Item 1. Business.

The Company

Carter Validus Mission Critical REIT II, Inc., or the Company, or we, is a Maryland corporation that was formed on January 11, 2013, which elected to be taxed as a real estate investment trust, or a REIT, under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code, for federal income tax purposes commencing with its taxable year ended December 31, 2014. Substantially all of our business is conducted through Carter Validus Operating Partnership II, LP, a Delaware limited partnership, or our Operating Partnership, formed on January 10, 2013. The Company is the sole general partner of our Operating Partnership and Carter Validus Advisors II, LLC, or our Advisor, is the initial limited partner of our Operating Partnership. As of December 31, 2016 , we owned 37 real estate investments, consisting of 51 properties, comprising approximately 2,984,000 rentable square feet of single-tenant and multi-tenant commercial space located in 29 metropolitan statistical areas, or MSAs, and one micropolitan statistical area, or µSA. As of December 31, 2016 , the rentable space of these real estate investments was 99.6% leased.

We are offering for sale a maximum of $2,350,000,000 in shares of common stock, or the maximum offering amount, consisting of up to $2,250,000,000 in shares of common stock in our primary offering and up to $100,000,000 in shares of common stock pursuant to our distribution reinvestment plan, or the DRIP, on a “best efforts” basis pursuant to a registration statement on Form S-11, or the Registration Statement, filed with the SEC under the Securities Act, or our Offering. As of December 31, 2016, we offered Class A shares and Class T shares of common stock, in any combination, with a dollar value up to the maximum offering amount. Through September 30, 2016, the initial offering price for the shares in the primary offering was $10.00 per Class A share and $9.574 per Class T share, and the purchase price for shares in our DRIP was $9.50 per Class A share and $9.095 per Class T share.

As of December 31, 2016 , we had accepted investors’ subscriptions for and issued approximately 83,102,000 shares of Class A and Class T common stock in our Offering, resulting in receipt of gross proceeds of approximately $819,283,000 , before selling commissions and dealer manager fees of approximately $69,185,000 and other offering costs of approximately $15,877,000 . As of December 31, 2016 , we had approximately $1,530,717,000 in Class A shares and Class T shares of common stock remaining in our Offering.

On September 29, 2016, our board of directors, at the recommendation of the audit committee, which is comprised solely of independent directors, unanimously approved and established an estimated per share net asset value, or NAV, of $9.07 as of June 30, 2016 of each of our Class A common stock and Class T common stock, or the Estimated Per Share NAV, for purposes of assisting broker-dealers participating in the Offering in meeting their customer account statement reporting obligations under National Association of Securities Dealers Conduct Rule 2340. As a result of our board of directors' determination of the Estimated Per Share NAV, our board of directors approved the revised primary offering prices of $10.078 per Class A share and $9.649 per Class T share and revised DRIP offering prices of $9.574 per Class A share and $9.167 per Class T share, effective October 1, 2016. On December 2, 2016, our board of directors approved the revised DRIP offering prices of $9.07 per Class A share and $9.07 per Class T share, effective with purchases of shares pursuant to the DRIP on January 1, 2017. The Estimated Per Share NAV is not subject to audit by our independent registered public accounting firm. We intend to publish an updated estimated NAV per share on at least an annual basis.

On January 13, 2017, we filed Articles Supplementary to the Second Articles of Amendment and Restatement with the State Department of Assessments and Taxation of Maryland reclassifying a portion of our Class A shares and Class T shares as Class I shares. On January 20, 2017, we filed Post-Effective Amendment No. 11 to the Registration Statement to register Class I shares of common stock, which was declared effective by the SEC on February 10, 2017. The primary offering price per share for Class I shares is $9.162 and the DRIP offering price per share for Class I shares is $9.07. Unlike Class A and Class T shares, which are available to the general public for purchase through brokerage and transaction-based accounts, Class I shares are generally available for purchase in the Offering only (1) through fee-based programs of participating broker dealers, also known as wrap accounts, that provide access to Class I shares, (2) through registered investment advisers not affiliated with a participating broker-dealer, (3) by endowments, foundations, pension funds and other institutional investors, or (4) other categories of investors that we name in a supplement or amendment to our prospectus.

Substantially all of our business is managed by our Advisor. Carter Validus Real Estate Management Services II, LLC, or our Property Manager, an affiliate of our Advisor, serves as our property manager. SC Distributors, LLC, an affiliate of our Advisor, or our Dealer Manager, serves as the dealer manager of our Offering. The Dealer Manager has received and will continue to receive fees for services related to our Offering. Our Advisor and Property Manager have received and will continue to receive fees for services related to our acquisition and operational stages. The Advisor also may receive fees during the liquidation stage.

We were formed to invest primarily in quality income-producing commercial real estate, with a focus on data centers and healthcare properties, preferably with long-term net leases to investment grade and other creditworthy tenants, as well as to make other real estate investments that relate to such property types. Other real estate investments may include equity or debt interests, including securities, in other real estate entities. We also may originate or invest in real estate-related debt. We expect real estate-related debt originations and investments to be focused on first mortgage loans, but they also may include real estate-related bridge loans, mezzanine loans and securitized debt.

Except as the context otherwise requires, “we,” “our,” “us,” and the “Company” refer to Carter Validus Mission Critical REIT II, Inc., our Operating Partnership and all wholly-owned subsidiaries.

Key Developments during 2016 and Subsequent

Our principal executive offices are located at 4890 West Kennedy Blvd., Suite 650, Tampa, Florida 33609. Our telephone number is (813) 287-0101.

Investment Objectives and Policies

Our primary investment objectives are to:

We cannot assure stockholders that we will attain these objectives or that the value of our assets will not decrease. Furthermore, within our investment objectives and policies, our Advisor has substantial discretion with respect to the selection of specific investments and the purchase and sale of our assets, subject to the approval of our board of directors. Our board of directors may revise our investment objectives and policies if it determines it is advisable and in the best interest of our stockholders.

Investment Strategy

Primary Investment Focus

There is no limitation on the number, size or type of properties we may acquire or the percentage of net proceeds of our Offering that may be invested in a single investment. We intend to focus our investment activities on acquiring mission critical net-leased properties, preferably with long-term leases, to creditworthy tenants that are primarily in the data center and healthcare sectors. We expect that most of our properties will be located throughout the continental United States; however, we may purchase properties in other jurisdictions. We may also invest in real estate-related debt and securities that meet our investment strategy and return criteria, provided that we do not intend for such investments to constitute a significant portion of our assets, and we will evaluate our assets to ensure that any such investments do not cause us to fail to lose our REIT status, cause us or any of our subsidiaries to be an investment company under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended, or the Investment Company Act, or cause our Advisor to have assets under management that would require our Advisor to register as an investment adviser under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, as amended, or the Advisers Act. We expect the sizes of individual properties that we purchase to vary significantly, but we expect most of the properties we acquire are likely to have a purchase price between $5,000,000 and $200,000,000. The number and mix of properties and other real estate-related investments comprising our portfolio will depend upon real estate market conditions and other circumstances existing at the time we acquire the properties and other real estate-related investments, and the amount of proceeds raised in our Offering.

Investing in Real Property

Our Advisor uses the following criteria to evaluate potential investment opportunities:

We believe that net-leased properties, as generally compared to properties with other lease structures, offer a distinct investment advantage since such properties typically provide more stable and predictable returns to the property owner, require less operating capital, have less recurring tenant turnover and, with respect to single-tenant properties, often are located in superior locations that are less dependent on the financial stability of adjoining tenants. Further, since we intend to acquire properties that are geographically diverse, we expect to minimize the potential adverse impact of economic slowdowns or downturns in specific geographic markets. We believe that a portfolio consisting of freestanding, single-tenant and multi-tenant mission critical properties that are long-term net-leased to creditworthy tenants will enhance our liquidity opportunities for investors by making the sale of individual properties, multiple properties or our investment portfolio as a whole attractive to institutional investors and by making a potential listing of our shares attractive to the public investment community.

We consider “mission critical” properties as those properties that are essential to the successful operations of the companies within the industries in which such companies operate.

As determined appropriate by our Advisor, we may acquire properties in various stages of development or that require substantial refurbishment or renovation. Our Advisor will make this determination based upon a variety of factors, including the available risk-adjusted returns for such properties when compared with other available properties, the effect such properties would have on the diversification of our portfolio, and our investment objectives of realizing both current income and capital appreciation upon the sale of such properties.

To the extent feasible, we will continue to seek to achieve a well-balanced portfolio of real estate investments that is diversified by geographic location, age and lease maturities. We also will focus on acquiring properties in the high-growth data center and healthcare sectors. We expect that tenants of our properties will be diversified between national, regional and local companies. We generally target properties with lease terms of six years or longer. We may acquire properties with shorter lease terms if the property is in an attractive location, is difficult to replace, or has other significant favorable attributes. We expect that these investments will provide long-term value by virtue of their size, location, quality and condition, and lease characteristics.

Many data center and healthcare companies currently are entering into sale-leaseback transactions (as described below) as a strategy for applying capital to their core operating businesses that would otherwise be invested in their real estate holdings. We believe that our investment strategy will enable us to take advantage of this trend and companies’ increased emphasis on core business operations and competence in today’s competitive corporate environment as many of these companies attempt to divest of their real estate assets.

We have incurred, and intend to continue to incur, debt to acquire properties when our board of directors determines that incurring such debt is in our best interest. In addition, from time to time, we may acquire certain properties without financing and later incur mortgage debt secured by one or more of such properties if favorable financing terms are available. We would use the proceeds from these loans to acquire additional properties and other real estate-related investments. We intend to limit our aggregate borrowings to 50% of the fair market value of our assets (calculated after the close of our Offering and once we have invested substantially all the net proceeds of our Offering), unless excess borrowing is approved by a majority of our independent directors.

We believe that our investment focus may present lower investment risks and greater stability to investors than other sectors of today’s commercial real estate market, such as the office and multifamily property sectors. By acquiring a large number of mission critical properties, we believe that lower-than-expected results of operations from one or a few investments will have a less significant effect on our ability to realize our investment objectives than an alternative strategy in which fewer or different properties are acquired.

Creditworthy Tenants

In evaluating potential property acquisitions, we apply credit underwriting criteria to the existing tenants of such properties. Similarly, we will apply credit underwriting criteria to possible new tenants when we are re-leasing properties in our portfolio (to the extent applicable). We expect many of the tenants of our properties to be creditworthy national or regional companies with high net worth and high operating income.

A tenant is considered creditworthy if it has a financial profile that our Advisor believes meets our criteria. In evaluating the creditworthiness of a tenant or prospective tenant, our Advisor will not use specific quantifiable standards, but will consider many factors, including, but not limited to, the proposed terms of the property acquisition, the financial condition of the tenant and/or guarantor, the operating history of the property with the tenant, the tenant’s market share and track record within its industry segment, the general health and outlook of the tenant’s industry segment, and the lease length and other lease terms at the time of the property acquisition.

We monitor the credit of our tenants to stay abreast of any material changes in credit quality. We monitor tenant credit by (1) reviewing the credit ratings of tenants (or their parent companies) that are rated by nationally recognized rating agencies, (2) reviewing financial statements that are publicly available or that are required to be delivered to us under the applicable lease, (3) monitoring news reports and other available information regarding our tenants and their underlying businesses, (4) monitoring the timeliness of rent collections, and (5) conducting periodic inspections of our properties to ascertain proper maintenance repair and upkeep. As of December 31, 2016 , we have not identified any material change in any of our tenants' credit quality.

Description of Leases

We acquire properties subject to existing tenant leases. When spaces in properties become vacant, existing leases expire, or we acquire properties under development or requiring substantial refurbishment or renovation, we anticipate entering into net leases. Net leases typically require tenants to pay, in addition to a fixed rental, all or a majority of the costs relating to the three broad expense categories of real estate taxes (including special assessments and sales and use taxes), insurance and common area maintenance (including repair and maintenance, utilities, cleaning and other operating expenses related to the property). There are various forms of net leases, most typically classified as triple net, or absolute net. Triple net leases typically require the tenant to pay, in addition to a fixed rental, all costs related to real estate taxes, insurance, utilities and common area maintenance of the property, including the roof and structure of the property. Generally, the leases require each tenant to procure, at its own expense, commercial general liability insurance, as well as property insurance covering the building for the full replacement value and naming the ownership entity and the lender, if applicable, as the additional insured on the policy. As a precautionary measure, we may obtain, to the extent available, secondary liability insurance, as well as loss of rents insurance that covers one year of annual rent in the event of a rental loss. Tenants will be required to provide proof of insurance by furnishing a certificate of insurance to our Advisor on an annual basis. With respect to multi-tenant properties, we expect to have a variety of lease arrangements with the tenants of these properties. Since each lease is an individually negotiated contract between two or more parties, each lease will have different obligations of both the landlord and tenant. Many large national tenants have standard lease forms that generally do not vary from property to property. We will have limited ability to revise the terms of leases to those tenants. We expect that multi-tenant properties will be subject to "gross" leases. "Gross" leases typically require the tenant to pay a flat rental amount and require us to pay for all property charges regularly associated with ownership of the property.

A majority of our acquisitions generally have lease terms of six years or longer at the time of the property acquisition. As of December 31, 2016 , the weighted average remaining lease term of our properties was 11.69 years. We have acquired and may continue to acquire properties under which the lease term is in progress and has a partial term remaining. We also may acquire properties with shorter lease terms if the property is in an attractive location, difficult to replace, or has other significant favorable real estate attributes. Under most commercial leases, tenants are obligated to pay a predetermined annual base rent. Some of the leases also will contain provisions that increase the amount of base rent payable at points during the lease term. In general, we will not permit leases to be assigned or subleased without our prior written consent. If we do consent to an assignment or sublease, the original tenant will generally remain fully liable under the lease unless we release that tenant from its obligations under the lease.

Investment Decisions

Our Advisor may purchase on our account, without the specific prior approval of our board of directors, properties with a purchase price of less than $15,000,000, so long as the investment in the property would not, if consummated, violate our investment guidelines or any restrictions on indebtedness and the consideration to be paid for such properties does not exceed the fair market value of such properties. Where the purchase price is equal to or greater than $15,000,000, investment decisions will be made by our board of directors upon the recommendation of our Advisor.

In evaluating and presenting investments for approval, our Advisor, to the extent such information is available, considers and provides to our board of directors, with respect to each property, the following:

Investing in and Originating Loans

We may originate or acquire real estate loans. Our criteria for investing in loans are substantially the same as those involved in our investment in properties. We may originate or invest in real estate loans (including, but not limited to, investments in first, second and third mortgage loans, wraparound mortgage loans, construction mortgage loans on real property, preferred equity loans, and loans on leasehold interest mortgages). We also may invest in mortgage, bridge or mezzanine loans. Further, we may invest in unsecured loans or loans secured by assets other than real estate; however, we will not make unsecured loans or loans not secured by mortgages unless such loans are approved by a majority of our independent directors. A bridge loan is short-term financing for an individual or business until permanent or the next stage of financing can be obtained. A mezzanine loan is a loan made in respect of certain real property that is secured by a lien on the ownership interests of the entity that, directly or indirectly, owns the real property. These loans would be subordinate to the mortgage loans directly on the underlying property.

Our underwriting process typically involves comprehensive financial, structural, operational and legal due diligence. We do not require an appraisal of the underlying property from a certified independent appraiser for an investment in mortgage, bridge or mezzanine loans, except for investments in transactions with our directors, our Advisor or any of their affiliates. For each such appraisal obtained, we will maintain a copy of such appraisal in our records for at least five years and will make it available during normal business hours for inspection and duplication by any stockholder at such stockholder’s expense. In addition, we will seek to obtain a customary lender’s title insurance policy or commitment as to the priority of the mortgage or condition of the title.

We will not make or invest in mortgage, bridge or mezzanine loans on any one property if the aggregate amount of all mortgage, bridge or mezzanine loans outstanding on the property, including our borrowings, would exceed an amount equal to 85% of the appraised value of the property, as determined by our board of directors, including a majority of our independent directors, unless substantial justification exists, as determined by our board of directors, including a majority of our independent directors. Our board of directors may find such justification in connection with the purchase of mortgage, bridge

or mezzanine loans in cases in which it believes there is a high probability of our foreclosure upon the property or we intend to foreclose upon the property in order to acquire the underlying assets and, in respect of transactions with our affiliates, in which the cost of the mortgage loan investment does not exceed the appraised value of the underlying property.

When evaluating prospective investments in and originations of real estate loans, our management and our Advisor will consider factors such as the following:

We may originate loans from mortgage brokers or personal solicitations of suitable borrowers, or we may purchase existing loans that were originated by other lenders. Our Advisor will evaluate all potential loan investments to determine if the term of the loan, the security for the loan and the loan-to-value ratio meet our investment criteria and objectives. An officer, director, agent or employee of our Advisor will inspect the property securing the loan, if any, during the loan approval process. We do not expect to make or invest in mortgage or mezzanine loans with a maturity of more than ten years from the date of our investment, and anticipate that most loans will have a term of five years. We do not expect to make or invest in bridge loans with a maturity of more than one year (with the right to extend the term for an additional one year) from the date of our investment. Most loans that we will consider for investment would provide for monthly payments of interest and some also may provide for principal amortization, although many loans of the nature that we will consider provide for payments of interest only and a payment of principal in full at the end of the loan term. We will not originate loans with negative amortization provisions.

Investing in Real Estate Securities

We may invest in non-majority owned securities of both publicly-traded and private companies primarily engaged in real estate businesses, including REITs and other real estate operating companies, and securities issued by pass-through entities of which substantially all of the assets consist of qualifying assets or real estate-related assets. We may purchase the common stock, preferred stock, debt, or other securities of these entities or options to acquire such securities. However, any investment in equity securities (including any preferred equity securities) must be approved by a majority of our directors, including a majority of our independent directors, not otherwise interested in the transaction, as being fair, competitive and commercially reasonable.

Acquisition Structure

We have and expect to continue to acquire fee interests in properties (a fee interest is the absolute, legal possession and ownership of land, property, or rights), although other methods of acquiring a property may be utilized if we deem them to be advantageous. Our focus is on acquiring commercial real estate predominantly in the data center and healthcare sectors, but we also may acquire other real property types, including office, industrial and retail properties.

To achieve our investment objectives, and to further diversify our portfolio, we have invested and will continue to invest in properties using a number of acquisition structures, which include direct and indirect acquisitions, joint ventures, leveraged investments, issuing units in our Operating Partnership in exchange for properties and making mortgages or other loans secured by the same types of properties which we may acquire. Further, our Advisor and its affiliates may purchase properties in their own name, assume loans in connection with the purchase or loan and temporarily hold title to the properties for the purpose of facilitating acquisition or financing by us or any other purpose related to our business.

Joint Ventures

We may enter into joint ventures, partnerships and other co-ownership partnerships for the purpose of making investments. Some of the potential reasons to enter into a joint venture would be to acquire assets we could not otherwise

acquire, to reduce our capital commitment to a particular asset, or to benefit from certain expertise a partner might have. In determining whether to invest in a particular joint venture, we evaluate the assets of the joint venture under the same criteria described elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the selection of our investments. In the case of a joint venture, we also evaluate the terms of the joint venture as well as the financial condition, operating capabilities and integrity of our partner or partners. We may enter into joint ventures with our directors and our Advisor (or its affiliates) only if a majority of our board of directors, including a majority of our independent directors, not otherwise interested in the transaction, approves the transaction as being fair and reasonable to us and on substantially the same terms and conditions as those received by the other joint venturers.

We may enter into joint ventures in which we have a right of first refusal to purchase the co-venturer’s interest in the joint venture if the co-venturer elects to sell such interest. If the co-venturer elects to sell property held in any such joint venture, however, we may not have sufficient funds to exercise our right of first refusal to buy the other co-venturer’s interest in the property held by the joint venture. If any joint venture with an affiliated entity holds interests in more than one property, the interest in each such property may be specially allocated based upon the respective proportion of funds invested by each co-venturer in each such property.

International Investments

We intend to primarily invest in real estate located in the United States; however, we may also invest in assets located outside of the United States. While we do not have specific locations identified, we could invest in real estate located in North America or Europe, or such other location as determined by our board of directors.

Disposition Policy

We intend to hold each asset we acquire for an extended period of time, generally five to seven years, or for the life of the Company. However, circumstances may arise that could result in the earlier sale of some assets. The determination of whether an asset will be sold or otherwise disposed of will be made after consideration of relevant factors, including prevailing economic conditions, specific real estate market conditions, tax implications for our stockholders, and other factors. The requirements for qualification as a REIT for federal income tax purposes also will put some limits on our ability to sell assets after short holding periods.

The determination of whether a particular property should be sold or otherwise disposed of will be made after consideration of relevant factors, including prevailing economic conditions, specific real estate market circumstances, and current tenant creditworthiness, with a view to achieving maximum capital appreciation. We cannot assure stockholders that this objective will be realized. The selling price of a property that is net-leased will be determined in large part by the amount of rent payable under the lease and the “sales multiple” applied to that rent. If a tenant has a repurchase option at a formula price, we may be limited in realizing any appreciation. In connection with our sales of properties, we may lend the purchaser all or a portion of the purchase price. In these instances, our taxable income may exceed the cash received in the sale. The terms of payment will be affected by custom in the area in which the property being sold is located and the then-prevailing economic conditions.

In addition, if during the period ending two years after the close of the Offering, we sell assets and then reinvest in other assets, we will pay our advisor 2.0% of the contract purchase price of each property acquired (including our pro rata share of debt attributable to such property) and 2.0% of the amount advanced for a loan or other investment (including our pro rata share of debt attributable to such investment); provided, however ,  that in no event shall the aggregate acquisition fee paid in respect of such sale or reinvestment exceed 6.0% of the contract purchase price of each property (including our pro rata share of debt attributable to such property) or 6.0% of the amount advanced for a loan or other investment (including our pro rata share of debt attributable to such investment).

Qualification as a REIT

We qualified and elected to be taxed as a REIT under Sections 856 through 860 of the Code. To maintain our qualification as a REIT, we must meet certain organizational and operational requirements, including a requirement to currently distribute at least 90.0% of our REIT taxable income, without regard to the deduction for dividends paid and excluding net capital gain, to our stockholders. As a REIT, we generally will not be subject to federal income tax on taxable income that we distribute to our stockholders.

If we fail to maintain our qualification as a REIT in any taxable year, we would then be subject to federal income taxes on our taxable income at regular corporate rates and would not be permitted to qualify for treatment as a REIT for federal income tax purposes for four years following the year during which qualification is lost unless the Internal Revenue Service grants us relief under certain statutory provisions. Such an event could have a material adverse effect on our net income and net cash available for distribution to our stockholders.

Distribution Policy

Our board of directors began declaring distributions to our Class A stockholders in July 2014, after we made our first real estate investment. Our board of directors approved and authorized distributions to our Class T stockholders on January 20, 2016. Our board of directors first approved and authorized distributions to our Class I stockholders on February 8, 2017; however, such distributions did not begin accruing until March 10, 2017, the day following the date on which Class I shares were first purchased. The amount of distributions we pay to our stockholders is determined by our board of directors and is dependent on a number of factors, including funds available for payment of distributions, our financial condition, capital expenditure requirements, annual distribution requirements needed to maintain our status as a REIT under the Code and restrictions imposed by our organizational documents and Maryland law.

We currently pay, and intend to continue to pay, monthly distributions to our stockholders. We currently calculate our monthly distributions on a daily record and declaration date. Therefore, new investors will be entitled to distributions immediately upon the purchase of their shares. Because all of our operations are performed indirectly through our Operating Partnership, our ability to continue to pay distributions depends on our Operating Partnership’s ability to pay distributions to its partners, including to us. If we do not have enough cash from operations to fund distributions, we may borrow, issue additional securities or sell assets in order to fund distributions, or make distributions out of net proceeds from our Offering. We have paid, and may continue to pay, distributions from sources other than from our cash flows from operations. Subject to certain limited exceptions, there is no limit to the amount of distributions that we may pay from Offering proceeds.

In accordance with our organizational documents and Maryland law, we may not make distributions that would: (1) cause us to be unable to pay our debts as they become due in the usual course of business; (2) cause our total assets to be less than the sum of our total liabilities plus senior liquidation preferences, if any; or (3) jeopardize our ability to maintain our qualification as a REIT.

To the extent that distributions to our stockholders are paid out of our current or accumulated earnings and profits, such distributions are taxable as ordinary income. To the extent that our distributions exceed our current and accumulated earnings and profits, such amounts constitute a return of capital to our stockholders for federal income tax purposes, to the extent of their basis in their stock, and thereafter will constitute capital gain. All or a portion of a distribution to stockholders may be paid from net offering proceeds and thus, will constitute a return of capital to our stockholders.

See Part II, Item 5. "Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities—Distributions," for further discussion on distribution rates approved by our board of directors.

Financing Strategies and Policies

We believe that utilizing borrowing is consistent with our investment objectives and has the potential to maximize returns to our stockholders. Financing for acquisitions and investments may be obtained at the time an asset is acquired or an investment is made or at a later time. In addition, debt financing may be used from time to time for property improvements, tenant improvements, leasing commissions and other working capital needs. The form of our indebtedness will vary and could be long-term or short-term, secured or unsecured, or fixed-rate or floating rate. We will not enter into interest rate swaps or caps, or similar hedging transactions or derivative arrangements for speculative purposes, but may do so in order to manage or mitigate our interest rate risk on variable rate debt.

We will not borrow from our Advisor, any member of our board of directors, or any of their affiliates unless a majority of our directors, including a majority of our independent directors, not otherwise interested in the transaction, approves the transaction as being fair, competitive and commercially reasonable and no less favorable to us than comparable loans between unaffiliated parties.

Conflicts of Interest

We are subject to various conflicts of interest arising out of our relationship with our Advisor, and its affiliates, including conflicts related to the arrangements pursuant to which our Advisor and its affiliates will be compensated by us. Our agreements and compensation arrangements with our Advisor and its affiliates were not determined by arm’s-length negotiations. Some of the potential conflicts of interest in our transactions with our Advisor and its affiliates, and the limitations on our Advisor adopted to address these conflicts, are described below.

Our Advisor and its affiliates try to balance our interests with their duties to other programs. However, to the extent that our Advisor or its affiliates take actions that are more favorable to other entities than to us, these actions could have a negative impact on our financial performance and, consequently, on distributions to our stockholders and the value of our stock. In addition, our directors and officers and certain of our stockholders may engage for their own account in business activities of the types conducted or to be conducted by our subsidiaries and us.

Our independent directors have an obligation to function on our behalf in all situations in which a conflict of interest may arise, and all of our directors have a fiduciary obligation to act on behalf of our stockholders.

Interests in Other Real Estate Programs

Affiliates of our Advisor act as executive officers of our Advisor and as directors and/or officers of Carter Validus Mission Critical REIT, Inc., which is the other publicly registered, non-traded REIT currently offered, distributed and/or managed by affiliates of our Advisor. Affiliates of our officers and entities owned or managed by such affiliates may acquire or develop real estate for their own accounts, and have done so in the past. Furthermore, affiliates of our officers and entities owned or managed by such affiliates may form additional real estate investment entities in the future, whether public or private, which may have the same investment objectives and policies as we do and which may be involved in the same geographic area, and such persons may be engaged in sponsoring one or more of such entities at approximately the same time as our shares of common stock are being offered. Our Advisor, its affiliates and affiliates of our officers are not obligated to present to us any particular investment opportunity that comes to their attention, unless such opportunity is of a character that might be suitable for investment by us. Our Advisor and its affiliates likely will experience conflicts of interest as they simultaneously perform services for us and other affiliated real estate programs.

Any affiliated entity, whether or not currently existing, could compete with us in the sale or operation of the properties. We will seek to achieve any operating efficiencies or similar savings that may result from affiliated management of competitive properties. However, to the extent that affiliates own or acquire a property that is adjacent, or in close proximity, to a property we own, our property may compete with the affiliate’s property for tenants or purchasers.

Every transaction that we enter into with our Advisor or its affiliates is subject to an inherent conflict of interest. Our board of directors may encounter conflicts of interest in enforcing our rights against any affiliate in the event of a default by or disagreement with an affiliate or in invoking powers, rights or options pursuant to any agreement between us and our Advisor or any of its affiliates.

Other Activities of Our Advisor and Its Affiliates

We rely on our Advisor for the day-to-day operation of our business. As a result of the interests of members of its management in other programs sponsored by affiliates of our Advisor and the fact that they also are engaged, and will continue to engage, in other business activities, our Advisor and its affiliates have conflicts of interest in allocating their time between us and other programs sponsored by affiliates of our Advisor and other activities in which they are involved. However, our Advisor believes that it and its affiliates have sufficient personnel to discharge fully their responsibilities to all of the programs sponsored by affiliates of our Advisor and other ventures in which they are involved.

In addition, each of our executive officers also serves as an officer of our Advisor, our Property Manager and/or other affiliated entities. As a result, these individuals owe fiduciary duties to these other entities, which may conflict with the fiduciary duties that they owe to us and our stockholders.

We may acquire properties or interests in properties from entities affiliated with our Advisor. We will not acquire any properties from entities affiliated with our Advisor unless a majority of our directors, including a majority of our independent directors, not otherwise interested in the transaction, determine that the transaction is fair and reasonable to us. The purchase price of any property we acquire from our Advisor, its affiliates or a director will not exceed the current appraised value of the property. In addition, the price of the property we acquire from an affiliate may not exceed the cost of the property to the affiliate, unless a majority of our directors, including a majority of our independent directors, determines that substantial justification for the excess exists and the excess is reasonable. During the year ended December 31, 2016 , we did not purchase any properties from our Advisor, its affiliates or any directors.

Competition in Acquiring, Leasing and Operating of Properties

Conflicts of interest will exist to the extent that we may acquire, or seek to acquire, properties in the same geographic areas where properties owned by Carter Validus Mission Critical REIT, Inc., the other publicly registered, non-traded REIT offered, distributed and/or managed by affiliates of our Advisor, or any other future programs which may be sponsored by affiliates of our Advisor, are located. In such a case, a conflict could arise in the acquisition or leasing of properties if we and another program sponsored by affiliates of our Advisor were to compete for the same properties or tenants in negotiating leases, or a conflict could arise in connection with the resale of properties if we and another program sponsored by affiliates of our Advisor were to attempt to sell similar properties at the same time. Conflicts of interest also may exist at such time as we or our affiliates, managing properties on our behalf, seek to employ developers, contractors or building managers, as well as under other circumstances. Our Advisor will seek to reduce conflicts relating to the employment of developers, contractors or building managers by making such prospective employees aware of all such properties seeking to employ such prospective employees. In addition, our Advisor will seek to reduce conflicts that may arise with respect to properties available for sale or rent by making prospective purchasers or tenants aware of all such properties. However, these conflicts cannot be fully avoided

in that there may be established differing compensation arrangements for employees at different properties or differing terms for resales or leasing of the various properties.

Our Dealer Manager

Since our Dealer Manager is an affiliate of our Advisor, we will not have the benefit of an independent due diligence review and investigation of the type normally performed by an unaffiliated, independent underwriter in connection with the offering of securities.

Affiliated Property Manager

The properties we acquire are managed and leased by our Property Manager, which is an affiliate of our Advisor, pursuant to a property management and leasing agreement. Our Property Manager is affiliated with the property manager of an affiliated real estate program, Carter Validus Mission Critical REIT, Inc., which may be in competition with our properties. Management fees paid to our Property Manager are based on a percentage of the rental income received by the managed properties.

Joint Ventures with Affiliates of Our Advisor

We may enter into joint ventures with other programs sponsored by affiliates of our Advisor (as well as other parties) for the acquisition, development or improvement of properties. We will not enter into a joint venture with our Sponsor, our Advisor, any director or any affiliate thereof, unless a majority of our directors, including a majority of our independent directors, not otherwise interested in such transaction, approve the transaction as being fair and reasonable to us and on substantially the same terms and conditions as those received by the other joint ventures. Our Advisor and its affiliates may have conflicts of interest in determining which programs sponsored by affiliates of our Advisor should enter into any particular joint venture agreement. The co-venturer may have economic or business interests or goals that are or that may become inconsistent with our business interests or goals. In addition, should any such joint venture be consummated, our Advisor may face a conflict in structuring the terms of the relationship between our interests and the interest of the co-venturer and in managing the joint venture. Since our Advisor and its affiliates will control both us and any affiliated co-venturer, agreements and transactions between the co-venturers with respect to any such joint venture will not have the benefit of arm’s-length negotiation of the type normally conducted between unrelated co-venturers.

Receipt of Fees and Other Compensation by Our Advisor and Its Affiliates

A transaction involving the purchase and sale of properties may result in the receipt of commissions, fees and other compensation by our Advisor and its affiliates, including acquisition and advisory fees, property management and leasing fees, disposition fees, brokerage commissions and participation in net sale proceeds. Subject to oversight by our board of directors, our Advisor will have considerable discretion with respect to all decisions relating to the terms and timing of all transactions. Therefore, our Advisor may have conflicts of interest concerning certain actions taken on our behalf, particularly due to the fact that such fees generally will be payable to our Advisor and its affiliates regardless of the quality of the properties acquired or the services provided to us.

Employees

We have no direct employees. The employees of our Advisor and its affiliates provide services for us related to acquisition, property management, asset management, accounting, investor relations, and all other administrative services.

We are dependent on our Advisor and its affiliates for services that are essential to us, including asset acquisition decisions, property management and other general administrative responsibilities. In the event that these companies are unable to provide these services to us, we would be required to obtain such services from other sources.

Reportable Segments

We operate through two reportable business segments – commercial real estate investments in data centers and healthcare. See Note 12—"Segment Reporting" to the consolidated financial statements that are a part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Insurance

See the section captioned “—Description of Leases” above.

Competition

As we continue to purchase properties for our portfolio, we are in competition with other potential buyers for the same properties, and may have to pay more to purchase the property than if there were no other potential acquirers or we may have to locate another property that meets our investment criteria. Although we generally acquire properties subject to existing leases,

the leasing of real estate is highly competitive in the current market, and we may experience competition for tenants from owners and managers of competing projects. As a result, we may have to provide free rent, incur charges for tenant improvements, or offer other inducements, or we might not be able to timely lease the space, all of which may have an adverse impact on our results of operations. At the time we elect to dispose of our properties, we will also be in competition with sellers of similar properties to locate suitable purchasers for its properties.

Concentration of Credit Risk and Significant Leases

As of December 31, 2016 , we had cash on deposit, including restricted cash and escrowed funds, in certain financial institutions that had deposits in excess of current federally insured levels. We limit cash investments to financial institutions with high credit standing; therefore, we believe we are not exposed to any significant credit risk on our cash deposits. To date, we have not experienced any loss of or lack of access to cash in our accounts.

Based on leases of our properties in effect as of December 31, 2016 , two exposures to tenant concentrations accounted for 10% or more of our 2016 contractual rental revenue. The following table shows the tenants that accounted for 10% or more of our 2016 contractual rental revenue:

The following table shows the segment diversification of our real estate properties based on contractual rental revenue as of December 31, 2016 :

Based on leases of our properties in effect as of December 31, 2016 , the following table shows the geographic diversification of our real estate properties that accounted for 10% or more of our contractual rental revenue as of December 31, 2016 :

Environmental Matters

All real properties and the operations conducted on real properties are subject to federal, state and local laws and regulations relating to environmental protection and human health and safety. In connection with ownership and operation of real estate, we may be potentially liable for costs and damages related to environmental matters. We intend to take commercially reasonable steps to protect ourselves from the impact of these laws, including obtaining environmental assessments of all properties that we acquire. We also carry environmental liability insurance on our properties, which provides coverage for pollution liability for third-party bodily injury and property damage claims.

Available Information

We electronically file our Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K and all amendments to those reports with the SEC. We have also filed our Registration Statement on Form S-11, amendments to our Registration Statement and supplements to our prospectus in connection with our Offering with the SEC. Copies of our filings with the SEC may be obtained from the SEC’s website, http://www.sec.gov . Access to these filings is free of charge. In addition, we make such materials that are electronically filed with the SEC available at www.cvmissioncriticalreitii.com as soon as reasonably practicable. They are also available for printing by any stockholder upon request.

Item 1A. Risk Factors.

The factors described below represent our principal risks. Other factors may exist that we do not consider to be significant based on information that is currently available or that we are not currently able to anticipate.

Risks Related to an Investment in Carter Validus Mission Critical REIT II, Inc.

We have a limited operating history and the prior performance of real estate investment programs sponsored by affiliates of our Advisor may not be an indication of our future results.

We were incorporated on January 11, 2013 and, therefore, have a limited operating history and our stockholders should not rely upon the past performance of other real estate investment programs sponsored by affiliates of our Advisor to predict our future results. Although members of our Advisor’s management have significant experience in the acquisition, finance, management and development of commercial real estate, the prior performance of real estate investment programs sponsored by the members of our advisor's management team and other affiliates of our Advisor may not be indicative of our future results.

We may not succeed in achieving our goals, and our failure to do so could cause our stockholders to lose all or a portion of their investment.

Because this is a “blind pool” offering, stockholders will not have the opportunity to evaluate our investments before we make them, which makes an investment in us more speculative.

We have not identified all of the properties we will acquire with the net proceeds from our offering. Additionally, we will not provide stockholders with information to evaluate our investments prior to our acquisition of properties. Since we currently have not identified all of the properties we intend to purchase, our offering is considered to be a “blind pool” offering. We

intend to invest the net offering proceeds in net-leased properties, primarily in data centers and healthcare sectors, preferably with long-term leases to creditworthy tenants located throughout the continental United States. We also may, in the discretion of our advisor, invest in other types of real estate or in entities that invest in real estate.

The shares sold in our offering will not be listed on an exchange for the foreseeable future, if ever, and we are not required to provide for a liquidity event. Therefore, if stockholders purchase shares in our offering, it will be difficult for stockholders to sell their shares and, if stockholders are able to sell their shares, they will likely sell them at a substantial discount.

The shares offered by us are illiquid assets for which there is not expected to be any secondary market nor is it expected that any will develop in the future. Moreover, investors should not rely on our share repurchase program as a method to sell shares promptly because our share repurchase program includes numerous restrictions that limit stockholders' ability to sell shares to us, and our board of directors may amend, suspend or terminate our share repurchase program at any time. In particular, the share repurchase program provides that we may make repurchase offers only if a stockholder has held our shares for a minimum of one year, we have sufficient funds available for repurchase and to the extent the total number of shares for which repurchase is requested does not exceed 5% of the number of shares of our common stock outstanding on December 31 ^st of the previous calendar year. Our board of directors may reject any request for repurchase of shares, suspend (in whole or in part) the share repurchase program at any time and from time to time upon notice to our stockholders and amend or terminate our share repurchase program at any time upon 30 days’ notice to our stockholders. Therefore, it will be difficult for stockholders to sell their shares promptly or at all. If stockholders are able to sell shares, they may only be able to sell them at a substantial discount from the price they paid. Investor suitability standards imposed by certain states may also make it more difficult to sell shares to someone in those states. The shares should be purchased as a long-term investment only.

In the future, our board of directors may consider various forms of liquidity, each of which is referred to as a liquidity event, including, but not limited to: (1) dissolution and winding up our assets; (2) merger or sale of all or substantially all of our assets; or (3) the listing of shares on a national securities exchange. In the event that a liquidity event does not occur on or before the seventh anniversary of the completion or termination of our primary offering, then a majority of our board and a majority of the independent directors must either (a) adopt a resolution that sets forth a proposed amendment to the charter extending or eliminating this deadline, or the Extension Amendment, declaring that the Extension Amendment is advisable and directing that the proposed Extension Amendment be submitted for consideration at either an annual or special meeting of our stockholders, or (b) adopt a resolution that declares that a proposed liquidation of the company is advisable on substantially the terms and conditions set forth in, or referred to, in the resolution, or the Plan of Liquidation, and directing that the proposed Plan of Liquidation be submitted for consideration at either an annual or special meeting of our stockholders. If our board seeks the Extension Amendment as described above and the stockholders do not approve such amendment, then our board shall seek the Plan of Liquidation as described above. If the stockholders do not then approve the Plan of Liquidation, the company will continue its business. If our board seeks the Plan of Liquidation as described above and the stockholders do not approve the Plan of Liquidation, then our board will seek the Extension Amendment as described above. If the stockholders do not then approve the Extension Amendment, the company will continue its business. In the event that listing on a national stock exchange occurs on or before the seventh anniversary of the completion or termination of our primary offering, the company will continue perpetually unless dissolved pursuant to any applicable provision of the Maryland General Corporation Law.

We may be unable to liquidate all assets. After we adopt a Plan of Liquidation, we would likely remain in existence until all our investments are liquidated. If we do not pursue a liquidity transaction, or delay such a transaction due to market conditions, shares may continue to be illiquid and stockholders may, for an indefinite period of time, be unable to convert their investment to cash easily and could suffer losses on their investment.

We may suffer from delays in locating suitable investments, which could adversely affect our ability to make distributions and the value of our stockholders’ investment.

We may suffer from delays in locating suitable investments, particularly as a result of our reliance on our Advisor at times when management of our Advisor is simultaneously seeking to locate suitable investments for other affiliated programs. Delays we encounter in the selection, acquisition and, if we develop properties, development of income-producing properties, likely would adversely affect our ability to make distributions and the value of our stockholders’ overall returns. In such event, we may pay all or a substantial portion of our distributions from the proceeds of our Offering or from borrowings in anticipation of future cash flow, which may constitute a return of our stockholders’ capital. Distributions from the proceeds of our Offering or from borrowings also could reduce the amount of capital we ultimately invest in properties. This, in turn, would reduce the value of our stockholders’ investment. In particular, if we acquire properties prior to the start of construction or during the early stages of construction, it typically will take at least several months to complete construction and rent available space. Therefore, our stockholders could suffer delays in the receipt of cash distributions attributable to those particular properties. If our Advisor is unable to obtain suitable investments for us, we will hold the uninvested proceeds of our Offering in an interest-bearing account or invest such proceeds in short-term, investment-grade investments. If we cannot invest all of the proceeds from our Offering within a reasonable amount of time, or if our board of directors determines it is in the best interests of our

stockholders, we will return the uninvested proceeds to investors and our stockholders may receive less than the amount they initially invested.

The Estimated Per Share NAV of each of our Class A common stock and Class T common stock are estimates as of a given point in time and likely will not represent the amount of net proceeds that would result if we were liquidated or dissolved or completed a merger or other sale of the company.

The offering prices per Class A share, Class I share and Class T share are based on our estimated per share NAV of each of our Class A common stock and Class T common stock as of June 30, 2016, as determined by our board of directors on September 29, 2016, which we refer to collectively as our Estimated Per Share NAV, and any applicable per share upfront selling commissions and dealer manager fees.

The price at which stockholders purchase shares and any subsequent values are likely to differ from the price at which a stockholder could resell such shares because: (1) there is no public trading market for our shares at this time; (2) the price does not reflect, and will not reflect, the fair value of our assets as we acquire them, nor does it represent the amount of net proceeds that would result from an immediate liquidation of our assets or sale of the company, because the amount of proceeds available for investment from this offering is net of selling commissions, dealer manager fees, other organization and offering expense reimbursements and acquisition fees and expenses; (3) the estimated value does not take into account how market fluctuations affect the value of our investments, including how the current conditions in the financial and real estate markets may affect the value of our investments; (4) the estimated value does not take into account how developments related to individual assets may increase or decrease the value of our portfolio; and (5) the estimated value does not take into account any portfolio premium or premiums to value that may be achieved in a liquidation of our assets or sale of our portfolio.

Further, the value of our shares will fluctuate over time as a result of, among other things, developments related to individual assets and responses to the real estate and capital markets. The Estimated Per Share NAV does not reflect a discount for the fact that we are externally managed, nor does it reflect a real estate portfolio premium/discount versus the sum of the individual property values. The Estimated Per Share NAV also does not take into account estimated disposition costs and fees for real estate properties that are not held for sale.

There are currently no SEC, federal and state rules that establish requirements specifying the methodology to employ in determining an estimated value per share; provided, however, that pursuant to FINRA rules, the determination of the estimated value per share must be conducted by, or with the material assistance or confirmation of, a third-party valuation expert and must be derived from a methodology that conforms to standard industry practice. Subsequent estimates of our Estimated Per Share NAV will be done at least annually. Our Estimated Per Share NAV is an estimate as of a given point in time and likely does not represent the amount of net proceeds that would result from an immediate sale of our assets.

The purchase prices a stockholder pays for shares of our Class A common stock, Class I common stock and Class T common stock are based on the Estimated Per Share NAV of each of our Class A common stock and Class T common stock at a given point in time, and any applicable per share upfront selling commissions and dealer manager fees. Our Estimated Per Share NAV is based upon a number of estimates, assumptions, judgments and opinions that may not be, or may later prove not to be, accurate or complete, which could make the estimated valuations incorrect. As a result, our Estimated Per Share NAV may not reflect the amount that a stockholder might receive for his or her shares in a market transaction, and the purchase price stockholders pay may be higher than the value of our assets per share of common stock at the time of purchase.

The per share price for Class A shares, Class I shares and Class T shares in our primary offering and pursuant to our DRIP are based on our most recent Estimated Per Share NAV of each of our Class A common stock and Class T common stock and applicable upfront commissions and fees. Currently, there are no SEC, federal or state rules that establish requirements specifying the methodology to employ in determining an estimated per share NAV. The audit committee of our board of directors, pursuant to authority delegated by our board of directors, was responsible for the oversight of the valuation process, including the review and approval of the valuation process and methodology used to determine our Estimated Per Share NAV, the consistency of the valuation and appraisal methodologies with real estate industry standards and practices and the reasonableness of the assumptions used in the valuations and appraisals. Pursuant to the prior approval of the audit committee of our board of directors, which is solely comprised of our independent directors, in accordance with the valuation policies previously adopted by our board of directors, we engaged Robert A. Stanger & Co., Inc., or Stanger, an independent third-party valuation firm, to assist with determining the Estimated Per Share NAV. Our Estimated Per Share NAV was determined after consultation with our advisor and Stanger. Stanger prepared an appraisal report summarizing key information and assumptions and providing a value on 40 of our 42 properties in our portfolio as of June 30, 2016. In addition, Stanger used the book value of two properties, which were under development as of June 30, 2016 Stanger also prepared a net asset value report, which estimates the Per Share NAV of each of our Class A and Class T common stock as of June 30, 2016. The valuation was based upon the estimated value of our assets less the estimated value of our liabilities divided by the number of shares outstanding on an adjusted fully diluted basis, calculated as of June 30, 2016, and was performed in accordance with the valuation guidelines

established by the Investment Program Association Practice Guideline 2013-01, Valuations of Publicly Registered Non-Listed REITs. The Estimated Per Share NAV was determined by our board of directors. Subsequent estimates of our per share NAV for each of our Class A common stock, Class I common stock and Class T common stock will be prepared at least annually. Our Estimated Per Share NAV is an estimate as of a given point in time and likely does not represent the amount of net proceeds that would result from an immediate sale of our assets. The Estimated Per Share NAV is not intended to be related to any values at which individual assets may be carried on financial statements under applicable accounting standards. While the determination of our most recent Estimated Per Share NAV was conducted with the material assistance of a third-party valuation expert, with respect to asset valuations, we are not required to obtain asset-by-asset appraisals prepared by certified independent appraisers, nor must any appraisals conform to formats or standards promulgated by any trade organization. Other than the information included in our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on September 30, 2016 regarding the Estimated Per Share NAV, we do not intend to release individual property value estimates or any of the data supporting the Estimated Per Share NAV.

It may be difficult to accurately reflect material events that may impact our estimated per share NAV between valuations, and accordingly we may be selling and repurchasing shares at too high or too low a price.

Our independent third-party valuation expert will calculate estimates of the market value of our principal real estate and real estate-related assets, and our board of directors will determine the net value of our real estate and real estate-related assets and liabilities taking into consideration such estimates provided by the independent third-party valuation expert. Our board of directors is ultimately responsible for determining the estimated per share NAV. Since our board of directors will determine our estimated per share NAV at least annually, there may be changes in the value of our properties that are not fully reflected in the most recent estimated per share NAV. As a result, the published estimated per share NAV may not fully reflect changes in value that may have occurred since the prior valuation. Furthermore, our advisor will monitor our portfolio, but it may be difficult to reflect changing market conditions or material events that may impact the value of our portfolio between valuations, or to obtain timely or complete information regarding any such events. Therefore, the estimated per share NAV published before the announcement of an extraordinary event may differ significantly from our actual per share NAV until such time as sufficient information is available and analyzed, the financial impact is fully evaluated, and the appropriate adjustment is made to our estimated per share NAV, as determined by our board of directors. Any resulting disparity may be to the detriment of a purchaser of our shares or a stockholder selling shares pursuant to our share repurchase program.

We expect that most of our properties will continue to be located in the continental United States and would be affected by economic downturns, as well as economic cycles and risks inherent to that area.

We expect to use a significant portion of the net proceeds of our Offering to acquire commercial real estate located in the continental United States; however, we may purchase properties in other jurisdictions. Real estate markets are subject to economic downturns, as they have been in the past, and we cannot predict how economic conditions will impact this market in both the short and long term. Declines in the economy or a decline in the real estate market in the continental United States could hurt our financial performance and the value of our properties. The factors affecting economic conditions in the continental United States include, but are not limited to:

Our stockholders may be more likely to sustain a loss on their investment because our Sponsor does not have as strong an economic incentive to avoid losses as do sponsors who have made significant equity investments in their companies.

Our Sponsor has only invested $200,000 in us through the purchase of 20,000 Class A shares of our common stock at $10.00 per share and may not have as much economic incentive as do sponsors who have invested more equity in their companies. Additionally, if we are successful in raising enough proceeds to be able to reimburse our Sponsor for our significant organization and offering expenses, our Sponsor will have little exposure to loss in value of our shares. Without this exposure, our investors may be at a greater risk of loss because our Sponsor may have less to lose from a decrease in the value of our shares as does a sponsor that makes more significant equity investments in its company.

Distributions paid from sources other than our cash flows from operations, including from the proceeds of this Offering, will result in us having fewer funds available for the acquisition of properties and other real estate-related investments, which may adversely affect our ability to fund future distributions with cash flows from operations and may adversely affect a stockholder's overall return.

We have paid, and may continue to pay, distributions from sources other than from our cash flows from operations. For the year ended December 31, 2016 , our cash flows provided by operations of approximately $25.0 million was a shortfall of approximately $15.6 million , or 38.4% , of our distributions paid (total distributions were approximately $40.6 million , of which $17.7 million was cash and $22.9 million was reinvested in shares of our common stock pursuant to our DRIP) during such period and such shortfall was paid from proceeds from our DRIP Offering. For the year ended December 31, 2015, our cash flows provided by operations of approximately $3.3 million was a shortfall of approximately $12.7 million , or 79.5%, of our distributions paid (total distributions were approximately $16.0 million , of which $6.4 million was cash and $9.6 million was reinvested in shares of our common stock pursuant to our DRIP) during such period and such shortfall was paid from proceeds from our Offering. Until we acquire additional properties or other real estate-related investments, we may not generate sufficient cash flows from operations to pay distributions. Our inability to acquire additional properties or other real estate-related investments may result in a lower return on a stockholder's investment than he or she may expect.

We may pay, and have no limits on the amounts we may pay, distributions from any source, such as from borrowings, the sale of assets, the sale of additional securities, advances from our Advisor, our Advisor’s deferral, suspension and/or waiver of its fees and expense reimbursements and Offering proceeds. Funding distributions from borrowings could restrict the amount we can borrow for investments, which may affect our profitability. Funding distributions with the sale of assets may affect our ability to generate cash flows. Funding distributions from the sale of additional securities could dilute stockholders' interest in us if we sell shares of our common stock to third party investors. Funding distributions from the proceeds of our Offering will result in us having less funds available for acquiring properties or real estate-related investments. Our inability to acquire additional properties or real estate-related investments may have a negative effect on our ability to generate sufficient cash flow from operations from which to pay distributions. As a result, the return investors may realize on their investment may be reduced and investors who invest in us before we generate significant cash flow may realize a lower rate of return than later investors. Payment of distributions from any of the aforementioned sources could restrict our ability to generate sufficient cash flows from operations, affect our profitability and/or affect the distributions payable upon a liquidity event, any or all of which may have an adverse effect on an investment in us.

If we are unable to raise substantial funds, we will be limited in the number and type of investments we may make and the value of our stockholders’ investment in us will fluctuate with the performance of the specific properties we acquire.

We are dependent upon the net proceeds we receive from our Offering to conduct our activities. If we are unable to raise substantial proceeds from our Offering, we will make fewer investments resulting in less diversification in terms of the number of investments owned, the geographic regions in which our investments are located and the types of investments that we make. In such event, the likelihood of our profitability being affected by the performance of any one of our investments will increase. Additionally, subject to our investment policies, we are not limited in the number or size of our investments or the percentage of net proceeds we may dedicate to a single investment. Our stockholders’ investment in our shares will be subject to greater risks to the extent that we lack a diversified portfolio of investments. In addition, our inability to raise substantial funds would increase our fixed operating expenses as a percentage of gross income, and our financial condition and ability to pay distributions could be adversely affected.

A high concentration of our properties in a particular geographic area, or of tenants in a similar industry, would magnify the effects of downturns in that geographic area or industry.

As of December 31, 2016 , we owned 37 real estate investments, located in 29 metropolitan statistical areas, or MSAs, and one micropolitan statistical area, of which three MSAs accounted for 10.0% or more of our contractual rental revenue for the year ended December 31, 2016 . Real estate investments located in the Oklahoma City, Oklahoma MSA, the Houston-The Woodlands-Sugar Land, Texas MSA, and the Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, Texas MSA accounted for 15.7% , 12.8% , and 10.5% , respectively, of our contractual rental revenue for the year ended December 31, 2016 . Accordingly, there is a geographic concentration of risk subject to fluctuations in each MSA’s economy. Geographic concentration of our properties exposes us to

economic downturns in the areas where our properties are located. A regional or local recession in any of these areas could adversely affect our ability to generate or increase operating revenues, attract new tenants or dispose of unproductive properties. Similarly, if tenants of our properties become concentrated in a certain industry or industries, any adverse effect to that industry generally would have a disproportionately adverse effect on our portfolio.

As of December 31, 2016 , the Company had two exposures to tenant concentration that accounted for 10.0% or more of contractual rental revenue. The leases with tenants under common control of the guarantor Post Acute Medical, LLC and the leases with Healthcare Partners Investments, LLC each accounted for 11.1% of contractual rental revenue for the year ended December 31, 2016 .

If our Advisor loses or is unable to obtain key personnel, our ability to implement our investment strategies could be delayed or hindered, which could adversely affect our ability to make distributions and the value of our stockholders’ investment.

Our success depends to a significant degree upon the contributions of certain of our executive officers and other key personnel of our Advisor, including John E. Carter, Todd M. Sakow, Michael A. Seton and Lisa A. Drummond, who would be difficult to replace. Our Advisor does not have an employment agreement with any of these key personnel and we cannot guarantee that all, or any particular one, will remain affiliated with us and/or our Advisor. If any of our key personnel were to cease their affiliation with our Advisor, our operating results could suffer. Further, we do not currently intend to separately maintain key person life insurance on John E. Carter, Todd M. Sakow, Michael A. Seton and Lisa A. Drummond or any other person. We believe that our future success depends, in large part, upon our Advisor’s ability to hire and retain highly skilled managerial, operational and marketing personnel. Competition for such personnel is intense, and we cannot assure our stockholders that our Advisor will be successful in attracting and retaining such skilled personnel. If our Advisor loses or is unable to obtain the services of key personnel, our ability to implement our investment strategies could be delayed or hindered, and the value of our stockholders’ investment may decline.

Our rights and the rights of our stockholders to recover claims against our officers, directors and our Advisor are limited, which could reduce our stockholders’ and our recovery against them if they cause us to incur losses.

Maryland law provides that a director has no liability in that capacity if he or she performs his or her duties in good faith, in a manner he or she reasonably believes to be in the corporation’s best interests and with the care that an ordinarily prudent person in a like position would use under similar circumstances. In addition, subject to certain limitations set forth therein or under Maryland law, our charter provides that no director or officer will be liable to us or our stockholders for money damages, requires us to indemnify and advance expenses to our directors, officers and Advisor and our Advisor’s affiliates and permits us, with approval of our board of directors or a committee of the board of directors' to indemnify our employees and agents. Although our charter does not allow us to indemnify or hold harmless an indemnitee to a greater extent than permitted under Maryland law and the North American Securities Administrators Association REIT Guidelines, or the NASAA REIT Guidelines, we and our stockholders may have more limited rights against our directors, officers, employees and agents, and our Advisor and its affiliates than might otherwise exist under common law, which could reduce our stockholders’ and our ability to recover against them. In addition, we may be obligated to fund the defense costs incurred by our directors, officers, employees and agents or our Advisor and its affiliates in some cases, which would decrease the cash otherwise available for distribution to stockholders.

The failure of any bank in which we deposit our funds could reduce the amount of cash we have available to pay distributions, make additional investments and service our debt.

We currently have cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash deposited in certain financial institutions in excess of federally insurable levels. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation only insures interest-bearing accounts in amounts up to $250,000 per depositor per insured bank. While we monitor our cash balance in our operating accounts, if any of the banking institutions in which we deposit funds ultimately fails, we may lose our deposits over $250,000. The loss of our deposits may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition.

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

A cyber incident is considered to be any adverse event that threatens the confidentiality, integrity or availability of our information resources. These incidents may be an intentional attack or an unintentional event and could involve gaining unauthorized access to our information systems for purposes of misappropriating assets, stealing confidential information, corrupting data or causing operational disruption. The result of these incidents may include disrupted operations, misstated or unreliable financial data, liability for stolen assets or information, increased cybersecurity protection and insurance costs, litigation and damage to our tenant and investor relationships. As our reliance on technology has increased, so have the risks posed to our information systems, both internal and those we have outsourced. There is no guarantee that any processes,

procedures and internal controls we have implemented or will implement will prevent cyber intrusions, which could have a negative impact on our financial results, operations, business relationships or confidential information.

Risks Related to Conflicts of Interest

We are subject to conflicts of interest arising out of our relationships with our Advisor and its affiliates, including the material conflicts discussed below. See the “Conflicts of Interest” section of Part I, Item I. of this Annual Report on Form 10-K .

Our Advisor faces potential conflicts of interest relating to the purchase and leasing of properties, and such conflicts may not be resolved in our favor, which could adversely affect our investment opportunities.

Affiliates of our Advisor have sponsored and may sponsor one or more other real estate investment programs in the future. We may buy properties at the same time as one or more of the other programs sponsored by affiliates of our Advisor and managed by officers and key personnel of our Advisor. There is a risk that our Advisor will choose a property that provides lower returns to us than a property purchased by another program sponsored by affiliates of our Advisor. We cannot be sure that officers and key personnel acting on behalf of our Advisor and on behalf of managers of other programs sponsored by affiliates of our Advisor will act in our best interests when deciding whether to allocate any particular property to us. In addition, we may acquire properties in geographic areas where other programs sponsored by affiliates of our Advisor own properties. Also, we may acquire properties from, or sell properties to, other programs sponsored by affiliates of our Advisor. If one of the other programs sponsored by affiliates of our Advisor attracts a tenant that we are competing for, we could suffer a loss of revenue due to delays in locating another suitable tenant. Our stockholders will not have the opportunity to evaluate the manner in which these conflicts of interest are resolved before or after making their investment.

Our Advisor faces conflicts of interest relating to joint ventures with its affiliates, which could result in a disproportionate benefit to the other venture partners at our expense.

We may enter into joint ventures with other programs sponsored by affiliates of our Advisor for the acquisition, development or improvement of properties. Our Advisor may have conflicts of interest in determining which program sponsored by affiliates of our Advisor should enter into any particular joint venture agreement. In addition, our Advisor may face a conflict in structuring the terms of the relationship between our interests and the interest of the affiliated co-venturer managing the joint venture. Since our Advisor and its affiliates will control both the affiliated co-venturer and, to a certain extent, us, agreements and transactions between the co-venturers with respect to any such joint venture will not have the benefit of arm’s-length negotiation of the type normally conducted between unrelated co-venturers, which may result in the co-venturer receiving benefits greater than the benefits that we receive. In addition, we may assume liabilities related to the joint venture that exceed the percentage of our investment in the joint venture.

Our Advisor and its officers and certain of its key personnel face competing demands relating to their time, and this may cause our operating results to suffer.

Our Advisor and its officers and employees and certain of our key personnel and their respective affiliates are key personnel, general partners and sponsors of other real estate programs having investment objectives and legal and financial obligations similar to ours and may have other business interests as well. Because these persons have competing demands on their time and resources, they may have conflicts of interest in allocating their time between our business and these other activities. During times of intense activity in other programs and ventures, they may devote less time and fewer resources to our business than is necessary or appropriate. If this occurs, the returns on our investments may suffer.

Our officers and directors face conflicts of interest related to the positions they hold with affiliated entities, which could hinder our ability to successfully implement our business strategy and generate returns to our stockholders.

Certain of our executive officers and directors, including John E. Carter, who also serves as the chairman of our board of directors, Todd M. Sakow, Michael A. Seton and Lisa A. Drummond, also are officers and/or directors of our Advisor, our Property Manager, and/or other affiliated entities. As a result, these individuals owe fiduciary duties to these other entities and their stockholders and limited partners, which fiduciary duties may conflict with the duties that they owe to us and our stockholders. Their loyalties to these other entities could result in actions or inactions that are detrimental to our business, which could harm the implementation of our business strategy and our investment and leasing opportunities. Conflicts with our business and interests are most likely to arise from involvement in activities related to:

If we do not successfully implement our business strategy, we may be unable to generate cash needed to make distributions to our stockholders and to maintain or increase the value of our assets.

Our Advisor faces conflicts of interest relating to the performance fee structure under the Advisory Agreement, which could result in actions that are not necessarily in the long-term best interests of our stockholders.

Under the Advisory Agreement, our Advisor or its affiliates are entitled to fees that are structured in a manner intended to provide incentives to our Advisor to perform in our best interests and in the best interests of our stockholders. However, because our Advisor does not maintain a significant equity interest in us and is entitled to receive substantial minimum compensation regardless of performance, our Advisor’s interests are not wholly aligned with those of our stockholders. In that regard, our Advisor could be motivated to recommend riskier or more speculative investments, or to use additional debt when acquiring assets, in order for us to generate the specified levels of performance or sales proceeds that would entitle our Advisor to fees. In addition, our Advisor’s or its affiliates’ entitlement to fees upon the sale of our assets and to participate in sale proceeds could result in our Advisor recommending sales of our investments at the earliest possible time at which sales of investments would produce the level of return that would entitle our Advisor to compensation relating to such sales, even if continued ownership of those investments might be in our best long-term interest. The Advisory Agreement requires us to pay a performance-based termination fee to our Advisor or its affiliates if we terminate the Advisory Agreement and have not paid our Advisor a subordinated incentive listing fee to our Advisor in connection with the listing of our shares for trading on an exchange. To avoid paying this fee, our independent directors may decide against terminating the Advisory Agreement prior to our listing of our shares even if, but for the termination fee, termination of the Advisory Agreement would be in our best interest. In addition, the requirement to pay the fee to our Advisor or its affiliates at termination could cause us to make different investment or disposition decisions than we would otherwise make in order to satisfy our obligation to pay the fee to the terminated Advisor. Moreover, our Advisor will have the right to terminate the Advisory Agreement upon a change of control of our company and thereby trigger the payment of the performance fee, which could have the effect of delaying, deferring or preventing the change of control.

There is no separate counsel for us and our affiliates, which could result in conflicts of interest.

Morris, Manning & Martin, LLP acts as legal counsel to us and also represents our Advisor and some of its affiliates. There is a possibility in the future that the interests of the various parties may become adverse and, under the Code of Professional Responsibility of the legal profession, Morris, Manning & Martin, LLP may be precluded from representing any one or all such parties. If any situation arises in which our interests appear to be in conflict with those of our Advisor or its affiliates, additional counsel may be retained by one or more of the parties to assure that their interests are adequately protected. Moreover, should a conflict of interest not be readily apparent, Morris, Manning & Martin, LLP may inadvertently act in derogation of the interest of the parties, which could affect our ability to meet our investment objectives.

Risks Related to Our Offering and Our Corporate Structure

The limit on the number of shares a person may own may discourage a takeover that could otherwise result in a premium price to our stockholders and may hinder a stockholder's ability to dispose of his or her shares.

Our charter, with certain exceptions, authorizes our directors to take such actions as are necessary and desirable to preserve our qualification as a REIT. In this respect, among other things, unless exempted (prospectively or retroactively) by our board of directors, no person may own more than 9.8% in value of the aggregate of our outstanding shares of stock or more than 9.8% (in value or number, whichever is more restrictive) of the aggregate of the outstanding shares of our common stock. This restriction may have the effect of delaying, deferring or preventing a change in control of us, including an extraordinary transaction (such as a merger, tender offer or sale of all or substantially all our assets) that might provide a premium price for holders of our common stock, and may make it more difficult for a stockholder to sell or dispose of his or her shares.

Our charter permits our board of directors to issue stock with terms that may subordinate the rights of common stockholders or discourage a third party from acquiring us in a manner that might result in a premium price to our stockholders.

Our charter permits our board of directors to issue up to 500,000,000 shares of common stock, of which 200,000,000 are designated as Class A shares, 100,000,000 are designated as Class I shares, and 200,000,000 are designated as Class T shares, and 100,000,000 shares of preferred stock. In addition, our board of directors, without any action by our stockholders, may amend our charter from time to time to increase or decrease the aggregate number of shares or the number of shares of any class or series of stock that we have authority to issue. Our board of directors may classify or reclassify any unissued common

stock or preferred stock into other classes or series of stock and establish the preferences, conversion or other rights, voting powers, restrictions, limitations as to dividends or other distributions, qualifications and terms and conditions of repurchase of any such stock. Thus, if also approved by a majority of our independent directors not otherwise interested in the transaction, who will have access, at our expense, to our legal counsel or independent legal counsel, our board of directors could authorize the issuance of additional preferred stock with terms and conditions that could have a priority as to distributions and amounts payable upon liquidation over the rights of the holders of our common stock. Preferred stock could also have the effect of delaying, deferring or preventing a change in control of us, including an extraordinary transaction (such as a merger, tender offer or sale of all or substantially all our assets) that might provide a premium price for holders of our common stock.

Maryland law prohibits certain business combinations, which may make it more difficult for us to be acquired and may limit our stockholders’ ability to exit the investment.

The Maryland Business Combination Act provides that certain business combinations between a Maryland corporation and an interested stockholder or an affiliate of an interested stockholder are prohibited for five years after the most recent date on which the interested stockholder becomes an interested stockholder. These business combinations include a merger, consolidation, share exchange or, in circumstances specified in the statute, an asset transfer or issuance or reclassification of equity securities. An interested stockholder is defined as:

A person is not an interested stockholder under the statute if our board of directors approved in advance the transaction by which the person otherwise would have become an interested stockholder. However, in approving a transaction, our board of directors may provide that its approval is subject to compliance, at or after the time of the approval, with any terms and conditions determined by our board of directors.

After the five-year prohibition, any such business combination between the Maryland corporation and an interested stockholder generally must be recommended by our board of directors of the corporation and approved by the affirmative vote of at least:

These super-majority vote requirements do not apply if the corporation’s common stockholders receive a minimum price, as defined under the Maryland Business Combination Act, for their shares in the form of cash or other consideration in the same form as previously paid by the interested stockholder for its shares. The Maryland Business Combination Act permits various exemptions from its provisions, including business combinations that are exempted by our board of directors prior to the time that the interested stockholder becomes an interested stockholder. Our board of directors has exempted from the Maryland Business Combination Act any business combination involving our Advisor or any of its affiliates. Consequently, the five-year prohibition and the super-majority vote requirements will not apply to business combinations between us and our Advisor or any of its affiliates. As a result, our Advisor and any of its affiliates may be able to enter into business combinations with us that may not be in the best interests of our stockholders, without compliance with the super-majority vote requirements and the other provisions of the Maryland Business Combination Act. The Maryland Business Combination Act may discourage others from trying to acquire control of us and increase the difficulty of consummating any offer.

Maryland law limits the ability of a third-party to buy a large stake in us and exercise voting power in electing directors.

The Maryland Control Share Acquisition Act provides that a holder of "control shares" of a Maryland corporation acquired in a "control share acquisition" has no voting rights except to the extent approved by stockholders by a vote of two-thirds of the votes entitled to be cast on the matter. Shares of stock owned by the acquirer, by officers or by employees who are directors of the corporation are excluded from shares entitled to vote on the matter. "Control shares" are voting shares of stock which, if aggregated with all other shares of stock owned by the acquirer or in respect of which the acquirer can exercise or direct the exercise of voting power (except solely by virtue of a revocable proxy), would entitle the acquirer, directly or indirectly, to exercise or direct the exercise of voting power of shares of stock in electing directors within specified ranges of voting power. Control shares do not include shares the acquiring person is then entitled to vote as a result of having previously obtained stockholder approval. A "control share acquisition" means the acquisition of issued and outstanding control shares. The Maryland Control Share Acquisition Act does not apply (a) to shares acquired in a merger, consolidation or statutory share

exchange if the corporation is a party to the transaction, or (b) to acquisitions approved or exempted by the charter or bylaws of the corporation. Our bylaws contain a provision exempting from the Maryland Control Share Acquisition Act any and all acquisitions of our stock by any person. There can be no assurance that this provision will not be amended or eliminated at any time in the future.

Our stockholders’ investment return may be reduced if we are required to register as an investment company under the Investment Company Act.

Neither we nor any of our subsidiaries are registered, and do not intend to register, as an investment company under the Investment Company Act. If we or any of our subsidiaries become obligated to register as an investment company, we would have to comply with a variety of substantive requirements under the Investment Company Act imposing, among other things:

We intend to continue to conduct our operations directly and through our wholly or majority-owned subsidiaries, so that we and each of our subsidiaries do not fall within the definition of an "investment company" under the Investment Company Act. Under Section 3(a)(1)(A) of the Investment Company Act, a company is deemed to be an "investment company" if it is, or holds itself out as being, engaged primarily, or proposes to engage primarily, in the business of investing, reinvesting or trading in securities. Under Section 3(a)(1)(C) of the Investment Company Act, a company is deemed to be an "investment company" if it is engaged, or proposes to engage, in the business of investing, reinvesting, owning, holding or trading in securities and owns or proposes to acquire "investment securities" having a value exceeding 40% of the value of its total assets (exclusive of government securities and cash items) on an unconsolidated basis, or the "40% Test."

We intend to continue to conduct our operations so that we and most, if not all, of our wholly and majority-owned subsidiaries will comply with the 40% Test. We will continuously monitor our holdings on an ongoing basis to determine that we and each of our wholly and majority-owned subsidiaries comply with this test. We expect that most, if not all, of our wholly-owned and majority-owned subsidiaries will not be relying on exemptions under either Section 3(c)(1) or 3(c)(7) of the Investment Company Act. Consequently, interests in these subsidiaries (which are expected to constitute most, if not all, of our assets) generally will not constitute "investment securities." Accordingly, we believe that we and most, if not all, of our wholly and majority-owned subsidiaries will not be considered investment companies under Section 3(a)(1)(C) of the Investment Company Act.

Since we are primarily engaged in the business of acquiring real estate, we believe that we and most, if not all, of our wholly and majority-owned subsidiaries will not be considered investment companies under Section 3(a)(1)(A) of the Investment Company Act. If we or any of our wholly or majority-owned subsidiaries would ever inadvertently fall within one of the definitions of "investment company," we intend to rely on the exception provided by Section 3(c)(5)(C) of the Investment Company Act.

Under Section 3(c)(5)(C), the SEC staff generally requires a company to maintain at least 55% of its assets directly in qualifying assets and at least 80% of the entity’s assets in qualifying assets and in a broader category of real estate-related assets to qualify for this exception. Mortgage-related securities may or may not constitute such qualifying assets, depending on the characteristics of the mortgage-related securities, including the rights that we have with respect to the underlying loans. Our ownership of mortgage-related securities, therefore, is limited by provisions of the Investment Company Act and SEC staff interpretations.

The method we use to classify our assets for purposes of the Investment Company Act will be based in large measure upon no-action positions taken by the SEC staff in the past. These no-action positions were issued in accordance with factual situations that may be substantially different from the factual situations we may face, and a number of these no-action positions were issued more than twenty years ago. Accordingly, no assurance can be given that the SEC staff will concur with our classification of our assets. In addition, the SEC staff may, in the future, issue further guidance that may require us to re-classify our assets for purposes of qualifying for an exclusion from regulation under the Investment Company Act. If we are required to re-classify our assets, we may no longer be in compliance with the exclusion from the definition of an "investment company" provided by Section 3(c)(5)(C) of the Investment Company Act.

A change in the value of any of our assets could cause us or one or more of our wholly or majority-owned subsidiaries to fall within the definition of an "investment company" and negatively affect our ability to maintain our exemption from regulation under the Investment Company Act. To avoid being required to register the Company or any of our subsidiaries as an investment company under the Investment Company Act, we may be unable to sell assets we would otherwise want to sell and

may need to sell assets we would otherwise wish to retain. In addition, we may have to acquire additional income- or loss-generating assets that we might not otherwise have acquired or may have to forgo opportunities to acquire interests in companies that we would otherwise want to acquire and would be important to our investment strategy.

To the extent that the SEC staff provides more specific guidance regarding any of the matters bearing upon the definition of investment company and the exceptions to that definition, we may be required to adjust our investment strategy accordingly. For example, on August 31, 2011, the SEC issued a concept release requesting comments regarding a number of matters relating to the exemption provided by Section 3(c)(5)(C) of the Investment Company Act, including the nature of assets that qualify for purposes of the exemption and whether mortgage REITs should be regulated in a manner similar to investment companies. Additional guidance from the SEC staff could provide additional flexibility to us, or it could further inhibit our ability to pursue the investment strategy we have chosen.

If we are required to register as an investment company but fail to do so, we will be prohibited from engaging in our business, and criminal and civil actions could be brought against us. In addition, our contracts would be unenforceable unless a court required enforcement, and a court could appoint a receiver to take control of us and liquidate our business.

The change in U.S. accounting standards for leases could reduce the overall demand to lease our properties.

The existing accounting standards for leases require lessees to classify their leases as either capital or operating leases. Under a capital lease, both the leased asset, which represents the tenant’s right to use the property, and the contractual lease obligation are recorded on the tenant’s balance sheet if one of the following criteria are met: (i) the lease transfers ownership of the property to the lessee by the end of the lease term; (ii) the lease contains a bargain purchase option; (iii) the non-cancellable lease term is more than 75% of the useful life of the asset; or (iv) the present value of the minimum lease payments equals 90% or more of the leased property’s fair value. If the terms of the lease do not meet these criteria, the lease is considered an operating lease, and no leased asset or contractual lease obligation is recorded by the tenant.

In order to address concerns raised by the SEC regarding the transparency of contractual lease obligations under the existing accounting standards for operating leases, the U.S. Financial Accounting Standards Board, or FASB, issued Accounting Standards Update, or ASU, 2016-02, Leases , or ASU 2016-02, on February 25, 2016, which substantially changes the current lease accounting standards, primarily by eliminating the concept of operating lease accounting. As a result, a lease asset and obligation will be recorded on the tenant’s balance sheet for all lease arrangements. In addition, ASU 2016-02 will impact the method in which contractual lease payments will be recorded. In order to mitigate the effect of the new lease accounting, tenants may seek to negotiate certain terms within new lease arrangements or modify terms in existing lease arrangements, such as shorter lease terms, which would generally have less impact on tenant balance sheets. Also, tenants may reassess their lease-versus-buy strategies. This could result in a greater renewal risk, a delay in investing our Offering proceeds, or shorter lease terms, all of which may negatively impact our operations and our ability to pay distributions to our stockholders. The leasing standard is effective on January 1, 2019, with early adoption permitted. We are in the process of evaluating the impact the adoption of ASU 2016-02 will have on our consolidated financial statements.

If our stockholders do not agree with the decisions of our board of directors, our stockholders will only have limited control over changes in our policies and operations and may not be able to change such policies and operations.

Our board of directors determines our major policies, including our policies regarding investments, financing, growth, debt capitalization, REIT qualification and distributions. Our board of directors may amend or revise these and other policies without a vote of the stockholders except to the extent that such policies are set forth in our charter. Under the Maryland General Corporation Law and our charter, our stockholders have a right to vote only on the following:

All other matters are subject to the discretion of our board of directors.

Our board of directors may change our investment policies without stockholder approval, which could alter the nature of our stockholders' investments.

Our charter requires that our independent directors review our investment policies at least annually to determine that the policies we are following are in the best interest of the stockholders. These policies may change over time. The methods of implementing our investment objectives and strategies also may vary, as new real estate development trends emerge and new investment techniques are developed. Except to the extent that policies and investment limitations are included in our charter, our investment policies, the methods for their implementation, and our other objectives, policies and procedures may be altered by our board of directors without the approval of our stockholders. As a result, the nature of our stockholders' investment could change without their consent.

Because of our holding company structure, we depend on our operating subsidiary and its subsidiaries for cash flow and we will be structurally subordinated in right of payment to the obligations of such operating subsidiary and its subsidiaries.

We are a holding company with no business operations of our own. Our only significant asset is and will be the general partnership interests of our Operating Partnership. We intend to conduct substantially all of our business operations through our Operating Partnership. Accordingly, our only source of cash to pay our obligations will be distributions from our Operating Partnership and its subsidiaries of their net earnings and cash flows. We cannot give assurance that our Operating Partnership or its subsidiaries will be able to, or be permitted to, make distributions to us that will enable us to make distributions to our stockholders from cash flows from operations. Each of our Operating Partnership’s subsidiaries will be a distinct legal entity and, under certain circumstances, legal and contractual restrictions may limit our ability to obtain cash from such entities. In addition, because we are a holding company, stockholders’ claims as stockholders will be structurally subordinated to all existing and future liabilities and obligations of our Operating Partnership and its subsidiaries. Therefore, in the event of our bankruptcy, liquidation or reorganization, our assets and those of our Operating Partnership and its subsidiaries will be able to satisfy our stockholders’ claims as stockholders only after all of our and our Operating Partnership’s and its subsidiaries’ liabilities and obligations have been paid in full.

Our stockholders’ interest in us will be diluted if we issue additional shares.

Existing stockholders and potential investors in our Offering do not have preemptive rights to any shares issued by us in the future. Our charter authorizes 600,000,000 shares of stock, of which 500,000,000 shares are classified as common stock and 100,000,000 are classified as preferred stock. Of the 500,000,000 shares of common stock, 200,000,000 shares are designated as Class A shares, 100,000,000 shares are designated as Class I shares, and 200,000,000 shares are designated as Class T shares. Other than the differing fees with respect to each class and the payment of a distribution and servicing fee out of cash otherwise distributable to Class T stockholders, Class A shares, Class I shares and Class T shares have identical rights and privileges, such as identical voting rights. The net proceeds from the sale of the three classes of shares will be commingled for investment purposes and all earnings from all of the investments will proportionally accrue to each share regardless of the class. Subject to any limitations set forth under Maryland law, our board of directors may amend our charter from time to time to increase or decrease the aggregate number of authorized shares of stock or the number of shares of any class or series of stock that we have authority to issue, or reclassify any unissued shares into other classes or series of stock without the necessity of obtaining stockholder approval. All such shares may be issued in the discretion of our board of directors except that issuance of preferred stock must also be approved by a majority of our independent directors not otherwise interested in the transaction, who will have access, at our expense, to our legal counsel or to independent legal counsel. Further, we have adopted the Carter Validus Mission Critical REIT II, Inc. 2014 Restricted Share Plan, or the Incentive Plan, pursuant to which we will have the power and authority to grant restricted or deferred stock awards to persons eligible under the Incentive Plan. We have authorized and reserved 300,000 of our Class A shares for issuance under the Incentive Plan and we granted 3,000 restricted shares of Class A common stock to each of our independent directors at the time we satisfied the minimum offering requirement and broke escrow and we granted 3,000 restricted shares of Class A common stock to each of our independent directors when they were re-elected to the board of directors. We will also grant 3,000 shares of Class A common stock in connection with such independent director’s subsequent election or re-election, as applicable. Existing stockholders and investors purchasing shares in our Offering likely will suffer dilution of their equity investment in us, if we:

In addition, the partnership agreement for our Operating Partnership contains provisions that would allow, under certain circumstances, other entities, including other programs affiliated with our Advisor and its affiliates, to merge into or cause the exchange or conversion of their interest for interests of our Operating Partnership. Because the limited partnership interests of our Operating Partnership may, in the discretion of our board of directors, be exchanged for shares of our common stock, any merger, exchange or conversion between our Operating Partnership and another entity ultimately could result in the issuance of a substantial number of shares of our common stock, thereby diluting the percentage ownership interest of other stockholders. Because of these and other reasons described herein, stockholders should not expect to be able to own a significant percentage of shares.

If we internalize our management functions, the percentage of our outstanding common stock owned by our other stockholders could be reduced, and we could incur other significant costs associated with being self-administered.

In the future, our board of directors may consider internalizing the functions performed for us by our Advisor. The method by which we could internalize these functions could take many forms, including without limitation, acquiring our Advisor. There is no assurance that internalizing our management functions would be beneficial to us and our stockholders. Any internalization transaction could result in significant payments to the owners of our Advisor, including in the form of our stock, which could reduce the percentage ownership of our then existing stockholders and concentrate ownership in the owner of our Advisor. Additionally, we may not realize the perceived benefits, we may not be able to properly integrate a new staff of managers and employees or we may not be able to effectively replicate the services provided previously by our Advisor, Property Manager or their affiliates. Internalization transactions involving the acquisition of advisors or property managers affiliated with entity sponsors have also, in some cases, been the subject of litigation. Even if these claims are without merit, we could be forced to spend significant amounts of money defending claims, which would reduce the amount of funds available for us to invest in properties or other investments and to pay distributions. All of these factors could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial condition and ability to pay distributions to our stockholders.

Payment of fees and expenses to our Advisor and our Property Manager will reduce the cash available for distribution and will increase the risk that our stockholders will not be able to recover the amount of their investment in our shares.

Our Advisor and our Property Manager perform services for us in connection with our Offering, including, among other things, the selection and acquisition of our investments, the management of our assets, dispositions of assets, financing of our assets and certain administrative services. We will pay our Advisor and our Property Manager fees and expense reimbursements for these services, which will reduce the amount of cash available for further investments or distribution to our stockholders.

We may be unable to pay or maintain cash distributions or increase distributions over time.

There are many factors that can affect the availability and timing of cash distributions to stockholders. Until we acquire additional properties or other real estate-related investments, we may not generate enough cash flow from operations from which to pay distributions. The amount of cash available for distributions is affected by many factors, such as our ability to buy properties as offering proceeds become available, rental income from such properties and our operating expense levels, as well as many other variables. Actual cash available for distributions may vary substantially from estimates. We cannot assure our stockholders that we will be able to pay or maintain our current level of distributions or that distributions will increase over time. We also cannot give any assurance that rents from our properties will increase, that the securities we buy will increase in value or provide constant or increased distributions over time, or that future acquisitions of real properties or any investments in securities will increase our cash available for distributions to stockholders. Our actual results may differ significantly from the assumptions used by our board of directors in establishing the distribution rate to stockholders. We may not have sufficient cash from operations to make a distribution required to maintain our REIT status. We may make distributions from the proceeds of our Offering or from borrowings in anticipation of future cash flow. Any such distributions will constitute a return of capital and may reduce the amount of capital we ultimately invest in properties and negatively impact the value of our stockholders’ investment.

Our Dealer Manager is one of our affiliates; therefore, stockholders will not have the benefit of the type of independent review of the Offering or us as customarily performed in underwritten offerings.

Our Dealer Manager is one of our affiliates and will not conduct an independent review of us or the Offering. Accordingly, stockholders will have to rely on his or her own broker-dealer to conduct an independent review of the terms of this Offering. If a stockholder's broker-dealer does not conduct such a review, the stockholder will not have the benefit of an independent review of the terms of this Offering. Further, the due diligence investigation of us by our Dealer Manager cannot be considered to be an independent review and, therefore, may not be as meaningful as a review conducted by an unaffiliated broker-dealer or investment banker. In addition, we do not, and do not expect to, have research analysts reviewing our

performance or our securities on an ongoing basis. Therefore, stockholders will not have an independent review of our performance and the value of our common stock relative to publicly traded companies.

General Risks Related to Investments in Real Estate

Our operating results will be affected by economic and regulatory changes that have an adverse impact on the real estate market in general, which may prevent us from being profitable or from realizing growth in the value of our real estate properties.

Our operating results are subject to risks generally incident to the ownership of real estate, including:

These and other reasons may prevent us from being profitable or from realizing growth or maintaining the value of our real estate properties.

If a tenant declares bankruptcy, we may be unable to collect balances due under relevant leases, which would reduce our cash flow from operations and the amount available for distributions to our stockholders.

Any of our tenants, or any guarantor of a tenant’s lease obligations, could be subject to a bankruptcy proceeding pursuant to Title 11 of the bankruptcy laws of the United States. Such a bankruptcy filing would bar all efforts by us to collect pre-bankruptcy debts from these entities or their properties, unless we receive an enabling order from the bankruptcy court. Post-bankruptcy debts would be paid currently. If a lease is assumed, all pre-bankruptcy balances owing under it must be paid in full. If a lease is rejected by a tenant in bankruptcy, we would have a general unsecured claim for damages. If a lease is rejected, it is unlikely we would receive any payments from the tenant because our claim is capped at the rent reserved under the lease, without acceleration, for the greater of one year or 15% of the remaining term of the lease, but not greater than three years, plus rent already due but unpaid. This claim could be paid only if funds were available, and then only in the same percentage as that realized on other unsecured claims.

A tenant or lease guarantor bankruptcy could delay efforts to collect past due balances under the relevant leases, and could ultimately preclude full collection of these sums. Such an event could cause a decrease or cessation of rental payments that would mean a reduction in our cash flow and the amount available for distributions to our stockholders. In the event of a bankruptcy, we cannot give assurance that the tenant or its trustee will assume our lease. If a given lease, or guaranty of a lease, is not assumed, our cash flow and the amounts available for distributions to our stockholders may be adversely affected.

Our investments in properties where the underlying tenant has below investment grade credit rating, as determined by major c redit rating agencies, or unrated tenants, may have a greater risk of default.

As of December 31, 2016, approximately 6.2% of our tenants had an investment grade credit rating from a major ratings agency, 18.3% of our tenants were rated but did not have an investment grade credit rating from a major ratings agency and 75.5% of our tenants are not rated.  Approximately 23.8% of our non-rated tenants were affiliates of companies having an investment grade credit rating. Our investments with tenants that do not have an investment grade credit rating from a major ratings agency or were not rated and are not affiliated with companies having an investment grade credit rating may have a greater risk of default and bankruptcy than investments in properties leased exclusively to investment grade tenants. When we invest in properties where the tenant does not have a publicly available credit rating, we use certain credit assessment tools as well as rely on our own estimates of the tenant’s credit rating which includes reviewing the tenant’s financial information (i.e., financial ratios, net worth, revenue, cash flows, leverage and liquidity). If our lender or a credit rating agency disagrees with our ratings estimates, or our ratings estimates are otherwise inaccurate, we may not be able to obtain our desired level of leverage or our financing costs may exceed those that we projected. This outcome could have an adverse impact on our returns on that asset and hence our operating results.

If a sale-leaseback transaction is re-characterized in a tenant’s bankruptcy proceeding, our financial condition could be adversely affected.

We have entered and may continue to enter into sale-leaseback transactions, whereby we would purchase a property and then lease the same property back to the person from whom we purchased it. In the event of the bankruptcy of a tenant, a transaction structured as a sale-leaseback may be re-characterized as either a financing or a joint venture, either of which

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

Properties that have vacancies for a significant period of time could be difficult to sell, which could diminish the return on our stockholders’ investment.

A property may incur vacancies either by the continued default of tenants under their leases or the expiration of tenant leases. If vacancies continue for a long period of time, we may suffer reduced revenues, resulting in less cash to be distributed to stockholders. In addition, because properties’ market values depend principally upon the value of the properties’ leases, the resale value of properties with prolonged vacancies could suffer, which could further reduce our stockholders’ return.

We may obtain only limited warranties when we purchase a property and would have only limited recourse if our due diligence did not identify any issues that lower the value of our property.

The seller of a property often sells such property in its “as is” condition on a “where is” basis and “with all faults,” without any warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular use or purpose. In addition, purchase agreements may contain only limited warranties, representations and indemnifications that will only survive for a limited period after the closing. The purchase of properties with limited warranties increases the risk that we may lose some or all of our invested capital in the property as well as the loss of rental income from that property.

We may be unable to secure funds for future tenant improvements or capital needs, which could adversely impact our ability to pay cash distributions to our stockholders.

When tenants do not renew their leases or otherwise vacate their space, it is usual that, in order to attract replacement tenants, we will be required to expend substantial funds for tenant improvements and tenant refurbishments to the vacated space. In addition, although we expect that our leases with tenants will require tenants to pay routine property maintenance costs, we will likely be responsible for any major structural repairs, such as repairs to the foundation, exterior walls and rooftops. We will use substantially all of our Offering’s gross proceeds to buy real estate and pay various fees and expenses. Accordingly, if we need additional capital in the future to improve or maintain our properties or for any other reason, we will have to obtain financing from other sources, such as cash flow from operations, borrowings, property sales or future equity offerings. These sources of funding may not be available on attractive terms or at all. If we cannot procure additional funding for capital improvements, our investments may generate lower cash flows or decline in value, or both.

Our inability to sell a property when we desire to do so could adversely impact our ability to pay cash distributions to our stockholders.

The real estate market is affected by many factors, such as general economic conditions, availability of financing, interest rates and other factors, including supply and demand, that are beyond our control. We cannot predict whether we will be able to sell any property for the price or on the terms set by us, or whether any price or other terms offered by a prospective purchaser would be acceptable to us. We cannot predict the length of time needed to find a willing purchaser and to close the sale of a property.

We may be required to expend funds to correct defects or to make improvements before a property can be sold. We cannot give assurance that we will have funds available to correct such defects or to make such improvements. Moreover, in acquiring a property, we may agree to restrictions that prohibit the sale of that property for a period of time or impose other restrictions, such as a limitation on the amount of debt that can be placed or repaid on that property. These provisions would restrict our ability to sell a property.

We may not be able to sell a property at a price equal to, or greater than, the price for which we purchased such property, which may lead to a decrease in the value of our assets and a reduction in the value of shares held by our stockholders.

Some of our leases will not contain rental increases over time, or the rental increases may be less than the fair market rate at a future point in time. Therefore, the value of the property to a potential purchaser may not increase over time, which may restrict our ability to sell a property, or if we are able to sell such property, may lead to a sale price less than the price that we paid to purchase the property.

We may acquire or finance properties with lock-out provisions, which may prohibit us from selling a property, or may require us to maintain specified debt levels for a period of years on some properties.

A lock-out provision is a provision that prohibits the prepayment of a loan during a specified period of time. Lock-out provisions could materially restrict us from selling or otherwise disposing of or refinancing properties. These provisions would affect our ability to turn our investments into cash and thus affect cash available for distributions to our stockholders. Lock-out provisions may prohibit us from reducing the outstanding indebtedness with respect to any properties, refinancing such indebtedness on a non-recourse basis at maturity, or increasing the amount of indebtedness with respect to such properties. Lock-out provisions could impair our ability to take other actions during the lock-out period that could be in the best interests of our stockholders and, therefore, may have an adverse impact on the value of the shares, relative to the value that would result if the lock-out provisions did not exist. In particular, lock-out provisions could preclude us from participating in major transactions that could result in a disposition of our assets or a change in control even though that disposition or change in control might be in the best interests of our stockholders.

Rising expenses could reduce cash flow and funds available for future acquisitions or distributions to our stockholders.

Our properties and any other properties that we buy in the future will be subject to operating risks common to real estate in general, any or all of which may negatively affect us. If any property is not fully occupied or if rents are being paid in an amount that is insufficient to cover operating expenses, we could be required to expend funds with respect to that property for operating expenses. The properties will be subject to increases in tax rates, utility costs, operating expenses, insurance costs, repairs and maintenance and administrative expenses. While we expect that many of our properties will continue to be leased on a triple net lease basis or require the tenants to pay all or a portion of such expenses, renewals of leases or future leases may not be negotiated on that basis, in which event we may have to pay those costs. If we are unable to lease properties on a triple net lease basis or on a basis requiring the tenants to pay all or some of such expenses, or if tenants fail to pay required tax, utility and other impositions, we could be required to pay those costs, which could adversely affect funds available for future acquisitions or cash available for distributions.

If we suffer losses that are not covered by insurance or that are in excess of insurance coverage, we could lose invested capital and anticipated profits.

We will carry comprehensive general liability coverage and umbrella liability coverage on all our properties with limits of liability which we deem adequate to insure against liability claims and provide for the costs of defense. Similarly, we are insured against the risk of direct physical damage in amounts we estimate to be adequate to reimburse us on a replacement cost basis for costs incurred to repair or rebuild each property, including loss of rental income during the rehabilitation period. Material losses may occur in excess of insurance proceeds with respect to any property, as insurance may not be sufficient to fund the losses. However, there are types of losses, generally of a catastrophic nature, such as losses due to wars, acts of terrorism, earthquakes, floods, hurricanes, pollution or environmental matters, which are either uninsurable or not economically insurable, or may be insured subject to limitations, such as large deductibles or co-payments. Insurance risks associated with potential terrorism acts could sharply increase the premiums we will pay for coverage against property and casualty claims. Additionally, mortgage lenders in some cases have begun to insist that commercial property owners purchase specific coverage against terrorism as a condition for providing mortgage loans. It is uncertain whether such insurance policies will be available, or available at reasonable cost, which could inhibit our ability to finance or refinance our potential properties. In these instances, we may be required to provide other financial support, either through financial assurances or self-insurance, to cover potential losses. We may not have adequate, or any, coverage for such losses. The Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002 is designed for a sharing of terrorism losses between insurance companies and the federal government, and extends the federal terrorism insurance backstop through December 31, 2020, pursuant to the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2015. We cannot be certain how this act will impact us or what additional cost to us, if any, could result. If such an event damaged or destroyed one or more of our properties, we could lose both our invested capital and anticipated profits from such property.

Real estate-related taxes may increase and if these increases are not passed on to tenants, our income will be reduced.

Some local real property tax assessors may seek to reassess some of our properties as a result of our acquisition of such properties. From time to time our property taxes may increase as property values or assessment rates change or for other reasons deemed relevant by the assessors. An increase in the assessed valuation of a property for real estate tax purposes will result in an increase in the related real estate taxes on that property. Although some tenant leases may permit us to pass through such tax increases to the tenants for payment, there is no assurance that renewal leases or future leases will be negotiated on the same basis. Increases not passed through to tenants will adversely affect our income, cash available for distributions, and the amount of distributions to our stockholders.

Covenants, conditions and restrictions may restrict our ability to operate our properties.

Some of our properties may be contiguous to other parcels of real property, comprising part of the same commercial center. In connection with such properties, there are significant covenants, conditions and restrictions, or "CC&Rs," restricting the operation of such properties and any improvements on such properties, and related to granting easements on such properties. Moreover, the operation and management of the contiguous properties may impact such properties. Compliance with CC&Rs may adversely affect our operating costs and reduce the amount of funds that we have available to pay distributions.

Our operating results may be negatively affected by potential development and construction delays and result in increased costs and risks.

We may use proceeds from our Offering to acquire and develop properties upon which we will construct improvements. We will be subject to uncertainties associated with re-zoning for development, environmental concerns of governmental entities and/or community groups, and our builder’s ability to build in conformity with plans, specifications, budgeted costs, and timetables. A builder’s performance also may be affected or delayed by conditions beyond the builder’s control. Delays in completion of construction could also give tenants the right to terminate preconstruction leases. We may incur additional risks when we make periodic progress payments or other advances to builders before they complete construction. These and other such factors can result in increased costs of a project or loss of our investment. In addition, we will be subject to normal lease-up risks relating to newly constructed projects. We also must rely on rental income and expense projections and estimates of the fair market value of property upon completion of construction when agreeing upon a price at the time we acquire the property. If our projections are inaccurate, we may pay too much for a property, and our return on our investment could suffer.

We may invest in unimproved real property, subject to the limitations on investments in unimproved real property contained in our charter. For purposes of this paragraph, "unimproved real property" is real property which has not been acquired for the purpose of producing rental or other operating income, has no development or construction in process and on which no construction or development is planned in good faith to commence within one year. Returns from development of unimproved properties are also subject to risks associated with re-zoning the land for development and environmental concerns of governmental entities and/or community groups. Although we intend to limit any investment in unimproved property to property we intend to develop, our stockholders’ investment nevertheless is subject to the risks associated with investments in unimproved real property.

Competition with third parties in acquiring properties and other investments may impede our ability to make future acquisitions or may increase the cost of these acquisitions and reduce our profitability and the return on our stockholders’ investment.

We compete with many other entities engaged in real estate investment activities, including individuals, corporations, bank and insurance company investment accounts, other REITs, real estate limited partnerships, other entities engaged in real estate investment activities and private equity firms, many of which have greater resources than we do. Competition for properties may significantly increase the price we must pay for properties or other assets we seek to acquire and our competitors may succeed in acquiring those properties or assets themselves. In addition, our potential acquisition targets may find our competitors to be more attractive because they may have greater resources, may be willing to pay more for the properties or may have a more compatible operating philosophy. Larger entities may enjoy significant competitive advantages that result from, among other things, a lower cost of capital and enhanced operating efficiencies. Further, the number of entities and the amount of funds competing for suitable investments may increase. This competition will result in increased demand for these assets and therefore increased prices paid for them. Because of an increased interest in single-property acquisitions among tax-motivated individual purchasers, we may pay higher prices if we purchase single properties in comparison with portfolio acquisitions. If we pay higher prices for properties and other investments, our profitability will be reduced and our stockholders may experience a lower return on their investment.

We will be subject to additional risks of our joint venture partner or partners when we enter into a joint venture, which could reduce the value of our investment.

We may enter into joint ventures with other real estate groups. The success of a particular joint venture may be limited if our joint venture partner becomes bankrupt or otherwise is unable to perform its obligations in accordance with the terms of the particular joint venture arrangement. The joint venture partner may have economic or business interests or goals that are or may become inconsistent with our business interests or goals. In addition, a dispute with our joint venture partners may result in litigation, which may cause us to incur additional expenses, require additional time and resources from our Advisor and result in liability, each of which could adversely affect our operating results and the value of our stockholders’ investment. In addition, we may assume liabilities related to the joint venture that exceed the percentage of our investment in the joint venture.

Our properties face competition that may affect tenants’ willingness to pay the amount of rent requested by us and the amount of rent paid to us may affect the cash available for distributions and the amount of distributions.

There will be numerous other properties within the market area of each of our properties that will compete with us for tenants. The number of competitive properties could have a material effect on our ability to rent space at our properties and the amount of rents charged. We could be adversely affected if additional competitive properties are built in locations competitive with our properties, causing increased competition for customer traffic and creditworthy tenants. This could result in decreased cash flow from tenants and may require us to make capital improvements to properties that we would not have otherwise made, thus affecting cash available for distributions and the amount available for distributions to our stockholders.

Delays in acquisitions of properties may have an adverse effect on the value of our stockholders’ investment.

There may be a substantial period of time before all of the proceeds of our Offering are invested. Delays we encounter in the selection, acquisition and/or development of properties could adversely affect our stockholders’ returns. When properties are acquired prior to the start of construction or during the early stages of construction, it will typically take several months to complete construction and rent available space. Therefore, our stockholders could suffer delays in the payment of cash distributions attributable to those particular properties.

Costs of complying with governmental laws and regulations, including those relating to environmental matters, may adversely affect our income and the cash available for any distributions.

All real property and the operations conducted on real property are subject to federal, state and local laws and regulations relating to environmental protection and human health and safety. These laws and regulations generally govern wastewater discharges, air emissions, the operation and removal of underground and above-ground storage tanks, the use, storage, treatment, transportation and disposal of solid and hazardous materials, and the remediation of contamination associated with disposals. Environmental laws and regulations may impose joint and several liability on tenants, owners or operators for the costs to investigate or remediate contaminated properties, regardless of fault or whether the acts causing the contamination were legal. This liability could be substantial. In addition, the presence of hazardous substances, or the failure to properly remediate these substances, may adversely affect our ability to sell, rent or pledge such property as collateral for future borrowings.

Some of these laws and regulations have been amended so as to require compliance with new or more stringent standards as of future dates. Compliance with new or more stringent laws or regulations or stricter interpretation of existing laws may require material expenditures by us. Future laws, ordinances or regulations may impose material environmental liability. Additionally, our tenants’ operations, the existing condition of land when we buy it, operations in the vicinity of our properties, such as the presence of underground storage tanks, or activities of unrelated third parties, may affect our properties. In addition, there are various local, state and federal fire, health, life-safety and similar regulations with which we may be required to comply, and that may subject us to liability in the form of fines or damages for noncompliance. Any material expenditures, fines, or damages we must pay will reduce our ability to make distributions and may reduce the value of our stockholders’ investment.

One particular federal law is The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, or CERCLA, which established a regulatory and remedial program intended to provide for the investigation and clean-up of facilities where, or from which, a release of any hazardous substance into the environment has occurred or is threatened. CERCLA’s primary mechanism for remedying such problems is to impose strict joint and several liability for clean-up of facilities on current owners and operators of the site, former owners and operators of the site at the time of the disposal of the hazardous substances, any person who arranges for the transportation, disposal or treatment of the hazardous substances, and the transporters who select the disposal and treatment facilities, regardless of the care exercised by such persons. CERCLA also imposes liability for the cost of evaluating and remedying any damage to natural resources. The costs of CERCLA investigation and clean-up can be very substantial. CERCLA also authorizes the imposition of a lien in favor of the United States on all real property subject to, or affected by, a remedial action for all costs for which a party is liable. Subject to certain procedural restrictions, CERCLA gives a responsible party the right to bring a contribution action against other responsible parties for their allocable shares of investigative and remedial costs. Our ability to obtain reimbursement from others for their allocable shares of such costs would be limited by our ability to find other responsible parties and prove the extent of their responsibility, their financial resources, and other procedural requirements. Various state laws also impose strict joint and several liability for investigation, clean-up and other damages associated with hazardous substance releases.

State and federal laws in this area are constantly evolving, and we intend to monitor these laws and take commercially reasonable steps to protect ourselves from the impact of these laws, including obtaining environmental assessments of most properties that we acquire; however, we will not obtain an independent third-party environmental assessment for every property we acquire. In addition, any such assessment that we do obtain may not reveal all environmental liabilities or that a prior owner of a property did not create a material environmental condition not known to us. The cost of defending against claims of liability, of compliance with environmental regulatory requirements, of remediating any contaminated property, or of paying

personal injury claims would materially adversely affect our business, assets or results of operations and, consequently, amounts available for distribution to our stockholders.

If we sell properties by providing financing to purchasers, defaults by the purchasers would adversely affect our cash flows.

In some instances we may sell our properties by providing financing to purchasers. When we provide financing to purchasers, we will bear the risk that the purchaser may default, which could negatively impact our cash distributions to stockholders. Even in the absence of a purchaser default, the distribution of the proceeds of sales to our stockholders, or their reinvestment in other assets, will be delayed until the promissory notes or other property we may accept upon the sale are actually paid, sold, refinanced or otherwise disposed of. In some cases, we may receive initial down payments in cash and other property in the year of sale in an amount less than the selling price, and subsequent payments will be spread over a number of years. If any purchaser defaults under a financing arrangement with us, it could negatively impact our ability to pay cash distributions to our stockholders.

Our recovery of an investment in a mortgage loan that has defaulted may be limited.

There is no guarantee that the mortgage, loan or deed of trust securing an investment will, following a default, permit us to recover the original investment and interest that would have been received absent a default. The security provided by a mortgage, deed of trust or loan is directly related to the difference between the amount owed and the appraised market value of the property. Although we intend to rely on a current real estate appraisal when we make the investment, the value of the property is affected by factors outside our control, including general fluctuations in the real estate market, rezoning, neighborhood changes, highway relocations and failure by the borrower to maintain the property. In addition, we may incur the costs of litigation in our efforts to enforce our rights under defaulted loans.

Our costs associated with complying with the Americans with Disabilities Act may affect cash available for distributions.

Our properties are subject to the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, or the Disabilities Act. Under the Disabilities Act, all places of public accommodation are required to comply with federal requirements related to access and use by disabled persons. The Disabilities Act has separate compliance requirements for "public accommodations" and "commercial facilities" that generally require that buildings and services, including restaurants and retail stores, be made accessible and available to people with disabilities. The Disabilities Act’s requirements could require removal of access barriers and could result in the imposition of injunctive relief, monetary penalties, or, in some cases, an award of damages. We will attempt to acquire properties that comply with the Disabilities Act or place the burden on the seller or other third party, such as a tenant, to ensure compliance with the Disabilities Act. However, we cannot give assurance that we will be able to acquire properties or allocate responsibilities in this manner. If we cannot, our funds used for Disabilities Act compliance may affect cash available for distributions and the amount of distributions to our stockholders.

Risks Associated with Investments in the Healthcare Property Sector

Our real estate investments are currently concentrated in healthcare properties, making us more vulnerable economically than if our investments were diversified.

We are subject to risks inherent in concentrating investments in real estate. These risks resulting from a lack of diversification are even greater as a result of our business strategy to invest to a substantial degree in healthcare properties. A downturn in the commercial real estate industry generally could significantly adversely affect the value of our properties. A downturn in the healthcare industry could negatively affect our lessees’ ability to make lease payments to us and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders. These adverse effects could be more pronounced than if we diversified our investments outside of real estate or if our portfolio did not include a concentration in healthcare properties. Our investments in healthcare properties accounted for 79.5% of our contractual rental revenue for the year ended December 31, 2016 .

Certain of our properties may not have efficient alternative uses, so the loss of a tenant may cause us to not be able to find a replacement or cause us to spend considerable capital to adapt the property to an alternative use.

Some of the properties we have acquired and seek to acquire are healthcare properties that may only be suitable for similar healthcare-related tenants. If we or our tenants terminate the leases for these properties or our tenants lose their regulatory authority to operate such properties, we may not be able to locate suitable replacement tenants to lease the properties for their specialized uses. Alternatively, we may be required to spend substantial amounts to adapt the properties to other uses. Any loss of revenues or additional capital expenditures required as a result may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

Our healthcare properties and tenants may be unable to compete successfully, which could result in lower rent payments, reduce our cash flows from operations and amount available for distributions to our stockholders.

The healthcare properties we have acquired or seek to acquire in the future may face competition from nearby hospitals and other healthcare properties that provide comparable services. Some of those competing facilities are owned by governmental agencies and therefore are supported by tax revenues, and others are owned by non-profit corporations and therefore are supported to a large extent by endowments and charitable contributions. Not all of our properties will be affiliated with non-profit corporations and receive such support. Similarly, our tenants will face competition from other healthcare practices in nearby hospitals and other healthcare properties. Our tenants’ failure to compete successfully with these other practices could adversely affect their ability to make rental payments, which could adversely affect our rental revenues. Further, from time to time and for reasons beyond our control, referral sources, including physicians and managed care organizations, may change their lists of hospitals or physicians that are permitted to participate in the payer program. This could adversely affect our tenants’ ability to make rental payments, which could adversely affect our rental revenues. Any reduction in rental revenues resulting from the inability of our healthcare properties and our tenants to compete successfully may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

Reductions in reimbursement from third party payors, including Medicare and Medicaid, could adversely affect the profitability of our tenants and hinder their ability to make rental payments to us.

Sources of revenue for our tenants may include the federal Medicare program, state Medicaid programs, private insurance carriers and health maintenance organizations, among others. Efforts by such payors to reduce healthcare costs will likely continue, which may result in reductions or slower growth in reimbursement for certain services provided by some of our tenants. In addition, the healthcare billing rules and regulations are complex, and the failure of any of our tenants to comply with various laws and regulations could jeopardize their ability to continue participating in Medicare, Medicaid and other government sponsored payment programs. Moreover, the state and federal governmental healthcare programs are subject to reductions by state and federal legislative actions. The American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 prevented the reduction in physician reimbursement of Medicare from being implemented in 2013. The Protecting Access to Medicare Act of 2014 prevented the reduction of 24.4% in the physician fee schedule by replacing the scheduled reduction with a 0.5% increase to the physician fee schedule through December 31, 2014, and a 0% increase for January 1, 2015 through March 31, 2015. The potential 21.0% cut in reimbursement that was to be effective April 1, 2015 was removed by the Medicare Access & CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 (MACRA) and replaced with a new methodology that will focus upon payment based upon quality outcomes. The second payment model created by MACRA is the Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS), which will combine the PQRS and Meaningful Use program with the Value Based Modifier program to provide for one payment model based upon (i) quality; (ii) resource use; (iii) clinical practice improvement and (iv) advancing care information through the use of certified EHR technology.

The healthcare industry continues to face various challenges, including increased government and private payor pressure on healthcare providers to control or reduce costs. It is possible that our tenants will continue to experience a shift in payor mix away from fee-for-service payors, resulting in an increase in the percentage of revenues attributable to reimbursement based upon value based principles and quality driven managed care programs, and general industry trends that include pressures to control healthcare costs. The federal government's goal is to move approximately ninety percent (90%) of its reimbursement for providers to be based upon quality outcome models. Pressures to control healthcare costs and a shift away from traditional health insurance reimbursement to payment based upon quality outcomes have increased the uncertainty of payments.

In 2014, state insurance exchanges were implemented, which provide a new mechanism for individuals to obtain insurance. At this time, the number of payers that are participating in the state insurance exchanges varies, and in some regions there are very limited insurance plans available for individuals to choose from when purchasing insurance. In addition, not all healthcare providers will maintain participation agreements with the payers that are participating in the state health insurance exchange. Therefore, it is possible that our tenants may incur a change in their reimbursement if the tenant does not have a participation agreement with the state insurance exchange payers and a large number of individuals elect to purchase insurance from the state insurance exchange. Further, the rates of reimbursement from the state insurance exchange payers to healthcare providers will vary greatly. The rates of reimbursement will be subject to negotiation between the healthcare provider and the payer, which may vary based upon the market, the healthcare provider’s quality metrics, the number of providers participating in the area and the patient population, among other factors. Therefore, it is uncertain whether healthcare providers will incur a decrease in reimbursement from the state insurance exchange, which may impact a tenant’s ability to pay rent.

The insurance plans that participated on the health insurance exchanges created by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (“Healthcare Reform Act”) were expecting to receive risk corridor payments to address the high risk claims that it paid through the exchange product. However, the federal government currently owes the insurance companies approximately $8.3 billion under the risk corridor payment program that is current disputed by the federal government. The federal government is currently defending several lawsuits from the insurance plans that participate on the health insurance

exchange. If the insurance companies do not receive the payments, the insurance companies may cease to participate on the insurance exchange which limits insurance options for patients. If patients do not have access to insurance coverage it may adversely impact the tenant’s revenues and the tenant’s ability to pay rent.

In addition, the healthcare legislation passed in 2010 included new payment models with new shared savings programs and demonstration programs that include bundled payment models and payments contingent upon reporting on satisfaction of quality benchmarks. The new payment models will likely change how physicians are paid for services. These changes could have a material adverse effect on the financial condition of some or all of our tenants. The financial impact on our tenants could restrict their ability to make rent payments to us, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations and our ability to pay distributions to stockholders. 

Furthermore, beginning in 2016, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services applies a negative payment adjustment to individual eligible professionals, Comprehensive Primary Care practice sites, and group practices participating in the Physician Quality Reporting System, or PQRS, group practice reporting option (including Accountable Care Organizations) that did not satisfactorily report PQRS in 2014. Program participation during a calendar year will affect payments after two years, such that individuals and groups that receive the 2016 negative payment adjustment will not receive a 2014 PQRS incentive payment. Providers can appeal the determination, but if the provider is not successful, the provider’s reimbursement may be adversely impacted, which would adversely impact a tenant’s ability to make rent payments to us.

Moreover, President Trump signed an Executive Order on January 20, 2017 to “ease the burden of Obamacare”. At this time, the implications of this Executive Order are unknown, but it is possible that it may adversely impact the insurance exchanges or remove the requirement for all individuals to obtain insurance. If individuals are not required to have insurance or if the insurance exchange products are not available to the general public, our tenants would not have as many patients that have insurance coverage, which would adversely impact the tenant’s revenues and ability to pay rent.

On March 6, 2017, members of the House of Representatives presented legislation to repeal portions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, as amended (the "Healthcare Reform"). The proposed legislation is currently being reviewed and processed by the respective House of Representative committees. It is anticipated that the proposed legislation will be debated at length and that the final bill will likely have modifications from the proposed version. At this time, the proposal focuses upon, among other items, repealing the individual responsibility to purchase insurance, modifying employer obligations to purchase insurance and modifying the funding for Medicaid programs. All of the proposals may impact the number of individuals that have insurance to pay for healthcare services, which may impact our tenants' collections. If our tenants' patients do not have insurance, it may adversely impact the tenants' ability to pay rent and operate a practice.

The healthcare industry is heavily regulated, and new laws or regulations, changes to existing laws or regulations, loss of licensure or failure to obtain licensure could result in the inability of our tenants to make rent payments to us.

The healthcare industry is heavily regulated by federal, state and local governmental bodies. The tenants in our healthcare properties generally will be subject to laws and regulations covering, among other things, licensure, certification for participation in government programs, and relationships with physicians and other referral sources. Changes in these laws and regulations could negatively affect the ability of our tenants to make lease payments to us and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders. Many of our healthcare properties and their tenants may require a license or certificate of need, or CON, to operate. Failure to obtain a license or CON, or loss of a required license or CON, would prevent a facility from operating in the manner intended by the tenant. These events could materially adversely affect our tenants’ ability to make rent payments to us. State and local laws also may regulate expansion, including the addition of new beds or services or acquisition of healthcare equipment, and the construction of healthcare properties, by requiring a CON or other similar approval. State CON laws are not uniform throughout the United States and are subject to change; therefore, this may adversely impact our tenants’ ability to provide services in different states. We cannot predict the impact of state CON laws on our development of facilities or the operations of our tenants. In addition, state CON laws often materially impact the ability of competitors to enter into the marketplace of our facilities. The repeal of CON laws could allow competitors to freely operate in previously closed markets. This could negatively affect our tenants’ abilities to make current payments to us. In limited circumstances, loss of state licensure or certification or closure of a facility could ultimately result in loss of authority to operate the facility and require new CON authorization to re-institute operations. As a result, a portion of the value of the facility may be reduced, which would adversely impact our business, financial condition and results of operations and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

Tenants of our healthcare properties are subject to anti-fraud and abuse laws, the violation of which by a tenant may jeopardize the tenant’s ability to make rent payments to us.

There are various federal and state laws prohibiting fraudulent and abusive business practices by healthcare providers who participate in, receive payments from or are in a position to make referrals in connection with government-sponsored healthcare programs, including the Medicare and Medicaid programs. Our lease arrangements with certain tenants may also be subject to these anti-fraud and abuse laws. These laws include the Federal Anti-Kickback Statute, which prohibits, among other

things, the offer, payment, solicitation or receipt of any form of remuneration in return for, or to induce, the referral of any item or service reimbursed by Medicare or Medicaid; the Federal Physician Self-Referral Prohibition, which, subject to specific exceptions, restricts physicians from making referrals for specifically designated health services for which payment may be made under Medicare or Medicaid programs to an entity with which the physician, or an immediate family member, has a financial relationship; the False Claims Act, which prohibits any person from knowingly presenting false or fraudulent claims for payment to the federal government, including claims paid by the Medicare and Medicaid programs; the Civil Monetary Penalties Law, which authorizes the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to impose monetary penalties or exclusion from participation in state or federal healthcare programs for certain fraudulent acts; the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (“HIPAA”) Fraud Statute which makes it a federal crime to defraud any health benefit plan, including private payers; and Exclusions Law which authorizes U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to exclude someone from participation in state or federal healthcare programs for certain fraudulent acts. Each of these laws includes criminal and/or civil penalties for violations that range from punitive sanctions, damage assessments, penalties, imprisonment, denial of Medicare and Medicaid payments and/or exclusion from the Medicare and Medicaid programs. Certain laws, such as the False Claims Act, allow for individuals to bring whistleblower actions on behalf of the government for violations thereof. Additionally, states in which the healthcare properties are located may have similar anti-fraud and abuse laws. Investigation by a federal or state governmental body for violation of anti-fraud and abuse laws or imposition of any of these penalties upon one of our tenants could jeopardize that tenant’s ability to operate or to make rent payments, which may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

Adverse trends in healthcare provider operations may negatively affect our lease revenues and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

The healthcare industry is currently experiencing changes in the demand for and methods of delivering healthcare services; changes in third party reimbursement policies; significant unused capacity in certain areas, which has created substantial competition for patients among healthcare providers in those areas; continuing pressure by private and governmental payors to reduce payments to providers of services; increased scrutiny of billing, referral and other practices by federal and state authorities; changes in federal and state healthcare program payment models; increase and expansion of government audits related to compliance with the HIPAA privacy and security rules; continued consolidation of providers; and increased emphasis on compliance with privacy and security requirements related to personal health information. In addition, the fines and penalties for a breach of the HIPAA privacy and security rules increased in 2013. If a tenant breaches a patient’s protected health information and is fined by the federal government, the tenant’s ability to operate and pay rent may be adversely impacted. These factors may adversely affect the economic performance of some or all of our tenants and, in turn, our lease revenues and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

Tenants of our healthcare properties may be subject to significant legal actions that could subject them to increased operating costs and substantial uninsured liabilities, which may affect their ability to pay their rent payments to us.

As is typical in the healthcare industry, certain types of tenants of our healthcare properties may often become subject to claims that their services have resulted in patient injury or other adverse effects. Many of these tenants may have experienced an increasing trend in the frequency and severity of professional liability and general liability insurance claims and litigation asserted against them. The insurance coverage maintained by these tenants may not cover all claims made against them nor continue to be available at a reasonable cost, if at all. In some states, insurance coverage for the risk of punitive damages arising from professional liability and general liability claims and/or litigation may not, in certain cases, be available to these tenants due to state law prohibitions or limitations of availability. As a result, these types of tenants of our healthcare properties operating in these states may be liable for punitive damage awards that are either not covered or are in excess of their insurance policy limits. We also believe that there has been, and will continue to be, an increase in governmental investigations of certain healthcare providers, particularly in the area of Medicare/Medicaid false claims, as well as an increase in enforcement actions resulting from these investigations. Insurance may not be available to cover such losses. Any adverse determination in a legal proceeding or governmental investigation, whether currently asserted or arising in the future, could have a material adverse effect on a tenant’s financial condition. If a tenant is unable to obtain or maintain insurance coverage, if judgments are obtained in excess of the insurance coverage, if a tenant is required to pay uninsured punitive damages, or if a tenant is subject to an uninsurable government enforcement action, the tenant could be exposed to substantial additional liabilities, which may affect the tenant’s ability to pay rent, which in turn could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

Comprehensive healthcare reform legislation, the effects of which are not yet known, could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations and our ability to pay distributions to our stockholders.

On March 23, 2010, the President signed into law the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, or the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, and on March 30, 2010, the President signed into law the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, or the Reconciliation Act, which in part modified the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Together, the two acts serve as the primary vehicle for comprehensive healthcare reform in the U.S (collectively, the

“Healthcare Reform Act”). The acts are intended to reduce the number of individuals in the U.S. without health insurance and effect significant other changes to the ways in which healthcare is organized, delivered and reimbursed. Included with the legislation is a limitation on physician-owned hospitals from expanding, unless the facility satisfies very narrow federal exceptions to this limitation. Therefore, if our tenants are physicians that own and refer to a hospital, the hospital would be limited in its operations and expansion potential, which may limit the hospital’s services and resulting revenues and may impact the owner’s ability to make rental payments. The legislation will become effective through a phased approach, beginning in 2010 and concluding in 2018. On June 28, 2012, the United States Supreme Court upheld the individual mandate under the healthcare reform legislation, although substantially limiting the legislation’s expansion of Medicaid. At this time, the effects of healthcare reform and its impact on our properties are not yet known but could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and ability to pay distributions to our stockholders.

On March 6, 2017, members of the House of Representatives presented legislation to repeal portions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, as amended. It is anticipated that the proposed legislation will be debated at length and that the final bill will likely have modifications from the proposed version. At this time, the proposal focuses upon, among other items, repealing the individual responsibility to purchase insurance, modifying employer obligations to purchase insurance and modifying the funding for Medicaid programs. All of the proposals may impact the number of individuals that have insurance to pay for healthcare services which may impact our tenants’ collections. If our tenants’ patients do not have insurance, it may adversely impact the tenants’ ability to pay rent and operate a practice.

Risks Associated with Investments in the Data Center Property Sector

Our data center properties depend upon the technology industry and a reduction in the demand for technology-related real estate could adversely impact our ability to find or keep tenants for our data center properties, which would adversely affect our results of operations.

A portion of our portfolio of properties consists of data center properties. A decline in the technology industry or a decrease in the adoption of data center space for corporate enterprises could lead to a decrease in the demand for technology-related real estate, which may have a greater adverse effect on our business and financial condition than if we owned a portfolio with a more diversified tenant base. We are susceptible to adverse developments in the corporate and institutional data center and broader technology industries (such as business layoffs or downsizing, industry slowdowns, relocations of businesses, costs of complying with government regulations or increased regulation and other factors) and the technology-related real estate market (such as oversupply of or reduced demand for space). In addition, the rapid development of new technologies or the adoption of new industry standards could render many of our tenants’ current products and services obsolete or unmarketable and contribute to a downturn in their businesses, thereby increasing the likelihood that they default under their leases, become insolvent or file for bankruptcy.

Our data center properties may not be suitable for lease to certain data center, technology or office tenants without significant expenditures or renovations.

Because many of our data center properties will contain extensive tenant improvements installed at our tenants’ expense, they may be better suited for a specific corporate enterprise data center user or technology industry tenant and could require modification in order for us to re-lease vacant space to another corporate enterprise data center user or technology industry tenant. For the same reason, our properties also may not be suitable for lease to traditional office tenants without significant expenditures or renovations.

Our tenants may choose to develop new data centers or expand their existing data centers, which could result in the loss of one or more key tenants or reduce demand for our newly developed data centers.

Our larger tenants may choose to develop new data centers or expand any existing data centers of their own. In the event that any of our key tenants were to do so, it could result in a loss of business to us or put pressure on our pricing. If we lose a tenant, there is no guarantee that we would be able to replace that tenant at a competitive rate or at all.

Our data center infrastructure may become obsolete or less marketable and we may not be able to upgrade our power, cooling, security or connectivity systems cost-effectively or at all.

The markets for data centers, as well as the industries in which data center tenants operate, are characterized by rapidly changing technology, evolving industry standards, frequent new service introductions, shifting distribution channels and changing tenant demands. The data center infrastructure in some of the data centers that we have acquired or may acquire in the future may become obsolete or less marketable due to demand for new processes and/or technologies, including, without limitation: (i) new processes to deliver power to, or eliminate heat from, computer systems; (ii) demand for additional redundancy capacity; or (iii) new technology that permits lower levels of critical load and heat removal than our data centers are currently designed to provide.  In addition, the systems that connect our data centers to the Internet and other external networks may become outdated, including with respect to latency, reliability and diversity of connectivity.  When tenants

demand new processes or technologies, we may not be able to upgrade our data centers on a cost effective basis, or at all, due to, among other things, increased expenses to us that cannot be passed on to the tenant or insufficient revenue to fund the necessary capital expenditures. The obsolescence of the power and cooling systems in such data centers and/or our inability to upgrade our data centers, including associated connectivity, could have a material negative impact on our business. Furthermore, potential future regulations that apply to industries we serve may require users in those industries to seek specific requirements from their data centers that we are unable to provide. These may include physical security regulations applicable to the defense industry and government contractors and privacy and security requirements applicable to the financial services and health care industries. Such regulations could have a material adverse effect on us. If our competitors offer data center space that our existing or potential data center users perceive to be superior to ours based on numerous factors, including power, security considerations, location or network connectivity, or if they offer rental rates below our or current market rates, we may lose existing or potential tenants, incur costs to improve our properties or be forced to reduce our rental rates.

Risks Associated with Debt Financing and Investments

We expect to incur mortgage indebtedness and other borrowing, which could adversely impact the value of our stockholders’ investment if the value of the property securing the debt falls or if we are forced to refinance the debt during adverse economic conditions.

We expect that in most instances, we will continue to acquire real properties by using either existing financing or borrowing new funds. In addition, we may incur mortgage debt and pledge all or some of our real properties as security for that debt to obtain funds to acquire additional real properties. We may borrow if we need funds to satisfy the REIT tax qualification requirement that we distribute at least 90% of our annual REIT taxable income, determined without regard to the dividends-paid deduction and excluding net capital gain, to our stockholders. We also may borrow if we otherwise deem it necessary or advisable to assure that we qualify, or maintain our qualification, as a REIT.

We believe that utilizing borrowing is consistent with our objective of maximizing the return to investors. There is no limitation on the amount we may borrow against any single improved property. Our charter provides that, until such time as shares of our common stock are listed on a national securities exchange or traded in the over-the-counter market, our borrowings may not exceed 300% of our total net assets as of the date of any borrowing (which is the maximum level of indebtedness permitted under the NASAA REIT Guidelines absent a satisfactory showing that a higher level is appropriate), which is generally expected to be approximately 75% of the cost of our investments; however, we may exceed that limit if approved by a majority of our independent directors and disclosed to stockholders in our next quarterly report following such borrowing along with justification for exceeding such limit. This charter limitation, however, does not apply to individual real estate assets or investments. In addition, our board of directors has adopted investment policies that prohibit us from borrowing, following the completion of our Offering, in excess of 50% of the greater of cost (before deducting depreciation or other non-cash reserves) or fair market value of our assets, unless borrowing a greater amount is approved by a majority of our independent directors and disclosed to stockholders in our next quarterly report along with justification for the excess; provided, however, that this policy limitation does not apply to individual real estate assets or investments. At the date of acquisition of each asset, we anticipate that the cost of investment for such asset will be substantially similar to its fair market value, which will enable us to comply with the limitations of the NASAA REIT Guidelines set forth in our charter. However, subsequent events, including changes in the fair market value of our assets, could result in our exceeding these limitations. We expect that from time to time during the period of our Offering, we will seek independent director approval of borrowings in excess of these limitations since we will then be in the process of raising our equity capital to acquire our portfolio. As a result, we expect that our debt levels will be higher until we have invested most of our capital, which may cause us to incur higher interest charges, make higher debt service payments or be subject to restrictive covenants.

If there is a shortfall between the cash flow from a property and the cash flow needed to service mortgage debt on a property, then the amount available for distributions to stockholders may be reduced. In addition, incurring mortgage debt increases the risk of loss since defaults on indebtedness secured by a property may result in lenders initiating foreclosure actions. In that case, we could lose the property securing the loan that is in default, thus reducing the value of our stockholders’ investment. For U.S. federal income tax purposes, a foreclosure of any of our properties would be treated as a sale of the property for a purchase price equal to the outstanding balance of the debt secured by the mortgage. If the outstanding balance of the debt secured by the mortgage exceeds our tax basis in the property, we would recognize taxable income on foreclosure, but would not receive any cash proceeds. In such event, we may be unable to pay the amount of distributions required in order to maintain our REIT status. We may give full or partial guarantees to lenders of mortgage debt to the entities that own our properties. When we provide a guaranty on behalf of an entity that owns one of our properties, we will be responsible to the lender for satisfaction of the debt if it is not paid by such entity. If any mortgages contain cross-collateralization or cross-default provisions, a default on a single property could affect multiple properties. If any of our properties are foreclosed upon due to a default, our ability to pay cash distributions to our stockholders will be adversely affected which could result in our losing our REIT status and would result in a decrease in the value of our stockholders’ investment.

Changes in the debt markets could have a material adverse impact on our earnings and financial condition.

The domestic and international commercial real estate debt markets are currently experiencing changing levels of volatility resulting in, from time to time, the tightening of underwriting standards by lenders and credit rating agencies, which results in lenders increasing the cost for debt financing. Should the overall cost of borrowings increase, either by increases in the index rates or by increases in lender spreads, we will need to factor such increases into the economics of future acquisitions. This may result in future acquisitions generating lower overall economic returns and potentially reducing future cash flow available for distribution. If these disruptions in the debt markets persist, our ability to borrow monies to finance the purchase of, or other activities related to, real estate assets will be negatively impacted. If we are unable to borrow monies on terms and conditions that we find acceptable, we likely will have to reduce the number of properties we can purchase, and the return on the properties we do purchase may be lower. In addition, we may find it difficult, costly or impossible to refinance indebtedness which is maturing.

In addition, the state of the debt markets could have an impact on the overall amount of capital invested in real estate, which may result in price or value decreases of real estate assets. Although this may benefit us for future acquisitions, it could negatively impact the current value of our existing assets.

High mortgage rates may make it difficult for us to finance or refinance properties, which could reduce the number of properties we can acquire and the amount of cash distributions we can make.

If we place mortgage debt on properties, we run the risk of being unable to refinance the properties when the loans come due, or of being unable to refinance on favorable terms. If interest rates are higher when the properties are refinanced, we may not be able to finance the properties and our income could be reduced. If any of these events occur, our cash flow would be reduced. This, in turn, would reduce cash available for distribution to our stockholders and may hinder our ability to raise more capital by issuing more stock or by borrowing more money.

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

In connection with providing us financing, certain of our lenders have and may impose restrictions on us that affect our distribution, investment and operating policies and our ability to incur additional debt. Loan documents we have entered into and may continue to enter into may contain covenants that limit our ability to further mortgage the property, discontinue insurance coverage or replace our Advisor. These or other limitations may adversely affect our flexibility and our ability to achieve our investment and operating objectives. Additionally, such restrictions could make it difficult for us to satisfy the requirements necessary to maintain our qualification as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes.

Increases in interest rates could increase the amount of our debt payments and adversely affect our ability to pay distributions to our stockholders.

As of December 31, 2016 , we had $147.5 million of fixed interest rate principal debt outstanding, of which $96.5 million was fixed through interest rate swaps, and $225.5 million of variable rate principal debt outstanding. As of December 31, 2016 , our weighted average interest rate was 3.31% . Increases in interest rates would increase our interest costs, if we obtain additional variable rate debt, which could reduce our cash flows and our ability to pay distributions to stockholders. In addition, if we need to repay existing debt during periods of rising interest rates, we could be required to liquidate one or more of our investments in properties at times that may not permit realization of the maximum return on such investments.

We may invest in collateralized mortgage-backed securities, which may increase our exposure to credit and interest rate risk.

We may invest in collateralized mortgage-backed securities, or CMBS, which may increase our exposure to credit and interest rate risk. We have not adopted, and do not expect to adopt, any formal policies or procedures designed to manage risks associated with our investments in CMBS. In this context, credit risk is the risk that borrowers will default on the mortgages underlying the CMBS. We intend to manage this risk by investing in CMBS guaranteed by U.S. government agencies, such as the Government National Mortgage Association, or GNMA, or U.S. government sponsored enterprises, such as the Federal National Mortgage Association, or FNMA, or the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, or FHLMC. Interest rate risk occurs as prevailing market interest rates change relative to the current yield on the CMBS. For example, when interest rates fall, borrowers are more likely to prepay their existing mortgages to take advantage of the lower cost of financing. As prepayments occur, principal is returned to the holders of the CMBS sooner than expected, thereby lowering the effective yield on the investment. On the other hand, when interest rates rise, borrowers are more likely to maintain their existing mortgages. As a result, prepayments decrease, thereby extending the average maturity of the mortgages underlying the CMBS. We intend to manage interest rate risk by purchasing CMBS offered in tranches, or with sinking fund features, that are designed to match our investment objectives. If we are unable to manage these risks effectively, our results of operations, financial condition and ability to pay distributions to our stockholders will be adversely affected.

Any real estate debt security that we originate or purchase is subject to the risks of delinquency and foreclosure.

We may originate and purchase real estate debt securities, which are subject to risks of delinquency and foreclosure and risks of loss. Typically, we will not have recourse to the personal assets of our borrowers. The ability of a borrower to repay a real estate debt security secured by an income-producing property depends primarily upon the successful operation of the property, rather than upon the existence of independent income or assets of the borrower. If the net operating income of the property is reduced, the borrower’s ability to repay the real estate debt security may be impaired. A property’s net operating income can be affected by, among other things:

We bear the risks of loss of principal to the extent of any deficiency between the value of the collateral and the principal and accrued interest of the real estate debt security, which could have a material adverse effect on our cash flow from operations and limit amounts available for distribution to our stockholders. In the event of the bankruptcy of a real estate debt security borrower, the real estate debt security to that borrower will be deemed to be collateralized only to the extent of the value of the underlying collateral at the time of bankruptcy (as determined by the bankruptcy court), and the lien securing the real estate debt security will be subject to the avoidance powers of the bankruptcy trustee or debtor-in-possession to the extent the lien is unenforceable under state law. Foreclosure of a real estate debt security can be an expensive and lengthy process that could have a substantial negative effect on our anticipated return on the foreclosed real estate debt security. We also may be forced to foreclose on certain properties, be unable to sell these properties and be forced to incur substantial expenses to improve operations at the property.

U.S. Federal Income Tax Risks

Failure to maintain our qualification as a REIT would adversely affect our operations and our ability to make distributions.

In order for us to maintain our qualification as a REIT, we must satisfy certain requirements set forth in the Code and Treasury Regulations and various factual matters and circumstances that are not entirely within our control. We intend to structure our activities in a manner designed to satisfy all of these requirements. However, if certain of our operations were to be recharacterized by the Internal Revenue Service, or IRS, such recharacterization could jeopardize our ability to satisfy all of the requirements for qualification as a REIT.

If we fail to maintain our qualification as a REIT for any taxable year and we do not qualify for certain statutory relief provisions, we will be subject to U.S. federal income tax on our taxable income at corporate rates. In addition, we would generally be disqualified from treatment as a REIT for the four taxable years following the year of losing our REIT status. Losing our REIT status would reduce our net earnings available for investment or distribution to stockholders because of the additional tax liability. In addition, distributions to stockholders would no longer qualify for the dividends-paid deduction, and we would no longer be required to make distributions. If this occurs, we might be required to borrow funds or liquidate some investments in order to pay the applicable tax. Our failure to qualify as a REIT would adversely affect the return of a stockholder's investment.

To maintain our qualification as a REIT, we must meet annual distribution requirements, which may result in us distributing amounts that may otherwise be used for our operations and which could result in our inability to acquire appropriate assets.

To maintain the favorable tax treatment afforded to REITs under the Code, we generally will be required each year to distribute to our stockholders at least 90% of our REIT taxable income determined without regard to the dividends-paid deduction and excluding net capital gain. To the extent that we do not distribute all of our net capital gains or distribute at least 90%, but less than 100%, of our REIT taxable income, as adjusted, we will have to pay tax on those amounts at regular ordinary and capital gains corporate tax rates. Furthermore, if we fail to distribute during each calendar year at least the sum of (a) 85% of our ordinary income for that year, (b) 95% of our capital gain net income for that year, and (c) any undistributed taxable income from prior periods, we would have to pay a 4% nondeductible excise tax on the excess of the required

distribution over the sum of (a) the amounts that we actually distributed and (b) the amounts we retained and upon which we paid income tax at the corporate level. These requirements could cause us to distribute amounts that otherwise would be spent on investments in real estate assets, and it is possible that we might be required to borrow funds, possibly at unfavorable rates, or sell assets to fund these distributions. In addition, we could pay part of these required distributions in shares of our common stock, which would result in shareholders having tax liabilities from such distributions in excess of the cash they receive. The treatment of such taxable share distributions is not clear, and it is possible the taxable share distribution will not count towards our distribution requirement, in which case adverse consequences could apply. Although we intend to continue to make distributions sufficient to meet the annual distribution requirements and to avoid U.S. federal income and excise taxes, it is possible that we might not always be able to do so.

Our stockholders may have current tax liability on distributions they elect to reinvest in our common stock but would not receive cash from such distributions, and therefore our stockholders would need to use funds from another source to pay such tax liability.

If our stockholders participate in our distribution reinvestment plan, they will be deemed to have received, and for U.S. federal income tax purposes will be taxed on, the amount reinvested in common stock to the extent the amount reinvested was not a tax-free return of capital. As a result, unless stockholders are a tax-exempt entity, they may have to use funds from other sources to pay their tax liability on distributions reinvested in our shares.

Certain of our business activities are potentially subject to the prohibited transaction tax, which could reduce the return on our stockholders’ investment.

Our ability to dispose of a property during the first few years following its acquisition is restricted to a substantial extent as a result of our REIT status. Whether property is inventory or otherwise held primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of a trade or business depends on the particular facts and circumstances surrounding each property. Properties we own, directly or through any subsidiary entity, including our Operating Partnership, but generally excluding our taxable REIT subsidiaries, may, depending on how we conduct our operations, be treated as inventory or property held primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of a trade or business. Under applicable provisions of the Code regarding prohibited transactions by REITs, we would be subject to a 100% tax on any gain recognized on the sale or other disposition of any property (other than foreclosure property) that we own, directly or through any subsidiary entity, including our Operating Partnership, but generally excluding our taxable REIT subsidiaries, that is deemed to be inventory or property held primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of trade or business. Any taxes we pay would reduce our cash available for distribution to our stockholders. Our concern over paying the prohibited transactions tax may cause us to forego disposition opportunities that would otherwise be advantageous if we were not a REIT.

In certain circumstances, we may be subject to U.S. federal, state and local income taxes as a REIT, which would reduce our cash available for distribution to our stockholders.

Even if we maintain our qualification as a REIT, we may be subject to U.S. federal, state and local income taxes. For example, net income from the sale of properties that are "dealer" properties sold by a REIT (a "prohibited transaction" under the Code) will be subject to a 100% excise tax. We may not be able to make sufficient distributions to avoid excise taxes applicable to REITs. We also may decide to retain net capital gain we earn from the sale or other disposition of our property and pay income tax directly on such income. In that event, our stockholders would be treated as if they earned that income and paid the tax on it directly. However, stockholders that are tax-exempt, such as charities or qualified pension plans, would have no benefit from their deemed payment of such tax liability unless they file U.S. federal income tax returns and thereon seek a refund of such tax. Further, a 100% excise tax would be imposed on certain transactions between us and any potential taxable REIT subsidiaries that are not conducted on an arm’s-length basis. We also may be subject to state and local taxes on our income or property, either directly or at the level of our Operating Partnership or at the level of the other companies through which we indirectly own our assets. Any taxes we pay would reduce our cash available for distribution to our stockholders.

The use of taxable REIT subsidiaries, which may be required for REIT qualification purposes, would increase our overall tax liability and thereby reduce our cash available for distribution to our stockholders.

Some of our assets may need to be owned by, or operations may need to be conducted through, one or more taxable REIT subsidiaries. Any of our taxable REIT subsidiaries would be subject to U.S. federal, state and local income tax on its taxable income. The after-tax net income of our taxable REIT subsidiaries would be available for distribution to us. Further, we would incur a 100% excise tax on transactions with our taxable REIT subsidiaries that are not conducted on an arm’s-length basis. For example, to the extent that the rent paid by one of our taxable REIT subsidiaries exceeds an arm’s-length rental amount, such amount would be potentially subject to a 100% excise tax. While we intend that all transactions between us and our taxable REIT subsidiaries would be conducted on an arm’s-length basis, and therefore, any amounts paid by our taxable REIT subsidiaries to us would not be subject to the excise tax, no assurance can be given that no excise tax would arise from such transactions.

Complying with REIT requirements may force us to forgo and/or liquidate otherwise attractive investment opportunities.

To maintain our qualification as a REIT, we must ensure that we meet the REIT gross income tests annually and that at the end of each calendar quarter, at least 75% of the value of our assets consists of cash, cash items, government securities and qualified real estate assets, including certain mortgage loans and certain kinds of mortgage-related securities. The remainder of our investment in securities (other than government securities, taxable REIT subsidiaries and qualified real estate assets) generally cannot include more than 10% of the outstanding voting securities of any one issuer or more than 10% of the total value of the outstanding securities of any one issuer. In addition, in general, no more than 5% of the value of our assets can consist of the securities (other than government securities, taxable REIT subsidiaries, and qualified real estate assets) of any one issuer. For the 2017 taxable year, no more than 25% of the value of our total assets can be represented by securities of one or more taxable REIT subsidiaries. For taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017, no more than 20% of the value of our total assets can be represented by securities of one or more taxable REIT subsidiaries. If we fail to comply with these requirements at the end of any calendar quarter other than our first REIT calendar quarter, we must correct the failure within 30 days after the end of the calendar quarter or qualify for certain statutory relief provisions to avoid losing our REIT qualification and suffering adverse tax consequences. As a result, we may be required to liquidate from our portfolio or not make otherwise attractive investments in order to maintain our qualification as a REIT. These actions could have the effect of reducing our income and amounts available for distribution to our stockholders.

If we fail to invest a sufficient amount of the net proceeds from selling our common stock in real estate assets within one year from the receipt of the proceeds, we could fail to qualify as a REIT.

Temporary investment of the net proceeds from sales of our common stock in short-term securities and income from such investment generally will allow us to satisfy various REIT income and asset requirements, but only during the one-year period beginning on the date we receive the net proceeds. If we are unable to invest a sufficient amount of the net proceeds from sales of our common stock in qualifying real estate assets within such one-year period, we could fail to satisfy one or more of the gross income or asset tests and/or we could be limited to investing all or a portion of any remaining funds in cash or cash equivalents. If we fail to satisfy any such income or asset test, unless we are entitled to relief under certain provisions of the Internal Revenue Code, we could fail to qualify as a REIT.

Recharacterization of sale-leaseback transactions may cause us to lose our REIT status, which would subject us to U.S. federal income tax at corporate rates, which would reduce the amounts available for distribution to our stockholders and threaten our ability to remain qualified as a REIT.

We have and may continue to purchase properties and lease them back to the sellers of such properties. While we will use our best efforts to structure any such sale-leaseback transaction such that the lease will be characterized as a true lease, thereby allowing us to be treated as the owner of the property for U.S. federal income tax purposes, the IRS could challenge such characterization. In the event that any such sale-leaseback is challenged and recharacterized as a financing transaction or loan for U.S. federal income tax purposes, deductions for depreciation and cost recovery relating to such property would be disallowed. If a sale-leaseback transaction were so recharacterized, we might fail to satisfy the REIT qualification asset tests or income tests and, consequently, lose our REIT status effective with the year of recharacterization. Alternatively, the amount of our REIT taxable income could be recalculated, which also might cause us to fail to meet the annual distribution requirement for a taxable year in the event we cannot make a sufficient deficiency dividend.

Legislative or regulatory action could adversely affect the returns to our investors.

In recent years, numerous legislative, judicial and administrative changes have been made in the provisions of U.S. federal income tax laws applicable to investments in shares of our common stock. Particularly, given a new presidential administration, additional changes to the tax laws are likely to continue to occur and may take effect retroactively, and we cannot assure our stockholders that any such changes will not adversely affect how we are taxed and the taxation of our stockholders. Any such changes could have an adverse effect on an investment in our shares or on the market value or the resale potential of our assets. Our stockholders are urged to consult with their own tax advisor with respect to the impact of recent legislation on their investment in our shares and the status of legislative, regulatory or administrative developments and proposals and their potential effect on an investment in our shares. Our stockholders also should note that our counsel’s tax opinion was based upon existing law, applicable as of the date of its opinion, all of which may be subject to change, either prospectively or retroactively.

Although REITs continue to receive substantially better tax treatment than entities taxed as corporations, it is possible that future legislation would result in a REIT having fewer tax advantages, and it could become more advantageous for a company that invests in real estate to elect to be taxed for U.S. federal income tax purposes as a corporation. As a result, our charter provides our board of directors with the power, in the event that our board of directors determines that it is no longer in our best interest to continue to be qualified as a REIT, to revoke or otherwise terminate our REIT election and cause us to be taxed as a corporation, without the vote of our stockholders. Our board of directors has fiduciary duties to us and our stockholders and

could only cause such changes in our tax treatment if it determines in good faith that such changes are in the best interests of our stockholders.

Dividends payable by REITs generally do not qualify for reduced tax rates under current law.

The maximum U.S. federal income tax rate for certain qualified dividends payable to U.S. stockholders that are individuals, trusts and estates generally is 20%. Dividends payable by REITs, however, are generally not eligible for the reduced rates and therefore may be subject to a 39.6% maximum U.S. federal income tax rate on ordinary income when paid to such stockholders. The more favorable rates applicable to regular corporate dividends under current law could cause investors who are individuals, trusts and estates or are otherwise sensitive to these lower rates to perceive investments in REITs to be relatively less attractive than investments in the stocks of non-REIT corporations that pay dividends, which could adversely affect the value of the stock of REITs, including our common stock.

If our Operating Partnership fails to maintain its status as a partnership, its income may be subject to taxation, which would reduce the cash available for distribution to our stockholders.

We intend to maintain the status of our Operating Partnership as a partnership for U.S. federal income tax purposes. However, if the IRS were to successfully challenge the status of our Operating Partnership as a partnership or disregarded entity for such purposes, it would be taxable as a corporation. In such event, this would reduce the amount of distributions that our Operating Partnership could make to us. This would also result in our losing REIT status, and becoming subject to a corporate level tax on our own income. This would substantially reduce our cash available to pay distributions and the yield on our stockholders’ investment. In addition, if any of the partnerships or limited liability companies through which our Operating Partnership owns its properties, in whole or in part, loses its characterization as a partnership and is otherwise not disregarded for U.S. federal income tax purposes, it would be subject to taxation as a corporation, thereby reducing distributions to our Operating Partnership. Such a recharacterization of an underlying property owner could also threaten our ability to maintain REIT status.

Foreign purchasers of our common stock may be subject to FIRPTA tax upon the sale of their shares or upon the payment of a capital gain dividend, which would reduce any gains they would otherwise have on their investment in our shares.

A foreign person disposing of a U.S. real property interest, including shares of a U.S. corporation whose assets consist principally of U.S. real property interests, is generally subject to the Foreign Investment in Real Property Tax Act of 1980, as amended, or FIRPTA, on the gain recognized on the disposition. However, certain foreign pension plans and certain foreign publicly traded entities are exempt from FIRPTA withholding. Further, such FIRPTA tax does not apply to the disposition of stock in a REIT if the REIT is “domestically controlled.” A REIT is "domestically controlled" if less than 50% of the REIT’s stock, by value, has been owned directly or indirectly by persons who are not qualifying U.S. persons during a continuous five-year period ending on the date of disposition or, if shorter, during the entire period of the REIT’s existence. We cannot assure our stockholders that we will qualify as a "domestically controlled" REIT. If we were to fail to so qualify, any gain realized by foreign investors on a sale of our shares would be subject to FIRPTA tax, unless our shares were traded on an established securities market and the foreign investor did not at any time during a specified testing period directly or indirectly own more than 10% of the value of our outstanding common stock.

A foreign investor also may be subject to FIRPTA tax upon the payment of any capital gain dividend by us, which dividend is attributable to gain from sales or exchanges of U.S. real property interests. We encourage our stockholders to consult their own tax advisor to determine the tax consequences applicable to them if they are a foreign investor.

Employee Benefit Plan, IRA, and Other Tax-Exempt Investor Risks

We, and our stockholders that are employee benefit plans, IRAs, annuities described in Sections 403(a) or (b) of the Internal Revenue Code, Archer MSAs, health savings accounts, or Coverdell education savings accounts (referred to generally as Benefit Plans and IRAs) will be subject to risks relating specifically to our having such Benefit Plan and IRA stockholders, which risks are discussed below.

If a stockholder fails to meet the fiduciary and other standards under ERISA or the Internal Revenue Code as a result of an investment in shares of our common stock, such stockholder could be subject to criminal and civil penalties.

There are special considerations that apply to Benefit Plans or IRAs investing in shares of our common stock. If a stockholder is investing the assets of a Benefit Plan or IRA in us, he or she should consider:

In addition to considering their fiduciary responsibilities under ERISA and the prohibited transaction rules of ERISA and the Internal Revenue Code, a Benefit Plan or IRA purchasing shares of our common stock should consider the effect of the plan asset regulations of the U.S. Department of Labor. To avoid our assets from being considered plan assets under those regulations, our charter prohibits “benefit plan investors” from owning 25.0% or more of the shares of our common stock prior to the time that the common stock qualifies as a class of publicly-offered securities, within the meaning of the ERISA plan asset regulations. However, we cannot assure our stockholders that those provisions in our charter will be effective in limiting benefit plan investor ownership to less than the 25.0% limit. For example, the limit could be unintentionally exceeded if a benefit plan investor misrepresents its status as a benefit plan. Even if our assets are not considered to be plan assets, a prohibited transaction could occur if we or any of our affiliates is a fiduciary (within the meaning of ERISA) with respect to a Benefit Plan or IRA purchasing shares of our common stock, and, therefore, in the event any such persons are fiduciaries (within the meaning of ERISA) of a stockholder's Benefit Plan or IRA, such stockholder should not purchase shares of our common stock unless an administrative or statutory exemption applies to his or her purchase.

The U.S. Department of Labor has issued a final regulation revising the definition of “fiduciary” and the scope of “investment advice” under ERISA, which may have a negative impact on our ability to raise capital.

On April 8, 2016, the U.S. Department of Labor issued a final regulation relating to the definition of a fiduciary under ERISA and Section 4975 of the Code. The final regulation broadens the definition of fiduciary by expanding the range of activities that would be considered to be fiduciary investment advice under ERISA and is accompanied by new and revised prohibited transaction exemptions relating to investments by employee benefit plans subject to Title I of ERISA or retirement plans or accounts subject to Section 4975 of the Code (including IRAs). The final regulation and the related exemptions are expected to become applicable for investment transactions on and after April 10, 2017, but generally should not apply to purchases of our shares before that date. On February 3, 2017, the President asked for additional review of this regulation, and the results of such review are unknown. In response, the U.S. Department of Labor has proposed an extension of the applicability date of the regulation (and accompanying exemptions) from April 10, 2017 to June 9, 2017. This proposed delay has not been finalized as of the date of this Annual Report. On March 2, 2017, the U.S. Department of Labor published a notice seeking public comments on, among other things, the proposal to adopt the aforementioned 60-day delay of the April 10 applicability date of the final rule. On March 10, 2017, the U.S. Department of Labor adopted a temporary enforcement policy providing that, if the DOL issues a final rule after April 10, 2017 implementing a delay of the April 10 applicability date, it will not initiate an enforcement action because an adviser or financial institution did not satisfy conditions of the rule during the “gap” period between the April 10 applicability date and when the delay is implemented. In addition, the DOL will not initiate an enforcement action because an adviser or financial institution, as of the April 10 applicability date of the rule, failed to satisfy conditions of the rule within a reasonable period after the publication of a decision not to delay the April 10 applicability date.

The final regulation and the accompanying exemptions are complex, and plan fiduciaries and the beneficial owners of IRAs are urged to consult with their own advisors regarding this development. The final regulation could have negative implications on our ability to raise capital from potential investors, including those investing through IRAs.

If stockholders invest in our shares through an IRA or other retirement plan, they may be limited in their ability to withdraw required minimum dividends.

If stockholders establish a plan or account through which to invest in our common stock, federal law may require stockholders to withdraw required minimum dividends from such plan in the future. Our stock will be highly illiquid, and our share repurchase program only offers limited liquidity. If stockholders require liquidity, they may generally sell their shares, but such sale may be at a price less than the price at which the stockholder initially purchased his or her shares of our common stock. If a stockholder fails to withdraw required minimum distributions from his or her plan or account, the stockholder may be subject to certain taxes and tax penalties.

Specific rules apply to foreign, governmental and church plans.

As a general rule, certain employee benefit plans, including foreign pension plans, governmental plans established or maintained in the United States (as defined in Section 3(32) of ERISA), and certain church plans (as defined in Section 3(33) of ERISA), are not subject to ERISA’s requirements and are not “benefit plan investors” within the meaning of the Plan Assets Regulation. Any such plan that is qualified and exempt from taxation under Sections 401(a) and 501(a) of the Internal Revenue Code may nonetheless be subject to the prohibited transaction rules set forth in Section 503 of the Internal Revenue Code and, under certain circumstances in the case of church plans, Section 4975 of the Internal Revenue Code. Also, some foreign plans and governmental plans may be subject to foreign, state, or local laws which are, to a material extent, similar to the provisions of ERISA or Section 4975 of the Internal Revenue Code. Each fiduciary of a plan subject to any such similar law should make its own determination as to the need for and the availability of any exemption relief.

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments.

None.

Item 2. Properties.

Our principal executive offices are located at 4890 West Kennedy Blvd., Suite 650, Tampa, Florida 33609. We do not have an address separate from our Advisor or our Sponsor.

As of December 31, 2016 , we owned a portfolio of 37 real estate investments, consisting of 51 properties, located in 29 MSAs and one µSA, comprising of approximately 2,984,000 rentable square feet of commercial space. As of December 31, 2016 , 27 of our real estate investments were single-tenant commercial properties and 10 of our real estate investments were multi-tenant commercial properties. As of December 31, 2016 , 99.6% of our rentable square feet was leased, with a weighted average remaining lease term of 11.69 years. See Part IV, Item 15. "Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules—Schedule III—Real Estate Assets and Accumulated Depreciation," of this Annual Report on Form 10-K for a detailed listing of our properties.

We believe the properties are adequately covered by insurance and are suitable for their respective intended purpose. Real estate assets, other than land, are depreciated on a straight-line basis over each asset's useful life.

Leases

Although there are variations in the specific terms of the leases in our portfolio, the following is a summary of the general structure of our leases. Generally, the leases of our properties provide for initial terms ranging from 10 to 20 years. As of December 31, 2016 , the weighted average remaining lease term of our properties was 11.69 years. The properties generally are leased under net leases pursuant to which the tenant bears responsibility for substantially all property costs and expenses associated with ongoing maintenance and operation, including utilities, property taxes and insurance. The leases at each individual property provide for annual rental payments (payable in monthly installments) ranging from approximately $400 to $4,944,000 (an average of $912,000) per year. Certain leases provide for fixed increases in rent. Generally, the property leases

provide the tenant with one or more multi-year renewal options, subject to generally the same terms and conditions as the initial lease term.

The following table shows lease expirations of our real properties based on annualized contractual base rent as of December 31, 2016 and for each of the next ten years ending December 31 and thereafter, as follows:

Indebtedness

For a discussion of our indebtedness, see Note 9—"Notes Payable" and Note 10—"Credit Facility" to the consolidated financial statements that are a part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K .

Item 3. Legal Proceedings.

We are not aware of any material pending legal proceedings to which we are a party or to which our properties are the subject.

Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures.

Not applicable.