Item 1A. Risk Factors
An investment in our common stock involves a high degree of risk and should be considered highly speculative. Before making an investment decision, you should carefully consider the following risk factors, which address the material risks concerning our business and an investment in our common stock. If any of the risks discussed below occur, our business, prospects, liquidity, internal rate of return, financial condition and results of operations, and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders could be materially and adversely affected, in which case the value of our common stock could decline significantly and you could lose all or part of your investment. Some statements in the following risk factors constitute forward-looking statements.
Risk Factors Summary
The following is a summary of the principal risks and uncertainties that could adversely affect our business, cash flows, financial condition and/or results of operations, and these adverse impacts may be material. This summary is qualified in its entirety by reference to the more detailed descriptions of the risks and uncertainties included in this Item 1A below and you should read this summary together with those more detailed descriptions. These principal risk and uncertainties relate to, among other things:
Risks Related to Our Business and Growth Strategy
We have limited operating history and may not be able to successfully operate our business, integrate new assets and/or manage our growth or to generate sufficient revenue to make or sustain distributions to our stockholders.
Competition for the capital that we provide may reduce the return of our loans, which could adversely affect our operating results and financial condition.
We are externally managed by our Manager and our growth and success depends on our Manager, its key personnel and investment professionals, and our Manager’s ability to make loans on favorable terms that satisfy our investment strategy and otherwise generate attractive risk-adjusted returns. If our Manager overestimates the yields or incorrectly prices the risks of our loans or if there are any adverse changes in our relationship with our Manager, we may experience losses.
Risks Related to the Cannabis Industry and Related Regulations
We provide loans to established companies operating in the cannabis industry, which involves significant risks, including the risk to our business of strict enforcement against our borrowers of the federal illegality of cannabis, and the lack of liquidity of such loans. As a result, we could lose all or part of any of our loans.
Our ability to grow our business depends on state laws pertaining to the cannabis industry. New laws that are adverse to our borrowers may be enacted, and current favorable state or national laws or enforcement guidelines relating to cultivation, production and distribution of cannabis may be modified or eliminated in the future, which would impede our ability to grow our business under our current business plan and could materially adversely affect our business.
We will not own real estate as long as it is used in cannabis-related operations due to current statutory prohibitions and exchange listing standards, which may delay or limit our remedies in the event that any of our borrowers default under the terms of their mortgage loans with us.
If we foreclose on properties securing our loans, we may have difficulty selling the properties due to the nature of specialized industrial cultivation/processing cannabis properties and the potentially limited number of high-quality operators for such properties, as well as for retail/dispensary cannabis properties.
Certain assets of our borrowers may not be used as collateral or transferred to us due to applicable state laws and regulations governing the cannabis industry, and such restrictions could negatively impact our profitability.
As a debt investor, we are often not in a position to exert influence on borrowers, and the stockholders and management of such companies may make decisions with which we disagree that could decrease the value of loans to such borrower.
Risks Related to Sources of Financing Our Business
Our growth depends on external sources of capital, which may not be available on favorable terms or at all.
Interest rate fluctuations could increase our financing costs, which could lead to a significant decrease in our results of operations, cash flows and the market value of our loans.
Risks Related to Our Organization and Structure
There are various conflicts of interest in our relationship with our Manager, including conflicts created by our Manager’s compensation arrangements with us, which could result in decisions that are not in the best interests of our stockholders.
Maintenance of our exemption from registration under the Investment Company Act may impose significant limits on our operations. Your investment return may be reduced if we are required to register as an investment company under the Investment Company Act.
Risks Related to Our Taxation as a REIT
Failure to maintain our qualification as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes would cause us to be taxed as a regular corporation, which would substantially reduce funds available for distributions to our stockholders.
We may incur significant debt, and our governing documents contain no limit on the amount of debt we may incur.
Risks Related to Ownership of Our Common Stock
We may in the future pay distributions from sources other than our cash flow from operations, including borrowings, offering proceeds or the sale of assets, which means we would have less funds available for investments or less income-producing assets, which may reduce a shareholder's total return.
The value of our common stock may be volatile and could decline substantially.
Risks Related to Our Business and Growth Strategy
We have limited operating history and may not be able to operate our business successfully or to generate sufficient revenue to make or sustain distributions to our stockholders.
We were formed on March 30, 2021, and are subject to all of the business risks and uncertainties associated with businesses with limited operating history, including the risk that we will not achieve our investment objective and that the value of your investment could decline substantially. We cannot assure you that we will be able to operate our business profitably or successfully implement our operating policies. Our ability to provide attractive returns to our stockholders is dependent on our ability both to generate sufficient cash flow to pay our investors attractive distributions and to achieve capital appreciation, and we cannot assure you that we will be able to do either. There can be no assurance that we will be able to generate sufficient revenue from operations to pay our operating expenses and make or sustain distributions to stockholders. Our limited resources may also materially and impact our ability to implement our business plan. The results of our operations and the implementation of our business plan depend on several factors, including the availability of to make loans, the availability of adequate equity and debt financing, the federal and state regulatory environment relating to the cannabis industry (which are described below under “ — Risks Related to the Cannabis Industry and Related Regulations ”), conditions in the financial markets and economic conditions.
Competition for the capital that we provide may reduce the return of our loans, which could adversely affect our operating results and financial condition.
We compete as an alternative financing provider of debt financing to companies in the cannabis industry. Several competitors have entered the marketplace, and these competitors may prevent us from making attractive loans on favorable terms. Our competitors may have greater resources than we do and may be able to compete more effectively as a capital provider. In particular, larger companies may enjoy significant competitive advantages that result from, among other things, a lower cost of capital and enhanced operating efficiencies.
Additionally, some of our competitors may have higher risk tolerances or different risk assessments, which could allow them to consider a wider variety of loans, deploy more aggressive pricing and establish more relationships than us. Our competitors may also adopt loan structures similar to ours, which would decrease our competitive advantage in offering flexible loan terms. In addition, due to a number of factors (including, but not limited to, potentially greater clarity and/or unification of the laws and regulations governing cannabis by states and the federal government, including through federal legislation or descheduling of cannabis, which may, in turn, encourage additional federally-chartered banks to provide their services to cannabis-related
businesses), the number of entities and the amount of funds competing to provide suitable capital may increase, resulting in loans with terms less favorable to investors. Moreover, we strategically benefit from the cannabis industry’s currently constrained access to U.S. capital markets and if such access is broadened, including if the New York Stock Exchange (the “NYSE”) and/or the Nasdaq Stock Market were to permit the listing of plant-touching cannabis companies in the U.S., the demand among U.S. cannabis companies for private equity investments and debt financings, including our target loans, may materially decrease and could result in our competing with financial institutions that we otherwise would not. Any of the foregoing may lead to a decrease in our profitability, and you may experience a lower return on your investment. Increased competition in providing capital may also preclude us from making loans that would generate attractive returns to us.
Our loans’ lack of liquidity may adversely affect our business.
Our existing portfolio includes, and our future loans will likely include, loans for which no public market exists, which are less liquid than publicly traded debt securities and other securities. Certain of our target investments such as secured loans, mezzanine and other loans (including participations) and preferred equity, in particular, are also particularly illiquid due to a variety of factors, which may include a short life, potential unsuitability for securitization and greater difficulty of recovery in the event of a default or insolvency by the company to which we have provided a loan. The illiquidity of our loans may make it difficult for us to sell such loans if the need or desire arises. Further, applicable laws and regulations restricting the ownership and transferability of loans to regulated cannabis companies in conjunction with many parties not wishing to invest in cannabis businesses as a result of cannabis being federally illegal may make it difficult for us to sell or transfer such loans to third parties. In addition, many of the loans we make, to the extent they constitute securities, will not be registered under the relevant securities laws, resulting in a prohibition their transfer, sale, pledge or disposition except in a transaction that is exempt from the registration requirements of, or otherwise in accordance with, those laws. As a result, we may be to of such loans in a timely manner or at all. If we are required and to all or a portion of our portfolio quickly, we could realize significantly less value than that which we had previously recorded for our loans and we cannot you that we will be to sell our assets at a profit in the future. Further, we may face other restrictions on our ability to a loan in a company to the extent that we or our Manager have or could be attributed as having material, non-public information regarding such company. Our ability to vary our portfolio in response to changes in economic, regulatory and other conditions or changes in our strategic plan may therefore be relatively limited, which could affect our results of operations and financial condition.
Our investments are subject to risks particular to real property. These risks may result in a reduction or elimination of or return from an investment secured by a particular property.
Real estate investments are subject to various risks, including:
acts of nature, including earthquakes, floods and other natural disasters, which may result in uninsured losses;
acts of war or terrorism, including the consequences of such acts;
adverse changes in national and local economic and market conditions;
changes in governmental laws and regulations, fiscal policies and zoning ordinances and the related costs of compliance with laws and regulations and ordinances;
costs of remediation and liabilities associated with environmental conditions including, but not limited to, indoor mold; and
the potential for uninsured or under-insured property losses.
If any of these or similar events occur, it may cause borrowers to default on their obligations to us and, thereby, reduce our return from an affected property or investment and reduce or eliminate our ability to pay dividends to stockholders.
All of our assets may be subject to recourse.
All of our assets may be available to satisfy all of our liabilities and other obligations. If we become subject to a liability, parties seeking to have the liability satisfied may have recourse to our assets generally and not be limited to any particular asset, such as the asset representing the investment giving rise to the liability.
Our existing portfolio is, and our future portfolio may be, concentrated in a limited number of loans, which subjects us to an increased risk of significant loss if any asset declines in value or if a particular borrower fails to perform as expected.
Our existing portfolio is, and our future loans may be, concentrated in a limited number of loans. If a significant loan to one or more companies fails to perform as expected, such failure could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and operating results, and the magnitude of such effect could be more significant than if we had further diversified our portfolio. A consequence of this limited number of loans is that the aggregate returns we realize may be significantly adversely affected if a small number of loans perform poorly, if we need to write down the value of any one loan, if a loan is repaid prior to maturity and we are not able to promptly redeploy the proceeds and/or if an issuer is unable to obtain and maintain commercial success. While we intend to diversify our portfolio of loans as we deem prudent, we do not have fixed guidelines for diversification. As a result, our portfolio could be concentrated in relatively few loans and in a limited number of borrowers.
Our portfolio of loans is concentrated in certain property types or in particular industries, such as cannabis, that may be subject to higher risk of default, or secured by properties concentrated in a limited number of geographic locations, economic and business downturns relating generally to such region or type of asset which may result in defaults on a number of our loans within a short time period, which may reduce our net income and the value of our common stock and accordingly reduce our ability to pay dividends to our stockholders. Further, since we focus on limited-license states, there may be fewer, if any, buyers for a distressed property. Accordingly, we may not be able to receive the full value of the collateral if we exercise our remedies under our loan in connection with a default.
We may lend to multiple borrowers that share a common sponsor. We do not have a limit on the amount of total principal that can be held by multiple borrowers that share the same sponsor. We may face greater credit risk to the extent a large portion of our portfolio is concentrated in loans to multiple borrowers that share the same sponsor.
Our existing portfolio contains loans to companies with operations that are geographically concentrated in a number of states with particular concentration Florida, Illinois, Ohio and Pennsylvania, and we will be subject to social, political and economic risks of doing business in those states and any other state in which we in the future have lending exposure.
Our existing portfolio contains loans to companies with operations that are geographically concentrated in a number of states with particular concentration in Florida, Illinois, Ohio and Pennsylvania. While our investment strategy includes a focus on providing loans to companies with operations in states that limit the number of cannabis license issuances in order to protect the value of our collateral, circumstances and developments related to operations in these markets that could negatively affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations include, but are not limited to, the following factors:
the development and growth of applicable state cannabis markets;
the responsibility of complying with multiple and likely conflicting state and federal laws, including with respect to retail sale, distribution, cultivation and manufacturing of cannabis, licensing, banking, and insurance;
unexpected changes in regulatory requirements and other laws;
difficulties and costs of managing operations in certain locations;
potentially adverse tax consequences;
the impact of national, regional or state specific business cycles and economic instability; and
access to capital may be more restricted, or unavailable on favorable terms or at all in certain locations.
We will not own real estate as long as it is used in cannabis-related operations due to current statutory prohibitions and exchange listing standards, which may delay or limit our remedies in the event that any of our borrowers default under the terms of their mortgage loans with us.
Although we will have the contractual ability to foreclose on, and take title to, the properties securing our mortgage loans upon a default by the borrower, we will not take title to and own such real estate as long as it is used in cannabis-related operations due to current statutory prohibitions, including Section 856 of the U.S. Controlled Substances Act of 1970, as amended (the “CSA”), which relates to, among other things, the management or control of properties that are used for the manufacturing, distributing or using of any controlled substances. Taking title to real estate used in cannabis-related activities or owning equity in cannabis-related businesses would also violate NASDAQ listing requirements, which require that an issuer’s business be conducted in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations. As a result, in the event of a borrower default, to the extent we determine that taking title to the underlying real estate is the optimal method of maximizing recovery on the defaulted loan, we will be forced to evict the borrower from the real estate and engage a third party to ensure all cannabis is removed from the subject property prior to taking possession. The regulatory requirements related to real property used in cannabis-related operations may cause significant or in transferring a property to another cannabis operator. In addition, any alternative uses of cannabis-related properties may be limited due to the specialized nature of the facilities or may be less than the cannabis-related operations, which would affect the value of the collateral securing our loans and could result in us selling the property at a . Any of the foregoing could have a material effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and ability to make distributions to our stockholders.
While we may instead pursue other remedies upon any defaults by our borrowers, including forcing a sale of the property to another cannabis operator, pursuing a judicial foreclosure and execution thereof through a sheriff’s sale without taking title to the property or using the property for non-cannabis related operations, there can be no assurances that such remedies will be as effective as us taking direct ownership of a property used in cannabis-related operations.
Loans to relatively new and/or small companies and companies operating in the cannabis industry generally involve significant risks.
We primarily seek to provide loans to established companies operating in the cannabis industry, but because the cannabis industry is relatively new and rapidly evolving, some of these companies may be relatively new and/or small companies. Loans to relatively new and/or small companies operating in the cannabis industry generally involve a number of significant risks, including, but not limited to, the following:
these companies may have limited financial resources and may be unable to meet their obligations, which may be accompanied by a deterioration in the value of any collateral securing our loan and a reduction in the likelihood of us realizing a return on our loan;
they typically have shorter operating histories, narrower product lines and smaller market shares than larger and more established businesses, which tend to render them more vulnerable to competitors’ actions and market conditions (including conditions in the cannabis industry), as well as general economic downturns;
they typically depend on the management talents and efforts of a small group of persons; therefore, the death, disability, resignation or termination of one or more of these persons could have a material adverse effect on such borrower and, in turn, on us;
there is generally less public information about these companies. Unless publicly traded, these companies and their financial information are generally not subject to the regulations that govern public companies, and we may be unable to uncover all material information about these companies, which may prevent us from making a fully informed lending decision and cause us to lose money on our loans;
they generally have less predictable operating results and may require substantial additional capital to support their operations, finance expansion or maintain their competitive position;
we, our executive officers and directors and our Manager may, in the ordinary course of business, be named as defendants in litigation arising from our loans to such borrowers and may, as a result, incur significant costs and expenses in connection with such litigation;
changes in laws and regulations, as well as their interpretations, may have a disproportionate adverse effect on their business, financial structure or prospects compared to those of larger and more established companies; and
they may have difficulty accessing capital from other providers on favorable terms or at all.
While we have historically experienced a limited number of payment defaults, there can be no assurance that we will not experience other defaults in the future.
If we are unable to successfully integrate new assets and manage our growth, our results of operations and financial condition may suffer.
We may in the future significantly increase the size and/or change the mix of our portfolio of assets. We may be unable to successfully and efficiently integrate new assets into our existing portfolio or otherwise effectively manage our assets or our growth effectively. In addition, increases in our portfolio of assets and/or changes in the mix of our assets may place significant demands on our Manager’s administrative, operational, asset management, financial and other resources. Any failure to manage increases in size effectively could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.
We may need to foreclose on loans that are in default, which could result in losses.
We may find it necessary to foreclose on loans that are in default. Foreclosure processes are often lengthy and expensive. Results of foreclosure processes may be uncertain, as claims may be asserted by the relevant borrower or by other creditors or investors in such borrower that interfere with enforcement of our rights, such as claims that challenge the validity or enforceability of our loan or the priority or perfection of our security interests. Our borrowers may resist foreclosure actions by asserting numerous claims, counterclaims and defenses against us, including, without limitation, lender liability claims and defenses, even when the assertions may have no merit, in an effort to the action and seek to us into a modification or buy-out of our loan for less than we are owed. Additionally, the transfer of certain collateral to us may be limited or prohibited by applicable laws and regulations. See “ We may make loans that are secured by properties that are, and will be, subject to extensive regulations, such that if such collateral was upon those regulations may result in significant costs and materially and affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations. ”
For transferable collateral, foreclosure or other remedies available may be subject to certain laws and regulations, including the need for regulatory disclosure and/or approval of such transfer. If federal law were to change to permit companies in the cannabis industry to seek federal bankruptcy protection, the applicable borrower could file for bankruptcy, which would have the effect of staying the foreclosure actions and delaying the foreclosure processes and potentially result in reductions or discharges of debt owed to us. Foreclosure may create a negative public perception of the collateral property, resulting in a diminution of its value. Even if we are successful in foreclosing on collateral property securing our loan, the liquidation proceeds upon sale of the underlying real estate may not be sufficient to recover our loan. Any costs or involved in the or a of the underlying property will reduce the net proceeds realized and, thus, increase the potential for .
In the event a borrower defaults on any of its obligations to us and such debt obligations are equitized, we do not intend to directly hold such equity interests, which may result in additional losses on our loans made to such entity.
The properties securing our loans may be subject to contingent or unknown liabilities that could adversely affect the value of these properties, and as a result, our loans.
Properties securing our loans may be subject to contingent, unknown or unquantifiable liabilities that may adversely affect the value of our loans. Such defects or deficiencies may include title defects, title disputes, liens or other encumbrances on properties securing our loans to borrowers. The discovery of such unknown defects, deficiencies and liabilities could affect the ability of our borrowers to make payments to us or could affect our ability to foreclose and sell the properties securing such loans, which could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition. Further, we, our executive officers, directors and our Manager may, in the ordinary course of business, be named as defendants in litigation arising from our loans.
We may in the future foreclose and acquire properties without any recourse, or with only limited recourse, against the prior property owner with respect to contingent or unknown liabilities. As a result, if a claim were asserted against us based on ownership of any of these properties, we may have to pay substantial amounts to defend or settle the claim. If the magnitude of such unknown liabilities is high, individually or in the aggregate, our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations would be materially and adversely affected.
Commercial real estate-related investments that are secured, directly or indirectly, by real property are subject to delinquency, foreclosure and loss, which could result in losses to us.
Commercial real estate debt instruments that are secured by commercial property are subject to risks of delinquency and foreclosure and risks of loss that are greater than similar risks associated with loans made on the security of single-family residential property. The ability of a borrower to repay a loan secured by an income-producing property typically is dependent primarily upon the successful operation of the property rather than upon the existence of independent income or assets of the borrower. If the net operating income of the property is reduced, the borrower’s ability to repay the loan may be impaired. Net operating income of an income-producing property can be affected by, among other things:
tenant mix and tenant bankruptcies;
success of tenant businesses;
property management decisions, including with respect to capital improvements, particularly in older building structures;
property location and condition;
competition from other properties offering the same or similar services;
changes in laws that increase operating expenses or limit rents that may be charged;
any liabilities relating to environmental matters at the property;
changes in national, regional or local economic conditions and/or specific industry segments;
declines in national, regional or local real estate values;
declines in national, regional or local rental or occupancy rates;
changes in interest rates and in the state of the debt and equity capital markets, including diminished availability or lack of debt financing for commercial real estate;
changes in real estate tax rates and other operating expenses;
changes in governmental rules, regulations and fiscal policies, including environmental legislation;
acts of God, terrorism, social unrest and civil disturbances, which may decrease the availability of or increase the cost of insurance or result in uninsured losses; and
adverse changes in zoning laws.
In addition, we are exposed to the risk of judicial proceedings with our borrowers and entities in which we invest, including bankruptcy or other litigation, as a strategy to avoid foreclosure or enforcement of other rights by us as a lender or investor. In the event that any of the properties or entities underlying or collateralizing our loans or investments experiences any of the foregoing events or occurrences, the value of, and return on, such investments could decline and could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.
If our Manager overestimates the yields or incorrectly prices the risks of our loans, we may experience losses.
Our Manager values our potential loans based on yields and risks, taking into account estimated future losses and the collateral securing a potential loan, if any, and the estimated impact of these losses on expected future cash flows, returns and appreciation. Our Manager’s loss estimates and expectations of future cash flows, returns and appreciation may not prove accurate, as actual results may vary from estimates and expectations. If our Manager underestimates the asset-level losses or overestimates loan yields relative to the price we pay for a particular loan, we may experience losses with respect to such loan.
An increase in benchmark interest rates tied to Prime and SOFR will likely have the effect of increasing our Core Earnings, which would make it easier for our Manager to earn Incentive Compensation.
In the absence of interest rate ceilings, any increase in interest rates would likely have the effect of increasing the interest rate that we receive on our floating-rate loan portfolio. Accordingly, an increase in interest rates may make it easier for our Manager to meet the quarterly hurdle rate for payment of Incentive Compensation under the Management Agreement and may result in a substantial increase in the amount of the Incentive Compensation payable to our Manager.
The due diligence process that our Manager undertakes in regard to investment opportunities may not reveal all facts that may be relevant in connection with an investment and if our Manager incorrectly evaluates the risks of our investments, we may experience losses.
Before making investments for us, our Manager conducts due diligence that it deems reasonable and appropriate based on the facts and circumstances relevant to each potential investment. When conducting diligence, our Manager may be required to evaluate important and complex business, financial, tax, accounting, environmental and legal issues. Outside consultants, legal advisors, accountants and investment banks may be involved in the due diligence process in varying degrees depending on the type of potential investment. Relying on the resources available to it, our Manager evaluates our potential investments based on criteria it deems appropriate for the relevant investment. Our Manager’s loss estimates may not prove accurate, as actual results may vary from estimates. If our Manager underestimates the asset-level losses relative to the price we pay for a particular investment, we may experience losses with respect to such investment.
In addition, it is difficult for real estate debt investors in certain circumstances to receive full transparency with respect to underlying investments because transactions are often effectuated on an indirect basis through pools or conduit vehicles rather than directly with the borrower. Loan structures or the terms of investments may make it difficult for us to monitor and evaluate investments. Therefore, we cannot assure you that our Manager will have knowledge of all information that may adversely affect such investment.
We are subject to additional risks associated with investments in the form of loan participation interests.
We may invest in loan participation interests in which another lender or lenders share with us the rights, obligations and benefits of a commercial mortgage loan made by an originating lender to a borrower. Accordingly, we will not be in privity of contract with a borrower because the other lender or participant is the record holder of the loan and, therefore, we will not have any direct right to any underlying collateral for the loan. These loan participations may be senior, pari passu or junior to the interests of the other lender or lenders in respect of distributions from the commercial mortgage loan. Furthermore, we may not be able to control the pursuit of any rights or remedies under the commercial mortgage loan, including enforcement proceedings in the event of default thereunder. In certain cases, the original lender or another participant may be able to take actions in respect of the commercial mortgage loan that are not in our best interests. In addition, in the event that (1) the owner of the loan participation interest does not have the benefit of a perfected security interest in the lender’s rights to payments from the borrower under the commercial mortgage loan or (2) there are substantial differences between the terms of the commercial mortgage loan and those of the applicable loan participation interest, such loan participation interest could be recharacterized as an unsecured loan to a lender that is the record holder of the loan in such lender’s , and the assets of such lender may not be sufficient to the terms of such loan participation interest. Accordingly, we may face risks from loan participation interests than if we had made first mortgage loans directly to the owners of real estate collateral.
Declines in market prices and liquidity in the capital markets can result in significant net unrealized depreciation of our portfolio, which in turn would reduce the net carrying value of our portfolio.
Volatility in the capital markets can adversely affect our loan valuations. Decreases in the market values or fair values of our loans are recorded as unrealized depreciation. The effect of all of these factors on our portfolio can reduce the net carrying value of our portfolio by increasing net unrealized depreciation in our portfolio. Depending on market conditions, we could incur substantial realized and/or unrealized losses, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.
The loans and other assets we obtain may be subject to impairment charges, and we may experience a decline in the net carrying value of our assets.
We will periodically evaluate the loans we obtain and other assets for impairment indicators. The judgment regarding the existence of impairment indicators is based upon factors such as market conditions, borrower performance and legal structure. If we determine that an impairment has occurred, we would be required to make an adjustment to the net carrying value of the asset which could have an adverse effect on our results of operations in the period in which the impairment charge is recorded.
Substantially all of the debt that we invest in is unrated. To the extent that credit ratings are assigned to our loans will be subject to ongoing evaluations and revisions, and we cannot assure you that those ratings will not be downgraded.
The debt that we invest in is typically not initially rated by any rating agency, but we believe that if such loans were rated, they would generally be below investment grade (rated lower than “Baa3” by Moody’s Investors Service, lower than “BBB-” by Fitch Ratings or lower than “BBB-” by Standard & Poor’s Ratings Services), which under the guidelines established by these entities is an indication of having predominantly speculative characteristics with respect to the borrower’s capacity to pay interest and repay principal. To the extent that some of our loans may be rated by rating agencies such as Moody’s Investors Service, Fitch Ratings, Standard & Poor’s, DBRS, Inc. or Realpoint LLC. Any credit ratings on our loans are subject to ongoing evaluation by credit rating agencies, and we cannot assure you that any such ratings will not be changed or withdrawn by a rating agency in the future if, in its judgment, circumstances warrant. If rating agencies assign a lower-than-expected rating or reduce or withdraw, or indicate that they may reduce or withdraw, their ratings of our loans in the future, the value of our loans could significantly decline, which would adversely affect the value of our loan portfolio and could result in losses upon disposition or, in the case of our loans, the of borrowers to their debt service obligations to us. As of December 31, 2025, none of our loans were rated by ratings agencies.
As a result, a substantial portion of our portfolio may result in an above average amount of risk and volatility or loss of principal. While the loans we invest in are often secured, such security does not guarantee that we will receive principal and interest payments according to the terms of the loan, or that the value of any collateral will be sufficient to allow us to recover all or a portion of the outstanding amount of such loan should we be forced to enforce our remedies.
Mezzanine loans, B-Notes and other investments that are subordinated or otherwise junior in an issuer’s capital structure, such as preferred equity, and that involve privately negotiated structures will expose us to greater risk of loss.
We have in the past originated, and may in the future originate or acquire, mezzanine loans, B-Notes and other investments that are subordinated or otherwise junior in an issuer’s capital structure, such as preferred equity, and that involve privately negotiated structures. To the extent we invest in subordinated debt or mezzanine tranches of an entity’s capital structure or preferred equity, such investments and our remedies with respect thereto, including the ability to foreclose on any collateral securing such investments, will be subject to the rights of holders of more senior tranches in the issuer’s capital structure and, to the extent applicable, contractual intercreditor and/or participation agreement provisions, which will expose us to greater risk of loss.
As the terms of such loans and investments are subject to contractual relationships among lenders, co-lending agents and others, they can vary significantly in their structural characteristics and other risks. For example, the rights of holders of B-Notes to control the process following a borrower default may vary from transaction to transaction. Further, B-Notes typically are secured by a single property and accordingly reflect the risks associated with significant concentration. Like B-Notes, mezzanine loans are by their nature structurally subordinated to more senior property-level financings. If a borrower defaults on our mezzanine loan or on debt senior to our loan, or if the borrower is in bankruptcy, our mezzanine loan will be satisfied only after the property-level debt and other senior debt is paid in full. As a result, a partial loss in the value of the underlying collateral can result in a total loss of the value of the mezzanine loan. In addition, even if we are able to foreclose on the underlying collateral following a default on a mezzanine loan, we would be substituted for the borrower and, to the extent income generated on the underlying property is to meet outstanding debt obligations on the property, we may need to commit substantial additional capital and/or deliver a replacement guarantee by a creditworthy entity, which could include us, to the property and prevent additional to lenders with existing liens on the property.
As of December 31, 2025, we had no investments in mezzanine loans, B-Notes or other investments that are subordinated or otherwise junior to other material indebtedness in an issuer’s capital structure.
Loans or investments involving international real estate-related assets are subject to special risks that we may not manage effectively, which would have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.
Our investment guidelines permit investments in non-U.S. assets, subject to the same guidelines as investments in U.S. assets. To the extent that we invest in non-U.S. real estate-related assets, we may be subject to certain risks associated with international investment generally, including, among others:
currency exchange matters, including fluctuations in currency exchange rates and costs associated with conversion of investment principal and income from one currency to another;
less developed or efficient financial markets than in the United States, which may lead to potential price volatility and relative illiquidity;
the burdens of complying with international regulatory requirements and prohibitions that differ between jurisdictions;
changes in laws or clarifications to existing laws that could impact our tax treaty positions, which could adversely impact the returns on our investments;
a less developed legal or regulatory environment, differences in the legal and regulatory environment or enhanced legal and regulatory compliance;
political hostility to investments by foreign investors;
higher inflation rates;
higher transaction costs;
difficulty enforcing contractual obligations;
fewer investor protections;
potentially adverse tax consequences; or
other economic and political risks.
If any of the foregoing risks were to materialize, they could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition. While our investment guidelines permit investments in non-U.S. real estate assets, as of December 31, 2025, none of our loans were made to non-U.S. borrowers nor collateralized by non-U.S. real estate assets.
We may not have control over certain of our loans and investments.
Our ability to manage our portfolio of loans and investments may be limited by the form in which they are made. In certain situations, we may:
acquire investments subject to rights of senior classes, special servicers or collateral managers under intercreditor, servicing agreements or securitization documents;
pledge our investments as collateral for financing arrangements;
acquire only a minority and/or a non-controlling participation in an underlying investment;
co-invest with others through partnerships, joint ventures or other entities, thereby acquiring non-controlling interests; or
rely on independent third-party management or servicing with respect to the management of an asset.
Therefore, we may not be able to exercise control over all aspects of our loans or investments. Such financial assets may involve risks not present in investments where senior creditors, junior creditors, servicers or third parties controlling investors are not involved. Our rights to control the process following a borrower default may be subject to the rights of senior or junior creditors or servicers whose interests may not be aligned with ours. A partner or co-venturer may have financial difficulties resulting in a negative impact on such asset, may have economic or business interests or goals that are inconsistent with ours, or may be in a position to take action contrary to our investment objective. In addition, we may, in certain circumstances, be liable for the actions of our partners or co-venturers.
Our loans and investments expose us to risks associated with debt-oriented real estate investments generally.
We seek to invest primarily in debt investments in or relating to real estate-related businesses, assets or interests. Any deterioration of real estate fundamentals generally, and in the United States in particular, could negatively impact our performance, increase the default risk applicable to borrowers, and/or make it relatively more difficult for us to generate attractive risk-adjusted returns. Changes in general economic conditions will affect the creditworthiness of borrowers and/or the value of underlying real estate collateral relating to our investments and may include economic and/or market fluctuations, changes in environmental, zoning and other laws, casualty or condemnation losses, regulatory limitations on rents, decreases in property values, changes in the appeal of properties to tenants, changes in supply and demand of real estate products, fluctuations in real estate fundamentals, energy and supply shortages, various uninsured or uninsurable risks, natural disasters, changes in government regulations (such as rent control, zoning restrictions, building code mandates, etc.), changes in real property tax rates and operating expenses, changes in interest rates, changes in the availability of debt financing and/or mortgage funds which may render the sale or refinancing of properties or , increased mortgage , increases in borrowing rates, developments in the economy and/or real estate values generally and other factors that are beyond our control.
We cannot predict the degree to which economic conditions generally, and the conditions for real estate debt investing in particular, will improve or decline. Any declines in the performance of the U.S. and global economies or in the real estate debt markets could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations. Market conditions relating to real estate debt investments have evolved since the global financial crisis that began in 2008, which has resulted in a modification to certain loan structures and/or market terms. Any such changes in loan structures and/or market terms may make it relatively more difficult for us to monitor and evaluate our loans and investments.
We may finance first mortgage loans, which may present greater risks than if we had made first mortgages directly to owners of real estate collateral.
Our portfolio may include first mortgage loan-on-loan financings, which are loans made to holders of mortgage loans that are secured by commercial real estate. While we will have certain rights with respect to the real estate collateral underlying a first mortgage loan, the holder of the commercial real estate first mortgage loans may fail to exercise its rights with respect to a default or other adverse action relating to the underlying real estate collateral or fail to promptly notify us of such an event, which would adversely affect our ability to enforce our rights. In addition, in the event of the bankruptcy of the borrower under the first mortgage loan, we may not have full recourse to the assets of the holder of the commercial real estate loan, or the assets of the holder of the commercial real estate loan may not be sufficient to satisfy our first mortgage loan financing. Accordingly, we may face greater risks from our first mortgage loan financings than if we had made first mortgage loans directly to owners of real estate collateral.
Loans on properties in transition will involve a greater risk of loss than conventional mortgage loans.
We may invest in transitional loans to borrowers who are typically seeking short-term capital to be used in an acquisition or rehabilitation of a property. The typical borrower under a transitional loan has usually identified an undervalued asset that has been under-managed and/or is located in a recovering market. If the market in which the asset is located fails to improve according to the borrower’s projections, or if the borrower fails to improve the quality of the asset’s management and/or the value of the asset, the borrower may not receive a sufficient return on the asset to satisfy the transitional loan, and we bear the risk that we may not recover some or all of our investment.
In addition, borrowers usually use the proceeds of a conventional mortgage to repay a transitional loan. Transitional loans therefore are subject to risks of a borrower’s inability to obtain permanent financing to repay the transitional loan. In the event of any default under transitional loans that may be held by us, we bear the risk of loss of principal and non-payment of interest and fees to the extent of any deficiency between the value of the mortgage collateral and the principal amount and unpaid interest of
the transitional loan. To the extent we suffer such losses with respect to these transitional loans, it could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.
As of December 31, 2025, we had no investments in transitional loans.
Any distressed loans or investments we make, or loans and investments that later become distressed, may subject us to losses and other risks relating to bankruptcy proceedings.
Our loans and investments may include making distressed investments from time to time (e.g., investments in defaulted, out-of-favor or distressed bank loans and debt securities) or may involve investments that become “non-performing” following our acquisition thereof. Certain of our investments may include properties that typically are highly leveraged, with significant burdens on cash flow and, therefore, involve a high degree of financial risk. During an economic downturn or recession, loans or securities of financially or operationally troubled borrowers or issuers are more likely to go into default than loans or securities of other borrowers or issuers. Loans or securities of financially or operationally troubled issuers are less liquid and more volatile than loans or securities of borrowers or issuers not experiencing such difficulties. The market prices of such securities are subject to erratic and market movements and the spread between bid and asked prices may be than normally expected. Investment in the loans or securities of financially or operationally borrowers or issuers involves a high degree of credit and market risk.
In certain limited cases (e.g., in connection with a workout, restructuring and/or foreclosing proceedings involving one or more of our investments), the success of our investment strategy with respect thereto will depend, in part, on our ability to effectuate loan modifications and/or restructure and improve the operations of the borrower entities. The activity of identifying and implementing successful restructuring programs and operating improvements entails a high degree of uncertainty. There can be no assurance that we will be able to identify and implement successful restructuring programs and improvements with respect to any distressed loans or investments we may have from time to time.
These financial difficulties may not be overcome and may cause borrower entities to become subject to bankruptcy or other similar administrative proceedings. There is a possibility that we may incur substantial or total losses on our loans and investments and, in certain circumstances, become subject to certain additional potential liabilities that may exceed the value of our original investment therein. For example, under certain circumstances, a lender that has inappropriately exercised control over the management and policies of a debtor may have its claims subordinated or disallowed or may be found liable for damages suffered by parties as a result of such actions. In any reorganization or liquidation proceeding relating to our investments, we may lose our entire investment, may be required to accept cash or securities with a value less than our original investment and/or may be required to accept different terms, including payment over an extended period of time. In addition, under certain circumstances, payments to us may be reclaimed if any such payment or distribution is later determined to have been a conveyance, preferential payment, or similar transaction under applicable and laws. Furthermore, laws and similar laws applicable to administrative proceedings may our ability to realize on collateral for loan positions held by us, may affect the economic terms and priority of such loans through doctrines such as equitable subordination or may result in a of the debt through principles such as the “cramdown” provisions of the laws.
In addition, our investments in the cannabis industry may further impair our ability to access bankruptcy proceedings, as entities engaged in cannabis-related activities have limitations in obtaining federal bankruptcy protection. Should a borrower involved in the cannabis industry be forced into bankruptcy, the inherent restrictions and uncertain judicial treatment of cannabis-related assets could delay or reduce the value recovered on collateral, if at all, adversely affecting the economic outcomes of such loans.
Construction loans involve an increased risk of loss.
We may invest in loans for which the proceeds are used for construction, primarily in the form of cultivation and dispensary build-outs of pre-existing buildings that collateralize our loans. If we fail to fund our entire commitment on a construction loan or if a borrower otherwise fails to complete the construction of a project, there could be adverse consequences associated with the loan, including, but not limited to, a loss of the value of the property securing the loan, especially if the borrower is unable to raise funds to complete it from other sources; a borrower’s claim against us for failure to perform under the loan documents; increased costs to the borrower that the borrower is unable to pay; a bankruptcy filing by the borrower; and abandonment by the borrower of the collateral for the loan. As of December 31, 2025, we had no investments in construction loans.
Investments in construction loans require us to make estimates about the fair value of land improvements that may be challenged by the IRS.
We may invest in construction loans, the interest from which would be qualifying income for purposes of the gross income tests applicable to REITs, provided that the loan value of the real property securing the construction loan was equal to or greater than the highest outstanding principal amount of the construction loan during any taxable year. For purposes of construction loans, the loan value of the real property is generally the fair value of the land plus the reasonably estimated cost of the improvements or developments (other than personal property) that secure the loan and that are to be constructed from the proceeds of the loan. There can be no assurance that the IRS would not challenge our estimates of the loan values of the real property.
We may in the future enter into credit agreements with borrowers that may permit them to incur debt that ranks equally with, or senior to, the loans we extend to such companies under such credit agreements.
Our credit agreements generally limit our borrowers from incurring any debt that ranks equally with, or senior to, our loans. In cases where our borrowers may have existing senior debt, such indebtedness generally represents traditional bank financing entered into prior to our relationship with the portfolio company. Although our intended investment strategy is to construct a portfolio of loans secured with first priority liens on certain assets of our borrowers, we may in the future enter into additional credit agreements that rank equally with, or are subordinated to, other debt of our borrowers or that otherwise permit our borrowers to incur other debt that ranks equally with, or senior to, our loans under such credit agreements. In such case, such instruments may, by their terms, provide that the holders of such other debt are entitled to receive payment of interest or principal on or before the dates on which we are entitled to receive payments in respect of our loans. These instruments may prohibit borrowers from paying interest on or repaying our loans in the event and during the continuance of a default under such instrument or upon the occurrence of other specified events. In certain cases, we may, and may continue to, obtain unsecured guarantees from the parent entities or subsidiaries of our borrowers in addition to the collateral provided by such borrowers and such guarantees may be effectively subordinated to any secured debt of any such entities and/or structurally subordinated to any debt of such subsidiaries. Also, in the event of insolvency, , , reorganization or of a borrower, holders of securities ranking senior to our loan to that borrower, if any, typically are entitled to receive payment in full before we can receive any distribution in respect of our loan. After repaying such holders, the borrower may not have any remaining assets to use for repaying its obligation to us. In the case of securities or other debt ranking equally with our loans, we would have to share on an equal basis any distributions with other security holders in the event of an , , , reorganization or of the relevant borrower.
Some of our borrowers may be highly leveraged.
Some of our borrowers may be highly leveraged, which may have adverse consequences to these companies and to us as a creditor. These companies may be subject to restrictive financial and operating covenants and the leverage may impair these companies’ ability to finance their future operations and capital needs. As a result, these companies’ flexibility to respond to changing business and economic conditions and to take advantage of business opportunities may be limited. Further, a leveraged company’s income and net assets will tend to increase or decrease at a greater rate than if borrowed money were not used.
There may be circumstances in which our loans could be subordinated to claims of other creditors, or we could be subject to lender liability claims.
If one of our borrowers were to go bankrupt, depending on the facts and circumstances, a bankruptcy court might re-characterize our loan and subordinate all or a portion of our claim to that of other creditors. In addition, we could be subject to lender liability claims if we are deemed to be too involved in a borrower’s business or exercise control over such borrower. For example, we could become subject to a lender’s liability claim if, among other things, we actually render significant managerial assistance to a borrower to which we have provided a loan.
As a debt investor, we are often not in a position to exert influence on borrowers, and the stockholders and management of such companies may make decisions with which we disagree and/or that could decrease the value of loans to such borrower.
As a debt investor, we are subject to the risk that a borrower may make business decisions with which we disagree, and the stockholders and management of such company may take risks or otherwise act in ways that do not serve our interests. As a result, or due to other factors, a borrower may make decisions that could decrease the value of our loan to such borrower.
Due to our borrowers’ involvement in the regulated cannabis industry, we currently do not have any insurance coverage. We and our borrowers have, and may continue to have, a difficult time obtaining or maintaining the various insurance policies that are desired to operate our business, which may expose us to additional risk and financial liabilities.
Insurance that is otherwise readily available, such as workers’ compensation, general liability, title insurance and directors’ and officers’ insurance, is more difficult for us and our borrowers to find and more expensive, because of our borrowers’ involvement in the regulated cannabis industry. We currently do not have any insurance coverage. There are no guarantees that we
or our borrowers will be able to find insurance now or in the future, or that such insurance will be available on economically viable terms. Until such time as federal rescheduling efforts—such as the proposed move from Schedule I to Schedule III—materially improve the risk profile of investments in the cannabis industry, our inability to secure insurance remains a material risk factor. As a result, this may prevent us from entering into certain business sectors, may inhibit our growth, may expose us to additional risk and financial liabilities and, in the case of an uninsured loss, may result in the loss of anticipated cash flow or the value of our loan.
We do not currently have catastrophic insurance policies.
There are certain types of losses, generally of a catastrophic nature, such as earthquakes, floods, hurricanes, terrorism or acts of war, which may be uninsurable or not economically insurable. Inflation, changes in building codes and ordinances, environmental considerations and other factors, including terrorism or acts of war, also might result in insurance proceeds insufficient to repair or replace an asset if it is damaged or destroyed. We do not currently have insurance policies to protect us from the type of losses described above or restore our economic position with respect to any of our loans, although we generally require that our borrowers do carry such insurance policies for collateralized real estate properties. Any uninsured loss could result in the loss of anticipated cash flow from, and the asset value of, the affected asset and the value of our loan related to such asset. In addition, we do not currently carry directors’ and officers’ insurance.
Subject to the approval of our Manager, our Board (which must include a majority of our independent directors) may change our investment strategies or guidelines, financing strategies or leverage policies without the consent of our stockholders.
Subject to the approval of our Manager, our Board (which must include a majority of our independent directors) may change our investment strategies or guidelines, financing strategies or leverage policies with respect to loans, originations, acquisitions, growth, operations, indebtedness, capitalization and distributions at any time without the consent of our stockholders, which could result in a loan portfolio with a different risk profile than that of our existing portfolio or of a portfolio comprised of our target loans. A change in our investment strategy may increase our exposure to interest rate risk, default risk and real estate market and cannabis industry fluctuations. Furthermore, a change in our asset allocation could result in our making loans in asset categories different from those described in this annual report on Form 10-K.
These changes could adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, the market price of our equity and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.
To the extent OID and PIK-interest constitute a portion of our income, we are exposed to typical risks associated with such income being required to be included in taxable and accounting income prior to receipt of cash representing such income.
Certain of our investments include original-issue-discount instruments and contractual PIK-interest arrangements. To the extent OID or PIK-interest constitutes a portion of our income, we are exposed to typical risks associated with such income being required to be included in taxable and accounting income prior to receipt of cash, including the following:
The higher interest rates of OID and PIK instruments reflect the payment deferral, which may result in a higher principal amount at the maturity of the instrument as compared to the original principal amount of the instrument, and increased credit risk associated with these instruments, and OID and PIK instruments generally represent a higher credit risk than traditional coupon-only loans.
Even if the accounting conditions for income accrual are met, the borrower could still default when our actual collection is supposed to occur at the maturity of the obligation.
OID and PIK instruments may have unreliable valuations because their continuing accruals require continuing judgments about the collectability of the deferred payments and the value of any associated collateral. OID and PIK-income may also create uncertainty about the source of our cash distributions.
To the extent we provide loans with interest-only payments or moderate loan amortization, the majority of the principal payment or amortization of principal may be deferred until loan maturity. Because this debt generally allows the borrower to make a large lump-sum payment of principal at the end of the loan term, there is a risk of loss if the borrower is unable to pay the lump sum or refinance the amount owed at maturity.
For accounting purposes, any cash distributions to stockholders representing OID and PIK-income are not treated as coming from paid-in capital, but rather retained earnings derived from REIT taxable income.
In certain cases, our taxable income may exceed our net cash provided by operating activities, as a result, we may have difficulty meeting the annual distribution requirement necessary to maintain our tax treatment as a REIT.
We may pay our Manager an incentive fee on certain investments that include a deferred interest feature.
We underwrite our loans to generally include an end-of-term payment, a PIK interest payment and/or OID. Our end-of-term payments are contractual and fixed interest payments due at the maturity date of the loan, including upon prepayment, and are generally a fixed percentage of the original principal balance of the loan. The portion of our end-of-term payments which equal the difference between our yield-to-maturity and the stated interest rate on the loan are recognized as non-cash income or OID until they are paid.
We may have difficulty paying our required distributions under applicable tax rules if we recognize income before or without receiving cash representing such income.
For U.S. federal income tax purposes, we may be required to include in income certain amounts before our receipt of the cash attributable to such amounts, such as OID or PIK interest, which represents contractual interest added to the loan balance and due at the end of the loan term. For example, such OID or increases in loan balances as a result of PIK interest will be included in income before we receive any corresponding cash payments. Also, we may be required to include in income other amounts that we will not receive in cash, including, for example, non-cash income from PIK securities, deferred payment securities and hedging and foreign currency transactions. In addition, we intend to seek debt investments in the secondary market that represent attractive risk-adjusted returns, taking into account both stated interest rates and current market discounts to par value. Such market discounts may be included in income before we receive any corresponding cash payments.
Since we may recognize income before or without receiving cash representing such income, we may have difficulty meeting the U.S. federal income tax requirement to distribute generally an amount equal to at least 90% of our REIT taxable income to maintain our status as a REIT. Accordingly, we may have to sell some of our investments at times we would not consider advantageous, raise additional debt or equity capital or reduce new investment originations to meet these distribution requirements. If we are not able to obtain cash from other sources, we may fail to qualify as a REIT and thus be subject to additional corporate-level taxes. However, in order to satisfy the Annual Distribution Requirement for a REIT, we may, but have no current intention to, declare a large portion of a dividend in shares of our common stock instead of in cash. As long as a portion of such dividend is paid in cash (which portion may be as low as 20% of such dividend) and certain requirements are met, the entire distribution will be treated as a dividend for U.S. federal income tax purposes.
We may expose ourselves to risks associated with the inclusion of non-cash income prior to receipt of cash.
To the extent we invest in OID instruments, including PIK loans and zero coupon bonds, investors will be exposed to the risks associated with the inclusion of such non-cash income in taxable and accounting income prior to receipt of cash.
The deferred nature of payments on PIK loans creates specific risks. Interest payments deferred on a PIK loan are subject to the risk that the borrower may default when the deferred payments are due in cash at the maturity of the loan. Since the payment of PIK income does not result in cash payments to us, we may also have to sell some of our investments at times we would not consider advantageous, raise additional debt or equity capital or reduce new investment originations (and thus hold higher cash balances, which could reduce returns) to pay our expenses or make distributions to stockholders in the ordinary course of business, even if such loans do not default. An election to defer PIK interest payments by adding them to principal increases our gross assets and, thus, increases future base management fees to the Manager. The deferral of interest on a PIK loan increases its loan-to-value ratio, which is a measure of the riskiness of a loan.
More generally, market prices of OID instruments are more volatile because they are impacted to a greater extent by interest rate changes than instruments that pay interest periodically in cash. Additionally, we will be required under the tax laws to make distributions of non-cash income to stockholders without receiving any cash. Such required cash distributions may have to be paid from the sale of our assets without investors being given any notice of this fact. The required recognition of non-cash income, including PIK and OID interest, for U.S. federal income tax purposes may have a negative impact on liquidity because it represents a non-cash component of our taxable income that must, nevertheless, be distributed to investors to avoid us being subject to corporate level taxation.
Changes in laws or regulations governing our operations, including laws and regulations governing cannabis and REITs, changes in the interpretation thereof or newly enacted laws or regulations and any failure by us to comply with these laws or regulations, could require changes to certain of our business practices, negatively impact our operations, cash flow or financial condition, impose additional costs on us or otherwise adversely affect our business.
We and our portfolio companies are subject to laws and regulations at the local, state and federal levels, including laws and regulations governing cannabis and REITs by state and federal governments. These laws and regulations, as well as their interpretation, may change from time to time, and new laws and regulations may be enacted, and enforcement priorities may shift, such as the possibility of more rigorous regulatory enforcement and reinterpretation of existing cannabis regulations. We cannot predict the nature and timing of future laws, regulations, interpretations or applications, or their potential effect. However, any change in these laws or regulations, changes in their interpretation, or newly enacted laws or regulations and any failure by us to comply with current or new laws or regulations or such changes thereto, could require changes to certain of our business practices, negatively impact our operations, cash flow or financial condition, impose additional costs on us or otherwise adversely affect our business.
We may not be able to obtain or maintain required licenses and authorizations to conduct our business and may fail to comply with various state and federal laws and regulations applicable to our business.
In general, lending is a highly regulated industry in the United States and we are required to comply with, among other statutes and regulations, certain provisions of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act of 1974 (the “Equal Credit Opportunity Act”) that are applicable to commercial loans, the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 (the “USA Patriot Act”), regulations promulgated by the Office of Foreign Assets Control, various laws, rules and regulations related to the cannabis industry and U.S. federal and state securities laws and regulations. In addition, certain states have adopted laws or regulations that may, among other requirements, require licensing of lenders and financiers, prescribe disclosures of certain contractual terms, impose limitations on interest rates and other charges, and limit or prohibit certain collection practices and creditor remedies.
There is no guarantee that we will be able to obtain, maintain or renew any required licenses or authorizations to conduct our business or that we would not experience significant delays in obtaining these licenses and authorizations. As a result, we could be delayed in conducting certain business if we were first required to obtain certain licenses or authorizations or if renewals thereof were delayed. Furthermore, once licenses are issued and authorizations are obtained, we are required to comply with various information reporting and other regulatory requirements to maintain those licenses and authorizations, and there is no assurance that we will be able to satisfy those requirements or other regulatory requirements applicable to our business on an ongoing basis, which may restrict our business and could expose us to penalties or other claims.
Any failure to obtain, maintain or renew required licenses and authorizations or failure to comply with regulatory requirements that are applicable to our business could result in material fines and disruption to our business and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, operating results and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.
Uncertainty and adverse changes in macroeconomic conditions of markets in which we participate and increased costs of energy, labor, construction materials and other factors could have an adverse impact on our financial performance and results of operations.
Our business and the companies with which we do business are subject to risks and uncertainties caused by factors beyond our control. Such factors include economic pressures related to high inflation, interest rate uncertainty, economic weakness or recession, as well as geopolitical and public health events such as the Russia-Ukraine and Israel-Hamas wars, pandemics, workforce expectations, and labor shortages.
These and other similar conditions and events have resulted in, and could lead to a tightening of credit and capital markets, lower levels of liquidity, lower consumer and business spending, unemployment, declines in real estate values, increases in employee-related costs, and other adverse economic conditions. These changes may negatively affect the performance of our borrowers, increase exposure to credit losses, increase the cost and decrease the availability of financing, or increase our recurring operational costs.
Risks Related to the Cannabis Industry and Related Regulations
Cannabis remains illegal under federal law, and therefore, strict enforcement of federal laws regarding cannabis would likely result in our inability to execute our business plan.
Cannabis, other than hemp, is a Schedule I controlled substance under the CSA. Even in states or territories that have legalized cannabis to some extent, the cultivation, possession and sale of cannabis all remain violations of federal law that are punishable by imprisonment, substantial fines and forfeiture. Moreover, individuals and entities may violate federal law if they aid and abet another in violating these federal controlled substance laws, or conspire with another to violate them, and violating the federal cannabis laws is a predicate for certain other crimes under the anti-money laundering laws and The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. Monitoring our compliance with these laws is a critical component of our business. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the federal government has the authority to regulate and criminalize the sale, possession and use of cannabis, even for individual medical purposes, regardless of whether it is legal under state law.
For several years, the U.S. government generally has not enforced those laws against cannabis companies complying with state law and their vendors. We would likely be unable to execute our business plan if the federal government were to reverse its long-standing hands-off approach to the state legal cannabis markets, described below, and start strictly enforcing federal law regarding cannabis.
On January 4, 2018, then acting U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions issued a memorandum for all U.S. Attorneys (the “Sessions Memo”) rescinding certain past DOJ memoranda on cannabis law enforcement, including the Memorandum by former Deputy Attorney General James Michael Cole (the “Cole Memo”) issued on August 29, 2013, under President Obama’s administration. Describing the criminal enforcement of federal cannabis prohibitions against those complying with state cannabis regulatory systems as an inefficient use of federal investigative and prosecutorial resources, the Cole Memo identified a list of federal enforcement priorities, including preventing interstate diversion or distribution of cannabis to minors, to focus enforcement efforts against operations that implicated these priorities. The Sessions Memo, which remains in effect, states that each U.S. Attorney’s Office should follow established principles that govern all federal prosecutions when deciding which cannabis activities to prosecute. As a result, federal prosecutors could and still can use their prosecutorial discretion to decide to even state-legal cannabis activities. Since the Sessions Memo was issued over six years ago, however, U.S. Attorneys have not state law compliant entities.
Former Attorney General William Barr testified in his confirmation hearing on January 15, 2019, that he would not upset “settled expectations,” “investments,” or other “reliance interest[s]” arising as a result of the Cole Memo, and that he did not intend to use federal resources to enforce federal cannabis laws in states that have legalized cannabis “to the extent people are complying with the state laws.” He stated: “My approach to this would be not to upset settled expectations and the reliance interest that have arisen as a result of the Cole Memorandum and investments have been made and so there has been reliance on it, so I don’t think it’s appropriate to upset those interests.” He also implied that the CSA’s prohibitions of cannabis may be null in states that have legalized cannabis: “T]he current situation
is almost like a back door nullification of federal law.” Industry observers generally did not interpret Attorney General Barr’s comments to suggest that the DOJ would proceed with cases against participants who entered the state-legal industry after the Cole Memo had been rescinded.
President Biden, at the time he won the Democratic Party nomination for President, affirmed that his administration would seek to “[d]ecriminalize marijuana use and legalize marijuana for medical purposes at the federal level”; “allow states to make their own decisions about legalizing recreational use”; and “automatically expunge all past marijuana convictions for use and possession.” This did not occur during his term. Although the U.S. Attorney General could order federal prosecutors not to interfere with cannabis businesses operating in compliance with states’ laws, the President alone cannot legalize medical cannabis, and as states have demonstrated, legalizing medical cannabis can take many different forms. President Biden issued a directive in October 2022 asking the Secretary of Health and Human Services and the Attorney General to review “expeditiously . . . how marijuana is scheduled under federal law.” In August 2023, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) recommended to the DEA that cannabis be reclassified from a Schedule I drug to a Schedule III drug under the CSA. HHS based this recommendation on a Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) review of cannabis’ classification pursuant to President Biden’s directive in October 2022. On May 16, 2024, the Justice Department announced that the Attorney General had submitted a notice of proposed rulemaking that proposed moving marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III, in accordance with the HHS recommendation.
A hearing on the proposed rulemaking took place in December 2024 before an administrative law judge ( ALJ ). The ALJ originally scheduled testimony on the proposed rescheduling through March 2025, but on January 13, the scheduled testimony was cancelled to allow an interlocutory appeal by a pro-rescheduling group. While this was still pending, on December 18, 2025, President Trump announced that he was “signing an executive order to reschedule marijuana from a Schedule I to a Schedule III Controlled substance with legitimate medical uses.” While the Executive Order requires the Attorney General to expedite the rescheduling process, an exact timeline remains unclear
The current Trump administration has not taken a singular official stance on cannabis, and it is therefore unclear whether the process of rescheduling will continue and, if so, what the timeline would be. Even in an expedited format, the re- or descheduling process could take months, or even years. Rescheduling cannabis to CSA Schedule III would ease certain research restrictions, but it would not make the state medical or adult use programs federally legal unless they were compliant with the FDA regulation of cannabis as a Schedule III drug.
Federal prosecutors have significant discretion, and no assurance can be given that the federal prosecutor in each judicial district where we make a loan will not choose to strictly enforce the federal laws governing cannabis manufacturing or distribution. Any change in the federal government’s enforcement posture with respect to state-licensed cultivation, distribution, sale or use of cannabis, including the enforcement postures of individual federal prosecutors in judicial districts where we make our loans, would result in our inability to execute our business plan, and we would likely suffer significant losses with respect to our loans to cannabis industry participants in the United States, which would adversely affect our operations, cash flow and financial condition.
Since fiscal year 2015, Congress has included in certain annual federal appropriations legislation a provision commonly referred to as the Rohrabacher–Farr amendment (also known as the Rohrabacher–Blumenauer amendment). This provision prohibits the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) from using appropriated funds to prevent states from implementing their laws authorizing the use, distribution, possession, or cultivation of medical cannabis.
Courts have interpreted this rider to restrict the DOJ from expending funds to prosecute individuals or entities that are strictly compliant with applicable state medical cannabis laws, so long as the rider remains in effect. However, the amendment does not legalize cannabis under federal law, does not amend the Controlled Substances Act (“CSA”), and does not apply to adult-use or recreational cannabis programs.
The Rohrabacher–Farr amendment is not permanent legislation. Rather, it is a temporary appropriations rider that must be renewed in each applicable federal spending bill. If Congress were to omit or modify this provision in future appropriations legislation, the DOJ could resume expending funds to enforce federal cannabis laws against state-compliant medical cannabis operators. Accordingly, the continuation of this protection is subject to the annual federal appropriations process and political considerations beyond our control.
As a result, there can be no assurance that federal enforcement priorities will not change, that this appropriations restriction will be extended in future fiscal years, or that federal authorities will not seek to enforce the CSA against cannabis-related activities, including those compliant with state medical cannabis laws.
Our loans do not prohibit our borrowers from engaging in the cannabis business for adult-use that is permissible under state and local laws. Consequently, certain of our borrowers currently (and may in the future) cultivate adult-use cannabis with the proceeds of our loans, if permitted by such state and local laws now or in the future. This could subject our borrowers to greater and/or different federal legal and other risks as compared to businesses where cannabis is cultivated exclusively for medical use, which could materially adversely affect our business.
Changes to state or federal laws regarding hemp might result in limitations or our inability to execute our business plan.
Although hemp and hemp-derived products containing no more than .3% delta-9 THC on a dry-weight basis were removed from the definition of marijuana in in the CSA under the 2018 Farm Bill, subsequent federal legislation has modified this framework as detailed below. In addition, a number of states have enacted statutes and regulations that restrict or prohibit manufacture, sale and distribution of certain hemp-derived cannabinoid products, even where such products may be federally lawful.
On November 12, 2025, H.R. 5371, the Continuing Appropriations, Agriculture, Legislative Branch, Military Construction and Veterans Affairs, and Extensions Act, 2026 (the “2026 Extensions Act”), was signed into law. In addition to extending certain authorities under the 2018 Farm Bill, the 2026 Extensions Act amended the federal definition of “hemp” and imposed new restrictions applicable to hemp and hemp-derived cannabinoid products.
Under the 2018 Farm Bill, hemp was defined as cannabis and cannabis derivatives containing no more than 0.3% delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol (“THC”) on a dry-weight basis. The 2026 Extensions Act modifies this framework by adopting a “total THC” standard. As amended, hemp must contain no more than 0.3% total tetrahydrocannabinols, including delta-9 THC, tetrahydrocannabinolic acid (“THCA”), and other cannabinoids with similar effects, as determined by applicable federal authorities.
The 2026 Extensions Act also establishes new limitations applicable to finished hemp-derived cannabinoid products intended for human or animal use. Such products may not contain more than 0.4 milligrams of total THC per container. In addition, the
amended statute excludes from the definition of hemp certain cannabinoids that are not naturally produced by the cannabis plant or that are produced through chemical synthesis or manufacturing processes outside the plant.
These revised hemp provisions are scheduled to take effect on November 12, 2026, following a one-year implementation period. Upon effectiveness, products that do not meet the revised definition of hemp or applicable THC limits may no longer qualify as federally lawful hemp under the Controlled Substances Act.
As a result of these statutory amendments, the regulatory framework governing hemp and hemp-derived cannabinoid products will become more restrictive beginning in late 2026. The ultimate impact of these changes on the hemp industry, including the availability and marketability of certain hemp-derived products, will depend on future regulatory implementation, enforcement practices, and any additional legislative action.
Our loans do not prohibit our borrowers from engaging in the cannabis business that is permissible under state and local laws. The dynamics involved with hemp-derived cannabinoids are becoming complex, and in the face of ever-changing laws, policies will need to address whether our borrowers can engage in hemp business that is permissible under federal law, but not under state and local laws. It will also need to address the likelihood of ongoing changes on the state and local level as to what hemp products are legal. This could subject our borrowers to greater and/or different federal legal, state legal, and other risks as compared to businesses where hemp is not used to create ingestible products, which could materially adversely affect our business.
Our ability to grow our business depends on current state laws pertaining to the cannabis industry. New laws that are adverse to our borrowers may be enacted at the federal or state level, and current favorable state or national laws or enforcement guidelines relating to cultivation, production and distribution of cannabis may be modified or eliminated in the future, which would impede our ability to grow our business under our current business plan and could materially adversely affect our business.
Continued development of the cannabis industry depends upon continued legislative authorization of cannabis at the state level, along with no significant adverse regulatory efforts at the federal level. The status quo of, or progress in, the regulated cannabis industry, while encouraging, is not assured and any number of factors could slow or halt further progress in this area. While there may be ample public support for legislative action permitting the manufacture and use of cannabis, numerous factors impact and can delay the legislative and regulatory processes. For example, many states that legalized medical-use and/or adult-use cannabis have seen significant delays in the drafting and implementation of industry regulations and issuance of licenses. In addition, burdensome regulations at the state level could slow or stop further development of the medical-use and/or adult-use cannabis industry, such as limiting the medical conditions for which medical-use cannabis can be recommended, restricting the form in which medical-use or adult-use cannabis can be consumed, or imposing significant taxes on the growth, processing and/or retail sales of cannabis, each of which could have the impact of dampening growth of the cannabis industry and making it for cannabis businesses, including our borrowers, to operate in those states. Any one of these factors could or additional legislative authorization of cannabis, which could our business prospects.
FDA regulation of cannabis could negatively affect the cannabis industry, which would directly affect our financial condition.
Should the federal government legalize cannabis for adult-use and/or medical-use, or if cannabis is rescheduled to Schedule III, it is possible that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (the “FDA”) may have some role in regulating certain cannabis product. Indeed, after the U.S. government removed hemp and its extracts from the CSA as part of the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2008, then FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb issued a statement reminding the public of the FDA’s continued authority “to regulate products containing cannabis or cannabis-derived compounds under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (the “FD&C Act”) and section 351 of the Public Health Service Act.” He also reminded the public that “it’s unlawful under the FD&C Act to introduce food containing added cannabidiol (“CBD”) or tetrahydrocannabinol (“THC”) into interstate commerce, or to market CBD or THC products, as, or in, dietary supplements, regardless of whether the substances are hemp-derived,” and regardless of whether health claims are made, because CBD and THC entered the FDA testing pipeline as the subject of public substantial clinical investigations for GW Pharmaceuticals’ Sativex (THC and CBD) and Epidiolex (CBD). The memo added that, prior to introduction into interstate commerce, any cannabis product, whether derived from hemp or otherwise, marketed with a disease claim (e.g., therapeutic , disease , etc.) must first be approved by the FDA for its intended use through one of the drug approval pathways. Notably, the FDA can look beyond the product’s express to find that a product is a “drug.” The definition of “drug” under the FDCA includes, in relevant part, “articles intended for use in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or of disease in man or other animals” as well as “articles intended for use as a component of [a drug as defined in the other sections of the definition].” 21 U.S.C. § 321(g)(1). In determining “intended use,” the FDA has traditionally looked beyond a product’s label to statements made on websites, on social media, or orally by the company’s representatives.
The FDA has sent numerous warning letters to sellers of CBD, Delta-8, and intoxicating hemp products. The FDA could turn its attention to the cannabis industry in the future, and will do so if cannabis is rescheduled, effectively moving it from primary
DEA oversight (as a Schedule I drug) to primary FDA oversight (as a Schedule III drug). In the event that it is rescheduled, it is expected that the FDA may have to develop new policies and procedures to address cannabis’s unique challenges as a botanical product. In addition to requiring FDA approval of cannabis products marketed as drugs, the FDA could issue rules and regulations including certified good manufacturing practices related to the growth, cultivation, harvesting and processing of cannabis. It is also possible that the FDA would require that facilities where cannabis is grown register with the FDA and comply with certain federally prescribed regulations. Cannabis facilities are currently regulated by state and local governments. In the event that some or all of these federal enforcement and regulations are imposed, we do not know what the impact would be on the cannabis industry, including what costs, requirements and possible prohibitions may be enforced or how state legal markets may be impacted. If we or our borrowers are unable to comply with the regulations or registration as prescribed by the FDA, we and/or our borrowers may be unable to continue to operate our and their business in its current form or at all.
We and our borrowers may have difficulty accessing the service of banks and other financial institutions, and we may be limited in our ability to provide debt to participants in the cannabis industry, which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.
Certain financial transactions involving proceeds from the trafficking of cannabis can form a basis for prosecution under the federal money laundering statutes, unlicensed money transmitter statute and the Bank Secrecy Act. Previous guidance issued by the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, a division of the U.S. Department of the Treasury, clarified how financial institutions can provide services to cannabis-related businesses consistent with their obligations under the Bank Secrecy Act. While the federal government has not initiated financial crimes prosecutions against state-law compliant cannabis companies or their vendors, the government theoretically could do so. The continued uncertainty surrounding financial transactions related to cannabis activities may result in financial institutions discontinuing services to the cannabis industry or limit our ability to provide loans to the cannabis industry.
Consequently, those businesses involved in the regulated cannabis industry continue to encounter difficulty establishing banking relationships, which could increase over time. Our inability to maintain our current bank accounts or service our lending relationships would make it difficult for us to operate our business, increase our operating costs, and pose additional operational, logistical and security challenges and could result in our inability to implement our business plan.
The terms of our loans require that our borrowers make payments on such loans via check, ACH, or wire transfer. Only a small percentage of financial institutions in the United States currently provide banking services to licensed companies operating in the cannabis industry. The inability of our current and potential borrowers to open accounts and continue using the services of banks will limit their ability to enter into debt arrangements with us or may result in their default under our debt agreements, either of which could materially harm our business, operations, cash flow and financial condition.
Laws and regulations affecting the regulated cannabis industry are continually changing, which could materially adversely affect our proposed operations, and we cannot predict the impact that future regulations may have on us.
Local, state and federal cannabis laws and regulations have been evolving rapidly and are subject to varied interpretations, which could require us to incur substantial costs associated with compliance or alter our business plan and could negatively impact our borrowers or prospective borrowers, which in turn could negatively impact our business. It is also possible that regulations may be enacted in the future that will be directly applicable to our proposed business. We can know neither the nature of any future laws, regulations, interpretations or applications nor the effect additional governmental regulations or administrative policies and procedures, when and if promulgated, could have on our business. For example, if cannabis is no longer illegal under federal law, we may experience a significant increase in competition. Accordingly, any change in these laws or regulations, changes in their interpretation, or newly enacted laws or regulations and any failure by us to comply with these laws or regulations, could require changes to certain of our business practices, negatively impact our operations, cash flow or financial condition, impose additional costs on us or otherwise adversely affect our business.
Applicable state laws may prevent us from maximizing our potential income.
Depending on the state, and the laws of that particular state, we may not be able to fully realize our potential to generate profit. For example, some states have residency requirements for those directly involved in the cannabis industry, which may impede our ability to contract with cannabis businesses in those states. Furthermore, cities and counties are being given broad discretion to ban certain cannabis activities. Even if these activities are legal under state law, specific cities and counties may ban them.
Loans to cannabis businesses may be forfeited to the federal government.
Any assets used in conjunction with the violation of federal law are potentially subject to federal forfeiture, even in states that have legalized cannabis. In July 2017, the DOJ issued a new policy directive regarding asset forfeiture, referred to as the “equitable sharing program.” This policy directive represents a reversal of DOJ’s policy under President Obama’s administration, and allows for forfeitures to proceed that are not in accord with the limitations imposed by state-specific forfeiture laws. This policy directive could lead to increased use of asset forfeitures by local, state and federal enforcement agencies. If the federal government decides to initiate forfeiture proceedings against cannabis businesses, such as the cannabis facilities that are owned or utilized by our borrowers, our loans to our borrowers would likely be materially and adversely affected.
We may have difficulty accessing bankruptcy courts.
Because cannabis is illegal under federal law, federal bankruptcy protection is currently not available to parties who engage in the cannabis industry or cannabis-related businesses. Past bankruptcy rulings have denied bankruptcies for dispensaries upon the justification that businesses cannot violate federal law and then claim the benefits of federal bankruptcy for the same activity and upon the justification that courts cannot ask a bankruptcy trustee to take possession of, and distribute cannabis assets as such action would violate the CSA. Therefore, we may not be able to seek the protection of the bankruptcy courts, and this could materially affect our business or our ability to obtain credit.
The loans we make may include Canadian entities within their corporate structure that have the ability to seek insolvency protections in Canada, which could materially and adversely affect our business.
The loans that we make may include U.S.-based companies operating in the cannabis industry with at least one Canadian entity within their corporate structure for the purpose of listing on the CSE. In May 2020, a U.S.-based cannabis company that is listed on the CSE filed for, and was granted, insolvency protection under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act pursuant to Canadian law. If the applicable borrower obtains bankruptcy protections in Canada, it could restrict our ability, or create additional costs or delays involved in our efforts, to foreclose on the collateral, which will reduce the net proceeds realized and, thus, increase the potential for loss.
We may make loans that are secured by properties that are, and will be, subject to extensive regulations, such that if such collateral was foreclosed upon those regulations may result in significant costs and materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.
We may make loans that are secured by properties that are, and will be, subject to various local laws and regulatory requirements, and we would be subject to such requirements if such collateral was foreclosed upon. Local property regulations may restrict the use of collateral or our ability to foreclose on the collateral. Among other things, these restrictions may relate to cultivation of cannabis, the use of water and the discharge of wastewater, fire and safety, seismic conditions, asbestos-cleanup or hazardous material abatement requirements. Due to current statutory prohibitions and exchange listing standards, we will not own any real estate used in cannabis-related operations. While our loan agreements and related mortgages provide for foreclosure remedies, receivership remedies and/or other remedies that would allow us to cause the sale or other realization of real property collateral, the regulatory requirements and statutory prohibitions related to real property used in cannabis-related operations may cause significant delays or difficulties in realizing upon the expected value of such real property collateral. We make no assurance that existing regulatory policies will not materially and adversely affect the value of such collateral, or that additional regulations will not be adopted that would increase such potential material effect. The effect on such collateral could have a material effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.
If we foreclose on properties securing our loans, we may have difficulty selling the properties due to the nature of specialized industrial cultivation/processing cannabis properties and the potentially limited number of high-quality operators for such properties, as well as for retail/dispensary cannabis properties.
Specialized industrial cultivation/processing cannabis properties are highly specialized and require substantial investment to make them suitable for such uses. In addition, there may be a limited number of high-quality operators of specialized industrial cultivation/processing and retail/dispensary cannabis properties or a limited number of operators in a particular market that have completed the state-licensing process. As a result, if we foreclose on properties securing our loans, we may have difficulty selling
such properties and may be forced to sell a property to a lower quality operator. To the extent there is a change in law or we are unable to find a suitable cannabis operator, we may be forced to sell a property at a loss to a party outside of the cannabis industry. Any of the foregoing could materially and adversely affect the value of our assets and our results of operations, financial condition and ability to pay dividends to our stockholders.
Certain assets of our borrowers may not be used as collateral or transferred to us due to applicable state laws and regulations governing the cannabis industry, and such restrictions could negatively impact our profitability.
Each state that has legalized cannabis in some form has adopted its own set of laws and regulations that differ from one another. In particular, laws and regulations differ among states regarding the collateralization or transferability of cannabis-related assets, such as cannabis licenses, cannabis inventory, and ownership interests in licensed cannabis companies. Some state laws and regulations where our borrowers operate may prohibit the collateralization or transferability of certain cannabis-related assets. Other states may allow the collateralization or transferability of cannabis-related assets, but with restrictions, such as meeting certain eligibility requirements, utilization of state receiverships, and/or upon approval by the applicable regulatory authority. Prohibitions or restrictions on our ability to acquire certain cannabis-related assets securing the loans of our borrowers could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.
Specifically, there is no limitation under state law on foreclosing on the real estate underlying the loans that we hold; however, to the extent the real estate is still being used in cannabis-related activities, we will not foreclose and take title to such real estate as doing so would violate NASDAQ listing standards. If we determine to foreclose on the real estate underlying a defaulted loan, we would have a third party collateral manager evict the tenant and have the cannabis equipment and inventory removed from such property. With respect to equipment, receivables and cash accounts, there are no limitations under state law regarding our ability to foreclose on such collateral. Foreclosing on pledged equity is subject to approval by the applicable state regulator as it would trigger a change of control, which has to be approved by the state regulator, in its discretion. Our loans are secured by liens on equity, including the equity in the entity that holds the state-issued license to cultivate, process, distribute, or retail cannabis, as the case may be, but we will not take title to such equity as doing so would NASDAQ listing standards. We also cannot on liens on state licenses as they are generally not transferable, nor do we have liens on cannabis inventory.
Our ability to force a sale of our real estate collateral in Arkansas, Arizona, California, Florida, Illinois, Michigan, Missouri, Nevada, New Jersey, Ohio and Pennsylvania is governed by judicial foreclosure. Under judicial foreclosure, we can enforce a judgment in foreclosure by a writ of execution. The writ directs the sheriff, clerk, special master, referee or other authorized person, as the case may be, to levy on and sell the real property, commonly at a properly noticed public auction. In Maryland, Massachusetts and West Virginia, a trustee or appointed auctioneer sells the property at a public sale.
We cannot take the position of mortgagee-in-possession as long as the property is used by a cannabis operator, but we can request that the court appoint a receiver to manage and operate the subject real property until the foreclosure proceedings are completed. The appointment of a receiver to manage the property does not render us a mortgagee-in-possession. A receiver serves as an officer of the court, appointed to preserve the value of the real property and the income from the real property during the pendency of foreclosure proceedings or trustee sales.
Equipment, receivables, and cash in deposit accounts may be collected under state Uniform Commercial Code ( “ UCC ” ). In all states, we are permitted for non-real estate collateral (e.g., equipment) to pursue a judicial action and execute on a judgment via sheriffs’ sale.
While we cannot foreclose under UCC and take title or sell equity in a licensed cannabis business, a potential purchaser of a delinquent or defaulted loan could. However, the transfer of ownership of equity in a licensed cannabis business requires state regulator approval, which can take significant time.
In addition, if a borrower defaults on a loan from us and we seek to cause a sale of the collateral, the sales of such assets may be forced upon the borrower at such point when time may be of the essence. Therefore, the assets may be made available to a limited number of potential purchasers, and particularly in limited-license states in which we focus, the sales prices may be less than the prices obtained with more time in a larger market. As a result, the sale of such collateral may not result in sufficient proceeds to repay our loan and could have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.
Liability relating to environmental matters may impact the value of properties that we may acquire upon foreclosure of the properties securing our loans.
To the extent we foreclose on properties securing our loans, we may be subject to environmental liabilities arising from such foreclosed properties. In particular, cannabis cultivation and manufacturing facilities may present environmental concerns of which we are not currently aware. Under various federal, state and local laws, an owner or operator of real property may become liable for the costs of removal of certain hazardous substances released on its property. These laws often impose liability without regard
to whether the owner or operator knew of, or was responsible for, the release of such hazardous substances. Accordingly, if environmental contamination exists on properties we acquire or develop after acquisition, we could become subject to liability for the contamination.
The presence of hazardous substances may adversely affect an owner’s ability to sell real estate or borrow using real estate as collateral. To the extent that an owner of a property securing one of our loans becomes liable for removal costs, the ability of the owner to make payments to us may be reduced, which in turn may adversely affect the value of the relevant loan held by us and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.
If we foreclose on any properties securing our loans, the presence of hazardous substances on a property may adversely affect our ability to sell the property and we may incur substantial remediation costs, thus harming our financial condition. The discovery of material environmental liabilities attached to any properties securing our loans could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.
The market value of properties securing our loans acquired by us upon foreclosure may decrease if they cannot be used for cannabis related operations.
Properties used for cannabis operations, particularly cultivation and manufacturing facilities, are generally more valuable than if used for other purposes. If we are unable to sell a property securing our loans to a licensed cannabis company for similar use and we, therefore, must foreclose on such property, we may recover significantly less than the expected value of the foreclosed property, thereby having a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.
Risks Related to Sources of Financing Our Business
Our growth depends on external sources of capital, which may not be available on favorable terms or at all.
We intend to grow by expanding our portfolio of loans, which we intend to finance primarily through newly issued equity or debt. We may not be in a position to take advantage of attractive lending opportunities for growth if we are unable, due to global or regional economic uncertainty, changes in the state or federal regulatory environment relating to our business, our own operating or financial performance or otherwise, to access capital markets on a timely basis and on favorable terms or at all. In addition, U.S. federal income tax law generally requires that a REIT distribute annually at least 90% of its REIT taxable income, without regard to the deduction for dividends paid and excluding net capital gain and certain non-cash income, and that it pay U.S. federal income tax at regular corporate rates to the extent that it annually distributes less than 100% of its taxable income. Because we intend to grow our business, this limitation may require us to raise additional equity or incur debt at a time when it may be disadvantageous to do so.
Our access to capital will depend upon a number of factors over which we have little or no control, including, but not limited to:
general economic or market conditions;
the market’s view of the quality of our assets;
the market’s perception of our growth potential;
the current regulatory environment with respect to our business; and
our current and potential future earnings and cash distributions.
If general economic instability or downturn leads to an inability to borrow at attractive rates or at all, our ability to obtain capital to finance our loans to borrowers could be negatively impacted. In addition, while we do not consider our Company to be engaged in the cannabis industry, banks and other financial institutions may be reluctant to enter into lending transactions with us, particularly secured lending, because we invest in companies involved in the cultivation, manufacturing and sale of cannabis.
If we are unable to obtain capital on terms and conditions that we find acceptable, we likely will have to reduce the loans we make. In addition, our ability to refinance all or any debt we may incur in the future, on acceptable terms or at all, is subject to all of the above factors, and will also be affected by our future financial position, results of operations and cash flows, which additional factors are also subject to significant uncertainties, and therefore we may be unable to refinance any debt we may incur in the future,
as it matures, on acceptable terms or at all. All of these events would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.
Global economic, political and market conditions could have a significant adverse effect on our business, financial condition, cash flows and results of operations.
Downgrades by rating agencies to the U.S. government’s credit rating or concerns about its credit and deficit levels in general could cause interest rates and borrowing costs to rise, which may negatively impact both the perception of credit risk associated portfolio and our ability to access the debt markets on favorable terms. In addition, a decreased U.S. government credit rating could create broader financial turmoil and uncertainty, which may weigh heavily on our financial performance and the value of our equity. Additionally, concerns regarding a potential increase in inflation would likely cause interest rates and borrowing costs to rise.
Deterioration in the economic conditions in the Eurozone and globally, including instability in financial markets, may pose a risk to our business. In recent years, financial markets have been affected at times by a number of global macroeconomic and political events, including the following: large sovereign debts and fiscal deficits of several countries in Europe and in emerging markets jurisdictions, levels of non-performing loans on the balance sheets of European banks, the potential effect of any European country leaving the Eurozone, the potential effect of the United Kingdom leaving the European Union, and market volatility and loss of investor confidence driven by political events. Market and economic disruptions have affected, and may in the future affect, consumer confidence levels and spending, personal bankruptcy rates, levels of incurrence and default on consumer debt and home prices, among other factors. We cannot assure you that market disruptions in Europe, including the increased cost of funding for certain governments and financial institutions, will not impact the global economy, and we cannot you that assistance packages will be available, or if available, be sufficient to countries and markets in Europe or elsewhere affected by a financial . To the extent uncertainty regarding any economic recovery in Europe impacts consumer confidence and consumer credit factors, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be significantly and affected.
Various social and political circumstances in the U.S. and around the world (including wars and other forms of conflict, terrorist acts, security operations and catastrophic events such as fires, floods, earthquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes and global health epidemics or outbreaks of infectious diseases), may also contribute to increased market volatility and economic uncertainties or deterioration in the U.S. and worldwide. Such events, including trade tensions and tariffs between the United States and other countries, such as Canada, Mexico, and China, other uncertainties regarding actual and potential shifts in U.S. and foreign trade, economic and other policies with other countries, the conflicts in Europe, Ukraine and the Middle East and health epidemics and pandemics, could adversely affect our business, financial condition, cash flows and results of operations. These market and economic disruptions could also negatively impact the operating results of our borrowers.
We may incur significant debt, which may subject us to restrictive covenants and increased risk of loss and may reduce cash available for distributions to our stockholders, and our governing documents contain no limit on the amount of debt we may incur.
Subject to market conditions and availability, we may incur significant debt through bank credit facilities (including term loans and revolving facilities), public and private debt issuances and derivative instruments, in addition to transaction or asset specific funding arrangements. The percentage of leverage we employ will vary depending on our available capital, our ability to obtain and access financing arrangements with lenders, debt restrictions contained in those financing arrangements and the lenders’ and rating agencies’ estimate of the stability of our loan portfolio’s cash flow. Our governing documents contain no limit on the amount of debt we may incur, and we may significantly increase the amount of leverage we utilize at any time without approval of our stockholders. Leverage can enhance our potential returns but can also exacerbate our losses. Incurring substantial debt could subject us to many risks that, if realized, would materially and adversely affect us, including, but not limited to, the risks that:
our cash flow from operations may be insufficient to make required payments of principal of and interest on the debt we incur or we may fail to comply with all of the other covenants contained in such debt, which is likely to result in (i) acceleration of such debt (and any other debt containing a cross-default or cross-acceleration provision) that we may be unable to repay from internal funds or to refinance on favorable terms, or at all, (ii) our inability to borrow unused amounts under our financing arrangements, even if we are current in payments on borrowings under those arrangements, and/or (iii) the loss of some or all of our assets to foreclosure or sale;
we may be unable to borrow additional funds as needed or on favorable terms, or at all;
to the extent we borrow debt that bears interest at variable rates, increases in interest rates could materially increase our interest expense;
our default under any loan with cross-default provisions could result in a default on other indebtedness;
incurring debt may increase our vulnerability to adverse economic and industry conditions with no assurance that loan yields will increase with higher financing costs;
we may be required to dedicate a substantial portion of our cash flow from operations to payments on the debt we may incur, thereby reducing funds available for operations, future business opportunities, stockholder distributions, including distributions currently contemplated or necessary to satisfy the requirements for REIT qualification, or other purposes; and
we are not able to refinance debt that matures prior to the loan it was used to finance on favorable terms, or at all.
There can be no assurance that a leveraging strategy will be successful. If any one of these events were to occur, our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow, and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders could be materially and adversely affected.
Interest rate fluctuations could increase our financing costs, which could lead to a significant decrease in our results of operations, cash flows and the market value of our loans.
Our primary interest rate exposures relate to the financing cost of our debt. Our financing costs are determined by reference to floating rates. The amount of such costs depends on a variety of factors, including, without limitation, (i) for collateralized debt, the value and liquidity of the collateral, and for non-collateralized debt, our credit, (ii) the level and movement of interest rates, and (iii) general market conditions and liquidity. In a period of rising interest rates, our interest expense on floating-rate debt would increase, while any additional interest income we earn on our floating-rate loans may not compensate for such increase in interest expense. At the same time, the interest income we earn on our fixed-rate loans would not change, the duration and weighted average life of our fixed-rate loans would increase and the market value of our fixed-rate loans would decrease. Similarly, in a period of declining interest rates, our interest income on floating-rate loans would decrease, while any decrease in the interest we are charged on our floating-rate debt may not compensate for such decrease in interest income and interest we are charged on our fixed-rate debt would not change. Any such scenario could materially and adversely affect us.
In order to combat inflation, the Federal Reserve raised the Federal Funds Rate multiple times from March 2022 through July 2023. From September 2024 through December 2024, the Federal Reserve reduced the Federal Funds Rate three times as the inflation began to stabilize. During fiscal year 2025, the Federal Reserve continued to cut the Federal Funds rate, resulting in additional decreases of 75 basis points to the Prime rate during the year. In February 2026, the Federal Reserve held interest rates steady, but policymakers continue to emphasize their commitment to monitoring and addressing inflationary pressures. Persistent inflationary pressures and ongoing fiscal deficits may pose risk of volatility, and therefore any long-term plans by the Federal Reserve are uncertain, though further rate declines remain probable. These developments, along with the United States government’s credit and deficit concerns, global economic uncertainties and market volatility and the impacts of any current or future global health pandemics, could cause interest rates to be fluctuate, which may impact our ability to access the capital markets on terms .
Any bank credit facilities that we may use in the future to finance our operations may require us to provide collateral or pay down debt.
We utilize bank credit facilities (including term loans and revolving facilities) to finance a portion of our operations. We may not have the funds available to repay our debt when due, which would likely result in defaults unless we are able to raise funds from alternative sources, which we may not be able to achieve on favorable terms or at all. If we cannot meet these requirements, lenders could accelerate our indebtedness, increase the interest rate on advanced funds and terminate our ability to borrow funds from it, which could materially and adversely affect our financial condition and ability to implement our investment strategy. In addition, if a lender files for bankruptcy or becomes insolvent, our loans may become subject to bankruptcy or insolvency proceedings, thus depriving us, at least temporarily, of the of such loans. Such an event could restrict our access to bank credit facilities and increase our cost of capital. The providers of bank credit facilities may also require us to maintain a certain amount of cash or set aside assets sufficient to maintain a specified liquidity position that would allow us to our collateral
obligations. As a result, we may not be able to obtain leverage as fully as we would choose, which could reduce the return on our loans. If we are unable to meet these collateral obligations, our financial condition and prospects could deteriorate rapidly.
In addition, there can be no assurance that we will be able to obtain additional bank credit facilities on favorable terms, or at all, if needed. Banks and other financial institutions may be reluctant to enter into lending transactions with us because of the risks and uncertainty inherent in our investments in the cannabis industry.
Adoption of the Basel III standards and other proposed supplementary regulatory standards may negatively impact our access to financing or affect the terms of our future financing arrangements.
In response to various financial crises and the volatility of financial markets, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision adopted the Basel III standards several years ago to reform, among other things, bank capital adequacy, stress testing, and market liquidity risk. United States regulators have elected to implement substantially all of the Basel III standards and have even implemented rules requiring enhanced supplementary leverage ratio standards, which impose capital requirements more stringent than those of the Basel II standards for the most systematically significant banking organizations in the United States. Adoption and implementation of the Basel III standards and the supplemental regulatory standards adopted by United States regulators may negatively impact our access to financing or affect the terms of our future financing arrangements due to an increase in capital requirements for, and constraints on, the financial institutions from which we may borrow.
Moreover, in January 2019, the Basel Committee published its revised capital requirements for market risk, known as Fundamental Review of the Trading Book (“FRTB”), which are expected to generally result in higher global capital requirements for banks that could, in turn, reduce liquidity and increase financing and hedging costs. The impact of FRTB will not be known until after any resulting rules are finalized and implemented by the United States federal bank regulatory agencies.
Risks Related to Our Organization and Structure
Provisions in our Charter and our amended and restated bylaws (our “Bylaws”) may have anti-takeover effects that could discourage an acquisition of us by others, even if an acquisition would be beneficial to our stockholders, and may prevent attempts by our stockholders to replace or remove our current management.
Our Charter and our Bylaws contain provisions that may have the effect of delaying or preventing a change in control of us or changes in our management. Our Charter and Bylaws include, among others, provisions that:
authorize our Board, without stockholder approval, to cause us to issue additional shares of our common stock or to raise capital through the creation and issuance of our preferred stock, debt securities convertible into common stock, options, warrants and other rights, on terms and for consideration as our Board in its sole discretion may determine;
authorize “blank check” preferred stock, which could be issued by our Board without stockholder approval, subject to certain specified limitations, and may contain voting, liquidation, dividend and other rights senior to our common stock;
specify that only our Board, the chairman of our Board, our chief executive officer or president or, upon the written request of stockholders entitled to cast not less than a majority of the votes entitled to be cast, our secretary can call special meetings of our stockholders;
establish advance notice procedures for stockholder proposals to be brought before an annual or special meeting of our stockholders, including proposed nominations of individuals for election to our Board;
provide that a majority of directors then in office, even though less than a quorum, may fill any vacancy on our Board, whether resulting from an increase in the number of directors or otherwise; and
provide our Board the exclusive power to adopt, alter or repeal any provision of our Bylaws and to make new Bylaws.
These provisions, alone or together, could delay or prevent hostile takeovers and changes in control or changes in our management.
Any provision of our Charter or Bylaws that has the effect of delaying or deterring a change in control could limit your opportunity to receive a premium for your shares of our common stock, and could also affect the price that some investors are willing to pay for our common stock. Any person or entity purchasing or otherwise acquiring any interest in shares of our stock shall be deemed to have notice of and to have consented to the provisions of our Charter and Bylaws described above.
Our Board may approve the issuance of stock, including preferred stock, with terms that may discourage a third party from acquiring us.
Our Charter permits our Board, without any action by our stockholders, to authorize the issuance of stock in one or more classes or series. Our Board may also classify or reclassify any unissued shares of stock and set or change the preferences, conversion and other rights, voting powers, restrictions, limitations as to dividends and other distributions, qualifications and terms and conditions of redemption of any such stock, which rights may be superior to those of our common stock. Thus, our Board could authorize the issuance of shares of a class or series of stock with terms and conditions which could have the effect of discouraging a takeover or other transaction in which holders of some or a majority of our outstanding common stock might receive a premium for their shares over the then current market price of our common stock.
Certain provisions of the Maryland General Corporation Law, or MGCL, could inhibit changes of control, which may discourage third parties from conducting a tender offer or seeking other change of control transactions that could involve a premium price for our common stock or that our stockholders otherwise believe to be in their best interests.
We are a Maryland corporation and subject to the MGCL. Under the MGCL, certain “business combinations” between a Maryland corporation and an “interested stockholder” or an affiliate of an interested stockholder are prohibited for five years after the most recent date on which the interested stockholder becomes an interested stockholder. These business combinations include a merger, consolidation, share exchange or, in circumstances specified in the statute, an asset transfer or issuance or reclassification of equity securities. An interested stockholder is defined as: (a) any person who beneficially owns, directly or indirectly, 10% or more of the voting power of the then-outstanding voting stock of a corporation; or (b) an affiliate or associate of a corporation who, at any time within the two-year period prior to the date in question, was the beneficial owner, directly or indirectly, of 10% or more of the voting power of the then-outstanding stock of such corporation.
A person is not an interested stockholder under the statute if the board of directors approved in advance the transaction by which the person otherwise would have become an interested stockholder. However, in approving a transaction, the board of directors may provide that its approval is subject to compliance, at or after the time of approval, with any terms and conditions determined by the board of directors.
After the expiration of the five-year period described above, any business combination between a Maryland corporation and an interested stockholder must generally be recommended by the board of directors of such corporation and approved by the affirmative vote of at least:
80% of the votes entitled to be cast by holders of the then-outstanding shares of voting stock of such corporation; and
two-thirds of the votes entitled to be cast by holders of voting stock of such corporation, other than shares held by the interested stockholder with whom or with whose affiliate the business combination is to be effected, or held by an affiliate or associate of the interested stockholder.
These supermajority vote requirements do not apply if the corporation’s common stockholders receive a minimum price, as defined under the MGCL, for their shares in the form of cash or other consideration in the same form as previously paid by the interested stockholder for its shares. The MGCL also permits various exemptions from these provisions, including business combinations that are exempted by the board of directors before the time that the interested stockholder becomes an interested stockholder. By resolution of our Board, we have opted out of the business combination provisions of the MGCL and provide that any business combination between us and any other person is exempt from the business combination provisions of the MGCL, provided that the business combination is first approved by our Board (including a majority of directors who are not affiliates or associates of such persons).
In addition, under the MGCL, holders of our “control shares” (defined as voting shares of stock that, if aggregated with all other shares of stock owned or controlled by the acquirer, would entitle the acquirer to exercise one of three increasing ranges of voting power in electing directors) acquired in a “control share acquisition” (defined as the direct or indirect acquisition of issued and outstanding “control shares”) have no voting rights except to the extent approved by our stockholders by the affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of all of the votes entitled to be cast on the matter, excluding all interested shares. Our Bylaws contain a
provision exempting from the Maryland Control Share Acquisition Act any and all acquisitions by any person of shares of our stock. There can be no assurance that this exemption will not be amended or eliminated at any time in the future.
Additionally, Title 3, Subtitle 8 of the MGCL permits our Board, without stockholder approval and regardless of what is currently provided in our Charter or Bylaws, to implement certain takeover defenses, such as a classified board, some of which we do not have.
Our Bylaws designate the Circuit Court for Baltimore City, Maryland as the sole and exclusive forum for certain types of actions and proceedings that may be initiated by our stockholders and provide that claims relating to causes of action under the Securities Act may only be brought in federal district courts, which could limit stockholders’ ability to obtain a favorable judicial forum for disputes with us or our directors, officers or employees, if any, and could discourage lawsuits against us and our directors, officers and employees, if any.
Our Bylaws provide that, unless we consent in writing to the selection of an alternative forum, the Circuit Court for Baltimore City, Maryland, or, if that court does not have jurisdiction, the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, Northern Division, will be the sole and exclusive forum for (a) any Internal Corporate Claim, as such term is defined in the MGCL, (b) any derivative action or proceeding brought on our behalf (other than actions arising under federal securities laws), (c) any action asserting a claim of breach of any duty owed by any of our directors, officers or other employees to us or to our stockholders, (d) any action asserting a claim against us or any of our directors, officers or other employees arising pursuant to any provision of the MGCL or our Charter or Bylaws or (e) any other action asserting a claim against us or any of our directors, officers or other employees that is governed by the internal affairs doctrine. These choice of forum provisions will not apply to suits brought to enforce a duty or liability created by the Securities Act, the Exchange Act, or any other claim for which federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction. Furthermore, our Bylaws provide that, unless we consent in writing to the selection of an alternative forum, the federal district courts of the United States of America shall, to the fullest extent permitted by law, be the sole and forum for the resolution of any claim arising under the Securities Act.
These exclusive forum provisions may limit the ability of our stockholders to bring a claim in a judicial forum that such stockholders find favorable for disputes with us or our directors, officers, or employees, if any, which may discourage such lawsuits against us and our directors, officers, and employees, if any. Alternatively, if a court were to find the choice of forum provisions contained in our Bylaws to be inapplicable or unenforceable in an action, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving such action in other jurisdictions, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, and operating results. For example, under the Securities Act, federal courts have concurrent jurisdiction over all suits brought to enforce any duty or liability created by the Securities Act, and investors cannot waive compliance with the federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder. In addition, the exclusive forum provisions described above do not apply to any actions brought under the Exchange Act.
Ownership limitations contained in the Charter may restrict change of control or business combination opportunities in which our stockholders might receive a premium for their shares.
For us to qualify as a REIT under the Code, not more than 50% of the value of our outstanding stock may be owned directly or indirectly, by five or fewer individuals (including certain entities treated as individuals for this purpose) at any time during the last half of a taxable year. For the purpose of assisting our qualification as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes, among other purposes, our Charter prohibits beneficial or constructive ownership by any person of more than a certain percentage, currently 9.8%, in value or by number of shares, whichever is more restrictive, of the outstanding shares of our common stock or 9.8% in value of our outstanding shares of all classes or series of our stock, which we refer to as the “ownership limits.” The constructive ownership rules under the Code and our Charter are complex and may cause shares of the outstanding common stock owned by a group of related persons to be deemed to be constructively owned by one person. As a result, the acquisition of less than 9.8% of our outstanding common stock or all classes or series of our stock by a person could cause a person to own constructively in excess of 9.8% of the outstanding shares of our common stock or in excess of 9.8% of the outstanding shares of all class and series of our stock, respectively, and thus the ownership limits. There can be no assurance that our Board, as permitted in the Charter, will not decrease the ownership limits in the future. Any attempt to own or transfer shares of our common stock in excess of the ownership limits without the consent of our Board will result either in the shares in excess of the limit being transferred by operation of the Charter to a trust, and the person who attempted to acquire such excess shares will not have any rights in such shares, or in the transfer being void. The ownership limits may have the effect of a change in control of us by a third party, even if such change in control would be in the interests of our stockholders or would result in receipt of a premium to the price of our common stock (and even if such change in control would not reasonably our REIT status). In addition, our Board has granted conditional exceptions to the ownership limits to affiliates of our Sponsor, which may limit our Board’s power to increase the ownership limits or grant further exemptions in the future.
Maintenance of our exemption from registration under the Investment Company Act may impose significant limits on our operations. Your investment return in our common stock may be reduced if we are required to register as an investment company under the Investment Company Act.
We have conducted and intend to continue to conduct our operations so that we will be exempt from the provisions of the Investment Company Act pursuant to an exemption contained in Section 3(c)(5)(C) thereunder. The Investment Company Act provides certain protections to investors and imposes certain restrictions on registered investment companies (including, for example, limitations on the ability of registered investment companies to incur leverage), none of which will be applicable to us.
We rely on the exception set forth in Section 3(c)(5) of the Investment Company Act, which excludes from the definition of investment company “[a]ny person who is not engaged in the business of issuing redeemable securities, face-amount certificates of the installment type or periodic payment plan certificates, and who is primarily engaged in one or more of the following businesses . . . (C) purchasing or otherwise acquiring mortgages and other liens on and interests in real estate.” The SEC generally requires that, for the exception provided by Section 3(c)(5) to be available, at least 55% of an entity’s assets be comprised of mortgages and other liens on and interests in real estate, also known as “qualifying interests,” and at least another 25% of the entity’s assets must be comprised of additional qualifying interests or real estate-type interests (with no more than 20% of the entity’s assets comprised of miscellaneous assets).
We classify our assets for purposes of our 3(c)(5)(C) exemption based upon no-action positions taken by the SEC staff and interpretive guidance provided by the SEC and its staff. These no-action positions are based on specific factual situations that may be substantially or entirely different from the factual situations we may face and a number of these no-action positions were issued more than twenty years ago. There may be no guidance from the SEC or its staff that applies directly to our factual situations and as a result we may have to apply SEC staff guidance that relates to other factual situations by analogy. No assurance can be given that the SEC or its staff will concur with our classification of our assets. In addition, the SEC or its staff may, in the future, issue further guidance that may require us to re-classify our assets for purposes of the Investment Company Act. If we are required to reclassify our assets, we may no longer be in compliance with the exemption from the definition of an investment company provided by Section 3(c)(5)(C) of the Investment Company Act.
A change in the value of any of our assets could negatively affect our ability to maintain our exemption from regulation under the Investment Company Act. To maintain compliance with the applicable exemption under the Investment Company Act, we may be unable to sell assets we would otherwise want to sell and may need to sell assets we would otherwise wish to retain. In addition, we may have to acquire additional assets that we might not otherwise have acquired or may have to forego opportunities to acquire assets that we would otherwise want to acquire and would be important to our investment strategy.
A failure by us to maintain this exemption would require us to significantly restructure our investment strategy. For example, because affiliated transactions are generally prohibited under the Investment Company Act, we would not be able to enter into transactions with any of our affiliates if we are required to register as an investment company, which could have a material adverse effect on our ability to operate the business and pay distributions. If we were required to register as an investment company but failed to do so, we would be prohibited from engaging in our business, and criminal and civil actions could be brought against us. In addition, our contracts would be unenforceable unless a court required enforcement, and a court could appoint a receiver to take control of such entity and liquidate its business.
Rapid and steep declines in the values of our real estate-related investments may make it more difficult for us to maintain our qualification as a REIT or exemption from the Investment Company Act.
If the market value or income potential of real estate-related investments declines as a result of increased interest rates or other factors, we may need to increase our real estate loans and income and/or liquidate our non-qualifying assets in order to maintain our REIT qualification or exemption from the Investment Company Act. If the decline in real estate asset values and/or income occurs quickly, this may be especially difficult to accomplish. This difficulty may be exacerbated by the illiquid nature of any non-qualifying assets that we may own. We may have to make investment decisions that we otherwise would not make absent REIT and Investment Company Act considerations.
Our rights and the rights of our stockholders to take action against our directors and officers are limited.
Our Charter eliminates the liability of our directors and officers to us and our stockholders for money damages to the maximum extent permitted under Maryland law. Under current Maryland law and our Charter, our directors and officers will not have any liability to us or our stockholders for money damages other than liability resulting from:
actual receipt of an improper benefit or profit in money, property or services; or
active and deliberate dishonesty by the director or officer that was established by a final judgment and is material to the cause of action adjudicated.
Our Charter obligates us to indemnify each of our directors or officers who is or is threatened to be made a party to or witness in a proceeding by reason of his or her service in those or certain other capacities, to the maximum extent permitted by Maryland law, from and against any claim or liability to which such person may become subject or which such person may incur by reason of his or her status as a present or former director or officer of us or serving in such other capacities. In addition, we may be obligated to pay or reimburse the expenses incurred by our present and former directors and officers without requiring a preliminary determination of their ultimate entitlement to indemnification. As a result, we and our stockholders may have more limited rights to recover money damages from our directors and officers than might otherwise exist absent these provisions in our Charter or that might exist with other companies, which could limit your recourse in the event of actions that are not in our best interests.
Future joint venture investments could be adversely affected by our lack of sole decision-making authority, our reliance on joint venture partners’ financial condition and liquidity and disputes between us and our joint venture partners.
We may in the future make investments through joint ventures. Such joint venture investments may involve risks not otherwise present when we originate or acquire investments without partners, including the following:
we may not have exclusive control over the investment or the joint venture, which may prevent us from taking actions that are in our best interest;
joint venture agreements often restrict the transfer of a partner’s interest or may otherwise restrict our ability to sell the interest when we desire and/or on advantageous terms;
any future joint venture agreements may contain buy-sell provisions pursuant to which one partner may initiate procedures requiring the other partner to choose between buying the other partner’s interest or selling its interest to that partner;
we may not be in a position to exercise sole decision-making authority regarding the investment or joint venture, which could create the potential risk of creating impasses on decisions, such as with respect to acquisitions or dispositions;
a partner may, at any time, have economic or business interests or goals that are, or that may become, inconsistent with our business interests or goals;
a partner may be in a position to take action contrary to our instructions, requests, policies or objectives, including our policy with respect to maintaining our qualification as a REIT and our exclusion or exemption from registration under the Investment Company Act;
a partner may fail to fund its share of required capital contributions or may become bankrupt, which may mean that we and any other remaining partners generally would remain liable for the joint venture’s liabilities;
our relationships with our partners are contractual in nature and may be terminated or dissolved under the terms of the applicable joint venture agreements and, in such event, we may not continue to own or operate the interests or investments underlying such relationship or may need to purchase such interests or investments at a premium to the market price to continue ownership;
disputes between us and a partner may result in litigation or arbitration that could increase our expenses and prevent our Manager and our officers and directors from focusing their time and efforts on our business and could result in subjecting the investments owned by the joint venture to additional risk; or
we may, in certain circumstances, be liable for the actions of a partner, and the activities of a partner could adversely affect our ability to maintain our qualification as a REIT or our exclusion or exemption from registration under the Investment Company Act, even though we do not control the joint venture.
Any of the above may subject us to liabilities in excess of those contemplated and adversely affect the value of our future joint venture investments.
Risks Related to Our Relationship with Our Manager and its Affiliates
Our future success depends on our Manager and its key personnel and investment professionals. We may not find a suitable replacement for our Manager if our Management Agreement is terminated or if such key personnel or investment professionals leave the employment of our Manager or otherwise become unavailable to us.
We rely on the resources of our Manager to manage our day-to-day operations, as we do not separately employ any personnel. We rely completely on our Manager to provide us with investment advisory services and general management services. Each of our executive officers also serve as officers or employees of our Manager. Our Manager has significant discretion as to the implementation of our investment and operating policies and strategies. Accordingly, we believe that our success depends to a significant extent upon the efforts, experience, diligence, skill and network of business contacts of the officers, key personnel and investment professionals of our Manager as well as the information and deal flow generated by such individuals. The officers, key personnel and investment professionals of our Manager source, evaluate, negotiate, close and monitor our loans; therefore, our success depends on their continued service. The departure of any of the officers, key personnel and investment professionals of our Manager could have a material adverse effect on our business.
None of our officers are obligated to dedicate any specific portion of their time to our business. Each of them may have significant responsibilities for other investment vehicles managed by affiliates of our Manager. As a result, the time these individuals may be able to devote to the management of our business could be limited. Further, when there are turbulent conditions in the real estate markets or distress in the credit markets, the attention of our Manager’s personnel and our executive officers and the resources of our Manager may also be required by other investment vehicles managed by affiliates of our Manager.
In addition, we offer no assurance that our Manager will remain our manager or that we will continue to have access to our Manager’s officers, key personnel and investment professionals due to the termination of the Management Agreement, our Manager being acquired, or due to other circumstances. Currently, we are managed by our Board and our officers and by our Manager, as provided for under our Management Agreement. The Management Agreement will expire on May 1, 2025, and will be automatically renewed for a one-year term thereafter unless otherwise terminated by us or our Manager. Our Manager may terminate the Management Agreement with 90 days’ written notice prior to the expiration of the renewal term. If the Management Agreement is terminated and we are unable to find a suitable replacement for our Manager, we may not be able to execute our investment strategy.
Our growth depends on the ability of our Manager to make loans on favorable terms that satisfy our investment strategy and otherwise generate attractive risk-adjusted returns initially and consistently from time to time.
Our ability to achieve our investment objective depends on our ability to grow, which depends, in turn, on the management and investment teams of our Manager and their ability to identify and to make loans on favorable terms in accordance with our investment strategy as well as on our access to financing on acceptable terms. The demands on the time of the professional staff of our Manager will increase as our portfolio grows and the management of our existing portfolio may divert our Manager’s attention from future potential loans or otherwise slow our rate of investment. Our Manager may be unable to successfully and efficiently integrate new loans into our existing portfolio or otherwise effectively manage our assets or our future growth effectively. We cannot assure you that our Manager will be able to hire, train, supervise, manage and retain new officers and employees to manage future growth effectively, and any such failure could have a material effect on our business. The to consummate loans on terms without substantial expense or would our growth, would affect our results of operations and our ability to generate cash flow and make distributions to our stockholders, and could cause the value of our common stock to .
There are various conflicts of interest in our relationship with our Manager that could result in decisions that are not in the best interests of our stockholders.
We are subject to conflicts of interest arising out of our relationship with our Manager and its affiliates. We are managed by our Manager, and our executive officers are employees of our Manager. There is no guarantee that the policies and procedures
adopted by us, the terms and conditions of the Management Agreement or the policies and procedures adopted by our Manager and its affiliates, will enable us to identify, adequately address or mitigate these conflicts of interest.
Some examples of conflicts of interest that may arise by virtue of our relationship with our Manager include:
Manager’s advisory activities. While our Manager and its affiliates have agreed that for so long as our Manager is managing us, neither it nor any of its affiliates will sponsor or manage any other mortgage REIT that invests primarily in loans of the same kind as our Company, our Manager and its affiliates may otherwise manage other investment vehicles that have investment objectives that compete or overlap with, and may from time to time invest in, our target asset classes. For example, in October 2024, an affiliate of our Manager acquired a controlling interest in Chicago Atlantic BDC Advisers, LLC (fka Silver Spike Adviser, LLC), which serves as the investment adviser to Chicago Atlantic BDC, Inc. (fka Silver Spike Investment Corporation) (“CA BDC”), a business development company whose shares trade on the Nasdaq Global Market. CA BDC’s investment strategy is substantially similar to ours, except that its operations are regulated under the Investment Company Act and it is taxed as a regulated investment company (RIC), rather than as a REIT.
This may apply to existing investment vehicles or investment vehicles that may be organized in the future. Consequently, we, on the one hand, and these other investment vehicles, on the other hand, may from time to time pursue the same or similar loan opportunities. To the extent such other investment vehicles seek to acquire the same target assets as us, the scope of opportunities otherwise available to us may be adversely affected and/or reduced. Our Manager or its affiliates may also give advice to such other investment vehicles that may differ from the advice given to us even though their investment objectives may be the same or similar to ours.
Allocation of loans. Our Manager and its affiliates endeavor to allocate loan opportunities in a fair and equitable manner, subject to their internal policies. The internal policies of our Manager and its affiliates, which may be amended without our consent, are intended to enable us to participate equitably in investment opportunities with any other investment vehicles that are managed by our Manager or affiliates of our Manager. In general, loan opportunities are allocated taking into consideration various factors, including, among others, the relevant investment vehicles’ available capital, their investment objectives or strategies, their risk profiles and their existing or prior positions in a borrower or particular loan, their potential conflicts of interest, the nature of the opportunity and market conditions, as well as the rotation of loan opportunities. Nevertheless, it is possible that we may not be given the opportunity to participate in certain loans made by investment vehicles managed by our Manager or affiliates of our Manager. In addition, there may be conflicts in the allocation of loan among us and the investment vehicles that our Manager or affiliates of our Manager manage in the future.
Co-investments. Investment vehicles managed by our Manager or affiliates of our Manager may co-invest with us or hold positions in a loan where we have also invested, including by means of splitting commitments, participating in loans or other means of syndicating loans. Such loans may raise potential conflicts of interest between us and such other investment vehicles. To the extent such investment vehicles seek to acquire the same target assets as us, subject to the internal policies of our Manager and its affiliates described above, the scope of opportunities otherwise available to us may be adversely affected and/or reduced. In such circumstances, the size of the investment opportunity in loans otherwise available to us may be less than it would otherwise have been, and we may participate in such opportunities on different and potentially less favorable economic terms than such other parties if our Manager deems such participation as being otherwise in our best interests. Furthermore, when such other investment vehicles have interests or requirements that do not align with our interests, including differing liquidity needs or desired investment horizons, may arise in the manner in which any voting or control rights are exercised with respect to the relevant borrower, potentially resulting in an impact on us. If we participate in a co-investment with an investment vehicle managed by our Manager or an affiliate of our Manager and such vehicle to fund a future advance on a loan, we may be required to, or we may elect to, cover such advance and invest additional funds. In addition, if we and such other investment vehicles invest in different classes or types of debt, equity or other investments relating to the same borrower, actions may be taken by such other investment vehicles that are to our interests, including, but not limited to, during a work-out, or proceeding or similar matter occurring with respect to such loan. To the extent CA BDC co-invests with us, the transaction must comply with the terms of an exemptive order obtained by CA BDC and affiliated entities. As of December 31, 2025, our affiliates and affiliates of our Manager hold co-investments in 17 of the 26 portfolio companies in which we hold an investment.
Loans in which other investment vehicles managed by our Manager or affiliates of our Manager hold different loans. We may invest in, acquire, sell assets to or provide financing to investment vehicles managed by our Manager or affiliates of our Manager and their borrowers or purchase assets from, sell assets to, or arrange financing from any such investment vehicles and their borrowers. Any such transactions will require approval by a majority of our independent directors. There can be no assurance that any procedural protections will be sufficient to ensure that these transactions will be made on terms that will be at least as favorable to us as those that would have been obtained in an arm’s-length transaction.
Fees and expenses. We will be responsible for certain fees and expenses as determined by our Manager, including due diligence costs, legal, accounting and financial advisor fees and related costs, incurred in connection with evaluating and consummating loan opportunities, regardless of whether such loans are ultimately consummated by the parties thereto.
The ability of our Manager and its officers and employees to engage in other business activities may reduce the time our Manager spends managing our business and may result in certain conflicts of interest.
Certain of our officers and directors and the officers and other personnel of our Manager also serve or may serve as officers, directors or partners of certain affiliates of our Manager, as well as investment vehicles sponsored by such affiliates, including investment vehicles or managed accounts not yet established, whether managed or sponsored by affiliates or our Manager. For example, Mr. Mazarakis, who serves as our Executive Chairman of the Board, was appointed in December 2024 to serve as Chief Executive Officer and Co-Executive Chairman of the Board of Vireo Growth Inc. (“Vireo”), which was previously one of our portfolio companies and a related party during 2025. Certain affiliated investment funds that are managed by entities under common control with our Manager, and for which Mr. Mazarakis can exercise significant influence, also hold material equity interests in Vireo. Vireo has further entered into binding agreements with certain target portfolio companies, which are or may become borrowers under loans held by us and/or our affiliates. As a result of these transactions, which are ongoing, there are conflicts of interest related to Mr. Mazarakis’ time and attention devoted to our affairs as well as his executive positions for both entities. Mr. Mazarakis has agreed to recuse himself from all matters that involve us, Vireo, and other target portfolio companies ancillary thereto; including as it relates to any actions that would arise, including exercise of rights and remedies under our credit agreements, if Vireo were to default on any potential obligations to us or if a similar material event occurred that presented a direct between us and Vireo.
Accordingly, the ability of our Manager and its officers and employees to engage in other business activities may reduce the time our Manager spends managing our business. These activities could be viewed as creating a conflict of interest insofar as the time and effort of the professional staff of our Manager and its officers and employees will not be devoted exclusively to our business; instead, it will be allocated between our business and the management of these other investment vehicles, some of which may have conflicting interests with ours.
In the course of our investing activities, we pay Base Management Fees to our Manager and will reimburse our Manager for certain expenses it incurs. As a result, investors in our common stock will invest on a “gross” basis and receive any distributions on a “net” basis after expenses, resulting in, among other things, a lower rate of return than one might achieve through direct loans. As a result of this arrangement, our Manager’s interests may be less aligned with our interests.
Our Management Agreement with our Manager was not negotiated on an arm’s-length basis and may not be as favorable to us as if they had been negotiated with an unaffiliated third party, and the manner of determining the Base Management Fees may not provide sufficient incentive to our Manager to maximize risk-adjusted returns for our portfolio since it is based on the book value of our equity per annum and not on our performance.
We rely completely on our Manager to provide us with investment advisory and general management services. Our executive officers also serve as officers or employees of our Manager. Our Management Agreement was negotiated between related parties and their terms, including fees payable, may not be as favorable to us as if they had been negotiated with an unaffiliated third party.
We pay our Manager Base Management Fees regardless of the performance of our portfolio. Pursuant to the terms of our Management Agreement, our Manager receives Base Management Fees that are calculated and payable quarterly in arrears in cash, in an amount equal to 0.375% (1.50% on an annualized basis) of our Equity, subject to certain adjustments, including any agency fees relating to our loans, but excluding the Incentive Compensation and any diligence fees paid to and earned by our Manager and paid by third parties in connection with our Manager’s due diligence of potential loans. Such Base Management Fees will be calculated and payable quarterly in arrears in cash, subject to certain adjustments. Our Manager’s entitlement to the Base Management Fees, which are not based upon performance metrics or goals, might reduce its incentive to devote its time and effort to seeking loans that provide attractive risk-adjusted returns for our portfolio. Further, the Base Management Fee structure gives our Manager the incentive to maximize the book value of our equity raised by the issuance of new equity securities or the retention of existing equity value, regardless of the effect of these actions on existing stockholders. In other words, the Base Management Fee structure will reward our Manager primarily based on the size of our equity raised and not necessarily on our financial returns to stockholders. This in turn could both our ability to make distributions to our stockholders and the market price of our common stock.
The Incentive Compensation payable to our Manager under the Management Agreement may cause our Manager to select riskier loans to increase its Incentive Compensation.
In addition to the Base Management Fees, our Manager is entitled to receive Incentive Compensation under our Management Agreement. Under our Management Agreement, we pay Incentive Compensation to our Manager based upon our achievement of targeted levels of Core Earnings. “Core Earnings” is generally defined in our Management Agreement as, for a given period, the net income (loss) computed in accordance with generally accepted accounting principals (“GAAP”), excluding (i) non-cash equity compensation expense, (ii) the Incentive Compensation, (iii) depreciation and amortization, (iv) any unrealized gains, losses or other non-cash items recorded in net income (loss) for the period, regardless of whether such items are included in other comprehensive income or loss, or in net income (loss); provided that Core Earnings does not exclude, in the case of loans with a deferred interest feature (such as OID, debt instruments with PIK interest and zero coupon securities), accrued income that we have not yet received in cash, and (v) one-time events pursuant to changes in GAAP and certain non-cash charges after discussions between our Manager and our independent directors and after approval by a majority of such independent directors. See " Non-GAAP Measures and Key Financial Measures and Indicators " within Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations for a description for further description of our Distributable Earnings, which is representative of Core Earnings, as defined in the Management Agreement.
In evaluating loans and other management strategies, the opportunity to earn Incentive Compensation based on Core Earnings and realized profits, as applicable, may lead our Manager to place undue emphasis on the maximization of Core Earnings and realized profits at the expense of other criteria, such as preservation of capital, in order to achieve higher Incentive Compensation. Loans with higher yield potential are generally riskier or more speculative. This could result in increased risk to the value of our loan portfolio.
Terminating our Management Agreement for unsatisfactory performance of our Manager or electing not to renew the Management Agreement may be difficult, and terminating our Management Agreement in certain circumstances requires payment of a substantial termination fee.
Terminating our Management Agreement without cause is difficult and costly. Our independent directors and the Audit Committee of our Board will review our Manager’s performance and the applicable Base Management Fees and Incentive Compensation at least annually. Upon 90 days’ written notice prior to the expiration of any renewal term, our Management Agreement may be terminated upon the affirmative vote of at least a majority of our independent directors, based upon unsatisfactory performance by our Manager that is materially detrimental to us. The Management Agreement provides that upon any termination as described in the foregoing, we would pay our Manager a Termination Fee equal to three times the sum of the annualized average quarterly Base Management Fees and annualized average quarterly Incentive Compensation received from us during the 24-month period immediately preceding the most recently completed fiscal quarter prior to such termination. This provision increases the cost to us of terminating the Management Agreement and affects our ability to our Manager without cause.
Even if we terminate our Management Agreement for cause, we may be required to continue to retain our Manager for 30 days following the occurrence of events giving rise to a for-cause termination.
While we have the right to terminate our Management Agreement for cause without paying a Termination Fee, we must provide 30 days’ notice to our Manager in advance of any such termination, including in the event of our Manager’s fraud, misappropriation of funds, embezzlement or bad faith, willful misconduct, gross negligence or reckless disregard in the performance of its duties. As a result, we would be forced to continue to pay our Manager during such 30-day period and we may not be able to find a suitable replacement for our Manager during this period or, if we were able to find a suitable replacement, we may be required to compensate the new manager while continuing to pay our Manager during this 30-day period, unless our Manager waives the notice requirement. This could have an effect on our business and operations, which could affect our operating results and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.
Our Manager manages our portfolio in accordance with very broad investment guidelines and our Board does not approve each loan and financing decision made by our Manager, which may result in us making riskier loans than those currently comprising our existing portfolio.
While our Board periodically reviews our loan portfolio, it does not review proposed loans. In addition, in conducting periodic reviews, such directors may rely primarily on information provided to them by our Manager. Our Investment Guidelines (as defined below) may be changed from time to time upon recommendation by our Manager and approval by a majority of our Board (which must include a majority of the independent directors of our Board) and our Manager, without stockholders’ consent. Furthermore, our Manager may use complex strategies and loans entered into by our Manager that may be difficult or impossible to unwind by the time they are reviewed by our Board. Our Manager has great latitude in determining the types of loans that are proper for us, which could result in loan returns that are substantially below expectations or that result in losses, which would
materially and adversely affect our business operations and results. In addition, our Manager is not subject to any limits or proportions with respect to the mix of target investments that we make or that we may in the future acquire other than as necessary to maintain our exemption from registration under the Investment Company Act and our qualification as a REIT. Decisions made and loans entered into by our Manager may not fully reflect your best interests.
Our Manager may change its investment process, or elect not to follow it, without the consent of our stockholders and at any time, which may adversely affect the performance of our portfolio.
Our Manager may change its investment process without the consent of our stockholders and at any time. In addition, there can be no assurance that our Manager will follow its investment process in relation to the identification and underwriting of prospective loans. Changes in our Manager’s investment process may result in inferior, among other things, due diligence and underwriting standards, which may adversely affect the performance of our portfolio.
In addition to other analytical tools, our Manager may utilize financial models to evaluate loan opportunities, the accuracy and effectiveness of which cannot be guaranteed.
In addition to other analytical tools, our Manager may utilize financial models to evaluate loan opportunities, the accuracy and effectiveness of which cannot be guaranteed. In all cases, financial models are only estimates of future results which are based upon assumptions made at the time that the projections are developed. There can be no assurance that our Manager’s projected results will be attained and actual results may vary significantly from the projections. General economic and industry-specific conditions, which are not predictable, can have an adverse impact on the reliability of projections.
Our Manager’s and its affiliates’ liability is limited under the Management Agreement, and we have agreed to indemnify our Manager against certain liabilities. As a result, we could experience poor performance or losses for which our Manager and its affiliates would not be liable.
Pursuant to the Management Agreement, our Manager does not assume any responsibility other than to render the services called for thereunder in good faith and will not be responsible for any action of our Board in following or declining to follow its advice or recommendations. Under the terms of the Management Agreement, our Manager, its affiliates, and any of their respective members, stockholders, managers, partners, trustees, personnel, officers, directors, employees, consultants and any person providing sub-advisory services to our Manager (collectively, the “Manager Parties”) will not be liable to us for acts or omissions performed in accordance with and pursuant to the Management Agreement, except by reason of acts constituting bad faith, willful misconduct, gross negligence, or reckless disregard of their duties under the relevant Management Agreement. In addition, we have agreed to indemnify the Manager Parties with respect to all losses, damages, liabilities, demands, charges and of any nature whatsoever, and any and all expenses, costs and fees related thereto, arising from acts or of the Manager Parties not constituting faith, willful , gross , or of duties, performed in faith in accordance with and pursuant to the Management Agreement. We have also entered into indemnification agreements with the members of the Manager’s Investment Committee to indemnify and advance certain fees, costs and expenses to such individuals, subject to certain standards to be met and certain other and conditions as set forth in such indemnification agreements. These protections may lead our Manager to act in a manner when acting on our behalf than it would when acting for its own account.
Risks Related to Our Taxation as a REIT
Failure to qualify as a REIT would cause us to be taxed as a regular corporation, which would substantially reduce funds available for distributions to our stockholders.
We intend to operate in a manner so as to continue to qualify as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes. We believe that our organization and method of operation will enable us to continue to meet the requirements for qualification and taxation as a REIT. However, we cannot assure you that we will qualify as such. This is because qualification as a REIT involves the application of highly technical and complex provisions of the Code, and regulations promulgated by the U.S. Treasury Department thereunder (“Treasury Regulations”) as to which there are only limited judicial and administrative interpretations and involves the determination of facts and circumstances not entirely within our control. In addition, while we intend to take the position that we and certain of our affiliates are treated as separate entities for purposes of determining whether we qualify as a REIT, there can be no guarantee that the IRS will agree with our position. If we and certain of our affiliates are treated as the same entity for this purpose, we may not qualify as a REIT. Furthermore, future legislation, new regulations, administrative interpretations or court decisions may significantly change the U.S. tax laws or the application of the U.S. tax laws with respect to qualification as a REIT for federal income tax purposes or the federal income tax consequences of such qualification.
If we fail to qualify as a REIT in any taxable year, we will face serious tax consequences that will substantially reduce the funds available for distributions to our stockholders because:
we would not be allowed a deduction for distributions paid to stockholders in computing our taxable income and would be subject to U.S. federal income tax at regular corporate rates;
we could be subject to increased state and local taxes; and
unless we are entitled to relief under statutory provisions, we would not be able to re-elect to be taxed as a REIT for four taxable years following the year in which we were disqualified.
In addition, if we fail to qualify as a REIT, we will no longer be required to make distributions to remain qualified as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes. As a result of all these factors, our failure to qualify as a REIT could impair our ability to expand our business and raise capital, and it would adversely affect the value of our common stock.
Even if we qualify as a REIT, we may face other tax liabilities that reduce our cash flows.
Even if we qualify for taxation as a REIT, we may be subject to certain 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. In addition, in order to meet the REIT qualification requirements or to avert the imposition of a 100% tax that applies to certain gains derived by a REIT from dealer property or inventory, we may hold certain assets through one or more to-be-formed taxable REIT subsidiaries that will be subject to corporate-level income tax at regular rates. In addition, if we lend money to a taxable REIT subsidiary (including loans to partnerships or limited liability companies in which a taxable REIT subsidiary owns an interest), the taxable REIT subsidiary may be unable to deduct all or a portion of the interest paid to us, which could result in an increased corporate-level tax liability. Any of these taxes would decrease cash available for distribution to our stockholders.
REIT distribution requirements could adversely affect our ability to exercise our business plan and liquidity and may force us to borrow funds during unfavorable market conditions.
In order to maintain our REIT status and to meet the REIT distribution requirements, we may need to borrow funds on a short-term basis or sell assets, even if the then-prevailing market conditions are not favorable for these borrowings or sales. In addition, we may need to reserve cash to satisfy our REIT distribution requirements, even though there are attractive lending opportunities that may be available. To qualify as a REIT, we must distribute to our stockholders at least 90% of our net taxable income each year, without regard to the deduction for dividends paid and excluding capital gains and certain non-cash income. In addition, we will be subject to corporate income tax to the extent we distribute less than 100% of our taxable income, including any net capital gain. We intend to make distributions to our stockholders to comply with the requirements of the Code for REITs and to minimize or eliminate our corporate income tax obligation to the extent consistent with our business objectives. Our cash flows from operations may be insufficient to fund required distributions as a result of differences in timing between the actual receipt of income and the recognition of income for U.S. federal income tax purposes, or the effect of non-deductible capital expenditures, the creation of reserves or required debt service or amortization payments. In addition, if the IRS were to certain of our deductions, such as management fees, depreciation or interest expense, by that we, through our business operations and/or loan agreements with state-licensed cannabis borrowers, are subject to Section 280E of the Code or otherwise, we could be to meet the distribution requirements and would to qualify as a REIT. Likewise, any governmental fine on us would not be deductible, and the to deduct such could cause us to be to the distribution requirement.
The insufficiency of our cash flows to cover our distribution requirements could have an adverse impact on our ability to raise short- and long-term debt or sell equity securities in order to fund distributions required to maintain our REIT status. In addition, we will be subject to a 4% nondeductible excise tax on the amount, if any, by which distributions paid by us in any calendar year are less than the sum of 85% of our ordinary income, 95% of our capital gain net income and 100% of our undistributed income from prior years. To address and/or mitigate some of these issues, we may make taxable distributions that are in part paid in cash and in part paid in our equity. In such cases, our stockholders may have tax liabilities from such distributions in excess of the cash they receive. The treatment of such taxable stock distributions is not entirely clear, and it is possible the taxable stock distribution will not count towards our distribution requirement, in which case adverse consequences could apply.
Complying with REIT requirements may cause us to forego otherwise attractive opportunities or to liquidate otherwise attractive loans.
To qualify as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes, we must continually satisfy tests concerning, among other things, the sources of our income, the nature and diversification of our assets and the amounts we distribute to our stockholders. In order to meet these tests, we may be required to forego loans that we might otherwise make or liquidate loans we might otherwise continue to hold. Thus, compliance with the REIT requirements may hinder our performance by limiting our ability to make and/or maintain ownership of certain otherwise attractive loans.
Temporary investment in short-term securities and income from such investment generally will allow us to satisfy various REIT income and asset qualifications, but only during the one-year period beginning on the date we receive such net proceeds from our initial public offering. If we are unable to invest a sufficient amount of the net proceeds of our initial public offering in qualifying real estate assets within such one-year period, we could fail to satisfy the gross income tests and/or we could be limited to investing all or a portion of any remaining funds in cash. If we fail to satisfy such income test, unless we are entitled to relief under certain provisions of the Code, we could fail to qualify as a REIT.
The tax on prohibited transactions will limit our ability to engage in certain loans involving the sale or other disposition of property or that would otherwise subject us to a 100% penalty tax.
A REIT’s net income from prohibited transactions is subject to a 100% tax. In general, prohibited transactions are sales or other dispositions of property, other than foreclosure property, held as inventory or primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of business. Although we do not intend to hold a significant amount of assets as inventory or primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of our business, the characterization of an asset sale as a prohibited transaction depends on the particular facts and circumstances. The Code provides a safe harbor that, if met, allows a REIT to avoid being treated as engaged in a prohibited transaction. We may sell certain assets in transactions that do not meet all of the requirements of such safe harbor if we believe the transaction would nevertheless not be a prohibited transaction based on an analysis of all of the relevant facts and circumstances. If the IRS were to successfully argue that such a sale was in fact a prohibited transaction, we would be subject to a 100% penalty tax on any net income from such sale. In addition, in order to avoid the prohibited transactions tax, we may choose not to engage in certain sales, even though the sales might otherwise be beneficial to us.
Legislative, regulatory or administrative tax changes related to REITs could materially and adversely affect our business.
At any time, the U.S. federal income tax laws or Treasury Regulations governing REITs, or the administrative interpretations of those laws or regulations, may be changed, possibly with retroactive effect. We cannot predict if or when any new U.S. federal income tax law, regulation or administrative interpretation, or any amendment to any existing U.S. federal income tax law, regulation or administrative interpretation, will be adopted, promulgated or become effective or whether any such law, regulation or interpretation may take effect retroactively. We and our stockholders could be adversely affected by any such change in, or any new, U.S. federal income tax law, regulation or administrative interpretation.
Dividends payable by REITs generally do not qualify for reduced tax rates applicable to qualified dividend income.
The maximum U.S. federal income tax rate for certain qualified dividends payable to individual U.S. stockholders is 20%. Dividends payable by REITs, however, are generally not qualified dividends and therefore are not eligible for taxation at the reduced rates. However, to the extent such dividends are attributable to certain dividends that we receive from a taxable REIT subsidiary or to income from a prior year that was retained by us and subject to corporate tax, such dividends generally will be eligible for the reduced rates that apply to qualified dividend income. The more favorable rates applicable to regular corporate dividends could cause investors who are individuals to perceive investments in REITs to be relatively less attractive than investments in the stocks of non-REIT corporations that pay dividends, which could adversely affect the value of the stock of REITs, including our equity. However, individual U.S. stockholders may be entitled to claim a deduction in determining their taxable income of 20% of ordinary REIT dividends (dividends other than capital gain dividends and dividends attributable to qualified dividend income received by us, if any). If we fail to qualify as a REIT, such stockholders may not claim this deduction with respect to dividends paid by us. Stockholders are urged to consult tax advisers regarding the effect of these rules on the tax rate with respect to REIT dividends.
The ability of our Board to revoke our REIT election without stockholder approval may cause adverse consequences to our stockholders.
The Charter provides that our Board may revoke or otherwise terminate our REIT election, without the approval of our stockholders, if our Board determines that it is no longer in our best interest to attempt to, or 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 the total return to our stockholders.
Complying with REIT requirements may limit our ability to hedge our operational risks effectively and may cause us to incur tax liabilities.
The REIT provisions of the Code may limit our ability to hedge risks relating to its operations. Any income from a hedging transaction that we enter into to manage risk of interest rate changes, price changes or currency fluctuations with respect to borrowings made or to be made, if 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 will likely be treated as non-qualifying income for purposes of both of the gross income tests.
To the extent the business interest deductions of our subsidiaries, if any, are deferred or disallowed, our taxable income may exceed our cash available for distributions to stockholders.
Code Section 163(j) limits the deductibility of “business interest” for both individuals and corporations. Certain real property trades or businesses are permitted to elect out of this limitation, but we do not expect this election to be available to us. To the extent our interest deductions or those of our subsidiaries, if any, are deferred or disallowed under Code Section 163(j) or any other provision of law, our taxable income may exceed our cash available for distribution to our stockholders. As a result, there is a risk that we may have taxable income in excess of cash available for distribution. In that event, we may need to borrow funds or take other action to satisfy the REIT distribution requirements for the taxable year in which this “phantom income” is recognized.
Risks Related to Ownership of Our Common Stock
As significant beneficial owners of our Manager, the founders of Chicago Atlantic can exert significant influence over our corporate actions and important corporate matters.
The founders of Chicago Atlantic, Mr. Mazarakis, our Executive Chairman, Mr. Cappell, our Co-Chief Executive Officer, and Dr. Bodmeier, our former President and former Chief Investment Officer, beneficially own approximately 5.7% of our common stock on a fully-diluted basis as of December 31, 2025. The founders of Chicago Atlantic also own 100% of the outstanding equity of our Manager. The founders of Chicago Atlantic could therefore exert substantial influence over our corporate matters, such as electing directors and approving material mergers, acquisitions, strategic partnerships or other business combination transactions, as applicable. This concentration of ownership may discourage, delay or prevent a change in control which could have the dual effect of depriving our stockholders from an opportunity to receive a premium for their equity as part of a sale of our Company and otherwise reducing the price of such equity.
The market price for our common stock may be volatile, which could contribute to the loss of all or part of your investment.
The market price and liquidity of the market for our common stock may be significantly affected by numerous factors, some of which are beyond our control and may not be directly related to our operating performance. Some of the factors that could negatively affect or result in fluctuations in the market price of our common stock include:
our actual or projected operating results, financial condition, cash flows and liquidity or changes in business strategy or prospects;
changes in governmental policies, regulations or laws;
loss of a major funding source or inability to obtain new favorable funding sources in the future;
equity issuances by us, or share resales by our stockholders, or the perception that such issuances or resales may occur;
actual, anticipated or perceived accounting or internal control problems;
publication of research reports about us, the real estate industry or the cannabis industry;
our value of the properties securing our loans;
changes in market valuations of similar companies;
adverse market reaction to any increased indebtedness we may incur in the future;
additions to or departures of the executive officers or key personnel supporting or assisting us from our Manager or its affiliates, including our Manager’s investment professionals;
speculation in the press or investment community about us or other similar companies;
our failure to meet, or the lowering of, our earnings estimates or those of any securities analysts;
increases in market interest rates, which may lead investors to demand a higher distribution yield for our common stock (if we have begun to make distributions to our stockholders) and which could cause the cost of our interest expenses on our debt to increase;
failure to qualify or maintain our qualification as a REIT or exclusion from the Investment Company Act;
price and volume fluctuations in the stock market generally; and
general market and economic conditions, including the state of the credit and capital markets.
Any of the factors listed above could materially adversely affect your investment in our common stock, and our common stock may trade at prices significantly below the initial public offering price, which could contribute to a loss of all or part of your investment. In such circumstances the trading price of our common stock may not recover and may experience a further decline.
In addition, broad market and industry factors could materially adversely affect the market price of our common stock, irrespective of our operating performance. The stock market in general, and Nasdaq and the market for cannabis-related companies and REITs have experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations that have often been unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of the particular companies affected. The trading prices and valuations of these stocks, and of ours, may not be predictable. A loss of investor confidence in the market for finance companies or for those companies in the cannabis industry or the stocks of other companies which investors perceive to be similar to us, the opportunities in the finance or cannabis market or the stock market in general, could depress our stock price regardless of our business, financial condition, results of operations or growth prospects.
The value of our equity securities could be materially and adversely affected by our level of cash distributions.
The value of the equity securities of a company whose principal business is similar to ours is based primarily upon investors’ perception of its growth potential and its current and potential future cash distributions, whether from operations, sales or refinancings, and is secondarily based upon the market value of its underlying assets. For that reason, our equity may be valued at prices that are higher or lower than our net asset value per share. To the extent we retain operating cash flow for investment purposes, working capital reserves or other purposes, these retained funds, while increasing the value of our underlying assets, may not correspondingly increase the price at which our equity could trade. Our failure to meet investors’ expectations with regard to future earnings and cash distributions likely would materially and adversely affect the valuation of our equity.
Future offerings of debt securities, which would rank senior to our common stock upon a bankruptcy liquidation, and future offerings of equity securities that may be senior to our common stock for the purposes of dividend and liquidating distributions, may adversely affect the value of our stock.
In the future, we may attempt to increase our capital resources by making offerings of debt securities or additional offerings of equity securities that may be senior to our common stock. As the cannabis industry continues to evolve and to the extent that additional states legalize cannabis, we expect the demand for capital to continue to increase as operators seek to enter and build out new markets. We expect the principal amount of the loans we originate to increase and that we will need to raise additional equity
and/or debt to increase our liquidity in the future. Upon bankruptcy or liquidation, holders of our debt securities, lenders with respect to any of our borrowings and holders of our preferred stock, if any, will receive a distribution of our available assets prior to the holders of our common stock. Additional equity offerings by us may dilute the holdings of our existing stockholders or reduce the valuation of our common stock. Our decision to issue securities in any future offering will depend on market conditions and other factors beyond our control. As a result, we cannot predict or estimate the amount, timing or nature of our future offerings, and holders of our common stock bear the risk of our future offerings reducing the valuation of our common stock and diluting their ownership interest.
We may in the future pay distributions from sources other than our cash flow from operations, including borrowings, offering proceeds or the sale of assets, which means we will have less funds available for investments or less income-producing assets and your overall return may be reduced.
We may in the future pay distributions from sources other than from our cash flow from operations. We intend to fund the payment of regular distributions to our stockholders entirely from cash flow from our operations. However, we may from time to time not generate sufficient cash flow from operations to fully fund distributions to stockholders. Therefore, if we choose to pay a distribution, we may choose to use cash flows from financing activities, including borrowings (including borrowings secured by our assets) and net proceeds of this or a prior offering, from the sale of assets or from other sources to fund distributions to our stockholders.
To the extent that we fund distributions from sources other than cash flows from operations, including borrowings, offering proceeds or proceeds from asset sales, the value of your investment will decline, and such distributions may constitute a return of capital and we may have fewer funds available for the funding of loans or less income-producing assets and your overall return may be reduced. Further, to the extent distributions exceed our earnings and profits, a stockholder’s basis in our stock will be reduced and, to the extent distributions exceed a stockholder’s basis, the stockholder will be required to recognize capital gain.
There is a risk that you may not receive distributions as holders of our common stock or that such dividends may not grow over time.
We intend to make regular quarterly distributions to our stockholders, consistent with our intention to maintain our qualification as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes. However, any future determination to actually pay dividends will be at the discretion of our Board, subject to compliance with applicable law and any contractual provisions, including under agreements for indebtedness, that restrict or limit our ability to pay dividends, and will depend upon, among other factors, our results of operations, financial condition, earnings, capital requirements and other factors that our Board deems relevant. We therefore cannot assure you that we will achieve investment results and other circumstances that will allow us to make a specified level of cash distributions or year-to-year increases in cash distributions.
We are an “emerging growth company” and a “smaller reporting company” and we cannot be certain if the reduced disclosure requirements applicable to emerging growth companies and smaller reporting companies will make shares of our common stock less attractive to investors.
We are an “emerging growth company” as defined in the JOBS Act, and we have elected to take advantage of certain exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not emerging growth companies, including not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in our periodic reports and proxy statements, an extended transition period for complying with new or revised accounting standards and exemptions from the requirements of holding a non-binding advisory vote on executive compensation and stockholder approval of any golden parachute payments not previously approved. We will remain an emerging growth company until the earliest to occur of (i) the last day of the fiscal year during which our total annual revenue equals or exceeds $1.235 billion (subject to adjustment for inflation), (ii) the last day of the fiscal year following the fifth anniversary of our initial public offering, (iii) the date on which we have, during the previous three year period, more than $1.0 billion in non-convertible debt or (iv) the date issued on which we are deemed to be a “large accelerated filer” under the Exchange Act.
Similarly, as a “smaller reporting company” under federal securities laws, we may take advantage of certain exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not smaller reporting companies, including, but not limited to, reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in our periodic reports and proxy statements. We may be a smaller reporting company even after we are no longer an emerging growth company.
We cannot predict if investors will find our common stock less attractive because we will rely on these exemptions. If some investors find our common stock less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our common stock
and our stock price may be more volatile. We may take advantage of these reporting exemptions until we are no longer an emerging growth company and/or smaller reporting company, as applicable.
General Risk Factors
We rely on information technology in our operations, and security breaches and other disruptions in our systems could compromise our information and expose us to liability, which would cause our business and reputation to suffer.
In the ordinary course of our business, we collect and store sensitive data, including intellectual property, our proprietary business information and that of our borrowers and business partners, including personally identifiable information of our borrowers and employees, if any, on our networks. Despite our security measures, our information technology and infrastructure may be vulnerable to attacks by hackers or breached due to employee error, malfeasance or other disruptions. These incidents may be an intentional attack or an unintentional event and could involve gaining unauthorized access to our information systems or those of our borrowers for purposes of misappropriating assets, stealing confidential information, corrupting data or causing operational disruption. Any such could compromise our networks and the information stored there could be accessed, publicly , or . The result of these may include operations, or financial data, liability for assets or information, increased cybersecurity protection and insurance costs, , to business relationships and regulatory and . The costs related to cyber or other security or may not be fully insured or indemnified by other means. Although we have implemented processes, procedures and internal controls to help mitigate cybersecurity risks and cyber intrusions, such measures will not guarantee that a cyber- will not occur and/or that our financial results, operations or confidential information will not be impacted by such an . In addition, cybersecurity has become a top priority for regulators around the world, and some jurisdictions have enacted laws requiring companies to notify individuals of data security involving certain types of personal data. If we to comply with the relevant laws and regulations, we could financial , a of our business, liability to investors, regulatory intervention or reputational .
Moreover, the evolving threat landscape—including the rise of sophisticated ransomware attacks, AI-driven phishing schemes, and increased risks stemming from supply chain vulnerabilities—has further heightened the challenges of safeguarding our information systems. Additionally, the rapid evolution and increased availability of artificial intelligence and machine learning technologies may also intensify cybersecurity risks by making such attacks and other cybersecurity incidents more difficult to detect, contain, and mitigate. New regulatory developments will likely continue to rise in priority and could impose more stringent disclosure requirements regarding cyber incidents, potentially amplifying the financial and operational impact of any breach.
We could be subject to litigation filed by or against us, including class action litigation.
In the past, securities class action litigation has often been brought against a company following a period of volatility or decline in the market price of its securities.
Legal or governmental proceedings brought by or on behalf of third parties may adversely affect our financial results. Our investment activities may include activities that are hostile in nature and will subject it to the risks of becoming involved in such proceedings. The expense of defending claims against us and paying any amounts pursuant to settlements or judgments would be borne by us and would reduce net assets. Our Manager will be indemnified by us in connection with such proceedings, subject to certain conditions. Similarly, we may from time-to-time institute legal proceedings on behalf of ourselves or others, the ultimate outcome of which could cause us to incur substantial damages and expenses, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.
If securities analysts do not publish research or reports about our business or if they publish negative reports or downgrade our stock, the price of our common stock could decline.
The trading market for our common stock will rely in part on the research and reports that industry or financial analysts publish about us, our business, our markets and our competitors. We do not control these analysts. If securities analysts do not cover our common stock, the lack of research coverage may materially adversely affect the market price of our common stock. Furthermore, if one or more of the analysts who do cover us downgrade our stock or if those analysts issue other unfavorable commentary about us or our business, our stock price would likely decline. If one or more of these analysts cease coverage of us or fails to regularly publish reports on us, we could lose visibility in the market and interest in our stock could decrease, which in turn could cause our stock price or trading volume to decline and may also impair our ability to expand our business with existing customers and attract new customers.
Future sales of our capital stock or other securities convertible into our capital stock could cause the value of our common stock to decline and could result in dilution of your shares of our common stock.
Our Board is authorized, without stockholder approval, to cause us to issue additional shares of our common stock and to raise capital through the creation and issuance of preferred stock, debt securities convertible into common stock, options, warrants and other rights, on terms and for consideration as our Board in its sole discretion may determine.
Sales of substantial amounts of our capital stock or other securities convertible into our capital stock could cause the valuation of our capital stock to decrease significantly. We cannot predict the effect, if any, of future sales of our equity, or the availability of our equity for future sales, on the value of our equity. Sales of substantial amounts of our equity by any large stockholder, or the perception that such sales could occur, may adversely affect the valuation of our equity.
If we fail to maintain an effective system of internal control over financial reporting, we may not be able to accurately report our financial results or prevent fraud. As a result, stockholders could lose confidence in our financial and other public reporting, which would materially adversely affect our business and the trading price of our common stock.
Effective internal controls over financial reporting are necessary for us to provide reliable financial reports and are designed to prevent fraud. Any failure to implement required new or improved controls, or difficulties encountered in their implementation could cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations. Pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, our management is required to report upon the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. When we lose our status as an emerging growth company our independent registered public accounting firm will be required to attest to the effectiveness 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. Any testing by us conducted in connection with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, or any subsequent testing by our independent registered public accounting firm, may reveal deficiencies in our internal controls over financial reporting that are deemed to be material or that may require prospective or retroactive changes to our consolidated financial statements or identify other areas for further attention or . internal controls could also cause investors to confidence in our reported financial information, which could materially affect the trading price of our common stock.
Failure to achieve and maintain effective internal controls over financial reporting in accordance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act could have a material adverse effect on our business and the value of our common stock.
We are obligated to maintain proper and effective internal control over financial reporting, including the internal control evaluation and certification requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (“Section 404”). We will not be required to comply with all of the requirements of Section 404 until we are no longer an emerging growth company under the JOBS Act. Prior to the IPO, we were not subject to the public company internal control framework requirements and therefore did not sufficiently design and document our control environment to be in compliance with all required public company standards contemplated by Section 404 that we will eventually be required to meet. Beginning with our annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2022, we are required to conduct annual management assessments of the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting. However, our independent registered public accounting firm will not be required to formally attest to the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting until the date we are no longer an emerging growth company under the JOBS Act.
If we are not able to implement the requirements of Section 404 in a timely manner or with adequate compliance, our operations, financial reporting or financial results could be adversely affected. Matters impacting our internal controls may cause us to be unable to report our financial information on a timely basis and thereby subject us to adverse regulatory consequences, including sanctions by the SEC or violations of applicable stock exchange listing rules, and result in a breach of the covenants under the agreements governing any of our financing arrangements. There could also be a negative reaction in the financial markets due to a loss of investor confidence in the Company and the reliability of our consolidated financial statements. Confidence in the reliability of our consolidated financial statements could also suffer. This could materially adversely affect us.
Our disclosure controls and procedures may not prevent or detect all errors or acts of fraud.
We are subject to the periodic reporting requirements of the Exchange Act. We designed our disclosure controls and procedures to reasonably assure that information we must disclose in reports we file or submit under the Exchange Act is accumulated and communicated to management, and recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the rules and forms of the SEC. We believe that any disclosure controls and procedures or internal controls and procedures, no matter how well-conceived and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system are met.
These inherent limitations include the realities that judgments in decision-making can be faulty, and that breakdowns can occur because of simple error or mistake. For example, our directors or executive officers could inadvertently fail to disclose a new relationship or arrangement causing us to fail to make any related party transaction disclosures. Additionally, controls can be circumvented by the individual acts of some persons, by collusion of two or more people or by an unauthorized override of the controls. Accordingly, because of the inherent limitations in our control system, misstatements due to error or fraud may occur and not be detected.
