Okay. Now all the guests could have joined. Hello everyone, and welcome. Good morning to everyone joining from the U.S. and North America, and good afternoon to everyone here in Europe. I am Max. I am Head of Investor Relations here at Innoscripta. I am very pleased to have you all with us on this earnings call for the first half year of 2026 today. We have scheduled around 30 minutes for this call. Before we get started, just a quick note on how we will handle questions later. You see a chat button on the very bottom of your meeting window. Please use the chat to submit any questions you have during the presentation. I will collect all the questions and address them in the Q&A at the end. I will pick up the questions from the chat and ask you to repeat them live. At that point, you can turn on your microphone and I will enable you to unmute yourself. Also, please be aware that this meeting is being recorded. Okay. With that, we are ready to get started, and I will hand over the words to our CEO, Michael Hohenester. Yeah. Thank you very much, Max. Can we please jump to the first slide, please? Yes. Basically, you saw the highlights already from today's press release. Basically, we have continued business operation in the second quarter and first half year. We see constant customer growth, constant low churn rate and, let's say, stable financial data. Next slide, please. Some bits we would like to address to give you some color about what we have reached already. If you look at the German R&D workforce, as you know probably, R&D, research and development, is a pretty recurring endeavor. That means, once you do research and development, once you set up a research and development department, usually, you continue here over several years. Yeah, so this is actually a pretty stable environment. We have managed to capture already around 10% of the whole German R&D workforce. That means if you count all our customers together and if you count how many employees are in our platform, we have actually, what we believe, reached some considerable scale, which also makes it easier for us to establish a standard when it comes to documentation and making sure that what is in the claim is the correct value. Another number I want to highlight here is if you look at large enterprises, that means non-SME, so non-small and medium-sized enterprises, which got a BSFZ certificate, again, this is a certificate that you are actually doing R&D. 31% of them were our clients. This is actually also a pretty interesting number. That means that again, our platform or the way how we document R&D for the tax credit claim is becoming more and more standard in Germany. Next slide, please. This is why we announced also the expansions or let's say at least the office setups in other locations, other geographies, during the year. As you might be aware of, we already have some substantial traction in Austria. That's simply because we already had an office there since several years. We wanted to repeat the success story, and this is why we started here in other countries for, let's say, pretty much the same reason. Our main aim is a little bit to, of course, serve our customers outside of Germany. As you know, quite a substantial part of our customers is international. That means they don't have only R&D in one geography, that means Germany. They also have other geographies and opening offices and, let's say, building a local establishment there enables us to serve also documentation requirements in other countries. France, we have an office close to Toulouse. It's one of the biggest and most established tax credits markets in Europe. There you typically have, let's say, a more difficult pricing situation since a lot of players there are competing over price. We don't compete over price, we compete over quality. This is what is our playbook there, is we want to establish our different way of how to do tax credit claims with larger corporations there and helping them to make better claims. That is also very relevant because also in France, there's increased scrutiny from the French government, especially larger claims. The United States naturally is the biggest market in the world. There is a lot of tax credits claims handed out each year, and we had a big increase in documentation standards, or let's say, in documentation standards or documentation requirements in the past year, which means that we believe that there is actually a need now for a lot of CPAs serving customers there to, let's say, have a better documentation, especially, again, if it comes to larger claims. Also here, we opened an office in New York City and look forward to hire some more sales professionals there. Last but not least, the U.K., where we see actually also, again, a similar trend. The HMRC, the British, let's say, tax revenue collection service, has massively increased the compliance checks. Especially also for larger claims, there are more investigations. We also believe that there is, after many reports also in the, let's say, newspapers about fraud and errors, we believe there is a payment for us with our, let's say, superior documentation standard. All in all, if you put everything together, let's say, we see it as a start of a longer journey. This is not the immediate impact in terms of revenue and EBIT, but we believe this will step by step make the market which we currently serve much bigger and which will also create synergies. Also if even over customers, those other geographies, they might have as well operations in Germany or one of these other countries. To a certain degree, we also believe there will be network effects once we settled or started in enough geographies. This is a little bit the idea which we pursue here. Next slide, please. As you saw in this morning's press release, the result might look a little bit lower than expected, but you also have to take into account that we did a big migration in the first quarter of this year, which hindered us in converting order intake into submissions, which basically made this impact in Q2. If we hadn't done this migration, the numbers would certainly be higher. I think from this standpoint, you have to see it. This was necessary in order to serve the national markets and also to improve the efficiency in the future. From our standpoint, especially if you look at the part because of order intake and, let's say, continuous business operation, we don't see any deviation from the current growth path, and we don't see any, let's say, impact at the end. We had a system migration, and it impacted the submissions in quarter one, which impacted the revenue in quarter two. But with future, let's say, gains to be harvested on this migration and efficiency wins. Okay. Please continue. Yes. Handing over to Alex. From my side, please let's go and tap into some financials to have a look at the historic development and then comment on recent developments. Again, we would like to highlight the midterm journey that we have already successfully passed, and also then highlighting how we feel that at this point of time, we also managed to steer this company into further long-term sustainable growth. To remind you, in 2023, we came from roughly EUR 40 million. Then shortly before the IPO, we increased the revenues to EUR 65 million. After our IPO, we managed this jump that we had communicated during our IPO process, that we were to land at a revenue figure above EUR 100 million. Last but not least, we gave out a guidance for this year, which was EUR 140 million. We feel that we are absolutely on track. Considering our regular business assumptions in terms of R&D volume that we get in every month, the success rate by the German government, a couple of other variables stay constant, then we are confident to achieve this guidance. Year-over-year, we see growth in H1 from EUR 44 million- EUR 63 million in revenue, which represents an overall growth of 43% in revenue. We also see Q2 over Q2 growth. Again, as highlighted, we had a software migration that we're working in our software that slowed down slightly the submissions of R&D proposals. This R&D volume is not gone. For the past, it led to a slightly lower growth, but the volume is there, and we are confident that this will accelerate our future performance from a platform perspective. Okay, let's go ahead. The same, a similar journey we can report about our EBIT growth. If we look back at 2023, where we were coming from, [EUR 15 million], we managed to grow to EUR 38 million. In our IPO year, we successfully managed an EBIT of EUR 63.6 million. We also highlight that EBIT growth continues. If we compare H1 2025, we were standing at EUR 24.5 million. We landed at EUR 36.4 million this year, which represents an EBIT growth of 49%, so close to 50%. Again, highlighting that we continue our midterm growth trajectory. Let's go ahead. Now we look at a couple of individual cost items, and maybe also at the historic trajectory. Sales and marketing is one of the major areas that we invest in. We regard growth as two major variables. One is to win new clients over. We still feel that this market has a lot of potential for us to increase the customer base. The second function is to retain existing customers, which we document through a low churn rate of below 2%. These cost categories are basically highlighted over here. Again, we are coming from EUR 12 million, was relatively flat to 2024. Then we see in our IPO year, we significantly invested more in our sales and marketing efforts. This also gets clearly documented if we look at the figures from H1 2025, where we spent EUR 8.9 million, and we increased our absolute spending to EUR 12.4 million. This expenditure also includes some of our investments into new markets. We received a question from one of the analysts about customer acquisition costs, if they have gone up. On paper, if you divide the amount of contracts by sales and marketing expenditure, it seems that they have slightly gone up. All expenditure also include the investments into new markets, and where we know that the sales cycles are somewhere between three to nine months. These expenditures also include further investments that will start paying off towards the end of the year and in 2027. As of revenue, the amount we spend on SME is relatively constant as of now. We roughly spent 20% in H1 last year, and now we are at 19.6%. Please go ahead. R&D, that's a very important function that we invest in our IT platform and our own IT people. There you can also observe a, let's say, midterm trajectory of continuous investment, coming from EUR 3.4 million in 2023, slightly increasing, and then within our IPO year, nearly doubling the R&D expenditure to EUR 6.6 million. If we compare now the H1 2025, where we stood at EUR 3.1 million, and now look at what is happening in the first six months in 2026, we can also see again, a slight increment in R&D expenditure. We will continue to invest in our platform to continue building on our USP for our clients. Go ahead. G&A, we have to summarize, we always try to be very efficient in whatever we do. You see historically, 2023, we had an absolute investment of EUR 8.4 million, then it went up to EUR 11.4 million. And within the IPO year, to further professionalize and invest in legal and finance, accounting, the price or the cost went up. This is also documented in H1 2026. So if we compare the G&A investment from last year, H1, it was 8.2, and we increased the spending to EUR 11 million. But again, interestingly, we stay in a similar ballpark, so our G&A is relatively efficient and stays at roughly 17%- 18% of our overall revenue. Okay. In summary, we have the following EBIT bridge. So we have a gross profit of EUR 63 million in H1. Then we have our sales marketing expenditure of 12.4. We have our R&D expenditure of roughly EUR 4 million. We have our G&A at 11, and then we arrive at an EBIT figure of EUR 36.4 million. Okay, please go ahead. Last but not least, I think we can highlight that we also have improved on cash collection. There are basically two main reasons. In the past, we have optimized our payment terms, if you remember from previous meetings and calls that we had. So our standard payment term since about two years is that invoices are due within a period of 180 days after a BSFZ approval. Typically, 66% of the invoice are due at the time of a positive approval, and then the rest of the invoice is due within another six months' time. We can use a factoring provider, and this enables us to collect our cash relatively early. As a reminder, in the past four, five, six years ago, we had payment terms of up to two years. So very long payment terms. Why did we originally start like this? Because the cashback for the client comes with another delay of nine to 12 months after a BSFZ approval. So we have to find an alignment between the customers paying us and when the customer receives his cashback from the German government. Now, we managed to optimize these payment terms and basically that shows our strong cash collection, which actually has gone above 108%. Okay. Then, I think we can jump to Q&A. Yeah. Thank you very much, Michael and Alexander, for the presentation. I think we can start with a question or maybe one or two questions from Gustav Froberg. Please feel free to unmute, and then you can tell us a question. Thank you very much. Can you hear me okay? Yes. Super. Thank you very much for taking my questions as well. I have a couple, but I'll try to be quick. My first question on growth. Q2 is seasonally soft, as we know, but your customer count on the other hand seems to be flying. I just wanted to ask, absent the Clusterix migration, if there were any other timing effects with respect to tax credit filing applications or anything that meant that some of the revenues you should have booked in Q2 were, for example, booked already in Q1 because they were filing in Q4, or if there is anything that will be booked in Q3. I'm just trying to get a sense of how much we should read into future sales with respect to your full-year guidance figure. That's the first question. Yeah. Basically we worked on the software migration in the first quarter. Remember, for our monetization, we have a rough delay of three months after an R&D submission. So when we hand in an R&D proposal in the first quarter, it typically leads to revenue in the second quarter. Now, because we knew that the second quarter is, from a seasonal perspective, relatively the weakest quarter, we have used the first quarter to work on our software migration. It's hard to quantify a precise number, how much basically revenue is lagging because of this. But for a fact, let's say it slowed down the submissions of proposals significantly, for the first two months. Basically in January is a holiday month, so most people don't return for submissions from mid to end of January, and that had a strong impact. I would say it's fair to assume that the number of submissions that could have led to revenue in Q2 could have been significantly higher. If we, just as an example, if we deducted one and a half months from Q1, this also would mean that this lag is present in Q2 numbers. This migration now is over, or the major migration is over, so we don't expect any significant delays in the, let's say, future quarters. Did you have any sub-questions? Great. Thank you. Yes, a couple more, please. Again, I just want to come back on customer count, because that was a very nice figure to see 2,900 customers. I'm just trying to get a sense for, and you addressed my customer acquisition cost question earlier, but what's your view on the velocity of customer additions in Q2? Do you expect a similar pace as we've seen this year so far, or any changes? At this point of time, we don't have reasons to assume that our customer signing is significantly dropping. Let's say what we have seen between H1 last year and this year, or basically the first six months, is not something where we have great volatility from month- to- month, but it's relatively constant. So it's fair to assume that our customer signing will have a relatively constant number over the next couple of months. Great. And then a question on one-off expenses. I know it's a small one, but we need to ask about it anyways. Do you expect any of the one-offs costs you booked in Q2 to reoccur in Q3 and Q4? No, we don't. In summary, we invested in a slight restructuring of the company. We, as you remember, announced during our full year report, during our Hauptversammlung, that we have moved our headquarters to Tutzing, and alongside, we have changed a bit of the company structure and created a KG structure. So basically, we build a lot of speedboats with small managing directors, to give our, let's say, team leaders an opportunity to run their own P&L. So we've done this slight restructuring in terms of a KG structure and their own managing directors. To build up a structure for the future where we can provide our best employees relatively high autonomy and the opportunity to run their own P&Ls. This is the reason behind it, and this is a one-off expense, and we don't expect significant impacts in the future. Okay. That's super. Thank you very much. Okay. I will take the next question from Heavy Moat Investments, who is not here to ask the question personally. The question is regarding capital allocation. Basically, the first question is, will the dividend payout remain at the full payout like in 2025, or will Innoscripta pay out a lower percentage of earnings through return cash? To answer that, we strive for stability, so we would like to increase the dividend payment this year. So at least, let's say a little bit. The full payout, currently, we don't have any specific plans regarding that. The question is a little bit, what can the cash be used for, M&A targets or buybacks? M&A targets, we have looked at a few opportunities in the first half of this year, but we don't find anything which will serve our strict quality criteria. That means that we don't have any immediate plans for cash deployment in M&A, which leaves share buybacks as an option. But again, there is no decision made. At least we will keep the dividend payment stable, or we at least aim for a slight increase. Okay, the next question from Yair. Max, can you please unmute? Yes. There you go. Yair from Kepler Capital. I would like to ask first about the customers in the U.S. Two questions. First, are these German companies with a U.S. branch, or are these U.S. companies? The second question is, what size of company is this? The first customers we signed up are German companies with a subsidiary in the U.S., since we have already established relationship with those customers. The size, it ranges from mid-size, which means around 500 employees, to also some large corporations, having over 1,000 employees, 5,000 employees. I do not have the specific numbers here, but the first signed customers in basically France, U.S., and the U.K., are pretty much customers of the existing customer base in Germany, which, by the way, also proves that this works if you address it the right way. Nevertheless, you need a local team on spot in order to serve the customers, of course. We have to help with the submission, and we need local people to facilitate the submissions there. Okay. But the submissions is for the U.S., not for the German applications. Yes. Let's say all tax credit schemas worldwide are slightly different. That means that you have different processes. In Germany, you have a two-stage process. You first have to submit at the government authority, which is called the BSFZ, and then this claim basically substantiates your R&D tax credit, and then again, you have to collect the cash at your annual tax statement. In the U.S., it's a little bit different. You only have one step. You only have this annual tax statement. Nevertheless, you have to support the customer there, and they expect a local person or local workforce to help you there. Our main aim is not only to have this local processing workforce, but also to have a local sales workforce there to generally win over American companies. And then this is, let's say, a harder step because this of course requires, let's say, a few references, but this will come time over time when we scale up and build the salesforce over there. By the way, we happen to manage to do this in Austria quite successfully, so we have some traction now in Austria with the Forschungsprämie, which is also a different tax credit schema as in Germany. Yeah, so we expect that we can repeat this playbook there. Maybe we can also answer your second question. This is, can you describe how AI is improving your OpEx? What is the main use case for AI in Innoscripta today? Yes. Thank you. Yeah. So, basically, what are we using AI mainly for? We are using AI for parsing documents. So if you can imagine, customers submit a lot of documents to us. So we have payroll journals covering several thousand pages. Our main concern here is, of course, the speed of processing those documents, but also the reliability and quality. Quality comes from two different perspectives. That means, let's say, first is the accuracy, how we do these documents. So no solution here reaches 100%. You always have errors, which you have to feed them into, of course, six eyes checks with humans. The second one is where do we do this data processing. Our strong direction here is to have our proprietary data processing in the European Union. So in order to address data concerns from our customers there, which are obviously concerned that their data is being used for training data on some models. This is actually the big main part where we will use AI and how we can accelerate our business. Improving OpEx, if you see our main, let's say, expenses, R&D, which goes into developing new products. So we don't see any main impact. We see some, let's say, improvement in G&A, but let's say that we don't see a very big driver of that. It's more about the ability to serve the customer with a drastic increase in quality, which basically gives us reason to believe that AI basically helps us here in a big deal. Okay. Thank you. Next question, Joseph Shera. Hi. Yes, hi. Partly my question was already answered, but maybe you can give some insight regarding your three new markets, France, U.K., and the U.S. What would be the potential in the coming one to three years from your perspective? What is competition looking like? And when do you expect to break even? I mean, you build up some offices with people. Maybe you can talk about that, about these three points. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Shera. Basically, in order to give you some color here, we do not expect any significant contributions in 2026. Let's say our requirement for those markets is that we get very soon to, let's say, within the first 12 months to a revenue of $1 million. This is the first target which we see on those markets. Obviously, this is not the break-even point. It will come at, let's say, a single-digit, let's say, million amount. It depends a little bit because of the salaries in the U.S. are quite high, as we found out there. But let's say, what we really have to manage there is we have to build up a sales organization, which is, let's say, not an easy task. We have hired experienced salespeople there who know already the tax credit schemas, who work for competitors. They also onboarded some, let's say, people they knew. We have to see how the pipeline development will be. We have a strong pipeline in all of those. That's my market, let's say, with some companies and already in contract negotiations. But let's say, we are here in the long run. The main challenge which we see is, for example, in France, you see an intense price competition. You see basically tenders where companies are invited in, and where competition is happening mostly over price. We don't believe this is smart, also for the customer, because at the end, he pays the price with the quality standard. And especially when there's increased scrutiny from the government there, especially when it comes to big claims. We believe we have a deep value with our approach of the data collection. Because data collection, data processing, and providing the documentation for a customer which answers those detailed questions, this is what we believe has a superior value. And our main challenge is that we communicate this in the market. This is not something which happens in half a year, a year, but I think we will basically see if a market surpasses $1 million revenue within 12 months, we have reason to believe that this will be very successful. And all of those markets are already much bigger than the German market. If it only comes from the U.S., we see a potential of several magnitudes in revenue, compared to the German market. And this is why we are doing it, essentially. Okay, let me pick up a couple of questions because we are running out of time. I see a couple of questions. I see a question from Mark, and I'll summarize quickly myself. Can you explain some revenue move from Q2 - Q3? What we basically just briefly talked about is the software migration and that at least one and a half months were missing in the first quarter to get to revenue in Q2 with our three months delay in revenue recognition. We expect to catch up with this in Q3 and Q4. We don't communicate a fixed number at this point of time, how we expect that to distribute between Q3 and Q4. But we are confirming the guidance that we generally keep believing in our guidance, which is EUR 140 million. Of revenue and EUR 80 million EBIT. I think we touched the question of Gustav if we see any increasing customer acquisition costs going up. The additional expenditure that we have is the investment in our international markets that naturally leads to new contracts coming in with a couple of months delay. It looks as if the customer acquisition is going up, but we feel in our established markets, based on numbers that we see, and if we roughly assume the amount we are spending on international markets, here in our core market in Austria and Germany, it is fairly constant. Regarding our market share, this was a comparison, where we have the fixed numbers of BSFZ approvals in 2025. There basically we had official statistics of the BSFZ approvals, and we had our own internal numbers. Based on that, we came to a conclusion that we have a market share of approximately 30% in non-SME clients that got granted a first BSFZ approval in Germany. We, at this point, don't communicate a forecast how we expect the total amount of applications to develop in the coming months. But naturally, with a growing customer base, we expect that to grow. Data migration is over. I can confirm that majority of data migration is over. We don't expect, in the short term, further delays. Last but not least, I would like to pick out the question from Thomas H. "How does management see the business developing over the medium to long term without committing to specific guidance in terms of revenue growth and EBIT margin? What long-term range would management consider realistic? Does management feel comfortable with prevailing analyst estimates for the next three years?" Just a couple of thoughts on this. We see in our core market in Germany, where we have started off, we see an increasing generosity of tax credits. This year, for example, the threshold of expenditure that can be handed in was increased from EUR 10 million - EUR 12 million a year. Basically, this way, the funding rate also got increased. We see positive regulatory tailwinds. If we think beyond growth in Germany, where we see a lot of potential to win, again, new clients who have never filed for tax credits before or have dramatically underclaimed. We see the potential in other adjacent markets. Number one is the U.K., where roughly EUR 9 billion are spent in tax credits every year. Just as a comparison, the German market at this point of time stands at EUR 1.2 billion a year. The U.K. is multiple times bigger. France is currently standing at EUR 7 billion in R&D tax credit expenditure. The U.S. is an even bigger market. We try to expand into other geographies where tax credits seem to be more attractive and even a bigger volume. With our approach, we offer one platform to a global client, and we serve them in all geographies on one platform. We assume to have a long-term competitive advantage. Other alternatives are typically Big Four and old traditional consulting companies. That's our competition. They have very little to no software solutions. This is where we see and where we feel we can also gain market share in other geographies. And maybe let me pick a couple of another questions, since we are short on time to address all questions. Andrea Ruda said you expected H2 EBIT growth slows down. I can only refer on the published guidance, which we confirmed, which is EUR 140 million in revenue and EUR 80 million EBIT. We feel confident we will, let's say, beat this and, basically, this is the current state of the information here. Question from Thomas H. Meyer already addressed this question, Thomas H., regarding the international road. I think you already addressed it as well. We believe those markets are magnitudes larger than the German market. At least, currently, since the German market is still in its infancy and is still growing at quite high rates. And we believe, we have reason to believe that we have a competitive edge in those markets, where our main challenge here is to explain to the market that this is actually an advantage, so the customer also understands it. Nicolas Olofsson has a question about. I just go through, which are already answered. Do we know something about the total market value of total tax grants in Germany, France? And if these markets are stable or if they cycle with the overall economy. The answer here is they are very stable. They do not cycle because R&D expenses are usually very, let's say, very slow to change. And even in crisis, the R&D headcount is the last one to be reduced. And the overall market value of I think we have the slide, so I will just refer to the published slides here. France, currently, is several times as big as Germany. The U.S. is way larger. As a referral, last year in Germany, we had EUR 1.2 billion. France was EUR 7 billion. United States, $34 billion. United Kingdom, EUR 9 billion. Roughly you can say it is 9%. Of the R&D expenses of a country is a tax credit claim. This is what we see. There had been some Clusterix migration. What has this. Basically, we can hand in faster with more stability. This is actually. And we can make international hand-ins. This is why we did this migration. Do you mean you served some customers outside of Clusterix that migrated into Clusterix? I do not particularly understand the question. There are no customers outside of Clusterix. So, it is more, let's say, a migration from a previous system. So we reduce the number of software systems we use internally. And those submissions will be pushed over to Q3. Again, let's say that we were not able to hand in some submissions in the first quarter, and naturally, they will be handed in the coming quarters. Does a normal customer typically function over, let's say, a 10-year cycle? Yeah, let's say when we have a given churn rate of below 2%, then, basically, we expect, let's say, a customer to be there in 10 years, so the average customer. And, let's say, in terms of submission, I think we still have to do some improvements in our after-sales process. There is still some, let's say, improvements we can do. We remain focused in Germany with new customers. That means that we want to still capture the market, this opportunity, and still invest a lot in capturing new customers. When it comes to submissions of existing customers, there is still some potential which we could leverage. Usually, a customer does submissions when we onboard them. In some cases, let us say, there is basically no real playbook what happens after that. In some cases, there is another submission in six months. In some cases, we build up a relationship with the customer. So the first submission is quite small, and the following submissions are quite large, every time larger, to build up this trust relationship. In some cases, the customers hand in for previous years. So at the end, let us say, we see the typical customers coming back. I see it does not come back in predictable patterns, but this is still some area where we could improve the rhythms and the structures area, and also to lead the customers to more regular, rhythmic submissions. This is something still upcoming for the future, which we see some area of growth and improvement. There is another question from William. Of the EUR 140 million forecast, let us say, how confident are we? As I already said, we confirmed it, so we are confident. Regarding the capital allocation of the company, is it fully focused on the expansion, or do we have other initiatives? Again, we look forward to keep at least the dividend stable or slightly increasing, not necessarily see a full payout. We also have the option to make some share buybacks, which we cautiously would weigh in the future. Maybe leading over to Alex for some other questions. I am just checking if there are any significant questions which we have not touched as yet. Okay, I see a small question. Can you give us a feeling how much the office openings have had an impact on EBIT in Q2 2026? So I hear the major investment is into people. Of course, office infrastructure is also an investment, but as we start with relatively small and flexible office structure, it is not a very super significant amount in comparison to salaries, when you hire five to 10 people, for example. So this represents the majority. Then I see a question, sales went down because migration. Can you explain the correlation of migration and sales decrease? So I think this is a very good question because we have to differentiate here. Sales, in terms of incoming contracts with customers and R&D volume, has not gone down. This is a very constant figure that we touched on with Gustav earlier. That is our customer acquisition over the last six months or last 12 months. What has gone down in that limited period of time is simply the submission of R&D proposals via our software platform. Again, that is only a temporary slowdown. The R&D volume behind with existing customers has not decreased. So there is simply a delay. The migration benefit overall is a simplification of internal software systems that we use to serve clients, and that will enable us to be more efficient and work with higher speeds and better precision in the future. Maybe another interesting question, how many percent of your customers need special adaptions? If so, how many percent of those are paid for by the customer? Do you expect those numbers to be very different in U.K., France, and U.S.? We work only with country-based workflows. Customers do not get individual adaptions. The cockpit within our platform for each customer looks the same. There is no customized work included because the tax credit workflow within a geography is usually the same for every client. In some geographies, you have a differentiation between an SME scheme and a large company scheme, that there might be two different workflows. Generally, this workflow has to be built for a country, but then this workflow for a customer is the same. Last but not least, if state elections in Germany in September result in a government coalition breakdown and snap election early 2027, how do you see impact for submissions, cashback, timeline, and Innoscripta in general? We are working based on a law which is indefinite. Tax credits is like your regular tax declaration and rules and regulation around it. It is a law that there is a legal right to have a cashback. This is an indefinite program. It is not limited to a period of two or three or four or five. If you were to check how parties generally think about R&D tax credits, then every party, it does not matter if left or right or middle or however you would define what a party is, everybody is in favor of R&D tax credits. First of all, it is a very stable instrument. It has been in adjacent countries, very stable over time, typically with more generosity. This is what we have seen in Germany as well, that the generosity was increased four times since the inception of this program. It is embedded in a law, which makes it very reliable for companies to use this instrument, and generally, all political parties are in favor of R&D. This is not about taxing somebody more or taking more from others. Everybody has the understanding that R&D is one of the very major welfare drivers of an economy. Okay. I think, and I hope that we have answered all questions and that we helped you with the understanding of our business. If there are further questions, please feel free to reach out to our colleague, Max Hunger, and he can answer further questions or also schedule one-on-one meetings with me and with Michael if there are further questions. Thanks a lot for your attention. I would like to highlight that you are part of our software world today. This meeting happened in Clusterix Meet, which is our own development, which we use internally to serve our clients. It is basically a video call and, of course, also a call software. We are very proud that we were able to host our first earnings call within our own software framework. Maybe this gave you a little bit of a taste that we love to build great software and great processes. At least today you have seen a small fraction of what we have developed. Thanks a lot for taking part in Clusterix Meet, and feel free to reach out with additional questions to us. Thank you very much. Thank you as well from my side. As Alex said, please feel free to reach out if you find that some of the questions were not answered here in this call because we have a short time frame. We are here for you, so you can address Max, and we will set up a one-on-one meeting, or we will answer the questions in writing. Please feel free out to reach anytime. Thank you. Bye-bye. Thank you very much, everybody. With that, we are at the end of our call. Feel free to reach out and have a good evening. Bye-bye.