HUNTINGTON INGALLS INDUSTRIES INC

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To the Shareholders and the Board of Directors of

Huntington Ingalls Industries, Inc.

Newport News, Virginia

Opinion on the Financial Statements

We have audited the accompanying consolidated statements of financial position of Huntington Ingalls Industries, Inc. and subsidiaries (the “Company”) as of December 31, 2023 and 2022, the related consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive income, changes in equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2023, the related notes and the financial statement 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, 2023, and 2022, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2023, in conformity with the 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, 2023, 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 1, 2024, 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 was communicated or required to be communicated to the audit committee and that (1) relates 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 a separate opinion on the critical audit matters or on the accounts or disclosures to which it relates.

Revenue – Shipbuilding Contracts — Refer to Note 2 and 7 to the financial statements

Critical Audit Matter Description

The Company recognizes revenue on shipbuilding contracts with U.S. Government customers over time as the construction of the ship progresses, because transfer of control to the customer is continuous. Ordinarily the Company’s contracts represent a single distinct performance obligation due to the highly interdependent and interrelated nature of the underlying goods. The use of the cost-to-cost method to measure performance progress over time is supported by clauses in the related contracts that allow the customer to unilaterally terminate the contract for convenience, pay the Company for costs incurred plus a reasonable profit, and take control of any work in process. The accounting for these contracts involves judgment, particularly as it relates to the process of estimating total material costs, labor costs, and profit for the performance obligation. Cost of sales is recognized as incurred, and revenues are determined by adding a proportionate amount of the estimated profit to the amount reported as cost of sales.

Given the judgments necessary to estimate total material costs, labor costs, and profit in order to recognize revenue for certain shipbuilding contracts, auditing such estimates required extensive audit effort due to the complexity of the contracts and a high degree of auditor judgment, especially for contracts where there is limited historical data.

How the Critical Audit Matter Was Addressed in the Audit

•Our audit procedures related to management’s estimates of total material costs, labor costs, and profit in order to recognize revenue for certain shipbuilding contracts included the following, among others:

•We tested the effectiveness of controls over shipbuilding contract revenue, including management’s controls over the estimates of total material costs, labor costs, and profit for performance obligations.

•We developed independent estimates of revenue based on historical profit margins and current year recorded costs. We compared those estimates to revenue recognized by the Company.

•We obtained the population of contracts during 2023 and assessed the financial and performance risk of the contracts based on our knowledge gained through prior year audits of the Company, industry experience, and ongoing conversations with members of program management regarding the contract performance to identify contracts that we believe were riskier. For contracts selected, we performed tailored audit procedures to address the specific characteristics of audit interest identified. Procedures performed, among others, may have included:

◦Read the relevant portions of contracts including any recent contract modifications to understand contract terms, including incentives, fee arrangement, scope of work, and other unusual contract terms.

◦Evaluated the estimates of total costs and profit for the performance obligation by performing some combination of the following:

▪Performed inquiries with the business managers and corroborated the information gained from these inquiries with other parties who have detailed knowledge of the contract’s progress, issues being encountered, and overall production status.

▪Evaluated management’s material and labor estimates against historical performance, underlying performance metrics, and metrics of similar performance obligations.

▪Tested the appropriateness of the timing and accuracy of changes in estimates, including inspection of underlying source documentation, and consideration of any contradictory information.

▪Evaluated the necessity and appropriateness of any constraints applied against any variable consideration.

Goodwill - Mission Technologies reporting unit – Refer to Note 2 and 11 to the financial statements

Critical Audit Matter Description

The Company performed a quantitative impairment evaluation of the goodwill for the Mission Technologies reporting unit by comparing the estimated fair value of the reporting unit to its carrying value. The Company’s testing approach utilizes a combination of discounted cash flow analysis and comparative market-based valuation methodologies to determine the fair value of the reporting unit for comparison to its corresponding book value. Estimating the fair value of a reporting unit requires the exercise of significant judgment and assumptions including judgments about the forecasted revenue, forecasted earnings before income tax, depreciation, and amortization (“EBITDA”), and the selection of the long-term growth rate and the discount rate. Changes in these assumptions could have a significant impact on the fair value of the reporting unit, the amount of any goodwill impairment charge, or both.

The goodwill balance was $2.6 billion as of December 31, 2023 of which $1.7 billion related to the Mission Technologies reporting unit. The fair value of the Mission Technologies reporting unit exceeded the carrying value by 10.4% as of the measurement date and, therefore, no impairment was recognized.

Given the significant judgments made by management to estimate the fair value of the Mission Technologies reporting unit and the difference between its fair value and carrying value, performing audit procedures to test the Company’s estimate of the fair value of the Mission Technologies reporting unit, which included evaluating estimates and assumptions related to forecasted revenue, forecasted EBITDA, and the selection of the long-term growth rate and the discount rate, required a high degree of auditor judgment and an increased extent of effort, including the need to involve our fair value specialists.

How the Critical Audit Matter Was Addressed in the Audit

Our audit procedures related to the selection of the forecasted revenue, forecasted EBITDA, and the selection of the long-term growth rate and the discount rate for the Mission Technologies reporting unit included the following, among others:

•We tested the effectiveness of controls over management’s goodwill impairment evaluation, including those over the selection of the assumptions used in the fair value models.

•We evaluated management’s ability to accurately forecast revenue and EBITDA by comparing actual results to management’s historical forecasts.

•We evaluated the reasonableness of management’s forecasted revenue and EBITDA by comparing the forecasts to internal communications to management and the Board of Directors and comparing the forecasts to third-party economic and industry data.

•We performed sensitivity analyses to evaluate the risk of impairment if key assumptions are changed.

•We evaluated, with the assistance of our fair value specialists, the reasonableness of the (1) valuation methodology utilized by management, and (2) the selected long-term growth rate and discount rate by:

◦Comparing the valuation methodologies used to generally accepted valuation practices.

◦Testing the appropriateness of source information used by management to select the long-term growth rate and discount rate used by management.

◦Developing a range of independent estimates and comparing those to the discount rate selected by management.

•We evaluated the carrying value of the Mission Technologies reporting unit including the corporate allocations.

/s/Deloitte & Touche LLP

Richmond, Virginia

February 1, 2024

We have served as the Company’s auditor since 2011.

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To the Shareholders and the Board of Directors of

Huntington Ingalls Industries, Inc.

Newport News, Virginia

Opinion on Internal Control over Financial Reporting

We have audited the internal control over financial reporting of Huntington Ingalls Industries, Inc. and subsidiaries (the "Company") as of December 31, 2023, based on criteria established in Internal Control — Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). In our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2023, based on criteria established in Internal Control — Integrated Framework (2013) issued by COSO.

We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB), the consolidated financial statements as of and for the year ended December 31, 2023, of the Company and our report dated February 1, 2024, expressed an unqualified opinion on those financial statements.

Basis for Opinion

The Company’s management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in the accompanying Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our audit. 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 audit in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk, and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

Definition and Limitations of Internal Control over Financial Reporting

A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

Richmond, Virginia

February 1, 2024