We have no prescribed limitation on any particular investment type. However, the Company’s board of directors (“Board of Directors”) has adopted the following investment guidelines:

The investment guidelines can be amended or waived with the approval of the Board of Directors (which must include a majority of the independent directors) and the Manager..

We intend to electelected to be taxed as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes beginning with our taxable year ended December 31, 2018. As a REIT, we generally will not be subject to U.S. federal income tax on the “REIT taxable income” that we distribute annually to our stockholders.

We and our subsidiaries conduct our operations so that we are not required to register as an investment company under the Investment Company Act.

We believe we are not an investment company under Section 3(a)(1)(A) of the Investment Company Act because we do not engage primarily, or hold ourselves out as being engaged primarily, in the business of investing, reinvesting or trading in securities. Rather, we, through our subsidiaries, are primarily engaged in non-investment company businesses related to real estate. In addition, we intend to conduct our operations so that we do not come within the definition of an investment company under Section 3(a)(1)(C) of the Investment Company Act because less than 40% of our total assets on an unconsolidated basis will consist of “investment securities.” Section 3(a)(1)(C) of the Investment Company Act defines an investment company as any issuer that is engaged or proposes to engage in the business of investing, reinvesting, owning, holding or trading in securities and that owns or proposes to acquire investment securities having a value exceeding 40% of the value of the issuer’s total assets (exclusive of U.S. government securities and cash items). Excluded from the term “investment securities” (as that term is defined in the Investment Company Act) are securities issued by majority-owned subsidiaries that are themselves not investment companies and are not relying on the exclusion from the definition of investment company set forth in Section 3(c)(1) or Section 3(c)(7) of the Investment Company Act. Under the Investment Company Act, a subsidiary is majority-owned if a company owns 50% or more of its outstanding voting securities. To avoid the need to register as an investment company, the securities issued to us by any wholly-owned or majority-

We hold our assets primarily through direct or indirect wholly-owned or majority-owned subsidiaries, certain of which are excluded from the definition of investment company pursuant to Section 3(c)(5)(C) or Section 3(c)(6) of the Investment Company Act. To qualify for the exclusion pursuant to Section 3(c)(5)(C), based on positions set forth by the staff of the SEC,U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”), each such subsidiary, considered on an individual basis, is generally is required to hold at least (i) 55% of its assets in “qualifying” real estate assets and (ii) at least 80% of its assets in “qualifying” real estate assets and real estate-related assets. For our subsidiaries that maintain this exclusion or another exclusion or exception under the Investment Company Act (other than Section 3(c)(1) or Section 3(c)(7) thereof), our interests in these subsidiaries do not and will not constitute “investment securities.” “Qualifying” real estate assets for this purpose include senior mortgage loans, certain B-notes and certain mezzanine loans that satisfy various conditions as set forth in Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”)SEC staff no-action letters and other guidance, and other assets that the SEC staff in various no-action letters and other guidance has determined are the functional equivalent of senior loans for the purposes of the Investment Company Act. We treat as real estate-related assets B-pieces and mezzanine loans that do not satisfy the conditions set forth in the relevant SEC staff no-action letters and other guidance, and debt and equity securities of companies primarily engaged in real estate businesses. Unless a relevant SEC no-action letter or other guidance applies, we expect to treat preferred equity interests as real estate-related assets. The SEC has not published guidance with respect to the treatment of CMBS for purposes of the Section 3(c)(5)(C) exclusion. Unless the SEC or its staff issues guidance with respect to CMBS, we intend to treat CMBS as a real estate-related asset. To the extent that the SEC staff publishes new or different guidance with respect to these matters, we may be required to adjust our strategy accordingly. For our subsidiaries that maintain this exclusion or another exclusion or exception under the Investment Company Act (other than Section 3(c)(1) or Section 3(c)(7) thereof), our interests in these subsidiaries do not and will not constitute “investment securities.”

If we were required to register as an investment company under the Investment Company Act, we would become subject to substantial regulation with respect to our capital structure (including our ability to use leverage), management, operations, transactions with affiliated persons (as defined in the Investment Company Act), portfolio composition, including restrictions with respect to diversification and industry concentration, and other matters.

As a consequence of our seeking to avoid the need to register under the Investment Company Act on an ongoing basis, we and/or our subsidiaries may be restricted from making certain investments or may structure investments in a manner that would be less advantageous to us than would be the case in the absence of such requirements. In particular, a change in the value of any of our assets could negatively affect our ability to avoid the need to register under the Investment Company Act and cause the need for a restructuring of our investment portfolio. For example, these restrictions may limit our and our subsidiaries’ ability to invest directly in mortgage-backed securities (“MBSs”) that represent less than the entire ownership in a pool of senior loans, debt and equity tranches of securitizations and certain asset-backed securities, noncontrolling equity interests in real estate companies or in assets not related to real estate. In addition, seeking to avoid the need to register under the Investment Company Act may cause us and/or our subsidiaries to acquire or hold additional assets that we might not otherwise have acquired or held or dispose of investments that we and/or our subsidiaries might not have otherwise disposed of, which could result in higher costs or lower proceeds to us than we would have paid or received if we were not seeking to comply with such requirements. Thus, avoiding registration under the Investment Company Act may hinder our ability to operate solely on the basis of maximizing profits.

There can be no assurance that we and our subsidiaries will be able to successfully avoid operating as an unregistered investment company. If it were established that we were an unregistered investment company, there would be a risk that we would be subject to monetary penalties and injunctive relief in an action brought by the SEC, that we would be unable to enforce contracts with third parties, that third parties could seek to obtain rescission of transactions undertaken during the period it was established that we were an unregistered investment company, and that we would be subject to limitations on corporate leverage that would have an adverse impact on our investment returns.

On April 30, 2021, we completed the internalization of the Company’s management and operating functions and terminated our relationship with CLNC Manager, LLC (the “Manager”), a subsidiary of DigitalBridge Group, Inc. (“DigitalBridge”), formerly known as Colony Capital, Inc., in accordance with that termination agreement dated April 4, 2021 between the Company, the OP, the Manager and Colony Capital Investment Advisors, LLC (the “Termination Agreement,” and the transactions

Our executive team remains unchanged, including Michael J. Mazzei, Chief Executive Officer; Andrew E. Witt, President and Chief Operating Officer; Frank V. Saracino, Chief Financial Officer and Executive Vice President; David A. Palamé, General Counsel, Secretary and Executive Vice President; George Kok, Chief Credit Officer; and Daniel Katz, Head of Originations. As a result of the Company’s 2021 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, DigitalBridge no longer has affiliated representatives on our board of directors. The Company’s board of directors is authorizedcomprised of seven members, including our six independent directors, led by Catherine D. Rice, our Independent Chairperson, Vernon Schwartz, John Westerfield, Winston W. Wilson, Kim S. Diamond, Catherine F. Long and Michael J. Mazzei, the Company’s Chief Executive Officer. Ms. Diamond and Ms. Long were appointed to followthe board of directors during 2021. Additionally, certain professionals that have contributed substantially to our investment, guidelinesunderwriting, portfolio and asset management, loan servicing, financial reporting, treasury, legal, tax, credit, risk and compliance responsibilities seamlessly moved forward as direct employees of the Company.

Our senior management team has extensive experience managing and investing in real estate-related investments through a variety of credit cycles and market conditions. The clarity in organizational structure and dedicated management and employee base achieved through the Internalization solidifies the footprint and corresponding network developed by our investment and asset management teams, with proprietary market knowledge, sourcing capabilities and the local presence required to identify, execute and manage new originations and existing investments on behalf of the Company. Our real estate investment platform and relationships allow us to source, underwrite, structure and manage investment opportunities as well as to access debt and equity capital to fund our operations. We have fully integrated investment and portfolio management, finance and administration functions, including legal, compliance, human resources, investor relations, asset valuation, credit and risk management and information technology services. The Company has a captive, fully functional, asset management company that engages primarily in loan servicing for performing, sub-performing and non-performing commercial loans, including senior secured loans, revolving lines of credit, loan participations, subordinated loans, unsecured loans and mezzanine debt. Our asset management subsidiary is a commercial special servicer rated by both Standard & Poor’s and Fitch’s rating services.

We focus on originating, acquiring, financing asset allocation and hedging decisionsmanaging CRE senior mortgage loans, mezzanine loans, preferred equity, debt securities and net leased properties. Our investment strategy is dynamic and flexible, enabling us to adapt to shifts in economic, real estate and capital market conditions and to exploit market inefficiencies. This flexible investment strategy will allow us to employ a customized, solutions-oriented approach to investment, which we believe is attractive to our borrowers and tenants and which will allow us to deploy capital across a broader opportunity set.

While we limit our use of leverage and believe we can achieve attractive yields on an unleveraged basis, we may use prudent amounts of leverage to increase potential returns to our stockholders and/or to finance future investments. Given current market conditions, to the extent generally, that we use borrowings to finance our assets, we currently expect that such leverage would not exceed on a debt-to-equity basis, a 3-to-1 ratio for us as a whole. We consider these leverage ratios to be prudent for our target asset classes. Our decision to use leverage currently or in the future to finance our assets will be based on our assessment of a variety of factors, including, among others, the anticipated credit quality, liquidity and price volatility of the assets in our investment portfolio, the potential for losses and extension risk in our portfolio, the ability to raise additional equity to reduce leverage and create liquidity for future investments, the availability of credit at favorable prices or at all, the credit quality of our assets and our outlook for borrowing costs relative to the interest income earned on our assets. Our decision to use leverage in the future to finance our assets will be at the discretion of our management and will not be subject to the approval of our stockholders, and we are not restricted by our governing documents or otherwise in the amount of leverage that we may use. To the extent that we use leverage in the future, we may mitigate interest rate risk through utilization of hedging instruments, primarily interest rate swap and cap agreements, to serve as a hedge against future interest rate increases on our borrowings.

We have no prescribed limitation on any suchparticular investment contemplatestype. However, the Company’s board of directors (“Board of Directors”) has adopted the following investment guidelines:

The investment guidelines can be amended or waived with the approval of the Board of Directors (which must include a majority of the independent directors).

We and our loan and investment portfolio but issubsidiaries conduct our operations so that we are not required to review and approveregister as an investment company under the Investment Company Act.

We believe we are not an investment company under Section 3(a)(1)(A) of the Investment Company Act because we do not engage primarily, or hold ourselves out as being engaged primarily, in advance allthe business of investing, reinvesting or trading in securities. Rather, we, through our subsidiaries, are primarily engaged in non-investment company businesses related to real estate. In addition, we intend to conduct our operations so that we do not come within the definition of an investment company under Section 3(a)(1)(C) of the Investment Company Act because less than 40% of our proposed loanstotal assets on an unconsolidated basis will consist of “investment securities.” Section 3(a)(1)(C) of the Investment Company Act defines an investment company as any issuer that is engaged or proposes to engage in the business of investing, reinvesting, owning, holding or trading in securities and investmentsthat owns or our Manager’s financing, asset allocation or hedging decisions, subjectproposes to acquire investment securities having a value exceeding 40% of the net commitment thresholdsvalue of the issuer’s total assets (exclusive of U.S. government securities and cash items). Excluded from the term “investment securities” (as that term is defined in the Investment Company Act) are securities issued by majority-owned subsidiaries that are themselves not investment companies and are not relying on the exclusion from the definition of investment company set forth in Section 3(c)(1) or Section 3(c)(7) of the Investment Company Act. Under the Investment Company Act, a subsidiary is majority-owned if a company owns 50% or more of its outstanding voting securities. To avoid the need to register as an investment company, the securities issued to us by any wholly-owned or majority-owned subsidiaries that we may form in the future that are excluded from the definition of investment company under Section 3(c)(1) or Section 3(c)(7) of the Investment Company Act, together with any other investment securities we may own, may not have a value in excess of 40% of the value of our total assets on an unconsolidated basis. We monitor our holdings to ensure ongoing compliance with this test.

As a consequence of our seeking to avoid the need to register under the Investment Company Act on an ongoing basis, we and/or our subsidiaries may be restricted from making certain investments or may structure investments in a manner that would be less advantageous to us than would be the case in the absence of such requirements. In particular, a change in the value of any of our assets could negatively affect our ability to avoid the need to register under the Investment Company Act and cause the need for a restructuring of our investment guidelines. Subject to maintainingportfolio. For example, these restrictions may limit our REIT qualification and our exclusion fromsubsidiaries’ ability to invest directly in mortgage-backed securities (“MBSs”) that represent less than the entire ownership in a pool of senior loans, debt and equity tranches of securitizations and certain asset-backed securities, noncontrolling equity interests in real estate companies or in assets not related to real estate. In addition, seeking to avoid the need to register under the Investment Company Act may cause us and/or our subsidiaries to acquire or hold additional assets that we might not otherwise have acquired or held or dispose of investments that we and/or our subsidiaries might not have otherwise disposed of, which could result in higher costs or lower proceeds to us than we would have paid or received if we were not seeking to comply with such requirements. Thus, avoiding registration under the Investment Company Act may hinder our Manager has latitude withinability to operate solely on the investment guidelines in determining the typesbasis of loansmaximizing profits.

There can be no assurance that we and investments it makes for us and how such loans and investments are financed or hedged and there are no limits on geographic or industry concentration, which could result in investment returns that are substantially below expectations or that result in losses, which could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.

We were organized in the state of Maryland on August 23, 2017 and maintain key offices in New York, New York and Los Angeles, California. We elected to be taxed as a REIT under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, beginning with these laws our taxable year ended December 31, 2018. We conduct all our activities and hold substantially all our assets and liabilities through our operating subsidiary, BrightSpire Capital Operating Company, LLC (formerly known as Credit RE Operating Company, LLC, the “OP”). At December 31, 2021, we owned 97.7% of the OP, as its sole managing member. The remaining 2.3% is owned as noncontrolling interests.

We continue to work closely with our borrowers and tenants to address the impact of COVID-19 on their businesses. To the extent that certain borrowers are experiencing significant financial dislocation we have and may continue to consider the use of interest and other reserves and/or regulations, could require changesreplenishment obligations of the borrower and/or guarantors to meet current interest payment obligations, for a limited period. Similarly, we have and may in the future evaluate converting certain current interest payment obligations to payment-in-kind as a potential bridge period solution. We have in limited cases allowed some portions of our business practices,current interest to convert to payment-in-kind.

The COVID-19 pandemic has created uncertainties that have and will continue to negatively impact our operations, cash flow orfuture operating results, liquidity and financial condition, impose additional costscondition. However, we believe there are too many uncertainties to predict and quantify the continuing impact. The potential concerns and risks include, but are not limited to, mortgage borrowers ability to make monthly payments, lessees’ capacity to pay their rent, and the resulting impact on us subjectto meet our obligations. Therefore, there can be no assurances that we will not need to take impairment charges in future quarters or experience further declines in revenues and net income, which could be material. For more information, refer to “Part I - Item 1A. Risk Factors” of this Annual Report on Form 10-K for further discussion regarding the COVID-19 pandemic and its impact on our future operating results, liquidity and financial condition.

Our senior management team has extensive experience managing and investing in real estate-related investments through a variety of credit cycles and market conditions. The clarity in organizational structure and dedicated management and employee base achieved through the Internalization solidifies the footprint and corresponding network developed by our investment and asset management teams, with proprietary market knowledge, sourcing capabilities and the local presence required to identify, execute and manage new originations and existing investments on behalf of the Company. Our real estate investment platform and relationships allow us to increased competition or otherwise adversely affect our business.

The allocation of our capital among our target assets will depend on prevailing market conditions at the time we invest and may change over time in response to different prevailing market conditions. In addition, in the future, we may invest in assets other than our target assets or change our target assets. With respect to all our investments, we invest so as to maintain our qualification as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes and our exclusion or exemption from regulation under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “Investment Company Act”).

We believe that events in the financial markets from time to time, including the current and new lawspotential impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, have created and regulations may be enacted. For example, from timewill continue to time the market forcreate dislocation between price and intrinsic value in certain asset classes as well as a supply and demand imbalance of available credit to finance these assets. We believe that our in-depth understanding of CRE and real estate-related investments, in-house underwriting, asset management and resolution capabilities, provides an extensive platform to regularly evaluate our investments and determine primary, secondary or alternative disposition strategies. This includes intermediate servicing and negotiating, restructuring of non-performing investments, foreclosure considerations, management or development of owned real estate, in each case to reposition and achieve optimal value realization for the Company and its stockholders. Depending on the nature of the underlying investment, we may pursue repositioning strategies through judicious capital investment in order to extract maximum value from the investment or recognize unanticipated losses to reinvest resulting liquidity in higher-yielding performing investments.

We focus on originating, acquiring, financing and managing CRE senior mortgage loans, mezzanine loans, preferred equity, debt transactions has been adversely affectedsecurities and net leased properties. Our investment strategy is dynamic and flexible, enabling us to adapt to shifts in economic, real estate and capital market conditions and to exploit market inefficiencies. This flexible investment strategy will allow us to employ a customized, solutions-oriented approach to investment, which we believe is attractive to our borrowers and tenants and which will allow us to deploy capital across a broader opportunity set.

In addition, we may use other forms of financing, including additional warehouse facilities, public and private secured and unsecured debt issuances and equity or equity-related securities issuances by us or our subsidiaries. We may also finance a decreaseportion of our investments through the syndication of one or more interests in a whole loan. We will seek to match the nature and duration of the financing with the underlying asset’s cash flow, including using hedges, as appropriate.

While we limit our use of leverage and believe we can achieve attractive yields on an unleveraged basis, we may use prudent amounts of leverage to increase potential returns to our stockholders and/or to finance future investments. Given current market conditions, to the extent that we use borrowings to finance our assets, we currently expect that such leverage would not exceed on a debt-to-equity basis, a 3-to-1 ratio for us as a whole. We consider these leverage ratios to be prudent for our target asset classes. Our decision to use leverage currently or in the future to finance our assets will be based on our assessment of a variety of factors, including, among others, the anticipated credit quality, liquidity and price volatility of the assets in our investment portfolio, the potential for losses and extension risk in our portfolio, the ability to raise additional equity to reduce leverage and create liquidity for future investments, the availability of seniorcredit at favorable prices or at all, the credit quality of our assets and subordinated financingour outlook for transactions,borrowing costs relative to the interest income earned on our assets. Our decision to use leverage in partthe future to finance our assets will be at the discretion of our management and will not be subject to the approval of our stockholders, and we are not restricted by our governing documents or otherwise in responsethe amount of leverage that we may use. To the extent that we use leverage in the future, we may mitigate interest rate risk through utilization of hedging instruments, primarily interest rate swap and cap agreements, to regulatory pressuresserve as a hedge against future interest rate increases on providers of financing to reduce or eliminate their exposure to such transactions. Furthermore, if regulatory capital requirements-whether under the Dodd-Frank Act, Basel III (voluntary minimum requirements for internationally active banks) or

other regulatory action-are imposedWe have no prescribed limitation on private lendersany particular investment type. However, the Company’s board of directors (“Board of Directors”) has adopted the following investment guidelines:

We elected to be taxed as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes beginning with our taxable year ended December 31, 2018. As a REIT, we generally will not be subject to U.S. federal income tax on the “REIT taxable income” that we distribute annually to our stockholders.

We believe we are not an investment company under Section 3(a)(1)(A) of the Investment Company Act because we do not engage primarily, or hold ourselves out as being engaged primarily, in the business of investing, reinvesting or trading in securities. Rather, we, through our subsidiaries, are primarily engaged in non-investment company businesses related to real estate. In addition, we intend to conduct our operations so that we do not come within the definition of an investment company under Section 3(a)(1)(C) of the Investment Company Act because less than 40% of our total assets on an unconsolidated basis will consist of “investment securities.” Section 3(a)(1)(C) of the Investment Company Act defines an investment company as any issuer that is engaged or proposes to engage in the business of investing, reinvesting, owning, holding or trading in securities and that owns or proposes to acquire investment securities having a value exceeding 40% of the value of the issuer’s total assets (exclusive of U.S. government securities and cash items). Excluded from the term “investment securities” (as that term is defined in the Investment Company Act) are securities issued by majority-owned subsidiaries that are themselves not investment companies and are not relying on the exclusion from the definition of investment company set forth in Section 3(c)(1) or Section 3(c)(7) of the Investment Company Act. Under the Investment Company Act, a subsidiary is majority-owned if a company owns 50% or more of its outstanding voting securities. To avoid the need to register as an investment company, the securities issued to us theyby any wholly-owned or majority-owned subsidiaries that we may form in the future that are excluded from the definition of investment company under Section 3(c)(1) or Section 3(c)(7) of the Investment Company Act, together with any other investment securities we may own, may not have a value in excess of 40% of the value of our total assets on an unconsolidated basis. We monitor our holdings to ensure ongoing compliance with this test.

We hold our assets primarily through direct or indirect wholly-owned or majority-owned subsidiaries, certain of which are excluded from the definition of investment company pursuant to Section 3(c)(5)(C) or Section 3(c)(6) of the Investment Company Act. To qualify for the exclusion pursuant to Section 3(c)(5)(C), based on positions set forth by the staff of U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”), each such subsidiary, considered on an individual basis, is generally required to hold at least (i) 55% of its assets in “qualifying” real estate assets and (ii) at least 80% of its assets in “qualifying” real estate assets and real estate-related assets. For our subsidiaries that maintain this exclusion or another exclusion or exception under the Investment Company Act (other than Section 3(c)(1) or Section 3(c)(7) thereof), our interests in these subsidiaries do not and will not constitute “investment securities.” “Qualifying” real estate assets for this purpose include senior mortgage loans, certain B-notes and certain mezzanine loans that satisfy various conditions as set forth in SEC staff no-action letters and other guidance, and other assets that the SEC staff in various no-action letters and other guidance has determined are the functional equivalent of senior loans for the purposes of the Investment Company Act. We treat as real estate-related assets B-pieces and mezzanine loans that do not satisfy the conditions set forth in the relevant SEC staff no-action letters and other guidance, and debt and equity securities of companies primarily engaged in real estate businesses. Unless a relevant SEC no-action letter or other guidance applies, we expect to treat preferred equity interests as real estate-related assets. The SEC has not published guidance with respect to the treatment of CMBS for purposes of the Section 3(c)(5)(C) exclusion. Unless the SEC or its staff issues guidance with respect to CMBS, we intend to treat CMBS as a real estate-related asset. To the extent that the SEC staff publishes new or different guidance with respect to these matters, we may be required to adjust our strategy accordingly. For our subsidiaries that maintain this exclusion or another exclusion or exception under the Investment Company Act (other than Section 3(c)(1) or Section 3(c)(7) thereof), our interests in these subsidiaries do not and will not constitute “investment securities.”

As a consequence of our seeking to avoid the need to register under the Investment Company Act on an ongoing basis, we and/or our subsidiaries may be restricted from making certain investments or may structure investments in a manner that would be less advantageous to us than would be the case in the absence of such requirements. In particular, a change in the value of any of our assets could negatively affect our ability to avoid the need to register under the Investment Company Act and cause the need for a restructuring of our investment portfolio. For example, these restrictions may limit our and our subsidiaries’ ability to invest directly in mortgage-backed securities (“MBSs”) that represent less than the entire ownership in a pool of senior loans, debt and equity tranches of securitizations and certain asset-backed securities, noncontrolling equity interests in real estate companies or in assets not related to real estate. In addition, seeking to avoid the need to register under the Investment Company Act may cause us and/or our subsidiaries to acquire or hold additional assets that we might not otherwise have acquired or held or dispose of investments that we and/or our subsidiaries might not have otherwise disposed of, which could result in higher costs or lower proceeds to us than we would have paid or received if we were not seeking to comply with such requirements. Thus, avoiding registration under the Investment Company Act may hinder our ability to operate solely on the basis of maximizing profits.

We are engaged in a competitive business. In our lending and investing activities, we compete for opportunities with a variety of institutional lenders and investors, including other REITs, specialty finance companies, public and private funds, commercial and investment banks, commercial finance and insurance companies and other financial institutions. Several other REITs have raised, or are expected to raise, significant amounts of capital, and may have similar acquisition objectives that overlap with ours. These other REITs will increase competition for the available supply of mortgage assets suitable for purchase and origination. Furthermore, this competition in our target asset classes may lead to the yields of such assets decreasing, which may further limit our ability to generate satisfactory returns.

Additionally, the economic impacts of the pandemic may continue to impact the financial stability of certain loans and loan borrowers underlying the residential and commercial securities and loans that we provideown, leading to others. Among other things, this could potentially increaseloan delinquencies and/or defaults, or requests for concessions or forbearance. Elevated levels of delinquency or default would have an adverse impact on our financing costs, reduceincome and the value of our ability to originate or acquire loansassets and reduce our liquidity ormay require us to repay amounts under our master repurchase facilities and we can provide no assurance that we will have funds available to make such payments. Any forced sales of loans, securities or other assets that secure our repurchase and other financing arrangements in the current environment would likely be on terms less favorable to us than might otherwise be available in a regularly functioning market and could result in deficiency judgments and other claims against us.

Issues related to financing are exacerbated in times of significant dislocation in the financial markets, such as those being experienced now related to the COVID-19 pandemic. It is possible our lenders will become unwilling or unable to provide us with financing and we could be forced to sell our assets at an inopportune time when prices are depressed. In addition, if the regulatory capital requirements imposed on our lenders change, they may be required to significantly increase the cost of the financing that they provide to us. Our lenders also have revised and may continue to revise their eligibility requirements for the types of assets they are willing to finance or price.the terms of such financings, including haircuts and requiring additional collateral in the form of cash, based on, among other factors, the regulatory environment and their management of actual and perceived

In response to the market dislocations resulting from the global pandemic of COVID-19, we made the determination that certain of our interest rate hedges were no longer effective in hedging asset market values and, as of March 27, 2020, had terminated or closed out a portion of our outstanding interest rate hedges and, overall, incurred realized losses. While we are monitoring market conditions and determining when we believe it would be appropriate and effective to re-implement interest rate hedging strategies, including by taking into account our future business activities and assets and liabilities, we will be exposed to the impact that changes in benchmark interest rates may have on the value of the loans, securities and other assets we own that are sensitive to interest rate changes, as well as long-term debt obligations that are sensitive to interest rate changes. Moreover, to the extent the value of loans and securities we own fluctuate as a result of changes in benchmark interest rates, we may be exposed to margin calls under lending facilities that we use to finance these assets. In the past, our interest rate hedging strategy was intended to be a source of liquidity in meeting margin calls that resulted from asset valuation changes attributable to changes in benchmark interest rates; however, because we have terminated or closed out a portion of our outstanding interest rate hedges, we will not be able to rely on these hedges as such a source of liquidity. Operating our business and maintaining a portfolio of interest rate sensitive loans, securities and other assets without an interest rate risk hedging program in place could expose us to losses and liquidity risks, which could be material and which could negatively impact our results of operations and financial condition. There can be no assurance that future market conditions and our financial condition in the future will enable us to re-establish an effective interest rate risk hedging program, even if in the future we believe it would otherwise be appropriate or desirable to do so.

Our investments in CMBS and CDOs are also subject to losses. In general, losses on a mortgaged property securing a mortgage loan included in a securitization will be borne first by the equity holder of the property, then by a cash reserve fund or letter of credit, if any, then by the holder of a mezzanine loan or B-Note, if any, then by the “first loss” subordinated security holder (generally, the “B-Piece” buyer) and then by the holder of a higher-rated security. In the event of default and the exhaustion of any equity support, reserve fund, letter of credit, mezzanine loans or B-Notes, and any classes of securities junior to those in which we invest, we will not be able to recover all of our investment in the securities we purchase. In addition, if the underlying mortgage portfolio has been increasing commentary amongst regulatorsovervalued by the originator, or if the values subsequently decline and, intergovernmental institutionsas a result, less collateral is available to satisfy interest and principal payments due on the rolerelated CMBS or CDO, there would be an increased risk of nonbank institutionsloss. The prices of lower credit quality securities are generally less sensitive to interest rate changes than more highly rated investments, but more sensitive to adverse economic downturns or individual issuer developments.

Our business is also closely tied to general economic conditions of the areas where our investments are located and in the real estate industry generally. As a term generally referringresult, our economic performance, the value of our CRE debt and debt-like investments, real estate and real estate related investments, and our ability to credit intermediation involving entitiesimplement our business strategies may be significantly and activities outside the regulated banking system and increased oversight and regulation of such entities. Inadversely affected by changes in economic conditions in the United States where a substantial number of our investments are

located and in international geographic areas, as applicable. The condition of the Dodd-Frankreal estate markets in which we operate is cyclical and depends on the condition of the economy in the United States and Europe and elsewhere as a whole and to the perceptions of investors of the overall economic outlook. Rising interest rates, declining employment levels, declining demand for real estate, declining real estate values or periods of general economic slowdown or recession, increasing political instability or uncertainty, or the perception that any of these events may occur have negatively impacted the real estate market in the past and may in the future negatively impact our operating performance. Declining real estate values could reduce our level of new loan originations and make borrowers less likely to service the principal and interest on our CRE debt investments. Slower than expected economic growth pressured by a strained labor market, could result in lower occupancy rates and lower lease rates across many property types, which could create obstacles for us to achieve our business plans. In addition, the economic condition of each local market where we operate may depend on one or more key industries within that market, which, in turn, makes our business sensitive to the performance of those industries.

Our financial performance is comprisedinfluenced by changes in interest rates, in particular, as such changes may affect our CRE securities, floating-rate borrowings and CRE debt to the extent such debt does not float as a result of representativesfloors or otherwise. Changes in interest rates affect our net interest income, which is the difference between the interest income we earn on our interest-earning investments and the interest expense we incur in financing these investments. Changes in the level of allinterest rates also may affect our ability to originate and acquire assets, the major U.S. financial regulators,value of our assets and our ability to actrealize gains from the disposition of assets. Changes in interest rates may also affect borrower default rates. In a period of rising interest rates, our interest expense could increase, while the interest we earn on our fixed-rate debt investments would not change, adversely affecting our profitability. Our operating results depend in large part on differences between the income from our assets, net of credit losses, and our financing costs. We anticipate that for any period during which our assets are not match-funded (when we match maturities and interest rates of our liabilities with our assets to manage risks of being forced to refinance), the income from such assets will respond more slowly to interest rate fluctuations than the cost of our borrowings. We may fail to appropriately employ a match-funded structure on favorable terms or at all. Consequently, changes in interest rates particularly short term interest rates may significantly influence our net income. Interest rates are highly sensitive to many factors, including governmental monetary and tax policies, domestic and international economic and political conditions and other factors beyond our control. Interest rate fluctuations resulting in our interest expense exceeding interest income would result in operating losses for us.

Any hedging activity we engage in may adversely affect our earnings, which could adversely affect cash available for distribution to stockholders. Therefore, while we may enter into such transactions to seek to reduce interest rate and/or currency risks, unanticipated changes in interest rates or exchange rates may result in poorer overall investment performance than if we had not engaged in any such hedging transactions. In addition, the degree of correlation between price movements of the instruments used in a hedging strategy and price movements in the portfolio positions being hedged or liabilities being hedged may vary materially. Moreover, for a variety of reasons, we may not be able to establish a perfect correlation between hedging instruments and the investments being hedged. Any such imperfect correlation may prevent us from achieving the intended hedge and expose us to risk of loss. We may also be exposed to liquidity issues as a result of margin calls or settlement of derivative hedges. Our hedging activities, if not undertaken in compliance with certain U.S. federal income tax requirements, could also adversely affect our ability to qualify for taxation as a REIT. In addition, hedging instruments involve risk since they often are not traded on regulated exchanges, guaranteed by an exchange or its clearing house, or regulated by any U.S. or foreign governmental authorities. Consequently, there are no regulatory or statutory requirements with respect to record keeping, financial system’s systemicresponsibility or segregation of customer funds and positions. Furthermore, the enforceability of agreements underlying derivative transactions may depend on compliance with applicable statutory, commodity and other regulatory requirements and, depending on the identity of the counterparty, applicable international requirements.

While we have and may continue to seek non-recourse, non-mark-to-market, matched-term, long-term financing through securitization financing transactions or other structures, such financing may be unavailable to us on favorable terms or at all. Consequently, we may be dependent on short-term financing arrangements that are not matched in duration to our financial assets. Short-term borrowing through repurchase arrangements, credit facilities and other types of borrowings may put our assets and financial condition at risk. Repurchase agreements economically resemble short-term, floating rate financing and usually require the maintenance of specific loan-to-collateral value ratios. Posting additional collateral to support our financing arrangements could significantly reduce our liquidity and limit our ability to leverage our assets. Furthermore, the cost of borrowings may increase substantially if lenders view us as having increased credit risk regulator. The FSOC hasduring periods of market distress. Any such short-term financing may also be recourse to us, which will increase the authorityrisk of our investments.

In the event that securitization financings become available, we may utilize, if available, warehouse facilities pursuant to which we would accumulate mortgage loans in anticipation of a securitization financing, which assets would be pledged as collateral for such facilities until the securitization transaction is consummated. In order to borrow funds to acquire assets under any future warehouse facilities, we expect that our lenders thereunder would have the right to review the activitiespotential assets for which we are seeking financing. We may be unable to obtain the consent of non-bank financial companies predominantly engageda lender to acquire assets that we believe would be beneficial to us, and we may be unable to obtain alternate financing for such assets. In addition, no assurance can be given that a securitization structure would be consummated with respect to the assets being warehoused. If the securitization is not consummated, the lender could liquidate the warehoused collateral and we would then have to pay any amount by which the original purchase price of the collateral assets exceeds its sale price, subject to negotiated caps, if any, on our exposure. In addition, regardless of whether the securitization is consummated, if any of the warehoused collateral is sold before the consummation, we would have to bear any resulting loss on the sale. Currently, we have no warehouse facilities in financial activitiesplace, and designate those companies as “systemically important” for supervision by the Federal Reserve. On April 18, 2016, the FSOC released an update on its multi-year review of asset management products and activities and created an interagency working group to assess potential risks associated with certain leveraged funds. While it cannotno assurance can be known at this time whether any regulationgiven that we will be implementedable to obtain one or what form any new law or regulation or amendment will take, compliance with any increased regulation of non-bank credit extension could require changesmore.

On August 31, 2011, the SEC published a concept release (Release No. 29778, File No. S7-34-11, Companies Engaged in the Business of Acquiring Mortgages and Mortgage Related Instruments), pursuant to which it is reviewing whether certain companies that invest in mortgage-backed securitiesMBSs and rely on the exclusion from registration under Section 3(c)(5)(C) of the Investment Company Act, such as us, should continue to be allowed to rely on such an exclusion from registration. If the SEC or its staff takes action with respect to this exclusion, these changes could mean that certain of our subsidiaries could no longer rely on the Section 3(c)(5)(C) exclusion, and would have to rely on Section 3(c)(1) or 3(c)(7), which would mean that our investment in those subsidiaries would be investment securities. This could result in our failure to maintain our exclusion from registration as an investment company. If we fail to maintain an exclusion from registration as an investment company, either because of SEC interpretational changes or otherwise, we could, among other things, be required either: (i) to substantially change the manner in which we conduct our operations to avoid being required to register as an investment company; or (ii) to register as an investment company, either of which could have an adverse effect on us and the value of our Class A common stock. If we are required to register as an investment company under the Investment Company Act, we would become subject to substantial regulation with respect to our capital structure (including our ability to use leverage), management, operations, transactions with affiliated persons (as defined in the Investment Company Act), portfolio composition, including restrictions with respect to diversification and industry concentration and other matters.

Certain of Colony Capital’s affiliates, including our Manager, areOur subsidiary, BrightSpire Advisors, LLC (“BrightSpire Advisors”) is subject to regulation as an investment advisers and/or fund managersadviser by various regulatory authorities that are charged with protecting our interests.authorities. Instances of criminal activity and fraud by participants in the investment management industry and disclosures of trading and other abuses by participants in the financial services industry have led the U.S. government and regulators in foreign jurisdictions to consider increasing the rules and regulations governing, and oversight of, the financial system. This activity is expected to result in continued changes to the laws and regulations governing the investment management industry and more aggressive enforcement of the existing laws and regulations. Our ManagerBrightSpire Advisors could be subject to civil liability, criminal liability, or sanction, including revocation of its registration as an investment adviser in the United States, revocation of the licenses of its employees, censures, fines or temporary suspension or permanent bar from conducting business if it is found to have violated any of these laws or regulations. Any such liability or sanction could adversely affect its ability to manage our business.

We elected to be taxed as a REIT under the U.S. federal income tax laws commencing with our taxable year ended December 31, 2018. Our qualification as a REIT involves the application of highly technical and complex provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (the “Code”) for which only limited judicial and administrative authorities exist. Even a technical or inadvertent violation could jeopardize our REIT qualification. New legislation, court decisions or administrative guidance, in each case possibly with retroactive effect, may make it more difficult or impossible for us to qualify as a REIT.

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

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

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

As a result of these factors, NorthStar I’s or NorthStar II’s failure to qualify as a REIT prior to the Mergers could impair our ability to expand our business and raise capital and could materially adversely affect the value of our Class A common stock. In addition, even if they qualified as REITs for the durationentirety of their existence, if there is an adjustment to NorthStar I’s or NorthStar II’s taxable income or dividends-paid deductions for periods prior to the Mergers, we could be required to elect to use the deficiency dividend procedure to maintain NorthStar I’s or NorthStar II’s, as applicable, REIT status for periods prior to the Mergers. That deficiency dividend procedure could require us to make significant distributions to our stockholders and to pay significant interest to the IRS.

The maximum rate applicable to “qualified dividend income” paid by non-REIT “C” corporations to U.S. stockholders that are individuals, trusts and estates generally is 20%. Dividends payable by REITs to those U.S. stockholders, however, generally are not eligible for the current reduced rate, except to the extent that certain holding requirements have been met and a REIT’s dividends are attributable to dividends received by a REIT from taxable corporations (such as a taxable REIT subsidiary (“TRS”)), to income that was subject to tax at the REIT/corporate level, or to dividends properly designated by the REIT as “capital gains dividends.” Effective for taxable years before January 1, 2026, those U.S. stockholders may deduct 20% of their dividends from REITs (excluding qualified dividend income and capital gains dividends). For those U.S. stockholders in the top marginal tax bracket of 37%, the deduction for REIT dividends yields an effective income tax rate of 29.6% on REIT dividends, which is higher than the 20% tax rate on qualified dividend income paid by non-REIT “C” corporations, but still lower than the effective rate that applied prior to 2018, which is the first year that this special deduction for REIT dividends is

available. Although the reduced rates applicable to dividend income from non-REIT “C” corporations do not adversely affect the taxation of REITs or dividends payable by REITs, it could cause investors who are non-corporate taxpayers to perceive investments in REITs to be relatively less attractive than investments in the shares of non-REIT “C” corporations that pay dividends, which could adversely affect the value of our Class A common stock.

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

As a result of both the requirement to distribute 90% of our REIT taxable income each year (and to pay tax on any income that we do not distribute) and the fact that our taxable income may well exceed our cash income due to the factors mentioned above as well as other factors, we may find it difficult to meet the REIT distribution requirements in certain circumstances while also having adequate cash resources to execute our business plan. In particular, where we experience differences in timing between the recognition of taxable income and the actual receipt of cash, the requirement to distribute a substantial portion of our taxable income could cause us to: (i) sell assets in adverse market conditions, (ii) borrow on unfavorable terms, (iii) distribute amounts that would otherwise be invested in future acquisitions, capital expenditures or repayment of debt or (iv) make a taxable distribution of our shares of Class A common stock as part of a distribution in which stockholders may elect to receive shares of Class A common stock or (subject to a limit measured as a percentage of the total distribution) cash, in order to comply with REIT requirements. These alternatives could increase our costs, reduce our equity, and/or result in stockholders being taxed on distributions of shares of stock without receiving cash sufficient to pay the resulting taxes. Thus, compliance with the REIT distribution requirements may hinder our ability to grow, which could adversely affect the value of our Class A common stock.

Even if we qualify for taxation as a REIT, we may be subject to certain U.S. federal, state and local taxes on our income and assets, including taxes on any undistributed income, tax on income from some activities conducted as a result of a foreclosure, and state or local income, property and transfer taxes, such as mortgage recording taxes. We also are subject to U.S. federal and state income tax (and any applicable non-U.S. taxes) on the net income earned by our TRSs. In addition, we have substantial operations and assets outside of the U.S. that are subject to tax in those countries - thosecountries. Those taxes, unless incurred by a TRS, are not likely to generate an offsetting credit for taxes in the U.S. In addition, if we have net income from “prohibited transactions,” that income will be subject to a 100% tax. In general, “prohibited transactions” are sales or other dispositions of property, other than foreclosure property, but including mortgage loans, held primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of business.

We might be subject to this tax if we were to dispose of, modify or securitize loans in a manner that was treated as a sale or deemed exchange of the loans for U.S. federal income tax purposes that is subject to the prohibited transactions tax. In order to avoid the prohibited transactions tax, we may choose not to engage in certain sales or modifications of loans at the REIT-level, and may limit the structures we utilize for our securitization transactions, even though such sales or structures might otherwise be beneficial to us. Finally, we could, in certain circumstances, be required to pay an excise or penalty tax (which could be significant in amount) in order to utilize one or more relief provisions under the Code to maintain our qualification as a REIT. Any of these taxes would decrease cash available for distribution to our stockholders.

To qualify as a REIT, we must ensure that we meet the REIT gross income tests annually and that at the end of each calendar quarter, at least 75% of the value of our assets consists of cash, cash items, government securities and qualified REIT real estate assets, including certain mortgage loans and certain kinds of MBS. The remainder of our investment in securities (other than qualified 75% asset test assets) generally cannot include more than 10% of the outstanding voting securities of any one issuer or more than 10% of the total value of the outstanding securities of any one issuer. In addition, in general, no more than 5% of the value of our assets (other than qualified 75% asset test assets) can consist of the securities of any one issuer, and no more than 20% of the value of our total assets can be represented by stock or securities of one or more TRSs. Debt instruments issued by “publicly offered REITs,” to the extent not secured by real property or interests in real property, qualify for the 75% asset test but the value of such debt instruments cannot exceed 25% of the value of our total assets. The compliance with these limitations, particularly given the nature of some of our investments, may hinder our ability to make, and, in certain cases, maintain ownership of certain attractive investments that might not qualify for the 75% asset test. If we fail to comply with the REIT asset tests requirements at the end of any calendar quarter, we must correct the failure within 30 days after the end of the calendar quarter or qualify for certain statutory relief provisions to avoid losing our REIT qualification and suffering adverse tax consequences. As a result, we may be required to liquidate from our portfolio, or contribute to a TRS, otherwise attractive investments in order to maintain our qualification as a REIT. These actions could have the effect of reducing our income, increasing our income tax liability, and reducing amounts available for distribution to our stockholders. In addition, we may be required to make distributions to stockholders at disadvantageous times or when we do not have funds readily available for distribution, and may be unable to pursue investments (or, in some cases, forego the sale of such investments) that would be otherwise advantageous to us in order to satisfy the source-of-income or asset-diversification requirements for qualifying as a REIT.

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

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

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

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

The IRS, the United States Treasury Department and Congress frequently review U.S. federal income tax legislation, regulations and other guidance. We cannot predict whether, when or to what extent new U.S. federal tax laws, regulations, interpretations or rulings will be adopted. Any legislative action may prospectively or retroactively modify our tax treatment and, therefore, may adversely affect our taxation or our stockholders. We urge you to consult with your tax advisor with respect to the status of legislative, regulatory or administrative developments and proposals and their potential effect on an investment in our shares. Although REITs generally receive certain tax advantages compared to entities taxed as C corporations, it is possible that future legislation would result in a REIT having fewer tax advantages, and it could become more advantageous for a company that invests in real estate to elect to be treated for U.S. federal income tax purposes as a C corporation.

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

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

Our Board of Directors determines our major policies, including our policies regarding growth, REIT qualification and distributions. Our Board of Directors may amend or revise these and other policies without a vote of the stockholders. We may change our investment policies without stockholder notice or consent, which could result in investments that are riskier or different than our current investments. Our Board of Directors’ broad discretion in setting policies and stockholders’ inability to transfer cash fromexert control over those policies increases the OPuncertainty and risks stockholders face.

As a public company, we are required to maintain internal controls over financial reporting and to report any material weaknesses in such internal controls. The process of designing, implementing and testing the internal controls over financial reporting required to comply with this obligation is time consuming, costly and complicated. If we identify material weaknesses in our internal controls over financial reporting, if we are unable to comply with the requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in a timely manner or to assert that our internal controls over financial reporting is effective, or if our independent registered public accounting firm is unable to express an opinion as to the Company within two years followingeffectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting, investors may lose confidence in the Mergers without incurring adverse tax consequences.accuracy and completeness of our financial reports, and the market price of our common stock could be negatively affected. We could also become subject to investigations by the stock exchange on which our securities are listed, the SEC or other regulatory authorities, which could require additional financial and management resources.

In June 2016, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2016-13, Financial Instruments - Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments. The standard replaced the incurred loss impairment methodology pursuant to GAAP with a methodology that reflects current expected credit losses (“CECL”) and requires consideration of a broader range of reasonable and supportable information to inform credit loss estimates. Under the “disguised sale” rules that apply when a member transfers property to a limited liability companyCECL model, which became effective for us for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019 and the limited liability company transfers cash to the partnerfor interim periods within twothose fiscal years, of that transfer, we are restricted in our abilityrequired to transfer cash frompresent certain financial assets carried at amortized cost, such as loans held for investment, at the OPnet amount expected to be collected. The measurement of expected credit losses is based on information about past events, including historical experience, current conditions, and reasonable and supportable forecasts that affect the Company within two years followingcollectability of the Mergers, unless that transfer can qualify for an exception provided for the applicable regulations or was not contemplatedreported amount. This measurement takes place at the time the financial asset is first added to the balance sheet and updated quarterly thereafter. This differs from the incurred loss impairment methodology pursuant to GAAP, which delays recognition until it is probable a loss has been incurred. Accordingly, the CECL model may affect how we determine our allowance for loan losses and could require us to increase our allowance and recognize provisions for loan losses earlier in the lending cycle. Moreover, the CECL model may create more volatility in the level of our allowance for loan losses. If we are required to increase our level of allowance for loan losses for any reason, such increase may affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Under various federal, state and local environmental laws, statutes, ordinances and regulations relating to the protection of the Mergers,environment, a current or previous owner or operator of real property, such as us, our borrowers and our tenants, may be liable in certain circumstances for the costs of investigation, removal or remediation of contamination, or related to hazardous or toxic substances, materials or wastes, including petroleum and materials containing asbestos or, mold, present or released at, under, on, or from such property. In addition, we also may be liable for costs of remediating contamination at off-site disposal or treatment facilities where we arranged for disposal or treatment of hazardous substances at such facilities. Potential liabilities relating to the forgoing also include government fines and penalties, natural resource damages, and damages for injuries to persons and property. In addition, some environmental laws can create a lien on the contaminated site in favor of the government for damages and the costs it incurs in connection with the contamination. These laws often impose liability without incurring adverse tax consequences. regard to whether the owner or operator knew of, or was responsible for, the presence, release or disposal of such substances, may be joint and several, and may be imposed on the current or former owner or operator of a property in connection with the activities of a tenant or a prior owner or operator at the property. The presence of contamination or the failure to remediate contamination may adversely affect our or our tenants’ ability to sell, develop, operate or lease real estate, or to borrow using the real estate as collateral, which, in turn, could reduce our revenues. As an owner or operator of a site, including if we take ownership through foreclosure, we also can be liable under common law to third parties for damages and injuries resulting from environmental contamination at or emanating from the site (e.g., for cleanup costs, natural resource damages, bodily injury or property damage). Some of our properties are or have been used for commercial or industrial purposes involving the use or presence of hazardous substances, materials or waste, which could have resulted in environmental impacts at or from these properties, including contamination of which we are not presently aware.

We are also subject to federal, state and local environmental, health and safety laws and regulations and zoning requirements, including those regarding the handling of regulated substances and wastes, emissions to the environment and fire codes. If we, or our tenants or borrowers, fail to comply with these various laws and requirements, we might incur costs and liabilities, including governmental fines and penalties. Moreover, we do not anticipateknow whether existing laws and requirements will change or,

if they do, whether future laws and requirements will require us to make significant unanticipated expenditures that could have a material adverse effect on our business. Our tenants are subject to the same environmental, health and safety and zoning laws and also may be liable for cleanup or remediation of contamination. Such liability could affect a tenant’s ability to make rental payments to us.

Some of our properties may contain, or may have contained, asbestos-containing building materials. Environmental, health and safety laws require that owners or operators of or employers in buildings with ACM properly manage and maintain these rules willmaterials, adequately inform or train those who may come into contact with ACM and undertake special precautions, including removal or other abatement, in the event that ACM is disturbed during building maintenance, renovation or demolition. These laws may impose fines and penalties on employers or, building owners or operators for failure to comply with these requirements. In addition, third parties may seek recovery from employers, owners or operators for personal injury associated with exposure to asbestos.

If we, our borrowers or other companies with which we do business, particularly utilities that provide our facilities with electricity, become subject to laws or regulations related to climate change, it could have a material adverse effect on us. The United States may enact new laws, regulations and interpretations relating to climate change, including potential cap-and-trade systems, carbon taxes and other requirements relating to reduction of carbon footprints and/or greenhouse gas emissions. Other countries have enacted climate change laws and regulations, and the United States has been involved in discussions and agreements regarding international climate change treaties. The federal government and some of the states and localities in which we operate have enacted certain climate change laws and regulations and/or have begun regulating carbon footprints and greenhouse gas emissions. Localities may enact laws that require mortgaged properties to comply with certain green building certification programs (e.g., LEED and EnergyStar) and other laws which may impact commercial real estate as a result of efforts to mitigate the factors contributing to climate change. Although these laws and regulations have not had any known material adverse effect on us to date, they could limit our ability to pay regular dividendsdevelop properties or result in substantial costs, including compliance costs, retrofit costs and construction costs, monitoring and reporting costs and capital expenditures for environmental control facilities and other new equipment. In addition, these laws and regulations could lead to increased costs for the electricity that our tenant’s require to conduct operations. Furthermore, our reputation could be damaged if we violate climate change laws or regulations. We cannot predict how future laws and regulations, or future interpretations of current laws and regulations, related to climate change will affect our business, results of operations, liquidity and financial condition. Lastly, the potential physical impacts of climate change on our operations are highly uncertain, and would be particular to the geographic circumstances in areas in which we operate. These potential impacts may include changes in rainfall and storm patterns and intensities, water shortages, changing sea levels and changing temperatures, any of which could increase our operating costs. Any of these matters could have a material adverse effect on us.

Certain of our Class A common stock pursuantfloating-rate debt and hedging arrangements determine the applicable interest rate or payment amount by reference to LIBOR, or to another financial metric.

On March 5, 2021, the U.K. Financial Conduct Authority (“FCA”) announced staggered dates by which LIBOR settings will either cease to be provided by any administrator or no longer be representative. Accordingly, unless our previously announced stock repurchase program. We believefloating rate debt and hedge arrangements are modified to provide for a specific replacement benchmark by June 30, 2023, it is unclear what rate would apply to such floating rate debt and hedges.

The U.S. Federal Reserve, in conjunction with the Alternative Reference Rates Committee, a steering committee composed of large U.S. financial institutions, has identified the Secured Overnight Financing Rate (“SOFR”) as the preferred alternative rate to LIBOR. The composition and characteristics of SOFR are not the same as those of LIBOR. SOFR is a secured rate backed by government securities, while LIBOR is an unsecured rate that we willincorporates bank credit risk, and SOFR is an overnight rate, while LIBOR is a forward-looking rate that represents interbank funding over different maturities. While market participants have the capacityproposed certain methods to make substantial repurchases, but we may not have the flexibility to repurchase as much stock as we would otherwise elect, depending upon future market conditions.

Furthermore, differences between LIBOR replacement methodology in loan and hedging markets could result in differences in conversion between our debt arrangements and corresponding hedges. While the loan market may eventually generally adopt the same replacement for LIBOR as the hedging market, there can be givenno assurance as to the abilitytiming of such adoption and any differences in the timing of adoption of LIBOR replacements between the loan and hedge market as well as differences in methodology and valuation can lead to mismatches in hedging, which could result in changes to our risk exposure, adverse tax or accounting effects, increased compliance and legal and operational costs.

The laws and regulations governing our operations, as well as their interpretation, may change from time to time, and new laws and regulations may be enacted. For example, from time to time the market for real estate debt transactions has been adversely affected by a decrease in the availability of senior and subordinated financing for transactions, in part in response to regulatory pressures on providers of financing to reduce or eliminate their exposure to such transactions. Furthermore, if regulatory capital requirements—whether under the Dodd-Frank Act, Basel III (voluntary minimum requirements for internationally active banks) or other regulatory action—are imposed on private lenders that provide us with funds, or were to be imposed on us, they or we may be required to limit, or increase the cost of, financing they provide to us or that we provide to others. Among other things, this could potentially increase our financing costs, reduce our ability to originate or acquire loans and reduce our liquidity or require us to sell theirassets at an inopportune time or price.

The capital and credit markets have from time to time experienced periods of extreme volatility and disruption. The market price and liquidity of the market for shares of our common stock or the price thatmay be significantly affected by numerous factors, some of which are beyond our stockholderscontrol and may obtain for their shares.not be directly related to our operating performance.

Some of the factors that could negatively affect the market price of our Class A common stock include: