ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

Risks Relating to Our Business and Our Properties

There are inherent risks associated with real estate investments and with the real estate industry, each of which could have an adverse impact on our financial performance and the value of our properties.

Real estate investments are subject to various risks and fluctuations and cycles in value and demand, many of which are beyond our control. Our financial performance and the value of our properties can be affected by many of these factors, including the following:

In addition, because the yields available from equity investments in real estate depend in large part on the amount of rental income earned, as well as property operating expenses and other costs incurred, a period of

7

Table of Contents

economic slowdown or recession, or declining demand for real estate, or the public perception that any of these events may occur, could result in a general decline in rents or an increased incidence of defaults among our existing leases, and, consequently, our properties, including any held by joint ventures, may fail to generate revenues sufficient to meet operating, debt service and other expenses. As a result, we may have to borrow amounts to cover fixed costs, and our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow, per share market price of our common stock and ability to satisfy our principal and interest obligations and to make distributions to our stockholders may be adversely affected.

Significant competition may decrease or prevent increases in our properties’ occupancy and rental rates and may reduce our investment opportunities.

We compete with numerous owners, operators and developers of office properties, many of which own properties similar to ours in the same submarkets in which our properties are located. Furthermore, undeveloped land in many of the markets in which we operate is generally more readily available and less expensive than in gateway markets, which are commonly defined as New York, Los Angeles, Washington, D.C., Boston, Chicago and San Francisco. If our competitors offer space from existing or new buildings at rental rates below current market rates, or below the rental rates that we currently charge our tenants, we may lose existing or potential tenants and we may be pressured to reduce our rental rates below those that we currently charge or to offer more substantial rent abatements, tenant improvements, early termination rights or below-market renewal options in order to retain or attract tenants when our tenants’ leases expire. Our competitors may have substantially greater financial resources than we do and may be able to accept more risk than we can prudently manage. In the future, competition from these entities may reduce the number of suitable investment opportunities offered to us or increase the bargaining power of property owners seeking to sell. As a result, our financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and market price of our common stock could be adversely affected.

We are dependent on our key personnel and the loss of such key personnel could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations and our ability to pay distributions to our stockholders.

We are dependent on the efforts of our key officers and employees, including James Farrar, our Chief Executive Officer, Gregory Tylee, our President and Chief Operating Officer, and Anthony Maretic, our Chief Financial Officer, Secretary and Treasurer. The loss of Mr. Farrar’s, Mr. Tylee’s and/or Mr. Maretic’s services could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations and our ability to pay distributions to our stockholders. Although we have employment agreements with them, we cannot assure you they will remain employed with us.

A decrease in demand for office space may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

Our portfolio of properties consists entirely of office properties and because we seek to acquire similar properties, a decrease in the demand for office space may have a greater adverse effect on our business and financial condition than if we owned a more diversified real estate portfolio. If parts of our properties are leased within a particular sector, a significant downturn in that sector in which the tenants’ businesses operate would adversely affect our results of operations. In addition, where a government agency is a tenant, which is the case for a number of our properties, austerity measures and governmental deficit reduction programs may lead government agencies to consolidate and reduce their office space, terminate their lease and decrease their workforce, which may reduce demand for office space in the government sector.

Failure by any major tenant to make rental payments to us, because of a deterioration of its financial condition, a termination of its lease, a non-renewal of its lease or otherwise, could seriously harm our results of operations.

As of December 31, 2016, approximately 36.6% of the base rental revenue of our properties was derived from our ten largest tenants. Our largest tenant is the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment,

8

Table of Contents

which accounted for approximately 6.9% of base rental revenue of our properties for the year ended December 31, 2016. At any time, our tenants may experience a downturn in their businesses that may significantly weaken their financial condition, whether as a result of general economic conditions or otherwise. As a result, our tenants may fail to make rental payments when due, delay lease commencements, decline to extend or renew leases upon expiration or declare bankruptcy. Any of these actions could result in the termination of the tenants’ leases or the failure to renew a lease and the loss of rental income attributable to the terminated leases. The occurrence of any of the situations described above could seriously harm our results of operations.

We may be unable to secure funds for future tenant or other capital improvements or payment of leasing commissions, which could limit our ability to attract or replace tenants and adversely impact our ability to make cash distributions to our stockholders.

When tenants do not renew their leases or otherwise vacate their space, it is common that, in order to attract replacement tenants, we will be required to expend funds for tenant improvements, payment of leasing commissions and other concessions related to the vacated space. Such tenant improvements may require us to incur substantial capital expenditures. We may not be able to fund capital expenditures solely from cash provided from our operating activities because we must distribute at least 90% of our REIT taxable income determined without regard to the deduction for dividends paid and excluding net capital gains, each year to qualify as a REIT. As a result, our ability to fund tenant and other capital improvements or payment of leasing commissions through retained earnings may be limited. If we have insufficient capital reserves, we will have to obtain financing from other sources. We may also have future financing needs for other capital improvements to refurbish or renovate our properties. If we are unable to secure financing on terms that we believe are acceptable or at all, we may be unable to make tenant and other capital improvements or payment of leasing commissions or we may be required to defer such improvements. If this happens, it may cause one or more of our properties to suffer from a greater risk of obsolescence or a decline in value, as a result of fewer potential tenants being attracted to the property or existing tenants not renewing their leases. If we do not have access to sufficient funding in the future, we may not be able to make necessary capital improvements to our properties, pay leasing commissions or other expenses or pay distributions to our stockholders.

We may be required to make rent or other concessions and significant capital expenditures to improve our properties in order to retain and attract tenants, which could adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations and cash flow.

In order to retain existing tenants and attract new clients, we may be required to offer more substantial rent abatements, tenant improvements and early termination rights or accommodate requests for renovations, build-to-suit remodeling and other improvements or provide additional services to our tenants. As a result, we may have to make significant capital or other expenditures in order to retain tenants whose leases expire and to attract new tenants in sufficient numbers, which could adversely affect our results of operations and cash flow. Additionally, if we need to raise capital to make such expenditures and are unable to do so, or such capital is otherwise unavailable, we may be unable to make the required expenditures. This could result in non-renewals by tenants upon expiration of their leases, which could adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations and cash flow.

We depend on external sources of capital that are outside of our control, which may affect our ability to seize strategic opportunities, satisfy our debt obligations and make distributions to our stockholders.

In order to maintain our qualification as a REIT, we are generally required under the U.S. Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”) to annually distribute at least 90% of our REIT taxable income, determined without regard to the deduction for dividends paid and excluding any net capital gain. In addition, as a REIT, we will be subject to income tax at regular corporate rates to the extent that we distribute less than 100% of our REIT taxable income, including any net capital gains. Because of these distribution requirements, we may

9

Table of Contents

not be able to fund future capital needs (including redevelopment, acquisition, expansion and renovation activities, payments of principal and interest on and the refinancing of our existing debt, tenant improvements and leasing costs), from operating cash flow. Consequently, we may rely on third-party sources to fund our capital needs. We may not be able to obtain the necessary financing on favorable terms, in the time period that we desire or at all. Any additional debt we incur will increase our leverage, expose us to the risk of default and may impose operating restrictions on us, and any additional equity we raise could be dilutive to existing stockholders. Our access to third-party sources of capital depends, in part, on:

If we cannot obtain capital from third-party sources, we may not be able to acquire or develop properties when strategic opportunities exist, satisfy our principal and interest obligations or make the cash distributions to our stockholders necessary to maintain our qualification as a REIT.

Covenants in our Amended and Restated Credit Agreement may cause us to fail to qualify as a REIT.

In order to maintain our qualification as a REIT, we are generally required under the Code to distribute annually at least 90% of our net taxable income, determined without regard to the deduction for dividends paid and excluding any net capital gain. In addition, we will be subject to income tax at regular corporate rates to the extent that we distribute less than 100% of our net taxable income, including any net capital gains. Under our Amended and Restated Credit Agreement, we are generally prohibited from making distributions in excess of 100% of Core Funds From Operations, as defined in the Amended and Restated Credit Agreement. If Core Funds From Operations is less than 90% of our net taxable income, we will not be able to make sufficient distributions to maintain our REIT status. In addition, if Core Funds From Operations is greater than 90% of our net taxable income but less than 100% of our net taxable income, we will be required to pay income tax at regular corporate rates on any net taxable income we are prohibited from distributing as a result of this covenant. Furthermore, if we fail to distribute at least the sum of 85% of our REIT ordinary income for the year, 95% of our REIT capital gain for the year and any undistributed taxable income from prior years, we will incur a 4% nondeductible excise tax on the excess of such required distribution over the amount we actually distribute.

We have a substantial amount of indebtedness outstanding which may affect our ability to pay distributions, may expose us to interest rate fluctuation risk and may expose us to the risk of default under our debt obligations.

Our total consolidated principal indebtedness, as of December 31, 2016, was approximately $374.9 million. We do not anticipate that our internally generated cash flows will be adequate to repay our existing indebtedness upon maturity, and, therefore, we expect to repay our indebtedness through refinancings and future offerings of equity and debt securities, either of which we may be unable to secure on favorable terms or at all. Our substantial outstanding indebtedness, and the limitations imposed on us by our debt agreements, could have other significant adverse consequences, including the following:

10

Table of Contents

If any one of these events were to occur, our financial condition, results of operations, cash flows, market price of our common stock and ability to satisfy our debt service obligations and to pay distributions to you could be adversely affected. In addition, any foreclosure on our properties could create taxable income without accompanying cash proceeds, which could adversely affect our ability to meet the distribution requirements necessary to maintain qualification as a REIT.

We could become highly leveraged in the future because our organizational documents contain no limitations on the amount of debt that we may incur.

As of December 31, 2016, our principal indebtedness represented approximately 56.7% of our total assets. However, our organizational documents contain no limitations on the amount of indebtedness that we may incur. We could alter the balance between our total outstanding indebtedness and the value of our properties at any time. If we become more highly leveraged, the resulting increase in outstanding debt could adversely affect our ability to make debt service payments, to pay our anticipated distributions and to make the distributions required to maintain our qualification as a REIT. The occurrence of any of the foregoing risks could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations, our ability to make distributions to our stockholders and the trading price of our securities.

Lenders may require us to enter into restrictive covenants relating to our operations, which could limit our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

In providing financing to us, a lender may impose restrictions on us that would affect our ability to incur additional debt, make certain investments, reduce liquidity below certain levels, make distributions to our stockholders and otherwise affect our distribution and operating policies. In general, we expect that our loan agreements will restrict our ability to encumber or otherwise transfer our interest in the respective property without the prior consent of the lender. Such loan documents may contain other negative covenants that may limit our ability to discontinue insurance coverage or impose other limitations. Any such restriction or limitation may limit our ability to make distributions to you. Further, such restrictions could make it difficult for us to satisfy the requirements necessary to maintain our qualification as a REIT.

We may engage in hedging transactions, which can limit our gains and increase exposure to losses.

Subject to maintaining our qualification as a REIT, we may enter into hedging transactions to protect us from the effects of interest rate fluctuations on floating rate debt. Our hedging transactions may include entering

11

Table of Contents

into interest rate swap agreements or interest rate cap or floor agreements, or other interest rate exchange contracts. Hedging activities may not have the desired beneficial impact on our results of operations or financial condition. No hedging activity can completely insulate us from the risks associated with changes in interest rates. Moreover, interest rate hedging could fail to protect us or adversely affect us because, among other things:

Hedging involves risk and typically involves costs, including transaction costs, that may reduce our overall returns on our investments. These costs increase as the period covered by the hedging increases and during periods of rising and volatile interest rates. These costs will also limit the amount of cash available for distribution to stockholders. We generally intend to hedge as much of the interest rate risk as we determine is in our best interests given the cost of such hedging transactions. The REIT tax rules may limit our ability to enter into hedging transactions by requiring us to limit our income from non-qualifying hedges. If we are unable to hedge effectively because of the REIT tax rules, we will face greater interest rate exposure than may be commercially prudent.

Economic conditions may adversely affect the real estate market and our income.

Continued concerns regarding the uncertainty over whether the U.S. economy will be adversely affected by inflation, deflation or stagflation, and the systemic impact of increased unemployment and underemployment, volatile energy costs, geopolitical issues, the availability and cost of credit, future policy and fiscal decision of the new administration, the mortgage market in the United States and a distressed real estate market have contributed to increased market volatility and threatened business and consumer confidence. This uncertain operating environment could adversely affect our ability to generate revenues, thereby reducing our operating income and earnings.

In addition, local real estate conditions such as an oversupply of properties or a reduction in demand for properties, competition from other similar properties, our ability to provide or arrange for adequate maintenance, insurance and management and advisory services, increased operating costs (including real estate taxes), the attractiveness, location of the property, changes in market rental rates and region-specific legislation or political initiatives may adversely affect a property’s income and value. A rise in energy costs could result in higher operating costs, which may affect our results of operations. In addition, local conditions in the markets in which we own or intend to own properties may significantly affect occupancy or rental rates at such properties. Events that could prevent us from raising or maintaining rents or cause us to reduce rents include layoffs, plant closings, relocations of significant local employers and other events reducing local employment rates, an oversupply of—or a lack of demand for—office space, a decline in household formation, the inability or unwillingness of tenants to pay rent increases, and geopolitical developments having a disproportionate effect on the markets in which we operate.

12

Table of Contents

Our joint venture investments could be adversely affected by the capital markets, our lack of sole decision-making authority, our reliance on joint venture partners’ financial condition and any disputes that may arise between us and our joint venture partners.

We have in the past co-invested, and may in the future co-invest, with third parties through partnerships, joint ventures or other structures, acquiring non-controlling interests in, or sharing responsibility for managing the affairs of, a property, partnership, co-tenancy or other entity. Investments in joint ventures may, under certain circumstances, involve risks not present when a third party is not involved, including potential deadlocks in making major decisions, restrictions on our ability to exit the joint venture, reliance on our joint venture partners and the possibility that joint venture partners might become bankrupt or fail to fund their share of required capital contributions, thus exposing us to liabilities in excess of our share of the investment or take action that could jeopardize our REIT status. The funding of our capital contributions may be dependent on proceeds from asset sales, credit facility advances and/or sales of equity securities. Joint venture partners may have business interests or goals that are inconsistent with our business interests or goals and may be in a position to take actions contrary to our policies or objectives. We may in specific circumstances be liable for the actions of our joint venture partners. In addition, any disputes that may arise between us and joint venture partners may result in litigation or arbitration that would increase our expenses.

We may incur significant costs complying with various federal, state and local laws, regulations and covenants that are applicable to our properties, which could have an adverse impact on our financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and market price of our common stock.

The properties in our portfolio are subject to various covenants and federal, state and local laws and regulatory requirements, including permitting and licensing requirements. Local regulations, including municipal or local ordinances, zoning restrictions and restrictive covenants imposed by community developers may restrict our use of our properties and may require us to obtain approval or waivers from local officials or restrict our use of our properties and may require us to obtain approval from local officials of community standards organizations at any time with respect to our properties, including prior to acquiring a property or when undertaking renovations of any of our existing properties. Among other things, these restrictions may relate to fire and safety, seismic or hazardous material abatement requirements. There can be no assurance that existing or future laws and regulatory policies, including federal laws or executive actions affecting the markets in which we operate, will not adversely affect us or the timing or cost of any future acquisitions or renovations, or that additional regulations will not be adopted that could increase such delays or result in additional costs. Our growth strategy may be affected by our ability to obtain permits, licenses and zoning relief. Our failure to obtain such permits, licenses and zoning relief or to comply with applicable laws could have an adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and per share market price of our common stock.

We could incur significant costs related to government regulation and private litigation over environmental matters involving the presence, discharge or threat of discharge of hazardous or toxic substances, which could adversely affect our operations, the value of our properties and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

Our properties may be subject to environmental liabilities. Under various federal, state and local laws, a current or previous owner, operator or tenant of real estate can face liability for environmental contamination created by the presence, discharge or threat of discharge of hazardous or toxic substances. Liabilities can include the cost to investigate, clean up and monitor the actual or threatened contamination and damages caused by the contamination or threatened contamination.

The liability under such laws may be strict, joint and several, meaning that we may be liable regardless of whether we knew of, or were responsible for, the presence of the contaminants, and the government entity or private party may seek recovery of the entire amount from us even if there are other responsible parties. Liabilities associated with environmental conditions may be significant and can sometimes exceed the value of

13

Table of Contents

the affected property. The presence of hazardous substances on a property may adversely affect our ability to sell or rent that property or to borrow using that property as collateral.

Environmental laws also:

Existing conditions at some of our properties may expose us to liability related to environmental matters.

Independent environmental consultants have conducted Phase I or similar environmental site assessments on all of our properties. Site assessments are intended to discover and evaluate information regarding the environmental condition of the surveyed property and surrounding properties. These assessments do not generally include subsurface investigations or mold or asbestos surveys. None of the recent site assessments revealed any past or present environmental liability that we believe would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, cash flows or results of operations. However, the assessments may have failed to reveal all environmental conditions, liabilities or compliance concerns. Material environmental conditions, liabilities or compliance concerns may have arisen after the review was completed or may arise in the future; and future laws, ordinances or regulations may impose material additional environmental liability.

Costs of future environmental compliance could negatively affect our ability to make distributions to our stockholders, and remedial measures required to address such conditions could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, cash flows or results of operations.

Our properties may contain asbestos or develop harmful mold, which could lead to liability for adverse health effects and costs of remediating the problem, which could adversely affect the value of the affected property and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

We are required by federal regulations with respect to our properties to identify and warn, via signs and labels, of potential hazards posed by workplace exposure to installed asbestos-containing materials (“ACMs”) and potential ACMs. We may be subject to an increased risk of personal injury lawsuits by workers and others exposed to ACMs and potential ACMs at our properties as a result of these regulations. The regulations may affect the value of any of our properties containing ACMs and potential ACMs. Federal, state and local laws and regulations also govern the removal, encapsulation, disturbance, handling and disposal of ACMs and potential ACMs when such materials are in poor condition or in the event of construction, remodeling, renovation or demolition of a property.

When excessive moisture accumulates in buildings or on building materials, mold growth may occur, particularly if the moisture problem remains undiscovered or is not addressed over a period of time. Some molds may produce airborne toxins or irritants. Concern about indoor exposure to mold has been increasing because exposure to mold may cause a variety of adverse health effects and symptoms, including allergic or other reactions.

The presence of ACMs or significant mold at any of our properties could require us to undertake a costly remediation program to contain or remove the ACMs or mold from the affected property. In addition, the presence of ACMs or significant mold could expose us to claims of liability to our tenants, their or our employees, and others if property damage or health concerns arise.

14

Table of Contents

Potential losses, including from adverse weather conditions, natural disasters and title claims, may not be covered by insurance.

Certain of our properties are located in states where natural disasters such as tornadoes, hurricanes and earthquakes are more common than in other states. Given recent extreme weather events across other parts of the United States, it is also possible that our other properties could incur significant damage due to other natural disasters. While we carry insurance to cover a substantial portion of the cost of such events, such as draughts or flooding, our insurance includes deductible amounts and certain items may not be covered by insurance. Future natural disasters may significantly affect our operations and properties and, more specifically, may cause us to experience reduced rental revenue (including from increased vacancy), incur clean-up costs or otherwise incur costs in connection with such events. Any of these events may have a material adverse effect on our business, cash flows, financial condition, results of operations and ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

Furthermore, we do not carry insurance for certain losses, including, but not limited to, losses caused by certain environmental conditions, such as mold or asbestos, riots, civil unrest or war. In addition, our title insurance policies may not insure for the current aggregate market value of our portfolio, and we do not intend to increase our title insurance coverage as the market value of our portfolio increases. As a result, we may not have sufficient coverage against all losses that we may experience, including from adverse title claims.

If we experience a loss that is uninsured or exceeds policy limits, we could incur significant costs and lose the capital invested in the damaged properties as well as the anticipated future cash flows from those properties. In addition, if the damaged properties are subject to recourse indebtedness, we would continue to be liable for the indebtedness, even if these properties were irreparably damaged.

Moreover, we carry several different lines of insurance, placed with several large insurance carriers. If any one of these large insurance carriers were to become insolvent, we would be forced to replace the existing insurance coverage with another suitable carrier and any outstanding claims would be at risk for collection. In such an event, we cannot be certain that we would be able to replace the coverage at similar or otherwise favorable terms. Replacing insurance coverage at unfavorable rates and the potential of uncollectible claims due to carrier insolvency could adversely affect our results of operations and cash flows.

We may be limited in our ability to diversify our investments making us more vulnerable economically than if our investments were diversified.

Our ability to diversify our portfolio may be limited both as to the number of investments owned and the geographic regions in which our investments are located. While we seek to diversify our portfolio by geographic location, we focus on our specified target markets that we believe offer the opportunity for attractive returns and, accordingly, our actual investments may result in concentrations in a limited number of geographic regions. As a result, there is an increased likelihood that the performance of any single property, or the economic performance of a particular region in which our properties are located, could materially affect our operating results.

We may acquire properties with lock-out provisions, or agree to such provisions in connection with obtaining financing, which may prohibit us from selling or refinancing a property during the lock-out period.

We may acquire properties in exchange for common units and agree to restrictions on sales or refinancing, called “lock-out” provisions, which are intended to preserve favorable tax treatment for the owners of such properties who sell them to us. In addition, we may agree to lock-out provisions in connection with obtaining financing for the acquisition of properties. Lock-out provisions could materially restrict us from selling, otherwise disposing of or refinancing properties. These restrictions could affect our ability to turn our investments into cash and thus affect cash available for distributions to our stockholders. Lock-out provisions could impair our ability to take actions during the lock-out period that would otherwise be in the best interests of

15

Table of Contents

our stockholders and, therefore, could adversely impact the market value of our common stock. In particular, lock-out provisions could preclude us from participating in major transactions that could result in a disposition of our assets or a change in control even though that disposition or change in control might be in the best interests of our stockholders.

Illiquidity of real estate investments could significantly impede our ability to respond to adverse changes in the performance of our properties and harm our financial condition.

The real estate investments made, and to be made, by us are relatively difficult to sell quickly. As a result, our ability to promptly sell one or more properties in our portfolio in response to changing economic, financial and investment conditions is limited. Return of capital and realization of gains, if any, from an investment generally will occur upon disposition or refinancing of the underlying property. We may be unable to realize our investment objectives by sale, other disposition or refinancing at attractive prices within any given period of time or may otherwise be unable to complete any exit strategy. In particular, our ability to dispose of one or more properties is subject to weakness in or even the lack of an established market for a property, changes in the financial condition or prospects of prospective purchasers, changes in national or international economic conditions, such as the recent economic downturn, and changes in laws, regulations or fiscal policies of jurisdictions in which the property is located. Furthermore, our ability to dispose of the properties that we acquired through our initial public offering within the four years immediately following the completion of our initial public offering and the related Formation Transactions is subject to certain limitations imposed by our tax protection agreements.

In addition, the Code imposes restrictions on a REIT’s ability to dispose of properties that are not applicable to other types of real estate companies. In particular, the tax laws applicable to REITs effectively require that we hold our properties for investment, rather than primarily for sale in the ordinary course of business, which may cause us to forego or defer sales of properties that otherwise would be in our best interest. Therefore, we may not be able to adjust our portfolio in response to economic or other conditions promptly or on favorable terms, which may adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and per share market price of our common stock.

If we sell properties by providing financing to purchasers, we will bear the risk of default by the purchaser.

If we decide to sell any of our properties, we intend to use commercially reasonable efforts to sell them for cash. However, in some instances we may sell our properties by providing financing to purchasers. If we provide financing to purchasers, we will bear the risk of default by the purchasers which would reduce the value of our assets, impair our ability to make distributions to our stockholders and reduce the price of our common stock.

We may be unable to collect balances due on our leases from any tenants in bankruptcy, which could adversely affect our cash flow and the amount of cash available for distribution to our stockholders.

The bankruptcy or insolvency of one or more of our tenants may adversely affect the income produced by our properties. We cannot assure you that any tenant that files for bankruptcy protection will continue to pay us rent. If a tenant files for bankruptcy, any or all of the tenant’s or a guarantor of a tenant’s lease obligations could be subject to a bankruptcy proceeding pursuant to Chapter 11 or Chapter 7 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. Such a bankruptcy filing would impose an automatic stay barring all efforts by us to collect pre-bankruptcy rents from these entities or their properties, unless we receive an order from the bankruptcy court lifting the automatic stay to permit us to pursue collections. A tenant or lease guarantor bankruptcy could delay our efforts to collect past due balances under the relevant leases and could ultimately preclude collection of these sums. If a lease is rejected by a tenant in bankruptcy, we would only have a general unsecured claim for damages. This claim could be paid only in the event funds were available and then only in the same percentage as that realized on other unsecured claims. Our claim would be capped at the rent reserved under the lease, without acceleration, for the

16

Table of Contents

greater of one year or 15% of the remaining term of the lease, but not greater than three years, plus rent already due but unpaid. Therefore, if a lease is rejected, it is possible that we would not receive payment from the tenant or that we would receive substantially less than the full value of any unsecured claims we hold, which would result in a reduction in our rental income, cash flow and the amount of cash available for distribution to our stockholders.

We may face additional risks and costs associated with owning properties occupied by government tenants, which could negatively impact our cash flows and results of operations.

As of December 31, 2016, we owned seven properties in which some or all of the tenants are federal government agencies. We may continue to pursue the acquisition of office properties in which substantial space is leased to governmental agencies. As such, lease agreements with these federal government agencies contain certain provisions required by federal law, which require, among other things, that the contractor (which is the lessor or the owner of the property), agree to comply with certain rules and regulations, including, but not limited to, rules and regulations related to anti-kickback procedures, examination of records, audits and records, equal opportunity provisions, prohibition against segregated facilities, certain executive orders, subcontractor cost or pricing data, certain provisions intending to assist small businesses and contractual rights of termination by the tenants. We may be subject to requirements of the Employment Standards Administration’s Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs and requirements to prepare affirmative action plans pursuant to the applicable executive order may be determined to be applicable to us.

In addition, some of our leases with government tenants may be subject to statutory or contractual rights of termination by the tenants, which will allow them to vacate the leased premises before the stated terms of the leases expire with little or no liability. For fiscal policy reasons, security concerns or other reasons, some or all of our government tenants may decide to vacate our properties. If a significant number of such vacancies occur, our rental income may materially decline, our cash flow and results of operations could be adversely affected and our ability to pay regular distributions to you may be jeopardized.

Our government tenants are also subject to discretionary funding from the federal government. Federal government programs are subject to annual congressional budget authorization and appropriation processes. For many programs, Congress appropriates funds on a fiscal year basis even though the program performance period may extend over several years. Laws and plans adopted by the U.S. Government relating to, along with pressures on and uncertainty surrounding the federal budget, potential changes in priorities and spending levels, sequestration, the appropriations process, use of continuing resolutions (with restrictions, e.g., on new starts) and the permissible federal debt limit, could adversely affect the funding for our government tenants. The budget environment and uncertainty surrounding the appropriations processes remain significant long-term risks as budget cuts could adversely affect the viability of our government tenants.

Some of the leases at our properties contain “early termination” provisions which, if triggered, may allow tenants to terminate their leases without further payment to us, which could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations and the value of the applicable property.

Certain tenants have a right to terminate their leases upon payment of a penalty, but others are not required to pay any penalty associated with an early termination. Most of our tenants that are federal or state governmental agencies, which account for approximately 53.9% of the base rental revenue from our properties as of December 31, 2016, may, under certain circumstances, vacate the leased premises before the stated terms of the leases expire with little or no liability to us. There can be no assurance that tenants will continue their activities and continue occupancy of the premises. Any cessation of occupancy by tenants may have an adverse effect on our operations.

The federal government’s “green lease” policies may adversely affect us.

In recent years, the federal government has instituted “green lease” policies which allow a government tenant to require leadership in energy and environmental design for commercial interiors, or LEED ^® -CI,

17

Table of Contents

certification in selecting new premises or renewing leases at existing premises. In addition, the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 allows the General Services Administration to prefer buildings for lease that have received an “Energy Star” label. Obtaining such certifications and labels may be costly and time consuming, but our failure to do so may result in our competitive disadvantage in acquiring new or retaining existing government tenants.

We may be unable to complete acquisitions and, even if acquisitions are completed, we may fail to successfully operate acquired properties.

Our business plan includes, among other things, growth through identifying suitable acquisition opportunities, consummating acquisitions and leasing such properties. We will evaluate the market of available properties and may acquire properties when we believe strategic opportunities exist. Our ability to acquire properties on favorable terms and successfully develop or operate them is subject to, among others, the following risks:

Acquired properties may be located in new markets where we may face risks associated with investing in an unfamiliar market.

We may acquire properties in markets that are new to us. When we acquire properties located in new markets, we may face risks associated with a lack of market knowledge or understanding of the local economy, forging new business relationships in the area and unfamiliarity with local government and permitting procedures. We work to mitigate such risks through extensive diligence and research and associations with experienced service providers. However, there can be no guarantee that all such risks will be eliminated.

18

Table of Contents

Adverse market and economic conditions could cause us to recognize impairment charges or otherwise impact our performance.

We intend to review the carrying value of our properties when circumstances, such as adverse market conditions (including conditions resulting from the recent economic downturn), indicate a potential impairment may exist. We intend to base our review on an estimate of the future cash flows (excluding interest charges) expected to result from the property’s use and eventual disposition on an undiscounted basis. We intend to consider factors such as future operating income, trends and prospects, as well as the effects of leasing demand, competition and other factors. If our evaluation indicates that we may be unable to recover the carrying value of a real estate investment, an impairment loss will be recorded to the extent that the carrying value exceeds the estimated fair value of the property.

Impairment losses would have a direct impact on our operating results because recording an impairment loss results in an immediate negative adjustment to our operating results. The evaluation of anticipated cash flows is highly subjective and is based in part on assumptions regarding future occupancy, rental rates and capital requirements that could differ materially from actual results in future periods. If the real estate market deteriorates, we may reevaluate the assumptions used in our impairment analysis. Impairment charges could materially adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and ability to pay distributions on, and the per share market price of, our common stock.

Litigation may result in unfavorable outcomes.

Like many real estate operators, we may be involved in lawsuits involving premises liability claims and alleged violations of landlord-tenant laws, which may give rise to class action litigation or governmental investigations. Any material litigation not covered by insurance, such as a class action, could result in us incurring substantial costs and harm our financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and ability to pay distributions to you.

We may invest in properties with other entities, and our lack of sole decision-making authority or reliance on a joint-venturer’s financial condition could make these joint venture investments risky and expose us to losses or impact our ability to maintain our qualification as a REIT.

We may co-invest in the future with third parties through partnerships, joint ventures or other entities. We may acquire non-controlling interests or share responsibility for managing the affairs of a property, partnership, joint venture or other entity. In such events, we would not be in a position to exercise sole decision-making authority regarding the property or entity. Investments in entities may, under certain circumstances, involve risks not present were a third party not involved. These risks include the possibility that partners or joint-venturers:

Such investments may also have the potential risk of impasses on decisions, such as a sale or refinancing of the property, because neither we nor the partner or joint-venturer would have full control over the partnership or joint venture. Disputes between us and partners or joint-venturers may result in litigation or arbitration that would increase our expenses and prevent our officers and directors from focusing their time and effort on our business or result in costs to terminate the relationship. Actions of partners or joint-venturers may cause losses to our investments and adversely affect our ability to maintain our qualification as a REIT. In addition, we may in certain circumstances be liable for the actions of our third-party partners or joint-venturers if:

19

Table of Contents

Compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and similar laws may require us to make significant unanticipated expenditures.

All of our properties and any future properties that we acquire are and will be required to comply with the ADA. The ADA requires that all public accommodations must meet federal requirements related to access and use by disabled persons. For those projects receiving federal funds, the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (the “RA”) also has requirements regarding disabled access. Although we believe that our properties are substantially in compliance with the present requirements, we may incur unanticipated expenses to comply with the ADA, the RA and other applicable legislation in connection with the ongoing operation or redevelopment of our properties. These and other federal, state and local laws may require modifications to our properties, or affect renovations of our properties. Non-compliance with these laws could result in the imposition of fines or an award of damages to private litigants and also could result in an order to correct any non-complying feature, which could result in substantial capital expenditures.

Our property taxes could increase due to property tax rate changes or reassessment, which may adversely impact our cash flows.

Even as a REIT, we will be required to pay some state and local taxes on our properties. The real property taxes on our properties may increase as property tax rates change or as our properties are assessed or reassessed by taxing authorities. Therefore, the amount of property taxes that we pay in the future may increase substantially. In addition, the real property taxes on Cherry Creek are reduced due to having a government user as its largest tenant and loss of such tenant would increase the amount of property taxes. If the property taxes that we pay increase, our cash flow could be impacted, and our ability to pay expected distributions to our stockholders may be adversely affected.

It may be difficult to enforce civil liabilities against members of our board of directors or our executive officers.

Some of the members of our board of directors and our executive officers reside in Canada and substantially all of the assets of such persons are located in Canada. As a result, it may be difficult for you to effect service of process within the United States or in any other jurisdiction outside of Canada upon these persons or to enforce against them in any jurisdiction outside of Canada judgments predicated upon the laws of any such jurisdiction, including any judgment predicated upon the federal and state securities laws of the United States.

20

Table of Contents

Risks Related to Our Status As a REIT

Our failure to maintain our qualification as a REIT would result in significant adverse tax consequences to us and would adversely affect our business and the value of our stock.

We have elected and intend to continue to operate in a manner that will allow us to qualify to be taxed as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes commencing with our taxable year ended December 31, 2014. Qualification as a REIT involves the application of highly technical and complex tax rules, for which there are only limited judicial and administrative interpretations. The fact that we hold substantially all of our assets through our Operating Partnership further complicates the application of the REIT requirements. Even a seemingly minor technical or inadvertent mistake could jeopardize our REIT status. Our REIT status depends upon various factual matters and circumstances that may not be entirely within our control. For example, in order to qualify as a REIT, at least 95% of our gross income in any year must be derived from qualifying sources, such as rents from real property, and we must satisfy a number of requirements regarding the composition of our assets. Also, we must make distributions to stockholders aggregating annually at least 90% of our REIT taxable income, determined without regard to the deduction for dividends paid and excluding net capital gains. In addition, new legislation, regulations, administrative interpretations or court decisions, each of which could have retroactive effect, may make it more difficult or impossible for us to maintain our qualifiaction as a REIT, or could reduce the desirability of an investment in a REIT relative to other investments. We have not requested and do not plan to request a ruling from the Internal Revenue Service (the “IRS”) that we qualify as a REIT, and the statements in this annual report are not binding on the IRS or any court. Accordingly, we cannot be certain that we will be successful in maintaining our qualification as a REIT.

If we fail to maintain our qualification as a REIT in any taxable year, we will face serious adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences that would substantially reduce the funds available to distribute to you. If we fail to maintain our qualification as a REIT:

In addition, if we fail to maintain our qualification as a REIT, we will not be required to make distributions to stockholders. As a result of all these factors, our failure to maintain our qualification as a REIT could impair our ability to expand our business and raise capital and would adversely affect the value of our capital stock.

Even if we qualify as a REIT, we may be subject to some U.S. federal, state and local income, property and excise taxes on our income or property and, in certain cases, a 100% penalty tax, in the event we sell property that we hold primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of business. In addition, our taxable REIT subsidiaries (“TRSs”) are subject to tax as regular corporations in the jurisdictions in which they operate.

To maintain our qualification as a REIT, we may be forced to borrow funds during unfavorable market conditions to make distributions to our stockholders.

To maintain our qualification as a REIT, we generally must distribute to our stockholders at least 90% of our REIT taxable income each year, determined without regard to the deduction for dividends paid and excluding any net capital gain, and we will be subject to regular corporate income taxes to the extent that we distribute less than 100% of our REIT taxable income each year. In addition, we will be subject to a 4% nondeductible excise tax on the amount, if any, by which distributions paid by us in any calendar year are less than the sum of 85% of our ordinary income, 95% of our capital gain net income and 100% of our undistributed income from prior years.

21

Table of Contents

To maintain our qualification as a REIT and avoid the payment of income and excise taxes, we may need to borrow funds to meet the REIT distribution requirements. These borrowing needs could result from:

We may need to borrow funds at times when the then-prevailing market conditions are not favorable for borrowing. These borrowings could increase our costs or reduce our equity and adversely affect the value of our common stock.

If our Operating Partnership failed to qualify as a partnership for U.S. federal income tax purposes, we would cease to qualify as a REIT and suffer other adverse consequences.

We believe that our Operating Partnership will be treated as a partnership for U.S. federal income tax purposes. As a partnership, our Operating Partnership generally will not be subject to U.S. federal income tax on its income. Instead, each of its partners, including us, will be required to pay tax on its allocable share of our Operating Partnership’s income. We cannot assure you, however, that the IRS will not challenge the status of our Operating Partnership or any other subsidiary partnership in which we own an interest as a partnership for U.S. federal income tax purposes, or that a court would not sustain such a challenge. If the IRS were successful in treating our Operating Partnership or any such other subsidiary partnership as an entity taxable as a corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes, we would fail to meet the gross income tests and certain of the asset tests applicable to REITs and, accordingly, we would likely cease to qualify as a REIT. Also, the failure of our Operating Partnership or any subsidiary partnerships to qualify as a partnership could cause it to become subject to U.S. federal and state corporate income tax, which would reduce significantly the amount of cash available for debt service and for distribution to its partners, including us.

Dividends payable by REITs do not qualify for the reduced tax rates available for some dividends.

The maximum income tax rate applicable to “qualified dividends” payable to non-corporate U.S. stockholders, including individuals, trusts and estates, is 20%. Dividends payable by REITs, however, generally are not eligible for the reduced rate. Although these rules do not adversely affect the taxation of REITs or dividends payable by REITs, the more favorable rates applicable to regular corporate qualified dividends could cause investors who are individuals, trusts and estates to perceive investments in REITs to be relatively less attractive than investments in the stocks of non-REIT corporations that pay dividends, which could adversely affect the value of the shares of REITs, including the market price of our capital stock.

The tax imposed on REITs engaging in “prohibited transactions” may limit our ability to engage in transactions which would be treated as sales for U.S. federal income tax purposes.

A REIT’s net income from prohibited transactions is subject to a 100% penalty tax. In general, prohibited transactions are sales or other dispositions of property, other than foreclosure property, held in inventory primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of business. Although we do not intend to hold any properties that would be characterized as inventory held for sale to customers in the ordinary course of our business, such characterization is a factual determination and no guarantee can be given that the IRS would agree with our characterization of our properties or that we will always be able to make use of the available safe harbors.

22

Table of Contents

To maintain our qualification as a REIT, we may be forced to forego otherwise attractive opportunities.

To maintain our qualification as a REIT, we must satisfy tests concerning, among other things, the sources of our income, the nature and diversification of our assets, the amounts that we distribute to our stockholders and the ownership of our stock. We may be required to make distributions to stockholders at times when it would be more advantageous to reinvest cash in our business or when we do not have funds readily available for distribution. Thus, compliance with the REIT requirements may hinder our ability to operate solely on the basis of maximizing profits.

In particular, we must ensure that at the end of each calendar quarter, at least 75% of the value of our assets consists of cash, cash items, government securities and qualified real estate assets. The remainder of our investment in securities (other than government securities, securities of any qualified REIT subsidiary or TRS of ours and securities that are qualified real estate assets) generally may not include more than 10% of the outstanding voting securities of any one issuer or more than 10% of the total value of the outstanding securities of any one issuer. In addition, in general, no more than 5% of the value of our assets (other than government securities, securities of any qualified REIT subsidiary or TRS of ours and securities that are qualified real estate assets) may consist of the securities of any one issuer. No more than 25% (20% for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017) of the value of our total assets can be represented by securities of one or more TRSs, and no more than 25% of our assets can be represented by debt of “publicly offered” REITs (i.e., REITs that are required to file annual and periodic reports with the SEC under the Exchange Act) that is not secured by real property or interests in real property. If we fail to comply with these requirements at the end of any calendar quarter, we must remedy the failure within 30 days or qualify for certain limited statutory relief provisions to avoid losing status as a REIT. As a result, we may be required to liquidate otherwise attractive investments. These actions could have the effect of reducing our income and amounts available for distribution to our stockholders.

We may be subject to adverse legislative or regulatory tax changes that could increase our tax liability, reduce our operating flexibility and reduce the market price of our shares of capital stock.

At any time, the U.S. federal income tax laws governing REITs may be amended or the administrative and judicial interpretations of those laws may be changed. We cannot predict when or if any new U.S. federal income tax law, regulation, or administrative and judicial interpretation, or any amendment to any existing U.S. federal income tax law, regulation or administrative or judicial interpretation, will be adopted, promulgated or become effective, and any such law, regulation, or interpretation may be effective retroactively. In addition, according to publicly released statements, a top legislative priority of the Trump administration and Congress may be significant reform of the Code, including significant changes to taxation of business entities. There is a substantial lack of clarity around both the timing and the details of any such tax reform and the impact of any potential tax reform on an investment in us. We and our stockholders could be adversely affected by any such change in, or any new, U.S. federal income tax law, regulation or administrative and judicial interpretation.

Risks Associated With the Internalization

We are subject to risks and uncertainties associated with the Internalization.

We have a limited operating history, particularly as an internally-managed company. Prior to the internalization of our management, we were externally managed by City Office Real Estate Management Inc. Realizing our business objectives depends in large part on the ability of our internal management structure to effectively manage the day-to-day operations of our assets and properties. We cannot assure you that our past performance with external management will be indicative of internal management’s ability to function effectively and successfully operate our Company. If our internal management structure is not successful in managing our properties to achieve the investment returns we anticipate, our operations may be adversely impacted.

23

Table of Contents

Our commitment to Second City following our internalization may give rise to various conflicts of interest.

We are subject to conflicts of interest arising out of our relationship with Second City and its affiliates. As a result of our Internalization, our management will continue to provide services to Second City under the terms of the Administrative Services Agreement. An example of these potential conflicts of interests includes competition for the time and services of personnel that work for us and our affiliates.

Risks Related to Our Organizational Structure

Conflicts of interest exist or could arise in the future between the interests of our stockholders and the interests of holders of units in our Operating Partnership, which may impede business decisions that could benefit our stockholders.

Conflicts of interest exist or could arise in the future as a result of the relationships between us, on the one hand, and our Operating Partnership or any partner thereof, on the other. Our directors and officers have duties to our Company under applicable Maryland law in connection with their management of our Company. At the same time, we, as the general partner of our Operating Partnership, have fiduciary duties and obligations to our Operating Partnership and its limited partners under Maryland law and the partnership agreement of our Operating Partnership in connection with the management of our Operating Partnership. Our fiduciary duties and obligations as general partner to our Operating Partnership and its partners may come into conflict with the duties of our directors and officers to our Company.

Additionally, the partnership agreement provides that we and our officers, directors and employees, will not be liable or accountable to our Operating Partnership for losses sustained, liabilities incurred or benefits not derived if we, or such officer, director or employee acted in good faith. The partnership agreement also provides that we will not be liable to our Operating Partnership or any partner for monetary damages for losses sustained, liabilities incurred or benefits not derived by our Operating Partnership or any limited partner, except for liability for our intentional harm or gross negligence. Moreover, the partnership agreement provides that our Operating Partnership is required to indemnify us and our officers, directors, employees, agents and designees from and against any and all claims that relate to the operations of our Operating Partnership, except (1) if the act or omission of the person was material to the matter giving rise to the action and either was committed in bad faith or was the result of active and deliberate dishonesty, (2) for any transaction for which the indemnified party received an improper personal benefit, in money, property or services or otherwise in violation or breach of any provision of the partnership agreement or (3) in the case of a criminal proceeding, if the indemnified person had reasonable cause to believe that the act or omission was unlawful. We are not aware of any reported decision of a Maryland appellate court that has interpreted provisions similar to the provisions of the partnership agreement of our Operating Partnership that modify and reduce our fiduciary duties or obligations as the general partner or reduce or eliminate our liability for money damages to our Operating Partnership and its partners, and we have not obtained an opinion of counsel as to the enforceability of the provisions set forth in the partnership agreement that purport to modify or reduce the fiduciary duties that would be in effect were it not for the partnership agreement.

The consideration that we pay for the properties and assets we own may exceed their aggregate fair market value.

The amount of consideration that we pay for properties is based on management’s estimate of fair market value, including an analysis of market sales comparables, market capitalization rates for other properties and assets and general market conditions for such properties and assets. In certain instances, management’s estimate of fair market value may exceed the fair market value of these properties and assets.

24

Table of Contents

We are a holding company with no direct operations and, as such, we rely on funds received from our Operating Partnership to pay liabilities, and the interests of our stockholders are structurally subordinated to all liabilities and obligations of our Operating Partnership and its subsidiaries.

We are a holding company and conduct substantially all of our operations through our Operating Partnership. We do not have, apart from an interest in our Operating Partnership, any independent operations. As a result, we rely on distributions from our Operating Partnership to pay any dividends that we may declare on shares of our capital stock. We also rely on distributions from our Operating Partnership to meet any of our obligations, including any tax liability on taxable income allocated to us from our Operating Partnership. In addition, because we are a holding company, your claims as stockholders are structurally subordinated to all existing and future liabilities and obligations (whether or not for borrowed money) of our Operating Partnership and its subsidiaries. Therefore, in the event of our bankruptcy, liquidation or reorganization, our assets and those of our Operating Partnership and its subsidiaries will be available to satisfy the claims of our stockholders only after all of our Operating Partnership’s and its subsidiaries’ liabilities and obligations have been paid in full.

We may have assumed unknown liabilities in connection with our acquisition of properties and any properties we may acquire in the future may expose us to unknown liabilities.

As part of the Formation Transactions and thereafter, we acquired entities and assets that may be subject to existing liabilities, some of which may be unknown or unquantifiable. These assumed liabilities might include liabilities for cleanup or remediation of undisclosed environmental conditions, claims by tenants, vendors, tax liabilities and accrued but unpaid liabilities incurred in the ordinary course of business or other potential claims or liabilities. While in some instances we may have the right to seek reimbursement against an insurer, any recourse against third parties, including the contributors of our assets, for these liabilities are limited. There can be no assurance that we are entitled to any such reimbursements or that ultimately we will be able to recover in respect of such rights for any of these historical liabilities.

In addition, there can be no assurance that our current title insurance policies will adequately protect us against any losses resulting from such title defects or adverse developments.

We may acquire properties subject to liabilities and without any recourse, or with only limited recourse, against the prior owners or other third parties with respect to unknown liabilities. As a result, if a liability were asserted against us based upon ownership of those properties, we might have to pay substantial sums to settle or contest it, which could adversely affect our results of operations and cash flow. Unknown liabilities with respect to acquired properties might include:

We may be unable to renew expiring leases or re-lease vacant space on a timely basis or on attractive terms, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and cash flow.

At December 31, 2016, approximately 18.6%, 16.5% and 14.8% of our annualized cash basis rent is scheduled to expire in 2017, 2018 and 2019, respectively, excluding month-to-month leases. Current tenants may not renew their leases upon the expiration of their terms and may attempt to terminate their leases prior to the expiration of their current terms. If non-renewals or terminations occur, we may not be able to locate qualified replacement tenants and, as a result, we could lose a significant source of revenue while remaining responsible for the payment of our financial obligations. Moreover, the terms of a renewal or new lease, including the

25

Table of Contents

amount of rent, may be less favorable to us than the current lease terms, or we may be forced to provide tenant improvements at our expense or provide other concessions or additional services to maintain or attract tenants. Any of these factors could cause a decline in lease revenue or an increase in operating expenses, which would have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and cash flow.

Our business and operations would suffer in the event of system failures.

Despite system redundancy and the implementation of security measures for our IT networks and related systems, our systems are vulnerable to damages from any number of sources, including computer viruses, energy blackouts, natural disasters, terrorism, war, and telecommunication failures. We rely on our IT networks and related systems, including the Internet, to process, transmit and store electronic information and to manage or support a variety of our business processes, including financial transactions and keeping of records, which may include personal identifying information of tenants and lease data. We rely on commercially available systems, software, tools and monitoring to provide security for processing, transmitting and storing confidential tenant information, such as individually identifiable information relating to financial accounts. Any failure to maintain proper function, security and availability of our IT networks and related systems could interrupt our operations, damage our reputation, subject us to liability claims or regulatory penalties and could have a material adverse effect on our operations. As such, any of the foregoing events could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.

We face risks associated with our tenants being designated “Prohibited Persons” by the Office of Foreign Assets Control.

Pursuant to Executive Order 13224 and other laws, the Office of Foreign Assets Control of the U.S. Department of the Treasury, or OFAC, maintains a list of persons designated as terrorists or who are otherwise blocked or banned, or Prohibited Persons. OFAC regulations and other laws prohibit conducting business or engaging in transactions with Prohibited Persons. Certain of our loan and other agreements may require us to comply with these OFAC requirements. If a tenant or other party with whom we contract is placed on the OFAC list, we may be required by the OFAC requirements to terminate the lease or other agreement. Any such termination could result in a loss of revenue or a damage claim by the other party that the termination was wrongful.

Our tax protection agreements could limit our ability to sell or otherwise dispose of certain properties.

In connection with our initial public offering and the related Formation Transactions, our Operating Partnership entered into tax protection agreements that provide that if we dispose of any interest in our initial properties in a taxable transaction prior to the fourth anniversary of the completion of our initial public offering, subject to certain exceptions, we will indemnify certain contributors of properties in our Formation Transactions for their tax liabilities attributable to the built-in gain that exists with respect to our properties as of the time of our initial public offering and their tax liabilities incurred as a result of such tax protection payment. Therefore, although it may be in our stockholders’ best interests that we sell one of these properties, it may be economically prohibitive for us to do so because of these obligations. Moreover, as a result of these potential tax liabilities, certain of our officers may have a conflict of interest with respect to our determination as to these properties.

Our tax protection agreements may require our Operating Partnership to maintain certain debt levels that otherwise would not be required to operate our business.

Under our tax protection agreements, our Operating Partnership is required to maintain a minimum level of indebtedness throughout the four years immediately following our initial public offering and the related Formation Transactions, regardless of whether such debt levels are otherwise required to operate our business. Moreover, our Operating Partnership may be required to provide certain contributors of properties in our Formation Transactions with the opportunity to guarantee debt upon a future repayment, retirement, refinancing

26

Table of Contents

or other reduction of currently outstanding debt prior to the fourth anniversary of the completion of our initial public offering. After such fourth anniversary, our Operating Partnership will be required to use commercially reasonable efforts to provide the protected parties with an opportunity to guarantee its debt, provided that it will not be required to incur any debt that it otherwise would not have incurred. If we fail to make such opportunities available, we will be required to make a cash payment intended to approximate the sum of the tax liabilities resulting from our failure to make such opportunities available or to maintain the minimum level of indebtedness and the tax liabilities incurred as a result of such tax protection payment. We agreed to these provisions in order to assist the contributors and their owners in deferring the recognition of taxable gain as a result of and after our initial public offering and the related Formation Transactions. These obligations may require us to maintain more or different indebtedness than we would otherwise require for our business.

Our charter, our amended and restated bylaws and Maryland law contain provisions that may delay, defer or prevent a change of control transaction and may prevent our stockholders from receiving a premium for their shares.

Our charter contains ownership limits that may delay, defer or prevent a change of control transaction. Our charter, with certain exceptions, authorizes our directors to take such actions as are necessary and desirable to qualify as a REIT. Unless exempted by our board of directors, our charter provides that no person may own more than 9.8% of the value of our outstanding shares of capital stock or more than 9.8% in value or number (whichever is more restrictive) of the outstanding shares of our common stock. Our board of directors may not grant such an exemption to any proposed transferee whose ownership in excess of 9.8% of the foregoing ownership limits would result in the termination of our status as a REIT. These restrictions on transferability and ownership will not apply if our board of directors determines that it is no longer in our best interests to attempt to qualify as a REIT. The ownership limit may delay or impede a transaction or a change of control that might involve a premium price for our common stock or otherwise be in the best interests of our stockholders.

We could authorize and issue stock without stockholder approval that may delay, defer or prevent a change of control transaction. Our charter authorizes us to issue additional authorized but unissued shares of our common stock or preferred stock. In addition, our board of directors may classify or reclassify any unissued shares of our common stock or preferred stock and may set the preferences, rights and other terms of the classified or reclassified shares. Our board of directors may also, without stockholder approval, amend our charter to increase the authorized number of shares of our common stock or our preferred stock that we may issue. Our board of directors could establish a class or series of common stock or preferred stock that could, depending on the terms of such class or series, delay, defer or prevent a transaction or a change of control that might involve a premium price for our common stock or otherwise be in the best interests of our stockholders.

Certain provisions of Maryland law could delay, defer or prevent a change of control transaction. Certain provisions of the Maryland General Corporation Law (“MGCL”) may have the effect of inhibiting a third party from making a proposal to acquire us or of impeding a change of control. In some cases, such an acquisition or change of control could provide you with the opportunity to realize a premium over the then-prevailing market price of your shares. These MGCL provisions include:

27

Table of Contents

In the case of the business combination provisions of the MGCL, we opted out by resolution of our board of directors. In the case of the control share provisions of the MGCL, we opted out pursuant to a provision in our amended and restated bylaws. However, our board of directors may by resolution elect to opt in to the business combination provisions of the MGCL. Further, we may opt in to the control share provisions of the MGCL in the future by amending our bylaws, which our board of directors can do without stockholder approval.

Maryland law, and our charter and amended and restated bylaws, also contain other provisions that may delay, defer or prevent a transaction or a change of control that might involve a premium price for our common stock or otherwise be in the best interest of our stockholders.

The ability of our board of directors to revoke our REIT status without stockholder approval may cause adverse consequences to our stockholders.

Our charter provides that our board of directors may revoke or otherwise terminate our REIT election, without the approval of our stockholders, if it determines that it is no longer in our best interest to continue to qualify as a REIT. If we cease to be a REIT, we would become subject to U.S. federal income tax on our taxable income and would no longer be required to distribute most of our taxable income to our stockholders, which may have adverse consequences on our total return to our stockholders.

Our board of directors may amend our investing and financing guidelines without stockholder approval, and, accordingly, you would have limited control over changes in our policies that could increase the risk that we default under our debt obligations or that could harm our business, results of operations and share price.

Although we are not required to maintain any particular leverage ratio, we intend, when appropriate, to employ prudent amounts of leverage and to use debt as a means of providing additional funds for the acquisition of our target assets and the diversification of our portfolio. Our organizational documents do not limit the amount or percentage of debt that we may incur, nor do they limit the types of properties that we may acquire or develop. The amount of leverage we will deploy for particular investments in our target assets will depend upon our management team’s assessment of a variety of factors, which may include the anticipated liquidity and price volatility of the target assets in our investment portfolio, the potential for losses, the availability and cost of financing the assets, our opinion of the creditworthiness of our financing counterparties, the health of the U.S. economy and commercial mortgage markets, our outlook for the level, slope and volatility of interest rates, the credit quality of our target assets and the collateral underlying our target assets. Our board of directors may alter or eliminate our current guidelines on investing and financing at any time without stockholder approval. Changes in our strategy or in our investing and financing guidelines could expose us to greater credit risk and interest rate risk and could also result in a more leveraged balance sheet. These factors could result in an increase in our debt service and could adversely affect our cash flow and our ability to make expected distributions to you. Higher leverage also increases the risk that we would default on our debt.

Our rights and the rights of our stockholders to take action against our directors and officers are limited.

Maryland law provides that a director or officer generally has no liability in that capacity if he or she performs his or her duties in good faith, in a manner he or she reasonably believes to be in our best interests and

28

Table of Contents

with the care that an ordinarily prudent person in a like position would use under similar circumstances. As permitted by the MGCL, our charter limits the liability of our directors and officers to us and our stockholders for money damages, except for liability resulting from:

In addition, our charter authorizes us to obligate our Company, and our amended and restated bylaws require us, to indemnify and pay or reimburse our present and former directors and officers for actions taken by them in those capacities to the maximum extent permitted by Maryland law. As a result, we and our stockholders may have more limited rights against our directors and officers than might otherwise exist under common law. Accordingly, in the event that actions taken in good faith by any of our directors or officers impede the performance of our Company, your ability to recover damages from such director or officer will be limited.