Item 1A. Risk Factors

Our financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows are affected by various factors, many of which are beyond our control. These include the following:

Cash distributions from us may change depending on the amount of cash available for distribution.

Throughout 2017, cash distributions were made to Unitholders at an annual rate of $0.50 per Unit. The amount of the cash per Unit distributed by the Partnership may increase or decrease at the determination of AFCA 2 based on its assessment of the amount of cash available to us for this purpose, as well as other factors it may deem to be relevant. During the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016, we generated Cash Available for Distribution of $0.60 and $0.50 per Unit, respectively. Although we may supplement our cash available for distribution with unrestricted cash, unless we can increase our cash receipts through completion of our current investment plans, we may need to reduce the level of cash distributions per unit from the current level. In addition, there is no assurance that we will be able to maintain our current level of annual cash distributions per unit even if we complete our current investment plans. Any change in our distribution policy could have a material adverse effect on the market price of our Units.

The receipt of interest and principal payments on our MRBs will be affected by the economic results of the underlying Residential Properties and a commercial property.

Although our MRBs are issued by state or local housing authorities, they are not obligations of these governmental entities and are not backed by any taxing authority. Instead, each of these MRBs is backed by a non-recourse loan made to the owner of the underlying Residential Properties and commercial property. Because of the non-recourse nature of the underlying mortgage loans, the sole source of cash to pay base and contingent interest on the MRB, and to ultimately pay the principal amount of the bond, is the net cash flow

12

generated by the operation of the financed property and the net proceeds from the ultimate sale or refinancing of the property, (except in cases where a property owner has provided a limited guarantee of certain payments). This makes our investments in these MRBs subject to risks usually associated with direct investments in multifamily real estate. If a property is unable to sustain net cash flow at a level necessary to pay its debt service obligations on our MRB on the property, a default may occur. Net cash flow and net sale proceeds from a property are applied only to debt service payments of the MRB secured by that property and are not available to satisfy debt service obligations on other MRBs that we hold. In addition, the value of a property at the time of its sale or refinancing will be a direct function of its perceived future profitability. Therefore, the amount of base and contingent interest that we earn on our MRBs, and whether or not we will receive the entire principal balance of the bonds as and when due, will depend to a large degree on the economic results of the underlying properties.

The net cash flow from the operation of a property may be affected by many things, such as the number of tenants, the rental and fee rates, operating expenses, the cost of repairs and maintenance, taxes, government regulation, competition from other similar multifamily, student, or senior citizen residential properties, mortgage rates for single-family housing, and general and local economic conditions. In most of the markets in which the properties financed by our MRBs are located, there is significant competition from other multifamily and single-family housing that is either owned or leased by potential tenants. Low mortgage interest rates and federal tax credits make single-family housing more accessible to persons who may otherwise rent apartments.

The only source of repayment of our MRBs is principally dependent upon proceeds from the sale or refinancing of the underlying properties.

The principal of most of our MRBs does not fully amortize over their terms. This means that all or some of the balance of the mortgage loans underlying these bonds will be repaid as a lump-sum “balloon” payment at the end of the term. The ability of the property owners to repay the mortgage loans with balloon payments is dependent upon their ability to sell the properties securing our MRBs or obtain adequate refinancing. The MRBs are not personal obligations of the property owners, and we rely solely on the value of the properties securing these bonds for security. Similarly, if a MRB goes into default, our only recourse is to foreclose on the underlying property. If the value of the underlying property securing the bond is less than the outstanding principal balance and accrued interest on the bond, we will incur a loss.

The properties securing the our MRBs are geographically dispersed throughout the United States, with significant concentrations in certain states.

The properties securing the our MRBs are geographically dispersed throughout the United States, with significant concentrations in certain states. Such concentrations expose us to potentially negative effects of local or regional economic downturns, which could prevent us from collecting interest and principal on our MRBs.

There is additional credit risk when we make a taxable loan on a property.

The taxable property loans that we make to owners of the Residential Properties that secure MRBs held by us are non-recourse obligations of the property owner. As a result, the sole source of principal and interest payments on these taxable property loans is the net cash flow generated by these properties or the net proceeds from the sale or refinance of these properties. The net cash flow from the operation of a property may be affected by many things as discussed above. In addition, any payment of principal and interest on a taxable property loan on a particular property will be subordinate to payment of all principal and interest (including contingent interest) on the MRB secured by the same property. As a result, there is a higher risk of default on the taxable property loans than on the associated MRBs. If a property is unable to sustain net cash flow at a level necessary to pay current debt service obligations on the taxable property loan on such property, a default may occur. While these taxable property loans are secured by the underlying properties, in general, we do not expect to pursue foreclosure or other remedies against a property upon default of a taxable property loan if the property is not in default on the MRBs financing the property.

There are risks associated with our strategy of acquiring ownership interests in MF Properties in anticipation of future bond financings of these projects.

To facilitate our investment strategy of acquiring additional MRBs secured by Residential Properties, we may acquire ownership positions in MF Properties that we expect to ultimately sell as part of a syndication of LIHTCs after the expiration of the compliance period relating to existing LIHTCs issued with respect to the MF Properties. Our plan is to provide MRB financing to the new property owners at the time of a syndication of new LIHTCs in connection with a rehabilitation of these MF Properties. The market for LIHTC syndications may be negatively affected from time to time by economic and market conditions, including the potential for corporate tax reform in the U.S. For this and other reasons, we may not be able to sell our interest in these MF Properties after the applicable LIHTC compliance period. In addition, the value of our interest in these MF Properties will be affected by the economic performance of the MF Properties and other factors generally affecting the value of residential rental properties. As a result, we may

13

incur a loss upon the sale of our interest in an MF Property. In addition, we may not be able to acquire MRBs on the MF Properties even if we are able to sell our interests in the MF Properties. During the time we own an interest in an MF Property, any net income we receive from these MF Properties will not be exempt from federal or state income taxation.

Any future issuances of additional BUCs could cause their market value to decline.

We may issue additional BUCs from time to time to raise additional equity capital. The issuance of additional BUCs will cause dilution of the existing BUCs and may cause a decrease in the market price of the BUCs. In addition, if additional units are issued but we are unable to invest the additional equity capital in assets that generate what we expect and believe to be tax-exempt income at levels at least equivalent to our existing assets, the amount of cash available for distribution on a per unit basis may decline.

We may suffer adverse consequences from changing interest rates.

We have financed the acquisition of some of our assets using variable-rate debt financing. The interest that we pay on these financings fluctuates with specific interest rate indices. Our MRBs bear interest at fixed rates and, notwithstanding the contingent interest feature on some of these bonds, the amount of interest we earn on these bonds will not increase with a general rise in interest rates. Accordingly, an increase in our interest expense due to an increase in the applicable interest rate index used for our variable rate debt financing will reduce the amount of cash we have available for distribution to Unitholders and may affect the market value of our BUCs. Our use of derivatives is designed to mitigate some but not all of the exposure to the negative impact of a higher cost of borrowing.

An increase in interest rates could also decrease the market value of assets owned by the Partnership. A decrease in the market value of assets owned by the Partnership could also decrease the amount we could realize on the sale of our investments and would thereby decrease the amount of funds available for distribution to our Unitholders. During periods of low prevailing interest rates, the interest rates we earn on new interest-bearing assets we acquire may be lower than the interest rates on our existing portfolio of interest-bearing assets.

To the extent we finance the acquisition of additional interest-bearing assets through the issuance of additional BUC’s, from the issuance of preferred units or from the proceeds from the sale of existing assets held by the Partnership and we earn a lower interest rate on these additional interest-bearing assets, the amount of cash available for distribution on a per unit basis may be reduced.

High interest rates may make it difficult for us to finance or refinance our debt obligations, which could reduce the number of investments we can acquire, our cash flow from operations and the amount of cash distributions we can make.

If debt is unavailable at reasonable rates, we may not be able to finance the purchase of additional investments. If we place debt on our investments, we run the risk of being unable to refinance the debt when it becomes due or of being unable to refinance on favorable terms. If interest rates are higher when we refinance, our income could be reduced. If any of these events occurs, our cash flow would be reduced. This, in turn, would reduce cash available for distribution and may hinder our ability to raise capital by issuing more stock or borrowing more money.

We are subject to various risks associated with our derivative agreements.

We use derivative instruments to mitigate some, but not all, of the risks to which we are exposed from changing interest rates. There is no assurance that these instruments will fully insulate us from the interest rate risks to which we are exposed. In addition, there are costs associated with these derivative instruments and these costs may not ultimately exceed the losses we would have suffered, if any, had these instruments not been in place. There is also a risk that the counterparty to such an instrument will be unable to perform its obligations to us. If a liquid secondary market does not exist for these instruments, we may be required to maintain a derivative position until exercise or expiration, which could result in losses to us. In addition, we are required to record the fair value of these derivative instruments on our financial statements by recording changes in their values as interest earnings or expense. This can result in significant period to period volatility in our reported net income over the term of these instruments.

There are risks associated with debt financing programs that involve securitization of our MRBs and PHC Certificates.

We have obtained debt financing through the securitization of our MRBs and PHC Certificates and may obtain this type of debt financing in the future. The terms of these securitization programs differ, but in general require our investment assets be placed into a trust or other special purpose entity that issues a senior security to unaffiliated investors and a residual interest to us. The trust or other entity receives all the interest payments from its underlying MRBs and PHC Certificates from which it pays interest on the senior security at a variable or fixed rate. As the holder of the residual interest, we are entitled to any remaining interest received by the trust

14

holding the securitized asset after it has paid the full amount of interest due on the senior security and all of the expenses of the trust, including various fees to the trustee, remarketing agents, credit providers, and liquidity providers. Specific risks generally associated with these asset securitization programs include the following:

Changes in short-term interest rates can adversely affect the cost of an asset securitization financing.

The interest rate payable on the senior securities resets periodically based on the weekly Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (“SIFMA”) floating index usually tied to interest rates on short-term instruments. In addition, because the senior securities may typically be tendered back to the trust, causing the trust to remarket the senior securities from time to time, an increase in interest rates may require an increase to the interest rate paid on the senior securities in order to successfully remarket these securities. Any increase in interest rate payable on the senior securities will result in more of the underlying interest being used to pay interest on the senior securities leaving less interest available to us. Higher short-term interest rates will reduce, and could even eliminate, our return on a residual interest in this type of financing.

Payments on the residual interests in these financing structures are subordinate to payments on the senior securities and to payment of trust expenses and there are no party guarantees to the payment of any amounts under the residual interests.

We hold a residual interest (known as Class B interests in the TEBS Financing with Freddie Mac, Term TOB Trust and Term A/B Trust facilities with Deutsche Bank and residual participating interests (“ LIFERs”) in the TOB financing facilities) in the securitization trusts established for the debt financing facilities. These residual interests are subordinate to the senior securities sold to investors. As a result, none of the interest received by such a trust will be paid to us as the holder of a residual interest until all payments currently due on the senior securities have been paid in full and other trust expenses satisfied. As the holder of a residual certificate in these trusts, we can look only to the assets of the trust remaining after payment of these senior obligations for payment on the residual certificates. No third party guarantees the payment of any amount on the residual certificates.

Termination of an asset securitization financing can occur for many reasons which could cause us to lose the assets and other collateral we pledged for such financing.

In general, the trust or other special purpose entity formed for an asset securitization financing can terminate for many different reasons relating to problems with the assets or problems with the trust itself. Problems with the assets that could cause the trust to collapse include payment or other defaults or a determination that the interest on the assets is taxable. Problems with a trust include a downgrade in the investment rating of the senior securities that it has issued, a ratings downgrade of the liquidity provider for the trust, increases in short term interest rates in excess of the interest paid on the underlying assets, an inability to remarket the senior securities or an inability to obtain credit or liquidity for the trust. In each of these cases, the trust will be collapsed and the MRBs and other collateral held by the trusts will be sold. If the proceeds from the sale of the trust collateral are not sufficient to pay the principal amount of the senior securities with accrued interest and the other expenses of the trusts then we will be required, through our guarantee of the trusts, to fund any such shortfall. The Partnership, as holder of the residual interest in the trust, may not only lose our investment in the residual certificates but could also realize additional losses to fully repay trust obligations to the senior securities.

An insolvency or receivership of the program sponsor could impair our ability to recover the assets and other collateral pledged by it in connection with a bond securitization financing.

In the event the sponsor of an asset securitization financing program becomes insolvent, it could be placed in receivership. In that situation, it is possible that we would not be able to recover the investment assets and other collateral it pledged in connection with the securitization financing or that it would not receive all or any of the payments due from the trust or other special purpose entity on the residual interest held by us in such trust or other entity.

Conditions in the tax credit markets due to known or potential changes in U.S. corporate tax rates may increase our cost of borrowing, make financing difficult to obtain or restrict our ability to invest in MRBs and other investments, each of which may have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and business.

Conditions in the tax credit market due to changes in the U.S. corporate tax rates have had, and may continue to have, an adverse impact on our cost of borrowings and may restrict our ability to invest in MRBs and other investments.  It is unclear when and how quickly conditions will stabilize in the tax credit markets. These conditions, the cost and availability of credit has been, and may continue to be, adversely affected in all markets in which we operate. Concern about the stability of the tax credit markets has led many lenders and institutional investors to reduce, and in some cases, cease, providing funding to borrowers. Our access to debt and equity financing may be adversely affected. Changes in the U.S. tax rates, and the resulting impacts to the tax credit market, may limit

15

our ability to replace or renew maturing debt financing on a timely basis, may impair our ability to acquire MRBs and other investments and may impair our access to capital markets to meet our liquidity and growth requirements which may have an adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

Federal regulations adopted under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 may require us to unwind our tender option bond financing facilities.

The “Volcker Rule” adopted under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 limits the ability of banking entities to sponsor or invest in certain types of “covered funds” (such as private equity funds and hedge funds) or to engage in certain types of proprietary trading in the U.S. The Volcker Rule restricts banking entities from acquiring or retaining an ownership interest in, sponsoring, or having certain relationships with certain “covered funds.” As currently structured, TOB Trusts like those used as part of our TOB financing program with DB, fit within the definition of “covered funds” and will be affected by the Volcker Rule. The Volcker Rule does not apply to Freddie Mac or more specifically, the M24, M31 and M33 TEBS Financing facilities with Freddie Mac.

The regulators specifically noted that banks will need to evaluate if TOB Trusts are, in fact, covered funds and if so, whether an exception to the definition is available. The regulators declined to provide a specific exclusion from the definition of “covered funds” for TOB financing programs. The preamble also notes that participation in a TOB transaction is not prohibited per se, but is subject to the same restrictions on other covered funds.

Any downgrade, or perceived potential of a downgrade, of U.S. sovereign credit ratings or the credit ratings of the U.S. Government-sponsored entities (or GSEs) by the various credit rating agencies may materially adversely affect our business.

Our TEBS Financing facilities are an integral part of our business strategy and those financings are dependent upon an investment grade rating of Freddie Mac. If Freddie Mac were downgraded to below investment grade, it would have a negative effect on our ability to finance our bond portfolio on a longer-term basis and could negatively impact Cash Available for Distribution and our ability to continue distributions at current levels.

The federal conservatorship of Freddie Mac and related efforts, along with any changes in laws and regulations affecting the relationship between Freddie Mac and the U.S. Government, may materially adversely affect our business.

The problems faced by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac commencing in 2008 resulting in them being placed into federal conservatorship and receiving significant U.S. Government support have sparked serious debate among federal policy makers regarding the continued role of the U.S. Government in providing liquidity and credit enhancement for mortgage loans. The Trump administration has publicly indicated a desire to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, including their relationship with the federal government. As a result, the future roles of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are likely to be reduced (perhaps significantly) and the nature of their guarantee obligations could be considerably limited relative to historical measurements. Alternatively, it is still possible that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac could be dissolved entirely or privatized, and, as mentioned above, the U.S. Government could determine to stop providing liquidity support of any kind to the mortgage market. Any changes to the nature of the GSEs or their guarantee obligations could have broad adverse implications for the market and our business, operations and financial condition. If Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac were to be eliminated, or their structures were to change radically (i.e., limitation or removal of the guarantee obligation), our ability to utilize TEBS Financings facilities would be materially and adversely impacted.

Our MRBs, PHC Certificates, property loans and investments in unconsolidated entities are illiquid assets and their value may decrease.

Our MRBs, PHC Certificates, property loans and investments in unconsolidated entities are relatively illiquid, and there is no existing trading market for them. There are no market makers, price quotations, or other indications of a developed trading market for these investments. In addition, no rating has been issued on any of the existing MRBs and we do not expect to obtain ratings on MRBs we may acquire in the future. Accordingly, any buyer of these MRBs would need to perform its own due diligence prior to a purchase. The Partnership’s ability to sell its MRBs, PHC Certificates, property loans and investments in unconsolidated entities and the price it may receive upon their sale, will be affected by the number of potential buyers, the number of similar securities on the market at the time and by other market conditions. Such a sale could result in a loss to the Partnership.

16

Delay, reduction, or elimination of appropriations from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development can result in payment defaults on our investments in PHC Trusts.

We have acquired interests, LIFERS, in three PHC TOB Trusts, which, in turn, hold PHC Certificates that have been issued by three PHC Trusts which hold custodial receipts evidencing loans made to numerous public housing authorities. Principal and interest on these loans are payable by the respective public housing authorities solely out of annual appropriations to be made to the public housing authorities by HUD under HUD’s Capital Fund Program. Annual appropriations for the Capital Fund Program must be determined by Congress each year, and there is no assurance that Congress will continue to make such appropriations at current levels or at all. If Congress fails to continue to make annual appropriations for the Capital Fund Program at or near current levels, or there is a delay in the approval of appropriations, the public housing authorities may not have funds from which to pay principal and interest on the loans underlying the PHC Certificates. The failure of public housing authorities to pay principal and interest on these loans will reduce or eliminate the payments received by us from the PHC TOB Trusts.

A reduction in the rating of PHC Certificates below investment grade would result in the liquidation of the investment in that TOB Trust

Our investment in PHC Certificates is made pursuant to the provision of our Amended and Restated LP Agreement that allows investment in securities that are not MRBs backed by multifamily housing projects provided that these alternative securities are rated investment grade in one of the four highest rating categories by at least one nationally recognized securities rating agency and provide what we expect and believe to be tax-exempt income. In the event the investment rating of any of the PHC Certificates held by a PHC TOB Trust was reduced to less than investment grade, the trustee of the TOB Trust has no obligation to divest of that securitized asset. Accordingly, we would be required to liquidate our LIFERS in that TOB Trust or liquidate the TOB Trust entirely. The TOB Trusts have no obligation to purchase the LIFERS and there is no established trading market for the LIFERS. Likewise, if we liquidate the TOB Trust, any downgrade in the investment rating of the PHC Certificates will likely decrease the value of the investment. The partnership may not be able to divest its position in these LIFERS or terminate the TOB Trusts without incurring a material loss.

The rent restrictions and occupant income limitations imposed on properties financed by our MRBs and on our MF Properties may limit the revenues of such properties.

All of the Residential Properties securing our MRBs and the MF Properties in which our subsidiaries hold indirect interests are subject to certain federal, state and/or local requirements with respect to the permissible income of their tenants. Since federal rent subsidies are not generally available on these properties, rents must be charged on a designated portion of the units at a level to permit these units to be continuously occupied by low or moderate-income persons or families. As a result, these rents may not be sufficient to cover all operating costs with respect to these units and debt service on the applicable MRB. This may force the property owner, when permissible, to charge rents on the remaining units that are higher than they would be otherwise and may, therefore, exceed competitive rents. This may adversely affect the occupancy rate of a property securing an investment and the property owner’s ability to service its debt.

The properties financed by some of our MRBs are not completely insured against damages from hurricanes and other major storms.

Two of the multifamily housing properties financed by MRBs held by us and one MF Property are in an area prone to damage from hurricanes and other major storms. Due to the significant losses incurred by insurance companies in recent years due to damages from hurricanes, many property and casualty insurers now require property owners to assume the risk of first loss on a larger percentage of their property’s value. In general, the current insurance policies on the property financed by us that is located in an area rated for hurricane and storm exposure carry a five percent deductible on the insurable value of the properties. As a result, if either of these properties were damaged in a hurricane or other major storm, the amount of uninsured losses could be significant, and the property owner may not have the resources to fully rebuild the property, which could result in a default on the MRBs secured by the property. In addition, the damages to a property may result in all or a portion of the rental units not being rentable for a period of time. Unless a property owner carries rental interruption insurance, this loss of rental income would reduce the cash flow available to pay base or contingent interest on our MRBs collateralized by these properties.

17

The properties securing our MRBs or the MF Properties may be subject to liability for environmental contamination which could increase the risk of default on such bonds or loss of our investment.

The owner or operator of real property may become liable for the costs of removal or remediation of hazardous substances released on its property. Various federal, state and local laws often impose such liability without regard to whether the owner or operator of real property knew of, or was responsible for, the release of such hazardous substances. We cannot assure you that the properties that secure our MRBs or the MF Properties, in which our subsidiaries hold indirect interests, will not be contaminated. The costs associated with the remediation of any such contamination may be significant and may exceed the value of a property or result in the property owner defaulting on the revenue bond secured by the property or otherwise result in a loss of our investment in a property.

If we acquire ownership of Residential Properties, we will be subject to all of the risks normally associated with the ownership of commercial real estate.

We may acquire ownership of Residential Properties financed by MRBs held by us in the event of a default on such bonds. We may also acquire indirect ownership of MF Properties on a temporary basis in order to facilitate the eventual acquisition by us of MRBs on these MF Properties. In either case, during the time we own an MF Property, we will generate taxable income or losses from the operations of such property rather than tax exempt interest. In addition, we will be subject to all of the risks normally associated with the operation of commercial real estate including declines in property value, occupancy and rental rates, increases in operating expenses, and the ability to refinance if needed. We may also be subject to government regulations, natural disasters and environmental issues, any of which could have an adverse effect on our financial results and ability to make distributions to Unitholders.

There are many risks related to the construction of Residential Properties that may affect the MRBs issued to finance these properties and multifamily properties that underlie our Investments in Unconsolidated Entities.

We may invest in MRBs secured by residential housing properties, and we make equity investments in limited liability companies created to develop, construct and operate multifamily properties. Construction of such properties generally takes approximately twelve to eighteen months. The principal risk associated with these investment activities is that construction of the underlying properties may be substantially delayed or never completed. This may occur for many reasons including (i) insufficient financing to complete the project due to underestimated construction costs or cost overruns; (ii) failure of contractors or subcontractors to perform under their agreements; (iii) inability to obtain governmental approvals; (iv) labor disputes; and (v) adverse weather and other unpredictable contingencies beyond the control of the developer. While we may be able to protect ourselves from some of these risks by obtaining construction completion guarantees from developers, agreements of construction lenders to purchase our bonds if construction is not completed on time, and/or payment and performance bonds from contractors, we may not be able to do so in all cases or such guarantees or bonds may not fully protect us in the event a property is not completed. In other cases, we may decide to forego certain types of available security if we determine that the security is not necessary or is too expensive to obtain in relation to the risks covered.

If a property is not completed or costs more to complete than anticipated, it may cause us to receive less than the full amount of interest owed to us on the mortgage revenue bond financing such property or otherwise result in a default under the mortgage loan that secures our mortgage revenue bond on the property. In such case, we may be forced to foreclose on the incomplete property and sell it in order to recover the principal and accrued interest on our mortgage revenue bond and we may suffer a loss of capital as a result. Alternatively, we may decide to finance the remaining construction of the property, in which event we will need to invest additional funds into the property, either as equity or as a taxable property loan. Any return on this additional investment would be taxable. Also, if we foreclose on a property, we will no longer receive interest on the bond issued to finance the property. The overall return to us from our investment in such property is likely to be less than if the construction had been completed on time or within budget.

As it relates to our equity investments, if a property is not completed or costs more to complete than anticipated, it may cause us to receive less distributions than expected. Furthermore, we may be prevented from receiving a return on our investments or recovering our initial investment, which would likely adversely affect our results of operations.

There are many risks related to the lease-up of newly constructed or renovated properties that may affect the MRBs issued to finance these properties.

We may acquire MRBs issued to finance properties in various stages of construction or renovation. As construction or renovation is completed, these properties will move into the lease-up phase. The lease-up of these properties may not be completed on schedule or at anticipated rent levels, resulting in a greater risk these investments may go into default rather than investments secured by mortgages on properties that are stabilized or fully leased-up. The underlying property may not achieve expected occupancy or debt service coverage levels. While we may require property developers to provide us with a guarantee covering operating deficits of the property during the lease-up phase, we may not be able to do so in all cases or such guarantees may not fully protect us in the event a property is not leased to an adequate level of economic occupancy as anticipated.

18

There are various risks associated with our Investments in Unconsolidated Entities.

Our Investments in Unconsolidated Entities represent equity investments in limited liability companies created to develop, construct and operate multifamily properties. We are entitled to certain distributions under the terms of the investees’ governing documents based on the availability of cash to pay such distributions. The only sources of cash flows for such distributions are either the net cash flows from the operation of the property, the cash proceeds from a sale of the property, or through the permanent financing in the form of a mortgage revenue bond. The net cash flow from the operation of a property may be affected by many factors, such as the number of tenants, the rental and fee rates, operating expenses, the cost of repairs and maintenance, taxes, debt service requirements, competition from other similar multifamily properties and general and local economic conditions. Sale proceeds are primarily dependent, among other things, on the value of a property to a prospective buyer at the time of its sale. If there are no net cash flows from operations or insufficient proceeds from a sale or a refinancing event, we are unlikely to receive distributions from our investees and we may be unable to recover our investments in these entities.

There is a risk associated with a third-party developer that has provided guarantees of our returns on Investments in Unconsolidated Entities.

One developer has provided a guarantee of returns on our Investments in Unconsolidated Entities during the period of construction of the underlying multifamily property.  The guarantees remain through the two-year anniversary of construction completion of each multifamily property up to a maximum amount for each investment. If the underlying multifamily properties do not generate sufficient cash proceeds, either through net cash flows from operations or upon a sale event or through the permanent financing in the form of a mortgage revenue bond, then we are entitled to enforce the guarantee against the developer. If the developer is unable to perform on the guarantee, we may be prevented from realizing our returns earned on our Investments in Unconsolidated Entities during the period of construction which may result in the recognition of losses.

We have assumed certain potential liabilities relating to recapture of tax credits on MF Properties.

We have acquired indirect interests in several MF Properties that generated LIHTCs for the previous investors in these properties. When we acquire an interest in an MF Property, we generally must agree to reimburse the prior partners for any liabilities they incur due to a recapture of LIHTCs that result from the failure to operate the MF Property in a manner consistent with the laws and regulations relating to LIHTCs after we acquired our interest in the MF Property. The amount of this recapture liability can be substantial and could negatively impact the financial performance of the MF Property.

We are not registered under the Investment Company Act.

We are not required to register as an investment company under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “Investment Company Act”) because we operate under an exemption therefrom. As a result, none of the protections of the Investment Company Act (such as provisions relating to disinterested directors, custody requirements for securities, and regulation of the relationship between a fund and its advisor) will be applicable to us.

We engage in transactions with related parties.

The majority of executive officers of Burlington, the named executive officers of the Partnership, and four of the Managers of Burlington hold equity positions in Burlington. A subsidiary of Burlington acts as our General Partner and manages our investments and performs administrative services for us and earns certain fees that are either paid by the properties financed by our MRBs or by us. Another subsidiary of Burlington provides on-site management for some of the Residential Properties that underlie our MRBs and each of our MF Properties earns fees from the property owners based on the gross revenues of these properties. The owners of the limited-purpose corporations which own two of the Residential Properties financed with MRBs and taxable property loans held by us are employees of Burlington who are not involved in our operation or management and who are not executive officers or managers of Burlington. These two Residential Properties are Bent Tree and Fairmont Oaks, which were sold during 2015. Because of these relationships, our agreements with Burlington and its subsidiaries are related-party transactions. By their nature, related-party transactions may not be considered to have been negotiated at arm’s length. These relationships may also cause a conflict of interest in other situations where we are negotiating with Burlington.

Unitholders may incur tax liability if any of the interest on our MRBs or PHC Certificates is determined to be taxable.

In each MRB transaction, the governmental issuer, as well as the underlying borrower, has covenanted and agreed to comply with all applicable legal and regulatory requirements necessary to establish and maintain the tax-exempt status of interest earned on the MRBs. Failure to comply with such requirements may cause interest on the related issue of bonds to be includable in gross income for federal

19

income tax purposes retroactive to the date of issuance, regardless of when such noncompliance occurs. Should the interest income on a MRB be deemed to be taxable, the bond documents include a variety of rights and remedies that we have concluded would help mitigate the economic impact of taxation of the interest income on the affected bonds. Under such circumstances, we would enforce all of such rights and remedies as set forth in the related bond documents as well as any other rights and remedies available under applicable law. In addition, in the event the tax-exemption of interest income on any MRB is challenged by the IRS, we would participate in the tax and legal proceedings to contest any such challenge and would, under appropriate circumstances, appeal any adverse final determinations. The loss of tax-exemption for any particular issue of bonds would not, in and of itself, result in the loss of tax-exemption for any unrelated issue of bonds. However, the loss of such tax-exemption could result in the distribution to our Unitholders of taxable income relating to such bonds.

Certain of our MRBs bear interest at rates which include contingent interest. Payment of the contingent interest depends on the amount of net cash flow generated by the property, net proceeds realized from the refinancing or sale of the property securing the bond. Due to this contingent interest feature, an issue may arise as to whether the relationship between the property owner and the Partnership is that of debtor and creditor or whether we are engaged in a partnership or joint venture with the property owner. If the IRS were to determine that these MRBs represented an equity investment in the underlying property, the interest paid to us could be viewed as a taxable return on such investment and would not qualify as tax-exempt interest for federal income tax purposes.

In addition, we have, and may in the future, obtain debt financing through asset securitization programs in which we place MRBs and PHC Certificates into trusts and are entitled to a share of the interest received by the trust on these bonds after the payment of interest on senior securities and related expenses issued by the trust. It is possible that the characterization of our residual interest in such a securitization trust could be challenged and the income that we receive through these instruments could be treated as ordinary taxable income includable in our gross income for federal tax purposes.

Not all the income received by us is exempt from taxation.

We have made, and may make in the future, taxable property loans to the owners of Residential Properties that collateralize our investments. The interest income earned by us on these taxable property loans is subject to federal and state income taxes. In addition, if we acquire direct or indirect interests in real estate, either through foreclosure of a property securing a MRB or a taxable property loan or through the acquisition of an MF Property, any income we receive from the property will be taxable income from the operation of real estate. In that case, the taxable income received by us will be allocated to our Unitholders and will represent taxable income to them regardless of whether an amount of cash equal to such allocable share of this taxable income is distributed to Unitholders.

Furthermore, income and gains generated by assets within a wholly-owned subsidiary (the “Greens Hold Co”) and its subsidiaries are subject to federal, state and local incomes as the Greens Hold Co is a “C” corporation for income tax purposes.

If we were determined to be an association taxable as a corporation, it will have adverse economic consequences for us and our Unitholders.

We have determined to be treated as a partnership for federal income tax purposes. The purpose of this determination is to eliminate federal and state income tax liability for us and allow us to pass through our interest income which we expect and believe to be tax-exempt to our Unitholders so that they are not subject to federal tax on this income. If our treatment as a partnership for tax purposes is successfully challenged, we would be classified as an association taxable as a corporation. This would result in the Partnership being taxed on its taxable income, if any, and, in addition, would result in all cash distributions made by us to Unitholders being treated as taxable dividend income to the extent of our earnings and profits. The payment of these dividends would not be deductible by us. The listing of our Units for trading on the NASDAQ causes us to be treated as a “publicly traded partnership” under Section 7704 of the Internal Revenue Code. A publicly traded partnership is generally taxable as a corporation unless 90% or more of its gross income is “qualifying” income. Qualifying income includes interest, dividends, real property rents, gain from the sale or other disposition of real property, gain from the sale or other disposition of capital assets held to produce interest or dividends, and certain other items. We expect and believe that substantially all of our gross income will continue to be tax-exempt interest income on our MRBs, but there can be no assurance that will be the case. While we believe that all of this interest income is qualifying income, it is possible that some or all of our income could be determined not to be qualifying income. In such a case, if more than ten percent of our annual gross income in any year is not qualifying income, we will be taxable as a corporation rather than a partnership for federal income tax purposes. We have not received, and do not intend to seek, a ruling from the Internal Revenue Service regarding our status as a partnership for tax purposes.

20

To the extent we generate taxable income; Unitholders will be subject to income taxes on this income, whether or not they receive cash distributions.

As a partnership, our Unitholders will be individually liable for income tax on their proportionate share of any taxable income realized by us, whether or not we make cash distributions.

There are limits on the ability of our Unitholders to deduct Partnership losses and expenses allocated to them.

The ability of Unitholders to deduct their proportionate share of the losses and expenses generated by us will be limited in certain cases, and certain transactions may result in the triggering of the Alternative Minimum Tax for Unitholders who are individuals.

Holders of the Series A Preferred Units may be required to bear the risks of an investment for an indefinite period of time.

Holders of the Series A Preferred Units may be required to bear the financial risks of an investment in the Series A Preferred Units for an indefinite period of time.  In addition, the Series A Preferred Units will rank junior to all Partnership current and future indebtedness (including indebtedness outstanding under the Partnership’s senior bank credit facility) and other liabilities, and any other senior securities we may issue in the future with respect to assets available to satisfy claims against the Partnership.

The Series A Preferred Units are subordinated to existing and future debt obligations, and the interests could be diluted by the issuance of additional units, including additional Series A Preferred Units, and by other transactions.

The Series A Preferred Units are subordinated to all existing and future indebtedness, including indebtedness outstanding under any senior bank credit facility.  The Partnership may incur additional debt under its senior bank credit facility or future credit facilities.  The payment of principal and interest on its debt reduces cash available for distribution to Unitholders, including the Series A Preferred Units.

The issuance of additional units  pari passu  with or senior to the Series A Preferred Units would dilute the interests of the holders of the Series A Preferred Units, and any issuance of senior securities, parity securities, or additional indebtedness could affect the Partnership’s ability to pay distributions on or redeem the Series A Preferred Units.

Holders of Series A Preferred Units have extremely limited voting rights.

The voting rights as a holder of Series A Preferred Units will be extremely limited.  Our BUCs are the only class of our partnership interests carrying full voting rights.

Holders of Series A Preferred Units generally have no voting rights.  

There is no public market for the Series A Preferred Units, which may prevent an investor from liquidating its investment.

The Series A Preferred Units were offered in a private placement and the Partnership did not register the Series A Preferred Units with the SEC or any state securities commission.  The Series A Preferred Units may not be resold unless the Partnership registers the securities with the SEC or an exemption from the registration requirement is available.  It is not expected that any market for the Series A Preferred Units will develop or be sustained in the future.  The lack of any public market for the Series A Preferred Units severely limits the ability to liquidate the investment, except for the right to put the Series A Preferred Units to the Partnership under certain circumstances.

Market interest rates may adversely affect the value of the Series A Preferred Units.

One of the factors that will influence the value of the Series A Preferred Units will be the distribution rate on the Series A Preferred Units (as a percentage of the price of the units) relative to market interest rates.  An increase in market interest rates, which are currently at low levels relative to historical rates, may lower the value of the Series A Preferred Units and also would likely increase the Partnership’s borrowing costs.

21

Holders of Series A Preferred Units may have liability to repay distributions.

Under certain circumstances, holders of the Series A Preferred Units may have to repay amounts wrongfully returned or distributed to them.  Under Section 17-607 of the Delaware Revised Uniform Limited Partnership Act, we may not make a distribution if the distribution would cause the Partnership’s liabilities to exceed the fair value of its assets.  Liabilities to partners on account of their partnership interests and liabilities that are non-recourse to the partnership are not counted for purposes of determining whether a distribution is permitted.

Delaware law provides that for a period of three years from the date of an impermissible distribution, limited partners who received the distribution and who knew at the time of the distribution that it violated Delaware law will be liable to the limited partnership for the distribution amount.  A purchaser of Series A Preferred Units who becomes a limited partner is liable for the obligations of the transferring limited partner to make contributions to the Partnership that are known to such purchaser of units at the time it became a limited partner and for unknown obligations if the liabilities could be determined from our Amended and Restated LP Agreement.

The Partnership’s portfolio investment decisions may create CRA strategy risks.

Portfolio investment decisions take into account the Partnership’s goal of holding MRBs and other securities in designated geographic areas and will not be exclusively based on the investment characteristics of such assets, which may or may not have an adverse effect on the Partnership’s investment performance.  CRA qualified assets in geographic areas sought by the Partnership may not provide as favorable return as CRA qualified assets in other geographic areas.  The Partnership may sell assets for reasons relating to CRA qualification at times when such sales may not be desirable and may hold short-term investments that produce relatively low yields pending the selection of long-term investments believed to be CRA-qualified.

Under certain circumstances, investors may not receive CRA credit for their investment in the Series A Preferred Units.

The CRA requires the three federal bank supervisory agencies, the FRB, the OCC, and the FDIC, to encourage the institutions they regulate to help meet the credit needs of their local communities, including low- and moderate-income neighborhoods.  Each agency has promulgated rules for evaluating and rating an institution’s CRA performance which, as the following summary indicates, vary according to an institution’s asset size.  An institution’s CRA performance can also be adversely affected by evidence of discriminatory credit practices regardless of its asset size.

For an institution to receive CRA credit with respect to an investment in the Series A Preferred Units, the Partnership must hold CRA-qualifying investments that relate to the institution’s delineated CRA assessment area.   The Partnership expects that an investment in its units will be considered a qualified investment under the CRA, but neither the Partnership nor the General Partner has received an interpretative letter from the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (“ FFIEC”) stating that an investment in the Partnership is considered eligible for regulatory credit under the CRA.  Moreover, there is no guarantee that future changes to the CRA or future interpretations by the FFIEC will not affect the continuing eligibility of the Partnership’s investments.  So that the Partnership itself may be considered a qualified investment, the Partnership will seek to invest only in investments that meet the prevailing community investing standards put forth by U.S. regulatory agencies.  

In this regard, the Partnership expects that a majority of its investments will be considered eligible for regulatory credit under the CRA, but there is no guarantee that an investor will receive CRA credit for its investment in the Series A Preferred Units.   For example, a state banking regulator may not consider the Partnership eligible for regulatory credit.  If CRA credit is not given, there is a risk that an investor may not fulfill its CRA requirements.

The assets held by the Partnership may not be considered qualified investments under the CRA by the bank regulatory authorities.

In most cases, “qualified investments,” as defined by the CRA, are required to be responsive to the community development needs of a financial institution’s delineated CRA assessment area or a broader statewide or regional area that includes the institution’s assessment area.  For an institution to receive CRA credit with respect to the Series A Preferred Units, the Partnership must hold CRA qualifying investments that relate to the institution’s assessment area.

As defined in the CRA, qualified investments are any lawful investments, deposits, membership shares, or grants that have as their primary purpose community development.  The term “community development” is defined in the CRA as: (1) affordable housing (including multifamily rental housing) for low- to moderate-income individuals; (2) community services targeted to low- or moderate-income individuals; (3) activities that promote economic development by financing businesses or farms that meet the size eligibility standards of 13 C.F.R. §121.802(a)(2) and (3) or have gross annual revenues of $1 million or less; or (4) activities that revitalize or stabilize low- or moderate-income geographies, designated disaster areas, or distressed or underserved non-metropolitan middle-income geographies designated by the federal banking regulators.

22

Investments are not typically designated as qualifying investments at the time of issuance by any governmental agency.  Accordingly, the General Partner must evaluate whether each potential investment may be qualifying investments with respect to a specific Unitholder.  The final determinations that assets held by the Partnership are qualifying investments are made by the federal and, where applicable, state bank supervisory agencies during their periodic examinations of financial institutions.  There is no assurance that the agencies will concur with the General Partner’s evaluation of any of the Partnership’s assets as qualifying investments.

Each investor will be a limited partner of the Partnership, not just of the investments in its Designated Target Region(s).  The financial returns on an investor’s investment will be determined based on the performance of all the assets in the Partnership’s geographically diverse portfolio, not just by the performance of the assets in the Designated Target Region(s) selected by the investor.

In determining whether a particular investment is qualified, the General Partner will assess whether the investment has as its primary purpose community development.  The General Partner will consider whether the investment: (1) provides affordable housing for low- to moderate-income individuals; (2) provides community services targeted to low- to moderate-income individuals; (3) funds activities that (a) finance businesses or farms that meet the size eligibility standards of the Small Business Administration’s Development Company or Small Business Investment Company programs or have annual revenues of $1 million or less and (b) promote economic development; or (4) funds activities that revitalize or stabilize low- to moderate-income areas.  For institutions whose primary regulator is the FRB, OCC, or FDIC, the General Partner may also consider whether an investment revitalizes or stabilizes a designated disaster area, or an area designated by those agencies as a distressed or underserved non-metropolitan middle-income area.

An activity may be deemed to promote economic development if it supports permanent job creation, retention, and/or improvement for persons who are currently low- to moderate-income, or supports permanent job creation, retention, and/or improvement in low- to moderate-income areas targeted for redevelopment by federal, state, local, or tribal governments.  Activities that revitalize or stabilize a low- to moderate-income geography are activities that help attract and retain businesses and residents.  The General Partner maintains documentation, readily available to a financial institution or an examiner, supporting its determination that a Partnership asset is a qualifying investment for CRA purposes.

Obligations of U.S. Government agencies, authorities, instrumentalities, and sponsored enterprises (such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) have historically involved little risk of loss of principal if held to maturity.  However, the maximum potential liability of the issuers of some of these securities may greatly exceed their current resources and no assurance can be given that the U.S. Government would provide financial support to any of these entities if it is not obligated to do so contractually or by law.

The investment in the Series A Preferred Units is not a deposit or obligation of, or insured or guaranteed by, any entity or person, including the U.S. Government and the FDIC.  The value of the Partnership’s assets will vary, reflecting changes in market conditions, interest rates, and other political and economic factors.  There is no assurance that the Partnership can achieve its investment objective, since all investments are inherently subject to market risk.  There also can be no assurance that either the Partnership’s investments or units of the Partnership will receive investment test credit under the CRA.

The Partnership faces legislative and regulatory risks in connection with its assets and operations, including under the CRA.

Many aspects of the Partnership’s investment objectives are directly affected by the national and local legal and regulatory environments.  Changes in laws, regulations, or the interpretation of regulations could all pose risks to the successful realization of the Partnership’s investment objectives.

It is not known what changes, if any, may be made to the CRA in the future and what impact these changes could have on regulators or the various states that have their own versions of the CRA.  Changes in the CRA might affect Partnership operations and might pose a risk to the successful realization of the Partnership’s investment objectives.  Repeal of the CRA would significantly reduce the attractiveness of an investment in the Partnership’s units for regulated investors.  There is no guarantee that an investor will receive CRA credit for is investment in the Series A Preferred Units.  If CRA credit is not given, there is a risk that an investor may not fulfill its CRA obligations.

We are increasingly dependent on information technology, and potential disruption, cyber-attacks, security problems, and expanding social media vehicles present new risks.

We are increasingly dependent on information technology networks and systems, including the Internet, to process, transmit, and store electronic and financial information, to manage and support a variety of business processes and activities, and to comply with regulatory, legal, and tax requirements. If we do not allocate and effectively manage the resources necessary to build and sustain the proper technology infrastructure and to maintain and protect the related automated and manual control processes, we could be subject to billing and collection errors, business disruptions, or damage resulting from security breaches. If any of our significant information technology systems suffer severe damage, disruption, or shutdown, and our business continuity plans do not effectively resolve the

23

issues in a timely manner, our revenues, financial condition, and results of operations may be materially and adversely affected, and we could experience delays in reporting our financial results. In addition, there is a risk of business interruption, litigation risks, and reputational damage from leakage of confidential information or from systems conversions when, and if, they occur in the normal course of business.

The inappropriate use of certain media vehicles could cause brand damage or information leakage. Negative posts or comments about the Partnership on any social networking web site could seriously damage its reputation. In addition, the disclosure of non-public company sensitive information through external media channels could lead to information loss. Identifying new points of entry as social media continues to expand presents new challenges. Any business interruptions or damage to our reputation could negatively impact our financial condition, results of operations, and the market price of our BUCs.