Item 1. Business.

In this Annual Report, unless specifically stated otherwise or the context indicates otherwise, the terms "Colony Capital," the "Company," "we," "our" and "us" refer to Colony Capital, Inc. and its consolidated subsidiaries beginning January 11, 2017, following the closing of the Merger, and Colony and its consolidated subsidiaries for all periods on or prior to the closing of the Merger on January 10, 2017. References to the “Operating Partnership,” our “Operating Company” and the “OP” refer to Colony Capital Operating Company, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company and the operating company of the Company, and its consolidated subsidiaries.

Overview

We are a leading global investment management firm with approximately $43 billion in assets under management ("AUM"). We manage capital on behalf of our stockholders, as well as institutional and retail investors in private funds, traded and non-traded real estate investment trusts ("REITs") and registered investment companies. We have significant holdings in: (a) the healthcare, industrial and hospitality property sectors; (b) Colony Credit Real Estate, Inc. (NYSE: CLNC) and NorthStar Realty Europe, Corp (NYSE: NRE) which are both externally managed by subsidiaries of the Company; and (c) various other equity and debt investments. We are headquartered in Los Angeles, with key offices in New York, Paris and London, and have over 400 employees in 17 locations in ten countries.

We were organized on May 31, 2016 as a Maryland corporation, and elected to be taxed as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes commencing with our initial taxable year ended December 31, 2017 . We conduct our operations as a REIT, and generally are not subject to U.S. federal income taxes on our taxable income to the extent that we annually distribute all of our taxable income to stockholders and maintain qualification as a REIT, although we are subject to U.S. federal income tax on income earned through our taxable subsidiaries. We also operate our business in a manner that will permit us to maintain our exemption from registration as an investment company under the 1940 Act. We conduct substantially all of our activities and hold substantially all of our assets and liabilities through our Operating Company. At December 31, 2018 , we owned 93.9% of the Operating Company, as its sole managing member.

Our Business

Our vision is to establish the Company as a leading global investment management firm, principally focused on real estate strategies. We believe our deep understanding of commercial real estate provides us a significant advantage in identifying relative value throughout real estate cycles. Through our prudent sector or subsector capital allocation and operational capabilities, we aim to generate outsized total returns on our balance sheet and third-party capital. Specifically, our preference is to invest our balance sheet capital alongside third party capital to create alignment and generate returns for our shareholders in two ways. First, through the return on investment through our balance sheet capital. Second, through base management fees paid by third party capital and potential carried interest, which provides us with a greater participation of profits after a minimum return is achieved. Over time, our goal is to manage third party capital alongside the majority of our balance sheet capital at a higher ratio than what is currently in place.

Currently, we conduct our business through the following six segments:

Refer to Note 25 to the consolidated financial statements for further information about our reportable segments.

Merger

On January 10, 2017, the Merger among NSAM, Colony and NRF to form Colony Capital, Inc. was completed in an all-stock exchange. The Merger was accounted for as a reverse acquisition, with NSAM as the legal acquirer for certain legal and regulatory matters, and Colony as the accounting acquirer for purposes of financial reporting.

Refer to Note 3 to the consolidated financial statements for further details on the Merger.

Colony Credit

On August 25, 2017, certain subsidiaries of the Company entered into a combination agreement with NorthStar Real Estate Income Trust, Inc. (“NorthStar I”) and NorthStar Real Estate Income II, Inc. (“NorthStar II”), both publicly registered non-traded real estate investment trusts sponsored and managed by a subsidiary of the Company, and certain other subsidiaries of the foregoing. Pursuant to the combination agreement, certain subsidiaries of the Company agreed to contribute the CLNY Contributed Portfolio (as defined below), represented by their ownership interests ranging from 38% to 100% in certain investment entities ("CLNY Investment Entities") to Colony Credit Real Estate, Inc. (formerly Colony NorthStar Credit Real Estate, Inc.) ("Colony Credit") and its operating company, and NorthStar I and NorthStar II agreed to merge with and into Colony Credit, with, in each case, Colony Credit surviving, in all-stock mergers (collectively, the “Combination”).

The CLNY Contributed Portfolio comprised the Company's interests in certain of its commercial real estate loans, net lease properties and limited partnership interests in third-party sponsored funds within the Company’s other equity and debt segment that were based in the U.S. and consistent with Colony Credit's strategy at the time of the Combination.

On January 18, 2018, the Combination was approved by the stockholders of NorthStar I and NorthStar II. The Combination closed on January 31, 2018. Upon closing of the Combination, the Company and its affiliates, NorthStar I stockholders and NorthStar II stockholders each owned approximately 37%, 32% and 31%, respectively, of Colony Credit on a fully diluted basis.

On June 25, 2018, Colony Credit changed its name from "Colony NorthStar Credit Real Estate, Inc." to "Colony Credit Real Estate, Inc." Additionally, in June 2018, Colony Credit was added to the Small-cap Russell 2000 and broad-market Russell 3000 Indexes. 

Refer to Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements for further information related to the Combination.

Corporate Restructuring

Following a strategic review process, in November 2018, we announced a corporate restructuring and reorganization plan aimed at reducing our annual compensation and administrative expenses over the next 12 months. The restructuring plan was designed to match resources that further align our increasing focus on our investment management business by, among other things, reducing our workforce globally by 10% to 20%, primarily in connection with the exit of non-core assets and business lines, together with general cost reductions. In the fourth quarter of 2018, we incurred $19.3 million of restructuring costs, which were primarily compensation costs.

Investment Strategy

We believe we can achieve our business objective of delivering attractive risk-adjusted returns through our rigorous underwriting and asset management processes, which benefit from our deep real estate experience, having invested through multiple economic cycles. These processes allow us to implement a flexible yet disciplined investment strategy for our balance sheet and for the companies and funds we manage on behalf of third parties as more fully described below:

Our investment strategy is dynamic and flexible, which enables us to adapt to shifts in economic, real estate and capital market conditions and to exploit inefficiencies around the world. Consistent with this strategy, in order to capitalize on the investment opportunities that may be present in various points of an economic cycle, we may expand or change our investment strategy or target assets over time as appropriate. We believe that the diversification of the portfolio of assets that we have acquired, our ability to acquire, originate and manage our target assets and the flexibility of our strategy will position us to identify undervalued opportunities and to generate attractive long-term returns for our stockholders in a variety of market conditions.

Financing Strategy

Our financing strategy in general is to favor investment-specific financing principally on a non-recourse basis, and then corporate financing, which is generally recourse to the Company or the Company’s assets. We seek to match terms and currencies, as available and applicable, and the amount of leverage we use is based on our assessment of a variety of factors, including, among others, the anticipated liquidity and price volatility of the assets in our investment portfolio, the potential for losses and extension risk in our portfolio, the ability to raise additional equity to reduce leverage and create liquidity for future investments, the availability of credit at favorable prices or at all, the credit quality of our assets, our outlook for borrowing costs relative to the income earned on our assets and financial covenants within our credit facilities.

Our decision to use leverage to finance our assets is at our discretion and not subject to the approval of our stockholders. To the extent that we use leverage in the future, we may mitigate interest rate risk through utilization of hedging instruments, primarily interest rate swap and cap agreements, to serve as a hedge against future interest rate increases on our borrowings. Refer to "Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources” for discussion of our liquidity needs and sources of liquidity.

Risk Management

Risk management is a significant component of our strategy to deliver consistent risk-adjusted returns to our stockholders. In order to maintain our qualification as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes and our exemption from registration under the 1940 Act, we closely monitor our portfolio and actively manage risks associated with, among other things, our assets and interest rates. In addition, the risk committee of our board of directors, in consultation with our chief risk officer, internal auditor and other management, periodically reviews our policies with respect to risk assessment and risk management, including key risks to which we are subject, including credit risk, liquidity risk, financing risk, foreign currency risk and market risk, and the steps that management has taken to monitor and control such risks. The audit committee of our board of directors maintains oversight of financial reporting risk matters.

Underwriting

In connection with evaluating any potential equity or debt investment for our portfolio or a managed investment vehicle, our underwriting team, in conjunction with third party providers, undertakes an asset-level due diligence process, involving data collection and analysis, to ensure that we understand the state of the market and the risk-reward profile of the asset. In addition, we evaluate material accounting, legal, financial and business issues surrounding such investment. These issues and risks are built into the valuation of an asset and ultimate pricing of an investment.

During the underwriting process, we review the following data, including, but not limited to: property financial data including historic and budgeted financial statements, liquidity and capital expenditure plans, property operating metrics (including occupancy, leasing activity, lease expirations, sales information, tenant credit review, tenant delinquency reports, operating expense efficiency and property management efficacy) and local and real estate market conditions including vacancy rates, absorption, new supply, rent levels and comparable sale transactions, as applicable. For debt investments, we also analyze metrics such as loan-to-collateral value ratios, debt service coverage ratios, debt yields, sponsor credit ratings and performance history.

In addition to evaluating the merits of any particular proposed investment, we evaluate the diversification of our or a particular managed investment vehicle’s portfolio of assets, as the case may be. Prior to making a final investment decision, we determine whether a target asset will cause the portfolio of assets to be too heavily concentrated with, or cause too much risk exposure to, any one real estate sector, geographic region, source of cash flow such as tenants or borrowers, or other geopolitical issues. If we determine that a proposed investment presents excessive concentration risk, we may decide not to pursue an otherwise attractive investment.

Investment Committees

We have established investment committees composed of senior executives for our various business segments as well as for the portfolios of the funds we manage. These investment committees review and evaluate potential investment opportunities, and meet periodically with the Company’s portfolio management team to review and monitor risks posed by existing investments.

Allocation Procedures

We currently manage, and may in the future manage, REITs and other entities that have investment and/or rate of return objectives similar to our own or to other investment vehicles that we manage. In order to address the risk of potential conflicts of interest among us and our managed investment vehicles, we have implemented an investment allocation policy consistent with our duty as a registered investment adviser to treat our managed investment vehicles fairly and equitably over time. See “—Regulation under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940” below. Pursuant to this policy, investment allocation decisions are based on a suitability assessment involving a review of numerous factors, including the particular source of capital’s investment objectives, available cash, diversification/concentration, leverage policy, the size of the investment, tax, anticipated pipeline of suitable investments and fund life.

Portfolio Management

The comprehensive portfolio management process generally includes day-to-day oversight by the Company's portfolio management team, regular management meetings and quarterly asset review process. These processes are designed to enable management to evaluate and proactively identify asset-specific issues and trends on a portfolio-wide basis for both assets on our balance sheet and assets of the companies within our investment management business. Nevertheless, we cannot be certain that such review will identify all issues within our portfolio due to, among other things, adverse economic conditions or events adversely affecting specific assets; therefore, potential future losses may also stem from investments that are not identified during these credit reviews.

We use many methods to actively manage our risk to preserve our income and capital. For commercial real estate equity and debt investments, frequent re-underwriting and dialogue with tenants, operators, partners and/or borrowers and regular inspections of our collateral and owned properties have proven to be an effective process for identifying issues early. With respect to our healthcare properties, we consider the impact of regulatory changes on operator performance and property values. During a quarterly review, or more frequently as necessary, investments are monitored and identified for possible asset impairment and loan loss reserves, as appropriate, based upon several factors, including missed or late contractual payments, significant declines in collateral performance and other data which may indicate a potential issue in our ability to recover our invested capital from an investment. In addition, we seek to utilize services of certain strategic partnerships and joint ventures with third parties with expertise in commercial real estate or other sectors and markets to assist our portfolio management.

In order to maintain our qualification as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes and our exemption from registration under the 1940 Act, and maximize returns and manage portfolio risk, we may dispose of an asset earlier than anticipated or hold an asset longer than anticipated if we determine it to be appropriate depending upon prevailing market conditions or factors regarding a particular asset. We can provide no assurances, however, that we will be successful in identifying or managing all of the risks associated with acquiring, holding or disposing of a particular asset or that we will not realize losses on certain assets.

Interest Rate and Foreign Currency Hedging

Subject to maintaining our qualification as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes and our exemption from registration under the 1940 Act, we may mitigate the risk of interest rate volatility through the use of hedging instruments, such as interest rate swap agreements and interest rate cap agreements. The goal of our interest rate management strategy is to minimize or eliminate the effects of interest rate changes on the value of our assets, to improve risk-adjusted returns and, where possible, to lock in, on a long-term basis, a favorable spread between the yield on our assets and the cost of financing such assets. In addition, because we are exposed to foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations, we employ foreign currency risk management strategies, including the use of, among others, currency hedges, and matched currency financing. We can provide no assurances, however, that our efforts to manage interest rate and foreign currency exchange rate volatility will successfully mitigate the risks of such volatility on our portfolio.

Operating and Regulatory Structure

REIT Qualification

We elected to be taxed as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes commencing with our initial taxable year ended December 31, 2017. So long as we qualify as a REIT, we generally will not be subject to U.S. federal income tax at the REIT-level on our REIT taxable income that we distribute currently to our stockholders. Our qualification as a REIT depends upon our ability to meet, on a continuing basis, various complex requirements under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code"), relating to, among other things, the sources of our gross income and the composition and values of our assets (which, based on the types of assets we own, can fluctuate rapidly, significantly and unpredictably), our distribution levels and the diversity of ownership of our shares. In addition, we hold certain of our assets through taxable REIT subsidiaries (each a "TRS"), which are subject to U.S. federal and applicable state and local income taxes (and any applicable non-U.S. taxes) at regular corporate rates. Due to the nature of the assets in which we invest, our TRSs may have a material amount of assets and net taxable income.

1940 Act Exemption

We intend to continue to conduct our operations so that we are not required to register as an investment company under the 1940 Act. Section 3(a)(1)(A) of the 1940 Act defines an investment company as any issuer that is or holds itself out as being engaged primarily in the business of investing, reinvesting or trading in securities. Section 3(a)(1)(C) of the 1940 Act defines an investment company as any issuer that is engaged in, 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 the issuer’s total assets (exclusive of U.S. Government securities and cash items) on an unconsolidated basis. Excluded from the definition of investment securities under the 1940 Act, among other things, are U.S. Government securities and securities issued by majority owned subsidiaries that are not themselves investment companies and are not relying on the exception from the definition of investment company set forth in Section 3(c)(1) or Section 3(c)(7) of the 1940 Act, which relate to “private” investment companies.

We are organized as a holding company that conducts its businesses primarily through wholly owned or majority owned subsidiaries. We expect that many of our subsidiaries will qualify for an exception from the definition of investment company under Section 3(c)(5)(C) or Section 3(c)(6) of the 1940 Act. Section 3(c)(5)(C) provides an exception for entities “primarily engaged in the business of purchasing or otherwise acquiring mortgages and other liens on and interests in real estate.” The SEC staff has taken the position that this exemption generally requires that at least 55% of an entity’s assets must be comprised of mortgages and other liens on and interests in real estate, also known as “qualifying assets,” and at least another 25% of the entity’s assets must be comprised of additional qualifying assets or a broader category of assets that we refer to as “real estate-related assets” (and no more than 20% of the entity’s assets may be comprised of miscellaneous assets). Section 3(c)(6) provides an exception for entities that are primarily engaged, directly or through majority owned subsidiaries, in, among other things, the business of purchasing mortgages or other real estate interests. We intend to limit the investment securities we hold in our wholly owned or majority owned subsidiaries that rely solely on the exception from the definition of investment company contained in Section 3(c)(1) or 3(c)(7) of the 1940 Act, with the result that, combined with any other investment securities we may hold directly, the value of such securities do not exceed 40% of the value of our total assets (exclusive of U.S. Government securities and cash items) on an unconsolidated basis. We intend to monitor our holdings to ensure ongoing compliance with the 40% test. In addition, we believe we are not an investment company under Section 3(a)(1)(A) of the 1940 Act because we do not and will not engage primarily, or hold ourselves out as being engaged primarily, in the business of investing, reinvesting or trading in securities. Rather, through our wholly owned and majority owned subsidiaries, we are primarily engaged in the non-investment company businesses of these subsidiaries.

Continuing qualification for exemption from registration under the 1940 Act will limit our ability to make certain investments. For example, for our subsidiaries that rely on Section 3(c)(5)(C) of the 1940 Act, the requirements to maintain the exemption will limit their ability to invest directly in mortgage-backed securities that represent less than the entire ownership in a pool of mortgage loans, debt and equity tranches of securitizations and certain asset-backed securities and real estate companies or assets not related to real estate.

We classify our investments for purposes of testing for these exemptions based in large measure on no-action letters issued by the Staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC") and other SEC interpretive guidance. These positions were based upon facts that may be different from ours, and many of these no-action positions were issued more than twenty years ago. To the extent that the Staff of the Division of Investment Management of the SEC provides more specific guidance regarding any of the matters bearing upon any exemption on which we may rely, we may be required to adjust our holdings and strategies accordingly. Additional guidance from the Staff of the Division of Investment Management of the SEC could provide us with additional flexibility, or it could further inhibit our ability to pursue strategies we have chosen. For example, on August 31, 2011, the SEC issued a concept release (Release No. 29778, File No. S7-34-11, Companies Engaged in the Business of Acquiring Mortgages and Mortgage Related Instruments), pursuant to which it is reviewing whether certain companies that invest in mortgage-backed securities should continue to be allowed to rely on the exclusion from registration under Section 3(c)(5)(C) of the 1940 Act. If the SEC takes action with respect to this exclusion, these changes could result in certain of our securitization vehicles and other subsidiaries being no longer able to rely on the exclusion from registration under Section 3(c)(5)(C) of the 1940 Act. In such a case, we would either need to conform our activities to one or more other exemptions from the 1940 Act or lose our status as exempt from registration under the 1940 Act, either of which could result in an adverse effect on us.

If we or our subsidiaries fail to maintain an exception or exemption from the 1940 Act, we may be required to, among other things: (i) substantially change the manner in which we conduct our operations to avoid being required to register as an investment company under the 1940 Act; or (ii) register as an investment company under the 1940 Act. Either of (i) or (ii) could have an adverse effect on us and the market price of our securities. If we were required to register as an investment company under the 1940 Act, we would become subject to substantial regulation with respect to our capital structure (including our ability to use leverage), management, operations, transactions with affiliated persons (as defined in the 1940 Act), portfolio composition, including restrictions with respect to diversification and industry concentration, and other matters.

Regulation under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940

We have subsidiaries that are registered with the SEC as investment advisers under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, as amended (the "Investment Advisers Act"). As a result, we are subject to the anti-fraud provisions of the Investment Advisers Act and to applicable fiduciary duties derived from these provisions that apply to our relationships with the investment vehicles that we manage. These provisions and duties impose restrictions and obligations on us with respect to our dealings with our investors and our investments, including, for example, restrictions on agency, cross and principal transactions. We, or our registered investment adviser subsidiaries, will be subject to periodic SEC examinations and other requirements under the Investment Advisers Act and related regulations primarily intended to benefit advisory clients. These additional requirements relate, among other things, to maintaining an effective and comprehensive compliance program, recordkeeping and reporting requirements and disclosure requirements. The Investment Advisers Act generally grants the SEC broad administrative powers, including the power to limit or restrict an investment adviser from conducting advisory activities in the event it fails to comply with federal securities laws. Additional sanctions that may be imposed for failure to comply with applicable requirements include the prohibition of individuals from associating with an investment adviser, the revocation of registrations and other censures and fines.

U.S. Healthcare Regulation—Overview

Assisted living, memory care, independent living, hospitals, skilled nursing facilities and other healthcare providers that operate healthcare properties in our portfolio are subject to extensive federal, state and local laws, regulations and industry standards governing their operations. Failure to comply with any of these, and other, laws could result in loss of licensure; loss of certification or accreditation; denial of reimbursement; imposition of civil and/or criminal penalties and fines; suspension or exclusion from federal and state healthcare programs; or closure of the facility. Although the properties within our portfolio may be subject to varying levels of governmental scrutiny, we expect that the healthcare industry, in general, will continue to face increased regulation and pressure in the areas of fraud and abuse and privacy and security, among others. We also expect that efforts by third-party payors, such as the federal Medicare program, state Medicaid programs and private insurers, to impose greater and more stringent cost controls upon operators will intensify and continue. Changes in laws, regulations, reimbursement, and enforcement activity can all have a significant effect on the operations and financial condition of our tenants, operators and managers, which in turn may adversely impact us, as set forth below and under "Item 1A. Risk Factors” in this report.

Healthcare Fraud and Abuse Enforcement

Healthcare providers are subject to federal and state laws and regulations that govern their operations and, in some cases, arrangements with referral sources. These laws include those that require providers to furnish only medically necessary services and submit to third-party payors valid and accurate statements for each service, as well as kickback laws, self-referral laws and false claims acts. In particular, enforcement of the federal False Claims Act has resulted in increased enforcement activity for healthcare providers and can involve significant monetary damages and awards to private plaintiffs who successfully bring “whistleblower” lawsuits. Sanctions for violations of these laws, regulations, and other applicable guidance may include, but are not limited to, loss of licensure, loss of certification or accreditation, denial of reimbursement, imposition of civil and/or criminal penalties and fines, suspension or exclusion from federal and state healthcare programs or closure of the facility; any of which could have a material adverse effect on the operations and financial condition of our tenants, operators and managers, which in turn may adversely impact us.

Healthcare Reform

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, or ACA, impacted the healthcare marketplace by decreasing the number of uninsured individuals in the United States through the establishment of health insurance exchanges to facilitate the purchase of health insurance, expanded Medicaid eligibility, subsidized insurance premiums and included requirements and incentives for businesses to provide healthcare benefits. The ACA remains subject to continuing legislative, administrative and judicial scrutiny. In 2017, Congress enacted legislation eliminating the tax penalty for individuals who do not purchase insurance after it unsuccessfully sought to replace substantial parts of the ACA with different mechanisms for facilitating insurance coverage in the commercial and Medicaid markets. Additionally, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) discontinued payment of cost-sharing reduction subsidies to insurance providers. In 2018, the average annual premium for employer-based family coverage rose five percent and three percent for single coverage. Further, CMS has begun approving waivers permitting states to alter state Medicaid programs by, among other things, requiring individuals to meet certain requirements, like work requirements, in order to maintain eligibility for Medicaid (although some of these waivers have subsequently been challenged in court). These and other actions may impact the insurance markets and reduce the number of individuals purchasing insurance or qualifying for Medicaid and may negatively impact the operations and financial condition of our tenants, operators and managers, which in turn may adversely impact us. Congress may revisit ACA or Medicaid reform legislation in 2019. If the ACA is repealed or further substantially modified, or if implementation of certain aspects of the ACA are suspended, slowed, or subject to reduced funding, such actions could negatively impact the operations and financial condition of our tenants and operators, which in turn may adversely impact us.

On December 14, 2018, a U.S. District Court in Texas ruled the ACA unconstitutional in its entirety. This decision has been appealed, and will not take effect while that appeal is pending. Nonetheless, should this ruling be upheld upon appeal, it could dramatically change U.S. healthcare regulation in numerous ways and may potentially spur congressional action, making the ultimate consequences of the ruling difficult to predict. Should the ruling be upheld and implemented, the immediate effects would include reduced access to health coverage through: (1) reduced Medicaid eligibility, (2) the disestablishment of health insurance exchanges and accompanying subsidized premiums, and (3) no requirement for businesses to provide health insurance. Amendments, including certain waivers to healthcare fraud and abuse laws made by the ACA would also be void, which could change the enforcement posture of federal regulators. Current healthcare reimbursement standards, including those discussed below, are predicated on changes made by the ACA and implementation of this ruling would create significant uncertainty regarding the legality of such standards and what standards are in effect absent the ACA. The effects of this ruling could adversely affect the operations and financial condition of our tenants and operators, which in turn may adversely impact us.

Healthcare Reimbursement

Federal, state and private payor reimbursement methodologies applied to healthcare providers continue to evolve. Federal and state healthcare financing authorities are continuing to implement new or modified reimbursement methodologies that shift risk to healthcare providers and generally reduce payments for services, which may negatively impact healthcare property operations. Additionally, Congress and the current presidential administration could substantially change the health insurance industry and payment systems. The impact of any such changes, if implemented, may result in an adverse effect on our tenants, managers and operators, which in turn may adversely impact us.

Skilled nursing facilities and hospitals typically receive most of their revenues from the Medicare and Medicaid programs, with the balance representing reimbursement payments from private payors, including private insurers and self-pay patients. Senior housing facilities (assisted living, independent living and memory care facilities) typically receive most of their revenues from private pay sources and a small portion of their revenue from the Medicaid program.

Providers that contract with government and private payors may be subject to periodic pre- and post-payment reviews and other audits. A review or audit of a property operator’s claims could result in recoupments, denials or delay of payments in the future, each of which could have a significant negative financial impact on such property. Additionally, there can be no guarantee that a third-party payor will continue to reimburse for services at current levels or continue to be available to residents of our facilities. Rates generated at facilities will vary by payor mix, market conditions and resident acuity. Rates paid by self-pay residents are set by the facilities and are determined by local market conditions and operating costs.

and/or offsetting the cost by further reducing payments to providers of services. Congress is also considering enacting substantial reforms to Medicaid to grant states more autonomy and discretion to design Medicaid programs. These changes, if enacted, could also reduce or eliminate eligibility for certain individuals and/or allow states to further reduce payments to providers of services. In some states, our tenants and operators could experience delayed or reduced payment for services furnished to Medicaid enrollees, which in turn may adversely impact us. As noted above, ongoing litigation regarding the ACA and Medicaid waivers may also affect Medicaid coverage and reimbursement.

Healthcare Licensure, CON, Certification and Accreditation

Hospitals, skilled nursing facilities, senior housing facilities and other healthcare providers that operate healthcare properties in our portfolio may be subject to extensive state licensing and certificate of need, or CON, laws and regulations, which may restrict the ability of our tenants and operators to add new properties, expand an existing facility’s size or services, or transfer responsibility for operating a particular facility to a new tenant, operator or manager. The failure of our tenants and operators to obtain, maintain or comply with any required license, CON or other certification, accreditation or regulatory approval (which could be required as a condition of third-party payor reimbursement) could result in loss of licensure, loss of certification or accreditation, denial of reimbursement, imposition of civil and/or criminal penalties and fines, suspension or exclusion from federal and state healthcare programs, or closure of the facility; any of which could have an adverse effect on the operations and financial condition of our tenants, operators and managers, which in turn may adversely impact us.

Health Information Privacy and Security

Healthcare providers, including those in our portfolio, are subject to numerous state and federal laws that protect the privacy and security of patient health information. The federal government, in particular, has significantly increased its enforcement of these laws. The failure of our tenants, operators and managers to maintain compliance with privacy and security laws could result in the imposition of penalties and fines, which in turn may adversely impact us.

For additional information regarding regulations applicable to the Company, refer to "Item 1A. Risk Factors.”

Competition

The Company is engaged in a competitive multifaceted business and competes for capital from investors and numerous types of target assets.

We compete directly with other real estate investment managers and to lesser degree, investment managers focused on corporate private equity, credit and hedge fund strategies and venture capital. Some of our competitors have greater financial resources, longer track records, more established relationships and more attractive fund terms, including fees. Further, as institutional fund investors increasingly consolidate their relationships for multiple investment products with a few investment firms, competition for capital from such institutional fund investors may become more acute.

Our competition for investments includes a variety of institutional investors, including other REITs and/or investment managers, specialty finance companies, public and private funds, commercial and investment banks, hedge funds, mortgage bankers, commercial finance and insurance companies, governmental bodies and other financial institutions. In addition, there are several REITs with similar investment objectives, including a number that have been recently formed, and others may be organized in the future. These other REITs increase competition for the available supply of industrial, healthcare, hospitality, commercial debt and equity real estate and other real estate-related assets suitable for purchase or origination. Some competitors may have greater financial resources, access to lower costs of capital and access to funding sources that may not be available to the Company, such as funding from the U.S. Government, if we are not eligible to participate in programs established by the U.S. Government. In addition, some of our competitors are not subject to the operating constraints associated with REIT compliance or maintenance of an exemption from the 1940 Act. Furthermore, some of our competitors may have higher risk tolerances or different risk assessments, which could allow them to consider a wider variety of investments, or pay higher prices, than we can. Current market conditions may attract more competitors, which may increase the competition for our target assets.

The industrial, healthcare and hospitality industries are also highly competitive. Competition in the markets in which our properties operate from existing or newly renovated properties could adversely affect the operating performance of our properties, and thus our financial results. Competition may also require us to make capital improvements or incur additional costs that we otherwise might not choose to make, which may adversely affect the profitability of our properties.

We also face competition in the recruitment and retention of qualified and skilled personnel. Our ability to continue to compete effectively in our businesses will depend upon our ability to attract new employees and retain and motivate our existing employees and consultants.

An increase in competition across the various components of our business may limit our ability to generate attractive risk-adjusted returns for our stockholders, thereby adversely affecting the market price of our common stock.

Employees

At December 31, 2018 , we employed over 400 full-time employees worldwide.

Seasonality

Operations of our hospitality portfolio are affected by seasonal patterns resulting from overall economic cycles, geographic locations, weather and customer mix at the hotels. Generally, we expect our hotel portfolio to have higher revenues, operating income and cash flows in the second and third quarters of each year and lower revenues, operating income and cash flows in the first and fourth quarters of each year.

Available Information and Corporate Governance

Our principal executive office is located at 515 South Flower Street, 44th Floor, Los Angeles, California, 90071. Our website address is www.clny.com .

Our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, proxy statements and amendments to those reports or statements are available on our website under “Public Shareholders—SEC Filings,” as soon as reasonably practicable after we file these materials with, or furnish them to, the SEC. We also post corporate presentations on our website from time to time.

All of our reports, proxy and information statements filed with the SEC can also be obtained at the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov .

Colony Capital, Inc. emphasizes the importance of professional business conduct and ethics through our corporate governance initiatives. Our board of directors consists of a majority of independent directors; the audit, compensation, nominating and corporate governance, and risk committees of the board of directors are composed exclusively of independent directors. Additionally, the following documents relating to corporate governance are available on our website under “Public Shareholders—Corporate Governance”:

These corporate governance documents are also available in print free of charge to any security holder who requests them in writing to: Colony Capital, Inc., Attention: Investor Relations, 515 South Flower Street, 44th Floor, Los Angeles, California, 90071. Within the time period required by the rules of the SEC and the NYSE, we will post on our website any amendment to such corporate governance documents.

Information contained on our website is not incorporated by reference into this Annual Report and such information should not be considered to be part of this report.

Item 1A. Risk Factors.

The following risk factors and other information included in this Annual Report should be carefully considered. The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones we face. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us that we currently deem immaterial or that generally apply to all businesses also may adversely impact our business. If any of the following risks occur, our business, financial condition, operating results, cash flow and liquidity could be materially adversely affected.

Risks Related to Our Company

Adverse changes in general economic conditions can negatively affect our business, which could adversely impact our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our success is dependent upon general economic conditions in the United States and in international geographic areas where a substantial number of our investments are located. Adverse changes in economic conditions in the United States or these countries or regions would likely have a negative impact on real estate values and, accordingly, our financial performance, the market prices of our securities, and our ability to pay dividends.

The condition of the real estate markets in which we operate is cyclical and depends on the condition of the economy in the United States, Europe, China and elsewhere as a whole and to the perceptions of investors of the overall economic outlook. Rising interest rates, declining employment levels, declining demand for real estate, declining real estate values or periods of general economic slowdown or recession, increasing political instability or uncertainty, or the perception that any of these events may occur have negatively impacted the real estate market in the past and may in the future negatively impact our operating performance. In addition, the economic condition of each local market where we operate may depend on one or more key industries within that market, which, in turn, makes our business sensitive to the performance of those industries.

We have only a limited ability to change our portfolio promptly in response to changing economic or other conditions. Certain significant expenditures, such as debt service costs, real estate taxes, and operating and maintenance costs, are generally not reduced when market conditions are poor. These factors impede us from responding quickly to changes in the performance of our investments and could adversely impact our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We require capital in order to continue to operate and grow our business, and the failure to obtain such capital, either through the public or private markets or other third party sources of capital, would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and ability to maintain our distributions to our stockholders .

We require capital to fund acquisitions and originations of our target investments, to fund our operations, including overhead costs, to fund distributions to our stockholders and to repay principal and interest on our borrowings. We expect to meet our capital requirements using cash on hand, cash flow generated from our operations, and principal and interest payments received from our investments. However, because of distribution requirements imposed on us to qualify as a REIT which generally requires that we distribute to our stockholders 90% of our taxable income and that we pay tax on any undistributed income, our ability to finance our growth must largely be funded by external sources of capital. As a result, we may have to rely on third party sources of capital, including public and private offerings of securities and debt financings.

Our ability to raise capital through the public and private capital markets depends on a number of factors, including many that are outside our control, such as the general economic environment, the regulatory environment, competition in the marketplace, media attention and investor investment allocation preferences. Poor performance by, or negative publicity about, our Company, our management or our managed companies could also make it more difficult for us to raise new capital. Investors in our managed companies may decline to invest in future companies we raise, and investors may withdraw their investments in our managed companies (subject to the terms of such managed company) as a result of poor performance or negative perceptions of our Company or our leadership. In addition, third party financing may not be available to us when needed, on favorable terms, or at all. In the event that we are unable to obtain adequate financing to fund or grow our business, it would have a material adverse effect on our ability to acquire additional assets and make our debt service payments and our financial condition, results of operations and the ability to fund our distributions to our stockholders would be materially adversely affected.

The investment management business is intensely competitive.

The investment management business is intensely competitive, with competition based on a variety of factors, including investment performance, the quality of service provided to clients, brand recognition and business reputation. Our investment management business competes for clients, personnel and investment opportunities with a large number of private equity funds, specialized investment funds, hedge funds, corporate buyers, traditional investment managers, commercial banks, investment banks, other investment managers and other financial institutions, and we expect that competition will increase. Numerous factors serve to increase our competitive risks, some of which are outside of our control, including that:

We may find it harder to raise managed companies, and we may lose investment opportunities in the future, if we do not match the fees, structures and terms offered by competitors to their fund clients. Alternatively, we may experience decreased profitability, rates of return and increased risk of loss if we match the prices, structures and terms offered by competitors. This competitive pressure could adversely affect our ability to make successful investments and limit our ability to raise future managed companies, either of which would adversely impact our business, revenues, results of operations and cash flow.

We may not be able to generate sufficient cash flow to meet all of our existing or potential future debt service obligations.

Our ability to meet all of our existing or potential future debt service obligations (including those under our revolving credit facility, pursuant to which we may incur significant indebtedness), to refinance our existing or potential future indebtedness, and to fund our operations, working capital, acquisitions, capital expenditures, and other important business uses, depends on our ability to generate sufficient cash flow in the future. Our future cash flow is subject to, among other factors, general economic, industry, financial, competitive, operating, legislative, and regulatory conditions, many of which are beyond our control.

We cannot assure you that our business will generate sufficient cash flow from operations or that future sources of cash will be available to us on favorable terms, or at all, in amounts sufficient to enable us to meet all of our existing or potential future debt service obligations, or to fund our other important business uses or liquidity needs. Furthermore, if we incur additional indebtedness in connection with future acquisitions or for any other purpose, our existing or potential future debt service obligations could increase significantly and our ability to meet those obligations could depend, in large part, on the returns from such acquisitions or projects, as to which no assurance can be given.

Furthermore, our obligations under the terms of our borrowings could impact us negatively. For example, such obligations could:

We may also need to refinance all or a portion of our indebtedness at or prior to the scheduled maturity. Our ability to refinance our indebtedness or obtain additional financing will depend on, among other things, (i) our business, financial condition, liquidity, results of operations, core funds from operations ("Core FFO") prospects, and then-current market conditions; and (ii) restrictions in the agreements governing our indebtedness. As a result, we may not be able to refinance any of our indebtedness or obtain additional financing on favorable terms, or at all.

If we do not generate sufficient cash flow from operations and additional borrowings or refinancings are not available to us, we may be unable to meet all of our existing or potential future debt service obligations. As a result, we would be forced to take other actions to meet those obligations, such as selling properties, raising equity or delaying capital expenditures, any of which could have a material adverse effect on us. Furthermore, we cannot assure you that we will be able to effect any of these actions on favorable terms, or at all.

We depend on our key personnel, and the loss of their services, through the termination of their employment agreements, or the loss of investor confidence in such personnel could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We depend on the efforts, skill, reputations and business contacts of our key personnel, including our executive officers, which include our Executive Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Thomas J. Barrack, Jr., and our President, Darren J. Tangen, in particular, and the services of the other members of our senior management team, including Mark M. Hedstrom, Ronald M. Sanders, Kevin P. Traenkle and Neale W. Redington, each of whom has entered into an employment agreement with us. For instance, the extent and nature of the experience of our executive officers and the nature of the relationships they have developed with real estate professionals and financial institutions are critical to the success of our business. Changes to our management team have occurred in the past, and we cannot assure stockholders that further changes will not be made. We also cannot assure stockholders of the continued employment of these individuals with the Company. The loss of services of certain of our executive officers could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and ability to effectively operate our business. Furthermore, our key personnel possess substantial experience and expertise and have strong business relationships with investors in certain of our managed companies and other members of the business community. As a result, the loss of these key personnel could jeopardize such business relationships and result in the reduction of capital raising or fewer investment opportunities.

In addition, certain of our key personnel have been and may continue to be the subject of media attention, which includes scrutiny or criticism of our Company, business and leadership. Such attention and scrutiny could negatively impact our reputation as well as that of our key personnel, which could in turn negatively impact the relationships our key personnel have with current and potential investors, business partners, vendors and employees. Negative perceptions of or a loss of investor confidence in our key personnel could adversely impact our business prospects.

Our board of directors has adopted, and will likely continue to adopt, certain incentive plans to establish incentives that will allow us to retain and attract the services of key personnel. These incentive plans may be tied to the performance of our Class A common stock. Further, the agreements we entered into with certain members of our senior management team contain certain restrictions on these executives, including a restriction on engaging in activities that are deemed competitive to our business. Although we believe these covenants to be enforceable under current law in the states in which we do business, there can be no guarantee that if our executives were to breach these covenants and engage in competitive activities, a court of law would fully enforce these restrictions. If our executives were to terminate their employment with us and engage in competitive activities, such activities could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We continue to be subject to business uncertainties following the Merger, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Uncertainty about the effect of the Merger on employees and clients may have an adverse effect on us following the Merger. These uncertainties have and could continue to disrupt our business and impair our ability to attract, retain and motivate key personnel and other experienced real estate professionals, and cause clients and others that deal with us to seek to change existing business relationships, cease doing business with us or cause potential new clients to delay

doing business with us. Retention and motivation of employees may be challenging due to the uncertainty and difficulty of integration, the Company's poor performance or a desire not to remain with us.

We often pursue investment opportunities that involve business, regulatory, legal or other complexities and the failure to successfully manage such risks could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We often pursue unusually complex investment opportunities involving substantial business, regulatory or legal complexity that would deter other investors. Our tolerance for complexity presents risks, as such transactions can be more difficult, expensive and time-consuming to finance and execute, it can be more difficult to manage or realize value from the assets acquired in such transactions, and such transactions sometimes entail a higher level of regulatory scrutiny or a greater risk of contingent liabilities. Failure to successfully manage these risks could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We have been and may continue to be subject to the actions of activist stockholders, which could cause us to incur substantial costs, divert management's attention and resources, and have an adverse effect on our business.

We have been and may continue to be the subject of increased activity by activist stockholders. Responding to stockholder activism can be costly and time-consuming, disrupt our operations and divert the attention of management and our employees from executing our business plan. Activist campaigns can create perceived uncertainties as to our future direction, strategy or leadership and may result in the loss of potential business opportunities, harm our ability to attract new investors, tenants/operators/managers and joint venture partners and cause our stock price to experience periods of volatility or stagnation. Moreover, if individuals are elected to our board of directors with a specific agenda, even though less than a majority, our ability to effectively and timely implement our current initiatives and execute on our long-term strategy may be adversely affected. Furthermore, there are circumstances in which our revolving credit facility could terminate and/or accelerate and various change of control payments could arise as a result of the conclusion of a proxy fight.

Many of our investments may be illiquid and we may not be able to vary our investment portfolio in response to changes in economic and other conditions.

Equity investments in real estate, as well as investments in mortgage-related assets, are relatively illiquid. As a result, our ability to vary our investment portfolio promptly in response to changed economic and other conditions is limited, which could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations and our ability to pay dividends and make distributions. In addition, the liquidity of our investments may also be impacted by, among other things, restrictions on a REIT’s ability to dispose of properties that are not applicable to other types of real estate companies, other legal or contractual restrictions, the lack of available financing for assets, the absence of a willing buyer or an established market and turbulent market conditions. The illiquidity of our investments may make it difficult for us to sell such investments at advantageous times or in a timely manner if the need or desire arises, including, if necessary, to maintain our status as a REIT or to maintain our exemption from the 1940 Act. If we are required to liquidate all or a portion of our portfolio quickly, we may realize significantly less than the value at which we have previously recorded our assets. If and to the extent that we use leverage to finance our investments that are or become liquid, the adverse impact on us related to trying to sell assets in a short period of time for cash could be greatly exacerbated.

Changes in the debt financing markets could negatively impact our ability to obtain attractive financing or re-financing for our investments and could increase the cost of such financing if it is obtained, which could lead to lower-yielding investments and potentially decrease our net income.

A significant contraction in the market for debt financing, such as the contraction that occurred in 2008 and 2009, or other adverse changes relating to the terms of such debt financing with, for example, higher interest rates, higher capital requirements and/or more restrictive covenants, particularly in the area of acquisition financings for leveraged buyout and real assets transactions, could have a material adverse impact on our business. In the event that we are unable to obtain committed debt financing for potential acquisitions or can only obtain debt at an increased interest rate or on unfavorable terms, we may have difficulty completing otherwise profitable acquisitions or may generate profits that are lower than would otherwise be the case, either of which could lead to a decrease in the income earned by us. Similarly, we regularly utilize the corporate debt markets in order to obtain financing for our operations. To the extent that the credit markets render such financing difficult to obtain or more expensive, this may negatively impact our operating performance. In addition, to the extent that the markets make it difficult or impossible to refinance debt that is maturing in the near term, we may be unable to repay such debt at maturity and may be forced to sell assets, undergo a recapitalization or seek bankruptcy protection.

We have undertaken a corporate restructuring and reorganization plan to reduce our annual compensation and administrative expenses. Our corporate restructuring and reorganization plan may not be effective, might have unintended consequences and could negatively impact our business.

In November 2018, we announced a corporate restructuring and reorganization plan aimed at reducing our annual compensation and administrative expenses over the next 12 months. This restructuring plan was designed to match resources that further align with our increasing focus on the investment management business by, among other things, reducing our workforce globally by 10% to 20%. Through December 31, 2018, we incurred approximately $19.3 million of restructuring charges. While we expect to continue with our cost reductions, we face a variety of risks and uncertainties relating to the effectiveness of such activities. Any delays in the implementation of our restructuring plan or unforeseen expenses related to such activities could adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Despite our planning, our corporate restructuring and reorganization plan could have unexpected negative consequences. As part of our workforce reduction, we may experience additional attrition, which may expose us to legal claims against us and loss of necessary human resources. If we face costly employee or contract termination claims, our operations and prospects could be harmed. In addition, there can be no assurance that the cost reductions we have made will be successful or are the right reductions for our business going forward. There is a risk that the restructuring, cost savings initiatives and reduction in personnel will make it more difficult to grow our investment management business and conduct our operations.

Our operations in Europe and elsewhere expose our business to risks inherent in conducting business in foreign markets.

A material portion of our revenues are sourced from our foreign operations in Europe and elsewhere or other foreign markets. Accordingly, our firm-wide results of operations depend in part on our foreign operations. Conducting business abroad carries significant risks, including:

Each of these risks might adversely affect our performance and impair our ability to make distributions to our stockholders required to qualify and remain qualified as a REIT. In addition, there is generally less publicly available information about foreign companies and a lack of uniform financial accounting standards and practices (including the availability of information in accordance with GAAP) which could impair our ability to analyze transactions and receive

timely and accurate financial information from our investments necessary to meet our reporting obligations to financial institutions or governmental or regulatory agencies.

Concerns persist regarding the debt burden of certain Eurozone countries and their ability to meet future financial obligations, the overall stability of the euro and the suitability of the euro as a single currency, given the diverse economic and political circumstances in individual Eurozone countries and in recent volatility in the value of the euro. These concerns could lead to the re-introduction of individual currencies in one or more Eurozone countries, or, in more extreme circumstances, the possible dissolution of the euro currency entirely. Should the euro dissolve entirely, the legal and contractual consequences for holders of euro-denominated obligations would be uncertain. Such uncertainty would extend to among other things, whether obligations previously expressed to be owed and payable in euros would be re-denominated in a new currency, what laws would govern and the courts of which country would have jurisdiction. These potential developments, or market perceptions concerning these and related issues, could materially adversely affect the value of our euro-denominated assets and obligations.

In addition, there is increased uncertainty in the wake of the “Brexit” referendum in the United Kingdom in June 2016, in which the majority of voters voted in favor of an exit from the European Union. The announcement of Brexit caused significant volatility in global stock markets and currency exchange rate fluctuations that resulted in the strengthening of the U.S. dollar against the U.K. Pound Sterling. Any impact of the Brexit vote depends on the terms of the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the European Union, which remains under negotiation between the parties despite the upcoming March 29, 2019 deadline. Failure to obtain parliamentary approval of an agreed withdrawal agreement would, absent a revocation of the United Kingdom’s notification to withdraw or some other delay, mean that the United Kingdom would leave the European Union on March 29, 2019, likely with no agreement (a so-called “hard Brexit”). Current discussions between the United Kingdom and the European Union may result in any number of outcomes including an extension or delay of the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the European Union. The consequences for the economies of the European Union member states as a result of the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the European Union are unknown and unpredictable, especially in the case of a hard Brexit. Uncertainty about global or regional economic conditions poses a risk as consumers and businesses may postpone spending in response to tighter credit, negative financial news, and declines in income or asset values, which could adversely affect the availability of financing, our business and our results of operations.

We are subject to substantial litigation risks and may face significant liabilities and damage to our professional reputation as a result of litigation allegations and negative publicity.

In the ordinary course of business, we are subject to the risk of substantial litigation and face significant regulatory oversight. Such litigation and proceedings, including, among others, regulatory actions and shareholder class action suits relating to transactions in which we have agreed to acquire public companies, may result in defense costs, settlements, fines or judgments against us, some of which may not be covered by insurance. Litigation could be more likely in connection with a change of control transaction or during periods of market dislocation or shareholder activism. During 2018, several class action lawsuits and related derivative actions were filed against our Company and certain of our current and former executive officers and directors alleging certain violations of securities laws and omissions or misstatements regarding disclosures made in connection with our business and the Merger. While these lawsuits are not expected to have a material impact on the Company's financial results or condition, due to the inherent uncertainties of litigation and regulatory proceedings, we cannot accurately predict the ultimate outcome of any such litigation or proceedings. An unfavorable outcome could negatively impact our cash flow, financial condition, results of operations and trading price of our shares of Class A common stock.

In addition, even in the absence of misconduct, we may be exposed to litigation or other adverse consequences where investments perform poorly and investors in or alongside our managed companies experience losses. We depend to a large extent on our business relationships and our reputation for integrity and high-caliber professional services to attract and retain investors and to pursue investment opportunities for us and our managed companies. As a result, allegations of improper conduct by private litigants (including investors in or alongside our managed companies) or regulators, whether the ultimate outcome is favorable or unfavorable to us, as well as negative publicity and press speculation about us, our investment activities or the private equity industry in general, whether or not valid, may harm our reputation, which may be more damaging to our business than to other types of businesses.

The historical financial information included in this Annual Report is not necessarily indicative of our future performance.

The historical financial information included in this Annual Report is not necessarily indicative of our future financial results, in particular because the historical financial information is related only to Colony. This financial information does not purport to represent or predict the results of any future periods.

Further, the results of future periods are likely to be materially different as a result of:

We are subject to significant competition and we may not be able to compete successfully for investments.

We are subject to significant competition for attractive investment opportunities from other real estate investors, some of which have greater financial resources than us, including publicly-traded REITs, non-traded REITs, insurance companies, commercial and investment banking firms, private institutional funds, hedge funds, private equity funds and other investors. We may not be able to compete successfully for investments. In addition, the number of entities and the amount of funds competing for suitable investments may increase. For example, a significant portion of the assets that were acquired in the Merger were acquired during periods of increased competition in 2014 and 2015. To the extent we paid higher prices for such investments or originated loans on less advantageous terms to us, or are required to do so in the future, due to increased competition, our returns may be lower and the value of our assets may not increase or may decrease significantly below the amount we paid for such assets. Further, as we reinvest capital, we may not realize risk adjusted returns that are as attractive as those we have realized in the past due to decreased competition for such investments or otherwise. If such events occur, we may experience lower returns on our investments.

Our assets may be subject to impairment charges, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.  

We evaluate our long-lived assets, primarily real estate held for investment, for impairment periodically or whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amounts may not be recoverable. In evaluating and/or measuring impairment, the Company considers, among other things, current and estimated future cash flows associated with each property, market information for each sub-market and other quantitative and qualitative factors. Another key consideration in this assessment is the Company's assumptions about the highest and best use of its real estate investments and its intent and ability to hold them for a reasonable period that would allow for the recovery of their carrying values. These key assumptions are subjective in nature and could differ materially from actual results if the property was disposed. Changes in our strategy or changes in the marketplace may alter the hold period of an asset or asset group, which may result in an impairment loss, and such loss could be material to our financial condition or operating performance. If, after giving effect to such changes, we conclude that the carrying values of such assets or asset groups are no longer recoverable, we may recognize impairments in future periods equal to the excess of the carrying values over the estimated fair value. Such impairments could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.

These subjective assessments have a direct impact on our net income because recording an impairment charge results in an immediate negative adjustment to net income. There can be no assurance that we will not take additional charges in the future related to the impairment of our assets. Any future impairment could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations in the period in which the charge is taken.

We face cybersecurity risks and risks associated with security breaches that have the potential to disrupt our operations, cause material harm to our financial condition, result in misappropriation of assets, compromise confidential information and/or damage our business relationships and can provide no assurance that the steps we and our service providers take in response to these risks will be effective.

We face cybersecurity risks and risks associated with security breaches or disruptions such as those through cyber-attacks or cyber intrusions over the Internet, malware, computer viruses, attachments to emails, social engineering and phishing schemes or persons inside our organization. The risk of a security breach or disruption, particularly through cyber-attacks or cyber intrusions, including by computer hackers, nation-state affiliated actors, and cyber terrorists, has generally increased as the number, intensity and sophistication of attempted attacks and intrusions from around the world have increased. These incidents may result in disruption of our operations, material harm to our financial condition, cash flows and the market price of our common shares, misappropriation of assets, compromise or corruption of confidential information collected in the course of conducting our business, liability for stolen information or assets, increased cybersecurity protection and insurance costs, regulatory enforcement, litigation and damage to our stakeholder relationships. These risks require continuous and likely increasing attention and other resources from us to, among other actions, identify and quantify these risks, upgrade and expand our technologies, systems and processes to adequately

address them and provide periodic training for our employees to assist them in detecting phishing, malware and other schemes. Such attention diverts time and other resources from other activities and there is no assurance that our efforts will be effective. Potential sources for disruption, damage or failure of our information technology systems include, without limitation, computer viruses, security breaches, human error, cyber-attacks, natural disasters and defects in design.Additionally, due to the size and nature of our company, we rely on third-party service providers for many aspects of our business. Furthermore, as an asset manager our business is highly dependent on information technology systems, including systems provided by third parties over which we have no control. We can provide no assurance that the networks and systems that our third-party vendors have established or use will be effective.

In the normal course of business, we and our service providers collect and retain certain personal information provided by our tenants, employees and vendors. We also rely extensively on computer systems to process transactions and manage our business. We can provide no assurance that the data security measures designed to protect confidential information on our systems established by us and our service providers will be able to prevent unauthorized access to this personal information. There can be no assurance that our efforts to maintain the security and integrity of the information we and our service providers collect and our and their computer systems will be effective or that attempted security breaches or disruptions would not be successful or damaging. Even the most well protected information, networks, systems and facilities remain potentially vulnerable because the techniques used in such attempted security breaches evolve and generally are not recognized until launched against a target, and in some cases are designed not be detected and, in fact, may not be detected. Accordingly, we and our service providers may be unable to anticipate these techniques or to implement adequate security barriers or other preventative measures, and thus it is impossible for us and our service providers to entirely mitigate this risk.

We are dependent on the effectiveness of our information and cyber security policies, procedures and capabilities to protect our computer and telecommunications systems and the data that resides on or is transmitted through them. An externally caused information security incident, such as a hacker attack, virus or worm, or an internally caused issue, such as failure to control access to sensitive systems, could materially interrupt business operations or cause disclosure or modification of sensitive or confidential information and could result in material financial loss, loss of competitive position, regulatory actions, breach of contracts, reputational harm or legal liability. Any failure or interruption of our systems could cause delays or other problems in our activities, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial performance. Potential sources for disruption, damage or failure of our information technology systems include, without limitation, computer viruses, security breaches, human error, cyber-attacks, natural disasters and defects in design.

If we are unable to satisfy the requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 ("Sarbanes-Oxley Act"), or our internal control over financial reporting is not effective, the reliability of our financial statements may be questioned and our stock price may suffer.

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires any company subject to the reporting requirements of the U.S. securities laws to do a comprehensive evaluation of its and its consolidated subsidiaries’ internal control over financial reporting. To comply with this statute, we are required to document and test our internal control procedures, our management is required to assess and issue a report concerning our internal control over financial reporting and our independent auditors are required to issue an opinion on their audit of our internal control over financial reporting. The rules governing the standards that must be met for management to assess our internal control over financial reporting are complex and require significant documentation, testing and possible remediation to meet the detailed standards under the rules. During the course of its testing, our management may identify material weaknesses or deficiencies which may not be remedied in time to meet the deadline imposed by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. If our management cannot favorably assess the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting or our auditors identify material weaknesses in our internal controls, investor confidence in our financial results may weaken and our stock price may suffer. For instance, accounting irregularities recently discovered at other companies have caused the SEC to launch an inquiry, stockholders to initiate lawsuits, executives to resign, the stock price to significantly decrease and the firm’s reputation to be questioned by stockholders and the press.

Increases in interest rates could adversely affect the value of our investments and cause our interest expense to increase, which could result in reduced earnings or losses and negatively affect our profitability as well as the cash available for distribution to our stockholders.

The value of our investments in certain assets may decline if long-term interest rates increase. Declines in the value of our investments may ultimately reduce earnings or result in losses to us, which may negatively affect cash available for distribution to our stockholders. Significant increases in interest rates may, among other things, increase the credit risk of our assets by negatively impacting the ability of the borrowers to pay debt service on our floating rate loan assets or our ability to refinance our assets upon maturity, negatively impact the value of the real estate collateralizing our investments

(or the real estate we own directly) through the impact such increases can have on property valuation capitalization rates and decrease the value of our fixed-rate debt investments.

In addition, in a period of rising interest rates, our operating results will partially depend on the difference between the income from our assets and financing costs. We anticipate that, in some cases, the income from such assets will respond more slowly to interest rate fluctuations than the cost of our borrowings. Consequently, changes in interest rates, particularly short-term interest rates, may significantly influence our net interest income, which is the difference between the interest income we earn on our interest-earning investments and the interest expense we incur in financing these investments. Increases in these rates could decrease our net income and the market value of our assets.

Rising interest rates may also affect the yield on our investments or target investments and the financing cost of our debt. If rising interest rates cause us to be unable to acquire a sufficient volume of our target investments with a yield that is above our borrowing cost, our ability to satisfy our investment objectives and to generate income and pay dividends may be materially and adversely affected. Due to the foregoing, significant fluctuations in interest rates could materially and adversely affect our results of operations, financial conditions and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

Changes in the method pursuant to which LIBOR and other benchmark rates are calculated and their potential discontinuance could hinder our ability to maintain effective hedges and could adversely impact our business operations and financial results.

Our floating-rate debt, certain senior and junior subordinated notes and certain hedging transactions determine the applicable interest rate or payment amount by reference to a benchmark rate, such as the London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”), or to another financial metric. In the event any such benchmark rate or other referenced financial metric is significantly changed, replaced or discontinued, or ceases to be recognized as an acceptable market benchmark rate or financial metric, there may be uncertainty or differences in the calculation of the applicable interest rate or payment amount depending on the terms of the governing instrument, and there may be significant work required to transition to any new benchmark rate or other financial metric.

In July 2017, the Chief Executive of the U.K. Financial Conduct Authority (“FCA”) announced that the FCA intends to stop persuading or compelling banks to submit rates for the calculation of LIBOR after 2021. This announcement indicates that the continuation of LIBOR on the current basis cannot and will not be guaranteed after 2021. In response to concerns regarding the reliability and robustness of commonly used reference rates, in particular LIBOR, the Financial Stability Oversight Council and Financial Stability Board called for the development of alternative interest rate benchmarks. In April 2018, the New York Federal Reserve commenced publishing an alternative reference rate, the Secured Overnight Financing Rate (“SOFR”), proposed by a group of major market participants convened by the U.S. Federal Reserve with participation by SEC Staff and other regulators, the Alternative Reference Rates Committee ("ARRC"). SOFR is based on transactions in the more robust U.S. Treasury repurchase market and has been proposed as the alternative to LIBOR for use in derivatives and other financial contracts that currently rely on LIBOR as a reference rate. ARRC has proposed a paced market transition plan to SOFR from LIBOR and organizations are currently working on industry wide and company specific transition plans as it relates to derivatives and cash markets exposed to LIBOR. It is impossible to predict whether and to what extent banks will continue to provide LIBOR submissions to the administrator of LIBOR, whether LIBOR rates will cease to be published or supported before or after 2021 or whether any additional reforms to LIBOR may be enacted in the United Kingdom or elsewhere. At this time, no consensus exists as to what rate or rates may become accepted alternatives to LIBOR, including for purposes of hedging arrangements such as those we currently have in place. Furthermore, the transition from LIBOR to one or more replacement rates could cause uncertainty in what reference rates apply to existing hedging and other arrangements. Additionally, there is some possibility that LIBOR continues to be published, but that the quantity of loans used to calculate LIBOR diminishes significantly enough to reduce the appropriateness of the rate as a reference rate. We can provide no assurance regarding the future of LIBOR, whether our current hedging arrangements will continue to use USD-LIBOR as a reference rate or whether any reliance on such rate will be appropriate. Confusion as to the relevant benchmark reference rate for our hedging instruments could hinder our ability to establish effective hedges.

Despite progress made to date by regulators and industry participants to prepare for the anticipated discontinuation of LIBOR, significant uncertainties still remain. Such uncertainties relate to, for example, whether LIBOR will continue to be viewed as an acceptable market benchmark rate, what rate or rates may become accepted alternatives to LIBOR (various characteristics of SOFR make it uncertain whether it would be viewed by market participants as an appropriate alternative to LIBOR for certain purposes), how any replacement would be implemented across the industry, and the effect of any changes in industry views or movement to alternative benchmarks would have on the markets for LIBOR-linked financial instruments.

The discontinuation of a benchmark rate or other financial metric, changes in a benchmark rate or other financial metric, or changes in market perceptions of the acceptability of a benchmark rate or other financial metric, including LIBOR, could, among other things result in increased interest payments, changes to our risk exposures, or require renegotiation of previous transactions. In addition, any such discontinuation or changes, whether actual or anticipated, could result in market volatility, adverse tax or accounting effects, increased compliance, legal and operational costs, and risks associated with contract negotiations.

Risks Related to Ownership of Our Securities

The market price of our Class A common stock has been and may continue to be volatile and holders of our Class A common stock could lose all or a significant portion of their investment due to drops in the market price of our Class A common stock.

The market price of our Class A common stock has been and may continue to be volatile, especially as a result of the Merger. Our stockholders may not be able to resell their common stock at or above the implied price at which they acquired such common stock pursuant to the merger agreement or otherwise due to fluctuations in the market price of our Class A common stock, including changes in market price caused by factors unrelated to our operating performance or prospects. Additionally, this volatility and other factors has and may continue to induce stockholder activism, which has been increasing in publicly traded companies in recent years and could materially disrupt our business, operations and ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

Specific factors that may have a significant effect on the market price of our Class A common stock include, among others, the following:

We may issue additional equity securities, which may dilute your interest in us.

In order to expand our business, we may consider offering Class A common stock and securities that are convertible into our Class A common stock and may issue additional common stock in connection with acquisitions or joint ventures. If we issue and sell additional shares of our Class A common stock, the ownership interests of our existing stockholders will be diluted to the extent they do not participate in the offering. The number of shares of Class A common stock that we may issue for cash in non-public offerings without stockholder approval will be limited by the rules of the NYSE. However, we may issue and sell shares of our Class A common stock in public offerings, and there generally are exceptions that allow companies to issue a limited number of equity securities in private offerings without stockholder approval, which could dilute your ownership.

Our board of directors may modify our authorized shares of stock of any class or series and may create and issue a class or series of common stock or preferred stock without stockholder approval.

Our Articles of Amendment and Restatement (our "Charter") authorizes our board of directors to, without stockholder approval, classify any unissued shares of common stock or preferred stock; reclassify any previously classified, but unissued, shares of common stock or preferred stock into one or more classes or series of stock; and issue such shares of stock so classified or reclassified. Our board of directors may determine the relative rights, preferences, and privileges of any class or series of common stock or preferred stock issued. As a result, we may issue series or classes of common stock or preferred stock with preferences, dividends, powers, and rights (voting or otherwise) senior to the rights of current holders of our Class A common stock. The issuance of any such classes or series of common stock or preferred stock could also have the effect of delaying or preventing a change of control transaction that might otherwise be in the best interests of our stockholders.

Risks Related to Our Organizational Structure and Business Operations

Thomas J. Barrack, Jr., our Executive Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, controls a significant number of votes in any matter presented to our stockholders for approval, including the election of directors.

In connection with the acquisition on April 2, 2015 by Colony’s operating partnership of substantially all of the real estate and investment management businesses and operations of Colony Capital, LLC ("CCLLC"), Mr. Barrack was issued shares of Colony's class B common stock which had additional voting rights. In the Merger, such Colony class B common stock was exchanged for shares of our Class B Common Stock. Mr. Barrack controls a significant number of votes in matters submitted to a vote of stockholders, including the election of directors, as a result of his beneficial ownership of our Class B Common Stock. Mr. Barrack may have interests that differ from our other stockholders and may vote in ways that may not be consistent with the interests of those other stockholders.

Our tax protection and related agreements could limit our ability to sell certain properties, engage in a strategic transaction or reduce our level of indebtedness, which could materially and adversely affect us.

At the closing of the Merger, CCLLC, CCH Management Partners I, LLC, FHB Holding LLC and Richard B. Saltzman, each of which we refer to as a protected member, entered into a tax protection agreement with the Company and the OP (the "TPA"). The TPA provides that each protected member is indemnified on an after-tax basis for any Section 704(c) gain, calculated as provided in the TPA, as a result of a transaction occurring during the period commencing on June 3, 2016 and ending on the fifth anniversary of the closing of the Merger and that is considered to be a sale of the tax goodwill, going concern value or airplane owned by the OP and contributed (directly or indirectly) by such protected members, which we refer to, collectively, as the protected property, other than on transfers to the protected members or persons or entities related to the protected members. The TPA also applies to a merger or other transaction that would convert interests in the OP held by the protected members to cash or otherwise result in a taxable disposition of such interests, but does not apply to a transaction in which the equity interests of the protected members are maintained in a manner that does not trigger gain or offers the protected members the option to roll over their investment into an equity interest that is substantially equivalent (including value, profit and loss share, distribution rights and liquidity) to the equity interests exchanged in such transaction.

If our tax indemnification obligations are triggered under these agreements, we will be required to pay damages for the resulting tax consequences to the protected members and the calculation of damages will not be based on the time value of money or the time remaining within the restricted period. Moreover, these obligations may restrict our ability to engage in a strategic transaction. In addition, these and related obligations may require us to maintain more or different indebtedness than we would otherwise require for our business. For example, the operating agreement of the OP requires us to maintain at least $1.05 billion of certain non-recourse liabilities during the five-year period beginning on the closing of Colony's internalization transaction. The OP estimates that if all of its assets subject to the TPA are sold in a taxable transaction, its indemnification obligations (based on tax rates applicable for the taxable year ended December 31, 2018 and exchange values and including additional payments to compensate the protected members for additional tax liabilities resulting from the indemnification payments) would be approximately $431 million.

We may not realize the anticipated benefits of our strategic partnerships and joint ventures.

We have and may continue to enter into strategic partnerships and joint ventures to support growth in our business. We may also make investments in partnerships or other co-ownership arrangements or participations with third parties. In connection with our investments, our partners provide, among other things, property management, investment advisory, sub-advisory and other services to us and certain of the companies that we manage. We may not realize any of the anticipated benefits of our strategic partnerships and joint ventures. Such investments and any future strategic

partnerships and/or joint ventures subject us and the companies we manage to risks and uncertainties not otherwise present with other methods of investment.

For a substantial portion of our assets, we rely upon joint venture partners to manage the day-to-day operations of the joint venture and underlying assets, as well as to prepare financial information for the joint venture. Any failure to perform these obligations may have a negative impact on our financial performance and results of operations. In addition, the terms of the agreements with our partners may limit or restrict our ability to make additional capital contributions for the benefit of properties or to sell or otherwise dispose of properties or interests held in joint ventures, even for ventures where we are the controlling partner. In certain instances, we may not control our joint venture investments. In these ventures, the controlling partner(s) may be able to take actions which are not in our best interests or the best interests of the investments we manage. Furthermore, to the extent that our joint venture partner provides services to the companies we manage, certain conflicts of interest will exist. Moreover, we may decide to terminate a strategic relationship or joint venture partner, which could be costly and time-consuming for our management team.

Any of the above might subject us to liabilities and thus reduce our returns on our investment with that joint venture partner, which in turn may have an adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. In addition, disagreements or disputes between us and our joint venture partner(s) could result in litigation, which could increase our expenses and potentially limit the time and effort our officers and directors are able to devote to our business.

We are not required to meet any diversification standards; therefore, our investments may become subject to concentration risks.

Subject to our intention to maintain our qualification as a REIT, there are no limitations on the number or value of particular types of investments that we may make. We are not required to meet any diversification standards, including geographic diversification standards. Therefore, our investments may become concentrated in type or geographic location, which could subject us to significant concentration risks with potentially adverse effects on our investment objectives.

At the closing of the Merger, we assumed liabilities and obligations of NSAM, Colony and NRF.

In connection with the Merger, we assumed the liabilities and obligations of NSAM, Colony and NRF, including NRF’s obligations under its exchangeable senior notes and Colony’s obligations under its convertible notes. These liabilities could have a material adverse effect on our business to the extent each of NSAM, Colony and NRF did not identify such liabilities or underestimated the nature, amount or significance, based on amount or otherwise, of such liabilities.

Risks Related to Our Incorporation in Maryland

The stock ownership limits imposed by the Code for REITs and our Charter may restrict our business combination opportunities.

In order for us to maintain our qualification as a REIT under the Code, not more than 50% in value of our outstanding stock may be owned, directly or indirectly, by five or fewer individuals (as defined in the Code to include certain entities) at any time during the last half of each taxable year following our first year. Our Charter, with certain exceptions, authorizes our board of directors to take those actions that are necessary and desirable to preserve our qualification as a REIT. In order to assist us in complying with the limitations on the concentration of ownership of REIT stock imposed by the Code, our Charter generally prohibits any person (other than a person who has been granted an exemption) from actually or constructively owning more than 9.8% of the aggregate of the outstanding shares of our capital stock (as defined in our Charter) by value or 9.8% of the aggregate of the outstanding shares of our common stock (as defined in our Charter) by value or by number of shares, whichever is more restrictive. Our board of directors may, in its sole discretion, grant an exemption to the ownership limits, subject to certain conditions and the receipt by our board of directors of certain representations and undertakings. The ownership limits imposed under the Code are based upon direct or indirect ownership by “individuals,” but only during the last half of a tax year. The ownership limits contained in our Charter are based on the ownership at any time by any “person,” which term includes entities. These ownership limitations are common in REIT charters and are intended to provide added assurance of compliance with the tax law requirements, and to minimize administrative burdens. However, the ownership limit on our common stock might also delay or prevent a transaction or a change in our control that might involve a premium price for our common stock or otherwise be in the best interest of our stockholders, and the proposed reduction in the ownership limit could further restrict such transactions that may otherwise not be so delayed or prevented.

Certain provisions of Maryland law could inhibit changes in control.

Certain provisions of the Maryland General Corporation Law ("MGCL") may have the effect of inhibiting a third party from making a proposal to acquire us or impeding a change of control that could provide our stockholders with the opportunity to realize a premium over the then-prevailing market price of our common stock, including:

The statute permits various exemptions from its provisions, including business combinations that are exempted by a board of directors prior to the time that the “interested stockholder” becomes an interested stockholder. Our board of directors has, by resolution, exempted any business combination between us and any person who is an existing, or becomes in the future, an “interested stockholder,” provided that any such business combination is first approved by our board of directors (including a majority of the directors of our company who are not affiliates or associates of such person). Consequently, the five-year prohibition and the supermajority vote requirements will not apply to business combinations between us and any such person. As a result, such person may be able to enter into business combinations with us that may not be in the best interest of our stockholders, without compliance with the supermajority vote requirements and the other provisions of the statute. Additionally, this resolution may be altered, revoked or repealed in whole or in part at any time and we may opt back into the business combination provisions of the MGCL. If this resolution is revoked or repealed, the statute may discourage others from trying to acquire control of us and increase the difficulty of consummating any offer. In the case of the control share provisions of the MGCL, we have elected to opt out of these provisions of the MGCL pursuant to a provision in our bylaws.

Conflicts of interest may exist or could arise in the future with the OP and its members, which may impede business decisions that could benefit our stockholders.

Conflicts of interest may exist or could arise as a result of the relationships between us and our affiliates, on the one hand, and the OP or any member thereof, on the other. Our directors and officers have duties to our Company and our stockholders under applicable Maryland law in connection with their management of our Company. At the same time, the Company, as sole managing member of the OP, has fiduciary duties to the OP and to its members under Delaware law in connection with the management of the OP. Our duties to the OP and its members, as the sole managing member, may come into conflict with the duties of our directors and officers to our Company and our stockholders. These conflicts may be resolved in a manner that is not in the best interest of our stockholders.

Risks Related to Our Managed Companies

Our ability to raise capital and attract investors at our current and any future managed companies is critical to their success and consequently our ability to grow our investment management business.

The fee income generated from or expected to be generated from our current and future managed companies is driven, both directly and indirectly, by the ability to raise capital at such companies, which is dependent on a number of factors, certain of which are substantially the same as those that may impact the ability to raise capital at our company. In addition, for our managed companies that raise capital through the retail market, the ability to raise capital has been and is expected to continue to be negatively impacted by regulatory changes, changes in market receptivity to illiquid investments with similar fee or compensation structures and regulatory scrutiny. In addition, the poor performance of, or negative media attention about, our Company or our senior management team and any of our current or future managed companies could also make it more difficult for our managed companies to raise new capital. In the event that our current and future managed companies are not able to raise new capital, our ability to grow our investment management business will be materially adversely affected.

Poor performance of our current and future managed companies could cause a decline in our revenue, income and cash flow.

The fee arrangements we have with certain of our managed companies are based on the respective performance of such companies. As a result, poor performance or a decrease in value of assets under management of such managed companies (or any companies we may manage in the future with similar performance-based fees) would result in a reduction of our investment management and other fees, carried interest and/or other incentive fees and consequently cause our revenue, income and cash flow to decline. Further, to the extent that we have an investment in a managed company, poor performance at such company could cause us to suffer losses on such investments of our own capital.

Investors in our current or future managed companies may negotiate less favorable terms to us than those of managed companies we currently manage, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

In connection with sponsoring new managed companies or securing additional capital commitments in existing managed companies, we will negotiate terms for such managed companies and commitments from investors. In addition, we have agreed and may in the future agree to re-negotiate terms in the agreements with our managed companies due to performance of such managed companies or other market conditions. The outcome of such negotiations could result in our agreement to terms that are materially less favorable to us economically than the existing terms of our managed companies or companies advised by our competitors. In addition, we may need to record an impairment in the goodwill associated with such agreement. Further, we may also agree to terms that could restrict our ability to sponsor competing managed companies, increase our obligations as the manager or require us to take on additional potential liabilities. Agreement to terms that are materially less favorable to us could result in a decrease in our profitability, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Certain of the management agreements with our managed companies are subject to limitation or termination, and any such termination could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

The agreements under which we provide management and other services to companies that raise capital through the retail market are renewable upon mutual consent of the parties for an unlimited number of successive one-year periods. These agreements may generally be terminated by such managed company immediately for cause, or upon 60 days’ written notice, without cause or for good reason, and expire on an annual basis, unless otherwise renewed. Further, we anticipate that our managed retail companies will pursue a liquidity transaction in the future and, if successful, certain liquidity transactions could result in termination or expiration of these agreements. There can be no assurance that these agreements will not expire or be terminated. Any such termination or expiration could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects.

We are subject to risks and liabilities in connection with sponsoring, investing in and managing new institutional funds.

We sponsor, manage and serve as general partner and/or manager of new institutional funds. Such sponsorship and management of, and investment in, these institutional funds may involve risks not otherwise present with a direct investment in such fund’s target investments, including, for example:

Valuation methodologies for certain assets in our managed institutional funds can involve subjective judgments, and the fair value of assets established pursuant to such methodologies may be incorrect, which could result in the misstatement of performance and accrued performance fees of an institutional fund.

There are often no readily ascertainable market prices for a substantial majority of illiquid investments of our managed institutional funds. We determine the fair value of the investments of each of our institutional funds at least quarterly based on the fair value guidelines set forth by GAAP. The fair value measurement accounting guidance establishes a hierarchal disclosure framework that ranks the observability of market inputs used in measuring financial instruments at fair value. The observability of inputs is impacted by a number of factors, including the type of financial instrument, the characteristics specific to the financial instrument and the state of the marketplace, including the existence and transparency of transactions between market participants. Financial instruments with readily available quoted prices, or for which fair value can be measured from quoted prices in active markets, will generally have a higher degree of market price observability and a lesser degree of judgment applied in determining fair value.

Investments for which market prices are not observable include, but are not limited to, illiquid investments in operating companies, real estate, energy ventures and structured vehicles, and encompass all components of the capital structure, including equity, mezzanine, debt, preferred equity and derivative instruments such as options and warrants. Fair values of such investments are determined by reference to the market approach (i.e., multiplying a key performance metric of the investee company or asset, such as earnings before interest, income tax, depreciation and amortization ("EBITDA"), by a relevant valuation multiple observed in the range of comparable public entities or transactions, adjusted by management as appropriate for differences between the investment and the referenced comparables), the income approach (i.e., discounting projected future cash flows of the investee company or asset and/or capitalizing representative stabilized cash flows of the investee company or asset) and other methodologies such as prices provided by reputable dealers or pricing services, option pricing models and replacement costs.

The determination of fair value using these methodologies takes into consideration a range of factors including but not limited to the price at which the investment was acquired, the nature of the investment, local market conditions, the multiples of comparable securities, current and projected operating performance and financing transactions subsequent to the acquisition of the investment. These valuation methodologies involve a significant degree of management judgment. For example, as to investments that we share with another sponsor, we may apply a different valuation methodology than the other sponsor does or derive a different value than the other sponsor has derived on the same investment, which could cause some investors to question our valuations.

Because there is significant uncertainty in the valuation of, or stability of the value of, illiquid investments, the fair values of such investments as reflected in an institutional fund’s net asset value do not necessarily reflect the prices that would be obtained by us on behalf of the institutional fund when such investments are realized. Realizations at values significantly lower than the values at which investments have been reflected in prior institutional fund net asset values would result in reduced earnings or losses for the applicable fund, the loss of potential carried interest and incentive fees and in the case of our hedge funds, management fees. Changes in values attributed to investments from quarter to quarter may result in volatility in the net asset values and results of operations that we report from period to period. Also, a situation where asset values turn out to be materially different than values reflected in prior institutional fund net asset values could cause investors to lose confidence in us, which could in turn result in difficulty in raising additional institutional funds.

The organization and management of our current and future managed companies may create conflicts of interest.

We currently manage, and may in the future manage, REITs and other entities that have investment and/or rate of return objectives similar to our own. Those entities may be in competition with us with respect to investment opportunities, potential purchasers, sellers and lessees of properties, and mortgage financing opportunities. We have agreed to implement certain procedures to help manage any perceived or actual conflicts among us and our managed companies, including the following:

In addition, subject to compliance with the rules promulgated under the Investment Advisers Act, we may allow a managed company to enter into principal transactions with us or cross-transactions with other managed companies or strategic vehicles. For certain cross-transactions, we may receive a fee from the managed company and conflicts may exist. If our interests and those of our managed companies are not aligned, we may face conflicts of interests that result in action or inaction that is detrimental to us, our managed companies, our strategic partnerships or our joint ventures.

Appropriately dealing with conflicts of interest is complex and difficult and our reputation could be damaged if we fail, or appear to fail, to deal appropriately with one or more potential or actual conflicts of interest. Regulatory scrutiny of, or litigation in connection with, conflicts of interest would have a material adverse effect on our reputation, which would materially adversely affect our business and our ability to raise capital in future managed companies.

Conflicts of interest may also arise in the allocation of fees and costs among our managed companies that we incur in connection with the management of their assets. This allocation sometimes requires us to exercise discretion and there is no guarantee that we will allocate these fees and costs appropriately.

In addition to the management fees we receive from our managed companies, we are reimbursed by the publicly traded and retail companies we manage for costs and expenses we incur on their behalf, including certain indirect personnel and employment costs that we may allocate to such managed companies and disputes could arise in connection with those allocations.

We are paid substantial fees for the services we and our subsidiaries provide to our managed companies and we are also reimbursed by the publicly-traded and retail companies we manage for certain costs and expenses we incur and pay on their behalf. Such managed companies reimburse us, subject to certain limitations and exceptions, for both direct expenses as well as indirect costs, including our personnel and employment costs. The costs and expenses that we allocate to our publicly-traded and retail companies can be substantial and may involve subjective judgment and discretion. There are conflicts of interest that arise when we make allocation determinations. These conflicts of interest, as well as the loyalties of our executives and other real estate and finance professionals to other entities and investors, could result in action or inaction that is detrimental to our business, which could harm the implementation of our business strategy and our reputation. For the year ended December 31, 2018, we allocated $15.4 million in costs to Colony Credit, NorthStar Realty Europe Corp. and our retail companies, in the aggregate. These managed companies could dispute the amount of costs we allocate to them and the methodologies we use to determine those amounts. Any dispute or investigation regarding our allocation of costs and expenses could be distracting, expensive and harmful to our reputation as well as have other adverse effects on our company and future operating performance, including the potential that such managed companies could seek to terminate their relationship with us.

In addition, our managed companies that are publicly-traded grant, either directly or indirectly through us as manager, equity awards to certain of our employees in connection with the services that we provide to such companies as their manager. Such grants of equity awards are in the discretion and subject to the approval of the specific managed company's board of directors or compensation committee. To the extent one or more of these publicly-traded managed companies determine not to grant equity awards to us or our employees, either in the amounts historically granted, recommended by us or at all, we may determine to increase the equity awards issued by our Company in order to compensate and retain our employees. During the year ended December 31, 2018, the publicly-traded companies we manage issued $26.9 million, based on grant date fair value, in equity-based compensation which was granted directly or indirectly to our employees.

Non-traded REITs and business development companies are subject to significant scrutiny by federal and state regulators, including FINRA, the U.S. Department of Labor ("DOL") and the SEC, and have been subjected to significant regulatory changes in recent years which have inhibited capital raising. These changes and any future changes in regulations could negatively impact the ability of our non-traded sponsored companies to raise substantial funds which will limit the number and type of investments they may make and their ability to diversify their assets.

In recent years regulators have scrutinized non-traded REITs and business development companies and their capital raising practices. This scrutiny has resulted in changes in regulations which have adversely impacted capital raising by non-traded companies. For example, amendments to FINRA rules regarding customer account statements were approved by the SEC and became effective on April 11, 2016. These amendments significantly affected the manner in which non-traded companies raise capital and may have contributed to a significant reduction in capital raised by non-traded companies. In addition, recent amendments adopted by the DOL to the definition of “fiduciary” under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 ("ERISA") and the Code, and other standards on sales practices of broker-dealers and the impact of such rules, have and could continue to adversely affect the ability of our managed companies to raise additional capital. Furthermore, if we or the non-traded companies we manage become the subject of

scrutiny, even if we have complied with all applicable laws and regulations, responding to such scrutiny could be expensive, harmful to our reputation and distracting to our management.

Future regulations, including possible SEC rules requiring fiduciary standards for broker-dealers, could also adversely affect the ability of our sponsored companies to raise additional capital. Should these companies be unable to raise substantial funds in their offerings, the number and type of investments they may make will be curtailed, all of which could materially adversely affect the fee income generated from our broker-dealer that acts as the dealer manager of these offerings as well as the asset management and other fees we earn and the nature of the transactions undertaken by the non-traded companies we manage which would adversely affect our ability to grow our business.

Our ownership of approximately 37% of Colony Credit, on a fully diluted basis, subjects us to various risks, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

In connection with our contribution of the CLNY Contributed Portfolio, as of the date of this report, we own approximately 44.4 million shares of Colony Credit’s Class A common stock, which is listed on the NYSE, and approximately 3.1 million common membership units in Colony Credit's operating company ("CLNC OP Units"), which represent, in the aggregate, approximately 37% of Colony Credit’s total outstanding shares on a fully diluted basis. The CLNC OP Units are redeemable for cash or Class A common stock of Colony Credit, in Colony Credit’s sole discretion. During 2018, Colony Credit’s Class A common stock traded between  $15.56  and  $23.23  per share, and closed at  $15.79  per share on December 31, 2018. At December 31, 2018, the carrying value of our Colony Credit investment was $1 billion or $21.65 per share. As of December 31, 2018, we believe that the carrying value of our investment in Colony Credit is recoverable in the near term and therefore, have not taken an impairment on the value of our investment. However, if Colony Credit's Class A common stock continues to trade below our carrying value for a prolonged period of time, an other-than-temporary impairment may be recognized in the future. Based on the closing price of Colony Credit’s Class A common stock as of  February 25, 2019 , our investment in Colony Credit has a value of approximately $849 million.

Although we are the external manager to Colony Credit and have two representatives who are our senior executives on Colony Credit’s board of directors, our role as manager is under the supervision and direction of Colony Credit’s board of directors, which has a total of seven members, a majority of whom are independent. In addition, until the later of the two year anniversary of the closing of the Combination and the second annual meeting of stockholders of Colony Credit, we have agreed to cause our shares of Colony Credit's Class A common stock to be voted in favor of the director nominees recommended by the Colony Credit board. Therefore, the value of our investment is subject to the strategies and management decisions of the Colony Credit board of directors as a whole, as well as the trading price of Colony Credit’s Class A common stock on the NYSE.

Moreover, Colony Credit owns and expects to continue to originate, acquire, finance and manage a diversified portfolio of commercial real estate debt and net lease real estate investments predominantly in the United States. As a result, our investment in Colony Credit exposes us to the same risks that we are subject to as a result of our other equity and debt segment, as further described in “Risk Factors — Risks Related to Our Other Equity and Debt Business.” If any of the foregoing risks were to occur, our investment in Colony Credit could decline in value and our results of operations could be materially and adversely affected.

Risks Related to Our Healthcare Business

Approximately 37% of our real estate investments are concentrated in healthcare properties, which increases the likelihood of risks related to owning healthcare real estate properties becoming more material to our business and results of operations.

Healthcare real estate properties currently represent approximately 37% of our real estate portfolio. As a result of this concentration of healthcare real estate properties, our exposure to the risks inherent in investments in the healthcare sector has also increased, making us more vulnerable to a downturn or slowdown in the healthcare sector. We cannot be certain that our tenants, operators and managers will achieve and maintain occupancy and rate levels that will enable them to satisfy their obligations to us. We also cannot assure you that future changes in government regulation will not adversely affect the healthcare industry. Any adverse changes in the regulation of the healthcare industry or the competitiveness of our tenants, operators and managers could have a more pronounced effect on us than if our investments were more diversified.

We have significant leverage on our healthcare properties, which increases the risk of loss associated with our healthcare investments, impacts our liquidity and restricts our ability to engage in certain activities.

As of December 31, 2018, we had $3.2 billion of borrowings outstanding on our healthcare properties. Use of leverage increases our risk of loss, impacts our liquidity and restricts our ability to engage in certain activities, including our ability to implement certain strategic initiatives or dispose of certain assets. If we fail to comply with the covenants required by our borrowers or do not generate sufficient cash flow to service our borrowings, our liquidity may be materially and adversely affected. As of December 31, 2018, $482 million in aggregate principal amount of our non-recourse borrowings were in default as a result of the failure of our tenants, operators or managers to satisfy certain performance thresholds or other covenants. As a result of these defaults or if we default on additional borrowings, we may be required to repay outstanding obligations, including penalties, prior to the stated maturity, be subject to cash flow sweeps or potentially have assets foreclosed upon. In addition, as of the date hereof, we have approximately $2.0 billion of borrowings maturing in 2019 and we may be unable to refinance these borrowings when they become due on favorable terms, at similar interest rate levels, or at all, which could have a material adverse impact on our results of operations.

We do not control the operations of our healthcare properties and are therefore dependent on the tenants/operators/managers of our healthcare properties to successfully operate their businesses.

Our healthcare properties are typically operated by healthcare operators pursuant to net leases or by an independent third party manager pursuant to management agreements. As a result, we are unable to directly implement strategic business decisions with respect to the daily operation and marketing of our healthcare properties. While we have various rights as the property owner under our leases or management agreements and monitor the tenants/operators/managers’ performance, we may have limited recourse under our leases or management agreements if we believe that the tenants/operators/managers are not performing adequately. Failure by the tenants/operators/managers to adequately manage the risks associated with operations of healthcare properties could result in defaults under our borrowings and otherwise affect adversely our results of operations. Furthermore, if our tenants/operators/managers experience any significant financial, legal, accounting or regulatory difficulties, such difficulties could have a material adverse effect on us.

Senior Lifestyle Corporation and its affiliates (“SLC”) manage a significant portion of our senior housing facilities pursuant to management agreements. Because SLC manages our properties in exchange for a management fee from us, we are not exposed to its credit risk. However, failure of SLC to manage our properties efficiently and effectively could have a significant adverse impact on us. We monitor and assess numerous factors, including legal, contractual, regulatory, business and other relevant considerations, in determining whether to pursue any rights or remedies under our management agreements with SLC, including termination. If we elected to terminate the management agreements for any properties, we would attempt to reposition the properties, but there can be no assurance that we will be able to locate a suitable replacement manager or that the replacement manager would manage the properties effectively.

We are directly exposed to operational risks at certain of our healthcare properties, which could adversely affect our revenue and operations .

We operate a substantial number of healthcare properties pursuant to management agreements, whereby we are directly exposed to various operational risks with respect to these healthcare properties that may increase our costs or adversely affect our ability to generate revenues. These risks include fluctuations in occupancy, government reimbursement, if applicable, private pay rates, economic conditions, competition, federal, state, local and industry-regulated licensure, certification, fraud and abuse and privacy and security laws, regulations and standards and related audits, investigations and litigation, the availability and increases in cost of general and professional liability insurance coverage, and the availability and increases in the cost of labor (as a result of unionization or otherwise). Any one or a combination of these factors may adversely affect our revenue and operations and our ability to make distributions to stockholders. Refer to “Operating and Regulatory Structure—U.S. Healthcare Regulation” included in Item 1 of this Annual Report for further discussion.

Decreases in our tenants’ and operators’ revenues or increases in our tenants and operators’ expenses could negatively affect our financial results.

Our tenants’ and operators’ revenues are primarily driven by occupancy, private pay rates, and Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement, if applicable. Expenses for these facilities are primarily driven by the costs of labor, food, utilities, taxes, insurance and rent or debt service. Revenues from government reimbursement may continue to be subject to reimbursement cuts, disruptions in payment, audit and recovery actions, and state budget shortfalls. Operating costs, including labor costs, continue to increase for our tenants and operators. To the extent that any decrease in revenues and/or any increase in operating expenses result in a property not generating sufficient cash, our tenants and operators may not be able to make payments to us. For our properties operated pursuant to management agreements, we may be

directly exposed to operating shortfalls. Failure of our tenants, operators or managers to perform could result in defaults under our borrowings. As a result, we may need to negotiate new leases or management agreements with our tenants, operators or managers or replace such tenants, operators or managers, which may subject us to significant liabilities and expense. Under these circumstances, we have recorded and may need to further record impairment for such assets. Furthermore, if we determine to dispose of an underperforming property, such sale may result in a loss. Any such impairment or loss on sale would negatively affect our financial results.

If we must replace any of our tenants, operators or managers, we might be unable to reposition the properties on as favorable terms, or at all, and we could be subject to delays, limitations and expenses, which could have a material adverse effect on us.

Following expiration of a lease term or if we exercise our right to replace a tenant, operator or manager in default, we will attempt to reposition properties. However, rental payments on the related properties could decline or cease altogether while we reposition the properties with a suitable replacement tenant, operator or manager. We also may not be successful in identifying suitable replacements or enter into new leases or management agreements on a timely basis or on terms as favorable to us as our current leases and management agreements, if at all, and we may be required to fund certain expenses and obligations (e.g., real estate taxes, debt costs and maintenance expenses) to preserve the value of, and avoid the imposition of liens on, our properties while they are being repositioned. In addition, we may incur certain obligations and liabilities, including obligations to indemnify the replacement tenant, operator or manager. Once a suitable replacement tenant/operator/manager has taken over operation of the properties, it may still take an extended period of time before the properties are fully repositioned and value restored, if at all. Any of these results could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations and our ability to make distributions to stockholders.

Increased competition may affect our tenants’ and operators’ ability to meet their obligations to us.

The healthcare industry is highly competitive, and our tenants, operators and managers may encounter increased competition for residents and patients, including with respect to the scope and quality of care and services provided, reputation and financial condition, physical appearance of the properties, price and location. Our tenants, operators and managers compete for labor, making their results sensitive to changes in the labor market and/or wages and benefits offered to their employees. If our tenants, operators and managers are unable to successfully compete with other tenants, operators and managers by maintaining profitable occupancy and rate levels or controlling labor costs, their ability to meet their respective obligations to us may be materially adversely affected, potentially decreasing our revenues or impairing our assets.

Failure to comply with certain healthcare laws and regulations could adversely affect the operations of our tenants/operators/managers, which could jeopardize our tenants/operators/managers’ abilities to meet their obligations to us.

Our tenants, operators and managers generally are subject to varying levels of federal, state, local, and industry-regulated laws, regulations and standards. Our tenants/operators/managers’ failure to comply with any of these laws, regulations or standards could result in denial of reimbursement, imposition of fines, penalties or damages, suspension, decertification or exclusion from federal and state healthcare programs, loss of license, loss of accreditation or certification, or closure of the facility. Such actions may have an effect on our tenants/operators/managers’ ability to meet all of their obligations to us, including obligations to make lease payments, and, therefore, adversely impact us. Refer to “Operating and Regulatory Structure—U.S. Healthcare Regulation” included in Item 1 of this Annual Report for further discussion.

Changes in the reimbursement rates or methods of payment from third party payors, including the Medicare and Medicaid programs, could have a material adverse effect on certain of our tenants and operators and on us.

Certain of our tenants and operators rely on reimbursement from third party payors, including payments received through the Medicare and Medicaid programs, for substantially all of their revenues. Federal and state legislators and healthcare financing authorities have adopted or proposed various cost-containment measures that would limit payments to healthcare providers and have considered Medicaid rate freezes or cuts. Additionally, some states are considering changes that would affect patient eligibility for Medicaid. See “Operating and Regulatory Structure—U.S. Healthcare Regulation” included in Item 1 of this Annual Report. Private third party payors also have continued their efforts to control healthcare costs. We cannot assure you that our tenants and operators who currently depend on governmental or private payor reimbursement will be adequately reimbursed for the services they provide. Significant limits by governmental and private third party payors on the scope of services reimbursed or on reimbursement rates and fees, whether from legislation, administrative actions or private payor efforts, could have a material adverse effect on the liquidity, financial

condition and results of operations of certain of our tenants and operators, which could affect adversely their ability to comply with the terms of our leases and have a material adverse effect on us.

Efforts by Congress, states, and the current presidential administration to repeal and replace the ACA in total or in part and reform Medicare and Medicaid could negatively impact the operations and financial condition of our tenants and operators, which in turn may adversely impact us .

The ACA remains subject to continuing and increasing legislative, administrative and judicial scrutiny, including continued efforts by the current presidential administration and parties in ongoing court cases to repeal and replace the ACA in total or in part. If certain key provisions of the ACA are repealed or substantially modified, or if implementation of certain aspects of the ACA are suspended, such action could negatively impact the operations and financial condition of our tenants and operators, which in turn may adversely impact us. Additionally, Congress is contemplating substantial reforms to the Medicare and Medicaid programs. Refer to “Operating and Regulatory Structure—U.S. Healthcare Regulation” included in Item 1 of this Annual Report for further discussion. Some states are also considering and already implementing changes that will affect patient eligibility for Medicaid, such as work requirements. More generally, and because of the dynamic nature of the legislative and regulatory environment for healthcare products and services, and in light of the current legislative environment, existing federal deficit and budgetary concerns, we cannot predict the impact that broad-based, far-reaching legislative or regulatory changes could have on the U.S. economy, our business or that of our tenants and operators. Additionally, on December 14, 2018, a U.S. District Court in Texas ruled the ACA unconstitutional in its entirety. This decision has been appealed, and will not take effect while that appeal is pending. Refer to “Operating and Regulatory Structure—U.S. Healthcare Regulation” included in Item 1 of this Annual Report for further discussion.

The hospitals on or near whose campuses many of our medical office buildings ("MOBs") are located and their affiliated health systems could fail to remain competitive or financially viable, which could adversely impact their ability to attract physicians and physician groups to our MOBs.

Our MOB operations depend on the competitiveness and financial viability of the hospitals on or near whose campuses our MOBs are located and their ability to attract physicians and other healthcare-related clients to our MOBs. The viability of these hospitals, in turn, depends on factors such as the quality and mix of healthcare services provided, competition for patients, physicians and physician groups, demographic trends in the surrounding community, market position and growth potential. Because we rely on proximity to and affiliations with hospitals to create leasing demand in our MOBs, a hospital’s inability to remain competitive or financially viable, or to attract physicians and physician groups, could materially adversely affect our MOB operations and have a material adverse effect on us.

Risks Related to Our Industrial Business

Our ownership of industrial properties is subject to various risks, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

Our ownership of industrial properties subjects us to various risks that could adversely affect our business and results of operations, including, among others, the following:

Any of the foregoing risks could materially and adversely affect our results of operations, cash flows and ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

Risks Related to Our Hospitality Business

A significant portion of our real estate investments are concentrated in hotels, which increases our exposure to risks affecting the hospitality industry.

Hotels in our hospitality segment represent approximately 27% (or 34% including the THL Hotel Portfolio in our other equity and debt segment) of our real estate portfolio. The hospitality industry is subject to changes in the travel patterns of business and leisure travelers, both of which are affected by the strength of the economy, as well as other factors. The performance of the hospitality industry has traditionally been closely linked with the performance of the general economy and, specifically, growth in gross domestic product. Changes in travel patterns of both business and leisure travelers, particularly during periods of economic contraction or low levels of economic growth, may create difficulties for the industry over the long-term and adversely affect our results. The majority of our hotels are classified as upscale extended stay and upscale select service that generally target business travelers. In periods of economic difficulties, business and leisure travelers may seek to reduce travel costs by limiting travel or seeking to reduce costs on their trips. Our results of operations and any forecast we make may be affected by, and can change based on, a variety of circumstances that affect the hospitality industry, including:

A reduction in our revenue or earnings as a result of the above risks may reduce our working capital, impact our long-term business strategy and impact the value of our assets and our ability to meet certain covenants in our existing debt agreements.

We do not control our hotel operations and we are dependent on the managers of our hotels.

To maintain our status as a REIT, we are not permitted to operate any of our hotels. As a result, we have entered into management agreements with third-party managers to operate our hotel properties. For this reason, we are unable to directly implement strategic business decisions with respect to the daily operation and marketing of our hotels, such as decisions with respect to the setting of room rates, negotiation of corporate client contracts, food and beverage pricing and certain similar matters. Although we consult with our hotel operators with respect to strategic business plans, the hotel operators are under no obligation to implement any of our recommendations with respect to these matters. While we monitor the hotel managers’ performance, we have limited recourse under our management agreements if we believe that the hotel managers are not performing adequately. The cash flow from our hotels may be affected adversely if our managers fail to provide quality services and amenities or if they or their affiliates fail to maintain the hotels in an acceptable condition.

From time to time, we may have differences with the managers of our hotels over their performance and compliance with the terms of our management agreements. If we are unable to reach satisfactory results through discussions and negotiations, we may choose to litigate the dispute or submit the matter to third-party dispute resolution. Failure by our hotel managers to fully perform the duties agreed to in our management agreements or the failure of our managers to adequately manage the risks associated with hotel operations, including cyber-security risks, could affect adversely our results of operations.

In addition, our hotel managers or their affiliates manage, and in some cases own, have invested in, or provided credit support or operating guarantees to hotels that compete with our hotels, all of which may result in conflicts of

interest. As a result, our hotel managers have in the past made, and may in the future make, decisions regarding competing hospitality facilities that are not or would not be in our best interest.

Island Hospitality Group, Inc. ("Island") manages the majority of our hotels in our hospitality segment pursuant to management agreements. In addition, Aimbridge Hospitality (“Aimbridge”) manages all of the hotel properties in the THL Hotel Portfolio that we acquired through consensual foreclosure in July 2017. Although we have various rights as the property owner under our management agreements, we rely on Island’s and Aimbridge’s respective personnel, expertise, technical resources and information systems, proprietary information, good faith and judgment to manage our hotel operations efficiently and effectively. Any adverse developments in Island’s and Aimbridge’s respective business and affairs or financial condition could impair their ability to manage our properties efficiently and effectively and could have a materially adverse effect on us.

We are subject to risks associated with the employment of hotel personnel, particularly with hotels that employ unionized labor.

Our third-party managers are responsible for hiring and maintaining the labor force at each of our hotels. Although we do not directly employ or manage employees at our hotels, we still are subject to many of the costs and risks generally associated with the hotel labor force, particularly at those hotels with unionized labor. From time to time, hotel operations may be disrupted as a result of strikes, lockouts, public demonstrations or other negative actions and publicity. We also may incur increased legal costs and indirect labor costs as a result of contract disputes involving our third-party managers and their labor force or other events. The resolution of labor disputes or re-negotiated labor contracts could lead to increased labor costs, a significant component of our hotel operating costs, either by increases in wages or benefits or by changes in work rules that raise hotel operating costs. Additionally, hotels where our third-party managers have collective bargaining agreements with employees are more highly affected by labor force activities than others. The resolution of labor disputes or re-negotiated labor contracts could lead to increased labor costs, either by increases in wages or benefits or by changes in work rules that raise hotel operating costs. Furthermore, labor agreements may limit the ability of our hotel managers to reduce the size of hotel workforces during an economic downturn because collective bargaining agreements are negotiated between the hotel managers and labor unions. Our ability, if any, to have any material impact on the outcome of these negotiations is restricted by and dependent on the individual management agreement covering a specific property and we may have little ability to control the outcome of these negotiations.

In addition, changes in labor laws may negatively impact us. For example, increases in minimum wage laws and the DOL’s proposed regulations expanding the scope of non-exempt employees under the Fair Labor Standards Act to increase the entitlement to overtime pay could significantly increase the cost of labor in the workforce, which would increase the operating costs of our hotel properties and may have a material adverse effect on us.

We are subject to risks associated with our ongoing need for renovations and capital improvements as well as financing these expenditures.

In order to remain competitive, our hotels have an ongoing need for renovations and other capital improvements, including replacements, from time to time, of furniture, fixtures and equipment. These capital improvements may give rise to the following risks:

We may have insufficient liquidity to fund capital expenditures and, consequently, we may need to rely upon the availability of debt or equity capital to fund our investments and capital improvements. These sources of funds may not be available on reasonable terms and conditions or at all.

Risks of operating hotels under franchise licenses, which may be terminated or not renewed, may impact our ability to make distributions to stockholders.

The continuation of our franchise licenses is subject to specified operating standards and other terms and conditions. All of the franchisors of our hotels periodically inspect our hotels to confirm adherence to their operating standards. The failure to maintain such standards or to adhere to such other terms and conditions could result in the loss or cancellation of the applicable franchise license. It is possible that a franchisor could condition the continuation of a franchise license on the completion of capital improvements that we determine are too expensive or otherwise not economically feasible in light of general economic conditions, the operating results or prospects of the affected hotel. In that event, we may elect to allow the franchise license to lapse or be terminated.

There can be no assurance that a franchisor will renew a franchise license at each option period. If a franchisor terminates a franchise license, we may be unable to obtain a suitable replacement franchise, or to successfully operate the hotel independent of a franchise license. The loss of a franchise license could have a material adverse effect upon the operations or the underlying value of the related hotel because of the loss of associated name recognition, marketing support and centralized reservation systems provided by the franchisor. Our loss of a franchise license for one or more of the hotels could have a material adverse effect on our revenues and our amounts available for distribution to shareholders.

Increasing interest rates could materially impact the operating results of our hotel properties.

A substantial portion of our hotel properties are financed with floating-rate debt. If interest rates rise, the costs of our existing floating rate borrowings and any new borrowings that we incur would increase. These increased costs could reduce the profitability of our hotel properties or impair our ability to meet our debt obligations, which in turn may have a material adverse effect on our cash flow, results of operations and overall financial position. An increase in interest rates also could limit our ability to refinance existing debt upon maturity or cause us to pay higher rates upon refinancing, as well as decrease the amount that third parties are willing to pay for our hotels, thereby limiting our ability to promptly reposition our portfolio in response to changes in economic or other conditions.

We have obtained, and we may in the future obtain, one or more forms of interest rate protection, including swap agreements, interest rate cap contracts or similar agreements, that involve additional risks, including the risks that counterparties may fail to honor their obligations under these arrangements, that these arrangements may not be effective in reducing our exposure to interest rate changes, that the amount of income we earn from hedging transactions may be limited by federal tax provisions governing REITs, and that these arrangements may cause us to pay higher interest rates on our debt obligations than otherwise would be the case. Moreover, no amount of hedging activity can fully insulate us from the risks associated with changes in interest rates. Failure to hedge effectively against interest rate risk, if we choose to engage in such activities, could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.

Risks Related to Our Other Equity and Debt Business

Our commercial real estate equity, debt and mortgage loans underlying our commercial real estate securities investments are subject to the risks typically associated with commercial real estate ("CRE").

Our CRE equity, debt and securities investments are subject to the risks typically associated with real estate, including:

The value of each property is affected significantly by its ability to generate cash flow and net income, which in turn depends on the amount of rental or other income that can be generated net of expenses required to be incurred with respect to the property. Many expenses associated with properties (such as operating expenses and capital expenses) cannot be reduced when there is a reduction in income from the properties. These factors may have a material adverse effect on the value and the return that we can realize from our assets, as well as ability of our borrowers to pay their loans and the ability of the borrowers on the underlying loans securing our securities to pay their loans.

Our existing mezzanine loan assets and those that we may originate or acquire in the future are subject to greater risks of loss than senior loans secured by income-producing properties.

We currently own interests in mezzanine loans and may, subject to maintaining our qualification as a REIT, originate or acquire additional mezzanine loans (or interests in mezzanine loans). Mezzanine loans take the form of subordinated loans secured by junior participations in mortgages or second mortgages on the underlying property, or loans secured by a pledge of the ownership interests of either the entity owning the property or a pledge of the ownership interests of the entity that owns the interest in the entity owning the property. These types of assets involve a higher degree of risk than long-term senior mortgage lending secured by income-producing real property, because the loan may be foreclosed on by the senior lender. In addition, mezzanine loans may have higher loan-to-value ratios than conventional mortgage loans, resulting in less equity in the property and increasing the risk of loss of principal. If a borrower defaults on our mezzanine loan or debt senior to our loan, or in the event of a borrower bankruptcy, our mezzanine loan will be satisfied only after the senior debt is paid in full. Where debt senior to our loan exists, the presence of intercreditor arrangements between the holder of the senior mortgage loan and us, as the mezzanine lender, may limit our ability to amend our loan documents, assign our loans, accept prepayments, exercise our remedies and control decisions made in bankruptcy proceedings relating to borrowers. As a result, we may not recover some or all of our investment, which could result in losses. In

addition, even if we are able to foreclose on the underlying collateral following a default on a mezzanine loan, we would replace the defaulting borrower and, to the extent income generated on the underlying property is insufficient to meet outstanding debt obligations on the property, we may need to commit substantial additional capital to stabilize the property and prevent additional defaults to lenders with remaining liens on the property. Significant losses related to our current or future mezzanine loans could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

Regulatory Risks

Extensive regulation in the United States and abroad affects our activities, increases the cost of doing business and creates the potential for significant liabilities and that could adversely affect our business and results of operations.

Our business is subject to extensive regulation, including periodic examinations by governmental agencies and self-regulatory organizations in the jurisdictions in which we operate around the world. Many of these regulators, including U.S. and foreign government agencies and self-regulatory organizations and state securities commissions in the United States, are empowered to grant, and in specific circumstances to cancel, permissions to carry on particular activities, and to conduct investigations and administrative proceedings that can result in fines, suspensions of personnel or other sanctions, including censure, the issuance of cease-and-desist orders or the suspension or expulsion of applicable licenses and memberships. For example, in recent years the SEC and several states have initiated investigations alleging that certain private equity firms and hedge funds, or agents acting on their behalf, have paid money to current or former government officials or their associates in exchange for improperly soliciting contracts with the state pension funds (i.e., “ pay to play” practices). Such “pay to play” practices are subject to extensive federal and state regulation, and any failure on our part to comply with rules surrounding “pay to play” practices could expose us to significant penalties and reputational damage. Even if an investigation or proceeding does not result in a sanction or the sanction imposed against us or our personnel by a regulator were small in monetary amount, the costs incurred in responding to such matters could be material and the adverse publicity relating to the investigation, proceeding or imposition of these sanctions could harm our reputation and cause us to lose existing investors or fail to gain new investors or discourage others from doing business with us.

In addition, we regularly rely on exemptions from various requirements of the Securities Act, the Exchange Act, the 1940 Act, the Commodity Exchange Act and ERISA in conducting our investment activities in the United States. Similarly, in conducting our investment activities outside the United States, we rely on available exemptions from the regulatory regimes of various foreign jurisdictions. These exemptions from regulation within the United States and abroad are sometimes highly complex and may, in certain circumstances, depend on compliance by third parties whom we do not control. If for any reason these exemptions were to become unavailable to us, we could become subject to regulatory action or third party claims and our business could be materially and adversely affected. Moreover, the requirements imposed by our regulators are designed primarily to ensure the integrity of the financial markets and to protect investors in our funds and are not designed to protect our stockholders. Consequently, these regulations often serve to limit our activities and impose burdensome compliance requirements.

It is difficult to determine the full extent of the impact on us of any new laws, regulations or initiatives that may be proposed or whether any of the proposals will become law. Any changes in the regulatory framework applicable to our business, including the changes as a result of, among others, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, may impose additional costs on us, require the attention of our senior management or result in limitations on the manner in which we conduct our business. Furthermore, we may become subject to additional regulatory and compliance burdens as we expand our product offerings and investment platform, including raising additional funds. Moreover, as calls for additional regulation have increased as a result of heightened regulatory focus in the financial industry, there may be a related increase in regulatory investigations of the trading and other investment activities of alternative asset management funds, including our managed companies. Compliance with any new laws or regulations could make compliance more difficult and expensive, affect the manner in which we conduct our business and adversely affect our profitability.

Failure to maintain our exemption from registration under the 1940 Act could require us to register as an investment company or substantially change the way we conduct our business, either of which may have an adverse effect on us and the market price for shares of our Class A common stock.

We intend to conduct our operations so that we are not required to register as an investment company under the 1940 Act. Maintenance of the applicable exemptions requires that we subject our business to certain limitations on investment and activities.

Continuing qualification for exemption from registration under the 1940 Act will limit our ability to make certain investments. For example, for our subsidiaries that rely on Section 3(c)(5)(C) of the 1940 Act, the requirements to maintain the exemption will limit their ability to invest directly in mortgage-backed securities that represent less than the entire ownership in a pool of mortgage loans, debt and equity tranches of securitizations and certain asset-backed securities and real estate companies or assets not related to real estate.

We classify our investments for purposes of testing for these exemptions based in large measure on no-action letters issued by the Staff of the SEC and other SEC interpretive guidance. These positions were based upon facts that may be different from ours, and many of these no-action positions were issued more than twenty years ago. To the extent that the Staff of the Division of Investment Management of the SEC provides more specific guidance regarding any of the matters bearing upon any exemption on which we may rely, we may be required to adjust our holdings and strategies accordingly. Additional guidance from the Staff of the Division of Investment Management of the SEC could provide us with additional flexibility, or it could further inhibit our ability to pursue strategies we have chosen. For example, on August 31, 2011, the SEC issued a concept release (Release No. 29778, File No. S7-34-11, Companies Engaged in the Business of Acquiring Mortgages and Mortgage Related Instruments), pursuant to which it is reviewing whether certain companies that invest in mortgage-backed securities should continue to be allowed to rely on the exclusion from registration under Section 3(c)(5)(C) of the 1940 Act. If the SEC takes action with respect to this exclusion, these changes could result in our CDOs and other subsidiaries being no longer able to rely on the exclusion from registration under Section 3(c)(5)(C) of the 1940 Act. In such a case, we would either need to conform its activities to one or more other exemptions from the 1940 Act or lose our status as exempt from registration under the 1940 Act, either of which could result in an adverse effect on us.

If we fail to maintain our exemption from registration as an investment company under the 1940 Act, either because of changes in SEC guidance or otherwise, we could be required to, among other things: (i) substantially change the manner in which we conduct our operations to avoid being required to register as an investment company under the 1940Act; or (ii) register as an investment company. Either of (i) or (ii) could have an adverse effect on us and the market price for shares of our Class A common stock. If we are required to register as an investment company under the 1940Act, we would become subject to substantial regulation with respect to our capital structure (including our ability to use leverage), management, operations, transactions with affiliated persons (as defined in the 1940 Act), portfolio composition, including restrictions with respect to diversification and industry concentration and other matters.

Regulation of a subsidiary of our company under the Investment Advisers Act subjects us to the anti-fraud provisions of the Investment Advisers Act and to fiduciary duties derived from these provisions.

We have subsidiaries that are registered with the SEC as investment advisers under the Investment Advisers Act. As a result, we are subject to the anti-fraud provisions of the Investment Advisers Act and to fiduciary duties derived from these provisions that apply to our relationships with our managed companies. These provisions and duties impose restrictions and obligations on us with respect to our dealings with our managed companies' investors and our investments, including, for example, restrictions on agency, cross and principal transactions. We or our registered investment adviser subsidiaries will be subject to periodic SEC examinations and other requirements under the Investment Advisers Act and related regulations primarily intended to benefit advisory clients. These additional requirements relate to, among other things, maintaining an effective and comprehensive compliance program, recordkeeping and reporting requirements and disclosure requirements. The Investment Advisers Act generally grants the SEC broad administrative powers, including the power to limit or restrict an investment adviser from conducting advisory activities in the event it fails to comply with federal securities laws. Additional sanctions that may be imposed for failure to comply with applicable requirements under the Investment Advisers Act include the prohibition of individuals from associating with an investment adviser, the revocation of registrations and other censures and fines.

Risks Related to Taxation

Our qualification as a REIT involves complying with highly technical and complex provisions of the Code.

We elected to be taxed as a REIT under the U.S. federal income tax laws commencing with our taxable year ended December 31, 2017. Our qualification as a REIT involves the application of highly technical and complex provisions of the Code for which only limited judicial and administrative authorities exist. Even a technical or inadvertent violation could jeopardize our REIT qualification. New legislation, court decisions or administrative guidance, in each case possibly with retroactive effect, may make it more difficult or impossible for us to qualify as a REIT.

Our qualification as a REIT depends on our satisfaction of certain gross asset, gross income, organizational, distribution, stockholder ownership and other requirements on a continuing basis:

not and will not obtain independent appraisals. Moreover, we invest in certain assets with respect to which the rules applicable to REITs are particularly difficult to interpret or to apply, including, but not limited to, the rules applicable to financing arrangements that are structured as sale and repurchase agreements; mezzanine loans; and investments in real estate mortgage loans that are acquired at a discount, subject to work-outs or modifications, or reasonably expected to be in default at the time of acquisition. If the IRS challenged our treatment of these assets as real estate assets for purposes of the REIT asset tests, and if such a challenge were sustained, we could fail to meet the asset tests applicable to REITs and thus fail to qualify as a REIT.

If we were to fail to qualify as a REIT in any taxable year, we would be subject to U.S. federal income tax on our taxable income at regular corporate rates, and dividends paid to our stockholders would not be deductible by us in computing our taxable income. Any resulting corporate tax liability could be substantial and would reduce the amount of cash available for distribution to our stockholders, which in turn could have an adverse impact on the value of our Class A Common Stock. In addition, we would no longer be required to make distributions to stockholders. Unless we were entitled to relief under certain Code provisions, we also would be disqualified from taxation as a REIT for the four taxable years following the year in which we failed to qualify as a REIT.

We may incur adverse tax consequences if Colony or NRF were to have failed to qualify as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes prior to the Mergers.

In connection with the closing of the Mergers, we received an opinion of counsel to each of Colony and NRF to the effect that it qualified as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes under the Code through the time of the Mergers. Neither Colony nor NRF, however, requested a ruling from the Internal Revenue Service (the “IRS”) that it qualified as a REIT. If, notwithstanding these opinions, Colony’s or NRF’s REIT status for periods prior to the Mergers were successfully challenged, we would face serious adverse tax consequences that would substantially reduce our Core FFO and cash available for distribution, or CAD, including cash available to pay dividends to our stockholders, because:

As a result of these factors, Colony’s or NRF’s failure to qualify as a REIT prior to the Mergers could impair our ability to expand our business and raise capital and could materially adversely affect the value of our common stock . In addition, even if they qualified as REITs for the duration of their existence, if there is an adjustment to Colony’s or NRF’s taxable income or dividends-paid deductions for periods prior to the Mergers, we could be required to elect to use the deficiency dividend procedure to maintain Colony’s or NRF’s, as applicable, REIT status for periods prior to the Mergers. That

deficiency dividend procedure could require us to make significant distributions to our stockholders and to pay significant interest to the IRS.

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

The maximum rate applicable to "qualified dividend income" paid by non-REIT "C" corporations to U.S. stockholders that are individuals, trusts and estates generally is 20%. Dividends payable by REITs to those U.S. stockholders, however, generally are not eligible for the current reduced rate, except to the extent that certain holding requirements have been met and a REIT's dividends are attributable to dividends received by a REIT from taxable corporations (such as a taxable REIT subsidiary, or TRS), to income that was subject to tax at the REIT/corporate level, or to dividends properly designated by the REIT as "capital gains dividends." Effective for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017, and before January 1, 2026, those U.S. stockholders may deduct 20% of their dividends from REITs (excluding qualified dividend income and capital gains dividends). For those U.S. stockholders in the top marginal tax bracket of 37%, the deduction for REIT dividends yields an effective income tax rate of 29.6% on REIT dividends, which is higher than the 20% tax rate on qualified dividend income paid by non-REIT “C” corporations but still lower than the effective rate that applied prior to 2018, which is the first year that this special deduction for REIT dividends is available. Although the reduced rates applicable to dividend income from non-REIT "C" corporations do not adversely affect the taxation of REITs or dividends payable by REITs, it could cause investors who are non-corporate taxpayers to perceive investments in REITs to be relatively less attractive than investments in the shares of non-REIT "C" corporations that pay dividends, which could adversely affect the value of our Common Stock.

REIT distribution requirements could adversely affect our ability to execute our business plan.

We generally must distribute annually at least 90% of our “REIT taxable income” (subject to certain adjustments and excluding any net capital gain), in order to qualify as a REIT, and any REIT taxable income that we do not distribute will be subject to U.S. corporate income tax at regular rates. In addition, from time to time, we may generate taxable income greater than our income for financial reporting purposes prepared in accordance with GAAP, or differences in timing between the recognition of taxable income and the actual receipt of cash may occur. For example,

As a result of both the requirement to distribute 90% of our REIT taxable income each year (and to pay tax on any REIT taxable income that we do not distribute) and the fact that our taxable income may well exceed our cash income due to the factors mentioned above as well as other factors, we may find it difficult to meet the REIT distribution requirements in certain circumstances while also having adequate cash resources to execute our business plan. In particular, where we experience differences in timing between the recognition of taxable income and the actual receipt of cash, the requirement to distribute a substantial portion of our taxable income could cause us to: (i) sell assets in adverse market conditions,

(ii) borrow on unfavorable terms, (iii) distribute amounts that would otherwise be invested in future acquisitions, capital expenditures or repayment of debt or (iv) make a taxable distribution of our shares of Common Stock as part of a distribution in which stockholders may elect to receive shares of Common Stock or (subject to a limit measured as a percentage of the total distribution) cash, in order to comply with REIT requirements. These alternatives could increase our costs, reduce our equity, and/or result in stockholders being taxed on distributions of shares of stock without receiving cash sufficient to pay the resulting taxes. Thus, compliance with the REIT distribution requirements may hinder our ability to grow, which could adversely affect the value of our Common Stock.

We might elect to distribute our common stock in a taxable distribution in order to satisfy the REIT distribution requirements, in which case stockholders may sell shares of our common stock to pay tax on such distributions, placing downward pressure on the market price of our common stock.

In order to reduce the amount of cash that we are required to distribute to stockholders, we might elect to make taxable distributions that are payable partly in cash and partly in shares of our common stock. If we made a taxable dividend payable in cash and shares of our common stock, taxable stockholders receiving such distributions will be taxed on the full amount of the distribution that otherwise would be a dividend for tax purposes, even though part is paid in stock. If we made a taxable dividend payable in cash and our common stock and a significant number of stockholders determine to sell shares of our common stock in order to pay taxes owed on dividends, it may put downward pressure on the trading price of our common stock.

Even if we continue to qualify as a REIT, we may face other tax liabilities that reduce our cash available for distribution to stockholders.

Even if we qualify for taxation as a REIT, we may be subject to certain U.S. federal, state and local taxes on our income and assets, including taxes on any undistributed income, tax on income from some activities conducted as a result of a foreclosure, and state or local income, property and transfer taxes, such as mortgage recording taxes. We also are subject to U.S. federal and state income tax (and any applicable non-U.S. taxes) on the net income earned by our TRSs. Due to the nature of the assets in which we invest, we expect our TRSs will have a material amount of assets and net taxable income. In addition, we have substantial operations and assets outside of the U.S. that are subject to tax in those countries - those taxes, unless incurred by a TRS, are not likely to generate an offsetting credit for taxes in the U.S.. In addition, if we have net income from “prohibited transactions,” that income will be subject to a 100% tax. In general, “prohibited transactions” are sales or other dispositions of property, other than foreclosure property, but including mortgage loans, held primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of business. We might be subject to this tax if we were to dispose of or securitize loans in a manner that was treated as a sale of the loans for U.S. federal income tax purposes that is subject to the prohibited transactions tax. In order to avoid the prohibited transactions tax, we may choose not to engage in certain sales of loans at the REIT-level, and may limit the structures we utilize for our securitization transactions, even though such sales or structures might otherwise be beneficial to us. Finally, we could, in certain circumstances, be required to pay an excise or penalty tax (which could be significant in amount) in order to utilize one or more relief provisions under the Code to maintain our qualification as a REIT. Any of these taxes would decrease cash available for distribution to our stockholders.

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

To qualify 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 REIT real estate assets, including certain mortgage loans and certain kinds of MBS. The remainder of our investment in securities (other than qualified 75% asset test 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 (other than qualified 75% asset test assets) can consist of the securities of any one issuer, and no more than 20% of the value of our total assets can be represented by stock or securities of one or more TRSs. Debt instruments issued by “publicly offered REITs,” to the extent not secured by real property or interests in real property, qualify for the 75% asset test but the value of such debt instruments cannot exceed 25% of the value of our total assets. Finally, in connection with the Mergers and the prior combination of Colony’s business, we were treated as having acquired substantial amounts of goodwill that may not qualify for the 75% asset test assets. The compliance with these limitations, particularly given the nature of some of our investments and the goodwill that we have that is not a qualifying real estate asset, may hinder our ability to make, and, in certain cases, maintain ownership of certain attractive investments that might not qualify for the 75% asset test. If we fail to comply with the REIT asset tests requirements at the end of any 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 contribute to a TRS, otherwise attractive investments in order to maintain our qualification as a REIT. These actions could have the effect of reducing our income, increasing our income tax liability, and reducing amounts available for distribution to our stockholders. In addition, we may be required to make distributions to stockholders at disadvantageous times or when we do not have funds readily available for distribution, and may be unable to pursue investments (or, in some cases, forego the sale of such investments) that would be otherwise advantageous to us in order to satisfy the source-of-income or asset-diversification requirements for qualifying as a REIT.

The “taxable mortgage pool” rules may increase the taxes that we or our stockholders may incur, and may limit the manner in which we effect future securitizations.

Securitizations by us or our subsidiaries could result in the creation of taxable mortgage pools for U.S. federal income tax purposes. As a result, we could have “excess inclusion income.” In general, dividend income that a tax-exempt entity receives from us should not constitute unrelated business taxable income, or UBTI, as defined in Section 512 of the Code. If, however, we realize excess inclusion income and allocate it to stockholders, then this income would be fully taxable as UBTI to a tax-exempt entity under Section 512 of the Code. A foreign stockholder would generally be subject to U.S. federal income tax withholding on this excess inclusion income without reduction pursuant to any otherwise applicable income tax treaty. U.S. stockholders would not be able to offset such income with their net operating losses.

Although the law is not entirely clear, the IRS has taken the position that we are subject to tax at the highest corporate rate on the portion of our excess inclusion income equal to the percentage of our stock held in record name by “disqualified organizations” (generally tax-exempt investors, such as certain state pension plans and charitable remainder trusts, that are not subject to the tax on unrelated business taxable income). To the extent that our stock owned by “disqualified organizations” is held in street name by a broker-dealer or other nominee, the broker-dealer or nominee would be liable for a tax at the highest corporate rate on the portion of our excess inclusion income allocable to the stock held on behalf of the “disqualified organizations.” A regulated investment company or other pass-through entity owning our stock may also be subject to tax at the highest corporate tax rate on any excess inclusion income allocated to their record name owners that are “disqualified organizations.”

Excess inclusion income could result if a REIT held a residual interest in a real estate mortgage investment conduit, or REMIC. In addition, excess inclusion income also may be generated if a REIT issues debt with two or more maturities and the terms of the payments of those debt instruments bear a relationship to the payments that the REIT received on mortgage loans or mortgage-backed securities securing those liabilities. If any portion of our dividends is attributable to excess inclusion income, then the tax liability of tax-exempt stockholders, non-U.S. stockholders, stockholders with net operating losses, regulated investment companies and other pass-through entities whose record name owners are disqualified organizations and brokers-dealers and other nominees who hold stock on behalf of disqualified organizations will very likely increase.

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

The REIT provisions of the Code limit our ability to hedge certain of our liabilities. Under these provisions, any income from a hedging transaction that we enter into to manage risk of interest rate changes with respect to borrowings made or to be made to acquire or carry real estate assets, or to manage the risk of certain currency fluctuations, and that is properly identified under applicable Treasury Regulations, does not constitute “gross income” for purposes of the 75% or 95% gross income tests. To the extent that we enter into other types of hedging transactions, the income from those transactions is likely to be treated as non-qualifying income for purposes of the REIT gross income tests. As a result of these rules, we intend to limit our use of advantageous hedging techniques that do not qualify for the exclusion from the REIT gross income tests or implement those hedges through a TRS. This could increase the cost of our hedging activities because our TRS would be subject to tax on gains or expose us to greater risks associated with changes in interest rates than we would otherwise want to bear. In addition, losses in our TRS will generally not provide any tax benefit, except for being carried forward against future taxable income in the TRS.

There is a risk of changes in the tax law applicable to REITs.

The IRS, the United States Treasury Department and Congress frequently review U.S. federal income tax legislation, regulations and other guidance. We cannot predict whether, when or to what extent new U.S. federal tax laws, regulations, interpretations or rulings will be adopted. Any legislative action may prospectively or retroactively modify our tax treatment and, therefore, may adversely affect our taxation or our stockholders.  We urge you to consult with your tax advisor with respect to the status of legislative, regulatory or administrative developments and proposals and their potential effect on an investment in our stock. Although REITs generally receive certain tax advantages compared to

entities taxed as non-REIT “C” 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 treated for U.S. federal income tax purposes as a non-REIT “C” corporation.

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

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

Our ownership of assets and conduct of operations through our TRSs is limited and involves certain risks for us.

We use our TRSs to hold assets and earn income that would not be qualifying assets or income if held or earned directly by us. Apart from the fact that income from those TRSs may be subject to U.S. federal, foreign, state and local income tax on their taxable income and only their after-tax net income is available for distribution to us, our use of the TRS for this purpose is subject to certain costs, risks and limitations:

We are mindful of all of these limitations and analyze and structure the income and operations of our TRSs to mitigate these costs and risks to us to the extent practicable, but we may not always be successful in all cases.

We could fail to continue to qualify as a REIT and/or pay additional taxes if the IRS recharacterizes certain of our international investments.

We have made, and intend to continue to make additional property investments in international jurisdictions. Our equity in such investments is funded through the use of instruments that we believe should be treated as equity for U.S. tax purposes. If the IRS disagreed with such characterization and was successful in recharacterizing the nature of our investments in international jurisdictions, we could fail to satisfy one or more of the REIT asset and income tests. Additionally, if the IRS recharacterized the nature of our investments and we were to take action to prevent such REIT test failures, the actions we would take could expose us to increased taxes both internationally and in the United States.

We could be subject to increased taxes if the tax authorities in various international jurisdictions were to modify tax rules and regulations on which we have relied in structuring our international investments.

We currently receive favorable tax treatment in various international jurisdictions through tax rules, regulations, tax authority rulings, and international tax treaties. Should changes occur to these rules, regulations, rulings or treaties, we may no longer receive such benefits, and consequently, the amount of taxes we pay with respect to our international investments may increase.

We will be subject to corporate income tax on the sale of assets acquired from or previously held by a non-REIT “C” corporation within five years of our acquisition of those assets or our becoming a REIT.

If a REIT previously was a non-REIT “C” corporation, or it acquires any asset from a non-REIT “C” corporation, or a corporation that generally is subject to full corporate-level tax, in a merger or other transaction in which it acquires a basis in the asset that is determined by reference either to the non-REIT “C” corporation’s basis in the asset or to another asset, the REIT generally will pay tax at the highest regular corporate rate applicable if it recognizes gain on the sale or disposition of the asset during the five-year period after it becomes a REIT or it acquires the asset. Because NSAM previously was a non-REIT “C” corporation, this tax will generally apply to gain recognized with respect to assets that were held by NSAM as of the effective date of our REIT election (January 1, 2017) if such gain is recognized during the five-year period following such effective date or it may apply if we were to engage in an merger transaction with another non-REIT “C” corporation in the future. The amount of gain on which we would pay tax in the foregoing circumstances is the lesser of (i) the amount of gain that we recognize at the time of the sale or disposition; and (ii) the amount of gain that we would have recognized if we had sold the asset at the time we acquired it (or in the case of NSAM assets, on January 1, 2017).

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments.

None.

Item 2. Properties.

Investment Properties

Information regarding our investment properties at December 31, 2018 are included in "Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Segments" and "Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules—Schedule III. Real Estate and Accumulated Depreciation" of this Annual Report.

Corporate Offices

We have 17 locations across ten countries. Our principal executive office is located at 515 South Flower Street, 44th Floor, Los Angeles, CA, 90071, with other key offices in New York, Paris and London. All of our office spaces are under operating leases. We believe our offices are suitable for conducting our business.

Item 3.  Legal Proceedings.

The Company may be involved in litigations and claims in the ordinary course of business. As of  December 31, 2018 , the Company was not involved in any material legal proceedings.

Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures.

Not applicable.