UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, DC 20549

SCHEDULE 14A

(RULE14a-101)

INFORMATION REQUIRED IN PROXY STATEMENT

SCHEDULE 14A INFORMATION

Proxy Statement Pursuant to Section 14(a) of the

Securities Exchange Act of 1934

Filed by the Registrant  x☒

Filed by a Party other than the Registrant  ¨☐

Check the appropriate box:

KBS REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUST III, INC.

(Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)

Payment of Filing Fee (Check the appropriate box):

¨☐     Check box if any part of the fee is offset as provided by Exchange ActRule 0-11(a)(2) and identify the filing for which the offsetting fee was paid previously. Identify the previous filing by registration statement number, or the Form or Schedule and the date of its filing.

800 Newport Center Drive, Suite 700

Newport Beach, California 92660

Proxy Statement and

Notice of 2016 Annual Meeting of Stockholders

To Be Held JulyApril 7, 20162020

SOLICITATION OF PROXIES BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Dear Stockholder:

On Thursday, JulyTuesday, April 7, 2016,2020, we will hold our 2016 annual meeting of stockholders at the offices of KBS, 800 Newport Center Drive, First Floor, Suite 140 Conference Center, Newport Beach, California 92660. The annual meeting will begin at 11:10:00 a.m. Pacific daylight time. Directions to

At the annual meeting, canwe will seek your approval of, among other proposals, two proposals related to our pursuit of conversion to anon-listed perpetual-life “NAV REIT.” We currently believe the best opportunity for us to achieve our objectives to provide attractive and stable cash distributions to our stockholders and provide additional liquidity for our stockholders is to pursue a strategy as anon-listed, perpetual-life “NAV REIT” that offers and sells new shares of our common stock continuously through a number of distribution channels in ongoing public offerings, and seeks to provide increased liquidity to current and future stockholders through an expansion of our current share redemption program and/or periodic self-tender offers. As more thoroughly described in the accompanying proxy statement, if we pursue conversion to an NAV REIT, we would implement a revised advisory fee structure, including a revised management fee and incentive fee structure that put a greater emphasis on our performance. We believe these changes would help further align the interests of our advisor (and its affiliates) and our stockholders in growing our company and performing well. In addition to the revised management fee and incentive fee structure, the new fee structure would eliminate the current transaction-based fees (i.e., the acquisition fee and disposition fee) payable to our advisor.

We believe we are more likely to succeed with a perpetual-life NAV REIT strategy if we revise our charter to remove Section 5.11, which requires that we seek stockholder approval of our liquidation if our shares of common stock are not listed on a national securities exchange by September 30, 2020, unless a majority of our independent directors determines that liquidation is not then in the best interest of our stockholders. We believe that the continued inclusion of Section 5.11 in our charter may create confusion if we are pursuing a perpetual-life NAV REIT strategy and we are proposing that stockholders approve this amendment to our charter.

With respect to the incentive fee structure currently in effect with our advisor, the triggering events for payment of the incentive fee are generally expected to occur, if ever, upon a listing of our shares of stock on a national securities exchange or a significant distribution of cash in connection with a sale of all or a substantial amount of our assets. These triggering events are inconsistent with a perpetual-life NAV REIT. With respect to our historical performance period from inception through the launch of our first public offering as a perpetual-life NAV REIT, we believe it is appropriate to accelerate the payment of the historical incentive fee in the form of restricted shares of our common stock so that it does not depend on the currently-existing triggering events. The acceleration of the payment of the historical incentive compensation to our advisor will not affect the net asset value of our shares of common stock because our net asset value calculation has always included the potential liability related to the incentive fee. Because the acceleration of this fee is not something we intended to do when we launched our initial public offering, we believe it is appropriate to ask the stockholders for their approval of this acceleration. The historical incentive fee would be obtained by calling (949) 417-6500.paid in restricted shares of our common stock and would be subject to certain restrictions as described further in the proxy statement.

We are holding the 2016 annual meeting of stockholders for the following purposes:

The Board of Directors recommends a vote FOR each nominee.

The Board of Directors recommends a vote FOR the ratification of the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm for the year ending December 31, 2016.2019.

The Board of Directors recommends a vote FOR this proposal.

The Board of Directors recommends a vote FOR this proposal.

The Board of Directors recommends a vote FOR this proposal.

The board of directors has selected AprilJanuary 8, 20162020 as the record date for determining stockholders entitled to vote at the annual meeting.

We expect to mail a Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials containing instructions on how to access our proxy materials, including ourThe proxy statement, proxy card and 2015our 2018 annual report to stockholders via the Internet, howare being mailed to vote online and how to request a paper copy of our proxy materials, to certain stockholdersyou on or about April 22, 2016.

We expect to mail a paper copy of our proxy materials to our other stockholders on or about April 22, 2016.January 17, 2020.

Whether or not you plan to attend the annual meeting and vote in person, we urgeencourage you to have your vote recorded as early as possible. Stockholders have the following three options for submitting their votes by proxy: (1) via the Internet; (2) by telephone; or (3) if you receive a paper copy of our proxy materials, by mail, using the paperenclosed proxy card.

YOUR VOTE IS VERY IMPORTANT! Your immediate response will help avoid potential delays and may save us significant additional expenses associated with soliciting stockholder votes.

By Order of the Board of Directors

Newport Beach, California

April 22, 2016January 9, 2020

ii

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT THE ANNUAL MEETING AND VOTING

With respect to any other proposals to be voted upon, the appointed proxies will vote in accordance with the recommendation of the board of directors or, in the absence of such a recommendation, in their discretion. It is important for you to submit your proxy via the Internet or by telephone or return your enclosed proxy card to us (if you are in receipt of one) as soon as possible, whether or not you plan on attending the annual meeting.

1

Note that our advisor, KBS Capital Advisors, which owned 20,857 shares of our common stock as of the record date, has agreed to abstain from voting any shares it owns in any vote regarding: (i) the removal of our advisor, a director or any of their affiliates or (ii) any transaction between us and our advisor, a director or any of their affiliates. As such, KBS Capital Advisors will not vote on Proposals 3 or 4 in this proxy statement due to the interests of KBS Capital Advisors and its principals in the Proposed Net Asset Value REIT Conversion, as defined and described in “Proposed NAV REIT Conversion.”

1

If a quorum is not present at the July 7, 2016annual meeting, the chairman of the meeting may adjourn the annual meeting to another date, time or place, not later than 120 days after the original record date of AprilJanuary 8, 2016.2020. Notice need not be given of the new date, time or place if announced at the annual meeting before an adjournment is taken.

2

3

Although we can offer no assurances, we expect that the Singapore Transaction will improve our chances to successfully raise capital as an NAV REIT. The Singapore Transaction has made additional capital available to us that we have and intend to continue to use to offer additional liquidity to our stockholders through our share redemption program and/or tender offers or through special distributions to stockholders after our stockholders have had an opportunity to vote on Proposals 3 and 4 at the annual meeting or any adjournment or postponement thereof. We believe we will have greater success as an NAV REIT if we are able to eliminate anypent-up demand for redemptions prior to the conversion.

4

This section further states that if a majority of the conflicts committee does determine that liquidation is not then in the best interests of our stockholders, the conflicts committee must revisit the issue of liquidation at least annually. The conflicts committee is a committee of our board of directors consisting solely of all of our independent directors, that is, all of our directors who are not affiliated with KBS Capital Advisors, our external advisor.

As described further herein, we believe that the continued inclusion of Section 5.11 in our charter may create confusion for existing and new investors if we are pursuing a perpetual-life company strategy. We believe that its continued inclusion may create doubts as to our long-term commitment to the perpetual-life strategy. In addition, complying with Section 5.11 is likely to create an annual burden on the time and focus of our board of directors and conflicts committee and may create significant additional expenses, in particular if the board of directors or conflicts committee solicits input from advisors regarding the charter determination required by Section 5.11. For these reasons, our board of directors believes we are more likely to succeed with a perpetual-life strategy if we remove Section 5.11 from the charter and has proposed its removal.In order to remove Section 5.11 from the charter, we need the approval of our stockholders. This proposal will not take effect unless the proposal to approve the acceleration of the payment of incentive compensation to our advisor is also approved.

We expect this acceleration payment would be made in the form of restricted shares of our common stock (“Restricted Shares”) with terms that are still under consideration, but are currently expected to be structured as follows:

5

Under our charter, we are required to limit our total operating expenses to the greater of 2% of our average invested assets or 25% of our net income for the four most recently completed fiscal quarters, as these terms are defined in our charter, unless the conflicts committee has determined that such excess expenses were justified based on unusual andnon-recurring factors. Because the award of Restricted Shares would be deemed an operating expense under our charter, such award may cause us to exceed the charter limitation on total operating expenses. We expect that any agreement to award Restricted Shares to our advisor would provide that (i) the conflicts committee has determined that the expense to us as a result of such award is justified based on unusual andnon-recurring factors and (ii) the advisor will not be required to reimburse us any expenses under this charter provision to the extent that we exceed the limit on total operating expenses as a result of the expense incurred in connection with the award of Restricted Shares. Though the award of Restricted Shares is an expense under our charter and generally accepted accounting principles, the award would not reduce our cash flow from operations.

6

7

For those stockholders with Internet access, we encourage you to vote by proxy via the Internet, since it is quick, convenient and provides a cost savings to us. When you vote by proxy via the Internet or by telephone prior to the annual meeting date, your vote is recorded immediately and there is no risk that postal delays will cause your vote to arrive late and, therefore, not be counted. For further instructions on voting, see the Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials or the paperenclosed proxy card (if you are in receipt of one).card.

If you elect to attend the annual meeting, you can submit your vote in person as described above under “Who is entitled to vote at the annual meeting?”, and any previous votes that you submitted, whether by Internet, telephone or mail, will be superseded.

Only the most recent proxy vote will be counted and all others will be discarded regardless of the method of voting. If a broker or other nominee holds your stock on your behalf, you must contact your broker, bank or other nominee to change your vote.

8

3

9

Brokers are precluded from exercising their voting discretion with respect to the approval ofnon-routine matters, such as the proposal to amend our charter and, as a result, absent specific instructions from the beneficial owner of such shares, brokers will not vote those shares. Brokernon-votes will have the effect of a vote AGAINST the election of each nominee for director, AGAINST the proposal to amend our charter and AGAINST the proposal to accelerate the payment of incentive compensation to KBS Capital Advisors but will have no effect on the adjournment proposal. Because brokers have discretionary authority to vote for the ratification of the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm, in the event they do not receive voting instructions from the beneficial owner of the shares, there will not be any brokernon-votes with respect to that proposal.

Your broker will send you information to instruct it on how to vote on your behalf. If you do not receive a voting instruction card from your broker, please contact your broker promptly to obtain a voting instruction card. Your vote is important to the success of the proposals. We encourage all of our stockholders whose shares are held by a broker to provide their brokers with instructions on how to vote.

Our directors and employees of our advisor or its affiliates will not be paid any additional compensation for soliciting proxies. We will pay all of the costs of soliciting these proxies, including the cost of Broadridge’s services. We anticipate that the cost for Broadridge’s solicitation services we will not exceed $10,000.pay approximately $73,500, plus

10

reimbursement of Broadridge’sout-of-pocket expenses. We will also reimburse brokerage houses and other custodians, nominees and fiduciaries for their reasonableout-of-pocket expenses for forwarding proxy and solicitation materials to our stockholders.

4

Broadridge Financial Solutions, Inc.

855-643-7458

11

12

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

Certain statements contained in this proxy statement other than historical facts may be considered forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). We intend for all such forward-looking statements to be covered by the applicable safe harbor provisions for forward-looking statements contained in those acts. Such statements include, in particular, statements about our plans, strategies, and prospects and are subject to certain risks and uncertainties, including known and unknown risks, which could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected or anticipated. Therefore, such statements are not intended to be a guarantee of our performance in future periods. Such forward-looking statements can generally be identified by our use of forward-looking terminology such as “may,” “will,” “expect,” “intend,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” “believe,” “continue,” or other similar words. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date they are made. We make no representations or warranties (expressed or implied) about the accuracy of any such forward-looking statements contained in this proxy statement, and we do not intend to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events, or otherwise, unless required by law.

Any such forward-looking statements are subject to risks, uncertainties, and other factors and are based on a number of assumptions involving judgments with respect to, among other things, future economic, competitive, and market conditions, all of which are difficult or impossible to predict accurately. To the extent that our assumptions differ from actual conditions, our ability to accurately anticipate results expressed in such forward-looking statements, including our ability to generate positive cash flows from operations, make distributions to stockholders, maintain the value of our real estate properties and provide liquidity to stockholders, may be significantly hindered. See Part I, Item 1A in our Annual Report on Form10-K filed with the SEC on March 14, 2019 and Part II, Item 1A in our Quarterly Reports on Form10-Q filed with the SEC on August 9, 2019 and November 13, 2019 for a discussion of some of the risks and uncertainties, although not all risks and uncertainties, that could cause actual results to differ materially from those presented in our forward-looking statements. See “Proposed NAV REIT Conversion” for risks related to our Proposed NAV REIT Conversion.

13

PROPOSED NAV REIT CONVERSION

Background

Our board of directors and management team regularly monitor the real estate and equity markets in order to find the best opportunities possible to continue to provide attractive and stable cash distributions to our stockholders and provide additional liquidity for our stockholders. We currently believe the best opportunity for us to achieve these objectives is to pursue a strategy as anon-listed, perpetual-life company that (a) calculates the net asset value or “NAV” per share on a regular basis that is more frequent that annually (i.e., daily, monthly or quarterly), (b) offers and sells new shares of our common stock continuously through a number of distribution channels in ongoing public offerings, and (c) seeks to provide increased liquidity to current and future stockholders through an expansion of our current share redemption program and/or periodic self-tender offers. We refer to a REIT that operates in this manner as an “NAV REIT” and we refer to our proposed conversion to this mode of operation as the “Proposed NAV REIT Conversion.”As an NAV REIT, we believe we will be able to raise additional equity capital to diversify and grow our portfolio for the benefit of our stockholders, while at the same time providing increased liquidity to our stockholders in excess of what is currently offered. We have seen significant appreciation in the portfolio to date and we believe there are still many opportunities in the marketplace to achieve strong stockholder returns through a combination of providing strong cash distributions and timing asset sales to maximize value.

Stockholders should carefully read this section of the proxy statement when deciding how to vote on Proposals 3 and 4.If our stockholders vote against those proposals, our board of directors and our advisor will reconsider all aspects of the Proposed NAV REIT Conversion, because we believe its success depends greatly on these proposals, and a decision might be made not to proceed with the NAV REIT Conversion. On the other hand, if our stockholders approve Proposals 3 and 4, we intend to implement the Proposed NAV REIT Conversion substantially as described herein. The Singapore Transaction has made additional capital available to us that we have and intend to continue to use to offer additional liquidity to our stockholders through our share redemption program and/or tender offers or through special distributions to stockholders after our stockholders have had an opportunity to vote on Proposals 3 and 4 at the annual meeting or any adjournment or postponement thereof. We believe we will have greater success as an NAV REIT if we are able to eliminate anypent-up demand for redemptions prior to the conversion. Before voting on Proposals 3 and 4, stockholders should carefully review the description of the Proposed NAV REIT Conversion that is provided below.

Terms of Proposed NAV REIT Conversion

We summarize below our current intentions as to the principal terms of the Proposed NAV REIT Conversion. While we have described in this proxy statement our current intentions with respect to the Proposed NAV REIT Conversion, our board of directors may change any aspect of it without stockholder approval, except the specific matters submitted for stockholder approval in Proposals 3 and 4. Such changes may be deemed appropriate for a variety of reasons, including but not limited to regulatory, capital-raising or business considerations, all of which can change over time. Furthermore, even if Proposals 3 and 4 are approved, our board of directors may delay the implementation of the Proposed NAV REIT Conversion until it deems it appropriate to do so and may decide, in its sole discretion, not to go forward at all with the Proposed NAV REIT Conversion.

More Frequent NAV Calculations

We currently calculate the NAV of our shares once each calendar year. As an NAV REIT, we currently intend to calculate our NAV once per month, though we could decide to calculate it daily or quarterly. We believe more frequent NAV calculations will improve our ability to offer and repurchase our shares at the most representative prices, and also improvevisibility and transparency into our performance.

Revised Share Redemption Program

As an NAV REIT, we believe we can (a) offer an expanded share redemption program, (b) have additional capital to fund redemptions, and (c) provide more frequent NAV per share calculations, which will provide stockholders with more information when making liquidity decisions and also allow more frequent and

14

representative pricing under our share redemption program. As an NAV REIT, we intend to revise our share redemption program to allow us to make monthly redemptions with an aggregate value of up to 5% of our NAV per calendar quarter. This would be a significant increase in maximum capacity compared to our current share redemption program, which limits redemptions of shares during any calendar year to no more than 5% of the weighted average number of shares outstanding during the prior calendar year. Our current share redemption program is also limited by funding restrictions that prevent us from redeeming the maximum number of shares permitted under the program, unless increased by our board of directors. While we are soliciting stockholders with respect to Proposals 3 and 4, the board of directors has determined to suspend ordinary redemptions under our share redemption program. Ordinary redemptions are all redemptions that do not qualify for the special provisions for redemptions sought in connection with a stockholder’s death, “Qualifying Disability” or “Determination of Incompetence” (each as defined in the share redemption program). Because the actual level of redemptions under our share redemption program as an NAV REIT would also depend on our ability to fund redemptions and our other capital needs, we may not be able to make redemptions up to the maximum capacity permitted by the program. However, our intention is to increase our stockholders’ access to liquidity through an expansion of our current share redemption program and/or through self-tender offers. As an NAV REIT, we expect that redemptions would be made on a monthly basis at a price generally equal to the prior month’s NAV per share for the class of stock (which will be our most recently disclosed NAV per share at such time) with two exceptions: (i) shares that have not been outstanding for at least one year will be redeemed at 97.0% of the prior month’s NAV per share for the class of stock (an “Early Redemption Deduction”) and (ii) all shares that are redeemed during the first year after our conversion to an NAV REIT will be redeemed at 97.0% of the prior month’s NAV per share for the class of stock (“Transition Deduction”). The Early Redemption Deduction and Transition Deduction may only be waived in the case of redemption requests arising from the death or qualified disability of the holder.

Distributions and Dividend Reinvestment Plan

Commencing in January 2019, our distributions were based on monthly record and payment dates. As an NAV REIT, we expect that we would continue to pay distributions based on monthly record and payment dates. We expect to revise our dividend reinvestment plan so that we would generally sell shares at our prior month’s NAV per share for the class of stock (which will be our most recently disclosed NAV per share at such time), rather than at 95% of the most recent NAV as we do now.

Ongoing Public Offerings Conducted through KBS Capital Markets Group LLC

As an NAV REIT, we expect that we would conduct ongoing primary public offerings of our shares on a continuous basis through our affiliated dealer manager, KBS Capital Markets Group LLC. Such offerings would likely include new classes of common stock, which would allow us to offer different classes of common stock with different combinations of upfront and ongoing commissions and other fees payable to our dealer manager and participating broker-dealers. We believe that having a number of different share classes with different distribution compensation structures will improve our ability to sell shares and raise capital in the current market.

We generally expect that the upfront and ongoing commissions and other fees payable to our dealer manager and participating broker-dealers in connection with these offerings would be borne by the new investors. In addition to upfront and ongoing commissions and other fees borne by new investors, from time to time we may agree to pay certain participating broker-dealers additional primary dealer fees in amounts to be determined by the board of directors. The primary dealer fee would impact all stockholders. We currently estimate that we may sell up to a maximum of $300 million of shares in primary offerings pursuant to a primary dealer fee arrangement, although in the future we may agree to additional primary dealer fee arrangements. We would also incur other offering expenses in connection with these offerings, which expenses would impact all stockholders. These other offering expenses would include, among other items, our legal, accounting, printing, mailing and filing fees, charges of our transfer agent, reimbursement of bona fide due diligence expenses, legal fees of our dealer manager, costs reimbursement for registered representatives of participating broker-dealers to attend educational conferences sponsored by us or our dealer manager, attendance fees for registered persons associated with our dealer manager to attend seminars conducted by participating broker-dealers, and promotional items. They could also include reimbursement to our dealer manager for wholesaling compensation expenses, though we do not currently intend to reimburse our dealer manager for such expenses.

15

Revised Advisory Fee Structure

With respect to our current asset management fee, our advisor has agreed to defer, without interest, our obligation to pay asset management fees for any month in which our modified funds from operations (“MFFO”) for such month, as such term is defined in the practice guideline issued by the IPA in November 2010 and interpreted by us, excluding asset management fees, does not exceed the amount of distributions declared by us for record dates of that month. We remain obligated to pay our advisor an asset management fee in any month in which our MFFO, excluding asset management fees, for such month exceeds the amount of distributions declared for the record dates of that month (such excess amount, an “MFFO Surplus”); however, any amount of such asset management fee in excess of the MFFO Surplus will also be deferred under the advisory agreement. If the MFFO Surplus for any month exceeds the amount of the asset management fee payable for such month, any remaining MFFO Surplus will be applied to pay any asset management fee amounts previously deferred in accordance with the advisory agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, any and all deferred asset management fees that are unpaid will become immediately due and payable at such time as our stockholders have received, together as a collective group, aggregate distributions (including distributions that may constitute a return of capital for federal income tax purposes) sufficient to provide (i) an 8.0% per year cumulative, noncompounded return on such net invested capital (the “Stockholders’ 8% Return”) and (ii) a return of their net invested capital, or the amount calculated by multiplying the total number of shares purchased by stockholders by the issue price, reduced by any amounts to repurchase shares pursuant to our share redemption program. The Stockholders’ 8% Return is not based on the return provided to any individual stockholder. Accordingly, it is not necessary for each of our stockholders to have received any minimum return in order for our advisor to receive deferred asset management fees.

16

As part of the Proposed NAV REIT Conversion, we currently expect to replace the current asset management fee with a fixed management fee equal to 1.25% of our NAV per annum payable monthly. Additionally, to the extent that our operating partnership, KBS Limited Partnership III (the “Operating Partnership”) issues Operating Partnership units to parties other than us, our Operating Partnership will pay our adviser or its affiliate a management fee equal to 1.25% of the NAV of the Operating Partnership attributable to such Operating Partnership units not held by us per annum payable monthly. In calculating the management fee, we intend to use our NAV before giving effect to accruals for the management fee and the performance participation allocation fee (described below), ongoing fees paid to our dealer manager (all or a portion of which will be paid or reallowed to broker-dealers) with respect to new sales of shares (i.e., ongoing class-specific fees), or distributions payable on our outstanding shares or Operating Partnership units.

The impact of this change will depend on a number of factors, including our leverage and the value of our assets compared to the purchase price (both of which will be taken into account with the new fee structure, unlike the old fee structure), and is therefore impossible to predict over the long term, but we do not expect the change to be significant in the near term. By way of example only, if the aggregate NAV of our company for the nine months ended September 30, 2019 were equal to the estimated net asset value of our company as of September 30, 2019, adjusted to give effect to the October 23, 2019 authorization of a special dividend of $0.80 per share on our outstanding shares of common stock to the stockholders of record as of the close of business on November 4, 2019 and a change in the estimated value of the Company’s investment in units of the SREIT, calculated in accordance with the estimated value per share approved by our board of directors on December 4, 2019 and then adjusted to exclude the value of our investment in units of the SREIT of $257.8 million, which is not subject to an asset management fee, this new fixed management fee would have been approximately $1.9 million per month. By comparison, the existing asset management fee incurred by us for the nine months ended September 30, 2019 was approximately $2.2 million per month.

The new management fee will not be subject to the deferrals described above with respect to our current asset management fee. This could result in the advisor or its affiliate receiving management fees sooner than it otherwise would under our current asset management fee arrangement, depending on our MFFO relative to our distributions.

The new management fee may be paid, at our advisor’s (or its affiliate’s) election, in cash, shares of our common stock or units of our Operating Partnership. To the extent that our advisor (or its affiliate) elects to receive any portion of the management fee in shares of common stock or units of our Operating Partnership, we may repurchase such shares or units of our Operating Partnership from our advisor or its affiliate at a later date. Shares of our common stock and units of our Operating Partnership obtained by our advisor or its affiliate will not be subject to the repurchase limits of our share redemption program or any Early Redemption Deduction. The Operating Partnership will repurchase any such Operating Partnership units for cash unless our board of directors determines that any such repurchase for cash would be prohibited by applicable law or our charter, in which case such Operating Partnership units will be repurchased for shares of our common stock with an equivalent aggregate NAV. Our advisor or its affiliates will have registration rights with respect to shares of our common stock.

17

We intend to eliminate this fee as part of the Proposed NAV REIT Conversion.

We have also entered into a fee reimbursement agreement with our dealer manager pursuant to which we agreed to reimburse our dealer manager for certain fees and expenses it incurs for administering our participation in the Depository Trust Clearing Corporation (“DTCC”) Alternative Investment Product Platform with respect to certain accounts of our investors serviced through the platform.

We do not expect any change to the foregoing in connection with the Proposed NAV REIT Conversion.

Revised Incentive Fee

Description of Current Incentive Fee

Pursuant to our advisory agreement currently in effect with the advisor, the advisor is due a subordinated participation in our net cash flows (the “Subordinated Participation in Net Cash Flows”) upon meeting certain performance goals. After our stockholders have received, together as a collective group, aggregate distributions (including distributions that may constitute a return of capital for federal income tax purposes) sufficient to provide (i) a return of their net invested capital, or the amount calculated by multiplying the total number of shares purchased by stockholders by the issue price, reduced by any amounts to repurchase shares pursuant to our share redemption program, and (ii) an 8.0% per year cumulative, noncompounded return on such net invested capital, the advisor is entitled to receive 15.0% of our net cash flows, whether from continuing operations, net sale proceeds or otherwise. Net sales proceeds means the net cash proceeds realized by us after deduction of all expenses incurred in connection with a sale, including disposition fees paid to the advisor. The 8.0% per year cumulative, noncompounded return on net invested capital is calculated on a daily basis. In making this calculation, the net invested capital is reduced to the extent distributions in excess of a cumulative, noncompounded, annual return of 8.0% are paid (from whatever source), except to the extent such distributions would be required to supplement prior distributions paid in order to achieve a cumulative, noncompounded, annual return of 8.0% (invested capital is only reduced as described in this sentence; it is not reduced simply because a distribution constitutes a return of capital for federal income tax purposes). The 8.0% per year cumulative, noncompounded return is not based on the return provided to any individual stockholder. Accordingly, it is not necessary for each of our stockholders to have received any minimum return in order for our advisor to participate in our net cash flows. In fact, if the advisor is entitled to participate in our net cash flows, the returns of our stockholders will differ, and some may be less than an 8.0% per year cumulative, noncompounded return. This fee is payable only if we are not listed on an exchange.

Alternatively, pursuant to our advisory agreement currently in effect with the advisor, the advisor is due a subordinated incentive listing fee (the “Subordinated Participation Listing Fee”) upon a listing of our common stock on a national securities exchange equal to 15.0% of the amount by which (i) the market value of our outstanding stock plus distributions paid by us (including distributions that may constitute a return of capital for federal income tax purposes) prior to listing exceeds (ii) the sum of our stockholders’ net invested capital, or the amount calculated by multiplying the total number of shares purchased by stockholders by the issue price, reduced by any amounts to repurchase shares pursuant to our share redemption program, and the amount of cash flow necessary to generate an 8.0% per year cumulative, noncompounded return on such amount. The 8.0% per year cumulative, noncompounded return on net invested capital is calculated on a daily basis. In making this calculation, the net invested capital is

18

reduced to the extent distributions in excess of a cumulative, noncompounded, annual return of 8.0% are paid (from whatever source), except to the extent such distributions would be required to supplement prior distributions paid in order to achieve a cumulative, noncompounded, annual return of 8.0% (invested capital is only reduced as described in this sentence; it is not reduced simply because a distribution constitutes a return of capital for federal income tax purposes). The 8.0% per year cumulative, noncompounded return is not based on the return provided to any individual stockholder. Accordingly, it is not necessary for each of our stockholders to have received any minimum return in order for our advisor to receive the listing fee. In fact, if our advisor is entitled to the listing fee, the returns of our stockholders will differ, and some may be less than an 8.0% per year cumulative, noncompounded return.

Neither the Subordinated Participation in Net Cash Flows nor the Subordinated Participation Listing Fee are currently payable to our advisor, and there is no guarantee that they will ever be payable. Most likely, we would need to list our shares on a national securities exchange or liquidate substantially all of our assets for one of these fees to be payable, and we would have to have met the requisite threshold for payment of the fee. Solely for purposes of determining the estimated net asset value of our company as of September 30, 2019, adjusted to give effect to the October 23, 2019 authorization of a special dividend of $0.80 per share on our outstanding shares of common stock to the stockholders of record as of the close of business on November 4, 2019 and a change in the estimated value of the Company’s investment in units of the SREIT, calculated in accordance with the estimated value per share approved by our board of directors on December 4, 2019, the advisor calculated the potential liability related to the Subordinated Participation in Net Cash Flows based on a hypothetical liquidation of the assets and liabilities at their estimated fair values, after considering the impact of any potential closing costs and fees related to the disposition of real estate properties. The advisor estimated the fair value of this liability to be $29.8 million or $0.17 per share as of the valuation date, and included the impact of this liability in its calculation of our estimated value per share.

Reasons for Proposing Changes to Incentive Fee Structure

The triggering events for the incentive fee structure currently in effect with our advisor are generally expected to occur, if ever, upon a listing of our shares of stock on a national securities exchange or a significant distribution of cash in connection with a sale of all or a substantial amount of our assets. These triggering events are inconsistent with a perpetual-life NAV REIT that intends to provide liquidity to its stockholders through a share redemption program and/or periodic self-tender offers. Therefore, in order to properly align our advisor’s and its affiliates’ incentive fee compensation structure with our proposed perpetual-life strategy, we intend to revise the incentive fee structure. Commencing with the launch of our first public offering as a perpetual-life NAV REIT, we intend to implement an annual incentive fee formula that would require us to pay our advisor (or its affiliate) an incentive fee for any given year if certain performance thresholds were met for that year. With respect to our historical performance period from inception through the launch of our first public offering as a perpetual-life NAV REIT, we believe it is appropriate to accelerate the payment of the historical incentive fee so that it does not depend on the currently-existing triggering events. Because the acceleration of this fee is not something we intended to do when we launched our initial public offering, we believe it is appropriate to ask the stockholders for their approval of this acceleration.Therefore, in Proposal 4, we are asking our stockholders to approve the acceleration of the payment of incentive compensation to our advisor, upon our conversion to an NAV REIT, on terms substantially consistent with those described below under “—Proposed Acceleration of Payment of Current Incentive Fee.”

Proposed Acceleration of Payment of Current Incentive Fee

We currently intend to accelerate the payment of incentive compensation to the advisor upon our conversion to an NAV REIT by agreeing to pay our advisor, in connection with our conversion to an NAV REIT, an amount equal to the estimated value of the Subordinated Participation in Net Cash Flows based on a hypothetical liquidation of our assets and liabilities at their then-current estimated values used in our NAV calculation at the time of conversion to an NAV REIT, after considering the impact of any potential closing costs and fees related to the disposition of real estate properties. Following this transaction, our obligation to pay the Subordinated Participation in Net Cash Flows and the Subordinated Participation Listing Fee would be eliminated.

19

We expect this acceleration payment would be made in the form of restricted shares of our common stock (“Restricted Shares”) with terms that are still under consideration, but are currently expected to be structured as follows:

Under our charter, we are required to limit our total operating expenses to the greater of 2% of our average invested assets or 25% of our net income for the four most recently completed fiscal quarters, as these terms are defined in our charter, unless the conflicts committee has determined that such excess expenses were justified based on unusual andnon-recurring factors. Because the award of Restricted Shares would be deemed an operating expense under our charter, such award may cause us to exceed the charter limitation on total operating expenses. We expect that any agreement to award Restricted Shares to our advisor would provide that (i) the conflicts committee has determined that the expense to us as a result of such award is justified based on unusual andnon-recurring factors and (ii) the advisor will not be required to reimburse us any expenses under this charter provision to the extent that we exceed the limit on total operating expenses as a result of the expense incurred in connection with the award of Restricted Shares. Though the award of Restricted Shares is an expense under our charter and generally accepted accounting principles, the award would not reduce our cash flow from operations.

In Proposal 4 of this proxy statement, we are asking our stockholders to approve the acceleration of the payment of incentive compensation to our advisor, upon our conversion to an NAV REIT, on terms substantially consistent with the paragraphs above. This proposal will not take effect unless Proposal 3 (the proposed charter

20

amendment) is also approved. Please see “Proposal 4. Acceleration of Incentive Compensation” for more information.

Proposed Incentive Fee Going Forward

In addition, going forward, commencing upon our conversion to an NAV REIT, we currently intend to replace the incentive fees described above with a new annual performance allocation. We expect that the advisor or one of its affiliates (the “Special Limited Partner”) will own a special limited partner interest in the Operating Partnership. So long as the advisory agreement with our advisor or its affiliate has not been terminated (including by means ofnon-renewal), the Special Limited Partner will hold a performance participation interest in the Operating Partnership that will entitle it to receive an allocation from our Operating Partnership equal to 12.5% of the Total Return, subject to a 6% Hurdle Amount and a High Water Mark, with a partialCatch-Up (each term as defined below). Such allocation will be made annually and accrue monthly.

Specifically, the Special Limited Partner will be allocated a performance participation in an amount equal to:

“Total Return” for any period since the end of the prior calendar year shall equal the sum of:

For the avoidance of doubt, the calculation of Total Return will (i) include any appreciation or depreciation in the NAV of units issued during the then-current calendar year but (ii) exclude the proceeds from the initial issuance of such units.

“Hurdle Amount” for any period during a calendar year means that amount that results in a 6% annualized internal rate of return on the NAV of the Operating Partnership units outstanding at the beginning of the then-current calendar year and all Operating Partnership units issued since the beginning of the then-current calendar year, taking into account the timing and amount of all distributions accrued or paid (without duplication) on all such units and all issuances of Operating Partnership units over the period and calculated in accordance with recognized industry practices. The ending NAV of the Operating Partnership units used in calculating the internal rate of return will be calculated before giving effect to any allocation/accrual to the performance participation interest and applicable distribution fee expenses, provided that the calculation of the Hurdle Amount for any period will exclude any Operating Partnership units repurchased during such period, which units will be subject to the performance participation allocation upon repurchase as described below.

Except as described in Loss Carryforward Amount below, any amount by which Total Return falls below the Hurdle Amount will not be carried forward to subsequent periods.

21

“Loss Carryforward Amount” shall initially equal zero and shall cumulatively increase by the absolute value of any negative annual Total Return and decrease by any positive annual Total Return, provided that the Loss Carryforward Amount shall at no time be less than zero and provided further that the calculation of the Loss Carryforward Amount will exclude the Total Return related to any Operating Partnership units repurchased during such year, which units will be subject to the performance participation allocation upon repurchase as described below. The effect of the Loss Carryforward Amount is that the recoupment of past annual Total Return losses will offset the positive annual Total Return for purposes of the calculation of the Special Limited Partner’s performance participation. This is referred to as a “High Water Mark.”

The Special Limited Partner will also be allocated a performance participation with respect to all Operating Partnership units that are repurchased at the end of any month (in connection with redemptions or repurchases of our shares in our share redemption program or otherwise) in an amount calculated as described above with the relevant period being the portion of the year for which such unit was outstanding, and proceeds for any such unit repurchase will be reduced by the amount of any such performance participation.

Distributions on the performance participation interest may be payable in cash or units of our Operating Partnership at the election of the Special Limited Partner. If the Special Limited Partner elects to receive such distributions in Operating Partnership units, the Special Limited Partner may request the Operating Partnership to repurchase such Operating Partnership units from the Special Limited Partner at a later date. Any such repurchase requests will not be subject to the Early Repurchase Deduction but will be subject to the same repurchase limits that exist under our share redemption program.

The Operating Partnership will repurchase any such Operating Partnership units for cash unless our board of directors determines that any such repurchase for cash would be prohibited by applicable law or our charter, in which case such Operating Partnership units will be repurchased for shares of our common stock with an equivalent aggregate NAV.

The NAV of the Operating Partnership calculated on the last trading day of a calendar year shall be the amount against which changes in NAV are measured during the subsequent calendar year. In our first calendar year of operations as an NAV REIT, the performance participation will be prorated for the portion of the calendar year in which we operate as an NAV REIT.

The measurement of the foregoing net assets change is also subject to adjustment by our board of directors to account for any unit dividend, unit split, recapitalization or any other similar change in the Operating Partnership’s capital structure or any distributions made after our conversion to an NAV REIT that the board of directors deems to be a return of capital (if such changes are not already reflected in the Operating Partnership’s net assets).

The Special Limited Partner will not be obligated to return any portion of the performance participation paid based on our subsequent performance.

Changes in our Operating Partnership’s NAV per unit of each class will generally correspond to changes in our NAV per share of the corresponding class of our common stock. Distributions with respect to the performance participation interest are calculated from the Operating Partnership’s Total Return over a calendar year. As a result, the Special Limited Partner may be entitled to receive compensation under the performance participation for a given year even if some of our stockholders who purchased shares during such year experienced a decline in NAV per share. Similarly, stockholders whose shares are repurchased during a given year may have their shares repurchased at a lower NAV per share as a result of an accrual for the estimated performance participation at such time, even if no performance participation allocation for such year is ultimately payable to the Special Limited Partner at the end of such calendar year.

In the event the advisory agreement is terminated, the Special Limited Partner will be allocated any accrued performance participation with respect to all Operating Partnership units as of the date of such termination.

22

Charter Amendment

As part of the Proposed NAV REIT Conversion, we are also proposing the deletion of Section 5.11 of our charter, which we believe is inconsistent with the pursuit of a perpetual-life strategy as an NAV REIT. This proposal will not take effect unless Proposal 4 (the proposal to approve the acceleration of the payment of incentive compensation to the advisor) is also approved. Please see “Proposal 3. Charter Amendment” for more information.

Risks of the Proposed NAV REIT Conversion

The following are the principal risks associated with the Proposed NAV REIT Conversion.

Our NAV REIT strategy may not result in increased liquidity for our stockholders.

Although we intend, as part of our NAV REIT strategy, to adopt a revised share redemption program that allows us to redeem a greater percentage of our shares each year than our current share redemption program, we cannot provide assurances that we will do so. We may decide for market, regulatory or other reasons to have a more limited share redemption program or conduct periodic self-tender offers on terms that we believe are appropriate.

We will not be required to purchase any particular number of shares, at any particular frequency or at any particular pricing, pursuant to our share redemption program or pursuant to periodic self-tender offers. Our board of directors will be permitted to modify, suspend or terminate our share redemption program at any time.

We may not have sufficient funding to satisfy the demand for liquidity. One of our primary sources for funding is currently expected to be a portion of the net proceeds from our new ongoing public offerings, but we cannot guarantee that the net proceeds raised will be sufficient to satisfy the demand for liquidity and our other capital needs, such as capital expenditures and funds for new investments. Under our current share redemption program, during any calendar year, we may redeem (i) only the number of shares that we could purchase with the amount of net proceeds from the sale of shares under our dividend reinvestment plan during the prior calendar year unless our board of directors authorizes additional funds for redemption, provided that once we have received requests for redemptions, whether in connection with Special Redemptions (defined below) or otherwise, that if honored, and when combined with all prior redemptions made during the calendar year, would result in the amount of remaining funds available for the redemption of additional shares in such calendar year being $10.0 million or less, the last $10.0 million of available funds shall be reserved exclusively for Special Redemptions and (ii) no more than 5% of the weighted average number of shares outstanding during the prior calendar year. Based on the amount of net proceeds raised from the sale of shares under our dividend reinvestment plan during 2018, we had an aggregate of $56.1 million available for redemptions in 2019, including the reserve for redemptions sought in connection with a stockholder’s death, “Qualifying Disability” or “Determination of Incompetence” (each as defined in the share redemption program and together with redemptions sought in connection with a stockholder’s death, “Special Redemptions”; all redemptions that do not meet the requirements for a Special Redemption are “Ordinary Redemptions”). As a result of the above-referenced limitations on the number of shares we can purchase pursuant to the share redemption program, as of March 1, 2019, we had exhausted all funds available for Ordinary Redemptions in 2019. On August 8, 2019, our board of directors approved an increase of the funding available for Ordinary Redemptions for calendar year 2019 by up to an additional $40.0 million, which including redemptions fulfilled to date and the remaining amount reserved for Special Redemptions, increased the share redemption program to the maximum amount for 2019. On October 23, 2019, as a result of the pending issuance of shares as a result of a special dividend to be paid in December 2019, our board of directors approved a delay of processing redemptions that would otherwise occur on the last business day of November 2019 under the share redemption program until the last business day of December 2019. As of December 1, 2019, we had $2.2 million available for Special Redemptions for the remainder of 2019. As of November 30, 2019, we had a total of $30.9 million of outstanding and unfulfilled redemption requests, representing 2,703,907 shares, including $0.6 million of outstanding and unfulfilled Special Redemption requests that would have otherwise been processed on the last business day of November 2019 but will now be processed on the last business day of December 2019. While we are soliciting stockholders with respect to Proposals 3 and 4, the board of directors has determined to suspend Ordinary Redemptions under our share redemption program.

Although the Singapore Transaction made additional capital available to us that we have and intend to continue to use to offer additional liquidity to our stockholders through our share redemption program and/or tender offers or through special distributions to stockholders after our stockholders have had an opportunity to vote on Proposals 3 and 4 at the annual meeting or any adjournment or postponement thereof, we cannot predict future redemption demand with any certainty. If future redemption requests exceed the amount of funding available under

23

our share redemption program and any additional funding made available under one or more self-tender offers, the number of rejected redemption or repurchase requests will increase over time.

You will be dependent on the board of directors to adopt and oversee valuation procedures to determine the NAV of our shares; the prices at which we sell and redeem our shares will be based on the NAV per share determined in accordance with these valuation procedures plus, in the case of our offering price, applicable upfront selling commissions and dealer manager fees.

In connection with our NAV REIT strategy, our board of directors intends to adopt valuation procedures to determine a monthly NAV per share. However, we may compute the NAV less frequently than monthly, such as quarterly. In addition, the procedures, methods and assumptions used to determine the NAV will be solely in our discretion and subject to change, will not be subject to U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (“GAAP”) and will not be subject to independent audit. No rule or regulation requires that we calculate our NAV in a certain way. Our board of directors has not finalized these procedures and once they do, our board of directors may adopt changes to the valuation procedures. The valuation procedures we adopt may be different from those used in our prior estimated value per share calculations.

The prices at which we sell shares in our offerings and redeem or repurchase shares under our share redemption program and/or self-tender offers will not be market-based prices. We currently intend for those prices to be based on the NAV per share of the applicable class of stock as of the last calendar day of the prior month (which will be our most recently disclosed NAV per share at such time) plus, in the case of the offering price, applicable upfront selling commissions and dealer manager fees. If our NAV calculations are too high, we may overpay for shares that we redeem, which would harm our remaining stockholders. If our NAV calculations are too low, we may dilute our existing stockholders when we sell new shares and we may underpay stockholders that sell their shares to us. Moreover, the NAV per share as of the date on which a subscription request or redemption request is made may be significantly different than the offering price paid or the redemption price received. There will be no market prices for our shares and you will be entirely dependent on us to determine an appropriate monthly NAV per share, which may not correspond to realizable value upon a sale of our assets.

Our NAV REIT strategy will result in additional expenses.

Our NAV REIT strategy will involve continuous, ongoing public offerings that will require registration with the SEC under federal securities laws and with each state in which we offer shares. Maintaining such offerings will result in offering fees and expenses such as those described under “Proposed NAV REIT Conversion – Terms of Proposed NAV REIT Conversion – Ongoing Public Offerings Conducted through KBS Capital Markets Group LLC.” We also expect to incur additional expenses in connection with calculating a monthly NAV per share. We have and intend to continue to use a substantial portion of the net proceeds from the Singapore Transaction to offer additional liquidity to our stockholders through our share redemption program and/or tender offers or through special distributions to stockholders after our stockholders have had an opportunity to vote on Proposals 3 and 4 at the annual meeting or any adjournment or postponement thereof, which has and will reduce the size of our company and therefore make ongoing expenses as an NAV REIT more burdensome.

New investors in our new offerings may have divergent interests from investors in our initial public offering.

We conducted our initial public offering of common stock from October 2010 through July 2015. Investors in the initial public offering have now held their shares between approximately four and nine years. When (and if) we launch a new public offering as an NAV REIT, they will have held their shares for an even longer period. New investors in our company may place a greater priority on funding for new investments than for liquidity or other purposes. They may be more supportive of our NAV REIT strategy than our original investors. Divergent interests of our stockholders may affect decisions by our board of directors or management, and may impact stockholder votes on various matters.

24

We may not raise a meaningful amount of capital in our ongoing offerings as an NAV REIT.

We currently intend to use the proceeds from our offerings as an NAV REIT, net of the fees and other expenses we pay in connection with the offerings: (1) to provide increased liquidity to our stockholders in excess of what is currently offered; (2) to make additional investments in accordance with our investment strategy and policies with the intention of growing the portfolio; and (3) for other general corporate purposes (which may include repayment of our debt or any other corporate purposes we deem appropriate). However, we may not raise a meaningful amount of capital in our ongoing offerings as an NAV REIT, which would mean that we would not have as much money for any of these purposes. In particular, we may face challenges raising additional capital if we are not able to satisfy our stockholders’ redemption requests on a regular basis.

We intend to retain KBS Capital Markets Group, an affiliate of our advisor, to conduct our ongoing offerings as an NAV REIT. The success of our offerings, and our ability to implement our business strategy, will be dependent upon the ability of KBS Capital Markets Group to build and maintain a network of broker-dealers to sell our shares to their clients. If KBS Capital Markets Group is not successful in establishing, operating and managing a network of broker-dealers, our ability to raise proceeds through future offerings will be limited and we may not have adequate capital to implement our NAV REIT strategy. Moreover, these offerings would be conducted on a “best efforts” basis, which means that KBS Capital Markets Group must only use its best efforts to sell the shares in the offerings and no underwriter, broker-dealer or other person would have any firm commitment or obligation to purchase any shares or to obtain any subscriptions on our behalf. We cannot assure you that any minimum number of shares of common stock would be sold. The past performance of KBS Capital Markets Group cannot be relied upon as predictive of KBS Capital Markets Group’s future performance.

We may suffer from delays in locating suitable investments with the capital we raise in our ongoing offerings as a perpetual-life company.

As described above, we intend to use a portion of the net proceeds from our offerings as an NAV REIT to make additional investments in accordance with our investment strategy and policies with the intention of growing the portfolio. However, we could suffer from delays in locating suitable investments. The more shares we sell in our offerings, the more difficult it may be to invest the net offering proceeds promptly and on attractive terms. Our reliance on our advisor and the real estate and debt finance professionals that our advisor retains to identify suitable investments for us at times when such persons are simultaneously seeking to identify suitable investments for otherKBS-sponsored programs orKBS-advised investors could also delay the investment of the proceeds from our offerings. KBS Realty Advisors LLC (“KBS Realty Advisors”), an affiliate of our advisor, acts as the U.S. asset manager for the SREIT. Currently, KBS Growth & Income REIT, Inc. (“KBS Growth & Income REIT”) and the SREIT are also in their acquisition stages, and our sponsor and its affiliates may also sponsor or advise public or private programs or accounts in the future while our offerings as an NAV REIT are ongoing.

In connection with the Singapore Transaction, our advisor, KBS Capital Advisors, and KBS Realty Advisors proposed that our conflicts committee and board of directors adopt an asset allocation policy (the “Allocation Process”) among us, KBS Real Estate Investment Trust II, Inc. (“KBS REIT II”) and KBS Growth & Income REIT (collectively, the “Core Strategy REITs”) and the SREIT. The board of directors and conflicts committee adopted the Allocation Process as proposed. The Allocation Process provides that, in order to mitigate potential conflicts of interest that may arise among the Core REITs and the SREIT, upon the listing of the SREIT (which occurred on July 19, 2019), potential asset acquisitions that meet all of the following criteria would be offered first to the SREIT:

25

To the extent the SREIT does not have the funds to acquire the asset or to the extent the external manager of the SREIT decides to forego the acquisition opportunity, such asset may then be offered to the Core Strategy REITs at the discretion of KBS Capital Advisors.

For so long as we are externally advised, our charter provides that it shall not be a proper purpose of the company for us to make any significant investment unless our advisor has recommended the investment to us. Thus, the real estate and debt finance professionals of our advisor could direct attractive investment opportunities to otherKBS-sponsored programs orKBS-advised investors. Such events could result in us investing in properties that provide less attractive returns, which would reduce the level of distributions we may be able to pay our stockholders. Delays we encounter in the selection, acquisition and development of income-producing properties or the acquisition or origination of other real estate investments would likely limit our ability to pay distributions to our stockholders and may reduce their overall returns.

We may pay lower dividends as an NAV REIT than we otherwise would.

As an NAV REIT, we may pay lower dividends than we otherwise would, because as a perpetual-life NAV REIT (1) we may have a greater interest in retaining the capital for new investments, increased liquidity or other general purposes and (2) we may have a greater interest in keeping our NAV stable or rising.

Our NAV REIT strategy may increase the compensation to our advisor and its affiliates.

As described above, we intend to accelerate the payment of the Subordinated Participation in Net Cash Flows to our advisor, and implement a new annual performance allocation for our advisor or its affiliate. Our advisor will benefit from these changes because (a) the value of the current incentive fee could go down in the future and (b) there is value in receiving compensation sooner rather than later. The new fee structure also puts a greater emphasis on our performance and, accordingly, would result in greater compensation to our advisor or its affiliates as a percentage of our NAV if we perform sufficiently well. Furthermore if we succeed in raising additional capital and growing our company, we would expect the fees paid to our advisor and its affiliates to increase because of our larger size. We believe these changes help further align the interests of our advisor (and its affiliates) and our stockholders in growing our company and performing well. The actual future impact to our stockholders of the proposed compensation changes is difficult to predict because it is subject to a number of factors, such as the amount of capital we raise in our public offerings, the size or value of the portfolio, and our performance.

Our advisor and its affiliates, including all of our executive officers, our affiliated director and other key real estate and debt finance professionals at our advisor, face conflicts of interest in the pursuit of an NAV REIT strategy.

All of our executive officers, our affiliated director and other key real estate and debt finance professionals at our advisor are also officers, directors, managers, or key professionals of and/or holders of a direct or indirect controlling interest in our advisor, KBS Capital Markets Group LLC, who we intend to hire as our dealer manager for our future public offerings, and other affiliated KBS entities. Charles J. Schreiber, Jr. is the Chairman of our Board, our Chief Executive Officer, our President and our affiliated director. Our advisor is owned and controlled by KBS Holdings LLC (“KBS Holdings”), our sponsor. Charles J. Schreiber, Jr. indirectly controls KBS Holdings and KBS Capital Advisors. Our advisor is also the external advisor to other publicKBS-sponsored programs. In addition, Mr. Schreiber and the team of real estate professionals at KBS Capital Advisors are also key real estate professionals at KBS Realty Advisors and its affiliates, the advisors to the privateKBS-sponsored programs, the investment advisors toKBS-advised investors and the U.S. asset manager for the SREIT. In addition, Mr. Schreiber is an executive officer and director of other publicKBS-sponsored programs and he is the Chairman of the Board and a director of the external manager of the SREIT. KBS Holdings, KBS Capital Advisors and KBS Realty Advisors and the KBS team of real estate and debt finance professionals may also sponsor or advise programs or accounts in the future. Some of the material conflicts that our advisor and its affiliates face in connection with our pursuit of a perpetual-life strategy include the following:

26

27

CERTAIN INFORMATION ABOUT MANAGEMENT

The Board of Directors

We operate under the direction of the board of directors. The board of directors oversees our operations and makes all major decisions concerning our business. During 2015,2018, the board of directors held 1013 meetings participated in three joint meetings with the conflicts committee and one joint meeting with the board of directors of an affiliated entity and acted by unanimous written consent on one occasion.6 occasions. Each director who was a director in 2018 attended at least 75% of the meetings of our board. For biographical information regarding our directors, see “ – Executive Officers and Directors” below.Directors.”

There are two committees of the board of directors: the audit committee and the conflicts committee. Information regarding each of these committees is set forth below.

Board Leadership Structure

The board of directors currently is composed of twoMr. Schreiber, who indirectly controls our sponsor and our advisor and who is one of our sponsors, Charles J. Schreiber, Jr.executive officers, and three independent directors that meet the independence criteria as specified in our charter. Our charter provides that the number of directors on the board of directors is five. On April 25, 2019, Peter McMillan III,M. Bren, our then President and threeone of our former affiliated directors, as well as one of the indirect owners of KBS Holdings LLC, our sponsor and the parent entity of our advisor, passed away. We have nominated fewer director candidates for election at the annual meeting than the number provided in our charter while the board of directors considers whether to fill the vacant position or reduce the size of the board. Stockholders may not vote for a greater number of persons than the number of nominees named.

Unless otherwise specified, all references to independent directors in this proxy statement refer to compliance with the independent director criteria as specified in our charter, as set forth under “ – Director Independence” below. Our charter provides that a majority of the seats on the board of directors will be for independent directors. The board composition and the corporate governance provisions in our charter ensure strong oversight by independent directors. The board of directors’ two committees, the audit committee and the conflicts committee, are composed entirely of independent directors. Our company is led by Mr. Schreiber, who has served as Chairman of the Board and our Chief Executive Officer since our inception in 2009. Although the board of directors has not established a policy on whether the role of Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer should be combined, in practice the board of directors has found that having a combined Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer role allows for more productive board meetings. As Chairman of the Board, Mr. Schreiber is responsible for leading board meetings and meetings of stockholders, generally setting the agendas for board meetings (subject to the requests of other directors) and providing information to the other directors in advance of meetings and between meetings. Mr. Schreiber’s direct involvement in the company’sour operations makes him best positioned to lead strategic planning sessions and determine the time allocated to each agenda item in discussions of our short- and long-term objectives. As a result, the board of directors currently believes that maintaining a structure that combines the roles of Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer is the appropriate leadership structure for our company. We do not currently have a policy requiring the appointment of a lead independent director as all of our independent directors are actively involved in board meetings.

The Role of the Board of Directors in our Risk Oversight Process

Our executive officers and our advisor are responsible for theday-to-day management of risks faced by the company,we face, while the board of directors, as a whole and through its committees, has responsibility for the oversight of risk management. No less than quarterly, the entire board of directors reviews information regarding the company’sour liquidity, credit, operations, regulatory compliance and compliance with covenants in our material agreements, as well as the risks associated with each. In addition, each year the board of directors reviews significant variances between our current portfolio business plan and our original underwriting analysis and each quarter the directors review significant variances between our current results and our projections from the prior quarter, review all significant changes to our projections for future periods and discuss risks related to our portfolio. The audit committee oversees risk management in the areas of financial reporting and internal controls and compliance with legal and regulatory requirements.controls. The conflicts committee manages risks associated with the independence of the independent directors and potential conflicts of interest involving our advisor and its affiliates. Although each committee is responsible for evaluating certain risks and overseeing the

28

management of such risks, the entire board of directors is regularly informed through committee reports about such risks as well as through regular reports directly from the executive officers responsible for oversight of particular risks within the company.to us.

Director Independence

AlthoughA majority of our board of directors, Messrs. Dritley, Gabriel and Sturzenegger, meet the independence criteria as specified in our charter. Our charter defines an independent director as a director who is not and has not for the last two years been associated, directly or indirectly, with our sponsor, KBS Holdings, or our advisor, KBS Capital Advisors. A director is deemed to be associated with our sponsor or our advisor if he or she (i) owns an interest in our sponsor, our advisor or any of their affiliates; (ii) is employed by our sponsor, our advisor or any of their affiliates; (iii) is an officer or director of our sponsor, our advisor or any of their affiliates, (iv) performs services, other than as a director, for us; (v) is a director for more than three REITs organized by our sponsor or advised by our advisor; or (vi) has any material business or professional relationship with our sponsor, our advisor or any of their affiliates. A business or professional relationship will be deemed material per se if the annual gross revenue derived by the director from our sponsor, our advisor or any of their affiliates exceeds 5% of (1) the director’s annual gross revenue derived from all sources during either of the last two years or (2) the director’s net worth on a fair market value basis. An indirect relationship is defined to include circumstances in which the director’s spouse, parents, children, siblings, mothers- orfathers-in-law, sons- ordaughters-in-law or brothers- orsisters-in-law is or has been associated with us, our sponsor, our advisor or any of their affiliates.

In addition, and although our shares are not listed for trading on any national securities exchange, a majority of the directors, and all of the members of the audit committee and the conflicts committee,our current independent directors are “independent” as defined by the New York Stock Exchange. The board of directors has affirmatively determined that Hank Adler, Barbara R. Cambon andJeffrey A. Dritley, Stuart A. Gabriel, Ph.D. and Ron D. Sturzenegger (appointed August 28, 2019) each satisfies the New York Stock Exchange independence standards.

In determining that Professor Gabriel is independent under the New York Stock Exchange independence standards, the

6

board of directors considered that (i) Peter M. Bren, one of our former executive officers and sponsors, isdirectors, was a member of the UCLA Anderson School of Management Board of Advisors and was a founding member of the Richard S. Ziman Center for Real Estate at the UCLA Anderson School of Management, that(ii) Professor Gabriel is a Director of the Richard S. Ziman Center for Real Estate and Professor of Finance and Arden Realty Chair at the UCLA Anderson School of Management and that(iii) in March 2012, Mr. Bren pledged a gift of $1.25 million to the Richard S. Ziman Center for Real Estate at the UCLA Anderson School of Management. The contribution by Mr. Bren would bewas made over five years in the amount of $250,000 per year. In addition, the board of directors considered that in 2017 Mr. Bren made an additional contribution to the Richard S. Ziman Center for Real Estate at the UCLA Anderson School of Management in the amount of $250,000. Because this contribution isthese contributions were made to a tax exempt entity and the contribution willcontributions did not exceed $250,000 in any year, the board of directors determined that this contribution wasthese contributions were not material and Professor Gabriel met the New York Stock Exchange independence standards. Mr. Bren passed away on April 25, 2019.

Barbara R. Cambon, who served as one of our independent directors from September 2010 until her resignation from the board of directors on June 26, 2019, met the independence criteria as specified in our charter. On June 13, 2018, an affiliate of our advisor offered Ms. Cambon the positions of chief executive officer and chief investment officer of KBS US Prime Property Management Pte. Ltd., which is the external manager of Prime US REIT. On June 14, 2018, Ms. Cambon verbally accepted the offer, subject to mutual agreement of written documentation of all terms. As a result of her acceptance of this offer, our board of directors determined that Ms. Cambon was no longer “independent” as defined under the rules of the New York Stock Exchange, and Ms. Cambon resigned from the audit committee. Ms. Cambon resigned from the board of directors and conflicts committee in connection with her appointment as chief executive officer and chief investment officer of KBS US Prime Property Management Pte. Ltd.

29

The Audit Committee

General

The audit committee’s function is to assist the board of directors in fulfilling its responsibilities by overseeing (i) our accounting and financial reporting processes, (ii) the integrity of our financial statements, (iii) our compliance with legal and regulatory requirements, (iv) our independent auditors’registered public accounting firm’s qualifications, performance and independence, and (v)(iv) the performance of our internal audit function. The audit committee fulfills these responsibilities primarily by carrying out the activities enumerated in the audit committee charter. The audit committee approved the audit committee charter in September 2010. The audit committee charter is available on our website atwww.kbsreitiii.com. www.kbsreitiii.com.

The members of the audit committee are Hank Adler (chair), Barbara R. Cambon andJeffrey A. Dritley, Stuart A. Gabriel, Ph.D. (chair) and Ron D. Sturzenegger (appointed August 28, 2019). The board of directors has determined that all of the members of the audit committee are “independent” as defined by the New York Stock Exchange. All of the members of the audit committee have significant financial and/or accounting experience, and the board of directors has determined that Professor Adler satisfiesall of the members of the audit committee satisfy the SEC’s requirements for an “audit committee financial expert.” Barbara R. Cambon served as a member of the audit committee from September 2010 until her resignation from the audit committee in July 2018.

During 2015,2018, the audit committee held sixfive meetings. Each director who was a member of the audit committee in 2018 attended at least 75% of the meetings of the audit committee.

Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

During the year ended December 31, 2015,2018, Ernst & Young LLP served as our independent registered public accounting firm and provided certain tax and other services. Ernst & Young LLP has served as our independent registered public accounting firm since our formation. We expect that Ernst & Young LLP representatives will be present at the annual meeting and they will have the opportunity to make a statement if they desire to do so. In addition, we expect that the Ernst & Young LLP representatives will be available to respond to appropriate questions posed by stockholders. The audit committee has engagedappointed Ernst & Young LLP as our independent auditorsregistered public accounting firm to audit our financial statements for the year ending December 31, 2016.2019. The audit committee may, however, select a new auditorsindependent registered public accounting firm at any time in the future in its discretion if it deems such decision to be in our best interests.interest. Any such decision would be disclosed to our stockholders in accordance with applicable securities laws.

Pre-Approval Policies

In order to ensure that the provision of such services does not impair the auditors’independent registered public accounting firm’s independence, the audit committee charter imposes a duty on the audit committee topre-approve all auditing services performed for us by our independent auditors,registered public accounting firm, as well as all permittednon-audit services. In determining whether or not topre-approve services, the audit committee considers whether the service is a permissible service under the rules and regulations promulgated by the SEC. The audit committee may, in its discretion, delegate to one or more of its members the authority topre-approve any audit ornon-audit services to be performed by our independent auditors,registered public accounting firm, provided any such approval is presented to and approved by the full audit committee at its next scheduled meeting.

For the years ended December 31, 20152018 and 2014,2017, all services rendered by Ernst & Young LLP werepre-approved in accordance with the policies and procedures described above.

730

Principal Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm Fees

The audit committee reviewed the audit andnon-audit services performed by Ernst & Young LLP, as well as the fees charged by Ernst & Young LLP for such services. In its review of thenon-audit service fees, the audit committee considered whether the provision of such services is compatible with maintaining the independence of Ernst & Young.Young LLP. The aggregate fees billed to us for professional accounting services, including the audit of our annual financial statements by Ernst & Young LLP for the years ended December 31, 20152018 and 2014,2017, are set forth in the table below.

For purposes of the preceding table, Ernst & Young’sYoung LLP’s professional fees are classified as follows:

Report of the Audit Committee

The function of the audit committee is oversight of the financial reporting process on behalf of the board of directors. Management has responsibility for the financial reporting process, including the system of internal control over financial reporting, and for the preparation, presentation and integrity of our financial statements. In addition, theour independent auditors devoteregistered public accounting firm devotes more time and havehas access to more information than does the audit committee. Membership on the audit committee does not call for the professional training and technical skills generally associated with career professionals in the field of accounting and auditing. Accordingly, in fulfilling their responsibilities, it is recognized that members of the audit committee are not, and do not represent themselves to be, performing the functions of auditors or accountants.

In this context, the audit committee reviewed and discussed the 20152018 audited financial statements with management, including a discussion of the quality and acceptability of our financial reporting, the reasonableness of significant judgments and the clarity of disclosures in the financial statements. The audit committee discussed with Ernst & Young LLP, which is responsible for expressing an opinion on the conformity of those audited financial statements with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”), the matters required to be discussed by Auditing Standard No. 16, “CommunicationsAS 1301, “Communications with Audit Committees,,” as adopted by the Public Company Accounting Oversight

31

Board. The audit committee received from Ernst & Young LLP the written disclosures and the letter required by applicable requirements of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board regarding Ernst & Young’s

8

Young LLP’s communications with the audit committee concerning independence, and discussed with Ernst & Young LLP their independence from us. In addition, the audit committee considered whether Ernst & Young’sYoung LLP’s provision ofnon-audit services is compatible with Ernst & Young’sYoung LLP’s independence.

Based on these reviews and discussions, the audit committee recommended to the board of directors that the audited financial statements be included in our Annual Report on Form10-K for the year ended December 31, 20152018 for filing with the SEC.

The foregoing Report of the Audit Committee shall not be deemed to be “soliciting material” or incorporated by reference by any general statement incorporating by reference this proxy statement into any filing under the Exchange Act, except to the extent that we specifically incorporate this information by reference, and shall not otherwise be deemed filed under the Exchange Act.

The Conflicts Committee

General

The members of the conflicts committee are Barbara R. CambonJeffrey A. Dritley (chair), Hank Adler and Stuart A. Gabriel, Ph.D. and Ron D. Sturzenegger (appointed August 28, 2019), all of whom are independent directors. Barbara R. Cambon served as a member of the conflicts committee from September 2010 until her resignation from the conflicts committee in June 2019. Our charter empowers the conflicts committee to act on any matter permitted under Maryland law if the matter at issue is such that the exercise of independent judgment by directors who are affiliates of our advisor could reasonably be compromised. Among the duties of the conflicts committee are the following:

The primary responsibilities of the conflicts committee are enumerated in our charter. The conflicts committee does not have a separate committee charter.

During 2015,2018, the conflicts committee held 14eighteen meetings participated in three joint meetings with the entire board of directors and acted by unanimous consent on two occasions. Each director who was a member of the conflicts committee in 2018 attended at least 75% of the meetings of the conflicts committee, except for Ms. Cambon who did not attend 75% of the meetings of the conflicts committee. Ms. Cambon recused herself from certain conflicts committee meetings due to potential conflicts of interest with respect to the Singapore Transaction.

32

Oversight of Executive Compensation

As noted above, the conflicts committee discharges the board of directors’ responsibilities relating to the compensation of our executives. However, we do not have any paid employees and our executive officers do not receive any compensation directly from us. Our executive officers are officers and/or employees of, or hold an indirect ownership interest in, our advisor and/or its affiliates and our executive officers are compensated by these entities, in part, for their services to us or our subsidiaries. See “– Report of the Conflicts Committee – Certain Transactions with Related Persons” below for a discussion of the fees paid to our advisor and its affiliates.

Report of the Conflicts Committee

Review of Our Policies

The conflicts committee has reviewed our policies and determined that they are in the best interest of our stockholders. Set forth below is a discussion of the basis for that determination.

Offering Policy. We ceased offering shares of common stock in our primary initial public offering on May 29, 2015 and terminated our primary initial public offering on July 28, 2015. We believe the termination of our primary initial public offering was in the best interest of our stockholders because we had raised sufficient funds to acquire a diverse portfolio of real estate investments to meet our stated investment objectives. We plan to continue

9

to offer shares under our dividend reinvestment plan. In some states, we will need to renew the registration statement annually or file a new registration statement to continue our dividend reinvestment plan offering. We may terminate our dividend reinvestment plan offering at any time. For the year ended December 31, 2015, the costs of raising capital in our now-terminated primary initial public offering and our dividend reinvestment plan offering represented 9% of the capital raised.

Acquisition and Investment Policies. We have invested substantially all of the net proceeds of our now-terminated primary initial public offering in a diverse portfolio of real estate investments. From time to time, and based upon asset sales, the maturity, prepayment or workout of debt-related investments, availability under our debt facilities or market conditions, we may seek to make additional real estate investments.

We have made investments in core real estate properties, which are generally lower risk, existing properties with at least 80% occupancy and minimal near-term lease rollover. Our primary investment focus is core office properties located throughout the United States, though we may also invest in other types of properties. The core office properties in which we have invested include low-rise, mid-rise and high-rise office buildings and office parks in urban and suburban locations in or near central business districts with access to transportation. Our core property focus in the U.S. office sector has reflected a more value-creating core strategy. In many cases, these properties have slightly higher (10% to 15%) vacancy rates and/or higher near-term lease rollover at acquisition than more conservative value-maintaining core properties. These characteristics may provide us with opportunities to lease space at higher rates, especially in markets with increasing absorption, or to re-lease space at higher rates, bringing below-market rates of in-place expiring leases up to market rates. Many of these properties required or will require a moderate level of additional investment for capital expenditures and tenant improvement costs in order to improve or rebrand the properties and increase rental rates. Thus, we believe these properties will provide an opportunity for us to achieve more significant capital appreciation by increasing occupancy, negotiating new leases with higher rental rates and/or executing enhancement projects.

We acquire all of our real estate assets directly or through our operating partnership, though we may invest in other entities that make similar investments. We generally hold fee title to the real estate properties in our portfolio. We may also enter into joint ventures, partnerships and other co-ownership arrangements (including preferred equity investments) or participations for the purpose of obtaining interests in real estate properties and other real estate investments.

We have also originated a first mortgage loan and currently do not expect to make any significant real estate-related investments.

As of April 6, 2016, we owned 28 office properties and one mixed-use office/retail property and had originated one first mortgage loan.

Borrowing Policies. We have financed our real estate acquisitions to date with a combination of the proceeds received from our now-terminated primary initial public offering and debt. We may use proceeds from borrowings to: finance acquisitions of new real estate investments; pay for capital improvements, repairs or tenant build-outs to properties; refinance existing indebtedness; pay distributions; or provide working capital. Careful use of debt will help us to achieve our diversification goals because we will have more funds available for investment. Our investment strategy is to utilize primarily secured and possibly unsecured debt to finance our investment portfolio. We may elect to secure financing subsequent to the acquisition date of future real estate investments and initially acquire investments without debt financing. To the extent that we do not finance our real estate investments, our ability to acquire additional real estate investments will be restricted.

Once we have fully invested the proceeds of our now-terminated primary initial public offering, we expect our debt financing and other liabilities to be between 35% and 65% of the cost of our tangible assets (before deducting depreciation or other non-cash reserves). We expect our debt financing related to the acquisition of core real estate properties to be between 45% and 65% of the aggregate cost of all such assets. We expect our debt financing related to the acquisition and origination of real estate-related investments to be between 0% and 65% of the aggregate cost of all such assets depending upon the availability of such financings in the marketplace. There is no limitation on the amount we may borrow for the purchase of any single asset. We limit our total liabilities to 75% of the cost (before deducting depreciation or other non-cash reserves) of our tangible assets, meaning that our

10

borrowings and other liabilities may exceed our maximum target leverage of 65% of the cost of our tangible assets without violating these borrowing restrictions. We may exceed the 75% limit only if a majority of the conflicts committee approves each borrowing in excess of this limitation and we disclose such borrowings to our stockholders in our next quarterly report with an explanation from the conflicts committee of the justification for the excess borrowing. To the extent financing in excess of this limit is available at attractive terms, the conflicts committee may approve debt in excess of this limit. From time to time, our total liabilities could also be below 35% of the cost of our tangible assets due to the lack of availability of debt financing. As of January 31, 2016, our borrowings and other liabilities were approximately 55% of both the cost (before deducting depreciation or other noncash reserves) and book value (before deducting depreciation) of our tangible assets, respectively.

Disposition Policies. We generally intend to hold our core properties for three to seven years, which we believe is a reasonable period to enable us to capitalize on the potential for increased income and capital appreciation of properties. We do not expect to make or invest in loans with a maturity of more than ten years from the date of our investment and anticipate that most loans will have a term of five years. We may hold some of our investments in loans for four to seven years. Our advisor develops a well-defined exit strategy for each investment we make and periodically performs a hold-sell analysis on each investment. These periodic analyses focus on the remaining available value enhancement opportunities for the investment, the demand for the investment in the marketplace, market conditions and our overall portfolio objectives to determine if the sale of the investment, whether via an individual sale or as part of a portfolio sale or merger, would generate a favorable return to our stockholders. Economic and market conditions may influence us to hold our investments for different periods of time. We may sell an investment before the end of the expected holding period if we believe that market conditions and asset positioning have maximized its value to us or the sale of the investment would otherwise be in the best interests of our stockholders.

We did not sell any real estate investments during the year ended December 31, 2015.

Policy Regarding Working Capital Reserves. We establish an annual budget for capital requirements and working capital reserves that we update periodically during the year. We have set aside proceeds from our now-terminated primary public offering for working capital purposes. We may use proceeds from our dividend reinvestment plan offering, debt proceeds and cash flow from operations to meet our needs for working capital for the upcoming year and to build a moderate level of cash reserves.

Policies Regarding Operating Expenses. Under our charter, we are required to limit our total operating expenses to the greater of 2% of our average invested assets or 25% of our net income for the four most recently completed fiscal quarters, as these terms are defined in our charter, unless the conflicts committee has determined that such excess expenses were justified based on unusual and non-recurring factors. Operating expenses for the four fiscal quarters ended December 31, 2015 did not exceed the charter-imposed limitation. For the four consecutive quarters ended December 31, 2015, total operating expenses represented approximately 0.9% and 23% of our average invested assets and our net income, respectively.

11

Our Policy Regarding Transactions with Related Persons

Our charter requires the conflicts committee to review and approve all transactions between us and our advisor, any of our officers or directors or any of their affiliates. Prior to entering into a transaction with a related party, a majority of the conflicts committee must conclude that the transaction is fair and reasonable to us and on terms and conditions not less favorable to us than those available from unaffiliated third parties.us. In addition, our Code of Conduct and Ethics lists examples of types of transactions with related parties that would create prohibited conflicts of interest and requires our officers and directors to be conscientious of actual and potential conflicts of interest with respect to our interests and to seek to avoid such conflicts or handle such conflicts in an ethical manner at all times consistent with applicable law. Our executive officers and directors are required to report potential and actual conflicts to the Compliance Officer, currently our advisor’s Chief Audit Executive, via the Ethics Hotline or directly to the audit committee chair, as appropriate.

Certain Transactions with Related Persons

The conflicts committee has reviewedSet forth below is a description of the material transactions between our affiliates and us since the beginning of 20152018 as well as any such currently proposed material transactions. Set forth below istransactions, other than the Proposed NAV REIT Conversion. See “Proposed NAV REIT Conversion” for a descriptiondiscussion of such transactionsthe proposed acceleration of the advisor’s incentive fee and the conflicts committee’s report on their fairness.other revised fees and expense reimbursements we would expect to implement in connection with a conversion to an NAV REIT, which we intend to pursue if Proposal 3 and Proposal 4 are approved by our stockholders.

As described further below, weWe have entered into agreements with certain affiliates pursuant to which they provide services to us. Peter M. Bren, Keith D. Hall, Peter McMillan IIIAll of our executive officers and our affiliated director are also officers, directors, managers, or key professionals of and/or holders of a direct or indirect controlling interest in our advisor, KBS Capital Markets Group LLC (our dealer manager), and other affiliated KBS entities. Charles J. Schreiber, Jr. control and indirectly own our advisor, KBS Capital Advisors LLC, andis the entity that acted as the dealer managerChairman of our now-terminated primary initial public offering,Board, our Chief Executive Officer, our President and our affiliated director. Our advisor and KBS Capital Markets Group LLC. We refer to these individuals as our sponsors. TheyLLC are also some of our executive officers. All four of our sponsors actively participate in the management and operations of our advisor. Our advisor has three managers: an entity owned and controlled by Mr. Bren; an entity ownedKBS Holdings, our sponsor. Charles J. Schreiber, Jr. indirectly controls our sponsor and controlled by Messrs. Hall and McMillan; and an entity owned and controlled by Mr. Schreiber.our advisor.

Our Relationship with KBS Capital AdvisorsAdvisors.. Our Since our inception, our advisor provides has providedday-to-day management of our business. Among the services provided by our advisor under the terms of the advisory agreement are the following:

33

Our advisor is subject to the supervision of the board of directors and only has such authority as we may delegate to it as our agent. The advisory agreement has aone-year term expiring September 27, 2016,2020, subject to an

12

unlimited number of successiveone-year renewals upon the mutual consent of the parties. From January 1, 20152018 through the most recent date practicable, which was January 31, 2016,September 30, 2019, we compensated our advisor as set forth below.

OrganizationOur advisor or its affiliates have paid, and in the future may pay, some of the offering costs (other than selling commissions and dealer manager fees) related to our now-terminated primary initial public offering were sometimes paid and, with respect to our dividend reinvestment plan, offering, may be paid by our advisor, our dealer manager or their affiliates on our behalf, or we may pay these costs directly. Offering costs include all costs incurred in connection with our now-terminated primary initial public offering or the now withdrawn follow-on offering (the “Follow-on Offering”) or incurred or to be incurred with respect to our dividend reinvestment plan offering. Organization costs include all costs incurred by us in connection with our formation, including, but not limited to, our legal, feesaccounting, printing, mailing and other costs to incorporate.

Pursuant to the advisory agreement and the dealer manager agreement, we were obligated to reimbursefiling fees. We are responsible for reimbursing our advisor our dealer manager and their affiliates for organization and offering costs they incurred on our behalf. However, atthese costs. At the terminationend of our now-terminated primary initial public offering and at the termination of our dividend reinvestment plan offering, our advisor has agreed to reimburse us to the extent that selling commissions, dealer manager fees and other organization and offering expenses incurred by us exceed 15% of the gross offering proceeds. In addition, at the termination of our now-terminated primary initial public offering and again at the termination our dividend reinvestment plan offering, our advisor has agreed to reimburse us to the extent that organization and other offering expenses excluding underwriting compensation (which includes selling commissions, dealer manager fees and any other items viewed as underwriting compensation by FINRA), exceed 2% of the gross offering proceeds. No reimbursements made by us to our advisor may cause total organization and offering expenses incurred by us to exceed 15% of the aggregate gross offering proceeds as of the date of reimbursement. From January 1, 20152018 through January 31, 2016,September 30, 2019, with respect to our dividend reinvestment plan, our advisor incurred approximately $0.4 million ofdid not incur any organization and offering expenses on our behalf related to our now-terminated primary initial public offering and our dividend reinvestment plan offering, all of which we had paid as of January 31, 2016.

In addition, from inception through August 2015, we had recorded $1.2 million of offering costs related to the now-withdrawn Follow-on Offering. Pursuant to the advisory agreement, our advisor was obligated to reimburse us to the extent offering costs incurred by us in the Follow-on Offering exceeded 15% of the gross offering proceeds of the offering. On August 24, 2015, we withdrew the registration statement for the Follow-on Offering. As such, our advisor reimbursed us for $1.2 million of offering costs related to the Follow-on Offering.behalf.

We incur acquisition and origination fees payable to our advisor equal to 1.0% of the cost of investments acquired by us, or the amount to be funded by us to acquire or originate loans, including the sum of the amount actually paid or allocated to the purchase, development, construction or improvement of such investments, acquisition and origination expenses and any debt attributable to such investments. Acquisition and origination fees relate to services provided in connection with the selection and acquisition or origination of real estate investments. Acquisition feesDuring the period from January 1, 20152018 through September 30, 2019, we did not acquire any investments accounted for as a business combination, but we did acquire the unaffiliated developer’s 25% equity interest in Village Center Station II and we now own 100% of the property. During the period from January 31, 2016 totaled approximately $9.21, 2018 through September 30, 2019, we capitalized an aggregate of $1.2 million allin acquisition fees related to the development of which we had paid as of January 31, 2016.Hardware Village and our investment in Village Center Station II. We did not originate or purchase any loans from January 1, 20152018 through January 31, 2016.September 30, 2019.

In addition to acquisition and origination fees, we reimburse our advisor for customary acquisition and origination expenses, whether or not we ultimately acquire the asset. From January 1, 20152018 through January 31, 2016,September 30, 2019, our advisor and its affiliates did not incur any such costs on our behalf.

For asset management services, we pay our advisor a monthly fee. With respect to investments in real property, the asset management fee is a monthly fee equal toone-twelfth of 0.75% of the amount paid or allocated to acquire the investment, plus the cost of any subsequent development, construction or improvements to the property. This amount includes any portion of the investment that was debt financed and is inclusive of acquisition expenses

34

related thereto (but excludes acquisition fees paid or payable to our advisor). In the case of investments made through joint ventures, the asset management fee is determined based on our proportionate share of the underlying investment (but excluding acquisition fees paid or payable to our advisor). With respect to investments in loans and any investments other than real property, the asset management fee is a monthly fee calculated, each month, asone-twelfth of 0.75% of the lesser of (i) the amount actually paid or allocated to acquire or fund the loan or other investment (which amount includes any portion of the investment that was debt financed and is inclusive of acquisition or origination expenses related thereto, but is exclusive of acquisition or origination fees paid or payable to our advisor) and (ii) the outstanding principal amount of such loan or other investment, plus the acquisition or origination expenses related to the acquisition or funding of such investment (excluding the acquisition or origination fees paid or payable to our advisor), as of the time of calculation.

However, with respect to asset

13

management fees accruing from March 1, 2014, our advisor has agreed to defer, without interest, our obligation to pay asset management fees for any month in which our modified funds from operations (“MFFO”) for such month, as such term is defined in the practice guideline issued by the IPA in November 2010 and interpreted by us, excluding asset management fees, does not exceed the amount of distributions declared by us for record dates of that month. We remain obligated to pay our advisor an asset management fee in any month in which our MFFO, excluding asset management fees, for such month exceeds the amount of distributions declared for the record dates of that month (such excess amount, an “MFFO Surplus”); however, any amount of such asset management fee in excess of the MFFO Surplus will also be deferred under the advisory agreement. If the MFFO Surplus for any month exceeds the amount of the asset management fee payable for such month, any remaining MFFO Surplus will be applied to pay any asset management fee amounts previously deferred in accordance with the advisory agreement.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, any and all deferred asset management fees that are unpaid will become immediately due and payable at such time as our stockholders have received, together as a collective group, aggregate distributions (including distributions that may constitute a return of capital for federal income tax purposes) sufficient to provide (i) an 8.0% per year cumulative, noncompounded return on such net invested capital (the “Stockholders’ 8% Return”) and (ii) a return of their net invested capital, or the amount calculated by multiplying the total number of shares purchased by stockholders by the issue price, reduced by any amounts to repurchase shares pursuant to our share redemption program. The Stockholders’ 8% Return is not based on the return provided to any individual stockholder. Accordingly, it is not necessary for each of our stockholders to have received any minimum return in order for our advisor to receive deferred asset management fees.

From January 1, 20152018 through January 31, 2016, ourSeptember 30, 2019, asset management fees totaled $22.1 million, and as of January 31, 2016, we had accrued and deferred payment of $12.1 million of these asset management fees under the advisory agreement, as we believe the payment of this amount to our advisor is probable.$46.6 million. From January 1, 20152018 through January 31, 2016,September 30, 2019, we paid $13.4$45.5 million in asset management fees, $2.8$2.3 million of which related to asset management fees incurred in prior periods. TheseAs of September 30, 2019, we had deferred payment of $2.9 million of asset management fees will be reimbursed in accordance withunder the terms noted above.advisory agreement, and an additional $0.5 million of asset management fees were payable to the advisor. The amount of asset management fees deferred, if any, will vary on amonth-to-month basis and the total amount of asset management fees deferred as well as the timing of the deferrals and repayments are difficult to predict as they will depend on the amount of and terms of theany debt we use to acquire assets, the level of operating cash flow generated by future acquisitionsour real estate investments, and the performance of all of the real estate investments in our portfolio and other factors. In addition, deferrals and repayments may occur in the same period, and it is possible that there could be additional deferrals even afterin the initial deferrals are fully repaid.future.

Under the advisory agreement, our advisor and its affiliates havehas the right to seek reimbursement from us for all costs and expenses they incurit incurs in connection with theirthe provision of services to us, including our allocable share of our advisor’s overhead, such as rent, employee costs, utilities, accounting software and cybersecurity costs. Our advisor may seek reimbursement forWith respect to employee costs, under the advisory agreement. Atat this time our advisor only expects to seek reimbursement for our allocable portion of the salaries, benefits and overhead of internal audit department personnel providing services to us. In the future, if our advisor seeks reimbursement for additional employee costs, such costs may include our proportionate share of the salaries of persons involved in the preparation of documents to meet SEC reporting requirements. We do not reimburse our advisor or its affiliates for employee costs in connection with services for which our advisor earns acquisition or origination fees or disposition fees (other than reimbursement of travel and communication expenses) or for the salaries and benefits our advisor or its affiliates may pay to our executive officers.

From January 1, 20152018 through January 31, 2016,September 30, 2019, we reimbursed our advisor for $0.2$4.9 million of operating expenses, including $180,000$0.6 million of employee costs. We also reimburse our advisor for certain of our direct costs incurred from third parties that were initially paid by our advisor on behalf of us. Prior to the Singapore

35

Transaction closing on July 19, 2019, we and our advisor had agreed to evenly divide certain costs and expenses related to the Singapore Transaction (discussed below). We had incurred a total of $4.1 million of costs related to the Singapore Transaction, which were reimbursable by the SREIT upon a successful closing. These costs include legal, audit, tax, printing and otherout-of-pocket costs that we incurred related to the Singapore Transaction. As of September 30, 2019, we had $2.8 million of reimbursable operating expense receivable related to the Singapore Transaction, which were subsequently collected in October 2019 from our advisor upon our advisor receiving the reimbursement from the SREIT.

In addition, from January 1, 2018 through September 30, 2019, our advisor reimbursed us $0.2 million for property insurance rebates.

For substantial assistance in connection with the sale of properties or other investments, we pay our advisor or one of its affiliates 1.0% of the contract sales price of each property or other investment sold; provided, however, that if, in connection with such disposition, commissions are paid to third parties unaffiliated with our advisor or one of its affiliates, the fee paid to our advisor or one of its affiliates may not exceed the commissions paid to such unaffiliated third parties, and provided further that the aggregate disposition fees paid to our advisor or one of its affiliates and unaffiliated third parties may not exceed 6.0% of the contract sales price. We will not pay a disposition fee upon the maturity, prepayment or workout of a loan or other debt-related investment, provided that if we take ownership of a property as a result of a workout or foreclosure of a loan, we will pay a disposition fee upon the sale of such property. From January 1, 20152018 through January 31, 2016,September 30, 2019, we did not disposesold one office property and the Singapore Portfolio and incurred $9.9 million of any real estate investments.

14

On January 6, 2014, we, together with KBS Real Estate Investment Trust, Inc. (“KBS REIT I”), KBS Real Estate Investment Trust II, Inc. (“KBS REIT II”), KBS Strategic Opportunity REIT, Inc. (“KBS Strategic Opportunity REIT”), KBS Legacy Partners Apartment REIT, Inc. (“KBS Legacy Partners Apartment REIT”), KBS Strategic Opportunity REIT II, Inc. (“KBS Strategic Opportunity REIT II”), our dealer manager, our advisor and other KBS-affiliated entities, entered into an errors and omissions and directors and officers liability insurance program where the lower tiersdisposition fees, all of such insurance coverage are shared. The costwhich had been paid as of these lower tiers is allocated by our advisor and its insurance broker among each of the various entities covered by the program, and is billed directly to each entity. The allocation of these shared coverage costs is proportionate to the pricing by the insurance marketplace for the first tiers of directors and officers liability coverage purchased individually by each REIT. Our advisor’s and our dealer manager’s portion of the shared lower tiers’ cost is proportionate to the respective entities’ prior cost for the errors and omissions insurance. In June 2015, KBS Growth & Income REIT, Inc. (“KBS Growth & Income REIT”) was added to the insurance program at terms similar to those described above.September 30, 2019.

In connection with our initial public offering, our sponsorsMessrs. Bren and Schreiber and Keith D. Hall and Peter McMillan III agreed to provide additional indemnification to one of the participating broker-dealers. We agreed to add supplemental coverage to our directors’ and officers’ insurance coverage to insure our sponsors’the obligations of Messrs. Bren, Hall, McMillan and Schreiber under this indemnification agreement in exchange for reimbursement to us by our sponsorsMessrs. Bren, Hall, McMillan and Schreiber for all costs, expenses and premiums related to this supplemental coverage, which does not dilute the directors and officers liability insurance coverage for the KBS entities. From January 1, 20152018 through January 31, 2016,September 30, 2019, our advisor had incurred $0.1 million for the costs of the supplemental coverage obtained by us, all of which had been paid to the insurer or reimbursed to us as of January 31, 2016.

The conflicts committee considers our relationship with our advisor and our sponsors during 2015 to be fair. The conflicts committee believes that the amounts payable to our advisor under the advisory agreement are similar to those paid by other publicly offered, unlisted, externally advised REITs and that this compensation is necessary in order for our advisor to provide the desired level of services to us and our stockholders.September 30, 2019.

Our Relationship with KBS Capital Markets Group. PursuantWe continue to the amended and restated dealer manager agreement, we paidoffer shares under our dealer manager up to 6.5% and 3.0% of the gross offering proceeds from our now-terminated primary initial public offering as selling commissions and dealer manager fees, respectively. A reduced sales commission and dealer manager fee was paiddividend reinvestment plan offering. From January 1, 2018 through September 30, 2019, with respect to certain categories of purchasers. No sales commission or dealer manager fee is paid with respect to shares issued pursuant to our dividend reinvestment plan offering. Our dealer manager reallowed 100% of selling commissions earned to participating broker-dealers. Our dealer manager also reallowed to certain participating broker-dealers up to 1.0% of the gross offering, proceeds attributable to that participating broker-dealer as a marketing fee and, in special cases, the dealer manager increased the reallowance. From January 1, 2015 through January 31, 2016, we incurred selling commissions of $33.2 million, all of which we had paid as of January 31, 2016 and all of which was reallowed by our dealer manager to participating broker-dealers. From January 1, 2015 through January 31, 2016, we incurred dealer manager fees of $15.7 million, all of which we had paid as of January 31, 2016 and $5.8 million of which was reallowed by our dealer manager to participating broker-dealers.

In addition to selling commissions and dealer manager fees, we were also obligated todid not reimburse our dealer manager and its affiliates for certain offering related expenses that they incurred on our behalf. These expenses included, among others, the cost of bona fide training and education meetings held by us (primarily the travel, meal and lodging costs of registered representatives of broker-dealers), attendance and sponsorship fees and travel, meal and lodging costs for registered persons associated with our dealer manager and officers and employees of our affiliates to attend retail seminars conducted by broker-dealers and, in special cases, reimbursement to participating broker-dealers for technology costs associated with our now-terminated primary initial public offering, costs andany expenses related to such technology costs, and costs and expenses associated with the facilitation of the marketing of our shares by such broker-dealers and the ownership of our shares by such broker-dealers’ customers. We directly paid or reimbursed our dealer manager for underwriting compensation as discussed in the prospectus for our now-terminated primary initial public offering, provided that within 30 days after the end of the month in which our now-terminated primary initial public offering terminated, our dealer manager was required to reimburse us to the extent that our reimbursements caused total underwriting compensation for our now-terminated primary initial public offering to exceed 10% of the gross offering proceeds from such offering. We also directly paid or reimbursed our dealer manager for bona fide invoiced due diligence expenses of broker-dealers. However, no reimbursements made by us to our advisor or our dealer manager could cause total organization and offering expenses incurred by us

15

(including selling commissions, dealer manager fees and all other items of organization and offering expenses) to exceed 15% of the aggregate gross proceeds from our now-terminated primary initial public offering and our dividend reinvestment plan offering as of the date of reimbursement. From January 1, 2015 through January 31, 2016, our dealer manager sought reimbursement for $2.1 million in expenses, all of which we had paid as of January 31, 2016.offering.

We have also entered into a fee reimbursement agreement (the “AIP Reimbursement Agreement”) with our dealer manager pursuant to which we agreed to reimburse our dealer manager for certain fees and expenses it incurs for administering our participation in the DTCC Alternative Investment Product Platform with respect to certain accounts of our stockholders serviced through the platform. From January 1, 20152018 through January 31, 2016,September 30, 2019, we incurred and paid $0.1 million of costs and expenses related to the AIP Reimbursement Agreement.

The conflicts committee believes that these arrangements with our dealer manager are fair. We believe that the compensation paid to our dealer manager has allowed us to achieve our goal of investing in a diverse portfolio of real estate investments.

Our Relationship with otherKBS-Affiliated Entities Entities.. On May 29, 2015, our indirect wholly owned subsidiary that owns 3003 Washington Boulevard entered into a lease with an affiliate of our advisor for 5,046 rentable square feet, or approximately 2.3%2.4% of the total rentable square feet, at 3003 Washington Boulevard. The lease commenced on October 1, 2015 and terminates onhad an initial termination date of August 31, 2019. The annualized base rent for the lease iswas approximately $0.2 million, and the average annual rental rate (net of rental abatements) over the lease term iswas $46.38 per square foot. From

On March 14, 2019, the Lessor entered into a First Amendment to Deed of Lease with the Lessee to extend the lease period commencing on September 1, 2019 and terminating on August 31, 2024 (the “Amended Lease”) and set the annual base rent during the extension period. The annualized base rent from the commencement of the lease on OctoberAmended Lease is approximately $0.3 million, and the average annual rental rate (net of rental abatements) over the term of the Amended Lease through its termination is $62.55 per square foot.

36

From January 1, 20152018 through January 31, 2016,September 30, 2019, we recognized $0.1$0.4 million of rental income related to the lease.lease and the Amended Lease.

Prior to their approvalInsurance Program.As of January 1, 2018, we, together with KBS REIT II, KBS Growth & Income REIT, Pacific Oak Strategic Opportunity REIT, Inc., formerly KBS Strategic Opportunity REIT, Inc. (“Pacific Oak Strategic Opportunity REIT”) (advisory agreement terminated as of October 31, 2019), KBS Legacy Partners Apartment REIT, Inc. (“KBS Legacy Partners Apartment REIT”), Pacific Oak Strategic Opportunity REIT II, Inc., formerly KBS Strategic Opportunity REIT II, Inc. (“Pacific Oak Strategic Opportunity REIT II”) (advisory agreement terminated as of October 31, 2019), our dealer manager, our advisor and otherKBS-affiliated entities, had entered into an errors and omissions and directors and officers liability insurance program where the lower tiers of such insurance coverage were shared. The cost of these lower tiers is allocated by our advisor and its insurance broker among each of the lease,various entities covered by the program, and is billed directly to each entity. At the June 2018 renewal, Pacific Oak Strategic Opportunity REIT, Pacific Oak Strategic Opportunity REIT II and KBS Legacy Partners Apartment REIT elected to cease participation in the program and obtained separate insurance coverage. In June 2019, we renewed our participation in the program. The program is effective through June 30, 2020.

Singapore Transaction.On June 27, 2019, we, through 12 wholly owned subsidiaries, entered into a Portfolio Purchase and Sale Agreement and Escrow Instructions (the “Purchase Agreement”) pursuant to which we agreed to sell 11 of our properties (the “Singapore Portfolio”) to various subsidiaries of Prime US REIT (the “SREIT”), a newly formed Singapore real estate investment trust that listed on the Singapore Stock Exchange on July 19, 2019 (the “Singapore Transaction”). The SREIT is affiliated with Charles J. Schreiber, Jr., our Chief Executive Officer, President, Chairman of the Board and one of our directors. The Singapore Portfolio consists of the following properties: Tower I at Emeryville, Emeryville, California; 222 Main, Salt Lake City, Utah; Village Center Station, Greenwood Village, Colorado; Village Center Station II, Greenwood Village, Colorado; 101 South Hanley, St. Louis, Missouri; Tower on Lake Carolyn, Irving, Texas; Promenade I & II at Eilan, San Antonio, Texas; CrossPoint at Valley Forge, Wayne, Pennsylvania; One Washingtonian Center, Gaithersburg, Maryland; Reston Square, Reston, Virginia; and 171 17th Street, Atlanta, Georgia. On July 18, 2019, we, through 12 wholly owned subsidiaries, sold the Singapore Portfolio to various subsidiaries of the SREIT. As of September 30, 2019, the SREIT does not own any properties other than the Singapore Portfolio. The sale price of the Singapore Portfolio was $1.2 billion, before third-party closing costs, closing credits and other costs of approximately $20.0 million and excluding disposition fees paid to our advisor of $9.5 million. In connection with the Singapore Transaction, we repaid $613.1 million of outstanding debt secured by the properties in the Singapore Portfolio.

As part of the Singapore Transaction, on June 27, 2019, KBS REIT Properties III LLC, our indirect wholly owned subsidiary (“REIT Properties III”), entered into a Subscription Agreement (the “Subscription Agreement”) with the SREIT’s manager, KBS US Prime Property Management Pte. Ltd. (the “Manager”), to subscribe for $201.0 million of the units to be issued by the SREIT. Certain of our indirect wholly owned subsidiaries, certain of the SREIT’s direct and indirect wholly owned subsidiaries, the Manager and DBS Trustee Limited, as trustee of the SREIT, also entered aSet-Off Agreement on June 27, 2019 (the“Set-Off Agreement”). Pursuant to theSet-Off Agreement, we agreed that the SREIT may deduct from the aggregate purchase price due from the SREIT under the Purchase Agreement the subscription amount to be paid by REIT Properties III for the units under the Subscription Agreement. Also pursuant to theSet-Off Agreement, the Manager discharges REIT Properties III from payment of the subscription amount upon receipt by us of the aggregate purchase price under the Purchase Agreement less the subscription amount under the Subscription Agreement.

On July 15, 2019, REIT Properties III entered into an amendment to the Subscription Agreement with the Manager (the “Subscription Agreement Amendment”) and an amendment to theSet-Off Agreement with the parties thereto (the“Set-Off Agreement Amendment”). Pursuant to REIT Properties III’s separate order to acquire an additional $70.0 million of units of the SREIT in the placement tranche of the SREIT’s offering, the Subscription Agreement Amendment required REIT Properties III’s to confirm certain representations and warranties made by REIT Properties III in the Subscription Agreement with respect to the units to be issued in the placement tranche. TheSet-Off Agreement Amendment provides that the SREIT may deduct from the aggregate purchase price due from the SREIT under the Purchase Agreement both (i) the subscription amount of $201.0 million to be paid by REIT Properties III for the units subscribed for under the Subscription Agreement and (ii) the additional $70.0 million to be paid by REIT Properties III for the units subscribed for under the placement tranche of the SREIT’s offering (collectively, the subscription amounts are the“Set-Off Amount”). Also pursuant to theSet-Off Agreement

37

Amendment, the Manager agreed that, upon receipt by us of the aggregate purchase price under the Purchase Agreement less theSet-Off Amount, our payment obligations under the Subscription Agreement and the order for units in the placement tranche of the SREIT’s offering are fully satisfied. As such, on July 19, 2019, REIT Properties III acquired 307,953,999 units in the SREIT at an aggregate price of $271 million representing a 33.3% ownership interest in the SREIT.

Also on July 15, 2019, REIT Properties III entered into a placement agreement (the “Placement Agreement”) and unit lending agreement (the “Unit Lending Agreement”) with respect to an offering of units of the SREIT. The Placement Agreement was entered into with the Manager, KBS Asia Partners Pte. Ltd. (“KAP”), KBS Realty Advisors, PBren Investments, L.P., Schreiber Real Estate Investments L.P. and the Underwriters. The Underwriters are DBS Bank Ltd., Merrill Lynch (Singapore) Pte. Ltd., China International Capital Corporation (Singapore) Pte. Limited, Credit Suisse (Singapore) Limited, Maybank Kim Eng Securities Pte. Ltd. and Oversea-Chinese Banking Corporation Limited. The Unit Lending Agreement was entered into with Merrill Lynch (Singapore) Pte. Ltd. (the “Stabilizing Manager”).

Pursuant to the Placement Agreement, the Underwriters agreed to procure subscriptions, or subscribe themselves, for an aggregate of 294,294,200 units in the SREIT, at a price of $0.88 per unit (the “Offering Price”). Other investors agreed to subscribe for units separately, including REIT Properties III (as discussed above) at the Offering Price, and the Underwriters entered into a separate offer agreement to sell an additional 40,909,000 units of the SREIT to the public in Singapore at the Offering Price. REIT Properties III is a party to the Placement Agreement as unit lender, and pursuant to the Placement Agreement, REIT Properties III granted the Underwriters an over-allotment option (the “Over-Allotment Option”) in which REIT Properties III agreed to sell to the Underwriters up to 22,727,000 of REIT Properties III’s units in the SREIT at the Offering Price. The Over-Allotment Option was exercisable for up to 30 days after the listing of the units of the SREIT on the Singapore Stock Exchange. The option is solely to cover the over-allotment of units (if any) in the SREIT’s offering. Under the terms of the Placement Agreement, REIT Properties III agrees to indemnify the Underwriters against certain losses and claims in so far as such losses or claims are based on or arising out of any breach or alleged breach by REIT Properties III of the representations, warranties or obligations made by or relating to REIT Properties III under the Placement Agreement. The Placement Agreement includes customary representations and warranties by REIT Properties III.

Pursuant to the Unit Lending Agreement, REIT Properties III agreed to lend the 22,727,000 units subject to the Over-Allotment Option to the Stabilizing Manager for the purpose of facilitating the settlement of the over-allotment of units in connection with the SREIT’s offering. The Unit Lending Agreement contains customary representations and warranties by REIT Properties III.

On August 21, 2019, REIT Properties III sold 18,392,100 units to the Underwriters pursuant to the Over-Allotment Option at the Offering Price, reducing REIT Properties III’s ownership in the SREIT to 31.3% of the outstanding units of the SREIT. The Stabilizing Managerre-delivered to REIT Properties III such number of units that were not purchased pursuant to the exercise of the Over-Allotment Option.

On July 8, 2019, we, KBS Limited Partnership III, KBS REIT Holdings III LLC and REIT Properties III (collectively, the “REIT III Entities”) entered intolock-up letter agreements with the Underwriters whereby each of the REIT III Entities agreed to hold 100% of REIT Properties III’s units in the SREIT for six months following the listing of the SREIT on the Singapore Stock Exchange and to hold 50% of REIT Properties III’s units in the SREIT for 12 months following the listing of the SREIT on the Singapore Stock Exchange. During the respectivelock-up periods, without the prior written consent of the Underwriters and other than pursuant to the Over-Allotment Option or lending for stabilizing transactions pursuant to the Unit Lending Agreement (described above), the REIT III Entities may not offer, sell, pledge, option, grant any rights or warrants, or enter into any swap, hedge or other similar arrangement that transfers to another, in whole or in part, any of the economic consequences of ownership of the units held by REIT Properties III.

The SREIT is externally managed by a joint venture (the “Manager”) currently among KAP (an entity in which Charles J. Schreiber, Jr. currently holds an indirect 50% ownership interest) and three entities unaffiliated with us or our advisor. For their ownership stake in the Manager, these three unaffiliated entities paid KAP an aggregate of $43.5 million.

38

The SREIT is expected to pay the Manager an annual base fee of 10% of annual distributable income and an annual performance fee of 25% of the increase in distributions per unit of the SREIT from the preceding year; however, there would not be any performance fee for 2019 and in 2020 such fee will be based on an increase over projected distributions per unit. In addition, for future acquisitions, the SREIT will pay the Manager an acquisition fee of 1% of the acquisition price of any real estate acquired. No acquisition fee will be paid with respect to the SREIT’s acquisition of the Singapore Portfolio. The SREIT will also pay the Manager a divestment fee of 0.5% of the sale price of any real estate sold or divested and a development management fee of 3% of the total project costs incurred for development projects, to the extent the SREIT acquires a development project. A portion of these fees paid to the Manager will be paid to KBS Realty Advisors, an affiliate of KBS Capital Advisors and an entity controlled by Mr. Schreiber, forsub-advisory services.

The Schreiber Trust, a trust whose beneficiaries are Charles J. Schreiber, Jr. and his family members, and the Linda Bren 2017 Trust also acquired units in the SREIT. The Schreiber Trust agreed that for the benefit of our company it will not sell any portion of its respective units in the SREIT unless and until it has received our prior written consent, including the consent of our conflicts committee. The Linda Bren 2017 Trust has agreed for the benefit of our company that it will not sell $5.0 million of its $10.0 million aggregate investment in the SREIT unless and until it has received our prior written consent, including the consent of our conflicts committee. Linda Bren is the spouse of our former director and president, who passed away in April 2019. Schreiber Real Estate Investments L.P. and PBren Investments L.P. are affiliated with Charles J. Schreiber, Jr. In addition, Barbara R. Cambon, one of our former directors, accepted the positions of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Investment Officer of the Manager and will receive compensation for her services. In connection with her acceptance of these positions, Ms. Cambon resigned from our board of directors effective June 26, 2019.

Allocation Policy.In connection with the Singapore Transaction, our advisor and KBS Realty Advisors proposed that our conflicts committee and board of directors determinedadopt an asset allocation policy (the “Allocation Process”) among us, KBS REIT II and KBS Growth & Income REIT (collectively, the lease to be fair“Core Strategy REITs”) and reasonable to us.

Thethe SREIT. Our conflicts committee has determinedand board of directors adopted the Allocation Process as proposed. The Allocation Process provides that, in order to mitigate potential conflicts of interest that may arise among the policies set forth in this ReportCore REITs and the SREIT, upon the listing of the Conflicts Committee are inSREIT on the best interestsSingapore Stock Exchange on July 19, 2019, potential asset acquisitions that meet all of our stockholders because they provide us with the highest likelihood of achieving our investment objectives.following criteria would be offered first to the SREIT:

To the extent the SREIT does not have the funds to acquire the asset or to the extent the Manager of the SREIT decides to forego the acquisition opportunity, such asset may then be offered to the Core Strategy REITs at the discretion of our advisor.

From January 1, 2018 through September 30, 2019, no other transactions occurred between us and KBS Real Estate Investment Trust, Inc. (“KBS REIT I”) (which liquidated in December 2018), KBS REIT II, Pacific Oak Strategic Opportunity REIT, Pacific Oak Strategic Opportunity REIT II, KBS Legacy Partners Apartment REIT (which liquidated in December 2018), KBS Growth & Income REIT, our dealer manager, our advisor or otherKBS-affiliated entities.

Effective October 31, 2019, Pacific Oak Strategic Opportunity REIT and Pacific Oak Strategic Opportunity REIT II transferred the management of the companies to a new external advisor, Pacific Oak Capital Advisors LLC. The transfer of management allows KBS Capital Advisors to focus on its current core asset portfolios, while the Pacific Oak group of companies focuses primarily on its current opportunistic portfolios. Pacific Oak Capital Advisors, LLC is owned and managed by Keith D. Hall and Peter McMillan III. Together, through GKP Holding LLC, Messrs. Hall and McMillan, indirectly own a 33 1/3% interest in KBS Capital Advisors and KBS Capital Markets Group.

39

Currently Proposed Transactions. There are no currently proposed material transactions with related persons other than those covered by the terms of the agreements described above and other than the Proposed NAV REIT Conversion. See “Proposed NAV REIT Conversion” for a discussion of the proposed acceleration of the advisor’s incentive fee and the other revised fees and expense reimbursements we would expect to implement in connection with a conversion to an NAV REIT, which we intend to pursue if Proposal 3 and Proposal 4 are approved by our stockholders.

Nomination of Directors

General

We do not have a standing nominating committee. Unless otherwise provided by Maryland law, the board of directors is responsible for selecting its own nominees and recommending them for election by our stockholders, provided that the conflicts committee is responsible for identifyingselecting and nominating replacements for vacancies among our independent director positions. Unless filled by a vote of theour stockholders as permitted by the Maryland General Corporation Law, a vacancy that results from the removal of a director will be filled by a vote of a majority of the remaining directors. Any vacancy on the board of directors for any other cause will be filled by a vote of a majority of the remaining directors, even if such majority vote is less than a quorum. The board of directors believes that the primary reason for creating a standing nominating committee is to ensure that candidates for independent director positions can be identified and their qualifications assessedevaluated under a process free from conflicts of interest with us. Because nominations for vacancies in independent director positions are handled exclusively by a committee composed only of independent directors, the board of directors has determined that the creation of a standing nominating committee is not necessary. We do not have a charter that governs the director nomination process.

16

Board Membership Criteria

With respect to filling vacancies for independent director positions, the conflicts committee reviews the appropriate experience, skills and characteristics required of directors in the context of the then-current membership of the board of directors. The full board of directors annually conducts a similar review with respect to all director nominations. This assessment includes, in the context of the perceived needs of the board of directors at that time, issues of knowledge, experience, judgment and skills, such as an understanding of the real estate and real estate finance industries or accounting or financial management expertise. The board of directors seeks to nominate directors with diverse backgrounds, experiences and skill sets that complement each other so as to maximize the collective knowledge, experience, judgment and skills of the entire board of directors. The board of directors assesses its effectiveness in achieving this goal annually, in part, by reviewing the diversity of the skill sets of the directors and determining whether there are any deficiencies in the board of directors’ collective skill set that should be addressed in the nominating process. The board of directors made such an assessment in connection with director nominations for the 2016 annual meeting of stockholders and determined that the composition of the current board of directors satisfies its diversity objectives.

Other considerations in director nominations include the candidate’s independence from conflict with us and the ability of the candidate to attend board meetings regularly and to devote an appropriate amount of time in preparation for those meetings. It also is expected that independent directors nominated by the conflicts committee will be individuals who possess a reputation and hold positions or affiliations befitting a director of a large publicly held company and who are actively engaged in their occupations or professions or are otherwise regularly involved in the business, professional or academic community. Moreover, as required by our charter, at least one of our independent directors must have at least three years of relevant real estate experience, and each director who is not an independent director must have at least three years of relevant experience demonstrating the knowledge and experience required to successfully acquire, manage and managedispose of the types of assets we acquire and manage.

Selection of Directors

Unless otherwise provided by Maryland law, the board of directors is responsible for selecting its own nominees and recommending them for election by our stockholders, provided that the conflicts committee must nominate replacements for any vacancies among the independent director positions. All director nominees stand for election by our stockholders annually.

40

In nominating candidates for the board of directors, the board of directors (or the conflicts committee, as appropriate) solicits candidate recommendations from its own members and the management of KBS Capital Advisors. The board of directors and the conflicts committee may also engage the services of a search firm to assist in identifying potential director nominees.

The board of directors and the conflicts committee will consider recommendations made by stockholders for director nominees who meet the established director criteria set forth above. In order to be considered for nomination, recommendations made by stockholders must be submitted within the timeframe required to request a proposal to be included in the proxy materials. See “Stockholder Proposals” below. In evaluating the persons recommended as potential directors, the board of directors (or the conflicts committee, as appropriate) will consider each candidate without regard to the source of the recommendation and take into account those factors that they determine are relevant. Stockholders may directly nominate potential directors (without the recommendation of the board of directors or conflicts committee) by satisfying the procedural requirements for such nomination as provided in Article II, Section 2.12 of our bylaws. Any stockholder may request a copy of our bylaws free of charge by calling 1-866-584-1381 and selecting “Option 2”.866-527-4264.

17

Stockholder Communications with the Board of Directors

We have established a procedure for stockholders to communicate comments and concerns to the board of directors. Stockholders may contact the board of directors at the following address:

Board of Directors of KBS Real Estate Investment Trust III, Inc.

800 Newport Center Drive, Suite 700

Newport Beach, California 92660

Stockholders should report any complaints or concerns regarding (1) suspected violations or concerns as to compliance with laws, regulations, our Code of Conduct and Ethics or other suspected wrongdoings affecting us or our properties or assets, or (2) any complaints or concerns regarding our accounting, internal accounting controls, auditing matters, or any concerns regarding any questionable accounting or auditing matters affecting us. Stockholders should report any such suspected violations or other complaints or concerns by any of the following means:

Audit Committee Chair

c/o KBS Real Estate Investment Trust III, Inc.

800 Newport Center Drive, Suite 700

Newport Beach, CA 92660

Reports made via the Ethics Hotline will be sent to our compliance officer, currently our advisor’s Chief Audit Executive, and the audit committee chair, provided that no person named in the report will receive the report directly.

Stockholders can also communicate directly with the Chairman of the Board at the annual meeting. Although we do not have a policy regarding the attendance of directors at annual meetings of stockholders, we expect that the Chairman of the Board will be present at all such meetings. AllOne of our directors, werethe Chairman of the Board, was present at the 20152018 annual meeting.meeting of stockholders.

41

Executive Officers and Directors

We have provided below certain information about our executive officers and directors. All of our directors have terms expiring on the date of the 2016 annual meeting of stockholders and are being nominated forre-election to serve until the 2017next annual meeting of stockholders and until his or her successor is elected and qualified.

18

We have nominated four directors for election at the annual meeting. Our charter provides that the number of directors on the board of directors is five. On April 25, 2019, Peter M. Bren, is our then President a position he has held since January 2010. He is also Chairmanand one of our affiliated directors, as well as one of the Boardindirect owners of KBS Holdings LLC, our sponsor and Presidentthe parent entity of our advisor, Presidentpassed away. We have nominated fewer director candidates for election at the annual meeting than the number provided in our charter while the board of KBS REIT I, President of KBS REIT II and President of KBS Growth & Income REIT, positions he has held for these entities since October 2004, June 2005, August 2007 and January 2015, respectively. Mr. Bren is President and a director of KBS Legacy Partners Apartment REIT, positions he has held since August 2009 and July 2009, respectively. In addition, Mr. Bren is a sponsor of our company and is a sponsor of KBS REIT I, KBS REIT II, KBS Strategic Opportunity REIT, KBS Legacy Partners Apartment REIT, KBS Strategic Opportunity REIT II and KBS Growth & Income REIT, which were formed in 2009, 2005, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2013 and 2015, respectively. Other than de minimis amounts owned by family membersdirectors considers whether to fill the vacant position or family trusts, Mr. Bren indirectly owns and controls a 33 1/3% interest in KBS Holdings LLC, which isreduce the sole owner of our advisor and our dealer manager. All four of our sponsors, Messrs. Bren, Hall, McMillan and Schreiber, actively participate in the management and operations of our advisor. Mr. Bren is a membersize of the investment committee formed by KBS Capital Advisors to evaluateboard. Stockholders may not vote for a greater number of persons than the number of nominees named.

⁽¹⁾ The address of each named executive officer and recommend new investment opportunities for us.director is 800 Newport Center Drive, Suite 700, Newport Beach, California 92660.

Mr. Bren is Chairman of the Board and President of KBS Realty Advisors LLC and is a principal of Koll Bren Schreiber Realty Advisors, Inc., each an active and nationally recognized real estate investment advisor. These entities are registered as investment advisers with the SEC. The first investment advisor affiliated with Messrs. Bren and Schreiber was formed in 1992.⁽²⁾ As of December 31, 2015, KBS Realty Advisors, together with KBS affiliates, including KBS Capital Advisors, had been involved in the investment in or management of approximately $21 billion of real estate investments on behalf of institutional investors, including public and private pension plans, endowments and foundations, institutional and sovereign wealth funds, and the investors in us, KBS REIT I, KBS REIT II, KBS Strategic Opportunity REIT, KBS Legacy Partners Apartment REIT, KBS Strategic Opportunity REIT II and KBS Growth & Income REIT.

Mr. Bren oversees all aspects of KBS Capital Advisors’ and KBS Realty Advisors’ operations, including the acquisition, management and disposition of individual investments and portfolios of investments for KBS-sponsored programs and KBS-advised investors. He also directs all facets of KBS Capital Advisors’ and KBS Realty Advisors’ business activities and is responsible for investor relationships.

Mr. Bren has been involved in real estate development, management, acquisition, disposition and financing for more than 40 years and with the acquisition, origination, management, disposition and financing of real estate-related debt investments for more than 30 years. Prior to taking his current positions as Chairman of the Board and President of KBS Capital Advisors and KBS Realty Advisors, he served as the President of The Bren Company, was a Senior Partner of Lincoln Property Company and was President of Lincoln Property Company, Europe. Mr. Bren is also a founding member of the Richard S. Ziman Center for Real Estate at the UCLA Anderson School of Management. He is also a member of the Real Estate Roundtable in Washington, D.C.November 1, 2019.

Charles J. Schreiber, Jr.is our Chairman of the Board, our Chief Executive Officer and one of our directors, positions he has held since January 2010, January 2010 and December 2009, respectively. In August 2019, he was also elected as our President. He is also the Chief Executive Officer of our advisor and Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer and a director of KBS REIT I and KBS Growth & Income REIT, positions he has held for these entities since October 2004 June 2005 and January 2015, respectively. Mr. Schreiber is Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer and a director of KBS REIT II, positions he has held since August 2007, August 2007 and July 2007, respectively. In addition,August 2019, Mr. Schreiber is a sponsorwas also elected President of our company and is a sponsor of KBS REIT I, KBS REIT II, KBS Strategic Opportunity REIT, KBS Legacy Partners Apartment REIT, KBS Strategic Opportunity REIT II and KBS Growth & Income REIT which were formedand KBS REIT II. Mr. Schreiber was Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer and a director of KBS REIT I from June 2005 until its liquidation in 2009, 2005, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2013 and 2015, respectively.December 2018. Other than de minimis amounts owned by family members or family trusts, Mr. Schreiber indirectly owns and controls a 33 1/3% interest in KBS Holdings LLC, which is the sole owner of our advisor and our dealer manager. All fourIn addition, Mr. Schreiber controls the voting rights with respect to the 33 1/3% interest of KBS Holdings LLC held indirectly by the estate of Peter M. Bren (together with other family members). KBS Holdings LLC is a sponsor of our sponsors, Messrs. Bren, Hall, McMillancompany and Schreiber, actively participateis or was a sponsor of KBS REIT I, KBS REIT II, Pacific Oak Strategic Opportunity REIT, KBS Legacy Partners Apartment REIT, Pacific Oak Strategic Opportunity REIT II and KBS Growth & Income REIT, which were formed in the management2009, 2005, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2013 and operations of our advisor. Mr. Schreiber is a member of the investment committee formed by KBS Capital Advisors to evaluate and recommend new investment opportunities for us.2015, respectively.

Mr. Schreiber is the Chief Executive Officer of KBS Realty Advisors LLC and is a principal of Koll Bren Schreiber Realty Advisors, Inc., each an active and nationally recognized real estate investment advisor. These entities are registered as investment advisers with the SEC. Messrs. Bren and Schreiber were the founding partners of theKBS-affiliated investment advisors. The first investment advisor affiliated with Messrs. Bren and Schreiber was formed in 1992. As of December 31, 2015,September 30, 2019, KBS Realty Advisors, together with KBS affiliates, including KBS Capital Advisors, had been involved in the investment in or management of approximately $21

19

$27.6 billion of real estate investments on behalf of institutional investors, including public and private pension plans, endowments and foundations, institutional and sovereign wealth funds, and the investors in us, KBS REIT I, KBS REIT II, KBSPacific Oak Strategic Opportunity REIT (advisory agreement terminated October 31, 2019), KBS Legacy Partners Apartment REIT, KBSPacific Oak Strategic Opportunity REIT II (advisory agreement terminated October 31, 2019) and

42

KBS Growth & Income REIT. Through October 31, 2019, our advisor also served as the U.S. asset manager for Keppel Pacific Oak US REIT, and KBS Realty Advisors serves as the U.S. asset manager for Prime US REIT, both Singapore real estate investment trusts.

Mr. Schreiber oversees all aspects of KBS Capital Advisors’ and KBS Realty Advisors’ operations, including the acquisition, management and managementdisposition of individual investments and portfolios of investments forKBS-sponsored programs andKBS-advised investors. He also directs all facets of KBS Capital Advisors’ and KBS Realty Advisors’ business activities and is responsible for investor relationships.

In addition, since July 2018, Mr. Schreiber has served as Chairman of the Board and a director for KBS US Prime Property Management Pte. Ltd., which is the external manager of Prime US REIT, a Singapore real estate investment trust that is listed on the Singapore Stock Exchange. Mr. Schreiber holds an indirect ownership interest in KBS US Prime Property Management Pte. Ltd. and KBS Asia Partners Pte. Ltd., which is the sponsor of Prime US REIT.

Mr. Schreiber has been involved in real estate development, management, acquisition, disposition and financing for more than 40 years and with the acquisition, origination, management, disposition and financing of real estate-related debt investments for more than 30 years. Prior to teaming with Mr. Brenforming the firstKBS-affiliated investment advisor in 1992, he served as the Executive Vice President of Koll Investment Management Services and Executive Vice President of Acquisitions/Dispositions for The Koll Company. During themid-1970s through the 1980s, he was Founder and President of Pacific Development Company and was previously Senior Vice President/Southern California Regional Manager of Ashwill-Burke Commercial Brokerage.

Mr. Schreiber graduated from the University of Southern California with a Bachelor’s Degree in Finance with an emphasis in Real Estate. During his four years at USC, he did graduate work in the then newly-formednewly formed Real Estate Department in the USC Graduate School of Business. He is currently an Executive Board Member for the USC Lusk Center for Real Estate at the University of Southern California Marshall School of Business/School of Policy, Planning and Development. Mr. Schreiber alsoDevelopment and serves as a member of the Executive Committee for the PublicNon-Listed REIT Council for the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts. He is also a member of the National Council of Real Estate Investment Fiduciaries. Mr. Schreiber has served as a member of the board of directors and executive committee of The Irvine Company since August 2016, and since December 2016, Mr. Schreiber has served on the Board of Trustees of The Irvine Company.

The board of directors has concluded that Mr. Schreiber is qualified to serve as a director, Chairman of the Board and as our Chief Executive Officer and President for reasons including his extensive industry and leadership experience. Since the formation of the first investment advisor affiliated with Messrs. Bren and Schreiber in 1992, and through December 31, 2015, Mr. Schreiber had been involved in the investment in or management of over $21 billion of real estate investments through KBS affiliates. With more than 40 years of experience in real estate development, management, acquisition and disposition and more than 30 years of experience with the acquisition, origination, management, disposition and financing of real estate-related debt investments, he has the depth and breadth of experience to implement our business strategy. He gained his understanding of the real estate and real estate-finance markets throughhands-on experience with acquisitions, asset and portfolio management, asset repositioning and dispositions. As our Chief Executive Officer and a principal of our external advisor, Mr. Schreiber is best-positioned to provide the board of directors with insights and perspectives on the execution of our business strategy, our operations and other internal matters. Further, as a principal ofKBS-affiliated investment advisors, as Chief Executive Officer, President, Chairman of the Board and a director of KBS REIT II and KBS Growth & Income REIT, as a director and trustee of The Irvine Company, as Chairman of the Board and a director of KBS US Prime Property Management Pte. Ltd. and as former Chief Executive Officer, Chairman of the Board and a director of KBS REIT I, KBS REIT II and KBS Growth & Income REIT, Mr. Schreiber brings to the board of directors demonstrated management and leadership ability.

Peter McMillan IIIJeffrey K. Waldvogel is one of our Executive Vice Presidents, our Treasurer and Secretary, and one of our directors, positions he has held since January 2010. He is also an Executive Vice President, the Treasurer and Secretary and a director of KBS REIT I, KBS REIT II and KBS Growth & Income REIT, positions he has held for these entities since June 2005, August 2007 and January 2015, respectively. He is President, Chairman of the Board and a director of KBS Strategic Opportunity REIT and KBS Strategic Opportunity REIT II, positions he has held for these entities since December 2008 and February 2013, respectively. He is also an Executive Vice President of KBS Legacy Partners Apartment REIT, which position he has held since August 2009. In addition, Mr. McMillan is a sponsor of our company and is a sponsor of KBS REIT I, KBS REIT II, KBS Strategic Opportunity REIT, KBS Legacy Partners Apartment REIT, KBS Strategic Opportunity REIT II and KBS Growth & Income REIT, which were formed in 2009, 2005, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2013 and 2015, respectively. Mr. McMillan owns and controls a 50% interest in GKP Holding LLC. GKP Holding owns a 33 1/3% interest in KBS Holdings LLC, which is the sole owner of our advisor and our dealer manager. All four of our sponsors, Messrs. Bren, Hall, McMillan and Schreiber, actively participate in the management and operations of our advisor. Mr. McMillan is a member of the investment committee formed by KBS Capital Advisors to evaluate and recommend new investment opportunities for us.

20

Mr. McMillan is a Partner and co-owner of Temescal Canyon Partners LP, an investment advisor formed in 2013 to manage a multi-strategy hedge fund on behalf of investors. Mr. McMillan is also a co-founder and the Managing Partner of Willowbrook Capital Group, LLC which, from August 2003 until December 2012, was an asset management company. Prior to forming Willowbrook in 2000, Mr. McMillan served as an Executive Vice President and Chief InvestmentFinancial Officer, of SunAmerica Investments, Inc., which was later acquired by AIG. As Chief Investment Officer, he was responsible for over $75.0 billion in assets, including residential and commercial mortgage-backed securities, public and private investment grade and non-investment grade corporate bonds and commercial mortgage loans and real estate investments. Before joining SunAmerica in 1989, he served as Assistant Vice President for Aetna Life Insurance and Annuity Company with responsibility for the company’s $6.0 billion fixed income portfolios. Mr. McMillan received his Master of Business Administration in Finance from the Wharton Graduate School of Business at the University of Pennsylvania and his Bachelor of Arts Degree with honors in Economics from Clark University. Mr. McMillan is a member of the Board of Trustees of Metropolitan West Funds and TCW Mutual Funds and is a former director of Steinway Musical Instruments, Inc.

The board of directors has concluded that Mr. McMillan is qualified to serve as one of our directors for reasons including his expertise in real estate finance and with real estate-related investments. With over 30 years of experience investing in and managing real estate-related debt investments, Mr. McMillan offers insights and perspective with respect to our real estate-related investment portfolio as well as our real estate portfolio. As one of our executive officers and a principal of our advisor, Mr. McMillan is also able to direct the board of directors to the critical issues facing our company. Further, his experiences as a director of KBS REIT I, KBS REIT II, KBS Strategic Opportunity REIT, KBS Strategic Opportunity REIT II and KBS Growth & Income REIT, as a member of the Board of Trustees of Metropolitan West Funds and TCW Mutual Funds, and as a former director of Steinway Musical Instruments, Inc., provide him with an understanding of the requirements of serving on a public company board.

Keith D. Hall is one of our Executive Vice Presidents, a position he has held since January 2010. He is an Executive Vice President of KBS REIT I, KBS REIT II and KBS Growth & Income REIT, positions he has held for these entities since June 2005, August 2007 and January 2015, respectively. He is also the Chief Executive Officer and a director of KBS Strategic Opportunity REIT, positions he has held since December 2008 and October 2008, respectively, and is the Chief Executive Officer and a director of KBS Strategic Opportunity REIT II, positions he has held since February 2013.2015. In addition, Mr. Hall is a sponsor of our company and is a sponsor of KBS REIT I, KBS REIT II, KBS Strategic Opportunity REIT, KBS Legacy Partners Apartment REIT, KBS Strategic Opportunity REIT II and KBS Growth & Income REIT, which were formed in 2009, 2005, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2013 and 2015, respectively. Mr. Hall owns and controls a 50% interest in GKP Holding LLC. GKP Holding owns a 33 1/3% interest in KBS Holdings LLC, which is the sole owner of our advisor and our dealer manager. All four of our sponsors, Messrs. Bren, Hall, McMillan and Schreiber, actively participate in the management and operations of our advisor. Mr. Hall is a member of the investment committee formed by KBS Capital Advisors to evaluate and recommend new investment opportunities for us.

Mr. Hall is a co-founder of Willowbrook Capital Group, LLC which, from August 2003 until December 2012, was an asset management company. Prior to forming Willowbrook in 2000, Mr. Hall was a Managing Director at CS First Boston, where he managed the distribution strategy and business development for the Principal Transaction Group’s $18.0 billion real estate securities portfolio. Mr. Hall’s two primary business unit responsibilities were Mezzanine Lending and Commercial Real Estate Development. Before joining CS First Boston in 1996, he served as a Director in the Real Estate Products Group at Nomura Securities, with responsibility for the company’s $6.0 billion annual pipeline of fixed-income, commercial mortgage-backed securities. During the 1980s, Mr. Hall was a Senior Vice President in the High Yield Department of Drexel Burnham Lambert’s Beverly Hills office, whereJuly 2018, he was responsible for distribution of the group’s high-yield real estate securities. Mr. Hall received a Bachelor of Arts Degree with honors in Finance from California State University, Sacramento.

Jeffrey K. Waldvogelisalso elected our Chief Financial OfficerTreasurer and Assistant Secretary, positions he has held since June 2015.Secretary. He is also the Chief Financial Officer of our advisor and Chief Financial Officer and Assistant Secretary of KBS REIT I, KBS REIT II, and KBS Growth & Income REIT, positions he has held for each of these entities since June 2015. In August 2018, Mr. Waldvogel was elected the Treasurer and Secretary of KBS REIT II. He is also the Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer and Secretary of KBS Growth & Income REIT, positions he has held since June 2015, April 2017 and April 2017, respectively. From June 2015 until November 2019, he also served as the Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer and Secretary of Pacific Oak Strategic Opportunity REIT and Pacific Oak Strategic Opportunity REIT II. He was Chief Financial Officer of KBS REIT I and KBS Legacy Partners Apartment REIT and KBS Strategic Opportunity REIT II, positions he has held for these

2143

Mr. Waldvogel has been employed by an affiliate of our advisor since November 2010. With respect to theKBS-sponsored REITs advised by our advisor, he served as the Director of Finance and Reporting from July 2012 to June 2015 and as the VP Controller Technical Accounting from November 2010 to July 2012. In these roles Mr. Waldvogel was responsible for overseeing internal and external financial reporting, valuation analysis, financial analysis, REIT compliance, debt compliance and reporting, and technical accounting.

Prior to joining an affiliate of KBS Realty Advisorsour advisor in 2010, Mr. Waldvogel was an audit senior manager at Ernst & Young LLP. During his eight years at Ernst & Young LLP, where he worked from October 2002 to October 2010, Mr. Waldvogel performed or supervised various auditing engagements, including the audit of financial statements presented in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”),GAAP, as well as financial statements prepared on a tax basis. These auditing engagements were for clients in a variety of industries, with a significant focus on clients in the real estate industry.

In April 2002, Mr. Waldvogel received a Master of Accountancy Degree and Bachelor of Science from Brigham Young University in Provo, Utah. Mr. Waldvogel is a Certified Public Accountant (California).

Stacie K. Yamaneis our Chief Accounting Officer, a position she has held since January 2010. In July 2018, she was also elected our Assistant Secretary. Ms. Yamane is also the Chief Accounting Officer, Portfolio Accounting of our advisor and Chief Accounting Officer of KBS REIT I, KBS REIT II, KBS Strategic Opportunity REIT, KBS Legacy Partners Apartment REIT, KBS Strategic Opportunity REIT II and KBS Growth & Income REIT, positions she has held for these entities since October 2008, October 2008 October 2008, August 2009, August 2009, February 2013 and January 2015, respectively. From August 2009 until November 2019 and from February 2013 until November 2019, she served as Chief Accounting Officer of Pacific Oak Strategic Opportunity REIT and Pacific Oak Strategic Opportunity REIT II, respectively. From August 2009 until its liquidation in December 2018, she served as Chief Accounting Officer of KBS Legacy Partners Apartment REIT; from October 2008 until its liquidation in December 2018, she served as Chief Accounting Officer of KBS REIT I. From July 2007 to December 2008, Ms. Yamane served as the Chief Financial Officer of KBS REIT II and from July 2007 to October 2008 she served as Controller of KBS REIT II; from October 2004 to October 2008, Ms. Yamane served as Fund Controller of our advisor; from June 2005 to December 2008, she served as Chief Financial Officer of KBS REIT I and from June 2005 to October 2008 she served as Controller of KBS REIT I.

Ms. Yamane also serves as Senior Vice President/Controller, Portfolio Accounting for KBS Realty Advisors LLC, a position she has held since 2004. She served as a Vice President/Portfolio Accounting withKBS-affiliated investment advisors from 1995 to 2004. At KBS Realty Advisors, from 2004 through 2015, Ms. Yamane was responsible for client accounting/reporting for two real estate portfolios. These portfolios consisted of industrial, office and retail properties as well as land parcels. Ms. Yamane worked closely with portfolio managers, asset managers, property managers and clients to ensure the completion of timely and accurate accounting, budgeting and financial reporting. In addition, she assisted in the supervision and management of KBS Realty Advisors’ accounting department.

Prior to joining an affiliate of KBS Realty Advisors in 1995, Ms. Yamane was an audit manager at Kenneth Leventhal & Company, a CPA firm specializing in real estate. During her eight years at Kenneth Leventhal & Company, Ms. Yamane performed or supervised a variety of auditing, accounting and consulting engagements including the audit of financial statements presented in accordance with GAAP, as well as financial statements presented on a cash and tax basis, the valuation of asset portfolios and the review and analysis of internal control systems. Her experiences with variousKBS-affiliated entities and Kenneth Leventhal & Company give her over 25almost 30 years of real estate experience.

Ms. Yamane received a Bachelor of Arts Degree in Business Administration with a dual concentration in Accounting and Management Information Systems from California State University, Fullerton. She is a Certified Public Accountant (inactive California).

Hank AdlerJeffrey A. Dritley is one of our independent directors and is the chair of the auditconflicts committee, positions he has held since September 2010. Professor Adler is also an independent directorOctober 2017 and chair of the audit committee of KBS REIT I and KBS REIT II, positions he has held for these entities since June 2005 and March 2008,July 2019, respectively. He is currently an Assistant Professor of Accounting at Chapman University. Prior to his retirement from Deloitte & Touche, LLP in 2003, Professor Adler was a partner with that firm where he had been employed for over 30 years. He specialized in tax accounting and served as client service and tax partner for a variety of public and private

22

companies. He received a Bachelor of Science in Accounting and a Master of Business Administration from the University of California, Los Angeles. From 2004 to 2015, Professor Adler served on the board of directors and as chairman of the audit committee of Corinthian Colleges, Inc., and he served on the board of directors and on the finance committee of Healthy Smiles for Kids of Orange County, a California non-profit entity. From 1998 to 2007, he also chaired the Toshiba Senior Classic charity event, a PGA Senior Tour championship event. From 1994 to 2006, he served on the board of directors of Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian. In the 1990s, he served on the board of trustees and as President of the Irvine Unified School District. Professor Adler is a Certified Public Accountant (California).

The board of directors has concluded that Professor Adler is qualified to serve as an independent director and as the chair of the audit committee for reasons including his extensive experience in public accounting. With over 30 years at one of the big four accounting firms, Professor Adler brings to the board of directors critical insights into and an understanding of the accounting principles and financial reporting rules and regulations affecting our company. His expertise in evaluating the financial and operational results of public companies and overseeing the financial reporting process makes him a valuable director and chair of the audit committee. In addition, as a director and chair of the audit committee of KBS REIT I and KBS REIT II and as a former director of Corinthian Colleges, Inc., of Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian and of Healthy Smiles for Kids of Orange County, Professor Adler is well aware of the corporate governance and regulatory issues facing public and other companies.

Barbara R. Cambon is one of our independent directors and is the chair of the conflicts committee, positions she has held since September 2010. Ms. Cambon is also an independent director and chair of the conflicts committee of KBS REIT I and KBS REIT II, positions shehe has held for these entities since June 2005October 2017 and March 2008,July 2019, respectively. Mr. Dritley is Founder and Managing Partner of Kearny Real Estate Company. Kearny, headquartered in Los Angeles, is a partnership of experienced real estate professionals active in the acquisition, entitlement, repositioning, development, leasing, management and disposition of large, complex commercial projects in Southern California. Since 1993, Kearny has been involved in approximately $4.4 billion of projects including the acquisition andwork-out of approximately $2.3 billion of distressed real estate debt.

44

From April 20091993 to December 2010, she served as Chief Operating Officer of Premium One Asset Management LLC, a company whose business focuses on providing investment management services to investors. From October 2003 to October 2009, she also2001, Mr. Dritley served as a Managing MemberDirector of Snowcreek Management LLC,Morgan Stanley, where he was responsible for the Morgan Stanley Real Estate Fund’s (“MSREF”) West Coast operations and was a member of the global investment committee. During his tenure, MSREF was involved in over $3 billion of transactions, including significant acquisitions, refinancings and work-outs. From 1986 to 1993, Mr. Dritley was employed by The Koll Company, a major real estate asset managementdevelopment company whose business activities focus on residential development projects for institutional investors. As Managing Member, Ms. Cambon provided asset management servicesin the western United States. From 1979 to an institutional partnership investment1984, Mr. Dritley was employed by Peat, Marwick, Mitchell in residential real estate development. SheKansas City and New York City.

Mr. Dritley has been involved30 years of experience in the real estate investment business forindustry. His experience has ranged from the acquisition, entitlement, development and redevelopment of over 30 years, principally working14 million square feet of properties in Southern California, to creating and managing an organization with institutional capital sourcesover 100 employees in the United States, Europe and investment programs. Asia focused on buying and restructuringnon-performing loans.

From November 1999 until October 2002, she2009 to 2016 Mr. Dritley served as a Principaldirector, chairman of Los Angeles-based Colony Capital, LLC,the compensation committee and member of the investment committee of Bixby Land Company, a private real estate investment firm,REIT with assets exceeding $1 billion, and from April 2000 until October 2002, she also2008 to 2016, he served as its Chief Operating Officer. Priora Senior Advisor to joining Colony Capital in 1999, Ms. Cambon was President and founder of InstitutionalTrigate Property Consultants, Inc.,Partners, a real estate consulting company. Sheprivate equity firm that manages a partnership with CalSTRS. He also has been active in several professional organizations, including the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corporation, for which he served on the Executive Committee, the Urban Land Institute and the Los Angeles Chapter of NAIOP, of which he is a past director and chairman ofpresident. His community involvement included serving on the board of the Pension Real EstateNeighborhood Youth Association in Venice, California and past director of the National Council of Real Estate Investment Fiduciaries. Ms. Cambon serves on the Advisory Board of the University of San Diego Burnham-Moores Centervolunteering his time for Real Estate Policy. Ms. Cambon previously served on the board of directors of Amstar Advisers, Neighborhood National Bancorpyouth sports and BioMed Realty Trust, Inc. Ms. Cambon receivedBoy Scouts. Mr. Dritley is a Master of Business Administration from Southern Methodist UniversityCertified Public Accountant and holds a Bachelor of ScienceBachelor’s Degree in EducationBusiness Administration from the University of Delaware.Missouri and an MBA from Harvard Business School.

The board of directors has concluded that Ms. CambonMr. Dritley is qualified to serve as an independent director and as the chair of the conflicts committee for reasons including herhis expertise in real estate investmentacquisition, restructuring and management. Ms. Cambon’sdisposition. His over 30 years of experience investing in managing and disposing ofthe real estate on behalfindustry gives him significant experience that will be of investors give her a wealthgreat benefit to our company and make him well-positioned to advise the board of knowledgedirectors with respect to potential investment, restructuring and experiences from which to draw in advising our company.disposition opportunities. As formerFounder and Managing MemberPartner of her ownKearny Real Estate Company, Mr. Dritley has encountered the myriad of practical, operational and other challenges that face large real estate asset management company, Ms. Cambon is acutely aware of the operational challenges facing companies such aslike ours. Further, her service as a director and chairin the course of serving on the conflicts committeeboard of KBS REIT I and KBS REIT II, both public REITs,directors of Bixby Land Company and as a former directorSenior Advisor to Trigate Property Partners, Mr. Dritley has developed strong leadership and consensus building skills that are a valuable asset to the board of Amstar Advisers, Neighborhood National Bancorpdirectors. In addition, as a Certified Public Accountant, he possesses valuable expertise in evaluating the financial and BioMed Realty Trust, Inc., gives her additional perspective and insight into large publicoperational results of companies such as ours.

Stuart A. Gabriel, Ph.D. is one of our independent directors a positionand is chair of the audit committee, positions he has held since September 2010.2010 and August 2018, respectively. Professor Gabriel is also an independent director and is chair of KBS REIT I andthe audit committee of KBS REIT II, positions he has held for these entities since March 2008 and August 2018, respectively. Professor Gabriel was an independent director of KBS REIT I from June 2005 and March 2008, respectively.until its liquidation in December 2018. Since June 2007, Professor Gabriel has served as Director of the Richard S. Ziman Center for Real Estate and Professor of Finance and Arden Realty Chair at the UCLA Anderson School of Management. Prior to joining UCLA he was Director and Lusk Chair in Real Estate at the USC Lusk Center for Real Estate, a position he held from 1999 to 2007. Professor Gabriel also served as Professor of Finance and Business Economics in the Marshall School of Business at the University of Southern California, a

23

position he held from 1990 to 2007. He received a number of awards at UCLA and USC for outstanding graduate teaching. In 2004, he was elected President of the American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association. Professor Gabriel serves on the editorial boards of seven academic journals. He is also a Fellow of the Homer Hoyt Institute for Advanced Real Estate Studies. Since March 2016, Professor Gabriel has served on the board of directors of KB Home and is a member of its audit committee. Professor Gabriel has published extensively on the topics of real estate finance and urban and regional economics. His teaching and academic research experience include analysis of real estate and real estate capital markets performance as well as structured finance products, including credit default swaps, commercial mortgage-backed securities and collateralized debt obligations. Professor Gabriel serves as a consultant to numerous corporate and governmental entities. From 1986 through 1990, Professor Gabriel served on the economics staff of the Federal Reserve Board in Washington, D.C. He also has been a Visiting Scholar at the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco. Professor Gabriel holds a Ph.D. in Economics from the University of California, Berkeley.

The board of directors has concluded that Professor Gabriel is qualified to serve as an independent director for reasons including his extensive knowledge and understanding of the real estate and finance markets and real

45

estate finance products. As a professor of real estate finance and economics, Professor Gabriel brings unique perspective to the board of directors. His years of research and analysis of the real estate and finance markets make Professor Gabriel well-positioned to advise us with respect to our investment and financing strategy. This expertise also makes him an invaluable resource for assessing and managing risks facing our company. Through his experience as a director of KBS REIT III and KB Home and as a former director of KBS REIT II,I, he also has an understanding of the requirements of serving on a public company board.

Ron D. Sturzenegger is one of our independent directors, a position he has held since August 2019. On September 3, 2019, Mr. Sturzenegger was also appointed as an independent director of KBS REIT II.

Mr. Sturzenegger has over 30 years of experience in the real estate industry through his career at major financial institutions. From July 2014 to January 2018, Mr. Sturzenegger was Enterprise Business & Community Engagement Executive at Bank of America, responsible for leading Bank of America’s strategy to integrate the delivery of its products and services to customers and clients in 90 key U.S. markets. In his role overseeing Enterprise Business & Community Engagement, he was responsible for driving global integration opportunities across the enterprise. In addition, Mr. Sturzenegger led Bank of America’s strategy through which leaders representing all the company’s various businesses in a given market or community worked together to integrate the delivery of products and services for customers and clients, including the oversight of the Market Presidents Organization.

From August 2011 to April 2015, Mr. Sturzenegger was on the Management Committee of Bank of America and Legacy Asset Servicing (LAS) Executive at Bank of America, whose responsibilities included resolving legacy mortgage issues following Bank of America’s acquisition of Countrywide Financial and Merrill Lynch during the financial crisis and the downturn in the U.S. housing markets, the management of the servicing of current, delinquent andat-risk loans, and the development and implementation of operational capabilities and processes to address regulators’ concerns regarding robo-signing.

From January 2009 to August 2011, Mr. Sturzenegger served as Managing Director and Global Head of Real Estate, Gaming and Lodging Investment Banking at Bank of America Merrill Lynch, and from January 2002 to December 2008, Mr. Sturzenegger served as Managing Director and Global Head of Real Estate, Gaming and Lodging Investment Banking for Bank of America Securities. From July 1998 to December 2001, he served as Head of Real Estate Mergers and Acquisitions at Bank of America Securities. From July 1986 to June 1998, Mr. Sturzenegger served in various roles at Morgan Stanley in Real Estate Investment Banking. From 1982 to 1984, Mr. Sturzenegger was a Financial Analyst with Bain & Company.

Mr. Sturzenegger serves on the Executive Committee for the policy advisory board for the Fisher Center for Real Estate & Urban Economics. He a member of the advisory board of the Stanford Professionals in Real Estate. Mr. Sturzenegger and his wife previously served as Chairs of the Parents’ Advisory Board for Stanford University. Mr. Sturzenegger holds a Bachelor of Science Degree in Industrial Engineering from Stanford University and an MBA from Harvard Business School.

The board of directors has concluded that Mr. Sturzenegger is qualified to serve as an independent director for reasons including his extensive real estate industry, investment banking and leadership experience. Mr. Sturzenegger’s 30 years of experience in the real estate industry through his career at major financial institutions given him the depth and breadth of experience from which to draw in advising our company. Through his executive and management roles at Bank of America, Mr. Sturzenegger brings to the board demonstrated management and leadership ability.

46

Compensation of Executive Officers

Our executive officers do not receive compensation directly from us for services rendered to us. Our executive officers are officers and/or employees of, or hold an indirect ownership interest in, our advisor and/or its affiliates, and our executive officers are compensated by these entities, in part, for their services to us. See “Report of the“—The Conflicts Committee – Certain—Certain Transactions with Related Persons” above for a discussion of the fees paid to our advisor and its affiliates.

Compensation of Directors

If a director is also one of our executive officers, we do not pay any compensation to that person for services rendered as a director. The amount and form of compensation payable to our independent directors for their service to us is determined by the conflicts committee, based upon recommendations from our advisor. FourOne of our executive officers, Messrs. Bren, Hall, McMillanMr. Schreiber, manages and Schreiber, manage and controlcontrols our advisor, and through our advisor, they arehe is involved in recommending and setting the compensation to be paid to our independent directors.

In order to attract and retain qualified individuals to serve as independent directors and in conjunction with the search for an independent director candidate to fill a vacancy on our board of directors at the time, the conflicts committee engaged Pearl Meyer, an independent executive compensation consultant, to conduct a review and make recommendations to the conflicts committee relating to the committee’s review of the compensation to be paid to independent directors. The conflicts committee instructed Pearl Meyer to identify a peer group of companies to determine how our independent director compensation compared to this group, to provide an analysis of the compensation paid to the independent directors of the peer group and paid to each of our independent directors and then to advise the conflicts committee with respect to such analysis. Pearl Meyer did not provide any additional services to us or the conflicts committee. Pearl Meyer was also engaged by the conflicts committee of an entity affiliated with us to provide the same analysis and advice with respect to the compensation of its independent directors. Based on consultation with and the study presented by Pearl Meyer and the recommendations contained therein, the conflicts committee’s own review of the Pearl Meyer study and the recommendation of our advisor, the conflicts committee approved a revised compensation structure for our independent directors on October 31, 2017.

We have provided below certain information regarding compensation earned by or paid to our directors during fiscal year 2015.2018.

2447

Cash Compensation

We compensate each of our independent directors with an annual retainer of $40,000. In addition, we pay$135,000 as well as paying compensation to our independent directors for attending board of directors and audit or conflicts committee meetings as follows:

All directors receive reimbursement of reasonableout-of-pocket expenses incurred in connection with attendance at board of directors meetings and committee meetings.

2548

STOCK OWNERSHIP

The following table shows, as of AprilJanuary 8, 2016,2020, the amount of our common stock beneficially owned (unless otherwise indicated) by (1) any person who is known by us to be the beneficial owner of more than 5% of the outstanding shares of our common stock, (2) our directors, (3) our executive officers, and (4) all of our directors and executive officers as a group.

Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance

Under U.S. securities laws, directors, executive officers, and any persons beneficially owning more than 10% of our common stock are required to report their initial ownership of the common stock and most changes in that ownership to the SEC. The SEC has designated specific due dates for these reports, and we are required to identify in this proxy statement those persons who did not file these reports when due. Based solely on our review of copies of the reports filed with the SEC and written representations of our directors and executive officers, we believe all persons subject to the Section 16 reporting requirements filed the reports on a timely basis in 2015.

2649

PROPOSAL 1. ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

At the annual meeting, you and the other stockholders will vote on the election of all fivefour members of the board of directors. Those persons elected will serve as directors until the 2017next annual meeting and until their successors are duly elected and qualified. The board of directors has nominated the following people forre-election as directors:

Each of the nominees for director is a current director. Detailed information on each nominee is provided under “Certain Information About Management — Executive Officers and Directors.”

We have nominated four directors for election at the annual meeting. Our charter provides that the number of directors on pages 19 through 24.the board of directors is five. On April 25, 2019, Peter M. Bren, our then President and one of our affiliated directors, as well as one of the indirect owners of KBS Holdings LLC, our sponsor and the parent entity of our advisor, passed away. We have nominated fewer director candidates for election at the annual meeting than the number provided in our charter while the board of directors considers whether to fill the vacant position or reduce the size of the board. Stockholders may not vote for a greater number of persons than the number of nominees named.

Vote Required

Under our charter, a majority of the shares entitled to vote and present in person or by proxy at an annual meeting at which a quorum is present is required for the election of the directors. This means that, of the shares entitled to vote and present in person or by proxy at an annual meeting, a director nominee needs to receive affirmative votes from a majority of such shares in order to be elected to the board of directors. Because of this majority vote requirement,“withhold” votes and brokernon-voteswill have the effect of a vote against each nominee for director. Broker non-votes, since they are not entitled to vote, will have no effect on the determination of this proposal. If an incumbent director nominee fails to receive the required number of votes forre-election, then under Maryland law, he or she will continue to serve as a “holdover” director until his or her successor is duly elected and qualified.

The appointed proxies will vote your shares of common stock as you instruct. If you submit a proxy card with no further instructions, the appointed proxies will vote your shares FOR all of the director nominees listed above. If any nominee becomes unable or unwilling to stand forre-election, the board of directors may reduce its size or designate a substitute. If a substitute is designated, proxies voting on the original nominee will be cast for the substituted nominee.

Whether or not you plan to attend the annual meeting and vote in person, we urge you to have your vote recorded. Stockholders have the following three options for submitting their votes by proxy: (1)(i) via the Internet, (2)(ii) by telephone or (3) if you receive a paper copy of our proxy materials,(iii) by mail, using the paperenclosed proxy card.YOUR VOTE IS VERY IMPORTANT!IMPORTANT! Your immediate response will help avoid potential delays and may save us significant additional expenses associated with soliciting stockholder votes.

Recommendation

THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDS A VOTE “FOR” ALL

NOMINEES LISTED FORRE-ELECTION AS DIRECTORS.

2750

PROPOSAL 2. RATIFICATION OF APPOINTMENT OF INDEPENDENT

REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

At the annual meeting, you and the other stockholders will vote on the ratification of the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm for the year ending December 31, 2016.2019.

During the year ended December 31, 2018, Ernst & Young LLP served as our independent registered public accounting firm and provided certain tax and other services. Ernst & Young LLP has served as our independent registered public accounting firm since our formation. The audit committee has appointed Ernst & Young LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm for the year ending December 31, 2016.2019.

The audit committee is directly responsible for the appointment, compensation, retention and oversight of the work of the independent registered public accounting firm. In making its determination regarding whether to appoint or retain a particular independent registered public accounting firm, the audit committee takes into account the opinions of management and our internal auditors in assessing the independent registered public accounting firm’s qualifications, performance and independence. Notwithstanding its

Although not required by law or our governance documents, we believe ratification of this appointment is good corporate practice because the audit of our books and records is a matter of importance to our stockholders. Even if the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP is ratified, the audit committee may, however, select a new auditorsindependent registered public accounting firm at any time in the future in its discretion if it deems such decision to be in our best interests.interest. Any such decision would be disclosed to our stockholders in accordance with applicable securities laws. If the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP is not ratified by our stockholders, the audit committee may consider whether it should appoint another independent registered public accounting firm.

During the year ended December 31, 2015, Ernst & Young LLP served as our independent registered public accounting firm and provided certain tax and other services. Ernst & Young LLP has served as our independent registered public accounting firm since our formation. We expect that Ernst & Young LLP representatives will be present at the annual meeting and they will have the opportunity to make a statement if they desire to do so. In addition, we expect that the Ernst & Young LLP representatives will be available to respond to appropriate questions posed by stockholders.

Vote Required

Under our bylaws, a majority of the votes cast at an annual meeting at which a quorum is present is required for the ratification of the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm for the year ending December 31, 2016.2019. Abstentions, if any, will not count as votes actually cast with respect to determining if a majority vote is obtained under our bylaws and will have no effect onaffect the determinationoutcome of this proposal. Your shares may be voted for this proposal if they are held in the name of a brokerage firm even if you do not provide the brokerage firm with voting instructions.

The appointed proxies will vote your shares of common stock as you instruct. If you submit a proxy card with no further instructions, the appointed proxies will vote your shares FOR the ratification of the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm for the year ending December 31, 2016.2019.

Whether or not you plan to attend the annual meeting and vote in person, we urge you to have your vote recorded. Stockholders have the following three options for submitting their votes by proxy: (1)(i) via the Internet, (2)(ii) by telephone or (3) if you receive a paper copy of our proxy materials,(iii) by mail, using the paperenclosed proxy card.YOUR VOTE IS VERY IMPORTANT! Your immediate response will help avoid potential delays and may save us significant additional expenses associated with soliciting stockholder votes.

Recommendation

THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDS A VOTE “FOR”

“FOR” THE RATIFICATION OF THE APPOINTMENT OF ERNST &

YOUNG LLP AS OUR INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC

ACCOUNTING FIRM FOR THE YEAR ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2016.

2851

PROPOSAL 3. CHARTER AMENDMENT

Proposed Amendment

We are proposing the deletion of Section 5.11 of our charter, which provides as follows:

Section 5.11.  Actions Required if Common Stock Not Listed.    If by September 30, 2020 the shares of Common Stock are not Listed, then the board of directors must adopt a resolution that declares a proposed liquidation is advisable on substantially the terms and conditions set forth in the resolution and direct that the proposed liquidation be submitted for consideration at either an annual or special meeting of the stockholders; provided, however, that such board action may be postponed if the Conflicts Committee determines by a majority vote that a liquidation is not then in the best interest of the Corporation’s stockholders. If such board action is so postponed, the Conflicts Committee shall revisit the issue of liquidation at least annually and further postponement of such board action would only be permitted if the Conflicts Committee again determined by a majority vote that a liquidation would not then be in the best interest of the Corporation’s stockholders.

Discussion

Below, we provide a discussion on the proposed charter amendment in a question and answer format. Note that this proposal will not take effect unless Proposal 4 (the proposal to approve the acceleration of the payment of incentive compensation to our advisor) is also approved.

What does Section 5.11 of our charter mean?

If we do not list our shares of common stock on a national securities exchange by September 30, 2020, Section 5.11 of our charter requires that we either:

If a majority of the conflicts committee does determine that liquidation is not then in the best interests of our stockholders, our charter requires that the conflicts committee revisit the issue of liquidation at least annually. Further postponement of listing or stockholder action regarding liquidation would only be permitted if a majority of the conflicts committee again determined that liquidation would not be in the best interest of our stockholders. If we sought and failed to obtain stockholder approval of a liquidation, our charter would not require us to list or liquidate and would not require the conflicts committee to revisit the issue of liquidation, and we could continue to operate as before. If we sought and obtained stockholder approval of a liquidation, we would begin an orderly sale of our assets. The precise timing of such sales would take account of the prevailing real estate finance markets and the debt markets generally as well as the federal income tax consequences to our stockholders. In making the decision whether to apply for listing of our shares, our directors would try to determine whether listing our shares, liquidating our assets or some other course of action would result in greater value for stockholders.

One of the factors our board of directors would consider when making this determination is the liquidity needs of our stockholders. In assessing whether to list, liquidate or take some other course of action, our board of directors would likely solicit input from financial advisors as to the likely demand for our shares upon listing. If the board believed that, after listing, it would be difficult for stockholders to dispose of their shares, then that factor would weigh against listing. However, this would not be the only factor considered by the board. If listing still appeared to be in the best long-term interest of our stockholders, despite the prospects of a relatively thin market for our shares upon the initial listing, the board could still opt to list our shares of common stock. The board would also likely consider whether there was a large demand to sell our shares when making decisions regarding listing or liquidation. The degree of participation in our dividend reinvestment plan and the number of requests for redemptions under the share redemption program at the time could be an indicator of stockholder demand to liquidate their investment.

52

What is the conflicts committee?

In order to reduce or eliminate certain potential conflicts of interest, our charter creates a conflicts committee of our board of directors consisting solely of all of our independent directors, that is, all of our directors who are not affiliated with KBS Capital Advisors LLC, our external advisor. Our charter authorizes the conflicts committee to act on any matter permitted under Maryland law. Both the board of directors and the conflicts committee must act upon thoseconflict-of-interest matters that cannot be delegated to a committee under Maryland law. Our charter also empowers the conflicts committee to retain its own legal and financial advisors.

Does Section 5.11 of our charter prevent other possible liquidity events, such as a sale of the company or a merger?

No.  Even with Section 5.11 in our charter, our board could pursue (a) a sale, merger or other transaction in which our stockholders either receive, or have the option to receive, cash, securities redeemable for cash and/or securities of another company or (b) the sale of all or substantially all of our assets where our stockholders either receive, or have the option to receive, cash or other consideration.

Does Section 5.11 of our charter require a listing or liquidation by September 30, 2020?

No. If we do not list our shares of common stock on a national securities exchange by September 30, 2020, the conflicts committee could postpone the decision of whether to liquidate the company indefinitely, by determining on an annual basis that liquidation is not then in the best interests of our stockholders. Alternatively, if we sought and failed to obtain stockholder approval of our liquidation pursuant to Section 5.11 of our charter, our charter would not require us to list or liquidate and would not require the conflicts committee to revisit the issue of liquidation, and we could continue to operate as before. Thus, Section 5.11 of our charter does not require a listing or liquidation by September 30, 2020 or at any time at all.

Why is the board proposing to remove Section 5.11 of our charter?

Our board of directors and management team regularly monitor the real estate and equity markets in order to find the best opportunities possible to continue to provide attractive and stable cash distributions to our stockholders and to provide additional liquidity for our stockholders. We currently believe the best opportunity for us to achieve these objectives is to pursue a strategy as anon-listed, perpetual-life “NAV REIT” that offers and sells new shares of our common stock continuously through a number of distribution channels in ongoing public offerings, and seeks to provide increased liquidity to current and future stockholders through an expansion of our current share redemption program and/or periodic self-tender offers. We have seen significant appreciation in the portfolio to date and we believe there are still many opportunities in the marketplace to achieve strong stockholder returns through a combination of providing strong cash distributions and timing asset sales to maximize values. See “Proposed NAV REIT Conversion” for more information.

We believe that the continued inclusion of Section 5.11 in our charter may create confusion for existing and new investors if we are pursuing a perpetual-life company strategy. We believe that its continued inclusion may create doubts as to our long-term commitment to the perpetual-life strategy. In addition, complying with Section 5.11 is likely to create an annual burden on the time and focus of our board of directors and conflicts committee and may create significant additional expenses, in particular if the board of directors or conflicts committee solicits input from advisors regarding the charter determination required by Section 5.11. For these reasons, our board of directors believes we are more likely to succeed with a perpetual-life strategy if we remove Section 5.11 from the charter. This proposal will not take effect unless the proposal to approve the acceleration of the payment of incentive compensation to our advisor is also approved.

Does elimination of Section 5.11 and pursuit of a perpetual-life NAV REIT strategy mean you will never consider other strategies to create value for stockholders, or sources of stockholder liquidity other than the share redemption program and/or periodic self-tender offers?

No. With or without Section 5.11 of the charter, our board of directors regularly considers our various strategic alternatives and accordingly would expect to consider changing strategies if it concludes that it is in the

53

best interests of our stockholders to do so. These strategic alternatives can consist of any number of options including a public listing of our shares on a national stock exchange, selling assets individually, and /or selling the entire portfolio in a single transaction. The precise terms of our perpetual-life NAV REIT strategy are still under consideration by our board of directors and are subject to change. We are under no obligation to pursue a perpetual-life strategy at all if our board of directors determines another strategy is preferable. Regardless of the success of our pursuit of a perpetual-life NAV REIT strategy, we may pursue various liquidity strategies in the future beyond the share redemption program and/or periodic self-tender offers, including but not limited to a listing of our shares on a national securities exchange, a sale of the company or a liquidation. However, we currently contemplate providing liquidity only through the share redemption program and/or periodic self-tender offers if we successfully convert to a perpetual-life NAV REIT.

The removal of Section 5.11 of the charter would not change the willingness of our board of directors to consider a change in strategy when and if appropriate. It would simply remove a formal, annual consideration by the conflicts committee as to whether liquidation is in the best interests of our stockholders.

If the stockholders vote against either Proposal 3 (the removal of Section 5.11 from the charter) or Proposal 4 (the acceleration of the payment of incentive compensation to the advisor), will the company still pursue a perpetual-life NAV REIT strategy?

Removal of Section 5.11 from the charter is not required in order for the company to pursue a perpetual-life NAV REIT strategy. However, we believe we are more likely to succeed with the strategy if we remove Section 5.11 of the charter. Similarly, stockholder approval of acceleration of the payment of incentive compensation to our advisor is not required in order for the company to pursue a perpetual-life NAV REIT strategy. However, we believe the change is appropriate in connection with the pursuit of a perpetual-life NAV REIT strategy. For this reason, neither Proposal 3 nor Proposal 4 will take effect unless both are approved by our stockholders. If our stockholders vote againsteither Proposal 3 or Proposal 4, our board of directors will meet to determine whether to continue with a perpetual-life NAV REIT strategy or what other reasonably available alternatives to pursue in the best interest of the company and our stockholders, including, without limitation, continuing to operate under the current business plan. As previously discussed, the Singapore Transaction has made additional capital available to us that we have and intend to continue to use to offer additional liquidity to our stockholders through our share redemption program and/or tender offers or through special distributions to stockholders after our stockholders have had an opportunity to vote on Proposals 3 and 4 at the annual meeting or any adjournment or postponement thereof.

Do any of our executive officers or directors have an interest in the outcome of this proposal?

Yes. All of our executive officers and our affiliated director are also officers, directors, managers, or key professionals of and/or holders of a direct or indirect controlling interest in our advisor, KBS Capital Markets Group LLC, who we intend to hire as our dealer manager for our future public offerings, and other affiliated KBS entities. Charles J. Schreiber, Jr. is the Chairman of our Board, our Chief Executive Officer, our President and our affiliated director. Our advisor is owned and controlled by KBS Holdings, our sponsor. Charles J. Schreiber, Jr. indirectly controls our sponsor and our advisor. Our advisor may receive significant compensation from the acceleration of the incentive fee and our advisor and its affiliates will receive the other revised fees and expense reimbursements we implement in connection with a conversion to an NAV REIT, which we intend to pursue if this proposal and Proposal 4 are approved by our stockholders. See “Terms of Proposed NAV REIT Conversion.” All of our executive officers have profit sharing arrangements in our advisor and therefore also have an interest in the outcome of this proposal.

Have the independent directors approved the pursuit of a perpetual-life NAV REIT strategy and the proposal to remove Section 5.11 of the charter?

The conflicts committee of our board of directors, which is composed of all our independent directors, has approved the pursuit of a perpetual-life NAV REIT, which includes submitting to stockholders for their approval the proposal to remove Section 5.11 of the charter and the proposal to accelerate the payment of incentive compensation to the advisor. However, implementation of the proposed charter amendment and the proposed acceleration of the payment of incentive compensation to the advisor remain subject to further approval of the conflicts committee, after the proposed amount of the accelerated payment of the incentive fee has been determined.

54

Implementation of Proposed Amendment

This proposal will not take effect unless Proposal 4 (the proposal to approve the acceleration of the payment of incentive compensation to our advisor) is also approved. If both this Proposal 3 and Proposal 4 are approved by our stockholders at the annual meeting, the removal of Section 5.11 from our charter will be effected by our filing of the Articles of Amendment attached hereto asExhibit A (the “Articles of Amendment”) with the State Department of Assessment and Taxation of the State of Maryland (the “SDAT”), and will become effective upon filing and acceptance for record by the SDAT. However, implementation of Proposal 3 and Proposal 4 both remain subject to further approval of the conflicts committee, after the proposed amount of the accelerated payment of the incentive fee has been determined.

If approved, although we intend to file the Articles of Amendment and implement the Proposed NAV REIT Conversion substantially as described herein, our board of directors may delay the filing of the Articles of Amendment and the implementation of the Proposed NAV REIT Conversion until it deems appropriate to do so and may decide, in its sole discretion, not to go forward at all with the Articles of Amendment or the Proposed NAV REIT Conversion. Even if our board of directors files the Articles of Amendment as proposed and approved by our stockholders, the board of directors will still have the authority to change other aspects of the Proposed NAV REIT Conversion. Such changes may be deemed appropriate for a variety of reasons, including but not limited to regulatory, capital-raising or business considerations, all of which can change over time.

Vote Required

Approval of the proposed charter amendment requires the affirmative vote of the holders of at least a majority of our outstanding shares of common stock entitled to vote thereon. You may vote for or against or abstain on the proposal to amend our charter. Abstentions and brokernon-votes will have the same effect as votes against the proposal to amend our charter. If you submit a proxy card with no further instructions, your shares will be voted FOR the proposal to amend our charter.

Appraisal Rights

Under Maryland law and our charter, you will not be entitled to rights of appraisal with respect to the proposed amendment to our charter. Accordingly, to the extent that you object to the proposed amendment to our charter, you will not have the right to have a court judicially determine (and you will not receive) the fair value for your shares of common stock under the provisions of Maryland law governing appraisal rights.

Whether or not you plan to attend the annual meeting and vote in person, we urge you to have your vote recorded. Stockholders have the following three options for submitting their votes by proxy: (i) via the Internet, (ii) by telephone or (iii) by mail, using the enclosed proxy card.YOUR VOTE IS VERY IMPORTANT! Your immediate response will help avoid potential delays and may save us significant additional expenses associated with soliciting stockholder votes.

Recommendation

THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDS A VOTE

FOR THE PROPOSAL TO REMOVE SECTION 5.11 FROM OUR CHARTER.

55

PROPOSAL 4.    ACCELERATION OF INCENTIVE COMPENSATION

Proposal

In this Proposal 4, we are asking our stockholders to approve the acceleration of the payment of incentive compensation to KBS Capital Advisors LLC, our external advisor, upon our conversion to an NAV REIT, in the form of restricted shares of our common stock and on terms substantially consistent with those described under “Proposed NAV REIT Conversion—Proposed Acceleration of Payment of Current Incentive Fee.”Please carefully review the entire “Proposed NAV REIT Conversion” section of this proxy statement for a detailed description of the terms and risks of the Proposed NAV REIT Conversion, including the acceleration of the payment of incentive compensation to our advisor.

Discussion

Below, we provide a discussion on the proposed acceleration of the payment of incentive compensation to our advisor in a question and answer format. Note that this proposal will not take effect unless Proposal 3 (the proposed charter amendment) is also approved.

Why is the board recommending that stockholders approve the acceleration of the payment of incentive compensation to our advisor?

The triggering events for the incentive fee structure currently in effect with our advisor are generally expected to occur, if ever, upon a listing of our shares of stock on a national securities exchange or a significant distribution of cash in connection with a sale of all or a substantial amount of our assets. These triggering events are inconsistent with a perpetual-life NAV REIT that intends to provide liquidity to its stockholders through a share redemption program and/or periodic self-tender offers. Therefore, in order to properly align our advisor’s and its affiliates’ incentive fee compensation structure with our proposed perpetual-life strategy, we intend to revise the incentive fee structure. Commencing with the launch of our first public offering as a perpetual-life NAV REIT, we intend to implement an annual incentive fee formula that would require us to pay our advisor (or its affiliate) an incentive fee for any given year if certain performance thresholds were met for that year. With respect to our historical performance period from inception through the launch of our first public offering as a perpetual-life NAV REIT, we believe it is appropriate to accelerate the payment of the historical incentive fee so that it does not depend on the currently-existing triggering events. Because the acceleration of this fee is not something we intended to do when we launched our initial public offering, we believe it is appropriate to ask the stockholders for their approval of this acceleration. Therefore, we are asking our stockholders to approve the acceleration of the payment of incentive compensation to KBS Capital Advisors LLC, our external advisor, on terms substantially consistent with those described in “Proposed NAV REIT Conversion—Proposed Acceleration of Payment of Current Incentive Fee.” This proposal will not take effect unless the proposal to amend our charter is also approved.

If the stockholders vote against either Proposal 3 (the removal of Section 5.11 from the charter) or Proposal 4 (the acceleration of the payment of incentive compensation to the advisor), will the company still pursue a perpetual-life NAV REIT strategy?

Removal of Section 5.11 from the charter is not required in order for the company to pursue a perpetual-life NAV REIT strategy. However, we believe we are more likely to succeed with the strategy if we remove Section 5.11 of the charter. Similarly, stockholder approval of acceleration of the payment of incentive compensation to our advisor is not required in order for the company to pursue a perpetual-life NAV REIT strategy. However, we believe the change is appropriate in connection with the pursuit of a perpetual-life NAV REIT strategy. For this reason, neither Proposal 3 nor Proposal 4 will take effect unless both are approved by our stockholders. If our stockholders vote againsteither Proposal 3 or Proposal 4, our board of directors will meet to determine whether to continue with a perpetual-life NAV REIT strategy or what other reasonably available alternatives to pursue in the best interest of the company and our stockholders, including, without limitation, continuing to operate under the current business plan. As previously discussed, the Singapore Transaction has made additional capital available to us that we have and intend to continue to use to offer additional liquidity to our stockholders through our share redemption program and/or tender offers or through special distributions to stockholders after our stockholders have had an opportunity to vote on Proposals 3 and 4 at the annual meeting or any adjournment or postponement thereof.

56

Do any of our executive officers or directors have an interest in the outcome of this proposal?

Yes.  All of our executive officers and our affiliated director are also officers, directors, managers, or key professionals of and/or holders of a direct or indirect controlling interest in our advisor, KBS Capital Markets Group LLC, who we intend to hire as our dealer manager for our future public offerings, and other affiliated KBS entities. Charles J. Schreiber, Jr. is the Chairman of our Board, our Chief Executive Officer, our President and our affiliated director. Our advisor is owned and controlled by KBS Holdings, our sponsor. Charles J. Schreiber, Jr. indirectly controls our sponsor and our advisor. Our advisor may receive significant compensation from the acceleration of the incentive fee and our advisor and its affiliates will receive the other revised fees and expense reimbursements we implement in connection with a conversion to an NAV REIT, which we intend to pursue if this proposal and Proposal 3 are approved by our stockholders. See “Terms of Proposed NAV REIT Conversion.” All of our executive officers have profit sharing arrangements in our advisor and therefore also have an interest in the outcome of this proposal.

Have the independent directors approved the pursuit of a perpetual-life NAV REIT strategy and the proposal to accelerate the payment of incentive compensation to the advisor?

The conflicts committee of our board of directors, which is composed of all our independent directors, has approved the pursuit of a perpetual-life NAV REIT, which includes submitting to stockholders for their approval the proposal to remove Section 5.11 of the charter and the proposal to accelerate the payment of incentive compensation to the advisor. However, implementation of the proposed charter amendment and the proposed acceleration of the payment of incentive compensation to the advisor remain subject to further approval of the conflicts committee, after the proposed amount of the accelerated payment of the incentive fee has been determined.

Implementation of Proposed Acceleration of Incentive Compensation

This proposal will not take effect unless Proposal 3 (the proposal to amend our charter) is also approved. If both this Proposal 4 and Proposal 3 are approved by our stockholders at the annual meeting, we intend to implement the proposed acceleration of incentive compensation to the advisor in connection with our conversion to an NAV REIT. However, implementation of Proposal 3 and Proposal 4 both remain subject to further approval of the conflicts committee, after the proposed amount of the accelerated payment of the incentive fee has been determined.

If approved, although we intend to implement the Proposed NAV REIT Conversion substantially as described herein, our board of directors may delay the acceleration of incentive compensation to the advisor and the implementation of the Proposed NAV REIT Conversion until it deems appropriate to do so and may decide, in its sole discretion, not to go forward at all with the acceleration of incentive compensation to the advisor or the Proposed NAV REIT Conversion. Even if our board of directors implements the proposed acceleration of incentive compensation to the advisor in connection with conversion to an NAV REIT, the board of directors will still have the authority to change other aspects of the Proposed NAV REIT Conversion. Such changes may be deemed appropriate for a variety of reasons, including but not limited to regulatory, capital-raising or business considerations, all of which can change over time.

Vote Required

Approval of the proposed acceleration of the payment of incentive compensation to our advisor requires the affirmative vote of the holders of at least a majority of our outstanding shares of common stock entitled to vote thereon. You may vote for or against or abstain on the proposal to accelerate the payment of incentive compensation to our advisor. Abstentions and brokernon-votes will have the same effect as votes against the proposal to accelerate the payment of incentive compensation to our advisor. If you submit a proxy card with no further instructions, your shares will be voted FOR the proposal to approve the acceleration of the payment of incentive compensation to our advisor.

Appraisal Rights

Under Maryland law and our charter, you will not be entitled to rights of appraisal with respect to the proposed acceleration of the payment of incentive compensation to our advisor. Accordingly, to the extent that you

57

object to the proposed acceleration of the payment of incentive compensation to our advisor, you will not have the right to have a court judicially determine (and you will not receive) the fair value for your shares of common stock under the provisions of Maryland law governing appraisal rights.

Whether or not you plan to attend the annual meeting and vote in person, we urge you to have your vote recorded. Stockholders have the following three options for submitting their votes by proxy: (i) via the Internet, (ii) by telephone or (iii) by mail, using the enclosed proxy card.YOUR VOTE IS VERY IMPORTANT! Your immediate response will help avoid potential delays and may save us significant additional expenses associated with soliciting stockholder votes.

Recommendation

THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDS A VOTE FOR THE

PROPOSAL TO ACCELERATE THE PAYMENT OF INCENTIVE COMPENSATION TO

OUR ADVISOR, IN THE FORM OF RESTRICTED SHARES OF OUR COMMON STOCK.

58

PROPOSAL 5.  ADJOURNMENT OF THE ANNUAL MEETING

At the annual meeting, you and the other stockholders will also vote to approve an adjournment of the annual meeting, including to solicit additional proxies in favor of Proposal 3 or Proposal 4 if there are not sufficient votes for these proposals.

Vote Required

Approval of the adjournment proposal (which would permit us to proceed with voting on and approval of only the proposals that have received sufficient votes to be approved at the annual meeting, and then subsequently to adjourn the annual meeting to solicit additional proxies to vote in favor of any proposal that has not received sufficient votes to be approved at the annual meeting) requires the affirmative vote of a majority of the votes cast at the annual meeting by the holders who are present in person or by proxy and entitled to vote. Abstentions and brokernon-votes will have no effect on the outcome of the vote. If you submit a proxy card with no further instructions, your shares will be voted FOR this proposal.

Whether or not you plan to attend the annual meeting and vote in person, we urge you to have your vote recorded. Stockholders have the following three options for submitting their votes by proxy: (i) via the Internet, (ii) by telephone or (iii) by mail, using the enclosed proxy card.YOUR VOTE IS VERY IMPORTANT! Your immediate response will help avoid potential delays and may save us significant additional expenses associated with soliciting stockholder votes.

Recommendation

THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDS A VOTE

FOR THIS PROPOSAL

59

STOCKHOLDER PROPOSALS

Any proposals by stockholders for inclusion in proxy solicitation material for the 2017next annual meeting of stockholders must be received by our secretary, Peter McMillan III,Secretary, Jeffrey K. Waldvogel, at our executive offices no later than December 24, 2016.September 19, 2020. However, if we hold the annual meeting before June 7, 2017March 8, 2021 or after August 6, 2017,May 7, 2021, stockholders must submit proposals for inclusion in our 2017 proxy statement within a reasonable time before we begin to print our proxy materials. The mailing address of our executive offices is 800 Newport Center Drive, Suite 700, Newport Beach, California 92660. If a stockholder wishes to present a proposal at the 2017next annual meeting, whether or not the proposal is intended to be included in the 2017 proxy materials, our bylaws require that the stockholder give advance written notice to our secretarySecretary by January 23, 2017.October 19, 2020.

OTHER MATTERS

As of the date of this proxy statement, we know of no business that will be presented for consideration at the annual meeting other than the items referred to above. If any other matter is properly brought before the annual meeting for action by stockholders, proxies in the enclosed form returned to us will be voted in accordance with the recommendation of the board of directors or, in the absence of such a recommendation, in accordance with the discretion of the proxy holder.

60

Exhibit A

KBS REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUST III, INC.

ARTICLES OF AMENDMENT

KBS Real Estate Investment Trust III, Inc., a Maryland corporation, having its principal office in Baltimore, Maryland (the “Corporation”), hereby certifies to the State Department of Assessments and Taxation of Maryland that:

FIRST: The Second Articles of Amendment and Restatement of the Corporation (the “Charter”) are hereby amended by deleting existing Section 5.11 in its entirety.

SECOND: The amendment to the Charter of the Corporation as set forth above has been duly advised by the board of directors and approved by the stockholders of the Corporation as required by law.

THIRD: The undersigned Chief Executive Officer of the Corporation acknowledges these Articles of Amendment to be the corporate act of the Corporation and, as to all matters or facts required to be verified under oath, the undersigned Chief Executive Officer acknowledges that to the best of his knowledge, information and belief, these matters and facts are true in all material respects and that this statement is made under the penalties for perjury.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Corporation has caused these Articles of Amendment to be signed in its name and on its behalf by its Chief Executive Officer and President and attested to by its Secretary on this      day of [    ], [                ].

29

A-1

C/O DST SYSTEMS, INC. P.O. BOX 219015 KANSAS CITY, MO 64121 PROXY VOTING INSTRUCTIONS VOTE BY PHONE - 1-800-690-6903 Use any touch-tone telephone to transmit your voting instructions up through April 6, 2020. Have your proxy card in hand. VOTE BY MAIL Mark, sign and date your proxy card and return it (for receipt by April 6, 2020) in the postage-paid envelope we have provided or return it to Vote Processing, c/o Broadridge, 51 Mercedes Way, Edgewood, NY 11717. VOTE BY INTERNET - www.proxyvote.com Use the Internet to transmit your voting instructions and for electronic delivery of information up through April 6, 2020. Have your proxy card in hand when you access the web site. Your QR vote, telephone vote or Internet vote authorizes the named proxies to vote the shares in the same manner as if you marked, signed and returned your proxy card. Control Number located in box below: TO VOTE, MARK BLOCKS BELOW IN BLUE OR BLACK INK AS FOLLOWS:

E03776-P77263 E88575-P32152 KEEP THIS PORTION FOR YOUR RECORDS

— — — — — — — — — — — —  — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —  — — — — — — — — — — —

PROXY FOR ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS

KBS REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUST III, INC. (the "Company") The Board of Directors recommends a vote FOR all nominees listed in Proposal 1. 1. Election of Directors For Withhold 1a. Schreiber ! ! 1b. Dritley ! ! 1c. Gabriel ! ! 1d. Sturzenegger ! ! The Board of Directors recommends a vote FOR For Against Abstain Proposals 2, 3, 4 and 5 as described in the proxy statement. 2. The ratification of the appointment of ! ! ! Ernst & Young LLP as independent registered public accounting firm for the year ending December 31, 2019. 3. Approval of an amendment to the Company's ! ! ! charter to remove Section 5.11 from the charter. This proposal will not take effect unless Proposal 4 is also approved. 4. Approval of the acceleration of the payment of For Against Abstain incentive compensation to KBS Capital Advisors LLC, the Company's external advisor, in the form of ! ! ! restricted shares of the Company's common stock. This proposal will not take effect unless Proposal 3 is also approved. 5. Approval of a proposal that would permit the ! ! ! Company to proceed with voting on only the proposals that have received sufficient votes to be approved at the annual meeting, and then subsequently, to adjourn the annual meeting to solicit additional proxies to vote in favor of any proposal that has not received sufficient votes to be approved at the annual meeting. Please sign exactly as your name appears on this proxy card. When shares of common stock are held by joint tenants, both should sign. When signing as attorney, executor, administrator, trustee or guardian, please give full title as such. If a corporation, please sign in full corporate name by president or other authorized officer. If a partnership, please sign in partnership name by general partner or other authorized person. Signature [PLEASE SIGN WITHIN BOX] Date Signature (Joint Owners) Date

PROXY FOR ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS KBS REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUST III, INC. Tuesday, April 7, 2016

11:2020 at 10:00 a.m. (PDT)

am PT At

Offices of KBS

800 Newport Center Drive First Floor, Suite 140 Conference Center

Newport Beach, California 92660

Your Vote is Important!

FOLD HERE BEFORE INSERTING INTO RETURN ENVELOPE

— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

                    E03777-P77263

Please Vote!

Your vote is not cast automatically for you. We encourage you to cast your vote promptly, which will help minimize any additional cost associated with soliciting votes.

  Read Enclosed Materials

   Enclosed is the following information for the 2016 Annual Meeting of Stockholders:

• 2015 The following materials are available at www.proxyvote.com: Notice and Proxy Statement and Annual Report

• Proxy Statement that describes on Form 10-K for the proposalsyear ended December 31, 2018. PROXY FOR ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS KBS REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUST III, INC. Tuesday, April 7, 2020 at 10:00 am PT At offices of KBS 800 Newport Center Drive First Floor, Suite 140 Conference Center Newport Beach, California 92660 Your Vote is Important! FOLD HERE BEFORE INSERTING INTO RETURN ENVELOPE KBS Real Estate Investment Trust III, Inc. 800 NEWPORT CENTER DRIVE FIRST FLOOR, SUITE 140 CONFERENCE CENTER NEWPORT BEACH . CALIFORNIA 92660 THIS PROXY IS SOLICITED ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS The undersigned stockholder hereby appoints Charles J. Schreiber, Jr., Jeffrey K. Waldvogel and Stacie K. Yamane, and each of them, as proxy and attorney-in-fact, each with the power to appoint his or her substitute, on behalf and in the name of the undersigned, to represent the undersigned at the annual meeting of stockholders of KBS REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUST III, INC. to be voted upon

• Proxy card for each registration*

  * You may have more than one proxy card included in your packet because you have multiple registrations.

  Please be sureheld on Tuesday, April 7, 2020, and at any adjournments or postponements thereof, and to vote all proxies in your packet.

  Completeshares of common stock that the Proxy Card and Return by Mail

   Onundersigned would be entitled to vote if personally present, as indicated on the reverse side of this card. The undersigned acknowledges receipt of the notice of annual meeting of stockholders, the proxy card, cast your vote onstatement and the proposals and sign and return itannual report. This proxy, when properly executed, will be voted in the postage-paid envelope provided. Please note,manner directed herein by the undersigned stockholder. If no direction is made, this proxy will be voted "FOR" all parties must sign.

nominees listed in Proposal 1 and "FOR" Proposals 2, 3, 4 and 5. The proxies are authorized to vote upon such other matters as may properly come before the annual meeting or Vote by Telephone*

   Call(800) 690-6903usingany adjournments or postponements thereof in accordance with the recommendation of the board of directors or, in the absence of such a touch-tone telephone and followrecommendation, in their discretion. Important Notice Regarding the simple, recorded instructions. Your control number is located    onAvailability of Proxy Materials for the proxy card.

  or Vote by Internet*

   Visitwww.proxyvote.comand follow the online instructions to cast your vote.

   Your control number is located on the proxy card.

  * If you voted by telephone or the Internet, you do not need to mail back the proxy card.

  For Assistance

   If you have any questions or need assistance with completing your proxy card, please call our proxy solicitor, Broadridge    Financial Solutions, Inc., at (855) 723-7816.

   RepresentativesAnnual Meeting of Stockholders: The following materials are available Monday through Friday 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. (EDT).

Thank you!

We appreciate your participationat www.proxyvote.com: Notice and support. Again, please be sure to vote!Proxy Statement and Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2018.