ACRES Commercial Realty Corp. - Annual Report: 2006 (Form 10-K)
UNITED
STATES
SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington,
D.C. 20549
FORM
10-K
(Mark
One)
[X] ANNUAL
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE
ACT OF 1934
For
the
fiscal year ended December 31, 2006
OR
[
] TRANSITION
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE
ACT OF 1934
For
the
transition period from _________ to __________
Commission
file number: 1-32733
RESOURCE
CAPITAL CORP.
(Exact
name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Maryland
(State
or other jurisdiction
of
incorporation or organization)
|
20-2287134
(I.R.S.
Employer
Identification
No.)
|
712
5th
Avenue, 10th
Floor
New
York, NY
(Address
of principal executive offices)
|
10019
(Zip
Code)
|
Registrant’s
telephone number, including area code: 212-506-3870
|
|
Securities
registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the
Act:
|
Title
of each class
|
Name
of each exchange on which registered
|
Common
Stock, $.001 par value
|
New
York Stock Exchange (NYSE)
|
Securities
registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
None
Indicate
by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined
in
Rule 405 of the Securities Act. ¨
Yes
x
No
Indicate
by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to
Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. ¨
Yes
x
No
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to
be
filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during
the
preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required
to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements
for
the past 90 days. x
Yes
¨
No
Indicate
by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of
Regulation S-K (§229.405 of this chapter) is not contained herein, and will not
be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or
information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K
or any amendment to this Form 10-K. ¨
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an
accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer. See definition of “accelerated
filer and large accelerated filer” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check
one).
Large
accelerated filer
¨ Accelerated
filer ¨ Non-accelerated
filer
x
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule
12b-2 of the Act). ¨
Yes
x
No
The
aggregate market value of the voting common equity held by non-affiliates of
the
registrant, based on the closing price of such stock on the last business day
of
the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter (June 30, 2006)
was approximately $160,772,194.
The
number of outstanding shares of the registrant’s common stock on March 23, 2007
was 24,991,629 shares.
DOCUMENTS
INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
[None]
RESOURCE
CAPITAL CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
ON
FORM 10-K
Page
|
|||
PART
I
|
|||
3
|
|||
4
|
|||
14
- 35
|
|||
35
|
|||
35
|
|||
36
|
|||
36
|
|||
PART
II
|
|
||
37
- 38
|
|||
39
|
|||
40 -
72
|
|||
73
- 75
|
|||
76
- 110
|
|||
111
|
|||
111
|
|||
111
|
|||
PART
III
|
|
||
112
- 116
|
|||
117
- 120
|
|||
121
- 122
|
|||
123 -
125
|
|||
126
|
|||
PART
IV
|
|
||
127 -
128
|
|||
129
|
This
report contains certain forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements
relate to expectations, beliefs, projections, future plans and strategies,
anticipated events or trends and similar expressions concerning matters that
are
not historical facts. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements
by terms such as “anticipate,” “believe,” “could,” “estimate,” “expects,”
“intend,” “may,” “plan,” “potential,” “project,” “should,” “will” and “would” or
the negative of these terms or other comparable
terminology.
Forward-looking
statements contained in this report are based on our beliefs, assumptions and
expectations of our future performance, taking into account all information
currently available to us. These beliefs, assumptions and expectations can
change as a result of many possible events or factors, not all of which are
known to us or are within our control. If a change occurs, our business,
financial condition, liquidity and results of operations may vary materially
from those expressed in our forward-looking statements. Forward-looking
statements we make in this report are subject to various risks and uncertainties
that could cause actual results to vary from our forward-looking statements,
including:
·
|
the
factors described in this report, including those set forth under
the
sections captioned “Risk Factors” and “Business;”
|
·
|
our
future operating results;
|
·
|
our
business prospects;
|
·
|
changes
in our business strategy;
|
·
|
availability,
terms and deployment of capital;
|
·
|
availability
of qualified personnel;
|
·
|
changes
in our industry, interest rates, the debt securities markets, real
estate
markets or the general economy;
|
·
|
increased
rates of default and/or decreased recovery rates on our investments;
|
·
|
increased
prepayments of the mortgage and other loans underlying our mortgage-backed
securities, or other asset-backed securities;
|
·
|
changes
in governmental regulations, tax rates and similar matters;
|
·
|
availability
of investment opportunities in commercial real estate-related and
commercial finance assets;
|
·
|
the
degree and nature of our competition;
|
·
|
the
adequacy of our cash reserves and working capital; and
|
·
|
the
timing of cash flows, if any, from our investments.
|
We
caution you not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements
which speak only as of the date of this report. All subsequent written and
oral
forward-looking statements attributable to us or any person acting on our behalf
are expressly qualified in their entirety by the cautionary statements contained
or referred to in this section. Except to the extent required by applicable
law
or regulation, we undertake no obligation to update these forward-looking
statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this filing
or
to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events.
PART
I
General
We
are a
specialty finance company that focuses primarily on commercial real estate
and
commercial finance. We qualify as a real estate investment trust, or REIT,
for
federal income tax purposes. Our objective is to provide our stockholders with
total returns over time, including quarterly distributions and capital
appreciation, while seeking to manage the risks associated with our investment
strategy. We invest in a combination of commercial real estate debt and other
real estate-related assets and, to a lesser extent, higher-yielding commercial
finance assets. We finance a substantial portion of our portfolio investments
through borrowing strategies seeking to match the maturities and repricing
dates
of our financings with the maturities and repricing dates of those investments,
and to mitigate interest rate risk through derivative instruments.
We
are
externally managed by Resource Capital Manager, Inc., which we refer to as
the
Manager, a wholly-owned indirect subsidiary of Resource America, Inc. (Nasdaq:
REXI), a specialized asset management company that uses industry specific
expertise to generate and administer investment opportunities for its own
account and for outside investors in the financial fund management, real estate,
and commercial finance sectors. As of December 31, 2006, Resource America
managed approximately $13.6 billion of assets in these sectors. To provide
its
services, the Manager draws upon Resource America, its management team and
their
collective investment experience.
Our
investments target the following asset classes:
Asset
Class
|
Principal
Investments
|
|
Commercial
real estate-related assets
|
· First
mortgage loans, which we refer to as whole loans
· First
priority interests in first mortgage real estate loans, which we
refer to
as A notes
· Subordinated
interests in first mortgage real estate loans, which we refer to
as B
notes
· Mezzanine
debt related to commercial real estate that is senior to the borrower’s
equity position but subordinated to other third-party
financing
· Commercial
mortgage-backed securities, which we refer to as CMBS
|
|
Commercial
finance assets
|
· Senior
secured corporate loans, which we refer to as bank loans
· Other
asset-backed securities, which we refer to as other ABS, backed
principally by small business and bank loans and, to a lesser extent,
by
consumer receivables
· Equipment
leases and notes, principally small- and middle-ticket commercial
direct
financing leases and notes
· Trust
preferred securities of financial institutions
· Debt
tranches of collateralized debt obligations, which we refer to
as
CDOs
· Private
equity investments, principally issued by financial
institutions
|
|
Residential
real estate-related assets
|
· Residential
mortgage-backed securities, which we refer to as
ABS-RMBS
|
Our
Business Strategy
We
intend
to achieve our investment objective by constructing a diversified portfolio,
using our disciplined approach to credit analysis to identify appropriate
opportunities in our targeted asset classes. Future distributions and capital
appreciation are not guaranteed, however, and we have only limited operating
history and REIT experience upon which you can base an assessment of our ability
to achieve our objectives. The core components and values of our business
strategy are described in more detail below.
Disciplined
credit underwriting and active risk management. The
core of our investment process is credit analysis and active risk management.
Senior management of our Manager and Resource America has extensive experience
in underwriting the credit risk associated with our targeted asset classes,
and
conducts detailed due diligence on all credit-sensitive investments, including
the use of proprietary credit stratifications and collateral stresses. After
making an investment, the Manager and Resource America engage in active
monitoring of our investments through several highly specialized, proprietary
risk management systems, including their PROTECT procedures for early detection
of troubled and deteriorating securities. If a default occurs, we will use
our
senior management team’s asset management skills to mitigate the severity of any
losses, and we will seek to optimize the recovery from assets if we foreclose
upon them.
Investment
in higher-yielding assets. Our
portfolio is and will be substantially comprised of assets such as commercial
real estate whole loans, B notes, mezzanine debt, ABS-RMBS and CMBS, rated
below
AAA by Standard & Poors, or S&P, and bank loans, which generally have
higher yields than more senior or more highly-rated obligations. In line with
this strategy, we recently sold our portfolio of agency ABS-RMBS and redeployed
the net proceeds into higher yielding assets. Depending upon relative yields,
we
may reinvest in agency ABS-RMBS in the future.
Diversification
of investments. We
invest
in a diversified portfolio of real estate debt and other real estate-related
assets, and commercial finance assets. We believe that our diversification
strategy will allow us to continually allocate our capital to the most
attractive sectors, enhancing the returns we will be able to achieve, while
reducing the overall risk of our portfolio through the autonomous nature of
these various asset classes. The percentage of assets that we may invest in
certain of our targeted asset classes is subject to the federal income tax
requirements for REIT qualification and the requirements for exclusion from
Investment Company Act regulation.
Use
of leverage. We
use
leverage to increase the potential returns to our stockholders, and seek to
achieve leverage consistent with our analysis of the risk profile of the
investments we finance and the borrowing sources available to us. Our income
is
generated primarily from the net spread between the interest income we earn
on
our investment portfolio and the cost of our borrowings and hedging activities.
Leverage can enhance returns but also magnifies losses.
Active
management of interest rate risk and liquidity risk. We
expect
to finance a substantial portion of our portfolio investments on a long-term
basis through borrowing strategies that seek to match the maturity and repricing
dates of our investments with the maturities and repricing dates of our
financing. We believe that these strategies allow us to mitigate our interest
rate risk and liquidity risk, resulting in more stable and predictable cash
flows and will include the use of CDOs structured for us by the Manager. We
will
retain the equity portion of the CDO and can retain one or more series of the
subordinated obligations issued by the CDO. We also use derivative instruments
such as interest rate swaps and interest rate caps to hedge the borrowings
we
use to finance our assets on a short-term basis. We intend to maintain borrowing
arrangements with multiple counterparties in order to manage the liquidity
risk
associated with our short-term financing.
Our
Operating Policies and Strategies
Investment
guidelines. We
have
established investment policies, procedures and guidelines that are reviewed
and
approved by our investment committee and board of directors. The investment
committee meets regularly to monitor the execution of our investment strategies
and our progress in achieving our investment objectives. As a result of our
investment strategies and targeted asset classes, we acquire our investments
primarily for income. We do not have a policy that requires us to focus our
investments in one or more particular geographic areas.
Financing
policies. We
use
leverage in order to increase potential returns to our stockholders and for
financing our portfolio. We do not speculate on changes in interest rates.
While
we have identified our leverage targets for each of our targeted asset classes,
our investment policies require no minimum or maximum leverage and our
investment committee will have the discretion, without the need for further
approval by our board of directors, to increase the amount of leverage we incur
above our targeted range for individual asset classes.
We
typically accumulate investments in warehouse facilities or through repurchase
agreements and, upon our acquisition of the assets in those facilities,
refinance them with CDOs. We are not limited to CDOs for our refinancing needs,
and may use other forms of term financing if we believe market conditions make
it appropriate.
Hedging
and interest rate management strategy. We
use
derivative financial instruments to hedge all or a portion of the interest
rate
risk associated with our borrowings. Under the federal income tax laws
applicable to REITs, we generally will be able to enter into certain
transactions to hedge indebtedness that we may incur, or plan to incur, to
acquire or carry real estate assets, provided that our total gross income from
such hedges and other non-qualifying sources must not exceed 25% of our total
gross income. These hedging transactions may include interest rate swaps,
collars, caps or floors, puts and calls and options.
Credit
and risk management policies. Our
Manager focuses its attention on credit and risk assessment from the earliest
stage of the investment selection process. In addition, the Manager screens
and
monitors all potential investments to determine their impact on maintaining
our
REIT qualification under federal income tax laws and our exclusion from
investment company status under the Investment Company Act of 1940. Risks
related to portfolio management, including the management of risks related
to
credit losses, interest rate volatility, liquidity and counterparty credit
are
generally managed on a portfolio-by-portfolio basis by each of Resource
America’s asset management divisions, although there is often interaction and
cooperation between divisions in this process.
Our
Investment Strategy
Commercial
Real Estate-Related Investments
Whole
loans. We
originate first mortgage loans, or whole loans, directly to borrowers. The
direct origination of whole loans enable us to better control the structure
of
the loans and to maintain direct lending relationships with the borrowers.
We
may create senior tranches of a loan, consisting of an A note (described below),
B notes (described below), mezzanine loans or other participations, which we
may
hold or sell to third parties. We do not expect to obtain ratings on these
investments until we aggregate and finance them through a CDO transaction.
We
expect our whole loan investments to have loan to value, or LTV, ratios of
up to
85%.
Senior
interests in whole loans (A notes). We
invest in senior interests in whole loans, referred to as A notes, either
directly originated or purchased from third parties. A notes are loans that,
generally, consist of senior participations in, or a senior tranche within
a
first mortgage. We do not expect to obtain ratings on these investments unless
we aggregate and finance them through a CDO transaction. We expect our A note
investments to have LTV ratios of up to 70%. We expect to hold our A note
investments to their maturity.
Subordinate
interests in whole loans (B notes). We
invest in subordinate interests in whole loans, referred to as B notes, which
we
either directly originate or purchase from third parties. B notes are loans
secured by a first mortgage and subordinated to an A note. The subordination
of
a B note is generally evidenced by an intercreditor or participation agreement
between the holders of the A note and the B note. In some instances, the B
note
lender may require a security interest in the stock or partnership interests
of
the borrower as part of the transaction. B note lenders have the same
obligations, collateral and borrower as the A note lender, but typically are
subordinated in recovery upon a default. B notes share certain credit
characteristics with second mortgages in that both are subject to greater credit
risk with respect to the underlying mortgage collateral than the corresponding
first mortgage or A note. We do not expect to obtain ratings on these
investments unless we aggregate and finance them through a CDO transactions.
We
expect our B note investments to have LTV ratios of between 55% and 80%. Typical
B note investments will have terms of three years to five years, and are
generally structured with an original term of up to three years, with one year
extensions that bring the loan to a maximum term of five years. We expect to
hold our B note investments to their maturity.
In
addition to the interest payable on the B note, we may earn fees charged to
the
borrower under the note or additional income by receiving principal payments
in
excess of the discounted price (below par value) we paid to acquire the note.
Our ownership of a B note with controlling class rights may, in the event the
financing fails to perform according to its terms, cause us to elect to pursue
our remedies as owner of the B note, which may include foreclosure on, or
modification of, the note. In some cases, the owner of the A note may be able
to
foreclose or modify the note against our wishes as owner of the B note. As
a
result, our economic and business interests may diverge from the interests
of
the owner of the A note.
Mezzanine
financing. We
invest in mezzanine loans that are senior to the borrower’s equity in, and
subordinate to a first mortgage loan on, a property. These loans are secured
by
pledges of ownership interests, in whole or in part, in entities that directly
own the real property. In addition, we may require other collateral to secure
mezzanine loans, including letters of credit, personal guarantees of the
principals of the borrower, or collateral unrelated to the property. We may
structure our mezzanine loans so that we receive a stated fixed or variable
interest rate on the loan as well as a percentage of gross revenues and a
percentage of the increase in the fair market value of the property securing
the
loan, payable upon maturity, refinancing or sale of the property. Our mezzanine
loans may also have prepayment lockouts, penalties, minimum profit hurdles
and
other mechanisms to protect and enhance returns in the event of premature
repayment. We expect our mezzanine investments to have LTV ratios between 65%
and 90%. We expect the stated maturity of our mezzanine financings to range
from
three to five years. Mezzanine loans may have maturities that match the maturity
of the related mortgage loan but may have shorter or longer terms. We expect
to
hold these investments to maturity.
CMBS. We
invest in CMBS, which are securities that are secured by or evidence interests
in a pool of mortgage loans secured by commercial properties. These securities
may be senior or subordinate and may be either investment grade or
non-investment grade. We expect that the majority of our CMBS investments will
be rated by at least one nationally recognized rating agency.
The
yields on CMBS depend on the timely payment of interest and principal due on
the
underlying mortgage loans and defaults by the borrowers on such loans may
ultimately result in deficiencies and defaults on the CMBS. In the event of
a
default, the trustee for the benefit of the holders of CMBS has recourse only
to
the underlying pool of mortgage loans and, if a loan is in default, to the
mortgaged property securing such mortgage loan. After the trustee has exercised
all of the rights of a lender under a defaulted mortgage loan and the related
mortgaged property has been liquidated, no further remedy will be available.
However, holders of relatively senior classes of CMBS will be protected to
a
certain degree by the structural features of the securitization transaction
within which such CMBS were issued, such as the subordination of the relatively
more junior classes of the CMBS.
Commercial
Finance Investments
Subject
to limitations imposed by REIT qualification standards and requirements for
exclusion from regulation under the Investment Company Act of 1940, which we
refer to as the Investment Company Act, we may invest in the following
commercial finance assets:
Bank
loans. We
acquire senior and subordinated, secured and unsecured loans made by banks
or
other financial entities. Bank loans may also include revolving credit
facilities, under which the lender is obligated to advance funds to the borrower
under the credit facility as requested by the borrower from time to time. We
expect that some amount of these loans will be secured by real estate mortgages
or liens on other assets. Certain of these loans may have an interest-only
payment schedule, with the principal amount remaining outstanding and at risk
until the maturity of the loan. These loans may include restrictive financial
and operating covenants. We also have invested, to a lesser extent, in bonds
which pay holders a coupon periodically until maturity of the bonds, when the
face value is due.
Other
ABS. We
invest in other ABS, principally CDOs backed by small business loans and trust
preferred securities of financial institutions such as banks, savings and thrift
institutions, insurance companies, holding companies for these institutions
and
REITs. As with CDOs collateralized by ABS-RMBS and CMBS, discussed above, we
may
invest in either the equity or debt tranches of the CDOs. Although we currently
have no plans to do so, we may also invest in consumer ABS, such as ABS backed
by credit card receivables and automobile loans.
Equipment
leases and notes. We
invest in small- and middle-ticket full payout equipment leases and notes.
Under
full payout leases and notes, the payments we receive over the term of the
financing will return our invested capital plus an appropriate return without
consideration of the value of the leased equipment of the end of the lease
or
note term, known as the residual, and the obligor will acquire the equipment
at
the end of the payment term. We focus on equipment and other assets that are
essential for businesses to conduct their operations so that end users will
be
highly motivated to make required monthly payments. We focus on equipment in
the
following areas:
·
|
general
office equipment, such as office machinery, furniture and telephone
and
computer systems;
|
·
|
medical
and dental practices and equipment for diagnostic and treatment use;
|
·
|
energy
and climate control systems;
|
·
|
industrial
equipment, including manufacturing, material handling and electronic
diagnostic systems; and
|
·
|
agricultural
equipment and facilities.
|
Trust
preferred securities. We
may invest in trust preferred securities, with an emphasis on securities
of
small- to middle-market financial institutions, including banks, savings
and
thrift institutions, insurance companies, holding companies for these
institutions and REITS. Trust preferred securities are issued by a special
purpose trust that holds a subordinated debenture or other debt obligation
issued by a company to the trust. The company holds the equity interest in
the
trust, with the preferred securities of the trust being sold to investors.
The
trust invests the proceeds of the preferred securities in the sponsoring
company
through the purchase of the debenture issued by the company. Issuers of trust
preferred securities are generally affiliated with financial institutions
because, under current regulatory and tax structures, unlike the proceeds
from
debt securities the proceeds from trust preferred securities may be treated
as
primary regulatory capital by the financial institution, while it may deduct
the
interest it pays on the debt obligation held by the trust from its income
for
federal income tax purposes. Our focus will be to invest in trust preferred
securities issued by financial institutions that have favorable characteristics
with respect to market demographics, cash flow stability and franchise value.
Collateralized
Debt Obligations
Subject
to limitations imposed by REIT qualification standards and requirements for
exclusion from regulation under the Investment Company Act, we invest in the
debt tranches of CDOs collateralized by CMBS, ABS-RMBS, other ABS and bank
loans. To avoid any actual or perceived conflicts of interest with the Manager
and Resource America, we will not invest in any CDO structured or co-structured
by them other than those structured or co-structured on our behalf.
In
general, CDOs are issued by special purpose vehicles that hold a portfolio
of
debt obligation securities. The CDO vehicle issues tranches of debt securities
of different seniority, and equity, to fund the purchase of the portfolio.
The
debt tranches are typically rated based on portfolio quality, diversification
and structural subordination. The equity securities issued by the CDO vehicle
are the “first loss” piece of the vehicle’s capital structure, but they are also
generally entitled to all residual amounts available for payment after the
vehicle’s obligations to the debt holders have been satisfied.
Private
Equity Investments
To
a
lesser extent, subject to limitations imposed by REIT qualification standards
and requirements for exclusion from regulation under the Investment Company
Act,
we also may invest from time to time in equity securities, which may or may
not
be related to real estate. We do not have a policy regarding the amount in
these
investments we may hold, but do not expect that they will be material to our
total assets. These investments may include direct purchases of private equity
as well as purchases of interests in private equity funds. While we do not
have
a policy or limitation with respect to the types of securities we may acquire,
or the activities of the person in which we may invest, we expect that any
such
investments will consist primarily of private equity securities issued by
financial institutions, particularly banks and savings and thrift institutions.
We will follow a value-oriented investment approach and focus on the anticipated
future cash flows generated by the underlying business, discounted by an
appropriate rate to reflect both the risk of achieving those cash flows and
the
alternative uses for the capital to be invested. We will also consider other
factors such as the strength of management, the liquidity of the investment,
the
underlying value of the assets owned by the issuer, and prices of similar or
comparable securities.
Residential
Real Estate-Related Investments
We
invest
in ABS-RMBS, which are securities that are secured by or evidence interests
in a
pool of residential mortgage loans. These securities may be issued by government
sponsored agencies or other entities and may or may not be rated investment
grade by rating agencies. The principal difference between agency ABS-RMBS
and
ABS-RMBS is that the mortgages underlying the ABS-RMBS do not conform to
agency
guidelines as a result of documentation deficiencies, high LTV ratios or
credit
quality issues. We currently invest in ABS-RMBS but may invest in agency
ABS-RMBS in the future. We expect that our ABS-RMBS will include loan pools
with
home equity loans (loans that are secured by subordinate liens), residential
B
or C loans (loans where the borrower’s FICO score, a measure used to rate the
financial strength of the borrower, is low, generally below 625), “Alt-A” loans
(where the borrower’s FICO score is between 675 and 725) and “high LTV” loans
(loans where the LTV 95% or greater).
Our
investment strategy within our ABS-RMBS portfolio includes an analysis of
credit, relative value, supply and demand, costs of hedging, forward LIBOR
interest rate volatility and the overall shape of the U.S. treasury and interest
rate swap yield curves.
Competition
See
“Risk
Factors” - “Risks Relating to Our Business”
Management
Agreement
We
have a
management agreement with the Manager and Resource America under which the
Manager provides the day-to-day management of our operations. The
management agreement requires the Manager to manage our business affairs in
conformity with the policies and the investment guidelines established by our
board of directors. The Manager’s role as manager is under the supervision and
direction of our board of directors. The Manager is responsible for the
selection, purchase and sale of our portfolio investments, our financing
activities, and providing us with investment advisory services. The Manager
receives fees and is reimbursed for its expenses as follows:
·
|
A
monthly base management fee equal to 1/12th of the amount of our
equity
multiplied by 1.50%. Under the management agreement, ‘‘equity’’ is equal
to the net proceeds from any issuance of shares of common stock less
offering related costs, plus or minus our retained earnings (excluding
non-cash equity compensation incurred in current or prior periods)
less
any amounts we have paid for common stock repurchases. The calculation
is
adjusted for one-time events due to changes in generally accepted
accounting principles in the United States, which we refer to as
GAAP, as
well as other non-cash charges, upon approval of our independent
directors.
|
·
|
Incentive
compensation based on the product of (i) 25% of the dollar amount
by
which, (A) our net income (determined in accordance with GAAP) per
common
share (before non-cash equity compensation expense and incentive
compensation), but after the base management fee, for a quarter (based
on
the weighted average number of shares outstanding) exceeds, (B) an
amount
equal to (1) the weighted average share price of shares of common
stock in
our offerings, multiplied by, (2) the greater of (a) 2.00% or (b)
0.50%
plus one-fourth of the Ten Year Treasury rate (as defined in the
management agreement) for such quarter, multiplied by, (ii) the weighted
average number of common shares outstanding for the quarter. The
calculation may be adjusted for one-time events due to changes in
GAAP as
well as other non-cash charges upon approval of our independent directors.
|
·
|
Reimbursement
of out-of-pocket expenses and certain other costs incurred by the
Manager
that relate directly to us and our
operations.
|
Incentive
compensation will be paid quarterly. Seventy-five percent (75%) of the incentive
compensation will be paid in cash and at least twenty-five percent (25%) will
be
paid in the form of a stock award. The Manager may elect to receive more than
25% of its incentive compensation in stock. All shares are fully vested upon
issuance. However, the Manager may not sell such shares for one year after
the
incentive compensation becomes due and payable unless the management agreement
is terminated. Shares payable as incentive compensation are valued as
follows:
·
|
if
such shares are traded on a securities exchange, at the average of
the
closing prices of the shares on such exchange over the thirty day
period
ending three days prior to the issuance of such
shares;
|
·
|
if
such shares are actively traded over-the-counter, at the average
of the
closing bid or sales price as applicable over the thirty day period
ending
three days prior to the issuance of such shares;
and
|
·
|
if
there is no active market for such shares, at the fair market value
as
reasonably determined in good faith by our board of
directors.
|
The
initial term of the management agreement expires on March 31, 2008 and will
be
automatically renewed for a one-year term on that date and each anniversary
date
thereafter. Our board of directors will review the Manager’s performance
annually. After the initial term, the management agreement may be terminated
annually upon the affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of our independent
directors, or by the affirmative vote of the holders of at least a majority
of
the outstanding shares of our common stock, based upon unsatisfactory
performance that is materially detrimental to us or a determination by our
independent directors that the management fees payable to the Manager are not
fair, subject to the Manager’s right to prevent such a compensation termination
by accepting a mutually acceptable reduction of management fees. Our board
of
directors must provide 180 days’ prior notice of any such termination. The
Manager will be paid a termination fee equal to four times the sum of the
average annual base management fee and the average annual incentive compensation
earned by the Manager during the two 12-month periods immediately preceding
the
date of termination, calculated as of the end of the most recently completed
fiscal quarter before the date of termination.
We
may
also terminate the management agreement for cause with 30 days’ prior written
notice from our board of directors. No termination fee is payable with respect
to a termination for cause. The management agreement defines cause
as:
·
|
the
Manager’s continued material breach of any provision of the management
agreement following a period of 30 days after written notice
thereof;
|
·
|
the
Manager’s fraud, misappropriation of funds, or embezzlement against
us;
|
·
|
the
Manager’s gross negligence in the performance of its duties under the
management agreement;
|
·
|
the
bankruptcy or insolvency of the Manager, or the filing of a voluntary
bankruptcy petition by the Manager;
|
·
|
the
dissolution of the Manager; and
|
·
|
a
change of control (as defined in the management agreement) of the
Manager
if a majority of our independent directors determines, at any point
during
the 18 months following the change of control, that the change of
control
was detrimental to the ability of the Manager to perform its duties
in
substantially the same manner conducted before the change of
control.
|
Cause
does not include unsatisfactory performance that is materially detrimental
to
our business.
The
management agreement will terminate at the Manager’s option, without payment of
the termination fee, in the event we become regulated as an investment company
under the Investment Company Act, with such termination deemed to occur
immediately before such event.
Regulatory
Aspects of Our Investment Strategy: Exclusion from Regulation Under the
Investment Company Act.
We
operate our business so as to be excluded from regulation under the Investment
Company Act. Because we conduct our business through wholly-owned subsidiaries,
we must ensure not only that we qualify for an exclusion from regulation under
the Investment Company Act, but also that each of our subsidiaries so qualifies.
We
believe that RCC Real Estate, Inc., the subsidiary that as of December 31,
2006
held all of our commercial real estate loan assets, is excluded from Investment
Company Act regulation under Sections 3(c)(5)(C) and 3(c)(6), provisions
designed for companies that do not issue redeemable securities and are primarily
engaged in the business of purchasing or otherwise acquiring mortgages and
other
liens on and interests in real estate. To qualify for this exclusion, at least
55% of RCC Real Estate’s assets must consist of mortgage loans and other assets
that are considered the functional equivalent of mortgage loans for purposes
of
the Investment Company Act, which we refer to as “qualifying real estate
assets.” Moreover, 80% of RCC Real Estate’s assets must consist of qualifying
real estate assets and other real estate-related assets. RCC Real Estate has
not
issued, and does not intend to issue, redeemable securities.
We
consider whole pool certificates to be qualifying real estate assets. A whole
pool certificate is a certificate that represents the entire beneficial interest
in an underlying pool of mortgage loans. By contrast, a certificate that
represents less than the entire beneficial interest in the underlying mortgage
loans is not considered to be a qualifying real estate asset for purposes of
the
55% test, but constitutes a real estate-related asset for purposes of the 80%
test.
We
treat
our investments in whole loans, specific types of B notes and specific types
of
mezzanine loans as qualifying real estate assets for purposes of determining
our
eligibility for the exclusion provided by Section 3(c)(5)(C) to the extent
such treatment is consistent with guidance provided by the SEC or its staff.
We
believe that SEC staff guidance allows us to treat B notes as qualifying real
estate assets where we have unilateral rights to instruct the servicer to
foreclose upon a defaulted mortgage loan, replace the servicer in the event
the
servicer, in its discretion, elects not to foreclose on such a loan, and
purchase the A note in the event of a default on the mortgage loan. We believe,
based upon an analysis of existing SEC staff guidance, that we may treat
mezzanine loans as qualifying real estate assets where (i) the borrower is
a special purpose bankruptcy remote entity whose sole purpose is to hold all
of
the ownership interests in another special purpose entity that owns commercial
real property, (ii) both entities are organized as limited liability
companies or limited partnerships, (iii) under their organizational
documents and the loan documents, neither entity may engage in any other
business, (iv) the ownership interests of either entity have no value apart
from the underlying real property which is essentially the only asset held
by
the property-owning entity, (v) the value of the underlying property in
excess of the amount of senior obligations is in excess of the amount of the
mezzanine loan, (vi) the borrower pledges its entire interest in the
property-owning entity to the lender which obtains a perfected security interest
in the collateral, and (vii) the relative rights and priorities between the
mezzanine lender and the senior lenders with respect to claims on the underlying
property is set forth in an intercreditor agreement between the parties which
gives the mezzanine lender certain cure and purchase rights in case there is
a
default on the senior loan. If the SEC staff provides guidance that these
investments are not qualifying real estate assets, we will treat them, for
purposes of determining our eligibility for the exclusion provided by
Section 3(c)(5)(C), as real estate-related assets or miscellaneous assets,
as appropriate. We do not expect that investments in non-whole pool loans,
CDOs,
other ABS, bank loans, equipment leases and notes, trust preferred securities
and private equity will constitute qualifying real estate assets. Moreover,
to
the extent that these investments are not backed by mortgage loans or other
interests in real estate, they will not constitute real estate-related assets.
Instead, they will constitute miscellaneous assets, which can constitute no
more
than 20% of RCC Real Estate’s assets.
To
the
extent RCC Real Estate holds its commercial real estate loan assets through
wholly-owned CDO subsidiaries, RCC Real Estate also intends to conduct its
operations so that it will not come within the definition of an investment
company set forth in Section 3(a)(1)(C) of the Investment Company Act because
less than 40% of the value of its total assets on an unconsolidated basis will
consist of “investment securities,” which we refer to as the 40% test.
“Investment securities” exclude U.S. government securities and securities of
majority-owned subsidiaries that are not themselves investment companies and
are
not relying on the exception from the definition of investment company under
Section 3(c)(1) or Section 3(c)(7) of the Investment Company Act.
Certain of the wholly-owned CDO subsidiaries of RCC Real Estate intend to rely
on Section 3(c)(5)(C) for their Investment Company Act exemption, with the
result that RCC Real Estate’s interest in the CDO subsidiaries would not
constitute “investment securities” for the purpose of the 40% test.
We
do not
expect that our other subsidiaries, RCC Commercial, Inc. and Resource TRS,
Inc.
will qualify for the Section 3(c)(5)(C) exclusion. However, we do expect
them to qualify for another exclusion under either Section 3(c)(1) or
3(c)(7). As required by these exclusions, we will not allow either entity to
make, or propose to make, a public offering of its securities, and we will
require that each owner of securities issued by those entities be a “qualified
purchaser” so that those entities are not investment companies subject to
regulation under the Investment Company Act. If we form other subsidiaries,
we
must ensure that they qualify for an exemption or exclusion from regulation
under the Investment Company Act.
Moreover,
we must ensure that Resource Capital Corp. itself qualifies for an exclusion
from regulation under the Investment Company Act. We will do so by monitoring
the value of our interests in our subsidiaries. At all times, we must ensure
that Resource Capital Corp. meets the 40% test. Our interest in RCC Real Estate
does not constitute an “investment security” for purposes of the 40% test, but
our interests in RCC Commercial does, and our interest in Resource TRS may
in
the future, constitute “investment securities.” Accordingly, we must monitor the
value of our interest in these two subsidiaries to ensure that the value of
our
interests in them never exceeds 40% of the value of our total assets. We will
monitor the value of our interest in Resource TRS for tax purposes as well;
the
applicable tax rules require us to ensure that the total value of the stock
and
other securities of Resource TRS and any other taxable REIT subsidiary, or
TRS,
held directly or indirectly by us does not exceed 20% of the value of our total
assets. These requirements may limit our flexibility in acquiring assets in
the
future.
We
have
not received, nor have we sought, a no-action letter from the SEC regarding
how
our investment strategy fits within the exclusions from regulation under the
Investment Company Act that we and our subsidiaries are using. To the extent
that the SEC provides more specific or different guidance regarding the
treatment of assets as qualifying real estate assets or real estate-related
assets, we may have to adjust our investment strategy accordingly. Any
additional guidance from the SEC could provide additional flexibility to us
or
it could further inhibit our ability to pursue the investment strategy we have
chosen.
Employees
We
have
no direct employees. Under our management agreement, the Manager provides us
with all management and support personnel and services necessary for our
day-to-day operations. We depend upon the Manager and Resource America for
personnel and administrative infrastructure. To provide its services, the
Manager draws upon the expertise and experience of Resource America which,
as of
December 31, 2006 and 2005, had 237 and 175 employees, respectively, involved
in
asset management, including 82 and 61 asset management professionals and 155
and
114 asset management support personnel, respectively.
Corporate
Governance and Internet Address
We
emphasize the importance of professional business conduct and ethics through
our
corporate governance initiatives. Our board of directors consists of a majority
of independent directors; the audit, compensation and nominating/corporate
governance committees of our board of directors are composed exclusively of
independent directors. We have adopted corporate governance guidelines and
a
code of business conduct and ethics, which delineate our standards for our
officers and directors, and employees of our manager.
Our
internet address is www.resourcecapitalcorp.com.
We make
available, free of charge through a link on our site, all reports filed with
the
SEC as soon as reasonably practicable after such filing. Our site also contains
our code of business conduct and ethics, corporate governance guidelines and
the
charters of the audit committee, nominating and governance committee and
compensation committee of our board of directors.
This
section describes material risks affecting our business. In connection with
the
forward-looking statements that appear in this annual report, you should
carefully review the factors discussed below and the cautionary statements
referred to in “Forward-Looking Statements.”
Risks
Related to Our Business
We
have a limited operating history. We may not be able to operate our business
successfully or generate sufficient revenue to make distributions to our
stockholders.
We
have
only a limited operating history. We commenced operations on March 8, 2005.
We are subject to all of the business risks and uncertainties associated with
any new business, including the risk that we will not be able to execute our
investment strategy or achieve our investment objectives and that the value
of
your investment could decline substantially. Our ability to achieve returns
for
our stockholders depends on our ability both to generate sufficient cash flow
to
pay distributions and to achieve capital appreciation, and we cannot assure
you
that we will do either.
We
depend on the Manager and Resource America and may not find suitable
replacements if the management agreement terminates.
We
have
no employees. Our officers, portfolio managers, administrative personnel and
support personnel are employees of Resource America. We have no separate
facilities and completely rely on the Manager and, because the Manager has
no
direct employees, Resource America, which has significant discretion as to
the
implementation of our operating policies and investment strategies. If our
management agreement terminates, we may be unable to find a suitable replacement
for them. Moreover, we believe that our success depends to a significant extent
upon the experience of the Manager’s and Resource America’s executive officers
and senior portfolio managers, and in particular Edward E. Cohen, Jonathan
Z.
Cohen, Steven J. Kessler, Jeffrey D. Blomstrom, David J. Bryant, Thomas C.
Elliott, Christopher D. Allen, Gretchen Bergstresser, David Bloom, Crit DeMent,
Alan F. Feldman and Andrew P. Shook, whose continued service is not guaranteed.
The departure of any of the executive officers or senior portfolio managers
could harm our investment performance.
The
Manager and Resource America have only limited prior experience managing a
REIT
and we cannot assure you that their past experience will be sufficient to
successfully manage our business.
The
federal income tax laws impose numerous constraints on the operations of REITs.
The executive officers of the Manager and Resource America have only limited
prior experience managing assets under these constraints, which may hinder
the
Manager’s ability to achieve our investment objectives.
We
must pay the Manager the base management fee regardless of the performance
of
our portfolio.
The
Manager is entitled to receive a monthly base management fee equal to 1/12
of
our equity, as defined in the management agreement, times 1.50%, regardless
of
the performance of our portfolio. The Manager’s entitlement to substantial
non-performance based compensation might reduce its incentive to devote its
time
and effort to seeking profitable opportunities for our portfolio. This in turn
could hurt our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.
The
incentive fee we pay the Manager may induce it to make riskier investments.
In
addition to its base management fee, the Manager will receive incentive
compensation, payable quarterly, equal to 25% of the amount by which our net
income, as defined in the management agreement, exceeds the weighted average
prices for our common stock in all of our offerings multiplied by the greater
of
2.00% or 0.50% plus one-fourth of the average 10-year treasury rate for such
quarter, multiplied by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding
during the quarter. In evaluating investments and other management strategies,
the opportunity to earn incentive compensation based on net income may lead
the
Manager to place undue emphasis on the maximization of net income at the expense
of other criteria, such as preservation of capital, in order to achieve higher
incentive compensation. Investments with higher yields generally have higher
risk of loss than investments with lower yields.
The
Manager manages our portfolio pursuant to very broad investment guidelines
and
our board does not approve each investment decision, which may result in our
making riskier investments.
The
Manager is authorized to follow very broad investment guidelines. While our
directors periodically review our investment guidelines and our investment
portfolio, they do not review all of our proposed investments. In addition,
in
conducting periodic reviews, the directors may rely primarily on information
provided to them by the Manager. Furthermore, the Manager may use complex
strategies, and transactions entered into by the Manager may be difficult or
impossible to unwind by the time they are reviewed by the directors. The Manager
has great latitude within the broad investment guidelines in determining the
types of investments it makes for us. Poor investment decisions could impair
our
ability to make distributions to our stockholders.
We
may change our investment strategy without stockholder consent, which may result
in riskier investments than those currently targeted.
Subject
to maintaining our qualification as a REIT and our exclusion from regulation
under the Investment Company Act, we may change our investment strategy,
including the percentage of assets that may be invested in each class, or in
the
case of securities, in a single issuer, at any time without the consent of
our
stockholders, which could result in our making investments that are different
from, and possibly riskier than, the investments described in this report.
A
change in our investment strategy may increase our exposure to interest rate
and
real estate market fluctuations, all of which may reduce the market price of
our
common stock and impair our ability to make distributions to you. Furthermore,
a
change in our asset allocation could result in our making investments in asset
categories different from those described in this prospectus.
Our
management agreement was not negotiated at arm’s-length and, as a result, may
not be as favorable to us as if it had been negotiated with a third party.
Our
officers and two of our directors, Edward E. Cohen and Jonathan Z. Cohen, are
officers or directors of the Manager and Resource America. As a consequence,
our
management agreement was not the result of arm’s-length negotiations and its
terms, including fees payable, may not be as favorable to us as if it had been
negotiated with an unaffiliated third party.
Termination
of the management agreement by us without cause is difficult and could be
costly.
Termination
of our management agreement without cause is difficult and could be costly.
We
may terminate the management agreement without cause only annually following
its
initial term upon the affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of our independent
directors or by a vote of the holders of at least a majority of our outstanding
common stock, based upon unsatisfactory performance by the Manager that is
materially detrimental to us or a determination that the management fee payable
to the Manager is not fair. Moreover, with respect to a determination that
the
management fee is not fair, the Manager may prevent termination by accepting
a
mutually acceptable reduction of management fees. We must give not less than
180
days’ prior notice of any termination. Upon any termination without cause, the
Manager will be paid a termination fee equal to four times the sum of the
average annual base management fee and the average annual incentive compensation
earned by it during the two 12-month periods immediately preceding the date
of
termination, calculated as of the end of the most recently completed fiscal
quarter before the date of termination.
The
Manager and Resource America may engage in activities that compete with us.
Our
management agreement does not prohibit the Manager or Resource America from
investing in or managing entities that invest in asset classes that are the
same
as or similar to our targeted asset classes, except that they may not raise
funds for, sponsor or advise any new publicly-traded REIT that invests primarily
in mortgage-backed securities, or MBS, in the United States. The Manager’s
policies regarding resolution of conflicts of interest may be varied by it
if
economic, market, regulatory or other conditions make their application
economically inefficient or otherwise impractical. Moreover, our officers,
other
than our chief financial officer, and the officers, directors and employees
of
Resource America who provide services to us are not required to work full time
on our affairs, and anticipate devoting significant time to the affairs of
Resource America. As a result, there may be significant conflicts between us,
on
the one hand, and the Manager and Resource America on the other, regarding
allocation of the Manager’s and Resource America’s resources to the management
of our investment portfolio.
Our
Manager’s liability is limited under the management agreement, and we have
agreed to indemnify our Manager against certain liabilities.
Our
Manager does not assume any responsibility under the management agreement other
than to render the services called for under it, and will not be responsible
for
any action of our board of directors in following or declining to follow its
advice or recommendations. Resource America, the Manager, their directors,
managers, officers, employees and affiliates will not be liable to us, any
subsidiary of ours, our directors, our stockholders or any subsidiary’s
stockholders for acts performed in accordance with and pursuant to the
management agreement, except by reason of acts constituting bad faith, willful
misconduct, gross negligence, or reckless disregard of their duties under the
management agreement. We have agreed to indemnify the parties for all damages
and claims arising from acts not constituting bad faith, willful misconduct,
gross negligence, or reckless disregard of duties, performed in good faith
in
accordance with and pursuant to the management agreement.
We
leverage our portfolio, which may reduce the return on our investments and
cash
available for distribution.
We
currently leverage our portfolio through securitizations, including CDOs,
repurchase agreements, secured term facilities, warehouse facilities, issuance
of trust preferred securities, bank credit facilities and other forms of
borrowing. We are not limited in the amount of leverage we may use. As of
December 31, 2006, our outstanding indebtedness was $1.5 billion and our
leverage ratio was 4.6 times. The amount of leverage we use will vary depending
on the availability of credit facilities, our ability to structure and market
securitizations, the asset classes we leverage and the cash flows from the
assets being financed. Our use of leverage subjects us to risks associated
with
debt financing, including the risks that:
·
|
the
cash provided by our operating activities will not be sufficient
to meet
required payments of principal and interest,
|
·
|
the
cost of financing will increase relative to the income from the assets
financed, reducing the income we have available to pay distributions,
and
|
·
|
our
investments may have maturities that differ from the maturities of
the
related financing and, consequently, the risk that the terms of any
refinancing we obtain will not be as favorable as the terms of existing
financing.
|
If
we are
unable to secure refinancing on acceptable terms, we may be forced to dispose
of
some of our assets upon disadvantageous terms or to obtain financing at
unfavorable terms, either of which may result in losses to us or reduce the
cash
flow available to meet our debt service obligations or to pay distributions.
Financing
that we obtain, and particularly securitization financing such as CDOs, may
require us to maintain a specified ratio of the amount of the financing to
the
value of the assets financed. A decrease in the value of these assets may lead
to margin calls or calls for the pledge of additional assets which we will
have
to satisfy. We may not have sufficient funds or unpledged assets to satisfy
any
such calls.
Growth
in our business operations may strain the infrastructure of the Manager and
Resource America, which could increase our costs, reduce our profitability
and
reduce our cash available for distribution and our stock price. Failure to
grow
may harm our ability to achieve our investment objectives.
Our
ability to achieve our investment objectives depends on our ability to grow,
which will depend on the ability of the Manager to identify investments that
meet our investment criteria and to obtain financing on acceptable terms. Our
ability to grow also depends upon the ability of the Manager and Resource
America to successfully hire, train, supervise and manage any personnel needed
to discharge their duties to us under our management agreement. Our business
operations may strain the management infrastructure of the Manager and Resource
America, which could increase our costs, reduce our profitability and reduce
either or both of the distributions we can pay or the price at which our common
stock trades.
We
operate in a highly competitive market for investment opportunities, which
may
result in higher prices, lower yields and a narrower net interest spread for
our
investments, and may inhibit the growth or delay the diversification of our
portfolio.
A
number
of entities compete with us to make the types of investments that we seek to
make. We compete with other REITs, public and private investment funds,
commercial and investment banks, commercial finance companies and other
debt-oriented investors. Many of our competitors are substantially larger and
have considerably greater financial, technical and marketing resources than
we
do. Other REITs have recently raised, or are expected to raise, significant
amounts of capital, and may have investment objectives substantially similar
to
ours. Some of our competitors may have a lower cost of funds and access to
funding sources that are not available to us. In addition, some of our
competitors may have higher risk tolerances or different risk assessments,
which
could allow them to consider a wider variety of investments or establish
more investment sourcing relationships than us. As a result of this competition,
we may not be able to take advantage of attractive investment opportunities
from
time to time or be able to identify and make investments that
are consistent with our investment objectives. Competition for desirable
investments may result in higher prices, lower yields and a narrower net
interest spread. If competition has these effects, our earnings and ability
to
pay distributions could be reduced.
Failure
to procure adequate capital and funding may decrease our profitability and
our
ability to make distributions, reducing the market price of our common stock.
We
depend
upon the availability of adequate funding and capital for our operations. As
a
REIT, we must distribute annually at least 90% of our REIT taxable income,
determined without regard to the deduction for dividends paid and excluding
net
capital gain, to our stockholders and are therefore not able to retain
significant amounts of our earnings for new investments. Moreover, although
Resource TRS, our TRS, may retain earnings as new capital, we are subject to
REIT qualification requirements which limit the relative value of TRS stock
and
securities to the other assets owned by a REIT. Consequently, we will depend
upon the availability of financing and additional capital to execute our
investment strategy. If sufficient financing or capital is not available to
us
on acceptable terms, we may not be able to achieve anticipated levels of
profitability either due to the lack of funding or an increase in funding costs
and our ability to make distributions and the price of our common stock may
decline.
We
intend to finance some of our investments through CDOs in which we will retain
the equity. CDO equity receives distributions from the CDO only if the CDO
generates enough income to first pay the holders of its debt securities and
its
expenses.
We
seek
to finance our commercial real estate-related loans, ABS-RMBS, CMBS and
commercial finance assets through CDOs in which we will retain the equity
interest. A CDO is a special purpose vehicle that purchases collateral that
is
expected to generate a stream of interest or other income. The CDO issues
various classes of securities that participate in that income stream, typically
one or more classes of debt instruments and a class of equity securities. The
equity interests are subordinate in right of payment to all other securities
issued by the CDO. The equity is usually entitled to all of the income generated
by the CDO after the CDO pays all of the interest due on the debt securities
and
other expenses. However, there will be little or no income available to the
CDO
equity if there are excessive defaults by the issuers of the underlying
collateral. In that event, the value of our investment in the CDO’s equity could
decrease substantially. In addition, the equity securities of CDOs are generally
illiquid, and because they represent a leveraged investment in the CDO’s assets,
the value of the equity securities will generally have greater fluctuations
than
the value of the underlying collateral.
The
use of CDO financings with over-collateralization requirements may reduce our
cash flow.
We
expect
that the terms of CDOs we may use to finance our portfolio will generally
require the principal amount of the assets forming the collateral pool to exceed
the principal balance of the CDOs, commonly referred to as
“over-collateralization.” Typically, in a CDO if the delinquencies or losses
exceed specified levels, which are generally established based on the analysis
by the rating agencies or a financial guaranty insurer of the characteristics
of
the assets collateralizing the CDOs, the amount of over-collateralization
required increases or may be prevented from decreasing from what would otherwise
be permitted if losses or delinquencies did not exceed those levels. Other
tests, based on delinquency levels or other criteria, may restrict our ability
to receive net income from assets collateralizing the obligations. Before
structuring any CDO issuances, we will not know the actual terms of the
delinquency tests, over-collateralization terms, cash flow release mechanisms
or
other significant terms. If our assets fail to perform as anticipated, we may
be
unable to comply with these terms, which would reduce or eliminate our cash
flow
from our CDO financings and, as a result, our net income and ability to make
distributions.
Declines
in the market values of our investments may reduce periodic reported results,
credit availability and our ability to make distributions.
We
classify a substantial portion of our assets for accounting purposes as
“available-for-sale.” As a result, changes in the market values of those assets
are directly charged or credited to stockholders’ equity. A decline in
these values will reduce the book value of our assets. Moreover, if the decline
in value of an available-for-sale asset is other than temporary, such decline
will reduce earnings.
A
decline
in the market value of our assets may also adversely affect us in instances
where we have borrowed money based on the market value of those assets. If
the
market value of those assets declines, the lender may require us to post
additional collateral to support the loan. If we were unable to post the
additional collateral, we could have to sell the assets under adverse market
conditions. As a result, a reduction in credit availability may reduce our
earnings and, in turn, cash available to make distributions.
Loss
of our exclusion from regulation under the Investment Company Act would require
significant changes in our operations and could reduce the market price of
our
common stock and our ability to make distributions.
In
order
to be excluded from regulation under the Investment Company Act, we must comply
with the requirements of one or more of the exclusions from the definition
of
investment company. Because we conduct our business through wholly-owned
subsidiaries, we must ensure not only that we qualify for an exclusion from
regulation under the Investment Company Act, but also that each of our
subsidiaries so qualifies. If we fail to qualify for an exclusion, we could
be
required to restructure our activities or register as an investment company.
Either alternative would require significant changes in our operations and
could
reduce the market price of our common stock. For example, if the market value
of
our investments in assets other than qualifying real estate assets or real
estate-related assets were to increase beyond the levels permitted under the
Investment Company Act exclusion upon which we rely or if assets in our
portfolio were deemed not to be qualifying real estate assets as a result of
SEC
staff guidance, we might have to sell those assets or acquire additional
qualifying real estate assets in order to maintain our exclusion. Any such
sale
or acquisition could occur under adverse market conditions. If we were required
to register as an investment company, our use of leverage to fund our investment
strategies would be significantly limited, which would limit our profitability
and ability to make distributions, and we would become subject to substantial
regulation concerning management, operations, transactions with affiliated
persons, portfolio composition, including restrictions with respect to
diversification and industry concentration, and other matters.
Rapid
changes in the values of our real-estate related investments may make it more
difficult for us to maintain our qualification as a REIT or exclusion from
regulation under the Investment Company Act.
If
the
market value or income potential of our real estate-related investments declines
as a result of increased interest rates, prepayment rates or other factors,
we
may need to increase our real estate-related investments and income and/or
liquidate our non-qualifying assets in order to maintain our REIT qualification
or exclusion from the Investment Company Act. If the decline in real estate
asset values and/or income occurs quickly, this may be especially difficult
to
accomplish. This difficulty may be exacerbated by the illiquid nature of many
of
our non-real estate assets. We may have to make investment decisions that we
otherwise would not make absent REIT qualification and Investment Company Act
considerations.
We
are highly dependent on information systems. Systems failures could
significantly disrupt our business.
Our
business is highly dependent on communications and information systems. Any
failure or interruption of our systems could cause delays or other problems
in
our securities trading activities which could harm our operating results, cause
the market price of our common stock to decline and reduce our ability to make
distributions.
If
we issue debt securities, the terms may restrict our ability to make cash
distributions, require us to obtain approval to sell our assets or otherwise
restrict our operations in ways which could make it difficult to execute our
investment strategy and achieve our investment objectives.
Any
debt
securities we may issue in the future will likely be governed by an indenture
or
other instrument containing covenants restricting our operating flexibility.
Holders of senior securities may be granted the right to hold a perfected
security interest in certain of our assets, to accelerate payments due under
the
indenture, to restrict distributions, and to require approval to sell assets.
These covenants could make it more difficult to execute our investment strategy
and achieve our investment objectives. Additionally, any convertible or
exchangeable securities that we issue may have rights, preferences and
privileges more favorable than those of our common stock. We, and indirectly
our
stockholders, will bear the cost of issuing and servicing such securities.
Terrorist
attacks and other acts of violence or war may affect the market for our common
stock, the industry in which we conduct our operations and our profitability.
Terrorist
attacks may harm our results of operations and your investment. We cannot assure
you that there will not be further terrorist attacks against the United States
or U.S. businesses. These attacks or armed conflicts may directly impact the
property underlying our ABS or the securities markets in general. Losses
resulting from these types of events are uninsurable.
More
generally, any of these events could cause consumer confidence and spending
to
decrease or result in increased volatility in the United States and worldwide
financial markets and economy. Adverse economic conditions could harm the value
of the property underlying our ABS or the securities markets in general which
could harm our operating results and revenues and may result in the volatility
of the value of our securities.
Risks
Related to Our Investments
Increases
in interest rates and other factors could reduce the value of our investments,
result in reduced earnings or losses and reduce our ability to pay
distributions.
A
significant risk associated with our investment in commercial real
estate-related loans, ABS-RMBS, CMBS and other debt instruments is the risk
that
either or both of long-term and short-term interest rates increase
significantly. If long-term rates increase, the market value of our assets
would
decline. Even if the mortgages underlying any agency ABS-RMBS we may own in
the
future are guaranteed by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac or Ginnie Mae, those guarantees
do not protect against declines in market value of the related ABS-RMBS caused
by interest rate changes. At the same time, because of the short-term nature
of
the financing we expect to use to acquire our investments and to hold ABS-RMBS,
an increase in short-term interest rates would increase our interest expense,
reducing our net interest spread. This could result in reduced profitability
and
distributions.
We
invest in ABS-RMBS backed by sub-prime residential mortgage loans which are
subject to higher delinquency, foreclosure and loss rates than mid-prime or
prime residential mortgage loans, which could result in losses to us.
Sub-prime
residential mortgage loans are made to borrowers who have poor or limited credit
histories and, as a result, do not qualify for traditional mortgage products.
Because of their credit histories, sub-prime borrowers have materially higher
rates of delinquency, foreclosure and loss compared to mid-prime and prime
credit quality borrowers. As a result, investments in ABS-RMBS backed by
sub-prime residential mortgage loans may have higher risk of loss than
investments in ABS-RMBS backed by mid-prime and prime residential mortgage
loans. At December 31, 2006, approximately $179.1 million (44.8%) of our RMBS
portfolio, the underlying assets of Ischus CDO II is invested in such
securities.
Investing
in mezzanine debt and mezzanine or other subordinated tranches of CMBS, bank
loans and other ABS involves greater risks of loss than senior secured debt
investments.
Subject
to maintaining our qualification as a REIT and exclusion from regulation under
the Investment Company Act, we will invest in mezzanine debt and expect to
invest in mezzanine or other subordinated tranches of CMBS, bank loans and
other
ABS. These types of investments carry a higher degree of risk of loss than
senior secured debt investments such as our ABS-RMBS investments because, in
the
event of default and foreclosure, holders of senior liens will be paid in full
before mezzanine investors and, depending on the value of the underlying
collateral at the time of foreclosure, there may not be sufficient assets to
pay
all or any part of amounts owed to mezzanine investors. Moreover, our mezzanine
and other subordinate debt investments may have higher LTV ratios than
conventional senior lien financing, resulting in less equity in the collateral
and increasing the risk of loss of principal. If a borrower defaults or declares
bankruptcy, we may be subject to agreements restricting or eliminating our
rights as a creditor, including rights to call a default, foreclose on
collateral, accelerate maturity or control decisions made in bankruptcy
proceedings. In addition, the prices of lower credit quality securities are
generally less sensitive to interest rate changes than more highly rated
investments, but more sensitive to economic downturns or individual issuer
developments. An economic downturn, for example, could cause a decline in the
price of lower credit quality securities because the ability of obligors of
instruments underlying the securities to make principal and interest payments
may be impaired. In such event, existing credit support relating to the
securities’ structure may not be sufficient to protect us against loss of our
principal.
The
B notes in which we invest may be subject to additional risks relating to the
privately negotiated structure and terms of the transaction, which may result
in
losses to us.
A
B note
is a loan typically secured by a first mortgage on a single large commercial
property or group of related properties and subordinated to a senior note
secured by the same first mortgage on the same collateral. As a result, if
a
borrower defaults, there may not be sufficient funds remaining for B note owners
after payment to the senior note owners. Since each transaction is privately
negotiated, B notes can vary in their structural characteristics and risks.
For
example, the rights of holders of B notes to control the process following
a
borrower default may be limited in certain investments. We cannot predict the
terms of each B note investment we will make. Further, B notes typically are
secured by a single property, and so reflect the increased risks associated
with
a single property compared to a pool of properties. B notes also are less liquid
than other forms of commercial real estate debt investments, such as CMBS,
and,
as a result we may be unable to dispose of underperforming or non-performing
investments. The higher risks associated with the subordinate position of our
B
note investments could subject us to increased risk of losses.
Our
assets likely will include trust preferred securities of financial institutions,
or CDOs collateralized by these securities, which may have greater risks of
loss
than senior secured loans.
Subject
to maintaining our qualification as a REIT and exclusion from regulation under
the Investment Company Act, we expect that we will invest in the trust preferred
securities of financial institutions or CDOs collateralized by these securities.
Investing in these securities will involve a higher degree of risk than
investing in senior secured loans, including the following:
·
|
Trust
preferred securities, which are issued by a special purpose trust,
typically are collateralized by a junior subordinated debenture of
the
financial institution and that institution’s guarantee, and thus are
subordinate and junior in right of payment to most of the financial
institution’s other debt.
|
·
|
Trust
preferred securities often will permit the financial institution
to defer
interest payments on its junior subordinated debenture, deferring
dividend
payments by the trust on the trust preferred securities, for specified
periods.
|
·
|
If
trust preferred securities are collateralized by junior subordinated
debentures issued by the financial institution’s holding company, dividend
payments may be affected by regulatory limitations on the amount
of
dividends, other distributions or loans a financial institution can
make
to its holding company, which typically are the holding company’s
principal sources of funds for meeting its obligations, including
its
obligations under the junior subordinated debentures.
|
As
a
result, a holder of trust preferred securities may be limited in its ability
both to enforce its payment rights and to recover its investment upon default.
Moreover, any deferral of dividends on the trust preferred securities in which
we may invest will reduce the funds available to us to make distributions which,
in turn, could reduce the market price of our common stock.
We
invest in small- and middle-ticket equipment leases and notes to small- and
mid-size businesses which may have greater risks of default than leases or
loans
to larger businesses.
We
invest
in small- and middle-ticket equipment leases and notes. Many of the obligors
are
small- to mid-size businesses. As a result, we may be subject to higher risks
of
lease default than if our obligors were larger businesses. While we will seek
to
repossess and re-lease or sell the equipment subject to a defaulted lease or
note, we may not be able to do so on advantageous terms. If an obligor files
for
protection under the bankruptcy laws, we may experience difficulties and delays
in recovering the equipment. Moreover, the equipment may be returned in poor
condition and we may be unable to enforce important lease provisions against
an
insolvent obligor, including the contract provisions that require the obligor
to
return the equipment in good condition. In some cases, an obligor’s
deteriorating financial condition may make trying to recover what the obligor
owes impractical. The costs of recovering equipment upon an obligor’s default,
enforcing the obligor’s obligations under the lease, and transporting, storing,
repairing and finding a new obligor or purchaser for the equipment may be high.
Higher than expected lease defaults will result in a loss of anticipated
revenues. These losses may impair our ability to make distributions and reduce
the market price of our common stock.
Private
equity investments involve a greater risk of loss than traditional debt
financing.
Private
equity investments are subordinate to debt financing and are not secured. Should
the issuer default on our investment, we would only be able to proceed against
the entity that issued the private equity in accordance with the terms of the
security, and not any property owned by the entity. Furthermore, in the event
of
bankruptcy or foreclosure, we would only be able to recoup our investment after
any lenders to the entity are paid. As a result, we may not recover some or
all
of our investment, which could result in losses.
Some
of our portfolio investments will be recorded at fair value as estimated by
our
management and reviewed by our board of directors and, as a result, there will
be uncertainty as to the value of these investments.
Some
of
our portfolio investments will be in the form of securities that are not
publicly traded, including the securities of Resource TRS. The fair value of
securities and other investments that are not publicly traded may not be readily
determinable. We will value these investments quarterly at fair value as
determined under policies approved by our board of directors. Because such
valuations are inherently uncertain, may fluctuate over short periods of time
and may be based on estimates, our determinations of fair value may differ
materially from the values that would have been used if a ready market for
these
securities existed. The value of our common stock would likely decrease if
our
determinations regarding the fair value of these investments were materially
higher than the values that we ultimately realize upon their disposal.
Some
of our investments may be illiquid, which may result in our realizing less
than
their recorded value should we need to sell such investments quickly.
We
have
made investments, and expect to make additional investments, in securities
that
are not publicly traded. A portion of these securities may be subject to legal
and other restrictions on resale or will otherwise be less liquid than publicly
traded securities. If we are required to liquidate all or a portion of our
portfolio quickly, we may realize significantly less than the value at which
we
have previously recorded our investments. In addition, we may face other
restrictions on our ability to liquidate an investment in a business entity
to
the extent that we, the Manager or Resource America has or could be attributed
with material non-public information regarding such business entity.
We
may enter into repurchase or warehouse agreements in connection with our planned
investment in the equity securities of CDOs and if the investment in the CDO
is
not consummated, the collateral will be sold and we must bear any loss resulting
from the purchase price of the collateral exceeding the sale price up to the
amount of our investment or guaranty.
In
connection with our investment in CDOs that the Manager structures for us,
we
enter into repurchase or warehouse agreements with investment banks or other
financial institutions, pursuant to which the institutions will initially
finance the purchase of the collateral that will be transferred to the CDOs.
The
Manager will select the collateral. If the CDO transaction is not consummated,
the institution would liquidate the collateral and we would have to pay any
amount by which the original purchase price of the collateral exceeds its sale
price up to the amount of our investment or guaranty, subject to negotiated
caps, if any, on our exposure. In addition, regardless of whether the CDO
transaction is consummated, if any of the collateral is sold before the
consummation, we will have to bear any resulting loss on the sale up to the
amount of our investment or guaranty. At December 31, 2006, we have $120.5
million outstanding under three of our repurchase agreements, with a maximum
amount at risk of $29.7 million.
We
may not be able to acquire eligible securities for a CDO issuance, or may not
be
able to issue CDO securities on attractive terms, which may require us to seek
more costly financing for our investments or to liquidate assets.
During
the accumulation period for our CDOs, we are subject to the risk that we will
not be able to acquire a sufficient amount of eligible assets to maximize the
efficiency of a CDO issuance. In addition, conditions in the capital markets
may
make the issuance of CDOs less attractive to us when we do have a sufficient
pool of collateral. If we are unable to issue a CDO to finance these assets,
we
may have to seek other forms of potentially less attractive financing or
otherwise to liquidate the assets at a price that could result in a loss of
all
or a portion of the cash and other collateral backing our purchase commitment
or
require us to make payments under any guaranties we have given.
We
may have to repurchase assets that we have sold in connection with CDOs and
other securitizations.
If
any of
the assets that we originate or acquire and sell or securitize does not comply
with representations and warranties that we make about their characteristics,
the borrowers and the underlying assets, we may have to purchase these assets
from the CDO or securitization vehicle, or replace them with substitute loans
or
securities. In addition, in the case of loans or securities that we have sold
instead of retained, we may have to indemnify purchasers for losses or expenses
incurred as a result of a breach of a representation or warranty. Any
significant repurchases or indemnification payments could materially reduce
our
liquidity, earnings and ability to make distributions.
An
increase in our borrowing costs relative to the interest we receive on our
assets may impair our profitability, and thus our cash available for
distribution to our stockholders.
We
use
short-term borrowings, principally repurchase agreements, to initially finance
our commercial real estate portfolio. As these short-term borrowings mature,
we
will be required either to enter into new borrowings or to sell certain of
our
investments at times when we might otherwise not choose to do so. At December
31, 2006, our repurchase agreements had a weighted average maturity of 16 days.
We also use a secured term facility to finance our direct financing leases
and
notes. At December 31, 2006, this facility had a weighted average maturity
of
3.2 years. An increase in short-term interest rates at the time that we seek
to
enter into new borrowings would reduce the spread between the income on our
assets and the cost of our borrowings. This would reduce returns on our assets,
which would reduce earnings and, in turn, cash available for distribution to
our
stockholders.
Termination
events contained in our repurchase agreements increase the possibility that
we
will be unable to maintain adequate capital and funding and may reduce cash
available for distribution.
The
occurrence of an event of default under our repurchase agreements may cause
commercial real estate investment transactions to be terminated early. Events
of
default include failure to complete an agreed upon repurchase transaction,
failure to comply with margin and margin repayment requirements, the
commencement by us of a bankruptcy, insolvency or similar proceeding or filing
of a petition against us under bankruptcy, insolvency or similar laws, or
admission of an inability to, or intention not to, perform our obligation under
the agreement. The occurrence of an event of default or termination event would
give our counterparty the option to terminate all repurchase transactions
existing with us and make any amount due by us to the counterparty payable
immediately. If outstanding repurchase transactions terminate and we are unable
to negotiate more favorable funding terms, our financing costs will increase.
This may reduce the amount of capital we have available for investing and/or
may
impair our ability to make distributions. In addition, we may have to sell
assets at a time when we might not otherwise choose to do so.
We
will lose money on our repurchase transactions if the counterparty to the
transaction defaults on its obligation to resell the underlying security back
to
us at the end of the transaction term, or if the value of the underlying
security has declined as of the end of the term or if we default on our
obligations under the repurchase agreement.
When
we
engage in a repurchase transaction, we generally sell securities to the
transaction counterparty and receive cash from the counterparty. The
counterparty must resell the securities back to us at the end of the term of
the
transaction, which is typically 30-90 days. Because the cash we receive from
the
counterparty when we initially sell the securities to the counterparty is less
than the market value of those securities, typically about 60% to 85% of that
value, if the counterparty defaults on its obligation to resell the securities
back to us we will incur a loss on the transaction. We will also incur a loss
if
the value of the underlying securities has declined as of the end of the
transaction term, as we will have to repurchase the securities for their initial
value but would receive securities worth less than that amount. Any losses
we
incur on our repurchase transactions could reduce our earnings, and thus our
cash available for distribution to our stockholders.
A
prolonged economic slowdown, recession or decline in real estate values could
impair our investments and harm our operating results.
Many
of
our investments may be susceptible to economic slowdowns or recessions or
declines in real estate values, which could lead to financial losses on our
investments and a decrease in revenues, net income and assets. Unfavorable
economic conditions also could increase our funding costs, limit our access
to
the capital markets or result in a decision by lenders not to extend credit
to
us. These events could prevent us from increasing investments and reduce or
eliminate our earnings and ability to make distributions.
We
may be exposed to environmental liabilities with respect to properties to which
we take title.
In
the
course of our business, we may take title to real estate through foreclosure
on
collateral underlying real estate investments. If we do take title to any
property, we could be subject to environmental liabilities with respect to
it.
In such a circumstance, we may be held liable to a governmental entity or to
third parties for property damage, personal injury, investigation, and clean-up
costs they incur as a result of environmental contamination, or may have to
investigate or clean up hazardous or toxic substances, or chemical releases
at a
property. The costs associated with investigation or remediation activities
could be substantial and could reduce our income and ability to make
distributions.
Our
hedging transactions may not completely insulate us from interest rate risk
and
may result in poorer overall investment performance than if we had not engaged
in any hedging transactions.
Subject
to maintaining our qualification as a REIT, we pursue various hedging strategies
to seek to reduce our exposure to losses from adverse changes in interest rates.
Our interest rate hedging activity varies in scope depending upon market
conditions relating to, among other factors, the level and volatility of
interest rates and the type of assets we hold. There are practical limitations
on our ability to insulate our portfolio from all of the negative consequences
associated with changes in short-term interest rates, including:
·
|
Available
interest rate hedges may not correspond directly with the interest
rate
risk against which we seek protection.
|
·
|
The
duration of the hedge may not match the duration of the related liability.
|
·
|
Interest
rate hedging can be expensive, particularly during periods of rising
and
volatile interest rates. Hedging costs may include structuring and
legal
fees and fees payable to hedge counterparties to execute the hedge
transaction.
|
·
|
Losses
on a hedge position may reduce the cash available to make distributions
to
stockholders, and may exceed the amounts invested in the hedge position.
|
·
|
The
amount of income that a REIT may earn from hedging transactions,
other
than through a TRS, is limited by federal tax provisions governing
REITs.
|
·
|
The
credit quality of the party owing money on the hedge may be downgraded
to
such an extent that it impairs our ability to sell or assign our
side of
the hedging transaction.
|
·
|
The
party owing money in the hedging transaction may default on its obligation
to pay.
|
We
have
adopted written policies and procedures governing our hedging activities. Under
these policies and procedures, our board of directors is responsible for
approving the types of hedging instruments we may use, absolute limits on the
notional amount and term of a hedging instrument and parameters for the
credit-worthiness of hedge counterparties. The senior managers responsible
for
each of our targeted asset classes are responsible for executing transactions
using the services of independent interest rate risk management consultants,
documenting the transactions, monitoring the valuation and effectiveness of
the
hedges, and providing reports concerning our hedging activities and the
valuation and effectiveness of our hedges, to the audit committee of our board
of directors no less often than quarterly. Our guidelines also require us to
engage one or more experienced third party advisors to provide us with
assistance in the identification of interest rate risks, the analysis, selection
and timing of risk protection strategies, the administration and negotiation
of
hedge documentation, settlement or disposition of hedges, compliance with hedge
accounting requirements and measurement of hedge effectiveness and valuation.
Hedging
against a decline in the values of our portfolio positions does not eliminate
the possibility of fluctuations in the values of the positions or prevent losses
if the values of the positions decline. Hedging transactions may also limit
the
opportunity for gain if the values of the portfolio positions should increase.
Moreover, we may not be able to hedge against an interest rate fluctuation
that
is generally anticipated by the market.
The
success of our hedging transactions will depend on the Manager’s ability to
correctly predict movements of interest rates. Therefore, unanticipated changes
in interest rates may result in poorer overall investment performance than
if we
had not engaged in any such hedging transactions. In addition, the degree of
correlation between price movements of the instruments used in a hedging
strategy and price movements in the portfolio positions being hedged may vary.
Moreover, for a variety of reasons, we may not seek to establish a perfect
correlation between such hedging instruments and the portfolio holdings being
hedged. Any such imperfect correlation may prevent us from achieving the
intended hedge and expose us to risk of loss.
Hedging
instruments often are not traded on regulated exchanges, guaranteed by an
exchange or its clearing house, or regulated by any U.S. or foreign governmental
authorities and involve risks of default by the hedging counterparty and
illiquidity.
Subject
to maintaining our qualification as a REIT, part of our investment strategy
involves entering into puts and calls on securities or indices of securities,
interest rate swaps, caps and collars, including options and forward contracts,
and interest rate lock agreements, principally Treasury lock agreements, to
seek
to hedge against mismatches between the cash flows from our assets and the
interest payments on our liabilities. Hedging instruments often are not traded
on regulated exchanges, guaranteed by an exchange or its clearing house, or
regulated by any U.S. or foreign governmental authorities. Consequently, there
are no requirements with respect to record keeping, financial responsibility
or
segregation of customer funds and positions. Furthermore, the enforceability
of
agreements underlying derivative transactions may depend on compliance with
applicable statutory and commodity and other regulatory requirements and,
depending on the identity of the counterparty, applicable international
requirements. The business failure of a counterparty with whom we enter into
a
hedging transaction will most likely result in a default. Default by a party
with whom we entered into a hedging transaction may result in the loss of
unrealized profits and force us to cover our resale commitments, if any, at
the
then current market price. Although generally we seek to reserve the right
to
terminate our hedging positions, we may not always be able to dispose of or
close out a hedging position without the consent of the hedging counterparty,
and we may not be able to enter into an offsetting contract in order to cover
our risk. A liquid secondary market may not exist for hedging instruments
purchased or sold, and we may have to maintain a position until exercise or
expiration, which could result in losses.
We
may enter into hedging instruments that could expose us to unexpected losses
in
the future.
We
may
enter into hedging instruments that would require us to fund cash payments
in
the future under certain circumstances, for example, upon the early termination
of the instrument caused by an event of default or other early termination
event, or the decision by a counterparty to request margin securities it is
contractually owed under the terms of the instrument. The amount due would
be
equal to the unrealized loss of the open positions with the counterparty and
could also include other fees and charges. These losses will be reflected in
our
financial results of operations, and our ability to fund these obligations
will
depend on the liquidity of our assets and access to capital at the time, and
the
need to fund these obligations could adversely impact our financial condition.
Increased
levels of prepayments on our MBS might decrease our net interest income or
result in a net loss.
Pools
of
mortgage loans underlie the MBS that we acquire. We generally will receive
payments from the payments that are made on these underlying mortgage loans.
When we acquire MBS, we anticipate that the underlying mortgages will prepay
at
a projected rate generating an expected yield. When borrowers prepay their
mortgage loans faster than expected, this results in corresponding prepayments
on the mortgage-related securities and may reduce the expected yield. Prepayment
rates generally increase when interest rates fall and decrease when interest
rates rise, but changes in prepayment rates are difficult to predict. Prepayment
rates also may be affected by other factors, including conditions in the housing
and financial markets, general economic conditions and the relative interest
rates on adjustable-rate and fixed-rate mortgage loans. No strategy can
completely insulate us from prepayment or other such risks. As a result, in
periods of declining rates, owners of MBS may have more money to reinvest than
anticipated and be required to invest it at the lower prevailing market rates.
Conversely, in periods of rising rates, owners of MBS may have less money to
invest than anticipated at the higher prevailing rates. This volatility in
prepayment rates also may affect our ability to maintain targeted amounts of
leverage on our MBS portfolio and may result in reduced earnings or losses
for
us and reduce or eliminate the cash available for distribution.
Our
real estate debt investments will be subject to the risks inherent in the real
estate securing or underlying those investments which could result in losses
to
us.
Commercial
mortgage loans are secured by, and mezzanine loans depend on, the performance
of
the underlying, multifamily or commercial property and are subject to risks
of
delinquency and foreclosure, and risks of loss, that are greater than similar
risks associated with loans made on the security of single-family residential
property. The ability of a borrower to repay a loan secured by or dependent
upon
an income-producing property typically depends primarily upon the successful
operation of the property rather than upon the existence of independent income
or assets of the borrower. If the net operating income of the property is
reduced, the borrower’s ability to repay the loan may be impaired. Net operating
income of an income producing property can be affected by, among other things:
·
|
tenant
mix, success of tenant businesses and property management decisions,
|
·
|
property
location and condition,
|
·
|
competition
from comparable types of properties,
|
·
|
changes
in laws that increase operating expense or limit rents that may be
charged,
|
·
|
any
need to address environmental contamination at the property,
|
·
|
the
occurrence of any uninsured casualty at the property,
|
·
|
changes
in national, regional or local economic conditions and/or specific
industry segments,
|
·
|
declines
in regional or local real estate values,
|
·
|
declines
in regional or local rental or occupancy rates,
|
·
|
increases
in interest rates, real estate tax rates and other operating expenses,
|
·
|
transitional
nature of a property being converted to an alternate use;
|
·
|
increases
in costs of construction material;
|
·
|
changes
in governmental rules, regulations and fiscal policies, including
environmental legislation, and
|
·
|
acts
of God, terrorism, social unrest and civil disturbances.
|
Residential
mortgage loans are secured by single-family residential property and are subject
to risks of delinquency and foreclosure, and risks of loss. The ability of
a
borrower to repay these loans is dependent upon the borrower’s income or assets.
A number of factors, including a national, regional or local economic downturn,
acts of God, terrorism, social unrest and civil disturbances, may impair
borrowers’ abilities to repay their loans. Economic problems specific to a
borrower, such as loss of a job or medical problems, may also impair a
borrower’s ability to repay his or her loan.
In
the
event of any default under a mortgage loan held directly by us, we will bear
a
risk of loss of principal to the extent of any deficiency between the value
of
the collateral and the principal and accrued interest of the mortgage loan,
which would reduce our cash flow from operations. Foreclosure of a mortgage
loan
can be an expensive and lengthy process which could reduce our return on the
foreclosed mortgage loan. In the event of the bankruptcy of a mortgage loan
borrower, the mortgage loan will be deemed to be secured only to the extent
of
the value of the underlying collateral at the time of bankruptcy as determined
by the bankruptcy court, and the lien securing the mortgage loan will be subject
to the avoidance powers of the bankruptcy trustee or debtor-in-possession to
the
extent the lien is unenforceable under state law.
For
a
discussion of other risks associated with mezzanine loans, see “—Investing in
mezzanine debt or mezzanine or other subordinated tranches of CMBS, bank loans
and other ABS involves greater risks of loss than senior secured debt
instruments.”
Our
assets will include bank loans, other ABS and private equity investments, which
will carry higher risks of loss than our real estate-related portfolio.
Subject
to maintaining our qualification as a REIT and exclusion from regulation under
the Investment Company Act, we invest in bank loans and other ABS. Our bank
loan
investments or our other ABS investments, which are principally backed by small
business and bank loans, may not be secured by mortgages or other liens on
assets or may involve higher LTV ratios than our real estate-related
investments. Our bank loan investments, and our ABS backed by loans, may involve
one or more loans that have an interest-only payment schedule or a schedule
that
does not fully amortize principal over the term of the loan, which will make
repayment of the loan depend upon the borrower’s liquidity or ability to
refinance the loan at maturity. Numerous factors affect a borrower’s ability to
repay or refinance loans at maturity, including national and local economic
conditions, a downturn in a borrower’s industry, loss of one or more principal
customers and conditions in the credit markets. A deterioration in a company’s
financial condition or prospects may be accompanied by a deterioration in the
collateral for the bank loan or any ABS backed by such company’s loans.
In
addition, private equity investments may also have a greater risk of loss than
senior secured or other financing since such investments are subordinate to
debt
of the issuer, are not secured by property underlying the investment and may
be
illiquid, depending upon the existence of a market for the issuer’s securities,
the length of time we have held the investment and any rights we may have to
require registration under the Securities Act.
Our
due diligence may not reveal all of an entity’s liabilities and other weaknesses
in its business.
Before
investing in the securities of any issuer, we will assess the strength and
skills of the issuer’s management, the value of any collateral securing debt
securities, the ability of the issuer and the collateral to service the debt
and
other factors that we believe are material to the performance of the investment.
In making the assessment and otherwise conducting customary due diligence,
we
will rely on the resources available to us and, in some cases, an investigation
by third parties. This process is particularly important and subjective with
respect to newly-organized entities because there may be little or no
information publicly available about the entities or, with respect to debt
securities, any underlying collateral. Our due diligence processes, however,
may
not uncover all facts that may be relevant to an investment decision.
Risks
Related to Our Organization and Structure
Our
charter and bylaws contain provisions that may inhibit potential acquisition
bids that you and other stockholders may consider favorable, and the market
price of our common stock may be lower as a result.
Our
charter and bylaws contain provisions that may have an anti-takeover effect
and
inhibit a change in our board of directors. These provisions include the
following:
·
|
There
are ownership limits and restrictions on transferability and ownership
in
our charter. For
purposes of assisting us in maintaining our REIT qualification under
the
Internal Revenue Code, our charter generally prohibits any person
from
beneficially or constructively owning more than 9.8% in value or
number of
shares, whichever is more restrictive, of any class or series of
our
outstanding capital stock. This restriction may:
|
-
|
discourage
a tender offer or other transactions or a change in the composition
of our
board of directors or control that might involve a premium price
for our
shares or otherwise be in the best interests of our stockholders;
or
|
-
|
result
in shares issued or transferred in violation of such restrictions
being
automatically transferred to a trust for a charitable beneficiary,
resulting in the forfeiture of those shares.
|
·
|
Our
charter permits our board of directors to issue stock with terms
that may
discourage a third party from acquiring us. Our
board of directors may amend our charter without stockholder approval
to
increase the total number of authorized shares of stock or the number
of
shares of any class or series and issue common or preferred stock
having
preferences, conversion or other rights, voting powers, restrictions,
limitations as to distributions, qualifications, or terms or conditions
of
redemption as determined by our board. Thus, our board could authorize
the
issuance of stock with terms and conditions that could have the effect
of
discouraging a takeover or other transaction in which holders of
some or a
majority of our shares might receive a premium for their shares over
the
then-prevailing market price.
|
·
|
Our
charter and bylaws contain other possible anti-takeover
provisions. Our
charter and bylaws contain other provisions that may have the effect
of
delaying or preventing a change in control of us or the removal of
existing directors and, as a result, could prevent our stockholders
from
being paid a premium for their common stock over the then-prevailing
market price.
|
Maryland
takeover statutes may prevent a change in control of us, and the market price
of
our common stock may be lower as a result.
Maryland
Control Share Acquisition Act.
Maryland law provides that “control shares” of a corporation acquired in a
“control share acquisition” will have no voting rights except to the extent
approved by a vote of two-thirds of the votes eligible to be cast on the matter
under the Maryland Control Share Acquisition Act. The act defines “control
shares” as voting shares of stock that, if aggregated with all other shares of
stock owned by the acquiror or in respect of which the acquiror is able to
exercise or direct the exercise of voting power (except solely by virtue of
a
revocable proxy), would entitle the acquiror to exercise voting power in
electing directors within one of the following ranges of voting power: one-tenth
or more but less than one-third, one-third or more but less than a majority,
or
a majority or more of all voting power. A “control share acquisition” means the
acquisition of control shares, subject to specific exceptions.
If
voting
rights or control shares acquired in a control share acquisition are not
approved at a stockholders’ meeting or if the acquiring person does not deliver
an acquiring person statement as required by the Maryland Control Share
Acquisition Act then, subject to specific conditions and limitations, the issuer
may redeem any or all of the control shares for fair value. If voting rights
of
such control shares are approved at a stockholders’ meeting and the acquiror
becomes entitled to vote a majority of the shares entitled to vote, all other
stockholders may exercise appraisal rights. Our bylaws contain a provision
exempting acquisitions of our shares from the Maryland Control Share Acquisition
Act. However, our board of directors may amend our bylaws in the future to
repeal this exemption.
Business
combinations. Under
Maryland law, “business combinations” between a Maryland corporation and an
interested stockholder or an affiliate of an interested stockholder are
prohibited for five years after the most recent date on which the interested
stockholder becomes an interested stockholder. These business combinations
include a merger, consolidation, share exchange or, in circumstances specified
in the statute, an asset transferor issuance or reclassification of equity
securities. An interested stockholder is defined as:
·
|
any
person who beneficially owns ten percent or more of the voting power
of
the corporation’s shares; or
|
·
|
an
affiliate or associate of the corporation who, at any time within
the
two-year period before the date in question, was the beneficial owner
of
ten percent or more of the voting power of the then outstanding voting
stock of the corporation.
|
A
person
is not an interested stockholder under the statute if the board of directors
approved in advance the transaction by which such person otherwise would have
become an interested stockholder. However, in approving a transaction, the
board
of directors may provide that its approval is subject to compliance, at or
after
the time of approval, with any terms and conditions determined by the board.
After
the
five-year prohibition, any business combination between the Maryland corporation
and an interested stockholder generally must be recommended by the board of
directors of the corporation and approved by the affirmative vote of at least:
·
|
80%
of the votes entitled to be cast by holders of outstanding shares
of
voting stock of the corporation; and
|
·
|
two-thirds
of the votes entitled to be cast by holders of voting stock of the
corporation other than shares held by the interested stockholder
with whom
or with whose affiliate the business combination is to be effected
or held
by an affiliate or associate of the interested stockholder.
|
These
super-majority vote requirements do not apply if the corporation’s common
stockholders receive a minimum price, as defined under Maryland law, for their
shares in the form of cash or other consideration in the same form as previously
paid by the interested stockholder for its shares.
The
statute permits exemptions from its provisions, including business combinations
that are exempted by the board of directors before the time that the interested
stockholder becomes an interested stockholder.
Our
rights and the rights of our stockholders to take action against our directors
and officers are limited, which could limit your recourse in the event of
actions not in your best interests.
Our
charter limits the liability of our directors and officers to us and our
stockholders for money damages, except for liability resulting from:
·
|
actual
receipt of an improper benefit or profit in money, property or services;
or
|
·
|
a
final judgment based upon a finding of active and deliberate dishonesty
by
the director or officer that was material to the cause of action
adjudicated.
|
In
addition, our charter authorizes us to indemnify our present and former
directors and officers for actions taken by them in those capacities to the
maximum extent permitted by Maryland law. Our bylaws require us to indemnify
each present or former director or officer, to the maximum extent permitted
by
Maryland law, in the defense of any proceeding to which he or she is made,
or
threatened to be made, a party by reason of his or her service to us. In
addition, we may be obligated to fund the defense costs incurred by our
directors and officers.
Our
right to take action against the Manager is limited.
The
obligation of the Manager under the management agreement is to render its
services in good faith. It will not be responsible for any action taken by
our
board of directors or investment committee in following or declining to follow
its advice and recommendations. Furthermore, as discussed above under “—Risks
Related to Our Business,” it will be difficult and costly for us to terminate
the management agreement without cause. In addition, we will indemnify the
Manager, Resource America and their officers and affiliates for any actions
taken by them in good faith.
We
have not established a minimum distribution payment level and we cannot assure
you of our ability to make distributions in the future. We may in the future
use
uninvested offering proceeds or borrowed funds to make distributions.
We
expect
to make quarterly distributions to our stockholders in amounts such that we
distribute all or substantially all of our taxable income in each year, subject
to certain adjustments. We have not established a minimum distribution payment
level, and our ability to make distributions may be impaired by the risk factors
described in this report. All distributions will be made at the discretion
of
our board of directors and will depend on our earnings, our financial condition,
maintenance of our REIT qualification and other factors as our board of
directors may deem relevant from time to time. We may not be able to make
distributions in the future. In addition, some of our distributions may include
a return of capital. To the extent that we decide to make distributions in
excess of our current and accumulated taxable earnings and profits, such
distributions would generally be considered a return of capital for federal
income tax purposes. A return of capital is not taxable, but it has the effect
of reducing the holder’s tax basis in its investment. Although we currently do
not expect that we will do so, we have in the past and may in the future also
use proceeds from any offering of our securities that we have not invested
or
borrowed funds to make distributions. During 2006, we borrowed funds and used
uninvested proceeds to make distributions and as a result, our distributions
exceeded GAAP net income for the year ended December 31, 2006 by $10.9 million.
Our GAAP net income included a loss on the sale of our agency ABS-RMBS
portfolio, net of hedging activities, of $8.8 million as a result of our
portfolio restructuring in the third quarter of 2006. If we use uninvested
offering proceeds to pay distributions in the future, we will have less funds
available for investment and, as a result, our earnings and cash available
for
distribution would be less than we might otherwise have realized had such funds
been invested. Similarly, if we borrow to fund distributions, our future
interest costs would increase, thereby reducing our future earnings and cash
available for distribution from what they otherwise would have been.
Tax
Risks
Complying
with REIT requirements may cause us to forego otherwise attractive
opportunities.
To
qualify as a REIT for federal income tax purposes, we must continually satisfy
various tests regarding the sources of our income, the nature and
diversification of our assets, the amounts we distribute to our stockholders
and
the ownership of our common stock. In order to meet these tests, we may be
required to forego investments we might otherwise make. Thus, compliance with
the REIT requirements may hinder our investment performance.
In
particular, at least 75% of our assets at the end of each calendar quarter
must
consist of real estate assets, government securities, cash and cash items.
For
this purpose, “real estate assets” generally include interests in real property,
such as land, buildings, leasehold interests in real property, stock of other
entities that qualify as REITs, interests in mortgage loans secured by real
property, investments in stock or debt instruments during the one-year period
following the receipt of new capital and regular or residual interests in a
real
estate mortgage investment conduit, or REMIC. In addition, the amount of
securities of a single issuer, other than a TRS, that we hold must generally
not
exceed either 5% of the value of our gross assets or 10% of the vote or value
of
such issuer’s outstanding securities.
Certain
of the assets that we hold or intend to hold, including interests in CDOs or
corporate leveraged loans, are not qualified and will not be qualified real
estate assets for purposes of the REIT asset tests. ABS-RMBS and CMBS securities
should generally qualify as real estate assets. However, to the extent that
we
own non-REMIC collateralized mortgage obligations or other debt instruments
secured by mortgage loans (rather than by real property) or secured by non-real
estate assets, or debt securities that are not secured by mortgages on real
property, those securities are likely not qualifying real estate assets for
purposes of the REIT asset test, and will not produce qualifying real estate
income. Further, whether securities held by warehouse lenders or financed using
repurchase agreements are treated as qualifying assets or as generating
qualifying real estate income for purposes of the REIT asset and income tests
depends on the terms of the warehouse or repurchase financing arrangement.
We
generally will be treated as the owner of any assets that collateralize CDO
transactions to the extent that we retain all of the equity of the
securitization vehicle and do not make an election to treat such securitization
vehicle as a TRS, as described in further detail below. It may be possible
to
reduce the impact of the REIT asset and gross income requirements by holding
certain assets through our TRSs, subject to certain limitations as described
below.
Our
qualification as a REIT and exemption from U.S. federal income tax with respect
to certain assets may be dependent on the accuracy of legal opinions or advice
rendered or given or statements by the issuers of securities in which we invest,
and the inaccuracy of any such opinions, advice or statements may adversely
affect our REIT qualification and result in significant corporate level tax.
When
purchasing securities, we have relied and may rely on opinions or advice of
counsel for the issuer of such securities, or statements, made in related
offering documents, for purposes of determining whether such securities
represent debt or equity securities for U.S. federal income tax purposes, and
also to what extent those securities constitute REIT real estate assets for
purposes of the REIT asset tests and produce income which qualifies under the
75% REIT gross income test. In addition, when purchasing CDO equity, we have
relied and may rely on opinions or advice of counsel regarding the qualification
of interests in the debt of such CDOs for U.S. federal income tax purposes.
The
inaccuracy of any such opinions, advice or statements may adversely affect
our
REIT qualification and result in significant corporate-level tax.
We
may realize excess inclusion income that would increase our tax liability and
that of our stockholders.
If
we
realize excess inclusion income and allocate it to stockholders, this income
cannot be offset by net operating losses of the stockholders. If the stockholder
is a tax-exempt entity, then this income would be fully taxable as unrelated
business taxable income under Section 512 of the Internal Revenue Code. If
the stockholder is a foreign person, it would be subject to federal income
tax
withholding on this income without reduction or exemption pursuant to any
otherwise applicable income tax treaty.
Excess
inclusion income could result if we hold a residual interest in a REMIC. Excess
inclusion income also could be generated if we issue debt obligations, such
as
certain CDOs, with two or more maturities and the terms of the payments on
these
obligations bore a relationship to the payments that we received on our mortgage
related securities securing those debt obligations, i.e., if we were to own
an
interest in a taxable mortgage pool. While we do not expect to acquire
significant amounts of residual interests in REMICs, we do own residual
interests in taxable mortgage pools, which means that we will likely generate
significant amounts of excess inclusion income.
If
we
realize excess inclusion income, we will be taxed at the highest corporate
income tax rate on a portion of such income that is allocable to the percentage
of our stock held in record name by “disqualified organizations,” which are
generally cooperatives, governmental entities and tax-exempt organizations
that
are exempt from unrelated business taxable income. To the extent that our stock
owned by “disqualified organizations” is held in record name by a broker/dealer
or other nominee, the broker/dealer or other nominee would be liable for the
corporate level tax on the portion of our excess inclusion income allocable
to
the stock held by the broker/dealer or other nominee on behalf of “disqualified
organizations.” We expect that disqualified organizations will own our stock.
Because this tax would be imposed on us, all of our investors, including
investors that are not disqualified organizations, would bear a portion of
the
tax cost associated with the classification of us or a portion of our assets
as
a taxable mortgage pool. A regulated investment company or other pass through
entity owning stock in record name will be subject to tax at the highest
corporate rate on any excess inclusion income allocated to its owners that
are
disqualified organizations. Finally, if we fail to qualify as a REIT, our
taxable mortgage pool securitizations will be treated as separate corporations,
for
federal income tax purposes that cannot be included in any consolidated
corporate tax return.
Failure
to qualify as a REIT would subject us to federal income tax, which would reduce
the cash available for distribution to our stockholders.
We
believe that we have been organized and operated in a manner that has enabled
us
to qualify as a REIT for federal income tax purposes commencing with our taxable
year ended on December 31, 2005. However, the federal income tax laws
governing REITs are extremely complex, and interpretations of the federal income
tax laws governing qualification as a REIT are limited. Qualifying as a REIT
requires us to meet various tests regarding the nature of our assets and our
income, the ownership of our outstanding stock, and the amount of our
distributions on an ongoing basis.
If
we
fail to qualify as a REIT in any calendar year and we do not qualify for certain
statutory relief provisions, we will be subject to federal income tax, including
any applicable alternative minimum tax on our taxable income, at regular
corporate rates. Distributions to stockholders would not be deductible in
computing our taxable income. Corporate tax liability would reduce the amount
of
cash available for distribution to our stockholders. Under some circumstances,
we might need to borrow money or sell assets in order to pay that tax.
Furthermore, if we fail to maintain our qualification as a REIT and we do not
qualify for the statutory relief provisions, we no longer would be required
to
distribute substantially all of our REIT taxable income, determined without
regard to the dividends paid deduction and not including net capital gains,
to
our stockholders. Unless our failure to qualify as a REIT were excused under
federal tax laws, we could not re-elect to qualify as a REIT until the fifth
calendar year following the year in which we failed to qualify. In addition,
if
we fail to qualify as a REIT, our taxable mortgage pool securitizations will
be
treated as separate corporations for U.S. federal income tax purposes.
Failure
to make required distributions would subject us to tax, which would reduce
the
cash available for distribution to our stockholders.
In
order
to qualify as a REIT, in each calendar year we must distribute to our
stockholders at least 90% of our REIT taxable income, determined without regard
to the deduction for dividends paid and excluding net capital gain. To the
extent that we satisfy the 90% distribution requirement, but distribute less
than 100% of our taxable income, we will be subject to federal corporate income
tax on our undistributed income. In addition, we will incur a 4% nondeductible
excise tax on the amount, if any, by which our distributions in any calendar
year are less than the sum of:
·
|
85%
of our ordinary income for that year;
|
·
|
95%
of our capital gain net income for that year; and
|
·
|
100%
our undistributed taxable income from prior years.
|
We
intend
to make distributions to our stockholders in a manner intended to satisfy the
90% distribution requirement and to distribute all or substantially all of
our
net taxable income to avoid both corporate income tax and the 4% nondeductible
excise tax. There is no requirement that a domestic TRS distribute its after-tax
net income to its parent REIT or their stockholders and Resource TRS may
determine not to make any distributions to us. However, non-U.S. TRSs, such
as
Apidos CDO I and Apidos CDO III, which we discuss in “Management’s Discussion
and Analysis of Financial Conditions and Results of Operations,” will generally
be deemed to distribute their earnings to us on an annual basis for federal
income tax purposes, regardless of whether such TRSs actually distribute their
earnings.
Our
taxable income may substantially exceed our net income as determined by GAAP
because, for example, realized capital losses will be deducted in determining
our GAAP net income but may not be deductible in computing our taxable income.
In addition, we may invest in assets that generate taxable income in excess
of
economic income or in advance of the corresponding cash flow from the assets,
referred to as phantom income. Although some types of phantom income are
excluded to the extent they exceed 5% of our REIT taxable income in determining
the 90% distribution requirement, we will incur corporate income tax and the
4%
nondeductible excise tax with respect to any phantom income items if we do
not
distribute those items on an annual basis. As a result, we may generate less
cash flow than taxable income in a particular year. In that event, we may be
required to use cash reserves, incur debt, or liquidate non-cash assets at
rates
or times that we regard
as
unfavorable in order to satisfy the distribution requirement and to avoid
corporate income tax and the 4% nondeductible excise tax in that year.
If
we make distributions in excess of our current and accumulated earnings and
profits, they will be treated as a return of capital, which will reduce the
adjusted basis of your stock. To the extent such distributions exceed your
adjusted basis, you may recognize a capital gain.
Unless
you are a tax-exempt entity, distributions that we make to you generally will
be
subject to tax as ordinary income to the extent of our current and accumulated
earnings and profits as determined for federal income tax purposes. If the
amount we distribute to you exceeds your allocable share of our current and
accumulated earnings and profits, the excess will be treated as a return of
capital to the extent of your adjusted basis in your stock, which will reduce
your basis in your stock but will not be subject to tax. To the extent the
amount we distribute to you exceeds both your allocable share of our current
and
accumulated earnings and profits and your adjusted basis, this excess amount
will be treated as a gain from the sale or exchange of a capital asset. For
risks related to the use of uninvested offering proceeds or borrowings to fund
distributions to stockholders, see “—Risks Related to Our Organization and
Structure—We have not established a minimum distribution payment level and we
cannot assure you of our ability to make distributions in the future.”
Our
ownership of and relationship with our TRSs will be limited and a failure to
comply with the limits would jeopardize our REIT qualification and may result
in
the application of a 100% excise tax.
A
REIT
may own up to 100% of the securities of one or more TRSs. A TRS may earn
specified types of income or hold specified assets that would not be qualifying
income or assets if earned or held directly by the parent REIT. Both the
subsidiary and the REIT must jointly elect to treat the subsidiary as a TRS.
A
corporation of which a TRS directly or indirectly owns more than 35% of the
voting power or value of the stock will automatically be treated as a TRS.
Overall, no more than 20% of the value of a REIT’s assets may consist of stock
or securities of one or more TRSs. A TRS will pay federal, state and local
income tax at regular corporate rates on any income that it earns, whether
or
not it distributes that income to us. In addition, the TRS rules limit the
deductibility of interest paid or accrued by a TRS to its parent REIT to assure
that the TRS is subject to an appropriate level of corporate taxation. The
rules
also impose a 100% excise tax on certain transactions between a TRS and its
parent REIT that are not conducted on an arm’s-length basis.
Resource
TRS will pay federal, state and local income tax on its taxable income, and
its
after-tax net income is available for distribution to us but is not required
to
be distributed to us. Income that is not distributed to us by Resource TRS
will
not be subject to the REIT 90% distribution requirement and therefore will
not
be available for distributions to our stockholders. We anticipate that the
aggregate value of the securities of Resource TRS, together with the securities
we hold in our other TRSs, including Apidos CDO I and Apidos CDO III, will
be
less than 20% of the value of our total assets, including our TRS securities.
We
will monitor the compliance of our investments in TRSs with the rules relating
to value of assets and transactions not on an arm’s-length basis. We cannot
assure you, however, that we will be able to comply with such rules.
Complying
with REIT requirements may limit our ability to hedge effectively.
The
REIT
provisions of the Internal Revenue Code substantially limit our ability to
hedge
mortgage-backed securities and related borrowings. Under these provisions,
our
annual gross income from qualifying and non-qualifying hedges of our borrowings,
together with any other income not generated from qualifying real estate assets,
cannot exceed 25% of our gross income. In addition, our aggregate gross income
from non-qualifying hedges, fees and certain other non-qualifying sources cannot
exceed 5% of our annual gross income determined without regard to income from
qualifying hedges. As a result, we might have to limit our use of advantageous
hedging techniques or implement those hedges through Resource TRS. This could
increase the cost of our hedging activities or expose us to greater risks
associated with changes in interest rates than we would otherwise want to bear.
The
tax on prohibited transactions will limit our ability to engage in transactions,
including certain methods of securitizing mortgage loans, that would be treated
as sales for federal income tax purposes.
A
REIT’s
net income from prohibited transactions is subject to a 100% tax. In general,
prohibited transactions are sales or other dispositions of property, other
than
foreclosure property, but including mortgage loans, held primarily for sale
to
customers in the ordinary course of business. We might be subject to this tax
if
we were able to sell or securitize loans in a manner that was treated as a
sale
of the loans for federal income tax purposes. Therefore, in order to avoid
the
prohibited transactions tax, we may choose not to engage in certain sales of
loans and may limit the structures we utilize for our securitization
transactions even though such sales or structures might otherwise be beneficial
to us.
Tax
law changes could depress the market price of our common stock.
The
federal income tax laws governing REITs or the administrative interpretations
of
those laws may be amended at any time. We cannot predict when or if any new
federal income tax law or administrative interpretation, or any amendment to
any
existing federal income tax law or administrative interpretation, will become
effective and any such law or interpretation may take effect retroactively.
Tax
law changes could depress our stock price or restrict our operations.
Dividends
paid by REITs do not qualify for the reduced tax rates provided for under
current law.
Dividends
paid by REITs are generally not eligible for the reduced 15% maximum tax rate
for dividends paid to individuals under recently enacted tax legislation. The
more favorable rates applicable to regular corporate dividends could cause
stockholders who are individuals to perceive investments in REITs to be
relatively less attractive than investments in the stock of non-REIT
corporations that pay dividends to which more favorable rates apply, which
could
reduce the value of the stocks of REITs.
We
may lose our REIT qualification or be subject to a penalty tax if the Internal
Revenue Service successfully challenges our characterization of income
inclusions from our foreign TRSs.
We
likely
will be required to include in our income, even without the receipt of actual
distributions, earnings from our foreign TRSs, including from our current and
contemplated equity investments in CDOs, such as our investment in Apidos CDO
I
and Apidos CDO III. We intend to treat certain of these income inclusions as
qualifying income for purposes of the 95% gross income test applicable to REITs
but not for purposes of the REIT 75% gross income test. The provisions that
set
forth what income is qualifying income for purposes of the 95% gross income
test
provide that gross income derived from dividends, interest and other enumerated
classes of passive income qualify for purposes of the 95% gross income test.
Income inclusions from equity investments in our foreign TRSs are technically
neither dividends nor any of the other enumerated categories of income specified
in the 95% gross income test for U.S. federal income tax purposes, and there is
no clear precedent with respect to the qualification of such income for purposes
of the REIT gross income tests. However, based on advice of counsel, we intend
to treat such income inclusions, to the extent distributed by a foreign TRS
in
the year accrued, as qualifying income for purposes of the 95% gross income
test. Nevertheless, because this income does not meet the literal requirements
of the REIT provisions, it is possible that the IRS could successfully take
the
position that it is not qualifying income. In the event that it was determined
not to qualify for the 95% gross income test, we would be subject to a penalty
tax with respect to the income to the extent it and other nonqualifying income
exceeds 5% of our gross income and/or we could fail to qualify as a REIT. See
“Federal Income Tax Consequences of Our Qualification as a REIT.” In addition,
if such income was determined not to qualify for the 95% gross income test,
we
would need to invest in sufficient qualifying assets, or sell some of our
interests in our foreign TRSs to ensure that the income recognized by us from
our foreign TRSs or such other corporations does not exceed 5% of our gross
income, or cease to qualify as a REIT.
The
failure of a loan subject to a repurchase agreement or a mezzanine loan to
qualify as a real estate asset would adversely affect our ability to qualify
as
a REIT.
We
have
entered into and we intend to continue to enter into sale and repurchase
agreements under which we nominally sell certain of our loan assets to a
counterparty and simultaneously enter into an agreement to repurchase the sold
assets. We believe that we have been and will be treated for U.S. federal income
tax purposes as the owner of the loan assets that are the subject of any such
agreement notwithstanding that the agreement may transfer record ownership
of
the assets to the counterparty during the term of the agreement. It is possible,
however, that the IRS could assert that we did not own the loan assets during
the term of the sale and repurchase agreement, in which case we could fail
to
qualify as a REIT.
In
addition, we have acquired and will continue to acquire mezzanine loans, which
are loans secured by equity interest in a partnership or limited liability
company that directly or indirectly owns real property. In Revenue Procedure
2003-65, the IRS provided a safe harbor pursuant to which a mezzanine loan,
if
it meets each of the requirements contained in the Revenue Procedure, will
be
treated by the IRS as a real estate asset for purposes of the REIT asset tests,
and interest derived from the mezzanine loan will be treated as qualifying
mortgage interest for purposes of the REIT 75% income test. Although the Revenue
Procedure provides a safe harbor on which taxpayers may rely, it does not
prescribe rules of substantive tax law. We have acquired and will continue
to
acquire mezzanine loans that may not meet all of the requirements for reliance
on this safe harbor. In the event we own a mezzanine loan that does not meet
the
safe harbor, the IRS could challenge the loan’s treatment as a real estate asset
for purposes of the REIT asset and income tests, and if the challenge were
sustained, we could fail to qualify as a REIT.
None.
Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania:
We
maintain offices through our Manager. Our Manager maintains executive and
corporate offices at One Crescent Drive in the Philadelphia Naval Yard under
a
lease for 8,771 square feet that expires in May 2019. We also lease 20,207
square feet for additional executive office space at 1845 Walnut Street. This
lease, which expires in May 2008, contains extension options through 2033.
The
Manager’s commercial finance operations are located in another office building
at 1818 Market Street under a lease for 29,554 square feet that expires in
March
2008.
New
York City, New York:
Our
Manager maintains additional executive offices in a 12,930 square foot location
in New York City at 712 5th
Avenue
under a lease agreement that expires in March 2010. Certain of our commercial
finance and real estate operations are also located in these
offices.
Other:
Our
Manager maintains another office in
Los
Angeles, California under a lease agreement that expires in August
2009.
We
are
not a party to any material legal proceedings.
No
matter
was submitted to a vote of our security holders during the fourth quarter of
2006.
36
PART
II
Market
Information
Our
common stock has been listed on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol
“RSO” since our initial public offering in February 2006. The following table
sets forth for the indicated periods the high and low prices for our common
stock, as reported on the New York Stock Exchange, and the dividends declared
and paid during our past two fiscal years:
High
|
Low
|
Dividends
Declared
|
||||||||
Fiscal
2006
|
||||||||||
Fourth
Quarter
|
17.73
|
15.09
|
$
|
$0.43(1)
|
|
|||||
Third
Quarter
|
15.67
|
12.01
|
$
|
$0.37
|
||||||
Second
Quarter
|
14.23
|
12.00
|
$
|
$0.36
|
||||||
First
Quarter
|
14.79
|
13.67
|
$
|
$0.33
|
||||||
Fiscal
2005 (2)
|
||||||||||
Fourth
Quarter
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
$
|
$0.36
|
||||||
Third
Quarter
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
$
|
$0.30
|
||||||
Second
Quarter
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
$
|
$0.20
|
||||||
First
Quarter
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
(1)
|
We
distributed a regular dividend ($0.38) and a special dividend ($0.05),
payable on January 4, 2007, for stockholders of record on December
15,
2006.
|
(2)
|
We
were formed in January 2005 as a Maryland
corporation.
|
We
are
organized and conduct our operation to qualify as a real estate investment
trust, or a REIT, which requires that we distribute at least 90% of our REIT
taxable income. Therefore, we intend to continue to declare quarterly
distributions on our common stock. No assurance, however, can be given as to
the
amounts or timing of future distributions as such distributions are subject
to
our earnings, financial condition, capital requirements and such other factors
as our board of directors seems relevant.
As
of
March 23, 2007, there were 24,991,629 common shares outstanding held by 68
persons of record.
Recent
Sales of Unregistered Securities; Use of Proceeds from Registered
Securities
In
accordance with the provisions of the management agreement, on January 31,
2007,
July 31, 2006, April 30, 2006 and January 31, 2006 we issued 9,960, 6,252,
2,086
and 5,738 shares of common stock, respectively, to the Manager. These shares
represented 25% of the Manager’s quarterly incentive compensation fee that
accrued for the three months ended December 31, 2006, June 30, 2006, March
31,
2006 and December 31, 2005, respectively. The issuance of these shares was
exempt from the registration requirements of the Securities Act pursuant
to
Section 4(2) thereof.
37
Performance
Graph
The
following line graph presentation compares cumulative total shareholder returns
of our common stock with the Russell 2000 Index and the NAREIT All REIT Index
for the period from February 10, 2006 to December 31, 2006. The graph and table
assume that $100 was invested in each of our common stock, the Russell 2000
Index and the NAREIT All REIT Index on February 10, 2006, and that all dividends
were reinvested. This data was furnished by the Research Data Group.
SELECTED
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL INFORMATION OF
RESOURCE
CAPITAL CORP AND SUBSIDIARIES
The
following selected financial and operating information should be read in
conjunction with Item 7 - “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations” and our financial statements, including the
notes, included elsewhere herein (in thousands, except share data).
As
of and for the
Year
Ended December 31, 2006
|
As
of and for the
Period
from
March
8, 2005
(Date
Operations Commenced) to
December
31, 2005
|
||||||
Consolidated
Statement of Operations Data
|
|||||||
Revenues:
|
|||||||
Net
interest income:
|
|||||||
Interest
income
|
$
|
136,748
|
$
|
61,387
|
|||
Interest
expense
|
101,851
|
43,062
|
|||||
Net
interest income
|
34,897
|
18,325
|
|||||
Other
(loss) revenue:
|
|||||||
Net
realized (losses) gains on investments
|
(8,627
|
)
|
311
|
||||
Other
income
|
480
|
−
|
|||||
Total
other (loss) revenue
|
(8,147
|
)
|
311
|
||||
|
|||||||
Expenses:
|
|||||||
Management
fees - related party
|
4,838
|
3,012
|
|||||
Equity
compensation − related party
|
2,432
|
2,709
|
|||||
Professional
services
|
1,881
|
580
|
|||||
Insurance
|
498
|
395
|
|||||
General
and administrative
|
1,495
|
1,032
|
|||||
Total
expenses
|
11,144
|
7,728
|
|||||
Net
income
|
$
|
15,606
|
$
|
10,908
|
|||
Net
income per share − basic
|
$
|
0.89
|
$
|
0.71
|
|||
Net
income per share − diluted
|
$
|
0.87
|
$
|
0.71
|
|||
Weighted
average number of shares outstanding − basic
|
17,538,273
|
15,333,334
|
|||||
Weighted
average number of shares outstanding - diluted
|
17,881,355
|
15,405,714
|
|||||
Consolidated
Balance Sheet Data:
|
|||||||
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
$
|
5,354
|
$
|
17,729
|
|||
Restricted
cash
|
30,721
|
23,592
|
|||||
Available-for-sale
securities, pledged as collateral, at fair value
|
420,997
|
1,362,392
|
|||||
Available-for-sale
securities, at fair value
|
−
|
28,285
|
|||||
Loans,
net of allowances of $0
|
1,240,288
|
569,873
|
|||||
Direct
financing leases and notes, net of unearned income
|
88,970
|
23,317
|
|||||
Total
assets
|
1,802,829
|
2,045,547
|
|||||
Repurchase
agreements (including accrued interest of $322 and $2,104)
|
120,457
|
1,068,277
|
|||||
CDOs
(net of debt issuance costs of $18,310 and $10,093)
|
1,207,175
|
687,407
|
|||||
Warehouse
agreement
|
−
|
62,961
|
|||||
Secured
term facility
|
84,673
|
−
|
|||||
Unsecured
revolving credit facility
|
−
|
15,000
|
|||||
Unsecured
junior subordinated debentures held by unconsolidated trusts that
issued trust preferred securities
|
51,548
|
−
|
|||||
Total
liabilities
|
1,485,278
|
1,850,214
|
|||||
Total
stockholders’ equity
|
317,551
|
195,333
|
|||||
Other
Data:
|
|||||||
Dividends
declared per common share
|
$
|
1.49
|
$
|
0.86
|
The
following discussion provides information to assist you in understanding our
financial condition and results of operations. This discussion should be read
in
conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and related notes
appearing elsewhere in this prospectus. This discussion contains forward-looking
statements. Actual results could differ materially from those expressed in
or
implied by those forward looking statements. Please see “Special Note Regarding
Forward-Looking Statements” and “Risk Factors” for a discussion of certain
risks, uncertainties and assumptions associated with those statements.
Overview
We
are a
specialty finance company that focuses primarily on commercial real estate
and
commercial finance. We qualify as a REIT under Subchapter M of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. Our objective is to provide our stockholders
with total returns over time, including quarterly distributions and capital
appreciation, while seeking to manage the risks associated with our investment
strategy. We invest in a combination of real estate-related assets and, to
a
lesser extent, higher-yielding commercial finance assets. We finance a
substantial portion of our portfolio investments through borrowing strategies
seeking to match the maturities and repricing dates of our financings with
the
maturities and repricing dates of those investments, and to mitigate interest
rate risk through derivative instruments. Future distributions and capital
appreciation are not guaranteed, however, and we have only limited operating
history and REIT experience upon which you can base an assessment of our ability
to achieve our objectives.
We
generate our income primarily from the spread between the revenues we receive
from our assets and the cost to finance the purchase of those assets and hedge
interest rate risks. We generate revenues from the interest we earn on our
whole
loans, A notes, B notes, mezzanine debt, CMBS, ABS-RMBS, other ABS, bank loans
and payments on equipment leases and notes. We use a substantial amount of
leverage to enhance our returns and we finance each of our different asset
classes with different degrees of leverage. The cost of borrowings to finance
our investments comprises a significant part of our expenses. Our net income
will depend on our ability to control these expenses relative to our revenue.
In
our ABS-RMBS, CMBS, other ABS, bank loans and equipment leases and notes, we
use
warehouse facilities as a short-term financing source and CDOs, and, to a lesser
extent, other term financing as a long-term financing source. In our commercial
real estate loan portfolio, we use repurchase agreements as a short-term
financing source, and CDOs and, to a lesser extent, other term financing as
a
long-term financing source. We expect that our other term financing will consist
of long-term match-funded financing provided through long-term bank financing
and asset-backed financing programs.
Before
October 2, 2006, we had a significant portfolio of agency ABS-RMBS. In
order to redeploy the capital we had invested in this asset class into
higher-yielding asset classes, we entered into an agreement to sell this
portfolio on September 27, 2006. The sale settled on October 2, 2006,
and we have no remaining agency ABS-RMBS. We had financed the acquisition of
our
agency ABS-RMBS with short-term repurchase arrangements which were paid off
upon
settlement of the transaction. We also had sought to mitigate the risk created
by any mismatch between the maturities and repricing dates of our agency
ABS-RMBS and the maturities and repricing dates of the repurchase agreements
we
used to finance them through derivative instruments, principally
floating-to-fixed interest rate swap agreements and interest rate cap
agreements. We terminated these derivatives upon completion of the sale of
our
agency ABS-RMBS.
On
March 8, 2005, we received net proceeds of $214.8 million from a private
placement of 15,333,334 shares of common stock. On February 10, 2006, we
received net proceeds of $27.3 million from our initial public offering of
4,000,000 shares of common stock (including 1,879,200 shares sold by certain
selling stockholders of ours). On December 20, 2006, we received net proceeds
of
$93.0 million from our follow-on offering of 6,000,000 shares of common stock
and we received net proceeds of $10.1 million on January 8, 2007 through
exercise of 650,000 shares of common stock of the over-allotment in connection
with the December 2006 offering.
As
of
December 31, 2006, we had invested 77.2% of our portfolio in commercial real
estate-related assets, 7.4% in ABS-RMBS and 15.4% in commercial finance assets.
As of December 31, 2005, we had invested 10.0% of our portfolio in commercial
real estate-related assets, 50.5% in agency ABS-RMBS, 17.0% in non-agency
ABS-RMBS and 22.5% in commercial finance assets. We expect that diversifying
our
portfolio by shifting the mix towards higher-yielding assets will increase
our
earnings, subject to maintaining the credit quality of our portfolio. If we
are
unable to maintain the credit quality of our portfolio, however, our earnings
may decrease. Because the amount of leverage we intend to use will vary by
asset
class, our asset allocation may not reflect the relative amounts of equity
capital we have invested in the respective classes. The results of operations
discussed below are for the year ended December 31, 2006 and the period from
March 8, 2005 (date operations commenced) to December 31, 2005 (which we
refer to as the period ended December 31, 2005).
Results
of Operations
Our
net
income for the year ended December 31, 2006, including a net loss of $8.8
million from the sale of our agency ABS-RMBS portfolio, was $15.6 million,
or
$0.89 per weighted average common share-basic ($0.87 per weighted average common
share-diluted) as compared to $10.9 million, or $0.71 per weighted average
common share (basic and diluted) for the period ended December 31,
2005.
Interest
Income—Year Ended December 31, 2006 as compared to Period Ended December 31,
2005
During
2005, we were in the process of acquiring and building our investment portfolio.
As a result, we acquired a substantial portion of our commercial real estate
loans and commercial finance assets after the period ended December 31, 2005
had
been completed. This balance sheet trend is important in comparing and analyzing
the results of operations for the 2006 and 2005 periods presented.
In
addition, since we commenced operations on March 8, 2005, results for the
period ended December 31, 2005 reflect less than ten months of activity as
compared with the full year ended December 31, 2006.
The
following tables set forth information relating to our interest income
recognized for the periods presented (in thousands, except
percentages):
Weighted
Average
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Rate
|
Balance
|
Rate
|
Balance
|
||||||||||||||||
Year
Ended
|
Period
Ended
|
Year
Ended
December
31,
|
Period
Ended
December
31,
|
||||||||||||||||
2006
(1)
|
2005
(1)
|
2006
(1)
|
2006
|
2005
(1)
|
2005
|
||||||||||||||
Interest
income:
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Interest
income from securities available-for-sale:
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Agency
ABS-RMBS
|
$
|
28,825
|
$
|
31,134
|
4.60
|
%
|
$
|
621,299
|
4.50
|
%
|
$
|
867,388
|
|||||||
ABS-RMBS
|
24,102
|
11,142
|
6.76
|
%
|
$
|
344,969
|
5.27
|
%
|
$
|
251,940
|
|||||||||
CMBS
|
1,590
|
1,110
|
5.65
|
%
|
$
|
27,274
|
5.57
|
%
|
$
|
24,598
|
|||||||||
Other
ABS
|
1,414
|
811
|
6.70
|
%
|
$
|
21,232
|
5.25
|
%
|
$
|
19,118
|
|||||||||
CMBS-private
placement
|
87
|
−
|
5.46
|
%
|
$
|
1,564
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
|||||||||||
Private
equity
|
30
|
50
|
16.42
|
%
|
$
|
170
|
6.29
|
%
|
$
|
923
|
|||||||||
Total
interest income from
securities
available-for-sale
|
56,048
|
44,247
|
|||||||||||||||||
Interest
income from loans:
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Bank
loans
|
42,526
|
11,903
|
7.41
|
%
|
$
|
565,414
|
6.06
|
%
|
$
|
230,171
|
|||||||||
Commercial
real estate loans
|
27,736
|
2,759
|
8.44
|
%
|
$
|
325,301
|
6.90
|
%
|
$
|
47,980
|
|||||||||
Total
interest income from loans
|
70,262
|
14,662
|
|||||||||||||||||
Interest
income - other:
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Leasing
|
5,259
|
578
|
8.57
|
%
|
$
|
62,612
|
9.44
|
%
|
$
|
7,625
|
|||||||||
Interest
rate swap agreements
|
3,755
|
−
|
0.78
|
%
|
$
|
511,639
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
|||||||||||
Temporary
investment in
over-night
repurchase
agreements
|
1,424
|
1,900
|
|||||||||||||||||
Total
interest income − other
|
10,438
|
2,478
|
|||||||||||||||||
Total
interest income
|
$
|
136,748
|
$
|
61,387
|
(1)
|
Certain
one-time items reflected in interest income have been excluded in
calculating the weighted average rate, since they are not indicative
of
expected future results.
|
Interest
income increased $75.4 million (123%) to $136.7 million for the year ended
December 31, 2006, from $61.4 million for the period ended December 31,
2005. We attribute this increase to the following:
Interest
Income from Securities Available-for-Sale
Interest
income from securities available-for-sale increased $11.8 million (27%) to
$56.0
million for the year ended December 31, 2006, from $44.2 million for the period
ended December 31, 2005.
ABS-RMBS
contributed $24.1 million of interest income for year ended December 31, 2006,
respectively, as compared to $11.1 million period ended December 31, 2005,
an
increase of $13.0 million (117%). This increase resulted primarily from the
following:
·
|
The
acquisition of $348.2 million of ABS-RMBS (net of sales of $3.0 million)
during the period ended December 31, 2005, which was held for the
entire
year ended December 31, 2006, respectively.
|
·
|
The
increase of the weighted average interest rate on these securities
to
6.76% for the year ended December 31, 2006 from 5.27% for the period
ended
December 31, 2005.
|
These
acquisitions and the increase in weighted average rate were partially offset
by
the receipt of principal payments on ABS-RMBS totaling $3.0 million since
December 31, 2005.
CMBS
contributed $1.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2006 as compared to
$1.1 million for the period ended December 31, 2005, an increase of $500,000
(45%). This increase resulted primarily from the following:
·
|
The
acquisition of $28.0 million of CMBS during the period ended December
31,
2005, which were held for the entire year ended December 31, 2006.
|
·
|
The
increase in weighted average interest rate on these securities
to 5.65%
for the year ended December 31, 2006 from 5.57% for the period
ended
December 31, 2005.
|
Other
ABS
contributed $1.4 million of interest income for the year ended December 31,
2006
as compared to $811,000 for the period ended December 31, 2005, an increase
of
$589,000 (73%). This increase resulted primarily from the
following:
·
|
The
acquisition of $23.1 million of ABS (net of sales of $5.5 million)
during
the period ended December 31, 2005, which were held for the entire
year
ended December 31, 2006.
|
·
|
The
increase in weighted average interest rate on these securities to
6.70%
for the year ended December 31, 2006 from 5.25% for the period ended
December 31, 2005.
|
These
acquisitions and the increase in weighted average rate were partially offset
by
the receipt of principal payments on other ABS totaling $1.5 million since
December 31, 2005.
CMBS-private
placement contributed $87,000 for the year ended December 31, 2006 due to the
purchase of $30.1 million of securities in December 2006. We held no such
securities for the period ended December 31, 2005.
These
increases were partially offset by the decrease in interest income from our
agency ABS-RMBS portfolio which generated $28.8 million of interest income
for
the year ended December 31, 2006 as compared to $31.1 million for the period
ended December 31, 2005, a decrease of $2.3 million (7%). This change primarily
resulted from the sell-off of our agency ABS-RMBS portfolio beginning in January
2006 with the sale of approximately $125.4 million of portfolio securities
and
the sale of the remaining $753.1 million of portfolio securities in September
2006.
Interest
Income from Loans
Interest
income from loans increased $55.6 million (378%) to $70.3 million for the year
ended December 31, 2006 from $14.7 million for the period ended December 31,
2005.
Bank
loans generated $42.5 million of interest income for the year ended December
31,
2006 as compared to $11.9 million for the period ended December 31, 2005, an
increase of $30.6 million (257%). This increase resulted primarily from the
following:
·
|
The
acquisition of $433.7 million of bank loans (net of sales of $91.0
million) during the year ended December 31, 2005, which were held
for the
entire year ended December 31, 2006.
|
·
|
The
acquisition of $366.1 million of bank loans (net of sales of $128.5
million) since December 31, 2005.
|
·
|
The
increase of the weighted average interest rate on these loans to
7.41% for
the year ended December 31, 2006 from 6.06% for the period ended
December
31, 2005.
|
These
acquisitions and the increase in weighted average rate were partially offset
by
the receipt of principal payments on bank loans totaling $150.4 million since
December 31, 2005.
Commercial
real estate loans produced $27.7 million of interest income for the year ended
December 31, 2006 as compared to $2.8 million for the period ended December
31,
2005, an increase of $24.9 million (889%). This increase resulted entirely
from
the following:
·
|
The
acquisition of $454.3 million of commercial real estate loans (net
of
principal payments of $55.2 million) since December 31,
2005.
|
·
|
The
increase of the weighted average interest rate on these loans to
8.44% for
the year ended December 31, 2006 from 6.90% for the period ended
December
31, 2005.
|
Interest
Income—Other
Interest
income-other increased $7.9 million (316%) to $10.4 million for the year ended
December 31, 2006 as compared to $2.5 million for the period ended December
31,
2005.
Our
equipment leasing portfolio generated $5.3 million of interest income for the
year ended December 31, 2006, as compared to $578,000 for the period ended
December 31, 2005, resulting from the purchase of $64.8 million of equipment
leases and notes (net of principal payments and sales of $41.9 million)
following December 31, 2005.
Interest
rate swap agreements generated $3.8 million for the year ended December 31,
2006
resulting from increases in the floating rate index we receive under our swap
agreements. During the prior year, the floating rate we received did not exceed
the fixed rate we paid under these same agreements. The resulting interest
expense of $516,000 is included in general interest expense for the period
ended
December 31, 2005. As a result, no interest income from interest rate swap
agreements was generated for the year ended December 31, 2005.
Interest
Expense—Year Ended December 31, 2006 as compared to the Period Ended December
31, 2005
During
2005, while we were in the process of acquiring and building our investment
portfolio, our borrowing obligations grew in tandem with the related underlying
assets. In 2006, we continued to expand our investment portfolio and the amount
of our borrowings. In addition, we repaid some of the borrowings existing during
2005 with new borrowings in 2006. These developing borrowing trends are
important in comparing and analyzing interest expense for the 2006 and 2005
periods presented.
In
addition, since we commenced operations on March 8, 2005, results for the
period ended December 31, 2005 reflect less than ten months of activity as
compared with the full year ended December 31, 2006.
The
following tables set forth information relating to our interest expense incurred
for the periods presented (in thousands, except percentages):
Weighted
Average
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Rate
|
Balance
|
Rate
|
Balance
|
||||||||||||||||
Year
Ended December 31,
|
Period
Ended December 31,
|
Year
Ended
December
31,
|
Period
Ended
December
31,
|
||||||||||||||||
2006
(1)
|
2005
(1)
|
2006
(1)
|
2006
|
2005
(1)
|
2005
|
||||||||||||||
Interest
expense:
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Commercial
real estate loans
|
$
|
14,436
|
$
|
1,090
|
6.42
|
%
|
$
|
224,844
|
5.15
|
%
|
$
|
25,406
|
|||||||
Bank
loans
|
30,903
|
8,149
|
5.61
|
%
|
$
|
535,894
|
4.18
|
%
|
$
|
234,701
|
|||||||||
Agency
ABS-RMBS
|
28,607
|
23,256
|
5.01
|
%
|
$
|
560,259
|
3.49
|
%
|
$
|
810,868
|
|||||||||
ABS-RMBS
/ CMBS / ABS
|
21,666
|
10,003
|
5.69
|
%
|
$
|
376,000
|
4.26
|
%
|
$
|
282,646
|
|||||||||
CMBS-private
placement
|
83
|
−
|
5.40
|
%
|
$
|
1,519
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
|||||||||||
Leasing
|
3,659
|
−
|
6.31
|
%
|
$
|
57,214
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
|||||||||||
General
|
2,497
|
564
|
9.06
|
%
|
$
|
24,916
|
0.09
|
%
|
$
|
709,997
|
|||||||||
Total
interest expense
|
$
|
101,851
|
$
|
43,062
|
(1)
|
Certain
one-time items reflected in interest expense have been excluded in
calculating the weighted average rate, since they are not indicative
of
expected future results.
|
Interest
expense increased $58.8 million (136%) to $101.9 million for the year ended
December 31, 2006 from $43.1 million for the period ended December 31, 2005.
We
attribute this increase to the following:
Interest
expense on commercial real estate loans was $14.4 million for the year ended
December 31, 2006 as compared to $1.1 million for the period ended December
31,
2005, an increase of $13.3 million (1,209%). This increase resulted primarily
from the following:
· |
We
closed our first commercial real estate loan CDO, Resource Real Estate
Funding CDO 2006-1 in August 2006. Resource Real Estate Funding CDO
2006-1
issued $308.7 million of senior notes at par consisting of several
classes
with rates ranging from one month LIBOR plus 0.32% to one-month LIBOR
plus
3.75%. Prior to August 10, 2006, we financed these commercial real
estate loans primarily with repurchase agreements. The Resource Real
Estate Funding CDO 2006-1 financing proceeds were used to repay a
majority
of these repurchase agreements, which had a balance at August 10,
2006 of $189.6 million. The weighted average interest rate on the
repurchase agreements was 6.07% for the period January 1, 2006 to
August
10, 2006 and was 6.17% on the senior notes from August 10, 2006 through
December 31, 2006.
|
· |
We
financed the growth of our commercial real estate loan portfolio
after the
closing of Resource Real Estate Funding CDO 2006-1 primarily through
repurchase agreements. We had a weighted average balances of $224.8
million and $25.4 million of repurchase agreements outstanding at
December
31, 2006 and 2005, respectively.
|
· |
We
had a weighted average interest rate of 6.42% for the year ended
December
31, 2006 as compared to 5.15% for the period ended December 31, 2005.
|
· |
We
amortized $233,000 of deferred debt issuance costs related to the
Resource
Real Estate Funding CDO 2006-1 closing for the year ended December
31,
2006. No such costs were incurred during the period ended December
31,
2005.
|
Interest
expense on bank loans was $30.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2006
as
compared to $8.1 million for the period ended December 31, 2005, an increase
of
$22.8 million (281%) . This increase resulted primarily from the following:
· |
As
a result of the continued acquisitions of bank loans after the closing
of
Apidos CDO I, we financed our second bank loan CDO (Apidos CDO III)
in May
2006. Apidos CDO III issued $262.5 million of senior notes into several
classes with rates ranging from three-month LIBOR plus 0.26% to
three-month LIBOR plus 4.25%. We used the Apidos CDO III proceeds
to repay
borrowings under a warehouse facility which had a balance at the
time of
repayment of $222.6 million. The weighted average interest rate on
the
senior notes was 5.58% for the year ended December 31, 2006 as compared
to
4.24% for the period ended December 31, 2005 on the warehouse facility
which began ramping in July 2005.
|
· |
In
August 2005, Apidos CDO I issued $321.5 million of senior notes consisting
of several classes with rates ranging from three-month LIBOR plus
0.26% to
a fixed rate of 9.25%. The Apidos CDO I financing proceeds were used
to
repay borrowings under a related warehouse facility, which had a
balance
at the time of repayment of $219.8 million. The weighted average
interest
rate on the senior notes was 5.47% for the year ended December 31,
2006 as
compared to 4.08% on the warehouse facility and senior notes for
period
ended December 31, 2005.
|
· |
The
weighted average balance of debt related to bank loans increased
by $301.2
million to $535.9 million in the year ended December 31, 2006 from
$234.7
million for the period ended December 31,
2005.
|
· |
We
amortized $785,000 of deferred debt issuance costs related to the
CDO
financings for the year ended December 31, 2006 and $213,000 for
the
period ended December 31, 2005.
|
Interest
expense related to agency ABS-RMBS repurchase agreements was $28.6 million
for
the year ended December 31, 2006 as compared to $23.3 million for the period
ended December 31, 2005 an increase of $5.3 million (23%). This increase
resulted primarily from the following:
· |
The
weighted average interest rate on these repurchase agreement obligations
increased to 5.01% for the year ended December 31, 2006 from 3.49%
for the
period ended December 31, 2005.
|
· |
The
increase in rates was partially offset by a decrease in the average
balance of our repurchase agreements financing our agency ABS-RMBS
portfolio. Our average repurchase obligations during the year ended
December 31, 2006 was $560.3 million as compared with $810.9 million
for
the period ended December 31, 2005.
|
ABS-RMBS,
CMBS and other ABS, which we refer to collectively as ABS, were pooled and
financed by Ischus CDO II. Interest expense related to these obligations
was
$21.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2006 as compared to $10.0 million
for the period ended December 31, 2005, an increase of $11.7 million (117%).
This increase resulted primarily from the following:
· |
The
weighted average interest rate on the senior notes issued by Ischus
CDO II
was 5.69% for the year ended December 31, 2006 as compared to 4.26%
on the
warehouse facility and senior notes for the period ended December
31,
2005.
|
· |
In
July 2005, Ischus CDO II issued $376.0 million of senior notes consisting
of several classes with rates ranging from one-month LIBOR plus 0.27%
to
one-month LIBOR plus 2.85%. The Ischus CDO II proceeds were used
to repay
borrowings under a related warehouse facility, which had a balance
at the
time of repayment of $317.8 million and a weighted-average balance
of
$282.6 million during the period ended December 31, 2005.
|
· |
We
amortized $591,000 of deferred debt issuance costs related to the
Ischus
CDO II financing for the year ended December 31, 2006 as compared
with
$248,000 for the period ended December 31, 2005.
|
Interest
expense on CMBS-private placement was $83,000 for the year ended December
31,
2006 due to the purchase and financing of two assets in December 2006. There
was
no interest expense for the period ended December 31, 2005.
Interest
expense on leasing activities was $3.7 million for the year ended December
31,
2006 resulting from the financing of direct financing leases and notes acquired
beginning in September 2005 with our secured term credit facility. There
was no
interest expense for the period ended December 31, 2005 because the term
credit
facility did not begin until March 2006. At December 31, 2006, we had an
outstanding balance of $84.7 million with an interest rate of 6.33%.
General
interest expense was $2.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2006 as
compared to $564,000 for the period ended December 31, 2005 an increase $1.9
million (337%). This increase resulted primarily from the
following:
· |
An
increase of $2.1 million in expense on our unsecured junior subordinated
debentures held by unconsolidated trusts that issued trust preferred
securities which were not issued until May 2006 and September 2006,
respectively.
|
· |
An
increase in interest expense on our credit facility of $320,000 which
was
not entered into until December 2005.
|
These
increases were offset by a $516,000 decrease in interest expense related
to
interest rate swap agreements. During the current year, the floating rate
we received exceeded the fixed rate we paid under these agreements generating
interest income. For the year ended December 31, 2006, the interest income
is classified as “Interest income - other” on our Consolidated Statement of
Operations.
Net
Realized (Losses) Gains on Investments—Year Ended December 31, 2006 as compared
to the Period Ended December 31, 2005
Net
realized losses on investments for the year ended December 31, 2006 of $8.6
million consisted of $12.2 million of gross losses related to the sale of our
agency ABS-RMBS portfolio, offset by a $2.6 million gain on termination of
our
amortizing swap agreement in connection with the sale of our agency ABS-RMBS
portfolio in September 2006, $279,000 of net realized gains on the sale of
bank
loans and $807,000 of gains related to the early termination of equipment
leases. Net realized gains on investments for the period ended December 31,
2005
of $311,000 primarily consisted of $307,000 of gains related to the sale of
bank
loans.
Other
Income—Year Ended December 31, 2006 as compared to the Period Ended December 31,
2005
Other
income for the year ended December 31, 2006 of $480,000 consisted of a $327,000
prepayment fees paid in connection with the payoff of two mezzanine loans,
$90,000 of consulting fee income and $63,000 of dividend income. There was
no
such income for the period ended December 31, 2005.
Non-Investment
Expenses—Year Ended December 31, 2006 as compared to the Period Ended December
31, 2005
The
following table sets forth information relating to our non-investment expenses
incurred for the periods presented (in thousands):
Year
Ended
2006
|
Period
Ended
2005
|
||||||
Non-investment
expenses:
|
|||||||
Management
fee - related party
|
$
|
4,838
|
$
|
3,012
|
|||
Equity
compensation − related party
|
2,432
|
2,709
|
|||||
Professional
services
|
1,881
|
580
|
|||||
Insurance
|
498
|
395
|
|||||
General
and administrative
|
1,495
|
1,032
|
|||||
Total
non-investment expenses
|
$
|
11,144
|
$
|
7,728
|
Since
we
commenced operations on March 8, 2005, results for the period ended
December 31, 2005 reflect less than ten months of activity as compared with
the
full year ended December 31, 2006.
Management
fee-related party increased $1.8 million (60%) to $4.8 million for the year
ended December 31, 2006 as compared to $3.0 million for the period ended
December 31, 2005. These amounts represent compensation in the form of base
management fees and incentive management fees pursuant to our management
agreement. The base management fees increased by $1.0 million (37%) to $3.7
million for the year ended December 31, 2006 as compared to $2.7 million for
the
period ended December 31, 2005. This increase was due to increased equity as
a
result of our public offerings in February and December 2006. Incentive
management fees increased by $756,000 (220%) to $1.1 million from $344,000.
Equity
compensation-related party decreased $300,000 (11%) to $2.4 million for the
year ended December 31, 2006 as compared to $2.7 million for the period ended
December 31, 2005. These expenses relate to the amortization of the
March 8, 2005 grant of restricted common stock to the Manager, the
March 8, 2005 and 2006 grants of restricted common stock to our
non-employee independent directors and the March 8, 2005 grant of options
to the Manager to purchase common stock. The decreases in expense were primarily
the result of an adjustment related to our quarterly remeasurement of unvested
stock and options to the Manager to reflect changes in the fair value of our
common stock.
Professional
services increased $1.3 million (224%) to $1.9 million for the year ended
December 31, 2006 as compared to $580,000 for the period ended December 31,
2005. This increase was primarily due to an $308,000 increase in consultant
and
tax fees associated with the closing of Apidos CDO III and an increase of
$162,000 in legal fees in connection with our general corporate operations
and
compliance. There was also a $214,000 increase in administrative fees in
connection with the closing of Apidos CDO III and RREF 2006-1.
In
addition, there was an increase of $595,000 in LEAF servicing expense due to
the
increase in managed assets in the year ended December 31, 2006.
Insurance
increased $103,000 (26%) to $498,000 for the year ended December 31, 2006
as compared to $395,000 for the period ended December 31, 2005. These amounts
represent expense related to our purchase of directors’ and officers’ insurance.
The increase for the year ended December 31, 2006 was due to the fact that
the
period ended December 31, 2005 did not contain a full year of operations, but
rather covered the period from our initial date of operations, March 8,
2005, through December 31, 2005, as compared to the full year ended December
31,
2006.
General
and administrative expenses increased $500,000 (50%) to $1.5 million for
the year ended December 31, 2006 as compared to $1.0 million for the period
ended December 31, 2005. These expenses include expense reimbursements to our
Manager, rating agency expenses and all other operating costs incurred. These
increases were primarily the result of the addition of rating agency fees
associated with our four CDOs, two of which closed subsequent to December 31,
2005, as well as to an increase in general operating expenses, primarily from
bank fees and printing expenses and income tax expense incurred at our taxable
REIT subsidiary, Resource TRS, Inc.
Income
Taxes
We
do not
pay federal income tax on income we distribute to our stockholders, subject
to
our compliance with REIT qualification requirements. However, Resource TRS,
our
domestic TRS, is taxed as a regular subchapter C corporation under the
provisions of the Internal Revenue Code. As of December 31, 2006, Resource
TRS
recognized a $67,000 provision for income taxes. As of December 31, 2005, we
did
not conduct any of our operations through Resource TRS.
Apidos
CDO III, one of our foreign TRSs, was formed to complete securitization
transactions structured as secured financings. Apidos CDO III is organized
as an
exempt company incorporated with limited liability under the laws of the Cayman
Islands and is generally exempt from federal and state income tax at the
corporate level because its activities in the United States is limited to
trading in stock and securities for its own account. Therefore, despite its
status as a TRS, it generally will not be subject to corporate tax on its
earnings and no provision for income taxes is required; however, we generally
will be required to include Apidos CDO III’s current taxable income in our
calculation of REIT taxable income.
Financial
Condition
Summary
Our
total
assets at December 31, 2006 were $1.8 billion as compared to $2.0 billion at
December 31, 2005. The decrease in total assets was principally due to the
sale of approximately $125.4 million of agency ABS-RMBS in January 2006 and
sale
of the remaining agency ABS-RMBS of approximately $764.1 in 2006 and principal
repayments during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006 of $125.0 million
on
this portfolio. As a result of the September agency ABS-RMBS sale, we repaid
the
associated debt with this portfolio. This $1.0 billion decrease in the agency
portfolio was partially offset by a $509.4 million increase in our commercial
real estate loan portfolio resulting from the purchase of 28 additional loans,
13 of which are held by Resource Real Estate Funding CDO 2006-1, which closed
in
August 2006, five additional fundings on one existing loan position, which
is
also being held
by
Resource Real Estate Funding CDO 2006-1, a $213.3 million increase in our bank
loans held by Apidos CDO III, which closed in May 2006, and a $64.8 million
increase (net of sales and principal payment of $41.9 million) in equipment
leases and notes in connection with nine additional purchases of leasing and
note assets from LEAF Financial Corporation during the year ended December
31,
2006. Our financial condition at December 31, 2006 was strengthened by the
completion of our initial public offering in February 2006 and follow-on
offering in December 2006, which resulted in net proceeds of $27.3 million
and
$93.0 million (totaling $120.3 million), respectively, after
deducting underwriters’ discounts and commissions and other offering expenses,
We also completed two trust preferred securities issuances in May and September
2006 that generated net proceeds totaling $48.4 million after issuance costs.
As
of December 31, 2006, we held $5.4 million of cash and cash
equivalents. For
a
discussion of our liquidity and its effect on our financial condition, see
“-
Liquidity and Capital Resources,” below.
Investment
Portfolio
The
table
below summarizes the amortized cost and estimated fair value of our investment
portfolio as of December 31, 2006 and 2005, classified by interest rate type.
The following table includes both (i) the amortized cost of our investment
portfolio and the related dollar price, which is computed by dividing amortized
cost by par amount, and (ii) the estimated fair value of our investment
portfolio and the related dollar price, which is computed by dividing the
estimated fair value by par amount (in thousands, except
percentages):
Amortized
cost
|
Dollar
price
|
Estimated
fair value
|
Dollar
price
|
Estimated
fair value less amortized cost
|
Dollar
price
|
||||||||||||||
December
31, 2006
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Floating
rate
|
|||||||||||||||||||
ABS-RMBS
|
$
|
342,496
|
99.22%
|
|
$
|
336,968
|
97.62%
|
|
$
|
(5,528
|
)
|
-1.60%
|
|
||||||
CMBS
|
401
|
100.00%
|
|
406
|
101.25%
|
|
5
|
1.25%
|
|
||||||||||
CMBS-private
placement
|
30,055
|
100.00%
|
|
30,055
|
100.00%
|
|
−
|
0.00%
|
|
||||||||||
Other
ABS
|
17,539
|
99.87%
|
|
17,669
|
100.61%
|
|
130
|
0.74%
|
|
||||||||||
A
notes
|
42,515
|
100.04%
|
|
42,515
|
100.04%
|
|
−
|
0.00%
|
|
||||||||||
B
notes
|
147,196
|
100.03%
|
|
147,196
|
100.03%
|
|
−
|
0.00%
|
|
||||||||||
Mezzanine
loans
|
105,288
|
100.07%
|
|
105,288
|
100.07%
|
|
−
|
0.00%
|
|
||||||||||
Whole
loans
|
190,768
|
99.06%
|
|
190,768
|
99.06%
|
|
−
|
0.00%
|
|
||||||||||
Bank
loans
|
613,981
|
100.15%
|
|
613,540
|
100.08%
|
|
(441
|
)
|
-0.07%
|
|
|||||||||
Total
floating rate
|
$
|
1,490,239
|
99.77%
|
|
$
|
1,484,405
|
99.38%
|
|
$
|
(5,834
|
)
|
-0.39%
|
|
||||||
Fixed
rate
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
ABS-RMBS
|
$
|
6,000
|
100.00%
|
|
$
|
5,880
|
98.00%
|
|
$
|
(120
|
)
|
-2.00%
|
|
||||||
CMBS
|
27,550
|
98.77%
|
|
27,031
|
96.91%
|
|
(519
|
)
|
-1.86%
|
|
|||||||||
Other
ABS
|
2,987
|
99.97%
|
|
2,988
|
100.00%
|
|
1
|
0.03%
|
|
||||||||||
B
notes
|
56,390
|
100.22%
|
|
56,390
|
100.22%
|
|
−
|
0.00%
|
|
||||||||||
Mezzanine
loans
|
83,901
|
94.06%
|
|
83,901
|
94.06%
|
|
−
|
0.00%
|
|
||||||||||
Bank
loans
|
249
|
100.00%
|
|
249
|
100.00%
|
|
−
|
0.00%
|
|
||||||||||
Equipment
leases and notes
|
88,970
|
100.00%
|
|
88,970
|
100.00%
|
|
−
|
0.00%
|
|
||||||||||
Total
fixed rate
|
$
|
266,047
|
97.97%
|
|
$
|
265,409
|
97.73%
|
|
$
|
(638
|
)
|
-0.24%
|
|
||||||
Grand
total
|
$
|
1,756,286
|
99.49%
|
|
$
|
1,749,814
|
99.12%
|
|
$
|
(6,472
|
)
|
-0.37%
|
|
||||||
December
31, 2005
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
Floating
rate
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
ABS-RMBS
|
$
|
340,460
|
99.12%
|
|
$
|
331,974
|
96.65%
|
|
$
|
(8,486
|
)
|
-2.47%
|
|
||||||
CMBS
|
458
|
100.00%
|
|
459
|
100.22%
|
|
1
|
0.22%
|
|
||||||||||
Other
ABS
|
18,731
|
99.88%
|
|
18,742
|
99.94%
|
|
11
|
0.06%
|
|
||||||||||
B
notes
|
121,671
|
99.78%
|
|
121,671
|
99.78%
|
|
−
|
0.00%
|
|
||||||||||
Mezzanine
loans
|
44,405
|
99.79%
|
|
44,405
|
99.79%
|
|
−
|
0.00%
|
|
||||||||||
Bank
loans
|
398,536
|
100.23%
|
|
399,979
|
100.59%
|
|
1,443
|
0.36%
|
|
||||||||||
Private
equity
|
1,984
|
99.20%
|
|
1,954
|
97.70%
|
|
(30
|
)
|
-1.50%
|
|
|||||||||
Total
floating rate
|
$
|
926,245
|
99.77%
|
|
$
|
919,184
|
98.97%
|
|
$
|
(7,061
|
)
|
-0.76%
|
|
||||||
Hybrid
rate
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
Agency
ABS-RMBS
|
$
|
1,014,575
|
100.06%
|
|
$
|
1,001,670
|
98.79%
|
|
$
|
(12,905
|
)
|
-1.27%
|
|
||||||
Total
hybrid rate
|
$
|
1,014,575
|
100.06%
|
|
$
|
1,001,670
|
98.79%
|
|
$
|
(12,905
|
)
|
-1.27%
|
|
||||||
Fixed
rate
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
ABS-RMBS
|
$
|
6,000
|
100.00%
|
|
$
|
5,771
|
96.18%
|
|
$
|
(229
|
)
|
-3.82%
|
|
||||||
CMBS
|
27,512
|
98.63%
|
|
26,904
|
96.45%
|
|
(608
|
)
|
-2.18%
|
|
|||||||||
Other
ABS
|
3,314
|
99.97%
|
|
3,203
|
96.62%
|
|
(111
|
)
|
-3.35%
|
|
|||||||||
Mezzanine
loans
|
5,012
|
100.00%
|
|
5,012
|
100.00%
|
|
−
|
0.00%
|
|
||||||||||
Bank
loans
|
249
|
99.60%
|
|
246
|
98.40%
|
|
(3
|
)
|
-1.20%
|
|
|||||||||
Equipment
leases and notes
|
23,317
|
100.00%
|
|
23,317
|
100.00%
|
|
−
|
0.00%
|
|
||||||||||
Total
fixed rate
|
$
|
65,404
|
99.42%
|
|
$
|
64,453
|
97.97%
|
|
$
|
(951
|
)
|
-1.45%
|
|
||||||
Grand
total
|
$
|
2,006,224
|
99.90%
|
|
$
|
1,985,307
|
98.86%
|
|
$
|
(20,917
|
)
|
-1.04%
|
|
At
December 31, 2006, we held $342.8 million of ABS-RMBS, at fair value, which
is
based on market prices provided by dealers, net of unrealized gains of $913,000
and unrealized losses of $6.6 million as compared to $337.7 million at
December 31, 2005, net of unrealized gains of $370,000 and unrealized
losses of $9.1 million. At December 31, 2006 and 2005, our ABS-RMBS portfolio
had a weighted average amortized cost of 99.23% and 99.13%, respectively. As
of
December 31, 2006 and 2005, our ABS-RMBS were valued below par, in the
aggregate, because of wide credit spreads during the respective periods.
The
following table summarize our ABS-RMBS portfolio classified as
available-for-sale as of December 31, 2006 and 2005 which are carried at fair
value (in thousands, except percentages):
December
31, 2006
|
December
31, 2005
|
||||||||||||
ABS-RMBS
|
Agency
ABS-RMBS
|
ABS-RMBS
|
Total
RMBS
|
||||||||||
ABS-RMBS,
gross
|
$
|
351,194
|
$
|
1,013,981
|
$
|
349,484
|
$
|
1,363,465
|
|||||
Unamortized
discount
|
(2,823
|
)
|
(777
|
)
|
(3,188
|
)
|
(3,965
|
)
|
|||||
Unamortized
premium
|
125
|
1,371
|
164
|
1,535
|
|||||||||
Amortized
cost
|
348,496
|
1,014,575
|
346,460
|
1,361,035
|
|||||||||
Gross
unrealized gains
|
913
|
13
|
370
|
383
|
|||||||||
Gross
unrealized losses
|
(6,561
|
)
|
(12,918
|
)
|
(9,085
|
)
|
(22,003
|
)
|
|||||
Estimated
fair value
|
$
|
342,848
|
$
|
1,001,670
|
$
|
337,745
|
$
|
1,339,415
|
|||||
Percent
of total
|
100.0
|
%
|
74.8
|
%
|
25.2
|
%
|
100.0
|
%
|
The
table
below summarizes our ABS-RMBS portfolio as of December 31, 2006 and 2005 (in
thousands, except percentages). Dollar price is computed by dividing amortized
cost by par amount.
December
31
|
|||||||||||||
2006
|
2005
|
||||||||||||
Amortized
cost
|
Dollar
price
|
Amortized
cost
|
Dollar
price
|
||||||||||
Moody’s
ratings category:
|
|||||||||||||
Aaa
|
$
|
−
|
N/A
|
$
|
1,014,575
|
100.06%
|
|
||||||
A1
through A3
|
42,163
|
100.18%
|
|
42,172
|
100.23%
|
|
|||||||
Baa1
through Baa3
|
279,641
|
99.88%
|
|
281,929
|
99.85%
|
|
|||||||
Ba1
through Ba3
|
26,692
|
91.68%
|
|
22,359
|
89.20%
|
|
|||||||
Total
|
$
|
348,496
|
99.23%
|
|
$
|
1,361,035
|
99.82%
|
|
|||||
S&P
ratings category:
|
|||||||||||||
AAA
|
$
|
−
|
N/A
|
$
|
1,014,575
|
100.06%
|
|
||||||
AA+
through AA-
|
−
|
N/A
|
2,000
|
100.00%
|
|
||||||||
A+
through A-
|
58,749
|
99.65%
|
|
59,699
|
99.55%
|
|
|||||||
BBB+
through BBB-
|
266,555
|
99.14%
|
|
262,524
|
98.99%
|
|
|||||||
BB+
through BB-
|
2,192
|
92.68%
|
|
1,199
|
94.78%
|
|
|||||||
No
rating provided
|
21,000
|
100.00%
|
|
21,038
|
100.00%
|
|
|||||||
Total
|
$
|
348,496
|
99.23%
|
|
$
|
1,361,035
|
99.82%
|
|
|||||
Weighted
average rating factor
|
412
|
104
|
|||||||||||
Weighted
average original FICO (1)
|
636
|
633
|
|||||||||||
Weighted
average original LTV (1)
|
80.58
|
%
|
80.02
|
%
|
(1)
|
Weighted
average reflects 100.0% and 25.2% at December 31, 2006 and 2005,
respectively, of the RMBS in our portfolio that are
non-agency.
|
The
constant prepayment rate to balloon, or CPB, on our agency ABS-RMBS at December
31, 2005 was 15%. We did not hold any agency ABS-RMBS at December 31, 2006.
CPB
attempts to predict the percentage of principal that will repay over the next
12
months based on historical principal paydowns. As interest rates rise, the
rate
of refinancing typically declines, which we believe may result in lower rates
of
prepayments and, as a result, a lower portfolio CPB.
Commercial
Mortgage-Backed Securities
At
December 31, 2006 and 2005, we held $27.4 million of CMBS at fair value, which
is based on market prices provided by dealers, net of unrealized gains of
$23,000 and $1,000, respectively, and unrealized losses of $536,000 and
$608,000, respectively. In the aggregate, we purchased our CMBS portfolio at
a
discount. As of December 31, 2006 and 2005, the remaining discount (net of
premium) to be accreted into income over the remaining lives of the securities
was $343,000 and $380,000, respectively. These securities are classified as
available-for-sale and, as a result, are carried at their fair market value.
The
table
below describes the terms of our CMBS as of December 31, 2006 and 2005 (in
thousands, except percentages). Dollar price is computed by dividing amortized
cost by par amount.
December
31, 2006
|
December
31, 2005
|
||||||||||||
Amortized
cost
|
Dollar
price
|
Amortized
cost
|
Dollar
price
|
||||||||||
Moody’s
ratings category:
|
|||||||||||||
Baa1
through Baa3
|
$
|
27,951
|
98.79%
|
|
$
|
27,970
|
98.66%
|
|
|||||
Total
|
$
|
27,951
|
98.79%
|
|
$
|
27,970
|
98.66%
|
|
|||||
S&P
ratings category:
|
|||||||||||||
BBB+
through BBB-
|
$
|
12,183
|
99.10%
|
|
$
|
12,225
|
98.98%
|
|
|||||
No
rating provided
|
15,768
|
98.55%
|
|
15,745
|
98.41%
|
|
|||||||
Total
|
$
|
27,951
|
98.79%
|
|
$
|
27,970
|
98.66%
|
|
|||||
Weighted
average rating factor (1)
|
346
|
346
|
(1)
|
WARF
is the quantitative equivalent of Moody’s traditional rating categories
and used by Moody’s in its credit enhancement calculation for
securitization transactions.
|
Commercial
Mortgage-Backed Securities-Private Placement
At
December 31, 2006, we held $30.1 million of CMBS-private placement at fair
value
which is based on market prices provided by dealers. There were no gains or
losses at December 31, 2006. The portfolio was purchased at par. These
securities are classified as available-for-sale and, as a result, are carried
at
their fair value. We did not hold any CMBS-private placement at December 31,
2005.
The
table
below summarizes our CMBS-private placement as of December 31, 2006 (in
thousands, except percentages). Dollar price is computed by dividing amortized
cost by par amount.
December
31, 2006
|
|||||||
Amortized
Cost
|
Dollar
Price
|
||||||
Moody’s
Ratings Category:
|
|||||||
Aaa
|
$
|
30,055
|
100.00%
|
|
|||
Total
|
$
|
30,055
|
100.00%
|
|
|||
S&P
Ratings Category:
|
|||||||
AAA
|
$
|
30,055
|
100.00%
|
|
|||
Total
|
$
|
30,055
|
100.00%
|
|
|||
Weighted
average rating factor
|
1
|
Other
Asset-Backed Securities
At
December 31, 2006 and 2005, we held $20.7 million and $21.9 million,
respectively, of other ABS at fair value, which is based on market prices
provided by dealers, net of unrealized gains of $130,000 and $24,000,
respectively, and unrealized losses of $0 and $124,000, respectively. In the
aggregate, we purchased our other ABS portfolio at a discount. As of December
31, 2006 and 2005, the remaining discount to be accreted into income over the
remaining lives of securities was $22,000 and $25,000, respectively. These
securities are classified as available-for-sale and, as a result, are carried
at
their fair market value.
The
table
below summarizes our other ABS as of December 31, 2006 and 2005 (in thousands,
except percentages). Dollar price is computed by dividing amortized cost by
par
amount.
December
31,
|
|||||||||||||
2006
|
2005
|
||||||||||||
Amortized
cost
|
Dollar
price
|
Amortized
cost
|
Dollar
price
|
||||||||||
Moody’s
ratings category:
|
|||||||||||||
Baa1
through Baa3
|
$
|
20,526
|
99.89
|
%
|
$
|
20,045
|
99.89
|
%
|
|||||
Ba1
through Ba3
|
−
|
−
|
%
|
−
|
−
|
%
|
|||||||
Total
|
$
|
20,526
|
99.89
|
%
|
$
|
22,045
|
99.89
|
%
|
|||||
S&P
ratings category:
|
|||||||||||||
BBB+
through BBB-
|
$
|
18,765
|
99.08
|
%
|
$
|
19,091
|
99.87
|
%
|
|||||
No
rating provided
|
1,761
|
100.0
|
%
|
2,954
|
100.00
|
%
|
|||||||
Total
|
$
|
20,526
|
99.89
|
%
|
$
|
22,045
|
99.89
|
%
|
|||||
Weighted
average rating factor
|
396
|
398
|
Commercial
Real Estate Loans
The
following is a summary of the loans in our commercial real estate loan portfolio
at the dates indicated (in thousands):
Description
|
Quantity
|
Amortized
Cost
|
Contracted
Interest
Rates
|
Maturity
Dates
|
|||||||||
December
31, 2006:
|
|||||||||||||
Whole
loans, floating rate
|
9
|
$
|
190,768
|
LIBOR
plus 2.50% to LIBOR plus 3.65%
|
|
August
2007 to January
2010
|
|||||||
A
notes, floating rate
|
2
|
42,515
|
LIBOR
plus 1.25% to LIBOR plus 1.35%
|
|
January
2008 to April
2008
|
||||||||
B
notes, floating rate
|
10
|
147,196
|
LIBOR
plus 1.90% to LIBOR plus 6.25%
|
|
April
2007 to October
2008
|
||||||||
B
notes, fixed rate
|
3
|
56,390
|
7.00%
to 8.68%
|
|
July
2011 to July
2016
|
||||||||
Mezzanine
loans, floating rate
|
7
|
105,288
|
LIBOR
plus 2.20% to LIBOR plus 4.50%
|
|
August
2007 to October
2008
|
||||||||
Mezzanine
loans, fixed rate
|
8
|
83,901
|
5.78%
to 11.00%
|
|
August
2007 to September
2016
|
||||||||
Total
|
39
|
$
|
626,058
|
|
|||||||||
December
31, 2005:
|
|||||||||||||
B
notes, floating rate
|
7
|
$
|
121,671
|
LIBOR
plus 2.15% to LIBOR plus 6.25%
|
|
January
2007 to April
2008
|
|||||||
Mezzanine
loans, floating rate
|
4
|
44,405
|
LIBOR
plus 2.25% to LIBOR plus 4.50%
|
|
August
2007 to July
2008
|
||||||||
Mezzanine
loan, fixed rate
|
1
|
5,012
|
9.50%
|
|
May
2010
|
||||||||
Total
|
12
|
$
|
171,088
|
Bank
Loans
At
December 31, 2006, we held a total of $613.8 million of bank loans at fair
value, all of which are held by and secure the debt issued by Apidos CDO I
and
Apidos CDO III. At December 31, 2005, we held a total of $400.2 million of
bank loans at fair value, of which $63.0 million were financed and held on
our
Apidos CDO III warehouse facility. This facility was subsequently terminated
in
May 2006 upon the closing of Apidos CDO III. The increase in total bank loans
was principally due to the Apidos CDO III funding. We own 100% of the equity
issued by Apidos CDO I and Apidos CDO III, which we have determined are variable
interest entities, or VIEs, and are therefore deemed to be their primary
beneficiaries. See “—Variable Interest Entities.” As a result, we consolidated
Apidos CDO I and Apidos CDO III as of December 31, 2006 and 2005, even though
we
did not own any of the equity of Apidos CDO III as of December 31, 2005.
The
table
below summarizes our bank loan investments as of December 31, 2006 and 2005
(in
thousands, except percentages). Dollar price is computed by dividing amortized
cost by par amount.
December
31, 2006
|
December
31, 2005
|
||||||||||||
Amortized
cost
|
Dollar
price
|
Amortized
cost
|
Dollar
price
|
||||||||||
Moody’s
ratings category:
|
|||||||||||||
Baa1
through Baa3
|
$
|
3,500
|
100.00%
|
|
$
|
−
|
−%
|
|
|||||
Ba1
through Ba3
|
218,941
|
100.09%
|
|
155,292
|
100.24%
|
|
|||||||
B1
through B3
|
385,560
|
100.15%
|
|
243,493
|
100.23%
|
|
|||||||
Caa1
through Caa3
|
3,722
|
100.00%
|
|
−
|
−%
|
|
|||||||
No
rating provided
|
2,507
|
100.28%
|
|
−
|
−%
|
|
|||||||
Total
|
$
|
614,230
|
100.13%
|
|
$
|
398,785
|
100.23%
|
|
|||||
S&P
ratings category:
|
|||||||||||||
BBB+
through BBB-
|
$
|
8,490
|
100.00%
|
|
$
|
15,347
|
100.20%
|
|
|||||
BB+
through BB-
|
241,012
|
100.13%
|
|
131,607
|
100.22%
|
|
|||||||
B+
through B-
|
350,262
|
100.13%
|
|
246,335
|
100.24%
|
|
|||||||
CCC+
through CCC-
|
10,193
|
100.05%
|
|
5,496
|
100.37%
|
|
|||||||
No
rating provided
|
4,273
|
100.16%
|
|
−
|
−%
|
|
|||||||
Total
|
$
|
614,230
|
100.13%
|
|
$
|
398,785
|
100.23%
|
|
|||||
Weighted
average rating factor
|
2,131
|
2,089
|
Equipment
Leases and Notes
Investments
in direct financing leases and notes as of December 31, 2006 and 2005, were
as
follows (in thousands):
December
31,
|
|||||||
2006
|
2005
|
||||||
Direct
financing leases
|
$
|
30,270
|
$
|
18,141
|
|||
Notes
receivable
|
58,700
|
5,176
|
|||||
Total
|
$
|
88,970
|
$
|
23,317
|
Private
Equity Investments
In
February 2006, we sold our private equity investment for $2.0 million. We may
invest in trust preferred securities and private equity investments with an
emphasis on securities of small- to middle-market financial institutions,
including banks, savings and thrift institutions, insurance companies, holding
companies for these institutions and REITS. Trust preferred securities are
issued by a special purpose trust that holds a subordinated debenture or other
debt obligation issued by a company to the trust.
Interest
Receivable
At
December 31, 2006, we had interest receivable of $8.8 million, which consisted
of $8.7 million of interest on our securities, loans and equipment leases and
notes, $8,000 of purchased interest that had been accrued on commercial real
estate loans purchased and $73,000 of interest earned on brokerage and sweep
accounts. At December 31, 2005, we had interest receivable of $9.3 million,
which consisted of $9.1 million of interest on our securities, loans and
equipment leases and notes, $172,000 of purchased interest that had been accrued
when our securities and loans were purchased and $95,000 of interest earned
on
escrow and sweep accounts.
Principal
Paydown Receivables
At
December 31, 2006, we had principal paydown receivables of $503,000, which
consisted of principal payments on our bank loans. At December 31, 2005, we
had principal paydown receivables of $5.8 million, all of which related to
principal payments on our agency ABS-RMBS portfolio that was sold during the
year ended December 31, 2006.
Other
Assets
Other
assets at December 31, 2006 of $3.1 million consisted primarily of $2.9 million
of loan origination costs associated with our trust preferred securities
issuance, revolving credit facility, commercial real estate loan portfolio
and
secured term facility and $92,000 of prepaid directors’ and officers’ liability
insurance. Other assets at December 31, 2005 of $1.5 million consisted
primarily of $1.2 million of prepaid costs, principally professional fees,
associated with the preparation and filing with the SEC of a registration
statement for our initial public offering and $193,000 of loan origination
costs
associated with our revolving credit facility, commercial real estate loan
portfolio and secured term facility.
Hedging
Instruments
Our
hedges at December 31, 2006 and 2005, were fixed-for-floating interest rate
swap
agreements whereby we swapped the floating rate of interest on the liabilities
we hedged for a fixed rate of interest. We also had one interest rate cap.
As of
December 31, 2005, we had entered into hedges with a notional amount of $987.2
million and maturities ranging from April 2006 to June 2014. At
December 31, 2005, the unrealized gain on our interest rate swap agreements
and interest rate cap agreement was $2.8 million. In an increasing interest
rate
environment, we expect that the fair value of our hedges will continue to
increase. We intend to continue to seek such hedges for our floating rate debt
in the future. Our hedges at December 31, 2006 were as follows (in
thousands):
Benchmark
rate
|
Notional
value
|
Strike
rate
|
Effective
date
|
Maturity
date
|
Fair
value
|
||||||||||||||
Interest
rate swap
|
1
month LIBOR
|
$
|
13,200
|
4.49%
|
|
07/27/05
|
06/06/14
|
$
|
295
|
||||||||||
Interest
rate swap
|
1
month LIBOR
|
29,607
|
5.32%
|
|
03/30/06
|
09/22/15
|
(242
|
)
|
|||||||||||
Interest
rate swap
|
1
month LIBOR
|
17,608
|
5.31%
|
|
03/30/06
|
11/23/09
|
(50
|
)
|
|||||||||||
Interest
rate swap
|
1
month LIBOR
|
9,128
|
5.41%
|
|
05/26/06
|
08/22/12
|
(71
|
)
|
|||||||||||
Interest
rate swap
|
1
month LIBOR
|
4,884
|
5.43%
|
|
05/26/06
|
04/22/13
|
(58
|
)
|
|||||||||||
Interest
rate swap
|
1
month LIBOR
|
4,313
|
5.72%
|
|
06/28/06
|
06/22/16
|
(102
|
)
|
|||||||||||
Interest
rate swap
|
1
month LIBOR
|
2,462
|
5.52%
|
|
07/27/06
|
07/22/11
|
(56
|
)
|
|||||||||||
Interest
rate swap
|
1
month LIBOR
|
3,769
|
5.54%
|
|
07/27/06
|
09/22/13
|
(118
|
)
|
|||||||||||
Interest
rate swap
|
1
month LIBOR
|
53,541
|
5.53%
|
|
08/10/06
|
05/25/16
|
(1,456
|
)
|
|||||||||||
Interest
rate swap
|
1
month LIBOR
|
5,289
|
5.25%
|
|
08/18/06
|
07/22/16
|
(81
|
)
|
|||||||||||
Interest
rate swap
|
1
month LIBOR
|
5,014
|
5.06%
|
|
09/28/06
|
07/22/16
|
(19
|
)
|
|||||||||||
Interest
rate swap
|
1
month LIBOR
|
2,109
|
4.97%
|
|
12/22/06
|
12/23/13
|
2
|
||||||||||||
Interest
rate swap
|
3
month LIBOR
|
18,000
|
5.27%
|
|
02/01/07
|
06/01/16
|
(338
|
)
|
|||||||||||
Interest
rate swap
|
1
month LIBOR
|
6,750
|
5.16%
|
|
02/01/07
|
09/01/16
|
(67
|
)
|
|||||||||||
Interest
rate swap
|
1
month LIBOR
|
22,377
|
5.05%
|
|
02/01/07
|
07/01/16
|
(45
|
)
|
|||||||||||
Interest
rate swap
|
1
month LIBOR
|
13,875
|
5.86%
|
|
02/01/07
|
02/01/17
|
(744
|
)
|
|||||||||||
Interest
rate swap
|
1
month LIBOR
|
12,965
|
4.63%
|
|
03/01/07
|
07/01/11
|
152
|
||||||||||||
Interest
rate cap
|
1
month LIBOR
|
15,000
|
7.50%
|
|
05/06/07
|
11/07/16
|
(136
|
)
|
|||||||||||
Total
|
$
|
239,891
|
5.43%
|
|
$
|
(3,134
|
)
|
Repurchase
Agreements
We
have
entered into repurchase agreements to finance our commercial real estate loans
and CMBS-private placement portfolio. We discuss these repurchase agreements
at
“-Liquidity and Capital Resources,” below. These agreements are secured by the
financed assets and bear interest rates that have historically moved in close
relationship to LIBOR. At December 31, 2006, we had established ten borrowing
arrangements with various financial institutions and had utilized four of these
arrangements, principally our arrangement with Credit Suisse Securities (USA)
LLC, the initial purchaser and placement agent for our March 2005 offering
and
one of the underwriters in our two public offerings. None of the counterparties
to these agreements are affiliates of the Manager or us.
We
seek
to renew the repurchase agreements we use to finance asset acquisitions as
they
mature under the then-applicable borrowing terms of the counterparties to our
repurchase agreements. Through December 31, 2006, we have encountered no
difficulties in effecting renewals of our repurchase agreements.
At
December 31, 2006, we have complied, to the best of our knowledge, with all
of
our other financial covenants under our debt agreements.
Collateralized
Debt Obligations
As
of
December 31, 2006, we had executed four CDO transactions. In August 2006, we
closed Resource Real Estate Funding CDO 2006-1, a $345.0 million CDO transaction
that provided financing for commercial real estate loans. The investments held
by Resource Real Estate Funding CDO 2006-1 collateralized $308.7 million of
senior notes issued by the CDO vehicle, of which RCC Real Estate purchased
100%
of the class J senior notes (rated BB:Moody’s) and class K senior notes (rated
B:Moody’s) for $43.1 million. At December 31, 2006, the notes had a weighted
average borrowing rate of 6.17%. In May 2006, we closed Apidos CDO III, a $285.5
million CDO transaction that provided financing for bank loans. The investments
held by Apidos CDO III collateralized $262.5 million of senior notes issued
by
the CDO vehicle. At December 31, 2006, the notes had a weighted average
borrowing rate of 5.81%. In August 2005, we closed Apidos CDO I, a $350.0
million CDO transaction that provided financing for bank loans. The investments
held by Apidos CDO I collateralize $321.5 million of senior notes issued by
the
CDO vehicle. At December 31, 2006, the notes had a weighted average borrowing
rate of 5.83%. In July 2005, we closed Ischus CDO II, a $403.0 million CDO
transaction that provided financing for MBS and other ABS. The investments
held
by Ischus CDO II collateralize $376.0 million of senior notes issued by the
CDO
vehicle. At December 31, 2006, the notes had a weighted average borrowing rate
of 5.83%.
Trust
Preferred Securities
In
May
and September 2006, we formed Resource Capital Trust I and RCC Trust II,
respectively, for the sole purpose of issuing and selling trust preferred
securities. In accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board, or FASB,
Interpretation No. 46-R, or FIN 46-R, Resource Capital Trust I and RCC Trust
II
are not consolidated into our consolidated financial statements because we
are
not deemed to be the primary beneficiary of either trust. We own 100% of the
common shares of each trust, each of which issued $25.0 million of preferred
shares to unaffiliated investors. Our rights as the holder of the common shares
of each trust are subordinate to the rights of the holders of preferred shares
only in the event of a default; otherwise, our economic and voting rights are
pari passu with the preferred shareholders. We record each of our investments
in
the trusts’ common shares of $774,000 as an investment in unconsolidated trusts
and record dividend income upon declaration by each trust.
In
connection with the issuance and sale of the trust preferred securities, we
issued $25.8 million principal amount of junior subordinated debentures to
each
of Resource Capital Trust I and RCC Trust II. The junior subordinated debentures
debt issuance costs are deferred in other assets in the consolidated balance
sheets. We record interest expense on the junior subordinated debentures and
amortization of debt issuance costs in our consolidated statements of
operations. At December 31, 2006, the junior subordinated debentures had a
weighted average borrowing rate of 9.32%.
Term
Facility
In
March
2006, we entered into a secured term credit facility with Bayerische Hypo-und
Vereinsbank AG, New York Branch to finance the purchase of equipment leases
and
notes. The maximum amount of our borrowing under this facility is $100.0
million. At December 31, 2006, $84.7 million was outstanding under the facility.
The facility bears interest at one of two rates, determined by asset class.
·
|
Pool
A—one-month LIBOR plus 1.10%; or
|
·
|
Pool
B—one-month LIBOR plus 0.80%.
|
The
weighted average interest rate was 6.33% at December 31, 2006.
Credit
Facility
In
December 2005, we entered into a $15.0 million corporate credit facility with
Commerce Bank, N.A. This facility was increased to $25.0 million in April 2006.
The unsecured revolving credit facility permits us to borrow up to the lesser
of
the facility amount and the sum of 80% of the sum of our unsecured assets rated
higher than Baa3 or better by Moody’s and BBB- or better by Standard and Poor’s
plus our interest receivables plus 65% of our unsecured assets rated lower
than
Baa3 by Moody’s and BBB- from Standard and Poor’s. Up to 20% of the borrowings
under the facility may be in the form of standby letters of credit. At December
31, 2006, no balance was outstanding under this facility. The interest rate
varies from, in the case of LIBOR loans, from the adjusted LIBOR rate (as
defined in the agreement) plus between 1.50% to 2.50% depending upon our
leverage ratio (the ratio of consolidated total liability to consolidated
tangible net worth) or, in the case of base rate loans, from Commerce Bank’s
base rate plus between 0.50% and 1.50% also depending upon our leverage
ratio.
Pricing
Level
|
Total
Leverage Ratio
|
Adjusted
LIBOR Rate +
|
Base
Rate +
|
I
|
Less
than 7.00:1.00
|
1.50%
|
0.50%
|
II
|
Greater
than or equal to 7.00:1.00,
but
less than 8.00:1.00
|
1.75%
|
0.75%
|
III
|
Greater
than or equal to 8.00:1.00,
but
less than 9.00:1.00
|
2.00%
|
1.00%
|
IV
|
Greater
than or equal to 9.00:1.00,
but
less than 10.00:1.00
|
2.25%
|
1.25%
|
V
|
Greater
than or equal to 10.00:1.00
|
2.50%
|
1.50%
|
Stockholders’
Equity
Stockholders’
equity at December 31, 2006 was $317.6 million and included $6.0 million of
net
unrealized losses on our ABS-RMBS, CMBS and other ABS portfolio and $3.2 million
of unrealized losses on cash flow hedges, shown as a component of accumulated
other comprehensive loss. Stockholders’ equity at December 31, 2005 was
$195.3 million and included $22.4 million of net unrealized losses on securities
classified as available-for-sale, offset by $2.8 million of unrealized gains
on
cash flow hedges, shown as a component of accumulated other comprehensive loss.
The increase in stockholders’ equity during the year ended December 31, 2006 was
principally due to the completion of our initial public offering of 4,000,000
shares of our common stock (including 1,879,200 shares sold by certain selling
stockholders) at a price of $15.00 per share and the follow-on offering of
6,000,000 shares of common stock at a price of $16.50 per share. The offerings
generated net proceed after underwriting discounts and commissions of $27.3
million and $93.0 million, respectively.
As
a
result of our “available-for-sale” accounting treatment, unrealized fluctuations
in market values of certain assets do not impact our income determined in
accordance with GAAP, or our taxable income, but rather are reflected on our
consolidated balance sheets by changing the carrying value of the asset and
stockholders’ equity under “Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss).” By
accounting for our assets in this manner, we hope to provide useful information
to stockholders and creditors and to preserve flexibility to sell assets in
the
future without having to change accounting methods.
REIT
Taxable Income
We
calculate estimated REIT taxable income, which is a non-GAAP financial measure,
according to the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code. The following table
reconciles net income to estimated REIT taxable income for the periods presented
(in thousands):
Year
Ended December 31, 2006
|
Period
Ended
December
31, 2005
|
||||||
Net
income
|
$
|
15,606
|
$
|
10,908
|
|||
Adjustments:
|
|||||||
Share-based
compensation to related parties
|
368
|
2,709
|
|||||
Incentive
management fee expense to related party paid in shares
|
371
|
86
|
|||||
Capital
losses from the sale of available-for-sale securities
|
11,624
|
−
|
|||||
Accrued
and/or prepaid expenses
|
90
|
(86
|
)
|
||||
Removal
of nonconsolidating REIT subsidiary
|
(80
|
)
|
−
|
||||
Net
book to tax adjustment for the inclusion of our taxable Foreign
REIT subsidiaries
|
121
|
(876
|
)
|
||||
Amortization
of deferred debt issuance costs on CDO financings
|
(162
|
)
|
(71
|
)
|
|||
Estimated
REIT taxable income
|
$
|
27,938
|
$
|
12,670
|
We
believe that a presentation of estimated REIT taxable income provides useful
information to investors regarding our financial condition and results of
operations as this measurement is used to determine the amount of dividends
that
we are required to declare to our stockholders in order to maintain our status
as a REIT for federal income tax purposes. Since we, as a REIT, expect to make
distributions based on taxable earnings, we expect that our distributions may
at
times be more or less than our reported earnings. Total taxable income is the
aggregate amount of taxable income generated by us and by our domestic and
foreign taxable REIT subsidiaries. Estimated REIT taxable income excludes the
undistributed taxable income of our domestic TRS, if any such income exists,
which is not included in REIT taxable income until distributed to us. There
is
no requirement that our domestic TRS distribute its earning to us. Estimated
REIT taxable income, however, includes the taxable income of our foreign TRSs
because we will generally be required to recognize and report their taxable
income on a current basis. We use estimated REIT taxable income for this
purpose. Because not all companies use identical calculations, this presentation
of estimated REIT taxable income may not be comparable to other similarly-titled
measures of other companies.
In
order
to maintain our qualification as a REIT and to avoid corporate-level income
tax
on the income we distribute to our stockholders, we intend to make regular
quarterly distributions of all or substantially all of our net taxable income
to
holders of our common stock. This requirement can impact our liquidity and
capital resources.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
Through
December 31, 2006, our principal sources of funds were CDO financings totaling
$1.2 billion, the net proceeds of $214.8 million from our March 2005 private
placement, net proceeds of $27.3 million from our February 2006 public offering,
net proceeds of $93.0 million from our December 2006 follow-on offering, net
proceeds from our May 2006 and September 2006 trust preferred securities
issuances totaling $48.4 million, repurchase agreements totaling $120.5 million,
and an equipment leasing secured term facility totaling $84.7 million. We expect
to continue to borrow funds in the form of repurchase agreements to finance
our
commercial real estate loan portfolio and CMBS, through warehouse agreements
to
finance bank loans, other ABS, trust preferred securities and private equity
investments and through our secured term facility to finance our equipment
leases and notes, in each case prior to the execution of CDOs and other term
financing vehicles. The remaining capacity under our repurchase agreements
at
December 31, 2006 was $358.8 million.
Our
liquidity needs consist principally of funds to make investments, make
distributions to our stockholders and pay our operating expenses, including
our
management fees. Our ability to meet our liquidity needs will be subject to
our
ability to generate cash from operations and, with respect to our investments,
our ability to obtain additional debt financing and equity capital. Through
December 31, 2006, we have not experienced difficulty in obtaining debt
financing. We may increase our capital resources through offerings of equity
securities (possibly including common stock and one or more classes of preferred
stock), CDOs, trust preferred securities issuances or other forms of term
financing. Such financing will depend on market conditions. If we are unable
to
renew, replace or expand our sources of financing on substantially similar
terms, we may be unable to implement our investment strategies successfully
and
may be required to liquidate portfolio investments. If required, a sale of
portfolio investments could be at prices lower than the carrying value of such
assets, which would result in losses and reduced income.
We
held
cash and cash equivalents of $5.4 million at December 31, 2006.
In
August
2006, our subsidiary, RCC Real Estate SPE 2, LLC, entered into a master
repurchase agreement with Column Financial, Inc., a subsidiary of Credit Suisse
Securities (USA) LLC, to finance the purchase of commercial real estate loans.
At December 31, 2006, we had borrowed $54.5 million with a weighted average
current borrowing rate of LIBOR plus 1.07%, which was 6.42%. At December 31,
2006 the repurchase agreement was secured by commercial real estate loans with
an estimated fair value of $67.4 million and had a weighted average maturity
of
18 days. The net amount of risk was $13.3 million at December 31, 2006. The
agreement provides as follows:
·
|
Column
Financial will purchase assets from us and will transfer those assets
back
to us at a particular date or on demand;
|
·
|
the
maximum amount of repurchase transactions is $300.0 million;
|
·
|
each
repurchase transaction specifies its own terms, such as identification
of
the assets subject to the transaction, sales price, repurchase price,
rate
and term;
|
·
|
we
guaranteed RCC Real Estate SPE 2, LLC’s obligations under the repurchase
agreement to a maximum of $300.0 million;
|
·
|
we
must cover margin deficits by depositing cash or other assets acceptable
to Column Financial in its discretion.
|
It
is an
event of default under the agreement if:
·
|
we
fail to repurchase securities, we fail to pay any price differential
or we
fail to make any other payment after we reach an agreement with respect
to
a particular transaction;
|
·
|
we
fail to transfer purchased assets to Column Financial by a particular
date;
|
·
|
we
fail to comply with the margin and margin repayment requirements;
|
·
|
RCC
Real Estate SPE 2, LLC or any of its affiliates are in default under
any
form of indebtedness in an amount which exceeds $1.0 million ($5.0
million
in the case of our default);
|
·
|
we
assign the facility without obtaining the written consent of Column
Financial;
|
·
|
an
act of insolvency has occurred;
|
·
|
a
material adverse change in our operations, business or financial
condition
has occurred;
|
·
|
a
material impairment of the ability to avoid an event of default has
occurred;
|
·
|
we
breach any material representation, warranty or covenant set forth
in the
agreement;
|
·
|
a
change of control has occurred;
|
·
|
a
final judgment is rendered against us in an amount greater than $5.0
million ($1.0 million in the case of RCC Real Estate SPE 2, LLC)
and
remains unpaid for a period of 30 days;
|
·
|
any
governmental or regulatory authority takes action materially adverse
to
our business operations;
|
·
|
we
admit our inability to, or our intention not to, perform under the
agreement;
|
·
|
the
agreement fails to create a first priority security interest in the
purchased assets;
|
·
|
a
“going concern” or similar qualification is stated in our audited annual
financial statements; and
|
·
|
we
fail to qualify as a REIT.
|
Upon
an
event of default, Column Financial may accelerate the repurchase date for the
transaction and all income paid will belong to it. It may also sell the
securities or give us credit for the value of the securities on the date of
default, and we would remain liable for any deficit. We will also be liable
for
all costs, expenses and damages, including the costs of entering into or
terminating hedge transactions, of Column Financial, plus interest.
The
agreement also provides that we will:
·
|
maintain
tangible net worth greater than or equal to $125.0 million; and
|
·
|
maintain
a ratio of consolidated indebtedness to consolidated tangible net
worth
not to exceed 11:1.
|
Through
our subsidiary, RCC Real Estate, Inc., we have also entered into a master
repurchase agreement with Bear, Stearns International Limited to finance our
commercial real estate loan portfolio. As of December 31, 2006, we had $36.7
million outstanding under this agreement all of which was guaranteed, which
was
substantially lower than the outstanding balance at December 31, 2005 of
$80.8 million, all of which matured in less than 30 days. This decrease resulted
from the closing of Resource Real Estate Funding CDO 2006-1 in August 2006,
and
our use of the proceeds generated thereby to repay the outstanding borrowings.
The outstanding balance as of December 31, 2006 represented three loans. The
weighted average current borrowing rates were 6.43% and 5.51% at December 31,
2006 and 2005, respectively. At December 31, 2006 and 2005, borrowings under
the
repurchase agreement was secured by commercial real estate loans with an
estimated fair value of $52.0 million and $116.3 million, respectively, and
had
weighted average maturities of 17 and 17 days, respectively. The net amount
of
risk was $15.5 million and $36.0 million at December 31, 2006 and 2005,
respectively. The agreement provides as follows:
·
|
Bear,
Stearns International Limited, in its sole discretion, will purchase
assets from us, and will transfer those assets back to us at a particular
date or on demand;
|
·
|
the
maximum aggregate amount of outstanding repurchase transactions is
$150.0
million;
|
·
|
each
repurchase transaction will be entered into by agreement between
the
parties specifying the terms of the transaction, including identification
of the assets subject to the transaction, sale price, repurchase
price,
rate, term and margin maintenance requirements; and
|
·
|
we
have guaranteed RCC Real Estate’s obligations under the repurchase
agreement to a maximum of $150.0 million;
|
·
|
if
we control the servicing of the purchased assets, we must service
the
assets for the benefit of Bear, Stearns International Limited.
|
It
is an
event of default under the agreement if:
·
|
Bear,
Stearns International Limited is not granted a first priority security
interest in the assets;
|
·
|
we
fail to repurchase securities, we fail to pay any price differential
or we
fail to make any other payment after we reach an agreement with respect
to
a particular transaction;
|
·
|
any
governmental or regulatory authority takes any action materially
adverse
to our business operations;
|
·
|
Bear,
Stearns International Limited determines, in good faith,
|
-
|
that
there has been a material adverse change in our corporate structure,
financial condition or creditworthiness;
|
-
|
that
we will not meet or we have breached any of our obligations; or
|
-
|
that
a material adverse change in our financial condition may occur due
to
pending legal actions;
|
·
|
we
have commenced a proceeding, or had a proceeding commenced against
us,
under any bankruptcy, insolvency, reorganization or similar laws;
|
·
|
we
make a general assignment for the benefit of creditors;
|
·
|
we
admit in writing our inability to pay our debts as they become due;
|
·
|
we
have commenced a proceeding, or had a proceeding commenced against
us,
under the provisions of the Securities Investor Protection Act of
1970,
which we consent to or do not timely contest and which results in
the
entry of an order for relief, or is not dismissed within 15 days;
|
·
|
a
final judgment is rendered against us in an amount greater than $1.0
million and remains undischarged or unpaid for 90 days;
|
·
|
we
have defaulted or failed to perform under any other note, indenture,
loan,
guaranty, swap agreement or any other contract to which we are a
party
which results in:
|
-
|
a
final judgment involving the failure to pay an obligation in excess
of
$1.0 million or
|
-
|
a
final judgment permitting the acceleration of the maturity of obligations
in excess of $1.0 million by any other party to or beneficiary of
such
note, indenture, loan, guaranty, swap agreement or any other contract;
or
|
·
|
we
breach any representation, covenant or condition, fail to perform,
admit
inability to perform or state our intention not to perform our obligations
under the repurchase agreement or in respect to any repurchase
transaction.
|
Upon
an
event of default, Bear, Stearns International Limited may accelerate the
repurchase date for each transaction. Unless we have tendered the repurchase
price for the assets, Bear, Stearns International Limited may sell the assets
and apply the proceeds first to its costs and expenses in connection with our
breach, including legal fees; second, to the repurchase price of the assets;
and
third, to any of our other outstanding obligations.
The
repurchase agreement also provides that we shall not, without the prior written
consent of Bear, Stearns International Limited:
·
|
permit
our net worth at any time to be less than the sum of 80% of our net
worth
on the date of the agreement and 75% of the amount received by us
in
respect of any equity issuance after the date of the agreement;
|
·
|
permit
our net worth to decline by more than 15% in any calendar quarter
or more
than 30% during any trailing consecutive twelve month period;
|
·
|
permit
our ratio of total liabilities to net worth to exceed 14:1; or
|
·
|
permit
our consolidated net income, determined in accordance with GAAP,
to be
less than $1.00 during the period of any four consecutive calendar
months.
|
RCC
Real
Estate has received a waiver from Bear Stearns with respect to compliance with
the consolidated net income financial covenant. The waiver was required
due to our net loss during the three months ended September 30, 2006, which
was caused by the loss realized by us on the sale of the remainder of our
portfolio of agency ABS-RMBS. The waiver was effective through
January 31, 2007. As of the end of the waiver period, we were in compliance
with the covenant.
Through
our subsidiary, RCC Real Estate SPE, LLC, we have also entered into a master
repurchase agreement with Deutsche Bank AG, Cayman Islands Branch, an affiliate
of Deutsche Bank Securities, Inc. to finance our commercial real estate loan
portfolio. At December 31, 2005, we had $38.6 million of outstanding
borrowings, all of which matured in less than 30 days. We had no risk under
this
guarantee at December 31, 2006 and our maximum risk under this guaranty was
$30.0 million at December 31, 2005. The weighted average borrowing rate was
5.68% at December 31, 2005. At December 31, 2005, the repurchase
agreement was secured by commercial real estate loans with an estimated fair
value of $55.0 million and had a weighted average maturity of 18 days. The
net
amount of risk was $16.7 million at December 31, 2005. The agreement
provides as follows:
·
|
Deutsche
Bank will purchase assets from us and will transfer those assets
back to
us on a particular date;
|
·
|
the
maximum aggregate amount of outstanding repurchase transactions is
$300.0
million;
|
·
|
each
repurchase transaction will be entered into by written agreement
between
the parties including identification of the assets subject to the
transaction, sale price, repurchase price, rate, term and margin
maintenance requirements; and
|
·
|
we
must cover margin deficits by depositing cash or additional securities
acceptable to Deutsche Bank in its sole discretion.
|
·
|
we
guaranteed RCC Real Estate SPE, LLC’s obligations under the repurchase
agreement to a maximum of $30.0 million, which may be reduced based
upon
the amount of equity we have in commercial real estate loans held
on this
facility.
|
It
is an
event of default under the agreement if:
·
|
we
fail to repurchase or Deutsche Bank fails to transfer assets after
we
reach an agreement with respect to a particular transaction;
|
·
|
any
governmental, regulatory, or self-regulatory authority takes any
action
with has a material adverse effect on our financial condition or
business;
|
·
|
we
have commenced a proceeding under any bankruptcy, insolvency,
reorganization or similar laws;
|
·
|
we
have commenced a proceeding, or had a proceeding commenced against
us,
under the provisions of the Securities Investor Protection Act of
1970,
which we consent to or do not timely contest and results in the entry
of
an order for relief, or is not dismissed within 60 days;
|
·
|
we
make a general assignment for the benefit of creditors;
|
·
|
we
admit in writing our inability to pay our debts as they become due;
|
·
|
a
final judgment is rendered against us in an amount greater than $5.0
million and remains unpaid for a period of 60 days;
|
·
|
we
have defaulted or failed to perform under any note, indenture, loan
agreement, guaranty, swap agreement or any other contract agreement
or
transaction to which we are a party which results in:
|
-
|
the
failure to pay a monetary obligation in excess of $1 million or
|
-
|
the
acceleration of the maturity of obligations in excess of $1 million
by any
other party to a note, indenture, loan agreement, guaranty, swap
agreement
or other contract agreement; or
|
·
|
we
breach or fail to perform under the repurchase agreement.
|
If
we
default, Deutsche Bank may accelerate the repurchase date for each transaction.
Unless we have tendered the repurchase price for the assets, Deutsche Bank
may
sell the assets and apply the proceeds first to cover its actual out-of-pocket
costs and expenses; second to cover its actual out-of-pocket costs to cover
hedging transactions; third to the repurchase price of the assets; fourth to
pay
an exit fee and other of our obligations; and fifth, to return to us any excess.
We
may
terminate a repurchase transaction without cause upon written notice to Deutsche
Bank and the repayment of the repurchase price plus fees.
We
have
entered into master repurchase agreements with Credit Suisse Securities (USA)
LLC, Barclays Capital Inc., J.P. Morgan Securities Inc., Countrywide Securities
Corporation, Deutsche Bank Securities Inc., Morgan Stanley & Co.
Incorporated, Goldman Sachs & Co., Bear, Stearns International Limited
and UBS Securities LLC. As of December 31, 2006, we had $29.3 million
outstanding under our agreement with Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC to
finance our CMBS-private placement portfolio. Each such agreement is a standard
form providing as follows:
·
|
The
parties may from time to time enter into repurchase transactions.
The
agreement for a repurchase transaction may be oral or in writing.
None of
the master repurchase agreements specifies a maximum amount for repurchase
transactions with us.
|
·
|
Each
repurchase transaction will be entered into by agreement between
the
parties specifying the terms of the transaction, including identification
of the assets subject to the transaction, sale price, repurchase
price,
rate, term and margin maintenance requirements.
|
·
|
We
must cover margin deficits by depositing cash or additional securities
reasonably acceptable to our counterparty with it, but have the option
to
obtain payment from our counterparty of the amount by which the market
value of the securities subject to a transaction exceeds the applicable
margin amount for the transaction, either in cash or by delivery
of
securities.
|
·
|
We
are entitled to receive all income paid on or with respect to the
securities subject to a transaction, provided that the counterparty
may
apply income received to reduce our repurchase price.
|
It
is an
event of default under the agreement if:
-
|
we
fail to transfer or our counterparty fails to purchase securities
after we
reach an agreement with respect to a particular
transaction.
|
-
|
either
party fails to comply with the margin and margin repayment
requirements.
|
-
|
the
counterparty fails to pay to us or credit us with income from the
securities subject to a
transaction.
|
-
|
either
party commences a proceeding or has a proceeding commenced against
it,
under any bankruptcy, insolvency or similar laws; or
|
-
|
either
party shall admit its inability to, or intention not to, perform
any of
its obligations under the master repurchase agreement.
|
Upon
an
event of default, the non-defaulting party may accelerate the repurchase date
for the transaction and all income paid upon the securities will belong to
the
non-defaulting party. If we are the defaulting party, our counterparty may
sell
the securities or give us credit for the value of the securities on the date
of
default, and we would remain liable for any deficit. If our counterparty is
the
defaulting party, we may purchase replacement securities, or elect to be deemed
to have purchased replacement securities, with our counterparty being liable
for
the cost of the replacement securities or the amount by which the deemed
repurchase price exceeds the stated repurchase price. We may also, by tender
of
the repurchase price, be deemed to have the securities automatically transferred
to us. The defaulting party will also be liable to the non-defaulting party
for
all costs, expenses and damages, including the costs of entering into or
terminating hedge transactions, of the non-defaulting party, plus interest
at
the rate specified in the repurchase agreement.
The
master repurchase agreements may be terminated by either party without cause
upon written notice, but will remain in effect as to any transactions then
outstanding.
Our
repurchase agreement with Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC also provides
that
it will terminate if:
·
|
our
net asset value declines 20% on a monthly basis, 30% on a quarterly
basis,
40% on an annual basis, or 50% or more from the highest net asset
value
since the inception of the repurchase agreement;
|
·
|
we
fail to maintain a minimum net asset value of $100 million;
|
·
|
the
Manager ceases to be our manager;
|
·
|
we
fail to qualify as a REIT; or
|
·
|
we
fail to deliver specified documents, including financial statements
or
financial information due annually, quarterly or monthly, or an estimate
of net asset values.
|
In
December 2005, we entered into a $15.0 million corporate credit facility with
Commerce Bank, N.A. The facility was increased to $25.0 million in April 2006.
At December 31, 2006, no borrowings were outstanding under this facility.
In
March
2006, Resource Capital Funding, LLC, a special purpose entity whose sole member
is Resource TRS, Inc., our wholly-owned subsidiary, entered into a Receivables
Loan and Security Agreement as the borrower among LEAF Financial Corporation
as
the servicer, Black Forest Funding Corporation as the lender, Bayerische
Hypo-Und Vereinsbank AG, New York Branch as the agent, U.S. Bank National
Association, as the custodian and the agent’s bank, and Lyon Financial Services,
Inc. (d/b/a U.S. Bank Portfolio Services), as the backup servicer. This
agreement is a $100.0 million secured term credit facility used to finance
the
purchase of equipment leases and notes. At December 31, 2006, there was $84.7
million outstanding under the facility.
It
is an
event of default under the agreement if, among other events:
·
|
a
bankruptcy event occurs involving any of us, Resource TRS, Resource
Capital Funding, the originator or the servicer;
|
·
|
any
representation or warranty was false or incorrect;
|
·
|
Resource
Capital Funding or the servicer fails to perform any term, covenant
or
agreement under the agreement or any ancillary agreement in any material
respect;
|
·
|
Resource
Capital Funding, Resource TRS or we fail to pay any principal of
or
premium or interest on any of the debt under the agreement in an
amount in
excess of $10.0 million when the same becomes due and payable;
|
·
|
Resource
Capital Funding or the servicer suffer any material adverse change
to its
financial condition;
|
·
|
the
lender fails to have a valid, perfected, first priority security
interest
in the pledged assets except for certain de minimus exceptions;
|
·
|
a
change of control of us, Resource TRS, Resource Capital Funding,
the
servicer or the originator occurs;
|
·
|
the
facility amount (as calculated under the agreement) exceeds certain
financial tests set forth in the agreement; or
|
·
|
Resource
America’s tangible net worth falls below a formula defined in the
agreement.
|
Upon
a
default, the program will terminate and Resource Capital Funding must cease
purchasing receivables from Resource TRS and the lender may declare all loans
made and any yield or fees due thereon to be immediately due and payable.
In
October 2006, Resource Capital Funding II, LLC, a special purpose entity whose
sole member is Resource TRS, entered into a Receivables Loan and Security
Agreement as the borrower among LEAF Financial Corporation as the servicer,
Morgan Stanley Bank as the lender, U.S. Bank National Association, as the
custodian and the lender’s bank, and Lyon Financial Services, Inc. (d/b/a U.S.
Bank Portfolio Services), as the backup servicer. This agreement provided a
$100.0 million secured term borrowing facility for the first 12 months and
a
$250.0 million secured term credit facility thereafter to finance the purchase
of equipment leases and notes. In December 2006, this facility was transferred
to Resource America, Inc.
We
had a
warehouse facility with Citigroup Financial Products, Inc. pursuant to which
it
would provide up to $200.0 million of financing for the acquisition of bank
loans to be sold to Apidos CDO III. On May 9, 2006, we terminated our
Apidos CDO III warehouse agreement with Citigroup Global Markets Inc. and the
warehouse funding liability was replaced with the issuance of long-term debt
by
Apidos CDO III.
We
anticipate that, upon repayment of each borrowing under a repurchase agreement,
we will immediately use the collateral released by the repayment as collateral
for borrowing under a new repurchase agreement. We also anticipate that our
borrowings under any warehouse credit facility will be refinanced through the
issuance of CDOs. Our leverage ratio may vary as a result of the various funding
strategies we use. As of December 31, 2006 and 2005, our leverage ratio was
4.6
times and 9.4 times, respectively. This decrease was primarily due to reducing
borrowings using the proceeds received from our initial public offering in
February 2006 and follow-on offering in December 2006 and the sale of our agency
ABS-RMBS portfolio during 2006.
During
the quarter ended December 31, 2006, we declared a dividend of $7.7 million,
or
$0.43 per common share, which was paid on January 4, 2007 to stockholders of
record as of December 15, 2006.
Contractual
Obligations and Commitments
The
table
below summarizes our contractual obligations as of December 31, 2006. The table
below excludes contractual commitments related to our derivatives, which we
discuss in Item 7A − “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market
Risk,” and the management agreement that we have with our Manager, which we
discuss in Item 1 − “Business” − and Item 13 − “Certain Relationships and
Related Transactions” because
those contracts do not have fixed and determinable payments.
Contractual
commitments
(dollars
in thousands)
|
||||||||||||||||
Payments
due by period
|
||||||||||||||||
Total
|
Less
than 1 year
|
1
-
3 years
|
3
-
5 years
|
More
than 5 years
|
||||||||||||
Repurchase
agreements(1)
|
$
|
120,457
|
$
|
120,457
|
$
|
−
|
$
|
−
|
$
|
−
|
||||||
CDOs
|
1,207,175
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
1,207,175
|
|||||||||||
Secured
term facility
|
84,673
|
−
|
−
|
84,673
|
−
|
|||||||||||
Junior
subordinated debentures held by unconsolidated
trusts
that
issued trust
preferred
securities
|
51,548
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
51,548
|
|||||||||||
Base
management fees(2)
|
4,985
|
4,985
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
|||||||||||
Total
|
$
|
1,468,838
|
$
|
125,442
|
$
|
−
|
$
|
84,673
|
$
|
1,258,723
|
(1)
|
Includes
accrued interest of $322,000.
|
(2)
|
Calculated
only for the next 12 months based on our current equity, as defined
in our
management agreement.
|
At
December 31, 2006, we had 12 interest rate swap contracts and five forward
interest rate swap contracts with a notional value of $224.9 million. These
contracts are fixed-for-floating interest rate swap agreements under which
we
contracted to pay a fixed rate of interest for the term of the hedge and will
receive a floating rate of interest. As of December 31, 2006, the average fixed
pay rate of our interest rate hedges was 5.33% and our receive rate was
one-month LIBOR, or 5.35%. As of December 31, 2006, the average fixed pay rate
of our forward interest rate hedges was 5.19% and our receive rate was one-month
and three-month LIBOR. Four of our forward interest rate swap contracts became
effective in February 2007 and one will become effective in March
2007.
At
December 31, 2006, we also had one interest rate cap with a notional value
of
$15.0 million. This cap reduces our exposure to the variability in future cash
flows attributable to changes in LIBOR.
Off-Balance
Sheet Arrangements
As
of
December 31, 2006, we did not maintain any relationships with unconsolidated
entities or financial partnerships, such as entities often referred to as
structured finance or special purpose entities or variable interest entities,
established for the purpose of facilitating off-balance sheet arrangements
or
contractually narrow or limited purposes. Further, as of December 31, 2006,
we
had not guaranteed any obligations of unconsolidated entities or entered into
any commitment or intent to provide additional funding to any such
entities.
Recent
Developments
On
January 8, 2007, we entered into an agreement with a CDO issuer to purchase
10,000 preference shares in the CDO. The agreement provides for guarantees
by us
on the first $10.0 million of losses on a portfolio of bank loans. This
guarantee, secured by a $5.0 million cash deposit, expires upon the closing
of
the associated CDO which is expected in the second quarter of 2007.
On
January 8, 2007, in connection with our December 2006 follow-on offering, our
underwriters exercised their over-allotment option with respect to 650,000
shares of 900,000 shares available, generating net proceeds of $10.1 million.
These proceeds were used to repay debt under our repurchase
agreements.
On
March
20, 2007, our board of directors declared a quarterly distribution of $0.39
per
share of common stock, $9.7 million in the aggregate, which will be paid on
April 16, 2007 to stockholders of record as of March 30, 2007.
On
January 13, 2007, the warrants issued as part of a special dividend paid on
January 13, 2006 became exercisable. As of March 23, 2007, 324,878 warrants
had
been exercised which resulted in our receipt of net proceeds of $4.9
million.
Critical
Accounting Policies and Estimates
Our
consolidated financial statements are prepared by management in accordance
with
GAAP. Note 3 to our financial statements, “Summary of Significant Accounting
Policies,” includes a detailed description of our significant accounting
policies. Our significant accounting policies are fundamental to understanding
our financial condition and results of operations because some of these policies
require that we make significant estimates and assumptions that may affect
the
value of our assets or liabilities and our financial results. We believe that
certain of our policies are critical because they require us to make difficult,
subjective and complex judgments about matters that are inherently uncertain.
The critical policies summarized below relate to classifications of investment
securities, revenue recognition, accounting for derivative financial instruments
and hedging activities, and stock-based compensation. We have reviewed these
accounting policies with our board of directors and believe that all of the
decisions and assessments upon which our financial statements are based were
reasonable at the time made based upon information available to us at the time.
We rely on the Manager’s experience and analysis of historical and current
market data in order to arrive at what we believe to be reasonable estimates.
Classifications
of Investment Securities
Statement
of Financial Accounting Standards, or SFAS, No. 115, “Accounting for
Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities,” or SFAS 115, requires us to
classify our investment portfolio as either trading investments,
available-for-sale investments or held-to-maturity investments. Although we
generally plan to hold most of our investments to maturity, we may, from time
to
time, sell any of our investments due to changes in market conditions or in
accordance with our investment strategy. Accordingly, SFAS 115 requires us
to
classify all of our investment securities as available-for-sale. We report
all
investments classified as available-for-sale at fair value, based on market
prices provided by dealers, with unrealized gains and losses reported as a
component of accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) in stockholders’
equity. As of December 31, 2006, we had aggregate unrealized losses on our
available-for-sale securities of $7.1 million, which if not recovered, may
result in the recognition of future losses.
We
evaluate our available-for-sale investments for other-than-temporary impairment
charges on available-for-sale securities under SFAS 115 in accordance with
Emerging Issues Task Force, or EITF, 03-1, “The Meaning of Other-Than-Temporary
Impairment and its Application to Certain Investments.” SFAS 115 and EITF 03-1
requires an investor to determine when an investment is considered impaired
(i.e., decline in fair value below its amortized cost), evaluate whether the
impairment is other than temporary (i.e., the investment value will not be
recovered over its remaining life), and, if the impairment is other than
temporary, recognize an impairment loss equal to the difference between the
investment’s cost and its fair value. The guidance also includes accounting
considerations subsequent to the recognition of other-than-temporary impairment
and requires certain disclosures about unrealized losses that have not been
recognized as other-than-temporary impairments. EITF 03-1 also includes
disclosure requirements for investments in an unrealized loss position for
which
other-than-temporary impairments have not been recognized.
We
record
investment securities transactions on the trade date. We record purchases of
newly issued securities when all significant uncertainties regarding the
characteristics of the securities are removed, generally shortly before
settlement date. We determine realized gains and losses on investment securities
on the specific identification method.
Repurchase
Agreements
As
a
financing source, we utilize repurchase agreements to finance our commercial
real estate loans and CMBS-private placement portfolios. Furthermore, we intend
to use repurchase agreements as a short-term financing source for our commercial
real estate loan portfolio prior to the execution of a CDO. Although structured
as a sale and purchase obligation, a repurchase agreement operates as a
financing arrangement under which we pledge our securities as collateral to
secure a loan which is equal in value to a specified percentage of the estimated
fair value of the pledged collateral, while we retain beneficial ownership
of
the pledged collateral. We carry these repurchase agreements at their
contractual amounts, as specified in the respective agreements. We recognize
interest expense on all borrowings on an accrual basis.
We
have
from time to time purchased debt investments from a counterparty and
subsequently financed the acquisition of those debt investments through
repurchase agreements with the same counterparty. We currently record the
acquisition of the debt investments as assets and the related repurchase
agreements as financing liabilities gross on the consolidated balance sheets.
Interest income earned on the debt investments and interest expense incurred
on
the repurchase obligations are reported gross on our consolidated income
statements. However, under an interpretation of SFAS No. 140, “Accounting for
Transfers and Servicing of Financial Assets and Extinguishments of Liabilities”
such transactions may not qualify as a purchase by us. We believe, and it is
industry practice, that we are accounting for these transactions in an
appropriate manner. However, the result of this technical interpretation would
prevent us from presenting the debt investments and repurchase agreements and
the related interest income and interest expense on a gross basis on our
financial statements. Instead, we would present the net investment in these
transactions with the counterparty and a derivative with the corresponding
change in fair value of the derivative being recorded through earnings. The
value of the derivative would reflect changes in the value of the underlying
debt investments and changes in the value of the underlying credit provided
by
the counterparty. As of December 31, 2006, we had one transaction where debt
instruments were financed with the same counterparty.
Interest
Income Recognition
We
accrue
interest income on our MBS, commercial real estate loans, other ABS, bank loans,
equipment leases and notes and private equity investments using the effective
yield method based on the actual coupon rate and the outstanding principal
amount of the underlying mortgages or other assets. We amortize or accrete
into
interest income premiums and discounts over the lives of the investments also
using the effective yield method (or a method that approximates effective
yield), adjusted for the effects of estimated prepayments based on SFAS
No. 91, “Accounting for Nonrefundable Fees and Costs Associated with
Originating or Acquiring Loans and Initial Direct Costs of Leases.” For
investments purchased at par, the effective yield is the contractual interest
rate on the investment. If the investment is purchased at a discount or at
a
premium, the effective yield is computed based on the contractual interest
rate
increased for the accretion of a purchase discount or decreased for the
amortization of a purchase premium. The effective yield method requires that
we
make estimates of future prepayment rates for our investments that can be
contractually prepaid before their contractual maturity date so that the
purchase discount can be accreted, or the
purchase
premium can be amortized, over the estimated remaining life of the investment.
The prepayment estimates that we use directly impact the estimated remaining
lives or our investments. We review and adjust our prepayment estimates as
of
each quarter end or more frequently if we become aware of any material
information that would lead us to believe that an adjustment is necessary.
If
our estimate of prepayments is incorrect, we may have to adjust the amortization
or accretion of premiums and discounts, which would have an impact on future
income.
We
use
both our experience and judgment and third-party prepayment projections when
developing our estimates of future prepayment rates. Prepayment rates for
residential mortgage loans and their related ABS-RMBS are very difficult to
predict accurately because the underlying borrowers have the option to prepay
their mortgages at any time before the contractual maturity date of their
mortgages, generally without incurring any prepayment penalties. Prepayment
models attempt to predict borrower behavior under different interest rate
scenarios and the related projected prepayment rates. The experience of the
Manager’s managers indicates that prepayment models are less accurate during
periods when there are material interest rate changes and material changes
in
the shape of the interest rate yield curves.
If
we
experience material differences between our projected prepayment rates and
the
actual prepayment rates that we realize, the remaining estimated lives of our
investments may change and result in greater earnings volatility and/or lower
net income than originally estimated. We may mitigate this risk by minimizing
the amount of purchase premium and purchase discount on our investment portfolio
and by purchasing investments where the underlying borrowers have no or fewer
prepayment options. As of December 31, 2006, the aggregate amount of unamortized
purchase premium on our ABS-RMBS portfolio totaled approximately $125,000 and
the aggregate amount of unamortized purchase discount totaled approximately
$2.8
million. Net purchase discount and purchase premium accretion totaled
approximately $726,000 for the year ended December 31, 2006.
Accounting
for Derivative Financial Instruments and Hedging Activities
Our
policies permit us to enter into derivative contracts, including interest rate
swaps and interest rate caps forwards, as a means of mitigating our interest
rate risk on forecasted interest expense associated with the benchmark rate
on
forecasted rollover/reissuance of repurchase agreements or the interest rate
repricing of repurchase agreements, or other similar hedged items, for a
specified future time period.
As
of
December 31, 2006, we had engaged in 12 interest rate swaps, five forward
interest swaps and one interest rate cap with a notional value of $239.9 million
and a fair value of ($3.1) million to seek to mitigate our interest rate risk
for specified future time periods as defined in the terms of the hedge
contracts. The contracts we have entered into have been designated as cash
flow
hedges and are evaluated at inception and on an ongoing basis in order to
determine whether they qualify for hedge accounting under SFAS No. 133,
“Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities,” as amended and
interpreted. The hedge instrument must be highly effective in achieving
offsetting changes in the hedged item attributable to the risk being hedged
in
order to qualify for hedge accounting. A hedge instrument is highly effective
if
changes in the fair value of the derivative provide an offset to at least 80%
and not more than 125% of the changes in fair value or cash flows of the hedged
item attributable to the risk being hedged. The futures and interest rate swap
contracts are carried on the consolidated balance sheets at fair value. Any
ineffectiveness which arises during the hedging relationship must be recognized
in interest expense during the period in which it arises. Before the end of
the
specified hedge time period, the effective portion of all contract gain and
losses (whether realized or unrealized) is recorded in other comprehensive
income or loss. Realized gains and losses on futures contracts are reclassified
into earnings as an adjustment to interest expense during the specified hedge
time period. Realized gains and losses on the interest rate hedges are
reclassified into earnings as an adjustment to interest expense during the
period after the swap repricing date through the remaining maturity of the
swap.
For taxable income purposes, realized gains and losses on futures and interest
rate cap and swap contracts are reclassified into earnings over the term of
the
hedged transactions as designated for tax.
We
are
not required to account for derivative contracts using hedge accounting as
described above. If we decided not to designate the derivative contracts as
hedges and to monitor their effectiveness as hedges, or if we entered into
other
types of financial instruments that did not meet the criteria to be designated
as hedges, changes in the fair values of these instruments would be recorded
in
the statement of operations, potentially resulting in increased volatility
in
our earnings.
Income
Taxes
We
expect
to operate in a manner that will allow us to qualify and be taxed as a REIT
and
to comply with the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code with respect thereto.
A REIT is generally not subject to federal income tax on that portion of its
REIT taxable income which is distributed to its stockholders, provided, that
at
least 90% of REIT taxable income is distributed and certain other requirements
are met. If we fail to meet these requirements and do not qualify for certain
statutory relief provisions, we would be subject to federal income tax. We
have
a wholly-owned domestic subsidiary, Resource TRS, that we and Resource TRS
have
elected to be treated as a taxable REIT subsidiary. For financial reporting
purposes, current and deferred taxes are provided for on the portion of earnings
recognized by us with respect to our interest in Resource TRS, because it is
taxed as a regular subchapter C corporation under the provisions of the Internal
Revenue Code. During the year ended December 31, 2006, we recorded a $67,000
provision for income taxes related to earnings for Resource TRS. This provision
is included in general and administrative expense on our Consolidated Statement
of Operations. During the period ended December 31, 2005, no such provision
was
recorded.
Apidos
CDO I and Apidos CDO III, our foreign TRSs, are organized as exempted companies
incorporated with limited liability under the laws of the Cayman Islands, and
are generally exempt from federal and state income tax at the corporate level
because their activities in the United States are limited to trading in stock
and securities for their own account. Therefore, despite their status as TRSs,
they generally will not be subject to corporate tax on their earnings and no
provision from income taxes is required; however because they are “controlled
foreign corporations,” we will generally be required to include their current
taxable income in our calculation of REIT taxable income.
Loans
Our
investments in corporate leveraged loans and commercial real estate loans are
held for investment and, therefore, we record them on our consolidated balance
sheets initially at their purchase price less any origination fees applied
at
closing and subsequently account for them based on their outstanding principal
plus or minus unamortized premiums or discounts. In certain instances when
the
credit fundamentals underlying a particular loan have changed in such a manner
that our expected return on investment may decrease, we may sell a loan held
for
investment. Once the determination has been made that we will no longer hold
the
loan for investment, we will identify the loan as a “loan held for sale” and
will account for it at the lower of amortized cost or market value.
Direct
Financing Leases and Notes
We
invest
in small- and middle-ticket equipment leases and notes. Investments in leases
are recorded in accordance with SFAS No. 13, “Accounting for Leases,” as
amended and interpreted. Direct financing leases and notes transfer
substantially all benefits and risks of equipment ownership to the customer.
Our
investment in direct financing leases consists of the sum of the total future
minimum lease payments receivable, less unearned finance income. Unearned
finance income, which we recognize over the term of the lease and financing
by
utilizing the effective interest method, represents the excess of the total
future minimum lease payments and contract payments over the cost of the related
equipment. Our investment in notes receivable consists of the sum of the total
future minimum loan payments receivable less unearned finance income.
Loan
Interest Income Recognition
Interest
income on loans includes interest at stated rates adjusted for amortization
or
accretion of premiums and discounts. Premiums and discounts are amortized or
accreted into income using the effective yield method. When we purchase a loan
or pool of loans at a discount, we consider the provisions of the American
Institute of Certified Public Accountants Statement of Position 03-3 “Accounting
for Certain Loans or Debt Securities Acquired in a Transfer” to evaluate whether
all or a portion of the discount represents accretable yield. If a loan with
a
premium or discount is prepaid, we immediately recognize the unamortized portion
as a decrease or increase to interest income.
Stock
Based Compensation
Pursuant
to our 2005 stock incentive plan, we granted 345,000 shares of restricted stock
and options to purchase 651,666 shares of common stock to the Manager. Holders
of the restricted shares have all of the rights of a stockholder, including
the
right to vote and receive dividends. We account for the restricted stock and
stock options granted in accordance with the consensus in Issue 1 of EITF 96-18,
“Accounting for Equity Instruments That Are Issued to Other Than Employees for
Acquiring, or in Conjunction with Selling, Goods or Services,” and SFAS
No. 123, “Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation.” During 2006, we
continued to apply the provisions of EITF 96-18, but effective January 1,
2006, we also adopted the provisions of SFAS No. 123(R) “Share-Based
Payment.” Under SFAS No. 123(R), our compensation expense for options is
accounted for using a fair-value-based method with the (non-cash) compensation
expense being recorded in the financial statements over the vesting period.
We
elected to use the modified prospective transition method as permitted by SFAS
No. 123(R) and, therefore, have not restated financial results for prior
periods. The adoption of SFAS No. 123(R) did not have any significant
impact on prior periods. In accordance with EITF 96-18, we recorded the stock
and options in stockholders’ equity at fair value through an increase to
additional paid-in-capital and an off-setting entry to deferred equity
compensation (a contra-equity account). We are amortizing the deferred
compensation over a three year graded vesting period with the amortization
expense reflected as equity compensation expense. The unvested stock and options
are adjusted quarterly to reflect changes in fair value as performance under
the
agreement is completed. We reflect change in fair value in stockholders’ equity
in the equity compensation expense recognized in that quarter and in future
quarters until the stock and options are fully vested.
We
also
issued 4,000 and 4,224 shares of stock to our directors on March 8, 2005
and March 8, 2006, respectively. The stock awards vest in full one year
after the date of the grant. We account for this issuance using the fair value
based methodology prescribed by SFAS No. 123(R). Pursuant to SFAS
No. 123(R), we measured the fair value of the award on the grant date and
recorded this value in stockholders’ equity through an increase to additional
paid-in capital and an offsetting entry to deferred equity compensation. This
amount is not remeasured under the fair value-based method. The deferred
compensation is amortized and included in equity compensation expense.
Incentive
Compensation
Our
management agreement with the Manager also provides for incentive compensation
if our financial performance exceeds certain benchmarks. Under the management
agreement, the incentive compensation will be paid up to 75% in cash and at
least 25% in stock. The cash portion of the incentive fee is accrued and
expensed during the period for which it is calculated and earned. In accordance
with SFAS No. 123(R) and EITF 96-18, the restricted stock portion of the
incentive fee is also accrued and expensed during the period for which it is
calculated and earned. Shares granted in connection with the incentive fee
will
vest immediately. For the year ended December 31, 2006, the Manager received
incentive management compensation of $1.1 million which was comprised of
$840,000 in cash and $280,000 in stock.
Variable
Interest Entities
In
December 2003, the Financial Accounting Standards Board, or FASB, issued FIN
46-R. FIN 46-R addresses the application of Accounting Research Bulletin No.
51,
‘‘Consolidated Financial Statements,’’ to a variable interest entity, or VIE,
and requires that the assets, liabilities and results of operations of a VIE
be
consolidated into the financial statements of the enterprise that has a
controlling financial interest in it. The interpretation provides a framework
for determining whether an entity should be evaluated for consolidation based
on
voting interests or significant financial support provided to the entity which
we refer to as variable interests. We consider all counterparties to a
transaction to determine whether a counterparty is a VIE and, if so, whether
our
involvement with the entity results in a variable interest in the entity. We
perform analyses to determine whether we are the primary beneficiary. As of
December 31, 2006, we determined that Resource Real Estate Funding CDO 2006-1,
Ischus CDO II, Apidos CDO I and Apidos CDO III were VIEs and that we were the
primary beneficiary of the VIEs. We own 100% of the equity interests of our
four
CDOs and, accordingly, we consolidated these entities.
Recent
Accounting Pronouncements
In
February 2007, the Financial Accounting Standards Board, or FASB issued SFAS
No.
159, “The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities −
Including an amendment of FASB Statement No. 115, or SFAS 159. SFAS 159 permits
entities to choose to measure many financial instruments and certain other
items
at fair value. This statement is effective for fiscal years beginning after
November 15, 2007. We are required to adopt SFAS 159 in the first quarter of
2008 and are currently evaluating the impact that SFAS 159 will have on our
consolidated financial statements.
In
September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157 “Fair Value Measurements,” or
SFAS 157. SFAS 157 clarifies the definition of fair value, establishes a
framework for measuring fair value in GAAP and expands the disclosure of fair
value measurements. This statement is effective for fiscal years beginning
after
November 15, 2007 and interim periods within those fiscal years. We are
currently determining the effect, if any, the adoption of SFAS 157 will have
on
our financial statements.
In
September 2006, the Securities and Exchange Commission staff issued Staff
Accounting Bulletin No. 108, “Considering the Effects of Prior Year
Misstatements when Quantifying Misstatements in Current Year Financial
Statements,” or SAB 108. SAB 108 provides guidance for how errors should be
evaluated to assess materiality from a quantitative perspective. SAB 108 permits
companies to initially apply its provisions by either restating prior financial
statements or recording the cumulative effect of initially applying the approach
as adjustments to the carrying values of assets and liabilities as of
January 1, 2006 with an offsetting adjustment to retained earnings. SAB 108
is required to be adopted for fiscal years ending after November 30, 2006
and did not have a material effect on our financial statements.
In
July
2006, the FASB issued Interpretation No. 48, or FIN 48, “Accounting for
Uncertainty in Income Taxes-An Interpretation of SFAS 109.” FIN 48 clarifies the
accounting for uncertainty in income taxes by creating a framework for how
companies should recognize, measure, present and disclose in their financial
statements uncertain tax positions that they have taken or expect to take in
a
tax return. FIN 48 is effective for fiscal years beginning after
December 15, 2006 and is required to be adopted by us beginning in the
first quarter of fiscal 2007. Although we will continue to evaluate the
application of FIN 48, we do not expect that adoption will have a material
effect on our financial statements.
Inflation
Virtually
all of our assets and liabilities are interest rate sensitive in nature. As
a
result, interest rates and other factors influence our performance far more
so
than does inflation. Changes in interest rates do not necessarily correlate
with
inflation rates or changes in inflation rates. Our financial statements are
prepared in accordance with GAAP and our distributions are determined by our
board of directors based primarily by our net income as calculated for tax
purposes; in each case, our activities and balance sheet are measured with
reference to historical cost and/or fair market value without considering
inflation.
As
of
December 31, 2006 and 2005, the primary component of our market risk was
interest rate risk, as described below. While we do not seek to avoid risk
completely, we do seek to assume risk that can be quantified from historical
experience, to actively manage that risk, to earn sufficient compensation to
justify assuming that risk and to maintain capital levels consistent with the
risk we undertake or to which we are exposed.
Prepayment
Risk
Prepayments
are the full or partial repayment of principal prior to the original term to
maturity of a mortgage loan and typically occur due to refinancing of the
mortgage loan. Prepayment rates for existing ABS-RMBS generally increase when
prevailing interest rates fall below the market rate existing when the
underlying mortgages were originated. Prepayments of ABS-RMBS could harm our
results of operations in several ways. Some adjustable-rate mortgages underlying
our adjustable-rate agency ABS-RMBS may bear initial “teaser” interest rates
that are lower than their “fully-indexed” rates, which refers to the applicable
index rates plus a margin. In the event that such an adjustable-rate mortgage
is
prepaid prior to or soon after the time of adjustment to a fully-indexed rate,
the holder of the related mortgage-backed security would have held such security
while it was less profitable and lost the opportunity to receive interest at
the
fully-indexed rate over the expected life of the adjustable-rate mortgage-backed
security. Although we currently do not own any adjustable-rate agency ABS-RMBS
with “teaser” rates, we may obtain some in the future which would expose us to
this prepayment risk. Additionally, we currently own ABS-RMBS that were
purchased at a premium. The prepayment of such ABS-RMBS at a rate faster than
anticipated would result in a write-off of any remaining capitalized premium
amount and a consequent reduction of our net interest income by such amount.
Finally, in the event that we are unable to acquire new ABS-RMBS to replace
the
prepaid ABS-RMBS, our financial condition, cash flow and results of operations
could be negatively impacted.
Effect
on Fair Value
Another
component of interest rate risk is the effect changes in interest rates will
have on the market value of our assets. We face the risk that the market value
of our assets will increase or decrease at different rates than that of our
liabilities, including our hedging instruments.
We
primarily assess our interest rate risk by estimating the duration of our assets
and the duration of our liabilities. Duration essentially measures the market
price volatility of financial instruments as interest rates change. We generally
calculate duration using various financial models and empirical data. Different
models and methodologies can produce different duration numbers for the same
securities.
The
following sensitivity analysis tables show, at December 31, 2006 and 2005,
the
estimated impact on the fair value of our interest rate-sensitive investments
and liabilities of changes in interest rates, assuming rates instantaneously
fall 100 basis points and rise 100 basis points (dollars in thousands):
December
31, 2006
|
||||||||||
Interest
rates
fall
100
basis
points
|
Unchanged
|
Interest
rates
rise
100
basis
points
|
||||||||
ABS-RMBS,
CMBS and other ABS(1)
|
||||||||||
Fair
value
|
$
|
37,962
|
$
|
35,900
|
$
|
34,036
|
||||
Change
in fair value
|
$
|
2,062
|
$
|
−
|
$
|
(1,864
|
)
|
|||
Change
as a percent of fair value
|
5.74
|
%
|
−
|
5.19
|
%
|
|||||
Repurchase
and warehouse agreements (2)
|
||||||||||
Fair
value
|
$
|
205,130
|
$
|
205,130
|
$
|
205,130
|
||||
Change
in fair value
|
$
|
−
|
$
|
−
|
$
|
−
|
||||
Change
as a percent of fair value
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
|||||||
Hedging
instruments
|
||||||||||
Fair
value
|
$
|
(14,493
|
)
|
$
|
(2,904
|
)
|
$
|
7,144
|
||
Change
in fair value
|
$
|
(11,589
|
)
|
$
|
−
|
$
|
10,048
|
|||
Change
as a percent of fair value
|
n/m
|
−
|
n/m
|
December
31, 2005
|
||||||||||
Interest
rates
fall
100
basis
points
|
Unchanged
|
Interest
rates
rise
100
basis
points
|
||||||||
Hybrid
adjustable-rate agency ABS-RMBS, ABS-RMBS, CMBS
and other ABS(1)
|
||||||||||
Fair
value
|
$
|
1,067,628
|
$
|
1,038,878
|
$
|
1,011,384
|
||||
Change
in fair value
|
$
|
28,750
|
$
|
−
|
$
|
(27,494
|
)
|
|||
Change
as a percent of fair value
|
2.77
|
%
|
−
|
2.65
|
%
|
|||||
Repurchase
and warehouse agreements (2)
|
||||||||||
Fair
value
|
$
|
1,131,238
|
$
|
1,131,238
|
$
|
1,131,238
|
||||
Change
in fair value
|
$
|
−
|
$
|
−
|
$
|
−
|
||||
Change
as a percent of fair value
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
|||||||
Hedging
instruments
|
||||||||||
Fair
value
|
$
|
(4,651
|
)
|
$
|
3,006
|
$
|
4,748
|
|||
Change
in fair value
|
$
|
(7,657
|
)
|
$
|
−
|
$
|
1,742
|
|||
Change
as a percent of fair value
|
n/m
|
−
|
n/m
|
(1)
|
Includes
the fair value of other available-for-sale investments that are sensitive
to interest rate changes.
|
(2)
|
The
fair value of the repurchase agreements and warehouse agreements
would not
change materially due to the short-term nature of these
instruments.
|
For
purposes of the tables, we have excluded our investments with variable interest
rates that are indexed to LIBOR. Because the variable rates on these instruments
are short-term in nature, we are not subject to material exposure to movements
in fair value as a result of changes in interest rates.
It
is
important to note that the impact of changing interest rates on fair value
can
change significantly when interest rates change beyond 100 basis points from
current levels. Therefore, the volatility in the fair value of our assets could
increase significantly when interest rates change beyond 100 basis points from
current levels. In addition, other factors impact the fair value of our interest
rate-sensitive investments and hedging instruments, such as the shape of the
yield curve, market expectations as to future interest rate changes and other
market conditions. Accordingly, in the event of changes in actual interest
rates, the change in the fair value of our assets would likely differ from
that
shown above and such difference might be material and adverse to our
stockholders.
Risk
Management
To
the
extent consistent with maintaining our status as a REIT, we seek to manage
our
interest rate risk exposure to protect our portfolio of ABS-RMBS and related
debt against the effects of major interest rate changes. We generally seek
to
manage our interest rate risk by:
·
|
monitoring
and adjusting, if necessary, the reset index and interest rate related
to
our mortgage-backed securities and our borrowings;
|
·
|
attempting
to structure our borrowing agreements for our ABS-RMBS to have a
range of
different maturities, terms, amortizations and interest rate adjustment
periods; and
|
·
|
using
derivatives, financial futures, swaps, options, caps, floors and
forward
sales, to adjust the interest rate sensitivity of our ABS-RMBS and
our
borrowing.
|
Report
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
Board
of
Directors and Stockholders of
Resource
Capital Corp.
We
have
audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Resource Capital Corp.
and subsidiaries (the “Company”) as of December 31, 2006 and 2005, and the
related consolidated statements of operations, changes in stockholders’ equity,
and cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2006 and the period from March
8,
2005 (Date Operations Commenced) to December 31, 2005. These financial
statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our
responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based
on
our audits.
We
conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we
plan
and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the
financial statements are free of material misstatement. The Company is not
required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal
control over financial reporting. Our audits included consideration of internal
control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures
that
are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing
an
opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial
reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes
examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures
in
the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and
significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall
financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a
reasonable basis for our opinion.
In
our
opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly,
in all material respects, the financial position of Resource Capital Corp.
and
subsidiaries as of December 31, 2006 and 2005, and the results of their
operations, and their cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2006 and the
period from March 8, 2005 (Date Operations Commenced) to December 31, 2005, in
conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States
of
America.
/s/
Grant
Thornton LLP
New
York,
New York
March
23,
2007
RESOURCE
CAPITAL CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS
(in
thousands, except share and per share data)
December
31,
|
|||||||
2006
|
2005
|
||||||
ASSETS
|
|||||||
Cash and cash equivalents
|
$
|
5,354
|
$
|
17,729
|
|||
Restricted
cash
|
30,721
|
23,592
|
|||||
Due
from broker
|
2,010
|
525
|
|||||
Available-for-sale
securities, pledged as collateral, at fair value
|
420,997
|
1,362,392
|
|||||
Available-for-sale
securities, at fair value
|
−
|
28,285
|
|||||
Loans,
net of allowances of $0
|
1,240,288
|
569,873
|
|||||
Direct
financing leases and notes, net of unearned income
|
88,970
|
23,317
|
|||||
Investments
in unconsolidated trusts
|
1,548
|
−
|
|||||
Derivatives,
at fair value
|
−
|
3,006
|
|||||
Interest
receivable
|
8,839
|
9,337
|
|||||
Accounts
receivable
|
486
|
183
|
|||||
Principal
paydown receivables
|
503
|
5,805
|
|||||
Other
assets
|
3,113
|
1,503
|
|||||
Total
assets
|
$
|
1,802,829
|
$
|
2,045,547
|
|||
LIABILITIES
|
|||||||
Repurchase
agreements, including accrued interest of $322
and $2,104
|
$
|
120,457
|
$
|
1,068,277
|
|||
Collateralized
debt obligations (“CDOs”) (net of debt issuance costs of $18,310
and $10,093)
|
1,207,175
|
687,407
|
|||||
Warehouse
agreement
|
−
|
62,961
|
|||||
Secured
term facility
|
84,673
|
−
|
|||||
Unsecured
revolving credit facility
|
−
|
15,000
|
|||||
Distribution
payable
|
7,663
|
5,646
|
|||||
Accrued
interest expense
|
6,523
|
9,514
|
|||||
Unsecured
junior subordinated debentures held by unconsolidated
trusts that issued trust preferred securities
|
51,548
|
−
|
|||||
Management
and incentive fee payable − related party
|
1,398
|
896
|
|||||
Derivatives,
at fair value
|
2,904
|
−
|
|||||
Security
deposits
|
725
|
−
|
|||||
Accounts
payable and other liabilities
|
2,212
|
513
|
|||||
Total
liabilities
|
1,485,278
|
1,850,214
|
|||||
STOCKHOLDERS’
EQUITY
|
|||||||
Preferred
stock, par value $0.001: 100,000,000 shares authorized; no
shares issued and outstanding
|
-
|
-
|
|||||
Common
stock, par value $0.001: 500,000,000 shares authorized; 23,821,434
and
15,682,334
shares issued and outstanding
(including
234,224
and 349,000
unvested restricted shares)
|
24
|
16
|
|||||
Additional
paid-in capital
|
341,400
|
220,161
|
|||||
Deferred
equity compensation
|
(1,072
|
)
|
(2,684
|
)
|
|||
Accumulated
other comprehensive loss
|
(9,279
|
)
|
(19,581
|
)
|
|||
Distributions
in excess of earnings
|
(13,522
|
)
|
(2,579
|
)
|
|||
Total
stockholders’ equity
|
317,551
|
195,333
|
|||||
TOTAL
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
|
$
|
1,802,829
|
$
|
2,045,547
|
See
accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements
RESOURCE
CAPITAL CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(in
thousands, except share and per share data)
December
31,
2006
|
Period
from
March
8, 2005
(Date
Operations Commenced) to
December
31,
2005
|
||||||
REVENUES
|
|||||||
Net
interest income:
|
|||||||
Interest
income from securities available-for-sale
|
$
|
56,048
|
$
|
44,247
|
|||
Interest
income from loans
|
70,262
|
14,662
|
|||||
Interest
income - other
|
10,438
|
2,478
|
|||||
Total
interest income
|
136,748
|
61,387
|
|||||
Interest
expense
|
101,851
|
43,062
|
|||||
Net
interest income
|
34,897
|
18,325
|
|||||
OTHER
(LOSS) REVENUE
|
|||||||
Net
realized (losses) gains on investments
|
(8,627
|
)
|
311
|
||||
Other
income
|
480
|
−
|
|||||
Total
other (loss) revenue
|
(8,147
|
)
|
311
|
||||
EXPENSES
|
|||||||
Management
fees - related party
|
4,838
|
3,012
|
|||||
Equity
compensation - related party
|
2,432
|
2,709
|
|||||
Professional
services
|
1,881
|
580
|
|||||
Insurance
|
498
|
395
|
|||||
General
and administrative
|
1,495
|
1,032
|
|||||
Total
expenses
|
11,144
|
7,728
|
|||||
NET
INCOME
|
$
|
15,606
|
$
|
10,908
|
|||
NET
INCOME PER SHARE - BASIC
|
$
|
0.89
|
$
|
0.71
|
|||
NET
INCOME PER SHARE - DILUTED
|
$
|
0.87
|
$
|
0.71
|
|||
WEIGHTED
AVERAGE NUMBER OF SHARES OUTSTANDING
- BASIC
|
17,538,273
|
15,333,334
|
|||||
WEIGHTED
AVERAGE NUMBER OF SHARES OUTSTANDING
- DILUTED
|
17,881,355
|
15,405,714
|
|||||
DIVIDENDS
DECLARED PER SHARE
|
$
|
1.49
|
$
|
0.86
|
See
accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements
RESOURCE
CAPITAL CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
Year
Ended December 31, 2006 and
Period
from March 8, 2005 (Date Operations Commenced) to December 31,
2005
(in
thousands, except share and per share data)
Common
Stock
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Shares
|
Amount
|
Additional
Paid-In Capital
|
Deferred
Equity
Compensation
|
Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive Income (Loss)
|
Retained
Earnings
|
Distributions
in
Excess of
Earnings
|
Total
Stockholders’
Equity
|
Comprehensive
Loss
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Common
shares issued
|
15,333,334
|
$
|
15
|
$
|
215,310
|
$
|
−
|
$
|
−
|
−
|
$
|
−
|
$
|
215,325
|
$
|
−
|
|||||||||||
Offering
costs
|
−
|
−
|
(541
|
)
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
(541
|
)
|
−
|
||||||||||||||||
Stock
based compensation
|
349,000
|
1
|
5,392
|
(5,393
|
)
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
|||||||||||||||||
Amortization
of stock based
compensation
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
2,709
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
2,709
|
−
|
||||||||||||||||||
Net
income
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
10,908
|
−
|
10,908
|
10,908
|
||||||||||||||||||
Available-for-sale
securities,
fair
value adjustment
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
(22,357
|
)
|
−
|
−
|
(22,357
|
)
|
(22,357
|
)
|
|||||||||||||||
Designated
derivatives, fair
value
adjustment
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
2,776
|
−
|
−
|
2,776
|
2,776
|
||||||||||||||||||
Distributions
- Common Stock
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
(10,908
|
)
|
(2,579
|
)
|
(13,487
|
)
|
||||||||||||||||
Comprehensive
loss
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
$
|
(8,673
|
)
|
||||||||||||||||
Balance,
December 31, 2005
|
15,682,334
|
16
|
220,161
|
(2,684
|
)
|
(19,581
|
)
|
−
|
(2,579
|
)
|
195,333
|
||||||||||||||||
Net
proceeds from common stock
offerings
|
8,120,800
|
8
|
123,213
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
123,221
|
−
|
||||||||||||||||||
Offering
costs
|
−
|
−
|
(2,988
|
)
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
(2,988
|
)
|
−
|
||||||||||||||||
Stock
based compensation
|
18,300
|
−
|
254
|
(60
|
)
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
194
|
−
|
|||||||||||||||||
Stock
based compensation, fair
value
adjustment
|
−
|
−
|
760
|
(760
|
)
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
|||||||||||||||||
Amortization
of stock based
compensation
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
2,432
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
2,432
|
−
|
||||||||||||||||||
Net
income
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
15,606
|
−
|
15,606
|
15,606
|
||||||||||||||||||
Available-for-sale
securities,
fair
value adjustment
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
16,325
|
−
|
−
|
16,325
|
16,325
|
||||||||||||||||||
Designated
derivatives, fair
value
adjustment
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
(6,023
|
)
|
−
|
−
|
(6,023
|
)
|
(6,023
|
)
|
|||||||||||||||
Distributions
on common stock
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
(15,606
|
)
|
(10,943
|
)
|
(26,549
|
)
|
−
|
|||||||||||||||
Comprehensive
income
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
$
|
25,908
|
|||||||||||||||||
Balance,
December 31, 2006
|
23,821,434
|
$
|
24
|
$
|
341,400
|
$
|
(1,072
|
)
|
$
|
(9,279
|
)
|
$
|
−
|
$
|
(13,522
|
)
|
$
|
317,551
|
See
accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements
RESOURCE
CAPITAL CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(in
thousands)
December
31,
2006
|
Period
from
March
8, 2005
(Date
Operations Commenced) to
December
31,
2005
|
||||||
CASH
FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES:
|
|||||||
Net
income
|
$
|
15,606
|
$
|
10,908
|
|||
Adjustments
to reconcile net income to net cash provided by (used in) operating
activities:
|
|||||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
399
|
5
|
|||||
Amortization
of premium (discount) on investments and notes
|
(705
|
)
|
(362
|
)
|
|||
Amortization
of debt issuance costs
|
1,608
|
461
|
|||||
Amortization
of stock-based compensation
|
2,432
|
2,709
|
|||||
Non-cash
incentive compensation to the manager
|
280
|
86
|
|||||
Net
realized gain on derivative instruments
|
(3,449
|
)
|
−
|
||||
Net
realized losses (gains) on investments
|
11,201
|
(311
|
)
|
||||
Changes
in operating assets and liabilities:
|
|||||||
Increase
in restricted cash
|
(14,409
|
)
|
(11,763
|
)
|
|||
Decrease
(increase) in interest receivable, net of purchased
interest
|
332
|
(9,339
|
)
|
||||
Increase
in accounts receivable
|
(303
|
)
|
−
|
||||
Increase
in due from broker
|
(1,485
|
)
|
(525
|
)
|
|||
Decrease
(increase) in principal paydowns receivable
|
5,301
|
(5,805
|
)
|
||||
Increase
in management and incentive fee payable
|
417
|
810
|
|||||
Increase
in security deposits
|
725
|
−
|
|||||
Increase
in accounts payable and accrued liabilities
|
1,698
|
501
|
|||||
(Decrease)
increase in accrued interest expense
|
(4,774
|
)
|
11,595
|
||||
Increase
in other assets
|
(2,002
|
)
|
(1,365
|
)
|
|||
Net
cash provided by (used in) operating activities
|
12,872
|
(2,395
|
)
|
||||
CASH
FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES:
|
|||||||
Restricted cash
|
7,279
|
(11,829
|
)
|
||||
Purchase of securities available-for-sale
|
(40,147
|
)
|
(1,557,752
|
)
|
|||
Principal
payments received on securities available-for-sale
|
129,900
|
136,688
|
|||||
Proceeds
from sale of securities available-for-sale
|
884,772
|
8,483
|
|||||
Purchase
of loans
|
(1,004,107
|
)
|
(696,320
|
)
|
|||
Principal
payments received on loans
|
205,546
|
35,130
|
|||||
Proceeds
from sale of loans
|
128,498
|
91,023
|
|||||
Purchase
of direct financing leases and notes
|
(106,742
|
)
|
(25,097
|
)
|
|||
Proceeds
from and payments received on direct financing leases and
notes
|
41,895
|
1,780
|
|||||
Purchase
of property and equipment
|
(6
|
)
|
(5
|
)
|
|||
Net
cash used in investing activities
|
246,888
|
(2,017,899
|
)
|
||||
CASH
FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES:
|
|||||||
Net
proceeds from issuances of common stock (net of offering costs of
$2,988
and
$541)
|
120,232
|
214,784
|
|||||
Proceeds
from borrowings:
|
|||||||
Repurchase
agreements
|
7,170,093
|
8,446,739
|
|||||
Warehouse
agreements
|
159,616
|
600,633
|
|||||
Collateralized
debt obligations
|
527,980
|
697,500
|
|||||
Unsecured
revolving credit facility
|
25,500
|
15,000
|
|||||
Secured
term facility
|
112,887
|
−
|
|||||
Payments
on borrowings:
|
|||||||
Repurchase
agreements
|
(8,116,131
|
)
|
(7,380,566
|
)
|
|||
Warehouse
agreements
|
(222,577
|
)
|
(537,672
|
)
|
|||
Unsecured
revolving credit facility
|
(40,500
|
)
|
−
|
||||
Secured
term facility
|
(28,214
|
)
|
−
|
||||
Issuance
of Trust Preferred Securities
|
50,000
|
−
|
|||||
Settlement
of derivative instruments
|
3,335
|
−
|
|||||
Payment
of debt issuance costs
|
(9,825
|
)
|
(10,554
|
)
|
|||
Distributions
paid on common stock
|
(24,531
|
)
|
(7,841
|
)
|
|||
Net
cash (used in) provided by financing activities
|
(272,135
|
)
|
2,038,023
|
||||
NET
(DECREASE) INCREASE IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS
|
(12,375
|
)
|
17,729
|
||||
CASH
AND CASH EQUIVALENTS AT BEGINNING OF PERIOD
|
17,729
|
−
|
|||||
CASH
AND CASH EQUIVALENTS AT END OF PERIOD
|
$
|
5,354
|
$
|
17,729
|
RESOURCE
CAPITAL CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS − (Continued)
(in
thousands)
December
31, 2006
|
Period
from
March
8, 2005
(Date
Operations Commenced) to
December
31,
2005
|
||||||
NON-CASH
INVESTING AND FINANCING ACTIVITIES:
|
|||||||
Distributions
on common stock declared but not paid
|
$
|
7,663
|
$
|
5,646
|
|||
SUPPLEMENTAL
DISCLOSURE:
|
|||||||
Interest
expense paid in cash
|
$
|
137,748
|
$
|
46,268
|
See
accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements
RESOURCE
CAPITAL CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER
31, 2006
NOTE
1 - ORGANIZATION AND BASIS OF QUARTERLY PRESENTATION
Resource
Capital Corp. (the ‘‘Company’’) was incorporated in Maryland on January 31, 2005
and commenced its operations on March 8, 2005 upon receipt of the net proceeds
from a private placement of shares of its common stock. The Company’s principal
business activity is to purchase and manage a diversified portfolio of
commercial real estate-related assets and commercial finance assets. The
Company’s investment activities are managed by Resource Capital Manager, Inc.
(‘‘Manager’’) pursuant to a management agreement (‘‘Management Agreement’’). The
Manager is a wholly owned indirect subsidiary of Resource America, Inc. (“RAI”)
(Nasdaq: REXI).
The
Company has three direct wholly-owned subsidiaries: RCC Real Estate, Inc. (“RCC
Real Estate”), RCC Commercial, Inc. (“RCC Commercial”) and Resource TRS, Inc.
(“Resource TRS”). RCC Real Estate holds real estate investments, including
commercial real estate loans. RCC Commercial holds bank loan investments and
real estate investments, including commercial and residential real
estate-related securities. Resource TRS holds all the Company’s equipment leases
and notes. RCC Real Estate owns 100% of the equity interest in Resource Real
Estate Funding CDO 2006-1 (“RREF 2006-1”), a Cayman Islands limited liability
company and qualified REIT subsidiary (“QRS”). RREF 2006-1 was established to
complete a collateralized debt obligation (“CDO”) issuance secured by a
portfolio of commercial real estate loans. RCC Commercial owns 100% of the
equity interest in Apidos CDO I, Ltd. (“Apidos CDO I”), a Cayman Islands limited
liability company and taxable REIT subsidiary (“TRS”). Apidos CDO I was
established to complete a CDO secured by a portfolio of syndicated bank loans.
RCC Commercial owns 100% of the equity interest in Apidos CDO III, Ltd. (“Apidos
CDO III”), a Cayman Islands limited liability company and TRS. Apidos CDO III
was established to complete a CDO secured by a portfolio of bank loans. RCC
Commercial owns 100% of the equity interest in Ischus CDO II, Ltd. (“Ischus CDO
II”), a Cayman Islands limited liability company and QRS. Ischus CDO II was
established to complete a CDO issuance secured by a portfolio of mortgage-backed
and other asset-backed securities.
NOTE
2 - BASIS OF PRESENTATION
The
accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared in conformity
with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America
(“GAAP”). The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the
Company and its wholly-owned subsidiaries and entities which are variable
interest entities (“VIE’s”) in which the Company is the primary beneficiary
under Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Interpretation No. 46-R,
“Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities” (“FIN 46-R”). In general, FIN 46-R
requires an entity to consolidate a VIE when the entity holds a variable
interest in the VIE and is deemed to be the primary beneficiary of the VIE.
An
entity is the primary beneficiary if it absorbs a majority of the VIE’s expected
losses, receives a majority of the VIE’s expected residual returns, or both.
RREF
2006-1, Ischus CDO II, Apidos CDO I and Apidos CDO III are VIEs and are not
considered to be qualifying special-purpose entities as defined by Statement
of
Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 140, “Accounting for Transfers and
Servicing of Financial Assets and Extinguishments of Liabilities, (“SFAS 140”).
The Company owns 100% of the equity (“preference shares”) issued by RREF 2006-1,
Ischus CDO II, Apidos CDO I and Apidos CDO III. As a result, the Company has
determined it is the primary beneficiary of these entities and has included
the
accounts of these entities in the consolidated financial statements. See Note
3
for a further discussion of our VIEs.
All
significant intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated in
consolidation.
RESOURCE
CAPITAL CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
DECEMBER
31, 2006
NOTE
3 - SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Reclassifications
Certain
reclassifications have been made to the 2005 consolidated financials statements
to conform to the 2006 presentation.
Use
of Estimates
The
preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management
to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets
and
liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date
of
the financial statements, and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses
during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
Estimates affecting the accompanying consolidated financial statements include
the fair values of the Company’s investments and derivatives and the estimated
life used to calculate amortization and accretion of premiums and discounts,
respectively, on investments.
Cash
and Cash Equivalents
Cash
and
cash equivalents include cash on hand and all highly liquid investments with
original maturities of three months or less (temporary cash investments) at
the
time of purchase, which are held at financial institutions.
Due
from Broker
Amounts
due from broker generally represent cash balances held with brokers as part
of
margin requirements related to hedging agreements.
Securities
Available for Sale
Statement
of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) SFAS No. 115, ‘‘Accounting for
Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities’’ (‘‘SFAS 115’’), requires the
Company to classify its investment portfolio as either trading investments,
available-for-sale investments or held-to-maturity investments. Although the
Company generally plans to hold most of its investments to maturity, it may,
from time to time, sell any of its investments due to changes in market
conditions or in accordance with its investment strategy. Accordingly, SFAS
115
requires the Company to classify all of its investment securities as
available-for sale. All investments classified as available-for-sale are
reported at fair value, based on market prices provided by dealers, with
unrealized gains and losses reported as a component of accumulated other
comprehensive income (loss) in stockholders’ equity.
The
Company evaluates its available-for-sale investments for other-than-temporary
impairment charges under SFAS 115, in accordance with Emerging Issues Task
Force
(‘‘EITF’’) 03-1, ‘‘The Meaning of Other-Than-Temporary Impairment and its
Application to Certain Investments.’’ SFAS 115 and EITF 03-1 requires an
investor to determine when an investment is considered impaired (i.e., a decline
in fair value below its amortized cost), evaluate whether that impairment is
other than temporary (i.e., the investment value will not be recovered over
its
remaining life), and, if the impairment is other than temporary, recognize
an
impairment loss equal to the difference between the investment’s cost and its
fair value. SFAS 115 also includes accounting considerations subsequent to
the
recognition of an other-than-temporary impairment and requires certain
disclosures about unrealized losses that have not been recognized as
other-than-temporary impairments.
RESOURCE
CAPITAL CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
DECEMBER
31, 2006
NOTE
3 - SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES −
(Continued)
Securities
Available for Sale − (Continued)
Investment
securities transactions are recorded on the trade date. Purchases of newly
issued securities are recorded when all significant uncertainties regarding
the
characteristics of the securities are removed, generally shortly before
settlement date. Realized gains and losses on investment securities are
determined on the specific identification method.
Interest
Income Recognition
Interest
income on the Company’s mortgage-backed and other asset-backed securities is
accrued using the effective yield method based on the actual coupon rate and
the
outstanding principal amount of the underlying mortgages or other assets.
Premiums and discounts are amortized or accreted into interest income over
the
lives of the securities also using the effective yield method (or a method
that
approximates effective yield), adjusted for the effects of estimated prepayments
based on SFAS No. 91, ‘‘Accounting for Nonrefundable Fees and Costs Associated
with Originating or Acquiring Loans and Initial Direct Costs of Leases.’’ For an
investment purchased at par, the effective yield is the contractual interest
rate on the investment. If the investment is purchased at a discount or at
a
premium, the effective yield is computed based on the contractual interest
rate
increased for the accretion of a purchase discount or decreased for the
amortization of a purchase premium. The effective yield method requires the
Company to make estimates of future prepayment rates for its investments that
can be contractually prepaid before their contractual maturity date so that
the
purchase discount can be accreted, or the purchase premium can be amortized,
over the estimated remaining life of the investment. The prepayment estimates
that the Company uses directly impact the estimated remaining lives of its
investments. Actual prepayment estimates are reviewed as of each quarter end
or
more frequently if the Company becomes aware of any material information that
would lead it to believe that an adjustment is necessary. If prepayment
estimates are incorrect, the amortization or accretion of premiums and discounts
may have to be adjusted, which would have an impact on future
income.
Loans
The
Company purchases whole loans through direct origination and participations
in
commercial real estate loans and corporate leveraged loans in the secondary
market and through syndications of newly originated loans. Loans are held for
investment; therefore, the Company initially records them at their purchase
prices, and subsequently accounts for them based on their outstanding principal
plus or minus unamortized premiums or discounts. In certain instances, where
the
credit fundamentals underlying a particular loan have changed in such a manner
that the Company’s expected return on investment may decrease, the Company may
sell a loan held for investment due to adverse changes in credit fundamentals.
Once the determination has been made by the Company that it no longer will
hold
the loan for investment, the Company will identify these loans as “Loans held
for sale” and will account for these loans at the lower of amortized cost or
market value.
Loan
Interest Income Recognition
Interest
income on loans includes interest at stated rates adjusted for amortization
or
accretion of premiums and discounts. Premiums and discounts are amortized or
accreted into income using the effective yield method. When the Company
purchases a loan or pool of loans at a discount, it considers the provisions
of
AICPA Statement of Position (‘‘SOP’’) 03-3 ‘‘Accounting for Certain Loans or
Debt Securities Acquired in a Transfer’’ to evaluate whether all or a portion of
the discount represents accretable yield. If a loan with a premium or discount
is prepaid, the Company immediately recognizes the unamortized portion as a
decrease or increase to interest income. In addition, the Company defers loan
origination fees and loan origination costs and recognizes them over the life
of
the related loan against interest using the effective yield method.
RESOURCE
CAPITAL CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
DECEMBER
31, 2006
NOTE
3 - SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES −
(Continued)
Allowance
and Provision for Loan Losses
At
December 31, 2006, all of the Company’s loans are current with respect to the
scheduled payments of principal and interest. In reviewing the portfolio of
loans and the observable secondary market prices, the Company did not identify
any loans that exhibit characteristics indicating that impairment has occurred.
Accordingly, as of December 31, 2006, the Company had not recorded an allowance
for loan losses.
Variable
Interest Entities
During
July 2005, the Company entered into warehouse and master participation
agreements with an affiliate of Citigroup Global Markets Inc. (“Citigroup”)
providing that Citigroup will fund the purchase of loans by Apidos CDO III.
On
May 9, 2006, the Company terminated its Apidos CDO III warehouse agreement
with Citigroup upon the closing of the CDO. The warehouse funding liability
was
replaced with the issuance of long-term debt by Apidos CDO III. The Company
owns
100% of the equity issued by Apidos CDO III and is deemed to be the primary
beneficiary. As a result, the Company consolidated Apidos CDO III at December
31, 2006.
Borrowings
The
Company finances the acquisition of its investments, including securities
available-for-sale and loans, primarily through the use of secured borrowings
in
the form of CDOs, repurchase agreements, unsecured junior subordinated
debentures held by unconsolidated trusts that issued trust preferred securities,
warehouse agreements and an unsecured revolving credit facility. The Company
may
use other forms of secured borrowing in the future. The Company recognizes
interest expense on all borrowings on an accrual basis.
Accounting
for Certain Mortgage-Backed Securities (“MBS”) and Related Repurchase Agreements
In
certain circumstances, the Company has purchased debt investments from a
counterparty and subsequently financed the acquisition of those debt investments
through repurchase agreements with the same counterparty. The Company currently
records the acquisition of the debt investments as assets and the related
repurchase agreements as financing liabilities gross on the consolidated balance
sheets. Interest income earned on the debt investments and interest expense
incurred on the repurchase obligations are reported gross on the consolidated
statements of operations. However, under a certain technical interpretation
of
SFAS No. 140, “Accounting for Transfers and Servicing of Financial Assets,” such
transactions may not qualify as a purchase. Instead, the Company would present
the net investment in these transactions with the counterparty as a derivative
with the corresponding change in fair value of the derivative being recorded
through earnings. The value of the derivative would reflect changes in the
value
of the underlying debt investments and changes in the value of the underlying
credit provided by the counterparty. Management of the Company believes, and
it
is industry practice, that it is accounting for these transactions in an
appropriate manner. As of December 31, 2006, the Company had one
transaction where debt instruments were financed with the same counterparty.
RESOURCE
CAPITAL CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
DECEMBER
31, 2006
NOTE
3 - SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES -
(Continued)
Comprehensive
Income
Comprehensive
income for the Company includes net income and the change in net unrealized
gains/ (losses) on available-for-sale securities and derivative instruments
used
to hedge exposure to interest rate fluctuations and protect against declines
in
the market-value of assets resulting from general trends in debt
markets.
Income
Taxes
The
Company expects to operate in a manner that will allow it to qualify and be
taxed as a real estate investment trust (“REIT”) and to comply with the
provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (the “Code”) with respect
thereto. A REIT is generally not subject to federal income tax on that portion
of its REIT taxable income (‘‘Taxable Income’’) which is distributed to its
stockholders, provided that at least 90% of Taxable Income is distributed and
certain other requirements are met. If the Company fails to meet these
requirements and does not qualify for certain statutory relief provisions,
it
would be subject to federal income tax. The Company has a wholly-owned domestic
subsidiary, Resource TRS, that the Company and Resource TRS have elected to
be
treated as a taxable REIT subsidiary (“TRS”). For financial reporting purposes,
current and deferred taxes are provided for on the portion of earnings
recognized by the Company with respect to its interest in Resource TRS, a
domestic TRS, because it is taxed as a regular subchapter C corporation under
the provisions of the Code. As of December 31, 2006, Resource TRS recognized
a
$67,000 provision for income taxes. Apidos CDO I and Apidos CDO III, the
Company’s foreign TRSs are organized as exempted companies incorporated with
limited liability under the laws of the Cayman Islands, and are generally exempt
from federal and state income tax at the corporate level because their
activities in the United States are limited to trading in stock and securities
for their own account. Therefore, despite their status as TRSs, they generally
will not be subject to corporate tax on their earnings and no provision for
income taxes are required; however because they are “controlled foreign
corporations,” the Company will generally be required to include their current
taxable income in its calculation of REIT taxable income.
Stock
Based Compensation
Pursuant
to its 2005 Stock Incentive Plan (see Note 15), the Company granted 345,000
shares of restricted stock and options to purchase 651,666 shares of common
stock to its Manager. A holder of the restricted shares has all of the rights
of
a stockholder of the Company, including the right to vote such shares and
receive dividends. The Company accounts for the restricted stock and stock
options in accordance with EITF 96-18, ‘‘Accounting for Equity Instruments that
are issued to other than Employees for Acquiring, or in Conjunction with
Selling, Goods or Services,’’ (‘‘EITF 96-18’’) and SFAS No. 123(R), ‘‘Accounting
for Stock-Based Compensation,’’ (‘‘SFAS No. 123(R)’’). In accordance with EITF
96-18, the stock and options are recorded in stockholders’ equity at fair value
through an increase to additional paid-in-capital and an off-setting entry
to
deferred equity compensation (a contra-equity account). The deferred
compensation is amortized over a three year graded vesting period with the
amortization expense reflected as equity compensation expense. The unvested
stock and options are adjusted quarterly to reflect changes in fair value as
performance under the agreement is completed. Any change in fair value is
reflected in the equity compensation expense recognized in that quarter and
in
future quarters until the stock and options are fully vested.
RESOURCE
CAPITAL CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
DECEMBER
31, 2006
NOTE
3 - SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES -
(Continued)
The
Company also issued 4,000 and 4,224 shares of restricted stock to its directors
on March 8, 2005 and March 8, 2006. The stock awards vest in full one year
after
the date of the grant. The Company accounts for this issuance using the fair
value based methodology prescribed by SFAS No. 123(R). Pursuant to SFAS No.
123(R), the fair value of the award is measured on the grant date and recorded
in stockholders’ equity through an increase to additional paid-in capital and an
offsetting entry to deferred equity compensation (a contra-equity account).
This
amount is not remeasured under the fair value based method. The deferred
compensation is amortized and included in equity compensation
expense.
Incentive
Compensation
The
Management Agreement provides for incentive compensation if the Company’s
financial performance exceeds certain benchmarks. See Note 10 for further
discussion on the specific terms of the computation and payment of the incentive
fee.
The
incentive fee will be paid up to 75% in cash and at least 25% in restricted
stock. The cash portion of the incentive fee is accrued and expensed during
the
period for which it is calculated and earned. In accordance with SFAS No. 123(R)
and EITF 96-18, the restricted stock portion of the incentive fee is also
accrued and expensed during the period for which it is calculated and earned.
Shares granted in connection with the incentive fee will vest immediately.
For
the period from January 1, 2006 to December 31, 2006, the manager earned an
incentive management fee of $1.1 million of which $840,000 was paid in cash
and
$280, 000 was paid in stock. For the period from March 8, 2005 to December
31,
2005, the Manager earned an incentive management fee of $344,000 of which
$258,000 was paid in cash and $86,000 was paid in stock.
Net
Income Per Share
In
accordance with the provisions of SFAS No. 128, ‘‘Earnings per Share,’’ the
Company calculates basic income per share by dividing net income for the period
by weighted-average shares of its common stock, including vested restricted
stock, outstanding for that period. Diluted income per share takes into account
the effect of dilutive instruments, such as stock options and unvested
restricted stock, but uses the average share price for the period in determining
the number of incremental shares that are to be added to the weighted-average
number of shares outstanding (see Note 9).
Derivative
Instruments
The
Company’s policies permit it to enter into derivative contracts, including
interest rate swaps and interest rate caps to add stability to its interest
expense and to manage its exposure to interest rate movements or other
identified risks. The Company has designated these transactions as cash flow
hedges. The contracts or hedge instruments are evaluated at inception and at
subsequent balance sheet dates to determine if they qualify for hedge accounting
under SFAS No. 133, “Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging
Activities,” (“SFAS 133”). SFAS 133 requires that we recognize all derivatives
on the balance sheet at fair value. The Company records changes in the estimated
fair value of the derivative in other comprehensive income to the extent that
it
is effective. Any ineffective portion of a derivative’s change in fair value
will be immediately recognized in earnings.
RESOURCE
CAPITAL CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
DECEMBER
31, 2006
NOTE
3 - SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES −
(Continued)
Recent
Accounting Pronouncements
In
February 2007, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued SFAS No.
159, “The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities −
Including an amendment of FASB Statement No. 115, (“SFAS 159”). SFAS 159 permits
entities to choose to measure many financial instruments and certain other
items
at fair value. This statement is effective for fiscal years beginning after
November 15, 2007. The Company is required to adopt SFAS 159 in the first
quarter of 2008 and is currently evaluating the impact that SFAS 159 will have
on its consolidated financial statements.
In
September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157 “Fair Value Measurements”
(“SFAS 157”). SFAS 157 clarifies the definition of fair value, establishes a
framework for measuring fair value in GAAP and expands the disclosure of fair
value measurements. This statement is effective for fiscal years beginning
after
November 15, 2007 and interim periods within those fiscal years. The
Company is currently determining the effect, if any, the adoption of SFAS 157
will have on its financial statements.
In
September 2006, the Securities and Exchange Commission staff issued Staff
Accounting Bulletin No. 108, “Considering the Effects of Prior Year
Misstatements when Quantifying Misstatements in Current Year Financial
Statements” (“SAB 108”). SAB 108 provides guidance for how errors should be
evaluated to assess materiality from a quantitative perspective. SAB 108 permits
companies to initially apply its provisions by either restating prior financial
statements or recording the cumulative effect of initially applying the approach
as adjustments to the carrying values of assets and liabilities as of
January 1, 2006 with an offsetting adjustment to retained earnings. SAB 108
is required to be adopted for fiscal years ending after November 15, 2006.
The adoption of SAB 108 did not have a material effect on the Company’s
financial statements.
In
July
2006, the FASB issued Interpretation No. 48, or FIN 48, “Accounting for
Uncertainty in Income Taxes-An Interpretation of SFAS 109.” FIN 48 clarifies the
accounting for uncertainty in income taxes by creating a framework for how
companies should recognize, measure, present and disclose in their financial
statements uncertain tax positions that they have taken or expect to take in
a
tax return. FIN 48 is effective for fiscal years beginning after
December 15, 2006 and is required to be adopted by the Company beginning in
the first quarter of fiscal 2007. Although the Company will continue to evaluate
the application of FIN 48, the Company does not expect that adoption will have
a
material effect on the Company’s financial statements.
NOTE
4 - RESTRICTED CASH
Restricted
cash consists of $25.1 million of principal and interest payments collected
on
investments held in four CDO trusts, a $2.5 million credit facility reserve
used
to fund future investments that will be acquired by Apidos CDO I and Apidos
CDO
III and a $629,000 expense reserve used to cover CDOs’ operating expenses. The
remaining $2.4 million consists of an interest reserve and security deposits
held in connection with the Company’s equipment lease and note portfolio.
RESOURCE
CAPITAL CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
DECEMBER
31, 2006
NOTE
5 - SECURITIES AVAILABLE-FOR-SALE
On
September 27, 2006, the Company entered into an agreement to sell its remaining
agency residential mortgage-backed securities (“RMBS”) for gross proceeds
totaling $753.2 million, realizing a loss of $10.9 million. On October 2, 2006,
$716.5 million of the proceeds from the sale were received and were used to
repay related debt. The balance of the proceeds was subsequently received in
October and November 2006 and was used to pay down debt on repurchase agreements
used to fund our commercial real estate loan portfolio.
The
following tables summarize the Company's mortgage-backed securities, other
asset-backed securities and private equity investments, including those pledged
as collateral and classified as available-for-sale, which are carried at fair
value (in thousands):
December
31, 2006:
|
Amortized
Cost
|
UnrealizedGains
|
Unrealized
Losses
|
Estimated
Fair Value
|
||||||||||||
ABS-RMBS
|
$
|
348,496
|
$
|
913
|
$
|
(6,561
|
)
|
$
|
342,848
|
|||||||
Commercial
mortgage-backed
|
27,951
|
23
|
(536
|
)
|
27,438
|
|||||||||||
Commercial
mortgage-backed private placement
|
30,055
|
−
|
−
|
30,055
|
||||||||||||
Other
asset-backed
|
20,526
|
130
|
−
|
20,656
|
||||||||||||
Total
|
$
|
427,028
|
$
|
1,066
|
$
|
(7,097
|
)
|
$
|
420,997
|
(1) |
|
|
||||
December
31, 2005:
|
||||||||||||||||
Agency
ABS-RMBS
|
$
|
1,014,575
|
$
|
13
|
$
|
(12,918
|
)
|
$
|
1,001,670
|
|||||||
ABS-RMBS
|
346,460
|
370
|
(9,085
|
)
|
337,745
|
|||||||||||
Commercial
mortgage-backed
|
27,970
|
1
|
(608
|
)
|
27,363
|
|||||||||||
Other
asset-backed
|
22,045
|
24
|
(124
|
)
|
21,945
|
|||||||||||
Private
equity
|
1,984
|
−
|
(30
|
)
|
1,954
|
|||||||||||
Total
|
$
|
1,413,034
|
$
|
408
|
$
|
(22,765
|
)
|
$
|
1,390,677
|
(1) |
|
|
(1)
|
As
of December 31, 2006, all securities were pledged as collateral security
under related financings. As of December 31, 2005, all securities,
other
than $26.3 million in agency ABS-RMBS and $2.0 million in private
equity
investments, were pledged as collateral security under related
financings.
|
RESOURCE
CAPITAL CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
DECEMBER
31, 2006
NOTE
5 - SECURITIES AVAILABLE-FOR-SALE − (Continued)
The
following tables summarize the estimated maturities of the Company’s
mortgage-backed securities, other asset-backed securities and private equity
investments according to their estimated weighted average life classifications
(in thousands, except percentages):
Weighted
Average Life
|
Estimated
Fair
Value
|
Amortized
Cost
|
Weighted
Average Coupon
|
|||||||
December
31, 2006:
|
||||||||||
Less
than one year
|
$
|
−
|
$
|
−
|
−
|
%
|
||||
Greater
than one year and less than five years
|
378,057
|
383,700
|
6.78
|
%
|
||||||
Greater
than five years
|
42,940
|
43,328
|
6.15
|
%
|
||||||
Total
|
$
|
420,997
|
$
|
427,028
|
6.71
|
%
|
||||
December
31, 2005:
|
||||||||||
Less
than one year
|
$
|
−
|
$
|
−
|
−
|
%
|
||||
Greater
than one year and less than five years
|
1,355,910
|
1,377,537
|
4.91
|
%
|
||||||
Greater
than five years
|
34,767
|
35,497
|
5.60
|
%
|
||||||
Total
|
$
|
1,390,677
|
$
|
1,413,034
|
4.92
|
%
|
The
contractual maturities of the available-for-sale securities range from February
20, 2014 to May 11, 2045.
The
following tables show the estimated fair value and gross unrealized losses,
aggregated by investment category and length of time, of only those individual
securities that have been in a continuous unrealized loss position (in
thousands):
Less
than 12 Months
|
Total
|
||||||||||||
Estimated
Fair
Value
|
Gross
Unrealized Losses
|
Estimated
Fair
Value
|
Gross
Unrealized Losses
|
||||||||||
December
31, 2006:
|
|||||||||||||
ABS-RMBS
|
$
|
143,948
|
$
|
(2,580
|
)
|
$
|
230,660
|
$
|
(6,561
|
)
|
|||
Commercial
mortgage-backed
|
−
|
−
|
19,132
|
(537
|
)
|
||||||||
Other
asset-backed
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
|||||||||
Total
temporarily impaired securities
|
$
|
143,948
|
$
|
(2,580
|
)
|
$
|
249,792
|
$
|
(7,098
|
)
|
|||
December
31, 2005:
|
|||||||||||||
Agency
ABS-RMBS
|
$
|
978,570
|
$
|
(12,918
|
)
|
$
|
978,570
|
$
|
(12,918
|
)
|
|||
ABS-RMBS
|
294,359
|
(9,085
|
)
|
294,359
|
(9,085
|
)
|
|||||||
Commercial
mortgage-backed
|
26,905
|
(608
|
)
|
26,905
|
(608
|
)
|
|||||||
Other
asset-backed
|
12,944
|
(124
|
)
|
12,944
|
(124
|
)
|
|||||||
Private
equity
|
1,954
|
(30
|
)
|
1,954
|
(30
|
)
|
|||||||
Total
temporarily impaired securities
|
$
|
1,314,732
|
$
|
(22,765
|
)
|
$
|
1,314,732
|
$
|
(22,765
|
)
|
RESOURCE
CAPITAL CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
DECEMBER
31, 2006
NOTE
5 - SECURITIES AVAILABLE-FOR-SALE − (Continued)
The
temporary impairment of the available-for-sale securities results from the
estimated fair value of the securities falling below their amortized cost
basis
and is solely attributed to changes in interest rates. As of December 31,
2006
and 2005, respectively, none of the securities held by the Company had been
downgraded by a credit rating agency since their purchase. The Company intends
and has the ability to hold the securities until the estimated fair value
of the
securities held is recovered, which may be maturity if necessary. As such,
the
Company does not believe any of the securities held are other-than-temporarily
impaired at December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively.
NOTE
6 - LOANS
The
following is a summary of the Company’s loans (in thousands):
Loan
Description
|
Principal
|
Unamortized
(Discount)
Premium
|
Net
Amortized
Cost
|
|||||||
December
31, 2006:
|
||||||||||
Bank
loans
|
$
|
613,322
|
$
|
908
|
$
|
614,230
|
||||
Commercial
real estate loans:
|
||||||||||
Whole
loans
|
190,768
|
−
|
190,768
|
|||||||
A
notes
|
42,515
|
−
|
42,515
|
|||||||
B
notes
|
203,553
|
33
|
203,586
|
|||||||
Mezzanine
loans
|
194,776
|
(5,587
|
)
|
189,189
|
||||||
Total
|
$
|
1,244,934
|
$
|
(4,646
|
)
|
$
|
1,240,288
|
|||
December
31, 2005:
|
||||||||||
Bank
loans
|
$
|
397,869
|
$
|
916
|
$
|
398,785
|
||||
Commercial
real estate loans:
|
||||||||||
B
notes
|
121,671
|
−
|
121,671
|
|||||||
Mezzanine
loans
|
49,417
|
−
|
49,417
|
|||||||
Total
|
$
|
568,957
|
$
|
916
|
$
|
569,873
|
At
December 31, 2006, the Company’s bank loan portfolio consisted of $614.0 million
of floating rate loans, which bear interest between the London Interbank Offered
Rate (“LIBOR”) plus 1.38% and LIBOR plus 7.50% with maturity dates ranging from
March 2008 to August 2022, and a $249,000 fixed rate loan, which bears interest
at 6.25% with a maturity date of September 2015.
At
December 31, 2005, the Company’s bank loan portfolio consisted of $398.5 million
of floating rate loans, which bore interest between LIBOR plus 1.00% and LIBOR
plus 7.00% with maturity dates ranging from April 2006 to October 2020, and
a
$249,000 fixed rate loan, which bore interest at 6.25% with a maturity date
of
September 2015.
RESOURCE
CAPITAL CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
DECEMBER
31, 2006
NOTE
6 - LOANS − (Continued)
The
following is a summary of the loans in the Company’s commercial real estate loan
portfolio at the dates indicated (in thousands):
Description
|
Quantity
|
Amortized
Cost
|
Contracted
Interest
Rates
|
Maturity
Dates
|
|||||||||
December
31, 2006:
|
|||||||||||||
Whole
loans, floating rate
|
9
|
$
|
190,768
|
LIBOR
plus 2.50% to LIBOR plus 3.65%
|
|
August
2007 to January
2010
|
|||||||
A
notes, floating rate
|
2
|
42,515
|
LIBOR
plus 1.25% to LIBOR plus 1.35%
|
|
January
2008 to April
2008
|
||||||||
B
notes, floating rate
|
10
|
147,196
|
LIBOR
plus 1.90% to LIBOR plus 6.25%
|
|
April
2007 to October
2008
|
||||||||
B
notes, fixed rate
|
3
|
56,390
|
7.00%
to 8.68%
|
|
July
2011 to July
2016
|
||||||||
Mezzanine
loans, floating rate
|
7
|
105,288
|
LIBOR
plus 2.20% to LIBOR plus 4.50%
|
|
August
2007 to October
2008
|
||||||||
Mezzanine
loans, fixed rate
|
8
|
83,901
|
5.78%
to 11.00%
|
|
August
2007 to September
2016
|
||||||||
Total
|
39
|
$
|
626,058
|
||||||||||
December
31, 2005:
|
|||||||||||||
B
notes, floating rate
|
7
|
$
|
121,671
|
LIBOR
plus 2.15% to LIBOR plus 6.25%
|
|
January
2007 to April
2008
|
|||||||
Mezzanine
loans, floating rate
|
4
|
44,405
|
LIBOR
plus 2.25% to LIBOR plus 4.50%
|
|
August
2007 to July
2008
|
||||||||
Mezzanine
loan, fixed rate
|
1
|
5,012
|
9.50%
|
|
May
2010
|
||||||||
Total
|
12
|
$
|
171,088
|
As
of
December 31, 2006 and 2005, the Company had not recorded an allowance for loan
losses. At December 31, 2006 and 2005, all of the Company’s loans were current
with respect to the scheduled payments of principal and interest. In reviewing
the portfolio of loans and secondary market prices, the Company did not identify
any loans with characteristics indicating that impairment had
occurred.
RESOURCE
CAPITAL CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
DECEMBER
31, 2006
NOTE
7 -DIRECT FINANCING LEASES AND NOTES
The
Company’s direct financing leases and notes have initial lease and note terms of
73 months and 54 months, as of December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively. The
interest rates on leases and notes receivable range from 6.1% to 13.4% and
from
8.2% to 12.2%, as of December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively. Investments
in
direct financing leases and notes, net of unearned income, were as follows
(in
thousands):
December
31,
|
|||||||
2006
|
2005
|
||||||
Direct
financing leases, net of unearned income
|
$
|
30,270
|
$
|
18,141
|
|||
Notes
receivable
|
58,700
|
5,176
|
|||||
Total
|
$
|
88,970
|
$
|
23,317
|
The
components of the net investment in direct financing leases are as follows
(in
thousands):
December
31,
|
|||||||
2006
|
2005
|
||||||
Total
future minimum lease payments
|
$
|
36,008
|
$
|
21,370
|
|||
Unearned
income
|
(5,738
|
)
|
(3,229
|
)
|
|||
Total
|
$
|
30,270
|
$
|
18,141
|
The
future minimum lease payments expected to be received on non-cancelable direct
financing leases and notes were as follows (in thousands):
Years
Ending December
31,
|
Direct
Financing
Leases
|
Notes
|
Total
|
|||||||
2007
|
$
|
10,705
|
$
|
10,519
|
$
|
21,224
|
||||
2008
|
9,173
|
10,923
|
20,096
|
|||||||
2009
|
6,692
|
9,613
|
16,305
|
|||||||
2010
|
5,770
|
8,059
|
13,829
|
|||||||
2011
|
2,269
|
6,100
|
8,369
|
|||||||
Thereafter
|
1,399
|
13,486
|
14,885
|
|||||||
$
|
36,008
|
$
|
58,700
|
$
|
94,708
|
NOTE
8 - BORROWINGS
The
Company finances the acquisition of its investments, including securities
available-for-sale, loans and equipment leases and notes, primarily through
the
use of secured and unsecured borrowings in the form of CDOs, repurchase
agreements, a secured term facility, warehouse facilities, trust preferred
securities issuances and other secured and unsecured borrowings.
RESOURCE
CAPITAL CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
DECEMBER
31, 2006
NOTE
8 - BORROWINGS − (Continued)
Certain
information with respect to the Company’s borrowings at December 31, 2006 and
2005 is summarized in the following table (dollars in thousands):
Outstanding
Borrowings
|
Weighted
Average Borrowing Rate
|
Weighted
Average Remaining Maturity
|
Value
of Collateral
|
||||||||||
December
31, 2006:
|
|||||||||||||
Repurchase
Agreements (1)
|
$
|
120,457
|
6.18%
|
|
16
days
|
$
|
149,439
|
||||||
RREF
CDO 2006-1 Senior Notes (2)
|
259,902
|
6.17%
|
|
39.6
years
|
|
334,682
|
|||||||
Ischus
CDO II Senior Notes (3)
|
371,159
|
5.83%
|
|
33.6
years
|
390,942
|
||||||||
Apidos
CDO I Senior Notes (4)
|
317,353
|
5.83%
|
|
10.6
years
|
339,858
|
||||||||
Apidos
CDO III Senior Notes (5)
|
258,761
|
5.81%
|
|
13.5
years
|
273,932
|
||||||||
Secured
Term Facility
|
84,673
|
6.33%
|
|
3.25
years
|
88,970
|
||||||||
Unsecured
Revolving Credit Facility
|
−
|
N/A
|
2.0
years
|
−
|
|||||||||
Unsecured
Junior Subordinated Debentures (6)
|
51,548
|
9.32%
|
|
29.7
years
|
−
|
||||||||
Total
|
$
|
1,463,853
|
6.07%
|
|
21.5
years
|
$
|
1,577,823
|
||||||
December
31, 2005:
|
|||||||||||||
Repurchase
Agreements (1)
|
$
|
1,068,277
|
4.48%
|
|
17
days
|
$
|
1,146,711
|
||||||
Ischus
CDO II Senior Notes (3)
|
370,569
|
4.80%
|
|
34.6
years
|
387,053
|
||||||||
Apidos
CDO I Senior Notes (4)
|
316,838
|
4.42%
|
|
11.6
years
|
335,831
|
||||||||
Apidos
CDO III - Warehouse Facility (5)
|
62,961
|
4.29%
|
|
90
days
|
62,954
|
||||||||
Unsecured
Revolving Credit Facility
|
15,000
|
6.37%
|
|
3.0
years
|
45,107
|
||||||||
Total
|
$
|
1,833,645
|
4.54%
|
|
9.1
years
|
$
|
1,977,656
|
(1)
|
For
December 31, 2006, collateral consists of available-for-sale securities
of
$30.1 million and loans of $119.4 million. For December 31, 2005,
collateral consists of available-for-sale securities of $975.3 million
and
loans of $171.4 million.
|
(2)
|
Amount
represents principal outstanding of $265.5 million less unamortized
issuance costs of $5.6 million as of December 31, 2006. This CDO
transaction closed in August 2006.
|
(3)
|
Amount
represents principal outstanding of $376.0 million less unamortized
issuance costs of $4.8 million and $5.4 million as of December 31,
2006
and 2005, respectively.
|
(4)
|
Amount
represents principal outstanding of $321.5 million less unamortized
issuance costs of $4.1 million and $4.7 million as of December 31,
2006
and 2005, respectively.
|
(5)
|
Amount
represents principal outstanding of $262.5 million less unamortized
issuance costs of $3.7 million as of December 31, 2006. This CDO
transaction closed in May 2006.
|
(6)
|
Amount
represents junior subordinated debentures issued to Resource Capital
Trust
I and RCC Trust II in connection with each respective trust’s issuance of
trust preferred securities in May 2006 and September 2006,
respectively.
|
RESOURCE
CAPITAL CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
DECEMBER
31, 2006
NOTE
8 - BORROWINGS − (Continued)
The
Company had repurchase agreements with the following counterparties at the
dates
indicated (dollars in thousands):
Amount
at
Risk
(1)
|
Weighted
Average Maturity in Days
|
Weighted
Average Interest Rate
|
||||||||
December
31, 2006:
|
||||||||||
Credit
Suisse Securities (USA) LLC
|
$
|
863
|
11
|
5.40%
|
|
|||||
Bear,
Stearns International Limited
|
$
|
15,538
|
17
|
6.43%
|
|
|||||
Column
Financial Inc, a subsidiary of Credit
Suisse Securities (USA) LLC.
|
$
|
13,262
|
18
|
6.42%
|
|
|||||
December
31, 2005:
|
||||||||||
Credit
Suisse Securities (USA) LLC
|
$
|
31,158
|
17
|
4.34%
|
|
|||||
Bear,
Stearns International Limited
|
$
|
36,044
|
17
|
5.51%
|
|
|||||
Deutsche
Bank AG, Cayman Islands Branch
|
$
|
16,691
|
18
|
5.68%
|
|
(1)
|
Equal
to the estimated fair value of securities or loans sold, plus accrued
interest income, minus the sum of repurchase agreement liabilities
plus
accrued interest expense.
|
Repurchase
and Credit Facilities
In
August
2006, the Company’s subsidiary, RCC Real Estate SPE 2, LLC, entered into a
master repurchase agreement with Column Financial, Inc., a wholly-owned
subsidiary of Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC, (“CS”) to finance the purchase
of commercial real estate loans. The maximum amount of the Company’s borrowing
under the repurchase agreement is $300.0 million. Each repurchase transaction
specifies its own terms, such as identification of the assets subject to the
transaction, sales price, repurchase price, rate and term. These are 30 day
contracts. The Company has guaranteed RCC Real Estate SPE 2, LLC’s obligations
under the repurchase agreement to a maximum of $300.0 million. At December
31,
2006, the Company had borrowed $54.5 million, all of which was guaranteed,
with
a weighted average interest rate of LIBOR plus 1.07%, which was 6.42% at
December 31, 2006.
In
March
2006, the Company entered into a secured term credit facility with Bayerische
Hypo - und Vereinsbank AG to finance the purchase of equipment leases and notes.
The maximum amount of the Company’s borrowing under this facility is $100.0
million.
Borrowings
under this facility bear interest at one of two rates, determined by asset
class:
·
|
Pool
A - one-month LIBOR plus 1.10%; or
|
·
|
Pool
B - one-month LIBOR plus 0.80%.
|
The
facility expires March 2010. The Company paid $300,000 and $34,000 in commitment
fees and unused line fees, respectively, as of December 31, 2006. Commitment
fees are being amortized into interest expense using the effective yield method
over the life of the facility and are recorded in the consolidated statements
of
operations. Unused line fees are expensed immediately into interest expense
and
are recorded in the consolidated statements of operations. As of December 31,
2006, the Company had borrowed $84.7 million at a weighted average interest
rate
of 6.33%.
RESOURCE
CAPITAL CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
DECEMBER
31, 2006
NOTE
8 - BORROWINGS − (Continued)
Repurchase
and Credit Facilities (continued)
In
December 2005, the Company’s subsidiary, RCC Real Estate SPE, LLC, entered into
a master repurchase agreement with Deutsche Bank AG, Cayman Islands Branch
to
finance the purchase of commercial real estate loans. The maximum amount of
the
Company’s borrowing under the repurchase agreement is $300.0 million. Each
repurchase transaction specifies its own terms, such as identification of the
assets subject to the transaction, sales price, repurchase price, rate and
term.
These are 30 day contracts. The Company had guaranteed RCC Real Estate SPE’s
obligations under the repurchase agreement to a maximum of $30.0 million, which
may be reduced based upon the amount of equity the Company has in the commercial
real estate loans held on this facility. At December 31, 2006, no borrowings
were outstanding under this facility. At December 31, 2005, the Company had
borrowed $38.6 million with a weighted average interest rate of LIBOR plus
1.32%, which was 5.68% at December 31, 2005. The
Company had no risk under this guaranty at December 31, 2006 and the Company’s
maximum risk under this guaranty was $30.0 million at December 31,
2005.
In
December 2005, the Company entered into a $15.0 million unsecured revolving
credit facility with Commerce Bank, N.A. This facility was increased to $25.0
million in April 2006. Outstanding borrowings bear interest at one of two rates
elected at the Company’s option; (i) the lender’s prime rate plus a margin
ranging from 0.50% to 1.50% based upon the Company’s leverage ratio; or (ii)
LIBOR plus a margin ranging from 1.50% to 2.50% based upon the Company’s
leverage ratio. The facility expires in December 2008. The Company paid $250,000
and $19,000 in commitment fees and unused line fees as of December 31, 2006.
Commitment fees are being amortized into interest expense using the effective
yield method over the life of the facility and are recorded in the consolidated
statements of operations. Unused line fees are expensed immediately into
interest expense and are recorded in the consolidated statements of operations.
As of December 31, 2006, no borrowings were outstanding under this facility.
At
December 31, 2005, the balance outstanding was $15.0 million at an interest
rate
of 6.37%.
In
August
2005, the Company’s subsidiary, RCC Real Estate, Inc. (“RCC Real Estate”),
entered into a master repurchase agreement with Bear, Stearns International
Limited (“Bear Stearns”) to finance the purchase of commercial real estate
loans. The maximum amount of the Company’s borrowing under the repurchase
agreement is $150.0 million. Each repurchase transaction specifies its own
terms, such as identification of the assets subject to the transaction, sales
price, repurchase price, rate and term. These are 30 day contracts. The Company
has guaranteed RCC Real Estate’s obligations under the repurchase agreement to a
maximum of $150.0 million. At December 31, 2006, the Company had borrowed $36.7
million, all of which was guaranteed, with a weighted average interest rate
of
LIBOR plus 1.08%, which was 6.43% at December 31, 2006. At December 31, 2005,
the Company had borrowed $80.8 million with a weighted average interest rate
of
LIBOR plus 1.14%, which was 5.51% at December 31, 2005.
RCC
Real
Estate has received a waiver from Bear Stearns with respect to compliance with
a
financial covenant in the master repurchase agreement between it and Bear
Stearns. The waiver was required due to the Company's net loss during the
three months ended September 30, 2006, which was caused by the loss realized
by
the Company on the sale of the remainder of its portfolio of agency ABS-RMBS
(see Note 5). Under the covenant, the Company is required to have no less
than $1.00 of net income in any period of four consecutive calendar
months. The waiver was effective through January 31, 2007.
At
December 31, 2006, the Company has complied, to the best of its knowledge,
with
all of its other financial covenants under its debt agreements.
RESOURCE
CAPITAL CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
DECEMBER
31, 2006
NOTE
8 - BORROWINGS − (Continued)
Repurchase
and Credit Facilities (continued)
In
March
2005, the Company entered into a master repurchase agreement with CS to finance
the purchase of agency ABS-RMBS securities. Each repurchase transaction
specifies its own terms, such as identification of the assets subject to the
transaction, sales price, repurchase price, rate and term. These are 30 days
contracts. On October 2, 2006, all outstanding borrowings under this facility
were repaid in full in connection with the sale of the Company’s agency ABS-RMBS
portfolio. In December 2006, the Company financed two CMBS-private placement
securities with this facility. At December 31, 2006, the Company had borrowed
$29.3 million with a weighted average interest rate of 5.40%. At December 31,
2005, the Company had borrowed $948.9 million with a weighted average interest
rate of 4.34%.
Collateralized
Debt Obligations
In
August
2006, the Company closed Resource Real Estate Funding CDO 2006-1 (“RREF
2006-1”), a $345.0 million CDO transaction that provides financing for
commercial real estate loans. The investments held by RREF 2006-1 collateralize
the debt it issued and, as a result, the investments are not available to the
Company, its creditors or stockholders. RREF 2006-1 issued a total of $308.7
million of senior notes at par to investors of which RCC Real Estate purchased
100% of the class J senior notes (rated BB:Moody’s) and class K senior notes
(rated B:Moody’s) for $43.1 million. In addition, Resource Real Estate Funding
2006-1 CDO Investor, LLC, a subsidiary of RCC Real Estate, purchased a $36.3
million equity interest representing 100% of the outstanding preference shares.
The senior notes purchased by RCC Real Estate are subordinated in right of
payment to all other senior notes issued by RREF 2006-1 but are senior in right
of payment to the preference shares. The equity interest is subordinated in
right of payment to all other securities issued by RREF 2006-1.
The
senior notes issued to investors by RREF 2006-1 consist of the following
classes: (i) $129.4 million of class A-1 notes bearing interest at 1-month
LIBOR
plus 0.32%; (ii) $17.4 million of class A-2 notes bearing interest at 1-month
LIBOR plus 0.35%; (iii) $5.0 million of class A-2 notes bearing interest at
a
fixed rate of 5.842%; (iv) $6.9 million of class B notes bearing interest at
1-month LIBOR plus 0.40%; (v) $20.7 million of class C notes bearing interest
at
1-month LIBOR plus 0.62%; (vi) $15.5 million of class D notes bearing interest
at 1-month LIBOR plus 0.80%; (vii) $20.7 million of class E notes bearing
interest at 1-month LIBOR plus 1.30%; (viii) $19.8 million of class F notes
bearing interest at 1-month LIBOR plus 1.60%; (ix) $17.3 million of class G
notes bearing interest at 1-month LIBOR plus 1.90%; (x) $12.9 million of class
H
notes bearing interest at 1-month LIBOR plus 3.75%, (xi) $14.7 million of Class
J notes bearing interest at a fixed rate of 6.00% and (xii) $28.4 million of
Class K notes bearing interest at a fixed rate of 6.00%. As a result of the
Company’s ownership of the Class J and K senior notes, these notes eliminate in
consolidation. All of the notes issued mature in August 2046, although the
Company has the right to call the notes anytime after August 2016 until
maturity. The weighted average interest rate on all notes issued to investors
was 6.17% at December 31, 2006.
In
May
2006, the Company closed Apidos CDO III, a $285.5 million CDO transaction that
provides financing for bank loans. The investments held by Apidos CDO III
collateralize the debt it issued and, as a result, the investments are not
available to the Company, its creditors or stockholders. Apidos CDO III issued
a
total of $262.5 million of senior notes at par to investors and RCC Commercial
purchased a $23.0 million equity interest representing 100% of the outstanding
preference shares. The equity interest is subordinated in right of payment
to
all other securities issued by Apidos CDO III.
RESOURCE
CAPITAL CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
DECEMBER
31, 2006
NOTE
8 - BORROWINGS − (Continued)
Collateralized
Debt Obligations − (Continued)
The
senior notes issued to investors by Apidos CDO III consist of the following
classes: (i) $212.0 million of class A-1 notes bearing interest at 3-month
LIBOR
plus 0.26%; (ii) $19.0 million of class A-2 notes bearing interest at 3-month
LIBOR plus 0.45%; (iii) $15.0 million of class B notes bearing interest at
3-month LIBOR plus 0.75%; (iv) $10.5 million of class C notes bearing interest
at 3-month LIBOR plus 1.75%; and (v) $6.0 million of class D notes bearing
interest at 3-month LIBOR plus 4.25%. All of the notes issued mature on June
12,
2020, although the Company has the right to call the notes anytime after June
12, 2011 until maturity. The weighted average interest rate on all notes was
5.81% at December 31, 2006.
In
August
2005, the Company closed Apidos CDO I, a $350.0 million CDO transaction that
provides financing for bank loans. The investments held by Apidos CDO I
collateralize the debt it issued and, as a result, the investments are not
available to the Company, its creditors or stockholders. Apidos CDO I issued
a
total of $321.5 million of senior notes at par to investors and RCC Commercial
purchased a $28.5 million equity interest representing 100% of the outstanding
preference shares. The equity interest is subordinated in right of payment
to
all other securities issued by Apidos CDO I.
The
senior notes issued to investors by Apidos CDO I consist of the following
classes: (i) $265.0 million of class A-1 notes bearing interest at 3-month
LIBOR
plus 0.26%; (ii) $15.0 million of class A-2 notes bearing interest at 3-month
LIBOR plus 0.42%; (iii) $20.5 million of class B notes bearing interest at
3-month LIBOR plus 0.75%; (iv) $13.0 million of class C notes bearing interest
at 3-month LIBOR plus 1.85%; and (v) $8.0 million of class D notes bearing
interest at a fixed rate of 9.251%. All of the notes issued mature on July
27,
2017, although the Company has the right to call the notes anytime after July
27, 2010 until maturity. The weighted average interest rate on all notes was
5.83% at December 31, 2006.
In
July
2005, the Company closed Ischus CDO II, a $403.0 million CDO transaction that
provides financing for mortgage-backed and other asset-backed securities. The
investments held by Ischus CDO II collateralize the debt it issued and, as
a
result, those investments are not available to the Company, its creditors or
stockholders. Ischus CDO II issued a total of $376.0 million of senior notes
at
par to investors and RCC Real Estate purchased a $27.0 million equity interest
representing 100% of the outstanding preference shares. In August 2006, upon
approval by the Company’s Board of Directors, the preference shares of Ischus
CDO II were transferred to the Company’s wholly-owned subsidiary, RCC
Commercial, Inc. (“RCC Commercial”). As of December 31, 2006, RCC Commercial
owned a $27.0 million equity interest representing 100% of the outstanding
preference shares. The equity interest is subordinate in right of payment to
all
other securities issued by Ischus CDO II.
The
senior notes issued to investors by Ischus CDO II consist of the following
classes: (i) $214.0 million of class A-1A notes bearing interest at 1-month
LIBOR plus 0.27%; (ii) $50.0 million of class A-1B delayed draw notes bearing
interest on the drawn amount at 1-month LIBOR plus 0.27%; (iii) $28.0 million
of
class A-2 notes bearing interest at 1-month LIBOR plus 0.45%; (iv) $55.0 million
of class B notes bearing interest at 1-month LIBOR plus 0.58%; (v) $11.0 million
of class C notes bearing interest at 1-month LIBOR plus 1.30%; and (vi) $18.0
million of class D notes bearing interest at 1-month LIBOR plus 2.85%. All
of
the notes issued mature on August 6, 2040, although the Company has the right
to
call the notes at par any time after August 6, 2009 until maturity. The weighted
average interest rate on all notes was 5.83% at December 31,
2006.
RESOURCE
CAPITAL CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
DECEMBER
31, 2006
NOTE
8 - BORROWINGS − (Continued)
Trust
Preferred Securities
In
May
2006 and September 2006, the Company formed Resource Capital Trust I (“RCTI”)
and RCC Trust II (“RCTII”), respectively, for the sole purpose of issuing and
selling trust preferred securities. In accordance with FASB Interpretation
No.
46R (“FIN 46R”), although the Company owns 100% of the common shares of RCTI and
RCTII, RCTI and RCTII are not consolidated into the Company’s consolidated
financial statements because the Company is not deemed to be the primary
beneficiaries of these entities. The Company owns 100% of the common shares
in
RCTI and RCTII. Each respective trust issued $25.0 million of preferred shares
to unaffiliated investors.
In
connection with the issuance and sale of the trust preferred securities, the
Company issued junior subordinated debentures to RCTI and RCTII of $25.8 million
each, representing the Company’s maximum exposure to loss. The debt issuance
costs associated with the junior subordinated debentures for RCTI and RCTII
at
December 31, 2006 were $816,000 and $822,000, respectively. These costs included
in other assets are being amortized into interest expense using the effective
yield method over a ten year period and are recorded in the consolidated
statements of operations.
The
rights of holders of common shares of RCTI and RCTII are subordinate to the
rights of the holders of preferred shares only in the event of a default;
otherwise, the common shareholders’ economic and voting rights are pari passu
with the preferred shareholders. The preferred and common securities of RCTI
and
RCTII are subject to mandatory redemption upon the maturity or call of the
junior subordinated debentures. Unless earlier dissolved, RCTI will dissolve
on
May 25, 2041 and RCTII will dissolve on September 29, 2041. The junior
subordinated debentures are the sole asset of RCTI and RCTII and mature on
June
30, 2036 and October 30, 2036, respectively, and may be called at par by the
Company any time after June 30, 2011 and October 30, 2011, respectively.
Interest is payable for RCTI and RCTII quarterly at a floating rate equal to
three-month LIBOR plus 3.95% per annum. The rates for RCTI and RCTII, at
December 31, 2006, were 9.31% and 9.33%, respectively. The Company records
its
investments in RCTI and RCTII’s common shares of $774,000 each as investments in
unconsolidated trusts and records dividend income upon declaration by RCTI
and
RCTII.
NOTE
9 - CAPITAL STOCK AND EARNINGS PER SHARE
The
Company had authorized 500,000,000 shares of common stock, par value $0.001
per
share, of which 23,821,434 and 15,682,334 shares (including 234,224 and 349,000
restricted shares) were outstanding as of December 31, 2006 and 2005,
respectively.
On
March
8, 2005, the Company granted 345,000 shares of restricted common stock and
options to purchase 651,666 common shares at an exercise price of $15.00 per
share, to the Manager. One third of the shares of restricted stock and options
vested on March 8, 2006. The Company also granted 4,000 shares of restricted
common stock to the Company’s four non-employee directors as part of their
annual compensation. These shares vested in full on March 8, 2006. On March
8,
2006, the Company granted 4,224 shares of restricted stock to the Company’s four
non-employee directors as part of their annual compensation. These shares vested
in full on March 8, 2007.
RESOURCE
CAPITAL CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
DECEMBER
31, 2006
NOTE
9 - CAPITAL STOCK AND EARNINGS PER SHARE − (Continued)
On
December 19, 2006, we sold 6,000,000 shares of common stock, at a price of
$16.50 per share, during our follow-on offering. We received net proceeds of
approximately $93.0 million after payment of underwriting discounts and
commissions of approximately $5.4 million and other offering expenses of
approximately $600,000.
The
following table summarizes restricted common stock transactions:
Manager
|
Non-Employee
Directors
|
Total
|
||||||||
Unvested
shares as of December 31, 2005
|
345,000
|
4,000
|
349,000
|
|||||||
Issued
|
−
|
4,224
|
4,224
|
|||||||
Vested
|
(115,000
|
)
|
(4,000
|
)
|
(119,000
|
)
|
||||
Forfeited
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
|||||||
Unvested
shares as of December 31, 2006
|
230,000
|
4,224
|
234,224
|
Pursuant
to SFAS No. 123(R), the Company is required to value any unvested shares of
restricted common stock granted to the Manager at the current market price.
The
estimated fair value of the shares of restricted stock granted, including shares
issued to the four non-employee directors, was $3.9 million and $5.2 million
at
December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively.
The
following table summarizes common stock option transactions:
Number
of Options
|
Weighted
Average Exercise Price
|
||||||
Outstanding
as of December 31, 2005
|
|
651,666
|
$
|
15.00
|
|||
Granted
|
−
|
$
|
−
|
||||
Exercised
|
−
|
$
|
−
|
||||
Forfeited
|
−
|
$
|
−
|
||||
Outstanding
as of December 31, 2006
|
651,666
|
$
|
15.00
|
As
of
December 31, 2006, 722 common stock options were exercisable. No common stock
options were exercisable as of December 31, 2005. None of the common stock
options outstanding were exercised at December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively.
The common stock options are valued using the Black-Scholes model using the
following assumptions:
December
31,
|
|||||||
2006
|
2005
|
||||||
Expected
life
|
8
years
|
10
years
|
|||||
Discount
rate
|
4.775%
|
|
4.603%
|
|
|||
Volatility
|
20.91%
|
|
20.11%
|
|
|||
Dividend
yield
|
9.73%
|
|
12.00%
|
|
RESOURCE
CAPITAL CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
DECEMBER
31, 2006
NOTE
9 - CAPITAL STOCK AND EARNINGS PER SHARE − (Continued)
The
estimated fair value of the total common stock options was $562,400 and $158,300
at December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively. The estimated fair value of each
option grant at December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively, was $1.061 and $0.243.
For the year ended December 31, 2006 and the period from March 8, 2005 (date
operations commenced) through December 31, 2005 (hereafter referred to as the
period ended December 31, 2005), the components of equity compensation expense
are as follows (in thousands):
December
31, 2006
|
Period
from
March
8, 2005
(Date
Operations Commenced) to
December
31,
2005
|
||||||
Options
granted to Manager
|
$
|
371
|
$
|
79
|
|||
Restricted
shares granted to Manager
|
2,001
|
2,581
|
|||||
Restricted
shares granted to non-employee directors
|
60
|
49
|
|||||
Total
equity compensation expense
|
$
|
2,432
|
$
|
2,709
|
During
the year ended December 31, 2006, the Manager received 14,076 shares as
incentive compensation, valued at $194,000, pursuant to the management
agreement. No incentive fee compensation shares were issued as of December
31,
2005.
In
connection with the July 2006 hiring of a commercial mortgage direct loan
origination team by Resource Real Estate, Inc. (see Related Party Transactions
-
Note 11), the Company agreed to issue up to 100,000 shares of common stock
and
options to purchase an additional 100,000 shares of common stock, if certain
loan origination performance thresholds are achieved by this origination team
on
behalf of the Company’s account. The performance thresholds are
two-tiered. Upon the achievement of $400.0 million of direct loan
originations of commercial real estate loans, 60,000 restricted shares of common
stock and options to purchase an additional 60,000 shares of common stock are
issuable. Upon the achievement of another $300.0 million of direct loan
originations of commercial real estate loans, a second tranche of 40,000
restricted shares of common stock and options to purchase another
40,000 shares
of
common stock are issuable. The
restricted shares and options to purchase shares of common stock vest over
a
two-year period after issuance. The Company accounts for equity instruments
issued to non-employees for goods or services in accordance with the provisions
of SFAS No. 123(R) and Emerging Task Force Issue No. 96-18, “Accounting for
Equity Instruments That Are Issued to Other Than Employees for Acquiring, or
in
Conjunction with Selling, Goods or Services” ("EITF 96-18"). Accordingly, when
the non-employees complete their performance or when a performance commitment
is
reached, the Company is required to measure the fair value of the equity
instruments. No expense was recognized for the year ended December 31,
2006, as neither a performance commitment nor completion of performance was
achieved.
RESOURCE
CAPITAL CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
DECEMBER
31, 2006
NOTE
9 - CAPITAL STOCK AND EARNINGS PER SHARE − (Continued)
The
following table presents a reconciliation of basic and diluted earnings per
share for the periods presented as follows (in thousands, except share and
per
share amounts):
December
31,
2006
|
Period
from
March
8, 2005
(Date
Operations Commenced) to
December
31,
2005
|
||||||
Basic:
|
|||||||
Net
income
|
$
|
15,606
|
$
|
10,908
|
|||
Weighted
average number of shares outstanding
|
17,538,273
|
15,333,334
|
|||||
Basic
net income per share
|
$
|
0.89
|
$
|
0.71
|
|||
Diluted:
|
|||||||
Net
income
|
$
|
15,606
|
$
|
10,908
|
|||
Weighted
average number of shares outstanding
|
17,538,273
|
15,333,334
|
|||||
Additional
shares due to assumed conversion of dilutive instruments
|
343,082
|
72,380
|
|||||
Adjusted
weighted-average number of common shares outstanding
|
17,881,355
|
15,405,714
|
|||||
Diluted
net income per share
|
$
|
0.87
|
$
|
0.71
|
NOTE
10 - THE MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT
On
March
8, 2005, the Company entered into a Management Agreement pursuant to which
the
Manager will provide the Company investment management, administrative and
related services. The Manager receives fees and is reimbursed for its expenses
as follows:
·
|
A
monthly base management fee equal to 1/12th of the amount of the
Company’s
equity multiplied by 1.50%. Under the Management Agreement, ‘‘equity’’ is
equal to the net proceeds from any issuance of shares of common stock
less
other offering related costs plus or minus the Company’s retained earnings
(excluding non-cash equity compensation incurred in current or prior
periods) less any amounts the Company paid for common stock repurchases.
The calculation may be adjusted for one-time events due to changes
in GAAP
as well as other non-cash charges, upon approval of the independent
directors of the Company.
|
·
|
Incentive
compensation calculated as follows: (i) 25% of the dollar amount
by which,
(A) the Company’s net income (determined in accordance with GAAP) per
common share (before non-cash equity compensation expense and incentive
compensation) for a quarter (based on the weighted average number
of
shares outstanding) exceeds, (B) an amount equal to (1) the weighted
average share price of shares of common stock in the offerings of
the
Company, multiplied by, (2) the greater of (A) 2.00% or (B) 0.50%
plus
one-fourth of the Ten Year Treasury rate as defined in the Management
Agreement for such quarter, multiplied by, (ii) the weighted average
number of common shares outstanding for the quarter. The calculation
may
be adjusted for one-time events due to changes in GAAP as well as
other
non-cash charges upon approval of the independent directors of the
Company.
|
·
|
Reimbursement
of out-of-pocket expenses and certain other costs incurred by the
Manager
that relate directly to the Company and its
operations.
|
RESOURCE
CAPITAL CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER
31, 2005 − (Continued)
NOTE
10 - THE MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT − (Continued)
Incentive
compensation is paid quarterly. Up to 75% of the incentive compensation is
paid
in cash and at least 25% is paid in the form of a stock award. The Manager
may
elect to receive more than 25% of its incentive compensation in stock. All
shares are fully vested upon issuance. However, the Manager may not sell such
shares for one year after the incentive compensation becomes due and payable.
Shares payable as incentive compensation are valued as follows:
·
|
if
such shares are traded on a securities exchange, at the average of
the
closing prices of the shares on such exchange over the thirty day
period
ending three days prior to the issuance of such
shares;
|
·
|
if
such shares are actively traded over-the-counter, at the average
of the
closing bid or sales price as applicable over the thirty day period
ending
three days prior to the issuance of such shares;
and
|
·
|
if
there is no active market for such shares, the value shall be the
fair
market value thereof, as reasonably determined in good faith by the
board
of directors of the Company.
|
The
initial term of the Management Agreement ends March 31, 2008. The Management
Agreement automatically renews for a one year term at the end of the initial
term and each renewal term. With a two-thirds vote of the independent directors,
the independent directors may elect to terminate the Management Agreement
because of the following:
·
|
unsatisfactory
performance; and/or
|
·
|
unfair
compensation payable to the Manager where fair compensation cannot
be
agreed upon by the Company (pursuant to a vote of two-thirds of the
independent directors) and the
Manager.
|
In
the
event that the Agreement is terminated based on the provisions disclosed above,
the Company must pay the Manager a termination fee equal to four times the
sum
of the average annual base management fee and the average annual incentive
during the two 12-month periods immediately preceding the date of such
termination. The Company is also entitled to terminate the Management Agreement
for cause (as defined therein) without payment of any termination
fee.
The
base
management fee for the year ended December 31, 2006 was $3.7 million. The
incentive management fee for the year ended December 31, 2006 was $1.1 million.
The base management fee for the period ended December 31, 2005 was $2.7 million.
The incentive management fee for the period ended December 31, 2005 was
$344,000.
At
December 31, 2006, the Company was indebted to the Manager for base and
incentive management fees of $711,000 and $683,000, respectively, and for
expense reimbursements of $87,000. At December 31, 2005, the Company was
indebted to the Manager for base and incentive management fees of $552,000
and
$344,000, respectively, and for expense reimbursements of $143,000. These
amounts are included in management and incentive fee payable and accounts
payable and accrued liabilities, respectively.
RESOURCE
CAPITAL CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
DECEMBER
31, 2006
NOTE
11 - RELATED-PARTY TRANSACTIONS
Relationship
with Resource Real Estate
Resource
Real Estate, Inc., a subsidiary of RAI, originates, finances and manages the
Company’s commercial real estate loan portfolio, including whole loans, A notes,
B notes and mezzanine loans. The Company reimburses Resource Real Estate for
loan origination costs associated with all loans originated. At December 31,
2006 and 2005, the Company was indebted to Resource Real Estate for loan
origination costs in connection with the Company’s commercial real estate loan
portfolio of $753,000 and $22,000, respectively.
Relationship
with LEAF Financial Corporation (“LEAF”)
LEAF,
a
majority-owned subsidiary of RAI, originates and manages equipment leases and
notes on the Company’s behalf. The Company purchases these leases and notes from
LEAF at a price equal to their book value plus a reimbursable origination cost
not to exceed 1% to compensate LEAF for its origination costs. At December
31,
2006 and December 31, 2005, we acquired $106.7 million and $25.1 million of
equipment lease and note investments from LEAF, including $1.1 million and
$247,000 of origination cost reimbursements, respectively. In addition, the
Company pays LEAF an annual servicing fee, equal to 1% of the book value of
managed assets, for servicing the Company’s equipment leases and notes. At
December 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005, the Company was indebted to LEAF for
servicing fees in connection with the Company’s equipment finance portfolio of
$229,000 and $41,000, respectively. The LEAF servicing fees for the year ended
December 31, 2006 and 2005, were $659,000 and $64,000,
respectively.
During
year ended December 31, 2006, the Company sold four notes back to LEAF at a
price equal to their book value. The total proceeds received on the outstanding
notes receivable were $17.3 million.
Relationship
with RAI
At
December 31, 2006, RAI, had an 8.0% ownership interest in the Company,
consisting of 1,900,000 shares it had purchased, 14,076 shares it received
as
incentive compensation pursuant to the management agreement and 307 vested
shares associated with the issuance of restricted stock. In addition, executive
officers of the Manager and its affiliates had a 0.8% ownership interest in
the
Company, consisting of 156,388 shares they had purchased and 40,832 vested
shares associated with the issuance of restricted stock as of December 31,
2006.
All purchased shares were acquired in offerings by the Company at the same
price
at which shares were purchased by the other investors in those
offerings.
The
Company entered into a management agreement under which the Manager receives
substantial fees. From March 8, 2005, the date the Company commenced
operations, through December 31, 2005, the Manager earned base management
fees of approximately $2.7 million, incentive compensation fees of $344,000.
For
the year ended December 31, 2006, the Manager earned base management fees of
approximately $3.7 million, incentive compensation fees of $1.1 million. The
Company may also reimburse the Manager and Resource America for financial
services expense, rent and other expenses incurred in performance under the
management agreement. From March 8, 2005, the date the Company commenced
operations, through December 31, 2005, the Company reimbursed the Manager
$797,000 for such expenses. For the year ended December 31, 2006, the Company
reimbursed the Manager $954,000 for such expenses. As of December 31, 2006,
the
Company executed four CDO transactions. These CDO transactions are structured
for the Company by the Manager, however, the Manager is not separately
compensated by the Company for these transactions. In addition, the Company
may
reimburse the Manager and Resource America for expenses for employees of
Resource America who perform legal, accounting, due diligence and other services
that outside professionals or consultants would otherwise perform.
RESOURCE
CAPITAL CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
DECEMBER
31, 2006
NOTE
11 - RELATED-PARTY TRANSACTIONS − (Continued)
Relationship
with Law Firm
Until
1996, the Company’s Chairman, Edward Cohen, was of counsel to Ledgewood, P.C., a
law firm. The Company paid Ledgewood $361,000 for the year ended December 31,
2006 and $876,000 for the period ended December 31, 2005. Mr. Cohen receives
certain debt service payments from Ledgewood related to the termination of
his
affiliation with Ledgewood and its redemption of his interest.
NOTE
12 - DISTRIBUTIONS
In
order
to qualify as a REIT, the Company must currently distribute at least 90% of
its
taxable income. In addition, the Company must distribute 100% of its taxable
income in order not to be subject to corporate federal income taxes on retained
income. The Company anticipates it will distribute substantially all of its
taxable income to its stockholders. Because taxable income differs from cash
flow from operations due to non-cash revenues or expenses (such as
depreciation), in certain circumstances, the Company may generate operating
cash
flow in excess of its distributions or, alternatively, may be required to borrow
to make sufficient distribution payments.
During
the year ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, the Company declared and paid
distributions totaling $26.5 million and $13.5 million, respectively, or $1.49
and $0.86 per share, respectively, including a distribution of $0.38 per share
of common stock, $6.8 million in the aggregate, declared on December 8, 2006
and
paid on January 4, 2007 to stockholders of record as of December 15, 2006 along
with a special dividend of $0.05 per common share $891,000 in the aggregate,
which was paid on January 4, 2007 to stockholders of record as of December
15,
2006. For tax purposes, 100% of the distributions declared in 2006 and 2005
have
been classified as ordinary income.
On
January 13, 2006, the Company paid a special dividend to stockholders of record
on January 4, 2006, including holders of restricted stock, consisting of
warrants to purchase the Company’s common stock. Each warrant entitles the
holder to purchase one share of common stock at an exercise price of $15.00
per
share. Stockholders received one warrant for each ten shares of common stock
and
restricted stock held. If an existing stockholder owned shares in other than
a
ten-share increment, the stockholder received an additional warrant. The
warrants will expire on January 13, 2009 and will not be exercisable until
January 13, 2007. An aggregate of 1,568,244 shares are issuable upon exercise
of
the warrants. See Note 18 -"Subsequent Events" for a further discussion on
warrants.
NOTE
13 - FAIR VALUE OF FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS
SFAS
No.
107, “Disclosure About Fair Value of Financial Instruments,” requires
disclosure of the fair value of financial instruments for which it is
practicable to estimate value. The estimated fair value of available-for-sale
securities, derivatives and direct financing leases and notes is equal to their
respective carrying value presented in the consolidated balance sheets. The
estimated fair value of loans held for investment was $1.2 billion and $571.3
million as of December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively. The estimated fair
value
of all other assets and liabilities approximate carrying value as of December
31, 2006 and 2005 due to the short-term nature of these
items.
RESOURCE
CAPITAL CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
DECEMBER
31, 2006
NOTE
14 - INTEREST RATE RISK AND DERIVATIVE INSTRUMENTS
The
primary market risk to the Company is interest rate risk. Interest rates are
highly sensitive to many factors, including governmental monetary and tax
policies, domestic and international economic and political considerations
and
other factors beyond the Company’s control. Changes in the general level of
interest rates can affect net interest income, which is the difference between
the interest income earned on interest-earning assets and the interest expense
incurred in connection with the interest-bearing liabilities, by affecting
the
spread between the interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities.
Changes in the level of interest rates also can affect the value of the
Company’s interest-earning assets and the Company’s ability to realize gains
from the sale of these assets. A decline in the value of the Company’s
interest-earning assets pledged as collateral for borrowings under repurchase
agreements could result in the counterparties demanding additional collateral
pledges or liquidation of some of the existing collateral to reduce borrowing
levels.
The
Company seeks to manage the extent to which net income changes as a function
of
changes in interest rates by matching adjustable-rate assets with variable-rate
borrowings. During periods of changing interest rates, interest rate mismatches
could negatively impact the Company’s consolidated financial condition,
consolidated results of operations and consolidated cash flows. In addition,
the
Company mitigates the potential impact on net income of periodic and lifetime
coupon adjustment restrictions in its investment portfolio by entering into
interest rate hedging agreements such as interest rate caps and interest rate
swaps.
At
December 31, 2006, the Company had 12 interest rate swap contracts and five
forward interest rate swap contracts. The Company will pay an average fixed
rate
of 5.33% and receive a variable rate equal to one-month and three-month LIBOR
on
the interest rate swap contracts. The aggregate notional amount of these
contracts was $150.9 million. The Company will pay an average fixed rate of
5.19% and receive a variable rate equal to one-month and three-month LIBOR
on
the forward interest rate swap contracts, which will commence in February 2007.
The aggregate notional amount of these contracts was $74.0 million. In addition,
the Company had one interest rate cap agreement outstanding whereby it reduced
its exposure to variability in future cash outflows attributable to changes
in
LIBOR. The aggregate notional amount of this contract was $15.0 million at
December 31, 2006.
At
December 31, 2005, the Company had six interest rate swap contracts outstanding
whereby the Company will pay an average fixed rate of 3.89% and receive a
variable rate equal to one-month and three-month LIBOR. The aggregate notional
amount of these contracts was $972.2 million at December 31, 2005. In addition,
the Company had one interest rate cap agreement outstanding whereby it reduced
its exposure to variability in future cash outflows attributable to changes
in
LIBOR. The aggregate notional amount of this contract was $15.0 million at
December 31, 2005.
The
estimated fair value of the Company’s interest rate swaps, forward swaps and
interest rate cap was ($3.1) million and $3.0 million as of December 31, 2006
and 2005, respectively. The Company had aggregate unrealized losses of $3.2
million and aggregate unrealized gains of $2.8 million on the interest rate
swap
agreements and interest rate cap agreement, as of December 31, 2006 and 2005,
respectively, which is recorded in accumulated other comprehensive loss. In
connection with the January 2006 sale of a portion of the Company’s agency
ABS-RMBS portfolio, the Company realized a swap termination gain of $881,000,
which is reflected in interest expense in the Company’s consolidated statements
of operations. In connection with the sale of the Company’s remaining agency
ABS-RMBS portfolio on September 27, 2006, the Company realized a swap
termination gain of $2.6 million. This swap agreement had an original
termination date of October 2007. The realized gain is reflected in net realized
gains (losses) on investments in the Company’s consolidated statements of
operations.
RESOURCE
CAPITAL CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
DECEMBER
31, 2006
NOTE
14 - INTEREST RATE RISK AND DERIVATIVE INSTRUMENTS −
(Continued)
Changes
in interest rates may also have an effect on the rate of mortgage principal
prepayments and, as a result, prepayments on mortgage-backed securities in
the
Company’s investment portfolio. The Company seeks to mitigate the effect of
changes in the mortgage principal repayment rate by balancing assets purchased
at a premium with assets purchased at a discount. At December 31, 2006, the
aggregate discount exceeded the aggregate premium on the Company’s
mortgage-backed securities by approximately $3.1 million. At December 31,
2005, the aggregate discount exceeded the aggregate premium on the Company’s
mortgage-backed securities by approximately $2.8 million.
NOTE
15 - STOCK INCENTIVE PLAN
Upon
formation of the Company, the 2005 Stock Incentive Plan (the “Plan”) was adopted
for the purpose of attracting and retaining executive officers, employees,
directors and other persons and entities that provide services to the Company.
The Plan authorizes the issuance of options to purchase common stock and the
grant of stock awards, performance shares and stock appreciation
rights.
Up
to
1,533,333 shares of common stock are available for issuance under the Plan.
The
share authorization, the incentive stock option limit and the terms of
outstanding awards will be adjusted as the board of directors determines is
appropriate in the event of a stock dividend, stock split, reclassification
of
shares or similar events. Upon completion of the March 2005 private placement,
the Company granted the Manager 345,000 shares of restricted stock and options
to purchase 651,666 shares of common stock with an exercise price of $15.00
per
share under the Plan, none of which were exercisable as of December 31, 2006
and
2005. The Company’s non-employee directors were also granted 4,224 and 4,000
shares of restricted stock as part of their annual compensation for the year
ended December 31, 2006 and the period ended December 31, 2005,
respectively.
NOTE
16 - INCOME TAXES
For
financial reporting purposes, current and deferred taxes are provided for on
the
portion of earnings recognized by the Company with respect to its interest
in
Resource TRS, a domestic TRS, because it is taxed as a regular subchapter C
corporation under the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as
amended.
During
the year ended December 31, 2006, the Company recorded a $67,000 provision
for
income taxes related to the earnings for Resource TRS. This provision is
included in general and administrative expenses on the Consolidated Statement
of
Operations. During the period ended December 31, 2005, no such provision was
recorded.
Apidos
CDO I and Apidos CDO III, the Company’s foreign TRSs, are organized as exempted
companies incorporated with limited liability under the laws of the Cayman
Islands, and are generally exempt from federal and state income tax at the
corporate level because their activities in the United States are limited to
trading in stock and securities for their own account. Therefore, despite their
status as taxable REIT subsidiaries, they generally will not be subject to
corporate tax on their earnings and no provision for income taxes is required;
however, because they are “controlled foreign corporations,” the Company will
generally be required to include Apidos CDO I’s and Apidos CDO III’s current
taxable income in its calculation of REIT taxable income.
RESOURCE
CAPITAL CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
DECEMBER
31, 2006
NOTE
17 - QUARTERLY RESULTS
The
following is a presentation of the quarterly results of operations for the
year
ended December 31, 2006 and period ended December 31, 2005:
Year
ended December 31, 2006
|
March
31
|
June
30
|
September
30
|
December
31
|
|||||||||
(unaudited)
|
(unaudited)
|
(unaudited)
|
(unaudited)
|
||||||||||
(in
thousands, except per share data)
|
|||||||||||||
Interest
income
|
$
|
29,433
|
$
|
34,895
|
$
|
39,148
|
$
|
33,272
|
|||||
Interest
expense
|
21,202
|
26,519
|
30,855
|
23,275
|
|||||||||
Net
interest income
|
8,231
|
8,376
|
8,293
|
9,997
|
|||||||||
Other
(loss) revenue
|
(699
|
)
|
168
|
(7,930
|
)
|
314
|
|||||||
Expenses
|
2,382
|
2,479
|
2,764
|
3,519
|
|||||||||
Net
income (loss)
|
$
|
5,150
|
$
|
6,065
|
$
|
(2,401
|
)
|
$
|
6,792
|
||||
Net
income (loss) per share − basic
|
$
|
0.31
|
$
|
0.35
|
$
|
(0.14
|
)
|
$
|
0.37
|
||||
Net
income (loss) per share − diluted
|
$
|
0.31
|
$
|
0.34
|
$
|
(0.14
|
)
|
$
|
0.36
|
Period
ended December 31, 2005
|
Period
from March 8 to March 31
|
June
30
|
September
30
|
December
31
|
|||||||||
(audited)
|
(audited)
|
(unaudited)
|
(unaudited)
|
||||||||||
(in
thousands, except per share data)
|
|||||||||||||
Interest
income
|
$
|
694
|
$
|
12,399
|
$
|
21,596
|
$
|
26,698
|
|||||
Interest
expense
|
210
|
7,930
|
15,595
|
19,327
|
|||||||||
Net
interest income
|
484
|
4,469
|
6,001
|
7,371
|
|||||||||
Other
revenue (loss)
|
−
|
(14
|
)
|
192
|
133
|
||||||||
Expenses
|
532
|
2,175
|
2,417
|
2,604
|
|||||||||
Net
(loss) income
|
$
|
(48
|
)
|
$
|
2,280
|
$
|
3,776
|
$
|
4,900
|
||||
Net
(loss) income per share − basic
|
$
|
(0.00
|
)
|
$
|
0.15
|
$
|
0.25
|
$
|
0.32
|
||||
Net
(loss) income per share − diluted
|
$
|
(0.00
|
)
|
$
|
0.14
|
$
|
0.24
|
$
|
0.32
|
NOTE
18 - SUBSEQUENT EVENTS
On
January 8,
2007,
the Company entered into an agreement with a CDO issuer to purchase 10,000
preference shares in the CDO. The
agreement provides for guarantees by the Company on the first $10.0 million
of
losses on a portfolio of bank loans. This guarantee, secured by a $5.0
million cash deposit, expires upon the closing of the associated CDO which
is
expected in the second quarter of 2007.
On
January 8, 2007, in connection with the Company’s December 2006 follow-on
offering, the underwriters exercised their over-allotment option with respect
to
650,000 of the 900,000 shares available generating net proceeds of $10.1
million. These proceeds were used to repay debt under the Company’s repurchase
agreements.
RESOURCE
CAPITAL CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
DECEMBER
31, 2006
NOTE
18 - SUBSEQUENT EVENTS − (Continued)
On
March
20, 2007, the Company’s board of directors declared a quarterly distribution of
$0.39 per share of common stock, $9.7 million in the aggregate, which will
be
paid on April 16, 2007 to stockholders of record as of March 30,
2007.
On
January 5, 2007, the Company issued 184,541 shares of restricted common stock
under its 2005 Stock Incentive Plan valued at $3.2 million based on the closing
price of the Company’s stock as of the date of grant. These restricted shares
vest 33.3% on January 5, 2008. The balance will vest quarterly thereafter
through January 5, 2010.
On
January 13, 2007, the warrants issued as part of a special dividend paid on
January 13, 2006 became exercisable. As of March 23, 2007, 324,878 warrants
had
been exercised which resulted in the receipt of net proceeds of $4.9
million.
None.
We
maintain disclosure controls and procedures that are designed to ensure that
information required to be disclosed in our Securities Exchange Act of 1934
reports is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods
specified in the Securities and Exchange Commission’s rules and forms, and that
such information is accumulated and communicated to our management, including
our Chief Executive Officer and our Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate,
to
allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. In designing and
evaluating the disclosure controls and procedures, our management recognized
that any controls and procedures, no matter how well designed and operated,
can
provide only reasonable assurance of achieving the desired control objectives,
and our management necessarily was required to apply its judgment in evaluating
the cost-benefit relationship of possible controls and procedures.
Under
the
supervision of our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, we
have
carried out an evaluation of the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and
procedures as of the end of the period covered by this report. Based upon that
evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded
that our disclosure controls and procedures are effective.
There
have been no significant changes in our internal controls over financial
reporting that have partially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially
affect, our internal control over financial reporting during our most
recent fiscal year.
None.
PART
III
All
members of the board of directors are elected for a term of one year or until
their successors are elected and qualified. Information is set forth below
regarding the principal occupation of each of our directors. There are no family
relationships among the directors and executive officers except that Jonathan
Z.
Cohen, our Chief Executive Officer, President and a director, is a son of Edward
E. Cohen, our Chairman of the Board.
Names
of Directors, Principal Occupation and Other Information
Edward
E. Cohen,
age 68,
has been our Chairman since March 2005. Mr. Cohen is Chairman of Resource
America, a position he has held since 1990. He was Resource America’s Chief
Executive Officer from 1988 to 2004 and its President from 2000 to 2003. He
is
Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President of Atlas America, Inc., a
publicly-traded (NASDAQ: ATLS) energy company, a position he has held since
2000, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Atlas Pipeline Holdings GP, LLC,
a
wholly-owned subsidiary of Atlas America that is the general partner of Atlas
Pipeline Holdings, L.P., a publicly-traded (NYSE: AHD) holding company, a
position he has held since 2006, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Atlas
Energy Resources, LLC, a publicly-traded (NYSE:ATN) energy company, a position
he has held since 2006 and Chairman of the Managing Board of Atlas Pipeline
Partners GP, LLC, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Atlas America that is the general
partner of Atlas Pipeline Partners, L.P., a publicly-traded (NYSE: APL) natural
gas pipeline company. He is also a director of TRM Corporation, a
publicly-traded (NASDAQ: TRMM) consumer services company, and Chairman of
Brandywine Construction & Management, Inc., a privately-held real
estate management company. From 1981 to 1999 he was Chairman of the Executive
Committee of JeffBanks, Inc., a bank holding company acquired by Hudson United
Bancorporation. From 1969 to 1989 he was Chairman of the Executive Committee
of
State National Bank of Maryland (now a part of Wachovia Bank).
Jonathan
Z. Cohen,
age 36,
has been our Chief Executive Officer and President and a director since March
2005. Mr. Cohen has been President since 2003, Chief Executive Officer
since 2004 and a Director since 2002 of Resource America. He was Executive
Vice
President of Resource America from 2001 to 2003, and a Senior Vice President
from 1999 to 2001. He has been Vice Chairman of the Managing Board of Atlas
Pipeline Partners GP since its formation in 1999, Vice Chairman of Atlas America
since 2000, Vice Chairman of Atlas Energy Resources since 2006 and Vice Chairman
of Atlas Pipeline Holdings GP since 2006. He was the Vice Chairman of RAIT
Investment Trust, (now RAIT Financial Trust) a publicly-traded (NYSE: RAS)
REIT,
from 2003 to 2006, and Secretary, trustee and member of RAIT’s investment
committee from 1997 to 2006. Since 2003 he has been the general partner of
Castine Partners, L.P., a financial services hedge fund.
Walter
T. Beach,
age 40,
has been a director since March 2005. Mr. Beach has been Managing Director
of Beach Investment Counsel, Inc., an investment management firm, since 1997.
From 1993 to 1997, Mr. Beach was a Senior Analyst and Director of Research
at Widmann, Siff and Co., Inc., an investment management firm where, beginning
in 1994, he was responsible for the firm’s investment decisions for its
principal equity product. Before that he was an associate and financial analyst
at Essex Financial Group, a consulting and merchant banking firm, and an analyst
at Industry Analysis Group, an industry and economic consulting firm.
Mr. Beach has served as a director of The Bancorp, Inc., a publicly-traded
(NASDAQ: TBBK) Delaware bank holding company, and its subsidiary bank, The
Bancorp Bank, since 1999.
William
B. Hart,
age 63,
has been a director since March 2005. Mr. Hart was Chairman of the Board of
Trustees of the National Trust for Historic Preservation from 1999 to 2004.
He
was also a director of Anthem, Inc. (now Wellpoint, Inc.), a publicly-traded
(NYSE: WLP) health insurance company, from 2000 to 2004. Mr. Hart was
Director of SIS Bancorp (now Banknorth Massachusetts, a division of Banknorth,
N.A.) from 1995 to 2000. From 1988 to 1999, Mr. Hart served in various
positions with Blue Cross/Blue Shield of New Hampshire, ending as Chairman
of
the Audit Committee and Chairman of the Board of Directors from 1996 to 1999.
He
also served as President of the Foundation for the National Capital Region,
Washington, DC, from 1993 to 1996 and President of The Dunfey Group, a private
investment
firm, from 1986 to 1998. From 1986 to 1994 he was also director of First NH
Banks where he was Chairman of the Audit Committee from 1992 to
1994.
Gary
Ickowicz,
age 51,
has been a director since February 2007. Mr. Ickowicz has been a Principal
of
Lazard Freres Real Estate Investors, a manager of funds invested in debt and
equity securities of North American real estate assets and enterprises, since
2001. In addition, he was a director of Lazard Freres’s real estate investment
banking unit from 1989 through 2001. Since 2000 he has been a director of Grant
Street Settlement, and since 2002 he has been a director of NCC/Neumann, both
not-for-profit developers of senior housing. Since 2001 he has been a director
of Commonwealth Atlantic Properties, Inc., a privately-held REIT. From 2001
to
2006 he was a director of Kimsouth, Inc., a joint venture with Kimco Realty
Corporation, a publicly-traded (NYSE: KIM) REIT.
Murray
S. Levin,
age 64,
has been a director since March 2005. Mr. Levin is a senior litigation
partner at Pepper Hamilton LLP, a law firm with which he has been associated
since 1970. Mr. Levin served as the first American president of the
Association Internationale des Jeunes Avocats (Young Lawyers International
Association), headquartered in Western Europe. He is a past president of the
American Chapter and a member of the board of directors of the Union
Internationale des Avocats (International Association of Lawyers), a Paris-based
organization that is the world’s oldest international lawyers association.
Mr. Levin was a member of the managing board of Atlas Pipeline Partners GP
from 2001 to March 2005.
P.
Sherrill Neff,
age 55,
has been a director since March 2005. Mr. Neff is a founder of Quaker
BioVentures, Inc., a life sciences venture fund, and has been Managing Partner
since 2002. He was a director of Resource America from 1998 to March 2005.
From
1994 to 2002 he was President and Chief Financial Officer, and from 1994 to
2003, a director of Neose Technologies, Inc., a publicly-traded (NASDAQ: NTEC)
life sciences company. Mr. Neff was also a director of The Bancorp from its
formation in 1999 until 2002.
Non-Director
Executive Officers
David
J. Bryant,
age 49,
has been our Chief Financial Officer, Chief Accounting Officer and Treasurer
since June 2006. From 2005 to 2006 Mr. Bryant served as Senior
Vice-President, Real Estate Services, at Pennsylvania Real Estate Investment
Trust, a publicly-traded (NYSE: PEI) REIT principally engaged in owning,
managing, developing and leasing malls and strip centers in the eastern United
States. Prior to that, from 2000 to 2005, Mr. Bryant served as PEI’s Senior
Vice President—Finance and Treasurer, and was its principal accounting
officer.
Jeffrey
D. Blomstrom,
age 38,
has been our Senior Vice President—CDO structuring since March 2005.
Mr. Blomstrom has been President and Managing Director of Resource
Financial Fund Management, Inc., a subsidiary of Resource America, since 2003.
Mr. Blomstrom currently serves as the head of collateral origination and as
a member of the credit committee for Trapeza Capital, Resource America’s trust
preferred security collateral manager. From 2001 to 2003 Mr. Blomstrom was
a Managing Director at Cohen and Company, a Philadelphia-based investment bank
specializing in the financial services sector. From 2000 to 2001 he was Senior
Vice President of iATMglobal.net, Inc., an ATM software development company.
Mr. Blomstrom was, from 1999 to 2000, an associate at Covington &
Burling, a law firm, where he focused on mergers and acquisitions and corporate
governance.
Steven
J. Kessler,
age 64,
has been our Senior Vice President—Finance since September 2005 and, before
that, served as our Chief Financial Officer, Chief Accounting Officer and
Treasurer from March 2005. Mr. Kessler has been Executive Vice President
since 2005 and Chief Financial Officer since 1997 and was Senior Vice President
from 1997 to 2005 of Resource America. He was Vice President—Finance and
Acquisitions at Kravco Company, a national shopping center developer and
operator, from 1994 to 1997. He has been a Trustee of GMH Communities Trust,
a
publicly traded (NYSE: GCT) specialty housing REIT, since 2004. From 1983 to
1993 he was employed by Strouse Greenberg & Co., a regional full
service real estate company, ending as Chief Financial Officer and Chief
Operating Officer. Before that, he was a partner at Touche Ross & Co.
(now Deloitte & Touche LLP), independent public
accountants.
David
E. Bloom,
age 42,
has been our Senior Vice President—Real Estate Investments since March 2005.
Mr. Bloom has been Senior Vice President of Resource America since 2001. He
has also been President of Resource Real Estate, Inc., a wholly owned real
estate subsidiary of Resource America, since 2004 and President of Resource
Capital Partners from 2002 to 2006. From 2001 to 2002 he was President of
Resource Properties. Before that he was Senior Vice President at Colony Capital,
LLC, an international real estate opportunity fund, from 1999 to 2001. From
1998
to 1999 he was Director at Sonnenblick-Goldman Company, a real estate investment
bank. From 1995 to 1998 he was an attorney at the law firm of Willkie
Farr & Gallagher, LLP.
Other
Significant Employees
The
following sets forth certain information regarding other significant employees
of the Manager and Resource America who provide services to us:
Christopher
D. Allen,
age 37,
has been our Senior Vice President—Commercial Lending since March 2005.
Mr. Allen has been a Managing Director of Resource Financial Fund
Management since 2003. At Resource Financial Fund Management, Mr. Allen is
in charge of identifying, implementing and overseeing new CDO products. He
is a
member of the investment committee of Ischus Capital Management, LLC, a
wholly-owned asset management subsidiary of Resource America, and is also a
member of the investment committee of Apidos Capital Management, LLC, a
wholly-owned asset management subsidiary of Resource America, where he serves
as
the Chief Operating Officer and Director of Product Management. Before joining
Resource Financial Fund Management, from 2002 to 2003 he was a Vice President
at
Trenwith Securities, the investment banking arm of BDO Seidman, LLP, where
he
was in charge of corporate finance, mergers and acquisitions and restructuring
transactions. From 1994 to 1997 he was an Associate with Citicorp Venture
Capital working on leveraged buyout and recapitalization
transactions.
Gretchen
L. Bergstresser,
age 44,
has been our Senior Vice President—Bank Loans since March 2005.
Ms. Bergstresser has been the President and Senior Portfolio Manager of
Apidos Capital Management since 2005. Before joining Apidos Capital Management,
from 2003 to 2005 she was the Managing Director and Portfolio Manager of MJX
Asset Management, a multi-billion dollar boutique asset management firm managing
leveraged loans across five structured vehicles. From 1996 to 2003
Ms. Bergstresser was CDO Portfolio Manager and Head Par Loan Trader at
Eaton Vance Management, an investment management company. From 1995 to 1996
she
was a Vice President in the Diversified Finance Division of Bank of Boston.
From
1991 to 1995 she was a Vice President at ING (U.S.), Capital Markets, an
investment banking firm.
John
R. Boyt,
age 32,
has been our Vice President—Director of Loan Originations since January 2006. He
has also been Senior Vice President of Resource Real Estate, Inc. since 2005.
From 2004 to 2005 he was a principal of Structured Property Advisors, LLC,
a
CMBS investment advisory firm. From 1998 to 2004 he was an Associate Director
of
Bear, Stearns & Co. Inc., where he was a senior member of the
commercial mortgage group involved in loan origination, underwriting, and CMBS
sales. Before that, from 1997 to 1998, Mr. Boyt worked for Bankers Trust
Company within their mortgage backed securities services unit, focusing on
MBS
and whole loan sales.
Crit
DeMent,
age 54,
has been our Senior Vice President—Equipment Leasing since March 2005.
Mr. DeMent has been Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of LEAF Financial
Corporation, a majority-owned commercial finance subsidiary of Resource America,
since 2001. Mr. DeMent was Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of its
subsidiary, LEAF Asset Management, Inc., from 2002 until 2004. From 2000 to
2001
he was President of the Small Ticket Group, an equipment leasing division of
European American Bank. Before that, he was President and Chief Operating
Officer of Fidelity Leasing, Inc., then the equipment leasing subsidiary of
Resource America, and its successor, the Technology Finance Group of CitiCapital
Vendor Finance, from 1996 to 2000. From 1987 to 1996 he was Vice President
of
Marketing for Tokai Financial Services, an equipment leasing firm.
Thomas
C. Elliott,
age 34,
has been our Senior Vice President—Finance and Operations since September 2006
and, prior to that, was our Chief Financial Officer, Chief Accounting Officer
and Treasurer from September 2005 to June 2006. He was our Senior Vice
President—Assets and Liabilities Management from June 2005 until September 2005
and, before that, served as our Vice President—Finance from March 2005.
Mr. Elliott has been Senior Vice President—Finance and Operations of
Resource America since 2006; was its Senior Vice President from 2005 to 2006
and
was its Vice President—Finance from 2001 to 2005. He has also been Chief
Financial Officer of Resource Financial Fund Management since 2004. From 1997
to
2001 Mr. Elliott was a Vice President at Fidelity Leasing, where he managed
all capital market functions, including the negotiation of all securitizations
and credit and banking facilities in the U.S. and Canada. Mr. Elliott also
oversaw the financial controls and budgeting departments.
Alan
F. Feldman,
age 43,
has been our Senior Vice President—Real Estate Investments since March 2005.
Mr. Feldman has been Chief Executive Officer of Resource Real Estate since
2004 and Senior Vice President of Resource America since 2002. Mr. Feldman
was President of Resource Properties from 2002 to 2005. From 1998 to 2002,
Mr. Feldman was Vice President at Lazard Freres & Co., an
investment banking firm, specializing in real estate mergers and acquisitions,
asset and portfolio sales and recapitalization. From 1992 through 1998,
Mr. Feldman was Executive Vice President of PREIT-RUBIN, Inc. the
management subsidiary of Pennsylvania Real Estate Investment Trust and its
predecessor, The Rubin Organization. Before that, from 1990 to 1992, he was
a
Director at Strouse, Greenberg & Co., a regional full service real
estate company.
Kevin
M. Finkel,
age 35,
has been our Vice President—Real Estate Investments since January 2006. He has
also been employed by Resource Capital Partners since 2002, having been its
Vice
President and Director of Acquisitions from 2003 to 2006 and President since
2006. Mr. Finkel has also been an officer of Resource Real Estate since
2004, and is currently its Executive Vice President and Director of
Acquisitions. In 2000, Mr. Finkel was an Associate at Lehman Brothers, a
global investment banking firm. From 1998 to 1999, Mr. Finkel was an
Associate at Barclays Capital, the investment banking division of Barclays
Bank
PLC. From 1994 to 1998, Mr. Finkel was an investment banker at Deutsche
Bank Securities, the investment banking division of Deutsche Bank
AG.
Kyle
Geoghegan,
age 38,
has been a Managing Director of Resource Real Estate Funding, Inc., a real
estate subsidiary of Resource America, since July 2006. Mr. Geoghegan
co-manages the whole loan origination platform for Resource Real Estate Funding
and is based in Los Angeles. Mr. Geoghegan worked at Bear Stearns from January
1998 to May 2006, serving as a Managing Director who co-managed the Bear Stearns
Commercial Mortgage office in Los Angeles which originated over $1 billion
of
loans annually. Prior to joining Bear Stearns, Mr. Geoghegan spent four years
as
a real estate loan officer at PNC Bank in Philadelphia, PA, primarily
originating construction and bridge loans.
Darryl
Myrose,
age 33,
has been a Managing Director of Resource Real Estate Funding since July 2006.
Mr. Myrose co-manages the whole loan origination platform for Resource Real
Estate Funding and is based in Los Angeles. Mr. Myrose worked at Bear
Stearns from April 1996 to May 2006, serving as a Managing Director who
co-managed the Bear Stearns Commercial Mortgage office in Los Angeles which
originated over $1 billion of loans annually. Prior to joining Bear Stearns,
Mr. Myrose was employed with Clarion Advisors (formerly Jones Lang Wootton
Realty Advisors) where he was an asset management analyst.
Joan
M. Sapinsley,
age 55,
joined Resource Financial Fund Management, Inc. in February 2007, as Managing
Director to manage and increase the firm’s CMBS portfolio. Prior to joining RAI,
Ms Sapinsley was a Managing Director at TIAA, where she worked from 1992
through
2006 purchasing CMBS. She was responsible for all single borrower and single
asset CMBS, as well as subordinate CMBS and B-notes. She also directed TIAA’s
conduit origination and securitization activities. Before TIAA, Ms Sapinsley
was
a Director in the Financial Services Group of Cushman & Wakefield and a real
estate consultant at Laventhol & Horwath.
Andrew
P. Shook,
age 37,
has been our Senior Vice President—ABS-RMBS and CMBS since March 2005.
Mr. Shook has been the President, Chief Investment Officer and Senior
Portfolio Manager of Ischus Capital Management since 2004. In 2001
Mr. Shook founded and ran HSBC Bank USA’s structured finance credit
arbitrage book until 2004. Before that, Mr. Shook worked domestically and
in London for Bank of America from 1996 to 2001. From 1994 to 1996 he was
a
Senior Securities Analyst at Hyperion Capital Management, a commercial and
residential mortgage related fixed income investment advisor.
Victor
Wang,
age 45,
has been our Vice President—Director of Asset Management since January 2006. He
has also been Vice President—Director of Asset Management of Resource Real
Estate since 2002. From 2000 to 2002, Mr. Wang was Vice President,
Financing and Dispositions, at Sonnenblick-Goldman Company, a real estate
investment banking firm. From 1998 to 1999, Mr. Wang was a Senior Asset
Manager at NorthStar Presidio Management Company, an asset management arm of
Northstar Capital Investment Corp. Before that, from 1994 to 1998, Mr. Wang
was an Asset Manager and Senior Analyst at Newkirk and Odin Management
Companies, an asset management company specializing in the management of highly
leveraged net lease and operating real estate.
Michael
S. Yecies,
age 39,
has been our Chief Legal Officer and Secretary since March 2005. Mr. Yecies
has been Senior Vice President of Resource America since 2005 and Chief Legal
Officer and Secretary since 1998. From 1994 to 1998 he was an attorney at the
law firm of Duane Morris LLP.
Section
16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance
Section 16(a)
of the Exchange Act requires our officers, directors and persons who own more
than ten percent of a registered class of our equity securities to file reports
of ownership and changes in ownership with the Securities and Exchange
Commission and to furnish us with copies of all such reports.
Based
solely on our review of the reports received by us, we believe that, during
fiscal 2006, our officers, directors and greater than ten percent shareholders
complied with all applicable filings requirements, except as follows: Messrs.
E.
Cohen, J. Cohen, Kessler, Elliott, Bloom and Blomstrom each filed one late
Form 4 relating to stock option grants; and Mr. Leon Cooperman, a stockholder
that reportedly beneficially owns more than 10% of our outstanding equity
securities, filed three late Form 4s, each relating to purchases of common
stock
by entities affiliated or controlled by him.
Code
of Ethics
We
have
adopted a code of business conduct and ethics applicable to all directors,
officers and employees. We will provide to any person without charge, upon
request, a copy of our code of conduct. Any such request should be directed
to
us as follows: Resource Capital Corp., 1845 Walnut Street, Suite 1000,
Philadelphia, PA 19103, Attention: Secretary. Our code of conduct is also
available on our website: www.resourcecapitalcorp.com.
Information
Concerning the Audit Committee
Our
Board
of Directors has a standing Audit Committee. The Audit Committee reviews the
scope and effectiveness of audits by the independent accountants, is responsible
for the engagement of independent accountants, and reviews the adequacy of
our
internal financial controls. Members of the Committee are Messrs. Neff
(Chairman), Beach and Hart. The board of directors has determined that each
member of the audit committee meets the independence standards for audit
committee members set forth in the listing standards of the New York Stock
Exchange, or NYSE, including those set forth in Rule 10A-3(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and that Messrs. Beach and Neff each qualify
as
an “audit committee financial expert” as that term is defined in the rules and
regulations thereunder.
Because
our management agreement provides that our Manager assumes principal
responsibility and is paid a management fee for managing our affairs, we have
not paid, and we do not intend to pay, any annual cash compensation to our
executive officers for their services to us as executive officers. In their
capacities as officers or employees of Resource America or our Manager, or
their
affiliates, our executive officers devote such portion of their time to our
affairs as is required for the performance of the duties of our Manager under
the management agreement. While our Chief Financial Officer is compensated
by
Resource America, he is exclusively dedicated to our operations. Therefore,
the
compensation paid to our Chief Financial Officer by Resource America is included
in the tables below. Additionally, we may from time to time grant shares of
our
common stock or options to purchase shares of our common stock to our officers
pursuant to our 2005 Stock Incentive Plan.
The
following table sets forth certain information concerning the compensation
paid
or accrued in fiscal 2006 for our Principal Executive Officer, Principal
Financial Officer and each of our three other most highly compensated executive
officers whose aggregate salary and bonus (including amounts of salary and
bonus
foregone to receive non-cash compensation) exceeded $100,000:
SUMMARY
COMPENSATION TABLE
Name
and Principal Position
|
Year
|
Salary
($)
|
|
Bonus
($)
|
|
Stock
Awards ($)(3)
|
|
Option
Awards
($)(4)
|
|
Non-Equity
Incentive
Plan
Compensation
($)
|
|
Change
in
Pension
Value
and
Nonqualified
Deferred
Compensation
Earnings
($)
|
|
All
Other Compen-sation ($)
|
|
Total
($)
|
|
||
Jonathan
Z. Cohen
Chief
Executive Officer, President and
Director
|
2006
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
||||||||||
David
J. Bryant
(1)
Chief
Financial Officer, Chief Accounting Officer and Treasurer
|
2006
|
122,769
|
−
|
−
|
10,761
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
133,530
|
||||||||||
Thomas
C. Elliott (2)
Senior
Vice President − Finance and Operations
|
2006
|
101,438
|
146,301
|
115,997
|
10,761
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
374,497
|
||||||||||
Jeffrey
D. Blomstrom
Senior
Vice President - CDO Structuring
|
2006
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
||||||||||
David
E. Bloom
Senior
Vice President—Real Estate Investments
|
2006
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
||||||||||
Steven
J. Kessler
Senior
Vice President − Finance
|
2006
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
(1)
|
Mr.
Bryant joined us as our Chief Financial Officer, Chief Accounting
Officer
and Treasurer on June 28, 2006.
|
(2)
|
Mr.
Elliott was our Chief Financial Officer, Chief Accounting Officer
and
Treasurer through June 27,
2006.
|
(3)
|
In
March 2005, we granted the Manager 345,000 shares of restricted stock
in
connection with our March 8, 2005 private placement. The Manager
transferred 142,500 of these shares in 2005 to the named executive
officers as follows: Mr. Cohen - 100,000 shares ($579,983); Mr. Elliott
-
20,000 shares ($115,997); Mr. Blomstrom - 10,000 shares ($57,998);
Mr.
Bloom - 5,000 shares ($28,999) and Mr. Kessler - 7,500 shares ($43,499).
The Manager made a further transfer of 36,665 of these shares in
2006 to
the named executive officers, as follows: Mr. Cohen - 33,333 shares
($193,326); Mr. Blomstrom - 1,666 shares ($9,663) and Mr. Bloom -
1,666
shares ($9,663). Dollar values represent the dollar amount recognized
for
financial statement reporting purposes with respect to 2006. For
financial
statement purposes, we are required to value these shares under EITF
96-18
because neither the Manager nor its transferees are employees of
our
company. See Item 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations - “Stock Based Compensation”
for a further discussion.
|
(4)
|
In
March 2005, we granted the Manager options to purchase 651,666 shares
of
our common stock in connection with our March 2005 private placement.
The
Manager transferred options to acquire 230,000 shares of our common
stock
to the named executive officers in 2005, as follows: Mr. Cohen -
100,000
options ($107,611); Mr. Elliott - 10,000 options ($10,761); Mr. Blomstrom
- 10,000 options ($10,761); Mr. Bloom - 100,000 options ($107,611);
and
Mr. Kessler 10,000 options ($10,761). The Manager made a further
transfer
of its options in 2006 to Mr. Bryant - 10,000 options ($10,761).
Dollar
values represent the dollar amount recognized for financial statement
reporting purposes with respect to 2006. For financial statement
purposes,
we are required to value these shares under EITF 96-18 because neither
the
Manager nor its transferees are employees of our company. See Item
7,
“Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations - “Stock Based Compensation” for a further discussion. In
valuing options transferred to Messrs. Cohen, Bryant, Elliott, Blomstrom,
Bloom and Kessler at $1.06 per option, we used the Black-Scholes
option
pricing model to estimate the weighted average fair value of each
option
granted with weighted average assumptions for (a) expected dividend
yield
of 9.7%, (b) risk-free interest rate of 4.8%, (c) expected volatility
of
20.9%, and (d) an expected life of 8.0 years.
|
OUTSTANDING
EQUITY AWARDS AT FISCAL YEAR-END
|
Option
Awards
|
Stock
Awards
|
||||||||
|
Number
of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options (#)
|
Number
of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options (#)
|
Equity
Incentive Plan Awards Number of Securities Underlying Unexercised
Unearned Options (#)
|
Option
Exercise Price($)
|
Option
Expiration Date
|
Number of
Shares or Units of Stock That Have Not Vested
(#)
|
Market
Value of Shares or Units of Stock That Have Not Vested ($)
(1)
|
Equity Incentive
Plan Awards: Number of Unearned Shares, Units or Other Rights That
Have
Not Vested (#)
|
Equity
Incentive Plan Awards:
Market
or Payout Value of Unearned Shares, Units or Other Rights That Have
Not
Vested ($)
|
|
Name
|
Exercisable
|
Unexercisable
|
||||||||
Jonathan
Z. Cohen
|
−
|
100,000
(2)
|
−
|
$15.00
|
3/7/15
|
100,000
|
1,695,000
|
−
|
−
|
|
David
J. Bryant
|
−
|
10,000
(3)
|
−
|
$15.00
|
3/7/15
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
|
Jeffrey
D. Blomstrom
|
−
|
10,000
(2)
|
−
|
$15.00
|
3/7/15
|
8,333
|
141,244
|
−
|
−
|
|
David
E. Bloom
|
−
|
100,000
(2)
|
−
|
$15.00
|
3/7/15
|
5,000
|
84,750
|
−
|
−
|
|
Steven
J. Kessler
|
−
|
10,000
(2)
|
−
|
$15.00
|
3/7/15
|
5,000
|
84,750
|
−
|
−
|
|
Thomas
C. Elliott
|
−
|
10,000
(2)
|
−
|
$15.00
|
3/7/15
|
13,334
|
226,011
|
−
|
−
|
(1)
|
Based
on the closing price of $16.95, our stock price on December 29,
2006.
|
(2)
|
Represents
options to purchase our stock that vest 33.33% on each of May 17,
2007,
May 17, 2008 and May 17, 2009.
|
(3)
|
Represents
options to purchase our stock that vest 33.33% on each of June 28,
2007,
June 28, 2008 and June 28, 2009.
|
OPTION
EXERCISES AND STOCK VESTED
Option
Awards
|
Stock
Awards
|
||||||||||||
Name
|
Number
of Shares Acquired
on
Exercise (#)
|
Value
Realized on Exercise ($)
|
Number
of Shares Acquired on Vesting (#)
|
Value
Realized on Vesting ($) (1)
|
|||||||||
Jonathan
Z. Cohen
|
−
|
−
|
33,333
|
473,329
|
|||||||||
David
J. Bryant
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
−
|
|||||||||
Jeffrey
D. Blomstrom
|
−
|
−
|
3,333
|
47,329
|
|||||||||
David
E. Bloom
|
−
|
−
|
1,666
|
23,657
|
|||||||||
Steven
J. Kessler
|
−
|
−
|
2,500
|
35,500
|
|||||||||
Thomas
C. Elliott
|
−
|
−
|
6,666
|
94,657
|
(1)
|
Calculated
by multiplying the number of shares of stock by the market value
of such
shares on the date of vesting ($14.20 per
share).
|
For
2006,
the board of directors approved compensation for each independent director
consisting of an annual cash retainer of $35,000 and an annual stock award
of
$15,000 worth of restricted stock, as set forth in the following table:
DIRECTOR
COMPENSATION
Name
|
Fees
Earned or Paid in Cash
($)
|
Stock
Awards
($)
(2)
|
Option
Awards
($)
|
Non-Equity
Incentive Plan Compensation ($)
|
Change
in Pension Value and Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Earnings
($)
|
All
Other Compensation ($)
|
Total
($)
|
|||||||||||||||
Walter
T. Beach
|
|
|
35,000
|
|
|
14,996
|
|
|
−
|
|
|
−
|
|
|
−
|
|
|
−
|
|
|
49,996
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
William
B. Hart
|
|
|
35,000
|
|
|
14,996
|
|
|
−
|
|
|
−
|
|
|
−
|
|
|
−
|
|
|
49,996
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Murray
S. Levin
|
|
|
35,000
|
|
|
14,996
|
|
|
−
|
|
|
−
|
|
|
−
|
|
|
−
|
|
|
49,996
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
P.
Sherrill Neff
|
|
|
35,000
|
|
|
14,996
|
|
|
−
|
|
|
−
|
|
|
−
|
|
|
−
|
|
|
49,996
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gary
Ickowicz (1)
|
|
|
−
|
|
|
−
|
|
|
−
|
|
|
−
|
|
|
−
|
|
|
−
|
|
|
−
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edward
E. Cohen
|
|
|
−
|
|
|
−
|
|
|
−
|
|
|
−
|
|
|
−
|
|
|
−
|
|
|
−
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jonathan
Z. Cohen
|
|
|
−
|
|
|
−
|
|
|
−
|
|
|
−
|
|
|
−
|
|
|
−
|
|
|
−
|
|
(1)
|
Mr.
Ickowicz joined the Board of Directors in February
2007.
|
(2)
|
Dollar
value represents the dollar amount recognized for financial statement
reporting purposes with respect to 2006 of 1,000 and 1,056 restricted
shares granted to each independent director on March 8, 2005 and
March 8,
2006, respectively. The 1,000 shares vested on March 8, 2006. The
1,056
shares will vest on March 8, 2007.
|
Compensation
Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation
The
compensation committee of the board during 2006 consisted of Messrs. Beach,
Levin and Neff. None of such persons was an officer or employee, or former
officer or employee, of our company or any of its subsidiaries during fiscal
2006. None of our executive officers was a director or executive officer of
any
entity of which any member of the compensation committee was a director or
executive officer during 2006.
ITEM
12. SECURITY
OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT
AND RELATED
STOCKHOLDERS MATTERS
The
following table sets forth the number and percentage of shares of common stock
owned, as of March 23, 2007, by (a) each person who, to our knowledge, is the
beneficial owner of more than 5% of the outstanding shares of common stock,
(b)
each of our present directors, (c) each of our executive officers and (d) all
of
our named executive officers and directors as a group. This information is
reported in accordance with the beneficial ownership rules of the Securities
and
Exchange Commission under which a person is deemed to be the beneficial owner
of
a security if that person has or shares voting power or investment power with
respect to such security or has the right to acquire such ownership within
60
days. Shares of common stock issuable pursuant to options or warrants are deemed
to be outstanding for purposes of computing the percentage of the person or
group holding such options or warrants but are not deemed to be outstanding
for
purposes of computing the percentage of any other person.
Shares owned
|
Percentage(1)
|
||
Executive
officers and directors: (2)
|
|||
Edward
E. Cohen (3)
|
267,000
|
1.07%
|
|
Jonathan
Z. Cohen (3)
|
399,492
|
1.60%
|
|
Walter
T. Beach (4)(5)
|
843,120
|
3.37%
|
|
William
B. Hart (5)
|
14,053
|
*
|
|
Gary
Ickowicz (5)
|
816
|
*
|
|
Murray
S. Levin (5)
|
7,453
|
*
|
|
P.
Sherrill Neff (5)
|
13,053
|
*
|
|
Steven
J. Kessler (3)
|
19,583
|
*
|
|
Jeffrey
D. Blomstrom (3)
|
31,792
|
*
|
|
David
J. Bryant (3)
|
9,183
|
*
|
|
David
E. Bloom (3)
|
60,437
|
*
|
|
Thomas
C. Elliott (3)
|
37,793
|
*
|
|
All
executive officers and directors as a group
(12 persons)
|
1,703,775
|
6.78%
|
|
Owners
of 5% or more of outstanding shares: (6)
|
|||
Resource
America, Inc. (7)
|
2,025,045
|
8.07%
|
|
Omega
Advisors, Inc. (8)
|
2,762,834
|
11.06%
|
|
Kensington
Investment Group, Inc. (9)
|
1,283,308
|
5.13%
|
*
|
Less
than 1%.
|
(1)
|
Does
not include 139,498 shares of common stock available for future grant
under our stock incentive plan. Includes 59,903 shares of common
stock
issuable upon exercise of the warrants which vested on January 13,
2007
and 81,665 shares of common stock issuable upon exercise of stock
options.
|
(2)
|
The
address for all of our executive officers and directors is c/o Resource
Capital Corp., 712 Fifth Avenue, 10th Floor, New York, New York
10019.
|
(3)
|
In
connection with our March 2005 private offering, we granted the Manager
345,000 shares of restricted stock. The Manager subsequently transferred
a
portion of those shares to certain of our executive officers, without
cash
consideration, as follows: Mr. E. Cohen—70,000 shares; Mr. J.
Cohen—133,333 shares; Mr. Kessler—7,500 shares; Mr. Blomstrom—11,666
shares; Mr. Bloom—6,666 shares and Mr. Elliott - 20,000 shares. Each such
person has the right to receive distributions on and vote, but not
to
transfer, such shares. One-third of the grant amount vests to the
recipient each year, commencing March 8, 2006, except that the vesting
period for 33,333 of the shares transferred to Mr. J. Cohen, 1,666
shares
transferred to Mr. Blomstrom and 1,666 shares transferred to Mr.
Bloom
commenced January 3, 2007. Also includes restricted stock awards
granted
to certain officers and directors on January 5, 2007 as follows:
Mr. J.
Cohen—87,158 shares; Mr. Blomstrom—14,526 shares; Mr. Bloom—11,621 shares;
Mr. Elliott—5,810 shares and Mr. Bryant—4,183 shares. These shares vest
33.3%
on January 5, 2008 and 8.33% quarterly thereafter.
|
(4)
|
Includes
(i) 300,000 shares purchased by Beach Investment Counsel, Inc. and
525,733
shares purchased by Beach Asset Management, LLC, Beach Investment
Counsel,
Inc. or Beach Investment Management, LLC, investment management firms
for
which Mr. Beach is a principal and possesses investment and/or voting
power over the shares and (ii) 14,434 shares of common stock issuable
upon exercise of the warrants which vested on January 13, 2007. The
address for these investment management firms is Five Tower Bridge,
300
Barr Harbor Drive, Suite 220, West Conshohocken, PA
19428.
|
(5)
|
Includes
(i) 1,056 shares of restricted stock issued to Messrs. Beach, Hart,
Levin
and Neff on March 8, 2006 which vest on March 8, 2007, (ii) 816 shares
of
restricted stock issued to Mr. Ickowicz on February 1, 2007 which
vest on
February 1, 2008 and (iii) 897 shares of restricted stock issued
to
Messrs. Beach, Hart, Levin and Neff on March 8, 2007 which vest March
8,
2006. Each non-employee director has the right to receive distributions
on
and vote, but not to transfer such shares.
|
(6)
|
The
addresses for our 5% or more holders are as follows: Resource America:
1845 Walnut Street, Suite 1000, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103;
Omega
Advisors, Inc.: 88 Pine Street, Wall Street Plaza, 31st
Floor, New York, New York 10005 and Kensington Investment Group,
Inc.: 4
Orinda Way, Orinda, California 94563.
|
(7)
|
Includes
(i) 921 shares of restricted stock granted to the Manager in connection
with our March 2005 private placement that the Manager has not allocated
to its employees, (ii) 100,000 shares purchased by the Manager in our
initial public offering, (iii) 900,000 shares purchased by Resource
Capital Investor in our March 2005 private placement, (iv) 900,000
shares purchased by Resource Capital Investor in our initial public
offering, (v) 24,036 shares transferred to the Manager as incentive
compensation pursuant to the terms of its management agreement with
us and
(vi) 100,088 shares of common stock issuable upon exercise of the
warrants which vested on January 13, 2007.
|
(8)
|
This
information is based on a Schedule 13G/A filed with the SEC on February
9,
2007. Leon G. Cooperman has or shares voting and/or investment power
over
these shares. Under the terms of a limited waiver granted to Omega
Advisors with respect to ownership limitations in our declaration
of
trust, Omega Advisors may be prohibited from exercising a majority
of
these warrants without first disposing of other shares of our common
stock. See “Description of Capital Stock and Warrants—Restrictions on
Ownership and Transfer.”
|
(9)
|
This
information is based on a Schedule 13G/A filed with the SEC on January
30,
2007.
|
Equity
Compensation Plan Information
The
following table summarizes certain information about our 2005 stock incentive
plan as of December 31, 2006:
|
(a)
|
(b)
|
(c)
|
Plan
category
|
Number
of securities to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options,
warrants
and rights
|
Weighted-average
exercise price of outstanding options,
warrants
and rights
|
Number
of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity
compensation plans excluding securities reflected in column
(a)
|
Equity
compensation plans approved
by
security
holders:
|
|
|
|
Options
|
651,666
|
$15.00
|
|
Restricted
shares
|
252,584
|
N/A
|
|
Total
|
904,250
|
|
528,444
(1)
|
1) |
Upon
the July 2006 hiring of certain significant employees of the Manager,
RCC
agreed to pay up to 100,000 shares of restricted stock and 100,000
options
to purchase restricted stock upon the achievement of certain performance
thresholds. These securities remain available for future issuance.
See
Item 8, “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” - “Note 9 Capital
Stock and Earnings Per Share” for a further
discussion.
|
Relationships
and Related Transactions
We
have
entered into a management agreement under which the Manager receives substantial
fees. We describe these fees in Item 1 − “Business − Management Agreement.” For
the year ended December 31, 2006, the Manager earned base management fees of
approximately $3.7 million and incentive compensation fees of $1.1 million.
We
also reimburse the Manager and Resource America for financial services expense,
rent and other expenses incurred in the performance of their duties under the
management agreement. For the year ended December 31, 2006, we reimbursed the
Manager $954,000 for such expenses. In addition, we may reimburse the Manager
and Resource America for expenses for employees of Resource America who perform
legal, accounting, due diligence and other services that outside professionals
or consultants would otherwise perform. No such expense reimbursements were
made
in the year ended December 31, 2006. As of December 31, 2006, we had executed
four CDO transactions. These CDO transactions are structured for us by the
Manager; however, the Manager is not separately compensated by us for these
transactions.
The
Manager is an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of Resource America. Edward
E.
Cohen, the Chairman of Resource America and the Manager, and Jonathan Z. Cohen,
the Chief Executive Officer and President of Resource America and the Manager,
in the aggregate beneficially owned approximately 23% of Resource America’s
common stock as of December 1, 2006. This information is reported in
accordance with the beneficial ownership rules of the SEC under which a person
is deemed to be the beneficial owner of a security if that person has or shares
voting power or investment power with respect to such security or has the right
to acquire such ownership within 60 days. Steven J. Kessler, one of our
executive officers, is the Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
of Resource America. Thomas C. Elliott, one of our officers and an executive
officer through June 27, 2006, is a Senior Vice President - Finance and
Operations of Resource America. Two other of our executive officers, Jeffrey
D.
Blomstrom and David E. Bloom, are executive officers of subsidiaries of Resource
America.
Resource
America, entities affiliated with it and our executive officers and directors
collectively beneficially own 3,728,820 shares of common stock, representing
approximately 15% of our common stock on a fully-diluted basis, including
72,500
shares purchased by our executive officers and directors in our February
2006
initial public offering, 84,400 shares purchased by our executive officers
and
directors subsequent to our February 2006 initial public offering, 345,000
shares of restricted stock and options to purchase 651,666 shares of our
common
stock granted to the Manager upon completion of our March 2005 private offering
(of which 344,079 shares of restricted stock and 649,500 stock options were
allocated to Resource America, entities affiliated with it and our officers
and
directors), 12,628 shares of restricted stock granted to our directors and
24,036 shares of common stock issued to the Manager as incentive
compensation.
LEAF
Financial Corp. a majority-owned subsidiary of Resource America, originates
and
manages our equipment lease and note investments. We purchase these investments
from LEAF Financial at a price equal to their book value plus a reimbursable
origination cost not to exceed 1% to compensate LEAF Financial for its
origination costs. In addition, we pay LEAF Financial an annual servicing fee,
equal to 1% of the book value of managed assets, for servicing our equipment
lease investments. For the year ended December 31, 2006, we acquired $106.7
million of equipment lease and note investments from LEAF Financial, including
$1.1 million of origination cost reimbursements. During the year ended December
31, 2006, we paid LEAF Financial $659,000 in annual servicing fees. During
the
year ended December 31, 2006, we sold four leases
back to LEAF Financial for $17.3 million, their book value.
In
December 2006, our wholly-owned subsidiary, RCC Commercial, transferred 100%
of
the membership interests in Resource Capital Funding II to LEAF Funding, Inc.,
an indirect subsidiary of Resource America. Resource Capital Funding had no
assets at the time of the transfer. As we discuss in Item 7, “Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations -
Liquidity and Capital Resources,” as part of this transfer, the related loan
agreement with Morgan Stanley Bank was transferred. We were reimbursed $125,000
by LEAF Funding for fees and expenses we had incurred in establishing the
facility.
Policies
and Procedures Regarding Related Transactions
Under
our
Management Agreement with the Manager and Resource America, we have established
policies regarding the offer of potential investments to us, our acquisition
of
those investments and the allocation of those investments among other programs
managed by the Manager or Resource America. We have also established policies
regarding investing in investment opportunities in which the Manager or Resource
America has an interest and regarding investing in any investment fund or CDO
structured, co-structured or managed by the Manager or Resource America.
The
Manager and Resource America must offer us the right to consider all investments
they identify that are within the parameters of our investment strategies and
policies. For all potential investments other than in equipment leases and
notes, if the Manager and Resource America identify an investment that is
appropriate both for us and for one or more other investment programs managed
by
them, but the amount available is less than the amount sought by all of their
investment programs, they will allocate the investment among us and such other
investment programs in proportion to the relative amounts of the investment
sought by each. If the portion of the investment allocable to a particular
investment program would be too small for it to be appropriate for that
investment program, either because of economic or market inefficiency,
regulatory constraints (such as REIT qualification or exclusion from regulation
under the Investment Company Act) or otherwise, that portion will be reallocated
among the other investment programs. Investment programs that do not receive
an
allocation will have preference in future investments where investment programs
are seeking more of the investment than is available so that, on an overall
basis, each investment program is treated equitably.
To
equitably allocate investments that the Manager or Resource America has acquired
at varying prices, the Manager and Resource America will allocate the investment
so that each investment program will pay approximately the same average
price.
With
respect to equipment leases and notes, if an investment is appropriate for
more
than one investment program, including us, the Manager and Resource America
will
allocate the investment based on the following factors:
·
|
which
investment program has been seeking investments for the longest period
of
time;
|
·
|
whether
the investment program has the cash required for the
investment;
|
·
|
whether
the amount of debt to be incurred with respect to the investment
is
acceptable for the investment
program;
|
·
|
the
effect the investment will have on the investment program’s cash
flow;
|
·
|
whether
the investment would further diversify, or unduly concentrate, the
investment program’s investments in a particular lessee, class or type of
equipment, location or industry;
and
|
·
|
whether
the term of the investment is within the term of the investment
program.
|
The
Manager and Resource America may make exceptions to these general policies
when
other circumstances make application of the policies inequitable or
uneconomic.
The
Manager has also instituted policies designed to mitigate potential conflicts
of
interest between it and us, including:
·
|
We
will not be permitted to invest in any investment fund or CDO structured,
co-structured or managed by the Manager or Resource America other
than
those structured, co-structured or managed on our behalf. The Manager
and
Resource America will not receive duplicate management fees from
any such
investment fund or CDO to the extent we invest in
it.
|
·
|
We
will not be permitted to purchase investments from, or sell investments
to, the Manager or Resource America, except that we may purchase
investments originated by those entities within 60 days before our
investment.
|
Except
as
described above or provided for in our management agreement with the Manager
and
Resource America, we have not adopted a policy that expressly prohibits
transactions between us or any of our directors, officers, employees,
security-holders or affiliates. However, our code of business conduct and ethics
prohibits any transaction that involves an actual or potential conflict except
for transactions permitted under guidelines which may be adopted by our Board
of
Directors. No such guidelines have been adopted as of the date of this report.
In addition, our Board of Directors may approve a waiver of the code of ethics
and business conduct for a specific transaction, which must be reported to
our
stockholders to the extent required by applicable law or New York Stock Exchange
rule. No such waivers have been granted through the date hereof.
Director
Independence
Our
common stock is listed on the NYSE under the symbol “RSO” and we are subject to
the NYSE’s listing standards. The board of directors has determined that Messrs.
Beach, Hart, Ickowicz, Levin and Neff each satisfy the requirement for
independence set out in Section 303A.02 of the rules of the NYSE and that each
of these directors has no material relationship with us (other than being a
director and/or a stockholder). In making its independence determinations,
the
board of directors sought to identify and analyze all of the facts and
circumstances relating to any relationship between a director, his immediate
family or affiliates and our company and our affiliates and did not rely on
categorical standards other than those contained in the NYSE rule referenced
above.
ITEM
14. PRINCIPAL
ACCOUNTING FEES AND SERVICES
Audit
Fees (Revised)
The
aggregate fees billed by our independent auditors, Grant Thornton LLP, for
professional services rendered for the audit of our annual financial statements
for the period from March 8, 2005 to December 31, 2005 were approximately
$316,000. This amount has been revised to include $175,000 of audit fees
relating to that period but which had not yet been billed as of December 31,
2005. The aggregate fees billed by our independent auditors, Grant Thornton
LLP,
for professional services rendered for the audit of our annual financial
statements for the year ended December 31, 2006 were approximately
$515,000.
The
aggregate fees billed by Grant Thornton LLP for audit services in connection
with the filing of our registration statements with the Securities and Exchange
Commission were approximately $646,000 for the period from March 8 2005 to
December 31, 2005 and $638,000 for the year ended December 31, 2006. The amount
for the period from March 8, 2005 to December 31, 2005 has been reallocated
to
Audit Fees from Audit - Related fees and include $38,000 of fees relating
to the period but which had not yet been billed as of December 31,
2005.
Audit−Related
Fees (Revised)
Fees
previously reported under this caption in 2005 have been reallocated and
are included above.
Tax
Fees
There
were no fees paid to Grant Thornton LLP for professional services related to
tax
compliance, tax advice and tax planning for the year period from March 8, 2005
to December 31, 2005 or the year ended December 31, 2006.
All
Other Fees
We
did
not incur fees in 2005 or 2006 for other services not included
above.
Audit
Committee Pre-Approval Policies and Procedures
The
Audit
Committee will, on at least an annual basis, review audit and non-audit services
performed by Grant Thornton, LLP as well as the fees charged by Grant Thornton,
LLP for such services. Our policy is that all audit and non-audit services
must
be pre-approved by the Audit Committee. All of such services and fees were
pre-approved during the year ended December 31, 2006.
PART
IV
ITEM
15. EXHIBITS
AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES
(a)
|
The
following documents are filed as part of this Annual Report on Form
10-K:
|
1.
|
Financial
Statements
|
Report
of
Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
Consolidated
Balance Sheets at December 31, 2006 and 2005.
Consolidated
Statements of Income for the year ended December 31, 2006 and the period ended
December 31, 2005
Consolidated
Statements of Changes in Stockholders’ Equity for year ended December 31, 2006
and the period ended December 31, 2005
Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows for the year ended December 31, 2006 and the period
ended December 31, 2005
Notes
to
Consolidated Financial Statements
2.
|
Financial
Statement Schedules
|
None
3.
|
Exhibits
|
Exhibit
No.
Description
3.1
(1)
|
Amended
and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of Resource Capital
Corp.
|
|
3.2
(1)
|
Amended
and Restated Bylaws of Resource Capital Corp.
|
|
4.1
(1)
|
Form
of Certificate for Common Stock for Resource Capital
Corp.
|
|
4.2
(2)
|
Junior
Subordinated indenture between Resource Capital Corp. and Wells Fargo
Bank, N.A., as Trustee, dated May 25, 2006.
|
|
4.3
(2)
|
Amended
and Restated Trust Agreement among Resource Capital Corp., Wells
Fargo
Bank, N.A., Wells Fargo Delaware Trust Company and the Administrative
Trustees named therein, dated May 25, 2006.
|
|
4.4
(2)
|
Junior
Subordinated Note due 2036 in the principal amount of $25,774,000,
dated
May 25, 2006.
|
|
4.5
(3)
|
Junior
Subordinated Indenture between Resource Capital Corp. and Wells Fargo
Bank, N.A., as Trustee, dated September 29, 2006.
|
|
4.6
(3)
|
Amended
and Restated Trust Agreement among Resource Capital Corp., Wells
Fargo
Bank, N.A., Wells Fargo Delaware Trust Company and the Administrative
Trustees named therein, dated September 29, 2006.
|
|
4.7
(3)
|
Junior
Subordinated Note due 2036 in the principal amount of $25,774,000,
dated
September 29, 2006.
|
|
10.2
(1)
|
Management
Agreement between Resource Capital Corp., Resource Capital Manager,
Inc.
and Resource America, Inc. dated as of March 8, 2005.
|
|
10.3
(1)
|
2005
Stock Incentive Plan.
|
|
10.4
(1)
|
Form
of Stock Award Agreement.
|
|
10.5
(1)
|
Form
of Stock Option Agreement.
|
|
10.6
(1)
|
Form
of Warrant to Purchase Common Stock.
|
|
10.7
(2)
|
Junior
Subordinated Note and Purchase Agreement by and between Resource
Capital
Corp. and Resource Capital Trust I, dated May 25, 2006.
|
|
10.8
(3)
|
Junior
Subordinated Note Purchase Agreement by and between Resource Capital
Corp.
and RCC Trust II, dated September 29,
2006.
|
Exhibit No.
Description
21.1
(4)
|
List
of Subsidiaries of Resource Capital Corp.
|
|
Certification
of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002.
|
||
Certification
of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002.
|
||
Certification
of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 1350 18 U.S.C., as
adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002.
|
||
Certification
of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 1350 18 U.S.C., as
adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002.
|
(1)
|
Filed
previously as an exhibit to the Company’s registration statement on Form
S-11, Registration No. 333-126517.
|
(2)
|
Filed
previously as an exhibit to the Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q
for the quarter ended June 30,
2006.
|
(3)
|
Filed
previously as an exhibit to the Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q
for the quarter ended September 30,
2006.
|
(4)
|
Filed
previously as an exhibit to the Company’s registration statement on Form
S-11, Registration No. 333-138990.
|
Pursuant
to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf
by
the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
RESOURCE CAPITAL CORP. (Registrant) | ||
|
|
|
Date: March 30, 2007 | By: | /s/ Jonathan Z. Cohen |
Jonathan Z. Cohen |
||
Chief Executive Officer and President |
Pursuant
to
the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been
signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the
capacities and on the dates indicated.
/s/
Edward E. Cohen
|
Chairman
of the Board
|
March
30, 2007
|
EDWARD
E. COHEN
|
||
/s/
Jonathan Z. Cohen
|
Director,
President and Chief Executive Officer
|
March
30, 2007
|
JONATHAN
Z. COHEN
|
||
/s/
Walter T. Beach
|
Director
|
March
30, 2007
|
WALTER
T. BEACH
|
||
/s/
William B. Hart
|
Director
|
March
30, 2007
|
WILLIAM
B. HART
|
||
/s/
Gary Ickowicz
|
Director
|
March
30, 2007
|
GARY
ICKOWICZ
|
||
/s/
Murray S. Levin
|
Director
|
March
30, 2007
|
MURRAY
S. LEVIN
|
||
/s/
P. Sherrill Neff
|
Director
|
March
30, 2007
|
P.
SHERRILL NEFF
|
||
/s/
David J. Bryant
|
Chief
Financial Officer, Chief
Accounting Officer and Treasurer
|
March
30, 2007
|
DAVID
J. BRYANT
|
|
129