Corebridge Financial, Inc.

Our businesses and operations are subject to regulation and supervision by many different types of regulatory authorities, including insurance, securities, derivatives and investment advisory regulators in the United States and abroad. We expect that the U.S. and international regulations applicable to us and our regulated entities will continue to evolve. In the United States, where the majority of our businesses are based, we are regulated primarily by state governments. Additionally, in the United States, while the federal government does not directly regulate the insurance industry, federal legislation and administrative policies in several areas, including pension regulation, age and sex discrimination, financial services regulation, securities regulation, derivatives regulation and federal taxation, can significantly affect the insurance industry and certain of our other operations. See “Risk Factors—Risks Relating to Regulation—Our business is heavily regulated.”Legislators, regulators and self-regulatory organizations may also consider changes to existing laws or regulations impacting our business, such as, for example, changes to reserving and accounting requirements, standard of care for financial professionals, and permitted investments. See “Risk Factors—Risks Relating to Regulation—New domestic or international laws and regulations, or new interpretations of current laws and regulations, may affect our ability to operate efficiently or compete effectively.”Further, insurance and other regulatory authorities, law enforcement agencies, attorneys general, and other governmental authorities from time to time make inquiries and conduct examinations or investigations regarding our compliance, as well as compliance by other companies in our industry, with applicable laws.

U.S. REGULATION

State Insurance Regulation

Our U.S. insurance subsidiaries are licensed to transact insurance business and are subject to extensive regulation and supervision by insurance regulators in the jurisdictions in which they do business, including the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and U.S. territories. The primary regulator of an insurance company, however, is located in its state of domicile. AGC is domiciled in Missouri and is primarily regulated by the Missouri Department of Commerce and Insurance, AGL and VALIC are each domiciled in Texas and are primarily regulated by the Texas Department of Insurance, and USL is domiciled in New York and is primarily regulated by the New York State Department of Financial Services (“NYDFS”).

The method of regulation of our insurance subsidiaries varies by jurisdiction but generally has its source in statutes that delegate regulatory and supervisory powers to state insurance officials. Such regulation and supervision relate primarily to the financial condition of the insurers, licensing, corporate conduct, including transactions among affiliates, market conduct activities, investments, and operational security and resiliency, including data security and privacy. In general, such regulation is for the protection of policyholders rather than the creditors or equity owners of these companies.

In the United States, the NAIC is a standard-setting and regulatory support organization created and governed by the chief insurance regulators from the 50 states, the District of Columbia and U.S. territories. Among other things, the NAIC develops and recommends adoption of model insurance laws and regulations. With assistance from the NAIC, state insurance regulators establish standards and best practices, conduct peer reviews and coordinate regulatory oversight. Model laws and regulations promulgated by the NAIC only become effective in a state if formally adopted and are subject to modification by each state. NAIC Accreditation Standards place limits on modifications by states to certain model law and regulation adoptions. Certain of such model laws and regulations, including as adopted by certain of our domiciliary states, are noted in more detail below.

Holding Company and Dividend Regulation

The NAIC’s Insurance Holding Company System Regulatory Act and the Insurance Holding Company System Model Regulation (together, the “Holding Company Models”), versions of which have been enacted by all of the states in which we have domestic insurers, generally require registration and periodic reporting by insurance companies that are licensed in such jurisdictions and are controlled by other entities. They also require periodic disclosure concerning the entity that controls the registered insurer and the other companies in the holding company system and place limitations on, and require prior approval of, intercompany transactions, including transfers of assets and certain payments of dividends or distributions.

Corebridge | 2025 Form 10-K 27

In particular, state insurance statutes typically place restrictions and limitations on the amount of dividends or other distributions payable by insurance company subsidiaries to their parent companies, as well as on transactions between an insurer and its affiliates, which transactions may be used to upstream funds. For example, the insurance statutes of Missouri and Texas generally permit without regulatory approval the payment of dividends that, together with dividends paid during the preceding twelve months, do not exceed the greater of (i) 10% of statutory policyholders’ surplus as of the preceding December 31 and (ii) statutory net gain from operations for the preceding calendar year. Additionally, under the Missouri and Texas insurance statutes, dividends may be paid only to the extent the insurer has unassigned surplus (as opposed to contributed surplus). New York has similar dividend restrictions, in some cases with more restrictive requirements. Dividends in excess of applicable prescribed limits established by the applicable state regulations, which are based on the prior year’s earnings and surplus of the insurance company, are considered to be extraordinary transactions and require prior approval or non-disapproval from the applicable insurance regulator. As a holding company with no significant business operations of its own, Corebridge Parent depends on dividends from its subsidiaries to meet its obligations.

Insurance holding company laws also generally provide that no person, corporation, or other entity may acquire control of an insurance company, or a controlling interest in any direct or indirect parent company of an insurance company, without the prior approval of such insurance company’s domiciliary state insurance regulator. Under the laws of each of the domiciliary states of our U.S. insurance subsidiaries, Missouri, New York and Texas, any person acquiring, directly or indirectly, 10% or more of the voting securities of an insurance company is presumed to have acquired “control” of the company, which may consider voting securities held at both the parent company and subsidiaries collectively. This statutory presumption of control may be rebutted by a showing that control does not exist in fact. State insurance regulators, however, may find that “control” exists even in certain circumstances in which a person owns or controls less than 10% of the voting securities of an insurance company. Such laws and regulations regarding “control” may discourage potential acquisitions or delay or prevent a change of control involving us.

The NAIC Holding Company Models include a liquidity stress test (“LST”) requirement for large life insurers based on a set of scope criteria and a Group Capital Calculation (“GCC”) requirement. The GCC tool uses an RBC aggregation methodology for all entities within an insurance holding company system. The LST is intended to support macroprudential surveillance by the NAIC regulators, including to assess the potential impact on broader financial markets of aggregate asset sales within a liquidity stress scenario. The NAIC encouraged states to implement the GCC to satisfy group capital assessment requirements of covered agreements the United States reached with the EU and UK and, in December 2023, the NAIC adopted the GCC and LST amendments to the Holding Company Models accreditation standards, effective January 1, 2026. Our domiciliary insurance regulators have adopted the LST and GCC requirements.

State regulators evaluate our insurers’ investment portfolio based on risk profile, as described in greater detail below, see - “Risk-Based Capital, Statutory Accounting, Investments Regulation, and Reserves.” In recent years, the NAIC has had an increased focus on private equity-owned life insurers following sizeable increases in the number of private equity-owned life insurers. The NAIC adopted Regulatory Considerations Applicable (But Not Exclusive) to Private Equity (“PE”) Owned Insurers (the “Regulatory Considerations”) in 2022, intended to identify areas where existing disclosures, policies, control and affiliation requirements, and other procedures should be modified, or new ones created, to address any gaps based on the increase in the number of private equity-owned insurers, the role of asset managers in insurance and the potential for control via asset management arrangements, and the increase of private investments in insurers’ portfolios. Many of the Regulatory Considerations have been referred to NAIC working groups and task forces, while others, such as new reporting on investment schedules relative to investment transactions with related parties and additional disclosures relative to private equity and complex assets, are already effective. As part of these efforts, the NAIC adopted a Framework for Regulation of Insurer Investments. Their stated goal is to provide a holistic review of the NAIC groups and initiatives, which are focused on investments, and determine the most effective use of regulatory resources. Changes to model laws and regulations or NAIC handbooks resulting from an analysis for the Regulatory Considerations may impact our insurance company subsidiaries’ affiliate and related party relationships and pursuit of strategic transactions, investment portfolios and financial condition.

The NAIC’s Risk Management and Own Risk and Solvency Assessment Model Act (“ORSA”) requires that insurers maintain a risk management framework and conduct an internal own risk and solvency assessment of the insurer’s material risks in normal and stressed environments and submit annual ORSA summary reports to the insurance group’s lead U.S.-state regulator. The NAIC has also adopted a Corporate Governance Annual Disclosure Model Act that requires insurers to submit an annual filing regarding their corporate governance structure, policies, and practices. Regulators review these annual filings together with an insurer’s ORSA report to determine whether corporate governance practices are appropriate in light of the insurer’s risk appetite and risk profile.

Corebridge | 2025 Form 10-K 28

Risk-Based Capital, Statutory Accounting, Investments Regulation, and Reserves

Every state has adopted, in substantial part, the Risk-Based Capital (“RBC”) Model Law promulgated by the NAIC that allows states to act upon the results of RBC ratio calculations and provides four incremental levels of regulatory action regarding insurers whose RBC ratio calculations fall below specific thresholds. Those levels of action range from the requirement to submit a plan describing how an insurer would regain a specified RBC ratio to a mandatory regulatory takeover of the company. The RBC ratio formula is designed to measure the adequacy of an insurer’s statutory surplus in relation to the risks inherent in its business. The RBC formula computes a risk-adjusted surplus level by applying discrete factors to various asset, premium, reserve and other financial statement items, or in the case of interest rate and equity return (C-3) market risk, applying stochastic scenario analyses. These factors are developed to be risk-sensitive so that higher RBC requirements are applied to items exposed to greater risk. Further, state insurance regulators have discretion in interpreting their reserving and valuation laws and regulations, which may impact the RBC ratio calculation. Certain such regulators have, from time to time, taken more stringent positions than other state insurance regulators on matters affecting, among other things, statutory capital and reserves as applied to their licensed insurance companies. The RBC ratio of each of our U.S. based insurance companies, determined in accordance with NAIC instructions, exceeded minimum required levels as of December 31, 2025. Additionally, the NAIC has adopted, or is considering, several changes impacting how RBC is calculated, including initiatives aimed at a comprehensive review of RBC investment framework, as well as using modeling methodology to determine RBC charges for structured securities. For example, the NAIC adopted proposed changes to the Purposes and Procedures Manual of the NAIC Investment Analysis Office, authorizing procedures through which the Investment Analysis Office may challenge credit risk ratings that are assigned to securities based on the rating provided by an NAIC-recognized rating agency. Additionally, in February 2025, the NAIC announced the creation of a new Risk-Based Capital Model Governance (EX) Task Force as part of its efforts to update and strengthen the governance framework around RBC requirements, which Task Force adopted governing principles in December 2025. The work of the Task Force is ongoing and could result in changes to RBC requirements and calculations in the future, which could affect our capital planning, investment strategies, reporting obligations and permitted disclosures. In 2026, a new Generator of Economic Scenarios for the RBC C-3 stochastic scenario analyses will be adopted, potentially with transition periods at our option. We will continue to monitor these developments and evaluate their potential impact to our business, financial condition, and legal entities.

The NAIC provides standardized insurance industry accounting and reporting guidance, as well as actuarial guidelines, through the NAIC Accounting Practices and Procedures Manual. For example, the NAIC adopted an interim proposal to allow some portion of net negative interest maintenance reserve to be an admitted asset of an insurer. The treatment expires in December 2026 unless further extended, and the NAIC is working toward a long-term plan. A limit of 10% of an insurer’s capital and surplus applies, subject to certain adjustments and a minimum RBC ratio of 300% authorized control level following such adjustments. In 2025, the NAIC adopted updates to the actuarial guidelines intended to enhance asset adequacy analysis for asset-intensive, life insurance and annuity reinsurance treaties above certain thresholds. The updated guidelines, referred to as Actuarial Guideline LV (“AG 55”), are designed as a testing and disclosure regime with the first AG 55 reports due in April 2026. The NAIC plans to review the AG 55 disclosures to identify any concerns with insurers’ approaches to asset adequacy testing, with the possibility of making additional changes that could lead to higher reserves for certain reinsurance agreements. We will continue to actively monitor developments associated with this NAIC initiative. Our insurance subsidiaries, as cedants, will implement AG 55 disclosure with respect to applicable reinsurance treaties and consider retroactive application, if necessary, in such reporting. Further, in December 2025, the NAIC adopted revisions to clarify statutory risk transfer on combination reinsurance contracts with interdependent contract features. The clarifications are immediately effective for new or newly amended contracts with provisions allowing until December 31, 2026, for existing contracts. We are continuing to assess the impact of these clarifications and we will also continue to monitor any further guidance that the NAIC may issue pertaining to these clarifications. Statutory accounting principles and related actuarial guidelines promulgated by the NAIC, including for our insurance company subsidiaries, have been, or may be, modified by individual state laws, regulations, and permitted practices granted by our domiciliary insurance regulators. The actual impact of the NAIC changes on our business will depend on how they are interpreted and implemented by our domiciliary insurance regulators. Changes to the NAIC Accounting Practices and Procedures Manual or modifications by the various state insurance departments may impact the investment portfolios, in-force transactions, and the statutory capital and surplus of our U.S. insurance companies.

Additionally, our insurance subsidiaries are subject to state laws and regulations governing their investment portfolios, including as to types of investment assets, issuers, credit quality, and limits. If our insurance subsidiaries fail to comply with such laws and regulations, their investments may exceed regulatory limits and be treated as non-admitted assets for purposes of measuring surplus. In some cases, we may be required to divest non-qualifying investments.

Corebridge | 2025 Form 10-K 29

The NAIC Valuation Manual contains a principle-based approach to life insurance company reserves. PBR is designed to tailor the reserving process to more closely reflect the risks of specific products, rather than the factor-based approach employed historically. Subsection 20 of the Valuation Manual (“VM-20”) applies to individual life insurance reserves, most notably term insurance and universal life policies with secondary guarantees (“ULSGs”), and Subsection 21 (“VM-21”) applies to variable annuities. The NAIC’s work to update and refine the Valuation Manual and address issues relating to the PBR framework, including VM-20, VM-21, and Subsection 22 of the Valuation Manual (“VM-22”) related to PBR for non-variable annuities, is ongoing, particularly with respect to non-variable annuities, and we will continue to monitor such developments as they evolve. The updates to VM-22 were adopted in 2025 and took effect January 1, 2026, modernizing these reserves in a similar manner to VM-20 and VM-21 and permitting a more flexible PBR framework that better aligns reserve requirements with the risks associated with specific product types. The NAIC has provided life insurance companies three years to implement the VM-22 updates, requiring compliance by January 2029, and the NAIC continues to discuss whether and to what extent VM-22 will apply retroactively. See also Notes 7 and 19 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information related to these statutory reserving requirements.

Insurance Regulatory Examinations and Other Activities

In addition to the NAIC’s model laws and regulations, state insurance and consumer protection laws and regulations also include numerous provisions governing the marketplace activities of life and annuity insurers, including provisions governing the form and content of disclosure to consumers, illustrations, advertising, sales practices, privacy and information security, permissible use of data in insurance practices, and complaint handling. The regulatory landscape is developing with respect to the use of external data and artificial intelligence in insurance practices, including underwriting, marketing and claims practices. The NAIC adopted a model bulletin on Use of Artificial Intelligence Systems by Insurers in December 2023, which has been adopted by a number of states, and is considering tools to evaluate companies’ use of artificial intelligence. In addition, some states have had legislative or regulatory initiatives relating to the use of external data and artificial intelligence applicable to the insurance industry, including Colorado’s algorithmic and external data accountability law and Circular Letter 7 from the New York Department of Financial Services (“NYDFS”). We continue to engage through industry trade groups and with our regulators to promote outcomes that balance efficiency with transparency and fairness.

State regulatory authorities generally enforce provisions relating to marketplace activities through periodic market conduct inquiries, data calls, investigations, and examinations. Further, as part of their regulatory oversight process, state insurance departments conduct periodic financial examinations, generally once every three to five years, of the books, records, accounts, and business practices of insurers domiciled in their states. Examinations are generally carried out under guidelines promulgated by the NAIC, and, in the case of financial exams, in cooperation with the insurance regulators of other domiciliary states of an insurance holding company group.

Regulation of Non-Guaranteed Elements

State regulators also consider regulatory standards applicable to the determination and readjustment of non-guaranteed elements (“NGEs”) within life insurance policies and annuity contracts that may be varied at the insurer’s discretion, such as interest crediting rates, expense charges, and cost of insurance rates. For example, New York’s Insurance Regulation 210 establishes standards for the determination and readjustment of NGEs and establishes guidelines for related disclosure. Such regulation of NGEs could adversely impact our ability to determine or re-adjust NGEs in the future.

Climate Regulation

Certain states and state insurance regulators have also shown interest in climate change risk and disclosure. For example, in 2021, the NYDFS issued final Guidance for New York Domestic Insurers on Managing the Financial Risks from Climate Change, detailing the NYDFS’s expectations related to insurers’ management of the financial risks from climate change and integration into their governance frameworks, risk management frameworks, and business and investment strategies. Further, in 2022, the NAIC adopted revisions to its Climate Disclosure Survey, which numerous states mandate for insurers with premiums exceeding certain thresholds. See “Environmental, Social and Governance Regulation” for further information.

Unclaimed Property

We are subject to the laws and regulations of states and other jurisdictions concerning identification, reporting, and escheatment of unclaimed or abandoned funds, and are subject to audit and examination for compliance with these requirements.

Corebridge | 2025 Form 10-K 30

State Guaranty Associations

U.S. states have state insurance guaranty associations in which insurers doing business in the state are required by law to be members. Member insurers may be assessed by the associations for certain obligations of insolvent insurance companies to policyholders and claimants. Typically, states assess member insurers in amounts related to the member’s proportionate share of the relevant type of business written by all members in the state. Some jurisdictions permit member insurers to recover assessments that they paid through full or partial premium tax offsets, usually over a period of years. The protection afforded by a state’s guaranty association to policyholders of insolvent insurers varies from state to state. The aggregate assessments levied against us for the year ended December 31, 2025 were not material to our financial condition.

Dodd-Frank

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank”), signed into law in 2010, brought about extensive changes to financial regulation in the United States and established the Financial Stability Oversight Council. Dodd-Frank also established the Federal Insurance Office (“FIO”) to serve as the central insurance authority in the federal government. While not serving a regulatory function, FIO performs certain duties related to the business of insurance, represents the U.S. in international insurance forums, and has authority to collect information on the insurance industry and recommend prudential standards. Certain parts of Dodd-Frank are noted below in more detail.

Title V of Dodd-Frank authorizes the United States to enter into covered agreements with foreign governments or regulatory entities regarding the business of insurance and reinsurance. On September 22, 2017, the United States and the EU entered into such an agreement to address, among other things, reinsurance collateral and group capital requirements, and on December 18, 2018, the United States signed a covered agreement with the UK, which is similar to the agreement with the EU. The NAIC adopted amendments to the credit for reinsurance model law and regulation and adopted GCC to conform to the requirements of the covered agreements. Numerous states, including our domiciliary states, have adopted the GCC requirements in their statutes.

Title VII of Dodd-Frank provides for significantly increased regulation of, and restrictions on, swap and security-based swap markets and transactions. While regulations under Title VII primarily address requirements of swap dealers and security-based swap dealers, this regulation has affected and, as additional regulations come into effect, could further affect, various activities of insurance and other financial services companies. Relevant regulatory requirements include (i) margin and collateral requirements, (ii) transaction and regulatory reporting, and (iii) mandated clearing through central counterparties and execution through regulated swap execution facilities for certain swaps (other than security-based swaps, which are not currently subject to mandatory execution or clearing requirements but could be in the future). The Commodities Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”), which oversees and regulates the U.S. swap, commodities and futures markets, and the SEC, which oversees and regulates the U.S. securities and security-based swap markets, have largely finalized the rules to carry out their mandates under Title VII of Dodd-Frank. Increased regulation of, and restrictions on, derivatives markets and transactions, including regulations related to initial margin for swaps and securities-based swaps, has increased, and could further increase the cost of our trading and hedging activities, reduce liquidity and reduce the availability of customized hedging solutions and derivatives.

Dodd-Frank also mandated a study to determine whether stable value contracts should be included in the definition of “swap.” If that study concludes that stable value contracts are swaps, Dodd-Frank authorizes certain federal regulators to determine whether an exemption from the definition of a swap for stable value contracts is appropriate and in the public interest. Our Institutional Markets business issues stable value contracts. We cannot predict what regulations might emanate from the aforementioned study or be promulgated applicable to this business in the future. In the event that the study determines that stable value contracts should be included in the definition of “swap,” Section 719(d)(1)(C) of Dodd-Frank provides that such determination would only apply to newly issued stable value contracts.

Title II of Dodd-Frank provides that a financial company whose largest United States subsidiary is an insurer may be subject to a special orderly liquidation process outside the Bankruptcy Code. U.S. insurance subsidiaries of any such financial company, however, would be subject to rehabilitation and liquidation proceedings under state insurance law.

Pursuant to Dodd-Frank, federal banking regulators adopted regulations that apply to certain qualified financial contracts, including many derivatives contracts, securities lending agreements and repurchase agreements, with certain banking institutions and certain of their affiliates. These regulations, which became effective on January 1, 2019, generally require the covered banking institutions and affiliates to include contractual provisions in their qualified financial contracts that limit or delay certain counterparty rights that may arise in connection with the banking institution or affiliate becoming subject to a bankruptcy or similar proceeding or impose such provisions as a matter of law in certain circumstances. Nearly all of our derivatives, securities lending agreements and repurchase agreements with certain banking institutions and certain of their affiliates are subject to these regulations, and as a result, we may be required to delay terminating transactions, realizing collateral posted, or otherwise mitigating exposures under these agreements. We are subject to greater risk and could receive a more limited or delayed recovery in the event of a default by such bank institution or the applicable affiliates.

Corebridge | 2025 Form 10-K 31

ERISA

We provide products and services to certain employee benefit plans that are subject to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (“ERISA”), and/or the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”). Plans subject to ERISA include certain pension and profit-sharing plans and welfare benefit plans, including health, life, and disability plans. ERISA establishes standards that must be met for the administration, reporting, and disclosure of such plans. As a result, our activities are subject to the restrictions imposed by ERISA and the Code, including the requirement under ERISA that fiduciaries must perform their duties solely in the interests of ERISA plan participants and beneficiaries, and that fiduciaries may not cause a covered plan to engage in certain prohibited transactions. The applicable provisions of ERISA and the Code are subject to enforcement by the Department of Labor (the “DOL”), the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”), and the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation.

Federal Retirement Legislation

In 2019 and 2022, significant legislation was signed into law – the Setting Every Community Up for Retirement Enhancement (“SECURE”) Act, and its successor, “SECURE 2.0” – making a number of changes to requirements for employer-sponsored retirement plans and the contracts and accounts held under those plans, including both mandatory and optional provisions. Many of the provisions of these enactments have already gone into effect, while others have future effective dates. We continue to implement new processes and procedures as needed, designed to comply with the new requirements.

Securities, Investment Adviser, Broker-Dealer, and Investment Company Regulations

Our investment products and services are subject to applicable federal and state securities, fiduciary, and other laws and regulations. The principal U.S. regulators of these operations include the SEC, FINRA, CFTC, Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board, state securities commissions, state insurance departments, and the DOL.

Our variable life insurance, variable annuity, registered index-linked annuity, and mutual fund products generally are subject to regulation as “securities” under applicable federal securities laws, except where exempt. Such regulation includes registration of the offerings of these products with the SEC, unless exempt from such registration, and requirements of distribution participants to be registered as broker-dealers, as well as recordkeeping, reporting, and other requirements. This regulation also involves the registration of mutual funds and other investment products offered by our businesses, and the separate accounts through which our variable life insurance, variable annuity, registered index-linked annuity and mutual fund products are issued, as investment companies under the Investment Company Act, except where exempt. The Investment Company Act imposes requirements relating to compliance, corporate governance, disclosure, recordkeeping, registration, and other matters. In addition, the offering of these products may involve filing and other requirements under the securities, corporate, or other laws of the states and other jurisdictions where offered or organized, including the District of Columbia and U.S. territories. Our separate account investment products are also subject to applicable state insurance regulation.

We have subsidiaries that are registered as broker-dealers under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act’’), and are members of FINRA and/or are registered as investment advisers under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, as amended (the ‘‘Advisers Act’’). These broker-dealers and investment advisers are involved in our life and annuity product sales, including participating in their distribution and/or serving as an investment adviser to mutual funds that underlie variable products offered by us. In addition to registration requirements, the Exchange Act, the Advisers Act, and the regulations thereunder impose various conduct, disclosure, qualification, recordkeeping, reporting, and other requirements on these subsidiaries and their operations. State securities laws also impose registration, filing, and other requirements on broker-dealers, investment advisers and/or their licensed representatives, except where exempt. The SEC, FINRA and other regulatory bodies also have the authority to examine regulated entities, such as our broker-dealer and investment adviser subsidiaries, and to institute administrative or judicial proceedings that may result in censure, fines, prohibitions, restrictions on activities, or other administrative sanctions.

Further, our licensed sales professionals appointed with certain of our broker-dealer and/or investment adviser subsidiaries and our other employees, insofar as they sell products that are securities, including wholesale and retail activity, are subject to the Exchange Act and to examination requirements and regulation by the SEC, FINRA, and state securities commissioners. Regulation and examination requirements also extend to our subsidiaries that employ or control those individuals.

The business of our investment adviser subsidiaries will be impacted by SEC regulatory initiatives with respect to the investment management business. The SEC is engaged in various initiatives and reviews that seek to modernize the regulatory structure governing the investment management industry, including investment advisers registered under the Advisers Act and investment companies registered under the Investment Company Act. However, the outcome of these initiatives and reviews is uncertain due to recent changes in the composition of the SEC.

Corebridge | 2025 Form 10-K 32

Standard of Conduct Developments

We and our distributors are subject to laws and regulations regarding the standard of care applicable to sales of our products and the provision of advice to our customers. In recent years, many of these laws and regulations have been revised or re-examined while others have been newly adopted. We closely monitor these legislative and regulatory activities and evaluate the impact of these requirements on us and our customers, distribution partners, and financial advisers. Where needed, we have made significant investments to implement or enhance our tools, processes, and procedures, to comply with the final laws, rules, and interpretations. These efforts and enhancements have resulted in increased compliance costs and may impact sales results. Additional changes in standard of care requirements or new standards issued by governmental authorities, such as the DOL, the SEC, the NAIC, or state regulators and/or legislators, have impacted, and may impact our businesses, results of operations, and financial condition and may increase regulatory and litigation risk.

DOL Fiduciary Rule

On April 25, 2024, the DOL published a final rule in the Federal Register updating the definition of when a person is an “investment advice fiduciary” for purposes of transactions with ERISA qualified plans, related plan participants, and IRAs. The DOL also published changes with respect to existing prohibited transaction exemptions (“PTEs”) relating to such advice, including PTE 84-24 and PTE 2020-02. On July 25, 2024, and July 26, 2024, in connection with separate lawsuits challenging the rule, the U.S. District Courts for the Eastern District of Texas and the Northern District of Texas, respectively, issued orders staying the rule’s initial September 23, 2024 effective date. The DOL appealed these two orders to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, but has since withdrawn its appeal. We are continuing to monitor the progress and potential impact of the DOL rule and any similar rulemaking to our business.

SEC Best Interest Regulation

In June 2020, the SEC's Regulation Best Interest (“Regulation BI”) went into effect. Regulation BI, which is applicable to our broker-dealer subsidiaries, established duties of care, compliance, disclosure, and conflict mitigation that broker-dealers and their associated persons must meet when making a recommendation of a securities transaction or investment strategy involving securities to a retail customer. In many cases, these duties are materially broader and more stringent than earlier “suitability” and disclosure requirements imposed by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”). As part of the rulemaking package, Form CRS also went into effect, requiring enhanced disclosures by broker-dealers and investment advisers regarding retail client relationships and certain conflicts of interest. Regulation BI and Form CRS continue to be identified as examination priorities for the SEC and FINRA with the particular focus shifting from year to year. Given the breadth and open-ended nature of the duties under Regulation BI in particular, SEC and FINRA expectations in this space may continue to evolve. We have implemented the requirements of Regulation BI and Form CRS, and continue to monitor interpretive guidance and enforcement activity from federal securities regulators.

State Standard of Conduct Developments

In 2020, the NAIC adopted revisions to its Suitability in Annuity Transactions Model Regulation (#275) (“NAIC Model”) implementing a best interest standard of care applicable to sales and recommendations of annuities. The new NAIC Model conforms in large part to Regulation BI, providing that all recommendations by agents and insurers must be in the best interest of the consumer under known circumstances at the time an annuity recommendation is made, without placing agents’ or insurers’ financial interests ahead of the consumer’s interest in making a recommendation. Nearly all states have adopted amendments to their suitability rules based on the NAIC Model revisions. Certain states have adopted standard of conduct requirements that varies from the NAIC Model. For example, in 2018, the NYDFS adopted the First Amendment to Insurance Regulation 187 — Suitability and Best Interests in Life Insurance and Annuity Transactions (“Regulation 187”), which requires producers to act in their client’s best interest when making both point-of-sale and in-force recommendations and to deliver to the client the written basis for the recommendation, as well as the facts and analysis to support the recommendation. The regulation also imposes additional duties on life insurance companies in relation to these transactions, such as requiring insurers to establish and maintain procedures designed to prevent financial exploitation and abuse. Besides New York, other state insurance and/or securities regulators have also adopted, or are considering adopting, additional standard of conduct requirements with applicability to insurance producers, agents, financial advisors, investment advisers, broker-dealers, and/or insurance companies. Changes in standards of care could impose additional costs in the areas of compliance and employee training and affect how we manage our business and overall costs.

Environmental, Social and Governance Regulation

Federal and state laws and regulations regarding ESG issues may be applicable to our operations. On March 6, 2024, the SEC adopted final rules on climate-related disclosure that would require registrants, including Corebridge, to disclose certain climate-related information in registration statements and annual reports. On March 27, 2025, the SEC decided to end its defense of litigation challenging these rules in court, and on September 12, 2025, the Eighth Circuit ordered that the litigation would be held in abeyance until such time that the SEC reconsiders or renews its defense of the rules. The Company continues to monitor the status of the final rule.

Corebridge | 2025 Form 10-K 33

In 2023, California adopted climate disclosure and financial reporting legislation, the Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act (“SB 253”) and the Climate Related Financial Risk Act (“SB 261”), which would respectively require large companies doing business in California such as Corebridge to report greenhouse gas emissions annually and to publish climate-related financial risk reports biennially. Litigation challenging the California climate laws is pending, and the Ninth Circuit granted a preliminary injunction as to SB 261 (requiring climate-related financial risk reports). On December 1, 2025, the California Air Resources Board issued an enforcement advisory stating that it will not enforce SB 261 against companies that do not meet the January 1, 2026 reporting deadline. We are assessing the impact of the injunction and enforcement advisory.

Other states, including New York and Illinois, have proposed but not yet passed climate disclosure laws similar to those adopted by California.

States continue to adopt laws and regulations governing corporate ESG activity and there are evolving expectations from investors, customers, regulators, and other stakeholders on ESG practices and disclosures, including those related to environmental stewardship, climate change, workplace conduct, and other social and political mandates. For more information on the NYDFS Guidance for New York Domestic Insurers on Managing the Financial Risks from Climate Change and the NAIC Climate Disclosure Survey, see “State Insurance Regulation—Climate Regulation.”

Privacy and Cybersecurity

We are subject to U.S. federal and state laws and regulations that require financial institutions and other businesses to implement and maintain technical, administrative, organizational, and physical measures designed to protect the confidentiality, availability and integrity of personal information and sensitive non-public information (“Company Information”) and the information systems used to process this information and conduct important business operations. These laws and regulations impose a broad range of obligations including collecting, disclosing, using, transferring, retaining, deleting, and otherwise processing (collectively, “Processing”) Company Information in compliance with certain restrictions; notifying individuals regarding our personal information Processing practices; and maintaining a security program designed to protect the confidentiality, availability, and integrity of Company Information and our information systems. Some of these laws and regulations require us to notify affected individuals, regulators, and self-regulatory bodies of certain events involving unauthorized access to, use of, or loss of, Company Information and information systems and associated impacts to our operations.

On November 1, 2023, the NYDFS published an amendment to its Part 500 Cybersecurity Regulation (“NYDFS Cybersecurity Regulation”) which includes additional certification obligations, enhanced governance requirements, new audit requirements, additional technology and business continuity requirements, enhanced security control and training requirements, and new cyber event notification obligations. Requirements under the amended NYDFS Cybersecurity Regulation became effective in phases, with the final provisions taking effect on November 1, 2025. Covered entities must certify compliance with the final phases of the NYDFS Cybersecurity Regulation in an annual report due April 15, 2026. The requirements under the amended NYDFS Cybersecurity Regulation are similar in certain respects to those under the NAIC Insurance Data Security Model Law, which has been adopted by slightly less than half of the U.S. states. The NYDFS continues to publish guidance related to addressing cybersecurity risks.

The SEC continues to focus on cybersecurity for a range of regulated entities, including public companies, registered investment companies, broker-dealers, investment advisers and funds, and has published periodic guidance on the topic. Since 2024, the SEC adopted amendments to Regulation S-P that require broker-dealers, investment companies, transfer agents, and registered investment advisers to adopt enhanced policies and procedures for the safeguarding of personally identifiable information of retail customers addressing areas such as incident response, customer notification, and oversight of service providers.

U.S. federal and state legislatures and government agencies and self-regulatory bodies continued to be active in 2025 and are expected to continue to focus on laws, regulations, and guidelines relating to privacy and other aspects of customer information, information security, resiliency, the use of AI, and protecting the ongoing confidentiality, availability, and integrity of personal information, sensitive non-public information, information systems, and business operations. Additional changes in the U.S. privacy and cybersecurity regulatory landscape may require additional compliance investment, including changes to policies, procedures, information systems, and operations.

Corebridge | 2025 Form 10-K 34

INTERNATIONAL REGULATION

Insurance and Financial Services Regulation

A portion of our business is conducted in foreign countries. Generally, our subsidiaries operating in foreign jurisdictions must satisfy local regulatory requirements; licenses issued by foreign authorities to our subsidiaries are subject to modification or revocation by such authorities, and therefore these subsidiaries could be prevented from conducting business in certain of the jurisdictions where they currently operate. For our international operations, a decline in capital and surplus over capital requirements would limit the ability of our insurance subsidiaries to make dividend payments or distributions and may, in certain cases, require us to contribute additional capital into such insurance subsidiaries. Additionally, regulators in the countries in which such subsidiaries operate may deem it necessary to impose restrictions on dividend distributions in the event of a significant financial market or insurance event which creates uncertainty over our future capital and solvency position.

The Bermuda Monetary Authority (the “BMA”) regulates our insurance subsidiary in Bermuda, Corebridge Insurance Company of Bermuda, Ltd. (“CRBG Bermuda”). The Insurance Act 1978, as amended, (the “Bermuda Insurance Act”) and its related regulations and other applicable Bermuda laws, impose a variety of requirements and restrictions, including the filing of annual and quarterly statutory financial returns; compliance with minimum enhanced capital requirements; compliance with the BMA’s Insurance Code of Conduct; provisional restrictions on the payment of dividends and distributions; restrictions on certain changes in control of regulated (re)insurers, maintenance of a head office, certain officers, and principal representative in Bermuda; performance of certain periodic examinations of CRBG Bermuda and its financial condition; and such other standards as the BMA may impose from time to time. The term “insurer” includes “reinsurer” in the Bermuda Insurance Act.

CRBG Bermuda, which is currently licensed to carry on long-term business, is registered as a Class E insurer, which is the license class for long-term insurers with total assets of more than $500 million. CRBG Bermuda is not licensed to carry on general business. CRBG Bermuda has received authorization as a reciprocal jurisdiction reinsurer from the State of Texas.

Pursuant to the terms of the Bermuda Insurance Act, as a Class E insurer, CRBG Bermuda will not be permitted to engage in non-insurance business unless that non-insurance business is ancillary to its core business. Non-insurance business means any business other than insurance business and includes carrying on investment business, underwriting debt or securities or otherwise engaging in investment banking, engaging in commercial or industrial activities, and carrying on the business of management, sales, or leasing of real property.

A Class E insurer is subject to certain requirements and limitations on its ability to make distributions or modify its statutory capital. For instance, a Class E insurer must refrain from declaring or paying any dividends during any financial year if it would cause the company to fail to meet its minimum margin of solvency or enhanced capital requirement. Further restrictions prevent Class E insurers from paying any dividends which would exceed 25% of its total statutory capital and surplus (as set out in its statutory balance sheet in relation to the previous financial year) unless prior to the payment of such dividends, it files an affidavit with the BMA which states that the declaration of the said dividends has not caused the insurer to fail to meet its solvency margins. Additionally, a Class E insurer must apply to the BMA for approval before reducing its total statutory capital (as set out in its previous year’s financial statements) by 15%. In addition to the foregoing restrictions under the Bermuda Insurance Act, as an incorporated Bermuda company, CRBG Bermuda remains subject to the provisions of the Bermuda Companies Act 1981, as amended, which has restrictions on when a company is able to pay dividends and distributions.

CRBG Bermuda must complete and file with the BMA a Capital and Solvency Return, which includes a Commercial Insurer’s Solvency Self-Assessment (“CISSA”). The CISSA assesses the adequacy of the company’s capital position and management of material risk exposures and is similar to the ORSA filed by our U.S. life insurance subsidiaries with their domiciliary regulators.

Additionally, Nippon Life Insurance Company, a mutual company (sougogaisha) organized under the laws of Japan (“Nippon”), which holds an approximately 24.6% interest in our Common Stock, as of December 31, 2025 is regulated by the Insurance Business Act of Japan (Act No. 105 of 1995, as amended) (“the IBA”) and the Financial Services Agency of Japan (the “JFSA”). As a result, we are considered an affiliate of Nippon for purposes of the IBA and its subordinate regulations and related supervisory guidelines issued by the JFSA (the “JFSA Guidelines”). As an affiliate of a regulated insurance company in Japan, Nippon may request that we comply with certain requirements of the IBA, its subordinate regulations, and the JFSA Guidelines, including providing certain information to satisfy Nippon’s financial reporting and risk and solvency requirements. In practice, the JFSA has broad prudential powers to request additional information from Nippon, which Nippon may, in turn, request from us. Nippon may also be prohibited from entering into certain transactions with us unless they are on arms’ length terms and approved by the JFSA.

Corebridge | 2025 Form 10-K 35

Derivatives

Regulation of, and restrictions on, derivatives markets and transactions were adopted outside the United States in conjunction with similar regulation promulgated by U.S. regulators. For U.S. derivatives discussion, see “U.S. Regulation—Dodd-Frank” for further information. For instance, the EU and UK established a set of regulatory requirements for EU and UK derivatives activities and EU- and UK-regulated entities under the European Market Infrastructure Regulation (“EMIR”) and English law, respectively. These requirements include, among other things, various risk mitigation, risk management, margin posting, regulatory reporting, and, for certain categories of derivatives, clearing requirements, that are broadly similar to, but also deviate in certain respects from, U.S. regulations of these activities.

Markets in Financial Instruments Directive II

The Markets in Financial Instruments Directive II (“MiFID II”) and Markets in Financial Instruments Regulation (“MiFIR”) took effect in Europe on January 3, 2018. MiFID II and the related regulations are intended to create transparency in market trading by, for example, imposing trade and transaction reporting and other requirements. Corebridge Institutional Investments (Europe), Limited has implemented and continues to implement new policies, procedures and reporting protocols required to ensure compliance with this legislation and its related rules. Corebridge Institutional Investments (Europe), Limited prepares and submits an Internal Capital Adequacy and Risk Assessment report to the UK Financial Conduct Authority relating to its own funds and liquidity requirements.

EMIR, which governs derivatives, and MiFID II were adopted by the UK government as part of the Brexit legislative “onshoring” process. The MiFID II requirements were implemented in the UK before the UK’s exit from the EU and then amended to reflect the UK’s exit from the EU. MiFIR and EMIR were “onshored” to become part of English law. The UK government has announced intended reforms to the MiFID II rules governing trading venues and equity markets in the UK, onshored versions of MiFID II and MiFIR in the Wholesale Markets Review, and minor changes to EMIR. At present, it is anticipated that substantive obligations on Corebridge Institutional Investments (Europe), Limited arising from EMIR and MIFID II are unlikely to change in the UK context in the near future.

Regulation of Non-U.S. Investment Business

We operate investment-related businesses in, among other jurisdictions, the UK. These businesses may advise on and market investment management products and services, investment funds, and separately managed accounts. The regulatory authorities for these businesses include securities, investment advisory, financial conduct, and other regulators that typically oversee such issues as: (i) company licensing; (ii) the approval of individuals with positions of responsibility; (iii) conduct of business to customers; (iv) solvency and capital adequacy; and (v) securities, commodities and related laws, among other items. For example, our regulated asset manager in the UK (Corebridge Institutional Investments (Europe) Limited) is regulated by the UK Financial Conduct Authority. We also participate in investment-related joint ventures in jurisdictions outside the United States, primarily in Europe and Asia. In some cases, our international investment operations are also subject to U.S. securities laws and regulations.

FSB and IAIS

The Financial Stability Board (the “FSB”) consists of representatives of national financial authorities of the G20 countries. The FSB is not a regulator but is focused primarily on promoting international financial stability.

The International Association of Insurance Supervisors (“IAIS”) represents insurance regulators and supervisors of more than 200 jurisdictions (including regions and states) in nearly 140 countries and seeks to promote globally consistent insurance industry supervision. The IAIS is not a regulator, but one of its activities is to develop insurance regulatory standards for use by local authorities across the globe. The IAIS has adopted ComFrame, a Common Framework for the Supervision of Internationally Active Insurance Groups (“IAIGs”). ComFrame sets out qualitative and quantitative standards for group supervision, governance and internal controls, enterprise risk management, and recovery and resolution planning. As part of ComFrame, the IAIS has adopted a risk-based global insurance capital standard applicable to IAIGs, with the purpose of creating a common language for supervisory discussions of group solvency of IAIGs. We are not to date designated as an IAIG.

The standards issued by the FSB and/or the IAIS are not binding on the United States or other jurisdictions around the world unless and until the appropriate local governmental bodies or regulators adopt laws and regulations implementing such standards. At this time, as these standards have been adopted only relatively recently and, in some cases, remain under development, it is not known how the IAIS’s frameworks and/or standards might be implemented in the United States and other jurisdictions around the world or how they might ultimately apply to us.

Corebridge | 2025 Form 10-K 36

Privacy and Cybersecurity

Our non-U.S. entities, and potentially certain entities established in the U.S., are subject to privacy and cybersecurity laws and regulations applicable in foreign countries where they operate, including the EU General Data Protection Regulation, the UK General Data Protection Regulation, the EU’s Artificial Intelligence Act, Bermuda’s Personal Information Protection Act, and BMA’s Insurance Sector Operational Cyber Risk Management Code of Conduct. These laws and regulations impose a range of compliance obligations in relation to the Processing of Company Information, including the privacy of personal data, the use of AI, and the confidentiality, integrity and availability of information systems and operations. We expect to see continued focus on privacy, cybersecurity, resiliency, and AI by regulators and other government authorities outside of the U.S.

Available Information

Our corporate website iswww.corebridgefinancial.com. Reference to our website is made as an inactive textual reference. We make available free of charge, through the Investor Relations section of our corporate website, the following reports (and related amendments as filed with the SEC) as soon as reasonably practicable after such materials are electronically filed with, or furnished to, the SEC:

•Annual Reports on Form 10-K

•Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q

•Current Reports on Form 8-K

•Proxy Statements on Schedule 14A, as well as other filings with the SEC

Also available on our corporate website:

•Amended and Restated Bylaws

•Second Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation

•Audit Committee Charter

•Compensation and Management Development Committee Charter

•Corporate Governance Guidelines

•Director Communications Policy

•Director, Executive Officer and Senior Financial Officer Code of Business Conduct and Ethics (we will post on our website any amendment or waiver to this Code within the time period required by the SEC)

• Code of Conduct

•Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee Charter

•Third Party Code of Conduct

Except for the documents specifically incorporated by reference into this Annual Report on Form 10-K, information contained on our website or that can be accessed through our website is not incorporated by reference into this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Corebridge | 2025 Form 10-K 37