The following table presents, in each case for the years and as of the dates indicated, our selected consolidated and combined carve-out financial and operating data, which includes, for periods prior to the closing of our initial public offering (“IPO”) on August 12, 2014, selected consolidated and combined carve-out financial and operating data of the Partnership and its subsidiaries that had interests in the PGN FSRU Lampung and the joint ventures that own the GDF Suez Neptune and the GDF Suez Cape Ann . The transfer of these equity interests and related loans and promissory notes by Höegh LNG to the Partnership in connection with the IPO was recorded at Höegh LNG’s consolidated book values.

Pursuant to our partnership agreement, our general partner has irrevocably delegated to our board of directors the power to oversee and direct the operations of, manage and determine the strategies and policies of the Partnership. Four of the seven board members were elected by the common unitholders at our first annual meeting of unitholders. As a result, Höegh LNG, as the owner of our general partner, does not have the power to control our board of directors or the Partnership, and we are not considered to be under the control of Höegh LNG for accounting purposes. As a consequence, we account for acquisitions from Höegh LNG under the purchase method of accounting. An acquisition is included in our consolidated and combined carve-out financial statements from the date of the acquisition and there has been no retroactive restatement of our financial statements to reflect the historical results of the entity acquired.

On October 1, 2015, the Partnership closed the acquisition of 100% of the shares of Höegh FSRU III, the entity that indirectly owns the Höegh Gallant. The results of operations of the Höegh Gallant are included in our results from the acquisition date. 

Two of the vessels in our fleet (the GDF Suez Neptune and the GDF Suez Cape Ann ) are owned by our joint ventures, each of which is owned 50% by us. Under applicable accounting rules, we do not consolidate the financial results of these two joint ventures into our financial results. We account for our 50% equity interests in these two joint ventures as equity method investments in our consolidated and combined carve-out financial statements. We derive cash flows from the operations of these two joint ventures from principal and interest payments on our shareholder loans to our joint ventures.

We have two segments, which are the “Majority held FSRUs” and the “Joint venture FSRUs.” As of December 31, 2015, Majority held FSRUs included the PGN FSRU Lampung and the Höegh Gallant. As of December 31, 2014 and 2013, Majority held FSRUs included the PGN FSRU Lampung and construction contract revenue and expenses of the mooring related to PGN FSRU Lampung (“the Mooring”) under construction. The Mooring project was completed in the fourth quarter of 2014. As of December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012, Joint venture FSRUs included two 50%-owned FSRUs, the GDF Suez Neptune and the GDF Suez Cape Ann . We measure our segment profit based on segment EBITDA. Segment EBITDA is reconciled to net income for each segment in the segment table below. The accounting policies applied to the segments are the same as those applied in the consolidated and combined carve-out financial statements, except that Joint venture FSRUs are presented under the proportional consolidation method for the segment reporting and under the equity method in our consolidated and combined carve-out financial statements. Under the proportional consolidation method, 50% of the Joint venture FSRUs’ revenues, expenses and assets are reflected in the segment reporting. Management monitors the results of operations of our joint ventures under the proportional consolidation method and not the equity method.

You should read the following selected financial and operating data in conjunction with “Item 5. Operating and Financial Review and Prospects” and our consolidated and combined carve-out financial statements and the combined financial statements of the two joint ventures that own the GDF Suez Neptune and the GDF Suez Cape Ann and the related notes thereto included elsewhere in this Annual Report.

Our financial position, results of operations and cash flows could differ from those that would have resulted if we operated autonomously or as an entity independent of Höegh LNG in the periods prior to our IPO for which historical financial and operating data are presented below, and such data may not be indicative of our future operating results or financial performance.

Non-GAAP Financial Measures

Segment EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA . EBITDA is defined as earnings before interest, depreciation and amortization and taxes. Segment EBITDA is defined as earnings before interest, depreciation and amortization, taxes and other financial items. Other financial items consist of gains and losses on derivative instruments and other items, net (including foreign exchange gains and losses and withholding tax on interest expenses). Adjusted EBITDA is defined as earnings before interest, depreciation and amortization, taxes, other financial items, cash collections on direct financing lease investments and amortization in revenues for above market contracts. Cash collections on direct financing lease investments consist of the difference between the payments under the PGN FSRU Lampung time charter and the revenues recognized as a financing lease (representing the repayment of the principal recorded as a receivable). Amortization in revenues for above market contracts consists of the non-cash amortization of the intangible for the above market time charter contract related to the acquisition of the Höegh Gallant . Segment EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA are used as supplemental financial measures by management and external users of financial statements, such as the Partnership's lenders, to assess its financial and operating performance. The Partnership believes that Segment EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA assist its management and investors by increasing the comparability of its performance from period to period and against the performance of other companies in the industry that provide Segment EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA information. This increased comparability is achieved by excluding the potentially disparate effects between periods or companies of interest, other financial items, depreciation and amortization and taxes, which items are affected by various and possibly changing financing methods, capital structure and historical cost basis and which items may significantly affect net income between periods. The Partnership believes that including Segment EBITDA as a financial and operating measure benefits investors in (a) selecting between investing in it and other investment alternatives and (b) monitoring its ongoing financial and operational strength in assessing whether to continue to hold common units. The Partnership believes Adjusted EBITDA benefits investors in comparing its results to other investment alternatives that account for time charters as operating leases rather than financial leases. Segment EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA should not be considered alternatives to net income, operating income, cash flow from operating activities or any other measure of financial performance presented in accordance with US GAAP. Segment EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA exclude some, but not all, items that affect net income, and these measures may vary among other companies. Therefore, Segment EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA as presented below may not be comparable to similarly titled measures of other companies. The following tables reconcile Segment EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA for each of the segments and the Partnership as a whole (combined carve-out reporting) to net income (loss), the comparable US GAAP financial measure, for the periods presented:

Not applicable.

Not applicable.

Some of the following risks relate principally to the industry in which we operate and to our business in general. Other risks relate principally to the securities market and to ownership of our common units. The occurrence of any of the events described in this section could significantly and negatively affect our business, financial condition, operating results or cash available for distribution or the trading price of our common units.

Risks Inherent in Our Business

Our fleet consists of only four vessels. Any limitation on the availability or operation of those vessels could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations and could significantly reduce our ability to make distributions to our unitholders.

Our fleet consists of four vessels. If any of these vessels is unable to generate revenues as a result of off-hire time, early termination of the applicable time charter, purchase of the vessel by the charterer or otherwise, our financial condition and ability to make distributions to unitholders could be materially and adversely affected.

The charters relating to our vessels permit the charterer to terminate the charter in the event that the vessel is off-hire for any extended period. The charters also allow the charterer to terminate the charter upon the occurrence of specified defaults by us or in certain other cases, including termination without cause, due to force majeure or disruptions caused by war. The termination of any of our charters could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations and could significantly reduce our ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders. For further details regarding termination of our charters, please read “Item 4.B. Business Overview—Vessel Time Charters— GDF Suez Neptune Time Charter—Termination,” “Item 4.B. Business Overview—Vessel Time Charters— PGN FSRU Lampung Time Charter—Termination” and “Item 4.B. Business Overview—Vessel Time Charters— Höegh Gallant Time Charter—Termination.” We may be unable to charter the applicable vessel on terms as favorable to us as those of the terminated charter.

We are dependent on GDF Suez, PGN LNG and EgyptCo as the sole customers for our vessels. A deterioration of the financial viability of GDF Suez, PGN LNG or EgyptCo or our relationship with GDF Suez, PGN LNG or EgyptCo or the loss of GDF Suez, PGN LNG or EgyptCo as a customer, would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders.

For the year ended December 31, 2015, PGN LNG and EgyptCo accounted for all of the revenues in our consolidated and combined carve-out income statements and for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, PGN LNG accounted for all of such revenues. For each of the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013, GDF Suez accounted for all of the revenues of our joint ventures from which we derived all of our equity in earnings of joint ventures. A deterioration in the financial viability of GDF Suez, PGN LNG or EgyptCo or the loss of GDF Suez, PGN LNG or EgyptCo as a customer, or a decline in payments under any of the related charters, would have a greater adverse effect on us than for a company with a more diverse customer base, and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders.

We or our joint ventures could lose a customer or the benefits of a charter as a result of a breach by the customer of a charter or other unanticipated developments, such as:

For further details regarding termination of our charters, please read “Item 4.B. Business Overview—Vessel Time Charters— GDF Suez Neptune Time Charter—Termination,” “Item 4.B. Business Overview—Vessel Time Charters— PGN FSRU Lampung Time Charter—Termination” and Item 4.B. Business Overview—Vessel Time Charters— Höegh Gallant Time Charter—Termination.” If any charter is terminated, we or our joint ventures, as applicable, may be unable to re-deploy the related vessel on terms as favorable as the current charters or at all. In addition, any termination fee payable to us may not adequately compensate us for the loss of the charter.

Any event, whether in our industry or otherwise, that adversely affects a customer’s financial condition, leverage, results of operations, cash flows or demand for our services may adversely affect our ability to sustain or increase cash distributions to our unitholders. Accordingly, we are indirectly subject to the business risks of our customers, including their level of indebtedness and the economic conditions and government policies in their areas of operation.

The ability of each of our customers to perform its obligations under its applicable charter depends on its future financial condition and economic performance, which, in turn, will depend on prevailing economic conditions and financial, business and other factors, many of which are beyond its control.

Due to our lack of diversification, adverse developments in our LNG transportation, storage and regasification businesses could reduce our ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders.

We rely exclusively on the cash flows generated from our FSRUs. Due to our lack of diversification, an adverse development in the LNG transportation, storage and regasification industry could have a significantly greater impact on our financial condition and results of operations than if we maintained more diverse assets or lines of businesses.

We may not have sufficient cash from operations following the establishment of cash reserves and payment of fees and expenses to enable us to pay the minimum quarterly distribution on our common units.

We may not have sufficient cash from operations to pay the minimum quarterly distribution of $0.3375 per unit on our common units. The amount of cash we can distribute on our units principally depends upon the amount of cash we generate from our operations. We generate cash from our operations and through distributions from our joint ventures, and as such our cash from operations are dependent on our operations and the cash distributions and operations of our joint ventures, each of which may fluctuate based on the risks described in this section, including, among other things:

In addition, the actual amount of cash we will have available for distribution will depend on other factors, including:

In addition, each quarter we are required by our partnership agreement to deduct estimated maintenance and replacement capital expenditures from operating surplus, which may result in less cash available to unitholders than if actual maintenance and replacement capital expenditures were deducted. Our ability to pay distributions will also be limited to the extent that we have sufficient cash after establishment of cash reserves and payments to our general partner.

The amount of cash we generate from our operations and the cash distributions received from our joint ventures may differ materially from our or their profit or loss for the period, which will be affected by non-cash items. As a result of this and the other factors mentioned above, we may make cash distributions during periods when we record losses and may not make cash distributions during periods when we record net income.

Our ability to grow and to meet our financial needs may be adversely affected by our cash distribution policy.

Our cash distribution policy, which is consistent with our partnership agreement, requires us to distribute all of our available cash (as defined in our partnership agreement) each quarter. Accordingly, our growth may not be as fast as businesses that reinvest their available cash to expand ongoing operations.

In determining the amount of cash available for distribution, our board of directors approves the amount of cash reserves to set aside, including reserves for future maintenance and replacement capital expenditures, working capital and other matters. We may also rely upon external financing sources, including commercial borrowings, to fund our capital expenditures. Accordingly, to the extent we do not have sufficient cash reserves or are unable to obtain financing, our cash distribution policy may significantly impair our ability to meet our financial needs or to grow.

We are a holding entity that has historically derived a significant amount of our income from equity interests in our joint ventures. Neither we nor our joint venture partners exercise affirmative control over our joint ventures. Accordingly, we cannot require our joint ventures to act in our best interests. Furthermore, our joint venture partners may prevent our joint ventures from taking action that may otherwise be beneficial to us, including making cash distributions to us. A deadlock between us and our joint venture partners could result in our exchanging equity interests in one of our joint ventures for the equity interests in our other joint venture held by our joint venture counterparties or in us or our joint venture partner selling shares in a joint venture to a third party.

We are a holding entity and conduct our operations and businesses through subsidiaries. We have historically derived a significant amount of our income from our 50% equity interests in our joint ventures that own the GDF Suez Neptune and the GDF Suez Cape Ann . Please read “Item 4.B. Business Overview—Shareholder Agreements” for a description of the shareholders’ agreement governing our joint ventures. Our ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders will depend on the performance of our joint ventures, subsidiaries and other investments. If our joint venture partners do not approve cash distributions or if they are not sufficient, we will not be able to make cash distributions unless we obtain funds from other sources. We may not be able to obtain the necessary funds from other sources on terms acceptable to us. The approval of a majority of the members of the board of directors is required to consent to any proposed action by such joint ventures and, as a result, we will be unable to cause our joint venture to act in our best interests over the objection of our joint venture partners or make cash distributions to us. Our inability to require our joint ventures to act in our best interests may cause us to fail to realize expected benefits from our equity interests and could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders.

Our joint venture partners for our joint ventures that own the GDF Suez Neptune and the GDF Suez Cape Ann are Mitsui O.S.K. Lines, Ltd (“MOL”) and Tokyo LNG Tanker Co., Ltd (“TLT”), whom we refer to in this Annual Report as our joint venture partners. These entities together exercise one half of the voting power on the board of directors of each joint venture. As such, our joint venture partners may prevent our joint ventures from making cash distributions to us or may act in a manner that would otherwise not be in our best interests.

If the directors nominated by us and our joint venture partner are unable to reach agreement on any decision or action, then the issue will be resolved in accordance with the procedures set forth in the shareholders’ agreement. After the board of directors has met a second time to consider the decision or action, if the deadlock persists, one or more of our senior executives will meet with their counterpart(s) from our joint venture partners. Should, after no more than 60 days, these efforts be unsuccessful and we and our joint venture partners, on a combined basis, each own 50% of the shares in each joint venture or, when the shareholdings in each joint venture are aggregated by party, we and our joint venture partners, on a combined basis, each own 50% of the aggregate shares, we and our joint venture partners will attempt to agree within 30 days that our shareholdings be exchanged so that we own 100% of one joint venture and our joint venture partners own 100% of the other joint venture. If, however, the shareholdings are not as described in the previous sentence or we and our joint venture partners cannot agree within the specified time, we or our joint venture partners may sell our shares, including to a third party, in accordance with the procedures set forth in the shareholders’ agreement. If any of these forms of resolution were to occur, the diversity of our fleet would be reduced, and our business, financial condition, results of operations and ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders may be adversely affected.

We must make substantial capital expenditures to maintain and replace the operating capacity of our fleet, which will reduce our cash available for distribution. In addition, each quarter we will be required, pursuant to our partnership agreement, to deduct estimated maintenance and replacement capital expenditures from operating surplus, which may result in less cash available to unitholders than if actual maintenance and replacement capital expenditures were deducted.

We must make substantial capital expenditures to maintain and replace, over the long-term, the operating capacity of our fleet. Maintenance and replacement capital expenditures include capital expenditures associated with drydocking a vessel, including costs for inspection, maintenance and repair, modifying an existing vessel, acquiring a new vessel or otherwise replacing current vessels at the end of their useful lives to the extent these expenditures are incurred to maintain or replace the operating capacity of our fleet. These expenditures could vary significantly from quarter to quarter and could increase as a result of changes in:

Our partnership agreement requires our board of directors to deduct estimated maintenance and replacement capital expenditures, instead of actual maintenance and replacement capital expenditures, from operating surplus each quarter in an effort to reduce fluctuations in operating surplus as a result of significant variations in actual maintenance and replacement capital expenditures each quarter. The amount of estimated maintenance and replacement capital expenditures deducted from operating surplus is subject to review and change by our board of directors at least once a year (with the approval of the conflicts committee of our board of directors). In years when estimated maintenance and replacement capital expenditures are higher than actual maintenance and replacement capital expenditures, the amount of cash available for distribution to unitholders will be lower than if actual maintenance and replacement capital expenditures were deducted from operating surplus. If our board of directors underestimates the appropriate level of estimated maintenance and replacement capital expenditures, we may have less cash available for distribution in periods when actual capital expenditures exceed our previous estimates. Refer to “Item 8.A. Consolidated Statements and Other Financial Information—The Partnership’s Cash Distribution Policy—Estimated Maintenance and Replacement Capital Expenditures” for a description of our estimated annual maintenance and replacement capital expenditures.

The required drydocking of our vessels could be more expensive and time consuming than we anticipate, which could adversely affect our cash available for distribution.

The drydocking of our vessels could require us to expend capital if the vessels are drydocked for longer than the allowable period under the time charters. Although each of our time charters, except for the Höegh Gallant time charter, requires the charterer to pay the hire rate for up to a specified number of days of scheduled drydocking and reimburse us for anticipated drydocking costs, any significant increase in the number of days of drydocking beyond the specified number of days during which the hire rate remains payable could have a material adverse effect on our ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders. A significant increase in the cost of repairs during drydocking could also adversely affect our cash available for distribution. We may underestimate the time required to drydock any of our vessels or unanticipated problems may arise. If more than one of our vessels is required to be out of service at the same time, if a vessel is drydocked longer than the permitted duration or if the cost of repairs during drydocking is greater than budgeted, our cash available for distribution could be adversely affected.

We may experience operational problems with vessels that could reduce revenue, increase costs or lead to termination of our time charters.

FSRUs are complex and their operations are technically challenging. The operations of our vessels may be subject to mechanical risks. Operational problems may lead to loss of revenue or higher than anticipated operating expenses or require additional capital expenditures. Moreover, pursuant to each time charter, the vessels in our fleet must maintain certain specified performance standards. Please read “Item 4.B. Business Overview—Vessel Time Charters”. If we fail to maintain these standards, we may be liable to our customers for damages and, in certain circumstances, our customers may terminate their respective time charters. Any of these results could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders.

If capital expenditures are financed through cash from operations or by issuing debt or equity securities, our ability to make cash distributions may be diminished, our financial leverage could increase or our unitholders may be diluted.

Use of cash from operations to expand our fleet will reduce cash available for distribution to unitholders. Our ability to obtain bank financing or to access the capital markets may be limited by our financial condition at the time of any such financing or offering as well as by adverse market conditions resulting from, among other things, general economic conditions, changes in the LNG industry and contingencies and uncertainties that are beyond our control. Our failure to obtain the funds for future capital expenditures could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders. Even if we are successful in obtaining necessary funds, the terms of any debt financings could limit our ability to pay cash distributions to unitholders. In addition, incurring additional debt may significantly increase our interest expense and financial leverage, and issuing additional equity securities may result in significant unitholder dilution and would increase the aggregate amount of cash required to pay the minimum quarterly distribution to unitholders, which could have a material adverse effect on our ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders.

We may be unable to make or realize expected benefits from acquisitions, which could have an adverse effect on our expected plans for growth.

Our growth strategy includes selectively acquiring FSRUs, LNG carriers and other LNG infrastructure assets that are operating under long-term charters with stable cash flows. Any acquisition of a vessel or business may not be profitable to us at or after the time we acquire such vessel or business and may not generate cash flows sufficient to justify our investment. In addition, our acquisition growth strategy exposes us to risks that may harm our business, financial condition and results of operations, including risks that we may:

Fluctuations in overall LNG supply and demand growth could adversely affect our ability to secure future long-term charters.

Demand for LNG depends on a number of factors, including economic growth, the cost effectiveness of LNG compared to alternative fuels, environmental policy and the perceived need to diversify fuel mix for energy security reasons. The cost effectiveness of LNG compared to alternative fuels is also dependent on supply. A change in any of the factors influencing LNG demand, or an imbalance between supply and demand, could adversely affect the need for LNG infrastructure and our ability to secure additional long-term charters.

Our future performance and growth depend on continued growth in demand for the services we provide.

Our growth strategy focuses on expansion in the floating storage and regasification sector and the maritime transportation sector, each within the LNG transportation, storage and regasification industry. The rate of LNG growth has fluctuated due to several reasons, including the global economic crisis and the continued increase in natural gas production from unconventional sources, including hydraulic fracturing, in regions such as North America and the highly complex and capital intensive nature of new or expanded LNG projects. Accordingly, our growth depends on continued growth in world and regional demand for LNG, FSRUs, LNG carriers and other LNG infrastructure assets, which could be negatively affected by a number of factors, including:

Reduced demand for LNG, FSRUs or LNG carriers would have a material adverse effect on our future growth and could harm our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Growth of the LNG market may be limited by many factors, including infrastructure constraints and community and political group resistance to new LNG infrastructure over concerns about environmental, safety and terrorism.

A complete LNG project includes production, liquefaction, regasification, storage and distribution facilities and FSRUs or LNG carriers. Existing LNG projects and infrastructure are limited, and new or expanded LNG projects are highly complex and capital intensive, with new projects often costing several billion dollars. Many factors could negatively affect continued development of LNG infrastructure and related alternatives, including floating storage and regasification, or disrupt the supply of LNG, including:

We expect that, in the event any of the factors discussed above negatively affect us, some of the proposals to expand existing or develop new LNG liquefaction and regasification facilities may be abandoned or significantly delayed. If the LNG supply chain is disrupted or does not continue to grow, or if a significant explosion, spill or similar incident occurs within the LNG transportation, storage and regasification industry, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders.

Demand for FSRUs or LNG shipping could be significantly affected by volatile natural gas prices and the overall demand for natural gas.

LNG prices are volatile and affected by numerous factors beyond our control, including, but not limited to, the following:

In 2015, global crude oil prices were volatile and declined significantly. LNG prices also declined significantly – in part because of pricing links with crude oil and in part because of the increasing availability of spot cargos. Changes in demand for natural gas and the competitiveness of LNG between geographic regions impacted demand. Although utilization of FSRUs generally increased because of the availability of LNG at attractive prices, the utilization of LNG carriers decreased after the arrival of new capacity coincided with delays to LNG projects and the decline of arbitrage opportunities between geographic regions. The weak LNG shipping market could impact FSRUs given that FSRUs not operating in regasification mode are typically deployed as LNG carriers.

The weakness in the LNG market may adversely affect our future business, results of operations and financial condition and our ability to make cash distributions, as a result of, among other things:

In general, reduced demand for LNG, FSRUs or LNG carriers would have a material adverse effect on our future growth and could harm our business, results of operations and financial condition.

PGN LNG has the option to purchase the PGN FSRU Lampung beginning in June 2018. If PGN LNG exercises this option, it could have a material adverse effect on our operating cash flows and our ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders.

PGN LNG has the option to purchase the PGN FSRU Lampung beginning in June 2018, at a price specified in the time charter. Any compensation we receive for the purchase of the PGN FSRU Lampung may not adequately compensate us for the loss of the vessel and related time charter. If PGN LNG exercises this option, it would significantly reduce the size of our fleet, and we may be unable to identify or acquire suitable replacement vessel(s) with the proceeds of the option exercise because, among other things that are beyond our control, there may be no replacement vessel(s) that are readily available for purchase at a price that is equal to or less than the proceeds from the option exercise and on terms acceptable to us. Even if we find suitable replacement vessel(s), the hire rate(s) of such vessel(s) may be significantly lower than the hire rate under the current PGN FSRU Lampung time charter. Our inability to find suitable replacement vessel(s) or the chartering of replacement vessel(s) at lower hire rate(s) would have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, cash flows and ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders. Please read “Item 4.B. Business Overview—Vessel Time Charters— PGN FSRU Lampung Time Charter—Termination.”

The debt levels of us and our joint ventures may limit our and their flexibility in obtaining additional financing, refinancing credit facilities upon maturity or pursuing other business opportunities or our paying distributions to you.

As of December 31, 2015 we had total debt of $362.8 million and our joint ventures’ debt was $499.2 million, of which 50% is our share. In addition, we have the ability to incur additional debt, and we will have the ability to borrow an additional $85 million under our sponsor credit facility, subject to certain limitations. If we acquire additional vessels or businesses, our consolidated debt may significantly increase. We may incur additional debt under this or future credit facilities. Our joint ventures’ credit facilities will mature in 2022 and require an aggregate principal repayment of approximately $330 million, of which 50% is our share. A portion of the credit facility secured by the PGN FSRU Lampung will mature in 2021 and require that an aggregate principal amount of $16.5 million be refinanced. If such principal repayment is not refinanced, the export credit tranche of the PGN FSRU Lampung financing that will have an outstanding balance of $68.2 million at this time may be accelerated together with the attendant hedges. A portion of the credit facility secured by the Höegh Gallant will mature in 2019 and require that an aggregate principal amount of $106.5 million be refinanced. If such principal repayment is not refinanced, the export credit tranche of the Höegh Gallant financing that will have an outstanding balance of $26.6 million at this time may be accelerated. Please read “Item 5.B. Liquidity and Capital Resources—Borrowing Activities—Long-term Debt—Lampung Facility” and “Item 5.B. Liquidity and Capital Resources—Borrowing Activities—Long-term Debt—Gallant/Grace Facility.”

Our level of debt could have important consequences to us, including the following:

Our ability to service or refinance our debt will depend on, among other things, our future financial and operating performance, which will be affected by prevailing economic conditions and financial, business, regulatory and other factors, some of which are beyond our control. If our operating results are not sufficient to service or refinance our current or future indebtedness, we will be forced to take actions such as reducing distributions, reducing or delaying our business activities, acquisitions, investments or capital expenditures, selling assets, restructuring our debt, or seeking additional equity capital or bankruptcy protection. We may not be able to effect any of these remedies on satisfactory terms, or at all.

We have a revolving credit facility with Höegh LNG to provide us with liquidity, and as a result we will be exposed to the credit risk of Höegh LNG.

Upon consummation of the IPO, we entered into a three-year, $85 million revolving credit facility with Höegh LNG as our lender to be used to fund our general partnership purposes, including working capital and distributions. This revolving credit facility provides our primary source of liquidity other than our cash from operations distributed to us by our subsidiaries and joint ventures and payments made to us under our shareholder loans. Höegh LNG’s ability to make loans under the revolving credit facility may be affected by events beyond our and their control, including prevailing economic, financial and industry conditions. If market or other economic conditions deteriorate, our and their ability to comply with the terms of the revolving credit facility may be impaired. If we request a borrowing under the revolving credit facility, Höegh LNG may not have, or be able to obtain, sufficient funds to make loans under the revolving credit facility. In the event that Höegh LNG is unable to make loans to us pursuant to the revolving credit facility, or a default or other circumstance prohibits us from borrowing loans thereunder our financial condition, results of operations and ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders could be materially adversely affected.

The financing arrangements of us and our joint ventures are secured by our vessels and contain operating and financial restrictions and other covenants that may restrict our business and financing activities as well as our ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders.

The operating and financial restrictions and covenants in the financing arrangements of us and our joint ventures, including lease agreements and any future financing agreements, could adversely affect our and their ability to finance future operations or capital needs or to engage, expand or pursue our business activities. For example, the financing agreements may restrict the ability of us and our subsidiaries to:

In addition, our financing agreements require us and Höegh LNG to comply with certain financial ratios and tests, including maintaining a minimum liquidity, a minimum EBITDA to debt service ratio and a minimum book equity ratio and, with respect to the Lampung facility, ensuring that available cash flows exceeds interest and principal payable for a nine-month test period. Please read “Item 5.B. Liquidity and Capital Resources—Borrowing Activities—Long-term Debt—Lampung Facility” and “Item 5.B. Liquidity and Capital Resources—Borrowing Activities—Long-term Debt—Gallant/Grace Facility.”

Our joint ventures,’ Höegh LNG’s and our ability to comply with covenants and restrictions contained in financing arrangements may be affected by events beyond our control, including prevailing economic, financial and industry conditions. If market or other economic conditions deteriorate, our and their ability to comply with these covenants may be impaired. If restrictions, covenants, ratios or tests in debt instruments are breached, a significant portion of the obligations may become immediately due and payable, and the lenders’ commitment to make further loans may terminate. We and/or our joint ventures or Höegh LNG may not have, or be able to obtain, sufficient funds to make these accelerated payments. In addition, obligations under our and our joint ventures’ financing arrangements are secured by our vessels and, in some cases, guaranteed by us or Höegh LNG, and if we or they, as applicable, are unable to repay debt under our financing arrangements, the lenders could seek to foreclose on those assets. Please read “Item 5.B. Liquidity and Capital Resources.”

Restrictions in our debt agreements and local laws may prevent us from paying distributions.

The payment of principal and interest on our debt will reduce our cash available for distribution. Our and our joint ventures’ financing arrangements prohibit the payment of distributions upon the occurrence of certain events, including, but not limited to:

Furthermore, our financing arrangements require that we maintain minimum amounts of free liquid assets and our subsidiaries and joint ventures to hold cash reserves that are, in certain cases, held for specifically designated uses, including working capital, operations and maintenance and debt service reserves, and are generally subject to “waterfall” provisions that allocate project revenues to specified priorities of use (such as operating expenses, scheduled debt service, targeted debt service reserves and any other reserves) and the remaining cash is distributable to us only on certain dates and subject to satisfaction of certain conditions, including meeting a 1.20 historical and in some cases, projected, debt service coverage ratio. In addition, the laws governing our joint ventures and subsidiaries may prevent us from making dividend distributions. Our joint ventures are subject to restrictions under the laws of the Cayman Islands and may only pay distributions out of profits or capital reserves if the joint venture entity is solvent after the distribution Höegh Lampung is subject to Singapore laws and may make dividend distributions only out of profits. Dividends may only be paid by PT Höegh if its retained earnings are positive under Indonesian law. As of December 31, 2015 and 2014, PT Höegh had negative retained earnings and therefore cannot make dividend payments to us under Indonesia law. However, subject to meeting a debt service ratio of 1.20 to 1.00, PT Höegh can distribute cash from its cash flow from operations to us as payment of intercompany accrued interest and / or intercompany debt, after quarterly payments of the Lampung facility and fulfilment of the “waterfall” provisions to meet operating requirements as defined by the Lampung facility. Under Cayman Islands law, FSRU III may only pay distributions out of profits or capital reserves if the entity is solvent after the distribution. Dividends from Höegh Cyprus may only be distributed (i) out of profits and not from the share capital of the company and (ii) if after the dividend payment, Höegh Cyprus would remain in compliance with the financial covenants under the Gallant/Grace facility. Please read “Item 8.A. Consolidated Statements and Other Financial Information—The Partnership’s Cash Distribution Policy—Limitations on Cash Distributions and Our Ability to Change Our Cash Distribution Policy.”

Höegh LNG’s failure to comply with certain obligations under the Lampung and Gallant/Grace facilities, and certain other events occurring at Höegh LNG, could result in cross-defaults or defaults under the Lampung or Gallant credit facilities, which could have a material adverse effect on us.

Höegh LNG guarantees the obligations of (i) PT Höegh, a company incorporated under the laws of the Republic of Indonesia and the owner of the PGN FSRU Lampung , under the Lampung facility, and (ii) Höegh Cyprus, a company incorporated under the laws of Cyprus and the owner of the Höegh Gallant , under the Gallant/Grace facility (each such facility as described in “Item 5.B. Liquidity and Capital Resources—Borrowing Activities—Long-term Debt”). Pursuant to the terms of the Lampung and the Gallant/Grace facilities, Höegh LNG must, among other things, maintain minimum book equity and comply with certain minimum liquidity financial covenants. Failure by Höegh LNG to satisfy any of the covenants applicable to Höegh LNG would result in a default under the Lampung and Gallant/Grace facilities. The Gallant/Grace facility is secured by, among other things, a first priority mortgage of the Höegh Gallant and the Höegh Grace , an FSRU owned by Höegh LNG . The tranches covering the Höegh Gallant and the Höegh Grace are cross-defaulted, cross-collateralized (except that the banks cannot enforce any of their rights to the security provided by Höegh Cyprus, Höegh FSRU III, the Partnership or EgyptCo unless an event of default occurs directly and expressly with respect to the Partnership, its subsidiaries or EgyptCo and its direct shareholders), and cross-guaranteed (except that the Partnership does not guarantee the obligations of Höegh LNG FSRU IV Ltd. (“Höegh FSRU IV”), the owner of the Höegh Grace ). However, Höegh Cyprus is jointly and severally liable with Höegh FSRU IV under the Gallant/Grace facility, which includes the financing of the Höegh Grace. Furthermore, among other things, a default by Höegh LNG or Höegh FSRU IV on its indebtedness or the occurrence of certain other adverse events at Höegh LNG or Höegh FSRU IV may cause a default under the Lampung and the Gallant/Grace facilities. Any one of these events could result in the acceleration of the maturity of the Lampung and the Gallant/Grace facilities. The lenders of the Lampung facility may foreclose upon any collateral securing that debt, including arrest and seizure of the PGN FSRU Lampung , even if Höegh LNG were to subsequently cure its default. The lenders of the Gallant/Grace facility cannot enforce any of their rights to the security provided by Höegh Cyprus, including the seizure of the Höegh Gallant , Höegh FSRU III, the Partnership or EgyptCo unless an event of default occurs directly and expressly with respect to the Partnership, its subsidiaries or EgyptCo and its direct shareholders. In the event of such acceleration and foreclosure, PT Höegh or Höegh Cyprus, as the case may be, might not have sufficient funds or other assets to satisfy all of their obligations under the related credit facility, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition and would significantly reduce our ability, or make us unable, to make cash distributions to our unitholders for so long as such default is continuing. Please read “Item 5.B. Liquidity and Capital Resources—Borrowing Activities—Long-term Debt—Lampung Facility” and “Item 5.B. Liquidity and Capital Resources—Borrowing Activities—Long-term Debt— Gallant/Grace Facility.”

Our growth depends on our ability to expand relationships with existing customers and obtain new customers, for which we will face substantial competition.

One of our principal objectives is to enter into additional long-term time charters for FSRUs, LNG carriers and other LNG infrastructure assets. The process of obtaining long-term charters for FSRUs, LNG carriers and other LNG infrastructure assets is competitive and generally involves an intensive screening process and competitive bids, and often extends for several months. We believe FSRU and LNG carrier time charters are awarded based upon a variety of factors relating to the vessel operator, including:

We expect substantial competition for providing floating storage and regasification services and marine transportation services for potential LNG projects from a number of experienced companies, including state-sponsored entities and major energy companies. Many of these competitors have significantly greater financial resources and larger fleets than do we or Höegh LNG. We anticipate that an increasing number of marine transportation companies—including many with strong reputations and extensive resources and experience—will enter the FSRU or LNG carrier markets. This increased competition may cause greater price competition for time charters. As a result of these factors, we may be unable to expand our relationships with existing customers or to obtain new customers on a profitable basis, if at all, which would have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders.

We may have more difficulty entering into long-term time charters in the future if an active short-term market for FSRUs develops.

One of our principal strategies is to enter into additional FSRU and LNG carrier time charters of five or more years. If a market for short-term time charters for FSRUs develops, we may have increased difficulty entering into long-term time charters upon expiration or early termination of the time charters for the FSRUs in our fleet or for any vessels that we acquire in the future. As a result, our cash flows may be less stable.

In the LNG carrier market, awards of LNG carrier time charters have historically been for five or more years, though the use of spot voyages and short-term time charters has grown in the past few years. This may impact our ability to identify attractive acquisition candidates in the LNG carrier market.

We may not be able to redeploy our FSRUs on terms as favorable as our or our joint venture’s current FSRU time charters or at all.

Due to the limitations on demand for FSRUs, in the event that any of the time charters on our vessels are terminated, we may be unable to recharter such vessel as an FSRU. While we may be able to employ such vessel as a traditional LNG carrier, the hire rates and/or other charter terms may not be as favorable to us as those in the existing time charter. If we acquire additional FSRUs and they are not, as a result of time charter termination or otherwise, subject to a long-term, profitable time charter, we may be required to bid for projects at unattractive rates in order to reduce our losses relating to the vessels.

An increase in the global supply or aggregate capacities of FSRUs or LNG carriers, including conversion of existing tonnage, without a commensurate increase in demand may have an adverse effect on hire rates and the values of our vessels, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders.

The supply of FSRUs, LNG carriers and other LNG infrastructure assets in the industry is affected by, among other things, assessments of the demand for these vessels by charterers. Any over-estimation of demand for vessels may result in an excess supply of new vessels. This may, in the long term when existing contracts expire, result in lower hire rates and depress the values of our vessels. If hire rates are lower when we are seeking new time charters upon expiration or early termination of our current time charters, or for any new vessels we acquire beyond our contracted newbuildings, our business, financial condition, results of operations and ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders may be adversely affected.

During periods of high utilization and high hire rates, industry participants may increase the supply of FSRUs and/or LNG carriers by ordering the construction of new vessels. This may result in an over-supply and may cause a subsequent decline in utilization and hire rates when the vessels enter the market. Lower utilization and hire rates could adversely affect revenues and profitability. Prolonged periods of low utilization and hire rates could also result in the recognition of impairment charges on our vessels if future cash flow estimates, based upon information available at the time, indicate that the carrying value of these vessels may not be recoverable. Such impairment charges may cause lenders to accelerate loan payments under our or our joint ventures’ financing agreements, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders.

Hire rates for FSRUs are not readily available and may fluctuate substantially. If rates are lower when we are seeking a new charter, our earnings and ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders may decline.

Hire rates for FSRUs are not readily available and may fluctuate over time as a result of changes in the supply demand balance relating to current and future FSRU and capacity. This supply demand relationship largely depends on a number of factors outside our control. The LNG market is closely connected to world natural gas prices and energy markets, which we cannot predict. A substantial or extended decline in natural gas prices could adversely affect our ability to recharter our vessels at acceptable rates or to acquire and profitably operate new FSRUs. Our ability from time to time to charter or re-charter any vessel at attractive rates will depend on, among other things, the prevailing economic conditions in the LNG industry. Hire rates for newbuilding FSRUs are correlated with the price of FSRU newbuildings. Hire rates at a time when we may be seeking a new charter may be lower than the hire rates at which our vessels are currently chartered. If rates are lower when we are seeking a new charter, our earnings and ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders may decline.

Vessel values may fluctuate substantially, and a decline in vessel values may result in impairment charges, the breach of our financial covenants or, if these values are lower at a time when we are attempting to dispose of vessels, a loss on the sale.

Vessel values for FSRUs and LNG carriers can fluctuate substantially over time due to a number of different factors, including:

As our vessels age, the expenses associated with maintaining and operating them are expected to increase, which could have an adverse effect on our business and operations if we do not maintain sufficient cash reserves for maintenance and replacement capital expenditures. Moreover, the cost of a replacement vessel would be significant.

If a charter terminates, we may be unable to re-deploy the affected vessel at attractive rates and, rather than continue to incur costs to maintain and finance her, we may seek to dispose of her. Our inability to dispose of a vessel at a reasonable value could result in a loss on her sale and adversely affect our ability to purchase a replacement vessel, financial condition, results of operations and ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders. A decline in the value of our vessels may also result in impairment charges or the breach of certain of the ratios and financial covenants we are required to comply with in our credit facilities.

We depend on Höegh LNG and its affiliates for the management of our fleet and to assist us in operating and expanding our business.

Our ability to enter into new charters and expand our customer relationships will depend largely on our ability to leverage our relationship with Höegh LNG and its reputation and relationships in the shipping industry. If Höegh LNG suffers material damage to its reputation or relationships, it may harm our ability to:

In addition, all our vessels are subject to management agreements with affiliates of Höegh LNG. The Höegh Gallant , GDF Suez Neptune and the GDF Suez Cape Ann are subject to ship management agreements with Höegh LNG Management and commercial and administration management agreements with Höegh Norway, and the PGN FSRU Lampung is subject to a technical information and services agreement with Höegh Norway, a master spare parts supply agreement with Höegh Asia and a master maintenance agreement with Höegh Shipping. Pursuant to a secondment agreement, Höegh Maritime Management provides crew to the Höegh Gallant . In addition, pursuant to an administrative services agreement among us, our operating company and Höegh UK and an administrative services agreement between our operating company and Leif Höegh UK, Höegh UK and Leif Höegh UK provide us and our operating company with certain administrative, financial and other support services. Höegh UK subcontracts some of these services to Höegh Norway and Leif Höegh UK pursuant to separate administrative services agreements. Our operational success and ability to execute our growth strategy will depend significantly upon the satisfactory performance of these services. Our business will be harmed if our service providers fail to perform these services satisfactorily, if they cancel their agreements with us or if they stop providing these services to us. Please read “Item 7.B. Related Party Transactions.”

The operation of FSRUs, LNG carriers and other LNG infrastructure assets is inherently risky, and an incident involving significant loss of life or property or environmental consequences involving any of our vessels could harm our reputation, business and financial condition.

Our vessels and their cargoes are at risk of being damaged or lost because of events such as:

An accident involving any of our vessels could result in any of the following:

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

If our vessels suffer damage, they may need to be repaired. The costs of vessel repairs are unpredictable and can be substantial. We may have to pay repair costs that our insurance policies do not cover, for example, due to insufficient coverage amounts or the refusal by our insurance provider to pay a claim. The loss of earnings while these vessels are being repaired, as well as the actual cost of these repairs not otherwise covered by insurance, would decrease our results of operations. If any of our vessels are involved in an accident with the potential risk of environmental consequences, the resulting media coverage could have a material adverse effect on our business, our results of operations and cash flows, weaken our financial condition and negatively affect our ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders.

Our insurance may be insufficient to cover losses that may occur to our property or result from our operations.

The operating of FSRUs, LNG carriers and other LNG infrastructure assets is inherently risky. Although we carry protection and indemnity insurance consistent with industry standards, all of the risks associated with operating FSRUs, LNG carriers and other LNG infrastructure assets may not be adequately insured against, and any particular claim may not be paid. Any claims covered by insurance would be subject to deductibles, and since it is possible that a large number of claims may be brought, the aggregate amount of these deductibles could be material. Certain of our insurance coverage is maintained through mutual protection and indemnity associations, and as a member of such associations we may be required to make additional payments over and above budgeted premiums if member claims exceed association reserves.

We may be unable to procure adequate insurance coverage at commercially reasonable rates in the future. For example, more stringent environmental regulations have led in the past to increased costs for, and in the future may result in the lack of availability of, insurance against risks of environmental damage or pollution. A marine disaster could exceed our insurance coverage, which could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders. Any uninsured or underinsured loss could harm our business and financial condition. In addition, our insurance may be voidable by the insurers as a result of certain of our actions, such as our ships failing to maintain certification with applicable maritime self-regulatory organizations.

Changes in the insurance markets attributable to terrorist attacks may also make certain types of insurance more difficult for us to obtain. In addition, upon renewal or expiration of our current policies, the insurance that may be available to us may be significantly more expensive than our existing coverage.

An increase in operating expenses could adversely affect our financial performance.

Our operating expenses and drydock capital expenditures depend on a variety of factors including crew costs, provisions, deck and engine stores and spares, lubricating oil, insurance, maintenance and repairs and shipyard costs, many of which are beyond our control and affect the entire shipping industry. While many of these costs are borne by the charterers under our time charters, there are some circumstance where this is not the case. For example, we bear the cost of fuel (bunkers) for the Höegh Gallant time charter, and fuel is a significant expense in our operations when our vessels are, for example, moving to or from drydock or when off-hire. The price and supply of fuel is unpredictable and fluctuates based on events outside our control, including geopolitical developments, supply and demand for oil and gas, actions by the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and other oil and gas producers, war and unrest in oil-producing countries and regions, regional production patterns and environmental concerns. These may increase vessel operating costs further. If costs continue to rise, they could materially and adversely affect our results of operations.

A shortage of qualified officers and crew could have an adverse effect on our business and financial condition.

FSRUs and LNG carriers require a technically skilled officer staff with specialized training. As the global FSRU fleet and LNG carrier fleet continues to grow, the demand for technically skilled officers and crew has been increasing, which has led to a more competitive recruiting market. Increases in our historical vessel operating expenses have been attributable primarily to the rising costs of recruiting and retaining officers for our fleet. Furthermore, each key officer crewing an FSRU or LNG carrier must receive specialized training related to the operation and maintenance of the regasification equipment. If Höegh LNG Management and Höegh Maritime Management are unable to employ technically skilled staff and crew, they will not be able to adequately staff our vessels. A material decrease in the supply of technically skilled officers or an inability of Höegh LNG Management or Höegh Maritime Management to attract and retain such qualified officers could impair our ability to operate or increase the cost of crewing our vessels, which would materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations and significantly reduce our ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders.

We may be unable to attract and retain key management personnel, which may negatively impact our growth, the effectiveness of our management and our results of operations.

Our success depends to a significant extent upon the abilities and the efforts of our senior executives. While we believe that we have an experienced management team, the loss or unavailability of one or more of our senior executives for any extended period of time could have an adverse effect on our growth, business and results of operations.

Exposure to currency exchange rate fluctuations could result in fluctuations in our cash flows and operating results.

Currency exchange rate fluctuations and currency devaluations could have an adverse effect on our results of operations from quarter to quarter. Historically, our revenue has been generated in U.S. Dollars, but we incur a minority of our operating expenses in other currencies. The revenues from the Höegh Gallant were denominated 90% in U.S. dollars and 10% in Egyptian pounds (“EGP”) from the acquisition date of October 1, 2015 to December 31, 2015. A limited amount of operating expenses from the Höegh Gallant was also denominated in EGP. Our revenues in EGP are greater than our operating expenses in EGP. Historically, the EGP has been subject to exchange restrictions and devaluation by the Egyptian authorities. Fluctuations in exchange rates could affect our cash flows and operating results. If the EGP should be devalued, we would recognize exchange losses for cash, net working capital positions and other net monetary assets denominated in EGP. Based on the outstanding balances of monetary assets and liabilities as of December 31, 2015, a 15% reduction in the EGP to U.S. dollar rate would result in a foreign exchange loss of approximately $0.1 million. Please read “Item 5. Operating and Financial Review and Prospects—Critical Accounting Estimates—Use of Exchange Rates” and “Item 11. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk—Foreign Currency Risk.”

Acts of piracy on any of our vessels or on oceangoing vessels could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Acts of piracy have historically affected oceangoing vessels trading in regions of the world such as the South China Sea and the Gulf of Aden off the coast of Somalia. If such piracy attacks result in regions in which our vessels are deployed being named on the Joint War Committee Listed Areas, war-risk insurance premiums payable for such insurance coverage could increase significantly and such insurance coverage might become more difficult to obtain. In addition, crew costs, including costs that may be incurred to the extent we employ onboard security guards, could increase in such circumstances. We may not be adequately insured to cover losses from these incidents, which could have a material adverse effect on us. In addition, hijacking as a result of an act of piracy against our vessels, or an increase in cost or unavailability of insurance for our vessels, could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Terrorist attacks, increased hostilities, piracy or war could lead to further economic instability, increased costs and disruption of business.

Terrorist attacks may adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, ability to raise capital and future growth. Continuing hostilities in the Middle East may lead to additional armed conflicts or to further acts of terrorism and civil disturbance in the United States or elsewhere, which may contribute further to economic instability and disruption of production and distribution of LNG, which could result in reduced demand for our services.

Terrorist attacks on vessels, such as the October 2002 attack on the m.v. Limburg and the July 2010 attack allegedly by Al-Qaeda on the m. Star , both very large crude carriers not related to us, may in the future adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operation. In addition, LNG facilities, shipyards, vessels, pipelines and natural gas fields could be targets of future terrorist attacks. Any such attacks could lead to, among other things, bodily injury or loss of life, vessel or other property damage, increased vessel operational costs, including insurance costs, and the inability to transport LNG to or from certain locations. Terrorist attacks, piracy, war or other events beyond our control that adversely affect the distribution, production or transportation of LNG to be shipped by us could entitle customers to terminate our charters, which would harm our cash flows and business. Terrorist attacks, or the perception that LNG facilities, FSRUs and LNG carriers are potential terrorist targets, could materially and adversely affect expansion of LNG infrastructure and the continued supply of LNG. Concern that LNG facilities may be targeted for attack by terrorists has contributed to a community and environmental resistance to the construction of a number of LNG facilities. In addition, the loss of a vessel as a result of terrorism or piracy would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We could be exposed to political, governmental and economic instability that could harm our operations.

We are affected by economic, political and governmental conditions in the countries where we are engaged in business or where our vessels are registered. Any disruption caused by these factors could harm our business. In particular, we derive a substantial portion of our revenues from shipping and regasifying LNG from politically unstable regions. Past political conflicts in these regions have included attacks on ships and other efforts to disrupt shipping in the area. In addition to acts of terrorism, vessels trading in these and other regions have also been subject, in limited instances, to piracy. Future hostilities or other political instability where we operate or may operate could have a material adverse effect on the growth of our business, financial condition, results of operations and ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders. In addition, tariffs, trade embargoes and other economic sanctions by the United States or other countries against countries in the Middle East, Southeast Asia or elsewhere as a result of terrorist attacks, hostilities or otherwise may limit trading activities with those countries, which could also harm our business and ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders.

The LNG transportation, storage and regasification industry is subject to substantial environmental and other regulations, which may significantly limit our operations or increase our expenses.

Our operations are materially affected by extensive and changing international, national and local environmental protection laws, regulations, treaties, conventions and standards in force in international waters, the jurisdictional waters of the countries in which our vessels operate, as well as the countries of our vessels’ registration, including those relating to equipping and operating FSRUs and LNG carriers, providing security and minimizing the potential for impacts to the environment from their operations. We have incurred, and expect to continue to incur, substantial expenses in complying with these laws and regulations, including expenses for vessel modifications and changes in operating procedures. Additional laws and regulations may be adopted that could limit our ability to do business or further increase costs, which could harm our business. In addition, failure to comply with applicable laws and regulations may result in administrative and civil penalties, criminal sanctions or the suspension or termination of operations. We may become subject to additional laws and regulations if we enter new markets or trades.

These requirements can affect the resale value or useful lives of our vessels, require a reduction in cargo capacity, ship modifications or operational changes or restrictions, lead to decreased availability of insurance coverage for environmental matters or result in the denial of access to certain jurisdictional waters or ports or detention in certain ports.

The design, construction and operation of FSRUs and interconnecting pipelines and the transportation of LNG are subject to governmental approvals and permits. The length of time it takes to receive regulatory approval for offshore LNG operations is one factor that has affected our industry, including through increased expenses.

Our vessels operating in international waters, now or in the future, will be subject to various international conventions and flag state laws and regulations relating to protection of the environment.

Our vessels traveling in international waters are subject to various existing regulations published by the International Maritime Organization (the “IMO”), as well as marine pollution and prevention requirements imposed by the IMO International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships of 1975, as from time to time may be amended (the “MARPOL Convention”). In addition, our FSRUs may become subject to the International Convention on Liability and Compensation for Damage in Connection with the Carriage of Hazardous and Noxious Substances by Sea, as amended by the April 2010 Protocol to the HNS Convention (the “2010 HNS Convention”), if it is entered into force. If the 2010 HNS Convention were to enter into force, we cannot estimate with any certainty at this time the costs that may be needed to comply with any such requirements that may be adopted. Please read “Item 4.B. Business Overview – Environmental and Other Regulation” for a more detailed discussion on these topics.

Our vessels operating in U.S. waters now or in the future will be subject to various federal, state and local laws and regulations relating to protection of the environment.

Our vessels operating in U.S. waters now or in the future will be subject to various federal, state and local laws and regulations relating to protection of the environment, including the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (“OPA 90”), the U.S. Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (“CERCLA”), the U.S. Clean Water Act (the “CWA”) and the U.S. Clean Air Act of 1970, as amended. In some cases, these laws and regulations require us to obtain governmental permits and authorizations before we may conduct certain activities. These environmental laws and regulations may impose substantial penalties for noncompliance and substantial liabilities for pollution. Failure to comply with these laws and regulations may result in substantial civil and criminal fines and penalties. As with the industry generally, our operations will entail risks in these areas, and compliance with these laws and regulations, which may be subject to frequent revisions and reinterpretation, may increase our overall cost of business. Please read “Item 4.B. Business Overview – Environmental and Other Regulation” for a more detailed discussion on these topics.

Our operations are subject to substantial environmental and other regulations, which may significantly increase our expenses.

Our operations are affected by extensive and changing international, national and local environmental protection laws, regulations, treaties and conventions in force in international waters, the jurisdictional waters of the countries in which our vessels operate, as well as the countries of our vessels’ registration, including those governing oil spills, discharges to air and water, and the handling and disposal of hazardous substances and wastes. These regulations include OPA 90, the CWA, the U.S. Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002 and regulations of the IMO, including the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage of 1969, as from time to time amended, the MARPOL Convention, the International Convention for the Prevention of Marine Pollution of 1973, the IMO International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea of 1974, as from time to time amended (“SOLAS”), the IMO International Convention on Load Lines of 1966, as from time to time amended, and the International Management Code for the Safe Operation of Ships and for Pollution Prevention (the “ISM Code”).

Many of these requirements are designed to reduce the risk of oil spills and other pollution. In addition, we believe that the heightened environmental, quality and security concerns of insurance underwriters, regulators and charterers will lead to additional regulatory requirements, including enhanced risk assessment and security requirements and greater inspection and safety requirements on vessels. We expect to incur substantial expenses in complying with these laws and regulation, including expenses for vessel modifications and changes in operating procedures.

These requirements can affect the resale value or useful lives of our vessels, require ship modifications or operational changes or restrictions, lead to decreased availability of insurance coverage for environmental matters or result in the denial of access to certain jurisdictional waters or ports, or detention in, certain ports. Under local, national and foreign laws, as well as international treaties and conventions, we could incur material liabilities, including cleanup obligations, in the event that there is a release of hazardous substances from our vessels or otherwise in connection with our operations. We could also become subject to personal injury or property damage claims relating to the release of or exposure to hazardous materials associated with our operations. In addition, failure to comply with applicable laws and regulations may result in administrative and civil penalties, criminal sanctions or the suspension or termination of our operations, including, in certain instances, seizure or detention of our vessels.

Further changes to existing environmental legislation that is applicable to international and national maritime trade may have an adverse effect on our business.

We believe that the heightened environmental, quality and security concerns of insurance underwriters, regulators and charterers will generally lead to additional regulatory requirements, including enhanced risk assessment and security requirements and greater inspection and safety requirements on all vessels in the marine LNG transportation markets and offshore LNG terminals. These requirements are likely to add incremental costs to our operations and the failure to comply with these requirements may affect the ability of our vessels to obtain and, possibly, collect on insurance or to obtain the required certificates for entry into the different ports where we operate.

Further legislation, or amendments to existing legislation, applicable to international and national maritime trade are expected over the coming years in areas such as ship recycling, sewage systems, emission control (including emissions of greenhouse gases) and ballast treatment and handling. The United States has recently enacted legislation and regulations that require more stringent controls of air and water emissions from oceangoing vessels. Such legislation or regulations may require additional capital expenditures or operating expenses (such as increased costs for low-sulfur fuel) in order for us to maintain our vessels’ compliance with international and/or national regulations.

Climate change and greenhouse gas restrictions may adversely impact our operations and markets.

Due to concern over the risk of climate change, a number of countries and the IMO have adopted, or are considering the adoption of, regulatory frameworks to reduce greenhouse gas emission from vessel emissions. These regulatory measures may include, among others, adoption of cap and trade regimes, carbon taxes, increased efficiency standards and incentives or mandates for renewable energy. Although the emissions of greenhouse gases from international shipping currently are not subject to the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (the “Kyoto Protocol”) or the recently announced Paris Agreement, a new treaty may be adopted in the future that includes restrictions on shipping emissions. Compliance with changes in laws and regulations relating to climate change could increase our costs of operating and maintaining our vessels and could require us to make significant financial expenditures that we cannot predict with certainty at this time.

Adverse effects upon the oil and gas industry relating to climate change, including growing public concern about the environmental impact of climate change, may also have an effect on demand for our services. For example, increased regulation of greenhouse gases or other concerns relating to climate change may reduce the demand for oil and gas in the future or create greater incentives for use of alternative energy sources. Any long-term material adverse effect on the oil and gas industry could have a significant financial and operational adverse impact on our business that we cannot predict with certainty at this time.

Please read “Item 4.B. Business Overview—Environmental and Other Regulation—Regulation of Greenhouse Gas Emissions” below for a more detailed discussion.

Maritime claimants could arrest our vessels, which could interrupt our cash flows.

Crew members, suppliers of goods and services to our vessels, owners of cargo or other parties may be entitled to a maritime lien against one or more of our vessels for unsatisfied debts, claims or damages. In many jurisdictions, a maritime lien holder may enforce its lien by arresting a vessel through foreclosure proceedings. In a few jurisdictions, claimants could try to assert “sister ship” liability against one vessel in our fleet for claims relating to another of our vessels. The arrest or attachment of one or more of our vessels could interrupt our cash flows and require us to pay to have the arrest lifted.

Governments could requisition our vessels during a period of war or emergency, resulting in loss of earnings.

The government of a jurisdiction where one or more of our vessels are registered could requisition for title or seize our vessels. Requisition for title or seizure occurs when a government takes control of a vessel and becomes her owner. Also, a government could requisition our vessels for hire. Requisition for hire occurs when a government takes control of a vessel and effectively becomes the charterer at dictated hire rates. Generally, requisitions occur during a period of war or emergency, although governments may elect to requisition vessels in other circumstances. Although we would expect to be entitled to government compensation in the event of a requisition of one or more of our vessels, the amount and timing of payments, if any, would be uncertain. A government requisition of one or more of our vessels would result in off-hire days under our time charters and may cause us to breach covenants in certain of our credit facilities. Furthermore, a requisition for title of either the GDF Suez Neptune or the GDF Suez Cape Ann constitutes a total loss under the terms of the related facility agreements, in which case we would have to repay all loans. If a government requisition of one or more of our vessels were to occur, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows, including cash available for distribution to our unitholders.

Compliance with safety and other vessel requirements imposed by classification societies may be very costly and may adversely affect our business.

The hull and machinery of every large, oceangoing commercial vessel must be classed by a classification society authorized by her country of registry. The classification society certifies that a vessel is safe and seaworthy in accordance with the applicable rules and regulations of the country of registry of the vessel and SOLAS. Each of our vessels is certified by Det Norske Veritas GL, compliant with the ISM Code and “in class.”

As part of the certification process, a vessel must undergo annual surveys, renewal surveys, intermediate surveys and special surveys. In lieu of a special survey, a vessel’s machinery may be on a continuous survey cycle, under which the machinery would be surveyed periodically over a five-year period. Each of the vessels in our fleet is on a planned maintenance system approval, and as such the classification society attends onboard once every year to verify that the maintenance of the equipment onboard is done correctly. For each of the GDF Suez Neptune and the GDF Suez Cape Ann , a renewal survey is conducted every five years and an intermediate survey is conducted every 30 months after a renewal survey. During the first 15 years of operation, the vessels have an approved extended drydock interval which allow them to be drydocked every 7.5 years, while intermediate surveys and certain renewal surveys occur while they are afloat, using an approved diving company in the presence of a surveyor from the classification society. After these vessels are 15 years old, they are drydocked both at each renewal survey and each intermediate survey, resulting in drydocking approximately every five years or pursuant to charterer’s requirements every 30 months. We do not anticipate drydocking the PGN FSRU Lampung for at least 20 years as certain inspections can be done without drydocking. For the Höegh Gallant a renewal survey is expected to be conducted every five years. During the first 15 years of operation, the vessel should qualify for an extended drydock interval which allows it to be drydocked every 7.5 years, and after the initial 15 year period we expect that the vessel will be drydocked every five years.

If any vessel does not maintain her class or fails any annual survey, renewal survey, intermediate survey or special survey, the vessel will be unable to trade between ports and will be unemployable. We would lose revenue while the vessel was off-hire and incur costs of compliance. This would negatively impact our revenues and reduce our cash available for distribution to unitholders.

Failure to comply with the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, the UK Bribery Act, the anti-corruption provisions in the Norwegian Criminal Code and other anti-bribery legislation in other jurisdictions could result in fines, criminal penalties, contract termination and an adverse effect on our business.

We may operate in a number of countries throughout the world, including countries known to have a reputation for corruption. We are committed to doing business in accordance with applicable anti-corruption laws and have adopted a code of business conduct and ethics which is consistent and in full compliance with the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977 (the “FCPA”), the Bribery Act 2010 of the Parliament of the United Kingdom (the “UK Bribery Act”) and the anti-corruption provisions of the Norwegian Criminal Code of 1902 (the “Norwegian Criminal Code”), respectively. We are subject, however, to the risk that we, our affiliated entities or our or their respective officers, directors, employees and agents may take actions determined to be in violation of such anti-corruption laws, including the FCPA, the UK Bribery Act and the Norwegian Criminal Code. Any such violation could result in substantial fines, sanctions, civil and/or criminal penalties, curtailment of operations in certain jurisdictions, and might adversely affect our business, results of operations or financial condition. In addition, actual or alleged violations could damage our reputation and ability to do business. Furthermore, detecting, investigating, and resolving actual or alleged violations is expensive and can consume significant time and attention of our senior management.

If in the future our business activities involve countries, entities and individuals that are subject to restrictions imposed by the U.S. or other governments, we could be subject to enforcement action and our reputation and the market for our common units could be adversely affected.

The tightening of U.S. sanctions in recent years has affected non-U.S. companies. In particular, sanctions against Iran have been significantly expanded. In 2012 the U.S. signed into law the Iran Threat Reduction and Syria Human Rights Act of 2012 (“TRA”), which placed further restrictions on the ability of non-U.S. companies to do business or trade with Iran and Syria. A major provision in TRA is that issuers of securities must disclose to the SEC in their annual and quarterly reports filed after February 6, 2013 if the issuer or ‘‘any affiliate’’ has ‘‘knowingly’’ engaged in certain activities involving Iran during the timeframe covered by the report. This disclosure obligation is broad in scope in that it requires the reporting of activity that would not be considered a violation of U.S. sanctions as well as violative conduct, and is not subject to a materiality threshold. The SEC publishes these disclosures on its website and the President must initiate an investigation in response to all disclosures. It should be noted that the U.S. and various other nations entered into a Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (“JCPOA”) with Iran that provides for phased sanctions relief. On January 16, 2016, following verification that Iran had satisfied its commitments under the JCPOA, the U.S. lifted its nuclear-related “secondary” sanctions and the European Union also took action to lift its sanctions. As a result of sanctions relief non-U.S. persons will be able to engage in business with Iran. Sanctions relief will not impact the SEC reporting requirements discussed above.

In addition to the sanctions against Iran, the U.S. also has sanctions that target other countries, entities and individuals. These sanctions have certain extraterritorial effects that need to be considered by non-U.S. companies. It should also be noted that other governments have implemented versions of U.S. sanctions. We believe that we are in compliance with all applicable sanctions and embargo laws and regulations imposed by the U.S., the United Nations or European Union countries and intend to maintain such compliance. However, there can be no assurance that we will be in compliance in the future, particularly as the scope of certain laws may be unclear and may be subject to changing interpretations. Any such violation could result in fines or other penalties and could result in some investors deciding, or being required, to divest their interest, or not to invest, in our common units. Additionally, some investors may decide to divest their interest, or not to invest, in our common units simply because we may do business with companies that do business in sanctioned countries. Investor perception of the value of our common units may also be adversely affected by the consequences of war, the effects of terrorism, civil unrest and governmental actions in these and surrounding countries.

We face risks relating to our ineffective internal control over financial reporting.

During the past two years, we identified material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting. We identified a combination of control deficiencies that constituted a material weakness related to the accounting treatment for certain Indonesian value added tax and withholding tax transactions for the year ended December 31, 2014. As of December 31, 2015, we also identified several control deficiencies related to our accounting for the procurement of goods and services that constituted a material weakness.  Neither of these material weaknesses has been fully remediated.  See “Item 15. Controls and Procedures.” Under standards established by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, a material weakness is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of our annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected or corrected on a timely basis. While we are working to remediate the material weaknesses, we cannot at this time estimate how long it will take, and our initiatives may not prove to be successful in remediating our material weaknesses. If our remedial measures are insufficient to address the material weaknesses, or if additional material weaknesses are discovered or occur in the future, then there is a risk that our financial statements may contain material misstatements that are unknown to us at that time, and such misstatements could require us to restate our financial results.

A cyber-attack could materially disrupt our business

We rely on information technology systems and networks, which are provided by Höegh LNG, in our operations and the administration of our business. Our operations could be targeted by individuals or groups seeking to sabotage or disrupt our information technology systems and networks, or to steal data. A successful cyber-attack could materially disrupt our operations, including the safety of our operations, or lead to unauthorized release of information or alteration of information on our systems. Any such attack or other breach of our information technology systems could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

Risks Inherent in an Investment in Us

Höegh LNG and its affiliates may compete with us.

Pursuant to the omnibus agreement that we and Höegh LNG entered into in connection with the closing of the IPO, Höegh LNG and its controlled affiliates (other than us, our general partner and our subsidiaries) generally have agreed not to acquire, own, operate or charter certain FSRUs and LNG carriers operating under charters of five or more years. The omnibus agreement, however, contains significant exceptions that may allow Höegh LNG or any of its controlled affiliates to compete with us, which could harm our business. Additionally, the omnibus agreement contains no restrictions on Höegh LNG’s ability to own, operate or charter FSRUs and LNG carriers operating under charters of less than five years. Also, pursuant to the omnibus agreement, we have agreed not to acquire, own, operate or charter FSRUs and LNG carriers operating under charters of less than five years. Please read “Item 7.B. Related Party Transactions—Omnibus Agreement—Noncompetition.”

Unitholders have limited voting rights, and our partnership agreement restricts the voting rights of the unitholders owning more than 4.9% of our common units.

Unlike the holders of common stock in a corporation, holders of common units have only limited voting rights on matters affecting our business. We will hold a meeting of the limited partners every year to elect one or more members of our board of directors and to vote on any other matters that are properly brought before the meeting. Common unitholders are entitled to elect only four of the seven members of our board of directors. The elected directors are elected on a staggered basis and will serve for staggered terms. Our general partner in its sole discretion appoints the remaining three directors and set the terms for which those directors will serve. Our partnership agreement also contains provisions limiting the ability of unitholders to call meetings or to acquire information about our operations, as well as other provisions limiting the unitholders’ ability to influence the manner or direction of management. Unitholders will have no right to elect our general partner, and our general partner may not be removed except by a vote of the holders of at least 75% of the outstanding common and subordinated units, including any units owned by our general partner and its affiliates, voting together as a single class.

Our partnership agreement further restricts unitholders’ voting rights by providing that if any person or group owns beneficially more than 4.9% of any class of units then outstanding, any such units owned by that person or group in excess of 4.9% may not be voted on any matter and will not be considered to be outstanding when sending notices of a meeting of unitholders, calculating required votes (except for purposes of nominating a person for election to our board of directors), determining the presence of a quorum or for other similar purposes, unless required by law. The voting rights of any such unitholders in excess of 4.9% will effectively be redistributed pro rata among the other common unitholders holding less than 4.9% of the voting power of all classes of units entitled to vote. Our general partner, its affiliates and persons who acquired common units with the prior approval of our board of directors will not be subject to this 4.9% limitation except with respect to voting their common units in the election of the elected directors.

Our general partner and its other affiliates own a significant interest in us and have conflicts of interest and limited fiduciary and contractual duties, which may permit them to favor their own interests to your detriment.

Höegh LNG owns approximately 16.1% of our common units and all of our subordinated units, which represent an aggregate approximate 58.0% limited partner interest in us. Certain of our directors will also serve as directors of Höegh LNG or its affiliates and, as such, they will have fiduciary duties to Höegh LNG that may cause them to pursue business strategies that disproportionately benefit Höegh LNG or its affiliates or which otherwise are not in the best interests of us or our unitholders.

Conflicts of interest may arise between Höegh LNG and its affiliates (including our general partner) on the one hand, and us and our unitholders, on the other hand. As a result of these conflicts, our general partner and its affiliates may favor their own interests over the interests of our unitholders. These conflicts include, among others, the following situations:

Although a majority of our directors will over time be elected by common unitholders, our general partner will likely have substantial influence on decisions made by our board of directors.

Our officers may face conflicts in the allocation of their time to our business.

Our sole existing officer and any future officers may face conflicts in the allocation of their time to our business. The affiliates of our general partner, including Höegh LNG, conduct substantial businesses and activities of their own in which we have no economic interest. As a result, there could be material competition for the time and effort of our officers who also provide services to our general partner’s affiliates, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Additionally, while our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer is expected to devote the substantial majority of his time to our business, he may, from time to time, participate in business development activities for Höegh LNG that are linked to developing opportunities for us.

Our partnership agreement limits our general partner’s and our directors’ fiduciary duties to our unitholders and restricts the remedies available to unitholders for actions taken by our general partner or our directors.

Our partnership agreement provides that our general partner has irrevocably delegated to our board of directors the authority to oversee and direct our operations, management and policies on an exclusive basis, and such delegation will be binding on any successor general partner of the Partnership. Our partnership agreement also contains provisions that reduce the standards to which our general partner and directors may otherwise be held by Marshall Islands law. For example, our partnership agreement:

By purchasing a common unit, a common unitholder is deemed to have agreed to become bound by the provisions of our partnership agreement, including the provisions discussed above.

Fees and expenses, which Höegh LNG determines for services provided to us and our joint ventures, are substantial, are payable regardless of our profitability and will reduce our cash available for distribution to you.

Pursuant to the ship management agreements, our joint ventures and Höegh Cyprus pay fees for services provided to them by Höegh LNG Management, and our joint ventures and Höegh Cyprus reimburse Höegh LNG Management for all expenses incurred on our behalf. These fees and expenses include all costs and expenses incurred in providing certain crewing and technical management services to the GDF Suez Neptune , the GDF Suez Cape Ann and the Höegh Gallant . In addition, pursuant to a technical information and services agreement, we reimburse Höegh Norway for expenses Höegh Norway incurs pursuant to the sub-technical support agreement that it is party to with Höegh LNG Management.

Moreover, pursuant to an administrative services agreement among us, our operating company and Höegh UK and an administrative services agreement between our operating company and Leif Höegh UK, Höegh UK and Leif Höegh UK provide us and our operating company with certain administrative, financial and other support services. We reimburse Höegh UK and Leif Höegh UK for their reasonable costs and expenses incurred in connection with the provision of these services. In addition, under our administrative services agreement with Höegh UK, we pay Höegh UK a service fee equal to 5.0% of its costs and expenses incurred in connection with providing services to us.

Pursuant to the above-mentioned administrative services agreement with Höegh UK, Höegh UK subcontracts to Höegh Norway and Leif Höegh UK certain administrative services provided to us pursuant to administrative services agreements with Höegh Norway and Leif Höegh UK. Höegh UK reimburses Höegh Norway and Leif Höegh UK for reasonable costs and expenses incurred in connection with the provision of these services. In addition, Höegh UK (i) pays to Höegh Norway a service fee equal to 3.0% of the costs and expenses incurred in connection with providing services and (ii) pays to Leif Höegh UK a service fee equal to 5.0% of the costs and expenses of certain secretarial services with all other services of Leif Höegh UK reimbursed at cost.

For a description of the ship management agreements, the technical information and services agreement and the administrative services agreements, please read “Item 7.B. Related Party Transactions.” The fees and expenses payable pursuant to the ship management agreements, the technical information and services agreement and the administrative services agreements are payable without regard to our financial condition or results of operations. The payment of fees to and the reimbursement of expenses of Höegh LNG Management, Höegh UK, Leif Höegh UK and Höegh Norway could adversely affect our ability to pay cash distributions to you.

Our partnership agreement contains provisions that may have the effect of discouraging a person or group from attempting to remove our current management or our general partner, and even if public unitholders are dissatisfied, they will be unable to remove our general partner without Höegh LNG’s consent, unless Höegh LNG’s ownership interest in us is decreased, all of which could diminish the trading price of our common units.

Our partnership agreement contains provisions that may have the effect of discouraging a person or group from attempting to remove our current management or our general partner.

The effect of these provisions may be to diminish the price at which the common units will trade.

The control of our general partner may be transferred to a third party without unitholder consent.

Our general partner may transfer its non-economic general partner interest to a third party in a merger or in a sale of all or substantially all of its assets without the consent of the unitholders. In addition, our partnership agreement does not restrict the ability of the members of our general partner from transferring their respective membership interests in our general partner to a third party.

Substantial future sales of our common units in the public market could cause the price of our common units to fall.

We have granted registration rights to Höegh LNG and certain of its affiliates. These unitholders have the right, subject to some conditions, to require us to file registration statements covering any of our common, subordinated or other equity securities owned by them or to include those securities in registration statements that we may file for ourselves or other unitholders. Höegh LNG owns 2,116,060 common units and 13,156,060 subordinated units and all of the incentive distribution rights. Following their registration and sale under the applicable registration statement, those securities will become freely tradable. By exercising their registration rights and selling a large number of common units or other securities, these unitholders could cause the price of our common units to decline.

We are subject to Marshall Islands law, which lacks a bankruptcy statute or general statutory mechanism for insolvency proceedings.

We are a Marshall Islands limited partnership, and we have limited operations in the United States and maintain limited assets in the United States. Consequently, in the event of any bankruptcy, insolvency, liquidation, dissolution, reorganization or similar proceeding involving us, bankruptcy laws other than those of the United States could apply. The Republic of the Marshall Islands does not have a bankruptcy statute or general statutory mechanism for insolvency proceedings. If we become a debtor under U.S. bankruptcy law, bankruptcy courts in the United States may seek to assert jurisdiction over all of our assets, wherever located, including property situated in other countries. There can be no assurance, however, that we would become a debtor in the United States, or that a U.S. bankruptcy court would be entitled to, or accept, jurisdiction over such a bankruptcy case, or that courts in other countries that have jurisdiction over us and our operations would recognize a U.S. bankruptcy court’s jurisdiction, if any other bankruptcy court would determine it had jurisdiction. These factors may delay or prevent us from entering bankruptcy in the United States and may affect the ability of our unitholders to receive any recovery following our bankruptcy.

We have been organized as a limited partnership under the laws of the Republic of the Marshall Islands, which does not have a well-developed body of partnership law.

The Partnership’s affairs are governed by our partnership agreement and by the Marshall Island Limited Partnership Act (the “Marshall Islands Act”). The provisions of the Marshall Islands Act resemble provisions of the limited partnership laws of a number of states in the United States, most notably Delaware. The Marshall Islands Act also provides that it is to be applied and construed to make the laws of the Marshall Islands, with respect to the subject matter of the Marshall Islands Act, uniform with the laws of the State of Delaware and, so long as it does not conflict with the Marshall Islands Act or decisions of the High and Supreme Courts of the Marshall Islands, the non-statutory law (“case law”) of the State of Delaware is adopted as the law of the Marshall Islands. There have been, however, few, if any, court cases in the Marshall Islands interpreting the Marshall Islands Act, in contrast to Delaware, which has a fairly well-developed body of case law interpreting its limited partnership statute. Accordingly, we cannot predict whether Marshall Islands courts would reach the same conclusions as the courts in Delaware. For example, the rights of our unitholders and the fiduciary responsibilities of our general partner under Marshall Islands law are not as clearly established as under judicial precedent in existence in Delaware. As a result, unitholders may have more difficulty in protecting their interests in the face of actions by our general partner and its officers and directors than would unitholders of a similarly organized limited partnership in the United States.

Because we are organized under the laws of the Marshall Islands, it may be difficult to serve us with legal process or enforce judgments against us, our directors or our management.

We are organized under the laws of the Marshall Islands, and substantially all of our assets are located outside of the United States. In addition, our general partner is a Marshall Islands limited liability company, and a majority of our directors and officers generally are or will be non-residents of the United States, and all or a substantial portion of the assets of these non-residents are located outside the United States. As a result, it may be difficult or impossible for you to bring an action against us or against these individuals in the United States if you believe that your rights have been infringed under securities laws or otherwise. Even if you are successful in bringing an action of this kind, the laws of the Marshall Islands and of other jurisdictions may prevent or restrict you from enforcing a judgment against our assets or the assets of our general partner or our directors or officers.

Höegh LNG, as the initial holder of all of the incentive distribution rights, may elect to cause us to issue additional common units to it in connection with a resetting of the target distribution levels related to the incentive distribution rights without the approval of the conflicts committee of our board of directors or holders of our common units and subordinated units. This may result in lower distributions to holders of our common units in certain situations.

Höegh LNG, as the initial holder of all of the incentive distribution rights, has the right, at a time when there are no subordinated units outstanding and Höegh LNG has received incentive distributions at the highest level to which it is entitled (50.0%) for each of the prior four consecutive fiscal quarters (and the amount of each such total distribution did not exceed adjusted operating surplus for each such quarter), to reset the initial cash target distribution levels at higher levels based on the distribution at the time of the exercise of the reset election. Following a reset election, the minimum quarterly distribution amount will be reset to the reset minimum quarterly distribution amount, and the target distribution levels will be reset to correspondingly higher levels based on the same percentage increases above the reset minimum quarterly distribution amount.

In connection with resetting these target distribution levels, Höegh LNG will be entitled to receive a number of common units equal to that number of common units whose aggregate quarterly cash distributions equaled the average of the distributions to Höegh LNG on the incentive distribution rights in the prior fiscal quarter. We anticipate that Höegh LNG would exercise this reset right in order to facilitate acquisitions or internal growth projects that would not be sufficiently accretive to cash distribution per common unit without such conversion; however, it is possible that Höegh LNG could exercise this reset election at a time when it is experiencing, or may be expected to experience, declines in the cash distributions it receives related to its incentive distribution rights and may therefore desire to be issued our common units, rather than retain the right to receive incentive distributions based on the initial target distribution levels. As a result, a reset election may cause our common unitholders to experience dilution in the amount of cash distributions that they would have otherwise received had we not issued additional common units to Höegh LNG in connection with resetting the target distribution levels related to its incentive distribution rights.

We may issue additional equity securities, including securities senior to the common units, without your approval, which would dilute your ownership interests.

We may, without the approval of our unitholders, issue an unlimited number of additional units or other equity securities. In addition, we may issue an unlimited number of units that are senior to the common units in right of distribution, liquidation and voting. The issuance by us of additional common units or other equity securities of equal or senior rank will have the following effects:

Upon the expiration of the subordination period, the subordinated units will convert into common units and will then participate pro rata with other common units in distributions of available cash.

During the subordination period, the common units will have the right to receive distributions of available cash from operating surplus in an amount equal to the minimum quarterly distribution of $0.3375 per unit, plus any arrearages in the payment of the minimum quarterly distribution on the common units from prior quarters, before any distributions of available cash from operating surplus may be made on the subordinated units. Distribution arrearages do not accrue on the subordinated units. The purpose of the subordinated units is to increase the likelihood that during the subordination period there will be available cash from operating surplus to be distributed on the common units. Upon the expiration of the subordination period, the subordinated units will convert into common units and will then participate pro rata with other common units in distributions of available cash.

In establishing cash reserves, our board of directors may reduce the amount of cash available for distribution to you.

Our partnership agreement requires our general partner to deduct from operating surplus cash reserves that it determines are necessary to fund our future operating expenditures. These reserves also will affect the amount of cash available for distribution to our unitholders. Our board of directors may establish reserves for distributions on the subordinated units, but only if those reserves will not prevent us from distributing the full minimum quarterly distribution, plus any arrearages, on the common units for the following four quarters. As described above in “—Risks Inherent in Our Business—We must make substantial capital expenditures to maintain and replace the operating capacity of our fleet, which will reduce our cash available for distribution. In addition, each quarter we will be required, pursuant to our partnership agreement, to deduct estimated maintenance and replacement capital expenditures from operating surplus, which may result in less cash available to unitholders than if actual maintenance and replacement capital expenditures were deducted,” our partnership agreement requires our board of directors each quarter to deduct from operating surplus estimated maintenance and replacement capital expenditures, as opposed to actual maintenance and replacement capital expenditures, which could reduce the amount of available cash for distribution. The amount of estimated maintenance and replacement capital expenditures deducted from operating surplus is subject to review and change by our board of directors at least once a year, with the approval of the conflicts committee of our board of directors.

Our general partner has a limited call right that may require you to sell your common units at an undesirable time or price.

If at any time our general partner and its affiliates own more than 80% of the common units, our general partner will have the right, which it may assign to any of its affiliates or to us, but not the obligation, to acquire all, but not less than all, of the common units held by unaffiliated persons at a price not less than the then-current market price of our common units. Our general partner is not obligated to obtain a fairness opinion regarding the value of the common units to be repurchased by it upon the exercise of this limited call right. As a result, you may be required to sell your common units at an undesirable time or price and may not receive any return on your investment. You may also incur a tax liability upon a sale of your units.

Höegh LNG, which owns and controls of our general partner, owns approximately 16.1% of our common units. At the end of the subordination period, assuming no additional issuances of common units, and the conversion of our subordinated units into common units, Höegh LNG will own approximately 58.0% of our common units.

Unitholders may not have limited liability if a court finds that unitholder action constitutes control of our business.

As a limited partner in a limited partnership organized under the laws of the Marshall Islands, you could be held liable for our obligations to the same extent as a general partner if you participate in the “control” of our business. Our general partner generally has unlimited liability for the obligations of the Partnership, such as its debts and environmental liabilities, except for those contractual obligations of the Partnership that are expressly made without recourse to our general partner. In addition, the limitations on the liability of holders of limited partner interests for the obligations of a limited partnership have not been clearly established in some jurisdictions in which we do business.

We can borrow money to make cash distributions, which would reduce the amount of credit available to operate our business.

Our partnership agreement allows us to make working capital borrowings to make cash distributions. Accordingly, if we have available borrowing capacity, we can make cash distributions on all our units even though cash generated by our operations may not be sufficient to pay such distributions. Any working capital borrowings by us to make cash distributions will reduce the amount of working capital borrowings we can make for operating our business.

Increases in interest rates may cause the market price of our common units to decline.

An increase in interest rates may cause a corresponding decline in demand for equity investments in general and in particular for yield based equity investments such as our common units. Any such increase in interest rates or reduction in demand for our common units resulting from other relatively more attractive investment opportunities may cause the trading price of our common units to decline.

Unitholders may have liability to repay distributions.

Under some circumstances, unitholders may have to repay amounts wrongfully returned or distributed to them. Under the Marshall Islands Act, we may not make a distribution to you if the distribution would cause our liabilities, other than liabilities to partners on account of their partnership interest and liabilities for which the recourse of creditors is limited to specified property of ours, to exceed the fair value of our assets, except that the fair value of property that is subject to a liability for which the recourse of creditors is limited will be included in our assets only to the extent that the fair value of that property exceeds that liability. Marshall Islands law provides that for a period of three years from the date of the impermissible distribution, limited partners who received the distribution and who knew at the time of the distribution that it violated Marshall Islands law will be liable to the limited partnership for the distribution amount. Assignees who become substituted limited partners are liable for the obligations of the assignor to make contributions to the limited partnership that are known to the assignee at the time it became a limited partner and for unknown obligations if the liabilities could be determined from our partnership agreement.

We are an “emerging growth company” and we cannot be certain if the reduced disclosure requirements applicable to emerging growth companies will make our common units less attractive to investors.

We are an “emerging growth company,” as defined in the JOBS Act, and we may take advantage of certain exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not “emerging growth companies.” These provisions include an exemption from the auditor attestation requirement in the assessment of the emerging growth company’s internal control over financial reporting and an exemption from compliance with any new requirements adopted by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board requiring mandatory audit firm rotation or a supplement to our auditor’s report in which the auditor would be required to provide additional information about the audit and our financial statements. For as long as we take advantage of the reduced reporting obligations, the information that we provide unitholders may be different than information provided by other public companies. We cannot predict if investors will find our common units less attractive because we may rely on these exemptions. If some investors find our common units less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our common units and our unit price may be more volatile. Furthermore, if we fail to successfully remediate the material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting as described in “Item 15. Controls and Procedures” or to create and maintain an effective system of internal controls and disclosure controls in the future, we may not be able to accurately report our financial results or prevent fraud. Please read “—Risks Related to Our Business—We face risks relating to our ineffective internal control over financial reporting.”

Tax Risks

In addition to the following risk factors, you should read “Item 4.B. Business Overview—Taxation of Partnership” and “Item 10.E. Taxation” for a more complete discussion of the expected material U.S. federal and non-U.S. income tax considerations relating to us and the ownership and disposition of our common units.

We are subject to taxes, which reduces our cash available for distribution to you.

Some of our subsidiaries will be subject to tax in the jurisdictions in which they are organized or operate, reducing the amount of cash available for distribution. In computing our tax obligation in these jurisdictions, we are required to take various tax accounting and reporting positions on matters that are not entirely free from doubt and for which we have not received rulings from the governing authorities. We cannot assure you that upon review of these positions the applicable authorities will agree with our positions. A successful challenge by a tax authority could result in additional tax imposed on our subsidiaries, further reducing the cash available for distribution. In addition, changes in our operations could result in additional tax being imposed on us, our operating company or our or its subsidiaries in jurisdictions in which operations are conducted. Please read “Item 4.B. Business Overview—Taxation of the Partnership.”

A change in tax laws in any country in which we operate could adversely affect us

Tax laws and regulations are highly complex and subject to interpretation. Consequently, we and our subsidiaries are subject to changing tax laws, treaties and regulations in and between countries in which we operate. Our tax expense is based on our interpretation of the tax laws in effect at the time the expense was incurred. A change in tax laws, treaties or regulations, or in the interpretation thereof, could result in a materially higher tax expense or a higher effective tax rate on our earnings. Such changes may include measures enacted in response to the ongoing initiatives in relation to fiscal legislation at an international level, such as the Action Plan on Base Erosion and Profit Shifting of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development.

U.S. tax authorities could treat us as a “passive foreign investment company,” which would have adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences to U.S. unitholders.

A non-U.S. entity treated as a corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes will be treated as a “passive foreign investment company” (“PFIC”) for U.S. federal income tax purposes for any taxable year in which at least 75.0% of its gross income consists of “passive income” or at least 50.0% of the average value of its assets (based on the average of the values at the end of each quarter) produce, or are held for the production of, “passive income.” For purposes of these tests, “passive income” includes dividends, interest, gains from the sale or exchange of investment property, and rents and royalties other than rents and royalties that are received from unrelated parties in connection with the active conduct of a trade or business. Income derived from the performance of services does not constitute “passive income.” U.S. shareholders of a PFIC are subject to a disadvantageous U.S. federal income tax regime with respect to the income derived by the PFIC, certain distributions they receive from the PFIC, and the gain, if any, they derive from the sale or other disposition of their interests in the PFIC.

Based on our current and projected method of operation, we believe that we were not a PFIC for any prior taxable year, and we expect that we will not be treated as a PFIC for the current or any future taxable year. We expect that more than 25.0% of our gross income for each taxable year was or will be nonpassive income, and more than 50.0% of the average value of our assets for each such year was or will be held for the production of such nonpassive income. This belief is based on certain valuations and projections regarding our assets, income and charters. While we believe these valuations and projections to be accurate, the shipping market is volatile and no assurance can be given that they will continue to be accurate at any time in the future.

Moreover, there are legal uncertainties involved in determining whether the income derived from time-chartering activities constitutes rental income or income derived from the performance of services. In Tidewater Inc. v. United States, 565 F.3d 299 (5th Cir. 2009), the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (the “Fifth Circuit”) held that income derived from certain time-chartering activities should be treated as rental income rather than services income for purposes of a provision of the Code relating to foreign sales corporations. In that case, the Fifth Circuit did not address the definition of passive income or the PFIC rules; however, the reasoning of the case could have implications as to how the income from a time charter would be classified under such rules. If the reasoning of this case were extended to the PFIC context, the gross income we derive or are deemed to derive from our time-chartering activities may be treated as rental income, and we would likely be treated as a PFIC. In published guidance, the Internal Revenue Service, or IRS, stated that it disagreed with the holding in Tidewater, and specified that time charters similar to those at issue in the case should be treated as service contracts. We have not sought, and we do not expect to seek, an IRS ruling on the treatment of income generated from our time-chartering activities, and the opinion of our counsel is not binding on the IRS or any court. As a result, the IRS or a court could disagree with our position. No assurance can be given that this result will not occur.

In addition, although we intend to conduct our affairs in a manner to avoid, to the extent possible, being classified as a PFIC with respect to any taxable year, we cannot assure you that the nature of our operations will not change in the future and that we will not become a PFIC in the future. If the IRS were to find that we are or have been a PFIC for any taxable year (and regardless of whether we remain a PFIC for subsequent taxable years), our U.S. unitholders would face adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences. Please read “Item 10.E Taxation—U.S. Federal Income Taxation of U.S. Holders—PFIC Status and Significant Tax Consequences” for a more detailed discussion of the U.S. federal income tax consequences to U.S. unitholders if we are treated as a PFIC.

We may have to pay tax on U.S. source income, which would reduce our cash flow.

Under the Code, U.S. source gross transportation income generally is subject to a 4.0% U.S. federal income tax without allowance for deduction of expenses unless an exemption from tax applies under Section 883 of the Code and the existing final and temporary regulations promulgated thereunder (“Treasury Regulations”). U.S. source gross transportation consists of 50.0% of the gross shipping income that a vessel-owning or chartering corporation, such as ourselves, derives (either directly or through one or more subsidiaries that are classified as partnerships or disregarded as entities separate from such corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes) and that is attributable to transportation that either begins or ends, but that does not both begin and end, in the United States.

We believe that we currently qualify and we expect that we will continue to qualify for the foreseeable future, for an exemption from U.S. tax on any U.S. source gross transportation income under Section 883 of the Code, and we expect to take this position for U.S. federal income tax purposes. Please read “Item 4.B— Business Overview—Taxation of the Partnership.” However, there are factual circumstances, including some that may be beyond our control, which could cause us to lose the benefit of this tax exemption. In addition, our position that we qualify for this exemption is based upon legal authorities that do not expressly contemplate an organizational structure such as ours; specifically, although we have elected to be treated as a corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes, we are organized as a limited partnership under Marshall Islands law. Therefore, we can give no assurance that the IRS will not take a different position regarding our qualification for this tax exemption.

If we are not entitled to this exemption under Section 883 of the Code for any taxable year, we generally would be subject to a 4.0% U.S. federal gross income tax on our U.S. source gross transportation income for such year. Our failure to qualify for the exemption under Section 883 of the Code could have a negative effect on our business and would result in decreased earnings available for distribution to our unitholders.

The vessels in our fleet do not currently engage, and we do not expect that they will in the future engage, in transportation that begins and ends in the United States or in the provision of regasification or storage services in the United States. If, notwithstanding this expectation, our subsidiaries earn income in the future from transportation that begins and ends in the United States, or from regasification or storage activities in the United States, that income would not be exempt from U.S. federal income tax under Section 883 of the Code and would be subject to a 35% net income tax in the United States (and the after-tax earnings attributable to such income may be subject to an additional 30% branch profits tax). Please read “Item 4.B Business Overview—Taxation of the Partnership—United States Taxation—The Section 883 Exemption” for a more detailed discussion of the rules relating to qualification for the exemption under Section 883 of the Code and the consequences for failing to qualify for such an exemption.

You may be subject to income tax in one or more non-U.S. jurisdictions, including the United Kingdom and Norway, as a result of owning our common units if, under the laws of any such jurisdiction, we are considered to be carrying on business there. Such laws may require you to file a tax return with, and pay taxes to, those jurisdictions.

We intend to conduct our affairs and cause or influence each of our subsidiaries to operate its business in a manner that minimizes income taxes imposed upon us and our subsidiaries and that may be imposed upon you as a result of owning our common units. However, because we are organized as a limited partnership, there is a risk in some jurisdictions, including the United Kingdom and Norway, that our activities or the activities of our subsidiaries may be attributed to our unitholders for tax purposes if, under the laws of such jurisdiction, we are considered to be carrying on business there. If you are subject to tax in any such jurisdiction, you may be required to file a tax return with, and to pay tax in, that jurisdiction based on your allocable share of our income. We may be required to reduce distributions to you on account of any tax withholding obligations imposed upon us by that jurisdiction in respect of such allocation to you. The United States may not allow a tax credit for any foreign income taxes that you directly or indirectly incur by virtue of an investment in us.

We believe we can conduct our affairs in a manner that does not result in our unitholders being considered to be carrying on business in the United Kingdom or Norway solely as a consequence of the acquisition, ownership, disposition or redemption of our common units. However, the question of whether either we or any of our subsidiaries will be treated as carrying on business in any jurisdiction, including the United Kingdom and Norway, will be largely a question of fact to be determined through an analysis of contractual arrangements, including the ship management agreements that our joint ventures and subsidiaries have entered into with Höegh LNG Management, the sub-technical support agreement that Höegh Norway has entered into with Höegh LNG Management, the administrative service agreement we have entered into with our operating company and Höegh UK, the administrative service agreement our operating company has entered into with Leif Höegh UK and the administrative service agreements Höegh UK has entered into with Höegh Norway and with Leif Höegh UK, as well as through an analysis of the manner in which we conduct business or operations, all of which may change over time. Furthermore, the laws of the United Kingdom, Norway or any other jurisdiction may also change, which could cause that jurisdiction’s taxing authorities to determine that we are carrying on business in such jurisdiction and that we or our unitholders are subject to its taxation laws. In addition to the potential for taxation of our unitholders, any additional taxes imposed on us or any of our subsidiaries will reduce our cash available for distribution.