Table of Contents

​

​

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

​

or

​

Commission file number: 001-33975

United States Gasoline Fund, LP

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

1850 Mt. Diablo Boulevard, Suite 640

Walnut Creek, California 94596

(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip code)

(510) 522-9600

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

​

N/A

(Former name, former address and former fiscal year, if changed since last report)

Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act.

​

Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None.

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. ☐ Yes ⌧ No

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. ☐ Yes ⌧ No

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. ⌧ Yes ◻ No

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files). ⌧ Yes ◻ No

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, a smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer”, “accelerated filer”, “smaller reporting company” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

​

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided in Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ◻

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed a report on and attestation to its management’s assessment of the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (15 U.S.C. 7262(b)) by the registered public accounting firm that prepared or issued its audit report. ⌧

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.). ☐ Yes ⌧ No

The aggregate market value of the registrant’s shares held by non-affiliates of the registrant as of June 30, 2021 was $120,135,519.

The registrant had 1,850,000 outstanding shares as of February 22, 2022.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE:

None.

​

​

​

Table of Contents

United States Gasoline Fund, LP

Table of Contents

​

​

​

​

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

another advisor of exchange traded funds. Wainwright is a wholly owned subsidiary of Concierge Technologies, Inc. (publicly traded under the ticker CNCG) (“Concierge”), a publicly traded holding company that owns various financial and non-financial businesses. Mr. Nicholas Gerber (discussed below), along with certain family members and certain other shareholders, owns the majority of the shares in Concierge. Wainwright is a holding company that currently holds both USCF, as well as USCF Advisers LLC, an investment adviser registered under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, as amended (“USCF Advisers”). USCF Advisers serves as the investment adviser for the USCF SummerHaven Dynamic Commodity Strategy No K-1 Fund (“SDCI”), USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund (“UMI”) and USCF Gold Strategy Plus Income Fund (“GLDX”), each a series of the USCF ETF Trust. USCF Advisers was also the investment adviser for the USCF Commodity Strategy Fund (the “Mutual Fund”), a series of the USCF Mutual Funds Trust, until March 2019, when the Mutual Fund liquidated all of its assets and distributed cash pro rata to all remaining shareholders. It was also the investment adviser for two series of the USCF ETF Trust that liquidated all of their assets and distributed cash pro rata to all remaining shareholders: the USCF SummerHaven SHPEI Index Fund (“BUY”), until October 2020, and the USCF SummerHaven SHPEN Index Fund (“BUYN”), until May 2020. USCF ETF Trust and USCF Mutual Funds Trust are registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”). The Board of Trustees for the USCF ETF Trust and USCF Mutual Funds Trust consist of different independent trustees than those independent directors who serve on the Board of Directors of USCF. USCF is a member of the National Futures Association (the “NFA”) and registered as a commodity pool operator (“CPO”) with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (the “CFTC”) on December 1, 2005 and as a swaps firm on August 8, 2013.

USCF serves as the general partner of UGA.

USCF is also the general partner of the United States Oil Fund, LP (“USO”), the United States 12 Month Oil Fund, LP (“USL”) and the United States Natural Gas Fund, LP (“UNG”), which listed their limited partnership shares on the American Stock Exchange (the “AMEX”) under the ticker symbols “USO” on April 10, 2006, “USL” on December 6, 2007 and “UNG” on February 26, 2008, respectively. As a result of the acquisition of the AMEX by NYSE Euronext, each of USO’s, USL’s and UNG’s shares commenced trading on the NYSE Arca on November 25, 2008. USCF is also the general partner of the United States 12 Month Natural Gas Fund, LP (“UNL”) and the United States Brent Oil Fund, LP (“BNO”), which listed their limited partnership shares on the NYSE Arca under the ticker symbols “UNL” on November 18, 2009 and “BNO” on June 2, 2010, respectively.

USCF is also the sponsor of the United States Commodity Index Fund (“USCI”) and the United States Copper Index Fund (“CPER”) each a series of the United States Commodity Index Funds Trust (“USCIFT”). USCI and CPER listed their shares on the NYSE Arca under the ticker symbols “USCI” on August 10, 2010 and “CPER” on November 15, 2011, respectively.

USO, UNG, UNL, USL, BNO, USCI and CPER are referred to collectively herein as the “Related Public Funds.”

The Related Public Funds are subject to reporting requirements under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). For more information about each of the Related Public Funds, investors in UGA may call 1-800-920-0259 or visit www.uscfinvestments.com or the website of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) at www.sec.gov.

USCF is required to evaluate the credit risk of UGA to the futures commission merchants (“FCMs”), oversee the purchase and sale of UGA’s shares by certain authorized purchasers (“Authorized Participants”), review daily positions and margin requirements of UGA and manage UGA’s investments. USCF also pays the fees of ALPS Distributors, Inc. (“ALPS Distributors”), which serves as the marketing agent for UGA (the “Marketing Agent”), and The Bank of New York Mellon (“BNY Mellon”), which serves as the administrator (the “Administrator”) and the custodian (the “Custodian”), and provides accounting and transfer agent services for, UGA since April 1, 2020. Brown Brothers Harriman & Co. (“BBH&Co.”) served as the administrator and custodian for UGA prior to BNY Mellon. Certain fund accounting and fund administration services rendered by BBH&Co. to UGA and the Related Public Funds terminated on May 31, 2020 to allow for the transition to BNY Mellon.

The limited partners take no part in the management or control of, and have a minimal voice in UGA’s operations or business. Limited partners have no right to elect USCF as the general partner on an annual or any other continuing basis. If USCF voluntarily withdraws as general partner, however, the holders of a majority of UGA’s outstanding shares (excluding for purposes of such determination shares owned, if any, by the withdrawing USCF and its affiliates) may elect its successor. USCF may not be removed as general partner except upon approval by the affirmative vote of the holders of at least 66 and 2/3 percent of UGA’s outstanding shares (excluding shares owned, if any, by USCF and its affiliates), subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions set forth in the LP Agreement.

The business and affairs of USCF are managed by a board of directors (the “Board”), which is comprised of four management directors (the “Management Directors”), each of whom are also executive officers or employees of USCF, and three independent directors who

2

Table of Contents

meet the independent director requirements established by the NYSE Arca Equities Rules and the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. The Management Directors have the authority to manage USCF pursuant to the terms of the Sixth Amended and Restated Limited Liability Company Agreement of USCF, dated as of May 15, 2015 (as amended from time to time, the “LLC Agreement”). Through its Management Directors, USCF manages the day-to-day operations of UGA. The Board has an audit committee which is made up of the three independent directors (Gordon L. Ellis, Malcolm R. Fobes III and Peter M. Robinson). For additional information relating to the audit committee, please see “Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance – Audit Committee” in this annual report on Form 10-K.

UGA has no executive officers or employees. Pursuant to the terms of the LP Agreement, UGA’s affairs are managed by USCF.

How Does UGA Operate?

An investment in the shares provides a means for diversifying an investor’s portfolio or hedging exposure to changes in gasoline prices. An investment in the shares allows both retail and institutional investors to easily gain this exposure to the gasoline market in a transparent, cost-effective manner.

The net assets of UGA consist primarily of investments in futures contracts for gasoline, other types of gasoline, crude oil, diesel-heating oil, natural gas and other petroleum-based fuels that are traded on the NYMEX, ICE Futures or other U.S. and foreign exchanges (collectively, “Futures Contracts”) and, to a lesser extent, in order to comply with regulatory requirements or in view of market conditions, other gasoline-related investments such as cash-settled options on Futures Contracts, forward contracts for gasoline, cleared swap contracts and non-exchange traded over-the-counter (“OTC”) transactions that are based on the price of gasoline, crude oil and other petroleum-based fuels, Futures Contracts and indices based on the foregoing (collectively, “Other Gasoline-Related Investments”). Market conditions that USCF currently anticipates could cause UGA to invest in Other Gasoline-Related Investments include those allowing UGA to obtain greater liquidity or to execute transactions with more favorable pricing. For convenience and unless otherwise specified, Futures Contracts and Other Gasoline-Related Investments collectively are referred to as “Gasoline Interests” in this annual report on Form 10-K. UGA invests substantially the entire amount of its assets in Futures Contracts while supporting such investments by holding the amounts of its margin, collateral and other requirements relating to these obligations in short-term obligations of the United States of two years or less (“Treasuries”), cash and cash equivalents. The daily holdings of UGA are available on UGA’s website at www.uscfinvestments.com.

UGA may invest in interests other than the Benchmark Futures Contract to comply with accountability levels and position limits. For a detailed discussion of accountability levels and position limits, see “Item 1. Business – What are Futures Contracts?” below in this annual report on Form 10-K.

USCF employs a “neutral” investment strategy in order to track changes in the price of the Benchmark Futures Contract regardless of whether the price goes up or goes down. UGA’s “neutral” investment strategy is designed to permit investors generally to purchase and sell UGA’s shares for the purpose of investing indirectly in gasoline in a cost-effective manner, and/or to permit participants in the gasoline or other industries to hedge the risk of losses in their gasoline-related transactions. Accordingly, depending on the investment objective of an individual investor, the risks generally associated with investing in gasoline and/or the risks involved in hedging may exist. In addition, an investment in UGA involves the risk that the daily changes in the price of UGA’s shares, in percentage terms, will not accurately track the daily changes in the Benchmark Futures Contract, in percentage terms, and that daily changes in the Benchmark Futures Contract, in percentage terms, will not closely correlate with daily changes in the spot prices of gasoline, in percentage terms.

The Benchmark Futures Contract is changed from the near month contract to the next month contract over a four-day period. Each month, the Benchmark Futures Contract changes starting at the end of the day on the date two weeks prior to expiration of the near month contract for that month. During the first three days of the period, the applicable value of the Benchmark Futures Contract is based on a combination of the near month contract and the next month contract as follows: (1) day 1 consists of 75% of the then near month contract’s price plus 25% of the price of the next month contract, divided by 75% of the near month contract’s prior day’s price plus 25% of the price of the next month contract, (2) day 2 consists of 50% of the then near month contract’s price plus 50% of the price of the next month contract, divided by 50% of the near month contract’s prior day’s price plus 50% of the price of the next month contract, and (3) day 3 consists of 25% of the then near month contract’s price plus 75% of the price of the next month contract, divided by 25% of the near month contract’s prior day’s price plus 75% of the price of the next month contract. On day 4, the Benchmark Futures Contract is the next month contract to expire at that time and that contract remains the Benchmark Futures Contract until the beginning of the following month’s change in the Benchmark Futures Contract over a one-day period.

3

Table of Contents

On each day during the four-day period, USCF anticipates it will “roll” UGA’s positions in Gasoline Interests by closing, or selling, a percentage of UGA’s positions in Gasoline Interests and reinvesting the proceeds from closing those positions in new Gasoline Interests that reflect the change in the Benchmark Futures Contract.

The anticipated dates on which the Benchmark Futures Contracts will be changed and UGA’s Gasoline Interests will be “rolled” are posted on UGA’s website at www.uscfinvestments.com, and are subject to change without notice.

UGA’s total portfolio composition is disclosed on its website each business day that the NYSE Arca is open for trading. The website disclosure of portfolio holdings is made daily and includes, as applicable, the name and value of each Gasoline Interest, the specific types of Other Gasoline-Related Investments and characteristics of such Other Gasoline-Related Investments, the name and value of each Treasury and cash equivalent, and the amount of cash held in UGA’s portfolio. UGA’s website is publicly accessible at no charge. UGA’s assets used for margin and collateral are held in segregated accounts pursuant to the Commodity Exchange Act (the “CEA”) and CFTC regulations.

The shares issued by UGA may only be purchased by Authorized Participants and only in blocks of 50,000 shares, called “Creation Baskets”. The amount of the purchase payment for a Creation Basket is equal to the aggregate NAV of the shares in the Creation Basket. Similarly, only Authorized Participants may redeem shares and only in blocks of 50,000 shares, called “Redemption Baskets”. The amount of the redemption proceeds for a Redemption Basket is equal to the aggregate NAV of shares in the Redemption Basket. The purchase price for Creation Baskets and the redemption price for Redemption Baskets are the actual NAV calculated at the end of the business day when a request for a purchase or redemption is received by UGA. The NYSE Arca publishes an approximate per share NAV intra-day based on the prior day’s per share NAV and the current price of the Benchmark Futures Contract, but the price of Creation Baskets and Redemption Baskets is determined based on the actual per share NAV calculated at the end of the day.

While UGA issues shares only in Creation Baskets, shares are listed on the NYSE Arca and investors may purchase and sell shares at market prices like any listed security.

What is UGA’s Investment Strategy?

In managing UGA’s assets, USCF does not use a technical trading system that issues buy and sell orders. USCF instead employs a quantitative methodology whereby each time a Creation Basket is sold, USCF purchases Futures Contracts or Other Gasoline-Related Investments, such as the Benchmark Futures Contract, that have an aggregate market value that approximates the amount of Treasuries and/or cash received upon the issuance of the Creation Basket.

UGA intends to continue to pursue its investment objective as described above. By remaining invested as fully as possible in Futures Contracts or Other Gasoline-Related Investments, USCF believes that the daily changes in percentage terms of UGA’s NAV will continue to closely track the daily changes in percentage terms in the price of the Benchmark Futures Contract. USCF believes that certain arbitrage opportunities result in the price of the shares traded on the NYSE Arca closely tracking the per share NAV of UGA. Additionally, Futures Contracts as traded on the NYMEX have closely tracked the spot price of gasoline for delivery to the New York harbor. Based on these expected interrelationships, USCF believes that the daily changes in the price of UGA’s shares traded on the NYSE Arca, on a percentage basis, have closely tracked and will continue to closely track the daily changes in the spot price of gasoline, on a percentage basis. For performance data relating to UGA’s ability to track its benchmark, see “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Tracking UGA’s Benchmark” in this annual report on Form 10-K.

As a specific benchmark, USCF endeavors to place UGA’s trades in Gasoline Interests and otherwise manage UGA’s investments so that “A” will be within plus/minus ten percent (10%) of “B”, where:

USCF believes that market arbitrage opportunities will cause the daily changes in UGA’s share price on the NYSE Arca on a percentage basis to closely track daily changes in UGA’s per share NAV on a percentage basis. USCF further believes that daily changes in prices of the Benchmark Futures Contract have historically closely tracked the daily changes in spot prices of gasoline. USCF believes that the net effect of these relationships will be that the daily changes in the price of UGA’s shares on the NYSE Arca on a percentage basis will

4

Table of Contents

closely track, the daily changes in the spot price of gasoline on a percentage basis, plus interest earned on UGA’s collateral holdings, less UGA’s expenses. For performance data relating to UGA’s ability to track its benchmark, see “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Tracking UGA’s Benchmark” in this annual report on Form 10-K.

The specific Futures Contracts purchased depend on various factors, including a judgment by USCF as to the appropriate diversification of UGA’s investments in Futures Contracts with respect to the month of expiration, and the prevailing price volatility of particular contracts. While USCF has made significant investments in NYMEX Futures Contracts, for various reasons, including the ability to enter into the precise amount of exposure to the crude oil market, position limits or other regulatory requirements limiting UGA’s holdings, and market conditions, it may invest in Futures Contracts traded on other exchanges or invest in Other Gasoline-Related Investments. To the extent that UGA invests in Other Gasoline-Related Investments, it would prioritize investments in contracts and instruments that are economically equivalent to the Benchmark Futures Contract, including cleared swaps that satisfy such criteria, and then, to a lesser extent, it would invest in other types of cleared swaps and other contracts, instruments and non-cleared swaps, such as swaps in the over-the-counter market (or commonly referred to as the “OTC market”). If UGA is required by law or regulation, or by one of its regulators, including a futures exchange, to reduce its position in the Benchmark Futures Contract to the applicable position limit or to a specified accountability level or if market conditions dictate it would be more appropriate to invest in Other Gasoline-Related Investments, a substantial portion of UGA’s assets could be invested in accordance with such priority in Other Gasoline-Related Investments that are intended to replicate the return on the Benchmark Futures Contract. As UGA’s assets reach higher levels, it is more likely to exceed position limits, accountability levels or other regulatory limits and, as a result, it is more likely that it will invest in accordance with such priority in Other Gasoline-Related Investments at such higher levels. In addition, market conditions that USCF currently anticipates could cause UGA to invest in Other Gasoline-Related Investments include those allowing UGA to obtain greater liquidity or to execute transactions with more favorable pricing. See “Item 1. Business – Commodities Regulation” in this annual report on Form 10-K for a discussion of the potential impact of regulation on UGA’s ability to invest in OTC transactions and cleared swaps.

USCF may not be able to fully invest UGA’s assets in Benchmark Futures Contracts having an aggregate notional amount exactly equal to UGA’s NAV. For example, as standardized contracts, the Benchmark Futures Contracts are for a specified amount of a particular commodity, and UGA’s NAV and the proceeds from the sale of a Creation Basket are unlikely to be an exact multiple of the amounts of those contracts. As a result, in such circumstances, UGA may be better able to achieve the exact amount of exposure to changes in price of the Benchmark Futures Contract through the use of Other Gasoline-Related Investments, such as OTC contracts that have better correlation with changes in price of the Benchmark Futures Contract.

UGA anticipates that to the extent it invests in Futures Contracts other than contracts on gasoline (such as futures contracts for diesel-heating oil, natural gas, and other petroleum-based fuels) and Other Gasoline-Related Investments, it will enter into various non-exchange-traded derivative contracts to hedge the short-term price movements of such Futures Contracts and Other Gasoline-Related Investments against the current Benchmark Futures Contract.

USCF does not anticipate letting UGA’s Futures Contracts expire and taking delivery of the underlying commodity. Instead, USCF closes existing positions, e.g., when it changes the Benchmark Futures Contract or Other Gasoline-Related Investments or it otherwise determines it would be appropriate to do so and reinvests the proceeds in new Futures Contracts or Other Gasoline-Related Investments. Positions may also be closed out to meet orders for Redemption Baskets and in such case proceeds for such baskets will not be reinvested.

What is the Gasoline Market and the Petroleum-Based Fuel Market?

UGA may purchase Futures Contracts traded on the NYMEX that are based on gasoline. The ICE Futures also offers an RBOB Gasoline Futures Contract which trades in units of 42,000 U.S. gallons (1,000 barrels). The RBOB Gasoline Futures Contract is cash settled against the prevailing market price for RBOB gasoline in the New York harbor. It may also purchase contracts on other exchanges, including the NYMEX, ICE Futures Exchange and other U.S. and foreign exchanges.

Gasoline. Gasoline is the largest single volume refined product sold in the U.S. and accounts for almost half of national oil consumption. The gasoline futures contract listed and traded on the NYMEX trades in units of 42,000 gallons (1,000 barrels) and is based on delivery at petroleum products terminals in the New York harbor, the major East Coast trading center for imports and domestic shipments from refineries in the New York harbor area or from the Gulf Coast refining centers. The price of gasoline has historically been volatile.

Light, Sweet Crude Oil. Light, sweet crudes are preferred by refiners because of their low sulfur content and relatively high yields of high-value products such as gasoline, diesel fuel, diesel-heating oil, and jet fuel. The price of light, sweet crude oil has historically exhibited periods of significant volatility.

5

Table of Contents

Demand for petroleum products by consumers, as well as agricultural, manufacturing and transportation industries, determines demand for crude oil by refiners. Since the precursors of product demand are linked to economic activity, crude oil demand will tend to reflect economic conditions. However, other factors such as weather also influence product and crude oil demand.

Crude oil supply is determined by both economic and political factors. Oil prices (along with drilling costs, availability of attractive prospects for drilling, taxes and technology, among other factors) determine exploration and development spending, which influence output capacity with a lag. In the short run, production decisions by the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (“OPEC”) also affect supply and prices. Oil export embargoes and the current conflicts in the Middle East represent other routes through which political developments move the market. It is not possible to predict the aggregate effect of all or any combination of these factors.

Diesel-Heating Oil. Diesel-heating oil, also known as No. 2 fuel oil, accounts for 25% of the yield of a barrel of crude oil, the second largest “cut” from oil after gasoline. The diesel-heating Oil Futures Contract listed and traded on the NYMEX trades in units of 42,000 gallons (1,000 barrels) and is based on delivery in the New York harbor, the principal cash market center. The ICE Futures also offers a diesel-heating Oil Futures Contract which trades in units of 42,000 U.S. gallons (1,000 barrels). The diesel-heating Oil Futures Contract is cash-settled against the prevailing market price for heating oil delivered to the New York Harbor.

Natural Gas. Natural gas accounts for almost a quarter of U.S. energy consumption. The natural gas futures contract listed and traded on the NYMEX trades in units of 10,000 million British thermal units and is based on delivery at the Henry Hub in Louisiana, the nexus of 16 intra- and interstate natural gas pipeline systems that draw supplies from the region’s prolific gas deposits. The pipelines serve markets throughout the U.S. East Coast, the Gulf Coast, the Midwest, and up to the Canadian border. The price of natural gas has historically been volatile.

What are Futures Contracts?

Futures contracts are agreements between two parties. One party agrees to buy a commodity such as gasoline from the other party at a later date at a price and quantity agreed-upon when the contract is made. Futures Contracts are traded on futures exchanges, including the NYMEX. For example, the Benchmark Futures Contract is traded on the NYMEX in units of 42,000 gallons (1,000 barrels). Futures Contracts traded on the NYMEX are priced by floor brokers and other exchange members both through an “open outcry” of offers to purchase or sell the contracts and through an electronic, screen-based system that determines the price by matching electronically offers to purchase and sell. Additional risks of investing in Futures Contracts are included in “Item 1A. Risk Factors” in this annual report on Form 10-K.

Accountability Levels, Position Limits and Price Fluctuation Limits. Designated contract markets (“DCMs”), such as the NYMEX and ICE Futures, have established accountability levels and position limits on the maximum net long or net short futures contracts in commodity interests that any person or group of persons under common trading control (other than as a hedge, which an investment by UGA is not) may hold, own or control. These levels and position limits apply to the futures contracts that UGA invests in to meet its investment objective. In addition to accountability levels and position limits, the NYMEX and ICE Futures also set daily price limits on futures contracts. The daily price limit establishes the maximum amount that the price of a futures contract may vary either up or down from the previous day’s settlement price. Once the daily price fluctuation limit has been reached in a particular futures contract, no trades may be made at a price beyond that limit.

The accountability levels for the Benchmark Futures Contract and other Futures Contracts traded on U.S. based futures exchanges, such as the NYMEX, are not a fixed ceiling, but rather a threshold above which the NYMEX may exercise greater scrutiny and control over an investor’s positions. The current accountability level for investments for any one month in the Benchmark Futures Contract is 5,000 contracts. In addition, the NYMEX imposes an accountability level for all months of 7,000 net futures contracts for gasoline. In addition, the ICE Futures maintains the same accountability levels, position limits and monitoring authority for its gasoline contract as the NYMEX. If UGA and the Related Public Funds exceed these accountability levels for investments in the futures contracts for gasoline, the NYMEX and ICE Futures will monitor such exposure and may ask for further information on their activities, including the total size of all positions, investment and trading strategy, and the extent of liquidity resources of UGA and the Related Public Funds. If deemed necessary by the NYMEX and/or ICE Futures, UGA could be ordered to reduce its aggregate position back to the accountability level. As of December 31, 2021, UGA held 769 NYMEX RBOB Gasoline Futures RB contracts. During the year ended December 31, 2021 UGA did not exceed accountability levels on the NYMEX or ICE Futures.

Position limits differ from accountability levels in that they represent fixed limits on the maximum number of futures contracts that any person may hold and cannot allow such limits to be exceeded without express CFTC authority to do so. In addition to accountability

6

Table of Contents

levels and position limits that may apply at any time, the NYMEX and ICE Futures impose position limits on contracts held in the last few days of trading in the near month contract to expire. It is unlikely that UGA will run up against such position limits because of UGA’s investment strategy is to close out its positions and “roll” from the near month contract to expire to the next month contract to expire during one day each month. For the year ended December 31, 2021, UGA did not exceed position limits imposed by the NYMEX and ICE Futures.

On October 15, 2020, the CFTC approved a final rule that amends the existing federal position limits regime set forth in Part 150 of the CFTC’s regulations as well as the framework for exchange-set position limits and exemptions (such final rule, the “Position Limits Rule”). The Position Limits Rule establishes federal position limits for 25 core referenced futures contracts (comprised of agricultural, energy and metals futures contracts), futures and options linked to the core referenced futures contracts, and swaps that are economically equivalent to the core referenced futures contracts.

The Benchmark Futures Contract will be subject to position limits under the Position Limits Rule, and UGA’s trading does not qualify for an exemption therefrom. Accordingly, the Position Limits Rule could negatively impact the ability of UGA to meet its investment objective by inhibiting USCF’s ability to effectively invest the proceeds from sales of Creation Baskets of UGA in particular amounts and types of its permitted investments.

Price Volatility. The price volatility of Futures Contracts generally has been historically greater than that for traditional securities such as stocks and bonds. Price volatility often is greater day-to-day as opposed to intra-day. Futures Contracts tend to be more volatile than stocks and bonds because price movements for gasoline are more currently and directly influenced by economic factors for which current data is available and are traded by gasoline futures traders throughout the day. Because UGA invests a significant portion of its assets in Futures Contracts, the assets of UGA, and therefore the prices of UGA shares, may be subject to greater volatility than traditional securities.

Marking-to-Market Futures Positions. Futures Contracts are marked to market at the end of each trading day and the margin required with respect to such contracts is adjusted accordingly. This process of marking-to-market is designed to prevent losses from accumulating in any futures account. Therefore, if UGA’s futures positions have declined in value, UGA may be required to post “variation margin” to cover this decline. Alternatively, if UGA futures positions have increased in value, this increase will be credited to UGA’s account.

Why Does UGA Purchase and Sell Futures Contracts?

UGA’s investment objective is for the daily changes in percentage terms of its shares’ per share NAV to reflect the daily changes in percentage terms of the Benchmark Futures Contract, plus interest earned on UGA’s collateral holdings, less UGA’s expenses. UGA invests primarily in Futures Contracts. UGA seeks to have its aggregate NAV approximate at all times the aggregate market value of the Futures Contracts (or Other Gasoline-Related Investments) it holds.

In connection with investing in Futures Contracts and Other Gasoline-Related Investments, UGA holds Treasuries, cash and/or cash equivalents that serve as segregated assets supporting UGA’s positions in Futures Contracts and Other Gasoline-Related Investments. For example, the purchase of a Futures Contract with a notional value of $10 million would not require UGA to pay $10 million upon entering into the contract; rather, only a margin deposit, generally of 5% to 30% of the stated value of the Futures Contract, would be required. To secure its Futures Contract obligations, UGA would deposit the required margin with the FCMs and would separately hold, through its Custodian or FCMs, Treasuries, cash and/or cash equivalents in an amount equal to the balance of the current market value of the contract, which at the contract’s inception would be $10 million minus the amount of the margin deposit, or $9 million (assuming a 10% margin).

As a result of the foregoing, typically 5% to 30% of UGA’s assets are held as margin in segregated accounts with an FCM. In addition to the Treasuries and cash it posts with the FCM for the Futures Contracts it owns, UGA may hold, through the Custodian, Treasuries, cash and/or cash equivalents that can be posted as additional margin or as other collateral to support its OTC contracts. UGA earns income from the Treasuries and/or cash equivalents that it purchases, and on the cash it holds through the Custodian or FCM. UGA anticipates that the earned income will increase the NAV and limited partners’ capital contribution accounts. UGA reinvests the earned income, holds it in cash, or uses it to pay its expenses. If UGA reinvests the earned income, it makes investments that are consistent with its investment objective.

7

Table of Contents

What are the Trading Policies of UGA?

Liquidity

UGA invests only in Futures Contracts and Other Gasoline-Related Investments that, in the opinion of USCF, are traded in sufficient volume to permit the ready taking and liquidation of positions in these financial interests and in Other Gasoline-Related Investments that, in the opinion of USCF, may be readily liquidated with the original counterparty or through a third party assuming the position of UGA.

Spot Commodities

While the Futures Contracts traded on the exchange can be physically settled, UGA does not intend to take or make physical delivery. UGA may from time to time trade in Other Gasoline-Related Investments, including contracts based on the spot price of gasoline.

Leverage

USCF endeavors to have the value of UGA’s Treasuries, cash and cash equivalents, whether held by UGA or posted as margin or other collateral, at all times approximate the aggregate market value of its obligations under its Futures Contracts and Other Gasoline-Related Investments. Commodity pools’ trading positions in futures contracts or other related investments are typically required to be secured by the deposit of margin funds that represent only a small percentage of a futures contract’s (or other commodity interest’s) entire market value. While USCF has not and does not intend to leverage UGA’s assets, it is not prohibited from doing so under the LP Agreement.

Although permitted to do so under the LP Agreement, UGA has not and does not intend to leverage its assets and makes its investments accordingly. Consistent with this, UGA’s investment decisions will take into account the need for UGA to make permitted investments that also allow it to maintain adequate liquidity to meet its margin and collateral requirements and to avoid, to the extent reasonably possible, UGA becoming leveraged, including by its holding of assets that have a high probability of causing the net asset value of the fund to be less than zero.

Borrowings

Borrowings are not used by UGA, unless UGA is required to borrow money in the event of physical delivery, if UGA trades in cash commodities, or for short-term needs created by unexpected redemptions.

OTC Derivatives (Including Spreads and Straddles)

In addition to Futures Contracts, there are also a number of listed options on the Futures Contracts on the principal futures exchanges. These contracts offer investors and hedgers another set of financial vehicles to use in managing exposure to the gasoline market. Consequently, UGA may purchase options on gasoline Futures Contracts on these exchanges in pursuing its investment objective.

In addition to the Futures Contracts and options on the Futures Contracts, there also exists an active non-exchange-traded market in derivatives tied to gasoline. These derivatives transactions (also known as OTC contracts) are usually entered into between two parties in private contracts. Unlike most of the exchange-traded Futures Contracts or exchange- traded options on the Futures Contracts, each party to such contract bears the credit risk of the other party, i.e., the risk that the other party may not be able to perform its obligations under its contract. To reduce the credit risk that arises in connection with such contracts, UGA will generally enter into an agreement with each counterparty based on the Master Agreement published by the International Swaps and Derivatives Association, Inc. (“ISDA”) that provides for the netting of its overall exposure to its counterparty.

USCF assesses or reviews, as appropriate, the creditworthiness of each potential or existing counterparty to an OTC contract pursuant to guidelines approved by USCF’s Board.

8

Table of Contents

UGA may enter into certain transactions where an OTC component is exchanged for a corresponding futures contract (“Exchange for Related Position” or “EFRP” transactions). In the most common type of EFRP transaction entered into by UGA, the OTC component is the purchase or sale of one or more baskets of UGA’s shares. These EFRP transactions may expose UGA to counterparty risk during the interim period between the execution of the OTC component and the exchange for a corresponding futures contract. Generally, the counterparty risk from the EFRP transaction will exist only on the day of execution.

UGA may employ spreads or straddles in its trading to mitigate the differences in its investment portfolio and its goal of tracking the price of the Benchmark Futures Contract. UGA would use a spread when it chooses to take simultaneous long and short positions in futures written on the same underlying asset, but with different delivery months.

During the reporting period of this annual report on Form 10-K, UGA limited its derivatives activities to futures contracts in gasoline and EFRP transactions.

Pyramiding

UGA has not employed and will not employ the technique, commonly known as pyramiding, in which the speculator uses unrealized profits on existing positions as variation margin for the purchase or sale of additional positions in the same or another commodity interest.

Who are the Service Providers?

Custodian, Registrar, Transfer Agent, and Administrator

USCF engaged The Bank of New York Mellon (“BNY Mellon”), a New York corporation authorized to do a banking business (“BNY Mellon”), to provide UGA and each of the Related Public Funds with certain custodial, administrative and accounting, and transfer agency services, pursuant to the following agreements with BNY Mellon dated as of March 20, 2020 (together, the “BNY Mellon Agreements”), which were effective as of April 1, 2020: (i) a Custody Agreement; (ii) a Fund Administration and Accounting Agreement; and (iii) a Transfer Agency and Service Agreement. USCF pays the fees of BNY Mellon for its services under the BNY Mellon Agreements and such fees are determined by the parties from time to time.

Brown Brothers Harriman and Co. (“BBH&Co.”) previously served as the Administrator, Custodian, Transfer Agent and Fund Accounting Agent for UGA and the Related Public Funds prior to BNY Mellon commencing such services on April 1, 2020. Certain fund accounting and fund administration services rendered by BBH&Co. to UGA and the Related Public Funds terminated on May 31, 2020 to allow for the transition to BNY Mellon.

Marketing Agent

UGA also employs ALPS Distributors as its marketing agent. USCF pays the Marketing Agent an annual fee. In no event may the aggregate compensation paid to the Marketing Agent and any affiliate of USCF for distribution-related services in connection with the offering of shares exceed ten percent (10%) of the gross proceeds of the offering.

ALPS Distributors’ principal business address is 1290 Broadway, Suite 1100, Denver, CO 80203. ALPS Distributors is a broker-dealer registered with the SEC and is a member of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”) and a member of the Securities Investor Protection Corporation.

Payments to Certain Third Parties

USCF or the Marketing Agent, or an affiliate of USCF or the Marketing Agent, may directly or indirectly make cash payments to certain broker-dealers for participating in activities that are designed to make registered representatives and other professionals more knowledgeable about exchange-traded funds and exchange-traded products, including UGA and the Related Public Funds, or for other activities, such as participation in marketing activities and presentations, educational training programs, conferences, the development of technology platforms and reporting systems.

Additionally, pursuant to written agreements, USCF may make payments, out of its own resources, to financial intermediaries in exchange for providing services in connection with the sale or servicing of the Fund’s shares, including waiving commissions on the purchase or sale of shares of participating exchange-traded products.

9

Table of Contents

Payments to a broker-dealer or intermediary may create potential conflicts of interest between the broker-dealer or intermediary and its clients. The amounts described above, which may be significant, are paid by USCF and/or the Marketing Agent from their own resources and not from the assets of UGA or the Related Public Funds.

Futures Commission Merchants

RBC Capital Markets LLC

On October 8, 2013, USCF entered into a Futures and Cleared Derivatives Transactions Customer Account Agreement with RBC Capital Markets, LLC (“RBC Capital” or “RBC”) to serve as UGA’s FCM, effective October 10, 2013. This agreement requires RBC Capital to provide services to UGA, as of October 10, 2013, in connection with the purchase and sale of Futures Contracts and Other Gasoline-Related Investments that may be purchased or sold by or through RBC Capital for UGA’s account. For the period October 10, 2013 and after, UGA pays RBC Capital commissions for executing and clearing trades on behalf of UGA.

RBC Capital’s primary address is 3 World Financial Center, 200 Vesey St., New York, NY 10281. Effective October 10, 2013, RBC Capital became the futures clearing broker for UGA. RBC Capital is registered in the United States with FINRA as a broker-dealer and with the CFTC as an FCM. RBC Capital is a member of various U.S. futures and securities exchanges.

RBC Capital is a large broker dealer subject to many different complex legal and regulatory requirements. As a result, certain of RBC Capital’s regulators may from time to time conduct investigations, initiate enforcement proceedings and/or enter into settlements with RBC Capital with respect to issues raised in various investigations. RBC Capital complies fully with its regulators in all investigations being conducted and in all settlements it reaches. In addition, RBC Capital is and has been subject to a variety of civil legal claims in various jurisdictions, a variety of settlement agreements and a variety of orders, awards and judgments made against it by courts and tribunals, both in regard to such claims and investigations. RBC Capital complies fully with all settlements it reaches and all orders, awards and judgments made against it.

RBC Capital has been named as a defendant in various legal actions, including arbitrations, class actions and other litigation including those described below, arising in connection with its activities. Certain of the actual or threatened legal actions include claims for substantial compensatory and/or punitive damages or claims for indeterminate amounts of damages. RBC Capital is also involved, in other reviews, investigations and proceedings (both formal and informal) by governmental and self-regulatory agencies regarding RBC Capital’s business, including among other matters, accounting and operational matters, certain of which may result in adverse judgments, settlements, fines, penalties, injunctions or other relief.

RBC Capital contests liability and/or the amount of damages as appropriate in each pending matter. In view of the inherent difficulty of predicting the outcome of such matters, particularly in cases where claimants seek substantial or indeterminate damages or where investigations and proceedings are in the early stages, RBC Capital cannot predict the loss or range of loss, if any, related to such matters; how or if such matters will be resolved; when they will ultimately be resolved; or what the eventual settlement, fine, penalty or other relief, if any, might be. Subject to the foregoing, RBC Capital believes, based on current knowledge and after consultation with counsel, that the outcome of such pending matters will not have a material adverse effect on the consolidated financial condition of RBC Capital.

On April 27, 2017, pursuant to an offer of settlement, a Panel of the Chicago Board of Trade Business Conduct Committee (“Panel”) found that RBC Capital engaged in EFRP transactions which failed to satisfy the Rules of the Chicago Board of Trade (the “Chicago Board of Trade”) in one or more ways. Specifically, the Panel found that RBC Capital traders entered into EFRP trades in which RBC Capital accounts were on both sides of the transactions. While the purpose of the transactions was to transfer positions between the RBC Capital accounts, the Panel found that the manner in which the trades occurred violated the Chicago Board of Trade’s prohibition on wash trades. The Panel found that RBC Capital thereby violated CBOT Rules 534 and (legacy) 538.B. and C. In accordance with the settlement offer, the Panel ordered RBC Capital to pay a $175,000 fine. On October 1, 2019, the CFTC issued an order filing and settling charges against RBCCM for the above activity, as well as related charges. The order required that RBCCM cease and desist from violating the applicable regulations, pay a $5 million civil monetary penalty, and comply with various conditions, including conditions regarding public statements and future cooperation with the CFTC.

On June 18, 2015, in connection with the Municipalities Continuing Disclosure Cooperation initiative of the SEC, the SEC commenced and settled an administrative proceeding against RBC Capital for willful violations of Sections 17(a)(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (“1933 Act”) after the firm self-reported instances in which it conducted inadequate due diligence in certain municipal

10

Table of Contents

securities offerings and as a result, failed to form a reasonable basis for believing the truthfulness of certain material representations in official statements issued in connection with those offerings. RBC Capital paid a fine of $500,000.

RBC Capital and certain affiliates were named as defendants in a lawsuit relating to their role in transactions involving investments made by a number of Wisconsin school districts in certain collateralized debt obligations. These transactions were also the subject of a regulatory investigation, which was resolved in 2011. RBC Capital reached a final settlement with all parties in the civil litigation, and the civil action against RBC Capital was dismissed with prejudice on December 6, 2016.

Beginning in 2015, putative class actions were brought against RBC Capital and/or Royal Bank of Canada in the U.S., Canada and Israel. These actions were each brought against multiple foreign exchange dealers and allege, among other things, collusive behavior in foreign exchange trading. Various regulators are also conducting inquiries regarding potential violations of law by a number of banks and other entities, including RBC Capital, regarding foreign exchange trading. In August 2018, the U.S. District Court entered a final order approving RBC Capital’s pending settlement with class plaintiffs. Certain institutional plaintiffs opted out of participating in the settlement and have brought their own claims. The Canadian class actions, and one other U.S. action that is purportedly brought on behalf of different classes of plaintiffs and an action filed in Israel, remain pending. Based on the facts currently known, it is not possible at this time for us to predict the ultimate outcome of these investigations or proceedings or the timing of their resolution.

On July 31, 2015, RBC Capital was added as a new defendant in a pending putative class action initially filed in November 2013 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The action is brought against multiple foreign exchange dealers and alleges collusive behavior, among other allegations, in foreign exchange trading. Based on the facts currently known, the ultimate resolution of these collective matters is not expected to have a material adverse effect on RBC.

On April 13, 2015, RBC Capital’s affiliate, Royal Bank of Canada Trust Company (Bahamas) Limited (“RBC Bahamas”), was charged in France with complicity in tax fraud. RBC Bahamas believes that its actions did not violate French law and contested the charge in the French court. The trial of this matter has concluded and a verdict was delivered on January 12, 2017, acquitting the company and the other defendants and on June 29, 2018, the French appellate court affirmed the acquittals. The acquittals are being appealed.

Various regulators and competition and enforcement authorities around the world, including in Canada, the United Kingdom, and the U.S., are conducting investigations related to certain past submissions made by panel banks in connection with the setting of the U.S. dollar London interbank offered rate (“LIBOR”). These investigations focus on allegations of collusion between the banks that were on the panel to make submissions for certain LIBOR rates. Royal Bank of Canada, RBC Capital’s indirect parent, is a member of certain LIBOR panels, including the U.S. dollar LIBOR panel, and has in the past been the subject of regulatory requests for information. In addition, Royal Bank of Canada and other U.S. dollar panel banks have been named as defendants in private lawsuits filed in the U.S. with respect to the setting of LIBOR including a number of class action lawsuits which have been consolidated before the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The complaints in those private lawsuits assert claims against us and other panel banks under various U.S. laws, including U.S. antitrust laws, the CEA, and state law. On February 28, 2018, the motion by the plaintiffs in the class action lawsuits to have the class certified was denied in relation to Royal Bank of Canada. As such, unless that ruling is reversed on appeal, Royal Bank of Canada is no longer a defendant in any pending class action. Royal Bank of Canada is still a party to the various individual LIBOR actions. Based on the facts currently known, it is not possible at this time for us to predict the ultimate outcome of these investigations or proceedings or the timing of their resolution.

Thornburg Mortgage Inc. (“TMST”) and RBC Capital were parties to a master repurchase agreement executed in September 2003 whereby TMST financed its purchase of residential mortgage-backed securities. Upon TMST’s default during the financial crisis, RBC Capital valued TMST’s collateral at allegedly deflated prices. After TMST’s bankruptcy filing, TMST’s trustee brought suit against RBC Capital in 2011 for breach of contract. In 2015, TMST was awarded more than $45 million in damages. RBC Capital has appealed. The appeals court set a briefing schedule and simultaneously ordered the parties to participate in a mediation. The parties subsequently reached an agreement to settle the matter; a motion to approve the settlement was filed with the bankruptcy court on January 10, 2016 and granted on February 27, 2017.

On October 14, 2014, the Delaware Court of Chancery (the “Court of Chancery”) in a class action brought by former shareholders of Rural/Metro Corporation, held RBC Capital liable for aiding and abetting a breach of fiduciary duty by three Rural/Metro directors, but did not make an additional award for attorney’s fees. A final judgment was entered on February 19, 2015 in the amount of US$93 million plus post judgment interest. RBC Capital appealed the Court of Chancery’s determination of liability and quantum of damages, and the plaintiffs cross-appealed the ruling on additional attorneys’ fees. On November 30, 2015, the Delaware Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Chancery with respect to both the appeal and cross-appeal. RBC Capital is cooperating with an investigation by the SEC

11

Table of Contents

relating to this matter. In particular, the SEC contended that RBC Capital caused materially false and misleading information to be included in the proxy statement that Rural filed to solicit shareholder approval for the sale in violation of section 14(A) of the Exchange Act and Rule 14A-9 thereunder. On August 31, 2016, RBC Capital was ordered by the SEC to cease and desist and paid $500,000 in disgorgement, plus interest of $77,759 and a civil penalty of $2 million.

Please see RBC Capital’s Form BD, which is available on the FINRA BrokerCheck program, for more details.

RBC Capital will act only as clearing broker for UGA and as such will be paid commissions for executing and clearing trades on behalf of UGA. RBC Capital has not passed upon the adequacy or accuracy of this annual report on Form 10-K. RBC Capital will not act in any supervisory capacity with respect to USCF or participate in the management of USCF or UGA.

RBC Capital is not affiliated with UGA or USCF. Therefore, neither USCF nor UGA believes that there are any conflicts of interest with RBC Capital or its trading principals arising from its acting as UGA’s FCM.

RCG Division of Marex Spectron

On May 28, 2020, UGA entered into a Commodity Futures Customer Agreement with RCG Division of Marex Spectron (“RCG”) to serve as a FCM for UGA. This agreement requires RCG to provide services to UGA in connection with the purchase and sale of Futures Contracts and Other Gasoline-Related Investments that may be purchased or sold by or through RCG for UGA’s account. Under this agreement, UGA pays RCG commissions for executing and clearing trades on behalf of UGA.

RCG’s primary address is 360 Madison Avenue, 3^rd Floor, New York, NY 10017. RCG is registered in the United States with FINRA as a broker-dealer and with the CFTC as an FCM. RCG is a member of various U.S. futures and securities exchanges.

RCG is a large broker dealer subject to many different complex legal and regulatory requirements. As a result, certain of RCG’s regulators may from time to time conduct investigations, initiate enforcement proceedings and/or enter into settlements with RCG with respect to issues raised in various investigations. RCG complies fully with its regulators in all investigations which may be conducted and in all settlements it may reach. As of the date hereof, RCG has no material litigation to disclose as that term is defined under the CEA and the regulations promulgated thereunder.

RCG will act only as clearing broker for UGA and as such will be paid commissions for executing and clearing trades on behalf of UGA. RCG has not passed upon the adequacy or accuracy of this annual report on Form 10-K. RCG will not act in any supervisory capacity with respect to USCF or participate in the management of USCF or UGA.

RCG is not affiliated with UGA or USCF. Therefore, neither USCF nor UGA believes that there are any conflicts of interest with RCG or its trading principals arising from its acting as UGA’s FCM.

E D & F Man Capital Markets Inc.

On June 5, 2020, UGA entered into a Customer Agreement E D & F Man Capital Markets Inc. (“MCM”) to serve as an FCM for UGA. This agreement requires MCM to provide services to UGA in connection with the purchase and sale of Futures Contracts and Other Gasoline-Related Investments that may be purchased or sold by or through MCM for UGA’s account. Under this agreement, UGA pays MCM commissions for executing and clearing trades on behalf of UGA.

MCM’s primary address is 140 East 45^th Street, 10^th Floor, New York, NY 10017. MCM is registered in the United States with FINRA as a broker-dealer and with the CFTC as an FCM. MCM is a member of various U.S. futures and securities exchanges.

MCM is a large broker dealer subject to many different complex legal and regulatory requirements. As a result, certain of MCM’s regulators may from time to time conduct investigations, initiate enforcement proceedings and/or enter into settlements with MCM with respect to issues raised in various investigations. MCM complies fully with its regulators in all investigations which may be conducted and in all settlements it may reach. As of the date hereof, MCM has no material litigation to disclose as that term is defined under the CEA and the regulations promulgated thereunder.

MCM will act only as clearing broker for UGA and as such will be paid commissions for executing and clearing trades on behalf of UGA. MCM has not passed upon the adequacy or accuracy of this annual report on Form 10-K. MCM will not act in any supervisory capacity with respect to USCF or participate in the management of USCF or UGA.

12

Table of Contents

MCM is not affiliated with UGA or USCF. Therefore, neither USCF nor UGA believes that there are any conflicts of interest with MCM or its trading principals arising from its acting as UGA’s FCM.

Macquarie Futures USA LLC

On December 3, 2020, UGA engaged Macquarie Futures USA LLC (“MFUSA”) to serve as an additional futures commission merchant for UGA. The Customer Agreement between UGA and MFUSA requires MFUSA to provide services to UGA in connection with the purchase and sale of Futures Contracts and Other Gasoline-Related Investments that may be purchased or sold by or through MFUSA for UGA’s account. Under this agreement, UGA pays MFUSA commissions for executing and clearing trades on behalf of UGA.

MFUSA’s primary address is 125 West 55^th Street, New York, NY 10019. MFUSA is registered in the United States with the CFTC as an FCM providing futures execution and clearing services covering futures exchanges globally. MFUSA is a member of various U.S. futures and securities exchanges.

MFUSA is a large broker dealer subject to many different complex legal and regulatory requirements. As a result, certain of MFUSA’s regulators may from time to time conduct investigations, initiate enforcement proceedings and/or enter into settlements with MFUSA with respect to issues raised in various investigations. MFUSA complies fully with its regulators in all investigations which may be conducted and in all settlements it may reach. As of the date hereof, MFUSA has no material litigation to disclose as that term is defined under the CEA and the regulations promulgated thereunder.

MFUSA will act only as clearing broker for UGA and as such will be paid commissions for executing and clearing trades on behalf of UGA. MFUSA has not passed upon the adequacy or accuracy of this annual report on Form 10-K. MFUSA will not act in any supervisory capacity with respect to USCF or participate in the management of USCF or UGA.

MFUSA is not affiliated with UGA or USCF. Therefore, neither USCF nor UGA believes that there are any conflicts of interest with MFUSA or its trading principals arising from its acting as UGA’s FCM.

Commodity Trading Advisor

Currently, USCF does not employ commodity trading advisors for the trading of UGA contracts. USCF currently does, however, employ SummerHaven Investment Management, LLC as a trading advisor for USCI and CPER. If, in the future, USCF does employ commodity trading advisors for UGA, it will choose each advisor based on arm’s-length negotiations and will consider the advisor’s experience, fees and reputation.

Summary of Risk Factors

Investing in our securities involves a high degree of risk. You should carefully consider the information in “Item 1A. Risk Factors”, including, but not limited to, the following risks:

13

Table of Contents

14

Table of Contents

New York Mercantile Exchange Licensing Fee⁽⁶⁾ – 0.015% on all net assets.

15

Table of Contents

Expenses Paid or Accrued by UGA from Inception through December 31, 2021 in dollar terms:

Expenses Paid or Accrued by UGA from Inception through December 31, 2021 as a Percentage of Average Daily Net Assets:

Other Fees. UGA also pays the fees and expenses associated with its audit expenses, professional fees, and tax accounting and reporting requirements. These fees were approximately $218,400 for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2021. In addition, UGA is responsible for paying its portion of the directors’ and officers’ liability insurance for UGA and the Related Public Funds and the fees and expenses of the independent directors who also serve as audit committee members of UGA and the Related Public Funds organized as limited partnerships and, as of July 8, 2011, those Related Public Funds organized as a series of a Delaware statutory trust. UGA shares the fees and expenses on a pro rata basis with each Related Public Fund, as described above, based on the relative assets of each fund computed on a daily basis. These fees and expenses for the year ended December 31, 2021 were $1,082,000 for UGA and the Related Public Funds. UGA’s portion of such fees and expenses for the year ended December 31, 2021 was $23,962.

Form of Shares

Registered Form. Shares are issued in registered form in accordance with the LP Agreement. The Administrator has been appointed registrar and transfer agent for the purpose of transferring shares in certificated form. The Administrator keeps a record of all limited partners and holders of the shares in certificated form in the registry. USCF recognizes transfers of shares in certificated form only if done in accordance with the LP Agreement. The beneficial interests in such shares are held in book-entry form through participants and/or accountholders in the Depository Trust Company (“DTC”).

Book Entry. Individual certificates are not issued for the shares. Instead, shares are represented by one or more global certificates, which are deposited by the Administrator with DTC and registered in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee for DTC. The global certificates evidence all of the shares outstanding at any time. Shareholders are limited to: (1) participants in DTC such as banks, brokers, dealers and trust companies (“DTC Participants”), (2) those who maintain, either directly or indirectly, a custodial relationship with a DTC Participant (“Indirect Participants”), and (3) those banks, brokers, dealers, trust companies and others who hold interests in the shares through DTC Participants or Indirect Participants, in each case who satisfy the requirements for transfers of shares. DTC Participants acting on behalf of investors holding shares through such participants’ accounts in DTC will follow the delivery practice applicable to

16

Table of Contents

securities eligible for DTC’s Same-Day Funds Settlement System. Shares are credited to DTC Participants’ securities accounts following confirmation of receipt of payment.

DTC. DTC has advised UGA as follows: It is a limited purpose trust company organized under the laws of the State of New York and is a member of the Federal Reserve System, a “clearing corporation” within the meaning of the New York Uniform Commercial Code and a “clearing agency” registered pursuant to the provisions of Section 17A of the Exchange Act. DTC holds securities for DTC Participants and facilitates the clearance and settlement of transactions between DTC Participants through electronic book-entry changes in accounts of DTC Participants.

Calculating Per Share NAV

UGA’s per share NAV is calculated by:

The Administrator calculates the per share NAV of UGA once each NYSE Arca trading day. The per share NAV for a normal trading day is released after 4:00 p.m. New York time. Trading during the core trading session on the NYSE Arca typically closes at 4:00 p.m. New York time. The Administrator uses the NYMEX closing price (determined at the earlier of the close of the NYMEX or 2:30 p.m. New York time) for the Futures Contracts traded on the NYMEX, but calculates or determines the value of all other UGA investments (including Gasoline Futures Contracts not traded on the NYMEX, Other Gasoline-Related Investments and Treasuries) using market quotations, if available, or other information customarily used to determine the fair value of such investments as of the earlier of the close of the NYSE Arca or 4:00 p.m. New York time, in accordance with the current Administrative Agency Agreement among the Administrator, UGA and USCF. “Other information” customarily used in determining fair value includes information consisting of market data in the relevant market supplied by one or more third parties including, without limitation, relevant rates, prices, yields, yield curves, volatilities, spreads, correlations or other market data in the relevant market; or information of the types described above from internal sources if that information is of the same type used by UGA in the regular course of its business for the valuation of similar transactions. The information may include costs of funding, to the extent costs of funding are not and would not be a component of the other information being utilized. Third parties supplying quotations or market data may include, without limitation, dealers in the relevant markets, end-users of the relevant product, information vendors, brokers and other sources of market information.

In addition, in order to provide updated information relating to UGA for use by investors and market professionals, the NYSE Arca calculates and disseminates throughout the core trading session on each trading day an updated indicative fund value. The indicative fund value is calculated by using the prior day’s closing per share NAV of UGA as a base and updating that value throughout the trading day to reflect changes in the most recently reported trade price for the Futures Contracts on the NYMEX. The prices reported for the active Futures Contract month are adjusted based on the prior day’s spread differential between settlement values for the relevant contract and the spot month contract. In the event that the spot month contract is also the Benchmark Futures Contract, the last sale price for that contract is not adjusted. The indicative fund value share basis disseminated during NYSE Arca core trading session hours should not be viewed as an actual real time update of the per share NAV, because the per share NAV is calculated only once at the end of each trading day based upon the relevant end of day values of UGA’s investments.

The indicative fund value is disseminated on a per share basis every 15 seconds during regular NYSE Arca core trading session hours of 9:30 a.m. New York time to 4:00 p.m. New York time. The normal trading hours of the NYMEX are 10:00 a.m. New York time to 2:30 p.m. New York time. This means that there is a gap in time at the beginning and the end of each day during which UGA’s shares are traded on the NYSE Arca, but real-time NYMEX trading prices for gasoline Futures Contracts traded on the NYMEX are not available. During such gaps in time, the indicative fund value will be calculated based on the end of day price of such Futures Contracts from the NYMEX immediately preceding trading session. In addition, other Gasoline Interests and Treasuries held by UGA will be valued by the Administrator, using rates and points received from client-approved third party vendors (such as Reuters and WM Company) and advisor quotes. These investments will not be included in the indicative fund value.

The NYSE Arca disseminates the indicative fund value through the facilities of CTA/CQ High Speed Lines. In addition, the indicative fund value is published on the NYSE Arca’s website and is available through on-line information services such as Bloomberg and Reuters.

17

Table of Contents

Dissemination of the indicative fund value provides additional information that is not otherwise available to the public and is useful to investors and market professionals in connection with the trading of UGA shares on the NYSE Arca. Investors and market professionals are able throughout the trading day to compare the market price of UGA and the indicative fund value. If the market price of UGA shares diverges significantly from the indicative fund value, market professionals will have an incentive to execute arbitrage trades. For example, if UGA appears to be trading at a discount compared to the indicative fund value, a market professional could buy UGA shares on the NYSE Arca and sell short gasoline Futures Contracts. Such arbitrage trades can tighten the tracking between the market price of UGA and the indicative fund value and thus can be beneficial to all market participants.

UGA reserves the right to adjust the Share price of UGA in the future to maintain convenient trading ranges for investors. Any adjustments would be accomplished through stock splits or reverse stock splits. Such splits would decrease (in the case of a split) or increase (in the case of a reverse split) the proportionate net asset value per Share, but would have no effect on the net assets of the Fund or the proportionate voting rights of shareholders or limited partners.

Creation and Redemption of Shares

UGA creates and redeems shares from time to time, but only in one or more Creation Baskets or Redemption Baskets. The creation and redemption of baskets are only made in exchange for delivery to UGA or the distribution by UGA of the amount of Treasuries and any cash represented by the baskets being created or redeemed, the amount of which is based on the combined NAV of the number of shares included in the baskets being created or redeemed determined as of 4:00 p.m. New York time on the day the order to create or redeem baskets is properly received.

Authorized Participants are the only persons that may place orders to create and redeem baskets. Authorized Participants must be: (1) registered broker-dealers or other securities market participants, such as banks and other financial institutions, that are not required to register as broker-dealers to engage in securities transactions as described below, and (2) DTC Participants. To become an Authorized Participant, a person must enter into an Authorized Participant Agreement with USCF on behalf of UGA (each such agreement, an “Authorized Participant Agreement”). The Authorized Participant Agreement provides the procedures for the creation and redemption of baskets and for the delivery of the Treasuries and any cash required for such creations and redemptions. The Authorized Participant Agreement and the related procedures attached thereto may be amended by UGA, without the consent of any limited partner or shareholder or Authorized Participant. Authorized Participants pay a transaction fee of $350 to UGA for each order placed to create one or more Creation Baskets or to redeem one or more Redemption Baskets. The transaction fee may be reduced, increased, or otherwise changed by USCF. Authorized Participants who make deposits with UGA in exchange for baskets receive no fees, commissions or other form of compensation or inducement of any kind from either UGA or USCF, and no such person will have any obligation or responsibility to UGA or USCF to effect any sale or resale of shares. As of December 31, 2021, 12 Authorized Participants had entered into agreements with USCF on behalf of UGA. During the year ended December 31, 2021, UGA issued 28 Creation Baskets and redeemed (59) Redemption Baskets.

Certain Authorized Participants are expected to be capable of participating directly in the physical gasoline market and the gasoline futures market. In some cases, Authorized Participants or their affiliates may from time to time buy or sell gasoline or Gasoline Interests and may profit in these instances. USCF believes that the size and operation of the gasoline market make it unlikely that an Authorized Participant’s direct activities in the gasoline or securities markets will significantly affect the price of gasoline, Gasoline Interests or the price of the shares.

Each Authorized Participant is required to be registered as a broker-dealer under the Exchange Act and is a member in good standing with FINRA, or exempt from being or otherwise not required to be registered as a broker-dealer or a member of FINRA, and qualified to act as a broker or dealer in the states or other jurisdictions where the nature of its business so requires. Certain Authorized Participants may also be regulated under federal and state banking laws and regulations. Each Authorized Participant has its own set of rules and procedures, internal controls and information barriers as it determines is appropriate in light of its own regulatory regime.

Under the Authorized Participant Agreement, USCF, and UGA under limited circumstances, have agreed to indemnify the Authorized Participants against certain liabilities, including liabilities under the 1933 Act, and to contribute to the payments the Authorized Participants may be required to make in respect of those liabilities.

The following description of the procedures for the creation and redemption of baskets is only a summary and an investor should refer to the relevant provisions of the LP Agreement and the form of Authorized Participant Agreement for more detail, each of which is incorporated by reference into this annual report on Form 10-K.

18

Table of Contents

Creation Procedures

On any business day, an Authorized Participant may place an order with the Marketing Agent to create one or more baskets. For purposes of processing purchase and redemption orders, a “business day” means any day other than a day when any of the NYSE Arca, the NYMEX or the NYSE is closed for regular trading. Purchase orders must be placed by 12:00 p.m. New York time or the close of regular trading on the NYSE Arca, whichever is earlier. The day on which the Marketing Agent receives a valid purchase order is referred to as the purchase order date.

By placing a purchase order, an Authorized Participant agrees to deposit Treasuries, cash, or a combination of Treasuries and cash, as described below. Prior to the delivery of baskets for a purchase order, the Authorized Participant must also have wired to the Custodian the non-refundable transaction fee due for the purchase order. Authorized Participants may not withdraw a creation request, except as otherwise set forth in the procedures in the Authorized Participant Agreement.

The manner by which creations are made is dictated by the terms of the Authorized Participant Agreement. By placing a purchase order, an Authorized Participant agrees to (1) deposit Treasuries, cash, or a combination of Treasuries and cash with the Custodian, and (2) if required by USCF in its sole discretion, enter into or arrange for a block trade, an exchange for physical or exchange for swap, or any other OTC energy transaction (through itself or a designated acceptable broker) with UGA for the purchase of a number and type of futures contracts at the closing settlement price for such contracts on the purchase order date. If an Authorized Participant fails to consummate (1) and (2), the order shall be cancelled. The number and types of contracts specified shall be determined by USCF, in its sole discretion, to meet UGA’s investment objective and shall be purchased as a result of the Authorized Participant’s purchase of shares.

Determination of Required Deposits

The total deposit required to create each Creation Basket (“Creation Basket Deposit”) is the amount of Treasuries and/or cash that is in the same proportion to the total assets of UGA (net of estimated accrued but unpaid fees, expenses and other liabilities) on the purchase order date as the number of shares to be created under the purchase order is in proportion to the total number of shares outstanding on the purchase order date. USCF determines, directly in its sole discretion or in consultation with the Administrator, the requirements for Treasuries and the amount of cash, including the maximum permitted remaining maturity of a Treasury and proportions of Treasury and cash that may be included in deposits to create baskets. The Marketing Agent will publish such requirements at the beginning of each business day. The amount of cash deposit required is the difference between the aggregate market value of the Treasuries required to be included in a Creation Basket Deposit as of 4:00 p.m. New York time on the date the order to purchase is properly received and the total required deposit.

Delivery of Required Deposits

An Authorized Participant who places a purchase order is responsible for transferring to UGA’s account with the Custodian the required amount of Treasuries and cash by the end of the second business day following the purchase order date. Upon receipt of the deposit amount, the Administrator directs DTC to credit the number of baskets ordered to the Authorized Participant’s DTC account on the second business day following the purchase order dates. The expense and risk of delivery and ownership of Treasuries until such Treasuries have been received by the Custodian on behalf of UGA shall be borne solely by the Authorized Participant.

Because orders to purchase baskets must be placed by 12:00 p.m., New York time, but the total payment required to create a basket during the continuous offering period will not be determined until after 4:00 p.m., New York time, on the date the purchase order is received, Authorized Participants will not know the total amount of the payment required to create a basket at the time they submit an irrevocable purchase order for the basket. UGA’s NAV and the total amount of the payment required to create a basket could rise or fall substantially between the time an irrevocable purchase order is submitted and the time the amount of the purchase price in respect thereof is determined.

Rejection of Purchase Orders

USCF acting by itself or through the Marketing Agent shall have the absolute right but no obligation to reject a purchase order or a Creation Basket Deposit if:

19

Table of Contents

None of USCF, the Marketing Agent or the Custodian will be liable for the rejection of any purchase order or Creation Basket Deposit.

Redemption Procedures

The procedures by which an Authorized Participant can redeem one or more baskets mirror the procedures for the creation of baskets. On any business day, an Authorized Participant may place an order with the Marketing Agent to redeem one or more baskets. Redemption orders must be placed by 12:00 p.m. New York time or the close of regular trading on the NYSE Arca, whichever is earlier. A redemption order so received will be effective on the date it is received in satisfactory form by the Marketing Agent (“Redemption Order Date”). The redemption procedures allow Authorized Participants to redeem baskets and do not entitle an individual shareholder to redeem any shares in an amount less than a Redemption Basket, or to redeem baskets other than through an Authorized Participant.

By placing a redemption order, an Authorized Participant agrees to deliver the baskets to be redeemed through DTC’s book-entry system to UGA, as described below. Prior to the delivery of the redemption distribution for a redemption order, the Authorized Participant must also have wired to UGA’s account at the Custodian the non-refundable transaction fee due for the redemption order. An Authorized Participant may not withdraw a redemption order, except as otherwise set forth in the procedures in the Authorized Participant Agreement.

The manner by which redemptions are made is dictated by the terms of the Authorized Participant Agreement. By placing a redemption order, an Authorized Participant agrees to (1) deliver the Redemption Basket to be redeemed through DTC’s book-entry system to UGA’s account with the Custodian not later than 3:00 p.m. New York time on the second business day following the effective date of the redemption order (“Redemption Distribution Date”), and (2) if required by USCF in its sole discretion, enter into or arrange for a block trade, an exchange for physical or exchange for swap, or any other OTC energy transaction (through itself or a designated acceptable broker) with UGA for the sale of a number and type of futures contracts at the closing settlement price for such contracts on the Redemption Order Date. If an Authorized Participant fails to consummate (1) and (2) above, the order shall be cancelled. The number and type of contracts specified shall be determined by USCF, in its sole discretion, to meet UGA’s investment objective and shall be sold as a result of the Authorized Participant’s sale of shares.

Determination of Redemption Distribution

The redemption distribution from UGA consists of a transfer to the redeeming Authorized Participant of an amount of Treasuries and/or cash that is in the same proportion to the total assets of UGA (net of estimated accrued but unpaid fees, expenses and other liabilities) on the date the order to redeem is properly received as the number of shares to be redeemed under the redemption order is in proportion to the total number of shares outstanding on the date the order is received. USCF, directly or in consultation with the Administrator, determines the requirements for Treasuries and the amounts of cash, including the maximum permitted remaining maturity of a Treasury, and the proportions of Treasuries and cash that may be included in distributions to redeem baskets. The Marketing Agent will publish an estimate of the redemption distribution per basket as of the beginning of each business day.

20

Table of Contents

Delivery of Redemption Distribution

The redemption distribution due from UGA will be delivered to the Authorized Participant by 3:00 p.m. New York time on the second business day following the redemption order date if, by 3:00 p.m. New York time on such second business day, UGA’s DTC account has been credited with the baskets to be redeemed. If UGA’s DTC account has not been credited with all of the baskets to be redeemed by such time, the redemption distribution will be delivered to the extent of whole baskets received. Any remainder of the redemption distribution will be delivered on the next business day to the extent of remaining whole baskets received if UGA receives the fee applicable to the extension of the redemption distribution date which USCF may, from time to time, determine and the remaining baskets to be redeemed are credited to UGA’s DTC account by 3:00 p.m. New York time on such next business day. Any further outstanding amount of the redemption order shall be cancelled. Pursuant to information from USCF, the Custodian will also be authorized to deliver the redemption distribution notwithstanding that the baskets to be redeemed are not credited to UGA’s DTC account by 3:00 p.m. New York time on the second business day following the redemption order date if the Authorized Participant has collateralized its obligation to deliver the baskets through DTC’s book entry-system on such terms as USCF may from time to time determine.

Suspension or Rejection of Redemption Orders

USCF may, in its discretion, suspend the right of redemption, or postpone the redemption settlement date, (1) for any period during which the NYSE Arca or the NYMEX is closed other than customary weekend or holiday closings, or trading on the NYSE Arca or the NYMEX is suspended or restricted, (2) for any period during which an emergency exists as a result of which delivery, disposal or evaluation of Treasuries is not reasonably practicable, or (3) for such other period as USCF determines to be necessary for the protection of the limited partners or shareholders. For example, USCF may determine that it is necessary to suspend redemptions to allow for the orderly liquidation of UGA’s assets at an appropriate value to fund a redemption. If USCF has difficulty liquidating its positions, e.g., because of a market disruption event in the futures markets, a suspension of trading by the exchange where the futures contracts are listed or an unanticipated delay in the liquidation of a position in an OTC contract, it may be appropriate to suspend redemptions until such time as such circumstances are rectified. None of USCF, the Marketing Agent, the Administrator, or the Custodian will be liable to any person or in any way for any loss or damages that may result from any such suspension or postponement.

Redemption orders must be made in whole baskets. USCF will reject a redemption order if the order is not in proper form as described in the Authorized Participant Agreement or if the fulfillment of the order, in the opinion of its counsel, might be unlawful. USCF may also reject a redemption order if the number of shares being redeemed would reduce the remaining outstanding shares to 100,000 shares (i.e., two baskets) or less, unless USCF has reason to believe that the placer of the redemption order does in fact possess all the outstanding shares and can deliver them.

Creation and Redemption Transaction Fee

To compensate UGA for its expenses in connection with the creation and redemption of baskets, an Authorized Participant is required to pay a transaction fee to UGA of $350 per order to create or redeem baskets, regardless of the number of baskets in such order. An order may include multiple baskets. The transaction fee may be reduced, increased or otherwise changed by USCF. USCF shall notify DTC of any change in the transaction fee and will not implement any increase in the fee for the redemption of baskets until thirty (30) days after the date of the notice.

Tax Responsibility

Authorized Participants are responsible for any transfer tax, sales or use tax, stamp tax, recording tax, value added tax or similar tax or governmental charge applicable to the creation or redemption of baskets, regardless of whether or not such tax or charge is imposed directly on the Authorized Participant, and agree to indemnify USCF and UGA if they are required by law to pay any such tax, together with any applicable penalties, additions to tax and interest thereon.

Secondary Market Transactions

As noted, UGA creates and redeems shares from time to time, but only in one or more Creation Baskets or Redemption Baskets. The creation and redemption of baskets are only made in exchange for delivery to UGA or the distribution by UGA of the amount of Treasuries and cash represented by the baskets being created or redeemed, the amount of which will be based on the aggregate NAV of the number of shares included in the baskets being created or redeemed determined on the day the order to create or redeem baskets is properly received.

21

Table of Contents

As discussed above, Authorized Participants are the only persons that may place orders to create and redeem baskets. Authorized Participants must be registered broker-dealers or other securities market participants, such as banks and other financial institutions that are not required to register as broker-dealers to engage in securities transactions. An Authorized Participant is under no obligation to create or redeem baskets, and an Authorized Participant is under no obligation to offer to the public shares of any baskets it does create. Authorized Participants that do offer to the public shares from the baskets they create will do so at per-share offering prices that are expected to reflect, among other factors, the trading price of the shares on the NYSE Arca, the NAV of UGA at the time the Authorized Participant purchased the Creation Baskets and the NAV of the shares at the time of the offer of the shares to the public, the supply of and demand for shares at the time of sale, the liquidity of the Futures Contract market and the market for Other Gasoline-Related Investments.

The prices of shares offered by Authorized Participants are expected to fall between UGA’s NAV and the trading price of the shares on the NYSE Arca at the time of sale. Shares initially comprising the same basket but offered by Authorized Participants to the public at different times may have different offering prices. An order for one or more baskets may be placed by an Authorized Participant on behalf of multiple clients. Authorized Participants who make deposits with UGA in exchange for baskets receive no fees, commissions or other forms of compensation or inducement of any kind from either UGA or USCF, and no such person has any obligation or responsibility to USCF or UGA to effect any sale or resale of shares. Shares trade in the secondary market on the NYSE Arca. Shares may trade in the secondary market at prices that are lower or higher relative to their NAV per share. The amount of the discount or premium in the trading price relative to the NAV per share may be influenced by various factors, including, among other things, the number of investors who seek to purchase or sell shares in the secondary market and the liquidity of the Futures Contracts market and the market for Other Gasoline-Related Investments. While the shares trade during the core trading session on the NYSE Arca until 4:00 p.m. New York time, liquidity in the market for Futures Contracts and Other Gasoline-Related Investments may be reduced after the close of the NYMEX at 2:30 p.m. New York time. As a result, during this time, trading spreads, and the resulting premium or discount, on the shares may widen.

Use of Proceeds

USCF causes UGA to transfer the proceeds from the sale of Creation Baskets to the Custodian or other custodian for trading activities. USCF will invest UGA’s assets in Gasoline-Interests and investments in Treasuries, cash and/or cash equivalents. When UGA purchases a Futures Contract and certain exchange-traded Other Gasoline-Related Investments, UGA is required to deposit typically 5% to 30% with the selling FCMs on behalf of the exchange a portion of the value of the contract or other interest as security to ensure payment for the obligation under Gasoline Interests at maturity. This deposit is known as initial margin. Counterparties in transactions in OTC Gasoline Interests will generally impose similar collateral requirements on UGA. USCF will invest the assets that remain after margin and collateral are posted in Treasuries, cash and/or cash equivalents subject to these margin and collateral requirements. USCF has sole authority to determine the percentage of assets that are:

Approximately 5% to 30% of UGA’s assets have normally been committed as margin for commodity futures contracts. However, from time to time, the percentage of assets committed as margin may be substantially more, or less than, such range. An FCM, counterparty, government agency or commodity exchange could increase margin or collateral requirements applicable to UGA to hold trading positions at any time. Ongoing margin and collateral payments will generally be required for both exchange-traded and OTC contracts based on changes in the value of the Gasoline Interests. Furthermore, ongoing collateral requirements with respect to OTC contracts are negotiated by the parties, and may be affected by overall market volatility, volatility of the underlying commodity or index, the ability of the counterparty to hedge its exposure under a Gasoline Interests, and each party’s creditworthiness. Margin is merely a security deposit and has no bearing on the profit or loss potential for any positions held. In light of the differing requirements for initial payments under exchange-traded and OTC contracts and the fluctuating nature of ongoing margin and collateral payments, it is not possible to estimate what portion of UGA’s assets will be posted as margin or collateral at any given time. The Treasuries, cash and cash equivalents held by UGA will constitute reserves that will be available to meet ongoing margin and collateral requirements. All interest income will be used for UGA’s benefit. USCF invests the balance of UGA’s assets not invested in Gasoline Interests or held in margin as reserves to be available for changes in margin. All interest income is used for UGA’s benefit.

The assets of UGA posted as margin for Futures Contracts are held in segregated accounts pursuant to the CEA and CFTC regulations.

22

Table of Contents

If UGA enters into a swap agreement, UGA must post both collateral and independent amounts to its swap counterparties. The amount of collateral UGA posts changes according to the amounts owed by UGA to its counterparty on a given swap transaction, while independent amounts are fixed amounts posted by UGA at the start of a swap transaction. Collateral and independent amounts posted to swap counterparties will be held by a third-party custodian.

The Commodity Interest Markets

General

The CEA governs the regulation of commodity interest transactions, markets and intermediaries. The CEA provides for varying degrees of regulation of commodity interest transactions depending upon: (1) the type of instrument being traded (e.g., contracts for future delivery, forwards, options, swaps or spot contracts), (2) the type of commodity underlying the instrument (distinctions are made between instruments based on agricultural commodities, energy and metals commodities and financial commodities), (3) the nature of the parties to the transaction (e.g., retail or eligible contract participant), (4) whether the transaction is entered into on a principal-to-principal or intermediated basis, (5) the type of market on which the transaction occurs, and (6) whether the transaction is subject to clearing through a clearing organization.

The offer and sale of shares of UGA, as well as shares of each Related Public Fund, is registered under the Securities Act. UGA and the Related Public Funds are subject to the requirements of the Securities Act, the Exchange Act and the rules and regulations adopted thereunder as administered by the SEC. Firms’ participation in the distribution of shares is regulated as described above, as well as by the self-regulatory association, FINRA.

Futures Contracts

A futures contract is a standardized contract traded on, or subject to the rules of, an exchange that calls for the future delivery of a specified quantity and type of a commodity at a specified time and place. Futures contracts are traded on a wide variety of commodities, including agricultural products, bonds, stock indices, interest rates, currencies, energy and metals. The size and terms of futures contracts on a particular commodity are identical and are not subject to any negotiation, other than with respect to price and the number of contracts traded between the buyer and seller.

The contractual obligations of a buyer or seller may generally be satisfied by taking or making physical delivery of the underlying commodity or by making an offsetting sale or purchase of an identical futures contract on the same or linked exchange before the designated date of delivery. The difference between the price at which the futures contract is purchased or sold and the price paid for the offsetting sale or purchase, after allowance for brokerage commissions, constitutes the profit or loss to the trader. Some futures contracts, such as stock index contracts, settle in cash (reflecting the difference between the contract purchase/sale price and the contract settlement price) rather than by delivery of the underlying commodity.

In market terminology, a trader who purchases a futures contract is long in the market and a trader who sells a futures contract is short in the market. Before a trader closes out his long or short position by an offsetting sale or purchase, his outstanding contracts are known as open trades or open positions. The aggregate amount of open positions held by traders in a particular contract is referred to as the open interest in such contract.

Forward Contracts

A forward contract is a contractual obligation to purchase or sell a specified quantity of a commodity at or before a specified date in the future at a specified price and, therefore, is economically similar to a futures contract. Unlike futures contracts, however, forward contracts are typically traded in the OTC markets and are not standardized contracts. Forward contracts for a given commodity are generally available for various amounts and maturities and are subject to individual negotiation between the parties involved. Moreover, generally there is no direct means of offsetting or closing out a forward contract by taking an offsetting position as one would a futures contract on a U.S. exchange. If a trader desires to close out a forward contract position, he generally will establish an opposite position in the contract but will settle and recognize the profit or loss on both positions simultaneously on the delivery date. Thus, unlike in the futures contract market where a trader who has offset positions will recognize profit or loss immediately, in the forward market a trader with a position that has been offset at a profit will generally not receive such profit until the delivery date, and likewise a trader with a position that has been offset at a loss will generally not have to pay money until the delivery date. Nevertheless, in some instances forward contracts now provide a right of offset or cash settlement as an alternative to making or taking delivery of the underlying commodity.

23

Table of Contents

In general, the CFTC does not regulate the interbank and forward foreign currency markets with respect to transactions in contracts between certain sophisticated counterparties such as UGA or between certain regulated institutions and retail investors. Although U.S. banks are regulated in various ways by the Federal Reserve Board, the Comptroller of the Currency and other U.S. federal and state banking officials, banking authorities do not regulate the forward markets to the same extent that the swap markets are regulated by the CFTC and SEC.

Regulation exempts both foreign exchange swaps and foreign exchange forwards from the definition of “swap” and, by extension, certain regulatory requirements applicable to swaps (such as clearing and margin). The exemption does not extend to other foreign exchange derivatives, such as foreign exchange options, currency swaps, and non-deliverable forwards.

While the U.S. government does not currently impose any restrictions on the movements of currencies, it could choose to do so. The imposition or relaxation of exchange controls in various jurisdictions could significantly affect the market for that and other jurisdictions’ currencies. Trading in the interbank market also exposes UGA to a risk of default since failure of a bank with which UGA had entered into a forward contract would likely result in a default and thus possibly substantial losses to UGA.

Options on Futures Contracts

Options on futures contracts are standardized contracts traded on an exchange. An option on a futures contract gives the buyer of the option the right, but not the obligation, to take a position at a specified price (the striking, strike, or exercise price) in the underlying futures contract or underlying interest. The buyer of a call option acquires the right, but not the obligation, to purchase or take a long position in the underlying interest, and the buyer of a put option acquires the right, but not the obligation, to sell or take a short position in the underlying interest.

The seller, or writer, of an option is obligated to take a position in the underlying interest at a specified price opposite to the option buyer if the option is exercised. The seller of a call option must stand ready to take a short position in the underlying interest at the strike price if the buyer should exercise the option. The seller of a put option, on the other hand, must stand ready to take a long position in the underlying interest at the strike price.

A call option is said to be in-the-money if the strike price is below current market levels and out-of-the-money if the strike price is above current market levels. Conversely, a put option is said to be in-the-money if the strike price is above the current market levels and out-of- the-money if the strike price is below current market levels.

Options have limited life spans, usually tied to the delivery or settlement date of the underlying interest. Some options, however, expire significantly in advance of such date. The purchase price of an option is referred to as its premium, which consists of its intrinsic value (which is related to the underlying market value) plus its time value. As an option nears its expiration date, the time value shrinks and the market and intrinsic values move into parity. An option that is out-of-the-money and not offset by the time it expires becomes worthless. On certain exchanges, in-the-money options are automatically exercised on their expiration date, but on others unexercised options simply become worthless after their expiration date.

Regardless of how much the market swings, the most an option buyer can lose is the option premium. The option buyer deposits his premium with his broker, and the money goes to the option seller. Option sellers, on the other hand, face risks similar to participants in the futures markets. For example, since the seller of a call option is assigned a short futures position if the option is exercised, his risk is the same as someone who initially sold a futures contract. Because no one can predict exactly how the market will move, the option seller typically posts margin to demonstrate his ability to meet any potential contractual obligations.

Options on Forward Contracts or Commodities

Options on forward contracts or commodities operate in a manner similar to options on futures contracts. An option on a forward contract or commodity gives the buyer of the option the right, but not the obligation, to take a position at a specified price in the underlying forward contract or commodity. However, unlike options on futures contracts, options on forward contracts or on commodities are individually negotiated contracts between counterparties and are typically traded in the OTC market. Therefore, options on forward contracts and physical commodities possess many of the same characteristics of forward contracts with respect to offsetting positions and credit risk that are described above.

24

Table of Contents

Swap Contracts

Swap transactions generally involve contracts between two parties to exchange a stream of payments computed by reference to a notional amount and the price of the asset that is the subject of the swap. Swap contracts are principally traded off-exchange, although certain swap contracts are also being traded in electronic trading facilities and cleared through clearing organizations.

Swaps are usually entered into on a net basis, that is, the two payment streams are netted out in a cash settlement on the payment date or dates specified in the agreement, with the parties receiving or paying, as the case may be, only the net amount of the two payments. Swaps do not generally involve the delivery of underlying assets or principal. Accordingly, the risk of loss with respect to swaps is generally limited to the net amount of payments that the party is contractually obligated to make. In some swap transactions one or both parties may require collateral deposits from the counterparty to support that counterparty’s obligation under the swap agreement. If the counterparty to such a swap defaults, the risk of loss consists of the net amount of payments that the party is contractually entitled to receive less any collateral deposits it is holding.

Some swap transactions are cleared through central counterparties. “Clearing” refers to the process by which a trade that is bilaterally executed by two parties is submitted to a central clearing counterparty, via a clearing member (i.e., an FCM), and replaced by two mirror swaps, with the central clearing counterparty becoming the counterparty to both of the initial parties to the swap. These transactions, known as cleared swaps, involve two counterparties first agreeing to the terms of a swap transaction, then submitting the transaction to a clearing house that acts as the central counterparty. Once accepted by the clearing house, the original swap transaction is terminated and replaced by two mirror trades for which the central counterparty becomes the counterparty to each of the original parties based upon the trade terms determined in the original transaction. In this manner each individual swap counterparty reduces its risk of loss due to counterparty nonperformance because the clearing house acts as the counterparty to each transaction.

Commodities Regulation

Futures exchanges in the United States are subject to varying degrees of regulation under the CEA depending on whether such exchange is a designated contract market, exempt board of trade or electronic trading facility. Clearing organizations are also subject to the CEA and the rules and regulations adopted thereunder and administered by the CFTC. The CFTC is the governmental agency charged with responsibility for regulation of futures exchanges and commodity interest trading. The CFTC’s function is to implement the CEA’s objectives of preventing price manipulation and excessive speculation and promoting orderly and efficient commodity interest markets. In addition, the various exchanges and clearing organizations themselves exercise regulatory and supervisory authority over their member firms.

The CFTC also regulates the activities of “commodity trading advisors” and “commodity pool operators” and the CFTC has adopted regulations with respect to certain of such persons’ activities. Pursuant to its authority, the CFTC requires a CPO, such as USCF, to keep accurate, current and orderly records with respect to each pool it operates. The CFTC may suspend, modify or terminate the registration of any registrant for failure to comply with CFTC rules or regulations. Suspension, restriction or termination of USCF’s registration as a CPO would prevent it, until such time (if any) as such registration were to be reinstated, from managing, and might result in the termination of, UGA or the Related Public Funds.

Under certain circumstances, the CEA grants shareholders the right to institute a reparations proceeding before the CFTC against USCF (as a registered commodity pool operator), as well as those of their respective employees who are required to be registered under the CEA. Shareholders may also be able to maintain a private right of action for certain violations of the CEA.

Pursuant to authority in the CEA, the NFA has been formed and registered with the CFTC as a registered futures association. The NFA is the only self-regulatory association for commodities professionals other than the exchanges. As such, the NFA promulgates rules governing the conduct of commodity professionals and disciplines those professionals that do not comply with such standards. The CFTC has delegated to the NFA responsibility for the registration of commodity pool operators. USCF is a member of the NFA. As a member of the NFA, USCF is subject to NFA standards relating to fair trade practices, financial condition, and consumer protection.

The CEA requires all FCMs, i.e., UGA’s clearing brokers, to meet and maintain specified fitness and financial requirements, to segregate customer funds from proprietary funds and account separately for all customers’ funds and positions, and to maintain specified books and records open to inspection by the staff of the CFTC. The CFTC has similar authority over introducing brokers, or persons who solicit or accept orders for commodity interest trades but who do not accept margin deposits for the execution of trades. The CEA authorizes the CFTC to regulate trading by FCMs and by their officers and directors, permits the CFTC to require action by exchanges

25

Table of Contents

in the event of market emergencies, and establishes an administrative procedure under which customers may institute complaints for damages arising from alleged violations of the CEA.

The regulations of the CFTC and the NFA prohibit any representation by a person registered with the CFTC or by any member of the NFA, that registration with the CFTC, or membership in the NFA, in any respect indicates that the CFTC or the NFA, as the case may be, has approved or endorsed that person or that person’s trading program or objectives. The registrations and memberships of the parties described in this summary must not be considered as constituting any such approval or endorsement. Likewise, no futures exchange has given or will give any similar approval or endorsement.

CFTC regulations require enhanced customer protections, risk management programs, internal monitoring and controls, capital and liquidity standards, customer disclosures and auditing and examination programs for FCMs. These regulations are intended to afford greater assurances to market participants that customer segregated funds and secured amounts are protected, customers are provided with appropriate notice of the risks of futures trading and of the FCMs with which they may choose to do business, FCMs are monitoring and managing risks in a robust manner, the capital and liquidity of FCMs are strengthened to safeguard the continued operations, and the auditing and examination programs of the CFTC and the self-regulatory organizations are monitoring the activities of FCMs in a thorough manner.

UGA’s investors are afforded prescribed rights for reparations under the CEA against USCF (as a registered commodity pool operator), as well as its respective employees who are required to be registered under the CEA. Investors may also be able to maintain a private right of action for violations of the CEA. The CFTC has adopted rules implementing the reparation provisions of the CEA, which provide that any person may file a complaint for a reparations award with the CFTC for violation of the CEA against a floor broker or an FCM, introducing broker, commodity trading advisor, CPO, and their respective associated persons.

The regulation of commodity interest trading in the United States and other countries is an evolving area of the law. Below are discussed several key regulatory items that are relevant to UGA. The various statements made in this summary are subject to modification by legislative action and changes in the rules and regulations of the CFTC, the NFA, the futures exchanges, clearing organizations and other regulatory bodies. In addition, with regard to any other rules that the CFTC or SEC may adopt in the future, the effect of any such regulatory changes on UGA is impossible to predict, but it could be substantial and adverse.

Futures Contracts and Position Limits

On October 15, 2020, the CFTC approved the Position Limits Rule. The Position Limits Rule establishes federal position limits for 25 core referenced futures contracts (comprised of agricultural, energy and metals futures contracts), futures and options linked to the core referenced futures contracts, and swaps that are economically equivalent to the core referenced futures contracts.

The Benchmark Futures Contract will be subject to position limits under the Position Limits Rule, and UGA’s trading does not qualify for an exemption therefrom. Accordingly, the Position Limits Rule could negatively impact the ability of UGA to meet its investment objective by inhibiting USCF’s ability to effectively invest the proceeds from sales of Creation Baskets of UGA in particular amounts and types of its permitted investments.

Margin Requirements

Futures and Cleared Swaps

Original or initial margin is the minimum amount of funds that must be deposited by a commodity interest trader with the trader’s broker to initiate and maintain an open position in futures contracts. Maintenance margin is the amount (generally less than the original margin) to which a trader’s account may decline before he must deliver additional margin. A margin deposit is like a cash performance bond. It helps assure the trader’s performance of the futures contracts that he or she purchases or sells.

Futures contracts are customarily bought and sold on initial margin that represents a very small percentage (ranging upward from 5%) of the aggregate purchase or sales price of the contract. Because of such low margin requirements, price fluctuations occurring in the futures markets may create profits and losses that, in relation to the amount invested, are greater than are customary in other forms of investment or speculation. As discussed below, adverse price changes in the futures contract may result in margin requirements that greatly exceed the initial margin. In addition, the amount of margin required in connection with a particular futures contract is set from time to time by the exchange on which the contract is traded and may be modified from time to time by the exchange during the term of the contract.

26

Table of Contents

Brokerage firms, such as UGA’s clearing brokers, carrying accounts for traders in commodity interest contracts may not accept lower, and generally require higher, amounts of margin as a matter of policy to further protect themselves. The clearing brokers require UGA to make margin deposits equal to exchange minimum levels for all commodity interest contracts. This requirement may be altered from time to time in the clearing brokers’ discretion.

Margin requirements are computed each day by the relevant clearing organization and a trader’s clearing broker. When the market value of a particular open commodity interest position changes to a point where the margin on deposit does not satisfy maintenance margin requirements, a margin call is made by the broker. With respect to trading by UGA, UGA (and not its investors personally) is subject to margin calls.

Finally, many major U.S. exchanges have passed certain cross margining arrangements involving procedures pursuant to which the futures and options positions held in an account would, in the case of some accounts, be aggregated and margin requirements would be assessed on a portfolio basis, measuring the total risk of the combined positions.

Options

When a trader purchases an option, there is no margin requirement; however, the option premium must be paid in full. When a trader sells an option, on the other hand, he or she may be required to deposit margin in an amount determined by the margin requirements established for the underlying interest and, in addition, an amount substantially equal to the current premium for the option. The margin requirements imposed on the selling of options, although adjusted to reflect the probability that out-of-the-money options will not be exercised, can in fact be higher than those imposed in dealing in the futures markets directly. Complicated margin requirements apply to spreads and conversions, which are complex trading strategies in which a trader acquires a mixture of options positions and positions in the underlying interest.

OTC Swaps

In October 2015, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the FDIC, the Farm Credit Administration, and the Federal Housing Finance Agency (each an “Agency” and, collectively, the “Agencies”) jointly adopted final rules to establish minimum margin and capital requirements for registered swap dealers, major swap participants, security-based swap dealers, and major security-based swap participants (“Swap Entities”) that are subject to the jurisdiction of one of the Agencies (such entities, “Covered Swap Entities”, and the joint final rules, the “Final Margin Rules”).

The Final Margin Rules will subject non-cleared swaps and non-cleared security-based swaps between Covered Swap Entities and Swap Entities, and between Covered Swap Entities and financial end users that have material swaps exposure (i.e., an average daily aggregate notional of $8 billion or more in non-cleared swaps calculated in accordance with the Final Margin Rules), to a mandatory two-way minimum initial margin requirement. The minimum amount of the initial margin required to be posted or collected would be either the amount calculated by the Covered Swap Entity using a standardized schedule set forth as an appendix to the Final Margin Rules, which provides the gross initial margin (as a percentage of total notional exposure) for certain asset classes, or an internal margin model of the Covered Swap Entity conforming to the requirements of the Final Margin Rules that is approved by the Agency having jurisdiction over the particular Covered Swap Entity. The Final Margin Rules specify the types of collateral that may be posted or collected as initial margin for non-cleared swaps and non-cleared security-based swaps with financial end users (generally cash, certain government, government- sponsored enterprise securities, certain liquid debt, certain equity securities, certain eligible publicly traded debt, and gold); and sets forth haircuts for certain collateral asset classes.

The Final Margin Rules require minimum variation margin to be exchanged daily for non-cleared swaps and non-cleared security-based swaps between Covered Swap Entities and Swap Entities and between Covered Swap Entities and all financial end-users (without regard to the swaps exposure of the particular financial end-user). The minimum variation margin amount is the daily mark-to-market change in the value of the swap to the Covered Swap Entity, taking into account variation margin previously posted or collected. For non-cleared swaps and security-based swaps between Covered Swap Entities and financial end-users, variation margin may be posted or collected in cash or non-cash collateral that is considered eligible for initial margin purposes. Variation margin is not subject to segregation with an independent, third-party custodian, and may, if permitted by contract, be rehypothecated.

The initial margin requirements of the Final Margin Rules are being phased in over time, and the variation margin requirements of the Final Margin Rules are currently in effect. UGA is not a Covered Swap Entity under the Final Margin Rules but it is a financial end-

27

Table of Contents

user. Accordingly, UGA is currently subject to the variation margin requirements of the Final Margin Rules. However, UGA does not have material swaps exposure and, accordingly, UGA will not be subject to the initial margin requirements of the Final Margin Rules.

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Dodd-Frank Act”) required the CFTC and the SEC to adopt their own margin rules to apply to a limited number of registered swap dealers, security-based swap dealers, major swap participants, and major security-based swap participants that are not subject to the jurisdiction of one of the Agencies. On December 16, 2015 the CFTC finalized its margin rules, which are substantially the same as the Final Margin Rules and have the same implementation timeline. The SEC adopted margin rules for security-based swap dealers and major security-based swap participants on June 21, 2019. The SEC’s margin rules are generally aligned with the Final Margin Rules and the CFTC’s margin rules, but they differ in a few key respects relating to timing for compliance and the manner in which initial margin must be segregated. UGA does not currently engage in security-based swap transactions and, therefore, the SEC’s margin rules are not expected to apply to UGA.

Mandatory Trading and Clearing of Swaps

CFTC regulations require that certain swap transactions be executed on organized exchanges or “swap execution facilities” and cleared through regulated clearing organizations (“derivative clearing organizations” (“DCOs”)), if the CFTC mandates the central clearing of a particular class of swap and such swap is “made available to trade” on a swap execution facility. Currently, swap dealers, major swap participants, commodity pools, certain private funds and entities predominantly engaged in activities that are financial in nature are required to execute on a swap execution facility, and clear, certain interest rate swaps and index-based credit default swaps. As a result, if UGA enters into an interest rate or index-based credit default swap that is subject to these requirements, such swap will be required to be executed on a swap execution facility and centrally cleared. Mandatory clearing and “made available to trade” determinations with respect to additional types of swaps are expected in the future, and, when finalized, could require UGA to electronically execute and centrally clear certain OTC instruments presently entered into and settled on a bi-lateral basis. If a swap is required to be cleared, initial and variation margin requirements are set by the relevant clearing organization, subject to certain regulatory requirements and guidelines. Additional margin may be required and held by UGA’s FCMs.

Other Requirements for Swaps

In addition to the margin requirements described above, swaps that are not required to be cleared and executed on a SEF but that are executed bilaterally are also subject to various requirements pursuant to CFTC regulations, including, among other things, reporting and recordkeeping requirements and, depending on the status of the counterparties, trading documentation requirements and dispute resolution requirements.

Derivatives Regulations in Non-U.S. Jurisdictions

In addition to U.S. laws and regulations, UGA may be subject to non-U.S. derivatives laws and regulations if it engages in futures and/or swap transactions with non-U.S. persons. For example, UGA may be impacted by European laws and regulations to the extent that it engages in futures transactions on European exchanges or derivatives transactions with European entities. Other jurisdictions impose requirements applicable to futures and derivatives that are similar to those imposed by the U.S., including position limits, margin, clearing and trade execution requirements.

The CFTC is generally prohibited by statute from regulating trading on non-U.S. futures exchanges and markets. The CFTC, however, has adopted regulations relating to the marketing of non-U.S. futures contracts in the United States. These regulations permit certain contracts on non-U.S. exchanges to be offered and sold in the United States.

SEC Reports

UGA makes available, free of charge, on its website, its annual reports on Form 10-K, its quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, its current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to these reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act as soon as reasonably practicable after these forms are filed with, or furnished to, the SEC. These reports are also available from the SEC through its website at: www.sec.gov.

CFTC Reports

UGA also makes available its monthly reports and its annual reports required to be prepared and filed with the NFA under the CFTC regulations.

28

Table of Contents

Intellectual Property

USCF owns trademark registrations for UNITED STATES GASOLINE FUND (U.S. Reg. No. 3486625) for “Fund investment services in the field of gasoline futures contracts, cash-settled options on gasoline futures contracts, forward contracts for gasoline, over-the-counter transactions based on the price of gasoline, and indices based on the foregoing,” in use since February 22, 2008, and UGA UNITED STATES GASOLINE FUND, LP (and Flame Design) (U.S. Reg. No. 4440923) for “Financial investment services in the field of gasoline futures contracts, cash-settled options on gasoline futures contracts, forward contracts for gasoline, over-the-counter transactions based on the price of gasoline, and indices based on the foregoing,” in use since September 30, 2012. USCF relies upon these trademarks through which it markets its services and strives to build and maintain brand recognition in the market and among current and potential investors. So long as USCF continues to use these trademarks to identify its services, without challenge from any third party, and properly maintains and renews the trademark registrations under applicable laws, rules and regulations, it will continue to have indefinite protection for these trademarks under current laws, rules and regulations.

USCF owns trademark registrations for USCF (and Design) (U.S. Reg. No. 5127374) for “Fund investment services,” in use since April 10, 2016, USCF (U.S. Reg No. 5040755) for “Fund investment services,” in use since June 24, 2008, and INVEST IN WHAT’S REAL (U.S. Reg. No. 5450808) for “Fund investment services,” in use since April 2016. USCF relies upon these trademarks and service mark through which it markets its services and strives to build and maintain brand recognition in the market and among current and potential investors. So long as USCF continues to use these trademarks to identify its services, without challenge from any third party, and properly maintains and renews the trademark registrations under applicable laws, rules and regulations, it will continue to have indefinite protection for these trademarks under current laws, rules and regulations. USCF has been granted two patents Nos. 7,739,186 and 8,019,675, for systems and methods for an exchange traded fund (ETF) that tracks the price of one or more commodities.

​

29

Table of Contents

Economic conditions impacting gasoline. The demand for unleaded gasoline correlates closely with general economic growth rates. The occurrence of recessions or other periods of low or negative economic growth will typically have a direct adverse impact on unleaded gasoline prices. Other factors that affect general economic conditions in the world or in a major region, such as changes in population growth rates, periods of civil unrest pandemics (e.g. COVID-19), government austerity programs, or currency exchange rate fluctuations, can also impact the demand for unleaded gasoline. Sovereign debt downgrades, defaults, inability to access debt markets due to credit or legal constraints, liquidity crises, the breakup or restructuring of fiscal, monetary, or political systems such as the European Union, and other events or conditions (e.g. pandemics such as COVID-19) that impair the functioning of financial markets and institutions also may adversely impact the demand for unleaded gasoline.

Other gasoline demand-related factors. Other factors that may affect the demand for unleaded gasoline and therefore its price, include technological improvements in energy efficiency; seasonal weather patterns, which affect the demand for unleaded gasoline associated with heating and cooling; increased competitiveness of alternative energy sources that have so far generally not been competitive with oil without the benefit of government subsidies or mandates; and changes in technology or consumer preferences that alter fuel choices, such as toward alternative fueled vehicles.

Other gasoline supply-related factors. Unleaded gasoline prices also vary depending on a number of factors affecting supply. For example, increased supply from the development of new oil supply sources and technologies to enhance recovery from existing sources tends to reduce unleaded gasoline prices to the extent such supply increases are not offset by commensurate growth in demand. Similarly, increases in industry refining or petrochemical manufacturing capacity may impact the supply of unleaded gasoline. World oil supply levels can also be affected by factors that reduce available supplies, such as adherence by member countries to OPEC production quotas and the occurrence of wars, hostile actions, natural disasters, disruptions in competitors’ operations, or unexpected unavailability of distribution channels that may disrupt supplies. Technological change can also alter the relative costs for companies in the petroleum industry to find, produce, and refine oil and to manufacture petrochemicals, which in turn may affect the supply of and demand for gasoline.

Other factors impacting the gasoline market. The supply of and demand for unleaded gasoline may also be impacted by changes in interest rates, inflation, and other local or regional market conditions, as well as by the development of alternative energy sources.

Price Volatility May Possibly Cause the Total Loss of Your Investment. Futures contracts have a high degree of price variability and are subject to occasional rapid and substantial changes. Consequently, you could lose all or substantially all of your investment in UGA.

30

Table of Contents

COVID-19 and other infectious disease outbreaks could negatively affect the valuation and performance of UGA’s investments.

An outbreak of infectious respiratory illness caused by a novel coronavirus known as COVID-19 was first detected in China in December 2019 and spread globally. In March 2020, the World Health Organization declared the COVID-19 outbreak a pandemic. COVID-19 has resulted in numerous deaths, travel restrictions, closed international borders, enhanced health screenings at ports of entry and elsewhere, disruption of and delays in healthcare service preparation and delivery, prolonged quarantines and the imposition of both local and more widespread “work from home” measures, cancellations, loss of employment, supply chain disruptions, and lower consumer and institutional demand for goods and services, as well as general concern and uncertainty. The ongoing spread of COVID-19 has had, and is expected to continue to have, a material adverse impact on local economies in the affected jurisdictions and also on the global economy, as cross border commercial activity and market sentiment are impacted by the outbreak and government and other measures seeking to contain its spread. The impact of COVID-19, and other infectious disease outbreaks that may arise in the future, could adversely affect individual issuers and capital markets in ways that cannot necessarily be foreseen. In addition, actions taken by government and quasi-governmental authorities and regulators throughout the world in response to the COVID-19 outbreak, including significant fiscal and monetary policy changes, may affect the value, volatility, pricing and liquidity of some investments or other assets, including those held by or invested in by UGA. Public health crises caused by the COVID-19 outbreak may exacerbate other pre-existing political, social and economic risks in certain countries or globally. The duration of the COVID-19 outbreak and its ultimate impact on UGA and, on the global economy, cannot be determined with certainty. The COVID-19 pandemic and its effects may last for an extended period of time, and could result in significant and continued market volatility, exchange trading suspensions and closures, declines in global financial markets, higher default rates, and a substantial economic downturn or recession. The foregoing could impair UGA’s ability to maintain operational standards (such as with respect to satisfying redemption requests), disrupt the operations of UGA’s service providers, adversely affect the value and liquidity of UGA’s investments, and negatively impact UGA’s performance and your investment in UGA. The extent to which COVID-19 continues to affect UGA and UGA’s service providers and portfolio investments will depend on future developments. There continues to be uncertainty around the COVID-19 pandemic as the Delta variant of COVID-19, which appears to be the most transmissible and contagious variant to date, has caused an increase in COVID-19 cases globally. The full impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on our business will depend on factors such as the length of time of the pandemic; how federal, state and local governments are responding, the impact of the Delta variant, the Omicron variant, and other variants that may emerge; vaccination rates among the population; the efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccines against the Delta variant, Omicron variant, and other variants that may emerge; and the longer-term impact of the pandemic on the economy and consumer behavior. Given the significant economic and financial market disruptions associated with the COVID-19 pandemic, the valuation and performance of UGA’s investments could be impacted adversely.

An investment in UGA may provide little or no diversification benefits. Thus, in a declining market, UGA may have no gains to offset losses from other investments, and an investor may suffer losses on an investment in UGA while incurring losses with respect to other asset classes.

Historically, Futures Contracts and Other Gasoline-Related Investments have generally been non-correlated to the performance of other asset classes such as stocks and bonds. Non-correlation means that there is a low statistically valid relationship between the performance of futures and other commodity interest transactions, on the one hand, and stocks or bonds, on the other hand.

However, there can be no assurance that such non-correlation will continue during future periods. If, contrary to historic patterns, UGA’s performance were to move in the same general direction as the financial markets, investors will obtain little or no diversification benefits from an investment in UGA’s shares. In such a case, UGA may have no gains to offset losses from other investments, and investors may suffer losses on their investment in UGA at the same time they incur losses with respect to other investments.

Variables such as drought, floods, weather, pandemics (such as COVID-19), embargoes, tariffs and other political events may have a larger impact on unleaded gasoline prices and unleaded gasoline-linked instruments, including Futures Contracts and Other Gasoline-Related Investments, than on traditional securities. These additional variables may create additional investment risks that subject UGA's investments to greater volatility than investments in traditional securities.

Non-correlation should not be confused with negative correlation, where the performance of two asset classes would be opposite of each other. There is no historical evidence that the spot price of unleaded gasoline and prices of other financial assets, such as stocks and bonds, are negatively correlated. In the absence of negative correlation, UGA cannot be expected to be automatically profitable during unfavorable periods for the stock market, or vice versa.

31

Table of Contents

Historical performance of UGA and the Benchmark Futures Contracts is not indicative of future performance.

Past performance of UGA or the Benchmark Futures Contract is not necessarily indicative of future results. Therefore, past performance of UGA or the Benchmark Futures Contract should not be relied upon in deciding whether to buy shares of UGA.

Correlation Risk

Investors purchasing shares to hedge against movements in the price of unleaded gasoline will have an efficient hedge only if the price investors pay for their shares closely correlates with the price of unleaded gasoline. Investing in UGA’s shares for hedging purposes involves the following risks:

As of the date of this annual report on Form 10-K, significant market volatility has occurred in the oil markets and the oil futures markets. Such volatility is attributable to the COVID-19 pandemic, related supply chain disruptions and continuing disputes among oil-producing countries. Although the volatility has abated in recent months, future volatility cannot be predicted. Volatility in the gasoline market was also elevated, but it did not reach the same extreme levels as the volatility in the oil futures market did. However, the COVID-19 pandemic could cause increased volatility in the future, the impact of which could limit UGA's ability to have a substantial portion of its assets invested in the Benchmark Futures Contract. In such a circumstance, UGA could, if it determined it appropriate to do so in light of market conditions and regulatory requirements, invest in other Futures Contract and/or Other Gasoline Related Investments.

The market price at which investors buy or sell shares may be significantly less or more than NAV.

UGA’s NAV per share will change throughout the day as fluctuations occur in the market value of UGA’s portfolio investments. The public trading price at which an investor buys or sells shares during the day from their broker may be different from the NAV of the shares, which is also the price shares can be redeemed with UGA by Authorized Participants in Redemption Baskets. USCF expects that exploitation of certain arbitrage opportunities by Authorized Participants and their clients will tend to cause the public trading price to track NAV per share closely over time, but there can be no assurance of that. For example, a shortage of UGA's shares in the market and other factors could cause UGA’s shares to trade at a premium. Investors should be aware that such premiums can be transitory. To the extent an investor purchases shares that include a premium (e.g., because of a shortage of shares in the market due to the inability of Authorized Participants to purchase additional shares from UGA that could be resold into the market) and the cause of the premium no longer exists causing the premium to disappear (e.g., because more shares are available for purchase from UGA by Authorized Participants that could be resold into the market) such investor’s return on its investment would be adversely impacted due to the loss of the premium. See the risk factor, An unanticipated number of Creation Basket requests during a short period of time could result in a shortage of shares, below.

The NAV of UGA’s shares may also be influenced by non-concurrent trading hours between the NYSE Arca and the various futures exchanges on which unleaded gasoline is traded. While the shares trade on the NYSE Arca from 9:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time, the trading hours for the futures exchanges on which unleaded gasoline trades may not necessarily coincide during all of this time. For example, while the shares trade on the NYSE Arca until 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time, liquidity in the global gasoline market will be reduced after the close of the NYMEX at 2:30 p.m. Eastern Time. As a result, during periods when the NYSE Arca is open and the futures exchanges on which unleaded gasoline is traded are closed, trading spreads and the resulting premium or discount on the shares may widen and, therefore, increase the difference between the price of the shares and the NAV of the shares.

Daily percentage changes in UGA’s NAV may not correlate with daily percentage changes in the price of the Benchmark Futures Contract.

It is possible that the daily percentage changes in UGA’s NAV per share may not closely correlate to daily percentage changes in the price of the Benchmark Futures Contract. Non- correlation may be attributable to disruptions in the market for unleaded gasoline, the

32

Table of Contents

imposition of position or accountability limits by regulators or exchanges, or other extraordinary circumstances. As UGA approaches or reaches position limits with respect to the Benchmark Futures Contract and other Futures Contracts or in view of market conditions, UGA may begin investing in Other Gasoline-Related Investments. In addition, UGA is not able to replicate exactly the changes in the price of the Benchmark Futures Contract because the total return generated by UGA is reduced by expenses and transaction costs, including those incurred in connection with UGA’s trading activities, and increased by interest income from UGA’s holdings of Treasuries (defined below). Tracking the Benchmark Futures Contract requires trading of UGA’s portfolio with a view to tracking the Benchmark Futures Contract over time and is dependent upon the skills of USCF and its trading principals, among other factors.

In addition, UGA is not able to replicate exactly the changes in the price of the Benchmark Futures Contract because the total return generated by UGA is reduced by expenses and transaction costs, including those incurred in connection with UGA’s trading activities, and increased by interest income from UGA’s holdings of Treasuries (defined below). Tracking the Benchmark Futures Contract requires trading of UGA’s portfolio with a view to tracking the Benchmark Futures Contract over time and is dependent upon the skills of USCF and its trading principals, among other factors.

An investment in UGA is not a proxy for investing in the gasoline markets, and the daily percentage changes in the price of the Benchmark Future Contract, or the NAV of UGA, may not correlate with daily percentage changes in the spot price of unleaded gasoline.

An investment in UGA is not a proxy for investing in the gasoline markets. To the extent that investors use UGA as a means of indirectly investing in gasoline, there is the risk that the daily changes in the price of UGA’s shares on the NYSE Arca, on a percentage basis, will not closely track the daily changes in the spot price of gasoline on a percentage basis. This could happen if the price of shares traded on the NYSE Arca does not correlate closely with the value of UGA’s NAV; the changes in UGA’s NAV do not correlate closely with the changes in the price of the Benchmark Futures Contract; or the changes in the price of the Benchmark Futures Contract do not closely correlate with the changes in the cash or spot price of gasoline. This is a risk because if these correlations do not exist, then investors may not be able to use UGA as a cost-effective way to indirectly invest in gasoline or as a hedge against the risk of loss in gasoline-related transactions. The degree of correlation among UGA’s share price, the price of the Benchmark Futures Contract and the spot price of gasoline depends upon circumstances such as variations in the speculative gasoline market, supply of and demand for Futures Contracts (including the Benchmark Futures Contract) and Other Gasoline-Related Investments, and technical influences on trading gasoline futures contracts. Investors who are not experienced in investing in gasoline futures contracts or the factors that influence that market or speculative trading in the gasoline markets and may not have the background or ready access to the types of information that investors familiar with these markets may have and, as a result, may be at greater risk of incurring losses from trading in UGA shares than such other investors with such experience and resources.

Daily percentage changes in the price of the Benchmark Futures Contract may not correlate with daily percentage changes in the spot price of gasoline.

The correlation between changes in prices of the Benchmark Futures Contract and the spot price of gasoline may at times be only approximate. The degree of imperfection of correlation depends upon circumstances such as variations in the speculative gasoline market, supply of and demand for Futures Contracts (including the Benchmark Futures Contract) and Other Gasoline-Related Investments, and technical influences in gasoline futures trading.

Natural forces in the gasoline futures market known as “backwardation” and “contango” may increase UGA’s tracking error and/or negatively impact total return.

The design of UGA’s Benchmark Futures Contract is such that every month it begins by using the near month contract to expire until the near month contract is within two weeks of expiration, when, over a one-day period, it transitions to the next month contract to expire as its benchmark contract and keeps that contract as its benchmark until it becomes the near month contract and close to expiration. In the event of a gasoline futures market where near month contracts trade at a higher price than next month to expire contracts, a situation described as “backwardation” in the futures market, then absent the impact of the overall movement in gasoline prices the value of the benchmark contract would tend to rise as it approaches expiration. Conversely, in the event of a gasoline futures market where near month contracts trade at a lower price than next month contracts, a situation described as “contango” in the futures market, then absent the impact of the overall movement in gasoline prices the value of the benchmark contract would tend to decline as it approaches expiration. When compared to total return of other price indices, such as the spot price of gasoline, the impact of

33

Table of Contents

backwardation and contango may cause the total return of UGA’s per share NAV to vary significantly. Moreover, absent the impact of rising or falling gasoline prices, a prolonged period of contango could have a significant negative impact on UGA’s per share NAV and total return and investors could lose part or all of their investment.

While contango and backwardation are consistently present in trading in the futures markets, such conditions can be exacerbated by market forces. For example, extraordinary market conditions in the crude oil markets, including “super contango” (a higher level of contango arising from the overabundance of oil being produced and the limited availability of storage for such excess supply), occurred in the crude oil futures markets in 2020 due to over-supply of crude oil in the face of weak demand during the COVID-19 pandemic when disputes among oil-producing countries regarding limitations on the production of oil also were occurring. Volatility in the gasoline market was also elevated, but it did not reach the same extreme levels as the volatility in the oil futures market did. However, the COVID-19 pandemic could cause increased volatility in the future, the impact of which could limit UGA’s ability to have a substantial portion of its assets invested in the Benchmark Futures Contract. In such a circumstance, UGA could, if it determined it appropriate to do so in light of market conditions and regulatory requirements, invest in other Futures Contract and/or Gasoline Related Investments. See “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” in this annual report on Form 10-K for a discussion of the potential effects of contango and backwardation.

Accountability levels, position limits, and daily price fluctuation limits set by the exchanges have the potential to cause tracking error, by limiting UGA’s investments, including its ability to fully invest in the Benchmark Futures Contract, which could cause the price of shares to substantially vary from the price of the Benchmark Futures Contract.

Designated contract markets, such as the NYMEX and ICE Futures, have established accountability levels and position limits on the maximum net long or net short futures contracts in commodity interests that any person or group of persons under common trading control (other than as a hedge, which an investment by UGA is not) may hold, own or control. These levels and position limits apply to the futures contracts that UGA invests in to meet its investment objective. In addition to accountability levels and position limits, the NYMEX and ICE Futures also set daily price limits on futures contracts. The daily price fluctuation limit establishes the maximum amount that the price of a futures contract may vary either up or down from the previous day’s settlement price. Once the daily price fluctuation limit has been reached in a particular futures contract, no trades may be made at a price beyond that limit.

The accountability levels for the Benchmark Futures Contract and other Futures Contracts traded on U.S. based futures exchanges, such as the NYMEX, are not a fixed ceiling, but rather a threshold above which the NYMEX may exercise greater scrutiny and control over an investor’s positions. The current accountability level for investments for any one month in the Benchmark Futures Contract is 5,000 contracts. In addition, the NYMEX imposes an accountability level for all months of 7,000 net futures contracts for gasoline. In addition, the ICE Futures maintains the same accountability levels, position limits and monitoring authority for its gasoline contract as the NYMEX. If UGA and the Related Public Funds exceed these accountability levels for investments in the futures contracts for gasoline, the NYMEX and ICE Futures will monitor such exposure and may ask for further information on their activities, including the total size of all positions, investment and trading strategy, and the extent of liquidity resources of UGA and the Related Public Funds. If deemed necessary by the NYMEX and/or ICE Futures, UGA could be ordered to reduce its aggregate position back to the accountability level. As of December 31, 2021, UGA held 769 NYMEX RBOB Gasoline Futures RB contracts. As of December 31, 2021, UGA did not hold any Futures Contracts traded on the ICE Futures. For the year ended December 31, 2021, UGA did not exceed accountability levels on the NYMEX or ICE Futures.

Position limits differ from accountability levels in that they represent fixed limits on the maximum number of futures contracts that any person may hold and cannot be exceeded without express CFTC authority to do so. In addition to accountability levels and position limits that may apply at any time, the NYMEX and the ICE Futures impose position limits on contracts held in the last few days of trading in the near month contract to expire. It is unlikely that UGA will run up against such position limits because UGA’s investment strategy is to close out its positions and “roll” from the near month contract to expire to the next month contract to expire beginning two weeks from expiration of the contract. For the year ended December 31, 2021, UGA did not exceed position limits imposed by the NYMEX or ICE Futures.

On October 15, 2020, the CFTC approved the Position Limits Rule. The Position Limits Rule establishes federal position limits for 25 core referenced futures contracts (comprised of agricultural, energy and metals futures contracts), futures and options linked to the core referenced futures contracts, and swaps that are economically equivalent to the core referenced futures contracts.

34

Table of Contents

The Benchmark Futures Contract will be subject to position limits under the Position Limits Rule, and UNG’s trading does not qualify for an exemption therefrom. Accordingly, the Position Limits Rule could negatively impact the ability of UNG to meet its investment objective by inhibiting USCF’s ability to effectively invest the proceeds from sales of Creation Baskets of UNG in particular amounts and types of its permitted investments.

Risk mitigation measures that could be imposed by UGA’s FCMs have the potential to cause tracking error by limiting UGA’s investments, including its ability to fully invest in the Benchmark Futures Contract and other Futures Contracts, which could cause the price of UGA’s shares to substantially vary from the price of the Benchmark Futures Contract.

UGA’s FCMs have discretion to impose limits on the positions that UGA may hold in the Benchmark Oil Futures Contract as well as certain other months. To date, UGA’s FCMs have not imposed any such limits. However, were UGA’s FCMs to impose limits, UGA’s ability to have a substantial portion of its assets invested in the Benchmark Futures Contract and other Futures Contracts could be severely limited, which could lead UGA to invest in other Futures Contracts or, potentially, Other Gasoline Related Investments. UGA could also have to more frequently rebalance and adjust the types of holdings in its portfolio than is currently the case. This could inhibit UGA from pursuing its investment objective in the same manner that it has historically and currently.

In addition, when offering Creation Baskets for purchase, limitations imposed by exchanges and/or any of UGA’s FCMs could limit UGA’s ability to invest the proceeds of the purchases of Creation Baskets in Benchmark Futures Contracts and other Futures Contracts. If this were the case, UGA may invest in other permitted investments, including Other Gasoline Related Investments, and may hold larger amounts of Treasuries, cash and cash equivalents, which could impair UGA’s ability to meet its investment objective.

Tax Risk

An investor’s tax liability may exceed the amount of distributions, if any, on its shares.

Cash or property will be distributed at the sole discretion of USCF. USCF has not and does not currently intend to make cash or other distributions with respect to shares. Investors will be required to pay U.S. federal income tax and, in some cases, state, local, or foreign income tax, on their allocable share of UGA’s taxable income, without regard to whether they receive distributions or the amount of any distributions. Therefore, the tax liability of an investor with respect to its shares may exceed the amount of cash or value of property (if any) distributed.

An investor’s allocable share of taxable income or loss may differ from its economic income or loss on its shares.

Due to the application of the assumptions and conventions applied by UGA in making allocations for tax purposes and other factors, an investor’s allocable share of UGA’s income, gain, deduction or loss may be different than its economic profit or loss from its shares for a taxable year. This difference could be temporary or permanent and, if permanent, could result in it being taxed on amounts in excess of its economic income.

Items of income, gain, deduction, loss and credit with respect to shares could be reallocated, and UGA could be liable for U.S. federal income tax, if the IRS does not accept the assumptions and conventions applied by UGA in allocating those items, with potential adverse consequences for an investor.

The U.S. tax rules pertaining to partnerships are complex and their application to large, publicly traded partnerships such as UGA is in many respects uncertain. UGA applies certain assumptions and conventions in an attempt to comply with the intent of the applicable rules and to report taxable income, gains, deductions, losses and credits in a manner that properly reflects shareholders’ economic gains and losses. These assumptions and conventions may not fully comply with all aspects of the Internal Revenue Code (the “Code”) and applicable Treasury Regulations, however, and it is possible that the IRS will successfully challenge UGA’s allocation methods and require UGA to reallocate items of income, gain, deduction, loss or credit in a manner that adversely affects investors.

UGA may be liable for U.S. federal income tax on any “imputed understatement” of tax resulting from an adjustment as a result of an IRS audit. The amount of the imputed understatement generally includes increases in allocations of items of income or gains to any investor and decreases in allocations of items of deduction, loss, or credit to any investor without any offset for any corresponding reductions in allocations of items of income or gain to any investor or increases in allocations of items of deduction, loss, or credit to any investor. If UGA is required to pay any U.S. federal income taxes on any imputed understatement, the resulting tax liability would reduce the net assets of UGA and would likely have an adverse impact on the value of the shares. Under certain circumstances, UGA

35

Table of Contents

may be eligible to make an election to cause the investors to take into account the amount of any imputed understatement, including any interest and penalties. The ability of a publicly traded partnership such as UGA to make this election is uncertain. If the election is made, UGA would be required to provide investors who owned beneficial interests in the shares in the year to which the adjusted allocations relate with a statement setting forth their proportionate shares of the adjustment (“Adjusted K-1s”). The investors would be required to take the adjustment into account in the taxable year in which the Adjusted K-1s are issued.

UGA could be treated as a corporation for federal income tax purposes, which may substantially reduce the value of the shares.

UGA has received an opinion of counsel that, under current U.S. federal income tax laws, UGA will be treated as a partnership that is not taxable as a corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes, provided that (i) at least 90 percent of UGA’s annual gross income will be derived from (a) income and gains from commodities (not held as inventory) or futures, forwards, options, swaps and other notional principal contracts with respect to commodities, and (b) interest income, (ii) UGA is organized and operated in accordance with its governing agreements and applicable law and (iii) UGA does not elect to be taxed as a corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes. Although USCF anticipates that UGA has satisfied and will continue to satisfy the “qualifying income” requirement for all of its taxable years, that result cannot be assured. UGA has not requested and will not request any ruling from the IRS with respect to its classification as a partnership not taxable as a corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes. If the IRS were to successfully assert that UGA is taxable as a corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes in any taxable year, rather than passing through its income, gains, losses and deductions proportionately to shareholders, UGA would be subject to tax on its net income for the year at corporate tax rates. In addition, although USCF does not currently intend to make distributions with respect to shares, any distributions would be taxable to shareholders as dividend income to the extent of UGA’s current and accumulated earnings and profits. Taxation of UGA as a corporation could materially reduce the after-tax return on an investment in shares and could substantially reduce the value of the shares.

UGA is organized and operated as a limited partnership in accordance with the provisions of the LP Agreement and applicable state law, and therefore, UGA has a more complex tax treatment than traditional mutual funds.

UGA is organized and operated as a limited partnership in accordance with the provisions of the LP Agreement and applicable state law. No U.S. federal income tax is paid by UGA on its income. Instead, UGA will furnish shareholders each year with tax information on IRS Schedule K-1 (Form 1065) and each U.S. shareholder is required to report on its U.S. federal income tax return its allocable share of the income, gain, loss and deduction of UGA.

This must be reported without regard to the amount (if any) of cash or property the shareholder receives as a distribution from UGA during the taxable year. A shareholder, therefore, may be allocated income or gain by UGA but receive no cash distribution with which to pay the tax liability resulting from the allocation, or may receive a distribution that is insufficient to pay such liability.

In addition to U.S. federal income taxes, shareholders may be subject to other taxes, such as state and local income taxes, unincorporated business taxes, business franchise taxes and estate, inheritance or intangible taxes that may be imposed by the various jurisdictions in which UGA does business or owns property or where the shareholders reside. Although an analysis of those various taxes is not presented here, each prospective shareholder should consider their potential impact on its investment in UGA. It is each shareholder’s responsibility to file the appropriate U.S. federal, state, local and foreign tax returns.

If UGA is required to withhold tax with respect to any Non-U.S. shareholders, the cost of such withholding may be borne by all shareholders.

Under certain circumstances, UGA may be required to pay withholding tax with respect to allocations to Non-U.S. shareholders. Although the LP Agreement provides that any such withholding will be treated as being distributed to the Non-U.S. shareholder, UGA may not be able to cause the economic cost of such withholding to be borne by the Non-U.S. shareholder on whose behalf such amounts were withheld since it does not generally expect to make any distributions. Under such circumstances, the economic cost of the withholding may be borne by all shareholders, not just the shareholders on whose behalf such amounts were withheld. This could have a material impact on the value of the shares.

36

Table of Contents

The impact of U.S. tax reform on UGA is uncertain.

Legislative or other actions relating to taxes could have a negative effect on UGA or our investors. The rules dealing with U.S. federal income taxation are constantly under review by persons involved in the legislative process and by the IRS and the U.S. Treasury Department. The Biden Administration has proposed significant changes to the existing U.S. tax rules, and there are a number of proposals in Congress that would similarly modify the existing U.S. tax rules. The likelihood of any such legislation being enacted is uncertain, and we cannot predict with certainty how any changes in the tax laws might affect UGA, our investors or our investments. Investors are urged to consult with their tax advisor with respect to the status of legislative, regulatory or administrative developments and proposals and their potential effect on an investment in our securities.

OTC Contract Risk

UGA will be subject to credit risk with respect to counterparties to OTC contracts entered into by UGA or held by special purpose or structured vehicles.

UGA faces the risk of non-performance by the counterparties to the OTC contracts. Unlike in futures contracts, the counterparty to these contracts is generally a single bank or other financial institution, rather than a clearing organization backed by a group of financial institutions. As a result, there will be greater counterparty credit risk in these transactions. A counterparty may not be able to meet its obligations to UGA, in which case UGA could suffer significant losses on these contracts. The two-way margining requirements imposed by U.S. regulators, discussed in “Item 1. Business – Commodities Regulation,” are intended to mitigate this risk.

If a counterparty becomes bankrupt or otherwise fails to perform its obligations due to financial difficulties, UGA may experience significant delays in obtaining any recovery in a bankruptcy or other reorganization proceeding. UGA may obtain only limited recovery or may obtain no recovery in such circumstances.

Valuing OTC derivatives may be less certain than actively traded financial instruments.

In general, valuing OTC derivatives is less certain than valuing actively traded financial instruments such as exchange traded futures contracts and securities or cleared swaps because, for OTC derivatives, the price and terms on which such OTC derivatives are entered into or can be terminated are individually negotiated, and those prices and terms may not reflect the best price or terms available from other sources. In addition, while market makers and dealers generally quote indicative prices or terms for entering into or terminating OTC contracts, they typically are not contractually obligated to do so, particularly if they are not a party to the transaction. As a result, it may be difficult to obtain an independent value for an outstanding OTC derivatives transaction.

Other Risks

UGA is not leveraged.

UGA has not leveraged, and does not intend to leverage, its assets through borrowings or otherwise, and makes its investments accordingly. Consistent with the foregoing, UGA’s announced investment intentions, and any changes thereto, will take into account the need for UGA to make permitted investments that also allow it to maintain adequate liquidity to meet its margin and collateral requirements and to avoid, to the extent reasonably possible, UGA becoming leveraged. If market conditions require it, UGA may implement risk reduction procedures, which may include changes to UGA’s investments, and such changes may occur on short notice if they occur other than during a roll or rebalance period.

UGA may temporarily limit the offering of Creation Baskets.

UGA may determine to limit the issuance of its shares through the offering of Creation Baskets to its Authorized Participants in order to allow it to reinvest the proceeds from sales of its Creation Baskets in currently permitted assets in a manner that meets its investment objective. UGA will announce to the market through the filing of a Current Report on Form 8-K if it intends to limit the offering of Creation Baskets at any time. In such case, orders for Creation Baskets will be considered for acceptance in the order they are received by UGA and UGA would continue to accept requests for redemption of its shares from Authorized Participants through Redemption Baskets during the period of the limited offering of Creation Baskets.

37

Table of Contents

Certain of UGA’s investments could be illiquid, which could cause large losses to investors at any time or from time to time.

Futures positions cannot always be liquidated at the desired price. It is difficult to execute a trade at a specific price when there is a relatively small volume of buy and sell orders in a market. A market disruption, such as a foreign government taking political actions that disrupt the market for its currency, its unleaded gasoline production or exports, or another major export, can also make it difficult to liquidate a position. Because both Futures Contracts and Other Gasoline-Related Investments may be illiquid, UGA’s Gasoline Interests may be more difficult to liquidate at favorable prices in periods of illiquid markets and losses may be incurred during the period in which positions are being liquidated. The large size of the positions that UGA may acquire increases the risk of illiquidity both by making its positions more difficult to liquidate and by potentially increasing losses while trying to do so.

OTC contracts that are not subject to clearing may be even less marketable than futures contracts because they are not traded on an exchange, do not have uniform terms and conditions, and are entered into based upon the creditworthiness of the parties and the availability of credit support, such as collateral, and in general, they are not transferable without the consent of the counterparty. These conditions make such contracts less liquid than standardized futures contracts traded on a commodities exchange and could adversely impact UGA’s ability to realize the full value of such contracts. In addition, even if collateral is used to reduce counterparty credit risk, sudden changes in the value of OTC transactions may leave a party open to financial risk due to a counterparty default since the collateral held may not cover a party’s exposure on the transaction in such situations.

UGA is not actively managed and its investment objective is to track the Benchmark Futures Contract so that the average daily percentage change in UGA's NAV for any period of 30 successive valuation days will be within plus/minus ten percent (10%) of the average daily percentage change in the price of the Benchmark Futures Contract over the same period.

UGA is not actively managed by conventional methods. Accordingly, if UGA’s investments in Gasoline Interests are declining in value, in the ordinary course, UGA will not close out such positions except in connection with paying the proceeds to an Authorized Participant upon the redemption of a basket or closing out its positions in Futures Contracts and other permitted investments (i) in connection with the monthly change in the Benchmark Futures Contract or when UGA otherwise determines it would be appropriate to do so, e.g., due to regulatory requirements or risk mitigation measures, or to avoid UGA becoming leveraged, and it reinvests the proceeds in new Futures Contracts or Other Gasoline-Related Investments to the extent possible. USCF will seek to cause the NAV of UGA’s shares to track the Benchmark Futures Contract during periods in which its price is flat or declining as well as when the price is rising.

UGA's ability to invest in the Benchmark Futures Contract could be limited as a result of any or all of the following: evolving market conditions, a change in regulatory accountability levels and position limits imposed on UGA with respect to its investment in Futures Contracts, additional or different risk mitigation measures taken by market participants, generally, including UGA, with respect to UGA acquiring additional Futures Contracts, or UGA selling additional shares. Accordingly, for the foreseeable future, to address and comply with the market conditions, regulatory requirements and other factors that have influenced, and will continue to influence, its investment decisions, UGA intends to buy or sell its permitted investments when UGA increases or decreases either its portfolio overall or its holdings of particular investments.

UGA may not meet the listing standards of NYSE Arca, which would adversely impact an investor’s ability to sell shares.

NYSE Arca may suspend UGA’s shares from trading on the exchange with or without prior notice to UGA, upon failure of UGA to comply with the NYSE’s listing requirements, or when in its sole discretion, the NYSE Arca determines that such suspension of dealings is in the public interest or otherwise warranted. There can be no assurance that the requirements necessary to maintain the listing of UGA’s shares will continue to be met or will remain unchanged. If UGA were unable to meet the NYSE’s listing standards and were to become delisted, an investor’s ability to sell its shares would be adversely impacted.

The NYSE Arca may halt trading in UGA’s shares, which would adversely impact an investor’s ability to sell shares.

Trading in shares may be halted due to market conditions or, in light of NYSE Arca rules and procedures, for reasons that, in the view of the NYSE Arca, make trading in shares inadvisable. In addition, trading is subject to trading halts caused by extraordinary market volatility pursuant to “circuit breaker” rules that require trading to be halted for a specified period based on a specified market decline.

38

Table of Contents

The liquidity of UGA’s shares may also be affected by the withdrawal from participation of Authorized Participants, which could adversely affect the market price of the shares.

In the event that one or more Authorized Participants which have substantial interests in the shares withdraw from participation, the liquidity of the shares will likely decrease, which could adversely affect the market price of the shares and result in investors incurring a loss on their investment.

Shareholders that are not Authorized Participants may only purchase or sell their shares in secondary trading markets, and the conditions associated with trading in secondary markets may adversely affect investors’ investment in the shares.

Only Authorized Participants may directly purchase from or redeem shares with UGA through Creation Baskets or Redemption Baskets respectively. All other investors that desire to purchase or sell shares must do so through the NYSE Arca or in other markets, if any, in which the shares may be traded. Shares may trade at a premium or discount relative to NAV per share.

The lack of an active trading market for UGA’s shares may result in losses on an investor’s investment in UGA at the time the investor sells the shares.

Although UGA’s shares are listed and traded on the NYSE Arca, there can be no guarantee that an active trading market for the shares will be maintained. If an investor needs to sell shares at a time when no active trading market for them exists, the price the investor receives upon sale of the shares, assuming they were able to be sold, likely would be lower than if an active market existed.

Limited partners and shareholders do not participate in the management of UGA and do not control USCF, so they do not have any influence over basic matters that affect UGA.

The limited partners and shareholders take no part in the management or control, and have a minimal voice in UGA’s operations or business. Limited partners and shareholders must therefore rely upon the duties and judgment of USCF to manage UGA’s affairs. Limited partners and shareholders have no right to elect USCF on an annual or any other continuing basis. If USCF voluntarily withdraws, however, the holders of a majority of UGA’s outstanding shares (excluding for purposes of such determination shares owned, if any, by the withdrawing general partner and its affiliates) may elect its successor. USCF may not be removed as general partner except upon approval by the affirmative vote of the holders of at least 66 2/3 percent of UGA’s outstanding shares (excluding shares, if any, owned by USCF and its affiliates), subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions set forth in the LP Agreement.

UGA could become leveraged if it had insufficient assets to completely meet its margin or collateral requirements relating to its investments.

Although UGA does not and will not borrow money or use debt to satisfy its margin or collateral obligations in respect of its investments, it could become leveraged if UGA were to hold insufficient assets that would allow it to meet not only the current, but also future, margin or collateral obligations required for such investments. Such a circumstance could occur if UGA were to hold assets that have a value of less than zero.

USCF endeavors to have the value of UGA's Treasuries, cash and cash equivalents, whether held by UGA or posted as margin or other collateral, at all times approximate the aggregate market value of its obligations under its Futures Contracts and Other Gasoline-Related Investments. Although permitted to do so under its Limited Partnership Agreement, UGA has not and does not intend to leverage its assets by making investments beyond its potential ability to meet the potential margin and collateral obligations relating to such investments. Consistent with this, UGA's investment decisions will take into account the need for UGA to make permitted investments that also allow it to maintain adequate liquidity to meet its margin and collateral requirements and to avoid, to the extent reasonably possible, UGA becoming leveraged, including by its holding of assets that have a high probability of having a value of less than zero.

Limited partners may have limited liability in certain circumstances, including potentially having liability for the return of wrongful distributions.

Under Delaware law, a limited partner might be held liable for UGA’s obligations as if it were a general partner if the limited partner participates in the control of the partnership’s business and the persons who transact business with the partnership think the limited partner is the general partner.

39

Table of Contents

A limited partner will not be liable for assessments in addition to its initial capital investment in any of UGA’s shares. However, a limited partner may be required to repay to UGA any amounts wrongfully returned or distributed to it under some circumstances. Under Delaware law, UGA may not make a distribution to limited partners if the distribution causes UGA’s liabilities (other than liabilities to partners on account of their partnership interests and nonrecourse liabilities) to exceed the fair value of UGA’s assets. Delaware law provides that a limited partner who receives such a distribution and knew at the time of the distribution that the distribution violated the law will be liable to the limited partnership for the amount of the distribution for three years from the date of the distribution.

The LLC Agreement provides limited authority to the Non-Management Directors, and any Director of USCF may be removed by USCF’s parent company, which is wholly owned by Concierge, a controlled public company where the majority of shares are owned by Nicholas D. Gerber along with certain of his other family members and certain other shareholders.

USCF’s Board of Directors currently consists of four Management Directors, who are also executive officers or employees of USCF, and three Non-Management Directors, who are considered independent for purposes of applicable NYSE Arca and SEC rules. Under USCF’s LLC Agreement, the Non-Management Directors have only such authority as the Management Directors expressly confer upon them, which means that the Non-Management Directors may have less authority to control the actions of the Management Directors than is typically the case with the independent members of a company’s Board of Directors. In addition, any Director may be removed by written consent of Wainwright Holdings, Inc. (“Wainwright”), which is the sole member of USCF. The sole shareholder of Wainwright is Concierge Technologies, Inc., a company publicly traded under the ticker symbol “CNCG” (“Concierge”). Mr. Nicholas D. Gerber, along with certain of his family members and certain other shareholders, owns the majority of the shares in Concierge, which is the sole shareholder of Wainwright, the sole member of USCF. Accordingly, although USCF is governed by the USCF Board of Directors, which consists of both Management Directors and Non-Management Directors, pursuant to the LLC Agreement, it is possible for Mr. Gerber to exercise his indirect control of Wainwright to affect the removal of any Director (including the Non-Management Directors which comprise the Audit Committee) and to replace that Director with another Director. Having control in one person could have a negative impact on USCF and UGA, including their regulatory obligations.

There is a risk that UGA will not earn trading gains sufficient to compensate for the fees and expenses that it must pay and as such UGA may not earn any profit.

UGA pays brokerage charges of approximately 0.10% of average total net assets based on brokerage fees of $3.50 per buy or sell, management fees of 0.60% of NAV on its average net assets, and OTC spreads and extraordinary expenses (e.g., subsequent offering expenses, other expenses not in the ordinary course of business, including the indemnification of any person against liabilities and obligations to the extent permitted by law and required under the LP Agreement and under agreements entered into by USCF on UGA’s behalf and the bringing and defending of actions at law or in equity and otherwise engaging in the conduct of litigation and the incurring of legal expenses and the settlement of claims and litigation) that cannot be quantified.

These fees and expenses must be paid in all cases regardless of whether UGA’s activities are profitable. Accordingly, UGA must earn trading gains sufficient to compensate for these fees and expenses before it can earn any profit.

UGA is subject to extensive regulatory reporting and compliance.

UGA is subject to a comprehensive scheme of regulation under the federal commodities and securities laws. UGA could be subject to sanctions for a failure to comply with those requirements, which could adversely affect its financial performance (in the case of financial penalties) or ability to pursue its investment objective (in the case of a limitation on its ability to trade).

Because UGA’s shares are publicly traded, UGA is subject to certain rules and regulations of federal, state and financial market exchange entities charged with the protection of investors and the oversight of companies whose securities are publicly traded. These entities include the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (the “PCAOB”), the SEC, the CFTC and NYSE Arca and these authorities have continued to develop additional regulations or interpretations of existing regulations. UGA’s ongoing efforts to comply with these regulations and interpretations have resulted in, and are likely to continue resulting in, a diversion of management’s time and attention from revenue-generating activities to compliance related activities.

UGA is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting. UGA’s internal control system is designed to provide reasonable assurance to its management regarding the preparation and fair presentation of published financial statements. All internal control systems, no matter how well designed, have inherent limitations. Therefore, even those systems determined to be effective may provide only reasonable assurance with respect to financial statement preparation and presentation.

40

Table of Contents

Regulatory changes or actions, including the implementation of new legislation is impossible to predict but may significantly and adversely affect UGA.

The futures markets are subject to comprehensive statutes, regulations, and margin requirements. In addition, the CFTC and futures exchanges are authorized to take extraordinary actions in the event of a market emergency, including, for example, the retroactive implementation of speculative position limits or higher margin requirements, the establishment of daily price limits and the suspension of trading. Regulation of commodity interest transactions in the United States is a rapidly changing area of law and is subject to ongoing modification by governmental and judicial action. Considerable regulatory attention has been focused on non-traditional investment pools that are publicly distributed in the United States. In addition, the SEC, CFTC and the exchanges are authorized to take extraordinary actions in the event of a market emergency, including, for example, the retroactive implementation of speculative position limits or higher margin requirements, the establishment of daily price limits and the suspension of trading. Further, various national governments outside of the United States have expressed concern regarding the disruptive effects of speculative trading in the energy markets and the need to regulate the derivatives markets in general. The effect of any future regulatory change on UGA is impossible to predict, but it could be substantial and adverse. For a more detailed discussion of the regulations to be imposed by the CFTC and the SEC and the potential impacts thereof on UGA, please see “Item 1. Business – Commodities Regulation” in this annual report on Form 10-K.

UGA is not a registered investment company so shareholders do not have the protections of the 1940 Act.

UGA is not an investment company subject to the 1940 Act. Accordingly, investors do not have the protections afforded by that statute, which, for example, requires investment companies to have a majority of disinterested directors and regulates the relationship between the investment company and its investment manager.

Trading in international markets could expose UGA to credit and regulatory risk.

UGA invests primarily in Futures Contracts, a significant portion of which are traded on United States exchanges, including the NYMEX. However, a portion of UGA’s trades may take place on markets and exchanges outside the United States. Trading on such non-U.S. markets or exchanges presents risks because they are not subject to the same degree of regulation as their U.S. counterparts, including potentially different or diminished investor protections. In trading contracts denominated in currencies other than U.S. dollars, UGA is subject to the risk of adverse exchange-rate movements between the dollar and the functional currencies of such contracts. Additionally, trading on non-U.S. exchanges is subject to the risks presented by exchange controls, expropriation, increased tax burdens and exposure to local economic declines and political instability. An adverse development with respect to any of these variables could reduce the profit or increase the loss earned on trades in the affected international markets.

UGA and USCF may have conflicts of interest, which may permit them to favor their own interests to the detriment of shareholders.

UGA is subject to actual and potential inherent conflicts involving USCF, various commodity futures brokers and Authorized Participants. USCF’s officers, directors and employees do not devote their time exclusively to UGA and also are directors, officers or employees of other entities that may compete with UGA for their services. They could have a conflict between their responsibilities to UGA and to those other entities. As a result of these and other relationships, parties involved with UGA have a financial incentive to act in a manner other than in the best interests of UGA and the shareholders. USCF has not established any formal procedure to resolve conflicts of interest. Consequently, investors are dependent on the good faith of the respective parties subject to such conflicts of interest to resolve them equitably. Although USCF attempts to monitor these conflicts, it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, for USCF to ensure that these conflicts do not, in fact, result in adverse consequences to the shareholders.

USCF serves as the general partner or sponsor to each of UGA and the Related Public Funds. USCF may have a conflict to the extent that its trading decisions for UGA may be influenced by the effect they would have on the other funds it manages. By way of example, if, as a result of reaching position limits imposed by the NYMEX, UGA purchased gasoline futures contracts, this decision could impact UGA's ability to purchase additional gasoline futures contracts if the number of contracts held by funds managed by USCF reached the maximum allowed by the NYMEX. Similar situations could adversely affect the ability of any fund to track its Benchmark Futures Contract.

UGA may also be subject to certain conflicts with respect to its FCMs, including, but not limited to, conflicts that result from receiving greater amounts of compensation from other clients, or purchasing opposite or competing positions on behalf of third party accounts traded through the FCMs. In addition, USCF’s principals, officers, directors or employees may trade futures and related contracts for

41

Table of Contents

their own account. A conflict of interest may exist if their trades are in the same markets and at the same time as UGA trades using the clearing broker to be used by UGA. A potential conflict also may occur if USCF’s principals, officers, directors or employees trade their accounts more aggressively or take positions in their accounts which are opposite, or ahead of, the positions taken by UGA.

UGA could terminate at any time and cause the liquidation and potential loss of an investor’s investment and could upset the overall maturity and timing of an investor’s investment portfolio.

UGA may terminate at any time, regardless of whether UGA has incurred losses, subject to the terms of the LP Agreement. In particular, unforeseen circumstances, including, but not limited to, (i) market conditions, regulatory requirements, risk mitigation measures taken by UGA or third parties or otherwise that would lead UGA to determine that it could no longer foreseeably meet its business objective or that UGA's aggregate net assets in relation to its operating expenses or its margin or collateral requirements make the continued operation of UGA unreasonable or imprudent, or (ii) adjudication of incompetence, bankruptcy, dissolution, withdrawal, or removal of USCF as the general partner of UGA could cause UGA to terminate unless a majority interest of the limited partners within 90 days of the event elects to continue the partnership and appoints a successor general partner, or the affirmative vote of a majority in interest of the limited partners subject to certain conditions. However, no level of losses will require USCF to terminate UGA. UGA’s termination would cause the liquidation and potential loss of an investor’s investment. Termination could also negatively affect the overall maturity and timing of an investor’s investment portfolio.

UGA does not expect to make cash distributions.

UGA has not previously made any cash distributions and intends to reinvest any realized gains in additional Gasoline Interests rather than distributing cash to limited partners, or other shareholders. Therefore, unlike mutual funds, commodity pools or other investment pools that actively manage their investments in an attempt to realize income and gains from their investing activities and distribute such income and gains to their investors, UGA generally does not expect to distribute cash to limited partners. An investor should not invest in UGA if the investor will need cash distributions from UGA to pay taxes on its share of income and gains of UGA, if any, or for any other reason. Nonetheless, although UGA does not intend to make cash distributions, the income earned from its investments held directly or posted as margin may reach levels that merit distribution, e.g., at levels where such income is not necessary to support its underlying investments in Gasoline Interests and investors adversely react to being taxed on such income without receiving distributions that could be used to pay such tax. If this income becomes significant then cash distributions may be made.

An unanticipated number of Redemption Basket requests during a short period of time could have an adverse effect on UGA’s NAV.

While USCF makes every effort to predict and maintain an adequate amount of shares outstanding, if a substantial number of requests for Creation Baskets are received by UGA during a relatively short period of time that substantially differs from past creation volumes, due to market volatility or otherwise, it could result in circumstances where, because of high demand for its shares, UGA may not have sufficient shares available for sale to satisfy demand. Authorized Participants may, therefore, be unable to purchase additional Creation Baskets.

An unanticipated number of Creation Basket requests during a short period of time could result in a shortage of shares.

USCF makes every effort to predict and maintain an adequate amount of shares outstanding. However, if a substantial number of requests for Creation Baskets are received by UGA during a relatively short period of time that substantially differ from past creation volumes, due to market volatility or otherwise, including, for example, occurrence of a pandemic like COVID-19, UGA may not have sufficient shares available for sale to satisfy demand and Authorized Participants may, therefore, be unable to purchase additional Creation Baskets.

In the event that there was a suspension in the ability of Authorized Participants to purchase additional Creation Baskets, Authorized Participants and other groups that make a market in shares of UGA would likely still continue to actively trade the shares. However, in such a situation, Authorized Participants and other market makers may seek to adjust the market they make in the shares. Specifically, such market participants may increase the spread between the prices that they quote for offers to buy and sell shares to allow them to adjust to the potential uncertainty as to when they might be able to purchase additional Creation Baskets of shares. In addition, Authorized Participants may be less willing to offer to quote offers to buy or sell shares in large numbers. The potential impact of either wider spreads between bid and offer prices, or reduced number of shares on which quotes may be available, could increase the trading costs to investors in UGA compared to the quotes and the number of shares on which bids and offers are made if the Authorized Participants still were able to freely create new baskets of shares. In addition, there could be a significant variation between the market price at which shares are traded and the shares’ NAV, which is also the price shares can be redeemed with UGA by Authorized

42

Table of Contents

Participants in Redemption Baskets. The foregoing could also create significant deviations from UGA's investment objective. Any potential impact to the market in shares of UGA that could occur from the Authorized Participant's inability to create new baskets would likely not extend beyond the time when additional shares would be registered and available for distribution.

UGA may determine that to allow it to reinvest the proceeds from sales of its Creation Baskets in currently permitted assets in a manner that meets its investment objective it may limit its offers of Creation Baskets.

UGA may determine that UGA will limit the issuance of its shares through the offering of Creation Baskets to its Authorized Participants. As a result of certain circumstances described herein, including (1) the need to comply with regulatory requirements (including, but not limited to, exchange accountability levels and position limits); (2) market conditions (including but not limited to those allowing UGA to obtain greater liquidity or to execute transactions with more favorable pricing); and (3) risk mitigation measures taken by UGA's current and other FCMs that limit UGA and other market participants from investing in particular gasoline futures contracts, UGA's management can determine that it will limit the issuance of shares and the offerings of Creation Baskets because it is unable to invest the proceeds from such offerings in investments that would permit it to reasonably meet its investment objective.

If such a determination is made, the same consequences associated with a suspension of the offering of Creation Baskets, as described in the foregoing risk factor, an unanticipated number of Creation Baskets requests during a short period of time could result in a shortage of shares, could also occur as a result of UGA determining to limit the offering of creation baskets.

The value of Treasury Bills and Money Market securities held by UGA will fluctuate in value with changes in interest rates.

Interest rate risk is generally lower for shorter term investments and higher for longer term investments. UGA may be subject to a greater risk of rising interest rates than would normally be the case due to the current period of historically low rates and the effect of potential fiscal policy initiatives and resulting market reaction to those initiatives. When interest rates fall, UGA may be required to reinvest the proceeds from the sale, redemption or early prepayment of a Treasury Bill or money market security at a lower interest rate.

UGA may lose money by investing in government money market funds.

UGA invests in government money market funds. Although such government money market funds seek to preserve the value of an investment at $1.00 per share, there is no guarantee that they will be able to do so and UGA may lose money by investing in a government money market fund. An investment in a government money market fund is not insured or guaranteed by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, referred to herein as the FDIC, or any other government agency. The share price of a government money market fund can fall below the $1.00 share price. UGA cannot rely on or expect a government money market fund’s adviser or its affiliates to enter into support agreements or take other actions to maintain the government money market fund’s $1.00 share price. The credit quality of a government money market fund’s holdings can change rapidly in certain markets, and the default of a single holding could have an adverse impact on the government money market fund’s share price. Due to fluctuations in interest rates, the market value of securities held by a government money market fund may vary. A government money market fund’s share price can also be negatively affected during periods of high redemption pressures and/or illiquid markets.

The failure or bankruptcy of a clearing broker or UGA’s Custodian could result in a substantial loss of UGA’s assets and could impair UGA in its ability to execute trades.

The CEA and CFTC regulations impose several requirements on FCMs and clearing houses that are designed to protect customers, including mandating the implementation of risk management programs, internal monitoring and controls, capital and liquidity standards, customer disclosures, and auditing and examination programs. In particular, the CEA and CFTC regulations require FCMs and clearing houses to segregate all funds received from customers from proprietary assets. There can be no assurance that the requirements imposed by the CEA and CFTC regulations will prevent losses to, or not materially adversely affect, UGA or its investors.

In particular, in the event of an FCM’s or clearing house’s bankruptcy, UGA could be limited to recovering either a pro rata share of all available funds segregated on behalf of the FCM’s combined customer accounts or UGA may not recover any assets at all. UGA may also incur a loss of any unrealized profits on its open and closed positions. This is because if such a bankruptcy were to occur, UGA would be afforded the protections granted to customers of an FCM, and participants to transactions cleared through a clearing house, under the United States Bankruptcy Code and applicable CFTC regulations. Such provisions generally provide for a pro rata distribution to customers of customer property held by the bankrupt FCMs or an exchange’s clearing house if the customer property held by the FCMs or the exchange’s clearing house is insufficient to satisfy all customer claims.

43

Table of Contents

Bankruptcy of a clearing FCMs can be caused by, among other things, the default of one of the FCM’s customers. In this event, the exchange’s clearing house is permitted to use the entire amount of margin posted by UGA (as well as margin posted by other customers of the FCM) to cover the amounts owed by the bankrupt FCM. Consequently, UGA could be unable to recover amounts due to it on its futures positions, including assets posted as margin, and could sustain substantial losses.

Notwithstanding that UGA could sustain losses upon the failure or bankruptcy of its FCM, the majority of UGA’s assets are held in Treasuries, cash and/or cash equivalents with the Custodian and would not be impacted by the bankruptcy of an FCM.

The failure or bankruptcy of the Custodian could result in a substantial loss of UGA’s assets.

The majority of UGA’s assets are held in Treasuries, cash and/or cash equivalents with the Custodian. The insolvency of the Custodian could result in a complete loss of UGA’s assets held by that Custodian, which, at any given time, would likely comprise a substantial portion of UGA’s total assets.

Third parties may infringe upon or otherwise violate intellectual property rights or assert that USCF has infringed or otherwise violated their intellectual property rights, which may result in significant costs and diverted attention.

It is possible that third parties might utilize UGA’s intellectual property or technology, including the use of its business methods, trademarks and trading program software, without permission. USCF has a patent for UGA’s business method and has registered its trademarks. UGA does not currently have any proprietary software. However, if it obtains proprietary software in the future, any unauthorized use of UGA’s proprietary software and other technology could also adversely affect its competitive advantage. UGA may not have adequate resources to implement procedures for monitoring unauthorized uses of its patents, trademarks, proprietary software and other technology. Also, third parties may independently develop business methods, trademarks or proprietary software and other technology similar to that of USCF or claim that USCF has violated their intellectual property rights, including their copyrights, trademark rights, trade names, trade secrets and patent rights. As a result, USCF may have to litigate in the future to protect its trade secrets, determine the validity and scope of other parties’ proprietary rights, defend itself against claims that it has infringed or otherwise violated other parties’ rights, or defend itself against claims that its rights are invalid. Any litigation of this type, even if USCF is successful and regardless of the merits, may result in significant costs, divert its resources from UGA, or require it to change its proprietary software and other technology or enter into royalty or licensing agreements.

Due to the increased use of technologies, intentional and unintentional cyber-attacks pose operational and information security risks.

With the increased use of technologies such as the Internet and the dependence on computer systems to perform necessary business functions, UGA is susceptible to operational and information security risks. In general, cyber incidents can result from deliberate attacks or unintentional events such as a cyber-attack against UGA, a natural catastrophe, an industrial accident, failure of UGA’s disaster recovery systems, or consequential employee error. Cyber-attacks include, but are not limited to, gaining unauthorized access to digital systems for purposes of misappropriating assets or sensitive information, corrupting data, or causing operational disruption. Cyber-attacks may also be carried out in a manner that does not require gaining unauthorized access, such as causing denial-of-service attacks on websites. Cyber security failures or breaches of UGA’s clearing broker or third party service provider (including, but not limited to, index providers, the administrator and transfer agent, the custodian), have the ability to cause disruptions and impact business operations, potentially resulting in financial losses, the inability of UGA shareholders to transact business, violations of applicable privacy and other laws, regulatory fines, penalties, reputational damage, reimbursement or other compensation costs, and/or additional compliance costs. Adverse effects can become particularly acute if those events affect UGA’s electronic data processing, transmission, storage, and retrieval systems, or impact the availability, integrity, or confidentiality of our data.

In addition, a service provider that has experienced a cyber-security incident may divert resources normally devoted to servicing UGA to addressing the incident, which would be likely to have an adverse effect on UGA's operations. Cyber-attacks may also cause disruptions to the futures exchanges and clearinghouses through which UGA invests in futures contracts, which could result in disruptions to UGA's ability to pursue its investment objective, resulting in financial losses to UGA and its shareholders.

In addition, substantial costs may be incurred in order to prevent any cyber incidents in the future. UGA and its shareholders could be negatively impacted as a result. While USCF and the Related Public Funds, including UGA, have established business continuity plans, there are inherent limitations in such plans, including the possibility that certain risks have not been identified or that new risks will

44

Table of Contents

emerge before countervailing measures can be implemented.  Furthermore, UGA cannot control cybersecurity plans and systems of its service providers, market makers or Authorized Participants.

UGA’s investment returns could be negatively affected by climate change and greenhouse gas restrictions.

Driven by concern over the risks of climate change, a number of countries have adopted, or are considering the adoption of, regulatory frameworks to reduce greenhouse gas emissions or production and use of oil and gas. These include adoption of cap and trade regimes, carbon taxes, trade tariffs, minimum renewable usage requirements, restrictive permitting, increased efficiency standards, and incentives or mandates for renewable energy. Political and other actors and their agents increasingly seek to advance climate change objectives indirectly, such as by seeking to reduce the availability of or increase the cost for, financial and investment in the oil and gas sector and taking actions intended to promote changes in business strategy for oil and gas companies. Many governments are also providing tax advantages and other subsidies to support transitioning to alternative energy sources or mandating the use of specific fuels other than oil or natural gas. Depending on how policies are formulated and applied, they could have the potential to negatively affect UGA’s investment returns and make oil and natural gas products more expensive or less competitive.

USCF is the subject of class action litigation. In light of the inherent uncertainties involved in litigation matters, an adverse outcome in this litigation could materially adversely affect USCF’s financial condition.

USCF and USCF’s directors and certain of its officers are currently subject to class action litigation. Estimating an amount or range of possible losses resulting from litigation proceedings to USCF is inherently difficult and requires an extensive degree of judgment, particularly where the matters involve indeterminate claims for monetary damages and are subject to appeal. In addition, because most legal proceedings are resolved over extended periods of time, potential losses are subject to change due to, among other things, new developments, changes in legal strategy, the outcome of intermediate procedural and substantive rulings and other parties’ settlement posture and their evaluation of the strength or weakness of their case against USCF. For these reasons, we are currently unable to predict the ultimate timing or outcome of, or reasonably estimate the possible losses or a range of possible losses resulting therefrom. In light of the inherent uncertainties involved in such matters, an adverse outcome in this litigation could materially adversely affect USCF’s financial condition, results of operations or cash flows in any particular reporting period. In addition, litigation could result in substantial costs and divert USCF’s management’s attention and resources from conducting USCF’s operations, including the management of UGA and the Related Public Funds. For more information, see “Item 3. Legal Proceedings” in this annual report on Form 10-K.

​

45

Table of Contents

Subsequently, on August 19, 2020, USCF, USO, and Mr. Love received a Wells Notice from the staff of the CFTC (the “CFTC Wells Notice”). The CFTC Wells Notice stated that the CFTC staff made a preliminary determination to recommend that the CFTC file an enforcement action against USCF, USO, and Mr. Love alleging violations of Sections 4o(1)(A) and (B) and 6(c)(1) of the Commodity Exchange Act of 1936, as amended (the “CEA”), 7 U.S.C. §§ 6o(1)(A) and (B) and 9(1) (2018), and CFTC Regulations 4.26, 4.41, and 180.1(a), 17 C.F.R. §§ 4.26, 4.41, 180.1(a) (2019).

On November 8, 2021, acting pursuant to an offer of settlement submitted by USCF and USO, the SEC issued an order instituting cease-and-desist proceedings, making findings, and imposing a cease-and-desist order pursuant to Section 8A of the 1933 Act, directing USCF and USO to cease and desist from committing or causing any violations of Section 17(a)(3) of the 1933 Act, 15 U.S.C. § 77q(a)(3) (the “SEC Order”). In the SEC Order, the SEC made findings that, from April 24, 2020 to May 21, 2020, USCF and USO violated Section 17(a)(3) of 1933 Act, which provides that it is “unlawful for any person in the offer or sale of any securities to engage in any transaction, practice, or course of business which operates or would operate as a fraud or deceit upon the purchaser.” USCF and USO consented to entry of the SEC Order without admitting or denying the findings contained therein, except as to jurisdiction.

Separately, on November 8, 2021, acting pursuant to an offer of settlement submitted by USCF, the CFTC issued an order instituting cease-and-desist proceedings, making findings, and imposing a cease-and-desist order pursuant to Section 6(c) and (d) of the CEA, directing USCF to cease and desist from committing or causing any violations of Section 4o(1)(B) of the CEA, 7 U.S.C. § 6o(1) (B), and CFTC Regulation 4.41(a)(2), 17 C.F.R. § 4.41(a)(2) (the “CFTC Order”). In the CFTC Order, the CFTC made findings that, from on or about April 22, 2020 to June 12, 2020, USCF violated Section 4o(1)(B) of the CEA and CFTC Regulation 4.41(a)(2), which make it unlawful for any commodity pool operator (“CPO”) to engage in “any transaction, practice, or course of business which operates as a fraud or deceit upon any client or participant or prospective client or participant” and prohibit a CPO from advertising in a manner which “operates as a fraud or deceit upon any client or participant or prospective client or participant,” respectively. USCF consented to entry of the CFTC Order without admitting or denying the findings contained therein, except as to jurisdiction.

Pursuant to the SEC Order and the CFTC Order, in addition to the command to cease and desist from committing or causing any violations of Section 17(a)(3) of the 1933 Act, Section 4o(1)(B) of the CEA, and CFTC Regulation 4.14(a)(2), civil monetary penalties totaling two million five hundred thousand dollars ($2,500,000) in the aggregate were required to be paid to the SEC and CFTC, of which one million two hundred fifty thousand dollars ($1,250,000) was paid by USCF to each of the SEC and the CFTC, respectively, pursuant to the offsets permitted under the orders.

In re: United States Oil Fund, LP Securities Litigation

On June 19, 2020, USCF, USO, John P. Love, and Stuart P. Crumbaugh were named as defendants in a putative class action filed by purported shareholder Robert Lucas (the “Lucas Class Action”). The Court thereafter consolidated the Lucas Class Action with two related putative class actions filed on July 31, 2020 and August 13, 2020, and appointed a lead plaintiff.  The consolidated class action is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York under the caption In re: United States Oil Fund, LP Securities Litigation, Civil Action No. 1:20-cv-04740.

On November 30, 2020, the lead plaintiff filed an amended complaint (the “Amended Lucas Class Complaint”). The Amended Lucas Class Complaint asserts claims under the 1933 Act, the 1934 Act, and Rule 10b-5. The Amended Lucas Class Complaint challenges statements in registration statements that became effective on February 25, 2020 and March 23, 2020 as well as subsequent public statements through April 2020 concerning certain extraordinary market conditions and the attendant risks that caused the demand for oil to fall precipitously, including the COVID-19 global pandemic and the Saudi Arabia-Russia oil price war. The Amended Lucas Class Complaint purports to have been brought by an investor in USO on behalf of a class of similarly-situated shareholders who purchased USO securities between February 25, 2020 and April 28, 2020 and pursuant to the challenged registration statements. The Amended Lucas Class Complaint seeks to certify a class and to award the class compensatory damages at an amount to be determined at trial as well as costs and attorney’s fees. The Amended Lucas Class Complaint named as defendants USCF, USO, John P. Love, Stuart P. Crumbaugh, Nicholas D. Gerber, Andrew F Ngim, Robert L. Nguyen, Peter M. Robinson, Gordon L. Ellis, and Malcolm R. Fobes III, as well as the marketing agent, ALPS Distributors, Inc., and the Authorized Participants: ABN Amro, BNP Paribas Securities Corporation, Citadel Securities LLC, Citigroup Global Markets, Inc., Credit Suisse Securities USA LLC, Deutsche Bank Securities Inc., Goldman Sachs & Company, J.P. Morgan Securities Inc., Merrill Lynch Professional Clearing Corporation, Morgan Stanley & Company Inc., Nomura Securities International Inc., RBC Capital Markets LLC, SG Americas Securities LLC, UBS Securities LLC, and Virtu Financial BD LLC.  

46

Table of Contents

The lead plaintiff has filed a notice of voluntary dismissal of its claims against BNP Paribas Securities Corporation, Citadel Securities LLC, Citigroup Global Markets Inc., Credit Suisse Securities USA LLC, Deutsche Bank Securities Inc., Morgan Stanley & Company, Inc., Nomura Securities International, Inc., RBC Capital Markets, LLC, SG Americas Securities LLC, and UBS Securities LLC.  

USCF, USO, and the individual defendants in In re: United States Oil Fund, LP Securities Litigation intend to vigorously contest such claims and have moved for their dismissal.

Wang Class Action

On July 10, 2020, purported shareholder Momo Wang filed a putative class action complaint, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, against defendants USO, USCF, John P. Love, Stuart P. Crumbaugh, Nicholas D. Gerber, Andrew F Ngim, Robert L. Nguyen, Peter M. Robinson, Gordon L. Ellis, Malcolm R. Fobes, III, ABN Amro, BNP Paribas Securities Corp., Citadel Securities LLC, Citigroup Global Markets Inc., Credit Suisse Securities USA LLC, Deutsche Bank Securities Inc., Goldman Sachs & Company, JP Morgan Securities Inc., Merrill Lynch Professional Clearing Corp., Morgan Stanley & Company Inc., Nomura Securities International Inc., RBC Capital Markets LLC, SG Americas Securities LLC, UBS Securities LLC, and Virtu Financial BD LLC, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California as Civil Action No. 3:20-cv-4596 (the “Wang Class Action”).

The Wang Class Action asserted federal securities claims under the 1933 Act, challenging disclosures in a March 19, 2020 registration statement. It alleged that the defendants failed to disclose to investors in USO certain extraordinary market conditions and the attendant risks that caused the demand for oil to fall precipitously, including the COVID-19 global pandemic and the Saudi Arabia-Russia oil price war. The Wang Class Action was voluntarily dismissed on August 4, 2020.

Mehan Action

On August 10, 2020, purported shareholder Darshan Mehan filed a derivative action on behalf of nominal defendant USO, against defendants USCF, John P. Love, Stuart P. Crumbaugh, Nicholas D. Gerber, Andrew F Ngim, Robert L. Nguyen, Peter M. Robinson, Gordon L. Ellis, and Malcolm R. Fobes, III (the “Mehan Action”). The action is pending in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Alameda as Case No. RG20070732.

The Mehan Action alleges that the defendants breached their fiduciary duties to USO and failed to act in good faith in connection with a March 19, 2020 registration statement and offering and disclosures regarding certain extraordinary market conditions that caused demand for oil to fall precipitously, including the COVID-19 global pandemic and the Saudi Arabia-Russia oil price war. The complaint seeks, on behalf of USO, compensatory damages, restitution, equitable relief, attorney’s fees, and costs. All proceedings in the Mehan Action are stayed pending disposition of the motion(s) to dismiss in In re: United States Oil Fund, LP Securities Litigation.

USCF, USO, and the other defendants intend to vigorously contest such claims.

In re United States Oil Fund, LP Derivative Litigation

On August 27, 2020, purported shareholders Michael Cantrell and AML Pharm. Inc. DBA Golden International filed two separate derivative actions on behalf of nominal defendant USO, against defendants USCF, John P. Love, Stuart P. Crumbaugh, Andrew F Ngim, Gordon L. Ellis, Malcolm R. Fobes, III, Nicholas D. Gerber, Robert L. Nguyen, and Peter M. Robinson in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York at Civil Action No. 1:20-cv-06974 (the “Cantrell Action”) and Civil Action No. 1:20-cv-06981 (the “AML Action”), respectively.

The complaints in the Cantrell and AML Actions are nearly identical. They each allege violations of Sections 10(b), 20(a) and 21D of the 1934 Act, Rule 10b-5 thereunder, and common law claims of breach of fiduciary duties, unjust enrichment, abuse of control, gross mismanagement, and waste of corporate assets. These allegations stem from USO’s disclosures and defendants’ alleged actions in light of the extraordinary market conditions in 2020 that caused demand for oil to fall precipitously, including the COVID-19 global pandemic and the Saudi Arabia-Russia oil price war. The complaints seek, on behalf of USO, compensatory damages, restitution, equitable relief, attorney’s fees, and costs. The plaintiffs in the Cantrell and AML Actions have marked their actions as related to the Lucas Class Action.

The Court consolidated the Cantrell and AML Actions under the caption In re United States Oil Fund, LP Derivative Litigation, Civil Action No. 1:20-cv-06974 and appointed co-lead counsel. All proceedings in In re United States Oil Fund, LP Derivative Litigation are stayed pending disposition of the motion(s) to dismiss in In re: United States Oil Fund, LP Securities Litigation.

47

Table of Contents

USCF, USO, and the other defendants intend to vigorously contest the claims in In re United States Oil Fund, LP Derivative Litigation.

​

48

Table of Contents

ability to continue to effectively manage our business. Forward-looking statements, which involve assumptions and describe UGA’s future plans, strategies and expectations, are generally identifiable by use of the words “may,” “will,” “should,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” “believe,” “intend” or “project,” the negative of these words, other variations on these words or comparable terminology. These forward-looking statements are based on assumptions that may be incorrect, and UGA cannot assure investors that the projections included in these forward-looking statements will come to pass. UGA’s actual results could differ materially from those expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements as a result of various factors.

UGA has based the forward-looking statements included in this annual report on Form 10-K on information available to it on the date of this annual report on Form 10-K, and UGA assumes no obligation to update any such forward-looking statements. Although UGA undertakes no obligation to revise or update any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, investors are advised to consult any additional disclosures that UGA may make directly to them or through reports that UGA files in the future with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”), including annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q and current reports on Form 8-K.

Introduction

UGA, a Delaware limited partnership, is a commodity pool that issues shares that may be purchased and sold on the NYSE Arca. The investment objective of UGA is for the daily changes, in percentage terms, of its shares’ per share NAV to reflect the daily changes, in percentage terms, of the spot price of gasoline (also known as reformulated gasoline blendstock for oxygen blending, or “RBOB”, for delivery to the New York harbor), as measured by the daily changes in the price of the futures contract for gasoline traded on the NYMEX that is the near month contract to expire, except when the near month contract is within two weeks of expiration, in which case it will be the futures contract that is the next month contract to expire (the “Benchmark Futures Contract”), plus interest earned on UGA’s collateral holdings, less UGA’s expenses. “Near month contract” means the next contract traded on the NYMEX due to expire. “Next month contract” means the first contract traded on the NYMEX due to expire after the near month contract. UGA seeks to achieve its investment objective by investing so that the average daily percentage change in UGA’s NAV for any period of 30 successive valuation days will be within plus/minus ten percent (10%) of the average daily percentage change in the price of the Benchmark Futures Contract over the same period.

UGA’s investment objective is not for its NAV or market price of shares to equal, in dollar terms, the spot price of gasoline or any particular futures contract based on gasoline, nor is UGA’s investment objective for the percentage change in its NAV to reflect the percentage change of the price of any particular futures contract as measured over a time period greater than one day. The general partner of UGA, United States Commodity Funds LLC (“USCF”) believes that it is not practical to manage the portfolio to achieve such an investment goal when investing in Futures Contracts (as defined below) and Other Gasoline-Related Investments (as defined below).

UGA invests primarily in futures contracts for gasoline, crude oil, natural gas, heating oil and other petroleum-based fuels that are traded on the NYMEX, ICE Futures or other U.S. and foreign exchanges (collectively, “Futures Contracts”) and to a lesser extent, in order to comply with regulatory requirements or in view of market conditions, other gasoline-related investments such as cash-settled options on Futures Contracts, forward contracts for gasoline, cleared swap contracts and over-the-counter (“OTC”) swaps that are based on the price of gasoline, crude oil and other petroleum-based fuels, Futures Contracts and indices based on the foregoing (collectively, “Other Gasoline-Related Investments”). For convenience and unless otherwise specified, Futures Contracts and Other Gasoline-Related Investments collectively are referred to as “Gasoline Interests” in this annual report on Form 10-K.

USCF believes that market arbitrage opportunities will cause daily changes in UGA’s share price on the NYSE Arca on a percentage basis to closely track daily changes in UGA’s per share NAV on a percentage basis. USCF further believes that daily changes in prices of the Benchmark Futures Contract have historically closely tracked the daily changes in spot prices of gasoline. USCF believes that the net effect of these relationships will be that the daily changes in the price of UGA’s shares on the NYSE Arca on a percentage basis will closely track, the daily changes in the spot price of gasoline on a percentage basis, plus interest earned on UGA’s collateral holdings, less UGA’s expenses.

UGA seeks to achieve its investment objective by investing so that the average daily percentage change in UGA’s NAV for any period of 30 successive valuation days will be within plus/minus ten percent (10%) of the average daily percentage change in the price of the Benchmark Futures Contract over the same period.

On any valuation day, the Benchmark Futures Contract is the near month futures contract for gasoline traded on the NYMEX unless the near month contract is within two weeks of expiration in which case the Benchmark Futures Contract is the next month contract for

49

Table of Contents

gasoline traded on the NYMEX. The regulation of commodity interest trading in the United States and other countries is an evolving area of the law. The various statements made in this summary are subject to modification by legislative action and changes in the rules and regulations of the SEC, FINRA, CFTC, the NFA, the futures exchanges, clearing organizations and other regulatory bodies. Pending final resolution of all applicable regulatory requirements, some examples of how new rules and regulations could impact UGA are discussed in “Item 1. Business” and “Item 1A. Risk Factors” in this annual report on Form 10-K.

Regulatory Disclosure

Accountability Levels, Position Limits and Price Fluctuation Limits. Designated contract markets (“DCMs”), such as the NYMEX and ICE Futures, have established accountability levels and position limits on the maximum net long or net short futures contracts in commodity interests that any person or group of persons under common trading control (other than as a hedge, which an investment by UGA is not) may hold, own or control. These levels and position limits apply to the futures contracts that UGA invests in to meet its investment objective. In addition to accountability levels and position limits, the NYMEX and ICE Futures also set daily price fluctuation limits on futures contracts. The daily price fluctuation limit establishes the maximum amount that the price of a futures contract may vary either up or down from the previous day’s settlement price. Once the daily price fluctuation limit has been reached in a particular futures contract, no trades may be made at a price beyond that limit.

The accountability levels for the Benchmark Futures Contract and other Futures Contracts traded on U.S.-based futures exchanges, such as the NYMEX, are not a fixed ceiling, but rather a threshold above which the NYMEX may exercise greater scrutiny and control over an investor’s positions. The current accountability level for investments for any one month in the Benchmark Futures Contract is 5,000 contracts. In addition, the NYMEX imposes an accountability level for all months of 7,000 net futures contracts for investments in futures contracts for gasoline. In addition, the ICE Futures maintains accountability levels, position limits and monitoring authority for its unleaded gasoline futures contracts. If UGA and the Related Public Funds (as defined below) exceed these accountability levels for investments in the futures contract for gasoline, the NYMEX and ICE Futures will monitor UGA’s and the Related Public Funds’ exposure and may ask for further information on their activities including the total size of all positions, investment and trading strategy, and the extent of liquidity resources of UGA and the Related Public Funds. If deemed necessary by the NYMEX and/or ICE Futures, UGA could be ordered to reduce its aggregate net position back to the accountability level. As of December 31, 2021, UGA held 769 futures contracts for gasoline traded on the NYMEX. As of December 31, 2021, UGA did not hold any Futures Contracts traded on ICE Futures. For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2021, UGA did not exceed any accountability levels on the NYMEX or ICE Futures.

Position limits differ from accountability levels in that they represent fixed limits on the maximum number of futures contracts that any person may hold and cannot allow such limits to be exceeded without express CFTC authority to do so. In addition to accountability levels and position limits that may apply at any time, the NYMEX and ICE Futures impose position limits on contracts held in the last few days of trading in the near month contract to expire. It is unlikely that UGA will run up against such position limits because UGA’s investment strategy is to close out its positions and “roll” from the near month contract to expire to the next month contract beginning two weeks from expiration of the contract. For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2021, UGA did not exceed any position limits imposed by the NYMEX and ICE Futures.

Futures Contracts and Position Limits

On October 15, 2020, the CFTC approved the Position Limits Rule. The Position Limits Rule establishes federal position limits for 25 core referenced futures contracts (comprised of agricultural, energy and metals futures contracts), futures and options linked to the core referenced futures contracts, and swaps that are economically equivalent to the core referenced futures contracts.

The Benchmark Futures Contract will be subject to position limits under the Position Limits Rule, and UGA’s trading does not qualify for an exemption therefrom. Accordingly, the Position Limits Rule could negatively impact the ability of UGA to meet its investment objective by inhibiting USCF’s ability to effectively invest the proceeds from sales of Creation Baskets of UGA in particular amounts and types of its permitted investments.

OTC Swaps

In October 2015, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the FDIC, the Farm Credit Administration, and the Federal Housing Finance Agency (each an “Agency” and, collectively, the “Agencies”) jointly adopted final rules to establish minimum margin and capital requirements for registered swap dealers, major swap participants, security-

50

Table of Contents

based swap dealers, and major security-based swap participants (“Swap Entities”) that are subject to the jurisdiction of one of the Agencies (such entities, “Covered Swap Entities”, and the joint final rules, the “Final Margin Rules”).

The Final Margin Rules will subject non-cleared swaps and non-cleared security-based swaps between Covered Swap Entities and Swap Entities, and between Covered Swap Entities and financial end users that have material swaps exposure (i.e., an average daily aggregate notional of $8 billion or more in non-cleared swaps calculated in accordance with the Final Margin Rules), to a mandatory two-way minimum initial margin requirement. The minimum amount of the initial margin required to be posted or collected would be either the amount calculated by the Covered Swap Entity using a standardized schedule set forth as an appendix to the Final Margin Rules, which provides the gross initial margin (as a percentage of total notional exposure) for certain asset classes, or an internal margin model of the Covered Swap Entity conforming to the requirements of the Final Margin Rules that is approved by the Agency having jurisdiction over the particular Covered Swap Entity. The Final Margin Rules specify the types of collateral that may be posted or collected as initial margin for non-cleared swaps and non-cleared security-based swaps with financial end users (generally cash, certain government, government-sponsored enterprise securities, certain liquid debt, certain equity securities, certain eligible publicly traded debt, and gold); and sets forth haircuts for certain collateral asset classes.

The Final Margin Rules require minimum variation margin to be exchanged daily for non-cleared swaps and non-cleared security- based swaps between Covered Swap Entities and Swap Entities and between Covered Swap Entities and all financial end-users (without regard to the swaps exposure of the particular financial end-user). The minimum variation margin amount is the daily mark- to-market change in the value of the swap to the Covered Swap Entity, taking into account variation margin previously posted or collected. For non-cleared swaps and security-based swaps between Covered Swap Entities and financial end-users, variation margin may be posted or collected in cash or non-cash collateral that is considered eligible for initial margin purposes. Variation margin is not subject to segregation with an independent, third-party custodian, and may, if permitted by contract, be rehypothecated.

The initial margin requirements of the Final Margin Rules are being phased in over time, and the variation margin requirements of the Final Margin Rules are currently in effect. The Fund is not a Covered Swap Entity under the Final Margin Rules, but it is a financial end-user. Accordingly, the Fund is currently subject to the variation margin requirements of the Final Margin Rules. However, the Fund does not have material swaps exposure and, accordingly, the Fund will not be subject to the initial margin requirements of the Final Margin Rules.

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Dodd-Frank Act”) required the CFTC and the SEC to adopt their own margin rules to apply to a limited number of registered swap dealers, security-based swap dealers, major swap participants, and major security-based swap participants that are not subject to the jurisdiction of one of the Agencies. On December 16, 2015 the CFTC finalized its margin rules, which are substantially the same as the Final Margin Rules and have the same implementation timeline. The SEC adopted margin rules for security-based swap dealers and major security-based swap participants on June 21, 2019. The SEC’s margin rules are generally aligned with the Final Margin Rules and the CFTC’s margin rules, but they differ in a few key respects relating to timing for compliance and the manner in which initial margin must be segregated. UGA does not currently engage in security-based swap transactions and, therefore, the SEC’s margin rules are not expected to apply to UGA.

Mandatory Trading and Clearing of Swaps

CFTC regulations require that certain swap transactions be executed on organized exchanges or “swap execution facilities” and cleared through regulated clearing organizations (“derivative clearing organizations” (“DCOs”)), if the CFTC mandates the central clearing of a particular class of swap and such swap is “made available to trade” on a swap execution facility. Currently, swap dealers, major swap participants, commodity pools, certain private funds and entities predominantly engaged in activities that are financial in nature are required to execute on a swap execution facility, and clear, certain interest rate swaps and index-based credit default swaps. As a result, if UGA enters into an interest rate or index-based credit default swap that is subject to these requirements, such swap will be required to be executed on a swap execution facility and centrally cleared. Mandatory clearing and “made available to trade” determinations with respect to additional types of swaps may be issued in the future, and, when finalized, could require UGA to electronically execute and centrally clear certain OTC instruments presently entered into and settled on a bi-lateral basis. If a swap is required to be cleared, initial and variation margin requirements are set by the relevant clearing organization, subject to certain regulatory requirements and guidelines. Additional margin may be required and held by UGA’s FCM.

51

Table of Contents

Other Requirements for Swaps

In addition to the margin requirements described above, swaps that are not required to be cleared and executed on a SEF but that are executed bilaterally are also subject to various requirements pursuant to CFTC regulations, including, among other things, reporting and recordkeeping requirements and, depending on the status of the counterparties, trading documentation requirements and dispute resolution requirements.

Derivatives Regulations in Non-U.S. Jurisdictions

In addition to U.S. laws and regulations, UGA may be subject to non-U.S. derivatives laws and regulations if it engages in futures and/or swap transactions with non-U.S. persons. For example, UGA may be impacted by European laws and regulations to the extent that it engages in futures transactions on European exchanges or derivatives transactions with European entities. Other jurisdictions impose requirements applicable to futures and derivatives that are similar to those imposed by the U.S., including position limits, margin, clearing and trade execution requirements.

The CFTC is generally prohibited by statute from regulating trading on non-U.S. futures exchanges and markets. The CFTC, however, has adopted regulations relating to the marketing of non-U.S. futures contracts in the United States. These regulations permit certain contracts on non-U.S. exchanges to be offered and sold in the United States.

Money Market Funds

The SEC adopted amendments to Rule 2a-7 under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (“1940 Act”), which became effective in 2016, to reform money market funds (“MMFs”). While the rule applies only to MMFs, it may indirectly affect institutional investors such as UGA. A portion of UGA’s assets that are not used for margin or collateral in the Futures Contracts currently are invested in government MMFs. UGA does not hold any non-government MMFs and does not anticipate investing in any non- government MMFs. However, if UGA invests in other types of MMFs besides government MMFs in the future, UGA could be negatively impacted by investing in an MMF that does not maintain a stable $1.00 NAV or that has the potential to impose redemption fees and gates (temporary suspension of redemptions).

Although such government MMFs seek to preserve the value of an investment at $1.00 per share, there is no guarantee that they will be able to do so and UGA may lose money by investing in a government MMF. An investment in a government MMF is not insured or guaranteed by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the “FDIC”) or any other government agency. The share price of a government MMF can fall below the $1.00 share price. UGA cannot rely on or expect a government MMF’s adviser or its affiliates to enter into support agreements or take other actions to maintain the government MMF’s $1.00 share price. The credit quality of a government MMF’s holdings can change rapidly in certain markets, and the default of a single holding could have an adverse impact on the government MMF’s share price. Due to fluctuations in interest rates, the market value of securities held by a government MMF may vary. A government MMF’s share price can also be negatively affected during periods of high redemption pressures and/or illiquid markets.

Price Movements

Gasoline futures prices were volatile during the year ended December 31, 2021. The price of the Benchmark Futures Contract started the year at $1.4101 per gallon. The high of the year was on October 15, 2021when the price reached $2.4864 per gallon. The low for the year was on January 4, 2021, which was $1.3729 per gallon. The year ended with the Benchmark Futures Contract at $2.2246 per gallon, an increase of approximately 57.76% over the year (investors are cautioned that these represent prices for gasoline on a wholesale basis and should not be directly compared to retail prices at a gasoline service station). UGA’s per share NAV began the year at $24.29 and ended the year at $41.04 on December 31, 2021, an increase of approximate 68.96% over the year. The Benchmark Futures Contract prices listed above began with the February 2021contracts and ended with the February 2022 contracts. The increase of approximately 57.76% on the Benchmark Futures Contract listed above is a hypothetical return only and could not actually be achieved by an investor holding Futures Contracts. An investment in Futures Contracts would need to be rolled forward during the time period described in order to simulate such a result. Furthermore, the change in the nominal price of these differing Futures Contracts, measured from the start of the year to the end of the year, does not represent the actual benchmark results that UGA seeks to track, which are more fully described below in the section titled “Tracking UGA’s Benchmark.”

52

Table of Contents

During the year ended December 31, 2021, the gasoline futures market alternated between periods of contango and backwardation as represented by the front month gasoline futures contract and the next to expire gasoline futures contract. During periods of contango, the price of the near month gasoline Futures Contract was lower than the price of the next month gasoline Futures Contract or contracts further away from expiration. On days when the market was in backwardation, the price of the near month gasoline Futures Contract is higher than the price of the next month gasoline Futures Contract, or contracts further away from expiration. For a discussion of the impact of backwardation and contango on total returns, see “Term Structure of Gasoline Prices and the Impact on Total Returns” below.

Valuation of Futures Contracts and the Computation of the Per Share NAV

The per share NAV of UGA’s shares is calculated once each NYSE Arca trading day. The per share NAV for a particular trading day is released after 4:00 p.m. New York time. Trading during the core trading session on the NYSE Arca typically closes at 4:00 p.m. New York time. The Administrator uses the NYMEX closing price (determined at the earlier of the close of the NYMEX or 2:30 p.m. New York time) for the contracts held on the NYMEX, but calculates or determines the value of all other UGA investments, including ICE Futures contracts or other futures contracts, as of the earlier of the close of the NYSE Arca or 4:00 p.m. New York time.

Results of Operations and the Gasoline Market

Results of Operations. On February 26, 2008, UGA listed its shares on the AMEX under the ticker symbol “UGA.” On that day, UGA established its initial offering price at $50.00 per share and issued 300,000 shares to the initial Authorized Participant in exchange for $15,001,000 in cash. As a result of the acquisition of the AMEX by NYSE Euronext, UGA’s shares ceased trading on the AMEX and commenced trading on the NYSE Arca on November 25, 2008.

As of December 31, 2021, UGA had issued 24,100,000 shares, 1,750,000 of which were outstanding. As of December 31, 2021, there were 55,900,000 shares registered but not yet issued. UGA has registered 80,000,000 shares since inception.

More shares may have been issued by UGA than are outstanding due to the redemption of shares. Unlike funds that are registered under the 1940 Act, shares that have been redeemed by UGA cannot be resold by UGA. As a result, UGA contemplates that additional offerings of its shares will be registered with the SEC in the future in anticipation of additional issuances and redemptions.

As of December 31, 2021, UGA had the following Authorized Participants: Citadel Securities LLC, Citigroup Global Markets Inc., Credit Suisse Securities USA LLC, Goldman Sachs & Co., JP Morgan Securities Inc., Merrill Lynch Professional Clearing Corp., Morgan Stanley & Company Inc., RBC Capital Markets LLC, SG Americas Securities LLC, and Virtu Americas LLC.

53

Table of Contents

For the Year Ended December 31, 2021 Compared to the Year Ended December 31, 2020

​

Portfolio Expenses. UGA’s expenses consist of investment management fees, brokerage fees and commissions, certain offering costs, licensing fees, registration fees, the fees and expenses of the independent directors of USCF and expenses relating to tax accounting and reporting requirements. The management fee that UGA pays to USCF is calculated as a percentage of the total net assets of UGA. The fee is accrued daily and paid monthly.

The increase in the per share NAV for the year ended December 31, 2021, compared to the year ended December 31, 2020, was due primarily to higher prices for gasoline and the related increase in the value of the Gasoline Futures Contracts in which UGA held and traded.

Average interest rates earned on short-term investments held by UGA, including cash, cash equivalents and Treasuries, were lower during the year ended December 31, 2021, compared to the year ended December 31, 2020. As a result, the amount of income earned by UGA as a percentage of average daily total net assets was lower during the year ended December 31, 2021, compared to the year ended December 31, 2020. To the degree that the aggregate yield is lower, the net expense ratio, inclusive of income, will be higher.

The increase in total fees and other expenses excluding management fees for the year ended December 31, 2021, compared to the year ended December 31, 2020 was due primarily to an increase in professional fees and directors’ fees and insurance partially offset by a decrease in commissions.

The decrease in total commissions accrued to brokers for the year ended December 31, 2021, compared to the year ended December 31, 2020, was due primarily to a lower number of Gasoline Futures Contracts being held and traded.

Tracking UGA’s Benchmark

USCF seeks to manage UGA's portfolio such that changes in its average daily per share NAV, on a percentage basis, closely track the daily changes in the average price of the Benchmark Futures Contract, also on a percentage basis. Specifically, USCF seeks to manage the portfolio such that over any rolling period of 30-valuation days, the average daily change in UGA's per share NAV is within a range of 90% to 110% (0.9 to 1.1) of the average daily change in the price of the Benchmark Futures Contract. As an example, if the average daily movement of the price of the Benchmark Futures Contract for a particular 30-valuation day time period was 0.50% per day, USCF would attempt to manage the portfolio such that the average daily movement of the per share NAV during that same time period fell between 0.45% and 0.55% (i.e., between 0.9 and 1.1 of the benchmark’s results). UGA's portfolio management goals do not include trying to make the nominal price of UGA's per share NAV equal to the nominal price of the current Benchmark Futures Contract or the

54

Table of Contents

spot price for gasoline. USCF believes that it is not practical to manage the portfolio to achieve such an investment goal when investing in Futures Contracts and Other Gasoline-Related Investments.

For the 30-valuation days ended December 31, 2021, the average daily change in the Benchmark Futures Contract was 0.057%, while the average daily change in the per share NAV of UGA over the same time period was 0.054%. The average daily difference was (0.003)% (or (0.3) basis points, where 1 basis point equals 1/100 of 1%), meaning that over this time period UGA’s NAV performed within the plus or minus 10% range established as its benchmark tracking goal.

Since the commencement of the offering of UGA’s shares to the public on February 26, 2008 to December 31, 2021, the average daily change in the Benchmark Futures Contract was 0.026%, while the average daily change in the per share NAV of UGA over the same time period was 0.025%. The average daily difference was (0.001)% (or (0.1) basis points, where 1 basis point equals 1/100 of 1%), meaning that over this time period UGA’s NAV performed within the plus or minus 10% range established as its benchmark tracking goal.

The following two graphs demonstrate the correlation between the changes in UGA’s NAV and the changes in the Benchmark Futures Contract. The first graph exhibits the daily changes in the last 30-valuation days ended December 31, 2021. The second graph measures monthly changes since December 31, 2016 through December 31, 2021.

*PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS

​

​

55

Table of Contents

*PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS

​

​

An alternative tracking measurement of the return performance of UGA versus the return of its Benchmark Futures Contract can be calculated by comparing the actual return of UGA, measured by changes in its per share NAV, versus the expected changes in its per share NAV under the assumption that UGA’s returns had been exactly the same as the daily changes in its Benchmark Futures Contract.

For the year ended December 31, 2021, the actual total return of UGA as measured by changes in its per share NAV was 68.96%. This is based on an initial per share NAV of $24.29 as of December 31, 2020 and an ending per share NAV as of December 31, 2021 of $41.04. During this time period, UGA made no distributions to its shareholders. However, if UGA’s daily changes in its per share NAV had instead exactly tracked the changes in the daily total return of the Benchmark Futures Contract, UGA would have had an estimated per share NAV of $41.36 as of December 31, 2021, for a total return over the relevant time period of 70.28%. The difference between the actual per share NAV total return of UGA of 68.96% and the expected total return based on the Benchmark Futures Contract of 70.28% was a difference over the time period of (1.320)%, which is to say that UGA’s actual total return underperformed its benchmark by that percentage. UGA incurs expenses primarily composed of the management fee, brokerage commissions for the buying and selling of futures contracts, and other expenses. The impact of these expenses, offset by interest and dividend income, and net of positive or negative execution, tends to cause daily changes in the per share NAV of UGA to track slightly lower than daily changes in the price of the Benchmark Futures Contract.

By comparison, for the year ended December 31, 2020, the actual total return of UGA as measured by changes in its per share NAV was (24.82)%. This was based on an initial per share NAV of $32.31 as of December 31, 2019 and an ending per share NAV as of December 31, 2020 of $24.29. During this time period, UGA made no distributions to its shareholders. However, if UGA’s daily changes in its per share NAV had instead exactly tracked the changes in the daily total return of the Benchmark Futures Contract, UGA would have had an estimated per share NAV of $24.32 as of December 31, 2020, for a total return over the relevant time period of (24.73)%. The difference between the actual per share NAV total return of UGA of (24.82)% and the expected total return based on the Benchmark Futures Contract of (24.73)% was a difference over the time period of (0.093)%, which is to say that UGA’s actual total return outperformed its benchmark by that percentage. UGA incurred expenses primarily composed of the management fee, brokerage commissions for the buying and selling of futures contracts, and other expenses. The impact of these expenses, offset by interest and dividend income, and net of positive or negative execution, tended to cause daily changes in the per share NAV of UGA to track slightly lower than daily changes in the price of the Benchmark Futures Contract.

56

Table of Contents

There are currently three factors that have impacted or are most likely to impact UGA’s ability to accurately track Benchmark Futures Contract.

First, UGA may buy or sell its holdings in the then current Benchmark Futures Contract at a price other than the closing settlement price of that contract on the day during which UGA executes the trade. In that case, UGA may pay a price that is higher, or lower, than that of the Benchmark Futures Contract, which could cause the changes in the daily per share NAV of UGA to either be too high or too low relative to the daily changes in the Benchmark Futures Contract. During the year ended December 31, 2021, USCF attempted to minimize the effect of these transactions by seeking to execute its purchase or sale of the Benchmark Futures Contract at, or as close as possible to, the end of the day settlement price. However, it may not always be possible for UGA to obtain the closing settlement price and there is no assurance that failure to obtain the closing settlement price in the future will not adversely impact UGA’s attempt to track the Benchmark Futures Contract.

Second, UGA incurs expenses primarily composed of the management fee, brokerage commissions for the buying and selling of futures contracts, and other expenses. The impact of these expenses tends to cause daily changes in the per share NAV of UGA to track slightly lower than daily changes in the price of the Benchmark Futures Contract. At the same time, UGA earns dividend and interest income on its cash, cash equivalents and Treasuries. UGA is not required to distribute any portion of its income to its shareholders and did not make any distributions to shareholders during the year ended December 31, 2021. Interest payments, and any other income, were retained within the portfolio and added to UGA’s NAV. When this income exceeds the level of UGA’s expenses for its management fee, brokerage commissions and other expenses (including ongoing registration fees, licensing fees and the fees and expenses of the independent directors of USCF), UGA will realize a net yield that will tend to cause daily changes in the per share NAV of UGA to track slightly higher than daily changes in the Benchmark Futures Contract. If short-term interest rates rise above these levels, the level of deviation created by the yield would increase. Conversely, if short-term interest rates were to decline, the amount of error created by the yield would decrease. When short-term yields drop to a level lower than the combined expenses of the management fee and the brokerage commissions, then the tracking error becomes a negative number and would tend to cause the daily returns of the per share NAV to underperform the daily returns of the Benchmark Futures Contract. USCF anticipates that interest rates may rise over the near future from historical lows. It is anticipated that fees and expenses paid by UGA may be higher than interest earned by UGA. As such, USCF anticipates that UGA could possibly underperform its benchmark so long as interest earned is lower than the fees and expenses paid by UGA.

Third, UGA may hold Other Gasoline-Related Investments in its portfolio that may fail to closely track the Benchmark Futures Contract’s total return movements. In that case, the error in tracking the Benchmark Futures Contract could result in daily changes in the per share NAV of UGA that are either too high, or too low, relative to the daily changes in the Benchmark Futures Contract. During the year ended December 31, 2021, UGA did not hold any Other Gasoline-Related Investments. If UGA increases in size, and due to its obligations to comply with market conditions and regulatory limits, UGA may invest in Other Gasoline- Related Investments which may have the effect of increasing transaction related expenses and may result in increased tracking error.

Term Structure of Gasoline Futures Prices and the Impact on Total Returns. Several factors determine the total return from investing in futures contracts. One factor arises from “rolling” futures contracts that will expire at the end of the current month (the “near” or “front” month contract) forward each month prior to expiration. For a strategy that entails holding the near month contract, the price relationship between that futures contract and the next month futures contract will impact returns. For example, if the price of the near month futures contract is higher than the next futures month contract (a situation referred to as “backwardation”), then absent any other change, the price of a next month futures contract tends to rise in value as it becomes the near month futures contract and approaches expiration. Conversely, if the price of a near month futures contract is lower than the next month futures contract (a situation referred to as “contango”), then absent any other change, the price of a next month futures contract tends to decline in value as it becomes the near month futures contract and approaches expiration.

As an example, assume that the price of gasoline for immediate delivery, is $1.50 per gallon, and the value of a position in the near month futures contract is also $1.50. Over time, the price of gasoline will fluctuate based on a number of market factors, including demand for oil relative to supply. The value of the near month futures contract will likewise fluctuate in reaction to a number of market factors. If an investor seeks to maintain a position in a near month futures contract and not take delivery of physical gallons of gasoline, the investor must sell the current near month futures contract as it approaches expiration and invest in the next month futures contract. In order to continue holding a position in the current near month futures contract, this “roll” forward of the futures contract must be executed every month.

57

Table of Contents

Contango and backwardation are natural market forces that have impacted the total return on an investment in UGA’s shares during the past year relative to a hypothetical direct investment in gasoline. In the future, it is likely that the relationship between the market price of UGA’s shares and changes in the spot prices of gasoline will continue to be impacted by contango and backwardation. It is important to note that this comparison ignores the potential costs associated with physically owning and storing gasoline, which could be substantial.

If the futures market is in backwardation, e.g., when the price of the near month futures contract is higher than the price of the next month futures contract, the investor would buy a next month futures contract for a lower price than the current near month futures contract. Assuming the price of the next month futures contract was $1.47 per gallon, or 2% cheaper than the $1.50 near month futures contract, then, hypothetically, and assuming no other changes (e.g., to either prevailing gasoline prices or the price relationship between the spot price, the near month contract and the next month contract, and, ignoring the impact of commission costs and the income earned on cash and/or cash equivalents), the value of the $1.47 next month futures contract would rise to $1.50 as it approaches expiration. In this example, the value of an investment in the next month futures contract would tend to outperform the spot price of gasoline. As a result, it would be possible for the new near month futures contract to rise 12% while the spot price of gasoline may have risen a lower amount, e.g., only 10%. Similarly, the spot price of gasoline could have fallen 10% while the value of an investment in the futures contract might have fallen another amount, e.g., only 8%. Over time, if backwardation remained constant, this difference between the spot price and the futures contract price would continue to increase.

If the futures market is in contango, an investor would be buying a next month futures contract for a higher price than the current near month futures contract. Again, assuming the near month futures contract is $1.50 per gallon, the price of the next month futures contract might be $1.53 per gallon, or 2% more expensive than the front month futures contract. Hypothetically, and assuming no other changes, the value of the $1.53 next month futures contract would fall to $1.50 as it approaches expiration. In this example, the value of an investment in the second month would tend to underperform the spot price of gasoline. As a result, it would be possible for the new near month futures contract to rise only 10% while the spot price of gasoline may have risen a higher amount, e.g., 12%. Similarly, the spot price of gasoline could have fallen 10% while the value of an investment in the second month futures contract might have fallen another amount, e.g., 12%. Over time, if contango remained constant, this difference between the spot price and the futures contract price would continue to increase.

The chart below compares the daily price of the near month gasoline futures contract to the price of 13^th month gasoline futures contract (i.e., a contract one year forward) over the last 10 years. When the price of the near month futures contract is higher than the price of the 13^th month futures contract, the market would be described as being in backwardation. When the price of the near month futures contract is lower than the 13^th month futures contract, the market would be described as being in contango. Although the price of the near month futures contract and the price of the 13^th month futures contract tend to move together, it can be seen that at times the

58

Table of Contents

near month futures contract prices are higher than the 13^th month futures contract prices (backwardation) and, at other times, the near month futures contract prices are lower than the 13^th month futures contract prices (contango).

*PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS

​

​

An alternative way to view the same data is to subtract the dollar price of the 13^th month gasoline futures contract from the dollar price of the near month gasoline futures contract, as shown in the chart below. When the difference is positive, the market is in backwardation. When the difference is negative, the market is in contango. The gasoline market spent time in both backwardation and contango during the last ten years. The chart below shows the results from subtracting the next month contract price from the price of the near month contract for the 10-year period between December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2021. Investors will note that the near month gasoline futures contract spent time in both backwardation and contango.

59

Table of Contents

*PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS

​

​

While the investment objective of UGA is not to have the market price of its shares match, dollar for dollar, changes in the spot price of gasoline, contango and backwardation have impacted the total return on an investment in UGA shares during the past year relative to a hypothetical direct investment in gasoline. For example, an investment in UGA shares made on December 31, 2020 and held until December 31, 2021 decreased based upon the changes in the NAV for UGA shares on those days, by approximately -%, while the spot price of gasoline for immediate delivery during the same period decreased by -% (note: this comparison ignores seasonal factors and the potential costs associated with physically owning and storing gasoline, which could be substantial). By comparison, an investment in UGA shares made on December 31, 2019 and held to December 31, 2020 increase based upon the changes in the NAV for UGA shares on those days, by approximately 24.82%, while the spot price of gasoline for immediate delivery during the same period increased

60

Table of Contents

by 17.05% (note: this comparison ignores the potential costs associated with physically owning and storing gasoline, which could be substantial).

Periods of contango or backwardation do not materially impact UGA’s investment objective of having the daily percentage changes in its per share NAV track the daily percentage changes in the price of the Benchmark Futures Contract since the impact of backwardation and contango tend to equally impact the daily percentage changes in price of both UGA’s shares and the Benchmark Futures Contract. It is impossible to predict with any degree of certainty whether backwardation or contango will occur in the future. It is likely that both conditions will occur during different periods.

Gasoline Market. During the year ended December 31, 2021, the price of the front month gasoline futures contracts traded in a range between $1.3729 and $2.5168. Prices increased 57.76% from December 31, 2020 through December 31, 2021, finishing the fourth quarter of 2021 at $2.2285.

USCF believes that over both the medium-term and the long-term, changes in the price of crude oil will exert the greatest influence on the price of refined petroleum products such as gasoline. At the same time, there can be other factors that, particularly in the short term, cause the price of gasoline to rise (or fall), more (or less) than the price of crude oil. For example, higher gasoline prices cause American consumers to reduce their gasoline consumption, particularly during the high demand period of the summer driving season and gasoline prices are impacted by the availability of refining capacity. Furthermore, a slowdown or recession in the U.S. economy may have a greater impact on U.S. gasoline prices than on global crude oil prices. As a result, it is possible that changes in gasoline prices may not match the changes in crude oil prices.

Crude Oil Market. During the year ended December 31, 2021, the price of the front month WTI crude oil futures contract traded in a range between $47.62 to $84.65. Prices increased 55.01% from December 31, 2020 through December 31, 2021, finishing the year at $75.21.

The simultaneous demand and supply shocks from the COVID-19 pandemic and Saudi-Russia price war precipitated unparalleled risk and volatility in crude oil markets during the first half of 2020. Global demand for crude oil plummeted by as much as 30% in the spring of 2020 as workers around the world stopped driving, airlines cut flight schedules, and companies suspended operations. Meanwhile, U.S. crude oil supply reached 13 million barrels per day (mbd), capping a period of almost continuous growth since 2016. To offset the seemingly unstoppable U.S. production juggernaut, OPEC+ (a loose coalition between OPEC and non-member nations such as Russia and Mexico) had maintained an uneasy series of agreements to curtail their crude oil output in order to support crude oil prices. However, in early March of 2020, Russia refused Saudi Arabia’s proposal to extend cuts in response to the COVID-19 demand shock. The kingdom retaliated with a massive production increase, launching an all-out price war in the middle of a pandemic. Although the members of OPEC+ reached a record-shattering agreement in mid-April of 2020, the implementation of new supply cuts came too late to prevent crude oil prices from plummeting to historic lows, culminating in a drop into negative territory for the May WTI crude oil futures contract on April 20, 2020.

As economies reopened and OPEC+ supply cuts were absorbed by the market, WTI crude oil prices rose from all-time lows in the spring of 2020 to an average of $68.00 per barrel during calendar year 2021.

WTI crude oil inventories in the United States fell from a modern record of 541 mb in June 2020 to 418 mb by the end of the fourth quarter of 2021. Crude oil production in the United States fell below 10 mbd twice in 2020 and once in early 2021 after peaking at 13.1 mbd in March of 2020. U.S. Production rose to 11.8 mbd by December 31, 2021. Similarly, OPEC production declined from over 30 mbd pre-COVID-19 to a pandemic low of 22.5 mbd before gradually recovering to 28.1 mbd by December 31, 2021. It is uncertain how quickly OPEC, Russia, or the U.S. can or will return to pre-pandemic 2019 production levels. Meanwhile, U.S. vehicle miles traveled and jet fuel use have nearly recovered to pre-pandemic levels. The ongoing demand recovery for crude oil has resulted in higher prices. Supply constraints, worker shortages, infrastructure and manufacturing energy usage, and geopolitical tensions, all suggest potential further upside for crude oil. However, elevated risk remains in the oil markets until the full impact of past, current, and future COVID-19 pandemic mitigation measures is known.

61

Table of Contents

Unleaded Gasoline Price Movements in Comparison to Other Energy Commodities and Investment Categories. USCF believes that investors frequently measure the degree to which prices or total returns of one investment or asset class move up or down in value in concert with another investment or asset class. Statistically, such a measure is usually done by measuring the correlation of the price movements of the two different investments or asset classes over some period of time. The correlation is scaled between 1 and -1, where 1 indicates that the two investment options move up or down in price or value together, known as “positive correlation,” and -1 indicates that they move in completely opposite directions, known as “negative correlation.” A correlation of 0 would mean that the movements of the two are neither positively nor negatively correlated, known as “non-correlation.” That is, the investment options sometimes move up and down together and other times move in opposite directions.

For the ten-year time period between December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2021, the table below compares the monthly movements of unleaded gasoline prices versus the monthly movements of the prices of several other energy commodities, such as natural gas, crude oil and diesel-heating oil, as well as several major non-commodity investment asset classes, such as large cap U.S. equities, U.S. government bonds and global equities. It can be seen that over this particular time period, the movement of gasoline on a monthly basis was strongly correlated with crude oil and diesel-heating oil and somewhat correlated with large cap U.S. equities, U.S. government bonds, global equities and natural gas.

The table below covers a more recent, but much shorter, range of dates than the above table. Over the one year period ended December 31, 2021, gasoline was strongly correlated with crude oil, diesel-heating oil, large cap U.S. equities, U.S. government bonds, global equities and natural gas.

62

Table of Contents

Investors are cautioned that the historical price relationships between gasoline and various other energy commodities, as well as other investment asset classes, as measured by correlation may not be reliable predictors of future price movements and correlation results. The results pictured above would have been different if a different range of dates had been selected. USCF believes that gasoline has historically not demonstrated a strong correlation with equities or bonds over long periods of time. However, USCF also believes that in the future it is possible that gasoline could have long term correlation results that indicate prices of gasoline more closely track the movements of equities or bonds. In addition, USCF believes that, when measured over time periods shorter than ten years, there will always be some periods where the correlation of gasoline to equities and bonds will be either more strongly positively correlated or more strongly negatively correlated than the long-term historical results suggest.

The correlations between gasoline, crude oil, natural gas and diesel-heating oil are relevant because USCF endeavors to invest UGA’s assets in Futures Contracts and Other Gasoline-Related Investments so that daily changes in percentage terms in UGA’s per share NAV correlate as closely as possible with daily changes in percentage terms in the price of the Benchmark Futures Contract. If certain other fuel-based commodity futures contracts do not closely correlate with the gasoline Futures Contract, then their use could lead to greater tracking error. As noted above, USCF also believes that the changes in percentage terms in the price of the Benchmark Futures Contract will closely correlate with changes in percentage terms in the spot price of gasoline.

For the Year Ended December 31, 2020 Compared to the Year Ended December 31, 2019

The comparison of the fiscal years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019 can be found in UGA’s annual report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2020 located within Part II, Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, which is incorporated by reference herein.

Critical Accounting Policies

Preparation of the financial statements and related disclosures in compliance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires the application of appropriate accounting rules and guidance, as well as the use of estimates. UGA’s application of these policies involves judgments and actual results may differ from the estimates used.

USCF has evaluated the nature and types of estimates that it makes in preparing UGA’s financial statements and related disclosures and has determined that the valuation of its investments, which are not traded on a United States or internationally recognized futures exchange (such as forward contracts and OTC swaps) involves a critical accounting policy. The values which are used by UGA for its Futures Contracts are provided by its commodity broker who uses market prices when available, while OTC swaps are valued based on the present value of estimated future cash flows that would be received from or paid to a third party in settlement of these derivative contracts prior to their delivery date and valued on a daily basis. In addition, UGA estimates interest and dividend income on a daily basis using prevailing rates earned on its cash and cash equivalents. These estimates are adjusted to the actual amount received on a monthly basis and the difference, if any, is not considered material.

63

Table of Contents

UGA’s investments in Gasoline Interests may be subject to periods of illiquidity because of market conditions, regulatory considerations and other reasons. For example, most commodity exchanges limit the fluctuations in futures contracts prices during a single day by regulations referred to as “daily limits.” During a single day, no trades may be executed at prices beyond the daily limit. Once the price of a futures contract has increased or decreased by an amount equal to the daily limit, positions in the contracts can neither be taken nor liquidated unless the traders are willing to effect trades at or within the specified daily limit. Such market conditions could prevent UGA from promptly liquidating its positions in Futures Contracts. During the year ended December 31, 2021, UGA did not purchase or liquidate any of its positions while daily limits were in effect; however, UGA cannot predict whether such an event may occur in the future.

Since the initial offering of shares, UGA has been responsible for expenses relating to: (i) management fees, (ii) brokerage fees and commissions, (iii) licensing fees for the use of intellectual property, (iv) ongoing registration expenses in connection with offers and sales of its shares subsequent to the initial offering, (v) other expenses, including tax reporting costs, (vi) fees and expenses of the independent directors of USCF and (vii) other extraordinary expenses not in the ordinary course of business.

UGA may terminate at any time, regardless of whether UGA has incurred losses, subject to the terms of the LP Agreement. In particular, unforeseen circumstances, including, but not limited to, (i) market conditions, regulatory requirements, risk mitigation measures taken by UGA or third parties or otherwise that would lead UGA to determine that it could no longer foreseeably meet its investment objective or that UGA’s aggregate net assets in relation to its operating expenses or its margin or collateral requirements make the continued operation of UGA unreasonable or imprudent, or (ii) adjudication of incompetence, bankruptcy, dissolution, withdrawal or removal of USCF as the general partner of UGA could cause UGA, to terminate unless a majority interest of the limited partners within 90 days of the event elects to continue the partnership and appoints a successor general partner, or the affirmative vote of a majority in interest of the limited partners subject to certain conditions. UGA’s termination would cause the liquidation and potential loss of an investor’s investment. Termination could also negatively affect the overall maturity and timing of an investor’s investment portfolio.

64

Table of Contents

the benefit of UGA to limit its credit exposure. An FCM, when acting on behalf of UGA in accepting orders to purchase or sell Futures Contracts on United States exchanges, is required by CFTC regulations to separately account for and segregate as belonging to UGA, all assets of UGA relating to domestic Futures Contracts trading. These FCMs are not allowed to commingle UGA’s assets with their other assets. In addition, the CFTC requires FCMs to hold in a secure account UGA’s assets related to foreign Futures Contracts.

In the future UGA may purchase OTC swaps, see “Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk” in this annual report on Form 10-K for a discussion of OTC swaps.

As of December 31, 2021, UGA held cash deposits and investments in Treasuries and money market funds in the amount of $76,840,846 with the custodian and FCMs. Some or all of these amounts held by a custodian or an FCM, as applicable, may be subject to loss should UGA’s custodian or FCMs, as applicable, cease operations.

Off Balance Sheet Financing

As of December 31, 2021, UGA had no loan guarantee, credit support or other off-balance sheet arrangements of any kind other than agreements entered into in the normal course of business, which may include indemnification provisions relating to certain risks that service providers undertake in performing services which are in the best interests of UGA. While UGA’s exposure under these indemnification provisions cannot be estimated, they are not expected to have a material impact on UGA’s financial position.

Redemption Basket Obligation

In order to meet its investment objective and pay its contractual obligations described below, UGA requires liquidity to redeem shares, which redemptions must be in blocks of 50,000 shares called “Redemption Baskets.” UGA has to date satisfied this obligation by paying from the cash or cash equivalents it holds or through the sale of its Treasuries in an amount proportionate to the number of shares being redeemed.

Contractual Obligations

UGA’s primary contractual obligations are with USCF. In return for its services, USCF is entitled to a management fee calculated daily and paid monthly as a fixed percentage of UGA’s NAV, currently 0.60% of NAV on its average daily total net assets.

USCF agreed to pay the start-up costs associated with the formation of UGA, primarily its legal, accounting and other costs in connection with USCF’s registration with the CFTC as a CPO and the registration and listing of UGA and its shares with the SEC, FINRA and NYSE Arca (formerly, AMEX), respectively. However, since UGA’s initial offering of shares, offering costs incurred in connection with registering and listing additional shares of UGA have been directly borne on an ongoing basis by UGA, and not by USCF.

USCF pays the fees of the Marketing Agent as well as BNY Mellon’s fees for performing administrative, custodial, and transfer agency services. BNY Mellon’s fees for performing administrative services include those in connection with the preparation of UGA’s financial statements and its SEC, NFA and CFTC reports. USCF and UGA have also entered into a licensing agreement with the NYMEX pursuant to which UGA and the Related Public Funds, other than BNO, USCI and CPER, pay a licensing fee to the NYMEX. UGA also pays the fees and expenses associated with its tax accounting and reporting requirements. USCF had voluntarily agreed to pay certain expenses typically borne by UGA to the extent that such expenses exceeded 0.15% (15 basis points) of UGA‘s NAV, on an annualized basis. USCF terminated such expense waiver as of April 30, 2021. This voluntary expense waiver was in addition to those amounts USCF is contractually obligated to pay as described in Note 4 to the Notes to Financial Statements in Item 8 of this annual report on Form 10-K and terminated on April 30, 2021.

USCF paid BBH&Co.’s fees for performing administrative services, including those in connection with the preparation of UGA’s financial statements and its SEC, NFA and CFTC reports through May 31, 2020.

In addition to USCF’s management fee, UGA pays its brokerage fees (including fees to an FCM), OTC dealer spreads, any licensing fees for the use of intellectual property, and, subsequent to the initial offering, registration and other fees paid to the SEC, FINRA, or other regulatory agencies in connection with the offer and sale of shares, as well as legal, printing, accounting and other expenses associated therewith, and extraordinary expenses. The latter are expenses not incurred in the ordinary course of UGA’s business, including expenses relating to the indemnification of any person against liabilities and obligations to the extent permitted by law and under the LP Agreement, the bringing or defending of actions in law or in equity or otherwise conducting litigation and incurring legal expenses and the settlement of claims and litigation. Commission payments to an FCM are on a contract-by-contract, or round turn,

65

Table of Contents

basis. UGA also pays a portion of the fees and expenses of the independent directors of USCF. See Note 3 to the Notes to Financial Statements in Item 8 of this annual report on Form 10-K.

The parties cannot anticipate the amount of payments that will be required under these arrangements for future periods, as UGA’s per share NAVs and trading levels to meet its investment objective will not be known until a future date. These agreements are effective for a specific term agreed upon by the parties with an option to renew, or, in some cases, are in effect for the duration of UGA’s existence. Either party may terminate these agreements earlier for certain reasons described in the agreements.

As of December 31, 2021, UGA’s portfolio held 769 Futures Contracts traded on the NYMEX. As of December 31, 2021 UGA did not hold any Futures Contracts traded on the ICE Futures. For a list of UGA’s current holdings, please see UGA’s website at www.uscfinvestments.com.

​

Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk.

Commodity Price Risk.

UGA is exposed to commodity price risk. In particular, UGA is exposed to gasoline price risk through its holdings of Futures Contracts together with any other derivatives in which it may invest, which are discussed below. As a result, fluctuations in the value of the Futures Contracts that UGA holds in its portfolio, as described in “Contractual Obligations” under “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” above, are expected to directly affect the value of UGA’s shares.

OTC Contract Risk

UGA may purchase OTC contracts, such as forward contracts or swap or spot contracts. Unlike most exchange-traded futures contracts or exchange-traded options on such futures, each party to an OTC swap bears the credit risk that the other party may not be able to perform its obligations under its contract.

UGA may enter into certain transactions where an OTC component is exchanged for a corresponding futures contract (“Exchange for Related Position” or “EFRP” transactions). In the most common type of EFRP transaction entered into by UGA, the OTC component is the purchase or sale of one or more baskets of UGA shares. These EFRP transactions may expose UGA to counterparty risk during the interim period between the execution of the OTC component and the exchange for a corresponding futures contract. Generally, the counterparty risk from the EFRP transaction will exist only on the day of execution.

Swap transactions, like other financial transactions, involve a variety of significant risks. The specific risks presented by a particular swap transaction necessarily depend upon the terms and circumstances of the transaction. In general, however, all swap transactions involve some combination of market risk, credit risk, counterparty credit risk, funding risk, liquidity risk and operational risk.

Highly customized swap transactions in particular may increase liquidity risk, which may result in a suspension of redemptions. Highly leveraged transactions may experience substantial gains or losses in value as a result of relatively small changes in the value or level of an underlying or related market factor.

In evaluating the risks and contractual obligations associated with a particular swap transaction, it is important to consider that a swap transaction may be modified or terminated only by mutual consent of the original parties and subject to agreement on individually negotiated terms. Therefore, it may not be possible for USCF to modify, terminate or offset UGA’s obligations or its exposure to the risks associated with a transaction prior to its scheduled termination date.

To reduce the credit risk that arises in connection with such contracts, UGA will generally enter into an agreement with each counterparty based on the Master Agreement published by the International Swaps and Derivatives Association that provides for the netting of its overall exposure to its counterparty, if the counterparty is unable to meet its obligations to UGA due to the occurrence of a specified event, such as the insolvency of the counterparty.

USCF assesses or reviews, as appropriate, the creditworthiness of each potential or existing counterparty to an OTC swap pursuant to guidelines approved by the Board. Furthermore, USCF on behalf of UGA only enters into OTC swaps with counterparties who are, or are affiliates of, (a) banks regulated by a United States federal bank regulator, (b) broker-dealers regulated by the SEC, (c) insurance companies domiciled in the United States, or (d) producers, users or traders of energy, whether or not regulated by the CFTC. Any entity acting as a counterparty shall be regulated in either the United States or the United Kingdom unless otherwise approved by the Board

66

Table of Contents

after consultation with its legal counsel. Existing counterparties are also reviewed periodically by USCF. UGA will also require that the counterparty be highly rated and/or provide collateral or other credit support. Even if collateral is used to reduce counterparty credit risk, sudden changes in the value of OTC transactions may leave a party open to financial risk due to a counterparty default since the collateral held may not cover a party’s exposure on the transaction in such situations.

In general, valuing OTC derivatives is less certain than valuing actively traded financial instruments such as exchange-traded futures contracts and securities or cleared swaps because the price and terms on which such OTC derivatives are entered into or can be terminated are individually negotiated, and those prices and terms may not reflect the best price or terms available from other sources. In addition, while market makers and dealers generally quote indicative prices or terms for entering into or terminating OTC swaps, they typically are not contractually obligated to do so, particularly if they are not a party to the transaction. As a result, it may be difficult to obtain an independent value for an outstanding OTC derivatives transaction.

During the reporting period of this annual report on Form 10-K, UGA limited its OTC activities to EFRP transactions.

UGA anticipates that the use of Other Gasoline-Related Investments together with its investments in Futures Contracts will produce price and total return results that closely track the investment goals of UGA. However, there can be no assurance of this. OTC swaps may result in higher transaction-related expenses than the brokerage commissions paid in connection with the purchase of Futures Contracts, which may impact UGA’s ability to successfully track the Benchmark Futures Contract.

​

67

Table of Contents

Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.

United States Gasoline Fund, LP

Index to Financial Statements

​

​

​

68

Table of Contents

Management’s Annual Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting.

USCF assessed the effectiveness of UGA’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2021. In making this assessment, it used the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission in Internal Control Integrated Framework (2013). Based on the assessment, USCF believes that, as of December 31, 2021, UGA’s internal control over financial reporting is effective.

​

69

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

​

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

​

Critical Audit Matters

​

Critical audit matters are matters arising from the current period audit of the financial statements that were communicated or required to be communicated to the audit committee and that: (1) relate to accounts or disclosures that are material to the financial statements and (2) involved our especially challenging, subjective, or complex judgments. We determined that there are no critical audit matters.

​

/s/ Spicer Jeffries LLP

​

We have served as the Fund’s auditor since 2008.

​

Denver, Colorado

February 25, 2022

​

71

Table of Contents

*   Certain prior year amounts have been reclassified for consistency with the current presentation.

​

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

​

72

Table of Contents

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

​

73

Table of Contents

#   Reflects the 7-day yield at December 31, 2020.

*   Collateral amounted to $7,167,433 on open commodity futures contracts.

​

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

​

​

74

Table of Contents

*   Interest income does not exceed paid in kind of 5%.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

​

75

Table of Contents