Just as a reminder, statements in today's earnings release and presentation and the comments made by management during this call may be considered forward-looking statements. These statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from our expectations and projections. Those risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to, the factors identified in the earnings release and in our SEC filings. The company undertakes no obligation to revise any forward-looking statements. Today's remarks also refer to certain non-GAAP financial measures. Reconciliations to the most comparable GAAP measures are included in today's earnings release and in the appendix to the presentation, which are available at investors.smurfitwestrock.com. Before handing over to Tony, given we have a full day of investor engagement, I would ask you to limit your questions to two, and should you require any clarifications on what we are discussing today, myself and Frank will do our best to make ourselves available after the call. I'll now hand you over to Tony Smurfit, CEO of Smurfit Westrock.

Thank you, Ciaran, and good morning, good afternoon, everyone. I appreciate you taking the time to join us today. As highlighted in this morning's release, we have achieved a strong fourth quarter performance with an adjusted EBITDA of USD 1.166 billion and an adjusted EBITDA margin of 15.5%. For the full year 2024, we reported a combined adjusted EBITDA of USD 4.706 billion, fully in line with our guidance from October. On July 5 of last year, Smurfit Kappa merged with Westrock to form the new Smurfit Westrock Company. The scale and scope of this company are impressive. We have numerous operating facilities globally, primarily in North America, which accounts for about 60% of our business, with EMEA and APAC representing 33%, and the remainder in Latin America, based on revenue. Our merger established us as the leading sustainable packaging partner, offering an unmatched product portfolio, expertise, and scale. To quantify that, we operate over 500 converting facilities across various areas, including corrugated and specialty packaging, along with 62 mills focused on sustainable packaging, corrugated papers, consumer papers, and some specialty papers. Our paper mills are supported by over 14 million tonnes of waste paper that we process, and we also manage approximately 300,000 acres of forestry, mainly in Brazil and Colombia. With a workforce exceeding 100,000 people across 40 countries and net sales surpassing $31 billion last year, our goal was not merely to be large but to be the best. A key factor in achieving this is our competent management team. While it's common for businesses to claim that their people are their most valuable assets, I can genuinely say that the Smurfit Westrock leadership team is stable, experienced, and has successfully navigated numerous challenges while meeting all performance metrics. This team improved the EBITDA margin of legacy Smurfit Kappa from 13.8% to 18.5%, increased ROCE from 12% to 17.1%, reduced leverage from 2.8 times to 1.4 times, and raised the dividend tenfold. Concurrently, we've invested capital to enhance our asset base and support customer growth. I'm proud to say we've built a unique, high-quality asset base and footprint. Many members of this team contributed to transforming the former Kappa Group and delivered successfully for its stakeholders. We achieved this by focusing on our core competencies. We adopt an owner-operator model and foster a performance-driven culture with decentralized operations, allowing every manager to hold P&L responsibility for their unit. This approach creates a sharp commercial focus, with the company supporting management to enhance efficiency, reduce costs, and fulfill customer needs. We also invest in training and rewarding our people at all levels to foster a unique culture. These factors are fundamental to Smurfit Kappa's success. Our team, along with many new colleagues from Westrock, is committed to building a successful future together at Smurfit Westrock. A lot has already been accomplished. We delivered on our target with $4.7 billion in adjusted EBITDA, fulfilling our commitments. Additionally, we initiated a synergy program that we are confident will meet or exceed the $400 million target by the end of this year, with benefits realized this year and next. As we analyze the business further, we have identified more opportunities for improvement, estimating an additional $400 million. By empowering our people, we can achieve significant operational enhancements through cost reduction, innovative commercial strategies, and targeted capital expenditures to boost profitability. My senior colleagues and I have visited the majority of our facilities, and while there's always room for improvement, we've adjusted our estimated capital spending for the current year to between $2.2 billion and $2.4 billion based on our strong asset positioning. However, it's crucial to note that good assets require the right people to thrive. I was pleased during my visits to see the enthusiasm and commitment of our team in supporting the success of the new Smurfit Westrock. Over the past seven months, we've established a solid foundation for future growth. Our decentralization model has necessitated some streamlining, leading to over 1,000 positions being eliminated globally in North America, Mexico, and elsewhere. Nevertheless, we've also launched a major program to train and develop our talent, reflecting our commitment to investing in good management. Throughout the years, we've consistently optimized our production. Difficult yet necessary decisions have been made to streamline our assets, and both Smurfit and Westrock have been focused on optimizing production in converting and mills recently. While these decisions are challenging, they contribute to a healthier and stronger company in the long run. We continue to invest for growth wherever we see opportunities, whether in North America, EMEA, APAC, or Latin America. The examples displayed represent over $750 million in investments across several plants over multiple years, emphasizing our commitment to strengthening the company to effectively serve our customers. Although it feels like our journey has just begun, it's been a little over seven months since our merger on July 5. We are confident that we can leverage our strong market positions and asset quality to ensure efficient and reliable product delivery to our customers. We are dedicated to empowering and motivating our people, who want to be part of our winning team. We believe we are refining our commercial focus to ensure our efforts and investments yield attractive returns. With a wealth of innovative solutions available in all business areas, we're committed to providing our customers with the right innovations at competitive prices. Our operating financial model, which has proven successful, will remain unchanged. Senior management and shareholders are aligned, and we will treat capital as a limited resource, making sure that any allocation decisions benefit all stakeholders. This philosophy has been part of our company's ethos since the 1930s. I will now pass it over to Ken, who will walk you through the financials.

Thank you, Tony. Good morning, and good afternoon, everyone, and thank you again for joining us. As you can see from the highlights slide here on Slide 14, the business delivered a strong fourth quarter performance with net sales of over $7.5 billion, adjusted EBITDA in line with our guidance of $1.166 billion, an EBITDA margin of 15.5% and adjusted free cash flow of almost $260 million. We are starting 2025, i.e., the transformation journey, from a position of significant strength, thanks to the hard work of teams globally and their dedication to customers and to creating the most innovative and sustainable paper-based packaging company in the world. Turning now to the reported performance of our three segments in the quarter, and starting with North America where our operations delivered sales of $4.6 billion with adjusted EBITDA of $710 million, and a very solid adjusted EBITDA margin of 15.4%. Looking at the historical performance of the segment on a combined non-GAAP basis as per the 8-K filed on 24th September last, we saw a significant margin improvement year-on-year primarily due to higher selling prices, with cost headwinds on items such as fiber sourcing and labor being more than offset by lower energy and distribution costs and by reduced economic downtime. Corrugated box pricing was higher compared to the prior year, while box volumes are broadly stable on both an absolute and same-day basis. Our third-party paper sales saw mid-single-digit growth in the quarter and consumer packaging also performed well with volume growth of over 2% when compared to the prior year. As Tony mentioned, we have taken significant actions to streamline the central functions of the segment, and to continue to optimize and invest in the asset base. Crucially, our long-standing philosophy of delivering value over volumes began on day one, and has been embraced right across the legacy operations. Knowledge transfer and the rollout of our unique innovation applications have commenced, and we are changing the business model to drive profit responsibility at the mill and the box plants, while retaining strong central capital controls where we see significant opportunities to replicate a performance-led and owner-operator culture to deliver for our customers and to drive profitable growth. Looking now at our EMEA and APAC division where the segment delivered sales of $2.5 billion, with adjusted EBITDA of $371 million and an adjusted EBITDA margin of 14.7%. Set against the backdrop of what was a challenging year for the wider sector, which we now believe is behind us. In the region, our operations continued to demonstrate exceptional resilience as sales remain stable with adjusted EBITDA or adjusted EBITDA margin only modestly lower compared to the prior year, mostly due to higher recovered fiber and to a lesser degree higher labor costs, which were only partially offset by lower energy and distribution costs and higher box volumes. Corrugated box prices were broadly unchanged while box volumes are 1% higher on an absolute and flat on a same-day basis. Our commitment to innovation, cost discipline, and quality has reinforced our reputation as not only the largest integrated player in the region but also the most reliable packaging and supply chain partner for our customers. We have continued to make significant investments in our operations through new converting machines, upgrades to corrugators and safety systems, and substantial investments in our bag-in-box business, all ensuring we meet the evolving needs of our customers with market-leading innovation, quality, and service. Our LatAm segment, again, remained very strong in the fourth quarter. As you can see here with slides of $0.5 billion, adjusted EBITDA of $121 million, and an adjusted EBITDA margin of over 23%. Again, we're looking at the comparative performance of the segment on a combined non-GAAP basis as compared to September 8-K year-on-year adjusted EBITDA and EBITDA margin were significantly higher in the fourth quarter of 2024. Corrugated box volumes were 3% lower on a same-day basis with Argentina being an outsized drag on the region's demand picture in the fourth quarter, along with our value over volume strategy seeing some pockets of volume contraction in places like Brazil and Colombia, as we continue to roll through some legacy contract structures. Nonetheless, by leveraging our strong track record in quality and service, we successfully implemented pricing initiatives that were more than offset a negative foreign currency translation impact and the lower volumes in our box business to deliver this strong result. Latin America is a region we have operated in since the 1950s and is built on the best of both legacy companies. The region benefits from growing economies and a diverse customer base. And by leveraging our deep understanding of each local market, Smurfit Westrock is well positioned to continue to drive long-term success. And finally, I want to outline how we think about capital allocation at Smurfit Westrock. Those who have followed Smurfit Kappa over the years will know how this framework is both flexible and returns focused at its core. As a team with deep industry experience, which you saw earlier on in the presentation, we see internally allocated capital as the lowest risk and highest quality form of investment and that is a key to the future success of our business. Upon closing the combination on July 5 last year, we conducted a comprehensive assessment of our capital needs right across the business. And as in line at the end of October, CapEx for full year 2025 will be in the range of $2.2 billion to $2.4 billion and well ahead of depreciation. The dividend is also a cornerstone of our capital allocation strategy and the Smurfit Westrock Board recently approved the quarterly dividend of $0.4308 per share, up from $0.3025 per share, again delivering on our promise to pay a dividend stream in line with legacy SKG's progressive policy as we start our full year at Smurfit Westrock. The balance sheet of Smurfit Westrock has significant strength and flexibility, and we are committed to maintaining a strong investment-grade credit rating and indeed, given the scale of our operations and our ability to generate significant free cash flow, we are targeting a long-term leverage ratio of below two times through the cycle. We will also maintain a disciplined approach to M&A and will benchmark any opportunities against all other capital allocation alternatives. And the inclusion of other forms of shareholder returns underscores the flexibility of the framework to ensure that all avenues to create and return value to our shareholders are considered and benchmarked against all options. Ultimately, the framework at its simplest is about creating long-term value for all stakeholders. Lastly, as we noted in the release, the year has started well. Based on that and assuming current market conditions prevail, we anticipate delivering an adjusted EBITDA of approximately $1.25 billion for the first quarter. And with that, I'll pass it back to Tony for concluding remarks.

Thank you, Ken. As I said at the outset, I'm extremely excited about where we find ourselves in Smurfit Westrock. In our previous incarnation, we have shown and proved that we are a winning company with a winning team that has consistently delivered superior operating and financial performance. It is essentially the same team with significant, very significant added expertise from our new colleagues in Westrock. This company has a truly unrivaled scale with a geographic footprint that is without parallel with a diverse product portfolio and a library of unique designs in all areas of our business. As we transfer innovation and best practice capabilities across the combined platform, we are and will open up opportunities for a growing customer base. What we have seen is that we have significant value-creating opportunities both for growth and for cost takeout. But of course, we will do as we have always done this in a disciplined way and in a way that ensures we get the returns that have been the hallmark of our company throughout its history. As I said at the beginning of the presentation today, we are so excited to have created a global leader in sustainable paper-based packaging. We're just seven months into our current transformation journey, a journey that we have been on before. In that time, we have brought together two cultures to form the new Smurfit Westrock culture. This performance-led culture will be the bedrock of our future success. Our industry has a fantastic long-term future as a producer of the most sustainable, innovative, transport and merchandising medium that our customers and their customers, the end consumer increasingly value. The Smurfit Westrock offering with over 2,000 designers every day, creating unique products across all of our product ranges, gives us a competitive advantage in this fundamentally excellent market. Our team has again delivered in the fourth quarter and indeed for the year. We, as a management team, have an owner-operator culture and are committed to continuing to drive growth, efficiency, innovation and cost takeout so that our stakeholders and our customers win. For the full year in 2025, we expect to deliver both continued and meaningful progress on this transformation journey. Thank you for taking the time to listen to Ken and myself, and I'll now hand you over to the operator for your questions. Thank you operator, and we'll take questions when you're ready.

Thank you. We will take our question. Your first question comes from Philip Ng from Jefferies. Please go ahead. Your line is open.

It's great to see your box volumes in North America in the fourth quarter aligning with the broader industry, even while adopting a value-over-volume strategy. So, Tony, as you shift towards focusing more on achieving better returns on the box side and how you approach things at a local level, what have been the early lessons learned on the commercial side? Also, how have the contract discussions progressed as we enter the new calendar year?

Yes, that's a great question, Philip. I believe the value over volume strategy was put into action during the second half of last year. We did not experience any significant negative impact on volumes while we analyzed our profitable and unprofitable customers. However, I do expect to see some decrease in volume as we address certain core issues. That said, the value side of the strategy should largely compensate for this in most cases. The volume performance we've experienced in Q3 and Q4 has not really been impacted by the challenges we're working on, and we anticipate seeing some of those changes in the first half of this year. Specifically in Brazil, we did notice some effects from rapidly addressing certain issues, leading to a slight contraction in volumes there, but our profitability improved. I expect we'll see similar results in our other markets as we progress into 2025. So far, we haven't lost anything significant, but I anticipate we may see a minor loss. On the flip side, our innovations will help us provide better packaging solutions for our customers, which will contribute positively as we move through 2025 and into 2026. Interestingly, one of our larger customers that we lost is already returning to us. When you deliver quality and service that customers need, it suggests that past pricing may have been slightly off.

Okay. That's great color, Tony. Appreciate it and pretty encouraging out of the gate. And then forgive me I'm obviously a lot newer to the European containerboard market. I noticed you and a handful of your peers have price increases in the marketplace for February and March. I guess, out of the gate what's the feedback from your customers and if you anticipate seeing traction? And can you walk us through the mechanics too and how do you see box prices progressing sequentially in the next few quarters? Since we've seen containerboard prices fall the last few months, call it in the last three to six months, but you have increases out there. So do box prices, I guess trigger? And any color, how we should think about box prices in the next few quarters sequentially in Europe?

Yes, that's an excellent question, Philip. If you examine our margins in Europe, you'll notice that we significantly outperform our competition due to our innovation and business model, even with the substantial decline in paper prices. Independent third-party producers who create more paper show minimal profitability. We've often experienced a seesaw effect where increasing paper prices would initially hurt our box prices until adjustments were made, and vice versa. In the second half of last year, our box prices remained relatively stable, allowing us to transfer profitability from paper to boxes. The paper market is currently at a low, resulting in industry price adjustments in February ranging from €30 to €80, with additional increases for kraftliner announced for March. I expect these changes will take effect. We will see a transition from corrugated to paper, followed by a return to our corrugated box system as paper prices adjust. We're continually working to improve the cost base of our paper mills while investing in our corrugated business for further innovation, which has proven effective for us. While we aim for margins higher than 15.5%, our level is still significantly better than most peers due to our integrated business model.

Okay. Appreciate the great color. Thank you.

Thanks, Phil.

Thank you. We will take our next question. Your next question comes from the line of Charlie Muir-Sands from BNP Paribas Exane. Please go ahead. Your line is open.

Hi guys. Thank you for taking my questions. The first one just relates to the $400 million plus of operational and commercial improvement opportunities that you've identified. I just wondered if you could give us a little bit more color on some specific examples, and particularly what actions you've taken so far and what are planned to be implemented in 2025?

Yes. Well, I mean, I'll take the first piece of it. It's very simple Charlie, that there was a lot of underselling going on in the past. And clearly, when you get back to plant level responsibility and you see some of the margins that exist, with some businesses and contracts that have been signed, while you can't get out of all the contracts initially, those that you can get out of you will immediately do so, and you won't lose all that business, because you're actually a very good supplier and a high-quality supplier with very good OTIF, which legacy Westrock has been doing it. In general, I would say, it's a good quality supplier. It was a good quality supplier that had been underpricing many of the businesses, much of the business that it was doing, despite investing in its assets over the years. And then the other improvement, I give before I hand it over to Ken, is that frankly speaking, a lot of the things relative to how the businesses were run were not correctly done, because there wasn't enough focus on it. So we're obviously giving it the right focus, as we push things down. And Rome wasn't built in a day, so it doesn't happen very quickly. But what we can see is just by doing the basics much better, then we'll have tremendous opportunity to improve each and every business. I mean, we don't have in Europe or in the legacy Smurfit Kappa, any businesses in corrugated that lose any substantial amount of money and that's not the case in legacy Westrock and we intend to fix that. And just by that alone, it's something that we hadn't banked on. It's nothing to do with the synergies. It's just about pure basic, running your businesses better. And the people are capable of doing it. It's just they need to be, let's say, the vast majority of people are capable of doing it. They just need to have the right direction and we're giving that. And I think that's working very well. I have to say that one of the things I've been incredibly impressed with is the quality of the people down at the operational level. Indeed, many of the people in Atlanta, who are really getting on board for this program of becoming a part of a winning team. And as I say, I've been really impressed with so many of our new colleagues in Westrock, that I can't speak highly enough of them. Obviously, not everybody is going to make the cut, but those that do, are really going to be part of a winning team. Ken, do you want to add anything?

Yes. Hi, Charlie. I suppose, if you leave aside the commercial side of the house, look, it's about shining a light in every aspect of the cost structure that exists. And remember, when you think about this combination, there are two very large public companies coming together. So there's a lot here about leveraging the size and scale of the operation in terms of what would naturally be combined programs, whether that's around insurance arrangements or external suppliers of the same service or actually just fundamentally looking at the systems in play and rolling out one over the other. So, we're kind of finding them on a phased basis. It would be difficult to kind of pin it to any quarter. We'll know, where they're there. But a lot of things just wait for the contracts to renew. And again, we're not going to renew that because we already have a system in place or we've chosen a different provider or we leverage it for the future forward. So I think, it's kind of an iterative process that everybody is on board with. Both organizations had very active cost takeout program. So, it's not a skill set that's unknown to either side of the house. I think what the level, we're asking to go to here is basically, go back to zero-based budgeting and kind of justify the spend and go from there, which in reality is what the teams are doing. So it will appear in the numbers across the year. But I think, it's more than we said in October, outside the $400 million synergy target, this number we have real confidence over because we can see and feel it around us and progressively the teams are seeing and feeling it as well beyond, if you like the commercial stuff that Tony talks about. So I think, we'll see it come through in the year. And in reality, we're already seeing some of that come through and some good ideas around how we can accelerate that.

Fantastic. And just my brief second question. Just regarding your Q1 expectations, can you give any color on whether you think maintenance costs are going to be particularly different year-on-year or quarter-on-quarter? And if there are any other big moving parts, you want to call out that's embedded in that guidance, beyond the kind of operating and pricing and volumes, et cetera? Thanks.

Yes. Sure, Charlie. I think the year started well from the demand perspective. So probably not a lot coming through there in terms of its volumes will be fine. In terms of pricing, given Tony's comments on where paper sits, unlikely to see any massive impact on paper or box in the first quarter. Broadly most of the cost book has remained stable. Energy in Europe, clearly spiking a little bit over the last few days, OCC kind of trending around the same kind of levels. And then in terms of maintenance downtime quarter-over-quarter, I think the net impact is actually largely material. I think it's $10 million less in quarter one versus quarter four last year.

Great. Thank you very much.

Thanks, Charlie.

Thank you. We will take our next question. Your next question comes from the line of Gabe Hajde from Wells Fargo. Please go ahead. Your line is open.

Thanks and good morning.

Hi, Gabe.

I wanted to ask about just the price discovery process in North America, specifically but just now that you've had six months or more and looking across both sides of the pond. Price discovery in North America, how important is that process kind of on a more medium-term basis? And at this point, do you guys sort of envision trying to decouple from some of the benchmarks that are out there implementing your own kind of pricing models with your clients over time?

I'll take the second part of it Gabe, and then I'll ask Ken to talk about the first part. Obviously, there's a lot of noise about RISI, and whether or not we should decouple. I mean we in a sense are decoupling to some extent, because whenever we feel that the pricing of individual customers is badly done then clearly we'll talk to them. And if there are other extraneous factors such as inflation, such as higher costs in a particular region of energy then we will again address that individually with our customers. And we have made a lot of provisions in many of our contracts in Europe, specifically about putting in inflation clauses that weren't there in the previous cycle, if you want to go back to prior to the inflation movements. So we have adjusted things considerably. With regard to RISI, I don't yet have a better benchmark. We try to be fair with all of our customers over the long period of time. And basically, there is one benchmark out there for our customers and ourselves to try and look to see where pricing movements of paper are going and that's RISI. And so we don't have a better benchmark than that. Sometimes, you could argue that the tail wags dog and I know some of our competitors have been saying that the integrated – or sorry the independents are wagging that particular issue. But I think over time, it has proven to be a reasonably good benchmark. But you do have to have within your own pricing with customers ways to move things if things go outside of the paper movements and that's what we do. So until somebody comes up with a better idea, we'll probably stick with where we're at with our customers because we think it's basically fair. Now I'm not saying they get it right all the time they don't. But like obviously, that's what we think is the best movement for the time being. Ken?

Sure. Hey, Gabe, hopefully, I'm understanding your question correctly, Gabe, but if I don't please, correct me. But in terms of our price discovery, if you like within Westrock, I think fundamentally I think the model at the Westrock business operated was one of an integrated margin across both businesses. So combining the paper and the box business to deliver one combined margin for the organization. That's sort of counterintuitive to us slightly because you take the focus on the mill and the box plant individual and we see those as two profit centers. So I think when we broke out of that and place the mills back in the mills and boxes to boxes, you were able to see quite clearly where value was being delivered and quite simply where value was not being delivered. I think you aligned that though with the profit responsibility at the local level which we're driving down which gives people a very individual focus on what they're achieving and delivering and quite simply against our peer set in the country and indeed against the group overall. So it is really about being as granular as you can on the income statement and giving people responsibility and control and indeed accountability over all those items. And that flows directly into where our capital sits, because quite simply the model is we allocate capital based on returns but you need to be able to see those returns at the lowest level possible. And indeed generate those trying to generate additional capital at least you can see where capital wins and capital quite simply doesn't win. So I think that the discovery piece was moving away from a blended margin back to individual margins which allows pure accountability at the local level. Hopefully I've captured that there.

Yes, that's helpful. Regarding the first quarter, you provided a forecast of $1,250 million, and I understand there's no historical benchmark in the past five years that really matches that. When we consider the organization in terms of halves, you're looking at $400 million in identified synergies plus additional increments. Is there a way to strategize around that, especially when factoring in maintenance? I believe you mentioned a $10 million decrease sequentially into the first quarter, but how should we think about the earnings potential from the first half compared to the second half of the year?

Not really. I don't think at this point, given where we see it in terms of pricing and cost inputs, it's really very largely phased similarly quarter-to-quarter as we sit here now. Clearly that will change if paper prices come through by the end of March; for example, you can expect to see some price progression on boxes as we move towards the back end of this year. But absent everything else, I think when you look at the statement and the comment at the end that Tony makes around continued progress, I think you can take that as broadly reflecting the current quarter annualized plus what we're doing around synergies and some of the other commercial opportunities.

Yes. Generally, the first and last quarters tend to be a bit weaker than the middle ones. However, this can vary based on the specific year and various influencing factors, such as energy prices and other elements. Typically, the busier months for packaging products are during the summer, as well as in the spring and fall.

Thank you. Good luck.

Thanks, Gabe.

Thanks Gabe. We will take our next question. Your next question comes from the line of Lars Kjellberg from Stifel. Please go ahead. Your line is open.

Thank you for providing the first quarter guidance. I would like to understand more about the timing of the synergies. You mentioned approximately $400 million by the end of the year. How should we view this as the year progresses? You have already eliminated some fixed costs, which should be reflected in the numbers moving forward. But how does that timing play out? Additionally, when discussing opportunities beyond the $400 million, do you anticipate any of those benefits materializing this year? I assume there will be costs involved, but it seems this isn't solely related to capital expenditures. Should we expect to see any of those opportunities appearing in 2025, or should we focus on 2026 for that incremental growth?

Thanks, Lars. But the look at my boss' face says I'm getting both of these questions.

No, I'll help you on the second one.

If we consider the synergy number, it will likely ramp up gradually throughout the year. The $400 million full run rate for 2026 remains in place. Additionally, remember there is a cost to achieve this, estimated at around $235 million. For this year, we anticipate seeing about $150 million reflected in the income statement, which accounts for the cost to achieve. In the first quarter, you might think of that figure as approximately $30 million. By the end of the quarter, we will have a clearer sense of the overall impact and achievements. Regarding the second $400 million, much of that is not strictly tied to capital expenditures. We previously mentioned our Quick Win program, which is not dependent on CapEx. Therefore, the faster we implement it, the sooner we will see results; however, it may be challenging to pinpoint because it involves substantial efforts to reduce costs in various areas. As Tony noted earlier, on the commercial front, it involves waiting for contracts to come up for renewal and renegotiating them to be more profitable than previous agreements. This makes it harder to forecast. However, as we progress through the quarters, we will provide clearer insights on our achievements and how we view the full year, with better visibility expected in the first and second quarters.

All right. Just one on the dividend. Was there any other consideration than just getting back to the old Smurfit Kappa dividend or anything else behind that big increase in Q4?

There was a lot of discussion because we needed to align two very different policies, payment cycles, and trajectories over the years. Ultimately, we concluded that for 2023, the dividend for Smurfit Kappa shareholders is set at $1.64. In comparison, Westrock shareholders are likely to see a cash base of about $1.21 in 2024. However, Smurfit Kappa's 2024 dividend is expected to be significantly higher, likely around $1.80, given that the last two quarters were $0.30 each. We aimed to balance these factors while maintaining a progressive dividend, resulting in the Smurfit Kappa 2023 dividend of $1.64 and a reasonable 5% increase, leading to quarterly dividends of $0.43. Additionally, when discussing how allocable cash flows are divided, we believe this reflects a fair share of the pre-CapEx cash flow, estimated at around 22% to 25% for the year. These were the main considerations in our decision-making process.

Great. Thank you.

Thanks Lars.

Thank you. We will take our next question. Your next question comes from the line of Detlef Winckelmann from JPMorgan. Please go ahead. Your line is open.

Hi there. Thanks for taking my question. Just two ones quickly. Maybe the first one just to clarify. You mentioned a synergy number of $30 million underlying that $1.250 billion in Q1. If I'm understanding that right, you should be getting a full year synergy number of $400 million, so call it $100 million a quarter. Should I be reading that as $30 million of the $100 million a quarter is already in Q1 or just making sure I got that right before my next question?

Detlef you think the net would be $30 million. So remember the $400 million synergy number had $235 million of costs attached to achieve before you get to the full run rate in 2026 if you like of the $400 million in your base. So, the $30 million for quarter one is a net number. For the full year, on a net basis, synergy minus the cost to achieve, you're probably thinking about given the phasing and timing about $150 million slightly ahead of that for the year.

Okay. Got it. Thank you. And then maybe just one more follow-up. Just regarding energy and you kind of alluded to it earlier that energy prices are spiking. Can you remind us or give us some kind of guidance as to where your hedging is at the moment specifically in Europe on energy side?

We are approximately 25% hedged in Europe for the first quarter and slightly less for the second and third quarters compared to the fourth. This will impact energy costs, which are already factored into our projections. Therefore, we do not anticipate a significant increase for the first quarter. The main risks we face are related to currency, tariffs, and energy. Unless energy prices surge significantly in March, we expect to be fine in that regard. We have not yet received any questions about tariffs, but I expect they will come up soon. The situation with tariffs remains uncertain for March. Additionally, currency volatility continues, particularly with the strong dollar, which has both positive and negative implications, especially in translating our earnings from euros to dollars, our reporting currency. Currently, we are managing these risks, but we would prefer not to see energy prices rise substantially as we approach March.

And I would also say that don't forget that when energy prices spike before in Europe, we were well able to optimize our system to ensure that we manage that whatever the impact of that was. And keep in mind too that we probably generate about 50% of our energy internally anyway through renewables and everything else and not necessarily fully expose that kind of price for the unhedged portion.

Perfect. Thanks. And then if I can squeeze in one more. And I know you kind of alluded to it regarding the maintenance kind of $10 million quarter-on-quarter. But just more in absolute terms in terms of maintenance is Q1 normally quite a high maintenance quarter? I mean imagine Q1, Q4 quite high, Q2, Q3 not as high. Am I thinking about that right?

No, I believe Q2 is usually our peak maintenance period because in some colder regions, maintenance tends not to occur in Q1. In Q4, it's also avoided due to weather conditions and staffing challenges. Typically, Q2 and Q3 represent our largest maintenance quarters. Based on our projections, Q2 is expected to be our most significant maintenance quarter.

Cool. Thanks very much.

Thank you. We will take our next question. Your next question comes from the line of Anthony Pettinari from Citi. Please go ahead. Your line is open.

Good morning. Tony, you brought up the topic of tariffs. I'm curious about the potential impacts they could have, both directly and indirectly, considering your operations. Specifically, I'm interested in your significant business in Mexico and how much product crosses the US-Mexico border.

I mean, Anthony, a lot. At the end of the day, it's not our products that cross the border; we have a very small number of direct products that transfer across. However, a significant amount of food and vegetables, such as protein, from the Mexican border and the Maquiladora region are being packaged and transported. So, there will definitely be a notable impact on our customers. Tariffs will ultimately affect consumers. The question is whether consumers will pay 25% more for items like avocados, oranges, pears, and apples. We'll have to wait and see how this will impact demand. Regarding Canada, the situation is a bit different for us since we operate a major mill there that exports to the United States. If that mill faces a 25% tariff, we will need to find ways to adjust because it would quickly become uncompetitive. So, we are looking at two distinct scenarios: one impacting the American consumer through Mexico and another concerning a specific asset in Canada. We have other assets in Canada that perform excellently, and our market positions are strong. Additionally, I've been really impressed with the team there. However, since we do export to the United States from one of our mills, we will need to analyze that situation, as it would affect the mill's profitability. But regarding the duration of these tariffs, who knows, Anthony?

Okay. That's very helpful. And then I'm curious in North American consumer, is it possible to say how volumes or demand has trended quarter-to-date? And I think when you closed the combination, there was maybe a little bit of kind of wait and see in terms of evaluating, maybe the kind of more attractive or less attractive parts of that business. I'm just curious, if you can kind of share your impressions on the consumer boxboard business in North America having the business...

Yes, Anthony, we've been assessing this for several months now. When looking at the consumer converting businesses, I believe we have strong assets and capable people. There are a few issues to address, but overall, legacy Westrock has effectively closed and consolidated several facilities. Therefore, I consider the converting side to be either good or excellent. Our CUK business has a strong global market position, effective sales operations, a capable mill, and a solid market standing, which I would also rate as excellent. As for our SBS business, while we have been in this segment for a long time, we see potential opportunities. I believe it requires a bit more time, but at this moment, I'm reasonably optimistic, and I think the team shares that sentiment. Lastly, regarding CRB, it's evident that our largest competitor has made significant capital investments to enhance their business in that sector, unlike the legacy company. Surprisingly, we remain the second player in the market, and despite some weaknesses in our mills, they continue to support our integration and provide quality. Our strategy for this business will depend on market developments and evolving trends in CRB. We hold a strong position as the number two player, and customers prefer not to deal with a dominant number one player. Therefore, I believe we have a solid market position to defend, but we need to formulate the right strategy going forward.

Okay. That's helpful. I'll turn it over.

Thank you, Anthony.

Thank you. We will take our next question. Your next question comes from the line of Patrick Mann from Bank of America. Please go ahead. Your line is open.

Thanks very much for the call and the opportunity to ask the question. Maybe a bit of a follow-up from the prior one. I mean, you're talking a lot about the back to basics approach and improving all the underlying operations. But if you kind of zoom out a little bit and think about the weighting of the business overall in terms of capacity in containerboard consumer board and converting. If I think about the old Smurfit Kappa you're much more long paper for example. Are you happy with that overall weighting in the balance of the business or kind of structurally or strategically is that how you want it to be set up? Yes maybe just a little bit around that. And then the second question would just be about good cash generation in the quarter. How should we think about the net debt target going from the 2.7 to under 2 over time? If you could talk about that. Thank you.

That's great, Patrick. I'll take the first part and Ken will address the second. Our philosophy as a company has been to be fully integrated in some of our containerboard grades from the legacy Smurfit Kappa, and we aim to maintain that along with our long-term customers. As a seller in the free market, Westrock is one of the largest sellers and has a strong reputation. We have established long-term relationships with excellent customers who value our products at fair prices. Given our long-term customers, our integration, and the synergies we expect to gain in our Latin American operations, we believe that in the near future, we will achieve a balanced position in our containerboard system. However, we will likely never be balanced in our sack conversion system since we have limited sack conversions, though we do produce lightweight sack paper. We are somewhat overextended in our consumer board grades, which we don't foresee completely resolving, and we will continue to sell those products while accepting the cyclicality they present. Currently, the market for those products is reasonably good. For our core business in containerboard, I expect us to have a balanced situation with some external customers involved.

Hey, Patrick, regarding the leverage target of 2.7 to 2.2, we see this as a long-term goal throughout the economic cycle. However, we are already starting to work towards this, similar to our previous efforts with Smurfit Kappa, to improve our net leverage. Achieving this will involve several factors. Clearly, the earnings potential of our organization should exceed the current levels, and looking at our performance this year indicates that revenue will likely increase, positively impacting our leverage target. Additionally, we see opportunities to enhance value through working capital management and throughout our capital cycle. It's about making disciplined investments and generating returns that translate into cash flow. Our previous experience has revolved around allocating capital effectively to drive returns, allowing those returns to finance themselves within the capital cycle. Our strategy going forward will involve targeted incremental capital investments in the business, which will support dividend growth and also reduce leverage, as we aim to generate more cash than we invest. Importantly, we will focus on commercial opportunities to grow both revenue and margins. While this is a medium to long-term target, we are already taking steps to achieve it in the short term, particularly concerning our working capital.

Yeah. Thank you very much.

I think Ken is on the selling point. We believe we've got some good working capital opportunities in the business, as we go forward.

Thank you. We will take our next question. Your next question comes from the line of Matthew McKellar from RBC Capital Markets. Please go ahead. Your line is open.

Good morning. Thanks for all the colors so far and for taking my questions. I'd like to start with just a follow-up question on SBS. You mentioned seeing some opportunities. I was wondering if you could just elaborate whether these are opportunities to sort of improve your own assets and operations or more related to developments in the market? Any more color there would be helpful. Thank you.

What I’ve seen so far is pretty good. However, I think the product selling has not been entirely focused in the right direction. We believe there are opportunities through our own integration to significantly increase sales moving forward. We see the opportunity in the marketplace where we can approach it in a more thoughtful way that hasn’t been done before.

Okay. Thanks very much for that color. And just second for me. On LatAm you kind of talked about continued progress in cost takeout efficiency, optimization of your cost base being a priority. Could you maybe just refresh us on your top focus items and most significant investments here as well as more broadly just what you're hoping to achieve in this region in 2025?

Yes, I would say this applies to all of our regions, not just Latin America. However, in Latin America, particularly in Brazil, we see a significant opportunity. We hold a strong market position there, with excellent assets and potential for cost reduction, which we're already identifying and implementing. There is also considerable progress to be made on the commercial side. When we compare the margins of the legacy Smurfit business with those of the legacy Westrock business, we see they are quite different, and we aim to set a higher standard rather than conforming to the lower one. This presents us with a tremendous opportunity for improvement in that market. As Ken mentioned in his comments, we face volume challenges in Argentina, but that is specific to that country. The business there is excellent, as we are the second-largest player in the market. With the innovations we introduce in that region, it holds great potential once the country stabilizes. There is always a risk involved in volatile markets, but given the strong results we've seen from Brazil even as recently as January, I am optimistic about our growth prospects.

Great. Thanks so much for the help. I'll turn it back.

Thanks, Matt.

Thank you. In the interest of time this concludes today's question-and-answer session. I'll now hand the conference back for closing remarks.

Yes. Well, thank you operator, and thank you all for your time and attention today. As I mentioned our objective in Smurfit Westrock is as we've said to realize the considerable combined potential of the companies together. Again, we believe the opportunity is bigger and better than we first thought. Smurfit Westrock I believe is the right business, at the right time. And most importantly as I've said on this call and as Ken has reiterated with the right people to do the job. So thanks for your time. Appreciate you following the company. And look forward to chatting to you individually going forward very much. Take care and have a good rest of the day.