While our current asset portfolio includes royalties relating to over 4535 marketed therapies and five development-stage product candidates,products, the top five therapiesproduct franchises accounted for 61%66% of our royalty receipts in the year ended December 31, 2020.2023. In addition, our asset portfolio may not be fully diversified by geographic region or other criteria. Any significant deterioration in the cash flows from the top products in our asset portfolio could adversely affect our business, financial condition andor results of operations.

There are a limited number of suitable and attractive opportunities to acquire high-quality royalties available in the market.royalties. Therefore, competition to acquire such royalties is intense and may increase. We compete with other potential acquirers for these opportunities, including companies that market the products on which royalties are paid, investment vehicles and other pools of capital, financial institutions, institutional investors (including sovereign wealth and pension funds) and others. These competitors may be able to access lower cost capital, may be larger than us, may have relationships that provide them access to opportunities before us, or may be willing to acquire royalties for lower projected returns than we are.

The biopharmaceutical industry is a highly competitive and rapidly evolving industry. The length of any product’s commercial life cannot be predicted with certainty. There can be no assurance that oneOne or more products on which we are entitled to a royalty will notmay be rendered obsolete or non-competitive by new or alternate products or improvements made to existing products on which we are not entitled to a royalty, made to existing products, either by the current marketer of such products or by another marketer. Current marketers of products may undertake these development efforts in order to improve their products or to avoid paying our royalty. Adverse competition, obsolescence or governmental and regulatory action or healthcare policy changes could significantly affect the revenues, including royalty-related revenues, of the products which generate our royalties.

Competitive factors affecting the market position and success of each product include:

Products on which we have a royalty receivable or other interest may be rendered obsolete or non-competitive by new or alternate products, including generics and/or biosimilars, improvements on existing products, marketing or commercialization strategies, or governmental or regulatory action. In addition, as biopharmaceutical companies increasingly devote significant resources to innovate next-generation products and therapies, using gene editing and new curative modalities, such as cell and gene therapy, products on which we have a royalty may become unattractive to commercialize or obsolete. TheseIf a product’s market acceptance is diminished or it is withdrawn from the market, continuing payments with respect to biopharmaceutical products may not be made on time or at all, which may affect our ability to realize the benefits of the royalty receivable or other interest in such product and may result in us incurring asset impairment charges. Further, any product for which we have a royalty receivable or other interest that competes with an approved product must demonstrate compelling advantages in efficacy, convenience, tolerability and safety in order to overcome price competition and to be commercially successful. Many approved drugs are well established therapies and are widely accepted by physicians, patients and third-party payors. Insurers and other third-party payors may also encourage the use of generic products. Any of these developments could adversely affect the sales of the biopharmaceutical products that generate our royalties,on which we have a royalty, and consequently could adversely affect our business, financial condition andor results of operations.

In the case of our royalty receivables, our cash flow consists primarily of payments supported by royalties paid by marketers. These marketers may have interests that are different from our interests. For example, these marketers may be motivated to maximize their overall income by allocating resources to other products and, in the future, may decide to focus less attention on the products generating our royalties or by allocating resources to develop products that do not generate royalties to us. There can be no assurance that any marketer or person with whom the marketer has a working relationship has adequate resources andor motivation to continue to produce, market and sell the products generating our royalties. Aside from any limited audit rights relating to the activities of the marketers that we may have in certain circumstances pursuant to the terms of our arrangements with the licensor, we do not have oversight rights with respect to the marketers’ operations and do not have rights allowing us to direct their operations or strategy nor do our agreements contain performance standards for their operations. We also have limited information onThe calculation of the marketers’ operations.royalty payments is subject to and dependent upon the adequacy and accuracy of our counterparties’ sales and accounting functions.

In these circumstances, whileWhile we may be able to receive certain information relating to sales of products through the exercise of audit rights and review of royalty reports we receive from the licensor, wesuch information may be received many months following our recognition of the royalty revenue, may require us to adjust our royalty revenues in later periods and may require expense on our part.

We have limited information on the marketers’ operations. We will not have the right to review or receive certain information relating to products that the marketers may have, including the results of any studies conducted by the marketers or others, or complaints from doctors or users of products. The market performance of the products generating our royalties may therefore be diminished by any number of factors relating to the marketers that are outside of our control.

Generally, the holders of royalties on products have granted exclusive regulatory approval, commercialization, manufacturing and marketing rights to the marketers of such products. The marketers have full control over those efforts and sole discretion to determine the extent and priority of the resources they will commit to their program for a product. Accordingly, the successful commercialization of a product depends on the marketer’s efforts and is beyond our control. If a marketer does not devote adequate resources to the ongoing development, regulatory approval, commercialization and manufacture of a product, or if a marketer engages in illegal or otherwise unauthorized practices, the product’s sales may not generate sufficient royalties, or the product’s sales may be suspended, and consequently, could adversely affect our business. In addition, if marketers of biopharmaceutical products decide to discontinue product programs or we believe the commercial prospects of assets have been reduced, we may recognize material non-cash impairment charges related to the financial royalty asset associated with those programs or assets.

License agreements relating to the products generating our royalties may be terminated, which may adversely affect sales of such products and therefore the payments we receive. For example, under certain license agreements, marketers retain the right to unilaterally terminate the agreements with the licensors. When the last patent covering a product expires or is otherwise invalidated in a country, a marketer may be economically motivated to terminate its license agreement, either in whole or with respect to such country, in order to terminate its payment and other obligations. In the event of any such a termination, a licensor may no longer receive all of the payments it expected to receive from the licensee and may also be unable to find another company to continue developing and commercializing the product on the same or similar terms as those under the license agreement that has been terminated.

In addition, license agreements may fail to provide significant protection for the licensor in case of the licensee’s failure to perform or in the event of disputes. License agreements which relate to the products underlying our royalties are complex, and certain provisions in such agreements may be susceptible to multiple interpretations. The resolution of any contract interpretation disagreement that may arise could narrow what the licensor believes to be the scope of its rights to the relevant intellectual property or technology, or decrease the licensee’s financial or other obligations under the relevant agreement, any of which could in turn impact the value of our royalties and adversely affect our business, financial condition andor results of operations. If a marketer were to default on its obligations under a license agreement, the licensor’s remedy may be limited either to terminating certain licenses related to certain countries or to generally terminate the license agreement with respect to such country. In such cases, we may not have the right to seek to enforce the rights of the licensor and we may be required to rely on the resources and willingness of the licensor to enforce its rights against the licensee.

In any of these situations, if the expected payments under the license agreements do not materialize, this could result in a significant loss to us and adversely affect our business, financial condition andor results of operations.

If a marketer were to become insolvent and seek to reorganize under Chapter 11 of Title 11 of the U.S. Code, as amended, or the Bankruptcy Code, or liquidate under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code (or foreign equivalent), such event could delay or impede the payment of the amounts due under a license agreement, pending a resolution of the insolvency proceeding. Any unpaid royalty payments due for the period prior to the filing of the bankruptcy proceeding would be unsecured claims against the marketer, which might not be paid in full or at all. While royalty payments due for periods after the filing may qualify as administrative expenses entitled to a higher priority, the actual payment of such post-filing royalty payments could be delayed for a substantial period of time and might not be in the full amount due under the license agreement. The licensor would be prevented by the automatic stay in the bankruptcy proceeding from taking any action to enforce its rights without the permission of the bankruptcy court. In addition, the marketer could elect to reject the license agreement, which would require the licensor to undertake a new effort to market the applicable product with another distributor. Such proceedings could adversely affect the ability of a payor to make payments with respect to a royalty, and could consequently adversely affect our business, financial condition andor results of operations.

The investigation of each specific target royalty and the negotiation, drafting and execution of relevant agreements disclosure and other documents requires substantial management time and attention and results in substantial costs for accountants, attorneys and others. If a decision is made not to complete a specific acquisition, the costs incurred for the proposed transaction would not be recoverable from a third party. Furthermore, even if an agreement is reached relating to a specific target asset, we may fail to consummate the acquisition for any number of reasons, including, in the case of an acquisition of a royalty through a business combination with a public company, approval by the target company’s public shareholders. Multiple unsuccessful attempts to acquire new royalties could hurt our reputation, result in significant costs and wastean inefficient use of the Manager’s time. The opportunity cost of diverting management and financial resources could negatively impact our ability to locate and acquire other assets.

In both the U.S. and non-U.S. markets, sales of medical, biopharmaceutical products, and the success of such products, depends in part on governmental regulation and the availability and extent of coverage and reimbursement from third-party payors, including government healthcare programs andin addition to private insurance plans.

In the United States, pharmaceutical product pricing is subject to enhanced government regulation, public scrutiny and calls for reforms. Some states haveFor example, the drug pricing provisions of the Inflation Reduction Act (“IRA”), which was signed into law in August 2022 and began to be implemented and other states are considering, pharmaceutical price controls or patient access constraints under their Medicaid program. There have also been recent state legislativein 20203 with implementation efforts that have generally focused on increasing transparency around drug costs or limiting drug prices.to continue over the next several years. In August 2023, the Biden Administration unveiled the first round of medicines subject to the “Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program,” which requires manufacturers of select drugs to engage in a process with the U.S. Federal government to set new Medicare prices which would go into effect in 2026. In addition, the growthU.S. Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act (the “ACA”) was enacted by Congress in March 2010 and established a major expansion of large managed care organizationshealthcare coverage, financed in part by several new rebates, discounts and taxes that had a significant effect on the expenses and profitability on the companies that manufacture the products that generate our royalties. These companies and their products face uncertainty due to federal legislative and administrative efforts to repeal, substantially modify or invalidate some or all of the provisions of the IRA and the ACA.

Other U.S. federal or state legislative or regulatory action or policy efforts could adversely affect the healthcare industry, including, among others, additional transparency and limitations related to product pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, general budget control actions, changes in patent laws, changing interpretations of competition law, exercise by the government of march-in rights in respect of government funded innovations, the importation of prescription benefit managers, as well asdrugs from outside the prevalenceUnited States at prices that are regulated by governments of generic substitution, has hindered price increases for prescription drugs. various foreign countries, revisions to reimbursement of biopharmaceutical products under government programs, restrictions on U.S. direct-to-consumer advertising or limitations on interactions with healthcare professionals. No assurances can be provided that these laws and regulations will not adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations.

Continued intense public scrutiny of the price of drugs, together with government and payor dynamics, may limit the ability of producers and marketers to set or adjust the price of products based on their value. There can be no assurance that new or proposed products will be considered cost-effective or that adequate third-party reimbursement will be available to enable the producer or marketer of such product to maintain price levels sufficient to realize an appropriate return. These pricing pressures may adversely affect our current royalties and the attractiveness of future acquisitions of royalties.

Outside the United States, numerous major markets, including the EU, Japan and China, have pervasive government regulation of healthcare and government involvement in funding healthcare, and, in that regard, fix the pricing and reimbursement of pharmaceutical products. Consequently, in those markets, the products generating our royalties are subject to government decision-making and budgetary actions.

In an effort to contain the U.S. federal deficit, the pharmaceuticalbiopharmaceutical industry could be considered a potential source of savings via legislative proposals. Government action to reduce U.S. federal spending on entitlement programs, including Medicare, Medicaid or other publicly funded or subsidized health programs, or to lower drug spending, may affect payment for the products that generate our royalties. These and any other cost controls and/or any significant additional taxes or fees that may be imposed on the biopharmaceutical industry as part of deficit reduction efforts could reduce cash flows from our royalties and therefore adversely affect our business, financial condition andor results of operations.

The procedures to approve biopharmaceutical products for commercialization vary among countries and can involve additional testing and time. Such procedures may include on-site inspections by regulatory authorities at clinical trial sites or manufacturing facilities, which inspections may be delayed by travel restrictions imposed in response to pandemics or other infectious diseases. Approval by the FDA does not ensure approval by regulatory authorities in other countries, and approval by one foreign regulatory authority does not ensure approval by regulatory authorities in other foreign countries or by the FDA. The foreign regulatory approval process may include all of the risks associated with obtaining FDA approval and many include additional risks, such as pricing approval.

There can be no assurance that any of these regulatory approvals will be granted or not be revoked or restricted in a manner that would adversely affect the sales of such products and on the ability of payors to make payments with respect to such royalties to us.

The manufacture of products generating our royalties is typically complex and is highly regulated. In particular, biopharmaceutical products are manufactured in specialized facilities that require the approval of, and ongoing regulation by, the FDA in the United States and, if manufactured outside of the United States, both the FDA and non-U.S. regulatory agencies, such as the MHRA and the EMA. With respect to a product, to the extent that operational standards set by such agencies are not adhered to, manufacturing facilities may be closed or production interrupted until such time as any deficiencies noted by such agencies are remedied. Any such closure or interruption may interrupt, for an indefinite period of time, the manufacture and distribution of a product and therefore the cash flows from the related biopharmaceutical asset may be significantly less than expected.

In addition, manufacturers of a product may rely on third parties for selected aspects of product development, such as packaging or to supply bulk raw material used in the manufacture of such product. In the United States, the FDA requires that all suppliers of pharmaceutical bulk materials and all manufacturers of pharmaceuticals for sale in or from the United States adhere to the FDA’s current “Good Manufacturing Practice” regulations and guidelines and similar requirements that exist in jurisdictions outside the United States. LicenseesMarketers of biopharmaceutical products generally rely on a small number of key, highly specialized suppliers, manufacturers and packagers. Any interruptions, however minimal, in the operation of these manufacturing and packaging facilities could adversely affect production and product sales and therefore adversely affect our business, financial condition andor results of operations.

The developer, manufacturer or marketer of a product could become subject to product liability claims. A product liability claim, regardless of its merits, could adversely affect the sales of the product and the amount of any related royalty payments and consequently, could even adversely affect the ability of a payor to make payments with respect to a royalty.

Although we believe that we will not bear responsibility in the event of a product liability claim against the developer, manufacturer, marketer or other seller of the product that generates our royalty,royalty. Any such product liability claims against us could adversely affect our business, financial condition andor results of operations due to the lower than expected cash flows from the royalty.operations.

Our right to receive royalties generally depends on the existence of valid and enforceable claims of registered and/or issued patents in the United States and elsewhere in the world. The products on which we receive payments are dependent on patent protection and on the fact that the manufacturing, marketing and selling of such products do not infringe, misappropriate or otherwise violate intellectual property rights of third parties. Typically, we have no ability to control the prosecution, maintenance, enforcement or defense of patent rights, but must rely on the willingness and ability of our partners or their marketers to do so. While we believe that these third parties are in the best position and have the requisite business and financial motivation to do so, thereThere can be no assurance that these third parties will vigorously prosecute, maintain, enforce or defend such rights. Even if such third parties seek to prosecute, maintain, enforce or defend such rights, they may not be successful.

Even if the patent applications our partners and their marketers license or own do issue as patents, they may not issue in a form that will provide them with any meaningful protection, prevent competitors or other third parties from competing with them or otherwise provide them with any competitive advantage. Competitors or other third parties may be able to circumvent patents of our partners and their marketers by developing similar or alternative products in a non-infringing manner. The issuance of a patent is not conclusive as to its inventorship, scope, validity or enforceability, and may be challenged in the courts or patent offices in the United States and abroad. Such challenges may result in loss of exclusivity or in patent claims being narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable, which could limit the ability of our partners and their marketers from stoppingpreventing others from using or commercializing similar or identical technology and products, or limit the duration of the patent protection of their products, development-stage product candidates and technologies.

Any loss or reduction in the scope or duration of patent protection for any product that generates our royalties, or any failure to successfully prosecute, maintain, enforce or defend any patents that protect any such product may result in a decrease in the sales of such product and any associated royalties payable to us. Any such event would adversely affect the ability of the payor to make payments of royalties to us or may otherwise reduce the value of our royalty interest,royalties, and could consequently adversely affect our business, financial condition andor results of operations. In cases where our contractual arrangements with our partner permit us to do so, we could participate in patent suits brought by third parties but this could result in substantial litigation costs, divert management’s attention from our core business and there can be no assurance that such suits would be successful.

The commercial success of a product depends, in part, on avoiding infringement, misappropriation or other violations of the intellectual property rights and proprietary technologies of others. Third-party issued patents or patent applications claiming subject matter necessary or useful to manufacture and market a product could exist or issue in the future. Such third-party patents or patent applications may include claims directed to the composition, manufacturing, mechanism of action or other unique features of a product. There can be no assurance that a license would be available to marketers for such subject matter if such infringement were to exist or, if offered, would be offered on reasonable and/or commercially feasible terms. Without such a license, it may be possible for third parties to assert infringement or other intellectual property claims against the marketer of such product based on such patents or other intellectual property rights.

Even if the marketer was able to obtain a license, it could be non-exclusive, thereby giving its competitors and other third parties access to the same technologies. In addition, if a marketer of a product that generates our royalties is required to obtain a license from a third party, the marketer may, in some instances, have the right to offset the licensing and royalty payments to such third party against royalties that would be owed to our partner, which may ultimately reduce the value of our royalty interest. An adverse outcome in infringement or other intellectual property-related proceedings could subject a marketer to significant liabilities to third parties, require disputed rights to be licensed from third parties or require the marketer to cease or modify its manufacturing, marketing and distribution of any affected product, any of which could reduce the amount of cash flow generated by the affected products and any associated royalties payable to us and therefore adversely affect our business, financial condition andor results of operations.

The marketers of the products that generate our royalties depend, in part, on trade secrets, know-how and technology, which are not protected by patents, to maintain the products’ competitive position. This information is typically protected through confidentiality agreements with parties that have access to such information, such as collaborative partners, licensors, employees and consultants. Any of these parties may breach the agreements and disclose the confidential information or competitors might independently develop or learn of the information in some other way, which could harm the competitive position of the products and therefore reduce the amount of cash flow generated by our royalty interest.

SubjectUnder English law, we will only be able to declare dividends, make distributions or repurchase shares (other than out of the termsproceeds of our indebtedness or other contractual obligations, the approval and paymenta new issuance of any interim dividends are at the sole discretion of our board of directors, which may change our dividend policy at any time and the payment of any final dividends will be subject to majority approval by holders of Class A ordinary and Class B ordinary shares and in each case will be paidfor that purpose) out of profits available for that purpose under English law. There can be no assurance that any dividends, whether quarterly or otherwise, will or can be paid. Our ability to pay dividends to our shareholders depends on a number of factors, including among other things, general economic and business conditions, our strategic plans and prospects, our business and acquisition opportunities, our financial condition and operating results, working capital requirements and anticipated cash needs, contractual restrictions and obligations, including fulfilling our current and future capital commitments, legal, tax and regulatory restrictions, restrictions and other implications on the payment of dividends by us to our shareholders and such other factors as our board of directors may deem relevant.

A shareholder who receives a distribution under circumstances where he or she knows or has reasonable grounds for believing that the distribution is unlawful in the circumstances is obliged to repay such distribution (or that part of it, as the case may be) to us.

We intend to conduct our business so as not to become regulated as an investment company under the U.S. Investment Company Act. An entity generally will be determined to be an investment company for purposes of the U.S. Investment Company Act if, absent an applicable exemption, (i) it is or holds itself out as being engaged primarily, or proposes to engage primarily, in the business of investing, reinvesting or trading in securities; or (ii) it owns or proposes to acquire investment securities having a value exceeding 40% of the value of its total assets (exclusive of U.S. government securities and cash items) on an unconsolidated basis, which we refer to as the ICA 40% Test.

We do not hold ourselves out as being engaged primarily, or propose to engage primarily, in the business of investing, reinvesting or trading in securities, and believe that we are not engaged primarily in the business of investing, reinvesting or trading in securities. We believe that, for U.S. Investment Company Act purposes, we are engaged primarily, through one or more of our subsidiaries, in the business of purchasing or otherwise acquiring certain obligations that represent part or all of the sales price of merchandise. Our subsidiaries that are so engaged rely on Section 3(c)(5)(A) of the U.S. Investment Company Act, which, as interpreted by the SEC staff, requires each such subsidiary to invest at least 55% of its assets in “notes, drafts, acceptances, open accounts receivable, and other obligations representing part or all of the sales price of merchandise, insurance, and services,” which we refer to as the ICA Exception Qualifying Assets.

In a no-action letter, dated August 13, 2010, to our predecessor, the SEC staff promulgated an interpretation that royalty interests that entitle an issuer to collect royalty receivables that are directly based on the sales price of specific biopharmaceutical assets that use intellectual property covered by specific license agreements are ICA Exception Qualifying Assets under Section 3(c)(5)(A). We rely on this no-action letter for the position that royalty receivables relating to biopharmaceutical assets that we hold are ICA Exception Qualifying Assets under Section 3(c)(5)(A) and Section 3(c)(6), which is described below.

To ensure that we are not obligated to register as an investment company, we must not exceed the thresholds provided by the ICA 40% Test. For purposes of the ICA 40% Test, the term investment securities does not include U.S. government securities or securities issued by majority-owned subsidiaries that are not themselves investment companies and are not relying on Section 3(c)(1) or Section 3(c)(7) of the U.S. Investment Company Act, such as majority-owned subsidiaries that rely on Section 3(c)(5)(A). We also may rely on Section 3(c)(6), which, based on SEC staff interpretations, requires us to invest, either directly or through majority-owned subsidiaries, at least 55% of our assets in, as relevant here, businesses relying on Section 3(c)(5)(A). Therefore, the assets that we and our subsidiaries hold and acquire are limited by the provisions of the U.S. Investment Company Act and the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder.

If the SEC or its staff in the future adopts a contrary interpretation to that provided in the no-action letter to Royalty Pharmaour predecessor or otherwise restricts the conclusions in the SEC staff’s no-action letter such that royalty interests are no longer treated as ICA Exception Qualifying Assets for purposes of Section 3(c)(5)(A) and Section 3(c)(6), or the SEC or its staff in the future determines that the no-action letter does not apply to some or all types of royalty receivables relating to biopharmaceutical assets, our business will be materially and adversely affected. In particular, we would be required either to convert to a corporation formed under the laws of the United States or a state thereof (which would likely result in our being subject to U.S. federal corporate income taxation) and to register as an investment company, or to stop all business activities in the United States until such time as the SEC grants an application to register us as an investment company formed under non-U.S. law. It is unlikely that such an application would be granted and, even if it were, requirements imposed by the Investment Company Act, including limitations on our capital structure, our ability to transact business with affiliates and our ability to compensate key employees, could make it impractical for us to continue our business as currently conducted. Our ceasing to qualify for an exemption from registration as an investment company could materially and adversely affect the value of our Class A ordinary shares and our ability to pay dividends in respect of our Class A ordinary shares.

Our board of directors is under no obligation to pay dividends, tomake distributions or repurchase our shareholders,ordinary shares and it may decide to use cash to fund asset acquisitions or operations in lieu of paying dividends.dividends, making distributions or repurchasing our ordinary shares. We will pay Equity Performance Awards to an affiliate of the Manager based on our Net Economic Profit regardless of whether any dividends are madepaid to our shareholders.shareholders or any ordinary shares are repurchased. Our board’sboard of directors’ decisions with respect to our cash may result in no dividends to our shareholders.shareholders and no ordinary shares repurchased. Furthermore, our board’sboard of directors’ decisions with respect to dividends or repurchases of ordinary shares may adversely affect the market price of our Class A ordinary shares. In the event thatIf we generate positive income, but pay limited or no dividends, holders of Class A ordinary shares may, if they have made certain elections for U.S. federal income tax purposes with respect to their Class A ordinary shares, have a tax liability on our income in excess of the actual cash dividends received by such holders. If our board of directors decides to approve limited or no dividends or repurchases of ordinary shares, the primary remedy for holders of Class A ordinary shares will be to sell their shares at the prevailing market prices,price, including at a loss, which prices may be low due to unfavorable or inconsistent dividends.dividends or repurchases of our ordinary shares.

We have discretion as to the types of healthcare assets that we may acquire. While we expect the Manager to acquire assets that primarily fall within the biopharmaceutical industry, we are not obligated to do so and may acquire other types of healthcare assets that are peripheral to or outside of the biopharmaceutical industry. Consequently, our asset acquisitions in the future, and the cash flows from such assets, may not resemble those of the assets in our current portfolio. We and the Manager may have limited experience acquiring assets that are peripheral to or outside of the biopharmaceutical industry. There can be no assurance that assets acquired in the future will have returns similar to the returns expected of the assets in our current portfolio or be profitable at all.

There could be a change of control of the Manager and, in such a case, the new controlling party may have a different philosophy, employ less experienced advisory professionals, who are less experienced, be unsuccessful in identifying assetroyalty acquisition opportunities or have a track record that is not as successful as that of the Manager prior to such a change of control.Manager. If the foregoing were to occur, we could experience difficulty in making new asset acquisitions, and the value of our existing assets, our business, financial condition andor results of operations could materially suffer.

Pursuant to the Management Agreement, theThe Manager does not assume any responsibility other than to render the services called for thereunder. Under the terms ofunder the Management Agreement, theAgreement. The Manager and its affiliates (including RPI EPA Holdings, LP (“EPA Holdings”)) and their respective officers, directors, stockholders,equity holders, members, employees, agents and partners, and any other person who is entitled to indemnification (each, an “Indemnitee”) is not liable to us, any subsidiary of ours, our directors, our stockholdersshareholders or any subsidiary’s stockholdersshareholders or partners for acts or omissions performed in accordance with and pursuant to the Management Agreement, except those resulting from acts constituting fraud, bad faith, willful misconduct, gross negligence (as such concept is interpreted under the laws of the State of New York)York law) and a material breach of the Management Agreement that is not cured in accordance with its terms or a violation of applicable securities laws.

In addition, to the fullest extent permitted by law, we have agreed to indemnify the Indemnitees from and against any and all claims, liabilities, damages, losses, penalties, actions, judgments, costs and expenses (including amounts paid in satisfaction of judgments, in compromises and settlements, as fines and penalties and legal or other costs and reasonable expenses of investigating or defending against any claim or alleged claim) of any nature whatsoever, known or unknown, liquidated or unliquidated that are incurred by any Indemnitee or to which such Indemnitee may be subject by reason of its activities on behalf of us or any of our subsidiaries to the extent that such Indemnitee’s conduct did not constitute fraud, bad faith, willful misconduct, gross negligence (as such concept is interpreted under the laws of the State of New York)York law), material breach of the Management Agreement that is not cured in accordance with the terms of the Management Agreement or a violation of applicable securities laws. As a result, we could experience unfavorable operating results or incur losses for which the Manager would not be liable.

We and the Manager rely heavily on our respectivethe Manager’s financial, accounting, information and other data processing systems and cloud computing services, as well as those of our current and future collaborators, contractors or consultants. Such systems are vulnerable to damage or interruption from computer viruses, data corruption, cyber-basedcyber-related attacks, unauthorized access, natural disasters, pandemics, such as the current COVID-19 pandemic, terrorism, war and telecommunication and electrical failures. If any of these events occur and such systems do not operate properly or are disabled or if there is any unauthorized disclosure of data, whether as a result of tampering, a breach of network security systems, a cyber-incidentcybersecurity vulnerability or attack or otherwise, we could suffer substantial financial loss, increased costs, a disruption of our business, loss of trade secrets or other proprietary information, liability to us, regulatory intervention or reputational damage.

Furthermore, federal, state and international laws and regulations relating to data privacy and protection, such as the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation, which took effect in May 2018, and the California Consumer Privacy Act, which took effect in January 2020, can expose us to enforcement actions and investigations by regulatory authorities, and potentially result in regulatory penalties and significant legal liability, if our information technology security efforts or data privacy and protection compliance efforts fail. In addition, we operate a business that is highly dependent on information systems and technology. OurThe Manager’s information systems and technology and that of the Manager may not continue to be able to accommodate our growth, and the cost of maintaining such systems may increase from its current level.increase. Such a failure to accommodate growth, or an increase in costs related to such information systems, could adversely affect our business, financial condition andor results of operations.

A disaster or a disruption in the public infrastructure that supports our business, including a disruption involving electronic communications or other services used by us or third parties with whom we conduct business, could adversely affect our ability to continue to operate our business without interruption. Our disaster recovery programs and those of the Manager may not be sufficient to mitigate the harm that may result from such a disaster or disruption. In addition, insurance and other safeguards might only partially reimburse us for our losses, if at all.

In addition, sustaining our growth may require us or the Manager to commit additional management, operational and financial resources to identify new professionals to join the team and to maintain appropriate operational and financial systems to adequately support expansion. Due to the fact thatSince the market for hiring talented professionals is competitive, we may not be able to grow at the pace we desire.

We are also subject to other laws and regulations governing our international operations, including regulations administered by the governments of the United Kingdom and the United States, and authorities in the European Union, including applicable export control regulations, economic sanctions and embargoes on certain countries and persons, anti-money laundering laws, import and customs requirements and currency exchange regulations, collectively referred to as the Trade“Trade Control laws.”

There is no assurance that we will be completely effective in ensuring our compliance with all applicable anti-corruption laws, including the Bribery Act, the FCPA or other legal requirements, including Trade Control laws. If we are not in compliance with the Bribery Act, the FCPA and other anti-corruption laws or Trade Control laws, we may be subject to criminal and civil penalties, disgorgement and other sanctions and remedial measures, and legal expenses, which could have an adverse impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations and liquidity. Likewise, any investigation of any potential violations of the Bribery Act, the FCPA, other anti-corruption laws or Trade Control laws by the United Kingdom, United States or other authorities could also have an adverse impact onadversely affect our reputation, our business, financial condition andor results of operations.

Efforts to ensure that our business arrangements with third parties will comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations will involve substantial costs. Because of the breadth of these laws and the narrowness of the statutory exceptions and safe harbors available, it is possible that some of our business activities or our business arrangements with third parties could be subject to challenge under one or more of such laws. It is possible that governmental authorities will conclude that our business practices or the business practices of the marketers of products that generate our royalties may not comply with current or future statutes, regulations or case law involving applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations. If our operations or the operations of the marketers of products that generate are royalties are found to be in violation of any of these laws or any other governmental regulations, we or marketers of products that generate our royalties may be subject to significant criminal, civil and administrative sanctions, including monetary penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, individual imprisonment and exclusion from participation in government-funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, additional reporting requirements and oversight if we or marketers of products that generate our royalties become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or similar agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws, reputational harm, and we or marketers of products that generate our royalties may be required to curtail or restructure operations, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our results of operations.

The risk of our being found in violation of these laws is increased by the fact that many of them have not been fully interpreted by the regulatory authorities or the courts, and their provisions are open to a variety of interpretations. Any action against us for violation of these laws, even if we successfully defend against it, could cause us to incur significant legal expenses and divert our management’s attention from the operation of our business. The shifting compliance environment and the need to build and maintain robust and expandable systems to comply with multiple jurisdictions with different compliance and/or reporting requirements increases the possibility that a healthcare company may run afoul of one or more of the requirements.

The AIFM Directive has been implemented into the national law of the majority of member states of the European Economic Area and the United Kingdom (each an “AIFM state”). The AIFM Directive sets out minimum conditions related to the marketing of interests in alternative investment funds (such as our Class A ordinary shares) in the AIFM states and may impact our ability to attract investors in the AIFM states and may significantly increase our and the Manager’s compliance costs. Such conditions include requirements for us to register with the competent authority in the relevant AIFM state in order to market the Class A ordinary shares to investors, state requirements to file periodic reports with the competent authority in the relevant AIFM state and requirements to comply with disclosure and reporting obligations in respect of investors in the relevant AIFM state. Such reports and disclosures may become publicly available. While such conditions are met in relation to the AIFM states where our Class A ordinary shares will be marketed, there can be no guarantee that this will continue to be the case. The AIFM Directive does not, however, prohibit an investor in such AIFM state from subscribing for our Class A ordinary shares at their own initiative in circumstances where such Class A ordinary shares have not been marketed in such AIFM state and we may issue our Class A ordinary shares to such investors, as long as they have provided us and the Manager with representations that they have done so at their own initiative.

In each AIFM state, our Class A ordinary shares may only be offered to investors in accordance with local measures implementing the AIFM Directive. Investors, together with any person making or assisting in the decision to invest in us, who are situated, domiciled or who have a registered office, in an AIFM state where our Class A ordinary shares are not being offered pursuant to private placement rules implementing the AIFM Directive may invest, or effect an investment in our Class A ordinary shares, but only in circumstances where they do so at their own initiative. Any investor acquiring our Class A ordinary shares at their own initiative in such AIFM state should note that as we have not been registered for marketing in that AIFM state, no reports will be filed with the competent authority in the relevant AIFM state by or in respect of us and no investor shall be entitled to receive any disclosure or report that is mandated in respect of an alternative investment fund being marketed pursuant to the AIFM Directive.

We are a holding company with no material direct operations. Our principal asset is our controlling equity interest in RP Holdings. As a result, we are dependent on loans, dividends and other payments from our subsidiaries to generate the funds necessary to meet our financial obligations and to pay dividends onor make distributions to our ordinary shares.shareholders. Our subsidiaries are legally distinct from us and may be prohibited or restricted from providing loans, paying dividends or otherwise making funds available to us under certain conditions. If the cash we receive from our subsidiaries pursuant to dividend payments is insufficient for us to fund our financial obligations, or if a subsidiary is unable to pay dividends to us, provided that we have sufficient distributable profits, our net assets exceed the total of our called-up share capital and distributable reserves and any dividend would not reduce our net assets to less than such total, we may be required to raise cash through the incurrence of debt, the issuance of equity or the sale of assets to fund the payment of the dividends.fund. However, there is no assurance that we would be able to raise cash by these means. If the ability of any of our subsidiaries to pay dividends or make other distributions or payments to us is materially restricted by regulatory or legal requirements, bankruptcy or insolvency, or our need to maintain our financial strength ratings, or is limited due to operating results or other factors, it could adversely affect our ability to paymeet our operating costsfinancial obligations and other corporate expenses and we may be unable to, or our board may exercise its discretion not to pay dividends.dividends or make distributions to our shareholders.

RP Holdings is treated as a partnership for U.S. federal income tax purposes and has owners that are subject to U.S. federal income taxation. To the extent permitted by applicable law, RP Holdings is required to make cash distributions, or tax distributions, to the direct owner or beneficial owners of the RP Holdings Class C Special Interest, calculated using an assumed tax rate that is generally uniform for all recipients regardless of their tax status. Funds used by RP Holdings to satisfy its tax distribution obligations will not be available for reinvestment in our business.

The market price of our Class A ordinary shares has been and may be highly volatile and could be subject to wide fluctuations. Securities markets worldwide experience significant price and volume fluctuations. This marketDuring the year ended December 31, 2023, the per share trading price of our Class A ordinary shares fluctuated from a low of $26.21 to a high of $39.40. Market volatility, as well as general economic, market or political conditions, could reduce the market price of Class A ordinary shares in spite of our operating performance. In addition to the factors discussed in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, our operating results could be below the expectations of public market analysts and investors due to a number of potential factors, including:

These and other factors may cause the market price of and demand for our Class A ordinary shares to fluctuate significantly, which may limit or prevent our existing shareholders from reselling their Class A ordinary shares at or above the purchase price.

The stock marketStock markets in general hashave from time to time experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations, including in recent months. In addition, in the past, following periods of volatility in the overall market and the market price of a company’s securities, securities class action litigation has often been instituted against public companies. This type of litigation, if instituted against us, could result in substantial costs and a diversion of our management’s attention and resources.

Our Articles of Association provide that the courts of England and Wales will be the exclusive forum for resolving all shareholder complaints other than shareholder complaints asserting a cause of action arising under the Securities Act and the Exchange Act, and that the U.S. federal district courts will be the exclusive forum for resolving any shareholder complaint asserting a cause of action arising under the Securities Act and the Exchange Act. This choice of forum provision may limit a shareholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that itsuch shareholder finds favorable for disputes with us or our directors, officers or other employees, which may discourage such lawsuits. If a court were to find either choice of forum provision contained in our Articles of Association to be inapplicable or unenforceable, in an action, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving such action in other jurisdictions, which could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.

We are a public limited company with our registered office in England and our subsidiaries are incorporated in various jurisdictions, including jurisdictions outside the United States. One of our directors is not a resident of the United States, and a substantial portion of our assets and the assets of this director are located outside the United States. As a result, it may be difficult for investors to effect service of process on this director in the United States or to enforce in the United States judgments obtained in U.S. courts against us or this director based on the civil liability provisions of the U.S. securities laws or otherwise. Even if youshareholders are successful in bringing an action of this kind, the laws of England may render youshareholders unable to enforce a judgment against our assets or the assets of our directors and executive officers. In addition, it is doubtful whether English courts would enforce certain civil liabilities under U.S. securities laws in original actions or judgments of U.S. courts based upon these civil liability provisions. In addition, awards of punitive damages in actions brought in the United States or elsewhere may be unenforceable in the United Kingdom. An award for monetary damages under the U.S. securities laws would likely be considered punitive if it does not seek to compensate the claimant for loss or damage suffered and is intended to punish the defendant. The enforceability of any judgment in the United Kingdom will depend on the particular facts of the case as well as the laws and treaties in effect at the time. The United States and the United Kingdom do not currently have a treaty providing for recognition and enforcement of judgments (other than arbitration awards) in civil and commercial matters. As a result of the above, public holders of our Class A ordinary sharesshareholders may have more difficulty in protecting their interest through actions against our management, directors or majorother shareholders than they would as shareholders of a U.S. public company.

We are incorporated under English law. The rights of holders of our Class A ordinary sharesshareholders are governed by English law, including the provisions of the Companies Act 2006 (the “U.K. Companies Act”), and by our Articles of Association. These rights differ in certain respects from the rights of shareholders in typical U.S. corporations and these differences may make our Class A ordinary shares less attractive to investors.corporations.

The U.K. City Code on Takeovers and Mergers (the “Takeover Code”) applies, among other things, to an offer for a public company whose registered office is in the United Kingdom (or the Channel Islands or the Isle of Man) and whose securities are not admitted to trading on a regulated market in the United Kingdom (or the Channel Islands or the Isle of Man) if the company is considered by the Panel on Takeovers and Mergers (the “Takeover Panel”) to have its place of central management and control in the United Kingdom (or the Channel Islands or the Isle of Man). This is known as the “residency test.” The test for central management and control under the Takeover Code is different from that used by the U.K. tax authorities. Under the Takeover Code, the Takeover Panel will determine whether we have our place of central management and control in the United Kingdom by looking at various factors, including the structure of our board of directors, the functions of the directors and where they are resident.

IfGiven that our central management and control is situated outside the United Kingdom (or the Channel Islands or the Isle of Man), we do not anticipate that we will be subject to the Takeover Code. However, if at the time of a takeover offer, the Takeover Panel determines that we have our place of central management and control in the United Kingdom (or the Channel Islands or the Isle of Man), we would be subject to a number of rules and restrictions, including but not limited to the following: (i) our ability to enter into deal protection arrangements with a bidder would be extremely limited; (ii) we might not, without the approval of our shareholders, be able to perform certain actions that could have the effect of frustrating an offer, such as issuing shares or carrying out acquisitions or disposals; and (iii) we would be obliged to provide equality of information to all bona fide competing bidders.

Under English law, and whether or not we are subject to the Takeover Code, an offeror for us that has acquired (i) 90% in value of; and (ii) 90% of the voting rights carried by the shares to which the offer relates may exercise statutory squeeze-out rights to compulsorily acquire the shares of the non-assenting minority. However, if an offer for us is conducted by way of a scheme of arrangement the threshold for the offeror obtaining 100% of Company shares comprises two components (i) approval by a majority in number of each class of Company shareholders present and voting at the shareholder meeting; and (ii) approval of Company shareholders representing 75% or more in value of each class of Company shareholders present and voting at that meeting.

We are a public limited company incorporated under the laws of England and Wales. English law provides that a board of directors may only allot shares (or rights to subscribe for or convert into shares) with the prior authorization of shareholders, such authorization stating the aggregate nominal amount of shares that it covers and valid for a maximum period of five years, each as specified in the articles of association or relevant shareholder resolution. We have obtained authority from our shareholders to allot additional shares for a period expiring on May 31, 2025, which authorization will need to be renewed upon expiration (i.e., at least every five years) but may be sought more frequently for additional five-year terms (or any shorter period).

English law also generally provides shareholders with preemptive rights when new shares are issued for cash. However, it is possible for the articles of association, or for shareholders to pass a special resolution at a general meeting, being a resolution passed by at least 75% of the votes cast, to disapply preemptive rights. Such a disapplication of preemptive rights may be for a maximum period of up to five years from the date of adoption of the articles of association, if the disapplication is contained in the articles of association, or from the date of the shareholder special resolution, if the disapplication is by shareholder special resolution. In either case, this disapplication would need to be renewed by our shareholders upon its expiration (i.e., at least every five years). We have obtained authority from our shareholders to disapply preemptive rights for a period expiring on May 31, 2025, which disapplication will need to be renewed upon expiration (i.e., at least every five years) to remain effective, but may be sought more frequently for additional five-year terms (or any shorter period).

English law also generally prohibits a public companyus from repurchasing its ownour shares by way of “off market purchases” without the prior approval of shareholders by ordinary resolution being a resolution passed by a simple(i.e., majority of votes cast by our shareholders), and other formalities. Such approval may be for a maximum period of up to five years.years but may be sought more frequently. English law prohibits us from conducting “on market purchases” as our shares are listed on the NASDAQ and will not be traded on a recognized investment exchange in the United Kingdom.

The facilities of The Depository Trust Company (“DTC”) are a widely-used mechanism that allow for rapid electronic transfers of securities between the participants in the DTC system, which include many large banks and brokerage firms. While our Class A ordinary shares are eligible for deposit and clearing within the DTC system, and DTC has agreed to accept our Class A ordinary shares for deposit and clearing within its facilities in certain specified circumstances, DTC will generally have discretion to cease to act as a depository and clearing agency for theour Class A ordinary shares, including to the extent that any changes in U.K. law (including changes as a result of the U.K.’s withdrawal from the EU, which could affectchange the stamp duty or stamp duty reserve tax (“SDRT”) position) change the stamp duty or SDRT position in relation to the Class A ordinary shares. If DTC determined at any time that the Class A ordinary shares were not eligible for continued deposit and clearance within its facilities, then we believe theour Class A ordinary shares wouldmay not be eligible for continued listing on a U.S. securities exchangethe NASDAQ and trading in the Class A ordinary shares would be disrupted. While we would pursue alternative arrangements to preserve our listing and maintain trading, any such disruption could adversely affect the market price of our Class A ordinary shares.shares and our access to the capital markets.

As a public entity,company, we are subject to the reporting requirements of the U.S. Securities Exchange Act, of 1934, as amended (“U.S. Exchange Act”), the requirements of the U.S. Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (“U.S. Sarbanes-Oxley Act”), and the requirements of the U.K. Companies Act and, if applicable, the Takeover Code. The requirements of these rules and regulations increase our legal and financial compliance costs, make some activities more difficult, time-consuming or costly and increase demand on our systems and resources.

We are obligated to file with the SEC annual and quarterly information and other reports that are specified in the Exchange Act, and therefore will need to have the ability to prepare financial statements that are compliant with all SEC reporting requirements on a timely basis. In addition, we are subject to other reporting and corporate governance requirements, including certain requirements of Nasdaq and certain provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and the regulations promulgated thereunder, which will impose significant compliance obligations upon us. The

We are required to comply with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which requires among other things, that we maintain effective disclosure controls and procedures and internal controls for financial reporting. In order to maintain and, if required, improve our disclosure controls and procedures andmanagement assessments of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting and disclosure controls and procedures. If we are unable to meet this standard, significant resourcesmaintain effective internal control over financial reporting or disclosure controls and management oversight mayprocedures, our ability to record, process and report financial information accurately and to prepare financial statements within required time periods could be required,adversely affected, which could subject us to regulatory consequences, including sanctions by the SEC, negatively affect investor confidence in our financial statements, restrict access to capital markets and management’s attention may be diverted from other business concerns.adversely impact the market price of our Class A ordinary shares.

Our compliance with the requirements under the U.S. Exchange Act, the U.S. Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the U.K. Companies Act and, if applicable, the Takeover Code and the rules and regulations thereunder increases our legal and financial compliance costs and makes some activities more time consuming and costly. These rules and regulations have made it more difficult and more expensive for us to obtain directors’ and officers’ liability insurance, and we may in the future be required to accept reduced policy limits and coverage or incur substantially higher costs to obtain the same or similar coverage. As a result, it may be more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified individuals to serve on our board of directors or as executive officers. We may not be able to predict or estimate accurately the amount of additional costs we may incur or the timing of such costs.

There have been significant changes both made and proposed to international tax laws that increase the complexity, burden and cost of tax compliance for all multinational groups.companies. We expect to continue to monitor these and other developments in international tax law.

Our subsidiaries expect to receive revenue from both U.S. and non-U.S. sources. We expect that our subsidiaries generally will be eligible for benefits under the applicable income tax treaties between Ireland and the jurisdictions where income is sourced. However, no assurances can be provided in this regard, and it is possible that a taxing authority could successfully assert that any of our subsidiaries does not qualify for treaty benefits as a result of its failure to satisfy the applicable requirements to be eligible to claim treaty benefits. If a taxing authority were to challenge our position regarding the application of an applicable income tax treaty, we could become subject to increased withholding taxes, and such taxes could be significant.

Specifically, with respect to certain U.S.-source income, we expect that our subsidiaries will be eligible for benefits under the U.S.-Ireland income tax treaty (the “Treaty”), and, under that Treaty, will not be subject to any U.S. withholding taxes on such U.S.-source payments. Our current treaty position with respect to U.S.-source payments relies in part on U.S. citizens or tax residents (as defined for purposes of the Treaty) owning, directly or indirectly, at least 50% of the beneficial interest in, or at least 50% of the aggregate vote and value of, each of our subsidiaries that earns U.S.-source income. Our treaty position is based on the current U.S. status of the majority of the existing indirect investors in RP Holdings and Old RPI. Subject to certain exceptions, the existing indirect U.S. investors in RP Holdings have the right to exchange their interests for our publicly traded Class A ordinary shares. Such publicly traded Class A ordinary shares could be further transferred on the public market to other persons. Therefore, it is possible that over time U.S. persons will own indirectly in the aggregate less than 50% of the interests in our subsidiaries. We currently expect that our Class A ordinary shares and other existing indirect interests in RP Holdings and Old RPI in the aggregate will continue to be owned in sufficient amount by U.S. citizens or tax residents, and that we will be able to establish such ownership, for purposes of satisfying the 50% ownership requirement under the Treaty. However, there is no assurance that RP Holdings and Old RPI will continue to be owned directly or indirectly by sufficient U.S. citizens or residents or that we will be able to establish to the IRS’ satisfaction such ownership for purposes of satisfying the 50% U.S. ownership requirement under the Treaty. It is possible that if the indirect U.S. ownership in our subsidiaries becomes lower than 50% (or we cannot establish such ownership) we may in the future be able to qualify for another applicable exemption from U.S. withholding under the Treaty, but there can be no assurance in this regard. A substantial portion of our revenue is, and is expected to continue to be, derived from U.S.-source royalties.U.S.-sourced income, such as royalties, interest or “other income” for Treaty purposes. Therefore, if our subsidiaries failed to qualify for an exemption from U.S. withholding tax under the Treaty (by satisfying either the 50% U.S. ownership requirement or an alternative Treaty exemption) and such royaltiestypes of income were subject to a 30% U.S. withholding tax, our financial position, and profitability and the value of your investment in our Class A ordinary sharescash flows could be materially and adversely affected.

Furthermore, on August 25, 2016, the Irish Department of Finance announced that, in the context of the publication by the United States Treasury Department of a revised U.S. Model Income Tax Convention in February 2016, discussions have begun with the United States Treasury on updating certain elements of the Treaty. It is at this time not clear what elements of the Treaty may be updated, or when any such updates would go into effect. However, certain elements of the revised U.S. Model Income Tax Convention could, if included in an update to the Treaty, result in our subsidiaries being unable to qualify for the benefits of the Treaty or eliminate or reduce the benefits of the Treaty that otherwise would have been available to us. If our subsidiaries are unable to qualify for the benefits of the Treaty, or if any benefits of the Treaty that otherwise would have been available to us are eliminated or reduced, then all or a portion of our income may become subject to increased withholding taxes, and such taxes could be very significant and materially and adversely affect our financial position, profitability and cash flows.

In general, if a foreign corporation, such as Royalty Pharma plc, is considered to be engaged in a U.S. trade or business, such corporation’s share of any income that is effectively connected with such U.S. trade or business will be subject to regular U.S. federal income taxation (currently imposed at a maximum rate of 21%) on a net basis and, potentially, an additional 30% U.S. “branch profits” tax on distributions attributable to income that is effectively connected with such U.S. trade or business. In addition, it is possible that such corporation could be subject to taxation on a net basis by state or local jurisdictions within the United States. We intend to conduct our activities, through our subsidiaries, such that no income realized by us will be effectively connected with the conduct of a U.S. trade or business or otherwise subject to regular U.S. federal income taxation on a net basis. If we are able to conduct our activities in this way, income or gains realized by us will not be subject to U.S. net federal income taxation. However, no assurance can be provided in this regard. The proper characterization of our income and gains for U.S. tax purposes is not certain, and it is possible that all or a portion of our income and gains could be characterized as income that is “effectively connected” with the conduct of a U.S. trade or business. If our income and gains were characterized as effectively connected with a U.S. trade or business, we would be subject to significant U.S. taxes plus interest and possible penalties, and our financial position, cash flows and profitability could be materially and adversely affected.

Under current U.K. tax law, a company that is incorporated in the U.K. is regarded as resident for tax purposes in the U.K. unless (i) it is concurrently treated as resident for tax purposes in another jurisdiction (applying the rules of that other jurisdiction for determining tax residency) that has a double tax treaty with the U.K. and (ii) there is a residency tie-breaker provision in that tax treaty which allocates tax residence to that other jurisdiction.

Based upon our anticipated management and organizational structure, we believe that we and RP Holdings should be regarded as tax resident solely in the U.K. However, because this analysis is highly factual and may depend on future changes in our management and organizational structure, as well as future changes in the tax residency laws of other jurisdictions where we operate, there can be no assurance regarding the determination of our tax residence in the future.

As U.K. tax resident companies, we and RP Holdings will be subject to U.K. corporation tax on our worldwide taxable profits and gains. Should we (or RP Holdings) be treated as resident in a jurisdiction other than the U.K., we (or RP Holdings, as applicable) could be subject to taxation in that jurisdiction and may be required to comply with a number of material and formal tax obligations, including withholding tax and/or reporting obligations provided under the relevant tax law, which could result in additional costs and expenses.

As U.K. tax resident companies, we and RP Holdings will be subject to the U.K.’s “controlled foreign companies” rules (the “U.K. CFC Rules”). The U.K. CFC Rules, broadly, can impose a charge to U.K. tax on U.K. tax resident companies that have, alone or together with certain other persons, interests in a non-U.K. tax resident company (the “Controlled Foreign Company”) which is controlled by a U.K. person or persons. The charge under the U.K. CFC Rules applies by reference to certain types of chargeable profit arising to the Controlled Foreign Company, whether or not that profit is distributed, subject to specific exemptions. The types of profits of a Controlled Foreign Company that can potentially be subject to a U.K. corporation tax charge under the U.K. CFC Rules include business profits of the Controlled Foreign Company that are attributable to assets or risks that are managed by activities in the U.K., or certain finance profits of the Controlled Foreign Company that arise from capital or other assets contributed, directly or indirectly, to the Controlled Foreign Company from a connected U.K. tax resident company.

U.K. tax resident companies are subject to U.K. corporation tax on receipt of dividends or other income distributions in respect of shares held by them, unless those dividends or other distributions fall within an exempt class. We believe that dividends received by us from RP Holdings, and dividends received by RP Holdings from RPI 2019 ICAV, should fall within such an exempt class and therefore should not be subject to U.K. corporation tax. However, a number of conditions must be met in order for such dividends to qualify for this tax exemption, including (in respect of dividends paid by RPI 2019 ICAV, which areis tax resident in Ireland) conditions relating to the application of Irish tax law. As such, it cannot be guaranteed that these conditions for the U.K. tax exemption in respect of distributions will continue at all times to be satisfied. If distributions received by us or by RP Holdings were not to fall within an exempt class, such distributions would likely be subject to U.K. corporation tax at the then prevailing corporation tax rate.

Our financial statements are prepared in accordance with U.S. GAAP, which are periodically revised, interpreted and/or expanded. From time to time, we are required to adopt new or revised accounting standards issued by recognized authoritative bodies. It is possible that future accounting standards we are required to adopt may require changes to the current accounting treatment that we apply to our consolidated financial statements and may require us to make significant changes to our systems. Such changes could adversely affect our financial condition andor results of operations.

The outbreak of COVID-19 and its variants has severely impacted global economic activity and caused significant volatility and negative pressure in financial markets. The global impact of the outbreak has been rapidly evolvingCOVID-19 and many countries, including the United States, have reacted by institutingother future health outbreaks and pandemics could lead to quarantines, mandating business and school closures and restricting travel. Many experts predict that the outbreak willtravel, or trigger a period of global economic slowdownslowdowns or a global recession.recessions. COVID-19 or another pandemic could have material and adverse effects onadversely affect us due to, among other factors:

We may be subject to a wide variety of legal claims and proceedings. Regardless of their merit, these claims can require significant time and expense to investigate and defend. Since litigation is inherently uncertain, there is no guarantee that we will be successful in defending ourselves against such claims or proceedings, or that our assessment of the materiality of these matters, including any reserves taken in connection therewith, will be consistent with the ultimate outcome of such matters. The resolution of, or increase in the reserves taken in connection with, one or more of these matters could adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations.

Our industry leading royalty portfolio and capital-efficient business model drives our compounding growth. We have a focused strategy of actively identifying and tracking the development and commercialization of important new therapies, which allows us to move quickly to make acquisitions when opportunities arise. With a deep and experienced team of investment professionals, an exhaustive due diligence process and a focus on high-quality therapies that address significant unmet patient need, we sustain attractive returns above our cost of capital, which in turn propels our compounding growth.