Item 1.  Business.

The Company

We are a real estate investment trust, or REIT, that was organized under the laws of the State of Maryland in 1998. As of December 31, 2017 , we owned 440 properties ( 466 buildings) located in 42 states and Washington, D.C. On that date, the undepreciated carrying value of our properties, which represents the gross book value of our real estate assets before depreciation and purchase price allocations, less impairment write downs, was $8.5 billion , excluding properties classified as held for sale. Our portfolio includes: 305 senior living communities, including independent living, assisted living, memory care and skilled nursing facilities, or SNFs, with 34,833 living units, with an undepreciated carrying value of $4.6 billion ; 125 properties ( 151 buildings) leased to medical providers, medical related businesses, clinics and biotech laboratory tenants, or MOBs, with 12.1 million square feet of space and an undepreciated carrying value of $3.7 billion ; and 10 wellness centers with approximately 812,000 square feet of interior space plus outdoor developed facilities with an undepreciated carrying value of $178.1 million .

Our principal executive offices are located at Two Newton Place, 255 Washington Street, Suite 300, Newton, Massachusetts 02458-1634, and our telephone number is (617) 796-8350.

We believe that the aging of the U.S. population will increase demand for existing independent and assisted senior living communities, SNFs, MOBs, wellness centers and other medical and healthcare related properties. We plan to profit from this demand by acquiring additional properties and entering into leases and management arrangements with qualified tenants and managers which generate returns to us that exceed our operating and capital costs, including structuring leases that provide for or permit periodic rental increases.

Our business plan contemplates investments in senior living communities, MOBs and wellness centers. Some properties may combine more than one type of service in a single building or campus. Our growth strategies are implemented and defined by our investment, and operating and financing policies.

Senior Living Communities

Independent Living Communities.  Independent living communities provide high levels of privacy to residents and require residents to be capable of relatively high degrees of independence. Unlike an age restricted apartment property, an independent living community usually bundles several services as part of a regular monthly charge. For example, an independent living community may include one or two meals per day in a central dining room, daily or weekly maid service or a social director in the base charge. Additional services are generally available from staff employees on a fee for service basis. In some of our independent living communities, separate parts of the property are dedicated to assisted living and/or nursing services.

Assisted Living Communities.  Assisted living communities typically have one bedroom units which include private bathrooms and efficiency kitchens. Services bundled within one charge usually include three meals per day in a central dining room, daily housekeeping, laundry, medical reminders and 24 hour availability of assistance with the activities of daily living, such as dressing and bathing. Professional nursing and healthcare services are usually available at the property on call or at regularly scheduled times. In some of our assisted living communities, separate parts of the property are dedicated to independent living and/or nursing services.

Skilled Nursing Facilities.  SNFs generally provide extensive nursing and healthcare services similar to those available in hospitals, without the high costs associated with operating rooms, emergency rooms or intensive care units. A typical purpose built SNF includes mostly rooms with one or two beds, a separate bathroom and shared dining facilities. Licensed nursing professionals staff SNFs 24 hours per day.

MOBs

MOBs are office or commercial buildings constructed for use or operated as medical office space for physicians and other healthcare personnel, and other businesses in medical related fields, including clinics and laboratory uses. Some of our MOBs are occupied as back office facilities for healthcare companies, such as hospitals and healthcare insurance companies.

Wellness Centers

Wellness centers typically have gymnasiums, strength and cardiovascular equipment areas, tennis and racquet sports facilities, pools, spas and children’s centers. Professional sport training and therapist services are often available. Wellness centers often market themselves as clubs for which members may pay monthly fees plus additional fees for specific services.

Other Types of Real Estate

In the past, we have considered investing in real estate different from our existing property types, including age restricted apartment buildings and some properties located outside the United States. We may explore these or other alternative investments in the future.

Lease Terms

The leases for our senior living communities and wellness centers are “triple net” leases, which generally require the tenants to pay rent and all property operating expenses, to indemnify us from liability which may arise by reason of our ownership of the properties, to maintain the properties at their expense, to remove and dispose of hazardous substances on the properties in compliance with applicable law and to maintain insurance on the properties for their and our benefit.  In the event of any damage, or immaterial condemnation, of a leased property, the tenants are generally required to rebuild with insurance or condemnation proceeds or, if such proceeds are insufficient, other amounts made available by us, if any, but if other amounts are made available by us, the rent will be increased accordingly.  In the event of any material or total condemnation of a leased property, generally the lease will terminate with respect to that leased property, in which event we will be entitled to the condemnation proceeds and the rent will be reduced accordingly.  In the event of any material or total destruction of a leased property, in certain cases the applicable tenant may terminate the lease with respect to that leased property, in which event the tenant will be required to pay us any shortfall in the amount of proceeds we receive from insurance compared to the replacement cost of that leased property and the rent will be reduced accordingly.

Our MOB leases include both triple net leases, as described above, and “net” and “modified gross” leases where we are responsible for operating and maintaining the properties and we charge the tenants for some or all of the property operating expenses. A small percentage of our MOB leases are “full service” leases where we receive fixed rent from the tenants and do not charge the tenants for any property operating expenses.

Events of Default.  Under our leases, events of default generally include:

Default Remedies.  Upon the occurrence of any event of default under our leases, we generally may (subject to applicable law):

For more information about our leases with Five Star Senior Living Inc. or its subsidiaries, or Five Star, see Note 5 to our Consolidated Financial Statements included in Part IV, Item 15 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Senior Living Community Management Agreements

Because we are a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes, we generally may not operate our senior living communities. For certain of our senior living communities, we use the taxable REIT subsidiary, or TRS, structure authorized by the REIT Investment Diversification and Empowerment Act. Under this structure, we lease certain of our communities to our TRSs and our TRSs enter into long term management agreements with third parties for the operation of such communities. These management agreements provide the manager with a management fee, which is a percentage of the gross revenues realized at the communities, plus reimbursement for the manager’s direct costs and expenses related to the communities, and generally provide the manager with an incentive fee equal to a percentage of the annual net operating income of the communities after we realize an annual minimum return equal to a percentage of our invested capital. The currently effective management agreements for our senior living communities generally expire between December 31, 2030 and December 31, 2041. In general, we have the right to terminate these management agreements upon certain manager events of default, including, without limitation, a change in control of the manager, as defined in the management agreements, and our manager has the right to terminate these management agreements upon certain events of default applicable to us.

Although we have various rights as owner under the management agreements, we rely on the manager’s personnel, good faith, expertise, performance, technical resources, operating efficiencies, information systems, proprietary information and judgment to manage our managed senior living communities efficiently and effectively. We also rely on the manager to set resident fees and otherwise operate our managed senior living communities in compliance with our management agreements.

For more information about these management agreements with Five Star and the related pooling agreements, see Note 5 to our Consolidated Financial Statements included in Part IV, Item 15 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Our Investment and Operating Policies

Our investment objectives include increasing cash flows from operations from dependable and diverse sources in order to increase per share distributions to our shareholders. To achieve these objectives, we seek to: maintain a strong capital base of shareholders’ equity; invest in strong credit quality properties with strong credit quality tenants and managers; use moderate debt leverage to fund additional investments which increase cash flow from operations because of positive spreads between our cost of investment capital and investment yields; structure investments which generate a minimum return and provide an opportunity to participate in operating growth at our properties; when market conditions permit, refinance debt with additional equity or long term debt; and pursue diversification so that our cash flow from operations comes from diverse properties and tenants.

Our Board of Trustees may change our investment and operating policies at any time without a vote of, or notice to, our shareholders.

Acquisition Policies

Our present acquisition strategy is to acquire additional properties primarily for income and secondarily for appreciation potential. We may purchase individual properties or multiple properties in one portfolio. In implementing this acquisition strategy, we consider a range of factors relating to each proposed acquisition, including, but not limited to:

An important part of our acquisition strategy is to identify and select, or create, qualified, experienced and financially stable tenants and managers.

Other Investments

We have no policies which specifically limit the percentage of our assets that may be invested in any individual property, in any one type of property, in properties leased to any one tenant or to an affiliated group of tenants or in properties operated by any one tenant or manager or by an affiliated group of tenants or managers or in securities of one or more persons.

We own common shares of Five Star and The RMR Group Inc. (Nasdaq: RMR), or RMR Inc. We may in the future acquire additional common shares of Five Star or RMR Inc. or securities of other entities, including entities engaged in real estate activities. We may invest in the securities of other entities for the purpose of exercising control, or otherwise, make loans to other persons or entities, engage in the sale of investments, offer securities in exchange for property or repurchase or reacquire our securities.

We prefer wholly owned investments in fee interests. However, circumstances may arise in which we may invest in leaseholds, joint ventures, mortgages and other real estate interests. We may invest or enter into real estate joint ventures if we conclude that by doing so we may benefit from the participation of co-venturers or that our opportunity to participate in the investment is contingent on the use of a joint venture structure. For example, in March 2017, we entered a joint venture with a sovereign investor for one of our MOBs (two buildings) located in Boston, Massachusetts. Further, we may acquire interests in joint ventures as part of an acquisition of properties or entities. We may invest in participating, convertible or other types of mortgages if we conclude that by doing so, we may benefit from the cash flow or appreciation in the value of a property which is not available for purchase.

Mergers and Strategic Combinations

In the past, we have considered the possibility of entering into mergers or strategic combinations with other companies and we may explore such possibilities in the future.

Our Financing Policies

There are no limitations in our organizational documents on the type or amount of indebtedness we may incur. Our revolving credit facility and term loan agreements and our senior unsecured notes indentures and their supplements contain financial covenants which, among other things, restrict our ability to incur indebtedness and require us to maintain financial ratios and a minimum net worth. However, we may seek to amend these covenants or seek replacement financings with less restrictive covenants. In the future, we may decide to seek changes in the financial covenants which currently restrict our debt leverage based upon then current economic conditions, the relative availability and costs of debt versus equity capital and our need for capital to take advantage of acquisition opportunities or otherwise.

We may also seek additional capital through equity offerings, debt financings, retention of cash flows in excess of distributions to shareholders, sales of properties or a combination of these methods or other transactions. To the extent we obtain additional debt financing, we may do so on an unsecured basis or a secured basis. We may seek to obtain lines of credit or to issue securities senior to our common shares, including preferred shares or debt securities, some of which may be convertible into our common shares or be accompanied by warrants to purchase our common shares. We may also finance acquisitions by assuming debt, through an exchange of properties or through the issuance of equity or other securities. The proceeds from any of our financings may be used to pay distributions, to provide working capital, to refinance existing indebtedness or to finance acquisitions and expansions of existing or new properties.

We currently have a $1.0 billion unsecured revolving credit facility that we use for working capital and general business purposes and for funding acquisitions on an interim basis until we are able to refinance them with equity or long term debt. In some instances, we may assume debt in connection with our acquisition of properties or place new mortgages on properties we own. For more information regarding our financing sources and activities, please see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources—Our Investment and Financing Liquidity and Resources” in Part II, Item 7 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Generally, we intend to manage our leverage in a way that may allow us to maintain “investment grade” ratings from nationally recognized statistical rating organizations; however, we cannot be sure that we will be able to maintain our investment grade ratings.

Our Board of Trustees may change our financing policies at any time without a vote of, or notice to, our shareholders.

Our Manager

RMR Inc. is a holding company, and substantially all of its business is conducted by its majority owned subsidiary, The RMR Group LLC, a Maryland limited liability company, or RMR LLC. Adam Portnoy, our Managing Trustee, as the current sole trustee of ABP Trust, is the controlling shareholder of RMR Inc. He is also a director and an officer of RMR Inc. Barry Portnoy was our other Managing Trustee and a director and an officer of RMR Inc. and an officer of RMR LLC until his death on February 25, 2018. Our day to day operations are conducted by RMR LLC. RMR LLC originates and presents investment and divestment opportunities to our Board of Trustees and provides management and administrative services to us. RMR LLC has a principal place of business at Two Newton Place, 255 Washington Street, Suite 300, Newton, Massachusetts, 02458-1634, and its telephone

number is (617) 796-8390. RMR LLC or its subsidiaries also acts as the manager to Government Properties Income Trust, or GOV, Hospitality Properties Trust, or HPT, Industrial Logistics Properties Trust, or ILPT, and Select Income REIT, or SIR, and provides management and other services to other private and public companies, including Five Star, TravelCenters of America LLC, or TA, and Sonesta International Hotels Corporation, or Sonesta. As of the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, the executive officers of RMR LLC are: Adam Portnoy, President and Chief Executive Officer; David M. Blackman, Executive Vice President; Jennifer B. Clark, Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary; David J. Hegarty, Executive Vice President; Matthew P. Jordan, Executive Vice President; Mark L. Kleifges, Executive Vice President; Bruce J. Mackey Jr., Executive Vice President; John G. Murray, Executive Vice President; John C. Popeo, Executive Vice President; and Andrew J. Rebholz, Executive Vice President. David J. Hegarty is our President and Chief Operating Officer. Our executive officers and other officers of RMR LLC also serve as officers of other companies to which RMR LLC provides management services. 

Employees

We have no employees. Services which would otherwise be provided to us by employees are provided by RMR LLC and by our Managing Trustee and officers. As of February 1, 2018, RMR LLC had over 550 full time employees in its headquarters and regional offices located throughout the United States.

Government Regulation and Reimbursement

The senior living and healthcare industries are subject to extensive, frequently changing federal, state and local laws and regulations. Although most of these laws and regulations affect the manner in which our tenants and managers operate our properties, some of them also impact us and the values of our properties. Some of the laws that impact or may impact us or our tenants or managers include: state and local licensure laws; laws protecting consumers against deceptive practices; laws relating to the operation of our properties and how our tenants and managers conduct their operations, such as health and safety, fire and privacy laws; federal and state laws affecting assisted living communities that participate in Medicaid and federal and state laws affecting SNFs, clinics and other healthcare facilities that participate in both Medicaid and Medicare that mandate allowable costs, pricing, reimbursement procedures and limitations, quality of services and care, food service and physical plants; resident rights laws (including abuse and neglect laws) and fraud laws; anti-kickback and physician referral laws; the Americans with Disabilities Act and similar state and local laws; and safety and health standards set by the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration, or OSHA. Medicaid funding is available in some, but not all, states for assisted living services. State licensure standards for assisted living communities, SNFs, clinics and other healthcare facilities typically address facility policies, staffing, quality of services and care, resident rights, fire safety and physical plant matters, and related matters. We are unable to predict the future course of federal, state and local legislation or regulation. Changes in the regulatory framework could have a material adverse effect on the ability of our tenants to pay us rent, the profitability of our managed senior living communities and the values of our properties.

State and local health and social service agencies and other regulatory authorities regulate and license many senior living communities. State health authorities regulate and license clinics and other healthcare facilities. In most states in which we own properties, we and our tenants and managers are prohibited from providing certain services without first obtaining appropriate licenses. In addition, most states require a certificate of need, or CON, before an entity may open a SNF or expand services at an existing community. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, some states also limit the number of assisted living facilities by requiring CONs. In addition, some states (such as California and Texas) that have eliminated CON laws have retained other means of limiting development of SNFs, including moratoria, licensing laws and limitations upon participation in the state Medicaid program. Senior living communities and certain other healthcare facilities must also comply with applicable state and local building, zoning, fire and food service codes before licensing or Medicare and Medicaid certification are granted. These laws and regulatory requirements could affect our ability and that of our tenants and managers to expand into new markets or to expand communities in existing markets.

In addition, government authorities have been subjecting healthcare facilities such as those that we own to increasing numbers of inspections, surveys, investigations, audits and other potential enforcement actions. We and our tenants and managers expend considerable resources to respond to such actions. Unannounced inspections or surveys may occur annually or biannually, or even more regularly, such as following a regulatory body’s receipt of a complaint about a facility. From time to time in the ordinary course of business, we and our tenants and managers receive deficiency reports from state regulatory bodies resulting from those inspections and surveys. We and our tenants and managers seek to resolve most inspection deficiencies through a plan of corrective action relating to the affected facility’s operations. If we or our tenants or managers fail to comply with any applicable legal requirements, or are unable to cure deficiencies, certain sanctions may be imposed and, if imposed, may adversely affect the ability of our tenants to pay their rent to us, the profitability of our managed senior living communities and the values of our properties. In addition, government agencies typically have the authority to take or seek further action against a licensed or certified facility, including the ability to impose civil money penalties or fines; suspend, modify, or revoke a license or Medicare or Medicaid participation; suspend or deny admissions of residents; deny payments in full or in part; institute state oversight, temporary

management or receivership; and impose criminal penalties. Loss, suspension or modification of a license or certification or the imposition of other sanctions or penalties could adversely affect the values of our properties, the ability of our tenants to pay their rents and the profitability of our managed senior living communities.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, or CMS, of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, or HHS, has increased its oversight of state survey agencies in recent years, focusing its enforcement efforts on SNFs and chains of SNF operators with findings of substandard care or repeat and continuing deficiencies and violations. CMS has also sought to provide consumers with additional information relating to SNFs. Moreover, state Attorneys General typically enforce consumer protection laws relating to senior living services, clinics and other healthcare facilities. In addition, state Medicaid fraud control agencies may investigate and prosecute assisted living communities and SNFs, clinics and other healthcare facilities under fraud and patient abuse and neglect laws.

Current state laws and regulations allow enforcement officials to make determinations as to whether the care provided by or on behalf of our tenants or by our managers at our facilities exceeds the level of care for which a particular facility is licensed. A finding that a community is delivering care beyond the scope of its license can result in closure of the community and the immediate discharge and transfer of residents, which could adversely affect the ability of that tenant to pay rent to us, the profitability of our managed senior living communities and the values of our properties. Furthermore, some states and the federal government allow certain citations of one facility to impact other facilities owned or operated by the same entity or a related entity, including facilities in other states. Revocation of a license or certification at one facility could therefore impact our or a tenant’s or manager’s ability to obtain new licenses or certifications or to maintain or renew existing licenses at other facilities, which could adversely affect the ability of that tenant to pay rent to us, the profitability of that manager, the profitability and values of our properties and trigger defaults under our tenants’ leases and managers’ management agreements and our or our tenants’ or managers’ credit arrangements, or adversely affect our or our tenants’ or managers’ ability to obtain financing in the future. In addition, an adverse finding by state officials could serve as the basis for lawsuits by private plaintiffs and lead to investigations under federal and state laws, which could result in civil and/or criminal penalties against the facility as well as a related entity.

For the year ended December 31, 2017 , approximately 97% of our net operating income, or NOI, was generated from properties where a majority of the revenues are derived from our tenants' and residents' private resources, and the remaining 3% of our NOI was generated from properties where a majority of the revenue is dependent upon Medicare and Medicaid programs. Our tenants and managers operate facilities in many states and they and we participate in federal and state healthcare payment programs, including the federal Medicare and state Medicaid benefit programs for services in SNFs and other similar facilities and state Medicaid programs for services in assisted living communities. In light of the current and projected federal budget deficit and challenging state fiscal conditions, there have been numerous recent legislative and regulatory actions or proposed actions with respect to federal Medicare rates and state Medicaid rates and federal payments to states for Medicaid programs, each of which, or in any combination, could have a material adverse effect on the ability of our tenants to pay us rent, the profitability of our managed senior living communities and the values of our properties. Examples include:

a more patient-centered healthcare system that adheres to the key principles of affordability, accessibility, quality, innovation and empowerment. It is unclear what the result of any of these legislative, executive and regulatory reform efforts may be or the effect they may have on us, if any.

which extended the outpatient therapy cap exceptions process from March 2015 through December 2017, further postponing the implementation of strict limits on Medicare payments for outpatient therapies. As of January 17, 2018, however, the outpatient therapy cap exceptions process had not yet been further extended by Congress. Therapy over the cap is statutorily excluded as a Medicare benefit in the absence of an exceptions process. If no action is taken, Medicare beneficiaries will be limited to $2,010 of therapy under each therapy cap in 2018.

We are unable to predict the impact of these or other recent legislative and regulatory actions or proposed actions with respect to state Medicaid rates and federal Medicare rates and federal payments to states for Medicaid programs on us and those of our tenants that derive a portion of their revenues from Medicare, Medicaid and other government programs. The changes implemented or to be implemented as a result of such actions could result in the failure of Medicare, Medicaid or private payment reimbursement rates to cover increasing costs, in a reduction in payments or other circumstances.

Regulatory Reform . In December 2017, the Trump Administration, including HHS, updated its “Regulatory Plan and Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions,” which lists the scope and anticipated timing of pending and future regulations. In releasing the agenda, the Administration highlighted its “ongoing progress toward the goals of more effective and less burdensome regulation,” including its plans to complete three deregulatory actions for every new regulatory action in fiscal year 2018. These efforts are consistent with executive orders issued by President Trump earlier in 2017, which called for the elimination of certain regulations, reductions in new regulatory costs to zero, and the creation of regulatory reform officers and taskforces within each federal agency. It is unclear how these regulatory reform efforts will impact our operations. Some of the regulatory updates described above may in the future be repealed, replaced or modified as a result of these regulatory reform efforts. For instance, in the latest update, HHS and CMS stated their intent to propose changes to the current Conditions of Participation or Conditions for Coverage that health care organizations must meet in order to begin and continue participating in the Medicare and Medicaid programs. This may include additional changes to the Conditions of Participation for long term care facilities that participate in Medicare and Medicaid, such as our SNFs. We are unable to predict the impact on us of these or other regulatory reform efforts. While these efforts could ultimately decrease regulatory burden for our operations in the long-term, they may increase regulatory uncertainty in the near-term.

Tax Reform . On December 22, 2017, legislation commonly referred to as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, or the TCJA, became effective, enacting significant change to the United States Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the IRC. The TCJA significantly impacts major aspects of the national economy, including the healthcare industry.

The TCJA has a direct effect on healthcare in that, effective January 1, 2019, it reduces the penalty associated with the individual mandate provision of the ACA to $0. Additionally, the TCJA changes the tax treatment of False Claims Act payments by amending the IRC to disallow any payments made to the government “in relation to the violation of any law or the investigation or inquiry by such government or entity into the potential violation of any law” from being deductible business expenses; the IRC had previously disallowed deductions for fines and penalties but allowed deductions for certain damages amounts for FCA cases because such amounts were inherently compensatory.

Other Matters. Federal and state efforts to target false claims, fraud and abuse and violations of anti-kickback, physician referral and privacy laws by providers under Medicare, Medicaid and other public and private programs have increased in recent years, as have civil monetary penalties, treble damages, repayment requirements and criminal sanctions for noncompliance. The federal False Claims Act, as amended and expanded by the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act of 2009 and the ACA, provides significant civil monetary penalties and treble damages for false claims and authorizes individuals to bring claims on behalf of the federal government for false claims. The federal Civil Monetary Penalties Law authorizes the Secretary of HHS to impose substantial civil penalties, treble damages and program exclusions administratively for false claims or violations of the federal anti-kickback statute. In addition, the ACA increased penalties under federal sentencing guidelines between 20% and 50% for healthcare fraud offenses involving more than $1 million.

Government authorities are devoting increasing attention and resources to the prevention, detection and prosecution of healthcare fraud and abuse. CMS contractors are also expanding the retroactive audits of Medicare claims submitted by SNFs and other providers, and recouping alleged overpayments for services determined by auditors not to have been medically necessary or not to meet Medicare coverage criteria as billed. State Medicaid programs and other third party payers are conducting similar medical necessity and compliance audits. The ACA facilitates the Department of Justice’s, or the DOJ’s, ability to investigate allegations of wrongdoing or fraud at SNFs, in part because of increased cooperation and data sharing among CMS, the Office of the Inspector General, the DOJ and the states. In March 2016, the DOJ also announced the launch of 10 regional intergovernmental task forces across the country to identify and take enforcement action against SNFs that provide substandard care to residents. In

addition, the ACA requires all states to terminate the Medicaid participation of any provider that has been terminated under Medicare or any Medicaid state plan. We and our tenants and managers expend significant resources to comply with these laws and regulations.

Federal and state laws designed to protect the confidentiality and security of individually identifiable information apply to us, our tenants and our managers. Under the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, and the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act, we, our tenants and our managers that are covered entities or business associates within the meaning of HIPAA must comply with rules adopted by HHS governing the privacy, security, use and disclosure of individually identifiable information, including financial information and protected health information, or PHI, and also with security rules for electronic PHI. There may be both civil monetary penalties and criminal sanctions for noncompliance with such federal laws. In January 2013, HHS released the HIPAA Omnibus Rule, or the Omnibus Rule, which went into effect in March 2013 and required compliance with most provisions by September 2013. The Omnibus Rule modified various requirements, including the standard for providing breach notices, which was previously to perform an analysis of the harm of any disclosure to a more objective analysis relating to whether any PHI was actually acquired or viewed as a result of the breach. In addition to HIPAA, many states have enacted their own security and privacy laws relating to individually identifiable information. In some states, these laws are more stringent than HIPAA, and we, our tenants and our managers must comply with both the applicable federal and state standards. HIPAA enforcement efforts have increased considerably over the past few years, with HHS, through its Office for Civil Rights, entering into several multi-million dollar HIPAA settlements in 2017 alone. Finally, the Office for Civil Rights and other regulatory bodies have become increasingly focused on cybersecurity risks, including the emerging threat of ransomware and similar cyber attacks. The increasing sophistication of cybersecurity threats presents challenges to the entire healthcare industry.

We require our tenants and managers to comply with all laws that regulate the operation of our senior living communities. Although we do not believe that the costs to comply with these laws will have a material adverse effect on us, those costs may adversely affect the profitability of our managed senior living communities and the ability of our tenants to pay their rent to us. If we or any of our tenants or managers were subject to an action alleging violations of such laws or to any adverse determination concerning any of our or our tenants’ or managers’ licenses or eligibility for Medicare or Medicaid reimbursement or any substantial penalties, repayments or sanctions, these actions could materially and adversely affect the ability of our tenants to pay rent to us, the profitability of our managed senior living communities and the values of our properties. If any of our tenants or managers becomes unable to operate our properties, or if any of our tenants becomes unable to pay its rent because it has violated government regulations or payment laws, we may experience difficulty in finding a substitute tenant or manager or selling the affected property at a price that provides us with a desirable return, and the value of the affected property may decline materially.

Federal, state and local agencies regulate our MOB tenants that provide healthcare services. Many states require medical clinics, ambulatory surgery centers, clinical laboratories and other outpatient healthcare facilities to be licensed and inspected for compliance with licensure regulations concerning professional staffing, services, patient rights and physical plant requirements, among other matters. Our tenants must comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and similar state and local laws to the extent that such facilities are “public accommodations” as defined in those statutes. The obligation to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and similar laws is an ongoing obligation, and our tenants expend significant resources to comply with such laws.

Healthcare providers and suppliers, including physicians and other licensed medical practitioners, that receive federal or state reimbursement under Medicare, Medicaid or other federal or state programs must comply with the requirements for their participation in those programs. Our tenants that are healthcare providers or suppliers are subject to reimbursement rates that are increasingly subject to cost control pressures and may be reduced or may not be increased sufficiently to cover their increasing costs, including our rents.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or the FDA, and other federal, state and local authorities extensively regulate our biotechnology laboratory tenants that develop, manufacture, market or distribute new drugs, biologicals or medical devices for human use. The FDA and such other authorities regulate the clinical development, testing, manufacture, quality control, safety, effectiveness, labeling, storage, record keeping, advertising and promotion of those products. Before a new pharmaceutical product or medical device may be marketed and distributed in the United States, the FDA must approve it as safe and effective for human use. Preclinical and clinical studies and documentation in connection with FDA approval of new pharmaceuticals or medical devices involve significant time, expense and risks of failure. Once a product is approved, the FDA maintains oversight of the product and its developer and can withdraw its approval, recall products or suspend their production, impose or seek to impose civil or criminal penalties on the developer or take other actions for the developer’s failure to comply with regulatory requirements, including anti-fraud, false claims, anti-kickback or physician referral laws. Other concerns affecting our biotechnology laboratory tenants include the potential for subsequent discovery of safety concerns and related litigation, ensuring that the product qualifies for reimbursement under Medicare, Medicaid or other federal or state programs, cost control initiatives of payment programs, the potential for litigation over the validity or infringement of intellectual property rights related to the product, the eventual expiration

of relevant patents and the need to raise additional capital. The cost of compliance with these regulations and the risks described in this paragraph, among others, could adversely affect the ability of our biotechnology laboratory tenants to pay rent to us. In addition, to the extent the new Trump Administration and the 115th Congress alter these laws and regulations, additional regulatory risks may arise. Depending upon what aspects of the laws and regulations are altered, the ability of our biotechnology laboratory tenants to pay rent to us could be adversely and materially affected.

Competition

Investing in senior living communities, MOBs and wellness centers is a highly competitive business. We compete against other REITs, numerous financial institutions, individuals and other public and private companies who are actively engaged in this business. Also, we compete for tenants and residents and for investments based on a number of factors including rents, rates, financings offered, underwriting criteria and reputation. Our ability to successfully compete is also impacted by economic and population trends, availability of acceptable investment opportunities, our ability to negotiate beneficial investment terms, availability and cost of capital and new and existing laws and regulations. Some of our competitors are dominant in selected geographic or property markets, including in markets we operate. Some of our competitors may have greater financial and other resources than we have. We believe the geographic diversity of our investments, the experience and abilities of our management, the quality of our assets and the financial strength and operator qualifications of many of our tenants and managers may afford us some competitive advantages and allow us to operate our business successfully despite the competitive nature of our business. 

Our tenants and managers compete on a local and regional basis with operators of facilities that provide comparable services. Operators compete for residents and patients based on quality of care, reputation, physical appearance of properties, services offered, family preferences, physicians, staff, price and location. We and our tenants and manager also face competition from other healthcare facilities for qualified personnel, such as physicians and other healthcare providers that provide comparable facilities and services.

For additional information on competition and the risks associated with our business, please see “Risk Factors” in Part I, Item 1A of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Environmental Matters

Under various laws, owners as well as tenants and operators of real estate may be required to investigate and clean up or remove hazardous substances present at or migrating from properties they own, lease or operate and may be held liable for property damage or personal injuries that result from hazardous substances. These laws also expose us to the possibility that we may become liable to reimburse governments or third parties for damages and costs they incur in connection with hazardous substances. We reviewed environmental conditions surveys of the properties we own prior to their purchase. Based upon those surveys we do not believe that there are environmental conditions at any of our properties that have had or will have a material adverse effect on us. However, we cannot be sure that environmental conditions are not present at our properties or that potential costs we incur in the future related to any such conditions will not have a material adverse effect on our business or financial condition and results of operations.

Insurance

We or our tenants are generally responsible for the costs of insurance coverage for our properties, including for casualty, liability, fire and extended coverage and rental or business interruption loss insurance.  Either we purchase the insurance ourselves and, except in the case of our managed senior living communities, our tenants are required to reimburse us, or the tenants buy the insurance directly and are required to list us as an insured party. We participate with RMR LLC and other companies to which RMR LLC provides management services in a combined property insurance program through Affiliates Insurance Company, or AIC, and with respect to which AIC is an insurer or a reinsurer of certain coverage amounts. We also participate with RMR Inc. and other companies managed by RMR LLC in a partial joint program for directors and officers liability insurance as well as purchasing such insurance for our own account. For more information, see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Related Person Transactions” in Part II, Item 7 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. 

Internet Website

Our internet website address is www.snhreit.com. Copies of our governance guidelines, our code of business conduct and ethics, or Code of Conduct, and the charters of our audit, compensation and nominating and governance committees are posted on our website and also may be obtained free of charge by writing to our Secretary, Senior Housing Properties Trust, Two Newton Place, 255 Washington Street, Suite 300, Newton, Massachusetts 02458-1634. We also have a policy outlining procedures for handling concerns or complaints about accounting, internal accounting controls or auditing matters and a governance hotline

accessible on our website that shareholders can use to report concerns or complaints about accounting, internal accounting controls or auditing matters or violations or possible violations of our Code of Conduct. We make available, free of charge, on our website, our Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K and amendments to these reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act, as soon as reasonably practicable after these forms are filed with, or furnished to, the Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC. Securityholders may send communications to our Board of Trustees or individual Trustees by writing to the party for whom the communication is intended at c/o Secretary, Senior Housing Properties Trust, Two Newton Place, 255 Washington Street, Suite 300, Newton, Massachusetts 02458-1634 or email secretary@snhreit.com. Our website address is included several times in this Annual Report on Form 10-K as a textual reference only and the information in our website is not incorporated by reference into this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Segment Reporting

As of December 31, 2017 , we have four operating segments, of which three are separate reporting segments.  We aggregate our triple net leased senior living communities, our managed senior living communities and our MOBs into three reporting segments, based on their similar operating and economic characteristics. The first reporting segment includes triple net leased senior living communities that provide short term and long term residential care and other services for residents. Properties in this segment include leased independent living communities, assisted living communities and SNFs. We earn rental income revenues from the tenants that lease and operate our leased communities. The second reporting segment includes third party managed senior living communities managed for our account that provide short term and long term residential care and other services for residents. Properties in this segment include independent living communities and assisted living communities. We earn fees and services revenues from the residents of our managed senior living communities. The third reporting segment includes MOBs. We earn rental income revenues from the tenants that lease space in our medical offices, life science laboratories and other medical related facilities. Our fourth segment includes all of our other operations, including certain properties that offer wellness, fitness and spa services to members, which we do not consider to be sufficiently material to constitute a separate reporting segment. For further information, see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” in Part II, Item 7 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K and our Consolidated Financial Statements included in Part IV, Item 15 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

MATERIAL UNITED STATES FEDERAL INCOME TAX CONSIDERATIONS

The following summary of material United States federal income tax considerations is based on existing law, and is limited to investors who own our shares as investment assets rather than as inventory or as property used in a trade or business. The summary does not discuss all of the particular tax considerations that might be relevant to you if you are subject to special rules under federal income tax law, for example if you are:

The sections of the IRC that govern the federal income tax qualification and treatment of a REIT and its shareholders are complex. This presentation is a summary of applicable IRC provisions, related rules and regulations, and administrative and judicial interpretations, all of which are subject to change, possibly with retroactive effect. Future legislative, judicial or administrative actions or decisions could also affect the accuracy of statements made in this summary. We have not received a ruling from the U.S. Internal Revenue Service, or the IRS, with respect to any matter described in this summary, and we cannot be sure that the IRS or a court will agree with all of the statements made in this summary. The IRS could, for example, take a different position from that described in this summary with respect to our acquisitions, operations, valuations, restructurings or other matters, which, if a court agreed, could result in significant tax liabilities for applicable parties. In addition, this summary is not exhaustive of all possible tax considerations, and does not discuss any estate, gift, state, local or foreign tax considerations. For all these reasons, we urge you and any holder of or prospective acquiror of our shares to consult with a tax advisor about the federal income tax and other tax consequences of the acquisition, ownership and disposition of our shares. Our intentions and beliefs described in this summary are based upon our understanding of applicable laws and regulations that are in effect as of the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. If new laws or regulations are enacted which impact us directly or indirectly, we may change our intentions or beliefs.

Your federal income tax consequences generally will differ depending on whether or not you are a “U.S. shareholder.” For purposes of this summary, a “U.S. shareholder” is a beneficial owner of our shares that is:

whose status as a U.S. shareholder is not overridden by an applicable tax treaty. Conversely, a “non-U.S. shareholder” is a beneficial owner of our shares other than an entity (or other arrangement) treated as a partnership for federal income tax purposes or a U.S. shareholder.

If any entity (or other arrangement) treated as a partnership for federal income tax purposes holds our shares, the tax treatment of a partner in the partnership generally will depend upon the status of the partner and the activities of the partnership. Any entity (or other arrangement) treated as a partnership for federal income tax purposes that is a holder of our shares and the partners in such a partnership (as determined for federal income tax purposes) are urged to consult their own tax advisors about the federal income tax consequences and other tax consequences of the acquisition, ownership and disposition of our shares.

Taxation as a REIT

We have elected to be taxed as a REIT under Sections 856 through 860 of the IRC, commencing with our 1999 taxable year. Our REIT election, assuming continuing compliance with the then applicable qualification tests, has continued and will continue in effect for subsequent taxable years. Although we cannot be sure, we believe that from and after our 1999 taxable year we have been organized and have operated, and will continue to be organized and to operate, in a manner that qualified us and will continue to qualify us to be taxed as a REIT under the IRC.

As a REIT, we generally are not subject to federal income tax on our net income distributed as dividends to our shareholders. Distributions to our shareholders generally are included in our shareholders’ income as dividends to the extent of our available current or accumulated earnings and profits. Our dividends are not generally entitled to the preferential tax rates on qualified dividend income, but a portion of our dividends may be treated as capital gain dividends or as qualified dividend income, all as explained below. However, for taxable years beginning after 2017 and before 2026 and pursuant to the deduction-without-outlay mechanism of Section 199A of the IRC, our noncorporate shareholders will be eligible for lower effective tax rates on our dividends that are not treated as capital gain dividends or as qualified dividend income. No portion of any of our dividends is eligible for the dividends received deduction for corporate shareholders. Distributions in excess of our current or accumulated earnings and profits generally are treated for federal income tax purposes as returns of capital to the extent of a recipient shareholder’s basis in our shares, and will reduce this basis. Our current or accumulated earnings and profits are generally allocated first to distributions made on our preferred shares, of which there are none outstanding at this time, and thereafter to distributions made on our common shares. For all these purposes, our distributions include cash distributions, any in kind distributions of property that we might make, and deemed or constructive distributions resulting from capital market activities (such as some redemptions), as described below.

Our counsel, Sullivan & Worcester LLP, is of the opinion that we have been organized and have qualified for taxation as a REIT under the IRC for our 1999 through 2017 taxable years, and that our current and anticipated investments and plan of operation will enable us to continue to meet the requirements for qualification and taxation as a REIT under the IRC. Our counsel’s opinions are conditioned upon the assumption that our leases, our declaration of trust and all other legal documents to which we have been or are a party have been and will be complied with by all parties to those documents, upon the accuracy and completeness of the factual matters described in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and upon representations made by us to our counsel as to certain factual matters relating to our organization and operations and our expected manner of operation. If this assumption or a description or representation is inaccurate or incomplete, our counsel’s opinions may be adversely affected and may not be relied upon. The opinions of our counsel are based upon the law as it exists today, but the law may change in the future, possibly with retroactive effect. Given the highly complex nature of the rules governing REITs, the ongoing importance of factual determinations, and the possibility of future changes in our circumstances, neither Sullivan & Worcester LLP nor we can be sure that we will qualify as or be taxed as a REIT for any particular year. Any opinion of Sullivan & Worcester LLP as to our qualification or taxation as a REIT will be expressed as of the date issued. Our counsel will have no obligation to advise us or our shareholders of any subsequent change in the matters stated, represented or assumed, or of any subsequent change in the applicable law. Also, the opinions of our counsel are not binding on either the IRS or a court, and either could take a position different from that expressed by our counsel.

Our continued qualification and taxation as a REIT will depend upon our compliance with various qualification tests imposed under the IRC and summarized below. While we believe that we have satisfied and will satisfy these tests, our counsel does not review compliance with these tests on a continuing basis. If we fail to qualify for taxation as a REIT in any year, we will be subject to federal income taxation as if we were a corporation taxed under subchapter C of the IRC, or a C corporation, and our shareholders will be taxed like shareholders of regular C corporations, meaning that federal income tax generally will be applied at both the corporate and shareholder levels. In this event, we could be subject to significant tax liabilities, and the amount of cash available for distribution to our shareholders could be reduced or eliminated.

If we qualify for taxation as a REIT and meet the tests described below, we generally will not pay federal income tax on amounts we distribute to our shareholders. However, even if we qualify for taxation as a REIT, we may still be subject to federal tax in the following circumstances, as described below:

If we fail to qualify for taxation as a REIT in any year, then we will be subject to federal income tax in the same manner as a regular C corporation. Further, as a regular C corporation, distributions to our shareholders will not be deductible by us, nor will distributions be required under the IRC. Also, to the extent of our current and accumulated earnings and profits, all distributions to our shareholders will generally be taxable as ordinary dividends potentially eligible for the preferential tax rates discussed below under the heading “Taxation of Taxable U.S. Shareholders” and, subject to limitations in the IRC, will be potentially eligible for the dividends received deduction for corporate shareholders. Finally, we will generally be disqualified from taxation as a REIT for the four taxable years following the taxable year in which the termination of our REIT status is effective. Our failure to qualify for taxation as a REIT for even one year could result in us reducing or eliminating distributions to our shareholders, or in us incurring substantial indebtedness or liquidating substantial investments in order to pay the resulting corporate level income taxes. Relief provisions under the IRC may allow us to continue to qualify for taxation as a REIT even if we fail to comply with various

REIT requirements, all as discussed in more detail below. However, it is impossible to state whether in any particular circumstance we would be entitled to the benefit of these relief provisions.

REIT Qualification Requirements

General Requirements. Section 856(a) of the IRC defines a REIT as a corporation, trust or association:

Section 856(b) of the IRC provides that conditions (1) through (4) must be met during the entire taxable year and that condition (5) must be met during at least 335 days of a taxable year of 12 months, or during a proportionate part of a taxable year of less than 12 months. Although we cannot be sure, we believe that we have met conditions (1) through (7) during each of the requisite periods ending on or before the close of our most recently completed taxable year, and that we will continue to meet these conditions in our current and future taxable years.

To help comply with condition (6), our declaration of trust restricts transfers of our shares that would otherwise result in concentrated ownership positions. These restrictions, however, do not ensure that we have previously satisfied, and may not ensure that we will in all cases be able to continue to satisfy, the share ownership requirements described in condition (6). If we comply with applicable Treasury regulations to ascertain the ownership of our outstanding shares and do not know, or by exercising reasonable diligence would not have known, that we failed condition (6), then we will be treated as having met condition (6). Accordingly, we have complied and will continue to comply with these regulations, including by requesting annually from holders of significant percentages of our shares information regarding the ownership of our shares. Under our declaration of trust, our shareholders are required to respond to these requests for information. A shareholder that fails or refuses to comply with the request is required by Treasury regulations to submit a statement with its federal income tax return disclosing its actual ownership of our shares and other information.

For purposes of condition (6), an “individual” generally includes a natural person, a supplemental unemployment compensation benefit plan, a private foundation, or a portion of a trust permanently set aside or used exclusively for charitable purposes, but does not include a qualified pension plan or profit-sharing trust. As a result, REIT shares owned by an entity that is not an “individual” are considered to be owned by the direct and indirect owners of the entity that are individuals (as so defined), rather than to be owned by the entity itself. Similarly, REIT shares held by a qualified pension plan or profit-sharing trust are treated as held directly by the individual beneficiaries in proportion to their actuarial interests in such plan or trust. Consequently, five or fewer such trusts could own more than 50% of the interests in an entity without jeopardizing that entity’s qualification for taxation as a REIT.

The IRC provides that we will not automatically fail to qualify for taxation as a REIT if we do not meet conditions (1) through (6), provided we can establish that such failure was due to reasonable cause and not due to willful neglect. Each such excused failure will result in the imposition of a $50,000 penalty instead of REIT disqualification. This relief provision may apply to a failure of the applicable conditions even if the failure first occurred in a year prior to the taxable year in which the failure was discovered.

Our Wholly Owned Subsidiaries and Our Investments Through Partnerships. Except in respect of a TRS as discussed below, Section 856(i) of the IRC provides that any corporation, 100% of whose stock is held by a REIT and its disregarded

subsidiaries, is a qualified REIT subsidiary and shall not be treated as a separate corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes. The assets, liabilities and items of income, deduction and credit of a qualified REIT subsidiary are treated as the REIT’s. We believe that each of our direct and indirect wholly owned subsidiaries, other than the TRSs discussed below (and entities owned in whole or in part by the TRSs), will be either a qualified REIT subsidiary within the meaning of Section 856(i) of the IRC or a noncorporate entity that for federal income tax purposes is not treated as separate from its owner under Treasury regulations issued under Section 7701 of the IRC, each such entity referred to as a QRS. Thus, in applying all of the REIT qualification requirements described in this summary, all assets, liabilities and items of income, deduction and credit of our QRSs are treated as ours, and our investment in the stock and other securities of such QRSs will be disregarded.

We have invested and may in the future invest in real estate through one or more entities that are treated as partnerships for federal income tax purposes. In the case of a REIT that is a partner in a partnership, Treasury regulations under the IRC provide that, for purposes of the REIT qualification requirements regarding income and assets described below, the REIT is generally deemed to own its proportionate share, based on respective capital interests, of the income and assets of the partnership (except that for purposes of the 10% value test, described below, the REIT’s proportionate share of the partnership’s assets is based on its proportionate interest in the equity and specified debt securities issued by the partnership). In addition, for these purposes, the character of the assets and items of gross income of the partnership generally remains the same in the hands of the REIT. In contrast, for purposes of the distribution requirements discussed below, we must take into account as a partner our share of the partnership’s income as determined under the general federal income tax rules governing partners and partnerships under Sections 701 through 777 of the IRC.

Subsidiary REITs . When a subsidiary qualifies for taxation as a REIT separate and apart from its REIT parent, the subsidiary’s shares are qualifying real estate assets for purposes of the REIT parent’s 75% asset test described below. However, failure of the subsidiary to separately satisfy the various REIT qualification requirements described in this summary or that are otherwise applicable (and failure to qualify for the applicable relief provisions) would generally result in (a) the subsidiary being subject to regular U.S. corporate income tax, as described above, and (b) the REIT parent’s ownership in the subsidiary (i) ceasing to be qualifying real estate assets for purposes of the 75% asset test, (ii) becoming subject to the 5% asset test, the 10% vote test and the 10% value test generally applicable to a REIT’s ownership in corporations other than REITs and TRSs, and (iii) thereby jeopardizing the REIT parent’s own REIT qualification and taxation on account of the subsidiary’s failure cascading up to the REIT parent, all as described under “Asset Tests” below.

We indirectly own real estate through a subsidiary that we believe has qualified and will remain qualified for taxation as a REIT under the IRC, and we may in the future invest in real estate through one or more other subsidiary entities that are intended to qualify for taxation as REITs. We joined with our subsidiary REIT in filing a protective TRS election, effective for the first quarter of 2017, and we have reaffirmed this protective election with this subsidiary as of January 2018, and we may continue to do so every January hereafter unless and until our ownership of this subsidiary falls below 10%. Pursuant to this protective TRS election, we believe that if our subsidiary is not a REIT for some reason, then it would instead be considered one of our TRSs, and as such its value would fit within our REIT gross asset tests described below. Protective TRS elections will not impact our compliance with the 75% and 95% gross income tests described below, because we do not expect our gains and dividends from a subsidiary REIT’s shares will jeopardize compliance with these tests even if for some reason the subsidiary is not a REIT.

Taxable REIT Subsidiaries. As a REIT, we are permitted to own any or all of the securities of a TRS, provided that no more than 20% (25% before our 2018 taxable year) of the total value of our assets, at the close of each quarter, is comprised of our investments in the stock or other securities of our TRSs. Very generally, a TRS is a subsidiary corporation other than a REIT in which a REIT directly or indirectly holds stock and that has made a joint election with its affiliated REIT to be treated as a TRS. Our ownership of stock and other securities in TRSs is exempt from the 5% asset test, the 10% vote test and the 10% value test discussed below. Among other requirements, a TRS of ours must:

In addition, any corporation (other than a REIT) in which a TRS directly or indirectly owns more than 35% of the voting power or value of the outstanding securities is automatically a TRS. Subject to the discussion below, we believe that we and each of our TRSs have complied with, and will continue to comply with, the requirements for TRS status at all times during which we intend for the subsidiary’s TRS election to be in effect, and we believe that the same will be true for any TRS that we later form or acquire.

We acquired in the second quarter of 2015, and continue to own, an ownership position in RMR Inc. that is in excess of 10% of RMR Inc.’s outstanding securities by vote or value. Accordingly, we elected to treat RMR Inc. as a TRS effective as of June 5, 2015. RMR Inc., through its principal subsidiary, RMR LLC, has provided and continues to provide business and property management and other services to us and to other public and private companies, including other public REITs. Among these clients were and are operators of lodging facilities, operators of health care facilities, and owners of such facilities. Our counsel, Sullivan & Worcester LLP, has provided to us an opinion that the activities proscribed to TRSs under Section 856(l)(3) of the IRC relating to operating or managing lodging facilities or health care facilities should include only regular onsite services or day to day operational activities at or for lodging facilities or health care facilities. To the best of our knowledge, neither RMR Inc. nor RMR LLC has been or is involved in proscribed activities at or for lodging facilities or health care facilities. Thus, we do not believe that Section 856(l)(3) of the IRC precluded or precludes RMR Inc. from being treated as our TRS. In addition, because we acquired a significant portion of our investment in RMR Inc. in exchange for our common shares that were newly issued, our counsel, Sullivan & Worcester LLP, is of the opinion that our investment in RMR Inc. should have qualified as a “temporary investment of new capital” under Section 856(c)(5)(B) of the IRC to the extent related to such issuance of our common shares. To the extent our investment in RMR Inc. so qualified, it constituted a “real estate asset” under Section 856(c) of the IRC and did not constitute a security subject to the REIT asset test limitations discussed below for a one year period that ended in June 2016. If the IRS or a court determines, contrary to the opinion of our counsel, that RMR Inc. was or is precluded from being treated as our TRS, then our ownership position in RMR Inc. in excess of 10% of RMR Inc.’s outstanding securities by vote or value, except to the extent and for the period that such ownership qualified as a “temporary investment of new capital,” would have been and would be in violation of the applicable REIT asset tests described below. Under those circumstances, however, we expect that we would qualify for the REIT asset tests’ relief provision described below, and thereby would preserve our qualification for taxation as a REIT. If the relief provision below were to apply to us, we would be subject to tax at the highest regular corporate income tax rate on the net income generated by our investment in RMR Inc. in excess of a 10% ownership position in that company.

In addition, we have elected to treat as a TRS a particular corporate subsidiary of Five Star with whom we do not have a rental relationship. This intended TRS manages and operates independent living facilities for us, and in the future may operate additional independent living facilities for us. In that role, the intended TRS provides amenities and services to our tenants, the independent living residents; for the duration of our ownership of these independent living facilities, there have not been, and are not expected to be, assisted living or skilled nursing residents at these facilities, and neither we nor the intended TRS have provided or expect to provide health care services at these facilities or elsewhere. Although the law is unclear on this point, and in fact a close read of the statute and legislative history might suggest otherwise, IRS private letter rulings conclude and imply that the management and operation of independent living facilities do not constitute operating or managing a health care facility such that TRS status is precluded, provided that there are no assisted living or skilled nursing residents in the facilities and provided further that neither the REIT nor the intended TRS provide health care services. Although IRS private letter rulings do not generally constitute binding precedent, they do represent the reasoned, considered judgment of the IRS and thus provide insight into how the IRS applies and interprets the federal income tax laws. Based on these IRS private letter rulings, our counsel, Sullivan & Worcester LLP, is of the opinion that it is more likely than not that our intended TRS that manages and operates pure independent living facilities will qualify as a TRS, provided that there are no assisted living or skilled nursing residents in the subject facilities and provided further that neither we nor the intended TRS provide health care services.

As discussed below, TRSs can perform services for our tenants without disqualifying the rents we receive from those tenants under the 75% gross income test or the 95% gross income test discussed below. Moreover, because our TRSs are taxed as C corporations that are separate from us, their assets, liabilities and items of income, deduction and credit generally are not imputed to us for purposes of the REIT qualification requirements described in this summary. Therefore, our TRSs may generally conduct activities that would be treated as prohibited transactions or would give rise to nonqualified income if conducted by us directly. Additionally, while a REIT is generally limited in its ability to earn qualifying rental income from a TRS, a REIT can earn qualifying rental income from the lease of a qualified health care property to a TRS if an eligible independent contractor operates the facility, as discussed more fully below. As regular C corporations, TRSs may generally utilize net operating losses and other tax attribute carryforwards to reduce or otherwise eliminate federal income tax liability in a given taxable year. Net operating losses and other carryforwards are subject to limitations, however, including limitations imposed under Section 382 of the IRC following an “ownership change” (as defined in applicable Treasury regulations) and a limitation stemming from December 2017 amendments to the IRC providing that carryforwards of net operating losses arising in taxable years beginning after 2017 generally cannot offset more than 80% of the current year’s taxable income. Moreover, pursuant to the December 2017 amendments to the IRC, net operating losses arising in taxable years beginning after 2017 may not be carried back, but may be carried forward indefinitely. As a result, we cannot be sure that our TRSs will be able to utilize, in full or in part, any net operating losses or other carryforwards that they have generated or may generate in the future.

Restrictions and sanctions are imposed on TRSs and their affiliated REITs to ensure that the TRSs will be subject to an appropriate level of federal income taxation. For example, if a TRS pays interest, rent or other amounts to its affiliated REIT in an amount that exceeds what an unrelated third party would have paid in an arm’s length transaction, then the REIT generally will

be subject to an excise tax equal to 100% of the excessive portion of the payment. Further, if in comparison to an arm’s length transaction, a third party tenant has overpaid rent to the REIT in exchange for underpaying the TRS for services rendered, and if the REIT has not adequately compensated the TRS for services provided to or on behalf of the third party tenant, then the REIT may be subject to an excise tax equal to 100% of the undercompensation to the TRS. A safe harbor exception to this excise tax applies if the TRS has been compensated at a rate at least equal to 150% of its direct cost in furnishing or rendering the service. Finally, beginning with our 2016 taxable year, the 100% excise tax also applies to the underpricing of services provided by one of our TRSs to us in contexts where the services are unrelated to services for our tenants. We cannot be sure that arrangements involving our TRSs will not result in the imposition of one or more of these restrictions or sanctions, but we do not believe that we or our TRSs are or will be subject to these impositions.

Income Tests. There are two gross income requirements for qualification for taxation as a REIT under the IRC:

Although we will use our best efforts to ensure that the income generated by our investments will be of a type that satisfies both the 75% and 95% gross income tests, there can be no assurance in this regard.

In order to qualify as “rents from real property” under Section 856 of the IRC, several requirements must be met:

qualification for taxation as a REIT under the IRC. Nevertheless, we cannot be sure that these restrictions will be effective to prevent our qualification for taxation as a REIT from being jeopardized under the 10% affiliated tenant rule. Furthermore, we cannot be sure that we will be able to monitor and enforce these restrictions, nor will our shareholders necessarily be aware of ownership of our shares attributed to them under the IRC’s attribution rules.

We believe that all or substantially all of our rents and related service charges have qualified and will continue to qualify as “rents from real property” for purposes of Section 856 of the IRC, subject to the considerations in the following paragraph.

As discussed above, we currently own independent living facilities that we purchased to be managed and operated by a TRS; the TRS provides amenities and services, but not health care services, to the facilities’ residents, who are our tenants. We may from time to time in the future acquire additional properties to be managed and operated in this manner. Our counsel, Sullivan & Worcester LLP, is of the opinion that it is more likely than not that our intended TRS that manages and operates independent living facilities will qualify as a TRS, provided that there are no assisted living or skilled nursing residents in the subject facilities and provided further that neither we nor the intended TRS provide health care services. Accordingly, we expect that the rents we receive from these facilities’ independent living residents will qualify as “rents from real property” because services and amenities to them are provided through a TRS. If the IRS should assert, contrary to its current private letter ruling practice, that our intended TRS does not in fact so qualify, and if a court should agree, then the rental income we receive from the independent living facility residents who are our tenants would be nonqualifying income for purposes of the 75% and 95% gross income tests, possibly jeopardizing our compliance with the 95% gross income test. Under those circumstances, however, we expect that we would qualify for the gross income tests’ relief provision described below, and thereby would preserve our qualification for taxation as a REIT. If the relief provision below were to apply to us, we would be subject to tax at a 100% rate on the amount by which we failed the 95% gross income test, with adjustments, multiplied by a fraction intended to reflect our profitability for the taxable

year; however, in a typical taxable year, we have little or no nonqualifying income from other sources and thus would expect to owe little tax in such circumstances.

In order to qualify as mortgage interest on real property for purposes of the 75% gross income test, interest must derive from a loan secured by a mortgage on real property or on interests in real property (including, in the case of a loan secured by both real property and personal property, such personal property to the extent that it does not exceed 15% of the total fair market value of all of the property securing the loan) with a fair market value at the time the loan is made (reduced by any senior liens on the property) at least equal to the amount of such loan. If the amount of the loan exceeds the fair market value of the real property (as so reduced by senior liens), then a part of the interest income from such loan equal to the percentage amount by which the loan exceeds the value of the real property (as so reduced by senior liens) will not be qualifying income for purposes of the 75% gross income test, but will be qualifying income for purposes of the 95% gross income test.

Absent the “foreclosure property” rules of Section 856(e) of the IRC, a REIT’s receipt of active, nonrental gross income from a property would not qualify under the 75% and 95% gross income tests. But as foreclosure property, the active, nonrental gross income from the property would so qualify. Foreclosure property is generally any real property, including interests in real property, and any personal property incident to such real property:

Any gain that a REIT recognizes on the sale of foreclosure property held as inventory or primarily for sale to customers, plus any income it receives from foreclosure property that would not otherwise qualify under the 75% gross income test in the absence of foreclosure property treatment, reduced by expenses directly connected with the production of those items of income, would be subject to income tax at the highest regular corporate income tax rate under the foreclosure property income tax rules of Section 857(b)(4) of the IRC. Thus, if a REIT should lease foreclosure property in exchange for rent that qualifies as “rents from real property” as described above, then that rental income is not subject to the foreclosure property income tax.

Property generally ceases to be foreclosure property at the end of the third taxable year following the taxable year in which the REIT acquired the property, or longer if an extension is obtained from the IRS. However, this grace period terminates and foreclosure property ceases to be foreclosure property on the first day:

Other than sales of foreclosure property, any gain that we realize on the sale of property held as inventory or other property held primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of a trade or business, together known as dealer gains, may be treated as income from a prohibited transaction that is subject to a penalty tax at a 100% rate. The 100% tax does not apply to gains from the sale of property that is held through a TRS, but such income will be subject to tax in the hands of the TRS at regular corporate income tax rates; we may therefore utilize our TRSs in transactions in which we might otherwise recognize dealer gains. Whether property is held as inventory or primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of a trade or business is a question of fact that depends on all the facts and circumstances surrounding each particular transaction. Sections 857(b)(6)(C) and (E) of the IRC provide safe harbors pursuant to which limited sales of real property held for at least two years and meeting specified additional requirements will not be treated as prohibited transactions. However, compliance with the safe harbors is not always achievable

in practice. We attempt to structure our activities to avoid transactions that are prohibited transactions, or otherwise conduct such activities through TRSs. We cannot be sure whether or not the IRS might successfully assert that one or more of our dispositions is subject to the 100% penalty tax. Gains subject to the 100% penalty tax are excluded from the 75% and 95% gross income tests, whereas real property gains that are not dealer gains or that are exempted from the 100% penalty tax on account of the safe harbors are considered qualifying gross income for purposes of the 75% and 95% gross income tests.

We believe that any gain from dispositions of assets that we have made, or that we might make in the future, including through any partnerships, will generally qualify as income that satisfies the 75% and 95% gross income tests to the extent that such assets qualify as real property, and will not be dealer gains or subject to the 100% penalty tax, because our general intent has been and is to:

If we fail to satisfy one or both of the 75% gross income test or the 95% gross income test in any taxable year, we may nevertheless qualify for taxation as a REIT for that year if we satisfy the following requirements:

Even if this relief provision does apply, a 100% tax is imposed upon the greater of the amount by which we failed the 75% gross income test or the amount by which we failed the 95% gross income test, with adjustments, multiplied by a fraction intended to reflect our profitability for the taxable year. This relief provision may apply to a failure of the applicable income tests even if the failure first occurred in a year prior to the taxable year in which the failure was discovered.

Based on the discussion above, we believe that we have satisfied, and will continue to satisfy, the 75% and 95% gross income tests outlined above on a continuing basis beginning with our first taxable year as a REIT.

Asset Tests. At the close of each calendar quarter of each taxable year, we must also satisfy the following asset percentage tests in order to qualify for taxation as a REIT for federal income tax purposes:

Our counsel, Sullivan & Worcester LLP, is of the opinion that, although the matter is not free from doubt, our investments in the equity or debt of a TRS of ours, to the extent that and during the period in which they qualify as temporary investments of new capital, will be treated as real estate assets, and not as securities, for purposes of the above REIT asset tests.

If we own a loan secured by a mortgage on real property or on interests in real property (including, in the case of a loan secured by both real property and personal property, such personal property to the extent that it does not exceed 15% of the total fair market value of all of the property securing the loan) with a fair market value at the time the loan is made (reduced by any senior liens on the property) at least equal to the amount of such loan, the mortgage loan will generally be treated as a real estate asset for purposes of the 75% asset test above. But if the loan is undersecured when made, then the portion adequately secured by the real property (or the interests in real property) will generally be treated as a real estate asset for purposes of the 75% asset test above and the remaining portion will generally be treated as a separate security that must satisfy applicable asset tests.

The above REIT asset tests must be satisfied at the close of each calendar quarter of each taxable year as a REIT. After a REIT meets the asset tests at the close of any quarter, it will not lose its qualification for taxation as a REIT in any subsequent quarter solely because of fluctuations in the values of its assets. This grandfathering rule may be of limited benefit to a REIT such as us that makes periodic acquisitions of both qualifying and nonqualifying REIT assets. When a failure to satisfy the above asset tests results from an acquisition of securities or other property during a quarter, the failure can be cured by disposition of sufficient nonqualifying assets within thirty days after the close of that quarter.

In addition, if we fail the 5% asset test, the 10% vote test or the 10% value test at the close of any quarter and we do not cure such failure within thirty days after the close of that quarter, that failure will nevertheless be excused if (a) the failure is de minimis and (b) within six months after the last day of the quarter in which we identify the failure, we either dispose of the assets causing the failure or otherwise satisfy the 5% asset test, the 10% vote test and the 10% value test. For purposes of this relief provision, the failure will be de minimis if the value of the assets causing the failure does not exceed $10,000,000. If our failure is not de minimis, or if any of the other REIT asset tests have been violated, we may nevertheless qualify for taxation as a REIT if (a) we provide the IRS with a description of each asset causing the failure, (b) the failure was due to reasonable cause and not willful neglect, (c) we pay a tax equal to the greater of (1) $50,000 or (2) the highest regular corporate income tax rate imposed on the net income generated by the assets causing the failure during the period of the failure, and (d) within six months after the last day of the quarter in which we identify the failure, we either dispose of the assets causing the failure or otherwise satisfy all of the REIT asset tests. These relief provisions may apply to a failure of the applicable asset tests even if the failure first occurred in a year prior to the taxable year in which the failure was discovered.

The IRC also provides an excepted securities safe harbor to the 10% value test that includes among other items (a) “straight debt” securities, (b) specified rental agreements in which payment is to be made in subsequent years, (c) any obligation to pay “rents from real property,” (d) securities issued by governmental entities that are not dependent in whole or in part on the profits of or payments from a nongovernmental entity, and (e) any security issued by another REIT. In addition, any debt instrument issued by an entity classified as a partnership for federal income tax purposes, and not otherwise excepted from the definition of a security for purposes of the above safe harbor, will not be treated as a security for purposes of the 10% value test if at least 75% of the partnership’s gross income, excluding income from prohibited transactions, is qualifying income for purposes of the 75% gross income test.

We have maintained and will continue to maintain records of the value of our assets to document our compliance with the above asset tests and intend to take actions as may be required to cure any failure to satisfy the tests within thirty days after the close of any quarter or within the six month periods described above.

Based on the discussion above, we believe that we have satisfied, and will continue to satisfy, the REIT asset tests outlined above on a continuing basis beginning with our first taxable year as a REIT.

Our Relationships with Five Star. As of December 31, 2017, we owned approximately 9% of the common shares of Five Star. Our leases with Five Star, Five Star’s charter, and other agreements collectively contain restrictions upon the ownership of Five Star common shares and require Five Star to refrain from taking any actions that may result in any affiliation with us that would jeopardize our qualification for taxation as a REIT under the IRC. Accordingly, commencing with our 2002 taxable year, we expect that the rental income we have received and will receive from Five Star and its subsidiaries has been and will be “rents from real property” under Section 856(d) of the IRC, and therefore qualifying income under the 75% and 95% gross income tests described above. In addition, as described above, we have elected to treat as a TRS a particular corporate subsidiary of Five Star with whom we do not have a rental relationship, and our counsel, Sullivan & Worcester LLP, is of the opinion that it is more likely

than not that this intended TRS will so qualify. Finally, as described below, we have engaged as an intended eligible independent contractor another corporate subsidiary of Five Star with whom we do not have a rental relationship.

Our Relationship with Our Taxable REIT Subsidiaries. In addition to the TRS described above that manages and operates independent living facilities for us, we also have wholly owned TRSs that lease properties from us. We may from time to time in the future acquire additional properties to be leased in this manner. In addition, in response to a lease default or expiration, we may choose to lease a reclaimed qualified health care property to a TRS.

In lease transactions involving our TRSs, our intent is for the rents paid to us by the TRS to qualify as “rents from real property” under the REIT gross income tests summarized above. In order for this to be the case, the manager operating the leased property on behalf of the applicable TRS must be an “eligible independent contractor” within the meaning of Section 856(d)(9)(A) of the IRC, and the properties leased to the TRS must be “qualified health care properties” within the meaning of Section 856(e)(6)(D) of the IRC. Qualified health care properties are defined as health care facilities and other properties necessary or incidental to the use of a health care facility.

For these purposes, a contractor qualifies as an “eligible independent contractor” if it is less than 35% affiliated with the REIT and, at the time the contractor enters into the agreement with the TRS to operate the qualified health care property, that contractor or any person related to that contractor is actively engaged in the trade or business of operating qualified health care properties for persons unrelated to the TRS or its affiliated REIT. For these purposes, an otherwise eligible independent contractor is not disqualified from that status on account of (a) the TRS bearing the expenses of the operation of the qualified health care property, (b) the TRS receiving the revenues from the operation of the qualified health care property, net of expenses for that operation and fees payable to the eligible independent contractor, or (c) the REIT receiving income from the eligible independent contractor pursuant to a preexisting or otherwise grandfathered lease of another property.

We have engaged as an intended eligible independent contractor a particular corporate subsidiary of Five Star with whom we do not have a rental relationship. This contractor and its affiliates at Five Star are actively engaged in the trade or business of operating qualified health care properties for their own accounts, including pursuant to management contracts among themselves and including properties that we do not lease to them; however, this contractor and its affiliates have few if any management contracts for qualified health care properties with third parties other than us and our TRSs. Based on a plain reading of the statute as well as applicable legislative history, our counsel, Sullivan & Worcester LLP, has opined that this intended eligible independent contractor should in fact so qualify. If the IRS or a court determines that this opinion is incorrect, then the rental income we receive from our TRSs in respect of properties managed by this particular contractor would be nonqualifying income for purposes of the 75% and 95% gross income tests, possibly jeopardizing our compliance with one or both of these gross income tests. Under those circumstances, however, we expect we would qualify for the gross income tests’ relief provision described above, and thereby would preserve our qualification for taxation as a REIT. If the relief provision were to apply to us, we would be subject to tax at a 100% rate upon the greater of the amount by which we failed the 75% gross income test or the amount by which we failed the 95% gross income test, with adjustments, multiplied by a fraction intended to reflect our profitability for the taxable year; even though we have little or no nonqualifying income from other sources in a typical taxable year, imposition of this 100% tax in this circumstance could be material because to date all of the properties leased to our TRSs are managed for the TRSs by this contractor.

As explained above, we will be subject to a 100% tax on the rents paid to us by any of our TRSs if the IRS successfully asserts that those rents exceed an arm’s length rental rate. Although there is no clear precedent to distinguish for federal income tax purposes among leases, management contracts, partnerships, financings, and other contractual arrangements, we believe that our leases and our TRSs’ management agreements will be respected for purposes of the requirements of the IRC discussed above. Accordingly, we expect that the rental income from our current and future TRSs will qualify as “rents from real property,” and that the 100% tax on excessive rents from a TRS will not apply.

Annual Distribution Requirements. In order to qualify for taxation as a REIT under the IRC, we are required to make annual distributions other than capital gain dividends to our shareholders in an amount at least equal to the excess of:

For these purposes, our “real estate investment trust taxable income” is as defined under Section 857 of the IRC and is computed without regard to the dividends paid deduction and our net capital gain and will generally be reduced by specified corporate level income taxes that we pay (e.g., taxes on built-in gains or foreclosure property income).

The December 2017 amendments to the IRC generally limit the deductibility of net interest expense paid or accrued on debt properly allocable to a trade or business to 30% of “adjusted taxable income,” subject to specified exceptions. Any deduction in excess of the limitation is carried forward and may be used in a subsequent year, subject to that year’s 30% limitation. Provided a taxpayer makes an election (which is irrevocable), the 30% limitation does not apply to a trade or business involving real property development, redevelopment, construction, reconstruction, acquisition, conversion, rental, operation, management, leasing, or brokerage, within the meaning of Section 469(c)(7)(C) of the IRC. Legislative history indicates that a real property trade or business includes a trade or business conducted by a corporation or a REIT. We intend to make an election to be treated as a real property trade or business and accordingly do not expect the foregoing interest deduction limitations to apply to us or to the calculation of our real estate investment trust taxable income.

For our 2014 and prior taxable years, a distribution of ours that was not pro rata within a class of our beneficial interests entitled to a distribution, or which was not consistent with the rights to distributions among our classes of beneficial interests, would have been a preferential distribution that would not have been taken into consideration for purposes of the distribution requirements, and accordingly the payment of a preferential distribution would have affected our ability to meet the distribution requirements. Taking into account our distribution policies, including any dividend reinvestment plan we adopted, we do not believe that we made any preferential distributions in 2014 or prior taxable years. From and after our 2015 taxable year, the preferential distribution rule has not applied to us because we have been and expect to remain a “publicly offered REIT” (as defined in Section 562(c)(2) of the IRC) that is required to file annual and periodic reports with the SEC under the Exchange Act.

Distributions must be paid in the taxable year to which they relate, or in the following taxable year if declared before we timely file our federal income tax return for the earlier taxable year and if paid on or before the first regular distribution payment after that declaration. If a dividend is declared in October, November or December to shareholders of record during one of those months and is paid during the following January, then for federal income tax purposes such dividend will be treated as having been both paid and received on December 31 of the prior taxable year.

The 90% distribution requirements may be waived by the IRS if a REIT establishes that it failed to meet them by reason of distributions previously made to meet the requirements of the 4% excise tax discussed below. To the extent that we do not distribute all of our net capital gain and all of our “real estate investment trust taxable income,” as adjusted, we will be subject to federal income tax at regular corporate income tax rates on undistributed amounts. In addition, we will be subject to a 4% nondeductible excise tax to the extent we fail within a calendar year to make required distributions to our shareholders of 85% of our ordinary income and 95% of our capital gain net income plus the excess, if any, of the “grossed up required distribution” for the preceding calendar year over the amount treated as distributed for that preceding calendar year. For this purpose, the term “grossed up required distribution” for any calendar year is the sum of our taxable income for the calendar year without regard to the deduction for dividends paid and all amounts from earlier years that are not treated as having been distributed under the provision. We will be treated as having sufficient earnings and profits to treat as a dividend any distribution by us up to the amount required to be distributed in order to avoid imposition of the 4% excise tax.

If we do not have enough cash or other liquid assets to meet the 90% distribution requirements, or if we so choose, we may find it necessary or desirable to arrange for new debt or equity financing to provide funds for required distributions in order to maintain our qualification for taxation as a REIT. We cannot be sure that financing would be available for these purposes on favorable terms, or at all.

We may be able to rectify a failure to pay sufficient dividends for any year by paying “deficiency dividends” to shareholders in a later year. These deficiency dividends may be included in our deduction for dividends paid for the earlier year, but an interest charge would be imposed upon us for the delay in distribution. While the payment of a deficiency dividend will apply to a prior year for purposes of our REIT distribution requirements and our dividends paid deduction, it will be treated as an additional distribution to the shareholders receiving it in the year such dividend is paid.

In addition to the other distribution requirements above, to preserve our qualification for taxation as a REIT we are required to timely distribute all C corporation earnings and profits that we inherit from acquired corporations, as described below.

Acquisitions of C Corporations

We have engaged and may in the future engage in transactions where we acquire all of the outstanding stock of a C corporation. Upon these acquisitions, except to the extent we have made or do make an applicable TRS election, each of our acquired entities and their various wholly owned corporate and noncorporate subsidiaries generally became or will become our QRSs. Thus, after such acquisitions, all assets, liabilities and items of income, deduction and credit of the acquired and then disregarded entities have been and will be treated as ours for purposes of the various REIT qualification tests described above. In addition, we generally have been and will be treated as the successor to the acquired and then disregarded entities’ federal income

tax attributes, such as those entities’ (a) adjusted tax bases in their assets and their depreciation schedules; and (b) earnings and profits for federal income tax purposes, if any. The carryover of these attributes creates REIT implications such as built-in gains tax exposure and additional distribution requirements, as described below. However, when we make an election under Section 338(g) of the IRC with respect to corporations that we acquire, as we have done from time to time in the past, we generally will not be subject to such attribute carryovers in respect of attributes existing prior to such election.

Built-in Gains from C Corporations. Notwithstanding our qualification and taxation as a REIT, under specified circumstances we may be subject to corporate income taxation if we acquire a REIT asset where our adjusted tax basis in the asset is determined by reference to the adjusted tax basis of the asset as owned by a C corporation. For instance, we may be subject to federal income taxation on all or part of the built-in gain that was present on the last date an asset was owned by a C corporation, if we succeed to a carryover tax basis in that asset directly or indirectly from such C corporation and if we sell the asset during the five year period beginning on the day the asset ceased being owned by such C corporation. To the extent of our income and gains in a taxable year that are subject to the built-in gains tax, net of any taxes paid on such income and gains with respect to that taxable year, our taxable dividends paid in the following year will be potentially eligible for taxation to noncorporate U.S. shareholders at the preferential tax rates for “qualified dividends” as described below under the heading “Taxation of Taxable U.S. Shareholders”. We generally have not sold and do not expect to sell assets if doing so would result in the imposition of a material built-in gains tax liability; but if and when we do sell assets that may have associated built-in gains tax exposure, then we expect to make appropriate provision for the associated tax liabilities on our financial statements.

Earnings and Profits. Following a corporate acquisition, we must generally distribute all of the C corporation earnings and profits inherited in that transaction, if any, no later than the end of our taxable year in which the transaction occurs, in order to preserve our qualification for taxation as a REIT. However, if we fail to do so, relief provisions would allow us to maintain our qualification for taxation as a REIT provided we distribute any subsequently discovered C corporation earnings and profits and pay an interest charge in respect of the period of delayed distribution. C corporation earnings and profits that we inherit are, in general, specially allocated under a priority rule to the earliest possible distributions following the event causing the inheritance, and only then is the balance of our earnings and profits for the taxable year allocated among our distributions to the extent not already treated as a distribution of C corporation earnings and profits under the priority rule. The distribution of these C corporation earnings and profits is potentially eligible for taxation to noncorporate U.S. shareholders at the preferential tax rates for “qualified dividends” as described below under the heading “Taxation of Taxable U.S. Shareholders”.

Depreciation and Federal Income Tax Treatment of Leases

Our initial tax bases in our assets will generally be our acquisition cost. As described above and pursuant to the December 2017 amendments to the IRC, we intend to make an election to be treated as an electing real property trade or business pursuant to Section 163(j)(7)(B) of the IRC; depreciable real property (including specified improvements) held by electing real property trades or businesses must be depreciated under the alternative depreciation system under the IRC, which generally imposes a class life for depreciable real property as long as forty years. We will generally depreciate our depreciable real property on a straight-line basis over forty years and our personal property over the applicable shorter periods. These depreciation schedules, and our initial tax bases, may vary for properties that we acquire through tax-free or carryover basis acquisitions, or that are the subject of cost segregation analyses.

We are entitled to depreciation deductions from our facilities only if we are treated for federal income tax purposes as the owner of the facilities. This means that the leases of our facilities must be classified for U.S. federal income tax purposes as true leases, rather than as sales or financing arrangements, and we believe this to be the case.

Distributions to our Shareholders

As described above, we expect to make distributions to our shareholders from time to time. These distributions may include cash distributions, in kind distributions of property, and deemed or constructive distributions resulting from capital market activities. The U.S. federal income tax treatment of our distributions will vary based on the status of the recipient shareholder as more fully described below under the headings “Taxation of Taxable U.S. Shareholders,” “Taxation of Tax-Exempt U.S. Shareholders,” and “Taxation of Non-U.S. Shareholders.”

A redemption of our shares for cash only will be treated as a distribution under Section 302 of the IRC, and hence taxable as a dividend to the extent of our available current or accumulated earnings and profits, unless the redemption satisfies one of the tests set forth in Section 302(b) of the IRC enabling the redemption to be treated as a sale or exchange of the shares. The redemption for cash only will be treated as a sale or exchange if it (a) is “substantially disproportionate” with respect to the surrendering shareholder’s ownership in us, (b) results in a “complete termination” of the surrendering shareholder’s entire share interest in us, or (c) is “not essentially equivalent to a dividend” with respect to the surrendering shareholder, all within the meaning of

Section 302(b) of the IRC. In determining whether any of these tests have been met, a shareholder must generally take into account shares considered to be owned by such shareholder by reason of constructive ownership rules set forth in the IRC, as well as shares actually owned by such shareholder. In addition, if a redemption is treated as a distribution under the preceding tests, then a shareholder’s tax basis in the redeemed shares generally will be transferred to the shareholder’s remaining shares in us, if any, and if such shareholder owns no other shares in us, such basis generally may be transferred to a related person or may be lost entirely. Because the determination as to whether a shareholder will satisfy any of the tests of Section 302(b) of the IRC depends upon the facts and circumstances at the time that our shares are redeemed, we urge you to consult your own tax advisor to determine the particular tax treatment of any redemption.

Taxation of Taxable U.S. Shareholders

For noncorporate U.S. shareholders, to the extent that their total adjusted income does not exceed applicable thresholds, the maximum federal income tax rate for long-term capital gains and most corporate dividends is generally 15%. For those noncorporate U.S. shareholders whose total adjusted income exceeds the applicable thresholds, the maximum federal income tax rate for long-term capital gains and most corporate dividends is generally 20%. However, because we are not generally subject to federal income tax on the portion of our “real estate investment trust taxable income” distributed to our shareholders, dividends on our shares generally are not eligible for these preferential tax rates, except that any distribution of C corporation earnings and profits and taxed built-in gain items will potentially be eligible for these preferential tax rates. As a result, our ordinary dividends generally are taxed at the higher federal income tax rates applicable to ordinary income (subject to the lower effective tax rates applicable to qualified REIT dividends via the deduction-without-outlay mechanism of Section 199A of the IRC, which is available to our noncorporate U.S. shareholders for taxable years after 2017 and before 2026). To summarize, the preferential federal income tax rates for long-term capital gains and for qualified dividends generally apply to:

As long as we qualify for taxation as a REIT, a distribution to our U.S. shareholders that we do not designate as a capital gain dividend generally will be treated as an ordinary income dividend to the extent of our available current or accumulated earnings and profits (subject to the lower effective tax rates applicable to qualified REIT dividends via the deduction-without-outlay mechanism of Section 199A of the IRC, which is available to our noncorporate U.S. shareholders for taxable years after 2017 and before 2026). Distributions made out of our current or accumulated earnings and profits that we properly designate as capital gain dividends generally will be taxed as long-term capital gains, as discussed below, to the extent they do not exceed our actual net capital gain for the taxable year. However, corporate shareholders may be required to treat up to 20% of any capital gain dividend as ordinary income under Section 291 of the IRC.

In addition, we may elect to retain net capital gain income and treat it as constructively distributed. In that case:

If we elect to retain our net capital gains in this fashion, we will notify our U.S. shareholders of the relevant tax information within sixty days after the close of the affected taxable year.

If for any taxable year we designate capital gain dividends for our shareholders, then a portion of the capital gain dividends we designate will be allocated to the holders of a particular class of shares on a percentage basis equal to the ratio of the amount of the total dividends paid or made available for the year to the holders of that class of shares to the total dividends paid or made available for the year to holders of all outstanding classes of our shares. We will similarly designate the portion of any dividend that is to be taxed to noncorporate U.S. shareholders at preferential maximum rates (including any qualified dividend income and any capital gains attributable to real estate depreciation recapture that are subject to a maximum 25% federal income tax rate) so that the designations will be proportionate among all outstanding classes of our shares.

Distributions in excess of our current or accumulated earnings and profits will not be taxable to a U.S. shareholder to the extent that they do not exceed the shareholder’s adjusted tax basis in our shares, but will reduce the shareholder’s basis in such shares. To the extent that these excess distributions exceed a U.S. shareholder’s adjusted basis in such shares, they will be included in income as capital gain, with long-term gain generally taxed to noncorporate U.S. shareholders at preferential maximum rates. No U.S. shareholder may include on its federal income tax return any of our net operating losses or any of our capital losses. In addition, no portion of any of our dividends is eligible for the dividends received deduction for corporate shareholders.

If a dividend is declared in October, November or December to shareholders of record during one of those months and is paid during the following January, then for federal income tax purposes the dividend will be treated as having been both paid and received on December 31 of the prior taxable year.

A U.S. shareholder will generally recognize gain or loss equal to the difference between the amount realized and the shareholder’s adjusted basis in our shares that are sold or exchanged. This gain or loss will be capital gain or loss, and will be long-term capital gain or loss if the shareholder’s holding period in our shares exceeds one year. In addition, any loss upon a sale or exchange of our shares held for six months or less will generally be treated as a long-term capital loss to the extent of any long-term capital gain dividends we paid on such shares during the holding period.

U.S. shareholders who are individuals, estates or trusts are generally required to pay a 3.8% Medicare tax on their net investment income (including dividends on and gains from the sale or other disposition of our shares), or in the case of estates and trusts on their net investment income that is not distributed, in each case to the extent that their total adjusted income exceeds applicable thresholds. U.S. shareholders are urged to consult their tax advisors regarding the application of the 3.8% Medicare tax, including the applicability of the deduction-without-outlay mechanism of Section 199A of the IRC to the calculation of their net investment income.

If a U.S. shareholder recognizes a loss upon a disposition of our shares in an amount that exceeds a prescribed threshold, it is possible that the provisions of Treasury regulations involving “reportable transactions” could apply, with a resulting requirement to separately disclose the loss generating transaction to the IRS. These Treasury regulations are written quite broadly, and apply to many routine and simple transactions. A reportable transaction currently includes, among other things, a sale or exchange of our shares resulting in a tax loss in excess of (a) $10 million in any single year or $20 million in a prescribed combination of taxable years in the case of our shares held by a C corporation or by a partnership with only C corporation partners or (b) $2 million in any single year or $4 million in a prescribed combination of taxable years in the case of our shares held by any other partnership or an S corporation, trust or individual, including losses that flow through pass through entities to individuals. A taxpayer discloses a reportable transaction by filing IRS Form 8886 with its federal income tax return and, in the first year of filing, a copy of Form 8886 must be sent to the IRS’s Office of Tax Shelter Analysis. The annual maximum penalty for failing to disclose a reportable transaction is generally $10,000 in the case of a natural person and $50,000 in any other case.

Noncorporate U.S. shareholders who borrow funds to finance their acquisition of our shares could be limited in the amount of deductions allowed for the interest paid on the indebtedness incurred. Under Section 163(d) of the IRC, interest paid or accrued on indebtedness incurred or continued to purchase or carry property held for investment is generally deductible only to the extent of the investor’s net investment income. A U.S. shareholder’s net investment income will include, only if an appropriate election is made by the shareholder, capital gain dividend distributions and qualified dividends received from us. In addition, a U.S. shareholder that utilizes the deduction under Section 199A of the IRC with respect to qualified REIT dividends received from us may also be required to make a similar election in order to include such qualified REIT dividends in the calculation of net investment income. Distributions treated as a nontaxable return of the shareholder’s basis will not enter into the computation of net investment income.

Taxation of Tax-Exempt U.S. Shareholders

The rules governing the federal income taxation of tax-exempt entities are complex, and the following discussion is intended only as a summary of material considerations of an investment in our shares relevant to such investors. If you are a tax-exempt shareholder, we urge you to consult your own tax advisor to determine the impact of federal, state, local and foreign tax laws, including any tax return filing and other reporting requirements, with respect to your acquisition of or investment in our shares.

Our distributions made to shareholders that are tax-exempt pension plans, individual retirement accounts or other qualifying tax-exempt entities should not constitute UBTI, provided that the shareholder has not financed its acquisition of our shares with “acquisition indebtedness” within the meaning of the IRC, that the shares are not otherwise used in an unrelated trade or business of the tax-exempt entity, and that, consistent with our present intent, we do not hold a residual interest in a real estate mortgage investment conduit or otherwise hold mortgage assets or conduct mortgage securitization activities that generate “excess inclusion” income.

Taxation of Non-U.S. Shareholders

The rules governing the U.S. federal income taxation of non-U.S. shareholders are complex, and the following discussion is intended only as a summary of material considerations of an investment in our shares relevant to such investors. If you are a non-U.S. shareholder, we urge you to consult your own tax advisor to determine the impact of U.S. federal, state, local and foreign tax laws, including any tax return filing and other reporting requirements, with respect to your acquisition of or investment in our shares.

We expect that a non-U.S. shareholder’s receipt of (a) distributions from us, and (b) proceeds from the sale of our shares, will not be treated as income effectively connected with a U.S. trade or business and a non-U.S. shareholder will therefore not be subject to the often higher federal tax and withholding rates, branch profits taxes and increased reporting and filing requirements that apply to income effectively connected with a U.S. trade or business. This expectation and a number of the determinations below are predicated on our shares being listed on a U.S. national securities exchange, such as The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC, or Nasdaq. Although we cannot be sure, we expect that each class of our shares has been and will remain listed on a U.S. national securities exchange; however, we cannot be sure that our shares will continue to be so listed in future taxable years or that any class of our shares that we may issue in the future will be so listed.

Distributions. A distribution by us to a non-U.S. shareholder that is not designated as a capital gain dividend will be treated as an ordinary income dividend to the extent that it is made out of our current or accumulated earnings and profits. A distribution of this type will generally be subject to U.S. federal income tax and withholding at the rate of 30%, or at a lower rate if the non-U.S. shareholder has in the manner prescribed by the IRS demonstrated to the applicable withholding agent its entitlement to benefits under a tax treaty. Because we cannot determine our current and accumulated earnings and profits until the end of the taxable year, withholding at the statutory rate of 30% or applicable lower treaty rate will generally be imposed on the gross amount of any distribution to a non-U.S. shareholder that we make and do not designate as a capital gain dividend. Notwithstanding this potential withholding on distributions in excess of our current and accumulated earnings and profits, these excess portions of distributions are a nontaxable return of capital to the extent that they do not exceed the non-U.S. shareholder’s adjusted basis in our shares, and the nontaxable return of capital will reduce the adjusted basis in these shares. To the extent that distributions in excess of our current and accumulated earnings and profits exceed the non-U.S. shareholder’s adjusted basis in our shares, the distributions will give rise to U.S. federal income tax liability only in the unlikely event that the non-U.S. shareholder would otherwise be subject to tax on any gain from the sale or exchange of these shares, as discussed below under the heading “Dispositions of Our Shares.” A non-U.S. shareholder may seek a refund from the IRS of amounts withheld on distributions to it in excess of such shareholder’s allocable share of our current and accumulated earnings and profits.

For so long as a class of our shares is listed on a U.S. national securities exchange, capital gain dividends that we declare and pay to a non-U.S. shareholder on those shares, as well as dividends to a non-U.S. shareholder on those shares attributable to our sale or exchange of “United States real property interests” within the meaning of Section 897 of the IRC, or USRPIs, will not be subject to withholding as though those amounts were effectively connected with a U.S. trade or business, and non-U.S. shareholders will not be required to file U.S. federal income tax returns or pay branch profits tax in respect of these dividends. Instead, these dividends will generally be treated as ordinary dividends and subject to withholding in the manner described above.

Tax treaties may reduce the withholding obligations on our distributions. Under some treaties, however, rates below 30% that are applicable to ordinary income dividends from U.S. corporations may not apply to ordinary income dividends from a REIT or may apply only if the REIT meets specified additional conditions. A non-U.S. shareholder must generally use an applicable

IRS Form W-8, or substantially similar form, to claim tax treaty benefits. If the amount of tax withheld with respect to a distribution to a non-U.S. shareholder exceeds the shareholder’s U.S. federal income tax liability with respect to the distribution, the non-U.S. shareholder may file for a refund of the excess from the IRS. Treasury regulations also provide special rules to determine whether, for purposes of determining the applicability of a tax treaty, our distributions to a non-U.S. shareholder that is an entity should be treated as paid to the entity or to those owning an interest in that entity, and whether the entity or its owners are entitled to benefits under the tax treaty.

If, contrary to our expectation, a class of our shares was not listed on a U.S. national securities exchange and we made a distribution on those shares that was attributable to gain from the sale or exchange of a USRPI, then a non-U.S. shareholder holding those shares would be taxed as if the distribution was gain effectively connected with a trade or business in the United States conducted by the non - U.S. shareholder. In addition, the applicable withholding agent would be required to withhold from a distribution to such a non - U.S. shareholder, and remit to the IRS, up to 21% of the maximum amount of any distribution that was or could have been designated as a capital gain dividend. The non-U.S. shareholder also would generally be subject to the same treatment as a U.S. shareholder with respect to the distribution (subject to any applicable alternative minimum tax and a special alternative minimum tax in the case of a nonresident alien individual), would be subject to fulsome U.S. federal income tax return reporting requirements, and, in the case of a corporate non-U.S. shareholder, may owe the up to 30% branch profits tax under Section 884 of the IRC (or lower applicable tax treaty rate) in respect of these amounts.

Dispositions of Our Shares. If as expected our shares are not USRPIs, then a non-U.S. shareholder’s gain on the sale of these shares generally will not be subject to U.S. federal income taxation or withholding. We expect that our shares will not be USRPIs because one or both of the following exemptions will be available at all times.

First, for so long as a class of our shares is listed on a U.S. national securities exchange, a non-U.S. shareholder’s gain on the sale of those shares will not be subject to U.S. federal income taxation as a sale of a USRPI. Second, our shares will not constitute USRPIs if we are a “domestically controlled” REIT. A domestically controlled REIT is a REIT in which at all times during the preceding five-year period less than 50% of the fair market value of its outstanding shares was directly or indirectly held by foreign persons. From and after December 18, 2015, a person who at all relevant times holds less than 5% of a REIT’s shares that are “regularly traded” on a domestic “established securities market” is deemed to be a U.S. person in making the determination of whether a REIT is domestically controlled, unless the REIT has actual knowledge that the person is not a U.S. person. Other presumptions apply in making the determination with respect to other classes of REIT shareholders. As a result of applicable presumptions, we expect to be able to demonstrate from and after December 18, 2015 that we are less than 50% foreign owned. For periods prior to December 18, 2015, we believe that we were less than 50% foreign owned, but that may not be possible to demonstrate unless and until technical corrections legislation expressly expands application of the ownership presumptions. Accordingly, although we cannot be sure, we believe that we are and will remain a “domestically controlled” REIT.

If, contrary to our expectation, a gain on the sale of our shares is subject to U.S. federal income taxation (for example, because neither of the above exemptions were then available, i.e. , that class of our shares were not then listed on a U.S. national securities exchange and we were not a “domestically controlled” REIT), then (a) a non-U.S. shareholder would generally be subject to the same treatment as a U.S. shareholder with respect to its gain (subject to any applicable alternative minimum tax and a special alternative minimum tax in the case of nonresident alien individuals), (b) the non-U.S. shareholder would also be subject to fulsome U.S. federal income tax return reporting requirements, and (c) a purchaser of that class of our shares from the non-U.S. shareholder may be required to withhold 15% of the purchase price paid to the non-U.S. shareholder and to remit the withheld amount to the IRS.

Information Reporting, Backup Withholding, and Foreign Account Withholding

Information reporting, backup withholding, and foreign account withholding may apply to distributions or proceeds paid to our shareholders under the circumstances discussed below. If a shareholder is subject to backup or other U.S. federal income tax withholding, then the applicable withholding agent will be required to withhold the appropriate amount with respect to a deemed or constructive distribution or a distribution in kind even though there is insufficient cash from which to satisfy the withholding obligation. To satisfy this withholding obligation, the applicable withholding agent may collect the amount of U.S. federal income tax required to be withheld by reducing to cash for remittance to the IRS a sufficient portion of the property that the shareholder would otherwise receive or own, and the shareholder may bear brokerage or other costs for this withholding procedure.

Amounts withheld under backup withholding are generally not an additional tax and may be refunded by the IRS or credited against the shareholder’s federal income tax liability, provided that such shareholder timely files for a refund or credit with the IRS. A U.S. shareholder may be subject to backup withholding when it receives distributions on our shares or proceeds

upon the sale, exchange, redemption, retirement or other disposition of our shares, unless the U.S. shareholder properly executes, or has previously properly executed, under penalties of perjury an IRS Form W-9 or substantially similar form that:

If the U.S. shareholder has not provided and does not provide its correct taxpayer identification number and appropriate certifications on an IRS Form W-9 or substantially similar form, it may be subject to penalties imposed by the IRS, and the applicable withholding agent may have to withhold a portion of any distributions or proceeds paid to such U.S. shareholder. Unless the U.S. shareholder has established on a properly executed IRS Form W-9 or substantially similar form that it comes within an enumerated exempt category, distributions or proceeds on our shares paid to it during the calendar year, and the amount of tax withheld, if any, will be reported to it and to the IRS.

Distributions on our shares to a non-U.S. shareholder during each calendar year and the amount of tax withheld, if any, will generally be reported to the non-U.S. shareholder and to the IRS. This information reporting requirement applies regardless of whether the non-U.S. shareholder is subject to withholding on distributions on our shares or whether the withholding was reduced or eliminated by an applicable tax treaty. Also, distributions paid to a non-U.S. shareholder on our shares will generally be subject to backup withholding, unless the non-U.S. shareholder properly certifies to the applicable withholding agent its non-U.S. shareholder status on an applicable IRS Form W-8 or substantially similar form. Information reporting and backup withholding will not apply to proceeds a non-U.S. shareholder receives upon the sale, exchange, redemption, retirement or other disposition of our shares, if the non-U.S. shareholder properly certifies to the applicable withholding agent its non-U.S. shareholder status on an applicable IRS Form W-8 or substantially similar form. Even without having executed an applicable IRS Form W-8 or substantially similar form, however, in some cases information reporting and backup withholding will not apply to proceeds that a non-U.S. shareholder receives upon the sale, exchange, redemption, retirement or other disposition of our shares if the non-U.S. shareholder receives those proceeds through a broker’s foreign office.

Non-U.S. financial institutions and other non-U.S. entities are subject to diligence and reporting requirements for purposes of identifying accounts and investments held directly or indirectly by U.S. persons. The failure to comply with these additional information reporting, certification and other requirements could result in a 30% U.S. withholding tax on applicable payments to non-U.S. persons, notwithstanding any otherwise applicable provisions of an income tax treaty. In particular, a payee that is a foreign financial institution that is subject to the diligence and reporting requirements described above must enter into an agreement with the U.S. Department of the Treasury requiring, among other things, that it undertake to identify accounts held by “specified United States persons” or “United States owned foreign entities” (each as defined in the IRC), annually report information about such accounts, and withhold 30% on applicable payments to noncompliant foreign financial institutions and account holders. Foreign financial institutions located in jurisdictions that have an intergovernmental agreement with the United States with respect to these requirements may be subject to different rules. The foregoing withholding regime generally applies to payments of dividends on our shares, and is expected to generally apply to other “withholdable payments” (including payments of gross proceeds from a sale, exchange, redemption, retirement or other disposition of our shares) made after December 31, 2018. In general, to avoid withholding, any non-U.S. intermediary through which a shareholder owns our shares must establish its compliance with the foregoing regime, and a non-U.S. shareholder must provide specified documentation (usually an applicable IRS Form W-8) containing information about its identity, its status, and if required, its direct and indirect U.S. owners. Non-U.S. shareholders and shareholders who hold our shares through a non-U.S. intermediary are encouraged to consult their own tax advisors regarding foreign account tax compliance.

Other Tax Considerations

Our tax treatment and that of our shareholders may be modified by legislative, judicial or administrative actions at any time, which actions may have retroactive effect. The rules dealing with federal income taxation are constantly under review by the U.S. Congress, the IRS and the U.S. Department of the Treasury, and statutory changes, new regulations, revisions to existing regulations and revised interpretations of established concepts are issued frequently; in fact, both technical corrections legislation and administrative guidance may someday be enacted or promulgated in response to the substantial December 2017 amendments to the IRC. Likewise, the rules regarding taxes other than U.S. federal income taxes may also be modified. No prediction can be made as to the likelihood of passage of new tax legislation or other provisions, or the direct or indirect effect on us and our shareholders. Revisions to tax laws and interpretations of these laws could adversely affect our ability to qualify and be taxed as a REIT, as well as the tax or other consequences of an investment in our shares. We and our shareholders may also be subject to taxation by state, local or other jurisdictions, including those in which we or our shareholders transact business or reside. These tax consequences may not be comparable to the U.S. federal income tax consequences discussed above.

ERISA PLANS, KEOGH PLANS AND INDIVIDUAL RETIREMENT ACCOUNTS

General Fiduciary Obligations

The Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended, or ERISA, the IRC and similar provisions to those described below under applicable foreign or state law, individually and collectively, impose certain duties on persons who are fiduciaries of any employee benefit plan subject to Title I of ERISA, or an ERISA Plan, or an individual retirement account or annuity, or an IRA, a Roth IRA, a tax-favored account (such as an Archer MSA, Coverdell education savings account or health savings account), a Keogh plan or other qualified retirement plan not subject to Title I of ERISA, each a Non-ERISA Plan. Under ERISA and the IRC, any person who exercises any discretionary authority or control over the administration of, or the management or disposition of the assets of, an ERISA Plan or Non-ERISA Plan, or who renders investment advice for a fee or other compensation to an ERISA Plan or Non-ERISA Plan, is generally considered to be a fiduciary of the ERISA Plan or Non-ERISA Plan.

Fiduciaries of an ERISA Plan must consider whether:

Fiduciaries of an ERISA Plan may incur personal liability for any loss suffered by the ERISA Plan on account of a violation of their fiduciary responsibilities. In addition, these fiduciaries may be subject to a civil penalty of up to 20% of any amount recovered by the ERISA Plan on account of a violation. Fiduciaries of any Non-ERISA Plan should consider that the Non-ERISA Plan may only make investments that are authorized by the appropriate governing instrument and applicable law.

Fiduciaries considering an investment in our securities should consult their own legal advisors if they have any concern as to whether the investment is consistent with the foregoing criteria or is otherwise appropriate. The sale of our securities to an ERISA Plan or Non-ERISA Plan is in no respect a representation by us or any underwriter of the securities that the investment meets all relevant legal requirements with respect to investments by the arrangements generally or any particular arrangement, or that the investment is appropriate for arrangements generally or any particular arrangement.

Prohibited Transactions

Fiduciaries of ERISA Plans and persons making the investment decision for Non-ERISA Plans should consider the application of the prohibited transaction provisions of ERISA and the IRC in making their investment decision. Sales and other transactions between an ERISA Plan or a Non-ERISA Plan and disqualified persons or parties in interest, as applicable, are prohibited transactions and result in adverse consequences absent an exemption. The particular facts concerning the sponsorship, operations and other investments of an ERISA Plan or Non-ERISA Plan may cause a wide range of persons to be treated as disqualified persons or parties in interest with respect to it. A non-exempt prohibited transaction, in addition to imposing potential personal liability upon ERISA Plan fiduciaries, may also result in the imposition of an excise tax under the IRC or a penalty under ERISA upon the disqualified person or party in interest. If the disqualified person who engages in the transaction is the individual

on behalf of whom an IRA, Roth IRA or other tax-favored account is maintained (or his beneficiary), the IRA, Roth IRA or other tax-favored account may lose its tax-exempt status and its assets may be deemed to have been distributed to the individual in a taxable distribution on account of the non-exempt prohibited transaction, but no excise tax will be imposed. Fiduciaries considering an investment in our securities should consult their own legal advisors as to whether the ownership of our securities involves a non-exempt prohibited transaction.

“Plan Assets” Considerations

The U.S. Department of Labor has issued a regulation defining “plan assets.” The regulation, as subsequently modified by ERISA, generally provides that when an ERISA Plan or a Non-ERISA Plan otherwise subject to Title I of ERISA and/or Section 4975 of the IRC acquires an interest in an entity that is neither a “publicly offered security” nor a security issued by an investment company registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended, the assets of the ERISA Plan or Non-ERISA Plan include both the equity interest and an undivided interest in each of the underlying assets of the entity, unless it is established either that the entity is an operating company or that equity participation in the entity by benefit plan investors is not significant. We are not an investment company registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended.

Each class of our equity (that is, our common shares and any other class of equity that we may issue) must be analyzed separately to ascertain whether it is a publicly offered security. The regulation defines a publicly offered security as a security that is “widely held,” “freely transferable” and either part of a class of securities registered under the Exchange Act, or sold under an effective registration statement under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, provided the securities are registered under the Exchange Act within 120 days after the end of the fiscal year of the issuer during which the offering occurred. Each class of our outstanding shares has been registered under the Exchange Act within the necessary time frame to satisfy the foregoing condition.

The regulation provides that a security is “widely held” only if it is part of a class of securities that is owned by 100 or more investors independent of the issuer and of one another. However, a security will not fail to be “widely held” because the number of independent investors falls below 100 subsequent to the initial public offering as a result of events beyond the issuer’s control. Although we cannot be sure, we believe our common shares have been and will remain widely held, and we expect the same to be true of any future class of equity that we may issue.

The regulation provides that whether a security is “freely transferable” is a factual question to be determined on the basis of all relevant facts and circumstances. The regulation further provides that, where a security is part of an offering in which the minimum investment is $10,000 or less, some restrictions on transfer ordinarily will not, alone or in combination, affect a finding that these securities are freely transferable. The restrictions on transfer enumerated in the regulation as not affecting that finding include:

We believe that the restrictions imposed under our declaration of trust on the transfer of shares do not result in the failure of our shares to be “freely transferable.” Furthermore, we believe that there exist no other facts or circumstances limiting the transferability of our shares that are not included among those enumerated as not affecting their free transferability under the regulation, and we do not expect or intend to impose in the future, or to permit any person to impose on our behalf, any limitations or restrictions on transfer that would not be among the enumerated permissible limitations or restrictions.

Assuming that each class of our shares will be “widely held” and that no other facts and circumstances exist that restrict transferability of these shares, our counsel, Sullivan & Worcester LLP, is of the opinion that our shares will not fail to be “freely transferable” for purposes of the regulation due to the restrictions on transfer of our shares in our declaration of trust and that under the regulation each class of our currently outstanding shares is publicly offered and our assets will not be deemed to be “plan

assets” of any ERISA Plan or Non-ERISA Plan that acquires our shares in a public offering. This opinion is conditioned upon certain assumptions and representations, as discussed above in “Material United States Federal Income Tax Considerations—Taxation as a REIT.”

Item 1A.  Risk Factors.

Our business is subject to a number of risks and uncertainties. The risks described below may not be the only risks we face but are risks we believe are material at this time. Additional risks that we do not yet know of, or that we currently think are immaterial, also may impair our business operations or financial results. If any of the events or circumstances described below occurs, our business, financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, prospects or ability to make or sustain distributions to our shareholders could be adversely affected and the value of our securities could decline. Investors and prospective investors should consider the risks described below, the information contained under the heading “Warning Concerning Forward Looking Statements” and the risks described elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K before deciding whether to invest in our securities.

Risks Related to Our Tenants and Managers

Financial and other difficulties at Five Star could adversely affect us.

Our leases with Five Star accounted for approximately 31.2% of our total annualized rental income as of December 31, 2017 and approximately 19.6% of our total revenues for the year ended December 31, 2017 . Five Star also leases 27.6% and manages for our account 19.3% of our properties, at cost before depreciation and purchase price allocations, less impairments, as of December 31, 2017 . Five Star has not been consistently profitable since it became a public company in 2001. Although Five Star has access to a $100.0 million secured revolving credit facility that matures in 2020, subject to extensions upon Five Star's payment of extension fees and meeting other conditions, it currently has limited resources and substantial lease obligations to us and others.

Five Star’s business is subject to a number of risks, including the following:

investigations and proceedings arising in the ordinary course of its business, some of which may involve material amounts.

If Five Star’s operations continue to be unprofitable, it may default in its rent obligations to us or we may realize reduced income from our managed senior living communities, and, if Five Star fails to provide quality services at the senior living communities we own, our income from these communities may be adversely affected. Furthermore, if we were required to replace Five Star as our majority tenant and manager, we could experience significant disruptions in operations at our applicable senior living communities, which could reduce our income and cash flow from, and the value of, those communities.

The current trend for seniors to delay moving to senior living communities until they require greater care could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Seniors have been increasingly delaying their moves to senior living communities, including to our leased and managed senior living communities, until they require greater care. Further, rehabilitation therapy and other services are increasingly being provided to seniors on an outpatient basis or in seniors’ personal residences in response to market demand and government regulation, which may increase the trend for seniors to delay moving to senior living communities. Such delays may cause decreases in occupancy rates and increases in resident turnover rates at our senior living communities. Moreover, older aged persons may have greater care needs and require higher acuity services, which may increase our tenants’ and managers’ cost of business, expose our tenants and managers to additional liability or result in lost business and shorter stays at our leased and managed senior living communities if our tenants and managers are not able to provide the requisite care services or fail to adequately provide those services. These trends may negatively impact the occupancy rates, revenues and cash flows at our leased and managed senior living communities and our results of operations.

Increases in labor costs at our managed senior living communities may have a material adverse effect on us.

Wages and employee benefits associated with the operations of our managed senior living communities represent a significant part of our managed senior living communities’ operating expenses. Our managers compete with other senior living community operators, among others, to attract and retain qualified personnel responsible for the day to day operations of our managed senior living communities. The market for qualified nurses, therapists and other healthcare professionals is highly competitive, and periodic or geographic area shortages of such healthcare professionals may require our managers to increase the wages and benefits they offer to their employees in order to attract and retain such personnel or to utilize temporary personnel at an increased cost. In addition, employee benefit costs, including health insurance and workers’ compensation insurance costs, have materially increased in recent years and, as noted above, we cannot predict the future impact of the ACA, or the possible future repeal, replacement or modification of the ACA, on the cost of employee health insurance. Although Five Star determines its employee health insurance and workers’ compensation self insurance reserves with guidance from third party professionals, its reserves may nonetheless be inadequate. Increasing employee health insurance and workers’ compensation insurance costs and increasing self insurance reserves for labor related insurance may materially and adversely affect our earnings from our managed senior living communities.

We cannot be sure that labor costs at our managed senior living communities will not increase or that any increases will be recovered by corresponding increases in the rates charged to residents or otherwise. Any significant failure by our managers to control labor costs or to pass any increases on to residents through rate increases could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Federal, state and local employment related laws and regulations could increase the cost of doing business at our managed senior living communities, and our managers may fail to comply with such laws and regulations.

The operations at our managed senior living communities are subject to a variety of federal, state and local employment related laws and regulations, including, but not limited to, the U.S. Fair Labor Standards Act, which governs such matters as minimum wages, the Family and Medical Leave Act, overtime pay, compensable time, recordkeeping and other working conditions, and a variety of similar laws that govern these and other employment related matters. Because labor represents a significant portion of our managed senior living communities’ operating expenses, compliance with these evolving laws and regulations could substantially increase the cost of doing business at our managed senior living communities, while failure to do so could subject our managers to significant back pay awards, fines and lawsuits. Our managers’ failure to comply with federal, state and local

employment related laws and regulations could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The nature of our tenants’ and managers’ business exposes them to litigation and regulatory and government proceedings.

Our tenants and managers have been, are currently, and expect in the future to be involved in claims, lawsuits and regulatory and government audits, investigations and proceedings arising in the ordinary course of their and our business, some of which may involve material amounts. The defense and resolution of such claims, lawsuits and other proceedings may require our tenants and managers to incur significant expenses. In several well publicized instances, private litigation by residents of senior living communities for alleged abuses has resulted in large damage awards against senior living companies. Some lawyers and law firms specialize in bringing litigation against senior living community operators. As a result of this litigation and potential litigation, the cost of our tenants’ and managers’ liability insurance continues to increase. Medical liability insurance reform has at times been a topic of political debate, and some states have enacted legislation to limit future liability awards. However, such reforms have not generally been adopted, and we expect our tenants’ and managers’ insurance costs may continue to increase. Further, although Five Star determines its self insurance reserves with guidance from third party professionals, its reserves may nonetheless be inadequate. Insurance costs related to our managed senior living communities are included as operating expenses of those communities, which reduce our returns from those communities. Increasing liability insurance costs and increasing self insurance reserves could have a material adverse effect on our tenants’ and managers’ business, financial condition and results of operations which could cause them to become unable to pay rents due to us or generate and pay minimum and other returns to us.

Depressed U.S. housing market conditions may reduce the willingness or ability of seniors to relocate to our senior living communities.

Downturns or stagnation in the U.S. housing market could adversely affect the ability, or perceived ability, of seniors to afford our tenants’ and managers’ entrance fees and resident fees as prospective residents frequently use the proceeds from the sale of their homes to cover the cost of such fees. If seniors have a difficult time selling their homes, their ability to relocate to our leased and managed senior living communities or finance their stays at our leased and managed senior living communities with private resources could be adversely affected. If U.S. housing market conditions reduce seniors’ willingness or ability to relocate to our leased and managed senior living communities, the occupancy rates, revenues and cash flows at our leased and managed senior living communities and our results of operations could be negatively impacted.

Our tenants or managers may fail to comply with laws relating to the operation of our leased and managed senior living communities.

We and our tenants and managers are subject to, or impacted by, extensive and frequently changing federal, state and local laws and regulations, including: licensure laws; laws protecting consumers against deceptive practices; laws relating to the operation of our properties and how our tenants and managers conduct their operations, such as with respect to health and safety, fire and privacy matters; laws affecting communities that participate in Medicaid; laws affecting SNFs, clinics and other healthcare facilities that participate in both Medicare and Medicaid which mandate allowable costs, pricing, reimbursement procedures and limitations, quality of services and care, food service and physical plants; resident rights laws (including abuse and neglect laws) and fraud laws; anti-kickback and physician referral laws; the Americans with Disabilities Act and similar laws; and safety and health standards established by OSHA. We and our tenants and managers are also required to comply with federal and state laws governing the privacy, security, use and disclosure of individually identifiable information, including financial information and protected health information. Under HIPAA, we and our tenants and managers are required to comply with the HIPAA privacy rule, security standards and standards for electronic healthcare transactions. State laws also govern the privacy of individual health information, and these laws are, in some jurisdictions, more stringent than HIPAA.

We and our tenants and managers expend significant resources to maintain compliance with these laws and regulations. However, if we or our tenants or managers are alleged to fail, or do fail, to comply with applicable legal requirements, we or they may have to expend significant resources to respond to such allegations, and if we or they are unable to cure deficiencies, certain sanctions may be imposed which may adversely affect the ability of our tenants to pay us rent, the profitability of our managed senior living communities and our ability to obtain, renew or maintain licenses at those communities and the values of our properties. Changes in applicable regulatory frameworks could also have similar adverse effects.

Termination of assisted living resident agreements and resident attrition could adversely affect revenues and earnings at our leased and managed senior living communities.

State regulations governing assisted living communities typically require a written resident agreement with each resident. Most of these regulations also require that each resident have the right to terminate these assisted living resident agreements for

any reason on reasonable notice. Consistent with these regulations, most of our tenants’ and managers’ resident agreements allow residents to terminate their agreements on 30 days’ notice. Thus, our tenants and managers may be unable to contract with assisted living residents to stay for longer periods of time, unlike typical apartment leasing arrangements that involve lease agreements with terms of up to a year or longer. If a large number of residents elected to terminate their resident agreements at or around the same time, revenues and earnings at our leased and managed senior living communities could be materially and adversely affected. In addition, the advanced ages of residents at our leased and managed senior living communities make resident turnover rates difficult to predict.

The operations of some of our communities are dependent upon payments from the Medicare and Medicaid programs.

For the year ended December 31, 2017, approximately 97% of our NOI was generated from properties where a majority of the revenue is derived from private resources, and the remaining 3% of our NOI was generated from properties where a majority of the revenue was derived from Medicare and Medicaid reimbursements. Operations at most of our Medicare and Medicaid dependent properties currently produce sufficient cash flow to pay our allocated rents or our minimum returns, but operations at certain of these properties do not. Even at properties where less than a majority of the NOI comes from Medicare or Medicaid payments, a reduction in such payments could materially adversely affect profits of, or result in losses to, our tenants or managers. With the background of the current and projected federal budget deficit and other federal priorities and continued challenging state fiscal conditions, there have been numerous recent legislative and regulatory actions or proposed actions with respect to federal Medicare and state Medicaid rates and federal payments to states for Medicaid programs. For further information regarding such programs, see elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, including under the caption “Business—Government Regulation and Reimbursement” in Part I, Item 1 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, and under the caption “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Impact of Government Reimbursement” in Part II, Item 7 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. If and to the extent Medicare or Medicaid rates are reduced from current levels, or if rate increases are less than increases in operating costs, such changes could have a material adverse effect on the ability of our tenants to pay us rent, the profitability of our managed senior living communities and the values of our properties. In addition, the revenues that we or our tenants receive from Medicare and Medicaid may be subject to statutory and regulatory changes, retroactive rate adjustments, recovery of program overpayments or set offs, administrative rulings and policy interpretations, and payment delays, any of which could have a material adverse effect on the ability of our tenants to pay us rent, the profitability of our managed senior living communities and the values of our properties.

Provisions of the ACA and efforts to repeal, replace or modify the ACA could adversely affect us or our tenants and managers.

The ACA contains insurance changes, payment changes and healthcare delivery systems changes that have affected, and will continue to affect, us, our tenants and managers. Examples of these, and other information regarding such programs, are provided below as well as under the caption “Business—Government Regulation and Reimbursement” in Part I, Item 1 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K and under the caption “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Impact of Government Reimbursement” in Part II, Item 7 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Provisions of the ACA include multiple reductions to the annual market basket updates for inflation that may result in SNF Medicare payment rates being less than for the preceding fiscal year. We are unable to predict how potential Medicare rate reductions under the ACA will affect our tenants’ and our managers’ future financial results of operations; however, the effect may be adverse and material and hence adverse and material to our future financial condition and results of operations.

Further, the ACA includes other changes that may affect us, our tenants and our managers, such as enforcement reforms and Medicare and Medicaid program integrity control initiatives, new compliance, ethics and public disclosure requirements, initiatives to encourage the development of home and community based long term care services rather than institutional services under Medicaid, value based purchasing plans and a Medicare post acute care pilot program to develop and evaluate making a bundled payment for services, including hospital, physician and SNF services, provided during an episode of care.

Changes implemented under the ACA resulting in reduced payments for services or the failure of Medicare, Medicaid or insurance payment rates to cover increasing costs could adversely and materially affect the ability of our tenants to pay rent to us, the profitability of certain of our managed senior living communities and the values of our properties.

On October 12, 2017, President Trump signed an executive order that modified certain aspects of the ACA by directing federal agencies to reduce limits on association health plans and temporary insurance plans and to permit workers to use funds from tax advantaged accounts to pay for their own coverage. On the same day, the Trump Administration also announced that it would stop paying what are known as cost sharing reduction subsidies to issuers of qualified health plans under the ACA. Further, as a result of a new tax reform law, effective January 1, 2019, the penalty associated with the individual mandate provision of the

ACA was reduced to $0. To the extent the ACA is repealed, replaced or modified, additional risks and regulatory uncertainty may arise. Depending upon what aspects of the ACA are repealed, replaced or modified, our future financial results could be adversely and materially affected.

Risks Related to Our Business

REIT distribution requirements and limitations on our ability to access reasonably priced capital may adversely impact our ability to carry out our business plan.

To maintain our qualification for taxation as a REIT under the IRC, we are required to distribute at least 90% of our annual REIT taxable income (excluding capital gains). Accordingly, we may not be able to retain sufficient cash to fund our operations, repay our debts, invest in our properties or fund our acquisitions or development or redevelopment efforts. Our business strategies therefore depend, in part, upon our ability to raise additional capital at reasonable costs. The volatility in the availability of capital to businesses on a global basis in most debt and equity markets generally may limit our ability to raise reasonably priced capital. We may also be unable to raise reasonably priced capital because of reasons related to our business, market perceptions of our prospects, the terms of our indebtedness or for reasons beyond our control, such as market conditions. Because the earnings we are permitted to retain are limited by the rules governing REIT qualification and taxation, if we are unable to raise reasonably priced capital, we may not be able to carry out our business plan.

Increasing interest rates may adversely affect us.

Since the most recent U.S. recession, the Board of Governors of the U.S. Federal Reserve System, or the U.S. Federal Reserve, has taken actions that have resulted in low interest rates for a long period of time. Since December 2016, the U.S. Federal Reserve has raised its benchmark interest rate by one percentage point, and there are some market expectations that market interest rates will rise further in the near to intermediate term. Market interest rates may continue to increase, and those increases may materially and negatively affect us in several ways, including:

We are limited in our ability to operate or manage our properties and are thus dependent on our tenants and managers.

Because federal income tax laws restrict REITs and their subsidiaries from operating or managing health care facilities, we do not operate or manage our senior living communities. Instead, we lease nearly all of our senior living communities to operating companies or to our subsidiaries that qualify as TRSs under the IRC. We have retained third party managers to operate and manage our senior living communities that are leased to our subsidiaries. Our income from our properties may be adversely affected if our tenants or managers fail to provide quality services and amenities to residents or if they fail to maintain quality services. While we monitor the performance of our tenants and managers and apply asset management strategies and discipline, we have limited recourse under our leases and management agreements if we believe that our tenants or managers are not performing adequately. Any failure by our tenants or managers to fully perform the duties agreed to in our leases and management agreements could adversely affect our results of operations. In addition, our tenants and managers operate, and in some cases own or have invested in, properties that compete with our properties, which may result in conflicts of interest, and fees paid to our managers are often set as a percentage of gross revenues rather than profits. As a result, our tenants and managers have made, and may in the future make, decisions regarding competing properties or our properties’ operations that may not be in our best interests.

Our properties and their operations are subject to extensive regulations.

Various government authorities mandate certain physical characteristics of senior housing properties, clinics, other healthcare communities and biotechnology laboratories. Changes in laws and regulations relating to these matters may require significant expenditures. Our leases, other than our MOB leases, and our management agreements generally require our tenants or managers to maintain our properties in compliance with applicable laws and regulations, and we expend resources to monitor their compliance. However, our tenants or managers may neglect maintenance of our properties if they suffer financial distress. Under some of our leases, we have agreed to fund capital expenditures in return for rent increases and minimum returns due to us, with respect to our managed senior living communities increase by a defined percentage of the capital expenditures we fund at those communities. Our available financial resources or those of our tenants or managers may be insufficient to fund the expenditures required to operate our properties in accordance with applicable laws and regulations. If we fund these expenditures, our tenants’ financial resources may be insufficient to satisfy their increased rental payments to us or our managed senior living communities may fail to generate profits sufficient to fund our minimum returns.

Licensing, Medicare and Medicaid laws also require our tenants who operate senior living communities, clinics and other healthcare communities to comply with extensive standards governing their operations. In addition, certain laws prohibit fraud by senior living operators, and other healthcare communities, including civil and criminal laws that prohibit false claims in Medicare, Medicaid and other programs and that regulate patient referrals. In recent years, the federal and state governments have devoted increasing resources to monitoring the quality of care at senior living communities and to anti-fraud investigations in healthcare operations generally. The ACA also facilitates the DOJ’s ability to investigate allegations of wrongdoing or fraud at SNFs. When violations of anti-fraud, false claims, anti-kickback or physician referral laws are identified, federal or state authorities may impose civil monetary damages, treble damages, repayment requirements and criminal sanctions. Healthcare communities may also be subject to license revocation or conditional licensure and exclusion from Medicare and Medicaid participation or conditional participation. When quality of care deficiencies or improper billing are identified, various laws may authorize civil money penalties or fines; the suspension, modification or revocation of a license or Medicare/Medicaid participation; the suspension or denial of admissions of residents; the denial of payments in full or in part; the implementation of state oversight, temporary management or receivership; and the imposition of criminal penalties. We, our tenants and managers receive notices of potential sanctions from time to time, and government authorities impose such sanctions from time to time on our communities which our tenants and managers operate. If our tenants or managers are unable to cure deficiencies which have been identified or which are identified in the future, these sanctions may be imposed, and if imposed, may adversely affect our tenants’ ability to pay rents to us, our returns and our ability to identify substitute tenants or managers. Federal and state requirements for change in control of healthcare communities, including, as applicable, approvals of the proposed operator for licensure, CONs, and Medicare and Medicaid participation, may also limit or delay our ability to find substitute tenants or managers. If any of our tenants or managers becomes unable to operate our properties, or if any of our tenants becomes unable to pay its rent or generate and pay our minimum returns because it has violated government regulations or payment laws, such incidents may trigger a default under their leases and management agreements with us and our or our tenants’ or managers’ credit agreements, and we may experience difficulty in finding a substitute tenant or manager or selling the affected property for a fair and commercially reasonable price, and the value of an affected property may decline materially.

Various laws administered by the FDA and other agencies regulate the operations of our tenants that operate biotechnology laboratories that develop, manufacture, market or distribute pharmaceuticals or medical devices. Once a product is approved, the FDA maintains oversight of the product and its developer and can withdraw its approval, recall products or suspend their production, impose or seek to impose civil or criminal penalties on the developer or take other actions for the developer’s failure to comply with regulatory requirements, including anti-fraud, false claims, anti-kickback or physician referral laws. Other concerns affecting our biotechnology laboratory tenants include the potential for subsequent discovery of safety concerns and related litigation, ensuring that the product qualifies for reimbursement under Medicare, Medicaid or other federal or state programs, cost control initiatives of payment programs, the potential for litigation over the validity or infringement of intellectual property rights related to the product, the eventual expiration of relevant patents and the need to raise additional capital. The cost of compliance with these regulations and the risks described in this paragraph, among others, could adversely affect the ability of our biotechnology laboratory tenants to pay rent to us.

We may be unable to grow our business by acquisitions of additional properties.

Our business plans involve the acquisition of additional properties. Our ability to make profitable acquisitions is subject to risks, including, but not limited to, risks associated with:

We might encounter unanticipated difficulties and expenditures relating to our acquired properties. For example:

For these reasons, among others, we might not realize the anticipated benefits of our acquisitions, and our business plan to acquire additional properties may not succeed or may cause us to experience losses.

We and our tenants and managers face significant competition.

We face significant competition for acquisition opportunities from other investors, including publicly traded and private REITs, numerous financial institutions, individuals, foreign investors and other public and private companies. Because of competition, we may be unable to acquire, or may pay a significantly increased purchase price for, a desired property, which would reduce our expected returns from that property. Some of our competitors may have greater financial and other resources than us. Further, during prior periods of economic recession, some investors have focused on healthcare real estate investments because of a belief that these types of investments may be less affected by general economic circumstances than most other investments. Low historical market interest rates and increased leverage utilized by financial and other buyers have caused purchase prices for healthcare real estate investments to increase, therefore decreasing rates of returns. Such conditions have resulted in increased competition for investments, fewer available investment opportunities and lower spreads over the cost of capital. If such conditions continue for a protracted period, our ability to grow our business and improve our financial results may be materially and adversely affected.

We also face competition for tenants at our properties, particularly at our MOBs. Some competing properties may be newer, better located or more attractive to tenants. Competing properties may have lower rates of occupancy than our properties, which may result in competing owners offering available space at lower rents than we offer at our properties. Development activities may increase the supply of properties of the type we own in the leasing markets in which we own properties and increase the competition we face. Competition may make it difficult for us to attract and retain tenants and may reduce the rents we are able to charge.

Further, our tenants and managers compete with numerous other senior living community operators, as well as companies that provide senior living services, such as home healthcare companies and other real estate based service providers. Some of our tenants’ and managers’ existing competitors are larger and have greater financial resources than they do and some of their competitors are not for profit entities which have endowment income and may not face the same financial pressures that they do. We cannot be sure that our tenants and managers will be able to attract a sufficient number of residents to our leased and managed senior living communities at rates that will generate acceptable returns or that they will be able to attract employees and keep wages and other employee benefits, insurance costs and other operating expenses at levels which will allow them to compete successfully and operate our senior living communities profitably.

Competition from newly developed senior living communities may adversely affect the profitability of our senior living communities.

In recent years, a significant number of new senior living communities have been developed and continue to be developed. Although there are indications that the rate of newly started developments has recently declined, the increased supply of senior living communities that has resulted from recent development activity has increased competitive pressures on our tenants and managers, particularly in certain geographic markets where we own senior living communities, and we expect these competitive challenges to continue for at least the next few years. These competitive challenges may prevent our tenants and manager from maintaining or improving occupancy and rates at our senior living communities, which may increase the risk of default under our leases, reduce the rents and returns we may receive and earn from our leased and managed senior living communities and adversely affect the profitability of our senior living communities, and may cause the value of our properties to decline.

We may be unable to lease our properties when our leases expire.

Although we typically will seek to renew our leases with current tenants when they expire, we cannot be sure that we will be successful in doing so. If our tenants do not renew their leases, we may be unable to obtain new tenants to maintain or increase the historical occupancy rates of, or rents from, our properties.

We may experience declining rents or incur significant costs to renew our leases or to lease our properties to new tenants.

When we renew our leases with current tenants or lease to new tenants, we may experience rent decreases, and we may have to spend substantial amounts for leasing commissions, tenant improvements or other tenant inducements. Moreover, many of our MOB properties have been specially designed for the particular businesses of our tenants; if the current leases for such properties are terminated or are not renewed, we may be required to renovate such properties at substantial costs, decrease the rents we charge or provide other concessions in order to lease such properties to new tenants.

Current office space utilization trends may adversely impact our business.

There is a general trend in office real estate for companies to decrease the space they occupy per employee. This increase in office utilization rates may result in our MOB tenants renewing their leases for less area than they currently occupy, which could increase the vacancy and decrease rental income at our MOBs. The need to reconfigure leased office space to increase utilization also may require us to spend increased amounts for tenant improvements.

Ownership of real estate is subject to environmental risks.

Ownership of real estate is subject to risks associated with environmental hazards. We may be liable for environmental hazards at, or migrating from, our properties, including those created by prior owners or occupants, existing tenants or managers, abutters or other persons. Various federal and state laws impose liabilities upon property owners, including us, for environmental damages arising at, or migrating from, owned properties, and we may be liable for the costs of environmental investigation and clean up at, or near, our properties. As an owner or previous owner of properties, we also may be liable to pay damages to government agencies or third parties for costs and damages they incur arising from environmental hazards at, or migrating from, such properties. The costs and damages that may arise from environmental hazards are often difficult to project and may be substantial.

In addition, we believe some of our properties may contain asbestos. We believe any asbestos on our properties is contained in accordance with applicable laws and regulations, and we have no current plans to remove it. If we removed the asbestos or demolished the affected properties, certain environmental regulations govern the manner in which the asbestos must be handled and removed, and we could incur substantial costs complying with such regulations.

Current government policies regarding interest rates and trade policies may cause a recession.

The U.S. Federal Reserve policy regarding the timing and amount of future increases in interest rates and changing U.S. and other countries’ trade policies may hinder the growth of the U.S. economy. It is unclear whether the U.S. economy will be able to withstand these challenges and continue sustained growth. Economic weakness in the U.S. economy generally or a new U.S. recession would likely adversely affect our financial condition and that of our tenants and managers, could adversely impact the ability of our tenants and managers to renew our leases or management agreements or pay rents or returns to us, and may cause the values of our properties and of our securities to decline.

Ownership of real estate is subject to climate change and adverse weather risks.

Some observers believe severe weather in different parts of the world over the last few years is evidence of global climate change. Severe weather may have an adverse effect on certain properties we own. Flooding caused by rising sea levels and severe weather events, including hurricanes, tornadoes and widespread fires, may have an adverse effect on properties we own and result in significant losses to us and interruption of our business. Also, the political debate about climate change has resulted in various treaties, laws and regulations that are intended to limit carbon emissions. These or future laws may cause operating costs at our properties to increase. Laws enacted to mitigate climate change may make some of our buildings obsolete or require us to make material investments in our properties which could materially and adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations and cause the value of our securities to decline.

Real estate ownership creates risks and liabilities.

In addition to the risks discussed above, our business is subject to other risks associated with real estate ownership, including:

We have debt and we may incur additional debt.

As of December 31, 2017, our consolidated indebtedness was $3.7 billion, our consolidated indebtedness to total gross assets ratio was 42.0% and we had $404.0 million available for borrowing under our $1.0 billion revolving credit facility. The agreements governing our $1.0 billion revolving credit facility, our $350.0 million term loan and our $200.0 million term loan include a feature under which the maximum aggregate borrowing availability may be increased to up to $2.0 billion, $700.0 million and $400.0 million, respectively.

We are subject to numerous risks associated with our debt, including the risk that our cash flows could be insufficient for us to make required payments on our debt. There are no limits in our organizational documents on the amount of debt we may incur, and we may incur substantial debt. Our debt obligations could have important consequences to our securityholders. Our incurring debt may increase our vulnerability to adverse economic, market and industry conditions, limit our flexibility in planning for, or reacting to, changes in our business, and place us at a disadvantage in relation to competitors that have lower debt levels. Excessive debt could limit our ability to obtain financing for working capital, capital expenditures, acquisitions, construction projects, refinancing, lease obligations or other purposes and hinder our ability to maintain investment grade ratings from nationally recognized credit rating agencies or to make or sustain distributions to our shareholders.

If we default under any of our debt obligations, we may be in default under the agreements governing other debt obligations of ours which have cross default provisions, including our credit facility and term loan agreements and our senior unsecured notes indentures and their supplements. In such case, our lenders may demand immediate payment of any outstanding indebtedness and we could be forced to liquidate our assets for less than the values we would receive in a more orderly process.

We may fail to comply with the terms of our credit facility and term loan agreements and our senior unsecured notes indentures and their supplements, which could adversely affect our business and may prevent our making distributions to our shareholders.

Our credit facility and term loan agreements and our senior unsecured notes indentures and their supplements include various conditions, covenants and events of default. We may not be able to satisfy all of these conditions or may default on some of these covenants for various reasons, including for reasons beyond our control. For example, our credit facility and term loan agreements and our senior unsecured notes indentures and their supplements require us to maintain certain debt service ratios. Our ability to comply with such covenants will depend upon the net rental income and returns we receive from our properties. If

the occupancy at our properties declines or if our rents or returns decline, we may be unable to borrow under our revolving credit facility. Complying with these covenants may limit our ability to take actions that may be beneficial to us and our securityholders.

If we are unable to borrow under our revolving credit facility, we may be unable to meet our obligations or grow our business by acquiring additional properties. If we default under our credit facility or term loan agreements, our lenders may demand immediate payment and may elect not to fund future borrowings. During the continuance of any event of default under our credit facility or term loan agreements, we may be limited or in some cases prohibited from making distributions to our shareholders. Any default under our credit facility or term loan agreements that results in acceleration of our obligations to repay outstanding indebtedness or in our no longer being permitted to borrow under our revolving credit facility would likely have serious adverse consequences to us and would likely cause the value of our securities to decline.

In the future, we may obtain additional debt financing, and the covenants and conditions which apply to any such additional debt may be more restrictive than the covenants and conditions that are contained in our credit facility or term loan agreements or our senior unsecured notes indentures and their supplements.

RMR LLC and Five Star rely on information technology and systems in their operations, and any material failure, inadequacy, interruption or security failure of that technology or those systems could materially and adversely affect us.

RMR LLC and Five Star rely on information technology and systems, including the Internet and commercially available software, to process, transmit, store and safeguard information and to manage or support a variety of their business processes (including managing our building systems), including financial transactions and maintenance of records, which may include personal identifying information of employees, residents and tenants and lease data. If either of RMR LLC or Five Star experiences material security or other failures, inadequacies or interruptions of its information technology, it could incur material costs and losses and our operations could be disrupted as a result. Further, third party vendors could experience similar events with respect to their information technology and systems that impact the products and services they provide to RMR LLC, Five Star or us. RMR LLC and Five Star rely on commercially available systems, software, tools and monitoring, as well as their internal procedures and personnel, to provide security for processing, transmitting, storing and safeguarding confidential resident, tenant, customer and vendor information, such as personally identifiable information related to their employees and others, including in Five Star’s case, residents, and information regarding their and our financial accounts. Each of RMR LLC and Five Star takes various actions, and incurs significant costs, to maintain and protect the operation and security of its information technology and systems, including the data maintained in those systems. However, it is possible that these measures will not prevent the systems’ improper functioning or a compromise in security, such as in the event of a cyberattack or the improper disclosure of personally identifiable information.

Security breaches, computer viruses, attacks by hackers, online fraud schemes and similar breaches can create significant system disruptions, shutdowns, fraudulent transfer of assets or unauthorized disclosure of confidential information. For example, in June 2017, RMR LLC became aware that it had been a victim of criminal fraud in which a person pretending to be a representative of a seller in a property acquisition transaction provided fraudulent money wire instructions that caused money to be wire transferred to an account that was believed to be, but was not, the seller’s account. We were not involved in that transaction and we did not incur any loss from that transaction; however, there may be a risk that similar fraudulent activities could be attempted against us, RMR LLC or others with respect to our assets. The cybersecurity risks to RMR LLC, Five Star, us and third party vendors are heightened by, among other things, the evolving nature of the threats faced, advances in computer capabilities, new discoveries in the field of cryptography and new and increasingly sophisticated methods used to perpetuate illegal or fraudulent activities against RMR LLC or Five Star, including cyberattacks, email or wire fraud and other attacks exploiting security vulnerabilities in RMR LLC’s, Five Star’s or other third parties’ information technology networks and systems or operations. Any failure to maintain the security, proper function and availability of RMR LLC’s or Five Star’s information technology and systems, or certain third party vendors’ failure to similarly protect their information technology and systems that are relevant to RMR LLC’s, Five Star’s or our operations, or to safeguard RMR LLC’s, Five Star’s or our business processes, assets and information could result in financial losses, interrupt RMR LLC’s or Five Star’s operations, damage RMR LLC’s or Five Star’s reputation, cause RMR LLC or Five Star to be in default of material contracts and subject RMR LLC or Five Star to liability claims or regulatory penalties. Any or all of the foregoing could materially and adversely affect our business and the value of our securities.

Real estate construction and redevelopment creates risks.

Our business plans involve the development of new properties or the redevelopment of some of our existing properties as the existing leases expire, as our tenants’ or managers’ needs change or to pursue any other opportunities that we believe are desirable. The development and redevelopment of new and existing buildings involves significant risks in addition to those involved in the ownership and operation of leased properties, including the risks that construction may not be completed on schedule or within budget, resulting in increased construction costs and delays in leasing such properties and generating cash flows. Development activities are also subject to risks relating to the inability to obtain, or delays in obtaining, all necessary zoning, land

use, building, occupancy, and other required government permits and authorizations. Once completed, any new properties may perform below anticipated financial results. The occurrence of one or more of these circumstances in connection with our development or redevelopment activities could have an adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and the value of our securities.

Insurance may not adequately cover our losses.

We or our tenants are generally responsible for the costs of insurance coverage for our properties, including for casualty, liability, fire and extended coverage. Losses of a catastrophic nature, such as those caused by hurricanes, flooding, volcanic eruptions and earthquakes, among other things, may be covered by insurance policies with limitations such as large deductibles or co-payments that we or a responsible tenant may not be able to pay. Insurance proceeds may not be adequate to restore an affected property to its condition prior to a loss or to compensate us for our losses, including the loss of future revenues from an affected property. Similarly, our other insurance, including our general liability insurance, may not provide adequate insurance to cover our losses.

Our use of joint ventures may limit our flexibility with jointly owned investments.

In March 2017, we entered a joint venture with a sovereign investor for one of our MOBs located in Boston, Massachusetts, and we may in the future acquire, develop or recapitalize properties in joint ventures with other persons or entities. Our participation in these joint ventures is subject to risks, including the following:

Any of the foregoing risks could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We may incur significant costs complying with the Americans with Disabilities Act and similar laws.

Under the Americans with Disabilities Act and certain similar state statutes, many commercial properties must meet specified requirements related to access and use by disabled persons. We may be required to make substantial capital expenditures at our properties to comply with these laws. In addition, non-compliance could result in the imposition of fines or an award of damages and costs to private litigants. These expenditures may have an adverse impact on our financial results and the value of our securities.

Our business could be adversely impacted if there are deficiencies in our disclosure controls and procedures or our internal control over financial reporting.

The design and effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures and our internal control over financial reporting may not prevent all errors, misstatements or misrepresentations. While management will continue to review the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures and our internal control over financial reporting, we cannot assure that our disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting will be effective in accomplishing all control objectives all

of the time. Deficiencies, including any material weaknesses, in our disclosure controls and procedures or internal control over financial reporting could result in misstatements of our results of operations or our financial statements or could otherwise materially and adversely affect our business, reputation, results of operations, financial condition or liquidity.

Changes in lease accounting standards may materially and adversely affect us.

The Financial Accounting Standards Board, or FASB, adopted new accounting rules to be effective for fiscal years ending after December 2018, which will require companies to capitalize substantially all leases on their balance sheets by recognizing a lessee’s rights and obligations. When the final rules are effective, many companies that account for certain leases on an “off balance sheet” basis will be required to account for such leases “on balance sheet.” This change will remove many of the differences in the way companies account for owned property and leased property and could have a material effect on various aspects of our tenants’ businesses, including the appearance of their credit quality and other factors they consider in deciding whether to own or lease properties. When the rules are effective, or as the effective date approaches, these rules could cause companies that lease properties to prefer shorter lease terms in an effort to reduce the leasing liability required to be recorded on their balance sheets or some companies may decide to prefer property ownership to leasing. Such decisions by our current or prospective tenants may adversely impact our business and the value of our securities.

Risks Related to Our Relationships with RMR Inc., RMR LLC and Five Star

We are dependent upon RMR LLC to manage our business and implement our growth strategy.

We have no employees. Personnel and services that we require are provided to us by RMR LLC pursuant to our management agreements with RMR LLC. Our ability to achieve our business objectives depends on RMR LLC and its ability to manage our properties, identify and complete our acquisitions and dispositions and to execute our growth strategy. Accordingly, our business is dependent upon RMR LLC’s business contacts, its ability to successfully hire, train, supervise and manage its personnel and its ability to maintain its operating systems. If we lose the services provided by RMR LLC or its key personnel, our business and growth prospects may decline. We may be unable to duplicate the quality and depth of management available to us by becoming internally managed or by hiring another manager. In the event RMR LLC is unwilling or unable to continue to provide management services to us, our cost of obtaining substitute services may be greater than the fees we pay RMR LLC under our management agreements, and as a result our expenses may increase.

Our management structure and agreements and relationships with RMR LLC and RMR LLC’s and its controlling shareholder's relationships with others may create conflicts of interest, or the appearance of such conflicts, and may restrict our investment activities.

Our manager, RMR LLC, is authorized to follow broad operating and investment guidelines and, therefore, has discretion in determining the properties that will be appropriate investments for us, as well as our individual operating and investment decisions. Our Board of Trustees periodically reviews our operating and investment guidelines and our operating activities and investments but it does not review or approve each decision made by RMR LLC on our behalf. In addition, in conducting periodic reviews, our Board of Trustees relies primarily on information provided to it by RMR LLC.

RMR LLC is a subsidiary of RMR Inc. Our Managing Trustee, Adam Portnoy, as the current sole trustee of ABP Trust, is the controlling shareholder of RMR Inc. and as the current sole Trustee of ABP Trust beneficially owns all the class A membership units of RMR LLC not owned by RMR Inc. Adam Portnoy is a managing director, president and chief executive officer of RMR Inc. and an officer of RMR LLC. Barry Portnoy was our other Managing Trustee and a director and an officer of RMR Inc. and an officer of RMR LLC until his death on February 25, 2018. RMR LLC or its subsidiary also acts as the manager for five other Nasdaq listed REITs: GOV, which primarily owns properties that are majority leased to government tenants and office properties in the metropolitan Washington, D.C. market area that may also be leased to private sector tenants; HPT, which owns hotels and travel centers; ILPT, which primarily owns industrial and logistics properties; SIR, which primarily owns and invests in net leased, single tenant properties; and Tremont Mortgage Trust, or TRMT, which primarily originates and invests in first mortgage loans secured by middle market and transitional commercial real estate . RMR LLC also provides services to other publicly and privately owned companies, including: Five Star, our largest tenant and the manager of our managed senior living communities; TA, which operates and franchises travel centers, convenience stores and restaurants; and Sonesta, which operates, manages and franchises hotels, resorts and cruise ships. An affiliate of RMR LLC is an investment adviser to the RMR Real Estate Income Fund, or RIF, a closed end investment company listed on the NYSE American, which primarily invests in securities of REITs that are not managed by RMR LLC.

Each of our executive officers is also an officer of RMR LLC, including our Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer, Richard W. Siedel, Jr., who is also the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of ILPT. Because our executive officers have duties

to RMR LLC as well as to us and Richard W. Siedel, Jr. has duties to ILPT, we do not have their undivided attention. They may have conflicts in allocating their time and resources between us and RMR LLC and other companies to which RMR LLC provides services. Our Independent Trustees also serve as independent directors or independent trustees of other companies to which RMR LLC or its subsidiary provides management services. In addition to their investments in RMR Inc. and RMR LLC, our current and former Managing Trustees hold equity investments in other companies to which RMR LLC provides management services and some of these companies, including us, have significant cross ownership interests, including, for example: as of February 23, 2018, our Managing Trustee and Barry Portnoy, our former Managing Trustee, owned, directly or indirectly, in aggregate 1.3% of our outstanding common shares, 36.4% of Five Star’s outstanding common stock,1.5% of HPT’s outstanding common shares, 1.8% of GOV’s outstanding common shares, 1.9% of SIR’s outstanding common shares; and 9.1% of RIF’s outstanding common shares; we own 8.4% of Five Star’s outstanding common stock; GOV owns 27.8% of SIR’s outstanding common shares; SIR owns 69.2% of ILPT’s outstanding common shares; HPT owns 8.6% of TA’s outstanding common shares; and Tremont Realty Advisors LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of RMR LLC, owns 19.2% of TRMT’s outstanding common shares. Our executive officers may also own equity investments in other companies to which RMR LLC or its subsidiary provides management services. These multiple responsibilities, relationships and cross ownerships could create competition for the time and efforts of RMR LLC, Adam Portnoy and other RMR LLC personnel, including our executive officers, and give rise to conflicts of interest or the appearance of such conflicts of interest with respect to matters involving us, RMR Inc., RMR LLC, our Managing Trustee, the other companies to which RMR LLC or its subsidiaries provide management services and their related parties. Conflicts of interest or the appearance of conflicts of interest could have a material adverse impact on our reputation, business and the market price of our common shares and other securities and we may be subject to increased risk of litigation as a result.

In our management agreements with RMR LLC, we acknowledge that RMR LLC may engage in other activities or businesses and act as the manager to any other person or entity (including other REITs) even though such person or entity has investment policies and objectives similar to our policies and objectives and we are not entitled to preferential treatment in receiving information, recommendations and other services from RMR LLC. Accordingly, we may lose investment opportunities to, and may compete for tenants with, other businesses managed by RMR LLC or its subsidiary. We cannot assure that our Code of Conduct or our Governance Guidelines, or other procedural protections we adopt will be sufficient to enable us to identify, adequately address or mitigate actual or alleged conflicts of interest or ensure that our transactions with related persons are made on terms that are at least as favorable to us as those that would have been obtained with an unrelated person.

Our management agreements were not negotiated on an arm’s length basis and their fee structure may not create proper incentives for RMR LLC, which may increase the risk of an investment in our common shares.

As a result of our relationships with RMR LLC, our management agreements were not negotiated on an arm’s length basis between unrelated parties, and therefore the terms, including the fees payable to RMR LLC, may not be as favorable to us as they would have been if they were negotiated on an arm’s length basis between unrelated parties. Our property management fees are calculated based on rents we receive and construction supervision fees for construction at our properties overseen and managed by RMR LLC, and our base business management fee is calculated based upon the lower of the historical costs of our real estate investments and our market capitalization. These fee arrangements could incentivize RMR LLC to pursue acquisitions, capital transactions, tenancies and construction projects or to avoid disposing of our assets in order to increase or maintain its management fees. If we do not effectively manage our investment, disposition, and capital transactions and leasing, construction and other property management activities, we may pay increased management fees without proportional benefits to us. In addition, we pay RMR LLC substantial base management fees regardless of our financial results. RMR LLC’s entitlement to a base management fee might reduce its incentive to devote its time and effort to seeking investments that provide attractive returns for us.

The termination of our management agreements may require us to pay a substantial termination fee, including in the case of a termination for unsatisfactory performance, which may limit our ability to end our relationship with RMR LLC.

The terms of our management agreements with RMR LLC automatically extend on December 31st of each year so that such terms thereafter end on the 20th anniversary of the date of the extension. We have the right to terminate these agreements: (1) at any time on 60 days’ written notice for convenience, (2) immediately upon written notice for cause, as defined in the agreements, (3) on written notice given within 60 days after the end of any applicable calendar year for a performance reason, as defined in the agreements, and (4) by written notice during the 12 months following a manager change of control, as defined in the agreements. However, if we terminate a management agreement for convenience, or if RMR LLC terminates a management agreement with us for good reason, as defined in such agreement, we are obligated to pay RMR LLC a termination fee in an amount equal to the sum of the present values of the monthly future fees, as defined in the agreement, payable to RMR LLC for the then remaining term, which depending on the time of termination would be between 19 and 20 years. Additionally, if we terminate a management agreement for a performance reason, as defined in the agreement, we are obligated to pay RMR LLC the termination fee calculated as described above, but assuming a remaining term of 10 years. These provisions substantially increase the cost to us of terminating the management agreements without cause, which may limit our ability to end our relationship with

RMR LLC as our manager. The payment of the termination fee could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, including our ability to pay dividends to our shareholders.

Our management arrangements with RMR LLC may discourage a change of control of us.

Our management agreements with RMR LLC have continuing 20 year terms that renew annually. As noted in the preceding risk factor, if we terminate either of these management agreements other than for cause or upon a change of control of our manager, we are obligated to pay RMR LLC a substantial termination fee. For these reasons, our management agreements with RMR LLC may discourage a change of control of us, including a change of control which might result in payment of a premium for our common shares. 

Our business dealings with Five Star comprise a significant part of our business and operations and they may create conflicts of interest or the appearance of such conflicts of interest.

Five Star was originally organized as our subsidiary. We distributed substantially all of our Five Star common shares to our shareholders on December 31, 2001. RMR LLC provides management services to both us and Five Star. Adam Portnoy, our Managing Trustee, as the current sole trustee of ABP Trust, is Five Star’s largest stockholder, controlling, directly or indirectly, in aggregate 36.4% of Five Star’s outstanding common stock. Barry Portnoy served as a managing director of Five Star until his death on February 25, 2018. Five Star is our largest tenant and, as of December 31, 2017, Five Star leased 185 senior living communities from us and also managed 70 of our senior living communities. We recognized total rental income from Five Star of $210.5 million (including percentage rent of $5.5 million) and incurred management fees of $14.1 million with respect to the communities Five Star manages for us for the year ended December 31, 2017.

The historical and continuing relationships which we, RMR LLC and our Managing Trustee have with Five Star could create, or appear to create, conflicts of interest with respect to matters involving us, the other companies to which RMR LLC provides management services and their related parties. As a result of these relationships, our agreements with Five Star were not negotiated on an arm’s length basis between unrelated parties, and therefore the terms may not be as favorable to us as they would have been if they were negotiated on an arm’s length basis between unrelated parties. Conflicts of interest or the appearance of conflicts of interest could have a material adverse impact on our reputation, business and the market price of our common shares and other securities and we may be subject to increased risk of litigation as a result.

We may not realize the expected benefits of our acquisition of an interest in RMR Inc.

On June 5, 2015, we participated in a transaction with RMR Inc., RMR LLC, ABP Trust and three other REITs to which RMR LLC provides management services in which, among other things, we acquired 5,272,787 shares of RMR Inc.’s class A common stock, ABP Trust acquired 2,345,000 of our common shares and we amended our management agreements with RMR LLC and extended them for continuing 20 year terms, or the Up-C Transaction. In December 2015, we distributed 2,635,379 of the shares of RMR Inc.’s class A common stock that we received in the Up-C Transaction pro rata to our shareholders. We believe the Up-C Transaction provided several benefits to us, including an attractive investment in the equity securities of RMR Inc., the further alignment of the interests of RMR LLC and Adam Portnoy with our interests and greater transparency for us and our shareholders into the compensation practices and financial and operating results of RMR LLC. However, our investment in RMR Inc. is subject to various risks, including the highly competitive nature of RMR LLC’s business and the limited public market for RMR Inc.’s securities, among others, which may result in us losing some or all of our investment in RMR Inc. or otherwise not realizing the benefits we expect from the Up-C Transaction. For further information on the Up-C Transaction, see Note 7 to our Consolidated Financial Statements included in Part IV, Item 15 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

The Up-C Transaction and the agreements entered into as part of the Up-C Transaction are among related persons, which increases the risk of allegations of conflicts of interest, and such allegations may impair our ability to realize the benefits we expect from the Up-C Transaction.

Because of the various relationships among us, GOV, RMR Inc., RMR LLC and the other REITs to which RMR LLC provides management services, the Up-C Transaction and the agreements entered into as part of the Up-C Transaction, including the amendment and extension of our management agreements for continuing 20 year terms, are among related persons. The Up-C Transaction and the terms thereof were negotiated and reviewed by a Joint Special Committee comprised solely of our Independent Trustees and the independent trustees of the other REITs to which RMR LLC then provided management services, or the Joint Special Committee, and were separately approved and adopted by our Independent Trustee who did not serve as an independent trustee of any of the other REITs, by a Special Committee of our Board of Trustees, comprised solely of our Independent Trustees, or our Special Committee, and by our Board of Trustees. Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC acted as financial advisor to the Joint Special Committee and Centerview Partners LLC acted as financial advisor to our Special Committee. Nonetheless, because of these various relationships, the Up-C Transaction was not negotiated on an arm’s length basis among unrelated third parties, and therefore

may not be on terms as favorable to us or the other applicable REITs to which RMR LLC provides management services as it would have been if it was negotiated on an arm’s length basis among unrelated parties. As a result of these relationships, we may be subject to increased risk that our shareholders or the shareholders of the other REITs to which RMR LLC provides management services may challenge the Up-C Transaction and the agreements entered into as part of the Up-C Transaction. Any such challenge could result in substantial costs and be a diversion to our management’s attention, could have a material adverse effect on our reputation, business and growth and could adversely affect our ability to realize the benefits we expect from the Up-C Transaction, whether or not the allegations have merit or are substantiated.

We may be at an increased risk for dissident shareholder activities due to perceived conflicts of interest arising from our management structure.

In the past, in particular following periods of volatility in the overall market or declines in the market price of a company’s securities, shareholder litigation, dissident shareholder trustee nominations and dissident shareholder proposals have often been instituted against companies alleging conflicts of interest in business dealings with affiliated and related persons and entities. Our relationships with RMR Inc., RMR LLC, Five Star, AIC, the other businesses and entities to which RMR LLC or its subsidiaries provide management services, Adam Portnoy and other related persons of RMR LLC may precipitate such activities. Certain proxy advisory firms which have significant influence over the voting by shareholders of public companies have, in the past, recommended, and in the future may recommend, that shareholders withhold votes for the election of our incumbent Trustees and vote against our say on pay vote or other management proposals. These recommendations may affect the outcome of our Board elections and impact our governance, which may increase shareholder activism and litigation. These activities, if instituted against us, could result in substantial costs, and diversion of our management’s attention and could have a material adverse impact on our reputation and business.

We may experience losses from our business dealings with AIC.

We, ABP Trust, Five Star and four other companies to which RMR LLC provides management services each own 14.3% of AIC, and we have invested approximately $6.0 million in AIC. We and those other AIC shareholders participate in a combined property insurance program arranged and insured and reinsured in part by AIC and we periodically consider the possibilities for expanding our relationship with AIC to other types of insurance. Our principal reason for investing in AIC and for purchasing insurance in these programs is to seek to improve our financial results by obtaining improved insurance coverages at lower costs than may be otherwise available to us or by participating in any profits which we may realize as an owner of AIC. While we believe we have in the past benefitted from these arrangements, these beneficial financial results may not occur in the future, and we may need to invest additional capital in order to continue to pursue these results. AIC’s business involves the risks typical of an insurance business, including the risk that it may not operate profitably. Accordingly, financial benefits from our business dealings with AIC may not be achieved in the future, and we may experience losses from these dealings.

Risks Related to Our Organization and Structure

Ownership limitations and certain provisions in our declaration of trust, bylaws and contracts, as well as certain provisions of Maryland law, may deter, delay or prevent a change in our control or unsolicited acquisition proposals.

Our declaration of trust prohibits any shareholder other than RMR LLC and its affiliates (as defined under Maryland law) and certain persons who have been exempted by our Board of Trustees from owning, directly and by attribution, more than 9.8% of the number or value of shares (whichever is more restrictive) of any class or series of our outstanding shares of beneficial interest, including our common shares. This provision of our declaration of trust is intended to, among other purposes, assist with our REIT compliance under the IRC and otherwise promote our orderly governance. However, this provision may also inhibit acquisitions of a significant stake in us and may deter, delay or prevent a change in control of us or unsolicited acquisition proposals that a shareholder may consider favorable. Additionally, provisions contained in our declaration of trust and bylaws or under Maryland law may have a similar impact, including, for example, provisions relating to:

In addition, our shareholders agreement with respect to AIC provides that AIC and the other shareholders of AIC may have rights to acquire our interests in AIC in the event that anyone acquires more than 9.8% of our shares or we experience some other change in control. 

Our rights and the rights of our shareholders to take action against our Trustees and officers are limited.

Our declaration of trust limits the liability of our Trustees and officers to us and our shareholders for money damages to the maximum extent permitted under Maryland law. Under current Maryland law, our Trustees and officers will not have any liability to us and our shareholders for money damages other than liability resulting from:

Our declaration of trust and indemnification agreements require us to indemnify any present or former trustee or officer, to the maximum extent permitted by Maryland law, who is made or threatened to be made a party to a proceeding by reason of his or her service in those and certain other capacities. In addition, we may be obligated to pay or reimburse the expenses incurred by our present and former Trustees and officers without requiring a preliminary determination of their ultimate entitlement to indemnification. As a result, we and our shareholders may have more limited rights against our present and former Trustees and officers than might otherwise exist absent the provisions in our declaration of trust and indemnification agreements or that might exist with other companies, which could limit our shareholders’ recourse in the event of actions not in their best interest.  

Disputes with Five Star or RMR LLC and shareholder litigation against us or our Trustees and officers may be referred to binding arbitration proceedings.

Our contracts with Five Star and RMR LLC provide that any dispute arising under those contracts may be referred to binding arbitration proceedings. Similarly, our bylaws provide that certain disputes by our shareholders against us or against our Trustees and officers, other than disputes, or any portion thereof, regarding the meaning, interpretation or validity of any provision of our declaration of trust or bylaws, may be referred to binding arbitration proceedings. As a result, we and our shareholders would not be able to pursue litigation in courts against Five Star, RMR LLC or our Trustees and officers for disputes referred to arbitration in accordance with our bylaws. In addition, the ability to collect attorneys’ fees or other damages may be limited in the arbitration proceedings, which may discourage attorneys from agreeing to represent parties wishing to commence such a proceeding.

Our bylaws designate the Circuit Court for Baltimore City, Maryland as the sole and exclusive forum for certain actions and proceedings that may be initiated by our shareholders, which could limit our shareholders’ ability to obtain a favorable judicial forum for disputes with us or our Trustees, officers, manager, agents or employees.

Our bylaws currently provide that, unless the dispute has been referred to binding arbitration, the Circuit Court for Baltimore City, Maryland will be the sole and exclusive forum for: (1) any derivative action or proceeding brought on our behalf; (2) any action asserting a claim for breach of a duty owed by any Trustee, officer, manager, agent or employee of ours to us or our shareholders; (3) any action asserting a claim against us or any Trustee, officer, manager, agent or employee of ours arising pursuant

to Maryland law, our declaration of trust or bylaws brought by or on behalf of a shareholder; or (4) any action asserting a claim against us or any Trustee, officer, manager, agent or employee of ours that is governed by the internal affairs doctrine. Our bylaws currently also provide that the Circuit Court for Baltimore City, Maryland will be the sole and exclusive forum for any dispute, or portion thereof, regarding the meaning, interpretation or validity of any provision of our declaration of trust or bylaws. Any person or entity purchasing or otherwise acquiring or holding any interest in our shares of beneficial interest shall be deemed to have notice of and to have consented to these provisions of our bylaws, as they may be amended from time to time. These choice of forum provisions may limit a shareholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that the shareholder believes is favorable for disputes with us or our Trustees, officers, manager, agents or employees, which may discourage lawsuits against us and our Trustees, officers, manager or agents. 

We may change our operational, financing and investment policies without shareholder approval and we may become more highly leveraged, which may increase our risk of default under our debt obligations.

Our Board of Trustees determines our operational, financing and investment policies and may amend or revise our policies, including our policies with respect to our intention to qualify for taxation as a REIT, acquisitions, dispositions, growth, operations, indebtedness, capitalization and distributions, or approve transactions that deviate from these policies, without a vote of, or notice to, our shareholders. Policy changes could adversely affect the market price of our common shares and our ability to make distributions to our shareholders. Further, our organizational documents do not limit the amount or percentage of indebtedness, funded or otherwise, that we may incur. Our Board of Trustees may alter or eliminate our current policy on borrowing at any time without shareholder approval. If this policy changes, we could become more highly leveraged, which could result in an increase in our debt service costs. Higher leverage also increases the risk of default on our obligations. In addition, a change in our investment policies, including the manner in which we allocate our resources across our portfolio or the types of assets in which we seek to invest, may increase our exposure to interest rate risk, real estate market fluctuations and liquidity risk.

Our ownership interest in AIC may prevent shareholders from accumulating a large stake in us, from nominating or serving as Trustees, or from taking actions to otherwise control our business.

As an owner of AIC, we are licensed and approved as an insurance holding company; and any shareholder who owns or controls 10% or more of our securities or anyone who wishes to solicit proxies for election of, or to serve as, one of our Trustees or for another proposal of business not approved by our Board of Trustees may be required to receive pre-clearance from the concerned insurance regulators. These pre-approval procedures may discourage or prevent investors from purchasing our securities, from nominating persons to serve as our Trustees or from taking other actions.

Risks Related to Our Taxation

Our failure to remain qualified for taxation as a REIT under the IRC could have significant adverse consequences.

As a REIT, we generally do not pay federal or most state income taxes as long as we distribute all of our REIT taxable income and meet other qualifications set forth in the IRC. However, actual qualification for taxation as a REIT under the IRC depends on our satisfying complex statutory requirements, for which there are only limited judicial and administrative interpretations. We believe that we have been organized and have operated, and will continue to be organized and to operate, in a manner that qualified and will continue to qualify us to be taxed as a REIT under the IRC. However, we cannot be sure that the IRS, upon review or audit, will agree with this conclusion. Furthermore, we cannot be sure that the federal government, or any state or other taxation authority, will continue to afford favorable income tax treatment to REITs and their shareholders.

Maintaining our qualification for taxation as a REIT under the IRC will require us to continue to satisfy tests concerning, among other things, the nature of our assets, the sources of our income and the amounts we distribute to our shareholders. In order to meet these requirements, it may be necessary for us to sell or forgo attractive investments.

If we cease to qualify for taxation as a REIT under the IRC, then our ability to raise capital might be adversely affected, we will be in breach under our revolving credit facility and term loan agreements, we may be subject to material amounts of federal and state income taxes and the market price of our common shares could decline. In addition, if we lose or revoke our qualification for taxation as a REIT under the IRC for a taxable year, we will generally be prevented from requalifying for taxation as a REIT for the next four taxable years.

Distributions to shareholders generally will not qualify for reduced tax rates applicable to “qualified dividends.”

Dividends payable by U.S. corporations to noncorporate shareholders, such as individuals, trusts and estates, are generally eligible for reduced federal income tax rates applicable to “qualified dividends.” Distributions paid by REITs generally are not

treated as “qualified dividends” under the IRC and the reduced rates applicable to such dividends do not generally apply. However, for tax years beginning after 2017 and before 2026, REIT dividends paid to noncorporate shareholders are generally taxed at an effective tax rate lower than applicable ordinary income tax rates due to the availability of a deduction under the IRC for specified forms of income from passthrough entities. More favorable rates will nevertheless continue to apply to regular corporate “qualified” dividends, which may cause some investors to perceive that an investment in a REIT is less attractive than an investment in a non-REIT entity that pays dividends, thereby reducing the demand and market price of our common shares.

REIT distribution requirements could adversely affect our ability to execute our business plan.

We generally must distribute annually at least 90% of our REIT taxable income, subject to specified adjustments and excluding any net capital gain, in order to maintain our qualification for taxation as a REIT under the IRC. To the extent that we satisfy this distribution requirement, federal corporate income tax will not apply to the earnings that we distribute, but if we distribute less than 100% of our REIT taxable income, then we will be subject to federal corporate income tax on our undistributed taxable income. We intend to make distributions to our shareholders to comply with the REIT requirements of the IRC. In addition, we will be subject to a 4% nondeductible excise tax if the actual amount that we pay out to our shareholders in a calendar year is less than a minimum amount specified under federal tax laws.

From time to time, we may generate taxable income greater than our income for financial reporting purposes prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, or GAAP, or differences in timing between the recognition of taxable income and the actual receipt of cash may occur. If we do not have other funds available in these situations, among other things, we may borrow funds on unfavorable terms, sell investments at disadvantageous prices or distribute amounts that would otherwise be invested in future acquisitions in order to make distributions sufficient to enable us to pay out enough of our taxable income to satisfy the REIT distribution requirement and to avoid corporate income tax and the 4% excise tax in a particular year. These alternatives could increase our costs or reduce our shareholders’ equity. Thus, compliance with the REIT distribution requirements may hinder our ability to grow, which could cause the market price of our common shares to decline.

Even if we remain qualified for taxation as a REIT under the IRC, we may face other tax liabilities that reduce our cash flow.

Even if we remain qualified for taxation as a REIT under the IRC, we may be subject to federal, state and local taxes on our income and assets, including taxes on any undistributed income, excise taxes, state or local income, property and transfer taxes, and other taxes. Also, some jurisdictions may in the future limit or eliminate favorable income tax deductions, including the dividends paid deduction, which could increase our income tax expense. In addition, in order to meet the requirements for qualification and taxation as a REIT under the IRC, prevent the recognition of particular types of non-cash income, or avert the imposition of a 100% tax that applies to specified gains derived by a REIT from dealer property or inventory, we may hold or dispose of some of our assets and conduct some of our operations through our TRSs or other subsidiary corporations that will be subject to corporate level income tax at regular rates. In addition, while we intend that our transactions with our TRSs will be conducted on arm’s length bases, we may be subject to a 100% excise tax on a transaction that the IRS or a court determines was not conducted at arm’s length. Any of these taxes would decrease cash available for distribution to our shareholders.

If arrangements involving our TRSs fail to comply as intended with the REIT qualification and taxation rules, we may fail to qualify for taxation as a REIT under the IRC or be subject to significant penalty taxes.

We lease many of our properties to our TRSs pursuant to arrangements that, under the IRC, are intended to qualify the rents we receive from our TRSs as income that satisfies the REIT gross income tests. We also intend that our transactions with our TRSs be conducted on arm’s length bases so that we and our TRSs will not be subject to penalty taxes under the IRC applicable to mispriced transactions. While relief provisions can sometimes excuse REIT gross income test failures, significant penalty taxes may still be imposed.

For our TRS arrangements to comply as intended with the REIT qualification and taxation rules under the IRC, a number of requirements must be satisfied, including:

• our TRSs may not directly or indirectly operate or manage a health care facility, as defined by the IRC;

We cannot be sure that the IRS or a court will agree with our assessment that our TRS arrangements comply as intended with REIT qualification and taxation rules. If arrangements involving our TRSs fail to comply as we intended, we may fail to qualify for taxation as a REIT under the IRC or be subject to significant penalty taxes.

Legislative or other actions affecting REITs could materially and adversely affect us and our shareholders.

The rules dealing with U.S. federal, state, and local taxation are constantly under review by persons involved in the legislative process and by the IRS, the U.S. Department of the Treasury, and other taxation authorities. Changes to the tax laws, with or without retroactive application, could materially and adversely affect us and our shareholders. We cannot predict how changes in the tax laws might affect us or our shareholders. New legislation, Treasury regulations, administrative interpretations or court decisions could significantly and negatively affect our ability to qualify for taxation as a REIT or the tax consequences of such qualification.

In addition, December 2017 legislation has made substantial changes to the IRC. Among those changes are a significant permanent reduction in the generally applicable corporate income tax rate, changes in the taxation of individuals and other noncorporate taxpayers that generally reduce their taxes on a temporary basis subject to “sunset” provisions, the elimination or modification of various deductions (including substantial limitation of the deduction for personal state and local taxes imposed on individuals), and preferential taxation of income derived by individuals from passthrough entities in comparison to earnings received directly by individuals. This legislation also imposes additional limitations on the deduction of net operating losses, which may in the future cause us to make additional distributions that will be taxable to our shareholders to the extent of our current or accumulated earnings and profits in order to comply with the REIT distribution requirements. The effect of these and other changes made in this legislation is highly uncertain, both in terms of their direct effect on the taxation of an investment in our common shares and their indirect effect on the value of properties owned by us. Furthermore, many of the provisions of the new law will require guidance through the issuance of Treasury regulations in order to assess their effect.  There may be a substantial delay before such regulations are promulgated, increasing the uncertainty as to the ultimate effect of the statutory amendments on us or our shareholders. It is also possible that there will be technical corrections legislation proposed with respect to the new law, the effect of which cannot be predicted and may be adverse to us or our shareholders.

Risks Related to Our Securities

Our distributions to our shareholders may decline.

We intend to continue to make regular quarterly distributions to our shareholders. However:

For these reasons, among others, our distribution rate may decline or we may cease making distributions to our shareholders.

Changes in market conditions could adversely affect the value of our securities.

As with other publicly traded equity securities and REIT securities, the value of our common shares and other securities depends on various market conditions that are subject to change from time to time, including:

We believe that one of the factors that investors consider important in deciding whether to buy or sell equity securities of a REIT is the distribution rate, considered as a percentage of the price of the equity securities, relative to market interest rates. Interest rates have been at historically low levels for an extended period of time. There is a general market perception that REIT shares outperform in low interest rate environments and underperform in rising interest rate environments when compared to the broader market. Since December 2016, the U.S. Federal Reserve has raised its benchmark interest rate by one percentage point, and there are some market expectations that market interest rates will rise further in the near to intermediate term. If market interest rates continue to increase, or if there continues to be market expectation of such increases, prospective purchasers of REIT equity securities may want to achieve a higher distribution rate. Thus, higher market interest rates, or the expectation of higher interest rates, could cause the value of our securities to decline.

Further issuances of equity securities may be dilutive to current shareholders.

The interests of our existing shareholders could be diluted if we issue additional equity securities to finance future acquisitions or to repay indebtedness. Our ability to execute our business strategy depends on our access to an appropriate blend of debt financing, which may include secured and unsecured debt, and equity financing, which may include common and preferred shares.

The Notes are structurally subordinated to the payment of all indebtedness and other liabilities and any preferred equity of our subsidiaries.

We are the sole obligor on our outstanding senior unsecured notes, and our outstanding senior unsecured notes and any notes or other debt securities we may issue in the future, or, together with our outstanding senior unsecured notes, the Notes, and such Notes are not, and any Notes we may issue in the future may not be guaranteed by any of our subsidiaries. Our subsidiaries are separate and distinct legal entities and have no obligation, contingent or otherwise, to pay any amounts due on the Notes, or to make any funds available therefor, whether by dividend, distribution, loan or other payments. The rights of holders of Notes to benefit from any of the assets of our subsidiaries are subject to the prior satisfaction of claims of our subsidiaries’ creditors and any preferred equity holders. As a result, the Notes are, and, except to the extent that future Notes are guaranteed by our subsidiaries, will be, structurally subordinated to all of the debt and other liabilities and obligations of our subsidiaries, including guarantees of other indebtedness of ours, payment obligations under lease agreements, trade payables and preferred equity. As of December 31, 2017, our subsidiaries had total indebtedness and other liabilities (excluding security and other deposits and guaranties) of $886.9 million.

The Notes are unsecured and effectively subordinated to all of our existing and future secured indebtedness to the extent of the value of the assets securing such indebtedness.

The outstanding Notes are not secured and any Notes we may issue in the future may not be secured. Upon any distribution to our creditors in a bankruptcy, liquidation, reorganization or similar proceeding relating to us or our property, the holders of our secured debt will be entitled to exercise the remedies available to a secured lender under applicable law and pursuant to the instruments governing such debt and to be paid in full from the assets securing that secured debt before any payment may be made

with respect to Notes that are not secured by those assets. In that event, because such Notes will not be secured by any of our assets, it is possible that there will be no assets from which claims of holders of such Notes can be satisfied or, if any assets remain, that the remaining assets will be insufficient to satisfy those claims in full. If the value of such remaining assets is less than the aggregate outstanding principal amount of such Notes and accrued interest and all future debt ranking equally with such Notes, we will be unable to fully satisfy our obligations under such Notes. In addition, if we fail to meet our payment or other obligations under our secured debt, the holders of that secured debt would be entitled to foreclose on our assets securing that secured debt and liquidate those assets. Accordingly, we may not have sufficient funds to pay amounts due on such Notes. As a result, noteholders may lose a portion or the entire value of their investment in such Notes. Further, the terms of the outstanding Notes permit, and the terms of any Notes we may issue in the future may permit, us to incur additional secured indebtedness subject to compliance with certain debt ratios. The Notes that are not secured will be effectively subordinated to any such additional secured indebtedness. As of December 31, 2017, we had $805.4 million in secured debt, net of unamortized debt issuance costs, premiums and discounts.

There may be no public market for certain of the Notes, and one may not develop, be maintained or be liquid.

We have not applied for listing of certain of the Notes on any securities exchange or for quotation on any automatic dealer quotation system, and we may not do so for Notes issued in the future. We can give no assurances concerning the liquidity of any market that may develop for such Notes, the ability of any holder to sell such Notes or the price at which holders would be able to sell such Notes. If a market for such Notes does not develop, holders may be unable to resell such Notes for an extended period of time, if at all. If a market for such Notes does develop, it may not continue or it may not be sufficiently liquid to allow holders to resell such Notes. Consequently, holders of such Notes may not be able to liquidate their investment readily, and lenders may not readily accept such Notes as collateral for loans.

The Notes may trade at a discount from their initial issue price or principal amount, depending upon many factors, including prevailing interest rates, the ratings assigned by rating agencies, the market for similar securities and other factors, including general economic conditions and our financial condition, performance and prospects. Any decline in market prices, regardless of cause, may adversely affect the liquidity and trading markets for the Notes.

A downgrade in credit ratings could materially adversely affect the market price of the Notes and may increase our cost of capital.

The outstanding Notes are rated by two rating agencies and any Notes we may issue in the future may be rated by one or more rating agencies. These credit ratings are continually reviewed by rating agencies and may change at any time based upon, among other things, our results of operations and financial condition. Negative changes in the ratings assigned to our debt securities could have an adverse effect on the market price of the Notes and our costs and availability of capital, which could in turn have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and our ability to satisfy our debt service obligations.

Redemption may adversely affect noteholders’ return on the Notes.

We have the right to redeem some or all of the outstanding Notes prior to maturity and may have such a right with respect to any Notes we issue in the future. We may redeem such Notes at times when prevailing interest rates may be relatively low compared to the interest rate of such Notes. Accordingly, noteholders may not be able to reinvest the redemption proceeds in a comparable security at an effective interest rate as high as that of the Notes.

Item 1B.  Unresolved Staff Comments.

None.

Item 2.  Properties.

At December 31, 2017 , we had real estate investments in 440 properties ( 466 buildings), excluding properties classified as held for sale. These investments represent gross book value of real estate assets before depreciation and purchase price allocations, less impairment write downs, totaling $8.5 billion at December 31, 2017. At December 31, 2017 , 25 properties ( 26 buildings) with an aggregate cost of $1.3 billion and an aggregate carrying value of $1.1 billion were subject to secured financing and capital lease obligations with an aggregate principal balance of $807.3 million , of which $620.0 million is related to a joint venture in which we own a 55% equity interest.

The following table summarizes certain information about our properties as of December 31, 2017 . All dollar amounts are in thousands: