Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows
(Unaudited)

The accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements (unaudited) for The Timken Company (the company) have been prepared in accordance with the instructions to Form 10-Q and do not include all of the information and footnotes required by the accounting principles generally accepted in the United States for complete financial statements. In the opinion of management, all adjustments (consisting of normal recurring accruals) and disclosures considered necessary for a fair presentation have been included. For further information, refer to the Consolidated Financial Statements and footnotes included in the company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006. Certain amounts in the 2006 Consolidated Financial Statements have been reclassified to conform to the 2007 presentation.

In July 2006, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued FASB Interpretation (FIN) 48, “Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes – an interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109.” This interpretation clarifies the accounting for uncertain tax positions recognized in an entity’s financial statements in accordance with SFAS No. 109, “Accounting for Income Taxes.” FIN 48 prescribes requirements and other guidance for financial statement recognition and measurement of positions taken or expected to be taken on tax returns. This interpretation is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2006. The cumulative effect of adopting FIN 48 is recorded as an adjustment to the opening balance of retained earnings in the period of adoption. The company adopted FIN 48 effective January 1, 2007. In connection with the adoption of FIN 48, the company recorded a $5,623 increase to retained earnings to recognize net tax benefits under the recognition and measurement criteria of FIN 48 that were previously not recognized under the company’s former accounting policy.

In September 2006, the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements.” SFAS No. 157 establishes a framework for measuring fair value that is based on the assumptions market participants would use when pricing an asset or liability and establishes a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the information to develop those assumptions. Additionally, the standard expands the disclosures about fair value measurements to include separately disclosing the fair value measurements of assets or liabilities within each level of the fair value hierarchy. SFAS No. 157 is effective for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007. The company is currently evaluating the impact of adopting SFAS No. 157 on the company’s results of operations and financial condition.

In February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 159, “The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities — Including an amendment of FASB Statement No. 115.” SFAS No. 159 permits entities to choose to measure many financial instruments and certain other items at fair value that are not currently required to be measured at fair value. SFAS No. 159 also establishes presentation and disclosure requirements designed to facilitate comparisons between entities that choose different measurement attributes for similar types of assets and liabilities. SFAS No. 159 is effective for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007. The company is currently evaluating the impact of adopting SFAS No. 159 on the company’s results of operations and financial condition.

Effective January 1, 2007, the company changed the method of accounting for certain product inventories for one of its domestic legal entities from the first-in, first-out (FIFO) method to the last-in, first-out (LIFO) method. This change affects approximately 8% of the company’s total gross inventory at December 31, 2006. As a result of this change, substantially all domestic inventories are stated at the lower of cost determined(determined on a LIFO basis,basis) or market. The change is preferable because it improves financial reporting by supporting the continued integration of the company’s domestic bearing business, as well as providingprovides a consistent and uniform costing method across the company’s domestic operations and reduces the complexity of intercompany transactions. SFAS No. 154, “Accounting Changes and Error Corrections,” requires that a change in accounting principle be reflected through retrospective application of the new accounting principle to all prior periods, unless it is impractical to do so. The company has determined that retrospective application to a period prior to January 1, 2007 is not practical as the necessary information needed to restate prior periods is not available. Therefore, the company began to apply the LIFO method to these inventories beginning January 1, 2007. The adoption of the LIFO method for these inventories did not have a material impact on the company’s results of operations or financial position during the first quarternine months of 2007.

An actual valuation of the inventory under the LIFO method can be made only at the end of each year based on the inventory levels and costs at that time. Accordingly, interim LIFO calculations must be based on management’s estimates of expected year-end inventory levels and costs. Because these are subject to many forces beyond management’s control, annual results may differ from interim results as they are subject to the final year-end LIFO inventory valuation.

The components of property, plant and equipment are as follows:

The following table displays intangible assets as of March 31,September 30, 2007 and December 31, 2006:

During 2000, the company’s Steel Group invested in a joint venture, PEL, to commercialize a proprietary technology that converts iron units into engineered iron oxides for use in pigments, coatings and abrasives. The company concluded that PEL was a variable interest entity and that the company was the primary beneficiary. In accordance with FIN 46, “Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities, an interpretation of Accounting Research Bulletin No. 51,” the company consolidated PEL effective March 31, 2004. In the first quarter of 2006, plans were finalized to liquidate the assets of PEL, and the company recorded a related gain of approximately $3,549. In January 2006, the company repaid, in full, the $23,000 balance outstanding of the revenue bonds held by PEL. In June 2006, the company continued to liquidate PEL, with land and buildings exchanged and the buyer’s assumption of the fixed-rate mortgage, which resulted in a gain of $2,787.

During 2002, the company’s Automotive Group formed a joint venture, Advanced Green Components, LLC (AGC), with Sanyo Special Steel Co., Ltd. (Sanyo) and Showa Seiko Co., Ltd. (Showa). AGC is engaged in the business of converting steel to machined rings for tapered bearings and other related products. The company has been accounting for its investment in AGC under the equity method since AGC’s inception. During the third quarter of 2006, AGC refinanced its long-term debt of $12,240. The company guaranteed half of this obligation. The company concluded the refinancing represented a reconsideration event to evaluate whether AGC was a variable interest entity under FIN 46 (revised December 2003). The company concluded that AGC was a variable interest entity and that the company was the primary beneficiary. Therefore, the company consolidated AGC, effective September 30, 2006. All of AGC’s assets are collateral for its obligations. Except for AGC’s indebtedness for which the company is a guarantor, AGC’s creditors have no recourse to the general credit of the company.

Short-term debt at March 31,September 30, 2007 and December 31, 2006 was as follows:

Long-term debt at March 31,September 30, 2007 and December 31, 2006 was as follows:

An analysis of the change in capital and earnings invested in the business is as follows:

The primary measurement used by management to measure the financial performance of each Group is adjusted EBIT (earnings before interest and taxes, excluding the effect of amounts related to certain items that management considersdoes not consider representative of ongoing operations such as impairment and restructuring, manufacturing rationalization and integration costs, one-time gains and losses on disposal of non-strategic assets, allocated receipts received or payments made under the U.S. Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act (CDSOA) and loss on the dissolution of subsidiary).

Impairment and restructuring charges by segment are comprised of the following:

For the three months ended March 31,September 30, 2007:

In 2005, the company announced plans for its Automotive Group to restructure its business and improve performance. These plans included the closure of a manufacturing facility in Clinton, South Carolina and engineering facilities in Torrington, Connecticut and Norcross, Georgia. In February 2006, the company announced additional plans to rationalize production capacity at itsthe company’s Vierzon, France bearing manufacturing facility in response to changes in customer demand for its products.

In September 2006, the company announced further planned reductions in its Automotive Group workforce. In March 2007, the company announced the closure of its manufacturing facility in Sao Paulo, Brazil. The closure of the manufacturing facility in Sao Paulo, Brazil has been delayed to serve demand, driven primarily by industrial markets, until further notice.

These plans are targeted to collectively deliver annual pretax savings of approximately $75,000 by the fourth quarter of 2008, with expected net workforce reductions of approximately 1,300 to 1,400 positions and pretax costs of approximately $125,000$115,000 to $135,000,$125,000, which include restructuring costs and rationalization costs recorded in cost of products sold and selling, administrative and general expenses. The Automotive Group has incurred cumulative pretax costs of approximately $74,421$93,972 as of March 31,September 30, 2007 for these plans.

During the third quarter and first quarternine months of 2007, the company recorded $6,546$794 and $10,449, respectively, of severance and related benefit costs and $264$63 and $2,192, respectively, of exit costs associated with the Automotive Group’s restructuring and workforce reduction plans. DuringThe exit costs recorded during the first nine months of 2007 were primarily the result of environmental charges related to the closure of a manufacturing facility in Sao Paulo, Brazil. The company also recorded impairment charges of $1,600 during the third quarter and first nine months of 2006,2007 as a result of the Automotive Group’s restructuring and workforce reduction plans. The company recorded $966 of severance and related benefit costs of $1,647 and exits costs of a negative $231 during the third quarter of 2006. The company recorded impairment charges of $689, severance and related benefit costs of $8,248 and exits costs of $814 during the first nine months of 2006. The charges taken during the respective periods of 2006 related to the closure of a manufacturing facility in Clinton, South Carolina and administrative and engineering facilities in Torrington, Connecticut and Norcross, Georgia.Georgia, and the rationalization of the company’s Vierzon, France bearing manufacturing facility.

In October 2006,April 2007, the company announced its intention to exitcompleted the closure of its European seamless steel tube manufacturing operationsfacility located in Desford, England during 2007.England. The company recorded $4,627$1,129 and $6,685 of severance and related benefit costs, and $64$246 and $642 of exit costs during the third quarter and first quarternine months of 2007, respectively, related to this action.

The following table sets forth the net periodic benefit cost for the company’s retirement and postretirement benefit plans. The amounts for the three and nine months ended March 31,September 30, 2007 are based on actuarial calculations prepared during 2006. Consistent with prior years, these calculations will be updated later in the year. These updated calculations may result in different net periodic benefit cost for 2007. The net periodic benefit cost recorded for the three and nine months ended March 31,September 30, 2007 is the company’s best estimate of each period’s proportionate share of the amounts to be recorded for the year ended December 31, 2007.

The effective tax rate for the firstthird quarter of 2007 was lower than the U.S. Federal statutory tax rate primarily due primarily to (1) a favorable discrete tax adjustment of $32,100 recorded in the first quarter of 2007 to recognize the benefits of a prior year tax position as a result of a change in tax law during the quarter, (2) tax benefits on foreign income, including tax holidays in China and the Czech Republic, as well as earnings of certain other foreign subsidiaries being taxed at a rate less than 35%, (3)(2) the domesticU.S. manufacturing deduction, provided by(3) a tax benefit on the American Jobs Creation Actdivesture of 2004,a foreign joint venture in the third quarter of 2007, and (4) aggregateother tax benefit of other U.S. tax items, including the accrual of the tax-free Medicare prescription drug subsidy, deductible dividends paidan adjustment to the company’s Employee Stock Ownership Plan (ESOP)deferred tax assets to reflect a state tax law change and the U.S. Federal research tax credit. These additional tax benefits were partially offset partially by (1) the inability to record a tax benefit for losses at certain foreign subsidiaries, (2) taxes incurred on foreign remittances, (3) U.S. state and local income taxes, (3) taxes incurred on foreign remittances and (4) the aggregateother tax expense items.

For the third quarter of other discrete tax items, including2006, the accrual of interest expense related to uncertain tax positions from prior years.

Effective January 1, 2007, the company adopted FIN 48, including the provisions of FASB Staff Position No. FIN 48-1, “Definition of Settlement in FASB Interpretation No. 48.” In connection with the adoption of FIN 48,therewith, the company recorded a $5,623 increase to retained earnings to recognize net tax benefits under the recognition and measurement criteria of FIN 48 that were previously not recognized under the company’s former accounting policy. As of January 1, 2007, the company had approximately $137,300 of total gross unrecognized tax benefits. Included in this amount was approximately $60,300 (including the federal benefit on state tax positions), which represents the amount of unrecognized tax benefits that would favorably impact the company’s effective income tax rate in any future periods if such benefits were recognized. As of January 1, 2007, the company anticipated a decrease in its unrecognized tax positions of approximately $75,000 to $80,000 during 2007. The anticipated decrease was primarily due to settlements and resulting cash payments related to tax years 2002 to 2005, which are currently under examination by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service (IRS). The tax positions under examination include the timing of income recognition for certain amounts received by the company and treated as capital contributions pursuant to Internal Revenue Code Section 118 and other miscellaneous items.

As of March 31,September 30, 2007, the company hashad approximately $107,500$111,200 of total gross unrecognized tax benefits. Included in this amount is approximately $31,000$34,700 (including the federal benefit on state tax positions), which represents the amount of unrecognized tax benefits that would favorably impact the company’s effective income tax rate in any future periods if such benefits were recognized. As of March 31,September 30, 2007, the company anticipates a decrease in its unrecognized tax positions of approximately $75,000$70,000 to $80,000$75,000 during the next 12 months. The anticipated decrease is primarily due to settlements and resulting cash payments related to tax years 2002 tothrough 2005, which are currently under examination by the IRS. The tax positions under examination include the timing of income recognition for certain amounts received by the company and treated as capital contributions pursuant to Internal Revenue Code Section 118 and other miscellaneous items. As of March 31,September 30, 2007, the company hashad accrued approximately $4,500$6,400 of interest and penalties related to uncertain tax positions.

In December 2006, the company completed the divestiture of its subsidiary, Latrobe Steel. Latrobe Steel is a leading global producer and distributor of high-quality, vacuum melted specialty steels and alloys. This business was part of the Steel Group for segment reporting purposes. The following results of operations for this business have been treatedclassified as discontinued operations for all periods presented.

The gain on divestiture recorded in the first quarternine months of 2007 primarily represents a purchase price adjustment and was net of tax of $611.adjustment. As of December 31, 2006, there were no assets or liabilities remaining from the divestiture of Latrobe Steel.

Overview

The Timken Company is a leading global manufacturer of highly engineered anti-friction bearings and alloy steels and a provider of related products and services. Timken operates under three segments: Industrial Group, Automotive Group and Steel Group.

The Industrial and Automotive Groups design, manufacture and distribute a range of bearings and related products and services. Industrial Group customers include both original equipment manufacturers and distributors for agriculture, construction, mining, energy, mill, machine tool, aerospace and rail applications. Automotive Group customers include original equipment manufacturers and suppliers for passenger cars, light trucks, and medium- to heavy-duty trucks. Steel Group products include steels of low and intermediate alloy and carbon grades, in both solid and tubular sections, as well as custom-made steel products for both industrial and automotive applications, including bearings.

per diluted share for the first quarternine months of 2006. Income from continuing operations per diluted share was $1.79 for the first nine months of 2007, compared to $1.70 per diluted share for the same period a year ago.

The company’s results for the third quarter and first quarter resultsnine months of 2007 reflect the ongoing strength of industrial markets and the performance of the Steel Group.Group, partially offset by higher raw material costs, higher manufacturing costs and restructuring activities. The company continued its focus to increaseon increasing production capacity in targeted areas, including major capacity expansions for industrial products at several manufacturing locations around the world.

The company’s first quarter results also reflect a favorable discrete tax adjustment of $32.1 million to recognize the benefits of a prior year tax position as a result of a change in tax law during the quarter.

The company’s strategy for the Industrial Group is to pursue growth in selected industrial markets and achieve a

diameter for use in power transmission and friction management applications for a variety of customers, including the rapidly growing automotive transplants. During the first quarter of 2007, the company added a new induction heat-treat line in Canton, Ohio, which will increaseincreased capacity and the ability to provide differentiated product to more customers in its global energy markets. In 2006,April 2007, the company also completed the divestitureclosure of its Latrobe Steel subsidiary and its Timken Precision Steel Components — Europe business. In addition, the company plans to close its seamless steel tube manufacturing operations located in Desford, England.