the CIC Agreement. The compensation committee determined that the CIC Agreements entered into with executives on or after July 2013 should provide for vesting only upon a termination without “cause” (as defined therein) or a resignation for “good reason” (as defined therein) within two years following a change in control of the Company, which is reflected in our agreements with Messrs. Widmar, Bradley, Verma and Dymbort. The employment agreement with Mr. Antoun was entered into in 2012. While our equity plans also contemplate vesting of equity if such equity is not assumed by a successor entity (see “Executive Compensation – Potential Payments upon Termination or Change in Control – Potential Payments upon a Change in Control”), the CIC Agreements address vesting whether or not the equity-based awards are assumed for executives with these arrangements. Severance Benefits. The CIC Agreements provide certain enhanced severance benefits for our named executive officers in the event their employment is terminated without “cause” or they resign for “good reason” within two years following a change in control. We believe this standard benefit reinforces the notion that in a change in control situation, all the executives are similarly situated and must remain focused. The standard benefit is two times their base salary; two times a bonus amount (which is defined as the greater of (i) the executive’s target annual bonus for the year of termination and (ii) the average of the annual cash bonuses payable to the executive in respect of the three full calendar years immediately preceding the calendar year that includes the termination date or, if the executive has not been employed for three full calendar years preceding the calendar year that includes the termination date, the average of the annual cash bonuses payable to the executive for the number of full calendar years prior to the termination date that he or she has been employed); a prorated target bonus; 18 months’ health benefits continuation; and outplacement benefits (maximum of $20,000). Severance benefits are subject to the executive’s execution of a release in favor of the Company and clawback pursuant to the Clawback Policy. Evaluation by the Compensation Committee. The compensation committee reviews the terms of the CIC Agreements in consultation with its independent compensation consultant, assesses the impact of possible payouts under the CIC Agreements in the event of a change in control, and evaluates whether the CIC Agreements are fair and reasonable to both the executive and the Company. Estimates of change in control payments are presented to, and reviewed by, the compensation committee when compensation is evaluated. Based on its most recent annual review of the CIC Agreements, the compensation committee continues to believe such payments are fair and reasonable. For a further description of compensation provided in the event of a change in control, see “Executive Compensation – Potential Payments upon Termination or Change in Control – Potential Payments upon a Change in Control.”

  24. Summary Compensation Table

    Summary Compensation Table The following table sets forth information with respect to compensation earned by each of our named executive officers for the years ended December 31, 2025, 2024, and 2023.

  25. Summary Compensation Table

    | Name and Principal Position | Year | Salary ($)(1) | Stock Awards ($)(2) | Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation ($)(3) | All Other Compensation ($)(4) | Total ($) | | Mark R. Widmar | 2025 | 1,021,535 | 5,500,032 | 1,603,038 | 14,000 | 8,138,605 | | Chief Executive Officer | 2024 | 1,005,812 | 5,000,053 | 366,976 | 13,800 | 6,386,641 | | | 2023 | 964,971 | 5,000,089 | 1,747,237 | 13,200 | 7,725,497 | | Alexander R. Bradley | 2025 | 549,402 | 1,750,128 | 601,973 | 14,000 | 2,915,503 | | Chief Financial Officer | 2024 | 541,231 | 1,500,079 | 131,638 | 13,800 | 2,186,748 | | | 2023 | 519,486 | 2,000,079 | 589,572 | 13,200 | 3,122,337 | | Kuntal Kumar Verma | 2025 | 478,837 | 1,600,079 | 458,225 | 14,000 | 2,551,141 | | Chief Manufacturing Officer | 2024 | 470,289 | 1,500,079 | 101,715 | 13,800 | 2,085,883 | | | 2023 | 433,731 | 2,000,079 | 472,406 | 13,200 | 2,919,416 | | George J. Antoun | 2025 | 608,750 | 1,249,968 | 609,894 | 14,000 | 2,482,612 | | Chief Commercial Officer | 2024 | 607,808 | 1,199,873 | 147,727 | 13,800 | 1,969,208 | | | 2023 | 598,553 | 1,200,132 | 650,266 | 13,200 | 2,462,151 | | Jason Dymbort | 2025 | 475,812 | 1,400,101 | 478,035 | 14,000 | 2,367,948 | | General Counsel & Secretary | 2024 | 467,288 | 1,199,873 | 101,067 | 13,800 | 1,782,028 | | | 2023 | 440,673 | 2,000,079 | 477,850 | 13,200 | 2,931,802 |

  26. Summary Compensation Table

    —————————— (1)Salary represents actual salary earned during the year and includes base salary and payments for vacation and holidays. (2)Stock awards reflect the aggregate grant date fair value of the RSU and PU awards determined in accordance with ASC Topic 718. The assumptions and methodologies used in the calculations of these amounts are set forth in Note 17. “Share-Based Compensation” to our audited financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2025 included in our 2025 Annual Report on Form 10-K. Under U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, compensation expense with respect to stock awards granted to our executive officers is generally recognized over the vesting periods applicable to the awards. The SEC disclosure rules require that we present stock award amounts in the applicable column of the table above using the grant date fair value of the awards granted during the corresponding year (regardless of the period over which the awards are scheduled to vest). In the table, PUs are reflected at the target level of achievement for applicable performance metrics. The actual number of PUs, if any, that vest following the end of the applicable performance period will depend on the relative attainment of the performance metrics. For a discussion of specific stock awards granted during 2025, including the grant date fair value at the maximum level of performance for the PUs, see “Grants of Plan-Based Awards” below. (3)For a description of Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation, see “Compensation Discussion and Analysis – Components of 2025 Executive Compensation” and “Compensation Discussion and Analysis – 2025 Compensation Decisions – Cash Incentive Compensation.” (4)All Other Compensation represents earned employer matching contributions under the Company’s 401(k) plan.

  27. Grants of Plan-Based Awards

    Grants of Plan-Based Awards The following table sets forth summary information regarding all grants of plan-based awards and other incentive compensation made to our named executive officers during the year ended December 31, 2025. The minimum award (below threshold performance) under the cash and equity plan-based award programs was $0.

  28. Grants of Plan-Based Awards

    | | | | | Estimated Future Payouts Under Non-Equity Incentive Plan Awards (1) | | | Estimated Future Payouts Under Equity Incentive Plan Awards (2) | | | All Other Stock Awards: Number of Shares of Stock or Units (#) | Grant Date Fair Value of Stock and Option Awards ($)(3) | | Name | Award Type | Grant Date | Approval Date | Threshold ($) | Target ($) | Max ($) | Threshold (#) | Target (#) | Max (#) | | | | Mark R. Widmar | RSU (4) | 3/6/25 | 2/12/25 | | | | | | | 16,778 | 2,200,099 | | | RSU (4) | 5/1/25 | 4/16/25 | | | | | | | 15,209 | 1,925,003 | | | PU (5) | 5/1/25 | 4/16/25 | | | | 5,432 | 10,863 | 21,726 | | 1,374,930 | | | Cash | | | 711,197 | 1,422,394 | 2,844,788 | | | | | | | Alexander R. Bradley | RSU (4) | 3/6/25 | 2/12/25 | | | | | | | 5,339 | 700,103 | | | RSU (4) | 5/1/25 | 4/16/25 | | | | | | | 4,840 | 612,599 | | | PU (5) | 5/1/25 | 4/16/25 | | | | 1,728 | 3,456 | 6,912 | | 437,426 | | | Cash | | | 270,380 | 540,759 | 1,081,519 | | | | | | | Kuntal Kumar Verma | RSU (4) | 3/6/25 | 2/12/25 | | | | | | | 4,881 | 640,046 | | | RSU (4) | 5/1/25 | 4/16/25 | | | | | | | 4,425 | 560,072 | | | PU (5) | 5/1/25 | 4/16/25 | | | | 1,580 | 3,160 | 6,320 | | 399,961 | | | Cash | | | 201,648 | 403,296 | 806,592 | | | | | | | Georges J. Antoun | RSU (4) | 3/6/25 | 2/12/25 | | | | | | | 1,907 | 250,065 | | | RSU (4) | 5/1/25 | 4/16/25 | | | | | | | 5,432 | 687,528 | | | PU (5) | 5/1/25 | 4/16/25 | | | | 1,234 | 2,468 | 4,936 | | 312,375 | | | Cash | | | 273,938 | 547,875 | 1,095,750 | | | | | | | Jason Dymbort | RSU (4) | 3/6/25 | 2/12/25 | | | | | | | 4,271 | 560,056 | | | RSU (4) | 5/1/25 | 4/16/25 | | | | | | | 3,872 | 490,079 | | | PU (5) | 5/1/25 | 4/16/25 | | | | 1,383 | 2,765 | 5,530 | | 349,966 | | | Cash | | | 210,366 | 420,732 | 841,464 | | | | | |

  29. Grants of Plan-Based Awards

    —————————— (1)For a description of cash incentive plan awards, see “Compensation Discussion and Analysis – Components of 2025 Executive Compensation” and “Compensation Discussion and Analysis – 2025 Compensation Decisions – Cash Incentive Compensation.” Bonus amounts are prorated for changes in salary or target bonus percentage during the year. (2)The actual number of PUs that vest following the end of the applicable performance period, if any, will depend on the relative attainment of the performance metrics. For additional discussion of PUs granted in 2025, see “Compensation Discussion and Analysis – Components of 2025 Executive Compensation” and “Compensation Discussion and Analysis – 2025 Compensation Decisions – Equity-Based Compensation.” The grant date fair value at the maximum level of the performance for the PUs in 2025 is $2,749,860 for Mr. Widmar, $874,852 for Mr. Bradley, $799,922 for Mr. Verma, $624,750 for Mr. Antoun, and $699,932 for Mr. Dymbort. (3)The grant date fair value of these awards was determined in accordance with ASC Topic 718. The assumptions and methodologies used in the calculations of these amounts are set forth in Note 17. “Share-Based Compensation” to our audited financial statements for year ended December 31, 2025 included in our 2025 Annual Report on Form 10-K. (4)RSUs vest over four years at a rate of 25% per year, commencing on the first anniversary of the grant date, subject to the named executive officer’s service through each vesting date. For a description of the material terms of the RSUs granted in 2025, see “Compensation Discussion and Analysis – Components of 2025 Executive Compensation” and “Compensation Discussion and Analysis – 2025 Compensation Decisions – Equity-Based Compensation – RSUs.” (5)Represents PUs granted in 2025 under the EPEP. For a description of the material terms of the PUs granted in 2025, see “Compensation Discussion and Analysis – Components of 2025 Executive Compensation” and “Compensation Discussion and Analysis – 2025 Compensation Decisions – Equity-Based Compensation – EPEP.”

  30. Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End

    Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End The following table sets forth information with respect to outstanding stock awards held by our named executive officers as of December 31, 2025.

  31. Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End

    | | | Stock Awards | | | | | | | Stock Award (1) | | Equity Incentive Plan Awards (2) | | | Name | Grant Date | Number of Shares or Units of Stock That Have Not Vested (#)(1) | Market Value of Shares or Units of Stock That Have Not Vested ($)(3) | Number of Unearned Shares, Units, or Other Rights That Have Not Vested (#)(2) | Market or Payout Value of Unearned Shares, Units, or Other Rights That Have Not Vested ($)(3) | | Mark R. Widmar | 3/6/21 | 5,101 | 1,332,534 | | | | | 3/15/22 | 9,712 | 2,537,066 | | | | | 3/6/23(4) | 17,664 | 4,614,367 | | | | | 3/6/23 | 3,532 | 922,664 | | | | | 3/6/24 | 9,469 | 2,473,587 | | | | | 3/6/24(5) | 3,787 | 989,278(5) | 15,150 | 3,957,635 | | | 3/6/25 | 16,778 | 4,382,917 | | | | | 5/1/25 | 15,209 | 3,973,047 | | | | | 5/1/25 | | (6) | 5,432 | 1,419,001 | | Total | | 81,252 | 21,225,460 | 20,582 | 5,376,636 | | Alexander R. Bradley | 3/6/21 | 1,465 | 382,702 | | | | | 3/15/22 | 2,881 | 752,604 | | | | | 3/6/23(4) | 7,065 | 1,845,590 | | | | | 3/6/23 | 1,413 | 369,118 | | | | | 3/6/24(5) | 1,136 | 296,757(5) | 4,545 | 1,187,290 | | | 3/6/24 | 2,841 | 742,154 | | | | | 3/6/25 | 5,339 | 1,394,707 | | | | | 5/1/25 | 4,840 | 1,264,353 | | | | | 5/1/25 | | (6) | 1,728 | 451,405 | | Total | | 26,980 | 7,047,985 | 6,273 | 1,638,695 | | Kuntal Kumar Verma | 3/6/21 | 651 | 170,061 | | | | | 3/15/22 | 1,814 | 473,871 | | | | | 3/6/23(4) | 7,065 | 1,845,590 | | | | | 3/6/23 | 1,413 | 369,118 | | | | | 3/6/24 | 2,841 | 742,154 | | | | | 3/6/24(5) | 1,136 | 296,757(5) | 4,545 | 1,187,290 | | | 3/6/25 | 4,881 | 1,275,064 | | | | | 5/1/25 | 4,425 | 1,155,943 | | | | | 5/1/25 | | (6) | 1,580 | 412,743 | | Total | | 24,226 | 6,328,558 | 6,125 | 1,600,033 | | George J. Antoun | 3/6/21 | 732 | 191,220 | | | | | 3/15/22 | 1,174 | 306,684 | | | | | 3/6/23(4) | 4,239 | 1,107,354 | | | | | 3/6/23 | 848 | 221,523 | | | | | 3/6/24 | 1,137 | 297,019 | | | | | 3/6/24(5) | 1,212 | 316,611(5) | 4,847 | 1,266,182 | | | 3/6/25 | 1,907 | 498,166 | | | | | 5/1/25 | 5,432 | 1,419,001 | | | | | 5/1/25 | | (6) | 1,234 | 322,358 | | Total | | 16,681 | 4,357,578 | 6,081 | 1,588,540 |

  32. Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End

    | | | Stock Awards | | | | | | | Stock Award (1) | | Equity Incentive Plan Awards (2) | | | Name | Grant Date | Number of Shares or Units of Stock That Have Not Vested (#)(1) | Market Value of Shares or Units of Stock That Have Not Vested ($)(3) | Number of Unearned Shares, Units, or Other Rights That Have Not Vested (#)(2) | Market or Payout Value of Unearned Shares, Units, or Other Rights That Have Not Vested ($)(3) | | Jason Dymbort | 3/6/21 | 760 | 198,535 | | | | | 3/15/22 | 1,707 | 445,920 | | | | | 3/6/23(4) | 7,065 | 1,845,590 | | | | | 3/6/23 | 1,413 | 369,118 | | | | | 3/6/24 | 2,273 | 593,776 | | | | | 3/6/24(5) | 909 | 237,458(5) | 3,635 | 949,571 | | | 3/6/25 | 4,271 | 1,115,713 | | | | | 5/1/25 | 3,872 | 1,011,483 | | | | | 5/1/25 | | (6) | 1,383 | 361,281 | | Total | | 22,270 | 5,817,593 | 5,018 | 1,310,852 |

  33. Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End

    (1)Unless otherwise noted, RSUs issued prior to 2024 vest over five years at a rate of 20% per year, commencing on the first anniversary of the grant date, subject to the named executive officer’s service through each vesting date. RSUs issued beginning in 2024 vest over four years at a rate of 25% per year, commencing on the first anniversary of the grant date, subject to the named executive officer’s service through each vesting date. (2)Represents PUs under the EPEP. The actual number of PUs that vest following the end of the applicable performance period, if any, will depend on the relative attainment of the performance metrics. For a discussion of specific stock awards granted during 2025, see “Grants of Plan-Based Awards” above. (3)The market value was calculated using the closing price per share of our common stock of $261.23 per share on December 31, 2025. (4)Represents the grant of PUs under the EPEP awarded in 2023 for the three-year performance period ended December 31, 2025, subject to the relative attainment of performance metrics relating to (i) backlog for delivery after 2025, (ii) Series 7 module production volume, (iii) CuRe module production volume, (iv) 2023 operating margin, (v) 2024 operating margin, and (vi) 2025 operating margin. The PU awards vested in February 2025 upon the compensation committee’s certification of the performance achievement and the respective executive officer’s continued employment with the Company through that time. The number of shares reflected in the table represents the actual shares vested based on the applicable performance goal. (5)Represents the grant of PUs under the EPEP awarded in 2024 for the three-year performance period ending December 31, 2026, subject to the relative attainment of performance metrics relating to (i) module sales backlog for delivery after 2026, (ii) average selling price per watt attributable to certain module technology improvements, (iii) CuRe production FY 2026, (iv) 2024 operating margin, (v) 2025 operating margin, and (vi) 2026 operating margin. With respect to the 2024 operating margin and the 2025 operating margin metrics, the performance conditions for these components have been satisfied and the number of shares in the table reflects performance conditions already achieved. In accordance with SEC rules, the value reflected in the table in respect of such PUs assumes applicable performance goals are achieved at target performance. (6)Represents the grant of PUs under the EPEP awarded in 2025 for the three-year performance period ending December 31, 2027, subject to the relative attainment of performance metrics relating to (a) the bookings backlog for delivery after 2027 and (b) perovskite development progress. In accordance with SEC rules, the value reflected in the table in respect of such PUs assumes applicable performance goals are achieved at threshold performance. For a description of this award, see “Compensation Discussion and Analysis – Components of 2025 Executive Compensation” and “Compensation Discussion and Analysis – 2025 Compensation Decisions – Equity-Based Compensation – EPEP.”

  34. Stock Vested

    Stock Vested The following table provides information, on an aggregate basis, with respect to stock awards that vested during the year ended December 31, 2025 for each of the named executive officers.

  35. Stock Vested

    | | Stock Awards | | | Name | Number of Shares Acquired on Vesting (#) | Value Realized on Vesting ($)(1) | | Mark R. Widmar | 87,130 | 13,304,723 | | Alexander R. Bradley | 25,934 | 3,958,307 | | Kuntal Kumar Verma | 16,582 | 2,525,460 | | Georges J. Antoun | 25,459 | 3,942,868 | | Jason Dymbort | 15,648 | 2,382,343 |

  36. Stock Vested

    —————————— (1)Calculated using the closing price per share of our common stock on the respective vesting dates.

  37. Pensions and Nonqualified Deferred Compensation

    Pensions and Nonqualified Deferred Compensation We do not currently provide our named executive officers with pension benefits (other than a tax-qualified 401(k) plan benefit) or other nonqualified deferred compensation arrangements that could be characterized as nonqualified deferred compensation arrangements under Section 409A of the Code.

  38. Potential Payments upon Termination or Change in Control

    Potential Payments upon Termination or Change in Control

  39. Potential Payments upon Termination of Employment (Other than in the Context of a Change in Control)

    Potential Payments upon Termination of Employment (Other than in the Context of a Change in Control) The table below reflects the estimated amount of compensation payable to each of our named executive officers in the event of termination of such executive’s employment as of December 31, 2025. Amounts included in the table reflect an involuntary termination without “cause” and a termination due to death, disability, or a qualifying retirement of the executive, in each case, other than in connection with a change in control. The actual amounts to be paid out can only be determined at the time of the executive’s separation from the Company. Unless otherwise noted, for purposes of the calculations below, we used a share value of $261.23 per share, which was the closing price per share of our common stock on December 31, 2025. None of the named executive officers is entitled to compensation upon a termination for “cause” except for the value of any earned and unused vacation. For descriptions relating to these payments and benefits, including any release, non-competition, non-solicitation, or similar requirements, see “Compensation Discussion and Analysis – Other Executive Compensation Information – Employment Agreements and Related Arrangements.” The amounts do not include amounts payable pursuant to the Company’s contracts, agreements, plans, or arrangements to the extent they do not discriminate in scope, terms, or operation, in favor of executive officers of the Company and that are available generally to all salaried associates, including payment of accrued rights such as payment for accrued and unpaid vacation.

  40. Potential Payments upon Termination of Employment (Other than in the Context of a Change in Control)

    | Name | Payment Type | Involuntary Not for Cause Termination ($) | Termination Due to Death, Disability, or Retirement ($) | | Mark R. Widmar | Cash severance(1) | 2,046,968(4) | 1,635,753 | | | Health coverage(2) | 18,179 | — | | | Equity treatment(3) | 5,822,033(3) | 14,681,910 | | | Total | 7,887,180 | 16,317,663 | | Alexander R. Bradley | Cash severance(1) | 550,450(4) | 621,873 | | | Health coverage(2) | 29,366 | — | | | Equity treatment(3) | 1,794,128(3) | 4,930,716 | | | Total | 2,373,944 | 5,552,589 | | Kuntal Kumar Verma | Cash severance(1) | 479,750(4) | 463,790 | | | Health coverage(2) | 26,851 | — | | | Equity treatment(3) | 1,385,041(3) | 4,496,030 | | | Total | 1,891,642 | 4,959,820 | | Georges J. Antoun | Cash severance(1) | 608,750(4) | 630,056 | | | Health coverage(2) | 20,394 | — | | | Equity treatment(3) | 996,592(3) | 3,374,830 | | | Total | 1,625,736 | 4,004,886 | | Jason Dymbort | Cash severance(1) | 476,720(4) | 483,842 | | | Health coverage(2) | 9,670 | — | | | Equity treatment(3) | 1,274,280(3) | 4,152,512 | | | Total | 1,760,670 | 4,636,354 |

  41. Potential Payments upon Termination of Employment (Other than in the Context of a Change in Control)

    (1)Estimates based on aggregate payments made over the severance period, which period for Mr. Widmar is 24 months and for all other executives is 12 months. (2)Represents maximum aggregate value of continued health benefit coverage based on 2025 costs for this benefit, to be provided over the health benefit continuation period, which is 12 months for all named executive officers for 2025. (3)Amounts are estimates, based on the aggregate value of 12 months’ acceleration of the vesting of time-based equity awards outstanding on December 31, 2025, as provided under the terms of each named executive officer’s employment agreement. In the event of a termination due to death, disability, or retirement, PUs would vest following the end of the performance period, based on actual achievement of the applicable performance metrics and pro-rated based on the length of the period the executive was employed by the Company during the performance period. In the table, PU vesting is reflected at the target level of achievement of applicable performance metrics. The actual number of PUs that vest following the end of the applicable performance period, if any, will depend on the relative attainment of the performance metrics. (4)Our 2025 Bonus Plan requires that all associates be employed on the bonus payout date, with exceptions for retirement, death, and long-term disability. These exceptions allow for eligibility of a pro-rated award based on days of service completed during the performance year. Amounts shown reflect actual payment with no discretion applied.

  42. Potential Payments upon a Change in Control

    Potential Payments upon a Change in Control Consequences of a Change in Control Under Equity-Based Compensation Plans. The 2020 Omnibus Plan provides that, unless otherwise provided in an award agreement, or unless provision is made in connection with the change in control (as defined below) for assumption of, or substitution for, awards previously granted, in the event of a change in control, any equity awards outstanding as of the date of the change in control shall be treated as follows as of the date immediately prior to the change in control: (i) awards subject only to time-based vesting criteria would become (or would be deemed) fully vested and/or exercisable, and all restrictions and forfeiture provisions related thereto would lapse, as applicable, and (ii) all PUs and other awards designated as performance compensation awards would be paid out as if the date of the change in control were the last day of the applicable performance period and “target” performance levels had been attained. The term “change of control” in the 2020 Omnibus Plan is defined as the occurrence of any of the following events: •During any period of 24 consecutive months, Incumbent Directors (as defined in the 2020 Omnibus Plan) cease at any time during such period for any reason to constitute at least a majority of the board of directors; provided, however, that any individual becoming a director subsequent to the beginning of such period whose appointment or election, or nomination for election, by the Company’s stockholders was approved by a vote of at least a majority of the Incumbent Directors shall be considered as though such individual were an Incumbent Director, but excluding, for purposes of this proviso, any such individual whose initial assumption of office occurs as a result of an actual or threatened proxy contest with respect to election or removal of directors or other actual or threatened solicitation of proxies or consents by or on behalf of any person; •The consummation of (i) a merger, consolidation, statutory share exchange or similar form of corporate transaction involving (x) the Company or (y) any of its subsidiaries (but in the case of this clause (y) only if voting securities of the Company are issued or issuable in connection with such transaction) or (ii) a sale or other disposition of all or substantially all the assets of the Company, in each case, unless following which (a) the stockholders of the Company as of just prior to such consummation continue to own in substantially the same proportions more than 50% of the combined voting power of the surviving entity (disregarding any interests in the surviving entity that such stockholders owned before such consummation), (b) no person (excluding employee benefit plans or related trusts and specified shareholders, defined below) owns 20% or more of the combined voting power of the surviving entity, and (c) a majority of the members of the board of directors of the surviving entity were members of the Company’s board of directors as of the time such transaction was agreed upon or approved; •The approval by the stockholders of the Company of a plan of complete liquidation or dissolution of the Company, unless such liquidation or dissolution is part of a transaction or series of transactions described in the preceding bullet that does not otherwise constitute a change of control; or •The date that any legal person, corporation, or other entity or group (as defined) other than any “specified shareholder” becomes the beneficial owner, directly or indirectly, of securities of the Company representing a percentage of the combined voting power that is equal to or greater than 30%. PU Award Agreements. The PUs granted to our named executive officers under the EPEP provide that, upon a change in control of the Company in which the acquirer assumes or substitutes the PUs, the PUs would accelerate vesting based on the greater of target or actual achievement of the applicable vesting conditions as of the date of termination, if, during the two-year period after a change in control, the executive’s employment is terminated without “cause” or the executive resigns for “good reason” (as defined in the executive’s CIC Agreement). Upon the occurrence of a change in control of the Company in which the acquirer does not assume or substitute the PUs, the PUs would be deemed immediately vested at the greater of target or actual achievement of the applicable vesting conditions as of the last date of the quarter preceding the change in control. Change-in-Control Severance Agreements. We have entered into CIC Agreements with our executive officers and certain senior management, including each of our named executive officers. As of July 2013, our compensation committee determined that such CIC Agreements will no longer provide for full vesting of unvested time-vested equity-based compensation upon a change in control of the Company and will instead provide for vesting of such equity-based compensation only upon a termination without “cause” or resignation for “good reason” within two years following a change in control of the Company. Consistent with that decision, pursuant to the CIC Agreements entered into with Messrs. Widmar, Bradley, Verma and Dymbort, if a change in control occurs (substantially as defined in the 2020 Omnibus Plan, except that a change in control will only be deemed to have occurred if such change in control constitutes a change in the ownership or effective control of the Company or a change in the ownership or a substantial portion of the assets of the Company within the meaning of Section 409A of the Code), Messrs. Widmar, Bradley, Verma and Dymbort will only become entitled to accelerated vesting of all equity-based, long-term incentive awards (other than awards which by their express terms do not accelerate under the CIC Agreements) upon termination without “cause” or resignation for “good reason” within two years following a change in control of the Company. Under the legacy CIC Agreements with Mr. Antoun, if a change in control occurs (substantially as defined in the 2020 Omnibus Plan, except that, pursuant to an August 2013 amendment to such CIC Agreements, a change in control will only be deemed to have occurred if such change in control constitutes a change in the ownership or effective control of the Company or a change in the ownership or a substantial portion of the assets of the Company within the meaning of Section 409A of the Code), Mr. Antoun would become immediately entitled to accelerated vesting of all equity-based, long-term incentive awards (other than awards which by their express terms do not accelerate under his CIC Agreements). Named executive officers who are party to a CIC Agreement will also be entitled to severance payments and benefits if, in the case of Mr. Antoun, his employment with the Company is terminated in anticipation of a change in control or if, with respect to Mr. Antoun and each other named executive officer during the two-year period after a change in control, the executive’s employment is terminated without “cause” or the executive resigns for “good reason” (including any material reduction in an executive’s authorities, duties, or responsibilities; any material reduction in annual base salary or annual incentive opportunity; a relocation of the executive’s principal place of employment by 50 or more miles; a failure to pay compensation when due; a failure of a successor to assume the obligations of the agreement; and receipt of written notice from the Company of a termination without “cause”) (such termination, a “qualifying termination”). If terminated or separated from the Company under those circumstances, the executive would be entitled to the following additional benefits under the CIC Agreement:

  43. Potential Payments upon a Change in Control

    •a lump-sum cash severance payment equal to two times the sum of (i) the executive’s annual base salary (without regard to any reduction giving rise to “good reason”) and (ii) the greater of (a) the executive’s target annual bonus for the year of termination; or (b) the average of the annual cash bonuses payable to the executive in respect of the three full calendar years immediately preceding the calendar year that includes the termination date or, if the executive has not been employed for three full calendar years preceding the calendar year that includes the termination date, the average of the annual cash bonuses payable to the executive for the number of full calendar years prior to the termination date that he or she has been employed; •a pro-rated target annual bonus for the year of termination; •the continuation of, or reimbursement for, medical and certain other employee benefits for 18 months after termination of employment; and •reimbursement of the cost of executive-level outplacement services (subject to a $20,000 limit). Such severance benefits under the CIC Agreements are in lieu of any other severance benefit the executive may otherwise be entitled to, such as under the executive’s employment agreement. To obtain severance benefits under a CIC Agreement, an executive must first execute a separation agreement with the Company that includes a waiver and release of any and all claims against the Company. As a result of our compensation committee’s decision to no longer provide any executives with excise tax gross-up payments that may be triggered under Section 280G of the Code, we no longer have any legacy employment agreements with our named executive officers that allow for such tax gross-up payments. The table below shows the amounts that would be payable to each of the named executive officers who is party to a CIC Agreement in the event of a qualifying termination following a change in control, if a change in control and the qualifying termination had occurred on December 31, 2025, using a share value of $261.23 per share, which was the closing price per share of our common stock on December 31, 2025. The amounts do not include amounts payable pursuant to our contracts, agreements, plans, or arrangements to the extent they do not discriminate in scope, terms, or operation, in favor of executive officers of the Company and that are available generally to all salaried associates, including payment of accrued rights such as payment for accrued and unpaid vacation.

  44. Potential Payments upon a Change in Control

    | Name | Cash Severance Payment Amount ($) | Value of Accelerated Equity Awards ($)(1) | Estimated Value of Medical and Welfare Benefits ($)(2) | Estimated Value of Outplacement Assistance ($)(3) | Total ($) | | Mark R. Widmar | 6,314,151 | 28,020,836 | 27,268 | 20,000 | 34,382,255 | | Alexander R. Bradley | 2,723,178 | 9,138,087 | 44,049 | 20,000 | 11,925,314 | | Kuntal Kumar Verma | 2,169,387 | 8,341,335 | 40,276 | 20,000 | 10,570,998 | | Georges J. Antoun | 2,861,125 | 6,268,475 | 30,592 | 20,000 | 9,180,192 | | Jason Dymbort | 2,215,635 | 7,489,464 | 14,505 | 20,000 | 9,739,604 |

  45. Potential Payments upon a Change in Control

    (1)All time-based equity awards for Mr. Antoun vest upon a change in control. The vesting of all time-based equity awards for Messrs. Widmar, Bradley, Verma and Dymbort is a double-trigger benefit, and such time-based equity awards vest only upon a termination without “cause” or for resignation for “good reason” within two years following a change in control of the Company. All PUs vest at the greater of target or actual performance, only upon a termination without “cause” or for resignation for “good reason” within two years following a change in control, in the event that an acquirer of the Company assumes or substitutes the PUs. In the table, amounts assume the acquirer of the Company substitutes PUs and PU vesting is reflected at the target level of achievement of applicable performance metrics. (2)Represents the estimated value of 18 months continued medical and certain other employee benefits based on 2025 costs for these benefits. (3)Assumes a maximum payment of $20,000, which may be made for outplacement assistance.

  46. Pay Versus Performance Table

    Pay Versus Performance Table The following table sets forth information about the relationships (i) between executive Compensation Actually Paid (“CAP”) to (x) our principal executive officer (“PEO”) and (y) all other named executive officers (“NEOs”) as a group on an average basis, on the one hand, and each of our (A) cumulative shareholder return, (B) net income or loss, and (C) company-selected financial performance measure for the years ended December 31, 2025, 2024, 2023, 2022, and 2021, and (ii) between our cumulative shareholder return and cumulative shareholder return of our peer group for the same period.

  47. Pay Versus Performance Table

    | Year | Summary Compensation Table Total for PEO ($)(1) | Compensation Actually Paid to PEO ($)(2) | Average Summary Compensation Table Total for Non-PEO NEOs ($)(3)(4) | Average Compensation Actually Paid to Non-PEO NEOs ($)(2)(3) | Value of Initial Fixed $100 Investment Based On: | | Net Income (Loss) ($ thousands) (7) | Adjusted Operating Margin (8) | | | | | | | Total Shareholder Return ($)(5) | Peer Group Total Shareholder Return ($)(6) | | | | 2025 | 8,138,605 | 10,361,718 | 2,579,301 | 3,333,502 | 264 | 48 | 1,528,229 | 37.8% | | 2024 | 6,386,641 | 6,478,560 | 2,037,953 | 2,128,135 | 178 | 32 | 1,292,044 | 37.3% | | 2023 | 7,725,497 | 19,876,806 | 2,966,334 | 4,910,325 | 174 | 52 | 830,777 | 32.1% | | 2022 | 7,207,833 | 32,511,818 | 2,074,445 | 7,778,798 | 151 | 71 | (44,166) | (3.6)% | | 2021 | 6,542,454 | 3,129,120 | 1,967,842 | 1,312,273 | 88 | 75 | 468,693 | 17.8% |

  48. Pay Versus Performance Table

    —————————— (1)Represents the “Total” compensation for our PEO, Mr. Widmar, as set forth under “Executive Compensation – Summary Compensation Table.” (2)CAP to our PEO and the average of all non-PEO NEOs is calculated in accordance with Item 402(v) of Regulation S-K (“Item 402(v)”). Such amounts do not reflect the actual amount of compensation earned by or paid to our PEO and other NEOs during the applicable year. In accordance with Item 402(v), the following adjustments were made to the amounts reported in the “Stock Awards” column in the “Summary Compensation Table” in each year’s respective proxy statement to determine the CAP.

  49. Pay Versus Performance Table

    | | Year | Reported Summary Compensation Table Total ($) | Reported Value of Stock Awards ($) | Stock Award Adjustments ($)(a) | Compensation Actually Paid ($) | | PEO | 2025 | 8,138,605 | (5,500,032) | 7,723,145 | 10,361,718 | | | 2024 | 6,386,641 | (5,000,053) | 5,091,972 | 6,478,560 | | | 2023 | 7,725,497 | (5,000,089) | 17,151,398 | 19,876,806 | | | 2022 | 7,207,833 | (4,549,997) | 29,853,982 | 32,511,818 | | | 2021 | 6,542,454 | (4,699,945) | 1,286,611 | 3,129,120 | | Average of non-PEO NEOs | 2025 | 2,579,301 | (1,500,069) | 2,254,270 | 3,333,502 | | | 2024 | 2,037,953 | (1,387,482) | 1,477,664 | 2,128,135 | | | 2023 | 2,966,334 | (2,000,079) | 3,944,070 | 4,910,325 | | | 2022 | 2,074,445 | (999,985) | 6,704,338 | 7,778,798 | | | 2021 | 1,967,842 | (1,118,754) | 463,185 | 1,312,273 |

  50. Pay Versus Performance Table

    (a)The stock award adjustments for each applicable year are further detailed in the table below. The fair value of such awards reflects changes to both the price per share of our common stock and the expected attainment of the underlying performance metrics associated with PU grants.

  51. Pay Versus Performance Table

    | | Year | Year End Fair Value of Outstanding and Unvested Stock Awards Granted in the Year ($) | Year over Year Change in Fair Value of Outstanding and Unvested Stock Awards ($) | Year over Year Change in Fair Value of Stock Awards Granted in Prior Years that Vested in the Year ($) | Total Stock Award Adjustments ($) | | PEO | 2025 | 6,810,789 | 2,514,188 | (1,601,832) | 7,723,145 | | | 2024 | 6,763,915 | 64,473 | (1,736,416) | 5,091,972 | | | 2023 | 5,153,067 | 5,375,117 | 6,623,214 | 17,151,398 | | | 2022 | 14,547,305 | 17,718,245 | (2,411,568) | 29,853,982 | | | 2021 | 5,467,198 | (2,117,060) | (2,063,527) | 1,286,611 | | Average of non-PEO NEOs | 2025 | 1,986,524 | 639,693 | (371,947) | 2,254,270 | | | 2024 | 1,900,925 | (26,714) | (396,547) | 1,477,664 | | | 2023 | 2,061,158 | 1,013,061 | 869,851 | 3,944,070 | | | 2022 | 3,307,026 | 3,856,455 | (459,143) | 6,704,338 | | | 2021 | 1,293,237 | (414,754) | (415,298) | 463,185 |

  52. Pay Versus Performance Table

    (3)For 2025, our non-PEO NEOs were Messrs. Bradley, Verma, Antoun, and Dymbort. For 2024, our non-PEO NEOs were Messrs. Bradley, Verma, Antoun, and Markus Gloeckler (our Chief Technology Officer). For 2023, our non-PEO NEOs were Messrs. Bradley, Dymbort, Verma, and Gloeckler. For 2022 and 2021, our non-PEO NEOs were Messrs. Bradley, Dymbort, Antoun, and Caroline Stockdale (our Chief People and Communications Officer). (4)Represents the total average compensation for our non-PEO NEOs, derived from the “Total” column in the “Summary Compensation Table” in each year’s respective proxy statement. (5)Represents the Total Shareholder Return (“TSR”) on our common stock assuming an investment of $100 on December 31, 2020. (6)Represents the TSR for the Invesco Solar ETF, which is a peer issuer group of solar companies. For purposes of the table, an investment of $100 (with reinvestment of all dividends) is assumed to have been made in the Invesco Solar ETF on December 31, 2020. (7)Represents our consolidated net income or loss, in thousands, as reported in our 2025 Annual Report for each of the years presented. (8)Represents the company-selected financial performance measure used to link CAP to our PEO and non-PEO NEOs for the most recently completed year to company performance. Adjusted operating margin is calculated as (i) operating income or loss, adjusted to exclude production start-up expense, costs associated with the ramp of our manufacturing facilities, and certain other one-time items divided by (ii) net sales. While the Company uses numerous financial and non-financial performance measures for the purpose of evaluating performance for the Company’s compensation programs, the Company has determined that adjusted operating margin is the financial performance measure that, in the Company’s assessment, represents the most important performance measure (that is not otherwise required to be disclosed in the table) used by the Company to link compensation actually paid to the Company’s NEOs, for the most recently completed year, to Company performance.

  53. Analysis of the Pay Versus Performance Table

    Analysis of the Pay Versus Performance Table Exhibit #1: Relationship between CAP and TSR. The following graph shows the relationship of CAP to our PEO and the average CAP to our non-PEO NEOs to our cumulative TSR for the years ended December 31, 2025, 2024, 2023, 2022, and 2021: As discussed in “Compensation Discussion and Analysis – Our Business Strategy, Key 2025 Compensation Decisions and Compensation Best Practices,” we seek to align the interests of our executives with those of our stakeholders by routinely reviewing the share ownership requirements for our executive officers. Under these guidelines, our PEO’s share ownership requirement is six times base salary and the share ownership requirement of all other executives is three times base salary. Accordingly, the CAP to our PEO and non-PEO NEOs is influenced to a large degree by changes in the price per share of our common stock, as well as the relative attainment of the performance metrics for PUs granted under the various EPEP awards. In 2025, CAP to our PEO and non-PEO NEOs increased primarily due to higher fair values at December 31, 2025 for unvested RSUs and PUs granted during the year. In addition, CAP increased due to higher fair values at December 31, 2025 than at December 31, 2024 for unvested RSUs and PUs granted in prior years. In 2024, CAP to our PEO and non-PEO NEOs decreased primarily due to lower fair values for RSUs and PUs that vested in early 2024, when the share price was lower compared to the share price at the end of 2023. This is in contrast to the elevated CAP to our PEO and non-PEO NEOs during 2022 and 2023, which was primarily driven by higher fair values for RSUs and PUs due to an increase in our share price, as well as an increase in the expected attainment of the underlying performance metrics associated with certain PU grants. The increase to TSR in 2025 compared to 2024, as well as 2024 compared to 2023, was primarily due to continued benefits received from government support programs, such as the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022; our backlog of future module sales, in particular those manufactured in the United States; and the expansion of our manufacturing capacity. Exhibit #2: Relationship between CAP and Net Income or Loss. The following graph shows the relationship of CAP to our PEO and the average CAP to our non-PEO NEOs to our net income or loss for the years ended December 31, 2025, 2024, 2023, 2022, and 2021: As discussed in Exhibit #1 above, the increased CAP to our PEO and non-PEO NEOs in 2025 was due primarily to higher fair values for unvested RSUs and PUs compared to their grant-date fair values for 2025 grants or their fair values at December 31, 2024 for prior year grants. Our executive compensation programs are designed to incentivize the achievement of performance objectives that align with our long-term strategic plans; such metrics include, among other factors, adjusted operating margin, Series 7 module production, and bookings backlog for future module deliveries. As net income is not currently a specific performance metric in our long-term incentive awards, it did not directly impact CAP during the periods shown in the graph above. Exhibit #3: Relationship between CAP and Adjusted Operating Margin. The following graph shows the relationship of CAP to our PEO and the average CAP to our non-PEO NEOs to our adjusted operating margin for the years ended December 31, 2025, 2024, 2023, 2022, and 2021: As discussed in Exhibit #1 above, the increased CAP to our PEO and non-PEO NEOs in 2025 was due primarily to higher fair values for unvested RSUs and PUs compared to their grant-date fair values for 2025 grants or their fair values at December 31, 2024 for prior year grants. Adjusted operating margin is based on the Company’s operating results for each period presented, which was consistent in 2025 and 2024. Although attainment of this metric in the current measurement period specified in the EPEP awards granted contributed slightly to the increased CAP in 2025, the fair value considerations discussed above, and the attainment of other metrics, such as booking backlog and Series 7 production for PUs granted in 2023, contributed more significantly to the increased CAP in 2025. Exhibit #4: Relationship between TSR and Peer Group TSR. The following graph shows the relationship of the five-year cumulative TSR on our common stock relative to the TSR of the Invesco Solar ETF for the years ended December 31, 2025, 2024, 2023, 2022, and 2021: As illustrated above, our TSR increased in 2025 compared to 2024 with an increase of approximately 48%. Even though on a percentage basis the peer group’s TSR increased slightly more than First Solar’s, our TSR remained high relative to peers primarily due to continued benefits received from government incentive programs, such as the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022; our backlog of future module sales, in particular those manufactured in the United States; and the ongoing expansion of our manufacturing capacity.

  54. Pay Ratio Disclosure

    Pay Ratio Disclosure As required by Section 953(b) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, and Item 402(u) of Regulation S-K, we are providing the following information about the relationship of the annual total compensation of our employees (excluding Mr. Mark Widmar, our Chief Executive Officer) and the annual total compensation of Mr. Widmar. The pay ratio included in this information represents a reasonable estimate calculated in a manner consistent with Item 402(u) of Regulation S-K based on our payroll and employment records and the methodology described below. The pay ratio reported by other companies may not be comparable to the pay ratio reported below, as other companies have different employee populations and compensation practices and may utilize different methodologies, exclusions, assumptions, adjustments or estimates in calculating their own pay ratios. For 2025, our last completed fiscal year: •the median annual total compensation of all employees of the Company (other than our Chief Executive Officer) was $42,006; •the annual total compensation of our Chief Executive Officer was $8,138,605; and •our Chief Executive Officer’s annual total compensation was 194 times that of the median annual total compensation of all employees. To identify the median of the annual total compensation of all our employees (or “median employee”), as well as to determine the annual total compensation of the median employee, we made assumptions: 1.Population Date. We selected December 31, 2025 as the date upon which we would identify the median employee because it enabled us to make such identification in a reasonably efficient and economical manner. 2.Population Composition. As of December 31, 2025, our global employee population consisted of approximately 7,900 associates. This population included the Company’s full-time and part-time employees but excluded independent contractors. 3.Median Employee. In 2025, we identified our median employee by using base salary, bonuses, and grant date fair value of equity awards granted to employees in 2025. We applied this measure consistently to our global employee population and annualized base salaries for permanent full-time and part-time employees who did not work the full fiscal year. We then applied the exchange rate as of December 31, 2025 to convert the compensation paid in local currency to U.S. dollars. Using this methodology, we determined that the median employee was a full-time, salaried employee located in the United States.

  55. ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

    ELECTION OF DIRECTORS Upon the recommendation of the nominating and governance committee of the board of directors, the board of directors has nominated for election at the annual meeting the following ten nominees. Information about these nominees is provided above in the section “Directors.” Each of the nominees, other than Mr. Morgan, is currently serving as a director of the Company. We expect each nominee for election as a director at the annual meeting to be able to accept such nomination. If a nominee is unable to stand for election, the board of directors may either reduce the number of directors to be elected or cause a substitute nominee to stand for election. If a substitute nominee is selected to stand for election, the proxy holders will vote shares with respect to the substitute nominee in accordance with the voting instructions received for the original nominee unless you change your vote in accordance with the procedures described above in the section “Questions and Answers About the Annual Meeting – Can I change my vote after I submit my proxy?” At the annual meeting, proxies cannot be voted for a greater number of persons than the number of nominees named in this proxy statement.