HGTXU Hugoton Royalty Trust (QB)

Notes to Condensed Financial Statements (Unaudited)

The financial statements of Hugoton Royalty Trust (the “Trust”) are prepared on the following basis and are not intended to present financial position and results of operations in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”):

Costs deducted in the calculation of net proceeds for the 80% net profits interests generally include applicable taxes, transportation, marketing and legal costs, production expense, development costs, operating charges and other costs.

The Trust’s financial statements differ from those prepared in conformity with U.S. GAAP because revenues are recognized when received rather than accrued in the month of production, expenses are recognized when paid rather than when incurred and certain cash reserves may be established by the trustee for contingencies which would not be recorded under U.S. GAAP. This comprehensive basis of accounting other than U.S. GAAP corresponds to the accounting permitted for royalty trusts by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, as specified by Staff Accounting Bulletin Topic 12:E, Financial Statements of Royalty Trusts.

Most accounting pronouncements apply to entities whose financial statements are prepared in accordance with U.S. GAAP, directing such entities to accrue or defer revenues and expenses in a period other than when such revenues were received or expenses were paid. Because the Trust’s financial statements are prepared on the modified cash basis, as described above, most accounting pronouncements are not applicable to the Trust’s financial statements.

9

Table of Contents

Impairment of Net Profits Interest

The trustee reviews the Trust’s net profits interests (“NPI”) in oil and gas properties for impairment whenever events or circumstances indicate that the carrying value of the NPI may not be recoverable. In general, the trustee does not view temporarily low prices as an indication of impairment. The markets for crude oil and natural gas have a history of significant price volatility and though prices will occasionally drop significantly, industry prices over the long term will continue to be driven by market supply and demand. If events and circumstances indicated that the carrying value may not be recoverable, the trustee would use the estimated undiscounted future net cash flows from the NPI to evaluate the recoverability of the Trust assets. If the undiscounted future net cash flows from the NPI are less than the NPI carrying value, the Trust would recognize an impairment loss for the difference between the NPI carrying value and the estimated fair value of the NPI. The determination as to whether the NPI is impaired requires a significant amount of judgment by the trustee and is based on the best information available to the trustee at the time of the evaluation. There was no impairment of the NPI during the quarter ended March 31, 2017.

Net profits interests in oil and gas properties

The initial carrying value of the net profits interests of $247,066,951 represents XTO Energy’s historical net book value for the interests on December 1, 1998, the date of the transfer to the Trust. During the second quarter 2016, the carrying value of the NPI was written down to its fair value of $28,801,000, resulting in an impairment of $57,306,527 charged directly to Trust corpus. Amortization of the net profits interests is calculated on a unit-of-production basis and charged directly to trust corpus. Accumulated amortization was $166,978,536 as of March 31, 2017 and $162,874,921 as of December 31, 2016.

The following summarizes actual development costs, budgeted development costs deducted in the calculation of net profits income, and the cumulative actual costs compared to the amount deducted for the underlying properties:

The monthly deduction is based on the current level of development expenditures, budgeted future development costs and the cumulative actual costs under (over) previous deductions. XTO Energy has advised the trustee that 2017 budgeted development costs for the underlying properties are between $2 million and $4 million. The 2017 budget year generally coincides with the Trust distribution months from April 2017 through March 2018. Changes in oil or natural gas prices could impact future development plans on the underlying properties. XTO Energy has advised the trustee that this monthly deduction will continue to be evaluated and revised as necessary.

10

Table of Contents

For federal income tax purposes, the Trust constitutes a fixed investment trust that is taxed as a grantor trust. A grantor trust is not subject to tax at the trust level. Accordingly, no provision for income taxes has been made in the financial statements. The unitholders are considered to own the Trust’s income and principal as though no trust were in existence. The income of the Trust is deemed to have been received or accrued by each unitholder at the time such income is received or accrued by the Trust and not when distributed by the Trust. Impairment for book purposes will not result in a loss for tax purposes for the unitholders until the loss is recognized.

All revenues from the Trust are from sources within Kansas, Oklahoma or Wyoming. Because it distributes all of its net income to unitholders, the Trust has not been taxed at the trust level in Kansas or Oklahoma. While the Trust has not owed tax, the trustee is required to file a return with Oklahoma reflecting the income and deductions of the Trust attributable to properties located in the state, along with a schedule that includes information regarding distributions to unitholders. The Trust does not expect to file a Kansas return for the 2017 tax year because it expects to have no revenues, income or deductions in 2017 attributable to properties located in Kansas. The Trust did not file a return with Kansas for the 2016 and 2015 tax years for the same reason.

Wyoming does not have a state income tax.

Each unitholder should consult his or her own tax advisor regarding income tax requirements, if any, applicable to such person’s ownership of Trust units.

Unitholders should consult the Trust’s latest annual report on Form 10-K for a complete discussion of federal and state tax matters.

In December 2010, a royalty class action lawsuit was filed against XTO Energy styled Chieftain Royalty Company v. XTO Energy Inc. in Coal County District Court, Oklahoma. XTO Energy removed the case to federal court in the Eastern District of Oklahoma. The plaintiffs allege that XTO Energy wrongfully deducted fees from royalty payments on Oklahoma wells, failed to make diligent efforts to secure the best terms available for the sale of gas and its constituents, and demand an accounting to determine whether they have been fully and fairly paid gas royalty interests. The case was certified as a class action in April 2012; however, on appeal in June 2012, the 10 ^th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the certification of the class and remanded the case back to the trial court for further proceedings. Pretrial discovery continues.

XTO Energy has informed the trustee that it believes that XTO Energy has strong defenses to the Chieftain lawsuit and intends to vigorously defend its position. However, XTO Energy has informed the trustee that it is cognizant of other, similar litigation. As these cases develop, XTO Energy will assess its legal position accordingly. If XTO Energy ultimately makes any settlement payments or receives a judgment against it in Chieftain , XTO Energy has advised the trustee that the Trust should bear its 80% share of such settlement or judgment, including any future royalty adjustments that would reduce net proceeds. The trustee intends to review any claimed reductions in payment to the Trust based on the facts and circumstances of such settlement or judgment. In light of a 2014 arbitration decision in which a three panel tribunal decided that the settlement in Fankhouser v. XTO Energy, Inc. , including a new royalty calculation for future royalty payments, could not be charged to the Trust, to the extent that the claims in Chieftain are similar to those in Fankhouser the trustee would likely object to such claimed reductions. Should there be a disagreement as to whether the Trust should bear its share of a settlement or judgment the matter will be resolved by binding

11

Table of Contents

arbitration through the American Arbitration Association under the terms of the Indenture creating the Trust. XTO Energy has informed the trustee that, although the amount of any reduction in net proceeds is not presently determinable, in its management’s opinion, the amount is not currently expected to be material to the Trust’s financial position or liquidity though it could be material to the Trust’s annual distributable income. Additionally, XTO Energy has advised the trustee that any reductions would result in costs exceeding revenues on the properties underlying the net profit interests of the case, as applicable, for several monthly distributions, depending on the size of the judgment or settlement, if any, and the net proceeds being paid at that time, which would result in the net profits interest being limited until such time that the revenues exceed the costs for those net profit interests.

Certain of the underlying properties are involved in various other lawsuits and governmental proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business. XTO Energy has advised the trustee that it does not believe that the ultimate resolution of these claims will have a material effect on the financial position or liquidity of the Trust, but may have an effect on annual distributable income.

Other

Several states have enacted legislation requiring state income tax withholding from nonresident recipients of oil and gas proceeds. After consultation with its tax counsel, the trustee believes that it is not required to withhold on payments made to the unitholders. However, regulations are subject to change by the various states, which could change this conclusion. Should amounts be withheld on payments made to the Trust or the unitholders, distributions to the unitholders would be reduced by the required amount, subject to the filing of a claim for refund by the Trust or unitholders for such amount.

If monthly costs exceed revenues for any of the three conveyances (one for each of the states of Kansas, Oklahoma and Wyoming), such excess costs must be recovered, with accrued interest, from future net proceeds of that conveyance and cannot reduce net proceeds from other conveyances.

The following summarizes excess costs activity and cumulative balances by conveyance:

Improved gas prices resulted in the partial recovery of excess costs on properties underlying the Kansas and Wyoming net profits interests for the quarter ended March 31, 2017.

Underlying cumulative excess costs for the Kansas and Wyoming conveyances remaining as of March 31, 2017 totaled $1,444,214 (NPI $1,155,372).

12

Table of Contents