AVIS BUDGET GROUP INC

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To the Stockholders and the Board of Directors of

Parsippany, New Jersey

Opinion on the Financial Statements

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Avis Budget Group, Inc. and subsidiaries (the "Company") as of December 31, 2024 and 2023, the related consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive income, stockholders' equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2024, and the related notes and the schedule listed in the Index at Item 15 (collectively referred to as the “financial statements”). In our opinion, the financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Company as of December 31, 2024 and 2023, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2024, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB), the Company's internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2024, based on criteria established in Internal Control — Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission and our report dated February 14, 2025, expressed an unqualified opinion on the Company's internal control over financial reporting.

Basis for Opinion

These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s financial statements based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the PCAOB and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud. Our audits included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

Critical Audit Matters

The critical audit matters communicated below are matters arising from the current-period audit of the financial statements that were communicated or required to be communicated to the audit committee and that (1) relate to accounts or disclosures that are material to the financial statements and (2) involved our especially challenging, subjective, or complex judgments. The communication of critical audit matters does not alter in any way our opinion on the financial statements, taken as a whole, and we are not, by communicating the critical audit matters below, providing separate opinions on the critical audit matters or on the accounts or disclosures to which they relate.

Vehicles - Depreciation Expense - United States Risk Vehicles - Refer to Notes 2 and 8 to the financial statements

The Company records rental vehicles at cost, net of accumulated depreciation. The initial cost of the vehicles is recorded net of incentives and allowances from manufacturers. Rental vehicles acquired by the Company outside of the manufacturer repurchase and guaranteed depreciation programs are referred to as risk vehicles and the carrying values of these risk vehicles are depreciated based upon the vehicles’ estimated residual values at their expected dates of disposition. The estimation of residual values for risk vehicles requires the Company to make assumptions regarding factors which include, but are not limited to, the anticipated age of the vehicles and market conditions for used vehicles at the time of disposal. The Company regularly evaluates estimated residual values and adjusts vehicle depreciation rates as appropriate. Any adjustments to depreciation are made prospectively.

Given the volume of risk vehicles in the United States and the significant estimation uncertainty and judgments made by management to calculate the estimated residual values of these risk vehicles, auditing the estimated residual values of the United States risk vehicles and related vehicle depreciation expense required extensive audit effort to develop an independent expectation of residual values and depreciation expense, and a high degree of auditor judgment was required when performing audit procedures and evaluating the results of those procedures. The significant estimation uncertainty was primarily due to management’s assumptions regarding the impact of future consumer demand and general economic conditions on expected pricing of used vehicles. Additionally, auditing the calculation of the estimated residual values for United States risk vehicles was challenging due to the volume of data inputs utilized in management’s calculation, including historical sales data and data specific to the Company’s current fleet.

Our audit procedures to assess the reasonableness of the estimated residual values and vehicle depreciation expense related to United States risk vehicles included the following, among others:

•We evaluated the appropriateness and consistency of the Company’s methods, significant assumptions and judgments to calculate the estimated residual values of risk vehicles and the expected dates of disposition.

•We tested the effectiveness of controls over vehicle depreciation expense related to risk vehicles and management’s review of the significant assumptions and judgments to calculate the estimated residual values of risk vehicles, including those over the Company’s monitoring of residual values and used vehicle market conditions.

•We assessed the reasonableness of the estimated residual values of risk vehicles by performing the following procedures on a selection of risk vehicles:

–We tested the underlying historical data that served as the basis for the Company’s calculation of the estimated residual values to evaluate the reasonableness of the inputs.

–We tested the mathematical accuracy of the Company’s calculation of the estimated residual values and vehicle depreciation expense rates.

–We tested significant assumptions and judgments used in the Company’s calculation by developing an independent expectation of residual values and compared them to the estimated residual values calculated by the Company. Our independent expectation was calculated using our professional judgment by reference to third-party data, information produced by the Company, subsequent vehicle sales, and inquiries of management.

–We searched for contradictory evidence associated with the significant assumptions and judgments made by management based on our knowledge of the industry and review of third-party industry data.

•We developed an independent expectation of depreciation expense based on, but not limited to, the vehicles’ age and results of our residual value testing and compared it to the amount recorded by the Company as depreciation expense.

Self-Insurance Reserves - Public Liability and Property Damage Claims - United States - Refer to Note 2 to the financial statements

The Company is self-insured for public liability and property damage claims. These self-insurance reserves represent an estimate for both reported claims not yet paid and claims incurred but not yet reported. The estimated reserve requirements for such claims are calculated on an undiscounted basis using actuarial methods and various assumptions which include, but are not limited to, historical loss experience and projected loss development factors. The required liability is subject to adjustment in the future based upon changes in claims experience, including changes in the number of incidents for which the Company is ultimately liable and changes in the cost per incident.

Given the volume of public liability and property damage claims in the United States and the subjectivity of estimating the related self-insurance reserves for reported claims not yet paid and claims incurred but not yet reported due to the uncertain exposure and projected loss development, performing audit procedures to evaluate whether these self-insurance reserves were appropriately recorded as of December 31, 2024 required a significant degree of auditor judgment and an increased extent of effort, including the need to involve our actuarial specialists.

Our audit procedures related to United States public liability and property damage self-insurance reserves included the following, among others:

•We tested the effectiveness of controls over management’s review of significant assumptions, key inputs and methods used to calculate the estimate of the reported claims not yet paid and claims incurred but not yet reported.

•We tested the underlying data that served as the basis for the Company’s actuarial analysis, including historical claims, to test the reasonableness of the inputs to the actuarial estimate.

•With the assistance of our actuarial specialists, we developed an independent estimate of the self-insurance reserves, including assessment of loss data and claim development factors, and compared our estimate to management’s estimate. In addition, we performed the following:

–Evaluated the reasonableness of the methodologies used in management’s estimate based on actuarial methods followed in the insurance industry associated with such liabilities.

–Evaluated the reasonableness of the assumptions used in management’s estimate by comparing prior-year assumptions of expected development and ultimate loss to actuals incurred during the current year to identify potential bias in the determination of these liabilities.

Impairment of Long-Lived Assets – United States Vehicles – Refer to Notes 2 and 8 to the financial statements

The Company reviews long-lived assets for impairment when events or changes in circumstances indicate the carrying value of these assets may exceed their current fair values. Recoverability of assets to be held and used is measured by a comparison of the carrying amount of an asset to the estimated undiscounted future cash flows expected to be generated by the asset. Assets are grouped at the lowest level of identifiable cash flows. If the carrying amount of an asset exceeds its estimated future cash flows, an impairment charge is recognized for the amount by which the carrying amount of the asset exceeds the fair value of the assets. In the current year, the Company changed their fleet strategy for the United States and Canadian vehicles, to accelerate certain fleet rotations and shorten the useful life of the associated vehicles. As a result, the Company performed a recoverability test by comparing the sum of undiscounted cash flows expected to result from the use and eventual disposition of the impacted vehicles, to their carrying value and concluded, that for certain vehicles, the carrying value exceeded the sum of undiscounted cash flows expected to result from the use and eventual disposition of those vehicles. For purposes of the recoverability test, the vehicles were aggregated into asset groups based on make, model and year of the vehicles. The test was performed as of November 30, 2024. The Company used a market approach to determine the fair value of the impacted vehicles, utilizing prices for similar assets in active markets (Level 2). During the year ended December 31, 2024, the Company recorded a non-cash impairment charge.

Given the volume of vehicles in the United States and the significant assumptions made by management to evaluate vehicles for impairment, we performed audit procedures to (1) evaluate whether management appropriately identified events or changes in circumstances indicating that the carrying amounts of vehicle assets may not be recoverable; (2) evaluate management's determination of asset groups at the lowest level of identifiable cash flows; (3) evaluate management’s recoverability test by comparing the sum of undiscounted cash flows expected to result from the use and eventual disposition of the impacted vehicles to their carrying value and, when applicable, (4) evaluate the fair value estimates for the impacted vehicles. Those procedures required a high degree of auditor judgment and an increased extent of effort, including the need to involve our fair value specialists and other professionals in our firm with expertise in long-lived asset impairment.

Our audit procedures related to impairment of long-lived assets of United States vehicles included the following, among others:

•We tested the effectiveness of controls over (1) management’s identification of events or changes in circumstances that indicate that the carrying amount of vehicles may not be recoverable, including management’s review of forecasted future cash flows, and (2) management’s review of the methodology in determining the fair value estimate of vehicles.

•We evaluated whether management appropriately identified events or changes in circumstances that indicated that the carrying amounts of vehicle assets may not be recoverable.

•We evaluated management’s determination of asset groups at the lowest level of identifiable cash flows.

•We tested management’s recoverability test by comparing the sum of undiscounted cash flows expected to result from the use and eventual disposition of the impacted vehicles to their carrying value by performing the following:

–Tested the mathematical accuracy of management’s analysis.

–Compared relevant information to historical data.

–Assessed management’s assumptions used when determining the expected rental revenue, operating expenses and residual values expected at the time of disposition of vehicles as part of their recoverability test.

•We tested the fair value estimates for the impacted vehicles.

•With the assistance of our fair value specialists, we evaluated the reasonableness of the valuation methodology applied and fair value determined for vehicles by testing the methodology applied and measurable inputs used, and the mathematical accuracy of the calculation.

/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

New York, New York

February 14, 2025

We have served as the Company’s auditor since 1997.