We have acquired in the past and in the future may acquire properties or portfolios of properties through tax deferred contribution transactions in exchange for partnership interests in BPLP. This acquisition structure has the effect, among others, of reducing the amount of tax depreciation we can deduct over the tax life of the acquired properties, and typically requires that we agree to protect the contributors’ ability to defer recognition of taxable gain through restrictions on our ability to dispose of the acquired properties and/or the allocation of partnership debt to the contributors to maintain their tax bases. These restrictions could limit our ability to sell an asset at a time, or on terms, that would be favorable absent such restrictions. 

Investments in international markets may also subject us to risks associated with funding increasing headcount, integrating new offices, and establishing effective controls and procedures to regulate the operations of new offices and to monitor compliance with U.S. laws and regulations such as the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and similar foreign laws and regulations, such as the U.K. Bribery Act.

Our use of joint ventures may limit our flexibility with jointly owned investments.

Our ability to dispose of some of our properties is constrained by their tax attributes. Properties which we developed and have owned for a significant period of time or which we acquired through tax deferred contribution transactions in exchange for partnership interests in BPLP often have low tax bases. Furthermore, as a REIT, BXP may be subject to a 100% “prohibited transactions” tax on the gain from dispositions of property if BXP is deemed to hold the property primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of business, unless the disposition qualifies under a safe harbor exception for properties that have been held for at least two years and with respect to which certain other requirements are met. The potential application of the prohibited transactions tax could cause us to forego potential dispositions of property or other opportunities that might otherwise be attractive to us, or to undertake such dispositions or other opportunities through a taxable REIT subsidiary, which would generally result in income taxes being incurred. If we dispose of these properties outright in taxable transactions, we may be required to distribute a significant amount of the taxable gain to our securityholders under the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code for REITs, which in turn would impact our future cash flow and may increase our leverage. In some cases, without incurring additional costs we may be restricted from disposing of properties contributed in exchange for our partnership interests under tax protection agreements with contributors. To dispose of low basis or tax-protected properties efficiently we from time to time use like-kind exchanges, which are intended to qualify for non-recognition of taxable gain, but can be difficult to consummate and result in the property for which the disposed assets are exchanged inheriting their low tax bases and other tax attributes (including tax protection covenants). 

Some holders of interests in BPLP could incur adverse tax consequences upon the sale of certain of our properties and on the repayment of related debt which differ from the tax consequences to BXP and its stockholders. Consequently, such holders of partnership interests in BPLP may have different objectives regarding the appropriate pricing and timing of any such sale or repayment of debt. While BXP has exclusive authority under the limited partnership agreement of BPLP to determine when to refinance or repay debt or whether, when, and on what terms to sell a property, subject, in the case of certain properties, to the contractual commitments described below, any such decision would require the approval of BXP’s Board of Directors. While the Board of Directors has a policy with respect to these matters directors and executive officers could exercise their influence in a manner inconsistent with the interests of some, or a majority, of BXP’s stockholders, including in a manner which could prevent completion of a sale of a property or the repayment of indebtedness.

We have entered intohad and may have in the future agreements with respect tothe contributors of some properties that we have acquired in exchange for partnership interests in BPLP. PursuantBPLP pursuant to those agreements,which we have agreed not to sell or otherwise transfer some of ourthe properties, prior to specified dates, in any transaction that would trigger taxable income andto the contributor. In addition, we are responsible for the reimbursement of certain tax-related costs to the prior owners if the subject properties are sold in a taxable sale. In general, our obligations to the prior owners are limited in time and only apply to actual damages suffered.

In addition, because our hotel property is located in Cambridge, Massachusetts, it is subject to the Cambridge market’s fluctuations in demand, increases in operating costs and increased competition from additions in supply.

Investments in these securities and funds are not insured against loss of principal. Under certain circumstances we may be required to redeem all or part of our investment, and our right to redeem some or all of our investment may be delayed or suspended. In addition, there is no guarantee that our investments in these securities or funds will be redeemable at par value. A decline in the value of our investment or a delay or suspension of our right to redeem may have a material adverse effect on our results of operations or financial condition. 

Our Chief Financial Officer and Regional Managers also have strong reputations. Their reputations aid us in identifying opportunities, having opportunities brought to us, and negotiating with tenants and build-to-suit prospects. While we believe that we could find replacements for these key personnel, the loss of their services could materially and adversely affect our operations because of diminished relationships with lenders, prospective tenants and industry personnel. 

As of December 31, 2016,2019, the U.S. Government was our largest tenant by square feet. We are subject to compliance with a wide variety of complex legal requirements because we are a federalFederal Government contractor. These laws regulate how we conduct business, require us to administer various compliance programs and require us to impose compliance responsibilities on some of our contractors. Our failure to comply with these laws could subject us to fines, penalties and damages, cause us to be in default of our leases and other contracts with the federalFederal Government and bar us from entering into future leases and other contracts with the federalFederal Government. There can be no assurance that these costs and loss of revenue will not have a material adverse effect on our properties, operations or business.

We carry insurance coverage on our properties, including those under development, of types and in amounts and with deductibles that we believe are in line with coverage customarily obtained by owners of similar properties. Certain properties owned in joint ventures with third parties are insured by the third party partner with insurance coverage of types and in amounts and with deductibles we believe are in line with coverage customarily obtained by owners of similar properties. In response to the uncertainty in the insurance market following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the Federal Terrorism Risk Insurance Act (as amended, “TRIA”) was enacted in November 2002 to require regulated insurers to make available coverage for “certified” acts of terrorism (as defined by the statute). The expiration date of TRIA was extended to December 31, 2014 by the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2007 and further extended to December 31, 2020 by the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2015 (“TRIPRA”), and we can provide no assurance that it will be extended further. Currently, ourOur property insurance program per occurrence limits are $1.0 billion for ourits portfolio insurance program, including coverage for acts of terrorism other than nuclear, biological, chemical or radiological terrorism (“Terrorism Coverage”). We also carry $250 million of Terrorism Coverage for 601 Lexington Avenue, New York, New York (“601 Lexington Avenue”) in excess of the $1.0 billion of coverage in our property insurance program. Certain properties, including the General Motors Building located at 767 Fifth Avenue in New York, New York (“767 Fifth Avenue”), are currently insured in separate insurance programs. The property insurance program per occurrence limits for 767 Fifth Avenue are $1.625 billion, including Terrorism Coverage. We also currently carry nuclear, biological, chemical and radiological terrorism insurance coverage for acts of terrorism certified under TRIAthe Federal Terrorism Risk Insurance Act (as amended, “TRIA”) (“NBCR Coverage”), which is provided by IXP as a direct insurer, for the properties in our portfolio, including 767 Fifth Avenue, but excluding certain other properties owned in joint ventures with third parties or which we manage. The per occurrence limit for NBCR Coverage is $1.0 billion. Under TRIA, after the payment of the required deductible and coinsurance, the NBCR Coverage provided by IXP is backstopped by the Federal Government if the aggregate industry insured losses resulting from a certified act of terrorism exceed a “program trigger.” In 2016,2019, the program trigger was $120$180 million and the coinsurance was 16%19%, however, both will increase in subsequent years pursuant to TRIPRA.TRIA. If the Federal Government pays out for a loss under TRIA, it is mandatory that the Federal Government recoup the full amount of the loss from insurers offering TRIA coverage after the payment of the loss pursuant to a formula in TRIPRA.TRIA. We may elect to terminate the NBCR Coverage if the Federal Government seeks recoupment for losses paid under TRIA, if TRIA is not extended after its expiration on December 31, 2027, if there is a change in our portfolio or for any other reason. We intend to continue to monitor the scope, nature and cost of available terrorism insurance and maintain terrorism insurance in amounts and on terms that are commercially reasonable.insurance.

We also currently carry earthquake insurance on our properties located in areas known to be subject to earthquakes in an amount and subject to self-insurance that we believe is commercially reasonable.earthquakes. In addition, this insurance is subject to a deductible in the amount of 3% of the value of the affected property. Specifically, we currently carry earthquake insurance which covers our San Francisco and Los Angeles regions (excluding Salesforce Tower) with a $170$240 million per occurrence limit and a $170$240 million annual aggregate limit, $20 million of which is provided by IXP, as a direct insurer. The builders risk

IXP, a captive insurance company which is a wholly-owned subsidiary, acts as a direct insurer with respect to a portion of our earthquake insurance coverage for our Greater San Francisco and Los Angeles properties and our NBCR Coverage. Insofar as we own IXP, we are responsible for its liquidity and capital resources, and the accounts of IXP are part of our consolidated financial statements. In particular, if a loss occurs which is covered by our NBCR Coverage but is less than the applicable program trigger under TRIA, IXP would be responsible for the full amount of the loss without any backstop by the Federal Government. IXP would also be responsible for any recoupment charges by the Federal Government in the event losses are paid out and its insurance policy is maintained after the payout by the Federal Government. If we experience a loss and IXP is required to pay under its insurance policy, we would ultimately record the loss to the extent of the required payment. Therefore, insurance

We continue to monitor the state of the insurance market in general, and the scope and costs of coverage for acts of terrorism and California earthquake risk in particular, but we cannot anticipate what coverage will be available on commercially reasonable terms in future policy years. There are other types of losses, such as from wars, for which we cannot obtain insurance at all or at a reasonable cost. With respect to such losses and losses from acts of terrorism, earthquakes or other catastrophic events, if we experience a loss that is uninsured or that exceeds policy limits, we could lose the capital invested in the damaged properties, as well as the anticipated future revenues from those properties. Depending on the specific circumstances of each affected property, it is possible that we could be liable for mortgage indebtedness or other obligations related to the property. Any such loss could materially and adversely affect our business and financial condition and results of operations.

Pursuant to Executive Order 13224 and other laws, the Office of Foreign Assets Control of the United States Department of the Treasury (“OFAC”) maintains a list of persons designated as terrorists or who are otherwise blocked or banned (“Prohibited Persons”). OFAC regulations and other laws prohibit conducting business or engaging in transactions with Prohibited Persons (the “OFAC Requirements”). Certain of our loan and other agreements require us to comply with OFAC Requirements. We have established a compliance program whereby tenants and others with whom we conduct business are checked against the OFAC list of Prohibited Persons prior to entering into any agreement and on a periodic basis thereafter. Our leases and other agreements, in general, require the other party to comply with OFAC Requirements. If a tenant or other

Potential liability for environmental contamination could result in substantial costs.

Under federal, state and local environmental laws, ordinances and regulations, we may be required to investigate and clean up the effects of releases of hazardous or toxic substances or petroleum products at or migrating from our properties simply because of our current or past ownership or operation of the real estate. If unidentified environmental problems arise, we may have to make substantial payments, which could adversely affect our cash flow and our ability to make distributions to our securityholders, because: as owner or operator we may have to pay for property damage and for investigation and clean-up costs incurred in connection with the contamination; the law typically imposes clean-up responsibility and liability regardless of whether the owner or operator knew of or caused the contamination; even if more than one person may be responsible for the contamination, each person who shares legal liability under the environmental laws may be held responsible for all of the clean-up costs; and governmental entities and third parties may sue the owner or operator of a contaminated site for damages and costs.

These costs could be substantial and in extreme cases could exceed the amount of our insurance or the value of the contaminated property. We currently carry environmental insurance in an amount and subject to deductibles that we believe are commercially reasonable. Specifically, we carry a pollution legal liability policy with a $20 million limit per incident and a policy aggregate limit of $40 million. The presence or migration of hazardous or toxic substances or petroleum products or the failure to properly remediate contamination may give rise to third-party claims for bodily injury, property damage and/or response costs and may materially and adversely affect our ability to borrow against, sell or rent an affected property. In addition, applicable environmental laws create liens on contaminated sites in favor of the government for damages and costs it incurs in connection with contamination. Changes in laws, regulations and practices and their implementation increasing the potential liability for environmental conditions existing at our properties, or increasing the restrictions on the handling, storage or discharge of hazardous or toxic substances or petroleum products or other actions may result in significant unanticipated expenditures.

Environmental laws also govern the presence, maintenance and removal of asbestos and other building materials. For example, laws require that owners or operators of buildings containing asbestos: 

Such laws may impose fines and penalties on building owners or operators who fail to comply with these requirements and may allow third parties to seek recovery from owners or operators for personal injury associated with exposure to asbestos fibers. 

Some of our properties are located in urban and previously developed areas where fill or current or historic industrial uses of the areas have caused site contamination. It is our policy to retain independent environmental consultants to conduct or update Phase I environmental site assessments and asbestos surveys with respect to our acquisition of properties. These assessments generally include a visual inspection of the properties and the surrounding areas, an examination of current and historical uses of the properties and the surrounding areas and a review of relevant state, federal and historical documents, but do not involve invasive techniques such as soil and ground water sampling. Where appropriate, on a property-by-property basis, our practice is to have these consultants conduct additional testing, including sampling for asbestos, for lead and other

Inquiries about indoor air quality may necessitate special investigation and, depending on the results, remediation beyond our regular indoor air quality testing and maintenance programs. Indoor air quality issues can stem from inadequate ventilation, chemical contaminants from indoor or outdoor sources, and biological contaminants such as molds, pollen, viruses and bacteria. Indoor exposure to chemical or biological contaminants above certain levels can be alleged to be connected to allergic reactions or other health effects and symptoms in susceptible individuals. If these conditions were to occur at one of our properties, we may be subject to third-party claims for personal injury, or may need to undertake a targeted remediation program, including without limitation, steps to increase indoor ventilation rates and eliminate sources of contaminants. Such remediation programs could be costly, necessitate the temporary relocation of some or all of the property’s tenants or require rehabilitation of the affected property. 

Any or all of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.

We acquired many of our properties from our predecessors at the completion of BXP’s initial public offering in June 1997. Before we acquired these properties, each of them was insured by a title insurance policy. We did not obtain new owner’s title insurance policies in connection with the acquisition of these properties. To the extent we have financed properties after acquiring them in connection with the initial public offering, we have obtained new title insurance policies, however, the amount of these policies may be less than the current or future value of the applicable properties. Nevertheless, because in many instances we acquired these properties indirectly by acquiring ownership of the entity that owned the property and those owners remain in existence as our subsidiaries, some of these title insurance policies may continue to benefit us. Many of these title insurance policies may be for amounts less than the current or future values of the applicable properties. If there was a title defect related to any of these properties, or to any of the properties acquired at the time of the initial public offering of BXP, that is no longer covered by a title insurance policy, we could lose both our capital invested in and our anticipated profits from such property. We have obtained title insurance policies for all properties that we have acquired after the initial public offering of BXP, however, these policies may be for amounts less than the current or future values of the applicable properties. 

We may be subject to adverse legislative or regulatory tax changes that could negatively impact our financial condition.

At any time, the U.S. federal income tax laws governing REITs or the administrative interpretations of those laws may be amended, including with respect to our hotel ownership structure. 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, Treasury regulation or administrative interpretation, will be adopted, promulgated or become effective and any such law, regulation, or interpretation may take effect retroactively. BXP, its taxable REIT subsidiaries, and our securityholders could be adversely affected by any such change in, or any new, U.S. federal income tax law, Treasury regulation or administrative interpretation.

MembersThe Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of the government have expressed an intent to pass2017 (the “TCJA”), signed into law on December 22, 2017, represents sweeping tax reform legislation to fundamentally reform the tax code. Among other changes, the proposals have includedthat makes significant changes to the taxation of business entitiescorporate and individual tax rates and the deductibilitycalculation of interest expense.taxes.  While there can be no assurance regardingwe currently do not expect the content of any tax legislation, whether itTCJA will ultimately be enacted, or when it will become effective, any such legislation could have a significant effectdirect impact on BXPus, it may impact us indirectly as our tenants and our stockholders.the jurisdictions in which we do business as well as the overall investment thesis for REITs may be impacted both positively and negatively in ways that are difficult to predict. Additionally, the overall impact of the TCJA depends on future interpretations and regulations that may be issued by federal tax authorities, as well as changes in state and local taxation in response to the TCJA, and it is possible that such future interpretations, regulations and other changes could adversely impact us.

We face possible adverse state local tax audits and changes in state and local tax law.

Because BXP is organized and qualifies as a REIT, it is generally not subject to federal income taxes, but we are subject to certain state and local taxes. In the normal course of business, certain entities through which we own real estate either have undergone, or are currently undergoing, tax audits. Although we believe that we have substantial arguments in favor of our positions in the ongoing audits, in some instances there is no controlling precedent or interpretive guidance on the specific point at issue. Collectively, tax deficiency notices received to date from the jurisdictions conducting the ongoing audits have not been material. However, there can be no assurance that future audits will not occur with increased frequency or that the ultimate result of such audits will not have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.

From time to time changes in state and local tax laws or regulations are enacted, which may result in an increase in our tax liability. A shortfall in tax revenues for states and municipalities in which we operate may lead to an increase in the frequency and size of such changes. If such changes occur, we may be required to pay additional taxes on our assets or income. These increased tax costs could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations and the amount of cash available for the payment of dividends and distributions to our securityholders. 

In addition, if BXP fails to qualify as a REIT and the relief provisions do not apply, it will no longer be required to pay dividends. As a result of all these factors, BXP’s failure to qualify as a REIT could impair our ability to raise capital and expand our business, and it would adversely affect the value of BXP’s common stock. If BXP or any of its subsidiaries that are REITs fails to qualify as a REIT but is eligible for certain relief provisions, then it may retain its status as a REIT, but may be required to pay a penalty tax, which could be substantial. 

In order to maintain BXP’s REIT status, we may need to borrow funds on a short-term basis to meet the REIT distribution requirements, even if the then-prevailing market conditions are not favorable for these borrowings. To qualify as a REIT, BXP generally must distribute to its stockholders at least 90% of its taxable income each year, excluding capital gains and with certain other adjustments. In addition, BXP will be subject to a 4% nondeductible excise tax on the amount, if any, by which dividends paid in any calendar year are less than the sum of 85% of ordinary income, 95% of capital gain net income and 100% of undistributed income from prior years. We may need short-term debt or long-term debt or proceeds from asset sales, creation of joint ventures or sales of common stock to fund required distributions as a result of differences in timing between the actual receipt of income and the recognition of income for federal income tax purposes, or the effect of non-deductible capital expenditures, the creation of reserves or required debt or amortization payments. TheAny inability 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 BXP’s REIT status. 

The market value of BXP’s common stock is based primarily upon the market’s perception of our growth potential and our current and potential future earnings and cash dividends. Consequently, BXP’s common stock may trade at prices that are greater or less than BXP’s net asset value per share of common stock. If our future earnings or cash dividends are less than expected, it is likely that the market price of BXP’s common stock will diminish. 

The interests of our existing securityholders could be diluted if additional equity securities are issued to finance future developments, acquisitions or repay indebtedness. Our ability to execute our business strategy depends on our access to an appropriate blend of debt financing, including unsecured lines of credit and other forms of secured and unsecured debt, and equity financing, including common and preferred equity.

In connection with and subsequent to BXP’s initial public offering, we have completed many private placement transactions in which shares of stock of BXP or partnership interests in BPLP were issued to owners of properties we acquired or to institutional investors. This common stock, or common stock issuable in exchange for such partnership interests in BPLP, may be sold in the public securities markets over time under registration rights we

granted to these investors. Additional common stock issuable under our employee benefit and other incentive plans, including as a result of the grant of stock options and restricted equity securities, may also be sold in the market at some time in the future. Future sales of BXP common stock in the market could adversely affect the price of its common stock. We cannot predict the effect the perception in the market that such sales may occur will have on the market price of BXP’s common stock. 

Our operating and financial policies, including our policies with respect to acquisitions of real estate, growth, operations, indebtedness, capitalization and dividends, are exclusively determined by BXP’s Board of Directors. Accordingly, our securityholders do not control these policies.

None.