Good evening everyone. Thanks for joining us. Curt Nagle, I'm the new senior business and information services analyst here at BofA. Session today during lunch is gonna be Thomson Reuters. Really pleased to have CEO Steve Hasker and CFO Mike Eastwood with us. We're gonna structure this as a fireside. Any questions, if we have time, you know, we'll field from the audience. Steve and Mike, again, thank you for coming. You bet. I really appreciate it. Why don't we kick off? Yeah, as you can probably imagine, and obviously very, very topical, we're starting these conversations on AI. In terms of the first one I wanna ask, Steve, you've spoken really, really directly and I think really directly about the criticality, right, of professional, as you put it. You know, fiduciary grade A models, right, versus general purpose models when we're thinking about all these, you know, potential risks, opportunities, right? And you know, how much that matters specifically for your legal end markets and of course for tax accounting and audit as well. High cost of failure, right? In terms of data assets, domain expertise, right, and increasing, you know, the use, right, not integration, but use of models, how are you differentiating yourself from both established competition and entrants? Yeah, thanks, Curt. We've also got Sai Ishwarbharath, who manages the CoCounsel product suite here, and of course, Gary Bisbee, who's a prime mover in our finance and operations at TR. Thanks Curt for having us, and thanks for the question. As we sort of enter this agentic era of AI, we see it as an opportunity for growth. We see our TAMs expanding and in legal and in tax. We see at least four assets that pretty clearly differentiate us as pertains to serving fiduciaries. When I say fiduciaries, I mean lawyers, tax preparers, auditors, and the like. These are people who have to be right? They can't use a probabilistic solution. They need a deterministic solution. They need to be right, and they need to be able to verify, constantly verify and validate their arguments and their results. The four assets that we bring to bear that equip us to provide fiduciary grade AI versus sort of broader knowledge work AI or even professional grade AI for salespeople or coders or whomever are as follows. The first is our vast repositories of unique and proprietary data. So if you don't have it, you can't ground and train your output, and you don't have a source of truth. You just don't have it, you know. So we have it in one or two other players, and we've got more of it than anyone else. The second is thousands and thousands, at last count, 4,500 highly trained domain experts that we have repurposed, and Ravia has been a leader in this. Repurposed them to train our agents. We have, you know, for example, CoCounsel Bench, which basically will train CoCounsel to perform a particular set of tasks. It will plan, it will reason, and it will execute. Before it gets released into the product, that bench of experts need to validate the results, and they need to sign off it. Once they sign off it, Ravia pushes it into the product. First is data, second is experts. The third is our data privacy and protection. We provide an ironclad guarantee to our customers, which is their input will not become part of our AI output. We suggest that they ask any other provider that question, because to the extent you've got a startup with a great product or a great UX or whatever they might have, but that it's learning from their workflows and from their IP and embedded in their product, that is a third rail issue for fiduciaries, right. That is a third rail issue for fiduciaries. The idea that you're gonna train a tech player to perform the tasks just in the long term, we don't think is durable or sustainable. We think that's gonna be a real sort of moment of correction, if you like. The last, which is sort of we don't talk about much, but if you're a subscriber to Westlaw or Practical Law, and you've been a subscriber a period of time, and now you're a subscriber amongst the 1 million users of CoCounsel, we have an extensive support network. You can actually pick up the phone in the middle of the night and say, "I am working my way through a particular piece of litigation research, and Westlaw has produced the following answer, and I don't understand it. And I'm in front of the judge tomorrow morning. Help me. Explain to me where my logic is wrong." By the way, we have the same for our tax calculation engines. I'm at line 1,079 of a state return, and I don't understand how to apply the depreciation schedule of my client into the deduction that I can or can't claim." You know, I think when you talk about the sort of some of the startups, some of the foundation models, ask them whether they're going to have that level of support for fiduciaries, because fiduciaries are doing two things. They're generating arguments, and then they're constantly validating and checking it. AI cannot be trusted to check AI. Yep. The data, the experts, the data privacy and protection, and the governance, and then the support, we think positions us uniquely to serve fiduciaries. 1 million CoCounsel users and the uptick in the growth of our legal business, as well as the successful deployment of Westlaw Advantage, which is the first deep research agentic product that truly unleashes the benefit of those things in the conduct of the agent. You know, that gives us great confidence that the upcoming launch of the next version of CoCounsel will be similarly successful and differentiated. Got it. Maybe sticking on that point, Steve. Yeah, just in terms of the importance of maybe we'll just, you know, zero in on CoCounsel Legal. I think new one's coming out in maybe a few months. Sai Ishwarbharath has got in alpha at the moment with a couple of hundred customers. Goes into beta on April 20th. Yep. You know, as soon as we start getting the right signal, we'll put it into general release in the summer. Yeah. In terms of, you know, what to me it sounds like a much more integrated tool right across kinda the whole corpus of? Yeah. It's really the first time we've taken. Yeah, The content and the expertise and embedded it into the agents. Right. In terms of, you know, a lot of ways you could look at it, whether it's stickiness, whether it's wallet share. Yep. Whether it's upgrades, you know, how should we think about that? I think it's a bit of all those things. Right. If you think about TR's legal business, we've traditionally sort of historically been very focused on litigation and very focused on the law firm. Potentially sort of less focused on transaction and less focused on corporates, on the general counsel. We think CoCounsel both strengthens our position within the litigation space and the law firm space, but it enables us to extend in a really meaningful way into the transactions activity within our legal customers and also, you know, build on Practical Law, build on Legal Tracker, and the sort of early forays. Mm-hmm. That we've made into the general counsel's office. Certainly, you know, the announcement that we made at the last earnings call that Microsoft's general counsel group are adopting- Mm-hmm. CoCounsel, top to bottom, we think is sort of the start of, you know, some interesting growth. Mm-hmm. In and around corporate, some corporate legal. An interesting client too. Yes. Maybe talk a little bit more generally about, you know, what you're seeing in terms of, you know, across the different segments, renewal cycles, upgrade cycles, and you've got a lot of new product coming in? How much of that is, you know, driving the 9% organic at least, you know, in legal? Just, you know, over the next, let's call it, I don't know, 24 months, what you envision, you know, for an upgrade cycle 'cause of all these new products coming on. Yeah. Mike, do you wanna take that? Yeah, happy to. We had a similar question in our last session before lunch today, and the question relates to in regards to what's driving the 9% organic growth for legal professionals. The way I frame it's the entire portfolio that's lifting it. I think there's some natural reaction thinking that it's our CoCounsel, given the significant growth that we have with it, and thanks to Ravi for it. The CoCounsel is certainly a key component of the legal professionals' growth of 9%, but also Westlaw. Many of you will remember we launched Westlaw Advantage in August of 2025 at ILTACON. It is performing incredibly well, as we mentioned on the last earnings call, and we're very pleased with the Q1 sales of Westlaw Advantage. Also within legal professionals, we have Practical Law, which is how Ravi joined us 13 years ago. That business continues to perform incredibly well. $650 million of revenue, about 60% of that's in legal professionals, 40% is in corporate. Curtis, really the entire portfolio, the legal professionals that has, is performing really well and driving the 9%. I'll just put a plug in with the May earnings call. We will start providing you with information on how legal professionals, excluding government, is performing. That's something that I think will be very important 'cause we did have some cancellations that we discussed during the February earnings call. I think you'll be very pleased with that trajectory of legal professionals, excluding government. Great. Always love more disclosure. Good. Steve, going back to you. Just wanna quickly touch on the Anthropic relationship. You gained a lot of exposure- Mm-hmm. Up on stage with them a couple weeks ago. I guess two fairly simple questions. Just, you know, one, just define the relationship you have with them? I think there's a little bit of confusion in terms of scope, depth, or, you know, however you wanna put it, but yeah, that'd be the first one. Yeah. Anthropic are a vendor to us today. I was actually there in San Francisco with them on Monday. We've built our agentic products, Westlaw Advantage, the next version of CoCounsel, to be model agnostic. In other words, we can and we do change to the best foundation model. We've used ChatGPT over time, we've used Gemini over time, and we're currently doing a lot of the work on top of the latest Claude models. We think that at the moment, those are the highest performing enterprise models. They're a vendor to us. We do constant evals, as you'd expect us to, on whose model is performing best for our products and our use cases. We have, in addition, developed our own large language model specific for legal. It's called Thomson, and we will talk about it more and more over the coming months. The reason we'll talk about it is that Jonathan Schwartz, who's a former Google DeepMind scientist, he has developed a model which is outperforming the very best foundation models for some of the specific legal tasks that we're going out after. If you think about that from Mike and Gary's perspective, it gives us a degree of optionality- Sure. In terms of both the cost and the speed and the accessibility to that and the exclusivity of that. If you're thinking about it from Ravi's point of view, it's a great means in which we keep the foundation modelers honest. Yep. You know, in terms of accessing the very best model and getting favorable terms. That's really the relationship with Anthropic, and we think that CoCounsel and Cowork will fit together quite nicely. You know, if Cowork is well suited to provide AI tools to knowledge workers more broadly, and in some cases professionals, we're at the fiduciary grade, and Cowork is not designed. Mm-hmm. ...For the fiduciary grade because it doesn't have the content. It's not supported by thousands of experts. Different data privacy and governance rules, and not the customer support. Just one more quick question on Anthropic, just with the supply risk designation of the U.S. government. I don't think this has changed today. Presumably, that may preclude maybe even yourselves or clients from using it. I guess being agnostic, is that not an issue? Yeah. I mean, it's not an issue because we are model agnostic. Yeah. I mean, obviously, you know, Sai Ishwarbharath's teams wanna spend time developing the product. Yep. Just driving further and further into more sophisticated use cases rather than chopping the model out. Yep. It's not completely costless to us in terms of time. Being model agnostic means that should that supply chain risk designation hold, you know, we can move away from that model. We hope that that's not the case. Yep. We're not sort of overly exposed to that. Okay. Fair enough. Yep, just sticking with AI, another, you know, I think maybe developing or, you know, large theme, right, is how do pricing models evolve, you know, over the next few years. You know, the ones that have the mission-critical, the fiduciary, proprietary data, you know, however you wanna. Yep. ... Call it. You know, potentially moving to more consumption models, value-based models or, you know, based on outcomes for your customers. You know, I guess to what extent, you know, is Thomson Reuters considering that? I guess just given, you know, the potential for, you know, changes in the legal workforce, you know, it seems like it's pretty pertinent. You know- Yeah. How are you looking at it? I mean, I think the first sort of misunderstanding that you know a lot of the sort of ups and downs, mainly downs, that we've seen in terms of market caps and valuations and so forth. The first one is I think there's sort of not an understanding of what it takes to be a fiduciary and what it takes to serve fiduciaries. You know, and I think and sort of undervalues that set of aspects. Sorry, what was the other part of your question? Well, on pricing. Just so. Oh, yeah. Look, you know, at the moment, the other, I think, misunderstanding was that we might have seat-based pricing. Well, it's not so much the seat-based pricing, right? But you know, with you know, again, to all the points you made about the value and you know, the I mean, it fiduciary. Yeah. Right? Yeah. Typically, we've got enterprise-based pricing, and it is sort of, you know, it's in some way, shape, or form tiered. Where we will move, particularly as the industry goes from the billable hour. Yeah. To value-based pricing, and more and more of the work is performed by agents, and ideally our agents, we will look to shift to value-based pricing. You know, we'll be able to sort of price differentially for more sophisticated tasks. Yep. We'll be able to price differentially for much more volume and usage. Yep. I think it's too early today to sort of prescribe exactly how that's gonna progress and what benefits that's gonna provide. Yep. To our shareholders. Certainly, we're keeping a keen eye on the overall usage of the product in terms of user numbers, the degree to which it's being used for highly sophisticated tasks versus more sort of repetitive operational routine tasks. Mm-hmm. Ultimately, the impact on fair equity partner profits and the impact on the sort of efficiency of a general counsel. Yep. At this point, I mean, you're basically, you know, preparing the, I guess you'd call it, evaluation framework for that, not something that you're having active discussions with customers. No, we certainly are having active discussions with customers, but you gotta understand, the tools at the moment, you know, I've had at least one general managing partner of a law firm here in New York say to me, "Look, the tools are 18 months ahead of the change management- Yep. In terms of the rewiring of the underlying legal work that's performed within his teams. As that change management starts to pick up steam. Yep. The impact starts to flow through his organization and ultimately to his bottom line. That's when we'll be able to kick the value-based pricing. Sure. Which I think another thing you commented on, right? Yeah. Yeah. Yep. Tools are ahead of, you know. Yeah. The usage. Which is sort of no different than any other significant tech, you know, development. Right. It takes a while for the sort of processes to be rewired to take full advantage. The rate of change. Yep. Lord knows. Yeah. No, exactly. Yeah. Okay. Maybe, Mike, I'll throw this one to you. Just, you know, changing up a bit, if we could talk about the audit tax and accounting side of your business? I think fairly long-standing, you know, structural issues in terms of being able to source, you know, labor. You've got a tax engine, right? You've had that for a while. It's the core of the business. Couple new acquisitions, right, to supplement that. Yep. Kinda sounds like you're building more of an end-to-end ecosystem, right? I think, right? Integrating AI. Yeah. I would say we have built that. Sorry to interrupt you, Curt Nagle. Sure. No, go ahead. Yeah. I say we have built it. If you go back over the last three years to January 2023, we've had four key acquisitions with SurePrep, with SafeSend, Materia, and Additive. Those acquisitions, coupled with the existing assets, have allowed us to really fill the gaps that existed three years ago. We go to market today with the full end-to-end solution, which gives us the confidence. When we talk about 2026, we've committed to 11%-13% organic growth for our tax and accounting professional business, which we now call tax, accounting, audit professionals there. Our confidence remains there, just given the we have transactional revenue within the TAP business, so there could be some variations quarter to quarter. Yeah. The confidence overall is significant there. You touched on the determination engine, which is critically important for us. Steve talked about the talent of Ravi. We have Kevin Merlini, who joined us from an acquisition about two years ago. He's just doing a fantastic job for us with our ready-to-review, ready-to advise products. If you think about our confidence level in that business, we have a full suite of offerings, given the recent acquisitions, the organic product developments that we have there. We're really, really pleased with the progression. Okay. Very good. Then maybe just, you know, sort of a who knows question, but in terms of kinda meeting those needs for so, you know, taking up, right, you know, the work of your clients, is that something that's happening as we speak? You know, are you getting more requests to, you know, basically digitize, I suppose. Yeah. It was certainly within the tax and accounting professional market. I think most people realize in regards to the level of professionals there. Yep. We've had significant retirements. Yep. Which I think is what you're getting at. Yes. Which is advantageous for us. We know the tax laws are complex. The U.S. is very complex. Brazil, when we think about our Domínio business in Brazil, that's grown 20% CAGR the last 12 years since we acquired it there. Yep. The inherent complexity, but also the shortage of workers within tax and accounting audit professionals, that weighs into our favor, in regards to us helping our clients, every day. Okay. Fair enough. Mike, I'll stick with you for just a couple more. Margins, right? 100 basis points this year and, you know, thereafter the next two. Yeah. You know, one of the strongest outlooks, I think at least in terms of what's guided, at least in info services. Can you just break down kind of some of the biggest contributing factors and obviously the fixed cost leverage, maybe mix in terms of the you know the operating segments, and then the reimagine how we work initiative? Yep. You know, how much is that kicking in? You know, another kind of big theme in terms of, you know, I guess labor and asset utilization, you know, which could be pretty meaningful. Just break that down and kind of level- Sure. ... The confidence in the 100 bips. Yeah. Just to level set, we were slightly over 39% EBITDA margin for calendar year 2025. We've committed to 100 basis points improvement in 2026, 2027 and 2028. What gives us the confidence? We have very significant operating leverage given 60%-65% of our cost base is fixed in nature. That's been consistent. I oftentimes get the question in the last three years as more of the AI, now agentic AI, do I see any significant change in that operating leverage? I do not. That's intact. Second, you mentioned the reimagine our workforce, which, more simply stated, drive and productivity. That is a key contributor in regards to our confidence. Those two are kinda the pluses. Slightly offsetting those items, we continue to reinvest in 2026, we will in 2027 and 2028. In areas where we think we'll have significant returns to help us accelerate organic growth, our guidance for this year, 7.5%-8% for total TR, approximately 9.5% for the big three. Those reinvestments will help us there. We are absorbing some dilution from acquisitions in 2025, and we've closed one acquisition in 2026. Given the operating leverage and our line of sight in regards to the progress and think we will achieve on the productivity initiatives, those are the factors that give us confidence in our EBITDA margin expansion for 2026, 2027, 2028. Okay. Maybe I'll just kick it back to you, Steve, in terms of reinvestment priorities, you know, where you think you can, you know, perhaps accelerate growth. I mean, what are you most excited for, and where are you dedicating the most capital in the business? I mean, it's fairly well balanced across the big three. Mm-hmm. Within legal, you know, we think that, as I mentioned before, we think that CoCounsel is an engine for growth and TAM expansion in the transactional space and in the general counsel's office. As Mike said, within tax and accounting and audit professionals, you know, we have these anchor properties around tax calculation engine. Yep. ... Which are very, very deeply entrenched within the corporation's tax group. They're lightning fast, they're very accurate, and they're cheap to run. The opportunity is to use agents to link into those and to perform more and more of the tasks to alleviate the talent shortage that Mike talked about. As we think about our corporates business, you know, we think more and more Fortune 1000 companies have to sort of come out of, to some extent, Excel-based calculations of tax and come into ONESOURCE. Mm-hmm. We think that indirect tax and e-invoicing, you know, is comfortably a double-digit or better growth proposition for the you know time horizon, particularly as the invoicing mandates roll out across the world. We think that the general counsel is gonna undertake the effort, as with every function and every corporation, to use AI to automate. Mm-hmm. That plays to CoCounsel. Then, of course, we have a really interesting proposition that was designed mostly for the U.S. federal government and security classified work in the form of the CLEAR and TRSS assets that we think has a growing role to play in AML and KYC in particular. Sure. Yep In that sort of broader risk landscape. As we look across the big three, we see a nice balanced portfolio of growth opportunities that ought to see us get into the sort of double digits in most cases. Mm-hmm. For those franchises. Okay. Got a big audience, so maybe I'll just pause for a sec if anyone wants to ask questions. I'm happy to field them. Okay. No problem. So, couple more, Mike. So kind of a perspective question. So transitioning to a new role, right, you're gonna be the chair of the Thomson Reuters Foundation, I think come April 30th, or just April. 30-year career at Thomson. I think it'd be valuable just in terms of kinda in your 30 years biggest takeaways, how the org has changed and, you know, what you're most excited for in the coming years? Yeah, I'll remain CFO through May 8th. Our next earnings call is May 5th, so I will participate in the May 5th and then May 8th, just to clarify that point. Your question on regards to perspective or reflections, the most important word is gratitude. Nearly three decades, Thomson Reuters afforded me more opportunities than I deserved. I had the opportunity to work in nearly every business, including many that we have divested over three decades. Also had the opportunity to work in many countries throughout the U.S., Argentina, Brazil, Switzerland, Canada, which was very rewarding personally and professionally, and I think it also helped me with the business, hopefully. The second item after gratitude is what the team has accomplished. Steve and I have been in our chairs six years. March 15 will be the six-year anniversary. If you benchmark, and Gary can check me here, 2019 versus 2026, kind of a 2x factor comes into play. In 2019, our total TR organic growth was 4%. Our guidance for 2026 is 7.5%-8%. If you look at our big three organic growth in 2019, we were 5%. Our guidance for 2026 is approximately 9.5%. If you look at free cash flow, 2019, we were $1.1 billion. Free cash flow in 2026, $2.1 billion. That's why I say the 2x factor. Over that time period, the team has also significantly increased our EBITDA margin. We were 31.5% back in 2019. We'll be over 40% in 2026. The way I view it, that's not about Steve Hasker and Mike Eastwood. You know, that's about the team. That's kinda my last point, reflecting on your question is optimism. I'm slightly, I can't say this in front of her, a little bit pissed that my wife is encouraging me to retire. I hit 60 years old in two weeks. The level of optimism I have for the business, given the talent that we have here, the $10 billion worth of capital capacity. If you go out to 2028, we're very low leverage now, roughly 0.5 turns. Take that up, you know, we can do a hell of a lot for our customers and our shareholders in 2026 through 2028 with that. Those are just some initial thoughts in regards to- Mike, can I add two things? Yeah. I think firstly, I've witnessed firsthand the tension between Mike, who wants to stay for another couple of years and sort of fight our way through this moment of skepticism from, you know, some of the investors versus Mike, the man of his word, and the promises he made to his wife in terms of retiring at in or around 60. I think the only thing I'd add to Mike's point is the rate of innovation. Mm-hmm. When we started our roles, TR used to put out a new version of Westlaw every three or four years and was good at that. Not here to denigrate our predecessors or anything like that, but we didn't do much else. There wasn't a lot of innovation across the portfolio. Whereas now we're putting out new versions of Westlaw from sort of start to finish in deep research and agentic in four months. Mm. From initial ideation to general availability in four months. Ravia and her colleagues have, you know, completely rebuilt and will relaunch CoCounsel, you know, starting now in alpha, beta April 20th, and then, as I said, release through the summer. CLEAR Investigate, which is an agentic AI offering, you know, new additions to and integrations around Pagero and ONESOURCE. You go across the portfolio and we're now, I think, a truly content and AI-driven tech company. Mm-hmm. That's able to go toe-to-toe with the most innovative players in and around B2B software in the world. Our sort of commitment is to just continue to improve that velocity and impact of innovation through the big three. We have the luxury of being very, very focused on those fiduciary professions. Yep. We're not gonna get distracted from that. We don't see a need to sort of branch out into different areas or try different things. We think there's lots of growth, as I said, within and across those big three segments. Yeah. Yeah, Gary, if I could just supplement there. All right. The pace of innovation, which we discussed a lot in the sessions this morning, especially the last three years with AI, agentic AI, just within our company, the pace of movement has just been incredible. Got it. With a very healthy balance sheet. Very healthy. Yeah, maybe just ending on that, then I'd love to do just a quick lightning round word association. Right. Yeah, I mean, kind of your point, capital allocation or deployment, I think, is a bigger theme. You know, the leverage, you just did a $1.2 billion buyback and capital return. I think, you know, in terms of, you know, again, very, very specific focus on your core markets, right? There is a desire to, you know, maybe do a big bolt-on, right? In terms of just thinking about, let's just call the next 24 months, the balance between the buybacks and, you know, where the valuation is versus, you know, potentially acting, you know, at the right valuation on, you know, a larger bolt-on. Yeah. I mean, I think I'll let Mike sort of talk about the capital allocation. I think, you know, the sort of beating we've taken over the last few months and more broadly over the last six months, in a sense, is energizing 'cause it makes us the underdog, and we sorta love that. I personally love that. We've really taken this opportunity to get our folks fired up about competing and outrunning everybody. That's the first thing. I think the second thing as we look across the landscape, you know, we've got $10 billion-$11 billion in dry powder between cash on hand leverage that what is 0.3x, 0.4x at the moment, and a business that's now producing north of $2 billion in free cash flow. We're somewhat optimistic that, you know, some of the sort of disruption is gonna create some interesting opportunities for us. You're not gonna see us do anything that is a head scratcher. Yeah. You know, we might do something bigger if we really saw the value for our shareholders and we felt that it was an asset that's around which we're an advantaged owner. We know we might do bigger sort of returns of capital, share buybacks and so forth. You know, our mindset and stance is to take advantage of this moment in every possible way we can, and we think we've got the franchises, the talent and the balance sheet to do so. The energy. The energy. Yeah. Yeah. I would just add, we'll remain disciplined in regards to our balanced capital allocation approach and strategy there. This year was our fifth year of increasing dividends 10%. We recognize dividends are more important to certain geographies than others, but I would anticipate a continued increase of 10% per year. Obviously, that has to be approved every year by our board, but that's an important aspect. Steve talked about strategic M&A. We talk internally in three tiers. Tier one for us are bolt-ons. Think about with valuations of $500 million-$1 billion, and tier two larger, and then tier three is your point there, Curt. We're certainly willing to consider larger than bolt-ons, which are the tier one. Will we consider a tier two? Yes. Certainly the level of confidence, the thresholds, is gotta meet some pretty high expectations there. That still leads us to your point, Curt, for capital returns. We did the $1.2 billion that we announced on April 25th. Questions about why we did, I think it was Manav Patnaik this morning asked about the $600 million return of capital. Under Canadian law and paid up capital, there's a provision. We received proceeds from monetizing our stake in the London Stock Exchange Group, and the tax benefit expires May 7th. That's why we did the return of capital, if there are questions there. I think just given the low leverage that we have, the capacity that I mentioned, $10 billion plus, it gives us flexibility as we move forward, whether it's dividends, strategic M&A, or more capital returns. Okay. Yeah, I think if you think about strategic M&A, I think Steve touched on it, but right now we have about $400 million within the indirect tax e-invoicing space, opportunity to scale $400 million in revenue in that risk, fraud, and compliance area that Steve mentioned, so opportunities to scale. And then certainly continued very focused expansion in areas internationally like Brazil, Southeast Asia. Okay. Word association. Okay. Lightning round. Ravia is smiling 'cause she's way better at this one than me. Maybe we'll swap. Legal Workflows. CoCounsel. TaxEngine. ONESOURCE. Westlaw. Preeminent. Preeminent. Reuters. The source. The source. General purpose AI models. White space growth opportunity for TR. I like that. Okay. Very good. Really appreciate the conversation. Thank you, Curt. Thanks so much. Thank you so much. Cheers. Steve. Thank you. Thank you.