Greetings, and welcome to the Huntsman Second Quarter 2026 Earnings Conference Call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. A question and answer session will follow the formal presentation. If anyone should require operator assistance during the conference, please press star zero on your telephone keypad. Please note that this conference is being recorded. I will now turn the conference over to Ivan Marcuse, VP of IR and Corporate Development. Thank you. You may begin.

Thank you, Daryl, and good morning, everyone. Welcome to Huntsman's second quarter 2026 earnings call. Joining us on the call today are Peter Huntsman, Chairman, CEO, and President, and Phil Lister, Executive Vice President and CFO. Yesterday, July 30th, 2026, we released our earnings for the second quarter 2026 via press release and posted it on our website, Huntsman.com. We also posted a set of slides and detailed commentary discussing the second quarter 2026 on our website. Peter Huntsman will provide some opening comments shortly, and we will then move into the question and answer session for the remainder of the call. During the call, let me remind you that we may make statements about our projections or expectations for the future. All such statements are forward-looking statements, and while they reflect our current expectations, they involve risks and uncertainties and are not guarantees of future performance. You should review our filings with the SEC for more information regarding the factors that could cause actual results that differ materially from these projections or expectations. We do not plan on publicly updating or revising any forward-looking statements during the quarter. We will also refer to non-GAAP financial measures such as adjusted EBITDA, adjusted net income, and free cash flow. You can find reconciliations to the most directly comparable GAAP financial measures in our earnings release, which has been posted to our website, Huntsman.com. I'll now turn the call over to Peter Huntsman, our Chairman and CEO.

Ivan, thank you very much, and thank you, everybody, for taking the time to join us this morning. It's been three months since the last time we were able to report on market conditions and what we were doing as a company to enhance shareholder value. Needless to say, it has been a rather busy few months on a number of fronts. I'd like to comment on a few things, but I plan to be brief as your questions and comments are the reason for this call. I stated during our last quarter's call that while I was heartened to see the prices and margins were improving across most of our product lines, I emphasized the need for, quote, stable and long-term demand trends to continue. While we improved our margins from the first quarter, I remain concerned as to the growth rates and consumer confidence that we are seeing. Since our last call, North American housing stats have softened and Chinese consumer confidence continues to languish. Europe continues its ill-fated energy policy, and all that free wind is now costing European consumers and industry near record amounts. As ongoing conflicts in the Middle East seemingly move weakly from a ceasefire to all-out war, moving energy prices, stock markets, and consumer sentiment with each action, we continue to keep a wary eye on inflation and consumer spending, especially on durable goods. It seems much of this turbulence will continue through the third quarter. While this is playing havoc on cost and order patterns, it is also demonstrating the value of reliable supply lines, contractual assurance of supply, and the value of pricing and consistent quality. We will continue to push for greater margins, as we believe that this industry still has a lot of room for improvement. On the 16th of June, we announced a merger of equal with Olin Corporation. Since that time, we've had the opportunity to visit one-on-one with the majority of our largest shareholders. If I had to summarize my feelings towards this transaction, it would be in the answer that I shared when I was asked if I could do anything different than what had been done. My response was that I wish I had met Ken Lane a year earlier and that we were here today earning materially more than we otherwise would be earning. Regardless of market conditions, whether they improve or continue to languish, our company and shareholders will be better off with this proposed merger. If this transaction was a year behind us, we would be today well on our way to achieving an additional $300 million in synergies. We would be earning more through newfound commercial opportunities that are not even part of our $300 million in synergies. We would have a stronger balance sheet that would be improving quarter by quarter. In short, should today's market conditions continue through next year, we will be better off than we are today. Should markets improve, we will be the benefactors of not only the forthcoming synergies, but also higher combined volumes and greater integration. Either way, this positions us to improve regardless of market conditions. I have been impressed with the strong collaboration and interaction between the Huntsman and Olin teams that are advancing our closing at a rapid pace. Our teams will be ready on day one of closing to commence with achieving our outline synergies. Between now and closing, we will continue to focus on creating as much shareholder value as possible. Following the completion of this transaction, we'll be able to achieve far more. Operator with that, we'll open the lineup for any questions and comments.

Thank you. We will now be conducting a question and answer session. If you would like to ask a question, please press star 1 on your telephone keypad. A confirmation tone will indicate your line is in the question queue. You may press star 2 if you would like to remove your question from the queue. Participants using speaker equipment, it may be necessary to pick up your handset before pressing the star keys. We ask that you please limit yourself to one question and one follow-up question. Our first questions come from the line of Frank Mitch with Fermium Research. Please proceed with your questions.

Hey, good morning. I was wondering if you could update us on the state of the MDI business from a demand and a supply standpoint, particularly on the supply side, given what's been going on with the Iranian conflict. How do you see that impact, 2Q? What are your expectations for 3Q and beyond?

Well, I think on 2Q, we had the ability to be able to put prices up. Much of that was to recover the increase of raw materials that we were seeing at the time. But we were also able to get ahead, as our results indicate, that we've nearly doubled our EBITDA since second quarter of last year. Look, on a supply basis, we obviously have a large global MDI plant that is on the wrong side of the Strait of Hormuz, I would say, and that is probably representing somewhere around 4% of industry average. so from from a supply point of view frank i i think that it's it's pretty well balanced my my disappointment if i have one is that we're not seeing greater demand and greater improvement in the macro economic situation i don't want to be overly dire on this i'm just saying that uh yeah on the supply side i think it's pretty well balanced on the demand side uh i'd like to I'd like to see a little bit more. Right now, depending on where you are around the world, you're probably seeing anywhere from 0% to 2%, very low single-digit sort of growth that is taking place. So an improved economy, improved housing demand, particularly North America would be very helpful. Return in consumer confidence in Asia would be very good to see. And frankly, improved sentiment, consumer sentiment, and lower energy inflation, Europe, I think, would all be benefactors this time.

I hear you. Obviously, the PMIs have actually ticked positive, so that's on the plus side of the equation. But if I could also, other than what would you do differently, what else have you been hearing from investors regarding the Ola merger or probably said a different way, what might be the investment community be missing given, you know, on how the shares have been trading? Thank you.

I'm not sure that the investment community is missing a whole lot as much as, you know, this industry is, I'll borrow the, what is it, Missouri, that's the show me state. I think that once you can actually get a transaction closed, show me that you're going to get the synergies that you said you're going to get on a timely basis. Show me the difference of what two companies together, one and one, adds up to three. Show me this, and I'll reward you with the commensurate results. And I think that the market feedback that I personally am getting is that this makes sense. I like the integration. Let's remember that chlorine and that the entire line of raw materials that we're presently buying from chlorine, to Caustic, to EPI, to LER, to EDC, this is the only major supply chain that every single one of the divisions within Huntsman consumes today. And it affects every one of our businesses. We really have a material opportunity here to improve our economics and to be more competitive on a global basis. And as we see the results of this coming through, I think that the market will be very quick and will be very generous in the reward.

Thank you. Our next questions come from the line of Josh Spector with UBS. Please proceed with your questions.

Yeah, hey, good morning. I wanted to ask in advanced materials. I mean, you called out some pull forward, and I don't think you actually sized it specifically in the quarter. I'm curious if you could give a comment on that. And it seems like you're assuming that unwinds in 3Q, just trying to understand some of the phasing there a bit better.

Sorry, when you say the pull forward into Q2. Yes.

So, Josh, it was a little bit in the aerospace segment where we saw where I think they were getting their supply chain. They just wanted to be more secure there. So you saw a gauge at a couple million.

Yeah, okay. Yeah, I think we're talking about low singular millions of dollars there. Sorry, I thought we were actually moving material volumes there or something. No, that'll be a de minimis impact.

Okay. And just, I mean, similarly within that segment, as you look at some of the upstream costs going down, I'm just wondering around some of the timing impacts. Is that something that helps your margins into 3Q, or is it all relatively quick?

I think it's – I mean, we respond pretty quickly. We've got low inventories on raw materials. Typically, what we see, the raw material movements we see in that industry, it comes through pretty quick. I would say that our biggest impact in Q3 is going to be based on what we do in pricing and what we see in demand, more so than raw material movement.

Thank you. Our next questions come from the line of Hassan Ahmed with Alembic Global. Please proceed with your questions.

Morning, Peter. You know, first question on polyurethanes. You know, obviously, a lot of stuff moving around. I mean, we've seen some TDI outages. I would imagine that may result in some incremental demand on the MDI side of it. Then we've obviously seen some outages in MDI itself. So just in terms of effective utilization rates, where do you see the industry, and should it be relatively snug over the next quarter or two? And part and parcel with that, I know you guys have taken some pricing actions in Europe in particular, but obviously nat gas prices, they continue to rise. So, I mean, will you guys be EBITDA positive over there after the price actions, and will the industry over there be EBITDA positive as well?

Well, if I had – Hassan, thank you very much. If I had to look at the market today in the snapshot, I would say that, yes, Europe, with the pricing actions and with the cost structure that we have, Europe should be positive as we look into the third quarter. Now, again, over the last couple of weeks here, and I'm talking the last two or three weeks, I've seen gas in Europe go from about $13, $14 per MMBT, rise above $20 per MMBT. Now, should it continue to do that? Should electricity continue to rise at these rates? I don't believe that will be the case. But if they were to continue, that obviously is going to pose some headwinds. That's my biggest concern around Europe right now on a macro basis are energy costs and overall consumer demand. It's tough to get prices up when you see demand going down. or languishing, and people are obviously fighting over a shrinking pie. So as I think about Europe, I continue to be optimistic that we will be EBITDA positive in the third quarter there. As you look at it on a macro basis, I would imagine, without looking at industry data, because there's not a whole lot that's published, We're probably operating in a capacity utilization rate somewhere in the mid-80s on a global basis. Some areas, I think in the U.S., it's tighter than that. I think in Europe it might be a little looser than that. Asia is probably right on top of that. There have been a number of outages that are around. And, again, if demand were rising at traditional levels of 4% to 6% per annum sort of growth rates, I think you'd see much tighter markets in today.

Understood. And as a follow-up on the merger with Olin, again, going back to the question around your conversations with investors, I mean, are you getting any pushback on these cost synergy numbers? And again, I just wanted to sort of seek some clarification around that. I mean, at least in my mind, part of the cost synergy is obviously the integration of chlorine into your polyurethane acid base, but also part of the synergy, cost synergy would be the incremental caustic that would sort of, you know, be sort of produced as a result of Olin taking up those operating rates to feed into your polyurethane system. Seeing investors sort of quiz that, question that, or, you know, I mean, is there some confusion around that?

No, I think, Hassan, I think it's a very good and fair question. I think that our industry is notorious for cost savings that don't always fall to the bottom line. And you see these massive cost-saving programs that are initiated over a two- or three-year period. At the end of the two- or three-year period, you're kind of asking yourself, well, which one was it? Either the industry collapsed or you got zero cost savings, because I don't really see a whole lot of difference in the bottom line. One of the things that literally in our very first conversations that Ken and I had on a one-on-one basis, this was something that was very important. If this deal is going to go forward, we're going to have to have real substantive synergies that make sense. We got our senior teams together. They've met multiple times on a face-to-face basis, on an ongoing basis over the last couple of months. And we have a bucket of about $300 million. Say that $75 million of that is purchasing logistics. That's pretty straightforward. You get your purchasing people together. They're buying products. We're buying products. Many of those are the same products. Who's buying at a better rate? You've got a cost savings there. We look at the overlap between our epoxy businesses. We think that the combination of the two businesses coming together make for a stronger, a more competitive, a more capable company that is able to compete on a global basis. But you've also got overlapping areas where you have an opportunity to become more efficient there. That was approximately another $75 million. That also included, between those two areas, that also included added integration that comes by consuming more chlorine, more epi, more LER, more EDC. And as you do that, you're obviously producing and generating internally more caustic credit for that. So that's kind of the two buckets of 75. And then you've got $150 million of SG&A. Obviously, the combined companies don't need two CEOs. Obviously, we don't need two CFOs. We don't need two independent board of directors and the associated cost filings, two audits, two this and two. So as you start going through all of that, we think that $150 million was a number that was eminently achievable and that after a two-year basis, the vast majority of these savings would be incurred. Now, there's another $100-plus million, and I say plus because that's just not only chlorine savings, but it's also caustic value that's generated from that chlorine savings. And that's merely a contract that exists with a chlorine supplier today that is not Olin, obviously. Huntsman will continue to honor that contract, and Olin Huntsman will continue to honor that contract through its duration. When it is complete, we will be supplying that internally, and we believe that that will be the benefit that will come from that. So it's very straightforward. It's just a question of opening up a valve through an existing pipeline, through a system that we've used in the past, and being able to take advantage of that. So the $300 million of synergies plus another $100 million that is the replacement, and none of that did I outline any commercial opportunities, wherein by being more competitive, by having a more competitive cost basis, that we're able to go out and get new customers, and that we're able to take our technologies of both companies coming together and capitalize on that. So, again, I believe that in order to have the full benefit of these synergies, you're going to have to offset on an ongoing basis your inflation pressures on your cost system. And when you can demonstrate that you truly have a combined package of $400 million of synergies, you're able to have the integration. You're able to have the new commercial opportunities. You're able to have your ongoing efficiency programs to offset inflation in addition to the synergies that I've just outlined. That's what will fundamentally make what I believe when I say one-on-one make three. The EBITDA benefit from that, the multiple on that, will create roughly the value of a standalone Huntsman or a standalone Olin today. and you're essentially creating an entity through those cost savings that is equal to either one of us on a standalone basis. So, Hassan, I am sorry. That was way long of an answer here. But it's one that I think that people are rightly focused on. It's one that people should rightly be focused on and should be questioning. And it's one that we feel very confident that from day one we've been able to have these as a bottom-up number and calculation and not just some third-party consultant coming in and saying, let's pick 5% or whatever of your revenues, and that should be your target.

Thank you. Our next questions come from the line of Matthew Dio with the Bank of America. Please proceed with your questions.

Morning, everyone. Can you talk through the potential impacts of the anti-dumping duties on USMDI and whether you think that lends to a higher floor over time for that business, what that floor could ultimately look like?

I think that, well, what the floor looks like, I don't want to – I wouldn't speculate on that, not that I'm trying to avoid an answer as much as I just simply don't know. but it ought to be better than where we were a year ago. But let's also be honest. I believe that you're going to need demand to pick up. You're going to need housing to get back to a more normalized run rate to see any real material benefit come from this. And let's remember, there's a lot of MDI that's exported from the United States. It goes into Canada, it goes into Mexico, it goes into Latin America and so forth. There are still imports from around the world that are going into those regions, and for every ton that goes into those regions and pushes U.S.-produced MDI back from those regions back into the United States market, I mean, we say that that export-oriented MDI is not coming to the U.S., but it kind of is in a roundabout way, right? And so I think that a lot of people were expecting as soon as this was implemented and put into place, you're going to see a benefit the next quarter. Now, this is something that will play out over a multi-quarter basis, and you'll see the greatest benefit of this come about when demand returns and housing returns to a more normalized basis.

I appreciate the answer, Peter. And I've been jumping around a little bit, so I apologize if I missed it, but polyol pricing was pretty strong in the quarter. You had an outage, obviously, at one of the large competitors, which tightened a fair amount of the market. What was the benefit there? What does that look like in 3Q, 4Q? How is that market managing all that? Because we also heard some customers on the coding side talking about these shortages domestically as well.

I wouldn't say that it was this. I heard a lot more horror stories than I think actually happened in the industry. Look, our impact and benefit would be in the low $2 million to $3 million sort of a range. So, yeah, I'm not sure that it was as big of a deal as some maybe put it out in the media.

And just as a reminder, Matt, obviously the upstream outages are over in quarter three, So product is coming back into the market there.

Our next question has come from the line of David Begleiter with Deutsche Bank. Please proceed with your questions.

Good morning, Peter. Good morning, David. Peter, U.S. MDI supply disruptions in Q2 helped you guys as these disruptions come back online in Q3. Is there a way to qualify the impact to you guys quarter over quarter?

I wish I could say that we had 100% operating rates during the quarter as well. We had some minor issues, I believe, that were reported. But I think across the industry, going from second quarter into third quarter, So there's quite a bit of inventory going into second quarter that was built up for a housing season that really didn't take off as much as probably some anticipated. Bottom line, I don't see a whole lot of impact with those restarts going into the third quarter. It looks like it's, you know, pretty flat from a demand or from a supply-demand basis. Got it.

And in the filings you guys put out, you did provide some projections for EBITDA. Specifically, 2027, roughly $500 million. Could you talk to that projection? And I know things have constantly changed here, but maybe how you think about that number sitting here today?

Yeah, David, it's Phil. Yeah, as we put together our projections and we looked out through the time period for the S4, we assumed a continued improvement in economies around the world. um pickups in construction nothing significant uh housing not moving back up to one eight one nine but fairly fairly moderate improvements in housing activities you move from 26 into 27 continued improvements in our power our aerospace businesses in advanced materials and in general sort of a moderate improvement as we move towards what we call sort of more cycle average earnings as you move through 2028 thank you our next questions come from the line

of Kevin McCarthy with Vertical Research Partners. Please proceed with your questions.

Yes, thank you very much. Peter, I'd welcome any thoughts that you might have on the month of July and how that compared to the second quarter average. In particular, I think what I'm trying to gauge is, you know, as you offer the guidance that you did on slide 13, do we need any sequential improvement between July and September to achieve the midpoint of that range, or not? Thank you.

Yeah, good question, Kevin. I think that as I look at the results of July and I look at the order patterns going into September, I think if I describe it as simply as possible, it's stable. And I think we're kind of looking to the third quarter to be that. And, you know, I think that, you know, we try to say there's as much tailwind as there is headwind. And I think that we've, from where I sit today, again, all of that can come apart with all the actions we're going around the world. But it feels pretty stable right now.

Okay, thank you for that. And then, if I may, your advanced materials volume seems like it's on a pretty good track at 8% growth in the second quarter. Can you comment on the aerospace piece of that segment and maybe the non-aerospace piece and kind of how you see the trajectory in the back half?

I would say that the business right now has a rising tide across all of our applications, but there are two that are probably, I would say, rising a little bit faster than the others. The first of those would be power, and when I talk about power, that's not electronics. That's power in the grid system. So you think about all of these – I'm going to say something favorable here about wind energy, so listen up. So you think about all these windmills that all need to be interconnected. You know, that's actually great. So you kind of got this spider web of power lines that are connecting all of these things. And as you think about that, you know, that power grid system needs to be improved with the renewable or alternative energy. Power is also being built out going into AI. And the third area is power is also we're relying on a fast-growing AI alternative energy system that's built largely around a 30- to 50-year-old infrastructure. So you're modernizing, you're expanding, and you've also, AI is impacting power. So I give a shout out to power. Aerospace for us, I want to just emphasize, we are still, when we think about wide bodies, wide body on a per plane basis, wide body is our bread and butter in advanced materials on the composite side. So you think about the material that's going into wings and fuselages and so forth. So the build rate on wide bodies, and I'm talking specifically about 777, 787s, and Airbus 350s, we are still not back to pre-COVID 2018, 2019 sort of build rates. What we are seeing in aerospace, we are seeing that recovery continue, A, but B, we're seeing a number of new applications, so interior parts and so forth, we're seeing aerospace adhesions and what have you. And that area for us is growing faster than is the composite. Now, I expect the composite to continue to recover. So aerospace for us will continue to be a strong recovery story and also new application story. And bear in mind that for us, usually second quarter is usually a stronger month in aerospace. It's not – I wouldn't say it's typically seasonal. it seems like people store up at the beginning of the year and build out throughout the year. So that's usually the case. And the rest of the business, I would say, in advanced materials, when we're looking at coatings, looking at construction, looking at automotive, all of those feel like they're all pretty much tracking PMI. I would just say that we are seeing a little bit better growth than what I would say would be inflation or PMI growth in automotive as well. Some new applications, particularly in EVs. We've talked about these in the past where we qualified for applications a year ago, six months ago, and so forth. We're now starting to see the build rates of those hitting the market. So we talked up these things a couple of quarters ago. We're actually starting to see that on the automotive. So in advanced materials, automotive is another area where we're seeing stronger than kind of expected growth.

Thank you. Our next questions come from the line of Matthew Blair with Tudor Pickering-Holtland Co. Please proceed with your questions.

Thanks, and good morning, Peter. Would you say that spray foam is pulling up relatively well despite the tough construction environment? I think the report remarks mentioned some new wins in select markets. Could you elaborate a little bit more on that?

Yeah, I think that spray foam, we've got excellent leadership in spray foam that's done a phenomenal job in looking and making their supply chain more efficient, their costs better, and most importantly, their marketing and their sales have been very effective in a lethargic construction environment. We're seeing low double-digit growth continue to consistently take place. In spray foam, energy efficiency, you know, I think that I'm a bit disappointed as to where we were two years ago in that business, but I look at where we are today, and they're hitting on all cylinders. They're doing a great job. So it's been a great business for us.

Sounds good. And then I guess this might be for Phil, but any estimates on what net leverage would look like by the end of the year? I think, you know, you showed a pretty good improvement in the second quarter down to 5.4 from 6.1 in Q1. Do you think something around the range of three and a half to four times net leverage by the end of 2026 is possible?

Yeah, so you're right, Matt. We went from 6.1 down to 5.4 with a net debt level of approximately $1.7 billion. Obviously, that was with kind of a seasonal cash outflow in the first half of the year. I'd expect certainly a cash inflow in the second half of the year to help that net debt number. And yeah, you should be moving more towards that sort of four times net debt leverage ratio as you progress through the second half of the year.

Thank you. Our next questions come from the line of Abigail Eberts with Wells Fargo. Please proceed with your questions.

Hi there. Thanks for taking my question. Again, trying to focus on the positives and polyurethanes. Can you speak to the underlying trends driving the growth in the industrial side of the market that you're seeing?

Yeah, Abigail, thank you very much. As we think about the industrial growth for us, that's mostly our elastomers business, smaller volumes, but much better margins there. And we see that on a second quarter versus the prior year in our Elastomers business, we're up double digits in Asia, Europe, and in the Americas. So again, that's going to be a lot of your coatings, a lot of your specialty coatings, adhesions, and so forth. Think about when you put coatings on the back of a pickup truck and you're looking at industrial coatings. So these are fast-growing markets. We've got great innovation in these areas and a strong customer base.

Thank you.

Thank you. Our next question has come from the line of Arun Viswanathan with RBC Capital Markets. Please proceed with your questions.

Thanks for taking my question. I was on mute there. Yeah, I just wanted to go back to the supply-demand in MDI, and, you know, we are seeing still some continued – would you characterize the market still in slightly oversupplied situations, And is that mainly rectified through demand improvement? I think you referenced that earlier. But are there any supply actions that you think would be required at this point?

No, I believe that it's pretty well balanced. There's not a lot of new capacity that's come on. The industry continues to grow, but it's just growing at a much slower pace than it has in years past. And what it needs is North American housing durable goods. It needs Asia domestic economy to come back and and European consumerism to return.

Thanks. And then I guess when you look out into downstream spray foam and maybe some of the system houses, you know, capacity that you have, would you also characterize that as as balanced? And does that – or tight, and does that lead to potentially some greater pricing opportunities downstream? But is it the case that you're just not able to take advantage of that because of weak demand as well? Thanks.

Yeah, I think those areas continue to be well balanced. Look, it's always a – as you go further downstream, there's always plenty of competition. And you're always in a race to make sure that as products are commoditized, that you've got a healthy supply chain of new products, new ideas, new innovation. And I think that we do a good job in that area. But it's a good balance, I think, between as things go commodity and as you have new opportunities and new innovation going in.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Mike Harrison with Seaport Research Partners. please proceed with your question.

Hi, good morning. I wanted to ask about polyurethane's pricing in the Americas. Can you give us a sense of what portion of your contracts turn over every quarter? And are there any actions that you can take to maybe work around the contract structure, things like surcharges? Or is there some kind of an opener that would would allow you to renegotiate the terms?

Yeah, well, about 40% of our contracts are formula, meaning that they're going to be on a longer than a quarter-to-quarter basis. Now, those open up on anywhere from every six months, every 12 months, where you can renegotiate what you're charging somebody. But those are designed to be able to take in and absorb benzene and natural gas prices and so forth. So as you think about that, about every, you know, six to 12 months, most of these contracts will have a pit stop where you can pull over and renegotiate, if you will, which I'm not a big fan of either of those. I'd rather, you know, have it where we can move prices instantaneous with market conditions. But we are where we are in polyurethanes, and that's largely dictated by competition. position. But yes, we are aggressively moving on surcharges on everything and everywhere that we can. And at the same time, we also want to make sure that as you think about your customer relationships, that you're taking care of your customers, because if you're taking advantage of them today, the tables turn pretty quickly in this industry. So yes, we do honor our contracts, we do honor pricing formulas that we entered into. Doesn't mean I'm always happy with those, but it is what it is.

And then I was hoping you could also provide some more color on how the situation in the Middle East is impacting your PO, MTBE business in China. Looks like there was a nice benefit in the second quarter. And I'm just curious, would you expect the third quarter benefit to be greater than what you saw in Q2? Thanks.

I think you're probably going to be flat Q2 to Q3. a lot of the gasoline-supplied, oxygenated levels and values and so forth, to some degree those are going to be government dictates. And so it's not as free-flowing, I would say, as you would see in the Americas or even in Europe. But I'd say from Q2 to Q3 it's going to be flat.

Thank you. Our next question has come from the line of John Roberts with Mizuho Securities. Please proceed with your questions.

Thank you. Do you think your deal with Olin will cause your current chlorine and EDC suppliers to deal with Huntsman differently until you can switch over?

No, I certainly wouldn't expect them to. We've got contracts that we're honoring, and I know most of the leadership of those companies, they're going to honor those contracts as much as we do. I don't see anything there that would change the outlook at all.

Do the contracts at least go out as far as until you can do the switchover?

Yes. I mean, I wish they weren't going to ask as long as they are, but as I said earlier, there's a contract that will be honored. And the largest and longest contract that we have in the Americas is the one that I made reference to earlier that ends at the end of 2030.

But as we said, John, we've got many other products which are moving from Olin's portfolio into Huntsman's, EDC, EPI, LER, and also Caustic. And we'll take advantage of those as and when we're able to. And we've already assumed that we'll get some synergies pretty early on once the deal is actually consummated.

Our final questions will come from the line of Lawrence Alexander with Jefferies. Please proceed through questions.

So, I wanted to touch on two things quickly, if possible. One is, does the merger open up scope for pruning or divestitures within your portfolio to accelerate the deleveraging? Can you just give a sense of what fits versus what is nice to have or maybe doesn't fit so well on the kind of merge portfolio basis from your perspective? And then secondly, just on innovation, can you update on two fronts? One, kind of with the discussion around the composite materials going into aerospace and so on and the demand there, what your current perspective is on Miralon and whatever happened to sort of scaling that up over time. And then secondly, kind of the strategy around the polyurethane derivatives business or downstream business, the innovation efforts you were doing there. Can you give a sense of how much that is adding to the growth? I realize it's swamped by the end market swings, but, you know, in terms of a compound effect, you know, kind of how much traction have those efforts had over the last couple of years and what does that set up for the next few years?

Yeah, Lawrence, thanks. Great question. I think that when you look at portfolio management, that's going to be a decision that would be made by the new CEO of Olin Huntsman, Ken Lane, obviously with the input of his management team and also that of the board of directors and looking over that entire portfolio. I think any prudent company has to be able to look at their asset base and what impact do those assets have and where's the value of those assets. The larger your portfolio is, I think is the general rule of thumb, not just in the chemical industry, but across the board, the larger your portfolio is, the more flexibility you have. If you're a relatively small company and you've got two divisions, you don't have a lot of optionality of getting rid of one of those divisions because you may end up being so small you can't afford to get that small and cut the company in half. If you've got a larger portfolio, more entities and different forms of integration and so forth, I think you've got more flexibility there. So again, probably a frustrating answer to you in the sense that I'm not going to get in, obviously, into various products or divisions or entities and so forth, but I think that this does give both companies, once they're together, greater flexibility to assess their assets and do more aggressively achieve their objectives of deleveraging and having a strong balance sheet. As I think about Miralon and the overall products that we see there, I think that we've, if I were just to put it in the simplest of terms, the product that we're producing today is being very well accepted by customers and our challenge that is before us today is how do we scale that production up as quickly as possible. and as successfully as possible. I'd rather have that challenge than the challenge that we're able to make a lot of product that nobody wants. So we're able to make something that customers have been able to utilize. They've seen the benefit of it. Now our challenge is to make sure that we've got the ability to increase our capacity, thus lowering the cost per ton of production. And I believe that we're well on that path. Again, as I said earlier, same with Synergy. Show me the output and show me the results, and I think you get credit for it. And I think we're much closer to achieving that than we were a quarter or two ago. As we look at our downstream derivatives in polyurethanes, I believe that we have, looking at our insulation business, looking at our adhesives, our elastomers, our ACE businesses that we talked about earlier, So we're going to continue to build on those. I think we've got a very good product pipeline. The investment we made a few years ago in the Patriot product in Louisiana to further derivatize downstream our capacity gives us the ability in China, gives us the ability in Europe, and gives us the ability in North America to take more pounds than we've ever had before and derivatize those into greater value-added components. And that's going to be an important part of our strategy going forward.

Lawrence, I just look at the growth numbers that we put out this quarter, 8% in advanced materials, 4% in polyurethanes, and those are clearly in excess of what we're seeing in the underlying markets. And a big part of that is the innovation gains that we're seeing throughout those two divisions.

We have reached the end of our question and answer session. And with that, I would like to bring the call to a close. We appreciate your participation. You may disconnect your lines at this time, and have a wonderful day.