Item 1A. Risk Factors.

An investment in our securities involves a number of significant risks and other factors relating to our structure and investment objectives. As a result, we cannot assure you that we will achieve our investment objectives. You should consider carefully the following information before making an investment in our securities.

Risks related to our business and properties

Certain of our tenants and borrowers may be unable to pay rent or make mortgage payments, which could adversely affect our cash available to make distributions to our stockholders.

Some of our tenants and borrowers may have recently been either restructured using leverage, or acquired in a leveraged transaction. Tenants and borrowers that are subject to significant debt obligations may be unable to make their rent or mortgage payments if there are adverse changes to their businesses or because of the impact of the recent recession or recurrence of a similar event. Tenants that have experienced leveraged restructurings or acquisitions will generally have substantially greater debt and substantially lower net worth than they had prior to the leveraged transaction. In addition, the payment of rent and debt service may reduce the working capital available to leveraged entities and prevent them from devoting the resources necessary to remain competitive in their industries.

In situations where management of the tenant or borrower will change after a transaction, it may be difficult for our Adviser to determine with reasonable certainty the likelihood of the tenant’s or borrower’s business success and of its ability to pay rent or make mortgage payments throughout the lease or loan term. These companies generally are more vulnerable to adverse economic and business conditions, and increases in interest rates.

We are subject to the credit risk of our tenants, which in the event of bankruptcy, could adversely affect our results of operations.

We are subject to the credit risk of our tenants. Any bankruptcy of a tenant or borrower could cause:

 

Under bankruptcy law, a tenant who is the subject of bankruptcy proceedings has the option of continuing or terminating any unexpired lease. If a bankrupt tenant terminates a lease with us, any claim we might have for breach of the lease (excluding a claim against collateral securing the lease) will be treated as a general unsecured claim. Our claim would likely be capped at the amount the tenant owed us for unpaid rent prior to the bankruptcy unrelated to the termination, plus the greater of one year’s lease payments or 15% of the remaining lease payments payable under the lease (but no more than three years’ lease payments). In addition, due to the long-term nature of our leases and terms providing for the repurchase of a property by the tenant, a bankruptcy court could re-characterize a net lease transaction as a secured lending transaction. If that were to occur, we would not be treated as the owner of the property, but might have additional rights as a secured creditor.

In addition, we may enter into sale-leaseback transactions, whereby we would purchase a property and then lease the same property back to the person from whom we purchased it. In the event of the bankruptcy of a tenant, a transaction structured as a sale-leaseback may be re-characterized as either a financing or a joint venture, either of which outcomes could adversely affect our business. If the sale-leaseback were re-characterized as a financing, we might not be considered the owner of the property, and as a result would have the status of a creditor in relation to the tenant. In that event, we would no longer have the right to sell or encumber our ownership interest in the property. Instead, we would have a claim against the tenant for the amounts owed under the lease, with the claim arguably secured by the property. The tenant/debtor might have the ability to propose a plan restructuring the term, interest rate and amortization schedule of its outstanding balance. If confirmed by the bankruptcy court, we could be bound by the new terms, and prevented from foreclosing our lien on the property. If the sale-leaseback were re-characterized as a joint venture, we could be treated as a co-venturer with our lessee with regard to the property. As a result, we could be held liable, under some circumstances, for debts incurred by the lessee relating to the property. Either of these outcomes could adversely affect our cash flow and our ability to pay distributions to stockholders.

We may be unable to renew leases, lease vacant space or re-lease space as leases expire, which could adversely affect our business and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

If we cannot renew leases, we may be unable to re-lease our properties to other tenants at rates equal to or above the current market rate. Even if we can renew leases, tenants may be able to negotiate lower rates as a result of market conditions. Market conditions may also hinder our ability to lease vacant space in newly developed or redeveloped properties. In addition, we may enter into or acquire leases for properties that are suited to the needs of a particular tenant. Such properties may require renovations, tenant improvements or other concessions to lease them to other tenants if the initial leases terminate. We may be required to expend substantial funds for tenant improvements and tenant refurbishments to re-lease the vacated space and cannot assure you that we will have sufficient sources of funding available to use in the future for such purposes and therefore may have difficulty in securing a replacement tenant. Any of these factors could adversely impact our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow or our ability to pay distributions to our stockholders.

Net leases may not result in fair market lease rates over time, thereby failing to maximize income and distributions to our stockholders.

A large portion of our rental income comes from net leases, which frequently provide the tenant greater discretion in using the leased property than ordinary property leases, such as the right to sublease the property, subject to our approval, to make alterations in the leased premises and to terminate the lease prior to its expiration under specified circumstances. Further, net leases are typically for longer lease terms and, thus, there is an increased risk that contractual rental increases in future years will fail to result in fair market rental rates during those years. As a result, our income and distributions to our stockholders could be lower than they would otherwise be if we did not engage in net leases.

Multi-tenant properties expose us to additional risks.

Our multi-tenant properties could expose us to the risk that a sufficient number of suitable tenants may not be found to enable the property to operate profitably. This loss of income could cause a material adverse impact to our results of operations and business. Multi-tenant properties are also subject to tenant turnover and fluctuation in occupancy rates, which could affect our operating results. Furthermore, multi-tenant properties expose us to the risk of increased operating expenses, which may occur when the actual cost of taxes, insurance and maintenance at the property exceeds the operating expenses paid by tenants and/or the amounts budgeted.

We face certain risks associated with our build-to-suit activities.

We may (1) provide a developer with either a combination of financing for construction of a build-to-suit property or a commitment to acquire a property upon completion of construction of a build-to-suit property and commencement of rent from the tenant or (2) acquire a property subject to a lease and engage a developer to complete construction of a build-to-suit property as required by the lease. We face uncertainties associated with a developer’s timely performance and timely completion of a project, including the performance or timely completion of contractors and subcontractors. If a developer, contractor or subcontractor fails to perform, we may resort to legal action to compel performance, remove the developer or rescind the purchase or construction contract. We may also incur additional risks as we make periodic payments or other advances to developers before completion of construction. These and other factors can result in increased costs of a project or loss of our investment, and may be affected by conditions beyond both our and the developer’s control.

Illiquidity of real estate investments may make it difficult for us to sell properties in response to market conditions and could harm our financial condition and ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

To the extent the properties are not subject to triple-net leases, some significant expenditures, such as real estate taxes and maintenance costs, are generally not reduced when circumstances cause a reduction in income from the investment. Should these events occur, our income and funds available for distribution could be adversely affected. In addition, as a REIT, we may be subject to a 100% tax on net income derived from the sale of property considered to be held primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of our business. We may seek to avoid this tax by complying with certain safe harbor rules that generally limit the number of properties we may sell in a given year, the aggregate expenditures made on such properties prior to their disposition, and how long we retain such properties before disposing of them. However, we can provide no assurance that we will always be able to comply with these safe harbors. If compliance is possible, the safe harbor rules may restrict our ability to sell assets in the future and achieve liquidity that may be necessary to fund distributions.

Our real estate investments may include special use and single or multi-tenant properties that may be difficult to sell or re-lease upon tenant defaults, early lease terminations, or non-renewals.

We focus our investments on office and industrial properties, a number of which include manufacturing facilities, special use storage or warehouse facilities and special use single or multi-tenant properties. These types of properties are relatively illiquid compared to other types of real estate and financial assets. This illiquidity will limit our ability to quickly change our portfolio in response to changes in economic or other conditions. With these properties, if the current lease is terminated or not renewed or, in the case of a mortgage loan, if we take such property in foreclosure, we may be required to renovate the property or to make rent concessions to lease the property to another tenant or sell the property. In addition, in the event we are forced to sell the property, we may have difficulty selling it to a party other than the tenant or borrower due to the special purpose for which the property may have been designed.

These and other limitations may affect our ability to sell or re-lease properties without adversely affecting returns to our stockholders.

Many of our tenants are lower middle market businesses, which exposes us to additional risks unique to these entities.

Leasing real property or making mortgage loans to lower middle market businesses exposes us to a number of unique risks related to these entities, including the following:

 

Our real estate investments have a limited number of tenants and are concentrated in a limited number of industries, which subjects us to an increased risk of significant loss if any one of these tenants is unable to pay or if particular industries experience downturns.

As of December 31, 2018 , we owned 101 properties and had 110 leases on these properties, and our five largest tenants accounted for approximately 16.5% of our total rental income. A consequence of a limited number of tenants is that the aggregate returns we realize may be materially adversely affected by the unfavorable performance of a small number of tenants. We generally do not have fixed guidelines for industry concentration, but we are restricted from exceeding an industry concentration greater than 20% without approval of our investment committee. As of December 31, 2018 , 15.4% of our total rental income was earned from tenants in the Telecommunications industry, 13.4% was earned from tenants in the Diversified/Conglomerate Services industry, and 12.5% was earned from tenants in the Automobile industry and 11.6% was earned from tenants in the Healthcare industry. As a result, a downturn in an industry in which we have invested a significant portion of our total assets could have a material adverse effect on us.

The inability of a tenant in a single tenant property to pay rent will reduce our revenues and increase our carrying costs of the building.

Since most of our properties are occupied by a single tenant, the success of each investment will be materially dependent on the financial stability of these tenants. If a tenant defaults, our rental revenues would be reduced and our expenses associated with carrying the property would increase, as we would be responsible for payments such as taxes and insurance. Lease payment defaults by these tenants could adversely affect our cash flows and cause us to reduce the amount of distributions to stockholders. In the event of a default by a tenant, we may experience delays in enforcing our rights as landlord and may incur substantial costs in protecting our investment and re-leasing our property. If a lease is terminated, there is no assurance that we will be able to lease the property for the rent previously received or sell the property without incurring a loss.

Liability for uninsured losses could adversely affect our financial condition.

Losses from disaster-type occurrences (such as wars, floods or earthquakes) may be either uninsurable or not insurable on economically viable terms. Should such a loss occur, we could lose our capital investment or anticipated profits and cash flow from one or more properties.

We could incur significant costs related to government regulation and private litigation over environmental matters.

Under various environmental laws, including the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, a current or previous owner or operator of real property may be liable for contamination resulting from the release or threatened release of hazardous or toxic substances or petroleum at that property, and an entity that arranges for the disposal or treatment of a hazardous or toxic substance or petroleum at another property may be held jointly and severally liable for the cost to investigate and clean up such property or other affected property. Such parties are known as potentially responsible parties (“PRPs”). Environmental laws often impose liability without regard to whether the owner or operator knew of, or was responsible for, the presence of the contaminants, and the costs of any required investigation or cleanup of these substances can be substantial. PRPs are liable to the government as well as to other PRPs who may have claims for contribution. The liability is generally not limited under such laws and could exceed the property’s value and the aggregate assets of the liable party. The presence of contamination or the failure to remediate contamination at our properties also may expose us to third-party liability for personal injury or property damage, or adversely affect our ability to sell, lease or develop the real property or to borrow using the real property as collateral.

Environmental laws also impose ongoing compliance requirements on owners and operators of real property. Environmental laws potentially affecting us address a wide variety of matters, including, but not limited to, asbestos-containing building materials, storage tanks, storm water and wastewater discharges, lead-based paint, wetlands and hazardous wastes. Failure to comply with these laws could result in fines and penalties and/or expose us to third-party liability. Some of our properties may have conditions that are subject to these requirements, and we could be liable for such fines or penalties and/or liable to third parties for those conditions.

We could be exposed to liability and remedial costs related to environmental matters.

Certain of our properties may contain, or may have contained, asbestos-containing building materials (“ACBMs”). Environmental laws require that ACBMs be properly managed and maintained and may impose fines and penalties on building owners and operators for failure to comply with these requirements. Also, certain of our properties may contain, or may have contained, or are adjacent to or near other properties that have contained or currently contain storage tanks for the storage of petroleum products or other hazardous or toxic substances. These operations create a potential for the release of petroleum products or other hazardous or toxic substances. Certain of our properties may contain, or may have contained, elevated radon levels. Third parties may be permitted by law to seek recovery from owners or operators for property damage and/or personal injury associated with exposure to contaminants, including, but not limited to, petroleum products, hazardous or toxic substances and asbestos fibers. Also, certain of our properties may contain regulated wetlands that can delay or impede development or require costs to be incurred to mitigate the impact of any disturbance. Absent appropriate permits, we can be held responsible for restoring wetlands and be required to pay fines and penalties.

Certain of our properties may contain, or may have contained, microbial matter such as mold and mildew. The presence of microbial matter could adversely affect our results of operations. In addition, if any of our property is not properly connected to a water or sewer system, or if the integrity of such systems are breached, or if water intrusion into our buildings otherwise occurs, microbial matter or other contamination can develop. 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. If this were to occur, we could incur significant remedial costs and we may also be subject to material private damage claims and awards. Concern about indoor exposure to mold has been increasing, as exposure to mold may cause a variety of adverse health effects and symptoms, including allergic or other reactions. If we become subject to claims in this regard, it could materially and adversely affect us and our future insurability for such matters.

The assessments we perform on our acquisition of property may fail to reveal all environmental conditions, liabilities or compliance concerns. Material environmental conditions, liabilities or compliance concerns may have arisen after the assessments were conducted or may arise in the future, and future laws, ordinances or regulations may impose material additional environmental liability. We cannot assure you that costs of future environmental compliance will not affect our ability to make distributions or that such costs or other remedial measures will not be material to us.

Our properties may be subject to impairment charges, which could adversely affect our results of operations.

We are required to periodically evaluate our properties for impairment indicators. A property’s value is considered impaired if management’s estimate of the aggregate future cash flows (undiscounted and without interest charges) to be generated by the property, based upon its intended use, is less than the carrying value of the property. These estimates of cash flows are based upon factors such as expected future operating income, trends and prospects, as well as the effects of interest and capitalization rates, demand and occupancy, competition and other factors. These factors may result in uncertainty in valuation estimates and instability in the estimated value of our properties which, in turn, could result in a substantial decrease in the value of the properties and significant impairment charges.

We continually assess our properties to determine if any impairments are necessary or appropriate. No assurance can be given that we will be able to recover the current carrying amount of our properties in the future. Our failure to do so would require us to recognize additional impairment charges for the period in which we reached that conclusion, which could materially and adversely affect us and our results of operations. We recognized impairment charges of $0.0 million , $6.8 million , and $2.0 million during the years ended December 31, 2018 , 2017 , and 2016 , respectively.

Mortgage loans may be affected by unfavorable real estate market conditions, including interest rate fluctuations, which could decrease the value of those loans and our results of operations.

Investments in mortgage loans, exposes us to the risk of default by the borrowers on those mortgage loans as well as interest rate risks. To the extent we incur delays in liquidating such defaulted mortgage loans, we may not be able to obtain sufficient proceeds to repay all amounts due to us under the mortgage loans. Further, we will not know whether the values of the properties securing the mortgage loans will remain at the levels existing on the dates of origination of those mortgage loans. If the values of the underlying properties fall, our risk will increase because of the lower value of the security associated with such loans. We do not have any mortgage loans receivable currently outstanding.

Risks related to our financing

Capital markets and economic conditions can materially affect our financial condition and results of operations, the value of our equity securities, and our ability to sustain payment of distributions at current levels.

Many factors affect the value of our equity securities and our ability to make or maintain the current levels of distributions to stockholders, including the state of the capital markets and the economy. The availability of credit has been and may in the future again be adversely affected by illiquid credit markets. Regulatory pressures and the burden of troubled and uncollectible loans has led some lenders and institutional investors to reduce, and in some cases, cease to provide funding to borrowers. If these market conditions recur, they may limit our ability and the ability of our tenants to timely refinance maturing liabilities and access the capital markets to meet liquidity needs, which may materially affect our financial condition and results of operations and the value of our equity securities and our ability to sustain payment of distributions to stockholders at current levels.

Our Credit Facility contains various covenants which, if not complied with, could accelerate our repayment obligations, thereby materially and adversely affecting our liquidity, financial condition, results of operations and ability to pay distributions to stockholders.

The agreement governing our Credit Facility requires us to comply with certain financial and operational covenants. These covenants require us to, among other things, maintain certain financial ratios, including fixed charge coverage, debt service coverage and a minimum net worth. We are also required to limit our distributions to stockholders to 100% of our FFO. As of December 31, 2018 , we were in compliance with these covenants. However, our continued compliance with these covenants depends on many factors, and could be impacted by current or future economic conditions, and thus there are no assurances that we will continue to comply with these covenants. Failure to comply with these covenants would result in a default which, if we were unable to obtain a waiver from the lenders, could accelerate our repayment obligations under the Credit Facility and thereby have a material adverse impact on our liquidity, financial condition, results of operations and ability to pay distributions to stockholders.

Because our business strategy relies on external financing, we may be negatively affected by restrictions on additional borrowings, and the risks associated with leverage, including our debt service obligations.

We use leverage so that we may make more investments than would otherwise be possible to maximize potential returns to stockholders. Although we have been gradually reducing our overall leverage over the past few years to lower this risk, if the income generated by our properties and other assets fails to cover our debt service, we could be forced to reduce or eliminate distributions to our stockholders and may experience losses.

Our ability to achieve our investment objectives will be affected by our ability to borrow money in sufficient amounts and on favorable terms. We expect that we will primarily borrow money that will be secured by our properties and that these financing arrangements will contain customary covenants such as those that limit our ability, without the prior consent of the lender, to further mortgage the applicable property or to discontinue insurance coverage. Accordingly, we may be unable to obtain the degree of leverage we believe to be optimal, which may cause us to have less cash for distribution to stockholders than we would have with an optimal amount of leverage. Our use of leverage could also make us more vulnerable to a downturn in our business or the economy, as it may become difficult to meet our debt service obligations if our cash flows are reduced due to tenant defaults. There is also a risk that a significant increase in the ratio of our indebtedness to the measures of asset value used by financial analysts may have an adverse effect on the market price of our securities.

We face risks related to “balloon payments” and refinancing.

Some of our debt financing arrangements may require us to make lump-sum or “balloon” payments at maturity. Our ability to make a balloon payment at maturity is uncertain and may depend upon our ability to obtain additional financing or to sell the financed property. At the time the balloon payment is due, we may not be able to refinance the balloon payment on terms as favorable as the original loan or sell the property at a price sufficient to make the balloon payment, which could adversely affect the amount of distributions to our stockholders. We have balloon payments of $48.9 million payable during the year ending December 31, 2019 .

We mortgage our properties, which subjects us to the risk of foreclosure in the event of non-payment.

We intend to acquire additional properties by using our Credit Facility and by continuing to seek long-term mortgage financing, where we will borrow a portion of the purchase price of a potential acquisition and secure the loan with a mortgage on some or all of our existing real property. We look to regional banks, insurance companies and other non-bank lenders, and, to a lesser extent, the CMBS market to issue mortgages to finance our real estate activities. For the year ended December 31, 2018 , we obtained approximately $21.0 million in long-term financing, which we used to acquire additional properties. If we are unable to make our debt payments as required, a lender could foreclose on the property securing its loan. This could cause us to lose part or all of our investment in such property which in turn could cause the value of our securities or the amount of distributions to our stockholders to be reduced.

We face a risk from the fact that certain of our properties are cross-collateralized.

As of December 31, 2018 , the mortgages on certain of our properties were cross-collateralized. To the extent that any of the properties in which we have an interest are cross-collateralized, any default by the property owner subsidiary under the mortgage note relating to the one property will result in a default under the financing arrangements relating to any other property that also provides security for that mortgage note or is cross-collateralized with such mortgage note.

A change in the value of our assets could cause us to experience a cash shortfall or be in default of our loan covenants.

We borrow on an unsecured basis under the Credit Facility; however, we are required to maintain a pool of unsecured assets sufficient to draw on the Credit Facility. A significant reduction in the value of our pool of unencumbered assets could require us to pay down a portion (or significant portion) of the balance of the Credit Facility. Although we believe that we have significant excess collateral and capacity, future asset values are uncertain. If we were unable to meet a request to add collateral to the Credit Facility, this inability could have a material adverse effect on our liquidity and our ability to meet our loan covenants.

Interest rate fluctuations may adversely affect our results of operations.

We may experience interest rate volatility in connection with mortgage loans on our properties or other variable-rate debt that we may obtain from time to time. Certain of our leases contain escalations based on market interest rates and the interest rate on our Credit Facility and a portion of our long-term mortgages is variable. We have $60.7 million of outstanding principal on variable rate mortgages as of December 31, 2018 . Although we seek to mitigate this risk by structuring such provisions to contain a maximum interest rate or escalation rate, as applicable, and generally obtain rate caps and interest rate swaps to limit our exposure to interest rate risk, these features or arrangements do not eliminate this risk. We are also exposed to the effects of interest rate changes as a result of holding cash and cash equivalents in short-term, interest-bearing investments. We have entered into interest rate caps to attempt to manage our exposure to interest rate fluctuations on all our outstanding variable rate mortgages. Additionally, increases in interest rates, or reduced access to credit markets due, among other things, to more stringent lending requirements or a high level of leverage, may make it difficult for us to refinance our mortgage debt as it matures or limit the availability of mortgage debt, thereby limiting our acquisition and/or refinancing activities. Even in the event that we are able to secure mortgage debt on, or otherwise refinance our mortgage debt, due to increased costs associated with securing financing and other factors beyond our control, we may be unable to refinance the entire mortgage debt as it matures or be subject to unfavorable terms, including higher loan fees interest rates and periodic payments, if we do refinance the mortgage debt. A significant change in interest rates could have an adverse impact on our results of operations.

Over the past few years, the Federal Reserve has made gradual increases in the federal funds rate. These increases in the federal funds rate and any future increases due to other key economic indicators, such as the unemployment rate or inflation, may cause interest rates and borrowing costs to rise, which may negatively impact our ability to access the debt markets on favorable terms. Any prolonged adverse economic conditions could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Changes relating to the LIBOR calculation process may adversely affect the value of the LIBOR-indexed, floating-rate debt in our portfolio.

In July 2017, the head of the United Kingdom Financial Conduct Authority announced the desire to phase out the use of LIBOR by the end of 2021. There is currently no definitive information regarding the future utilization of LIBOR or any particular replacement rate. As such, the potential effect of any such event on our cost of capital cannot yet be determined.

Actions by the United Kingdom Financial Conduct Authority or other regulators or law enforcement agencies as a result of these or future events, may result in changes to the manner in which LIBOR is determined. Potential changes, or uncertainty related to such potential changes may adversely affect the market for LIBOR-based debt. In addition, any further changes or reforms to the determination or supervision of LIBOR may result in a sudden or prolonged increase or decrease in reported LIBOR, which could have an adverse impact on the market for LIBOR-based debt, or the value of our portfolio of LIBOR-indexed, floating-rate debt.

Risks related to the real estate industry

We are subject to certain risks associated with real estate ownership and lending which could reduce the value of our investments.

Our investments include primarily industrial and office property. Our performance, and the value of our investments, is subject to risks inherent to the ownership and operation of these types of properties, including:

 

The debt obligations of our tenants are dependent upon certain factors, which neither we nor our tenants or borrowers control, such as national, local and regional business and economic conditions, government economic policies, and the level of interest rates.

Competition for the acquisition of real estate may impede our ability to make acquisitions or increase the cost of these acquisitions.

We compete with many other entities to acquire properties, including financial institutions, institutional pension funds, other REITs, foreign real estate investors, other public and private real estate companies and private real estate investors. These competitors may prevent us from acquiring desirable properties, cause an increase in the price we must pay for real estate, have greater resources than we do, and be willing to pay more for certain assets or may have a more compatible operating philosophy with our acquisition targets. In particular, larger REITs may enjoy significant competitive advantages that result from, among other things, a lower cost of capital and enhanced operating efficiencies. Our competitors may also adopt transaction structures similar to ours or offer more substantial rent abatements, tenant improvements, early termination rights or below-market renewal options to retain tenants, which would decrease our competitive advantage in offering flexible transaction terms. In addition, the number of entities and the amount of funds competing for suitable investment properties may increase, resulting in increased demand and increased prices paid for these properties.

Our ownership of properties through ground leases exposes us to risks which are different than those resulting from our ownership of fee title to other properties.

We have acquired an interest in four of our properties by acquiring a leasehold interest in the land underlying the property, and we may acquire additional properties in the future that are subject to similar ground leases. In this situation, we have no economic interest in the land underlying the property and do not control this land, thus this type of ownership interest poses potential risks for our business because (i) if the ground lease terminates for any reason, we will lose our interest in the property, including any investment that we made in the property, (ii) if our tenant defaults under the previously existing lease, we will continue to be obligated to meet the terms and conditions of the ground lease without the annual amount of ground lease payments reimbursable to us by the tenant, and (iii) if the third party owning the land under the ground lease disrupts our use either permanently or for a significant period of time, then the value of our assets could be impaired and our results of operations could be adversely affected.

Risks related to our Adviser and Administrator

We are dependent upon our key personnel, who are employed by our Adviser or Administrator, as applicable, for our future success, particularly David Gladstone, Terry Lee Brubaker, Robert Cutlip, and Michael Sodo.

We are dependent on our senior management and other key management members to carry out our business and investment strategies. Our future success depends to a significant extent on the continued service and coordination of our senior management team, particularly David Gladstone, our chairman and chief executive officer, Terry Lee Brubaker, our vice chairman and chief operating officer, Robert Cutlip, our president, and Michael Sodo, our chief financial officer. The departure of any of our executive officers or key personnel could have a material adverse effect on our ability to implement our business strategy and to achieve our investment objectives.

Our success depends on the performance of our Adviser and if our Adviser makes inadvisable investment or management decisions, our operations could be materially adversely impacted.

Our ability to achieve our investment objectives and to pay distributions to our stockholders is dependent upon the performance of our Adviser in evaluating potential investments, selecting and negotiating property purchases and dispositions and mortgage loans, selecting tenants and borrowers, setting lease or mortgage loan terms and determining financing arrangements. Accomplishing these objectives on a cost-effective basis is largely a function of our Adviser’s marketing capabilities, management of the investment process, ability to provide competent, attentive and efficient services and our access to financing sources on acceptable terms. Our stockholders have no opportunity to evaluate the terms of transactions or other economic or financial data concerning our investments and must rely entirely on the analytical and management abilities of our Adviser and the oversight of our Board of Directors. If our Adviser or our Board of Directors makes inadvisable investment or management decisions, our operations could be materially adversely impacted. As we grow, our Adviser may be required to hire, train, supervise and manage new employees. Our Adviser’s failure to effectively manage our future growth could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We may have conflicts of interest with our Adviser and other affiliates.

Our Adviser manages our business and locates, evaluates, recommends and negotiates the acquisition of our real estate investments. At the same time, our Advisory Agreement permits our Adviser to conduct other commercial activities and provide management and advisory services to other entities, including, but not limited to, Gladstone Capital, Gladstone Investment, and Gladstone Land. Moreover, with the exception of our chief financial officer, treasurer and president, all of our executive officers and directors are also executive officers and directors of Gladstone Capital and Gladstone Investment, which actively make loans to and invest in lower middle market companies, and with the exception of our chief financial officer and president, all of our executive officers and directors are also officers and directors of Gladstone Land, an agricultural real estate investment trust. Further, our chief executive officer and chairman is on the board of managers of Gladstone Securities, an affiliated broker dealer that provides us with mortgage financing services pursuant to a contractual agreement and is the 100% indirect owner of and controls Gladstone Securities. As a result, we may from time to time have conflicts of interest with our Adviser in its management of our business, Gladstone Securities, in its provision of services to us and our other affiliated funds, and with Gladstone Capital, Gladstone Investment and Gladstone Land, which may arise primarily from the involvement of our Adviser, Gladstone Securities, Gladstone Capital, Gladstone Investment, Gladstone Land and their affiliates in other activities that may conflict with our business.

Examples of these potential conflicts include:

 

These and other conflicts of interest between us and our Adviser and other affiliates could have a material adverse effect on the operation of our business and the selection or management of our real estate investments.

Terminating the Advisory Agreement without cause requires payment of a termination fee.

Termination of the Advisory Agreement with our Adviser without cause would be difficult and costly. We may only terminate the agreement without cause (as defined therein) upon 120 days’ prior written notice and after the affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of our independent directors. Furthermore, if we default under the agreement and any applicable cure period has expired, the Adviser may terminate the agreement. In each of the foregoing cases, we will be required to pay the Adviser a termination fee equal to two times the sum of the average annual base management fee and incentive fee earned by our Adviser during the 24-month period prior to such termination. This provision increases the cost to us of terminating the Advisory Agreement and adversely affects our ability to terminate our Adviser without cause. Additionally, depending on the amount of the fee, if incurred, it could adversely affect our ability to pay distributions to our common, preferred and senior common stockholders.

Our Adviser is not obligated to provide a waiver of the incentive fee, which could negatively impact our earnings and our ability to maintain our current level of, or increase, distributions to our stockholders.

The Advisory Agreement contemplates a quarterly incentive fee based on our Core FFO (as defined in the Advisory Agreement). Our Adviser has the ability to issue a full or partial waiver of the incentive fee for current and future periods; however, our Adviser is not required to issue any waiver. Any waiver issued by our Adviser is a voluntary, unconditional and irrevocable waiver. For the years ended December 31, 2018 , 2017 , and 2016 our Adviser did not issue a full or partial waiver of the incentive fee. If our Adviser does not issue this waiver in future quarters, it could negatively impact our earnings and may compromise our ability to maintain our current level of, or increase, distributions to our stockholders, which could have a material adverse impact on the market price of our securities.

Risks Related to Qualification and Operation as a REIT

If we fail to qualify as a REIT, our operations and distributions to stockholders would be adversely impacted.

We intend to continue to be organized and to operate to qualify as a REIT under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”). A REIT generally is not taxed at the corporate level on income it currently distributes to its stockholders. Qualification as a REIT involves the application of highly technical and complex rules for which there are only limited judicial or administrative interpretations. The determination of various factual matters and circumstances not entirely within our control may affect our ability to continue to qualify as a REIT. In addition, new legislation, new regulations, administrative interpretations or court decisions could significantly change the tax laws, possibly with retroactive effect, with respect to qualification as a REIT or the federal income tax consequences of such qualification.

If we were to fail to qualify as a REIT in any taxable year:

 

We may need to incur additional borrowings to meet the REIT minimum distribution requirement and to avoid excise tax.

To maintain our qualification as a REIT, we are required to distribute to our stockholders at least 90% of our annual real estate investment trust taxable income (excluding any net capital gain and before application of the distributions paid deduction). To the extent that we satisfy this distribution requirement, but distribute less than 100% of our taxable income, we will be subject to federal corporate income tax on our undistributed taxable income. In addition, we are subject to a 4% nondeductible excise tax on the amount, if any, by which certain distributions paid by us with respect to any calendar year are less than the sum of (i) 85% of our ordinary income for that year, (ii) 95% of our net capital gain for that year and (iii) 100% of our undistributed taxable income from prior years. To meet the 90% distribution requirement and to avoid the 4% excise tax, we may need to incur additional borrowings. Although we intend to pay distributions to our stockholders in a manner that allows us to meet the 90% distribution requirement and avoid this 4% excise tax, we cannot assure you that we will always be able to do so.

Complying with the REIT requirements may cause us to forgo otherwise attractive opportunities or liquidate otherwise attractive investments.

To qualify as a REIT for federal income tax purposes, we must continually satisfy tests concerning, among other things, the nature of our assets, the sources of our gross income, the amounts we distribute to our stockholders and the ownership of our capital stock. To meet these tests, we may be required to forgo investments we might otherwise make. Thus, compliance with the REIT requirements may hinder our performance.

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 taxable REIT subsidiaries (“TRSs”) and qualified real estate assets) generally cannot include more than 10% by voting power or vote 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 TRSs and qualified real estate assets) can consist of the securities of any one issuer, and no more than 25% (20% beginning with our taxable year ending December 31, 2018) of the value of our total assets can be represented by the securities of one or more TRSs.

We also must ensure that (i) at least 75% of our gross income for each taxable year consists of certain types of income that we derive, directly or indirectly, from investments relating to real property or mortgages on real property or qualified temporary investment income and (ii) at least 95% of our gross income for each taxable year consists of income that is qualifying income for purposes of the 75% gross income test, other types of interest and distributions, gain from the sale or disposition of stock or securities, or any combination of these.

In addition, we may be required to make distributions to our stockholders at disadvantageous times or when we do not have funds readily available for distribution. If we fail to comply with these requirements at the end of any calendar quarter, we must qualify for certain statutory relief provisions to avoid losing our REIT qualification and suffering adverse tax consequences. As a result, we may be required to liquidate otherwise attractive investments, and may be unable to pursue investments that would otherwise be advantageous to us to satisfy the asset and gross income requirements for qualifying as a REIT. These actions could have the effect of reducing our income and the amounts available for distribution to our stockholders. Thus, compliance with the REIT requirements may hinder our ability to make, and, in certain cases, maintain ownership of certain attractive investments.

To the extent that our distributions represent a return of capital for tax purposes, you could recognize an increased capital gain upon a subsequent sale of your stock.

Distributions in excess of our current and accumulated earnings and profits and not treated by us as a dividend will not be taxable to a U.S. stockholder to the extent such distributions do not exceed the stockholder’s adjusted tax basis in its shares of our stock but instead will constitute a return of capital and will reduce the stockholder’s adjusted tax basis in its share of our stock. If our distributions result in a reduction of a stockholder’s adjusted basis in its shares of our stock, subsequent sales by such stockholder of its shares of our stock potentially will result in recognition of an increased capital gain or reduced capital loss due to the reduction in such stockholder’s adjusted basis in its shares of our stock.

We may be subject to adverse legislative or regulatory tax changes that could reduce the market price of our securities.

At any time, the federal income tax laws governing REITs or the administrative interpretations of those laws may be amended. We cannot predict when or if any new federal income tax law, regulation, or administrative interpretation, or any amendment to any existing federal income tax law, regulation or administrative interpretation, will be adopted, promulgated or become effective and any such law, regulation, or interpretation may take effect retroactively. We and our stockholders could be adversely affected by any such change in, or any new, federal income tax law, regulation or administrative interpretation.

Complying with the REIT requirements may limit our ability to hedge effectively and may cause us to incur tax liabilities.

The REIT provisions of the Code substantially limit our ability to hedge our liabilities. Any income from a hedging transaction that we enter into to manage risk of interest rate changes, price changes or currency fluctuations with respect to borrowings made or to be made to acquire or carry real estate assets does not constitute “gross income” for purposes of the gross income requirements. To the extent that we enter into other types of hedging transactions, the income from those transactions is likely to be treated as non-qualifying income for purposes of both of the gross income tests. As a result of these rules, we may need to limit our use of advantageous hedging techniques or implement those hedges through TRSs. This could increase the cost of our hedging activities because any TRS would be subject to tax on gains or expose us to greater risks associated with changes in interest rates than we would otherwise want to bear. In addition, losses incurred by a TRS generally will not provide any tax benefit, except for being carried forward against future taxable income earned by the TRS.

Ownership limitations may restrict or prevent stockholders from engaging in certain transfers of our common stock.

Our charter contains an ownership limit which prohibits any person or group of persons from acquiring, directly or indirectly, beneficial or constructive ownership of more than 9.8% of our outstanding shares of capital stock. Shares owned by a person or a group of persons in excess of the ownership limit are deemed “excess shares.” Shares owned by a person who individually owns of record less than 9.8% of outstanding shares may nevertheless be excess shares if the person is deemed part of a group for purposes of this restriction.

If the transferee-stockholder acquires excess shares, the person is considered to have acted as our agent and holds the excess shares on behalf of the ultimate stockholder. When shares are held in this manner they do not have any voting rights and shall not be considered for purposes of any stockholder vote or determining a quorum for such vote.

 

Our charter stipulates that any acquisition of shares that would result in our disqualification as a REIT under the Code shall be void to the fullest extent permitted under applicable law.

The ownership limit does not apply to (i) offerors which, in accordance with applicable federal and state securities laws, make a cash tender offer, where at least 90% of the outstanding shares of our stock (not including shares or subsequently issued securities convertible into common stock which are held by the tender offeror and any “affiliates” or “associates” thereof within the meaning of the Exchange Act) are duly tendered and accepted pursuant to the cash tender offer; (ii) an underwriter in a public offering of our shares; (iii) a party initially acquiring shares in a transaction involving the issuance of our shares of capital stock, if our Board determines such party will timely distribute such shares such that, following such distribution, such shares will not be deemed excess shares; and (iv) a person or persons which our Board exempt from the ownership limit upon appropriate assurances that our qualification as a REIT is not jeopardized.

We operate as a holding company dependent upon the assets and operations of our subsidiaries, and because of our structure, we may not be able to generate the funds necessary to make dividend payments on our capital stock.

We generally operate as a holding company that conducts its businesses primarily through our Operating Partnership, which in turn is a holding company conducting its business through its subsidiaries. These subsidiaries conduct all of our operations and are our only source of income. Accordingly, we are dependent on cash flows and payments of funds to us by our subsidiaries as dividends, distributions, loans, advances, leases or other payments from our subsidiaries to generate the funds necessary to make dividend payments on our capital stock. Our subsidiaries’ ability to pay such dividends and/or make such loans, advances, leases or other payments may be restricted by, among other things, applicable laws and regulations, current and future debt agreements and management agreements into which our subsidiaries may enter, which may impair our ability to make cash payments on our common stock or our preferred stock. In addition, such agreements may prohibit or limit the ability of our subsidiaries to transfer any of their property or assets to us, any of our other subsidiaries or to third parties. Our future indebtedness or our subsidiaries’ future indebtedness may also include restrictions with similar effects.

In addition, because we are a holding company, stockholders’ claims will be 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, claims of our stockholders will be satisfied only after all of our and our Operating Partnership’s and its subsidiaries’ liabilities and obligations have been paid in full.

Other risks

The number of shares of preferred stock outstanding may increase as a result of ATM Programs that we have in place for our Series A, B and D Preferred Stock, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The number of outstanding shares of preferred stock may increase as a result of the ATM Programs currently in place, for each of our Series A, B and D Preferred stock. The issuance of additional shares of Preferred Stock could have significant consequences on our future operations, including:

 

Any of the above-listed factors could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations and our ability to meet our payment obligations under our Credit Facility and monthly dividend obligations with respect to our preferred stock and to pay dividends on our common stock.

We are subject to restrictions that may discourage a change of control. Certain provisions contained in our articles of incorporation and Maryland law may prohibit or restrict a change of control.

 

These prohibitions last for five years after the most recent date on which the interested stockholder became an interested stockholder. Thereafter, any business combination with the interested stockholder must be recommended by our Board of Directors and approved by the affirmative vote of at least 80% of the votes entitled to be cast by holders of our outstanding shares of common stock and two-thirds of the votes entitled to be cast by holders of our common stock other than shares held by the interested stockholder. These requirements could have the effect of inhibiting a change in control even if a change in control were in our stockholders’ interest. These provisions of Maryland law do not apply, however, to business combinations that are approved or exempted by our Board of Directors prior to the time that someone becomes an interested stockholder.

Market conditions could adversely affect the market price and trading volume of our securities

The market price of our common and preferred stock may be highly volatile and subject to wide fluctuations, and the trading volume in our common and preferred stock may fluctuate and cause significant price variations to occur. We cannot assure investors that the market price of our common and preferred stock will not fluctuate or decline further in the future. Some market conditions that could negatively affect our share price or result in fluctuations in the price or trading volume of our securities include, but are not limited to:

Shares of common and preferred stock eligible for future sale may have adverse effects on the respective share price.

We cannot predict the effect, if any, of future sales of common or preferred stock, or the availability of shares for future sales, on the market price of our common or preferred stock. Sales of substantial amounts of common or preferred stock (including shares of common stock issuable upon the conversion of units of the Operating Partnership that we may issue from time to time, issuable upon conversion of our Senior Common Stock, or issuances made through our ATM programs or otherwise), or the perception that these sales could occur, may adversely affect prevailing market prices for our common and preferred stock.

Compliance or failure to comply with laws requiring access to our properties by disabled persons could result in substantial cost.

The Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), and other federal, state and local laws generally require public accommodations be made accessible to disabled persons. Noncompliance could result in the imposition of fines by the government or the award of damages to private litigants. These laws may require us to modify our existing properties. These laws may also restrict renovations by requiring improved access to such buildings by disabled persons or may require us to add other structural features which increase our construction costs. Legislation or regulations adopted in the future may impose further burdens or restrictions on us with respect to improved access by disabled persons. We may incur unanticipated expenses that may be material to our financial condition or results of operations to comply with ADA and other federal, state and local laws, or in connection with lawsuits brought by private litigants.

Our Board of Directors may change our investment policy without stockholders’ approval.

Our Board of Directors will determine our investment and financing policies, growth strategy and our debt, capitalization, distribution, acquisition, disposition and operating policies. Our Board of Directors may revise or amend these strategies and policies at any time without a vote by stockholders. Accordingly, stockholders’ control over changes in our strategies and policies is limited to the election of directors, and changes made by our Board of Directors may not serve the interests of stockholders and could adversely affect our financial condition or results of operations, including our ability to distribute cash to stockholders or qualify as a REIT.

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 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 advisable and in our best interests and with the care that an ordinarily prudent person in a like position would use under similar circumstances. In addition, our charter (i) eliminates our directors’ and officers’ liability to us and our stockholders for money damages except for liability resulting from actual receipt of an improper benefit in money, property or services or active and deliberate dishonesty established by a final judgment and that is material to the cause of action and (ii) requires us to indemnify directors and officers for liability resulting from actions taken by them in those capacities to the maximum extent permitted by Maryland law. As a result, our stockholders and we may have more limited rights against our directors and officers than might otherwise exist under common law. In addition, we may be obligated to fund the defense costs incurred by our directors and officers.

We may enter into tax protection agreements in the future if we issue OP Units in connection with the acquisition of properties, which could limit our ability to sell or otherwise dispose of certain properties.

Our Operating Partnership may enter into tax protection agreements in connection with issuing OP units to acquire additional properties which could provide that, if we dispose of any interest in the protected acquired property to a certain time, we will indemnify the other party for its tax liabilities attributable to the built-in gain that exists with respect to such a property. Therefore, although it otherwise may be in our stockholders’ best interests that we sell one of these properties, it may be economically prohibitive for us to do so if we are a party to such a tax protection agreement. While we do not currently have any of these tax protection agreements in place, we may enter into such agreements in the future.

Our redemption of OP Units could result in the issuance of a large number of new shares of our common stock and/or force us to expend significant cash, which may limit our funds necessary to make distributions on our common stock.

As of the date of this filing, unaffiliated third parties owned approximately 2.48% of the outstanding OP Units. Following any contractual lock-up provisions, including the one-year mandatory holding period, an OP Unitholder may require us to redeem the OP Units it holds for cash. At our election, we may satisfy the redemption through the issuance of shares of our common stock on a one-for-one basis. However, the limited partners’ redemption rights may not be exercised if and to the extent that the delivery of the shares upon such exercise would result in any person violating the ownership and transfer restrictions set forth in our charter. If a large number of OP Units were redeemed, it could result in the issuance of a large number of new shares of our common stock, which could dilute our existing stockholders’ ownership. Alternatively, if we were to redeem a large number of OP Units for cash, we may be required to expend significant amounts to pay the redemption price, which may limit our funds necessary to make distributions on our common stock. Further, if we do not have sufficient cash on hand at the time the OP Units are tendered for redemption, we may be forced to sell additional shares of our common stock or preferred stock to raise cash, which could cause dilution to our existing stockholders and adversely affect the market price of our common stock.

Our ability to pay distributions is limited by the requirements of Maryland law.

Our ability to pay distributions on our stock is limited by the laws of Maryland. Under applicable Maryland law, a Maryland corporation generally may not make a distribution if, after giving effect to the distribution, the corporation would not be able to pay its debts as the debts become due in the usual course of business or the corporation’s total assets would be less than the sum of its total liabilities plus, unless the corporation’s charter permits otherwise, the amount that would be needed, if the corporation were dissolved at the time of the distribution, to satisfy the preferential rights upon dissolution of stockholders whose preferential rights are superior to those receiving the distribution. Accordingly, we generally may not make a distribution on our stock if, after giving effect to the distribution, we would not be able to pay our debts as they become due in the usual course of business or our total assets would be less than the sum of our total liabilities plus, unless the terms of such class or series provide otherwise, the amount that would be needed to satisfy the preferential rights upon dissolution of the holders of shares of any class or series of stock then outstanding, if any, with preferences upon dissolution senior to those of such class of stock with respect to which the distribution would be made.

Cybersecurity risks and cyber incidents may adversely affect our business by causing a disruption to our operations, or the operations of businesses in which we invest, a compromise or corruption of our confidential information and/or damage to our business relationships, all of which could negatively impact our business, financial condition and operating results.

In the normal course of business we and our service providers collect and retain certain personal information provided by our tenants, employees of our Administrator and Adviser, and vendors. We also rely extensively on computer systems to process transactions and manage our business. A cyber incident is considered to be any adverse event that threatens the confidentiality, integrity or availability of our information resources. These incidents may be an intentional attack or an unintentional event and could involve gaining unauthorized access to our information systems for purposes of misappropriating assets, stealing confidential information, corrupting data or causing operational disruption. The result of these incidents may include disrupted operations, misstated or unreliable financial data, liability for stolen assets or information, increased cybersecurity protection and insurance costs, litigation and damage to our business relationships. As our reliance on technology has increased, so have the risks posed to our information systems, both internal and those provided to us by third-party service providers. We have implemented processes, procedures and internal controls to help prevent, detect and mitigate cybersecurity risks and cyber intrusions, but these measures, as well as our increased awareness of the nature and extent of a risk of a cyber-incident, do not guarantee that a cyber-incident will not occur and/or that our financial results, operations or confidential information will not be negatively impacted by such an incident.

Upcoming changes in U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles regarding operating leases may make the leasing of our properties less attractive to prospective tenants, and reduce potential lease terms.

In February 2016, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued ASU 2016-02, “Leases: Amendments to the FASB Accounting Standards Codification” (“ASU 2016-02”). Under the new leasing standard, a lessee is required to record a right-of-use asset and a lease liability for all leases with a term greater than 12 months regardless of their classification. The upcoming standard is effective for fiscal years (and interim periods within those fiscal years) beginning after December 15, 2018, with early adoption permitted. The upcoming standard will affect lessee accounting for most current and prospective tenants. This standard may encourage current and prospective tenants to enter into shorter term leases, or acquire real estate, to lessen the impact to their balance sheets, both which would negatively impact our operations.

Legislative or regulatory tax changes related to REITs could materially and adversely affect us.

The U.S. federal income tax laws and regulations governing REITs and their stockholders, as well as the administrative interpretations of those laws and regulations, constantly are under review and may be changed at any time, possibly with retroactive effect. No assurance can be given as to whether, when, or in what form, the U.S. federal income tax laws applicable to us and our stockholders may be enacted. Changes to the U.S. federal income tax laws and interpretations of U.S. federal tax laws could adversely affect an investment in our stock.

On December 22, 2017, President Donald J. Trump signed into law P.L. 115-97, informally titled the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (the “TCJA”). The TCJA made significant changes to U.S. federal income tax laws applicable to businesses and their owners, including REITs and their stockholders, and may lessen the relative competitive advantage of operating as a REIT rather than as a corporation. Our stockholders should consult with their own tax advisers regarding the effects of the TCJA or other legislative, regulatory or administrative developments on their investment in our stock.