Audit Committee Report

The Audit Committee of the Board of Directors has furnished the following report, in accordance with rules established by the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), for inclusion in this Proxy Statement.

In fulfilling its oversight responsibilities, the Audit Committee reviewed and discussed with management the audited financial statements in the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2022, including a discussion of the quality, not just the acceptability, of the accounting principles, the reasonableness of significant judgments, and the clarity of disclosures in the financial statements. In addition, the Audit Committee reviewed and discussed with management the internal audit plan for the year ended December 31, 2022. Furthermore, the Audit Committee reviewed and discussed with the Company’s management the Company’s design and functioning of its internal controls over financial reporting, including a review of management’s report on its assessment and for the year ended December 31, 2022, Marcum’s audit of the effectiveness of the Company’s internal controls over financial reporting and any significant deficiencies or material weaknesses identified by such audit. The Audit Committee reviewed with Marcum LLP, who are responsible for expressing an opinion on the conformity of those audited financial statements with generally accepted accounting principles, their judgments as to the quality, not just the acceptability, of the Company’s accounting principles and such other matters as are required to be discussed with the Committee under generally accepted auditing standards. In addition, the Committee has discussed with Marcum LLP the matters required to be discussed by applicable requirements of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board. The Audit Committee has received the written disclosures and the letter from Marcum LLP

12

Table of Contents

required by applicable requirements of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board regarding Marcum LLP’s communications with the Audit Committee concerning independence, and has discussed with Marcum LLP their independence. The Audit Committee also considered the compatibility of non-audit services with Marcum LLP’s independence.

The Audit Committee discussed with Marcum LLP the overall scope and plans for their audit. The Audit Committee regularly meets with Marcum LLP, with and without management present, to discuss the results of their examination, the Company’s internal controls, and the overall quality of the Company’s financial reporting.

In reliance on the reviews and discussions referred to above, the Audit Committee recommended to the Board that the audited financial statements be included in the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2022 for filing with the SEC. The Audit Committee nominates Marcum LLP for appointment by the Company’s shareholders as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2023.

Submitted by the Audit Committee of the Company’s Board of Directors

Robert Dykes, Chair of the Committee

Cary Grossman

Wesley Williams

13

Table of Contents

See page 9 of this Proxy Statement for the biography of Tyler Page.

Edward Farrell has served as Cipher’s Chief Financial Officer since August 2021. Prior to Cipher, from 2003 to 2018, Mr. Farrell held several senior positions at AllianceBernstein, L.P., including Controller, Chief Accounting Officer and Chief Financial Officer. Mr. Farrell brings more than 35 years of financial administration and leadership experience in the financial services industry, including his prior positions at Nomura Securities International and Salomon Brothers. Ed started his career at PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP. Mr. Farrell currently serves on the board of directors Arbor Realty Trust, Inc. where he is a member to both their Audit and Compensation Committees. He received his B.B.A. in Business Administration from St. Bonaventure University.

Patrick Kelly has served as Cipher’s Chief Operating Officer since August 2021, and as Co-President since March 2023. Prior to Cipher, from 2012 to 2019, Mr. Kelly served as Chief Operating Officer at Stone Ridge Asset Management, LLC. Between 2012 and 2018, he also held several directorship positions with several trusts of Stone Ridge Asset Management. From 2009 to 2012, Mr. Kelly served as Chief Operating Officer of Quantitative Strategies at Magnetar Capital. Prior to that, he served as Head of Portfolio Valuation at D. E. Shaw & Co. Mr. Kelly is a Chartered Financial Analyst (CFA) and received his B.S. in Finance from DePaul University.

William Iwaschuk has served as Cipher’s Chief Legal Officer since August 2021, as Corporate Secretary since May 2022, and as Co-President since March 2023. Prior to Cipher, from 2014 to 2020, Mr. Iwaschuk held senior positions at Tower Research Capital LLC, including serving as General Counsel and Secretary (2016‑2020) and Counsel (2014‑2016). From 2013 to 2014, Mr. Iwaschuk was a Partner in the Investment Management Group of Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP in New York. Mr. Iwaschuk also previously served as a Vice‑President in the legal department at Goldman Sachs & Co. from 2005 until 2012. He started his career as an equity derivatives associate at Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP in New York. Mr. Iwaschuk also currently serves on the board of directors of Futures and Options, a non-profit organization. Mr. Iwaschuk received his LL.B. and B.A. degrees from The University of British Columbia.

14

Table of Contents

Board Leadership Structure

Our Corporate Governance Guidelines provide our board of directors with flexibility to combine or separate the positions of Chairperson of the Board and Chief Executive Officer in accordance with its determination that utilizing one or the other structure would be in the best interests of our Company. Our Corporate Guidelines also provide that if the Chairperson is an Independent Director, then the Chairperson of the Board will serve as lead director.

The positions of our Chairperson of the Board and our Chief Executive Officer are currently served by two separate persons. James Newsome, an independent director, serves as Chairperson of the Board and lead director, and Mr. Page serves as our Chief Executive Officer.

The Board believes that our current leadership structure of Chief Executive Officer and Chairperson of the Board being held by two separate individuals, with the Chairperson qualified as independent and serving as lead director, is in the best interests of the Company and its stockholders and strikes the appropriate balance between the Chief Executive Officer’s responsibility for the strategic direction, day-to day-leadership and performance of our Company and the Chairperson’s responsibility to guide overall strategic direction of our Company and provide oversight of our corporate governance and guidance to our Chief Executive Officer and to set the agenda for and preside over Board meetings.

We recognize that different leadership structures may be appropriate for companies in different situations and believe that no one structure is suitable for all companies. Accordingly, the Board will continue to periodically review our leadership structure and make such changes in the future as it deems appropriate and in the best interests of the Company and its stockholders.

Additionally, on April 8, 2022, we entered into a Board Observer Agreement (the “Board Observer Agreement”) with Bitfury Holding B.V. (“Bitfury Holding”) and Bitfury Top HoldCo B.V. (“Bitfury,” and together with “Bitfury Holding,” the “Investors”), which provides that the Investors have the right to designate a representative to serve as an observer (the “Observer”) of our Board. The Observer has the right to attend and observe meetings of the Board, including any meetings of the committees of the Board, subject to certain exceptions specified in the Board Observer Agreement. The Investors’ rights under the Board Observer Agreement will terminate upon the date that the Investors no longer beneficially own at least 10% of the outstanding shares of common stock. As of the date of this Proxy Statement, the Investors have not designated an Observer pursuant to the Board Observer Agreement. The Board Observer Agreement was negotiated and approved by an independent committee of the Board.

15

Table of Contents

Director Independence

As a controlled company within the meaning of the Nasdaq rules, we are not required to have a board that is composed of a majority of independent directors, as defined in the Nasdaq rules. However, we currently do not rely on that exemption and voluntarily comply with the Nasdaq requirement to have a board that is composed of a majority of independent directors.

Under our Corporate Governance Guidelines and the applicable Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (“Nasdaq”) rules (the “Nasdaq rules”), a director is not independent unless the Board affirmatively determines that he or she does not have a direct or indirect material relationship with us or any of our subsidiaries. In addition, the director must not be precluded from qualifying as independent under the per se bars set forth by the Nasdaq rules. The Nasdaq independence definition includes a series of objective tests, including that the director is not, and has not been for at least three years, one of our employees and that neither the director nor any of his family members has engaged in various types of business dealings with us. In addition, as required by Nasdaq rules, our board of directors has made a subjective determination as to each independent director that no relationships exist, which, in the opinion of our board of directors, would interfere with the exercise of independent judgment in carrying out the responsibilities of a director.

Our Board has undertaken a review of its composition, the composition of its committees and the independence of our directors and considered whether any director has a material relationship with us that could compromise his or her ability to exercise independent judgment in carrying out his or her responsibilities. Based upon information requested from and provided by each director concerning his or her background, employment and affiliations, including family relationships and all other facts and circumstances our Board deemed relevant in determining their independence, including the director’s beneficial ownership of our common stock, our Board of Directors has determined that none of James Newsome, Robert Dykes, Cary Grossman, Caitlin Long, Holly Morrow Evans and Wesley Williams, representing six of our seven directors, has a relationship that would interfere with the exercise of independent judgment in carrying out the responsibilities of a director and that each of these directors qualifies as “independent” as that term is defined under the Nasdaq rules. Tyler Page is not an independent director due to his employment as Chief Executive Officer of the Company.

Audit Committee

Our audit committee is responsible for, among other things:

16

Table of Contents

Our audit committee currently consists of Robert Dykes, Cary Grossman and Wesley Williams, with Mr. Dykes serving as chair. All members of our audit committee meet the requirements for financial literacy under the applicable Nasdaq rules and regulations. Our Board of Directors has affirmatively determined that each member of our audit committee qualifies as “independent” under Nasdaq’s additional standards applicable to audit committee members and Rule 10A-3 of the Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”) applicable audit committee members. In addition, our Board of Directors has determined that Mr. Dykes qualifies as an “audit committee financial expert,” as such term is defined in Item 407(d)(5) of Regulation S-K.

Compensation Committee

Our compensation committee is responsible for, among other things:

Our compensation committee currently consists of Cary Grossman, Holly Morrow Evans and Wesley Williams, with Mr. Grossman serving as chair. Our Board of Directors has determined that each member of our compensation committee qualifies as “independent” under Nasdaq’s additional standards applicable to compensation committee members and is a “non-employee director” as defined in Section 16b-3 of the Exchange Act.

Pursuant to the compensation committee’s charter, the compensation committee has the authority to retain or obtain the advice of compensation consultants, legal counsel and other advisors to assist in carrying out its responsibilities. Before selecting any such consultant, counsel or advisor, the compensation committee reviews and considers the independence of such consultant, counsel or advisor in accordance with applicable Nasdaq rules. We must provide appropriate funding for payment of reasonable compensation to any advisor retained by the compensation committee.

17

Table of Contents

Compensation Consultants

As mentioned above, the compensation committee has the authority under its charter to retain outside consultants or advisors, as it deems necessary or advisable. In 2022, the compensation committee engaged Pay Governance LLC as a consultant and advisor with respect to the grant of the Special Retention RSUs, described in further detail under “Executive and Director Compensation, Equity Awards – 2022 Special Retention RSUs”. Pay Governance does not maintain any other direct or indirect business relationships with the Company or any of its affiliates, and the compensation committee has reviewed the independence of Pay Governance, including the factors required by Nasdaq and the SEC, and has determined that the services provided by Pay Governance did not raise any conflicts of interest

Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee

Our nominating and corporate governance committee is responsible for, among other things:

Our nominating and corporate governance committee currently consists of Robert Dykes, Holly Morrow Evans and Caitlin Long, with Ms. Long serving as chair. Our Board has determined that each member of our nominating and corporate governance committee qualifies as “independent” under applicable Nasdaq rules applicable to nominating and corporate governance committee members.

Board and Board Committee Meetings and Attendance

During fiscal 2022, our Board of Directors met seven times, the audit committee met four times, the compensation committee met four times and the nominating and corporate governance committee met four times. In 2022, each of our current directors attended at least 75% of the meetings of the Board and committees on which he or she served as a member held during the period for which he or she was a member of the Board and committees, as applicable.

Executive Sessions

Executive sessions, which are meetings of the non-management members of the Board, are periodically scheduled throughout the year. In addition on a regularly scheduled basis, but no less than twice a year, the independent directors meet in a private session that excludes management and any non-independent directors. At each of these meetings, the non-management and independent directors in attendance, as applicable, determine which member will preside at such session.

Director Attendance at Annual Meeting of Stockholders

We do not have a formal policy regarding the attendance of our Board members at our annual meetings of stockholders, but we expect all directors to make every effort to attend any meeting of stockholders. All directors then-serving attended last year’s annual general meeting of stockholders, and, to the Company’s knowledge, all of our current directors will attend this year’s Annual Meeting.

18

Table of Contents

Director Nominations Process

The nominating and corporate governance committee is responsible for recommending candidates to serve on the Board and its committees. In considering whether to recommend any particular candidate to serve on the Board or its committees or for inclusion in the Board’s slate of recommended director nominees for election at the annual meeting of stockholders, the nominating and corporate governance committee considers the criteria set forth in our Corporate Governance Guidelines. Specifically, the nominating and corporate governance committee may take into account many factors, including: personal and professional integrity, ethics and values; experience in corporate management, such as serving as an officer or former officer of a publicly held company; strong finance experience; relevant social policy concerns; experience relevant to the Company’s industry; experience as a board member or executive officer of another publicly held company; relevant academic expertise or other proficiency in an area of the Company’s operations; diversity of expertise and experience in substantive matters pertaining to the Company’s business relative to other board members; diversity of background and perspective, including, but not limited to, with respect to age, gender, race, place of residence and specialized experience; practical and mature business judgment, including, but not limited to, the ability to make independent analytical inquiries; participation and attendance at Board meetings and committee meetings, if applicable; and any other relevant qualifications, attributes or skills. In addition, the Board will consider whether there are potential conflicts of interest with the candidate’s other personal and professional pursuits. In determining whether to recommend a director for re-election, the nominating and corporate governance committee will also consider the director’s past attendance at meetings and participation in and contributions to the activities of the Board.

We consider diversity a meaningful factor in identifying director nominees, but do not have a formal diversity policy. The Board evaluates each individual in the context of the Board as a whole, with the objective of assembling a group that can best perpetuate the success of the business and represent stockholder interests through the exercise of sound judgment using its diversity of experience in these various areas.

In identifying prospective director candidates, the nominating and corporate governance committee may seek referrals from other members of the Board, management, stockholders and other sources, including third party recommendations. The nominating and corporate governance committee also may, but need not, retain a search firm in order to assist it in identifying candidates to serve as directors of the Company. The nominating and corporate governance committee uses the same criteria for evaluating candidates regardless of the source of the referral or recommendation. When considering director candidates, the nominating and corporate governance committee seeks individuals with backgrounds and qualities that, when combined with those of our incumbent directors, provide a blend of skills and experience to further enhance the Board’s effectiveness. In connection with its annual recommendation of a slate of nominees, the nominating and corporate governance committee also may assess the contributions of those directors recommended for re-election in the context of the Board evaluation process and other perceived needs of the Board.

Ms. Evans, Mr. Newsome and Mr. Williams, as Class II director nominees, were initially recommended to serve as members of our Board by our majority shareholder in connection with the Business Combination. In determining to nominate each of the director nominees to be elected at the Annual Meeting, each were evaluated in accordance with our standard review process for director candidates described herein.

When considering whether the directors and nominees have the experience, qualifications, attributes and skills, taken as a whole, to enable the Board to satisfy its oversight responsibilities effectively in light of our business and structure, the Board focused primarily on the information discussed in each of the board member’s biographical information set forth above. We believe that our directors provide an appropriate mix of experience and skills relevant to the size and nature of our business. This process resulted in the Board’s nomination of the incumbent directors named in this Proxy Statement and proposed for election by you at the Annual Meeting.

The nominating and corporate governance committee will consider director candidates recommended by stockholders, and such candidates will be considered and evaluated under the same criteria described above. Any recommendation submitted to the Company should be in writing and should include any supporting material the stockholder considers appropriate in support of that recommendation, but must include information that would be required under the rules of the SEC to be included in a proxy statement soliciting proxies for the election of such candidate and a written consent of the candidate to serve as one of our directors if elected and must otherwise

19

Table of Contents

comply with the requirements under our Bylaws for stockholders to recommend director nominees. Stockholders wishing to propose a candidate for consideration may do so by submitting the above information to the attention of the Secretary, Cipher Mining Inc., 1 Vanderbilt Avenue, Floor 54, Suite C, New York, New York 10017. All recommendations for director nominations received by the Secretary that satisfy our Bylaws requirements relating to such director nominations will be presented to the nominating and corporate governance committee for its consideration. Stockholders also must satisfy the notification, timeliness, consent and information requirements set forth in our Bylaws. These timing requirements are also described under the caption “Stockholder Proposals and Director Nominations.”

Board Role in Risk Oversight

The Board of Directors has overall responsibility for risk oversight, including, as part of regular Board and committee meetings, general oversight of executives’ management of risks relevant to the Company. A fundamental part of risk oversight is not only understanding the material risks a company faces and the steps management is taking to manage those risks, but also understanding what level of risk is appropriate for the Company. The involvement of the Board of Directors in reviewing our business strategy is an integral aspect of the Board’s assessment of management’s tolerance for risk and its determination of what constitutes an appropriate level of risk for the Company. While the full Board has overall responsibility for risk oversight, it is supported in this function by its audit committee, compensation committee and nominating and corporate governance committee. Each of the committees regularly reports to the Board.

The audit committee assists the Board in fulfilling its risk oversight responsibilities by periodically reviewing our accounting, reporting and financial practices, including the integrity of our financial statements, the effectiveness of internal controls, our compliance with legal and regulatory requirements and our enterprise risk management program and our cybersecurity risk exposures. Through its regular meetings with management, including the finance and legal functions, the audit committee reviews and discusses significant areas of our business and summarizes for the Board areas of risk and the appropriate mitigating factors. The compensation committee assists the Board by overseeing and evaluating risks related to the Company’s compensation structure and compensation programs, including the formulation, administration and regulatory compliance with respect to compensation matters. The nominating and corporate governance committee assists the Board by overseeing and evaluating programs and risks associated with Board organization, membership and structure, and corporate governance. In addition, our Board receives periodic detailed operating performance reviews from management.

Committee Charters and Corporate Governance Guidelines

Our Corporate Governance Guidelines, charters of the audit committee, compensation committee and nominating and corporate governance committee and other corporate governance information are available under the Governance section of the Investor Relations page of our website located at https://investors.ciphermining.com, or by writing to our Secretary at our offices at 1 Vanderbilt Avenue, Floor 54, Suite C, New York, New York 10017.

Code of Business Conduct and Ethics

We have adopted a written code of business conduct and ethics that applies to our directors, officers and employees, including our principal executive officer, principal financial officer, principal accounting officer or controller, or persons performing similar functions. Our code of business conduct and ethics is available under the Corporate Governance section of our website at https://investors.ciphermining.com. In addition, we intend to post on our website all disclosures that are required by law or the Nasdaq rules concerning any amendments to, or waivers from, any provision of the code.

Anti-Hedging Policy

Our Board of Directors has adopted an Insider Trading Compliance Policy, which applies to all of our directors, officers and employees. The policy prohibits our directors, officers and employees from engaging in hedging transactions, short sales and transactions in publicly traded options, such as puts, calls and other derivatives involving our equity securities.

20

Table of Contents

We may allow pledging transactions pursuant to our Insider Trading Compliance Policy, because we acknowledge that personal circumstances may warrant entrance into such an arrangement in lieu of selling Company shares. Accordingly, we entered into a Waiver Agreement, dated April 8, 2022 with Bitfury Top HoldCo B.V. (“Bitfury”) (the “Waiver Agreement”), pursuant to which we waived certain restrictions on transfer of shares under (a) that certain Lock-up Agreement, dated as of August 26, 2021, by and between Good Works Acquisition Corp. and Bitfury and (b) those certain Lock-up Agreements, dated as of August 26, 2021, by and between Good Works Acquisition Corp. and each of (i) I-B Goodworks, LLC, (ii) Magnetar Financial LLC, (iii) Mint Tower Capital Management B.V., (iv) Periscope Capital, Inc. and (v) Polar Asset Management Partners Inc., respectively (the stockholders contemplated by clauses (a)-(b), the “Stockholders”) imposing similar restrictions on the Stockholders. The Waiver Agreement was negotiated and approved by an independent committee of our Board of Directors and permits each Stockholder to pledge its shares, subject to certain conditions as specified in the Waiver Agreement.

Communications with the Board

Any stockholder or any other interested party who desires to communicate with our Board of Directors, our non-management directors or any specified individual director, may do so by directing such correspondence to the attention of the Secretary, Cipher Mining Inc., 1 Vanderbilt Avenue, Floor 54, Suite C, New York, New York, 10017. The Secretary will forward the communication to the appropriate director or directors as appropriate.

21

Table of Contents