CIM REAL ESTATE FINANCE TRUST, INC. - Annual Report: 2017 (Form 10-K)
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
Form 10-K
Commission file number 000-54939
(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, 2017 | ||
o | TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 | |
For the transition period from to | ||
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Maryland | 27-3148022 | |
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) | (I.R.S. Employer Identification Number) | |
2325 East Camelback Road, 10th Floor Phoenix, Arizona 85016 (Address of principal executive offices; zip code) | (602) 778-8700 (Registrant’s telephone number, including area code) | |
Title of Each Class | Name of Exchange on Which Registered | |
None | None | |
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: Common Stock, $0.01 par value per share
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes o No x
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 o No x
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. Yes x No o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes x No o
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. o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, a smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company,” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
Large accelerated filer | o | Accelerated filer | o | Non-accelerated filer (Do not check if a smaller reporting company) | x | ||
Smaller reporting company | o | Emerging growth company | o | ||||
If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ¨
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes o No x
There is no established market for the registrant’s shares of common stock. As of June 30, 2017, the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter, there were approximately 311.3 million shares of common stock held by non-affiliates, for an aggregate market value of $3.1 billion, assuming a market value as of that date of $10.08 per share, the most recent estimated per share net asset value of the registrant’s common stock established by the registrant’s board of directors at that time. Effective March 29, 2018, the estimated per share net asset value of the registrant’s common stock as of December 31, 2017 is $9.37 per share.
As of March 26, 2018, there were approximately 311.5 million shares of common stock, par value per share of $0.01, of Cole Credit Property Trust IV, Inc. outstanding.
Documents Incorporated by Reference:
The Registrant incorporates by reference portions of the Cole Credit Property Trust IV, Inc. Definitive Proxy Statement for the 2018 Annual Meeting of Stockholders (into Items 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14 of Part III).
TABLE OF CONTENTS | |||
PART I | |||
ITEM 1. | |||
ITEM 1A. | |||
ITEM 1B. | |||
ITEM 2. | |||
ITEM 3. | |||
ITEM 4. | |||
PART II | |||
ITEM 5. | |||
ITEM 6. | |||
ITEM 7. | |||
ITEM 7A. | |||
ITEM 8. | |||
ITEM 9. | |||
ITEM 9A. | |||
ITEM 9B. | |||
PART III | |||
ITEM 10. | |||
ITEM 11. | |||
ITEM 12. | |||
ITEM 13. | |||
ITEM 14. | |||
PART IV | |||
ITEM 15. | |||
ITEM 16. | |||
CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
Certain statements contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Cole Credit Property Trust IV, Inc., other than historical facts, may be considered forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). We intend for all such forward-looking statements to be covered by the safe harbor provisions for forward-looking statements contained in Section 27A of the Securities Act and Section 21E of the Exchange Act, as applicable by law. Such statements include, in particular, statements about our plans, strategies, and prospects and are subject to certain risks and uncertainties, as well as known and unknown risks, which could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected or anticipated. Therefore, such statements are not intended to be a guarantee of our performance in future periods. Such forward-looking statements can generally be identified by our use of forward-looking terminology such as “may,” “would,” “could,” “should,” “expect,” “intend,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” “believe,” “continue,” or other similar words. Forward-looking statements that were true at the time made may ultimately prove to be incorrect or false. We caution readers not to place undue reliance on forward-looking statements, which reflect our management’s view only as of the date this Annual Report on Form 10-K is filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). Additionally, we undertake no obligation to update or revise forward-looking statements to reflect changed assumptions, the occurrence of unanticipated events or changes to future operating results.
The following are some, but not all, of the assumptions, risks, uncertainties and other factors that could cause our actual results to differ materially from those presented in our forward-looking statements:
• | We may be unable to renew leases, lease vacant space or re-lease space as leases expire on favorable terms or at all. |
• | We are subject to risks associated with tenant, geographic and industry concentrations with respect to our properties. |
• | Our properties, intangible assets and other assets may be subject to impairment charges. |
• | We could be subject to unexpected costs or unexpected liabilities that may arise from potential dispositions and may be unable to dispose of properties on advantageous terms. |
• | We are subject to competition in the acquisition and disposition of properties and in the leasing of our properties and we may be unable to acquire, dispose of, or lease properties on advantageous terms. |
• | We could be subject to risks associated with bankruptcies or insolvencies of tenants or from tenant defaults generally. |
• | We have substantial indebtedness, which may affect our ability to pay distributions, and expose us to interest rate fluctuation risk and the risk of default under our debt obligations. |
• | We may be affected by the incurrence of additional secured or unsecured debt. |
• | We may not be able to maintain profitability. |
• | We may not generate cash flows sufficient to pay our distributions to stockholders or meet our debt service obligations. |
• | We may be affected by risks resulting from losses in excess of insured limits. |
• | We may fail to remain qualified as a real estate investment trust (“REIT”) for U.S. federal income tax purposes. |
• | Our advisor has the right to terminate the advisory agreement upon 60 days’ written notice without cause or penalty. |
All forward-looking statements should be read in light of the risks identified in Part I, Item 1A. Risk Factors within this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
2
Definitions
We use certain defined terms throughout this Annual Report on Form 10-K that have the following meanings:
The phrase “annualized rental income” refers to the straight-line rental revenue under our leases on operating properties owned as of the respective reporting date, which includes the effect of rent escalations and any tenant concessions, such as free rent, and excludes any bad debt allowances and any contingent rent, such as percentage rent. Management uses annualized rental income as a basis for tenant, industry and geographic concentrations and other metrics within the portfolio. Annualized rental income is not indicative of future performance.
Under a “net lease,” the tenant occupying the leased property (usually as a single tenant) does so in much the same manner as if the tenant were the owner of the property. The tenant generally agrees that it will either have no ability or only limited ability to terminate the lease or abate rent prior to the expiration of the term of the lease as a result of real estate driven events such as casualty, condemnation or failure by the landlord to fulfill its obligations under the lease. There are various forms of net leases, most typically classified as triple-net or double-net. Triple-net leases typically require the tenant to pay all expenses associated with the property (e.g., real estate taxes, insurance, maintenance and repairs, including roof, structure and parking lot). Double-net leases typically hold the landlord responsible for the capital expenditures for the roof and structure, while the tenant is responsible for all lease payments and remaining operating expenses associated with the property (e.g., real estate taxes, insurance and maintenance).
3
PART I
ITEM 1. | BUSINESS |
Formation
Cole Credit Property Trust IV, Inc. (the “Company,” “we,” “our” or “us”) is a Maryland corporation that was formed on July 27, 2010, our date of inception, which has elected to be taxed, and qualified as a real estate investment trust (“REIT”) for U.S. federal income tax purposes commencing with our taxable year ended December 31, 2012. We are the sole general partner of and own, directly or indirectly, 100% of the partnership interests in Cole Operating Partnership IV, LP (“CCPT IV OP”), a Delaware limited partnership.
On November 13, 2017, VEREIT Operating Partnership, L.P. (“VEREIT OP”), a former affiliated entity of our sponsor, CCO Group (as defined below), entered into a Purchase and Sale Agreement with CCA Acquisition, LLC (“CCA”), a newly-formed affiliate of CIM Group, LLC (“CIM”), pursuant to which CCA agreed to acquire all of the issued and outstanding shares of common stock of Cole Capital Advisors, Inc., the direct or indirect owner of Cole REIT Advisors IV, LLC (“CR IV Advisors”), Cole Capital Corporation and CREI Advisors, LLC (“CREI Advisors”), our external advisor, dealer manager and property manager, respectively (the “Transaction”). CIM is a vertically-integrated owner and operator of real assets with multidisciplinary expertise and in-house research, acquisition, credit analysis, development, finance, leasing, and asset management capabilities. CIM is headquartered in Los Angeles, California and has offices in Oakland, California; Bethesda, Maryland; Dallas, Texas; New York, New York; Chicago, Illinois; and Phoenix, Arizona.
On February 1, 2018, the Transaction was completed. Immediately following the completion of the Transaction, Cole Capital Advisors, Inc. and our dealer manager were each converted into Delaware limited liability companies, Cole Capital Advisors, Inc.’s name was changed to CCO Group, LLC, and our dealer manager’s name was changed to CCO Capital, LLC (“CCO Capital”). As a result of the Transaction, CIM owns and/or controls CCO Group, LLC and its subsidiaries (collectively, “CCO Group”), and CCO Group, LLC owns and controls CR IV Advisors, CCO Capital and CREI Advisors, our external advisor, dealer manager for the Offerings (as defined below) and property manager, respectively.
In addition, as part of the Transaction, VEREIT OP and CCO Group, LLC entered into a services agreement (the “Services Agreement”) pursuant to which VEREIT OP will continue to provide certain services to CCO Group and to us, Cole Credit Property Trust V, Inc. (“CCPT V”), Cole Office & Industrial REIT (CCIT II), Inc. (“CCIT II”), Cole Office & Industrial REIT (CCIT III), Inc. (“CCIT III”), and Cole Real Estate Income Strategy (Daily NAV), Inc. (“Cole Income NAV Strategy”) (CCPT V, CCIT II, CCIT III, Cole Income NAV Strategy and us collectively, the “Cole REITs®”), including operational real estate support. VEREIT OP will continue to provide such services through March 31, 2019 (or, if later, the date of the last government filing other than a tax filing made by any of the Cole REITs with respect to its 2018 fiscal year) (the “Initial Services Term”) and will provide consulting and research services through December 31, 2023 as requested by CCO Group, LLC.
Despite the indirect change of ownership and control of our advisor, dealer manager, property manager and sponsor, we expect that, during the Initial Services Term of the Services Agreement, the advisory, dealer manager and property management services we receive will continue without any material changes in personnel (except as supplemented by the management oversight of CIM personnel) or material change in service procedures. During the Initial Services Term of the Services Agreement, CCO Group, LLC intends to evaluate and effectuate an appropriate transition of VEREIT OP’s services under the Services Agreement to other CIM affiliates or third parties with the goal of ensuring continuity and minimizing disruption.
CCO Group has sponsored and operated various real estate investment programs. CR IV Advisors, pursuant to an advisory agreement with us, is responsible for managing our affairs on a day-to-day basis and for identifying and making acquisitions and investments on our behalf. Pursuant to the advisory agreement, CR IV Advisors has fiduciary obligations to us and our stockholders. Our charter provides that our independent directors are responsible for reviewing the performance of CR IV Advisors and determining whether the compensation paid to CR IV Advisors and its affiliates is reasonable. The advisory agreement with CR IV Advisors has a term that is reconsidered for renewal on an annual basis by our board of directors.
Pursuant to a Registration Statement on Form S-11 filed under the Securities Act (Registration No. 333-169533) and declared effective by the SEC on January 26, 2012, we commenced our initial public offering on a “best efforts” basis of up to a maximum of $2.975 billion in shares of common stock (the “Offering”). On November 25, 2013, we reallocated $400.0 million in shares from our distribution reinvestment plan (the “DRIP”) portion of the Offering to the primary offering, and on February 18, 2014, we reallocated an additional $23.0 million in shares from the DRIP portion of the Offering to the primary offering. As a result of these reallocations, the Offering offered up to a maximum of approximately 292.3 million shares of our common stock at a price of $10.00 per share, and up to approximately 5.5 million additional shares pursuant to the DRIP under which our stockholders could have elected to have distributions reinvested in additional shares of common stock at a price of $9.50 per share.
4
We terminated the Offering on April 4, 2014. At the completion of the Offering, a total of approximately 297.4 million shares of common stock had been issued, including approximately 292.3 million shares of common stock sold to the public pursuant to the primary portion of the Offering and approximately 5.1 million shares of common stock sold pursuant to the DRIP portion of the Offering. The remaining approximately 404,000 unsold shares from the Offering were deregistered.
In addition, we registered $247.0 million in shares of common stock under the DRIP pursuant to a Registration Statement on Form S-3 under the Securities Act (Registration No. 333-192958) (the “Initial DRIP Offering”), which was filed with the SEC on December 19, 2013 and automatically became effective with the SEC upon filing. We ceased issuing shares under the Initial DRIP Offering effective as of June 30, 2016. At the completion of the Initial DRIP Offering, a total of approximately $241.7 million of common stock had been issued. The remaining $5.3 million of unsold shares from the Initial DRIP Offering were deregistered.
We registered an additional $600.0 million of shares of common stock under the DRIP pursuant to a Registration Statement filed on Form S-3 (Registration No. 333-212832) (the “Secondary DRIP Offering,” and together with the Initial DRIP Offering, the “DRIP Offerings,” and the DRIP Offerings collectively with the Offering, the “Offerings”), which was filed with the SEC on August 2, 2016 and automatically became effective with the SEC upon filing. We have issued and will continue to issue shares of common stock under the Secondary DRIP Offering.
As of December 31, 2017, we had issued approximately 339.2 million shares of our common stock in the Offerings, including 40.9 million shares issued in the DRIP Offerings, for gross offering proceeds of $3.4 billion before organization and offering costs, selling commissions and dealer manager fees of $306.0 million.
On September 27, 2015, we announced that our board of directors had established an estimated value of the Company’s common stock, as of August 31, 2015, of $9.70 per share for purposes of assisting broker-dealers that participated in the Offering in meeting their customer account statement reporting obligations under National Association of Securities Dealers Conduct Rule 2340. On November 10, 2016, our board of directors established an updated estimated per share net asset value (“NAV”) of our common stock, as of September 30, 2016, of $9.92 per share. On March 24, 2017, our board of directors established an updated estimated per share NAV of our common stock, as of December 31, 2016, of $10.08 per share. On March 29, 2018, our board of directors established an updated estimated per share NAV of our common stock, as of December 31, 2017, of $9.37 per share.
Prior to October 1, 2015, distributions were reinvested in shares of our common stock under the DRIP at a price of $9.50 per share. From October 1, 2015 to November 13, 2016, distributions were reinvested in shares of our common stock under the DRIP at a price of $9.70 per share, the estimated value per share as of August 31, 2015, as determined by our board of directors. From November 14, 2016 to March 27, 2017, distributions were reinvested in shares of our common stock under the DRIP at a price of $9.92 per share, the estimated per share NAV as of September 30, 2016, as determined by our board of directors. From March 28, 2017 to March 28, 2018, distributions were reinvested in shares of our common stock under the DRIP at a price of $10.08 per share, the estimated per share NAV as of December 31, 2016, as determined by our board of directors. Commencing on March 29, 2018, following the board of directors’ determination of an updated estimated per share NAV, distributions will be reinvested in shares of our common stock under the DRIP at a price of $9.37 per share, the estimated per share NAV as of December 31, 2017, as determined by our board of directors. Additionally, $9.37 per share will serve as the most recent estimated per share NAV for purposes of the share redemption program.
We primarily acquire core commercial real estate assets primarily consisting of necessity retail properties located throughout the United States. We use the term “core” to describe existing properties currently operating and generating income that are leased to national and regional creditworthy tenants under long-term net leases and are strategically located. As of December 31, 2017, we owned 909 properties, which includes nine properties owned through a consolidated joint venture arrangement (the “Consolidated Joint Venture”), comprising 26.9 million rentable square feet of commercial space located in 45 states. As of December 31, 2017, the rentable space at these properties was 97.5% leased, including month-to-month agreements, if any.
Investment Objectives and Policies
Our primary investment objectives are:
• | to acquire quality commercial real estate properties, net leased under long-term leases to creditworthy tenants, which provide current operating cash flow; |
• | to provide reasonably stable, current income for stockholders through the payment of cash distributions; and |
• | to provide the opportunity to participate in capital appreciation in the value of our investments. |
5
Our charter requires that our independent directors review our investment policies, described below, at least annually to determine that our policies are in the best interests of our stockholders. Except to the extent that investment policies and limitations are included in our charter, our board of directors may revise our investment policies without the approval of our stockholders. Investment policies that are provided in our charter may only be amended by a vote of stockholders holding a majority of our outstanding shares, unless the amendments do not adversely affect the rights, preferences and privileges of our stockholders.
Acquisition and Investment Policies
Types of Investments
We have acquired income-producing necessity retail properties that are primarily single-tenant properties or anchored shopping centers, which are leased to national and regional creditworthy tenants under long-term net leases, and are strategically located throughout the United States. We consider necessity retail properties to be properties leased to retail tenants that attract consumers for everyday needs, such as pharmacies, home improvement stores, national superstores, restaurants and regional retailers. Anchored shopping centers are multi-tenant properties that are anchored by one or more large national, regional or local retailers.
We have and may continue to acquire other income-producing properties, such as office and industrial properties, which may share certain core characteristics with our retail investments, such as a principal creditworthy tenant, a long-term net lease, and a strategic location. We believe acquisitions of these types of office and industrial properties, which are essential to the business operations of the tenant, are consistent with our goal of providing stockholders with a stable stream of current income and an opportunity for capital appreciation.
Many of our properties are, and we anticipate that future properties will be, leased to tenants in the chain or franchise retail industry, including, but not limited to, convenience stores, drug stores and restaurant properties, as well as leased to large national retailers as standalone properties or as part of anchored shopping centers, which are anchored by national, regional and local retailers. CR IV Advisors monitors industry trends and identifies properties on our behalf that serve to provide a favorable return balanced with risk. Our management primarily targets regional or national name brand retail businesses with established track records. We generally intend to hold each property for a period in excess of seven years.
By acquiring a large number of properties, we believe that lower than expected results of operations from one or a few investments will not necessarily preclude our ability to realize our investment objective of cash flow from our overall portfolio. In addition, we believe that properties under long-term triple-net and double-net leases offer a distinct investment advantage since these properties generally require less management and operating capital, have less recurring tenant turnover and, with respect to single-tenant properties, often offer superior locations that are less dependent on the financial stability of adjoining tenants. Since we acquire properties that are geographically diverse, we expect to minimize the potential adverse impact of economic slowdowns or downturns in local markets.
To the extent feasible, we seek to achieve a well-balanced portfolio diversified by geographic location, age and lease maturities of the various properties. We pursue properties leased to tenants representing a variety of retail industries to avoid concentration in any one industry. We also are diversified between national, regional and local brands. We generally target properties with lease terms in excess of ten years. We have acquired and may continue to acquire properties with shorter lease terms if the property is in an attractive location, if the property is difficult to replace, or if the property has other significant favorable attributes. We expect that these acquisitions will provide long-term value by virtue of their size, location, quality and condition, and lease characteristics.
There is no limitation on the number, size or type of properties that we may acquire, or on the percentage of net proceeds of the Offerings that may be used to acquire a single property. The number and mix of properties comprising our portfolio will depend upon real estate market conditions and other circumstances existing at the time we acquire properties. We will not forgo acquiring a high-quality asset because it does not precisely fit our expected portfolio composition. See “— Other Possible Investments” below for a description of other types of real estate and real estate-related investments we may make.
We incur debt to acquire properties when CR IV Advisors determines that incurring such debt is in our best interests and in the best interests of our stockholders. In addition, from time to time, we have acquired and may continue to acquire some properties without financing and later incur mortgage debt secured by one or more of such properties if favorable financing terms are available. We use the proceeds from these loans to acquire additional properties. See “— Borrowing Policies” below for a more detailed description of our borrowing intentions and limitations.
6
Real Estate Underwriting Process
In evaluating potential property acquisitions consistent with our investment objectives, CR IV Advisors applies a well-established underwriting process to determine the creditworthiness of potential tenants. We consider a tenant to be creditworthy if we believe that the tenant has sufficient assets, cash flow generation and stability of operations to meet its obligations under the lease. Similarly, CR IV Advisors applies credit underwriting criteria to possible new tenants when we are leasing properties in our portfolio. Many of the tenants of our properties are, and we expect will continue to be, national or regional retail chains that are creditworthy entities having high net worth and operating income. CR IV Advisors’ underwriting process includes analyzing the financial data and other available information about the tenant, such as income statements, balance sheets, net worth, cash flow, business plans, data provided by industry credit rating services, and/or other information CR IV Advisors may deem relevant. Generally, these tenants must have a proven track record in order to meet the credit tests applied by CR IV Advisors. In addition, we may obtain guarantees of leases by the corporate parent of the tenant, in which case CR IV Advisors will analyze the creditworthiness of the guarantor. In many instances, especially in sale-leaseback situations where we are acquiring a property from a company and simultaneously leasing it back to the company under a long-term lease, we will meet with the tenant’s senior management to discuss the company’s business plan and strategy.
When using debt rating agencies, a tenant typically will be considered creditworthy when the tenant has an “investment grade” debt rating by Moody’s Investors Service (“Moody’s”) of Baa3 or better, credit rating by Standard & Poor’s Financial Services LLC (“Standard & Poor’s”) of BBB- or better, or its payments are guaranteed by a company with such rating. Changes in tenant credit ratings, coupled with future acquisition and disposition activity, may increase or decrease our concentration of creditworthy tenants in the future.
Moody’s ratings are forward-looking opinions of future relative creditworthiness, which consider, but are not limited to, franchise value, financial statement analysis and management quality. The rating given to a debt obligation describes the level of risk associated with receiving full and timely payment of principal and interest on that specific debt obligation and how that risk compares with that of all other debt obligations. The rating, therefore, provides one measure of the ability of a company to generate cash in the future.
A Moody’s debt rating of Baa3, which is the lowest investment grade rating given by Moody’s, is assigned to companies which, in Moody’s opinion, are subject to moderate credit risk and, as such, may possess certain speculative characteristics. A Moody’s debt rating of AAA, which is the highest investment grade rating given by Moody’s, is assigned to companies which, in Moody’s opinion, are of the highest quality and subject to the lowest level of credit risk.
Standard & Poor’s assigns a credit rating to companies and to each issuance or class of debt issued by a rated company. A Standard & Poor’s credit rating of BBB-, which is the lowest investment grade rating given by Standard & Poor’s, is assigned to companies that, in Standard & Poor’s opinion, exhibit adequate protection parameters. However, adverse economic conditions or changing circumstances are more likely to lead to a weakened capacity of the company to meet its financial commitments. A Standard & Poor’s credit rating of AAA+, which is the highest investment grade rating given by Standard & Poor’s, is assigned to companies that, in Standard & Poor’s opinion, have extremely strong capacities to meet their financial commitments.
While we will utilize ratings by Moody’s and Standard & Poor’s as one factor in determining whether a tenant is creditworthy, CR IV Advisors also considers other factors in determining whether a tenant is creditworthy for the purpose of meeting our investment objectives. CR IV Advisors’ underwriting process considers information provided by third-party analytical services, such as Moody’s CreditEdge, along with CR IV Advisors’ own analysis of the financial condition of the tenant and/or the guarantor, the operating history of the property with the tenant, the tenant’s market share and track record within the tenant’s industry segment, the general health and outlook of the tenant’s industry segment, the strength of the tenant’s management team and the terms and length of the lease at the time of the acquisition.
Description of Leases
We expect, in most instances, to continue to acquire tenant properties with existing double-net or triple-net leases. “Net” leases means leases that typically require tenants to pay all or a majority of the operating expenses, including real estate taxes, special assessments and sales and use taxes, utilities, maintenance, insurance and building repairs related to the property, in addition to the lease payments. Triple-net leases typically require the tenant to pay all costs associated with a property in addition to the base rent and percentage rent, if any, including capital expenditures for the roof and the building structure. Double-net leases typically hold the landlord responsible for the capital expenditures for the roof and structure, while the tenant is responsible for all lease payments and remaining operating expenses associated with the property. Double-net and triple-net leases help ensure the predictability and stability of our expenses, which we believe will result in greater predictability and stability of our cash distributions to stockholders. Not all of our properties are, or will be subject to, net leases. In respect of anchored shopping centers, we expect to continue to have a variety of lease arrangements with the tenants of these properties.
7
Since each lease is an individually negotiated contract between two or more parties, each lease will have different obligations of both the landlord and tenant. Many large national tenants have standard lease forms that generally do not vary from property to property. We will have limited ability to revise the terms of leases to those tenants. We have acquired and may continue to acquire properties subject to “gross” leases. “Gross” leases means leases that typically require the tenant to pay a flat rental amount and we would pay for all property charges regularly incurred as a result of our owning the property. When spaces in a property become vacant, existing leases expire, or we acquire properties under development or requiring substantial refurbishment or renovation, we generally expect to enter into “net” leases.
We generally expect to enter into long-term leases that have terms of ten years or more; however, certain leases may have a shorter term. We may continue to acquire properties under which the lease term has partially expired. We also may acquire properties with shorter lease terms if the property is in an attractive location, if the property is difficult to replace, or if the property has other significant favorable real estate attributes. Under most commercial leases, tenants are obligated to pay a predetermined annual base rent. Some of the leases also contain provisions that increase the amount of base rent payable at points during the lease term. We expect that many of our leases will continue to contain periodic rent increases. Generally, the leases require each tenant to procure, at its own expense, commercial general liability insurance, as well as property insurance covering the building for the full replacement value and naming the ownership entity and the lender, if applicable, as the additional insured on the policy. Tenants will be required to provide proof of insurance by furnishing evidence of insurance to CR IV Advisors on an annual basis. The evidence of insurance will be tracked and reviewed for compliance by CR IV Advisors personnel responsible for property and risk management. As a precautionary measure, we may obtain, to the extent available, secondary liability insurance, as well as loss of rents insurance that will typically cover one year of annual rent in the event of a rental loss.
Some leases may require that we procure insurance for both commercial general liability and property damage; however, generally the premiums are fully reimbursable from the tenant. In such instances, the policy will list us as the named insured and the tenant as the additional insured.
We do not expect to allow leases to be assigned or subleased without our prior written consent. If we do consent to an assignment or sublease, we generally expect the terms of such consent to provide that the original tenant remains fully liable under the lease unless we release that original tenant from its obligations.
We may enter into sale-leaseback transactions, pursuant to which we purchase properties and lease them back to the sellers of such properties. While we intend to use our best efforts to structure any such sale-leaseback transaction so that the lease will be characterized as a “true lease” and so that we are treated as the owner of the property for federal income tax purposes, the Internal Revenue Service (the “IRS”) could challenge this characterization. In the event that any sale-leaseback transaction is re-characterized as a financing transaction for federal income tax purposes, deductions for depreciation and cost recovery relating to such property would be disallowed, and in certain circumstances, we could lose our REIT status.
Acquisition Decisions
CR IV Advisors has substantial discretion with respect to the selection of our specific acquisitions, subject to our investment and borrowing policies, which are approved by our board of directors. In pursuing our investment objectives and making investment decisions on our behalf, CR IV Advisors evaluates the proposed terms of the acquisition against all aspects of the transaction, including the condition and financial performance of the asset, the terms of existing leases and the creditworthiness of the tenant, and property location and characteristics. Because the factors considered, including the specific weight we place on each factor, vary for each potential acquisition, we do not, and are not able to, assign a specific weight or level of importance to any particular factor.
CR IV Advisors procures and reviews an independent valuation estimate on each and every proposed acquisition. In addition, CR IV Advisors, to the extent such information is available, considers the following:
• | tenant rolls and tenant creditworthiness; |
• | a property condition report; |
• | unit level store performance; |
• | property location, visibility and access; |
• | age of the property, physical condition and curb appeal; |
• | neighboring property uses; |
• | local market conditions including vacancy rates and market rents; |
• | area demographics, including trade area population and average household income; |
• | neighborhood growth patterns and economic conditions; |
8
• | presence of nearby properties that may positively or negatively impact store sales at the subject property; and |
• | lease terms, including length of lease term, scope of landlord responsibilities, presence and frequency of contractual rental increases, renewal option provisions, exclusive and permitted use provisions, co-tenancy requirements and termination options. |
CR IV Advisors also reviews the terms of each existing lease by considering various factors, including:
•rent escalations;
•remaining lease term;
•renewal option terms;
•tenant purchase options;
•termination options;
•scope of the landlord’s maintenance, repair and replacement requirements;
•projected net cash flow yield; and
•projected internal rates of return.
Our board of directors has adopted a policy to prohibit acquisitions from affiliates of CR IV Advisors unless a majority of our directors (including a majority of our independent directors) not otherwise interested in the transaction determine that the transaction is fair and reasonable to us and certain other conditions are met. See the section captioned “— Acquisition of Properties from Affiliates of CR IV Advisors” below.
Conditions to Closing Our Acquisitions
Generally, we condition our obligation to close the purchase of any acquisition on the delivery and verification of certain documents from the seller or developer, including, where appropriate:
• | plans and specifications; |
• | surveys; |
• | evidence that title to the property can be freely sold or otherwise transferred to us, subject to such liens and encumbrances as are acceptable to CR IV Advisors; |
• | financial statements covering recent operations of properties, if available; |
• | title and liability insurance policies; and |
• | certificates of the tenant attesting that the tenant believes that, among other things, the lease is valid and enforceable. |
In addition, we will take such steps as we deem necessary with respect to potential environmental matters. See the section captioned “Environmental Matters” below.
We have and may continue to enter into purchase and sale arrangements with a seller or developer of a suitable property under development or construction. In such cases, we are obligated to purchase the property at the completion of construction, provided that the construction conforms to definitive plans, specifications, and costs approved by us in advance. In such cases, prior to our acquiring the property, we generally receive a certificate of an architect, engineer or other appropriate party, stating that the property complies with all plans and specifications. If renovation or remodeling is required prior to the purchase of a property, we expect to pay a negotiated maximum amount to the seller upon completion.
In determining whether to purchase a particular property, we may, in accordance with customary practices, obtain an option to purchase such property. The amount paid for an option, if any, normally is forfeited if the property is not purchased and credited against the purchase price if the property is purchased.
In the purchasing, leasing and developing of properties, we are subject to risks generally incident to the ownership of real estate. Refer to Part I, Item 1A. Risk Factors — General Risks Related to Acquisitions of Real Estate in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Ownership Structure
Our real estate acquisitions generally take the form of holding fee title or a long-term leasehold estate. We have acquired, and expect to continue to acquire, such interests either directly through our operating partnership or indirectly through limited liability companies, limited partnerships or other entities owned and/or controlled by us or our operating partnership. We have acquired and may continue to acquire properties by acquiring the entity that holds the desired properties. We also have acquired
9
and may continue to acquire properties through investments in joint ventures, partnerships, co-tenancies or other co-ownership arrangements with third parties, including the developers of the properties or affiliates of CR IV Advisors. See the section captioned “— Joint Ventures” below.
Joint Ventures
We have entered, and may continue to enter into, joint ventures, partnerships, co-tenancies and other co-ownership arrangements with affiliated entities of CR IV Advisors, including other real estate programs sponsored or operated by CCO Group, or other affiliates of CR IV Advisors, and other third parties for the acquisition, development or improvement of properties or the acquisition of other real estate-related assets. We may also enter into such arrangements with real estate developers, owners and other unaffiliated third parties for the purpose of developing, owning and operating real properties. In determining whether to participate in a particular joint venture, CR IV Advisors will evaluate the underlying real property or other real estate-related asset using the same criteria described above in “— Acquisition Decisions.” CR IV Advisors also will evaluate the joint venture or co-ownership partner and the proposed terms of the joint venture or a co-ownership arrangement.
Our general policy is to invest in joint ventures only when we will have an option or contract to purchase, or a right of first refusal to purchase, the property held by the joint venture or the co-venturer’s interest in the joint venture if the co-venturer elects to sell such interest. In the event that the co-venturer elects to sell all or a portion of the interests held in any such joint venture, however, we may not have sufficient funds to exercise our right of first refusal to buy the other co-venturer’s interest in the joint venture. In the event that any joint venture with an affiliated entity holds interests in more than one asset, the interest in each such asset may be specially allocated between us and the joint venture partner based upon the respective proportion of funds deemed contributed by each co-venturer in each such asset.
In the event we enter into a joint venture or other co-ownership arrangements with CIM or its affiliates or another real estate program sponsored or operated by CCO Group, CR IV Advisors’ officers, key persons and affiliates may have conflicts of interest. The co-venturer may have economic or business interests or goals that are or may become inconsistent with our business interests or goals. In addition, CR IV Advisors’ officers and key persons may face a conflict in structuring the terms of the relationship between our interests and the interests of any affiliated co-venturer and in managing the joint venture. Since some or all of CR IV Advisors’ officers and key persons may also advise the affiliated co-venturer, agreements and transactions between us and CIM or any other real estate programs sponsored or operated by CCO Group would not have the benefit of arm’s-length negotiation of the type normally conducted between unrelated co-venturers, which may result in the co-venturer receiving benefits greater than the benefits that we receive. In addition, we may assume liabilities related to the joint venture that exceed the percentage of our contribution to the joint venture.
We may enter into joint ventures with CIM, other real estate programs sponsored or operated by CCO Group, CR IV Advisors, one or more of our directors, or any of their respective affiliates, but only if a majority of our directors (including a majority of our independent directors) not otherwise interested in the transaction approve the transaction as being fair and reasonable to us and on substantially the same terms and conditions as those received by unaffiliated joint venturers, and the cost of our investment must be supported by a current third-party appraisal of the asset.
Development and Construction of Properties
We have acquired and may continue to acquire properties on which improvements are to be constructed or completed or which require substantial renovation or refurbishment. We expect that joint ventures would be the exclusive vehicle through which we would invest in build-to-suit property projects. Our general policy is to structure them as follows:
• | we may enter into a joint venture with third parties who have an executed lease with the developer who has an executed lease in place with the future tenant whereby we will provide a portion of the equity or debt financing; |
• | we would accrue a preferred return during construction on any equity investment; |
• | the properties would be developed by third parties; and |
• | consistent with our general policy regarding joint ventures, we would have an option or contract to purchase, or a right of first refusal to purchase, the property or the co-investor’s interest. |
It is possible that joint venture partners may resist granting us a right of first refusal or may insist on a different methodology for unwinding the joint venture if one of the parties wishes to liquidate its interest.
In the event that we elect to engage in development or construction projects, in order to help ensure performance by the builders of properties that are under construction, completion of such properties will be guaranteed at the contracted price by a completion guaranty, completion bond or performance bond. CR IV Advisors may rely upon the substantial net worth of the contractor or developer or a personal guarantee accompanied by financial statements showing a substantial net worth provided
10
by an affiliate of the person entering into the construction or development contract as an alternative to a completion bond or performance bond. Development of real estate properties is subject to risks relating to a builder’s ability to control construction costs or to build in conformity with plans, specifications and timetables. Refer to Part I, Item 1A. Risk Factors — General Risks Related to Acquisitions of Real Estate in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
We have and may continue to make periodic progress payments or other cash advances to developers and builders of our properties prior to completion of construction, but only upon receipt of an architect’s certification as to the percentage of the project then completed and as to the dollar amount of the construction then completed. We intend to use such additional controls on disbursements to builders and developers as we deem necessary or prudent. We have and may continue to directly employ one or more project managers, including CR IV Advisors or an affiliate of CR IV Advisors, to plan, supervise and implement the development of any unimproved properties that we may acquire. Such persons would be compensated directly by us or through an affiliate of CR IV Advisors and reimbursed by us. In either event, the compensation would reduce the amount of any construction fee, development fee or acquisition fee that we would otherwise pay to CR IV Advisors or its affiliate.
In addition, we have and may continue to acquire unimproved properties, provided that we will not invest more than 10% of our total assets in unimproved properties or invest in mortgage loans secured by such properties. We will consider a property to be an unimproved property if it was not acquired for the purpose of producing rental or other operating cash flows, has no development or construction in process at the time of acquisition and no development or construction is planned to commence within one year of the acquisition.
Other Possible Investments
Although we have acquired and expect to continue to acquire primarily real estate assets, our portfolio may also include other real estate-related assets, such as mortgage, mezzanine, bridge and other loans and securities related to real estate assets, frequently, but not necessarily always, in the corporate sector; however, we do not intend for such real estate-related assets to constitute a significant portion of our asset portfolio; and we will evaluate our assets to ensure that any such investments do not cause us to lose our REIT status, cause us or any of our subsidiaries to be an investment company under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “Investment Company Act”), or cause our advisor to have assets under management that could require our advisor to register as an investment adviser under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, as amended. We may make adjustments to our target portfolio based on real estate market conditions, capital raised, financing secured and investment opportunities. Thus, to the extent that CR IV Advisors presents us with high quality investment opportunities that allow us to meet the REIT requirements under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Internal Revenue Code”), and do not cause us, our operating partnership or any other subsidiaries to meet the definition of an “investment company” under the Investment Company Act, our portfolio composition may vary from what we initially expect. Our board of directors has broad discretion to change our investment policies in order for us to achieve our investment objectives.
Investing in and Originating Loans. The criteria that CR IV Advisors will use in making or investing in loans on our behalf are substantially the same as those involved in acquiring properties for our portfolio. We do not intend to make loans to other persons, to underwrite securities of other issuers or to engage in the purchase and sale of any types of investments other than those relating to real estate. However, unlike our property acquisitions, which we expect to hold in excess of seven years, we expect that the average duration of loans will typically be one to five years.
We do not expect to make or invest in loans that are not directly or indirectly secured by real estate. We will not make or invest in mortgage loans on any one property if the aggregate amount of all mortgage loans outstanding on the property, including our loan, would exceed an amount equal to 85% of the appraised value of the property, as determined by an independent third-party appraiser, unless we find substantial justification due to other underwriting criteria. We may find such justification in connection with the purchase of loans in cases in which we believe there is a high probability of our foreclosure upon the property in order to acquire the underlying assets and in which the cost of the loan investment does not exceed the fair market value of the underlying property. We will not invest in or make loans unless an appraisal has been obtained concerning the underlying property, except for those loans insured or guaranteed by a government or government agency. In cases in which a majority of our independent directors so determine, and in the event the transaction is with CCO Group, CR IV Advisors, any of our directors or their respective affiliates, the appraisal will be obtained from a certified independent appraiser in order to support its determination of fair market value.
We may invest in first, second and third mortgage loans, mezzanine loans, bridge loans, wraparound mortgage loans, construction mortgage loans on real property and loans on leasehold interest mortgages. However, we will not make or invest in any loans that are subordinate to any mortgage or equity interest of CCO Group, CR IV Advisors, any of our directors or any of their or our affiliates. We also may invest in participations in mortgage loans. A mezzanine loan is a loan made in respect of certain real property but is secured by a lien on the ownership interests of the entity that, directly or indirectly, owns the real
11
property. A bridge loan is short-term financing for an individual or business, until permanent or the next stage of financing can be obtained. Second mortgage and wraparound loans are secured by second or wraparound deeds of trust on real property that is already subject to prior mortgage indebtedness. A wraparound loan is one or more junior mortgage loans having a principal amount equal to the outstanding balance under the existing mortgage loan, plus the amount actually to be advanced under the wraparound mortgage loan. Under a wraparound loan, we would generally make principal and interest payments on behalf of the borrower to the holders of the prior mortgage loans. Third mortgage loans are secured by third deeds of trust on real property that is already subject to prior first and second mortgage indebtedness. Construction loans are loans made for either original development or renovation of property. Construction loans in which we would generally consider an investment would be secured by first deeds of trust on real property for terms of six months to two years. Loans on leasehold interests are secured by an assignment of the borrower’s leasehold interest in the particular real property. These loans are generally for terms of six months to 15 years. The leasehold interest loans are either amortized over a period that is shorter than the lease term or have a maturity date prior to the date the lease terminates. These loans would generally permit us to cure any default under the lease. Participations in mortgage loans are investments in partial interests of mortgages of the type described above that are made and administered by third-party mortgage lenders.
In evaluating prospective loan investments, CR IV Advisors will consider factors such as the following:
•the ratio of the investment amount to the underlying property’s value;
•the property’s potential for capital appreciation;
•expected levels of rental and occupancy rates;
•the condition and use of the property;
•current and projected cash flow of the property;
•potential for rent increases;
•the degree of liquidity of the investment;
•the property’s income-producing capacity;
•the quality, experience and creditworthiness of the borrower;
•general economic conditions in the area where the property is located;
•in the case of mezzanine loans, the ability to acquire the underlying real property; and
•other factors that CR IV Advisors believes are relevant.
In addition, we will seek to obtain a customary lender’s title insurance policy or commitment as to the priority of the mortgage or condition of the title. Because the factors considered, including the specific weight we place on each factor, will vary for each prospective loan investment, we do not, and are not able to, assign a specific weight or level of importance to any particular factor.
We may originate loans from mortgage brokers or personal solicitations of suitable borrowers, or may purchase existing loans that were originated by other lenders. CR IV Advisors will evaluate all potential loan investments to determine if the security for the loan and the loan-to-value ratio meets our investment criteria and objectives. Most loans that we will consider for investment would provide for monthly payments of interest and some may also provide for principal amortization, although many loans of the nature that we will consider provide for payments of interest only and a payment of principal in full at the end of the loan term. We will not originate loans with negative amortization provisions.
We do not have any policies directing the portion of our assets that may be invested in construction loans, mezzanine loans, bridge loans, loans secured by leasehold interests and second, third and wraparound mortgage loans. However, we recognize that these types of loans are more subject to risk than first deeds of trust or first priority mortgages on income-producing, fee-simple properties, and we expect to minimize the amount of these types of loans in our portfolio, to the extent that we make or invest in loans at all. CR IV Advisors will evaluate the fact that these types of loans are riskier in determining the rate of interest on the loans. We do not have any policy that limits the amount that we may invest in any single loan or the amount we may invest in loans to any one borrower. We are not limited as to the amount of gross offering proceeds that we may use to invest in or originate loans.
Our loan investments may be subject to regulation by federal, state and local authorities and subject to various laws and judicial and administrative decisions imposing various requirements and restrictions, including among other things, regulating credit granting activities, establishing maximum interest rates and finance charges, requiring disclosures to customers, governing secured transactions and setting collection, repossession and claims handling procedures and other trade practices. In addition, certain states have enacted legislation requiring the licensing of mortgage bankers or other lenders and these requirements may affect our ability to effectuate our proposed investments in loans. Commencement of operations in these or
12
other jurisdictions may be dependent upon a finding of our financial responsibility, character and fitness. We may determine not to make loans in any jurisdiction in which the regulatory authority determines that we have not complied in all material respects with applicable requirements.
Investment in Other Real Estate-Related Securities. To the extent permitted by Section V.D.2 of the Statement of Policy Regarding Real Estate Investment Trusts adopted by the North American Securities Administrators Association (the “NASAA REIT Guidelines”), and subject to the limitations set forth in our charter, we may invest in common and preferred real estate-related equity securities of both publicly traded and private real estate companies. Real estate-related equity securities are generally unsecured and also may be subordinated to other obligations of the issuer. Our investments in real estate-related equity securities will involve special risks relating to the particular issuer of the equity securities, including the financial condition and business outlook of the issuer.
We may also make investments in commercial mortgage backed securities (“CMBS”) to the extent permitted by the NASAA REIT Guidelines. CMBS are securities that evidence interests in, or are secured by, a single commercial mortgage loan or a pool of commercial mortgage loans. CMBS are generally pass-through certificates that represent beneficial ownership interests in common law trusts whose assets consist of defined portfolios of one or more commercial mortgage loans. They are typically issued in multiple tranches whereby the more senior classes are entitled to priority distributions from the trust’s income. Losses and other shortfalls from expected amounts to be received on the mortgage pool are borne by the most subordinate classes, which receive payments only after the more senior classes have received all principal and/or interest to which they are entitled. CMBS are subject to all of the risks of the underlying mortgage loans. We may invest in investment grade and non-investment grade CMBS classes. Our board of directors has adopted a policy to limit any investments in non-investment grade CMBS to not more than 10% of our total assets.
Borrowing Policies
CR IV Advisors believes that utilizing borrowings to make acquisitions is consistent with our investment objective of maximizing the return to stockholders. By operating on a leveraged basis, we have more funds available for acquiring properties. This allows us to make more investments than would otherwise be possible, potentially resulting in a more diversified portfolio.
At the same time, CR IV Advisors believes in utilizing leverage in a moderate fashion. While there is no limitation on the amount we may borrow against any single improved property, our charter limits our aggregate borrowings to 75% of the cost of our gross assets (or 300% of net assets) (before deducting depreciation or other non-cash reserves) unless excess borrowing is approved by a majority of the independent directors and disclosed to our stockholders in the next quarterly report along with the justification for such excess borrowing. Consistent with CR IV Advisors’ approach toward the moderate use of leverage, our board of directors has adopted a policy to further limit our borrowings to 60% of the greater of cost (before deducting depreciation or other non-cash reserves) or fair market value of our gross assets, unless excess borrowing is approved by a majority of the independent directors and disclosed to our stockholders in the next quarterly report along with a justification for such excess borrowing. Our advisor has set a target leverage ratio of 40% to 50% of the greater of cost (before deducting depreciation or other non-cash reserves) or fair market value of our gross assets. Fair market value is based on the estimated market value of our real estate assets as of December 31, 2016 used to determine our estimated per share NAV as of such date, and for those assets acquired from January 1, 2017 through December 31, 2017, is based on the purchase price. As of December 31, 2017, our ratio of debt to the cost (before deducting depreciation or other non-cash reserves) of our gross assets was 49.0% (48.9% including adjustment to debt for cash and cash equivalents), and our ratio of debt to the fair market value of our gross assets was 44.3%.
CR IV Advisors uses its best efforts to obtain financing on the most favorable terms available to us. CR IV Advisors has substantial discretion with respect to the financing we obtain, subject to our borrowing policies, which have been approved by our board of directors. Lenders may have recourse to assets not securing the repayment of the indebtedness. CR IV Advisors may elect to refinance properties during the term of a loan, but we expect this would occur only in limited circumstances, such as when a decline in interest rates makes it beneficial to prepay an existing mortgage, when an existing mortgage matures or if an attractive asset becomes available and the proceeds from the refinancing can be used to purchase such asset. The benefits of the refinancing may include increased cash flow resulting from reduced debt service requirements and an increase in property ownership if some refinancing proceeds are reinvested in real estate.
Our ability to increase our diversification through borrowing may be adversely impacted if banks and other lending institutions reduce the amount of funds available for loans secured by real estate. When interest rates on mortgage loans are high or financing is otherwise unavailable on a timely basis, we have purchased, and may continue to purchase, properties for cash with the intention of obtaining a mortgage loan for a portion of the purchase price at a later time. To the extent that we do not obtain mortgage loans on our properties, our ability to acquire additional properties will be restricted and we may not be
13
able to adequately diversify our portfolio. Refer to Part I, Item 1A. Risk Factors — Risks Associated with Debt Financing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
We may not borrow money from any of our directors, CCO Group, CR IV Advisors or any of their affiliates unless such loan is approved by a majority of the directors (including a majority of the independent directors) not otherwise interested in the transaction as fair, competitive and commercially reasonable and no less favorable to us than a comparable loan between unaffiliated parties.
Disposition Policies
We intend to hold each property we acquire for an extended period, generally in excess of seven years. Holding periods for other real estate-related assets may vary. Regardless of intended holding periods, circumstances might arise that could cause us to determine to sell an asset before the end of the expected holding period if we believe the sale of the asset would be in the best interests of our stockholders. The determination of whether a particular asset should be sold or otherwise disposed of will be made after consideration of relevant factors, including prevailing and projected economic conditions, current tenant rolls and tenant creditworthiness, whether we could apply the proceeds from the sale of the asset to acquire other assets, whether disposition of the asset would increase cash flow, and whether the sale of the asset would be a prohibited transaction under the Internal Revenue Code or otherwise impact our status as a REIT for federal income tax purposes. The selling price of a property that is net leased will be determined in large part by the amount of rent payable under the lease. If a tenant has a repurchase option at a formula price, we may be limited in realizing any appreciation. In connection with our sales of properties, we may lend the purchaser all or a portion of the purchase price. In these instances, our taxable income may exceed the cash received in the sale. During the year ended December 31, 2017, we sold 15 properties for an aggregate gross sales price of $100.6 million, resulting in net cash proceeds of $65.9 million and a gain of $17.0 million.
Acquisition of Properties from Affiliates of CR IV Advisors
We may acquire properties or interests in properties from, or in co-ownership arrangements with, entities affiliated with CR IV Advisors, including properties acquired from affiliates of CR IV Advisors engaged in construction and development of commercial real properties. We will not acquire any property from an affiliate of CR IV Advisors unless a majority of our directors (including a majority of our independent directors) not otherwise interested in the transaction determine that the transaction is fair and reasonable to us. The purchase price that we will pay for any property we acquire from affiliates of CR IV Advisors, including property developed by an affiliate of CR IV Advisors as well as property held by such an affiliate that has already been developed, will not exceed the current appraised value of the property. In addition, the price of the property we acquire from an affiliate of CR IV Advisors may not exceed the cost of the property to the affiliate, unless a majority of our directors (including a majority of our independent directors) determine that substantial justification for the excess exists and the excess is reasonable. During the year ended December 31, 2017, we did not purchase any properties from affiliates of our advisor.
Conflicts of Interest
We are subject to various conflicts of interest arising out of our relationship with CR IV Advisors and its affiliates, including conflicts related to the arrangements pursuant to which we will compensate CR IV Advisors and its affiliates. Certain conflict resolution procedures are set forth in our charter.
The officers and affiliates of CR IV Advisors will try to balance our interests with the interests of CIM and its affiliates and other programs sponsored or operated by CCO Group to whom they owe duties. However, to the extent that these persons take actions that are more favorable to other entities than to us, these actions could have a negative impact on our financial performance and, consequently, on distributions to our stockholders and the value of their investments.
Our independent directors have an obligation to act on our behalf and on behalf of our stockholders in all situations in which a conflict of interest may arise.
As a result of the Services Agreement between VEREIT OP and CCO Group, we are also subject to conflicts of interest arising out of our contractual relationship with VEREIT, Inc. (“VEREIT”), the publicly-traded (NYSE: VER) parent company of VEREIT OP, which also has investment objectives and targeted assets similar to ours. Conflicts of interest will also exist to the extent that we may acquire, or seek to acquire, properties in the same geographic areas where CIM or its affiliates own properties. In addition, our directors and our officers may engage for their own account in business activities of the types conducted or to be conducted by our subsidiaries and us.
14
Interests in Other Real Estate Programs and Other Concurrent Offerings
Richard S. Ressler, our chief executive officer, president and one of our directors, who is also a founder and principal of CIM and certain of its affiliates and a director of CCIT III and Cole Income NAV Strategy, and Nathan D. DeBacker, our chief financial officer and treasurer, act as executive officers to one or more other programs sponsored by CCO Group. One of our directors, W. Brian Kretzmer, also serves as a director of CCIT III and Cole Income NAV Strategy. In addition, affiliates of CR IV Advisors act as an advisor to, and our chief financial officer and chief executive officer act as executive officers of, CCPT V, CCIT II, CCIT III and/or Cole Income NAV Strategy, all of which are or intend to be public, non-listed REITs distributed and managed by affiliates of CR IV Advisors. In addition, all of these programs primarily focus on the acquisition and management of commercial properties subject to long-term net leases to creditworthy tenants and have acquired or may acquire assets similar to ours. VEREIT and CCPT V, like us, focus primarily on the retail sector, while CCIT II and CCIT III focus primarily on the office and industrial sectors and Cole Income NAV Strategy focuses primarily on commercial properties in the retail, office and industrial sectors. Nevertheless, the investment strategy used by each REIT would permit them to purchase certain properties that may also be suitable for our portfolio.
CCIT II’s initial public offering of up to $2.975 billion in shares of common stock was declared effective by the SEC on September 17, 2013. CCIT II is no longer offering shares for investment to the public as of the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Cole Income NAV Strategy’s offerings of up to $4.0 billion in shares of common stock of three classes were declared effective by the SEC on December 6, 2011, August 26, 2013 and February 10, 2017. CCPT V’s initial public offering of up to $2.975 billion in shares of common stock was declared effective by the SEC on March 17, 2014 and terminated on August 1, 2017. CCPT V’s follow-on offering of up to $1.5 billion in shares of common stock was declared effective by the SEC on August 1, 2017. CCIT III’s initial public offering of up to $3.5 billion in shares of common stock of two classes was declared effective by the SEC on September 22, 2016.
Other real estate programs sponsored or operated by CCO Group, including other real estate offerings in registration, could compete with us in the sale or operation of our assets. We will seek to achieve any operating efficiencies or similar savings that may result from affiliated management of competitive assets. However, to the extent such programs own or acquire property that is adjacent, or in close proximity, to a property we own, our property may compete with such other program’s property for tenants or purchasers.
During the Initial Services Term of the Services Agreement, VEREIT OP will provide property acquisition services to us and CCO Group, and property acquisitions will be allocated among VEREIT and the real estate programs sponsored by CCO Group pursuant to an asset allocation policy and in accordance with the terms of the Services Agreement. During this period, in the event that an acquisition opportunity has been identified that may be suitable for more than one of us, VEREIT or one or more other programs sponsored by CCO Group, and for which more than one of such entities has sufficient funds, then an allocation committee, which is comprised of employees of VEREIT and employees of CIM, CCO Group or their respective affiliates (the “Allocation Committee”), will examine the following factors, among others, in determining the entity for which the acquisition opportunity is most appropriate:
•the investment objective of each entity;
•the anticipated operating cash flows of each entity and the cash requirements of each entity;
• | the effect of the acquisition both on diversification of each entity’s investments by type of property, geographic area and tenant concentration; |
•the amount of funds available to each program and the length of time such funds have been available to deploy;
•the policy of each entity relating to leverage of properties;
•the income tax effects of the purchase to each entity; and
•the size of the investment.
If, in the judgment of the Allocation Committee, the acquisition opportunity may be equally appropriate for more than one program, then the entity that has had the longest period of time elapse since it was allocated an acquisition opportunity of a similar size and type (e.g., office, industrial or retail properties) will be allocated such acquisition opportunity.
If a subsequent development, such as a delay in the closing of the acquisition or a delay in the construction of a property, causes any such acquisition opportunity, in the opinion of the Allocation Committee, to be more appropriate for an entity other than the entity that committed to make the acquisition opportunity, the Allocation Committee may determine that VEREIT or another program sponsored by CCO Group will be allocated the acquisition opportunity. Our board of directors has a duty to ensure that the method used for the allocation of the acquisition of properties by VEREIT or by other programs sponsored by CCO Group seeking to acquire similar types of properties is applied fairly to us.
15
In addition, after the Initial Services Term of the Services Agreement, CIM or its affiliates will have similar responsibilities for allocating acquisition opportunities among CIM and its affiliates, us and the other real estate programs sponsored by CCO Group, and in such circumstances will accordingly face similar conflicts of interest to those described above with respect to VEREIT OP during the Initial Services Term of the Services Agreement.
Although our board of directors has adopted a policy limiting the types of transactions that we may enter into with CR IV Advisors and its affiliates, including other real estate programs sponsored by CCO Group, we may still enter into certain such transactions, which are subject to inherent conflicts of interest. Similarly, joint ventures involving affiliates of CR IV Advisors also give rise to conflicts of interest. In addition, our board of directors may encounter conflicts of interest in enforcing our rights against any affiliate of CR IV Advisors in the event of a default by or disagreement with an affiliate or in invoking powers, rights or options pursuant to any agreement between us and CR IV Advisors, any of its affiliates or another real estate program sponsored by CCO Group.
Other Activities of CR IV Advisors and Its Affiliates
We rely on our advisor, CR IV Advisors, and, during the Initial Services Term of the Services Agreement, VEREIT OP, for the day-to-day operation of our business. As a result of the interests of certain members of these entities’ management in CIM or its affiliates, VEREIT and/or other real estate programs sponsored by CCO Group, and the fact that such persons also are engaged, and will continue to engage, in other business activities, CIM, VEREIT OP, our advisor and their respective officers, key persons and affiliates may have conflicts of interest in allocating their time and resources among us, CIM, VEREIT OP, their respective affiliates and other real estate programs sponsored by CCO Group, as applicable. However, our advisor believes that it, CIM and their respective affiliates, along with VEREIT OP, have sufficient personnel to discharge fully their responsibilities to all of the other programs sponsored or operated by CIM, CCO Group or their respective affiliates, or VEREIT and the other ventures in which they are involved.
Richard S. Ressler, our chief executive officer, president and one of our directors, is also a founder and principal of CIM and an officer/director of certain of its affiliates and a director of CCIT III and Cole Income NAV Strategy. In addition, our chief financial officer and treasurer, Nathan D. DeBacker, is also an officer of other real estate programs sponsored by CCO Group. As a result, Messrs. Ressler and DeBacker may owe duties to these other entities and their stockholders or equity owners, as applicable, which may from time to time conflict with the duties that they owe to us and our stockholders.
Dealer Manager
Because CCO Capital, the dealer manager for the Offering, is an affiliate of CR IV Advisors, we did not have the benefit of an independent due diligence review and investigation of the type normally performed by an unaffiliated, independent underwriter in connection with the Offering.
Property Manager
Our properties are, and we anticipate that substantially all properties we acquire in the future will be, managed and leased by our property manager, CREI Advisors, an affiliate of our advisor, pursuant to property management and leasing agreements with our subsidiaries that hold title to our properties. We expect CREI Advisors to also serve as property manager for properties owned by other real estate programs sponsored by CCO Group, some of which may be in competition with our properties.
Receipt of Fees and Other Compensation by CR IV Advisors and Its Affiliates
We have incurred, and expect to continue to incur, fees and expenses payable to CR IV Advisors and its affiliates in connection with the acquisition and management of our assets, including acquisition and advisory fees, acquisition expenses and operating expenses.
A transaction involving the purchase or sale of properties, or the purchase or sale of any other real estate-related asset will likely result in the receipt of fees and other compensation by CR IV Advisors and its affiliates, including acquisition and advisory fees, disposition fees and the possibility of subordinated performance fees. Subject to oversight by our board of directors, CR IV Advisors will continue to have considerable discretion with respect to all decisions relating to the terms and timing of all transactions. Therefore, CR IV Advisors may have conflicts of interest concerning certain actions taken on our behalf, particularly due to the fact that acquisition fees will generally be based on the cost of the acquisition and payable to CR IV Advisors and its affiliates regardless of the quality of the properties acquired. The advisory fees are based on the estimated value of our assets which were acquired prior to the “as of” date of the most recent estimated per share NAV and are based on the costs of the assets acquired subsequent to the date of the most recent estimated per share NAV. Basing acquisition fees and advisory fees on the cost or estimated value of our assets may influence CR IV Advisors’ decisions relating to property acquisitions.
16
Employees
We have no direct employees. The employees of CR IV Advisors and its affiliates provide services to us related to acquisitions and dispositions, property management, asset management, financing, accounting, stockholder relations and administration. The employees of CCO Capital, the dealer manager for the Offering, provided wholesale brokerage services during the Offering.
We are dependent on CR IV Advisors and its affiliates for services that are essential to us, including the sale of shares of our common stock, asset acquisition decisions, property management and other general administrative responsibilities. In the event that these companies are unable to provide these services to us, we would be required to obtain such services from other sources.
We reimburse CR IV Advisors and its affiliates for expenses incurred in connection with its provision of administrative, acquisition, property management, asset management, financing, accounting and stockholder relations services, including personnel costs, subject to certain limitations. During the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, $10.0 million, $9.7 million and $9.7 million, respectively, were recorded for reimbursement of services provided by CR IV Advisors and its affiliates in connection with the acquisition, management, operating and financing of our assets. No amounts were recorded for the reimbursement of certain third-party and personnel costs allocated in connection with the issuance of shares pursuant to the Offering during the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016, and 2015.
Reportable Segment
We operate on a consolidated basis in our commercial properties segment. See Note 2 — Summary of Significant Accounting Policies to our consolidated financial statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Competition
As we purchase properties, we are in competition with other potential buyers for the same properties and may have to pay more to purchase the property than if there were no other potential acquirers or we may have to locate another property that meets our acquisition criteria. Regarding the leasing efforts of our owned properties, the leasing of real estate is highly competitive in the current market, and we may continue to experience competition for tenants from owners and managers of competing projects. As a result, we may have to provide free rent, incur charges for tenant improvements, or offer other inducements, or we might not be able to timely lease the space, all of which may have an adverse impact on our results of operations. At the time we elect to dispose of our properties, we may also be in competition with sellers of similar properties to locate suitable purchasers for our properties. See the section captioned “— Conflicts of Interest” above.
Property Concentrations
As of December 31, 2017, no single tenant accounted for greater than 10% of our 2017 annualized rental income. As of December 31, 2017, 77 of our properties were located in California, which accounted for 10% of our 2017 annualized rental income. In addition, we have tenants in the discount store and pharmacy industries, which comprised 15% and 10%, respectively, of our 2017 annualized rental income. See Part I, Item 2. Properties of this Annual Report on Form 10-K for additional information regarding the geographic concentration of our properties.
Environmental Matters
All real property and the operations conducted on real property are subject to federal, state and local laws, ordinances and regulations relating to environmental protection and human health and safety. These laws and regulations generally govern wastewater discharges, air emissions, the operation and removal of underground and above-ground storage tanks, the use, storage, treatment, transportation and disposal of solid and hazardous materials, the presence and release of hazardous substances and the remediation of any associated contamination. Federal, state and local laws in this area are constantly evolving, and we intend to take commercially reasonable steps to protect ourselves from the impact of these laws. We carry environmental liability insurance on our properties that will provide limited coverage for remediation liability and/or pollution liability for third-party bodily injury and/or property damage claims for which we may be liable.
We generally will not purchase any property unless and until we also obtain what is generally referred to as a “Phase I” environmental site assessment and are generally satisfied with the environmental status of the property. However, we may purchase a property without obtaining such assessment if our advisor determines the assessment is not necessary because there exists a recent Phase I environmental site assessment that we deem satisfactory. A Phase I environmental site assessment generally consists of a visual survey of the building and the property in an attempt to identify areas of potential environmental concerns, visually observing neighboring properties to assess surface conditions or activities that may have an adverse environmental impact on the property, interviewing the key site manager and/or property owner, contacting local governmental
17
agency personnel and performing an environmental regulatory database search in an attempt to determine any known environmental concerns in, and in the immediate vicinity of, the property. A Phase I environmental site assessment does not generally include any sampling or testing of soil, ground water or building materials from the property and may not reveal all environmental hazards on a property.
In the event the Phase I environmental site assessment uncovers potential environmental problems with a property, our advisor will determine whether we will pursue the acquisition opportunity and whether we will have a “Phase II” environmental site assessment performed. The factors we may consider in determining whether to conduct a Phase II environmental site assessment include, but are not limited to, (1) the types of operations conducted on the property and surrounding property, (2) the time, duration and materials used during such operations, (3) the waste handling practices of any tenants or property owners, (4) the potential for hazardous substances to be released into the environment, (5) any history of environmental law violations on the subject property and surrounding properties, (6) any documented environmental releases, (7) any observations from the consultant that conducted the Phase I environmental site assessment, and (8) whether any party (e.g., surrounding property owners, prior owners or tenants) may be responsible for addressing the environmental conditions. We will determine whether to conduct a Phase II environmental site assessment on a case by case basis.
We have acquired and we expect that some of the properties that we acquire in the future may contain, at the time of our acquisition, or may have contained prior to our acquisition, storage tanks for the storage of petroleum products and other hazardous or toxic substances. All of these operations create a potential for the release of petroleum products or other hazardous or toxic substances. Some of the properties that we acquire may be adjacent to or near other properties that have contained or contain storage tanks used to store petroleum products or other hazardous or toxic substances. In addition, certain of the properties that we acquire may be on, or adjacent to or near other properties upon which others, including former owners or tenants of our properties, have engaged, or may in the future engage, in activities that may release petroleum products or other hazardous or toxic substances.
From time to time, we may acquire properties, or interests in properties, with known adverse environmental conditions where we believe that the environmental liabilities associated with these conditions are significant and quantifiable but that the acquisition will yield a superior risk-adjusted return. In such an instance, we will estimate the costs of environmental investigation, clean-up and monitoring in determining the purchase price. Further, in connection with property dispositions, we may agree to remain responsible for, and to bear the cost of, remediating or monitoring certain environmental conditions on the properties.
We are not aware of any environmental matters which we believe are reasonably likely to have a material effect on our results of operations, financial condition or liquidity.
Available Information
We electronically file our Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K and all amendments to those reports with the SEC. We have also filed registration statements, amendments to our registration statements, and/or supplements to our prospectus in connection with our Offerings with the SEC. Copies of our filings with the SEC may be obtained from the SEC’s website, at http://www.sec.gov. Access to these filings is free of charge.
Supplement To Material U.S. Federal Income Tax Consequences
This summary is for general information purposes only and is not tax advice. This discussion does not address all aspects of taxation that may be relevant to particular holders of our securities in light of their personal investment or tax circumstances.
Recent Legislation
The recently enacted “Tax Cuts and Jobs Act”, generally applicable for tax years beginning after December 31, 2017, made significant changes to the Code, including a number of provisions of the Code that affect the taxation of businesses and their owners, including REITs and their stockholders.
Among other changes, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act made the following changes:
• | For tax years beginning after December 31, 2017 and before January 1, 2026, (i) the U.S. federal income tax rates on ordinary income of individuals, trusts and estates have been generally reduced and (ii) non-corporate taxpayers are generally permitted to deduct 20% of certain pass-through business income, including dividends received from REITs that are not designated as capital gain dividends or qualified dividend income, subject to certain limitations. |
18
• | The maximum U.S. federal income tax rate for corporations has been reduced from 35% to 21%, and corporate alternative minimum tax has been eliminated for corporations, which would generally reduce the amount of U.S. federal income tax payable by our taxable REIT subsidiaries (“TRSs”) and by us to the extent we were subject to corporate U.S. federal income tax (for example, if we distributed less than 100% of our taxable income or recognized built-in gains in assets acquired from C corporations). In addition, the maximum withholding rate on distributions by us to non-U.S. stockholders that are treated as attributable to gain from the sale or exchange of a U.S. real property interest is reduced from 35% to 21%. |
• | Certain new limitations on the deductibility of interest expense now apply, which limitations may affect the deductibility of interest paid or accrued by us or our TRSs. |
• | Certain new limitations on net operating losses now apply, which limitations may affect net operating losses generated by us or our TRSs. |
• | A U.S. tax-exempt stockholder that is subject to tax on its unrelated business taxable income (“UBTI”) will be required to separately compute its taxable income and loss for each unrelated trade or business activity for purposes of determining its UBTI. |
New accounting rules generally require us to recognize income items for federal income tax purposes no later than when we take the item into account for financial statement purposes, which may accelerate our recognition of certain income items.
ITEM 1A. | RISK FACTORS |
Stockholders should carefully consider the following factors, together with all the other information included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, in evaluating the Company and our business. If any of the following risks actually occur, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected, and stockholders may lose all or part of their investment. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we currently deem immaterial also may impair our business operations.
Risks Related to Our Business
We currently have not identified all of the properties or real estate-related assets we intend to purchase. For this and other reasons, an investment in our shares is speculative.
We currently have not identified all of the properties or real estate-related assets that we may purchase. We have established policies relating to the types of assets we will acquire and the creditworthiness of tenants of our properties, but our advisor has wide discretion in implementing these policies, subject to the oversight of our board of directors. Additionally, our advisor has discretion to determine the location, number and size of our acquisitions and the percentage of net proceeds we may dedicate to a single asset. As a result, you will not be able to evaluate the economic merit of our future acquisitions until after such acquisitions have been made. Therefore, an investment in our shares is speculative.
Our stockholders should consider our prospects in light of the risks, uncertainties and difficulties frequently encountered by companies that, like us, have not identified all properties or real estate-related assets that they intend to purchase. To be successful in this market, we and our advisor must, among other things:
• | identify and acquire assets that further our investment objectives; |
• | rely on our advisor and its affiliates to attract, integrate, motivate and retain qualified personnel to manage our day-to-day operations; |
• | respond to competition for our targeted real estate and other investments; |
• | rely on our advisor and its affiliates to continue to build and expand our operations structure to support our business; and |
• | be continuously aware of, and interpret, marketing trends and conditions. |
We may not succeed in achieving these goals, and our failure to do so could cause our stockholders to lose all or a portion of their investment.
Our shares have limited liquidity and we are not required, through our charter or otherwise, to provide for a liquidity event. There is no public trading market for our shares and there may never be one; therefore, it will be difficult for our stockholders to sell their shares. Our stockholders should view our shares only as a long-term investment.
19
There is no public market for our common stock and there may never be one. In addition, although we presently intend to consider alternatives for providing liquidity for our stockholders beginning five to seven years following the termination of our initial public offering, we do not have a fixed date or method for providing stockholders with liquidity. We expect that our board of directors will make that determination in the future based, in part, upon advice from our advisor. If our stockholders are able to find a buyer for their shares, our stockholders will likely have to sell them at a substantial discount to their purchase price. It also is likely that our stockholders’ shares would not be accepted as the primary collateral for a loan. Therefore, shares of our common stock should be considered illiquid and a long-term investment, and our stockholders must be prepared to hold their shares of our common stock for an indefinite length of time.
Our stockholders are limited in their ability to sell their shares pursuant to our share redemption program and may have to hold their shares for an indefinite period of time.
Our share redemption program includes numerous restrictions that limit our stockholders’ ability to sell their shares. Subject to funds being available, we will generally limit the number of shares redeemed pursuant to our share redemption program to no more than 5% of the weighted average number of shares outstanding during the trailing 12 months prior to the end of the fiscal quarter for which the redemption is being paid. In addition, we intend to limit quarterly redemptions to approximately 1.25% of the weighted average number of shares outstanding during the trailing 12-month period ending on the last day of the fiscal quarter, and funding for redemptions for each quarter generally will be limited to the net proceeds we receive from the sale of shares in the respective quarter under the DRIP. Any of the foregoing limits might prevent us from accommodating all redemption requests made in any fiscal quarter or in any 12-month period. For the past seven quarters, quarterly redemptions have been honored on a pro rata basis, as we have exceeded the redemption limits described above. Our board of directors may amend the terms of, suspend, or terminate our share redemption program without stockholder approval upon 30 days’ prior notice, and our management may reject any request for redemption. These restrictions severely limit our stockholders’ ability to sell their shares should they require liquidity, and limit our stockholders’ ability to recover the value they invested or the fair market value of their shares.
Our estimated per share NAV is an estimate as of a given point in time and likely will not represent the amount of net proceeds that would result if we were liquidated or dissolved or completed a merger or other sale of the Company.
Based on the recommendation from the valuation committee, which is comprised solely of independent directors, the board of directors, including all of its independent directors, approves and establishes at least annually an estimated per share NAV of the Company’s common stock, which is based on an estimated market value of the Company’s assets less the estimated market value of the Company’s liabilities, divided by the number of shares outstanding. The Company provides this estimated per share NAV to assist broker-dealers that participated in the Company’s public offering in meeting their customer account statement reporting obligations under National Association of Securities Dealers Rule 2340.
As with any valuation methodology, the methodology used by our board of directors in reaching an estimate of the per share NAV of our shares is based upon a number of estimates, assumptions, judgments and opinions that may, or may not, prove to be correct. The use of different estimates, assumptions, judgments or opinions may have resulted in significantly different estimates of the per share NAV of our shares. In addition, our board of directors’ estimate of per share NAV is not based on the book values of the Company’s real estate, as determined by generally accepted accounting principles, as the Company’s book value for most real estate is based on the amortized cost of the property, subject to certain adjustments. Furthermore, in reaching an estimate of the per share NAV of the Company’s shares, our board of directors did not include, among other things, a discount for debt that may include a prepayment obligation or a provision precluding assumption of the debt by a third party. As a result, there can be no assurance that:
• | stockholders will be able to realize the estimated per share NAV upon attempting to sell their shares; or |
• | the Company will be able to achieve, for its stockholders, the estimated per share NAV upon a listing of the Company’s shares of common stock on a national securities exchange, a merger of the Company, or a sale of the Company’s portfolio. |
When determining the estimated per share NAV, there are currently no SEC, federal or state rules that establish requirements specifying the methodology to employ in determining an estimated per share NAV. However, pursuant to FINRA rules, the determination of the estimated per share NAV must be conducted by, or with the material assistance or confirmation of, a third-party valuation expert and must be derived from a methodology that conforms to standard industry practice.
The estimated per share NAV is an estimate as of a given point in time and likely does not represent the amount of net proceeds that would result from an immediate sale of our assets. The estimated per share NAV of the Company’s shares will fluctuate over time as a result of, among other things, developments related to individual assets and changes in the real estate and capital markets.
20
We may be unable to pay or maintain cash distributions or increase distributions over time.
There are many factors that can affect the availability and timing of cash distributions to our stockholders. Distributions are based primarily on cash flow from operations. The amount of cash available for distributions is affected by many factors, such as the performance of our advisor in selecting acquisitions for us to make, selecting tenants for our properties and securing financing arrangements, our ability to buy properties, the amount of rental income from our properties, and our operating expense levels, as well as many other variables. We may not always be in a position to pay distributions to our stockholders and any distributions we do make may not increase over time. In addition, our actual results may differ significantly from the assumptions used by our board of directors in establishing the distribution rate to our stockholders. There also is a risk that we may not have sufficient cash flow from operations to fund distributions required to maintain our REIT status.
We have paid, and may continue to pay, some of our distributions from sources other than cash flows from operations, including borrowings and proceeds from asset sales, which may reduce the amount of capital we ultimately deploy in our real estate operations and may negatively impact the value of our common stock.
To the extent that cash flow from operations has been or is insufficient to fully cover our distributions to our stockholders, we have paid, and may continue to pay, some of our distributions from sources other than cash flow from operations. Such sources may include borrowings, proceeds from asset sales or the sale of our securities. We have no limits on the amounts we may use to pay distributions from sources other than cash flow from operations. The payment of distributions from sources other than cash provided by operating activities may reduce the amount of proceeds available for acquisitions and operations or cause us to incur additional interest expense as a result of borrowed funds, and may cause subsequent holders of our common stock to experience dilution. This may negatively impact the value of our common stock.
During the year ended December 31, 2017 we paid distributions of $194.7 million, including $101.3 million through the issuance of shares pursuant to the DRIP Offerings. Net cash provided by operating activities for the year ended December 31, 2017 was $198.9 million and reflected a reduction for real estate acquisition-related fees and expenses incurred of $1.6 million, in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”). The distributions paid during the year ended December 31, 2017 were fully funded by net cash provided by operating activities.
Because we have in the past paid, and may in the future pay, distributions from sources other than our cash flows from operations, distributions at any point in time may not reflect the current performance of our properties or our current operating cash flow.
We may make distributions from any source, including the sources described in the risk factor above. Because the amount we pay in distributions may exceed our earnings and our cash flow from operations, distributions may not reflect the current performance of our properties or our current operating cash flow. To the extent distributions exceed cash flow from operations, distributions may be treated as a return of our stockholders’ investment and could reduce their basis in our common stock. A reduction in a stockholder’s basis in our common stock could result in the stockholder recognizing more gain upon the disposition of his or her shares, which, in turn, could result in greater taxable income to such stockholder.
We have experienced losses in the past, and we may experience additional losses in the future.
We have experienced net losses in the past (calculated in accordance with GAAP) and we may not be profitable or realize growth in the value of our assets. Many of our losses can be attributed to start-up costs, depreciation and amortization, as well as acquisition expenses incurred in connection with purchasing properties or making other investments. Our ability to sustain profitability is uncertain and depends on the demand for, and value of, our portfolio of properties. For a further discussion of our operational history and the factors affecting our losses, see Part II, Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and our accompanying consolidated financial statements and notes thereto.
We may suffer from delays in locating suitable acquisitions, which could adversely affect our ability to pay distributions to our stockholders and the value of their investment.
We could suffer from delays in locating suitable acquisitions. Delays we encounter in the selection and/or acquisition of income-producing properties could adversely affect our ability to pay distributions to our stockholders and/or the value of their overall returns. Competition from other real estate investors increases the risk of delays in investing our net offering proceeds. If our advisor is unable to identify suitable acquisitions, we will hold the proceeds we raise or raised in the Offerings in an interest-bearing account or invest the proceeds in short-term, investment-grade investments, which would provide a significantly lower return to us than the return we expect from our real estate assets.
21
Following the expiration of the Initial Services Term of the Services Agreement, CCO Group, LLC may be unable to make, on a timely or cost-effective basis, the changes necessary to replace the services provided by VEREIT OP pursuant to the Services Agreement and otherwise operate our programs.
Pursuant to the Services Agreement, VEREIT OP will continue to provide certain services to CCO Group and to the Cole REITs, including operational real estate support, during the Initial Services Term of the Services Agreement. During that period, CCO Group, LLC intends to evaluate and effectuate an appropriate transition of these services to other CIM affiliates or third parties with the goal of ensuring continuity and minimizing disruption. We cannot assure our stockholders that CCO Group, LLC will be able to successfully identify or transition to itself or third parties, on a timely and cost-effective basis, the services provided by VEREIT OP pursuant to the Services Agreement and continue to effectively provide us services, and we cannot assure our stockholders that there will be no disruption in quality or quantity of services provided. Furthermore, any transition of such services to CCO Group, LLC or third parties could lead to increased expenses associated with such services. These increased expenses could materially and adversely affect our business, financial position or results of operations.
CIM, the new parent company of CCO Group, has limited experience in the business of operating or managing entities that engage in double- and triple-net lease activities, which is an important aspect of CCO Group’s operations.
CIM, the new parent company of CCO Group, has limited experience in the business of operating or managing entities that principally engage in double- or triple-net lease activities. While CIM’s management has considerable general real estate operational and management experience, and some members of CIM’s management have knowledge and abilities relating to double- or triple-net lease activities, sponsoring entities that principally engage in double- and triple-net lease activities is a new business for CIM with risks that differ from those to which CIM has been subject historically. There can be no assurance that CIM’s management will have the skills needed to operate CCO Group profitably, especially following the expiration of the Initial Services Term of the Services Agreement.
It may be difficult to accurately reflect material events that may impact the estimated per share NAV between valuations and, accordingly, we may be selling shares in our DRIP and repurchasing shares at too high or too low a price.
Our independent valuation firm calculated estimates of the market value of our principal real estate and real estate-related assets, and our board of directors determined the net value of our real estate and real estate-related assets and liabilities taking into consideration such estimate provided by the independent valuation firm. Our board of directors is ultimately responsible for determining the estimated per share NAV. Since our board of directors will determine our estimated per share NAV at least annually, there may be changes in the value of our properties that are not fully reflected in the most recent estimated per share NAV. As a result, the published estimated per share NAV may not fully reflect changes in value that may have occurred since the prior valuation.
Furthermore, our advisor will monitor our portfolio, but it may be difficult to reflect changing market conditions or material events that may impact the value of our portfolio between valuations, or to obtain timely or complete information regarding any such events. Therefore, the estimated per share NAV published before the announcement of an extraordinary event may differ significantly from our actual per share NAV until such time as sufficient information is available and analyzed, the financial impact is fully evaluated, and the appropriate adjustment is made to our estimated per share NAV, as determined by our board of directors. Any resulting disparity may be to the detriment of a purchaser of our shares or a stockholder selling shares pursuant to our share redemption program.
Our future success depends to a significant degree upon certain key personnel of our advisor. If our advisor loses or is unable to attract and retain key personnel, our ability to achieve our investment objectives could be delayed or hindered, which could adversely affect our ability to pay distributions to our stockholders and the value of their investment.
Our success depends to a significant degree upon the contributions of certain executive officers and other key personnel of CCO Group and our advisor. We cannot guarantee that all of these key personnel, or any particular person, will remain affiliated with us, CCO Group and/or our advisor. If any of our key personnel were to cease their affiliation with our advisor, our operating results could suffer. We believe that our future success depends, in large part, upon our advisor’s ability to hire and retain highly skilled managerial, operational and marketing personnel. Competition for such personnel is intense, and we cannot assure our stockholders that CCO Group or our advisor will be successful in attracting and retaining such skilled personnel. If our advisor loses or is unable to obtain the services of key personnel, our ability to implement our investment strategies could be delayed or hindered, and the value of our stockholders’ investment may decline.
If we seek to internalize our management functions in connection with a listing of our shares of common stock on an exchange or other liquidity event, and such internalization is approved by our stockholders, our stockholders’ interest in us could be diluted, and we could incur other significant costs associated with being self-managed.
22
In the future, we may undertake a listing of our common stock on an exchange or other liquidity event that may involve internalizing our management functions. If our board of directors determines that it is in our best interest to internalize our management functions, and such internalization is approved by our stockholders, we may negotiate to acquire our advisor’s assets and personnel. At this time, we cannot be sure of the form or amount of consideration or other terms relating to any such acquisition. Such consideration could take many forms, including cash payments, promissory notes and shares of our common stock. The payment of such consideration could result in dilution of our stockholders’ interests as a stockholder and could reduce the net income per share attributable to their investment.
Internalization transactions involving the acquisition of advisors affiliated with entity sponsors have also, in some cases, been the subject of litigation. Even if these claims are without merit, we could be forced to spend significant amounts of money defending claims, which would reduce the amount of funds available to operate our business and to pay distributions.
In addition, while we would no longer bear the costs of the various fees and expenses we expect to pay to our advisor under the advisory agreement, our direct expenses would include general and administrative costs, including legal, accounting, and other expenses related to corporate governance, including SEC reporting and compliance. We would also incur the compensation and benefits costs of our officers and other employees and consultants that we now expect will be paid by our advisor or its affiliates. If the expenses we assume as a result of an internalization are higher than the expenses we avoid paying to our advisor, our net income per share would be lower as a result of the internalization than it otherwise would have been, potentially decreasing the amount of funds available to distribute to our stockholders and the value of our shares.
If we internalize our management functions, we could have difficulty integrating these functions as a stand-alone entity and we may fail to properly identify the appropriate mix of personnel and capital needed to operate as a stand-alone entity. Additionally, upon any internalization of our advisor, certain key personnel may not remain with our advisor, but will instead remain employees of CCO Group.
Our participation in a co-ownership arrangement could subject us to risks that otherwise may not be present in other real estate assets, which could result in litigation or other potential liabilities that could increase our costs and negatively affect our results of operations.
We may enter in co-ownership arrangements with respect to a portion of the properties we acquire. Co-ownership arrangements involve risks generally not otherwise present with an acquisition of real estate and could result in litigation or other potential liabilities, such as the following:
• | the risk that a co-owner may at any time have economic or business interests or goals that are or become inconsistent with our business interests or goals; |
• | the risk that a co-owner may be in a position to take action contrary to our instructions or requests or our policies or objectives or status as a REIT; |
• | the possibility that an individual co-owner might become insolvent or bankrupt, or otherwise default under any mortgage loan financing documents applicable to the property, which may constitute an event of default under all of the applicable mortgage loan financing documents, result in a foreclosure and the loss of all or a substantial portion of the investment made by the co-owner, or allow the bankruptcy court to reject the agreements entered into by the co-owners owning interests in the property; |
• | the possibility that a co-owner might not have adequate liquid assets to make cash advances that may be required in order to fund operations, maintenance and other expenses related to the property, which could result in the loss of current or prospective tenants and otherwise adversely affect the operation and maintenance of the property, could cause a default under any mortgage loan financing documents applicable to the property and result in late charges, penalties and interest, and could lead to the exercise of foreclosure and other remedies by the lender; |
• | the risk that a co-owner could breach agreements related to the property, which may cause a default under, and possibly result in personal liability in connection with, any mortgage loan financing documents applicable to the property, violate applicable securities laws, result in a foreclosure or otherwise adversely affect the property and the co-ownership arrangement; |
• | the risk that we could have limited control and rights, with management decisions made entirely by a third party; and |
• | the possibility that we will not have the right to sell the property at a time that otherwise could result in the property being sold for its maximum value. |
In the event that our interests become adverse to those of the other co-owners, we may not have the contractual right to purchase the co-ownership interests from the other co-owners. Even if we are given the opportunity to purchase such co-ownership interests in the future, we cannot guarantee that we will have sufficient funds available at the time to purchase co-ownership interests from the co-owners.
23
We might want to sell our co-ownership interests in a given property at a time when the other co-owners in such property do not desire to sell their interests. Therefore, because we anticipate that it will be much more difficult to find a willing buyer for our co-ownership interests in a property than it would be to find a buyer for a property we owned outright, we may not be able to sell our co-ownership interest in a property at the time we would like to sell.
Uninsured losses or losses in excess of our insurance coverage could materially adversely affect our financial condition and cash flows, and there can be no assurance as to future costs and the scope of coverage that may be available under insurance policies.
We carry comprehensive liability, fire, extended coverage, and rental loss insurance covering all of the properties in our portfolio under one or more blanket insurance policies with policy specifications, limits and deductibles customarily carried for similar properties. In addition, we carry professional liability and directors’ and officers’ insurance, and cyber liability insurance. While we select policy specifications and insured limits that we believe are appropriate and adequate given the relative risk of loss, any insurance coverages provided by tenants, the cost of the coverage and industry practice, there can be no assurance that we will not experience a loss that is uninsured or exceeds policy limits. In addition, we may reduce or discontinue terrorism, earthquake, flood or other insurance on some or all of our properties in the future if the cost of premiums for any of these policies exceeds, in our judgment, the value of the coverage discounted for the risk of loss. Our title insurance policies may not insure for the current aggregate market value of our portfolio, and we do not intend to increase our title insurance coverage as the market value of our portfolio increases.
Further, we do not carry insurance for certain losses, including, but not limited to, losses caused by riots or war. Certain types of losses may be either uninsurable or not economically insurable, such as losses due to earthquakes, riots or acts of war. If we experience a loss that is uninsured or which exceeds policy limits, we could lose the capital invested in the damaged properties as well as the anticipated future cash flows from those properties. In addition, if the damaged properties are subject to recourse indebtedness, we would continue to be liable for the indebtedness, even if these properties were irreparably damaged. In addition, we carry several different lines of insurance, placed with several large insurance carriers. If any one of these large insurance carriers were to become insolvent, we would be forced to replace the existing insurance coverage with another suitable carrier, and any outstanding claims would be at risk for collection. In such an event, we cannot be certain that we would be able to replace the coverage at similar or otherwise favorable terms. As a result of any of the situations described above, our financial condition and cash flows may be materially and adversely affected.
Cybersecurity risks and cyber incidents may adversely affect our business by causing a disruption to our operations, a compromise or corruption of our confidential information, and/or damage to our business relationships, all of which could negatively impact our financial results.
A cyber incident is considered to be any adverse event that threatens the confidentiality, integrity or availability of our information resources. These incidents may be an intentional attack or an unintentional event and could involve gaining unauthorized access to our information systems for purposes of misappropriating assets, stealing confidential information, corrupting data or causing operational disruption. The result of these incidents may include disrupted operations, misstated or unreliable financial data, liability for stolen assets or information, increased cybersecurity protection and insurance costs, litigation and damage to our tenant and stockholder relationships. As our reliance on technology has increased, so have the risks posed to our information systems, both internal and those we have outsourced. We have implemented processes, procedures and internal controls to help mitigate cyber incidents, but these measures do not guarantee that a cyber incident will not occur or that attempted security breaches or disruptions would not be successful or damaging. A cyber incident could materially adversely impact our business, financial condition, results of operations or our ability to satisfy our debt service obligations or to maintain our level of distributions on common stock.
Risks Related to Conflicts of Interest
We are subject to conflicts of interest arising out of our relationships with our advisor and its affiliates, including the material conflicts discussed below. The “Conflicts of Interest” section of Part I, Item 1 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K provides a more detailed discussion of the conflicts of interest between us and our advisor and its affiliates, and our policies to reduce or eliminate certain potential conflicts.
Our advisor and its affiliates face conflicts of interest caused by their compensation arrangements with us, including significant compensation that may be required to be paid to our advisor if our advisor is terminated, which could result in actions that are not in the long-term best interests of our stockholders.
Our advisor and its affiliates are entitled to substantial fees from us under the terms of the advisory agreement. These fees could influence the judgment of our advisor and its affiliates in performing services for us. Among other matters, these compensation arrangements could affect their judgment with respect to:
24
• | the continuation, renewal or enforcement of our agreements with our advisor and its affiliates, including the advisory agreement; |
• | property acquisitions from other real estate programs sponsored or operated by CCO Group, which might entitle affiliates of our advisor to real estate commissions and possible success-based sale fees in connection with its services for the seller; |
• | property acquisitions from third parties, which entitle our advisor to acquisition fees and advisory fees; |
• | property or asset dispositions, which may entitle our advisor or its affiliates to disposition fees; |
• | borrowings to acquire properties, which borrowings will increase the acquisition and advisory fees payable to our advisor; and |
• | how and when to recommend to our board of directors a proposed strategy to provide our stockholders with liquidity, which proposed strategy, if implemented, could entitle our advisor to the payment of significant fees. |
The acquisition fee payable to our advisor is principally based on the cost of our acquisitions and not on performance, which could result in our advisor taking actions that are not necessarily in the long-term best interests of our stockholders.
The acquisition fee we pay to our advisor is based on the cost of our acquisitions. As a result, our advisor receives this fee regardless of the quality of such acquisitions, the performance of such acquisitions or the quality of our advisor’s services rendered to us in connection with such acquisitions. This creates a potential conflict of interest between us and our advisor, as the interests of our advisor in receiving the acquisition fee may not be aligned with our interest of acquiring real estate that is likely to produce the maximum risk adjusted returns.
Our advisor faces conflicts of interest relating to the incentive fee structure under our advisory agreement, which could result in actions that are not necessarily in the long-term best interests of our stockholders.
Pursuant to the terms of our advisory agreement, our advisor is entitled to a subordinated performance fee that is structured in a manner intended to provide incentives to our advisor to perform in our best interests and in the best interests of our stockholders. However, because our advisor does not maintain a significant equity interest in us and is entitled to receive certain fees regardless of performance, our advisor’s interests are not wholly aligned with those of our stockholders. Furthermore, our advisor could be motivated to recommend riskier or more speculative acquisitions in order for us to generate the specified levels of performance or sales proceeds that would entitle our advisor to performance-based fees. In addition, our advisor will have substantial influence with respect to how and when our board of directors elects to provide liquidity to our stockholders, and these performance-based fees could influence our advisor’s recommendations to us in this regard. Our advisor also has the right to terminate the advisory agreement upon 60 days’ written notice without cause or penalty which, under certain circumstances, could result in our advisor earning a performance fee. This could have the effect of delaying, deferring or preventing a change of control.
Other real estate programs sponsored or operated by CCO Group, as well as VEREIT, CIM and certain of its affiliates, use investment strategies that are similar to ours; therefore, our executive officers and the officers and key personnel of our advisor and its affiliates may face conflicts of interest relating to the purchase and leasing of properties, and such conflicts may not be resolved in our favor.
CCPT V, CCIT II, CCIT III, Cole Income NAV Strategy, CIM and its affiliates and VEREIT have characteristics, including targeted investment types, and investment objectives and criteria substantially similar to ours. As a result, we may be seeking to acquire properties and real estate-related assets at the same time as CIM or its affiliates, VEREIT or one or more of the other real estate programs sponsored or operated by CCO Group and managed by officers and key personnel of our advisor and/or its affiliates, and these other programs may use investment strategies and have investment objectives and criteria substantially similar to ours. Certain of our executive officers and the executive officers of our advisor also are executive officers of CIM or its affiliates and other programs sponsored or operated by CCO Group, the general partners of other private investment programs sponsored or operated by CCO Group and/or the advisors or fiduciaries of other real estate programs sponsored or operated by CCO Group. During the Initial Services Term of the Services Agreement, all transactions with a purchase price at or below $100 million will be allocated among VEREIT, us and the other real estate programs sponsored by CCO Group by the Allocation Committee, which is comprised of employees of VEREIT and employees of CIM, CCO Group and their respective affiliates, in a manner consistent with the policy described in Part I, Item 1. Business — Conflicts of Interest in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. There is a risk that the allocation of acquisition opportunities may result in our acquiring a property that provides lower returns to us than a property purchased by VEREIT or another real estate program sponsored by CCO Group.
In addition, we have acquired, and may continue to acquire, properties in geographic areas where CIM or its affiliates, VEREIT or other real estate programs sponsored by CCO Group own properties. If one of these other real estate programs attracts a tenant that we are competing for, we could suffer a loss of revenue due to delays in locating another suitable tenant.
25
Similar conflicts of interest may arise if our advisor recommends that we make or purchase mortgage loans or participations in mortgage loans, since CIM or its affiliates or other real estate programs sponsored by CCO Group may be competing with us for these investments.
Our officers, certain of our directors and our advisor, including its key personnel and officers, face conflicts of interest related to the positions they hold with affiliated and unaffiliated entities, which could hinder our ability to successfully implement our business strategy and to generate returns to our stockholders.
Richard S. Ressler, our chief executive officer, president and one of our directors, is also a founder and principal of CIM and certain of its affiliates, as well as a director of CCIT III and Cole Income NAV Strategy. Furthermore, W. Brian Kretzmer, one of our directors, also serves as a director of CCIT III and Cole Income NAV Strategy. In addition, our chief financial officer and treasurer, Nathan D. DeBacker, is also an officer of other real estate programs sponsored by CCO Group. Also, our advisor and its key personnel are or may be key personnel of other current or future real estate programs that have investment objectives, targeted assets, and legal and financial obligations substantially similar to ours, and/or key personnel of the advisor to such programs, and they may have other business interests as well. As a result, Messrs. Ressler, Kretzmer and DeBacker may owe fiduciary duties to these other entities and their stockholders or equity owners, as applicable, which may from time to time conflict with the duties that they owe to us and our stockholders.
Conflicts with our business and interests are most likely to arise from involvement in activities related to (1) allocation of new acquisition opportunities, management time and operational expertise among us and the other entities, (2) our purchase of properties from, or sale of properties to, affiliated entities, (3) the timing and terms of the acquisition or sale of an asset, (4) development of our properties by affiliates, (5) investments with affiliates of our advisor, (6) compensation to our advisor and its affiliates, and (7) our relationship with, and compensation to, our dealer manager. Even if these persons do not violate their duties to us and our stockholders, they will have competing demands on their time and resources and may have conflicts of interest in allocating their time and resources among us and these other entities and persons. Should such persons devote insufficient time or resources to our business, returns on our investments may suffer.
Our charter permits us to acquire assets and borrow funds from affiliates of our advisor, and sell or lease our assets to affiliates of our advisor, and any such transaction could result in conflicts of interest.
Under our charter, we are permitted to acquire properties from affiliates of our advisor, provided that any and all acquisitions from affiliates of our advisor must be approved by a majority of our directors, including a majority of our independent directors, not otherwise interested in such transaction as being fair and reasonable to us and at a price to us that is no greater than the cost of the property to the affiliate of our advisor, unless a majority of our directors, including a majority of our independent directors, not otherwise interested in such transaction determines that there is substantial justification for any amount that exceeds such cost and that the difference is reasonable. In no event will we acquire a property from an affiliate of our advisor if the cost to us would exceed the property’s current appraised value as determined by an independent appraiser. In the event that we acquire a property from an affiliate of our advisor, we may be foregoing an opportunity to acquire a different property that might be more advantageous to us. In addition, under our charter, we are permitted to borrow funds from affiliates of our advisor, including our sponsor, provided that any such loans from affiliates of our advisor must be approved by a majority of our directors, including a majority of our independent directors, not otherwise interested in such transaction as fair, competitive and commercially reasonable, and no less favorable to us than comparable loans between unaffiliated parties. Under our charter, we are also permitted to sell and lease our assets to affiliates of our advisor, and we have not established a policy that specifically addresses how we will determine the sale or lease price in any such transaction. Any such sale or lease transaction must be approved by a majority of our directors, including a majority of our independent directors, not otherwise interested in such transaction as being fair and reasonable to us. To the extent that we acquire any properties from affiliates of our advisor, borrow funds from affiliates of our advisor or sell or lease our assets to affiliates of our advisor, such transactions could result in a conflict of interest.
Our advisor faces conflicts of interest relating to joint ventures or other co-ownership arrangements that we may enter into with CIM or its affiliates, VEREIT or another real estate program sponsored or operated by CCO Group, which could result in a disproportionate benefit to CIM or its affiliates, VEREIT or another real estate program sponsored or operated by CCO Group.
We may enter into joint ventures or co-ownership arrangements (including co-investment transactions) with CIM or its affiliates, VEREIT or another real estate program sponsored or operated by CCO Group for the acquisition, development or improvement of properties, as well as the acquisition of real estate-related assets. Since one or more of the officers of our advisor are officers of CIM or its affiliates, including CCO Group and/or the advisors to other real estate programs sponsored or operated by CCO Group, our advisor may face conflicts of interest in determining which real estate program should enter into any particular joint venture or co-ownership arrangement. These persons also may have a conflict in structuring the terms of the
26
relationship between us and any affiliated co-venturer or co-owner, as well as conflicts of interests in managing the joint venture, which may result in the co-venturer or co-owner receiving benefits greater than the benefits that we receive.
In the event we enter into joint venture or other co-ownership arrangements with CIM or its affiliates, VEREIT or another real estate program sponsored or operated by CCO Group, our advisor and its affiliates may have a conflict of interest when determining when and whether to buy or sell a particular property, or to make or dispose of another real estate-related asset. In addition, if we become listed for trading on a national securities exchange, we may develop more divergent goals and objectives from any affiliated co-venturer or co-owner that is not listed for trading. In the event we enter into a joint venture or other co-ownership arrangement with another real estate program sponsored or operated by CIM, CCO Group or their respective affiliates, or VEREIT, that has a term shorter than ours, the joint venture may be required to sell its properties earlier than we may desire to sell the properties. Even if the terms of any joint venture or other co-ownership agreement between us and CIM or its affiliates, VEREIT or another real estate program sponsored or operated by CCO Group grants us the right of first refusal to buy such properties, we may not have sufficient funds or borrowing capacity to exercise our right of first refusal under these circumstances. We have adopted certain procedures for dealing with potential conflicts of interest as further described in Part I, Item 1. Business — Conflicts of Interest in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
If we fail to maintain an effective system of internal control over financial reporting, we may not be able to accurately report our financial results.
An effective system of internal control over financial reporting is necessary for us to provide reliable financial reports, prevent fraud and operate successfully as a public company. As part of our ongoing monitoring of internal controls, we may discover material weaknesses or significant deficiencies in our internal controls that we believe require remediation. If we discover such weaknesses, we will make efforts to improve our internal controls in a timely manner. Any system of internal controls, however well designed and operated, is based in part on certain assumptions and can only provide reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the system are met. Any failure to maintain effective internal controls, or implement any necessary improvements in a timely manner, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flow or our ability to satisfy our debt service obligations or to maintain our level of distributions on our common stock, or cause us to not meet our reporting obligations. Ineffective internal controls could also cause holders of our securities to lose confidence in our reported financial information, which would likely have a negative effect on business.
Risks Related to Our Corporate Structure
Our charter permits our board of directors to issue stock with terms that may subordinate the rights of common stockholders or discourage a third party from acquiring us in a manner that might result in a premium price to our stockholders.
Our charter permits our board of directors to issue up to 500,000,000 shares of stock, of which 490,000,000 shares are classified as common stock and 10,000,000 shares are classified as preferred stock. In addition, our board of directors, without any action by our stockholders, may amend our charter from time to time to increase or decrease the aggregate number of shares or the number of shares of any class or series of stock that we have authority to issue. Our board of directors may classify or reclassify any unissued common stock or preferred stock into other classes or series of stock and establish the preferences, conversion or other rights, voting powers, restrictions, limitations as to distributions, qualifications and terms and conditions of redemption of any such stock. Shares of our common stock shall be subject to the express terms of any series of our preferred stock. Thus, if also approved by a majority of our independent directors not otherwise interested in the transaction, our board of directors could authorize the issuance of preferred stock with terms and conditions that have a priority as to distributions and amounts payable upon liquidation over the rights of the holders of our common stock. Preferred stock could also have the effect of delaying, deferring or preventing the removal of incumbent management or a change of control of us, including an extraordinary transaction (such as a merger, tender offer or sale of all or substantially all of our assets) that might provide a premium to the purchase price of our common stock for our stockholders.
Maryland law prohibits certain business combinations, which may make it more difficult for us to be acquired and may limit our stockholders’ ability to dispose of their shares.
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 transfer or issuance or reclassification of equity securities. An interested stockholder is defined as:
• | any person who beneficially owns, directly or indirectly, 10% or more of the voting power of the corporation’s outstanding voting stock; or |
27
• | an affiliate or associate of the corporation who, at any time within the two-year period prior to the date in question, was the beneficial owner of 10% or more of the voting power of the then outstanding 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 the 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 our board of directors.
After the five-year prohibition, any such 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 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 business combination statute permits various exemptions from its provisions, including business combinations that are exempted by the board of directors prior to the time that the interested stockholder becomes an interested stockholder. Pursuant to the statute, our board of directors has exempted any business combination involving our advisor or any affiliate of our advisor. As a result, our advisor and any affiliate of our advisor may be able to enter into business combinations with us that may not be in the best interest of our stockholders, without compliance with the super-majority vote requirements and the other provisions of the statute. The business combination statute may discourage others from trying to acquire control of us and increase the difficulty of consummating any offer.
Maryland law also limits the ability of a third party to buy a large percentage of our outstanding shares and exercise voting control in electing directors.
Under its Control Share Acquisition Act, Maryland law also provides that a holder of “control shares” of a Maryland corporation acquired in a “control share acquisition” has no voting rights with respect to such shares except to the extent approved by the corporation’s disinterested stockholders by a vote of two-thirds of the votes entitled to be cast on the matter. Shares of stock owned by interested stockholders, that is, by the acquirer, or officers of the corporation or employees of the corporation who are directors of the corporation, are excluded from shares entitled to vote on the matter. “Control shares” are voting shares of stock that would entitle the acquirer, except solely by virtue of a revocable proxy, to exercise voting control in electing directors within specified ranges of voting control. Control shares do not include shares the acquiring person is then entitled to vote as a result of having previously obtained stockholder approval. A “control share acquisition” means the acquisition of control shares. The control share acquisition statute does not apply (a) to shares acquired in a merger, consolidation or share exchange if the corporation is a party to the transaction or (b) to acquisitions approved or exempted by the charter or bylaws of the corporation. Our bylaws contain a provision exempting from the Control Share Acquisition Act any acquisition of shares of our stock by CCO Group, LLC or any affiliate of CCO Group, LLC. This provision may be amended or eliminated at any time in the future. If this provision were amended or eliminated, this statute could have the effect of discouraging offers from third parties to acquire us and increasing the difficulty of successfully completing this type of offer by anyone other than our advisor or any of its affiliates.
Our charter includes a provision that may discourage a stockholder from launching a tender offer for our shares.
Our charter requires that any tender offer, including any “mini-tender” offer, must comply with most of the requirements of Regulation 14D of the Exchange Act. The offering person must provide us notice of the tender offer at least ten business days before initiating the tender offer. If the offering person does not comply with these requirements, our stockholders will be prohibited from transferring any shares to such non-complying person unless they first offered such shares to us at the tender offer price offered by the non-complying person. In addition, the non-complying person shall be responsible for all of our expenses in connection with that person’s noncompliance. This provision of our charter may discourage a person from initiating a tender offer for our shares and prevent our stockholders from receiving a premium to the purchase price for their shares in such a transaction.
28
If we are required to register as an investment company under the Investment Company Act, we could not continue our current business plan, which may significantly reduce the value of our stockholders’ investment.
We intend to conduct our operations, and the operations of our operating partnership and any other subsidiaries, so that no such entity meets the definition of an “investment company” under Section 3(a)(1) of the Investment Company Act. Under the Investment Company Act, in relevant part, a company is an “investment company” if:
• | pursuant to Section 3(a)(1)(A), it is, or holds itself out as being, engaged primarily, or proposes to engage primarily, in the business of investing, reinvesting or trading in securities; or |
• | pursuant to Section 3(a)(1)(C), it is engaged, or proposes to engage, in the business of investing, reinvesting, owning, holding or trading in securities and owns or proposes to acquire “investment securities” having a value exceeding 40% of the value of its total assets (exclusive of U.S. government securities and cash items) on an unconsolidated basis (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. |
We intend to monitor our operations and our assets on an ongoing basis in order to ensure that neither we, nor any of our subsidiaries, meet the definition of “investment company” under Section 3(a)(1) of the Investment Company Act. If we were obligated to register as an investment company, we would have to comply with a variety of substantive requirements under the Investment Company Act imposing, among other things:
• | limitations on capital structure; |
• | restrictions on specified investments; |
• | prohibitions on transactions with affiliates; |
• | compliance with reporting, record keeping, voting, proxy disclosure and other rules and regulations that would significantly change our operations; and |
• | potentially, compliance with daily valuation requirements. |
In order for us to not meet the definition of an “investment company” and avoid regulation under the Investment Company Act, we must engage primarily in the business of buying real estate, and these investments must be made within one year after the end of the Offering. To avoid meeting the definition of an “investment company” under Section 3(a)(1) of the Investment Company Act, we may be unable to sell assets we would otherwise want to sell and may need to sell assets we would otherwise wish to retain. Similarly, we may have to acquire additional income or loss generating assets that we might not otherwise have acquired or may have to forgo opportunities to acquire interests in companies that we would otherwise want to acquire and would be important to our investment strategy. Accordingly, our board of directors may not be able to change our investment policies as they may deem appropriate if such change would cause us to meet the definition of an “investment company.” In addition, a change in the value of any of our assets could negatively affect our ability to avoid being required to register as an investment company. If we were required to register as an investment company but failed to do so, we would be prohibited from engaging in our business, and criminal and civil actions could be brought against us. In addition, our contracts would be unenforceable unless a court were to require enforcement, and a court could appoint a receiver to take control of us and liquidate our business.
Our board of directors may change certain of our policies without stockholder approval, which could alter the nature of our stockholders’ investment. If our stockholders do not agree with the decisions of our board of directors, they only have limited control over changes in our policies and operations and may not be able to change such policies and operations.
Our board of directors determines our major policies, including our policies regarding investments, financing, growth, debt capitalization, REIT qualification and distributions. Our board of directors may amend or revise these and other policies without a vote of our stockholders. As a result, the nature of our stockholders’ investment could change without their consent. Under the Maryland General Corporation Law and our charter, our stockholders generally have a right to vote only on the following:
• | the election or removal of directors; |
• | an amendment of our charter, except that our board of directors may amend our charter without stockholder approval to increase or decrease the aggregate number of our shares or the number of our shares of any class or series that we have the authority to issue, to change our name, to change the name or other designation or the par value of any class or series of our stock and the aggregate par value of our stock or to effect certain reverse stock splits; provided, however, that any such amendment does not adversely affect the rights, preferences and privileges of the stockholders; |
• | our dissolution; and |
29
• | a merger or consolidation, a statutory share exchange or the sale or other disposition of all or substantially all of our assets. |
In addition, pursuant to our charter, we will submit any other proposed liquidity event or transaction to our stockholders for approval if the transaction involves (a) the internalization of our management functions through our acquisition of our advisor or an affiliate of our advisor or (b) the payment of consideration to our advisor or an affiliate of our advisor other than pursuant to the terms of the advisory or dealer manager agreements or where the advisor or its affiliate receives consideration in its capacity as a stockholder on the same terms as our other stockholders.
All other matters are subject to the discretion of our board of directors.
The power of the board of directors to revoke our REIT election without stockholder approval may cause adverse consequences to our stockholders.
Our organizational documents permit our board of directors to revoke or otherwise terminate our REIT election, without the approval of our stockholders, if the board of directors determines that it is no longer in our best interest to continue to qualify as a REIT. In such a case, we would become subject to U.S. federal, state and local income tax on our net taxable income and we would no longer be required to distribute most of our net taxable income to our stockholders, which could have adverse consequences on the total return to holders of our common stock.
Our rights and the rights of our stockholders to recover claims against our officers, directors and our advisor are limited, which could reduce our stockholders’ and our recovery against them if they cause us to incur losses.
The Maryland General Corporation Law provides that a director has no liability in such capacity if he or she performs his or her duties in good faith, in a manner he or she reasonably believes to be in the corporation’s best interests and with the care that an ordinarily prudent person in a like position would use under similar circumstances. Our charter, in the case of our directors and officers, and our charter and the advisory agreement, in the case of our advisor and its affiliates, require us, subject to certain exceptions, to indemnify and advance expenses to our directors, our officers, and our advisor and its affiliates. Our charter permits us to provide such indemnification and advance for expenses to our employees and agents. Additionally, our charter limits, subject to certain exceptions, the liability of our directors and officers to us and our stockholders for monetary damages. Although our charter does not allow us to indemnify our directors or our advisor and its affiliates for any liability or loss suffered by them or hold harmless our directors or our advisor and its affiliates for any loss or liability suffered by us to a greater extent than permitted under Maryland law or the NASAA REIT Guidelines, we and our stockholders may have more limited rights against our directors, officers, employees and agents, and our advisor and its affiliates, than might otherwise exist under common law, which could reduce our stockholders’ and our recovery against them. In addition, our advisor is not required to retain cash to pay potential liabilities and it may not have sufficient cash available to pay liabilities if they arise. If our advisor is held liable for a breach of its fiduciary duty to us, or a breach of its contractual obligations to us, we may not be able to collect the full amount of any claims we may have against our advisor. In addition, we may be obligated to fund the defense costs incurred by our directors, officers, employees and agents or our advisor in some cases, which would decrease the cash otherwise available for distribution to our stockholders.
Our stockholders’ interest in us will be diluted if we issue additional shares.
Existing stockholders do not have preemptive rights to any shares issued by us in the future. Our charter authorizes 500,000,000 shares of stock, of which 490,000,000 shares are classified as common stock and 10,000,000 shares are classified as preferred stock. Subject to any limitations set forth under Maryland law, our board of directors may amend our charter from time to time to increase the number of authorized shares of stock, increase or decrease the number of shares of any class or series of stock that we have authority to issue, or classify or reclassify any unissued shares into other classes or series of stock without the necessity of obtaining stockholder approval. All of such shares may be issued in the discretion of our board of directors, except that the issuance of preferred stock must also be approved by a majority of our independent directors not otherwise interested in the transaction. Our stockholders likely will suffer dilution of their equity investment in us, in the event that we (1) sell additional shares in the future, including those issued pursuant to our Secondary DRIP Offering, (2) sell securities that are convertible into shares of our common stock, (3) issue shares of our common stock in a private offering of securities to institutional investors, (4) issue shares of our common stock to our advisor, its successors or assigns, in payment of an outstanding fee obligation as set forth under our advisory agreement or (5) issue shares of our common stock to sellers of properties acquired by us in connection with an exchange of limited partnership interests of our operating partnership. In addition, the partnership agreement of our operating partnership contains provisions that would allow, under certain circumstances, other entities, including other real estate programs sponsored or operated by CCO Group, to merge into or cause the exchange or conversion of their interest in that entity for interests of our operating partnership. Because the limited partnership interests of our operating partnership may, in the discretion of our board of directors, be exchanged for shares of our
30
common stock, any merger, exchange or conversion between our operating partnership and another entity ultimately could result in the issuance of a substantial number of shares of our common stock, thereby diluting the percentage ownership interest of other stockholders.
Our UPREIT structure may result in potential conflicts of interest with limited partners in our operating partnership whose interests may not be aligned with those of our stockholders.
Our directors and officers have duties to our corporation and our stockholders under Maryland law in connection with their management of the corporation. At the same time, we, as general partner, have fiduciary duties under Delaware law to our operating partnership and to the limited partners in connection with the management of our operating partnership. If we admit outside limited partners to our operating partnership, our duties as general partner of our operating partnership and its partners may come into conflict with the duties of our directors and officers to the corporation and our stockholders. Under Delaware law, a general partner of a Delaware limited partnership owes its limited partners the duties of good faith and fair dealing. Other duties, including fiduciary duties, may be modified or eliminated in the partnership’s partnership agreement. The partnership agreement of our operating partnership provides that, for so long as we own a controlling interest in our operating partnership, any conflict that cannot be resolved in a manner not adverse to either our stockholders or the limited partners will be resolved in favor of our stockholders.
Additionally, the partnership agreement expressly limits our liability by providing that we and our officers, directors, agents and employees, will not be liable or accountable to our operating partnership for losses sustained, liabilities incurred or benefits not derived if we or our officers, directors, agents or employees acted in good faith. In addition, our operating partnership is required to indemnify us and our officers, directors, employees, agents and designees to the extent permitted by applicable law from and against any and all claims arising from operations of our operating partnership, unless it is established that: (1) the act or omission was committed in bad faith, was fraudulent or was the result of active and deliberate dishonesty; (2) the indemnified party received an improper personal benefit in money, property or services; or (3) in the case of a criminal proceeding, the indemnified person had reasonable cause to believe that the act or omission was unlawful.
The provisions of Delaware law that allow the fiduciary duties of a general partner to be modified by a partnership agreement have not been tested in a court of law, and we have not obtained an opinion of counsel covering the provisions set forth in the partnership agreement that purport to waive or restrict our fiduciary duties.
General Risks Related to Real Estate Assets
Adverse economic, regulatory and geographic conditions that have an impact on the real estate market in general may prevent us from being profitable or from realizing growth in the value of our real estate properties.
Our operating results will be subject to risks generally incident to the ownership of real estate, including:
• | changes in international, national or local economic or geographic conditions; |
• | changes in supply of or demand for similar or competing properties in an area; |
• | changes in interest rates and availability of permanent mortgage funds that may render the sale of a property difficult or unattractive; |
• | the illiquidity of real estate investments generally; |
• | changes in tax, real estate, environmental and zoning laws; and |
• | periods of high interest rates and tight money supply. |
These risks and other factors may prevent us from being profitable, or from maintaining or growing the value of our real estate properties.
We are primarily dependent on single-tenant leases for our revenue and, accordingly, if we are unable to renew leases, lease vacant space, including vacant space resulting from tenant defaults, or re-lease space as leases expire on favorable terms or at all, our financial condition could be adversely affected.
We focus our investment activities on ownership of primarily freestanding, single-tenant commercial properties that are net leased to a single tenant. Therefore, the financial failure of, or other default by, a significant tenant or multiple tenants could cause a material reduction in our revenues and operating cash flows. In addition, to the extent that we enter into a master lease with a particular tenant, the termination of such master lease could affect each property subject to the master lease, resulting in the loss of revenue from all such properties.
31
We cannot assure our stockholders that our leases will be renewed or that we will be able to lease or re-lease the properties on favorable terms, or at all, or that lease terminations will not cause us to sell the properties at a loss. Any of our properties that become vacant could be difficult to re-lease or sell. We have and may continue to experience vacancies either by the default of a tenant under its lease or the expiration of one of our leases. We typically must incur all of the costs of ownership for a property that is vacant. Upon or pending the expiration of leases at our properties, we may be required to make rent or other concessions to tenants, or accommodate requests for renovations, remodeling and other improvements, in order to retain and attract tenants. Certain of our properties may be specifically suited to the particular needs of a tenant (e.g., a restaurant) and major renovations and expenditures may be required in order for us to re-lease the space for other uses. If the vacancies continue for a long period of time, we may suffer reduced revenues and increased costs, resulting in less cash available for distribution to our stockholders and unitholders. If we are unable to renew leases, lease vacant space, including vacant space resulting from tenant defaults, or re-lease space as leases expire on favorable terms or at all, our financial condition could be adversely affected.
We are subject to geographic and industry concentrations that make us more susceptible to adverse events with respect to certain geographic areas or industries.
As of December 31, 2017, we had derived approximately:
• | 10% of our annualized rental income from tenants in California; and |
• | 15% and 10% of our 2017 annualized rental income from tenants in the discount store and pharmacy industries, respectively. |
Any adverse change in the financial condition of a tenant with whom we may have a significant credit concentration now or in the future, or any downturn of the economy in any state or industry in which we may have a significant credit concentration now or in the future, could result in a material reduction of our cash flows or material losses to us.
Our net leases may require us to pay property-related expenses that are not the obligations of our tenants.
Under the terms of the majority of our net leases, in addition to satisfying their rent obligations, our tenants are responsible for the payment or reimbursement of property expenses such as real estate taxes, insurance and ordinary maintenance and repairs. However, under the provisions of certain existing leases and leases that we may enter into in the future with our tenants, we may be required to pay some or all of the expenses of the property, such as the costs of environmental liabilities, roof and structural repairs, real estate taxes, insurance, certain non-structural repairs and maintenance. If our properties incur significant expenses that must be paid by us under the terms of our leases, our business, financial condition and results of operations may be adversely affected and the amount of cash available to meet expenses and to pay distributions to our stockholders may be reduced.
If a major tenant declares bankruptcy, we may be unable to collect balances due under relevant leases, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and ability to pay distributions to our stockholders.
The bankruptcy or insolvency of our tenants may adversely affect the income produced by our properties. Under bankruptcy law, a tenant cannot be evicted solely because of its bankruptcy and has the option to assume or reject any unexpired lease. If the tenant rejects the lease, any resulting claim we have for breach of the lease (excluding collateral securing the claim) will be treated as a general unsecured claim. Our claim against the bankrupt tenant for unpaid and future rent will be subject to a statutory cap that might be substantially less than the remaining rent actually owed under the lease, and it is unlikely that a bankrupt tenant that rejects its lease would pay in full amounts it owes us under the lease. Even if a lease is assumed and brought current, we still run the risk that a tenant could condition lease assumption on a restructuring of certain terms, including rent, that would have an adverse impact on us. Any shortfall resulting from the bankruptcy of one or more of our tenants could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flow or our ability to satisfy our debt service obligations or to maintain our level of distributions on our common stock.
In addition, the financial failure of, or other default by, one or more of the tenants to whom we have exposure could have an adverse effect on the results of our operations. While we evaluate the creditworthiness of our tenants by reviewing available financial and other pertinent information, there can be no assurance that any tenant will be able to make timely rental payments or avoid defaulting under its lease. If any of our tenants’ businesses experience significant adverse changes, they may fail to make rental payments when due, close a number of stores, exercise early termination rights (to the extent such rights are available to the tenant) or declare bankruptcy. A default by a significant tenant or multiple tenants could cause a material reduction in our revenues and operating cash flows. In addition, if a tenant defaults, we may incur substantial costs in protecting our asset.
32
If a sale-leaseback transaction is re-characterized in a tenant’s bankruptcy proceeding, our financial condition could be adversely affected.
We may enter into sale-leaseback transactions, whereby we would purchase a property and then lease the same property back to the person from whom we purchased it. In the event of the bankruptcy of a tenant, a transaction structured as a sale-leaseback might be re-characterized as either a financing or a joint venture, either of which outcomes could adversely affect our financial condition, cash flow and the amount available for distributions to our stockholders.
If the sale-leaseback were re-characterized as a financing, we would not be considered the owner of the property, and as a result would have the status of a creditor in relation to the tenant. In that event, we would no longer have the right to sell or encumber our ownership interest in the property. Instead, we would have a claim against the tenant for the amounts owed under the lease, with the claim arguably secured by the property. The tenant/debtor might have the ability to propose a plan restructuring the term, interest rate and amortization schedule of its outstanding balance. If confirmed by the bankruptcy court, we could be bound by the new terms, and prevented from foreclosing our lien on the property. If the sale-leaseback were re-characterized as a joint venture, we and our tenant could be treated as co-venturers with regard to the property. As a result, we could be held liable, under some circumstances, for debts incurred by the tenant relating to the property.
We have assumed, and in the future may assume, liabilities in connection with our property acquisitions, including unknown liabilities.
In connection with the acquisitions of properties, we may assume existing liabilities, some of which may have been unknown or unquantifiable at the time of the transaction. Unknown liabilities might include liabilities for cleanup or remediation of undisclosed environmental conditions, claims of tenants or other persons dealing with the sellers prior to our acquisition of the properties, tax liabilities, and accrued but unpaid liabilities whether incurred in the ordinary course of business or otherwise. If the magnitude of such unknown liabilities is high, either singly or in the aggregate, it could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flow or our ability to satisfy our debt service obligations or maintain our level of distributions on our common stock.
Challenging economic conditions could adversely affect vacancy rates, which could have an adverse impact on our ability to make distributions and the value of an investment in our shares.
Challenging economic conditions, the availability and cost of credit, turmoil in the mortgage market, and declining real estate markets may contribute to increased vacancy rates in the commercial real estate sector. If we experience vacancy rates that are higher than historical vacancy rates, we may have to offer lower rental rates and greater tenant improvements or concessions than expected. Increased vacancies may have a greater impact on us, as compared to REITs with other investment strategies, as our investment approach relies on long-term leases in order to provide a relatively stable stream of income for our stockholders. As a result, increased vacancy rates could have the following negative effects on us:
• | the values of our commercial properties could decrease below the amount paid for such assets; |
• | revenues from such properties could decrease due to low or no rental income during vacant periods, lower future rental rates and/or increase tenant improvement expenses or concessions; |
• | ownership costs could increase; |
• | revenues from such properties that secure loans could decrease, making it more difficult for us to meet our payment obligations; and/or |
• | the resale value of such properties could decline. |
All of these factors could impair our ability to make distributions and decrease the value of an investment in our shares.
We may be unable to secure funds for future leasing commissions, tenant improvements or capital needs, which could adversely impact our ability to pay cash distributions to our stockholders.
When tenants do not renew their leases or otherwise vacate their space, it is usual that, in order to attract replacement tenants, we will be required to expend substantial funds for leasing commissions, tenant improvements and tenant refurbishments to the vacated space. In addition, although we expect that our leases with tenants will require tenants to pay routine property maintenance costs, we could be responsible for any major structural repairs, such as repairs to the foundation, exterior walls and rooftops. We will use substantially all of the net proceeds from the Offerings to buy real estate and real estate-related assets and to pay various fees and expenses. We intend to reserve only approximately 0.1% of the gross proceeds from the Offerings for future capital needs. Accordingly, if we need additional capital in the future to improve or maintain our properties or for any other reason, we will have to obtain funds from other sources, such as cash flow from operations, borrowings, property sales or future equity offerings. These sources of funding may not be available on attractive terms or at
33
all. If we cannot procure additional funding for capital improvements, we may be required to defer necessary improvements to a property, which may cause that property to suffer from a greater risk of obsolescence or a decline in value, or a greater risk of decreased operating cash flows as a result of fewer potential tenants being attracted to the property. If this happens, our assets may generate lower cash flows or decline in value, or both.
We may be unable to successfully expand our operations into new markets.
Each of the risks described in the previous risk factors that are applicable to our ability to acquire and successfully integrate and operate properties in the markets in which our properties are located are also applicable to our ability to acquire and successfully integrate and operate properties in new markets. In addition to these risks, we may not possess the same level of familiarity with the dynamics and market conditions of certain new markets that we may enter, which could adversely affect our ability to expand into those markets. We may be unable to build a significant market share or achieve a desired return on our assets in new markets. If we are unsuccessful in expanding into new markets, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flow or our ability to satisfy our debt service obligations or to maintain our level of distributions on our common stock.
Our properties may be subject to impairment charges.
We routinely evaluate our real estate assets for impairment indicators. The judgment regarding the existence of impairment indicators is based on factors such as market conditions, tenant performance and lease structure. For example, the early termination of, or default under, a lease by a tenant may lead to an impairment charge. Since our investment focus is on properties net leased to a single tenant, the financial failure of, or other default by, a single tenant under its lease may result in a significant impairment loss. If we determine that an impairment has occurred, we would be required to make a downward adjustment to the net carrying value of the property, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations in the period in which the impairment charge is recorded. Management has recorded an impairment charge related to certain properties in the year ended December 31, 2017, and may record future impairments based on actual results and changes in circumstances. Negative developments in the real estate market may cause management to reevaluate the business and macro-economic assumptions used in its impairment analysis. Changes in management’s assumptions based on actual results may have a material impact on the Company’s financial statements. See Note 3 — Fair Value Measurements to our consolidated financial statements for a discussion of our real estate impairment charge.
We may obtain only limited warranties when we purchase a property and typically have only limited recourse in the event our due diligence did not identify any issues that lower the value of our property.
The seller of a property often sells such property in its “as is” condition on a “where is” basis and “with all faults,” without any warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular use or purpose. In addition, purchase agreements may contain only limited warranties, representations and indemnifications that will only survive for a limited period after the closing. The purchase of properties with limited warranties increases the risk that we may lose some or all of our invested capital in the property.
We may be unable to sell a property if or when we decide to do so, including as a result of uncertain market conditions.
Real estate assets are, in general, relatively illiquid and may become even more illiquid during periods of economic downturn. As a result, we may not be able to sell our properties quickly or on favorable terms in response to changes in the economy or other conditions when it otherwise may be prudent to do so. In addition, certain significant expenditures generally do not change in response to economic or other conditions, including debt service obligations, real estate taxes, and operating and maintenance costs. This combination of variable revenue and relatively fixed expenditures may result, under certain market conditions, in reduced earnings. Further, as a result of the 100% prohibited transactions tax applicable to REITs, we intend to hold our properties for investment, rather than primarily for sale in the ordinary course of business, which may cause us to forgo or defer sales of properties that otherwise would be favorable. Therefore, we may be unable to adjust our portfolio promptly in response to economic, market or other conditions, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flow or our ability to satisfy our debt service obligations or to maintain our level of distributions on our common stock.
Some of our leases may not contain rental increases over time, or the rental increases may be less than the fair market rate at a future point in time. When that is the case, the value of the leased property to a potential purchaser may not increase over time, which may restrict our ability to sell that property, or if we are able to sell that property, may result in a sale price less than the price that we paid to purchase the property or the price that could be obtained if the rental was at the then-current market rate.
34
We expect to hold the various real properties in which we invest until such time as we decide that a sale or other disposition is appropriate given our REIT status and investment business objectives. Our ability to dispose of properties on advantageous terms or at all depends on certain factors beyond our control, including competition from other sellers and the availability of attractive financing for potential buyers of our properties. We cannot predict the various market conditions affecting real estate assets which will exist at any particular time in the future. Due to the uncertainty of market conditions which may affect the disposition of our properties, we cannot assure our stockholders that we will be able to sell such properties at a profit or at all in the future. Accordingly, the extent to which our stockholders will receive cash distributions and realize potential appreciation on our real estate assets will depend upon fluctuating market conditions. Furthermore, we may be required to expend funds to correct defects or to make improvements before a property can be sold. We cannot assure our stockholders that we will have funds available to correct such defects or to make such improvements.
Our properties where the underlying tenant has a below investment grade credit rating, as determined by major credit rating agencies, or has an unrated tenant may have a greater risk of default.
As of December 31, 2017, approximately 66.1% of our tenants were not rated or did not have an investment grade credit rating from a major ratings agency or were not affiliates of companies having an investment grade credit rating. Our properties with such tenants may have a greater risk of default and bankruptcy than properties leased exclusively to investment grade tenants. When we acquire properties where the tenant does not have a publicly available credit rating, we will use certain credit assessment tools as well as rely on our own estimates of the tenant’s credit rating which includes reviewing the tenant’s financial information (e.g., financial ratios, net worth, revenue, cash flows, leverage and liquidity, if applicable). If our ratings estimates are inaccurate, the default or bankruptcy risk for the subject tenant may be greater than anticipated. If our lender or a credit rating agency disagrees with our ratings estimates, we may not be able to obtain our desired level of leverage or our financing costs may exceed those that we projected. This outcome could have an adverse impact on our returns on that asset and hence our operating results.
We are exposed to risks related to increases in market lease rates and inflation, as income from long-term leases is the primary source of our cash flow from operations.
We are exposed to risks related to increases in market lease rates and inflation, as income from long-term leases is the primary source of our cash flow from operations. Leases of long-term duration or which include renewal options that specify a maximum rate increase may result in below-market lease rates over time if we do not accurately estimate inflation or market lease rates. Provisions of our leases designed to mitigate the risk of inflation and unexpected increases in market lease rates, such as periodic rental increases, may not adequately protect us from the impact of inflation or unexpected increases in market lease rates. If we are subject to below-market lease rates on a significant number of our properties pursuant to long-term leases and our operating and other expenses are increasing faster than anticipated, our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flow or our ability to satisfy our debt service obligations or to maintain our level of distributions on our common stock could be materially adversely affected.
We may acquire or finance properties with lock-out provisions, which may prohibit us from selling a property or may require us to maintain specified debt levels for a period of years on some properties.
A lock-out provision is a provision that prohibits the prepayment of a loan during a specified period of time. Lock-out provisions may include terms that provide strong financial disincentives for borrowers to prepay their outstanding loan balance. If a property is subject to a lock-out provision, we may be materially restricted from or delayed in selling or otherwise disposing of or refinancing such property. Lock-out provisions may prohibit us from reducing the outstanding indebtedness with respect to any properties, refinancing such indebtedness at maturity, or increasing the amount of indebtedness with respect to such properties. Lock-out provisions could impair our ability to take other actions during the lock-out period that could be in the best interests of our stockholders and, therefore, may have an adverse impact on the value of our shares relative to the value that would result if the lock-out provisions did not exist. In particular, lock-out provisions could preclude us from participating in major transactions that could result in a disposition of our assets or a change of control even though that disposition or change of control might be in the best interests of our stockholders.
Increased operating expenses could reduce cash flow from operations and funds available to acquire investments or make distributions.
Our properties are subject to operating risks common to real estate in general, any or all of which may negatively affect us. If any property is not fully occupied or if rents are payable (or are being paid) in an amount that is insufficient to cover operating expenses that are the landlord’s responsibility under the lease, we could be required to expend funds in excess of such rents with respect to that property for operating expenses. Our properties are subject to increases in tax rates, utility costs, insurance costs, repairs and maintenance costs, administrative costs and other operating and ownership expenses. Some of our
35
property leases may not require the tenants to pay all or a portion of these expenses, in which event we may be responsible for these costs. If we are unable to lease properties on terms that require the tenants to pay all or some of the properties’ operating expenses, if our tenants fail to pay these expenses as required or if expenses we are required to pay exceed our expectations, we could have less funds available for future acquisitions or cash available for distributions to our stockholders.
The market environment may adversely affect our operating results, financial condition and ability to pay distributions to our stockholders.
Any deterioration of domestic or international financial markets could impact the availability of credit or contribute to rising costs of obtaining credit and therefore, could have the potential to adversely affect the value of our assets, the availability or the terms of financing, our ability to make principal and interest payments on, or refinance, any indebtedness and/or, for our leased properties, the ability of our tenants to enter into new leasing transactions or satisfy their obligations, including the payment of rent, under existing leases. The market environment also could affect our operating results and financial condition as follows:
• | Debt Markets - The debt market is sensitive to the macro environment, such as Federal Reserve policy, market sentiment, or regulatory factors affecting the banking and commercial mortgage backed securities (“CMBS”) industries. Should overall borrowing costs increase, due to either increases in index rates or increases in lender spreads, our operations may generate lower returns. |
• | Real Estate Markets - While incremental demand growth has helped to reduce vacancy rates and support modest rental growth in recent years, and while improving fundamentals have resulted in gains in property values, in many markets property values, occupancy and rental rates continue to be below those previously experienced before the most recent economic downturn. If recent improvements in the economy reverse course, the properties we acquire could substantially decrease in value after we purchase them. Consequently, we may not be able to recover the carrying amount of our properties, which may require us to recognize an impairment charge or record a loss on sale in our earnings. |
Real estate related taxes may increase, and if these increases are not passed on to tenants, our income will be reduced.
Local real property tax assessors may reassess our properties, which may result in increased taxes. Generally, property taxes increase as property values or assessment rates change, or for other reasons deemed relevant by property tax assessors. An increase in the assessed valuation of a property for real estate tax purposes will result in an increase in the related real estate taxes on that property. Although some tenant leases may permit us to pass through such tax increases to the tenants for payment, renewal leases or future leases may not be negotiated on the same basis. Tax increases not passed through to tenants could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flow or our ability to satisfy our debt service obligations or to maintain our level of distributions on our common stock.
Covenants, conditions and restrictions may restrict our ability to operate a property.
Many of our properties are or will be subject to significant covenants, conditions and restrictions, known as “CC&Rs,” restricting their operation and any improvements on such properties. Compliance with CC&Rs may adversely affect the types of tenants we are able to attract to such properties, our operating costs and reduce the amount of funds that we have available to pay distributions to our stockholders.
Acquisitions of build-to-suit properties will be subject to additional risks related to properties under development.
We may engage in build-to-suit programs and the acquisition of properties under development. In connection with these acquisitions, we will enter into purchase and sale arrangements with sellers or developers of suitable properties under development or construction. In such cases, we are generally obligated to purchase the property at the completion of construction, provided that the construction conforms to definitive plans, specifications, and costs approved by us in advance. We may also engage in development and construction activities involving existing properties, including the expansion of existing facilities (typically at the request of a tenant) or the development or build-out of vacant space at retail properties. We may advance significant amounts in connection with certain development projects.
As a result, we are subject to potential development risks and construction delays and the resultant increased costs and risks, as well as the risk of loss of certain amounts that we have advanced should a development project not be completed. To the extent that we engage in development or construction projects, we may be subject to uncertainties associated with obtaining permits or re-zoning for development, environmental and land use concerns of governmental entities and/or community groups, and the builder’s ability to build in conformity with plans, specifications, budgeted costs and timetables. If a developer or builder fails to perform, we may terminate the purchase, modify the construction contract or resort to legal action to compel performance (or in certain cases, we may elect to take over the project and pursue completion of the project ourselves). A
36
developer’s or builder’s performance may also be affected or delayed by conditions beyond that party’s control. Delays in obtaining permits or completion of construction could also give tenants the right to terminate preconstruction leases.
We may incur additional risks if we make periodic progress payments or other advances to builders before they complete construction. These and other such factors can result in increased project costs or the loss of our investment. Although we rarely engage in construction activities relating to space that is not already leased to one or more tenants, to the extent that we do so, we may be subject to normal lease-up risks relating to newly constructed projects. We also will rely on rental income and expense projections and estimates of the fair market value of the property upon completion of construction when agreeing upon a price at the time we acquire the property. If these projections are inaccurate, we may pay too much for a property and our return on our investment could suffer. If we contract with a development company for a newly developed property, there is a risk that money advanced to that development company for the project may not be fully recoverable if the developer fails to successfully complete the project.
Our operating results may be negatively affected by potential development and construction delays and the resultant increased costs and risks.
If we engage in development or construction projects, we will be subject to uncertainties associated with re-zoning for development, environmental and land use concerns of governmental entities and/or community groups, and our builder’s ability to build in conformity with plans, specifications, budgeted costs, and timetables. If a builder fails to perform, we may resort to legal action to rescind the breached agreements or to compel performance. A builder’s performance may also be affected or delayed by conditions beyond the builder’s control. Delays in completion of construction could also give tenants the right to terminate preconstruction leases. We may incur additional risks if we make periodic progress payments or other advances to builders before they complete construction. These and other such factors can result in increased costs of a project or loss of our asset. In addition, we will be subject to normal lease-up risks relating to newly constructed projects. We also must rely on rental income and expense projections and estimates of the fair market value of property upon completion of construction when agreeing upon a price at the time we acquire the property. If our projections are inaccurate, we may pay too much for a property, and our return on our assets could suffer.
We may deploy capital in unimproved real property. Returns from development of unimproved properties are also subject to risks associated with re-zoning the land for development and environmental and land use concerns of governmental entities and/or community groups.
If we purchase an option to acquire a property but do not exercise the option, we likely would forfeit the amount we paid for such option, which would reduce the amount of cash we have available to make other investments.
In determining whether to purchase a particular property, we may obtain an option to purchase such property. The amount paid for an option, if any, normally is forfeited if the property is not purchased and normally is credited against the purchase price if the property is purchased. If we purchase an option to acquire a property but do not exercise the option, we likely would forfeit the amount we paid for such option, which would reduce the amount of cash we have available to make other investments.
Competition with third parties in acquiring, leasing or selling properties and other investments may reduce our profitability and the return on our stockholders’ investment.
We compete with many other entities engaged in real estate investment activities, including individuals, corporations, bank and insurance company investment accounts, other REITs, real estate limited partnerships, and other entities engaged in real estate investment activities, many of which have greater resources than we do. Larger competitors may enjoy significant advantages that result from, among other things, a lower cost of capital and enhanced operating efficiencies. In addition, the number of entities and the amount of funds competing for suitable acquisitions may increase. Any such increase would result in increased demand for these assets and therefore increased prices paid for them. If we pay higher prices for properties and other assets as a result of competition with third parties without a corresponding increase in tenant lease rates, our profitability will be reduced, and our stockholders may experience a lower return on their investment.
We are also subject to competition in the leasing of our properties. Many of our competitors own properties similar to ours in the same markets in which our properties are located. If one of our properties is nearing the end of the lease term or becomes vacant and our competitors (which could include funds sponsored by affiliates of our advisor) offer space at rental rates below current market rates or below the rental rates we currently charge our tenants, we may lose existing or potential tenants and we may be pressured to reduce our rental rates below those we currently charge or to offer substantial rent concessions in order to retain tenants when such tenants’ leases expire or to attract new tenants.
37
In addition, if our competitors sell assets similar to assets we intend to sell in the same markets and/or at valuations below our valuations for comparable assets, we may be unable to dispose of our assets at all or at favorable pricing or on favorable terms. As a result of these actions by our competitors, our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations may be adversely affected.
Our properties face competition that may affect tenants’ ability to pay rent and the amount of rent paid to us may affect the cash available for distributions to our stockholders and the amount of distributions.
Many of our leases provide for increases in rent as a result of increases in the tenant’s sales volume. There likely will be numerous other retail properties within the market area of such properties that will compete with our tenants for customer business. In addition, traditional retailers face increasing competition from alternative retail channels, including internet-based retailers and other forms of e-commerce, factory outlet centers, wholesale clubs, mail order catalogs and television shopping networks, which could adversely impact our retail tenants’ sales volume. Such competition could negatively affect such tenants’ ability to pay rent or the amount of rent paid to us. This could result in decreased cash flow from tenants thus affecting cash available for distributions to our stockholders and the amount of distributions we pay.
Acquiring or attempting to acquire multiple properties in a single transaction may adversely affect our operations.
From time to time, we may acquire multiple properties in a single transaction. Portfolio acquisitions are often more complex and expensive than single-property acquisitions, and the risk that a multiple-property acquisition does not close may be greater than in a single-property acquisition. Portfolio acquisitions may also result in us owning assets in geographically dispersed markets, placing additional demands on our ability to manage the properties in the portfolio. In addition, a seller may require that a group of properties be purchased as a package even though we may not want to purchase one or more properties in the portfolio. In these situations, if we are unable to identify another person or entity to acquire the unwanted properties, we will be required to either pass on the entire portfolio, including the desirable properties or acquire the entire portfolio and operate or attempt to dispose of the unwanted properties. To acquire multiple properties in a single transaction, we may be required to accumulate a large amount of cash. We would expect the returns that we earn on such cash to be less than the ultimate returns on real property, therefore accumulating such cash could reduce our funds available for distributions to our stockholders. Any of the foregoing events may have an adverse impact on our operations.
Terrorism and war could harm our operating results.
The strength and profitability of our business depends on demand for and the value of our properties. Future terrorist attacks in the United States, such as the attacks that occurred in New York and the District of Columbia on September 11, 2001 and in Boston on April 15, 2013, and other acts of terrorism or war may have a negative impact on our operations. Terrorist attacks in the United States and elsewhere may result in declining economic activity, which could harm the demand for and the value of our properties. In addition, the public perception that certain locations are at greater risk for attack, such as major airports, ports, and rail facilities, may decrease the demand for and the value of our properties near these sites. A decrease in demand could make it difficult for us to renew or re-lease our properties at these sites at lease rates equal to or above historical rates. Such terrorist attacks could have an adverse impact on our business even if they are not directed at our properties.
In addition, the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 have substantially affected the availability and price of insurance coverage for certain types of damages or occurrences, and our insurance policies for terrorism include large deductibles and co-payments. Although we maintain terrorism insurance coverage on our portfolio, the amount of our terrorism insurance coverage may not be sufficient to cover losses inflicted by terrorism and therefore could expose us to significant losses and have a negative impact on our operations.
Costs of complying with environmental laws and regulations may adversely affect our income and the cash available for any distributions.
All real property and the operations conducted on real property are subject to federal, state and local laws, ordinances and regulations relating to environmental protection and human health and safety. These laws and regulations generally govern wastewater discharges, air emissions, the operation and removal of underground and above-ground storage tanks, the use, storage, treatment, transportation and disposal of hazardous materials, and the remediation of any associated contamination. Some of these laws and regulations may impose joint and several liability on tenants, current or previous owners or operators for the costs of investigation or remediation of contaminated properties, regardless of fault or whether the acts causing the contamination were legal. This liability could be substantial. In addition, such laws often impose liability whether or not the owner or operator knew of, or was responsible for, the presence of such hazardous or toxic substances. Environmental laws also may impose restrictions on the manner in which the property may be used or businesses may be operated, and these restrictions may require substantial expenditures and/or adversely affect the value of the property. Environmental laws provide for sanctions in the event of noncompliance and may be enforced by governmental agencies or, in certain circumstances, by private
38
parties. Certain environmental laws and common law principles could be used to impose liability for release of and exposure to hazardous substances, and third parties may seek recovery from owners or operators of real properties for personal injury or property damage associated with exposure to released hazardous substances. The presence of hazardous substances, or the failure to properly remediate these substances, may adversely affect our ability to sell or rent such property or to use such property as collateral for future borrowing.
Compliance with new or more stringent laws or regulations or stricter interpretation of existing laws may require material expenditures by us. Future laws, ordinances or regulations may impose material environmental liability. Additionally, our properties may be affected by our tenants’ operations, the existing condition of land when we buy it, operations in the vicinity of our properties, such as the presence of underground storage tanks, or activities of unrelated third parties. In addition, there are various local, state and federal fire, health, life-safety and similar regulations that we may be required to comply with, and that may subject us to liability in the form of fines or damages for noncompliance. Any material expenditures, fines, or damages we must pay will reduce our ability to make distributions to our stockholders and may reduce the value of their investment.
Some of these properties may contain at the time of acquisition, or may have contained prior to our acquisition, underground storage tanks for the storage of petroleum products and other hazardous or toxic substances. Certain of our properties may be adjacent to or near other properties upon which others have engaged, or may engage in the future, in activities that may release petroleum products or other hazardous or toxic substances.
From time to time, we may acquire properties, or interests in properties, with known adverse environmental conditions where we believe that the environmental liabilities associated with these conditions are quantifiable and that the acquisition will yield a superior risk-adjusted return. In such an instance, we will estimate the costs of environmental investigation, clean-up and monitoring in determining the purchase price. Further, in connection with property dispositions, we may agree to remain responsible for, and to bear the cost of, remediating or monitoring certain environmental conditions on the properties.
We may not obtain an independent third-party environmental assessment for every property we acquire. In addition, any such assessment that we do obtain may not reveal all environmental liabilities. The cost of defending against claims of liability, of compliance with environmental regulatory requirements, of remediating any contaminated property, or of paying personal injury claims would adversely affect our business, assets or results of operations and, consequently, amounts available for distribution to our stockholders.
If we sell properties by providing financing to purchasers, defaults by the purchasers would adversely affect our cash flow from operations.
In some instances, we may sell our properties by providing financing to purchasers. When we provide financing to purchasers, we will bear the risk that the purchaser may default on its obligations under the financing, which could negatively impact cash flow from operations. Even in the absence of a purchaser default, the distribution of sale proceeds or their reinvestment in other assets will be delayed until the promissory notes or other property we may accept upon the sale are actually paid, sold, refinanced or otherwise disposed of. In some cases, we may receive initial down payments in cash and other property in the year of sale in an amount less than the selling price, and subsequent payments will be spread over a number of years. If any purchaser defaults under a financing arrangement with us, it could negatively impact our ability to pay cash distributions to our stockholders.
Changes in U.S. accounting standards regarding operating leases may make the leasing of our properties less attractive to our potential tenants, which could reduce overall demand for our leasing services.
Under current authoritative accounting guidance for leases, a lease is classified by a tenant as a capital lease if the significant risks and rewards of ownership are considered to reside with the tenant. Under capital lease accounting for a tenant, both the leased asset and liability are reflected on its balance sheet. If the lease does not meet the criteria for a capital lease, the lease is to be considered an operating lease by the tenant, and the obligation does not appear on the tenant’s balance sheet; rather, the contractual future minimum payment obligations are only disclosed in the footnotes thereto. Thus, entering into an operating lease can appear to enhance a tenant’s balance sheet in comparison to direct ownership. The Financial Accounting Standards Board (the “FASB”) and the International Accounting Standards Board conducted a joint project to re-evaluate lease accounting. In February 2016, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2016-02, Leases (“ASU 2016-02”), which will require that a tenant recognize assets and liabilities on the balance sheet for all leases with a lease term of more than 12 months, with the result being the recognition of a right of use asset and a lease liability and the disclosure of key information about the entity’s leasing arrangements. These and other potential changes to the accounting guidance could affect both our accounting for leases as well as that of our current and potential tenants. These changes may affect how our real estate leasing business is conducted. For example, with the ASU 2016-02 revision, companies may be less willing to enter into leases in general or desire to enter into leases with shorter terms because the apparent benefits to their balance sheets under current
39
practice could be reduced or eliminated. This impact in turn could make it more difficult for us to enter into leases on terms we find favorable. The amendments in ASU 2016-02 are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company is still currently evaluating the full impact ASU 2016-02 will have on its consolidated financial statements; however the Company plans to adopt ASU 2016-02 as of January 1, 2019.
Changes in accounting standards may adversely impact our financial condition and/or results of operations.
We are subject to the rules and regulations of the FASB related to GAAP. Various changes to GAAP are constantly being considered, some of which could materially impact our reported financial condition and/or results of operations. Also, to the extent that public companies in the United States would be required in the future to prepare financial statements in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards instead of the current GAAP, this change in accounting standards could materially affect our financial condition or results of operations.
Compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, as amended, and fire, safety and other regulations may require us to make unanticipated expenditures that could significantly reduce the cash available for distributions on our common stock.
Our properties are subject to regulation under federal laws, such as the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, as amended (the “ADA”), pursuant to which all public accommodations must meet federal requirements related to access and use by disabled persons. Although we believe that our properties substantially comply with present requirements of the ADA, we have not conducted an audit or investigation of all of our properties to determine our compliance. If one or more of our properties or future properties are not in compliance with the ADA, we might be required to take remedial action, which would require us to incur additional costs to bring the property into compliance. Noncompliance with the ADA could also result in imposition of fines or an award of damages to private litigants.
Additional federal, state and local laws also may require modifications to our properties or restrict our ability to renovate our properties. We cannot predict the ultimate amount of the cost of compliance with the ADA or other legislation.
In addition, our properties are subject to various federal, state and local regulatory requirements, such as state and local earthquake, fire and life safety requirements. If we were to fail to comply with these various requirements, we might incur governmental fines or private damage awards. If we incur substantial costs to comply with the ADA or any other regulatory requirements, our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flow or our ability to satisfy our debt service obligations or to maintain our level of distributions on our common stock could be materially adversely affected. Local regulations, including municipal or local ordinances, zoning restrictions and restrictive covenants imposed by community developers may restrict our use of our properties and may require us to obtain approval from local officials or community standards organizations at any time with respect to our properties, including prior to acquiring a property or when undertaking renovations of any of our existing properties.
Risks Associated with Debt Financing
We have incurred mortgage indebtedness and other borrowings, which may increase our business risks, hinder our ability to make distributions, and decrease the value of our stockholders’ investment.
We have acquired real estate and other real estate-related assets by borrowing new funds. In addition, we have incurred mortgage debt and pledged some of our real properties as security for that debt to obtain funds to acquire additional real properties and other investments and to pay distributions to our stockholders. We may borrow additional funds if we need funds to satisfy the REIT tax qualification requirement that we distribute at least 90% of our annual REIT taxable income to our stockholders. We may also borrow additional funds if we otherwise deem it necessary or advisable to assure that we maintain our qualification as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes.
Our advisor believes that utilizing borrowing is consistent with our investment objective of maximizing the return to stockholders. There is no limitation on the amount we may borrow against any individual property or other investment. However, under our charter, we are required to limit our borrowings to 75% of the cost (before deducting depreciation or other non-cash reserves) of our gross assets, unless excess borrowing is approved by a majority of our independent directors and disclosed to our stockholders in our next quarterly report along with a justification for such excess borrowing. Moreover, our board of directors has adopted a policy to further limit our borrowings to 60% of the greater of cost (before deducting depreciation or other non-cash reserves) or fair market value of our gross assets, unless such excess borrowing is approved by a majority of our independent directors and disclosed to our stockholders in the next quarterly report along with a justification for such excess borrowing. Our borrowings will not exceed 300% of our net assets as of the date of any borrowing, which is the maximum level of indebtedness permitted under the NASAA REIT Guidelines and our charter; however, we may exceed that limit if approved by a majority of our independent directors and disclosed to our stockholders in our next quarterly report, along
40
with a justification for such excess borrowing. These factors could limit the amount of cash we have available to distribute to our stockholders and could result in a decline in the value of our stockholders’ investment.
We do not intend to incur mortgage debt on a particular property unless we believe the property’s projected operating cash flows are sufficient to service the mortgage debt. However, if there is a shortfall between the cash flow from a property and the cash flow needed to service mortgage debt on a property, the amount available for distributions to our stockholders may be reduced. In addition, incurring mortgage debt increases the risk of loss since defaults on indebtedness secured by a property may result in lenders initiating foreclosure actions. In that case, we could lose the property securing the loan that is in default, thus reducing the value of our stockholders’ investments. For tax purposes, a foreclosure of any of our properties would be treated as a sale of the property for a purchase price equal to the outstanding balance of the debt secured by the mortgage. If the outstanding balance of the debt secured by the mortgage exceeds our tax basis in the property, we would recognize taxable income on foreclosure, but would not receive any cash proceeds from the foreclosure. In such event, we may be unable to pay the amount of distributions required in order to maintain our qualification as a REIT. We may give full or partial guarantees to lenders of recourse mortgage debt to the entities that own our properties. If we provide a guaranty on behalf of an entity that owns one of our properties, we will be responsible to the lender for satisfaction of the debt if it is not paid by such entity and with respect to any such property that is vacant, potentially be responsible for any property-related costs such as real estate taxes, insurance and maintenance, which costs will likely increase if the lender does not timely exercise its remedies. If any mortgages contain cross-collateralization or cross-default provisions, a default on a single property could affect multiple properties. If any of our properties are foreclosed upon due to a default, our ability to pay cash distributions to our stockholders will be adversely affected, which could result in our losing our REIT status and would result in a decrease in the value of our stockholders’ investment.
We intend to rely on external sources of capital to fund future capital needs, and if we encounter difficulty in obtaining such capital, we may not be able to meet maturing obligations or make any additional acquisitions.
In order to maintain our qualification as a REIT under the Internal Revenue Code, we are required, among other things, to distribute annually to our stockholders at least 90% of our REIT taxable income (which does not equal net income as calculated in accordance with GAAP), determined without regard to the deduction for dividends paid and excluding any net capital gain. Because of this dividend requirement, we may not be able to fund from cash retained from operations all of our future capital needs, including capital needed to refinance maturing obligations or make new acquisitions.
The capital and credit markets have experienced extreme volatility and disruption in recent years. Market volatility and disruption could hinder our ability to obtain new debt financing or refinance our maturing debt on favorable terms or at all or to raise debt and equity capital. Our access to capital will depend upon a number of factors, including:
• | general market conditions; |
• | government action or regulation, including changes in tax law; |
• | the market’s perception of our future growth potential; |
• | the extent of investor interest; |
• | analyst reports about us and the REIT industry; |
• | the general reputation of REITs and the attractiveness of their equity securities in comparison to other equity securities, including securities issued by other real estate-based companies; |
• | our financial performance and that of our tenants; |
• | our current debt levels and changes in our credit ratings, if any; |
• | our current and expected future earnings; and |
• | our cash flow and cash distributions, including our ability to satisfy the dividend requirements applicable to REITs. |
If we are unable to obtain needed capital on satisfactory terms or at all, we may not be able to meet our obligations and commitments as they mature or make any new acquisitions.
High interest rates may make it difficult for us to finance or refinance assets, which could reduce the number of properties we can acquire and the amount of cash distributions we can make.
We run the risk of being unable to finance or refinance our assets on favorable terms or at all. If interest rates are high when we desire to mortgage our assets or when existing loans come due and the assets need to be refinanced, we may not be able to, or may choose not to, finance the assets and we would be required to use cash to purchase or repay outstanding obligations. Our inability to use debt to finance or refinance our assets could reduce the number of assets we can acquire, which could reduce
41
our operating cash flows and the amount of cash distributions we can make to our stockholders. Higher costs of capital also could negatively impact our operating cash flow and returns on our assets.
Increases in interest rates could increase the amount of our debt payments and adversely affect our ability to pay distributions to our stockholders.
We have incurred indebtedness, and in the future may incur additional indebtedness, that bears interest at a variable rate. To the extent that we incur variable rate debt and do not hedge our exposure thereunder, increases in interest rates would increase the amounts payable under such indebtedness, which could reduce our operating cash flows and our ability to pay distributions to our stockholders. In addition, if our existing indebtedness matures or otherwise becomes payable during a period of rising interest rates, we could be required to liquidate one or more of our assets at times that may prevent realization of the maximum return on such assets.
We may not be able to generate sufficient cash flow to meet our debt service obligations.
Our ability to make payments on and to refinance our indebtedness, and to fund our operations, working capital and capital expenditures, depends on our ability to generate cash. To a certain extent, our cash flow is subject to general economic, industry, financial, competitive, operating, legislative, regulatory and other factors, many of which are beyond our control.
We cannot assure our stockholders that our business will generate sufficient cash flow from operations or that future sources of cash will be available to us in an amount sufficient to enable us to pay amounts due on our indebtedness or to fund our other liquidity needs.
Additionally, if we incur additional indebtedness in connection with any future deployment of capital or development projects or for any other purpose, our debt service obligations could increase. We may need to refinance all or a portion of our indebtedness before maturity. Our ability to refinance our indebtedness or obtain additional financing will depend on, among other things:
• | our financial condition and market conditions at the time; |
• | restrictions in the agreements governing our indebtedness; |
• | general economic and capital market conditions; |
• | the availability of credit from banks or other lenders; and |
• | our results of operations. |
As a result, we may not be able to refinance our indebtedness on commercially reasonable terms, or at all. If we do not generate sufficient cash flow from operations, and additional borrowings or refinancings or proceeds of asset sales or other sources of cash are not available to us, we may not have sufficient cash to enable us to meet all of our obligations. Accordingly, if we cannot service our indebtedness, we may have to take actions such as seeking additional equity, or delaying any strategic acquisitions and alliances or capital expenditures, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flow or our ability to satisfy our debt service obligations or maintain our level of distributions on our common stock.
Lenders may require us to enter into restrictive covenants relating to our operations, which could limit our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.
In connection with providing us financing, a lender could impose restrictions on us that affect our distribution and operating policies and our ability to incur additional debt. In general, our loan agreements restrict our ability to encumber or otherwise transfer our interest in the respective property without the prior consent of the lender. Loan documents we enter into may contain covenants that limit our ability to further mortgage the property, discontinue insurance coverage or replace CR IV Advisors as our advisor. These or other limitations imposed by a lender may adversely affect our flexibility and our ability to pay distributions on our common stock.
Interest-only indebtedness may increase our risk of default and ultimately may reduce our funds available for distribution to our stockholders.
We have financed some of our property acquisitions using interest-only mortgage indebtedness and may continue to do so. During the interest-only period, the amount of each scheduled payment will be less than that of a traditional amortizing mortgage loan. The principal balance of the mortgage loan will not be reduced (except in the case of prepayments) because there are no scheduled monthly payments of principal during this period. After the interest-only period, we will be required either to make scheduled payments of amortized principal and interest or to make a lump-sum or “balloon” payment at maturity. These required principal or balloon payments will increase the amount of our scheduled payments and may increase
42
our risk of default under the related mortgage loan. If the mortgage loan has an adjustable interest rate, the amount of our scheduled payments also may increase at a time of rising interest rates. Increased payments and substantial principal or balloon maturity payments will reduce the funds available for distribution to our stockholders because cash otherwise available for distribution will be required to pay principal and interest associated with these mortgage loans.
Our ability to make a balloon payment at maturity is uncertain and may depend upon our ability to obtain additional financing or our ability to sell the property. At the time the balloon payment is due, we may or may not be able to refinance the loan on terms as favorable as the original loan or sell the property at a price sufficient to make the balloon payment. The effect of a refinancing or sale could affect the rate of return to stockholders and the projected time of disposition of our assets. In addition, payments of principal and interest made to service our debts may leave us with insufficient cash to pay the distributions that we are required to pay to maintain our qualification as a REIT. Any of these results would have a significant, negative impact on the value of our common stock.
To hedge against exchange rate and interest rate fluctuations, we have used, and may continue to use, derivative financial instruments that may be costly and ineffective and may reduce the overall returns on our stockholders’ investment.
We have used, and may continue to use, derivative financial instruments to hedge our exposure to changes in exchange rates and interest rates on loans secured by our assets and investments in CMBS. Derivative instruments may include interest rate swap contracts, interest rate caps or floor contracts, rate lock arrangements, futures or forward contracts, options or repurchase agreements. Our actual hedging decisions will be determined in light of the facts and circumstances existing at the time of the hedge and may differ from time to time.
To the extent that we use derivative financial instruments to hedge against exchange rate and interest rate fluctuations, we will be exposed to credit risk, market risk, basis risk and legal enforceability risks. In this context, credit risk is the failure of the counterparty to perform under the terms of the derivative contract. If the fair value of a derivative contract is positive, the counterparty owes us, which creates credit risk for us. Market risk includes the adverse effect on the value of the financial instrument resulting from a change in interest rates. Basis risk occurs when the index upon which the contract is based is more or less variable than the index upon which the hedged asset or liability is based, thereby making the hedge less effective. Finally, legal enforceability risks encompass general contractual risks, including the risk that the counterparty will breach the terms of, or fail to perform its obligations under, the derivative contract. If we are unable to manage these risks effectively, our results of operations, financial condition and ability to pay distributions to our stockholders will be adversely affected.
Risks Associated with Real Estate-Related Assets
Investing in mortgage, bridge or mezzanine loans could adversely affect our return on our loan investments.
We may make or acquire mortgage, bridge or mezzanine loans, or participations in such loans, to the extent our advisor determines that it is advantageous for us to do so. However, if we make or invest in mortgage, bridge or mezzanine loans, we will be at risk of defaults on those loans caused by many conditions beyond our control, including local and other economic conditions affecting real estate values and interest rate levels. If there are defaults under these loans, we may not be able to repossess and sell quickly any properties securing such loans. An action to foreclose on a property securing a loan is regulated by state statutes and regulations and is subject to many of the delays and expenses of any lawsuit brought in connection with the foreclosure if the defendant raises defenses or counterclaims. In the event of default by a mortgagor, these restrictions, among other things, may impede our ability to foreclose on or sell the mortgaged property or to obtain proceeds sufficient to repay all amounts due to us on the loan, which could reduce the value of our investment in the defaulted loan.
We are subject to risks relating to real estate-related securities, including CMBS.
Real estate-related securities are often unsecured and also may be subordinated to other obligations of the issuer. As a result, investments in real estate-related securities may be subject to risks of (1) limited liquidity in the secondary trading market in the case of unlisted or thinly traded securities, (2) substantial market price volatility resulting from changes in prevailing interest rates in the case of traded equity securities, (3) subordination to the prior claims of banks and other senior lenders to the issuer, (4) the operation of mandatory sinking fund or call/redemption provisions during periods of declining interest rates that could cause the issuer to reinvest redemption proceeds in lower yielding assets, (5) the possibility that earnings of the issuer or that income from collateral may be insufficient to meet debt service and distribution obligations and (6) the declining creditworthiness and potential for insolvency of the issuer during periods of rising interest rates and economic slowdown or downturn. These risks may adversely affect the value of outstanding real estate-related securities and the ability of the obliged parties to repay principal and interest or make distribution payments.
CMBS are securities that evidence interests in, or are secured by, a single commercial mortgage loan or a pool of commercial mortgage loans. Accordingly, these securities are subject to the risks above and all of the risks of the underlying
43
mortgage loans. CMBS are issued by investment banks and non-regulated financial institutions, and are not insured or guaranteed by the U.S. government. The value of CMBS may change due to shifts in the market’s perception of issuers and regulatory or tax changes adversely affecting the mortgage securities market as a whole and may be negatively impacted by any dislocation in the mortgage-backed securities market in general.
CMBS are also subject to several risks created through the securitization process. Subordinate CMBS are paid interest only to the extent that there are funds available to make payments. To the extent the collateral pool includes delinquent loans, there is a risk that interest payments on subordinate CMBS will not be fully paid. Subordinate CMBS are also subject to greater credit risk than those CMBS that are more highly rated. In certain instances, third-party guarantees or other forms of credit support can reduce the credit risk.
U.S. Federal Income and Other Tax Risks
Failure to maintain our qualification as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes would adversely affect our operations and our ability to make distributions.
We are currently taxed as a REIT under the Internal Revenue Code. Our ability to maintain our qualification as a REIT will depend upon our ability to meet requirements regarding our organization and ownership, distributions of our income, the nature and diversification of our income and assets and other tests imposed by the Internal Revenue Code. Future legislative, judicial or administrative changes to the U.S. federal income tax laws could be applied retroactively, which could result in our disqualification as a REIT. If we fail to continue to qualify as a REIT for any taxable year, we will be subject to U.S. federal income tax on our taxable income at corporate rates. In addition, we would generally be disqualified from treatment as a REIT for the four taxable years following the year of losing our REIT status. Losing our REIT status would reduce our net earnings available for investment or distribution to our stockholders because of the additional tax liability. In addition, distributions to our stockholders would no longer qualify for the dividends paid deduction, and we would no longer be required to make distributions. If we lose our REIT status, we might be required to borrow funds or liquidate some investments in order to pay the applicable tax. Our failure to continue to qualify as a REIT would adversely affect the return on our stockholders’ investment.
Re-characterization of sale-leaseback transactions may cause us to lose our REIT status.
We may purchase properties and lease them back to the sellers of such properties. We would characterize such a sale-leaseback transaction as a “true lease,” which treats the lessor as the owner of the property for U.S. federal income tax purposes. In the event that any sale-leaseback transaction is challenged by the IRS and re-characterized as a financing transaction or loan for U.S. federal income tax purposes, deductions for depreciation and cost recovery relating to such property would be disallowed. If a sale-leaseback transaction were so re-characterized, we might fail to satisfy the REIT qualification “asset tests” or the “income tests” and, consequently, lose our REIT status effective with the year of re-characterization. Alternatively, such a re-characterization could cause the amount of our REIT taxable income to be recalculated, which might also cause us to fail to meet the distribution requirement for a taxable year and thus lose our REIT status.
Our stockholders may have current tax liability on distributions they elect to reinvest in our common stock.
If our stockholders participate in our DRIP, they will be deemed to have received, and for income tax purposes will be taxed on, the amount reinvested in shares of our common stock that does not represent a return of capital. In addition, our stockholders may be treated, for tax purposes, as having received an additional distribution to the extent the shares are purchased at a discount from fair market value. Such an additional deemed distribution could cause our stockholders to be subject to additional income tax liability. Unless our stockholders are a tax-exempt entity, they may have to use funds from other sources to pay their tax liability arising as a result of the distributions reinvested in our shares.
Dividends payable by REITs generally do not qualify for the reduced tax rates available for some dividends.
Income from “qualified dividends” payable to U.S. stockholders that are individuals, trusts and estates are generally subject to tax at preferential rates. Dividends payable by REITs, however, generally are not eligible for the preferential tax rates applicable to qualified dividend income. Although these rules do not adversely affect the taxation of REITs or dividends payable by REITs, to the extent that the preferential rates continue to apply to regular corporate qualified dividends, investors who are individuals, trusts and estates may perceive investments in REITs to be relatively less attractive than investments in the stocks of non-REIT corporations that pay dividends, which could materially and adversely affect the value of the shares of REITs, including the per share trading price of our securities. However, under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, non-corporate U.S. stockholders of REITs are entitled to a deduction equal to 20% of any “qualified REIT dividends.” A qualified REIT dividend is defined as any dividend from a REIT that is not a capital gain dividend or a dividend attributable to dividend income from U.S.
44
corporations or certain non-U.S. corporations. A non-corporate U.S. stockholder’s ability to claim a deduction equal to 20% of qualified REIT dividends received may be limited by the stockholder’s particular circumstances.
We may be subject to adverse legislative or regulatory tax changes that could increase our tax liability or reduce our operating flexibility, including the recently passed Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.
In recent years, numerous legislative, judicial and administrative changes have been made in the provisions of U.S. federal income tax laws applicable to investments similar to an investment in shares of our common stock. Additional changes to the tax laws are likely to continue to occur, and we cannot assure our stockholders that any such changes will not adversely affect our taxation and our ability to continue to qualify as a REIT, or the taxation of a stockholder. Any such changes could have an adverse effect on an investment in our shares or on the market value or the resale potential of our assets. Our stockholders are urged to consult with their tax advisor with respect to the impact of recent legislation on their investment in our shares and the status of legislative, regulatory or administrative developments and proposals and their potential effect on an investment in our shares. Although REITs generally receive better tax treatment than entities taxed as regular corporations, it is possible that future legislation would result in a REIT having fewer tax advantages, and it could become more advantageous for a company that acquires real estate to elect to be treated for U.S. federal income tax purposes as a regular corporation. As a result, our charter provides our board of directors with the power, under certain circumstances, to revoke or otherwise terminate our REIT election and cause us to be taxed as a regular corporation, without the vote of our stockholders. Our board of directors has fiduciary duties to us and our stockholders and could only cause such changes in our tax treatment if it determines in good faith that such changes are in the best interests of our stockholders.
In addition, on December 22, 2017, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act was signed into law. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act makes significant changes to the U.S. federal income tax rules for taxation of individuals and businesses, generally effective for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act makes major changes to the Code, including a number of provisions of the Code that affect the taxation of REITs and their stockholders. Among the changes made by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act are permanently reducing the generally applicable corporate tax rate, generally reducing the tax rate applicable to individuals and other noncorporate taxpayers for tax years beginning after December 31, 2017 and before January 1, 2026, eliminating or modifying certain previously allowed deductions (including substantially limiting interest deductibility and, for individuals, the deduction for non-business state and local taxes), and, for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017 and before January 1, 2026, providing for preferential rates of taxation through a deduction of up to 20% (subject to certain limitations) on most ordinary REIT dividends and certain trade or business income of non-corporate taxpayers. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act also imposes new limitations on the deduction of net operating losses and requires us to recognize income for tax purposes no later than when we take it into account on our financial statements, which may result in us having to make additional taxable distributions to our stockholders in order to comply with REIT distribution requirements or avoid taxes on retained income and gains. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act also makes numerous large and small changes to the tax rules that do not affect the REIT qualification rules directly but may otherwise affect us or our stockholders.
While the changes in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act generally appear to be favorable with respect to REITs, the extensive changes to non-REIT provisions in the Internal Revenue Code may have unanticipated effects on us or our stockholders. Moreover, Congressional leaders have recognized that the process of adopting extensive tax legislation in a short amount of time without hearings and substantial time for review is likely to have led to drafting errors, issues needing clarification and unintended consequences that will have to be revisited in subsequent tax legislation. At this point, it is not clear if or when Congress will address these issues or when the IRS will issue administrative guidance on the changes made in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.
We urge our stockholders to consult with their own tax advisor with respect to the status of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act and other legislative, regulatory or administrative developments and proposals and their potential effect on holding our common stock.
In certain circumstances, we may be subject to certain federal, state and local taxes as a REIT, which would reduce our cash available for distribution to our stockholders.
Even if we maintain our status as a REIT, we may be subject to certain federal, state and local taxes. For example, net income from the sale of properties that are “dealer” properties sold by a REIT (a “prohibited transaction” under the Internal Revenue Code) will be subject to a 100% excise tax. Additionally, if we are not able to make sufficient distributions to eliminate our REIT taxable income, we may be subject to tax as a corporation on our undistributed REIT taxable income. We may also decide to retain income we earn from the sale or other disposition of our property and pay income tax directly on such income. In that event, our stockholders would be treated as if they earned that income and paid the tax on it directly. However, stockholders that are tax-exempt, such as charities or qualified pension plans, would have no benefit from their deemed payment of such tax liability. We may also be subject to state and local taxes on our income or property, either directly or at the
45
level of our operating partnership or at the level of the other entities through which we indirectly own our assets. Any federal, state or local taxes we pay will reduce our cash available for distribution to our stockholders.
If our operating partnership or certain other subsidiaries fail to maintain their status as disregarded entities or partnerships, their income may be subject to taxation, which would reduce the cash available to us for distribution to our stockholders.
We intend to cause CCPT IV OP, our operating partnership, to maintain its current status as an entity separate from us (a disregarded entity), or in the alternative, a partnership for U.S. federal income tax purposes. Our operating partnership would lose its status as a disregarded entity for U.S. federal income tax purposes if it issues interests to any subsidiary we establish that is not a disregarded entity for tax purposes (a “regarded entity”) or a person other than us. If our operating partnership issues interests to any subsidiary we establish that is a regarded entity for tax purposes or a person other than us, we would characterize our operating partnership as a partnership for U.S. federal income tax purposes. As a disregarded entity or partnership, our operating partnership is not subject to U.S. federal income tax on its income. However, if the IRS were to successfully challenge the status of our operating partnership as a disregarded entity or partnership, CCPT IV OP would be taxable as a corporation. In such event, this would reduce the amount of distributions that the operating partnership could make to us. This could also result in our losing REIT status, and becoming subject to a corporate-level tax on our income. This would substantially reduce the cash available to us to make distributions to our stockholders and the return on their investment.
In addition, if certain of our other subsidiaries through which CCPT IV OP owns its properties, in whole or in part, lose their status as disregarded entities or partnerships for U.S. federal income tax purposes, such subsidiaries would be subject to taxation as corporations, thereby reducing cash available for distributions to our operating partnership. Such a re-characterization of CCPT IV OP’s subsidiaries also could threaten our ability to maintain REIT status.
To maintain our qualification as a REIT we must meet annual distribution requirements, which may force us to forgo otherwise attractive opportunities or borrow funds during unfavorable market conditions. This could delay or hinder our ability to meet our investment objectives and reduce our stockholders’ overall return.
In order to maintain our qualification as a REIT, we must distribute annually to our stockholders at least 90% of our REIT taxable income (which does not equal net income as calculated in accordance with GAAP), determined without regard to the deduction for dividends paid and excluding any net capital gain. We will be subject to U.S. federal income tax on our undistributed taxable income and net capital gain and to a 4% nondeductible excise tax on any amount by which dividends we pay with respect to any calendar year are less than the sum of (a) 85% of our ordinary income, (b) 95% of our capital gain net income and (c) 100% of our undistributed income from prior years.
Further, to maintain our qualification as a REIT, we must ensure that we meet the REIT gross income tests annually and that at the end of each calendar quarter, at least 75% of the value of our assets consists of cash, cash items, government securities and qualified REIT real estate assets, including certain mortgage loans and certain kinds of mortgage-related securities. The remainder of our investment in securities (other than government securities, qualified real estate assets and stock of a TRS) generally cannot include more than 10% of the outstanding voting securities of any one issuer or more than 10% of the total value of the outstanding securities of any one issuer. In addition, in general, no more than 5% of the value of our assets (other than government securities, qualified real estate assets and stock of a TRS) can consist of the securities of any one issuer, no more than 20% of the value of our total assets can be represented by securities of one or more TRSs and no more than 25% of the value of our total assets can be represented by certain debt securities of publicly offered REITs. If we fail to comply with these requirements at the end of any calendar quarter, we must correct the failure within 30 days after the end of the calendar quarter or qualify for certain statutory relief provisions to avoid losing our REIT qualification and suffering adverse tax consequences. As a result, we may be required to liquidate assets from our portfolio or not make otherwise attractive investments in order to maintain our qualification as a REIT. These actions could have the effect of reducing our income and amounts available for distribution to our stockholders.
The foregoing requirements could cause us to distribute amounts that otherwise would be spent on real estate assets and it is possible that we might be required to borrow funds, possibly at unfavorable rates, or sell assets to fund these dividends or make taxable stock dividends. Although we intend to make distributions sufficient to meet the annual distribution requirements and to avoid U.S. federal income and excise taxes on our earnings, it is possible that we might not always be able to do so.
Non-U.S. stockholders may be subject to U.S. federal withholding tax and may be subject to U.S. federal income tax upon the disposition of our shares.
Gain recognized by a non-U.S. stockholder upon the sale or exchange of our common stock generally will not be subject to U.S. federal income taxation unless such stock constitutes a “U.S. real property interest” (“USRPI”) under the Foreign Investment in Real Property Tax Act of 1980 (“FIRPTA”). Our common stock will not constitute a USRPI so long as we are a “domestically-controlled qualified investment entity.” A domestically-controlled qualified investment entity includes a REIT if
46
at all times during a specified testing period, less than 50% in value of such REIT’s stock is held directly or indirectly by non-U.S. stockholders. We believe that we are a domestically-controlled qualified investment entity. However, because our common stock is and will be freely transferable, no assurance can be given that we are or will be a domestically-controlled qualified investment entity.
Even if we do not qualify as a domestically-controlled qualified investment entity at the time a non-U.S. stockholder sells or exchanges our common stock, gain arising from such a sale or exchange would not be subject to U.S. taxation under FIRPTA as a sale of a USRPI if: (a) our common stock is “regularly traded,” as defined by applicable Treasury regulations, on an established securities market, and (b) such non-U.S. stockholder owned, actually or constructively, 10% or less of our common stock at any time during the five-year period ending on the date of the sale.
Complying with REIT requirements may limit our ability to hedge our liabilities effectively and may cause us to incur tax liabilities.
The REIT provisions of the Internal Revenue Code may limit our ability to hedge our liabilities. Any income from a hedging transaction we enter into to manage risk of interest rate changes, price changes or currency fluctuations with respect to borrowings made or to be made to acquire or carry real estate assets or to offset certain other positions, if properly identified under applicable Treasury Regulations, does not constitute “gross income” for purposes of the 75% or 95% gross income tests. To the extent that we enter into other types of hedging transactions, the income from those transactions will likely be treated as non-qualifying income for purposes of one or both of the gross income tests. As a result of these rules, we may need to limit our use of advantageous hedging techniques or implement those hedges through a taxable REIT subsidiary (“TRS”). This could increase the cost of our hedging activities because our TRSs would be subject to tax on gains or expose us to greater risks associated with changes in interest rates than we would otherwise want to bear. In addition, losses in a TRS generally will not provide any tax benefit, except for being carried forward against future taxable income of such TRS.
Our property taxes could increase due to property tax rate changes or reassessment, which would impact our cash flows.
Even if we continue to qualify as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes, we will be required to pay some state and local taxes on our properties. The real property taxes on our properties may increase as property tax rates change or as our properties are assessed or reassessed by taxing authorities. Therefore, the amount of property taxes we pay in the future may increase substantially. If the property taxes we pay increase and if any such increase is not reimbursable under the terms of our lease, then our cash flows will be impacted, which in turn could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flow or our ability to satisfy our debt service obligations or to maintain our level of distributions on our common stock.
The share transfer and ownership restrictions applicable to REITs and contained in our charter may inhibit market activity in our shares of stock and restrict our business combination opportunities.
In order to continue to qualify as a REIT, five or fewer individuals, as defined in the Internal Revenue Code, may not own, actually or constructively, more than 50% in value of our issued and outstanding shares of stock at any time during the last half of each taxable year, other than the first year for which a REIT election is made. Attribution rules in the Internal Revenue Code determine if any individual or entity actually or constructively owns our shares of stock under this requirement. Additionally, at least 100 persons must beneficially own our shares of stock during at least 335 days of a taxable year for each taxable year, other than the first year for which a REIT election is made. To help ensure that we meet these tests, among other purposes, our charter restricts the acquisition and ownership of our shares of stock.
Our charter, with certain exceptions, authorizes our directors to take such actions as are necessary and desirable to preserve our qualification as a REIT. Unless exempted by the board of directors, for so long as we continue to qualify as a REIT, our charter prohibits, among other limitations on ownership and transfer of shares of our stock, any person from beneficially or constructively owning (applying certain attribution rules under the Internal Revenue Code) more than 9.8% in value of the aggregate of our outstanding shares of stock and more than 9.8% (in value or in number of shares, whichever is more restrictive) of any class or series of our shares of stock. The board of directors, in its sole discretion and upon receipt of certain representations and undertakings, may exempt a person (prospectively or retrospectively) from the ownership limits. However, the board of directors may not, among other limitations, grant an exemption from these ownership restrictions to any proposed transferee whose ownership, direct or indirect, in excess of the 9.8% ownership limit would result in the termination of our qualification as a REIT. These restrictions on transferability and ownership will not apply, however, if the board of directors determines that it is no longer in our best interest to continue to qualify as a REIT or that compliance with the restrictions is no longer required in order for us to continue to so qualify as a REIT.
47
These ownership limits could delay or prevent a transaction or a change in control that might involve a premium price for our common stock or otherwise be in the best interest of our stockholders.
If we elect to treat one or more of our subsidiaries as a TRS, it will be subject to corporate-level taxes, and our dealings with our TRSs may be subject to a 100% excise tax.
A REIT may own up to 100% of the stock of one or more TRSs. Both the subsidiary and the REIT must jointly elect to treat the subsidiary as a TRS. A TRS will be subject to applicable U.S. federal, state, local and foreign income tax on its taxable income, including corporate income tax on the TRS’s income, and is, as a result, less tax efficient than with respect to income we earn directly. The after-tax net income of our TRSs would be available for distribution to us. A TRS may hold assets and earn income that would not be qualifying assets or income if held or earned directly by a REIT, including gross income from operations pursuant to management contracts. In addition, the rules, which are applicable to us as a REIT, as described in the preceding risk factors, 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. For example, to the extent that the rent paid by one of our TRSs exceeds an arm’s-length rental amount, such amount would be potentially subject to a 100% excise tax. While we intend that all transactions between us and our TRSs would be conducted on an arm’s-length basis, and therefore, any amounts paid by our TRSs to us would not be subject to the excise tax, no assurance can be given that the IRS would not disagree with such conclusion and levy an excise tax on such transactions.
For qualified accounts, if an investment in our common stock constitutes a prohibited transaction under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”) or the Internal Revenue Code, it is possible that our stockholders may be subject to the imposition of significant excise taxes and penalties with respect to the amount invested. In order to avoid triggering additional taxes and/or penalties, if our stockholders intend to invest in our shares through pension or profit-sharing trusts or IRAs, they should consider additional factors.
If our stockholders are investing the assets of a pension, profit-sharing, 401(k), Keogh or other qualified retirement plan or the assets of an IRA in our common stock, our stockholders should satisfy themselves that, among other things:
• | their investment is consistent with their fiduciary obligations under ERISA and the Internal Revenue Code; |
• | their investment is made in accordance with the documents and instruments governing their plan or IRA, including their plan’s investment policy; |
• | their investment satisfies the prudence and diversification requirements of ERISA and other applicable provisions of ERISA and the Internal Revenue Code; |
• | their investment will not impair the liquidity needs to satisfy minimum and other distribution requirements of the plan or IRA and the withholding requirements that may be applicable; |
• | their investment will not produce unrelated business taxable income for the plan or IRA; |
• | they will be able to value the assets of the plan annually in accordance with ERISA requirements and applicable provisions of the plan or IRA; and |
• | their investment will not constitute a prohibited transaction under Section 406 of ERISA or Section 4975 of the Internal Revenue Code. |
Specific rules apply to foreign, governmental and church plans.
As a general rule, certain employee benefit plans, including foreign pension plans, governmental plans established or maintained in the United States (as defined in Section 3(32) of ERISA), and certain church plans (as defined in Section 3(33) of ERISA), are not subject to ERISA’s requirements and are not “benefit plan investors” within the meaning of the plan asset regulations of the U.S. Department of Labor. Any such plan that is qualified and exempt from taxation under Sections 401(a) and 501(a) of the Internal Revenue Code may nonetheless be subject to the prohibited transaction rules set forth in Section 503 of the Internal Revenue Code and, under certain circumstances in the case of church plans, Section 4975 of the Internal Revenue Code. Also, some foreign plans and governmental plans may be subject to foreign, state, or local laws which are, to a material extent, similar to the provisions of ERISA or Section 4975 of the Internal Revenue Code. Each fiduciary of a plan subject to any such similar law should make its own determination as to the need for and the availability of any exemption relief.
ITEM 1B. | UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS |
None.
48
ITEM 2. | PROPERTIES |
See Part II, Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Portfolio Information for a discussion of the properties we hold for rental operations and Part IV, Item 15. Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules — Schedule III — Real Estate and Accumulated Depreciation of this Annual Report on Form 10-K for a detailed listing of such properties.
ITEM 3. | LEGAL PROCEEDINGS |
In the ordinary course of business, we may become subject to litigation or claims. We are not aware of any material pending legal proceedings, other than ordinary routine litigation incidental to our business, to which we are a party or to which our properties are the subject.
ITEM 4. | MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES |
Not applicable.
49
PART II
ITEM 5. | MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES |
Market Information
As of March 26, 2018, we had approximately 311.5 million shares of common stock outstanding, held by a total of 59,822 stockholders of record. The number of stockholders is based on the records of DST Systems, Inc., which serves as our registrar and transfer agent.
There is no established trading market for our common stock. Therefore, there is a risk that a stockholder may not be able to sell our stock at a time or price acceptable to the stockholder, or at all. Unless and until our shares are listed on a national securities exchange, we do not expect that a public market for the shares will develop. Pursuant to the DRIP portion of the Offering, and the Initial DRIP Offering until September 30, 2015, we issued shares of our common stock at a price of $9.50 per share. Pursuant to the Initial DRIP Offering, beginning October 1, 2015, we issued shares of our common stock at a price of $9.70 per share, the estimated per share NAV as determined by the board of directors as of August 31, 2015. Pursuant to the Secondary DRIP Offering, we issued shares of our common stock at a price of $9.70 per share until November 13, 2016, issued shares of our common stock at a price of $9.92 per share from November 14, 2016 until March 27, 2017, which is the estimated per share NAV of our shares as determined by our board of directors as of September 30, 2016, and issued shares of our common stock at a price of $10.08 per share from March 28, 2017 to March 28, 2018, which is the estimated per share NAV of our shares as determined by our board of directors as of December 31, 2016. On March 29, 2018, our board of directors established an updated estimated per share NAV of our common stock as of December 31, 2017 of $9.37 per share. Effective March 29, 2018, we will issue shares of our common stock at a price of $9.37 per share pursuant to the Secondary DRIP Offering.
To assist fiduciaries of tax-qualified pension, stock bonus or profit-sharing plans, employee benefit plans and annuities described in Section 403(a) or (b) of the Internal Revenue Code or an individual retirement account or annuity described in Section 408 of the Internal Revenue Code subject to the annual reporting requirements of ERISA and IRA trustees or custodians in preparation of reports relating to an investment in the shares, we will publicly disclose and provide reports, as requested, of the per share estimated value of our common stock to those fiduciaries who request such reports. Furthermore, in order for FINRA members and their associated persons to participate in the Offering, we are required pursuant to FINRA Rule 5110 to disclose in each annual report distributed to stockholders a per share estimated value of the shares, the method by which it was developed and the date of the data used to develop the estimated value. In addition, pursuant to National Association of Securities Dealers Conduct Rule 2340, which took effect on April 11, 2016, we are required to publish an updated estimated per share NAV on at least an annual basis. Our board of directors will make decisions regarding the valuation methodology to be employed, who will perform valuations of our assets and the frequency of such valuations; provided, however, that the determination of the estimated per share NAV must be conducted by, or with the material assistance or confirmation of, a third-party valuation expert and must be derived from a methodology that conforms to standard industry practice. Our board of directors established an estimated per share NAV of $9.37 per share as of December 31, 2017, using a methodology that conformed to standard industry practice. However, as set forth above, there is no public trading market for the shares at this time and stockholders may not receive $9.37 per share if a market did exist.
In determining the estimated per share NAVs as of August 31, 2015, September 30, 2016, December 31, 2016 and December 31, 2017, the board of directors considered information and analysis, including valuation materials that were provided by Duff & Phelps, LLC (“Duff & Phelps”), information provided by CR IV Advisors, LLC, and the estimated per share NAV recommendation made by the valuation committee of the board of directors, which committee is comprised entirely of independent directors. See our Current Reports on Form 8-K, filed with the SEC on September 27, 2015, November 14, 2016, March 28, 2017 and March 30, 2018, for additional information regarding Duff & Phelps and its valuation materials.
Share Redemption Program
Our board of directors has adopted a share redemption program that enables our stockholders to sell their shares to us in limited circumstances. Our share redemption program permits stockholders to sell their shares back to us, subject to the conditions and limitations described below.
Our common stock is currently not listed on a national securities exchange, and we will not seek to list our stock unless and until such time as our independent directors believe that the listing of our stock would be in the best interest of our stockholders. In order to provide stockholders with the benefit of interim liquidity, stockholders who have held their shares for at least one year may present all or a portion of their shares consisting of at least the lesser of (1) 25% of the stockholder’s shares; or (2) a number of shares with an aggregate redemption price of at least $2,500, to us for redemption at any time in
50
accordance with the procedures outlined below. At that time, we may, subject to the conditions and limitations described below, redeem the shares presented for redemption for cash to the extent that we have sufficient funds available to us to fund such redemption. We will not pay to our advisor or its affiliates any fees to complete any transactions under our share redemption program.
The per share redemption price (other than for shares purchased pursuant to our DRIP and as provided below for redemptions due to a stockholder’s death) depends on the length of time the stockholder has held such shares as follows: after two years from the purchase date, 97.5% of the most recently determined estimated per share NAV; and after three years from the purchase date, 100% of the most recently determined estimated per share NAV. During this time period, the redemption price for shares purchased pursuant to our DRIP will be 100% of the most recently determined estimated per share NAV. In each case, the redemption price will be adjusted for any stock dividends, combinations, splits, recapitalizations and the like with respect to our common stock. Until September 30, 2015, the most recent estimated value per share for purposes of our share redemption program was $10.00 per share, the purchase price per share in the primary portion of the Offering. From October 1, 2015 until November 13, 2016, the most recently determined estimated per share NAV for purposes of our share redemption program was $9.70 per share, the estimated per share NAV as of August 31, 2015, as determined by the board of directors. From November 14, 2016 until March 27, 2017, the most recently determined estimated per share NAV for purposes of our share redemption program was $9.92 per share, the estimated per share NAV as of September 30, 2016, as determined by the board of directors. From March 28, 2017 until March 28, 2018, the most recently determined estimated per share NAV for purposes of our share redemption program was $10.08 per share, the estimated per share NAV as of December 31, 2016, as determined by the board of directors. As a result of the board of directors’ determination of an updated estimated per share NAV of our shares of common stock, the estimated per share NAV of $9.37 as of December 31, 2017 will serve as the most recent estimated per share NAV for purposes of the share redemption program, effective March 29, 2018, until such time as the board of directors determines a new estimated per share NAV.
In determining the redemption price, we consider shares to have been redeemed from a stockholder’s account on a first-in, first-out basis. Our board of directors will announce any redemption price adjustment and the time period of its effectiveness as a part of its regular communications with our stockholders. If we have sold a property and have made one or more special distributions to our stockholders of all or a portion of the net proceeds from such sales, the per share redemption price will be reduced by the net sale proceeds per share distributed to stockholders prior to the redemption date. Our board of directors will, in its sole discretion, determine which distributions, if any, constitute a special distribution. While our board of directors does not have specific criteria for determining a special distribution, we expect that a special distribution will only occur upon the sale of a property and the subsequent distribution of the net sale proceeds.
Upon receipt of a request for redemption, we may conduct a Uniform Commercial Code (“UCC”) search to ensure that no liens are held against the shares. Any costs for conducting the UCC search will be borne by us.
In the event of the death of a stockholder, we must receive notice from the stockholder’s estate within 270 days after the stockholder’s death. Shares redeemed in connection with a stockholder’s death will be redeemed at a purchase price per share equal to 100% of the estimated per share NAV.
In the event that a stockholder requests a redemption of all of their shares, and such stockholder is participating in our DRIP, the stockholder will be deemed to have notified us, at the time they submit their redemption request, that such stockholder is terminating its participation in our DRIP, and has elected to receive future distributions in cash. This election will continue in effect even if less than all of such stockholder’s shares are redeemed unless they notify us that they wish to resume their participation in our DRIP.
We will limit the number of shares redeemed pursuant to our share redemption program as follows: (1) we will not redeem in excess of 5% of the weighted average number of shares outstanding during the trailing 12 months prior to the end of the fiscal quarter for which the redemptions are being paid; and (2) funding for the redemption of shares will be limited, among other things, to the net proceeds we receive from the sale of shares under our DRIP, net of shares redeemed to date. In an effort to accommodate redemption requests throughout the calendar year, we intend to limit quarterly redemptions to approximately 1.25% of the weighted average number of shares outstanding during the trailing 12-month period ending on the last day of the fiscal quarter, and funding for redemptions for each quarter generally will be limited, among other things, to the net proceeds we receive from the sale of shares in the respective quarter under our DRIP; however, our management may waive these quarterly limitations in its sole discretion, subject to the 5% cap on the number of shares we may redeem during the respective trailing 12-month period. Any of the foregoing limits might prevent us from accommodating all redemption requests made in any quarter, in which case quarterly redemptions will be made pro rata, except as described below. Our management also reserves the right, in its sole discretion at any time, and from time to time, to reject any request for redemption for any reason.
51
We will redeem our shares no later than the end of the month following the end of each fiscal quarter. Requests for redemption must be received on or prior to the end of the fiscal quarter in order for us to repurchase the shares in the month following the end of that fiscal quarter. A stockholder may withdraw their request to have shares redeemed, but all such requests generally must be submitted prior to the last business day of the applicable fiscal quarter. Any redemption capacity that is not used as a result of the withdrawal or rejection of redemption requests may be used to satisfy the redemption requests of other stockholders received for that fiscal quarter, and such redemption payments may be made at a later time than when that quarter’s redemption payments are made.
We will determine whether we have sufficient funds and/or shares available as soon as practicable after the end of each fiscal quarter, but in any event prior to the applicable payment date. If we cannot purchase all shares presented for redemption in any fiscal quarter, based upon insufficient cash available and/or the limit on the number of shares we may redeem during any quarter or year, we will give priority to the redemption of deceased stockholders’ shares. While deceased stockholders’ shares will be included in calculating the maximum number of shares that may be redeemed in any annual or quarterly period, they will not be subject to the annual or quarterly percentage caps; therefore, if the volume of requests to redeem deceased stockholders’ shares in a particular quarter were large enough to cause the annual or quarterly percentage caps to be exceeded, even if no other redemption requests were processed, the redemptions of deceased stockholders’ shares would be completed in full, assuming sufficient proceeds from the sale of shares under our DRIP, net of shares redeemed to date, were available. If sufficient proceeds from the sale of shares under our DRIP, net of shares redeemed to date, were not available to pay all such redemptions in full, the requests to redeem deceased stockholders’ shares would be honored on a pro rata basis. We next will give priority to requests for full redemption of accounts with a balance of 250 shares or less at the time we receive the request, in order to reduce the expense of maintaining small accounts. Thereafter, we will honor the remaining redemption requests on a pro rata basis. Following such quarterly redemption period, if a stockholder would like to resubmit the unsatisfied portion of the prior request for redemption, such stockholder must submit a new request for redemption of such shares prior to the last day of the new quarter. Unfulfilled requests for redemption will not be carried over automatically to subsequent redemption periods.
Our board of directors may choose to amend, suspend or terminate our share redemption program at any time upon 30 days’ notice to our stockholders. Additionally, we will be required to discontinue sales of shares under our Secondary DRIP Offering on the date we sell all of the shares registered for sale under the Secondary DRIP Offering, unless we register additional DRIP shares to be offered pursuant to an effective registration statement with the SEC and applicable states. Because the redemption of shares will be funded with the net proceeds we receive from the sale of shares under our Secondary DRIP Offering, net of shares redeemed to date, the discontinuance or termination of our Secondary DRIP Offering will adversely affect our ability to redeem shares under the share redemption program. We will notify our stockholders of such developments (1) in our next annual or quarterly report or (2) by means of a separate mailing, accompanied by disclosure in a current or periodic report under the Exchange Act.
Our share redemption program is only intended to provide interim liquidity for stockholders until a liquidity event occurs, which may include the sale of the Company, the sale of all or substantially all of our assets, a merger or similar transaction, an
alternative strategy that will result in a significant increase in opportunities for stockholders to redeem their shares or the listing of the shares of our common stock for trading on a national securities exchange. We cannot guarantee that a liquidity event will occur.
The shares we redeem under our share redemption program are canceled and returned to the status of authorized but unissued shares. We do not intend to resell such shares to the public unless they are first registered with the SEC under the Securities Act and under appropriate state securities laws or otherwise sold in compliance with such laws.
We received redemption requests for approximately 11.1 million shares (or $111.9 million) in excess of the net proceeds we received from issuance of shares under the DRIP Offerings during the three months ended December 31, 2017. Management, in its discretion, limited the amount of shares redeemed for the three months ended December 31, 2017 to an amount equal to net proceeds we received from the sale of shares pursuant to the DRIP Offerings during the period. During the year ended December 31, 2017, we received valid redemption requests under our share redemption program totaling approximately 44.2 million shares, of which we redeemed approximately 7.6 million shares as of December 31, 2017 for $76.6 million (at an average redemption price of $10.08 per share) and approximately 2.4 million shares subsequent to December 31, 2017 for $24.3 million (at an average redemption price of $10.08 per share). The remaining redemption requests relating to approximately 34.2 million shares went unfulfilled. During the year ended December 31, 2016, we received valid redemption requests under our share redemption program totaling approximately 14.9 million shares, of which we redeemed approximately 8.6 million shares as of December 31, 2016 for $83.1 million (at an average redemption price of $9.62 per share) and approximately 2.7 million shares subsequent to December 31, 2016 for $27.1 million (at an average redemption price of $9.91 per share). The remaining redemption requests relating to approximately 3.6 million shares went unfulfilled. A valid redemption request is one that complies with the applicable requirements and guidelines of our current share redemption program set forth above. We funded such redemptions with proceeds from our DRIP Offerings. During the years ended
52
December 31, 2017 and 2016, we issued approximately 10.1 million and 11.2 million shares of common stock, respectively, under the DRIP Offerings, for proceeds of $101.3 million and $109.2 million, respectively, which were recorded as redeemable common stock on the consolidated balance sheets, net of any redemptions paid.
In general, we redeem shares on a quarterly basis. During the three-month period ended December 31, 2017, we redeemed shares, including those redeemable due to death, as follows:
Period | Total Number of Shares Redeemed | Average Price Paid per Share | Total Number of Shares Purchased as Part of Publicly Announced Plans or Programs | Maximum Number of Shares that May Yet Be Purchased Under the Plans or Programs | ||||||||
October 1, 2017 - October 31, 2017 | 732 | $ | 10.08 | 732 | (1) | |||||||
November 1, 2017 - November 30, 2017 | 2,479,428 | $ | 10.08 | 2,479,428 | (1) | |||||||
December 1, 2017 - December 31, 2017 | 4,907 | $ | 10.08 | 4,907 | (1) | |||||||
Total | 2,485,067 | 2,485,067 | (1) | |||||||||
____________________________________
(1) | A description of the maximum number of shares that may be purchased under our share redemption program is included in the narrative preceding this table. |
See Part II, Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Share Redemptions in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, and Note 13 — Stockholders’ Equity to our consolidated financial statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for additional share redemption information.
Distributions
We elected to be taxed, and currently qualify, as a REIT for federal income tax purposes commencing with our taxable year ended December 31, 2012. As a REIT, we have made, and intend to continue to make, distributions each taxable year equal to at least 90% of our taxable income (computed without regard to the dividends paid deduction and excluding net capital gains). One of our primary goals is to pay regular (monthly) distributions to our stockholders.
See Part II, Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Distributions in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for additional information on distributions.
For federal income tax purposes, distributions to common stockholders are characterized as ordinary dividends, capital gain distributions, or nondividend distributions. To the extent that we make a distribution in excess of our current or accumulated earnings and profits, the distribution will be a nontaxable return of capital, reducing the tax basis in each U.S. stockholder’s shares. In addition, the amount of distributions in excess of U.S. stockholders’ tax basis in their shares will be taxable as a capital gain realized from the sale of those shares. See Note 14 — Income Taxes to our consolidated financial statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the character of the distributions paid during the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015.
The following table shows the distributions declared on a per share basis during the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015 (in thousands, except per share data):
Year Ending December 31, | Total Distributions Declared | Distributions Declared per Common Share | ||||||
2017 | $ | 194,687 | $ | 0.625 | ||||
2016 | $ | 194,834 | $ | 0.625 | ||||
2015 | $ | 193,311 | $ | 0.625 | ||||
53
ITEM 6. | SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA |
The following data should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and the notes thereto and Part II, Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Certain amounts presented below have been reclassified to conform to the current period presentation. See Note 2 — Summary of Significant Policies to our consolidated financial statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for a discussion of the various reclassifications. The selected financial data (in thousands, except share and per share amounts) presented below was derived from our consolidated financial statements.
Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||
2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | ||||||||||||||||
Balance Sheet Data: | ||||||||||||||||||||
Total real estate and related assets, net | $ | 4,627,546 | $ | 4,534,010 | $ | 4,484,326 | $ | 3,923,840 | $ | 2,203,056 | ||||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents | $ | 4,745 | $ | 9,754 | $ | 26,316 | $ | 55,287 | $ | 300,574 | ||||||||||
Total assets | $ | 4,728,689 | $ | 4,624,335 | $ | 4,582,199 | $ | 4,031,468 | $ | 2,544,324 | ||||||||||
Notes payable and credit facility, net | $ | 2,471,763 | $ | 2,246,259 | $ | 2,066,563 | $ | 1,458,828 | $ | 689,621 | ||||||||||
Intangible lease liabilities, net | $ | 45,572 | $ | 49,075 | $ | 53,822 | $ | 55,535 | $ | 37,485 | ||||||||||
Total liabilities | $ | 2,572,024 | $ | 2,357,566 | $ | 2,195,084 | $ | 1,583,090 | $ | 775,868 | ||||||||||
Redeemable common stock and noncontrolling interest | $ | 186,453 | $ | 188,938 | $ | 190,561 | $ | 121,972 | $ | 26,484 | ||||||||||
Total stockholders’ equity | $ | 1,970,212 | $ | 2,077,831 | $ | 2,196,554 | $ | 2,326,406 | $ | 1,741,972 | ||||||||||
Operating Data: | ||||||||||||||||||||
Total revenues | $ | 424,095 | $ | 407,451 | $ | 367,731 | $ | 256,282 | $ | 102,557 | ||||||||||
Total operating expenses | $ | 270,900 | $ | 258,267 | $ | 243,531 | $ | 210,852 | $ | 113,253 | ||||||||||
Operating income (loss) | $ | 153,195 | $ | 149,184 | $ | 124,200 | $ | 45,430 | $ | (10,696 | ) | |||||||||
Net income (loss) attributable to the Company | $ | 79,420 | $ | 71,842 | $ | 64,771 | $ | 11,190 | $ | (32,880 | ) | |||||||||
Cash Flow Data: | ||||||||||||||||||||
Net cash provided by operating activities | $ | 198,925 | $ | 192,296 | $ | 182,885 | $ | 89,086 | $ | 7,570 | ||||||||||
Net cash used in investing activities | $ | (223,386 | ) | $ | (187,746 | ) | $ | (673,009 | ) | $ | (1,743,988 | ) | $ | (1,695,287 | ) | |||||
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities | $ | 20,510 | $ | (21,346 | ) | $ | 464,867 | $ | 1,405,982 | $ | 1,982,066 | |||||||||
Per Share Data: | ||||||||||||||||||||
Net income (loss) - basic and diluted | $ | 0.25 | $ | 0.23 | $ | 0.21 | $ | 0.04 | $ | (0.36 | ) | |||||||||
Distributions declared per common share | $ | 0.625 | $ | 0.625 | $ | 0.625 | $ | 0.625 | $ | 0.625 | ||||||||||
Weighted average shares outstanding - basic and diluted | 311,677,149 | 311,863,844 | 309,263,576 | 292,072,088 | 90,330,927 | |||||||||||||||
54
ITEM 7. | MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS |
The following discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations should be read in conjunction with Part II, Item 6. Selected Financial Data in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and our accompanying consolidated financial statements and notes thereto. See also the Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements section preceding Part I of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Overview
We were formed on July 27, 2010, and we elected to be taxed, and currently qualify, as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes commencing with our taxable year ended December 31, 2012. We commenced our principal operations on April 13, 2012, when we satisfied the conditions of our escrow agreement regarding the minimum offering and issued approximately 308,000 shares of our common stock. We have no paid employees and are externally advised and managed by CR IV Advisors. On February 1, 2018, the Transaction, as discussed in Part I, Item 1. Business — Formation, was completed. Immediately following the completion of the Transaction, CIM indirectly owns and/or controls CR IV Advisors; our dealer manager, CCO Capital; our property manager, CREI Advisors; and CCO Group.
In addition, as part of the Transaction, pursuant to the Services Agreement, VEREIT OP will continue to provide certain services to CCO Group and to us, including operational real estate support. VEREIT OP will continue to provide such services through March 31, 2019 (or, if later, the date of the last government filing other than a tax filing made by any of the Cole REITs with respect to its 2018 fiscal year) and will provide consulting and research services through December 31, 2023 as requested by CCO Group, LLC.
Despite the indirect change of ownership and control of our advisor, dealer manager, property manager and sponsor, we expect that, during the Initial Services Term of the Services Agreement, the advisory, dealer manager and property management services we receive will continue without any material changes in personnel (except as supplemented by the management oversight of CIM personnel) or material change in service procedures. During the Initial Services Term of the Services Agreement, CCO Group, LLC intends to evaluate and effectuate an appropriate transition of VEREIT OP’s services under the Services Agreement to other CIM affiliates or third parties with the goal of ensuring continuity and minimizing disruption.
We ceased issuing shares in our Offering on April 4, 2014 and in the Initial DRIP Offering effective as of June 30, 2016, but will continue to issue shares of common stock under the Secondary DRIP Offering until certain liquidity events occur, such as the listing of our shares on a national securities exchange or the sale of our company, or the Secondary DRIP Offering is otherwise terminated by our board of directors. We expect that property acquisitions in 2018 and future periods will be funded by proceeds from financing of the acquired properties, cash flows from operations and the strategic sale of properties and other investments.
Our operating results and cash flows are primarily influenced by rental income from our commercial properties, interest expense on our indebtedness and acquisition and operating expenses. Rental and other property income accounted for 88% and 87% of our total revenue for the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016, respectively. As 97.5% of our rentable square feet was under lease, including any month-to-month agreements, as of December 31, 2017 with a weighted average remaining lease term of 9.6 years, we believe our exposure to changes in commercial rental rates on our portfolio is substantially mitigated, except for vacancies caused by tenant bankruptcies or other factors. CR IV Advisors regularly monitors the creditworthiness of our tenants by reviewing each tenant’s financial results, credit rating agency reports, when available, on the tenant or guarantor, the operating history of the property with such tenant, the tenant’s market share and track record within its industry segment, the general health and outlook of the tenant’s industry segment, and other information for changes and possible trends. If CR IV Advisors identifies significant changes or trends that may adversely affect the creditworthiness of a tenant, it will gather a more in-depth knowledge of the tenant’s financial condition and, if necessary, attempt to mitigate the tenant credit risk by evaluating the possible sale of the property or identifying a possible replacement tenant should the current tenant fail to perform on the lease.
Our Business Environment and Current Outlook
Current conditions in the global capital markets remain volatile as the world’s economic growth has been affected by geopolitical and economic events. In the United States, the overall economic environment continued to improve in 2017. During 2017, the U.S. real gross domestic product increased 2.3%, the unemployment rate decreased 0.6 percentage points to 4.1%, and Core CPI, a measure of inflation which removes food and energy prices and is seasonally adjusted, increased 1.8%, as compared to the same period a year earlier.
55
Economic trends and government policies affect global and regional commercial real estate markets as well as our operations directly. These include: overall economic activity and employment growth, interest rate levels, the cost and availability of credit and the impact of tax and regulatory policies.
Critical Accounting Policies and Significant Accounting Estimates
Our accounting policies have been established to conform with GAAP. The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires us to use judgment in the application of accounting policies, including making estimates and assumptions. These judgments affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the dates of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the reporting periods. Management believes that we have made these estimates and assumptions in an appropriate manner and in a way that accurately reflects our financial condition. We continually test and evaluate these estimates and assumptions using our historical knowledge of the business, as well as other factors, to ensure that they are reasonable for reporting purposes. However, actual results may differ from these estimates and assumptions. If our judgment or interpretation of the facts and circumstances relating to various transactions had been different, it is possible that different accounting policies would have been applied, thus resulting in a different presentation of the financial statements. Additionally, other companies may utilize different estimates that may impact comparability of our results of operations to those of companies in similar businesses. We believe the following critical accounting policies govern the significant judgments and estimates used in the preparation of our financial statements, which should be read in conjunction with the more complete discussion of our accounting policies and procedures included in Note 2 — Summary of Significant Accounting Policies to our consolidated financial statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Recoverability of Real Estate Assets
We acquire real estate assets and subsequently monitor those assets quarterly for impairment, including the review of real estate properties subject to direct financing leases, if applicable. Additionally, we record depreciation and amortization related to our assets. The risks and uncertainties involved in applying the principles related to real estate assets include, but are not limited to, the following:
• | The estimated useful lives of our depreciable assets affects the amount of depreciation and amortization recognized on our assets; |
• | The review of impairment indicators and subsequent determination of the undiscounted future cash flows could require us to reduce the value of assets and recognize an impairment loss; |
• | The fair value of held for sale assets is estimated by management. This estimated value could result in a reduction of the carrying value of the asset; and |
• | Changes in assumptions based on actual results may have a material impact on our financial results. |
Allocation of Purchase Price of Real Estate Assets
In connection with our acquisition of properties, we allocate the purchase price to the tangible and intangible assets and liabilities acquired based on their respective estimated fair values. Tangible assets consist of land, buildings, fixtures and tenant improvements. Intangible assets consist of above- and below-market lease values and the value of in-place leases. Our purchase price allocations are developed utilizing third-party appraisal reports, industry standards and management experience. The risks and uncertainties involved in applying the principles related to purchase price allocations include, but are not limited to, the following:
• | The value allocated to land, as opposed to buildings, fixtures and tenant improvements, affects the amount of depreciation expense we record. If more value is attributed to land, depreciation expense is lower than if more value is attributed to buildings, fixtures and tenant improvements; |
• | Intangible lease assets and liabilities can be significantly affected by estimates including market rent, lease terms including renewal options at rental rates below estimated market rental rates, carrying costs of the property during a hypothetical expected lease-up period, and current market conditions and costs, including tenant improvement allowances and rent concessions; and |
• | We determine whether any financing assumed is above- or below-market based upon comparison to similar financing terms for similar types of debt financing with similar maturities. |
Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements
Recently issued accounting pronouncements are described in Note 2 — Summary of Significant Accounting Policies to our consolidated financial statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
56
Operating Highlights and Key Performance Indicators
2017 Activity
• | Acquired 42 properties for an aggregate purchase price of $307.4 million. |
• | Disposed of 15 properties, 14 retail properties and one industrial property, for an aggregate sales price of $100.6 million. |
• | Entered into the Second Amended and Restated Credit Agreement that increased the allowable borrowings and extended the maturity dates associated with the original amended and restated unsecured credit facility. |
• | Total debt increased by $231.1 million, from $2.3 billion to $2.5 billion. |
Portfolio Information
As of December 31, 2017, we owned 909 properties located in 45 states, the gross rentable square feet of which was 97.5% leased, including any month-to-month agreements, with a weighted average lease term remaining of 9.6 years. During the year ended December 31, 2017, we disposed of 15 properties, for an aggregate gross sales price of $100.6 million.
The following table shows the property statistics of our real estate assets, which exclude uncompleted development projects and any properties owned through unconsolidated joint ventures, as of December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015:
Year Ended December 31, | |||||||||
2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |||||||
Number of commercial properties | 909 | 882 | 871 | ||||||
Rentable square feet (in thousands) (1) | 26,888 | 26,548 | 25,195 | ||||||
Percentage of rentable square feet leased | 97.5 | % | 98.2 | % | 98.5 | % | |||
Percentage of investment-grade tenants (2) | 33.9 | % | 35.5 | % | 35.1 | % | |||
____________________________________
(1) | Includes square feet of buildings on land parcels subject to ground leases. |
(2) Investment-grade tenants are those with a credit rating of BBB- or higher by Standard & Poor’s or a credit rating of Baa3 or higher by Moody’s. The ratings may reflect those assigned by Standard & Poor’s or Moody’s to the lease guarantor or the parent company, as applicable. The weighted average credit rating is weighted based on annualized rental income and is for only those tenants rated by Standard & Poor’s.
The following table summarizes our real estate acquisition activity during the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015:
Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2017 | 2016 | 2015 | ||||||||||
Commercial properties acquired (1) | 42 | 15 | 111 | |||||||||
Purchase price of acquired properties (in thousands) (1) | $ | 307,385 | $ | 216,652 | $ | 615,846 | ||||||
Rentable square feet (in thousands) (1) (2) | 1,407 | 1,268 | 3,417 | |||||||||
____________________________________
(1) | Excludes a property owned through the Unconsolidated Joint Venture that was consolidated during the year ended December 31, 2016 and a development project placed into service during 2015. |
(2) | Includes square feet of buildings on land parcels subject to ground leases. |
57
The following table shows the tenant diversification of our real estate portfolio, based on annualized rental income, as of December 31, 2017:
2017 | 2017 | Percentage of | |||||||||||||||
Total | Leased | Annualized | Annualized | 2017 | |||||||||||||
Number | Square Feet | Rental Income | Rental Income | Annualized | |||||||||||||
Tenant | of Leases (1) | (in thousands) (2) | (in thousands) | per Square Foot (2) | Rental Income | ||||||||||||
Walgreens - pharmacy | 63 | 923 | $ | 22,608 | $ | 24.49 | 6 | % | |||||||||
Dollar General - discount store | 170 | 1,646 | 16,661 | 10.12 | 4 | % | |||||||||||
Family Dollar - discount store | 33 | 1,214 | 14,925 | 12.29 | 4 | % | |||||||||||
United Oil - gas and convenience | 4 | 72 | 13,342 | 185.31 | 4 | % | |||||||||||
Lowe’s - home and garden | 15 | 1,898 | 13,256 | 6.98 | 4 | % | |||||||||||
Academy Sports - sporting goods | 8 | 2,098 | 13,211 | 6.30 | 4 | % | |||||||||||
CVS - pharmacy | 46 | 576 | 12,884 | 22.37 | 3 | % | |||||||||||
PetSmart - pet supply | 39 | 753 | 11,319 | 15.03 | 3 | % | |||||||||||
LA Fitness - entertainment and recreation | 11 | 502 | 9,110 | 18.15 | 2 | % | |||||||||||
Dick's Sporting Goods - sporting goods | 17 | 774 | 8,856 | 11.44 | 2 | % | |||||||||||
Other | 1,193 | 15,755 | 236,961 | 15.04 | 64 | % | |||||||||||
1,599 | 26,211 | $ | 373,133 | $ | 14.24 | 100 | % | ||||||||||
____________________________________
(1) | Includes leases which are master lease agreements. |
(2) | Includes square feet of the buildings on land parcels subject to ground leases. |
The following table shows the tenant industry diversification of our real estate portfolio, based on annualized rental income, as of December 31, 2017:
2017 | 2017 | Percentage of | |||||||||||||||
Total | Leased | Annualized | Annualized | 2017 | |||||||||||||
Number | Square Feet | Rental Income | Rental Income | Annualized | |||||||||||||
Industry | of Leases (1) | (in thousands) (2) | (in thousands) | per Square Foot (2) | Rental Income | ||||||||||||
Discount store | 297 | 5,268 | $ | 54,151 | $ | 10.28 | 15 | % | |||||||||
Pharmacy | 112 | 1,526 | 36,011 | 23.60 | 10 | % | |||||||||||
Sporting goods | 38 | 3,581 | 32,277 | 9.01 | 9 | % | |||||||||||
Home and garden | 58 | 3,341 | 31,716 | 9.49 | 8 | % | |||||||||||
Gas and convenience | 36 | 287 | 27,246 | 94.93 | 7 | % | |||||||||||
Grocery | 55 | 2,123 | 26,831 | 12.64 | 7 | % | |||||||||||
Restaurants - casual dining | 123 | 632 | 18,621 | 29.46 | 5 | % | |||||||||||
Pet supply | 55 | 963 | 14,669 | 15.23 | 4 | % | |||||||||||
Entertainment and recreation | 28 | 739 | 14,182 | 19.19 | 4 | % | |||||||||||
Apparel and jewelry | 99 | 838 | 13,422 | 16.02 | 4 | % | |||||||||||
Other | 698 | 6,913 | 104,007 | 15.05 | 27 | % | |||||||||||
1,599 | 26,211 | $ | 373,133 | $ | 14.24 | 100 | % | ||||||||||
____________________________________
(1) | Includes leases which are master lease agreements. |
(2) | Includes square feet of the buildings on land parcels subject to ground leases. |
58
The following table shows the geographic diversification of our real estate portfolio, based on annualized rental income, as of December 31, 2017:
2017 | 2017 | Percentage of | |||||||||||||||
Total | Rentable | Annualized | Annualized | 2017 | |||||||||||||
Number of | Square Feet | Rental Income | Rental Income | Annualized | |||||||||||||
Location | Properties | (in thousands) (1) | (in thousands) | per Square Foot (1) | Rental Income | ||||||||||||
California | 77 | 1,034 | $ | 37,084 | $ | 35.86 | 10 | % | |||||||||
Texas | 101 | 2,024 | 32,112 | 15.87 | 9 | % | |||||||||||
Georgia | 39 | 2,273 | 27,662 | 12.17 | 7 | % | |||||||||||
Ohio | 62 | 2,123 | 24,543 | 11.56 | 7 | % | |||||||||||
Florida | 59 | 1,712 | 20,679 | 12.08 | 6 | % | |||||||||||
Alabama | 66 | 1,541 | 19,129 | 12.41 | 5 | % | |||||||||||
Illinois | 26 | 1,215 | 15,613 | 12.85 | 4 | % | |||||||||||
North Carolina | 31 | 1,182 | 14,451 | 12.23 | 4 | % | |||||||||||
New York | 12 | 372 | 13,815 | 37.14 | 4 | % | |||||||||||
Indiana | 26 | 1,045 | 13,684 | 13.09 | 4 | % | |||||||||||
Other | 410 | 12,367 | 154,361 | 12.48 | 40 | % | |||||||||||
909 | 26,888 | $ | 373,133 | $ | 13.88 | 100 | % | ||||||||||
____________________________________
(1) | Includes square feet of the buildings on land parcels subject to ground leases. |
The following table shows the property type diversification of our real estate portfolio, based on annualized rental income, as of December 31, 2017:
2017 | 2017 | Percentage of | |||||||||||||||
Total | Rentable | Annualized | Annualized | 2017 | |||||||||||||
Number of | Square Feet | Rental Income | Rental Income | Annualized | |||||||||||||
Property Type | Properties | (in thousands) (1) | (in thousands) | per Square Foot (1) | Rental Income | ||||||||||||
Retail | 831 | 14,394 | $ | 216,148 | $ | 15.02 | 58 | % | |||||||||
Anchored shopping centers | 74 | 10,841 | 148,523 | 13.70 | 40 | % | |||||||||||
Industrial and distribution | 4 | 1,653 | 8,462 | 5.12 | 2 | % | |||||||||||
909 | 26,888 | $ | 373,133 | $ | 13.88 | 100 | % | ||||||||||
____________________________________
(1) | Includes square feet of the buildings on land parcels subject to ground leases. |
Leases
Although there are variations in the specific terms of the leases of our properties, the following is a summary of the general structure of our current leases. Generally, the leases of the properties acquired provide for initial terms of ten or more years and
provide the tenant with one or more multi-year renewal options, subject to generally the same terms and conditions as the initial lease term. Certain leases also provide that in the event we wish to sell the property subject to that lease, we first must offer the lessee the right to purchase the property on the same terms and conditions as any offer which we intend to accept for the sale of the property. The properties are generally leased under net leases pursuant to which the tenant bears responsibility for substantially all property costs and expenses associated with ongoing maintenance and operation, including utilities, property taxes and insurance, while certain of the leases require us to maintain the roof, structure and parking areas of the building. Additionally, certain leases provide for increases in rent as a result of fixed increases, increases in the consumer price index, and/or increases in the tenant’s sales volume. The leases of the properties provide for annual rental payments (payable in monthly installments) ranging from $6,000 to $8.0 million (average of $207,000). Certain leases provide for limited increases in rent as a result of fixed increases or increases in the consumer price index.
59
The following table shows lease expirations of our real estate portfolio, as of December 31, 2017, during each of the next ten years and thereafter, assuming no exercise of renewal options:
2017 | |||||||||||||||||
Total | Leased | Annualized | 2017 | Percentage of | |||||||||||||
Number | Square Feet | Rental Income | Annualized | 2017 | |||||||||||||
of Leases | Expiring | Expiring | Rental Income | Annualized | |||||||||||||
Year of Lease Expiration | Expiring (1) | (in thousands) (2) | (in thousands) | per Square Foot (2) | Rental Income | ||||||||||||
2018 | 118 | 618 | $ | 8,410 | $ | 13.61 | 2 | % | |||||||||
2019 | 151 | 1,195 | 17,657 | 14.78 | 5 | % | |||||||||||
2020 | 152 | 1,061 | 16,551 | 15.60 | 5 | % | |||||||||||
2021 | 134 | 1,118 | 16,655 | 14.90 | 4 | % | |||||||||||
2022 | 131 | 1,624 | 19,300 | 11.88 | 5 | % | |||||||||||
2023 | 135 | 2,521 | 33,870 | 13.44 | 9 | % | |||||||||||
2024 | 92 | 1,964 | 26,655 | 13.57 | 7 | % | |||||||||||
2025 | 64 | 1,891 | 21,688 | 11.47 | 6 | % | |||||||||||
2026 | 76 | 1,301 | 19,272 | 14.81 | 5 | % | |||||||||||
2027 | 86 | 1,743 | 19,556 | 11.22 | 5 | % | |||||||||||
Thereafter | 460 | 11,175 | 173,519 | 15.53 | 47 | % | |||||||||||
1,599 | 26,211 | $ | 373,133 | $ | 14.24 | 100 | % | ||||||||||
____________________________________
(1) | Includes leases which are master lease agreements. |
(2) | Includes square feet of the buildings on land parcels subject to ground leases. |
The following table shows the economic metrics of our real estate assets as of and for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015:
2017 | 2016 | 2015 | ||||
Economic Metrics | ||||||
Weighted-average lease term (in years) (1) | 9.6 | 9.9 | 10.9 | |||
Lease rollover (1)(2): | ||||||
Annual average | 4.2% | 4.0% | 3.2% | |||
Maximum for a single year | 5.2% | 5.3% | 4.8% | |||
____________________________________
(1) | Based on annualized rental income of our real estate portfolio as of December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015. |
(2) | Through the end of the next five years as of the respective reporting date. |
Results of Operations
The following table provides summary information about our results of operations for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015 (dollars in thousands):
60
Year Ended December 31, | 2017 vs. 2016 Increase (Decrease) | 2016 vs. 2015 Increase (Decrease) | ||||||||||||||||||
2017 | 2016 | 2015 | ||||||||||||||||||
Total revenues | $ | 424,095 | $ | 407,451 | $ | 367,731 | $ | 16,644 | $ | 39,720 | ||||||||||
General and administrative expenses | $ | 13,716 | $ | 12,502 | $ | 13,652 | $ | 1,214 | $ | (1,150 | ) | |||||||||
Property operating expenses | $ | 29,777 | $ | 23,176 | $ | 20,890 | $ | 6,601 | $ | 2,286 | ||||||||||
Real estate tax expenses | $ | 37,489 | $ | 35,063 | $ | 33,571 | $ | 2,426 | $ | 1,492 | ||||||||||
Advisory fees and expenses | $ | 44,072 | $ | 41,926 | $ | 36,225 | $ | 2,146 | $ | 5,701 | ||||||||||
Acquisition-related expenses | $ | 1,599 | $ | 4,191 | $ | 15,526 | $ | (2,592 | ) | $ | (11,335 | ) | ||||||||
Depreciation and amortization | $ | 141,392 | $ | 134,672 | $ | 122,227 | $ | 6,720 | $ | 12,445 | ||||||||||
Impairment | $ | 2,855 | $ | 6,737 | $ | 1,440 | $ | (3,882 | ) | $ | 5,297 | |||||||||
Operating income | $ | 153,195 | $ | 149,184 | $ | 124,200 | $ | 4,011 | $ | 24,984 | ||||||||||
Interest expense and other, net | $ | 90,688 | $ | 79,465 | $ | 59,199 | $ | 11,223 | $ | 20,266 | ||||||||||
Gain (loss) on disposition of real estate, net | $ | 17,044 | $ | 2,907 | $ | (108 | ) | $ | 14,137 | $ | 3,015 | |||||||||
Net income attributable to the Company | $ | 79,420 | $ | 71,842 | $ | 64,771 | $ | 7,578 | $ | 7,071 | ||||||||||
Revenue
Our revenues consist primarily of rental and other property income from net leased commercial properties. We also incur certain operating expenses that are subject to reimbursement by our tenants, which results in tenant reimbursement income.
2017 vs 2016 – The increase in revenue of $16.6 million during the year ended December 31, 2017, as compared to the same period in 2016, was primarily due to the acquisition of 42 rental income-producing properties subsequent to December 31, 2016 as well as recognizing a full year of revenue on 15 properties acquired in 2016. Rental income from net leased commercial properties accounted for 88% of total revenue for the year ended December 31, 2017, compared to 87% for the year ended December 31, 2016. We also incurred certain operating expenses subject to reimbursement by our tenants, which resulted in $52.2 million of tenant reimbursement income during the year ended December 31, 2017, compared to $51.3 million during the year ended December 31, 2016.
2016 vs 2015 – The increase in revenue of $39.7 million during the year ended December 31, 2016, as compared to the same period in 2015, was primarily due to the acquisition of 15 rental income-producing properties subsequent to December 31, 2015 as well as recognizing a full year of revenue on 111 properties acquired in 2015. Rental income from net leased commercial properties accounted for 87% of total revenue for each of the years ended December 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015. We also incurred certain operating expenses subject to reimbursement by our tenants, which resulted in $51.3 million of tenant reimbursement income during the year ended December 31, 2016, compared to $46.3 million during the year ended December 31, 2015.
General and Administrative Expenses
The primary general and administrative expense items are operating expense reimbursements to our advisor, escrow and trustee fees, state franchise and income taxes, office expenses and accounting fees.
2017 vs 2016 – The increase in general and administrative expenses of $1.2 million during the year ended December 31, 2017, as compared to the same period in 2016, was primarily due to increases in operating expense reimbursements to our advisor, as well as increases in state franchise and income taxes during the year ended December 31, 2017, primarily as a result of the acquisition of 42 rental income-producing properties subsequent to December 31, 2016 as well as recognizing a full year of general and administrative expenses on 15 properties acquired in 2016.
2016 vs 2015 – The decrease in general and administrative expenses of $1.2 million during the year ended December 31, 2016, as compared to the same period in 2015, was primarily due to decreases in state franchise and income taxes as a result of favorable tax planning strategies and lower franchise taxes due to a lower net book value on existing properties, as well as decreases in operating expense reimbursements to our advisor and lower professional fees incurred during the year ended December 31, 2016.
Property Operating Expenses
Property operating expenses such as property repairs, maintenance and property-related insurance include both reimbursable and non-reimbursable property expenses. We are reimbursed by tenants for certain property operating expenses in accordance with the respective lease agreements.
61
2017 vs 2016 – The increase in property operating expenses of $6.6 million during the year ended December 31, 2017, as compared to the same period in 2016, was primarily due to the acquisition of 42 rental income-producing properties subsequent to December 31, 2016 as well as recognizing a full year of property operating expenses on 15 properties acquired in 2016.
2016 vs 2015 – The increase in property operating expenses of $2.3 million during the year ended December 31, 2016, as compared to the same period in 2015, was primarily due to the acquisition of 15 rental income-producing properties subsequent to December 31, 2015 as well as recognizing a full year of property operating expenses on 111 properties acquired in 2015.
Real Estate Tax Expenses
2017 vs 2016 – The increase in real estate tax expenses of $2.4 million during the year ended December 31, 2017, as compared to the same period in 2016, was primarily due to the acquisition of 42 rental income-producing properties during the year ended December 31, 2017, as well as recognizing a full year of real estate tax expense on 15 properties acquired in 2016.
2016 vs 2015 – The increase in real estate tax expenses of $1.5 million during the year ended December 31, 2016, as compared to the same period in 2015, was primarily due to the acquisition of 15 rental income-producing properties during the year ended December 31, 2016, as well as recognizing a full year of real estate tax expense on 111 properties acquired in 2015.
Advisory Fees and Expenses
Pursuant to the advisory agreement with CR IV Advisors and based upon the amount of our current invested assets, we are required to pay to CR IV Advisors a monthly advisory fee equal to one-twelfth of 0.75% of the average invested assets up to $2.0 billion, one-twelfth of 0.70% of the average invested assets over $2.0 billion up to $4.0 billion and one-twelfth of 0.65% of assets over $4.0 billion. Additionally, we may be required to reimburse certain expenses incurred by CR IV Advisors in providing such advisory services, subject to limitations as set forth in the advisory agreement.
2017 vs 2016 – The increase in advisory fees and expenses of $2.1 million during the year ended December 31, 2017, as compared to the same period in 2016, was primarily due to an increase in our average invested assets to $5.5 billion for the year ended December 31, 2017, compared to $5.2 billion for the year ended December 31, 2016.
2016 vs 2015 – The increase in advisory fees and expenses of $5.7 million during the year ended December 31, 2016, as compared to the same period in 2015, was primarily due to an increase in our average invested assets to $5.2 billion for the year ended December 31, 2016, compared to $4.5 billion for the year ended December 31, 2015.
Acquisition-Related Expenses
We reimburse CR IV Advisors or its affiliates for acquisition-related expenses incurred in the process of acquiring a property or the origination or acquisition of a loan, so long as the total acquisition fees and expenses relating to the transaction do not exceed 6.0% of the contract purchase price, unless otherwise approved by a majority of our board of directors, including a majority of our independent directors, as commercially competitive, fair and reasonable to us. In April 2017, we early adopted ASU 2017-01, which clarifies the definition of a business by adding guidance to assist entities in evaluating whether transactions should be accounted for as acquisitions (or disposals) of assets or businesses. Beginning in April 2017, our acquisitions qualify as asset acquisitions, and as such, acquisition-related fees and certain acquisition-related expenses related to these asset acquisitions are capitalized. Prior to the adoption of ASU 2017-01 in April 2017, costs related to property acquisitions, including acquisition fees described below, were expensed as incurred, and all of our acquisitions were accounted for as business combinations. Prior to April 2017, acquisition-related expenses primarily consisted of legal, deed transfer and other costs related to real estate purchase transactions, including costs incurred for deals that were not consummated. We also pay CR IV Advisors or its affiliates acquisition fees of up to 2.0% of: (1) the contract purchase price of each property or asset we acquire; (2) the amount paid in respect of the development, construction or improvement of each asset we acquire; (3) the purchase price of any loan we acquire; and (4) the principal amount of any loan we originate.
2017 vs 2016 – The decrease in acquisition-related expenses of $2.6 million during the year ended December 31, 2017, as compared to the same period in 2016, was primarily due to the acquisition of four commercial properties prior to the adoption of ASU 2017-01, for an aggregate purchase price of $55.4 million during the year ended December 31, 2017, compared to the acquisition of 15 commercial properties for an aggregate purchase price of $216.7 million during the year ended December 31, 2016. During the year ended December 31, 2016, acquisition-related costs related to property acquisitions were expensed as incurred.
2016 vs 2015 – The decrease in acquisition-related expenses of $11.3 million during the year ended December 31, 2016, as compared to the same period in 2015, was primarily due to the acquisition of 15 commercial properties for an aggregate purchase price of $216.7 million during the year ended December 31, 2016, compared to the acquisition of 111 commercial properties for an aggregate purchase price of $615.8 million during the year ended December 31, 2015.
62
Depreciation and Amortization
2017 vs 2016 – The increase in depreciation and amortization expenses of $6.7 million during the year ended December 31, 2017, as compared to the same period in 2016, was primarily due to the acquisition of 42 additional rental income-producing properties subsequent to December 31, 2016 as well as recognizing a full year of depreciation and amortization expenses on 15 properties acquired in 2016.
2016 vs 2015 – The increase in depreciation and amortization expenses of $12.4 million during the year ended December 31, 2016, as compared to the same period in 2015, was primarily due to the acquisition of 15 additional rental income-producing properties subsequent to December 31, 2015 as well as recognizing a full year of depreciation and amortization expenses on 111 properties acquired in 2015.
Impairment
2017 vs 2016 — The decrease in impairments of $3.8 million during the year ended December 31, 2017, as compared to the same period in 2016, was due to four properties that were deemed to be impaired, resulting in impairment charges of $2.9 million during the year ended December 31, 2017, compared to three properties that were deemed to be impaired, resulting in impairment charges of $6.7 million during the year ended December 31, 2016.
2016 vs 2015 — The increase in impairments of $5.3 million during the year ended December 31, 2016, as compared to the same period in 2015, was due to three properties that were deemed to be impaired, resulting in impairment charges of $6.7 million during the year ended December 31, 2016, compared to one property that was deemed to be impaired, resulting in impairment charges of $1.4 million during the year ended December 31, 2015.
Interest Expense and Other, Net
Interest expense and other, net also includes amortization of deferred financing costs.
2017 vs 2016 – The increase in interest expense and other, net of $11.2 million during the year ended December 31, 2017, as compared to the same period in 2016, was primarily due to an increase in the average aggregate amount of debt outstanding from $2.2 billion during the year ended December 31, 2016 to $2.4 billion during the year ended December 31, 2017.
2016 vs 2015 – The increase in interest expense and other, net of $20.3 million during the year ended December 31, 2016, as compared to the same period in 2015, was primarily due to an increase in the average aggregate amount of debt outstanding from $1.8 billion during the year ended December 31, 2015 to $2.2 billion during the year ended December 31, 2016.
Gain (Loss) on Disposition of Real Estate, Net
2017 vs 2016 – The increase in gain (loss) on disposition real estate, net of $14.1 million during the year ended December 31, 2017, as compared to the same period in 2016 was due to the disposition of 15 properties for a gain of $17.0 million during the year ended December 31, 2017 compared to the the disposition of five properties for a gain of $2.9 million during the year ended December 31, 2016.
2016 vs 2015 – The increase in gain (loss) on disposition real estate, net of $3.0 million during the year ended December 31, 2016, as compared to the same period in 2015 was due to the disposition of five properties for a gain of $2.9 million during the year ended December 31, 2016 compared to the the disposition of one undeveloped land parcel for a loss of $108,000 during the year ended December 31, 2015.
Same Store Properties
We review our stabilized operating results, measured by contract rental revenue, from properties that we owned for the entirety of both the current and prior year reporting periods, referred to as “same store” properties. Contract rental revenue is a supplemental non-GAAP financial measure of real estate companies’ operating performance. Contract rental revenue is considered by management to be a helpful supplemental performance measure, as it provides a consistent method for the comparison of our properties. In determining the same store property pool, we include all properties that were owned for the entirety of both the current and prior reporting periods, except for properties during the current or prior year that were under development or redevelopment.
“Non-same store” properties, as reflected in the table below, includes properties acquired on or after January 1, 2016 and any properties under development or redevelopment. As shown in the table below, contract rental revenue on the 850 same store properties for the year ended December 31, 2017 decreased approximately $2.6 million to $324.8 million, compared to $327.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2016. Tenant bankruptcies at 14 same store properties accounted for $2.6
63
million of the net decrease in contract rental revenue for the year ended December 31, 2017. The same store properties were 97.4% occupied as of December 31, 2017 and 98.2% occupied as of December 31, 2016. The following table shows the contract rental revenue from properties owned for both of the entire years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016, along with a reconciliation to rental income, calculated in accordance with GAAP (dollar amounts in thousands):
Number of Properties | Year Ended December 31, | Increase (Decrease) | ||||||||||||||||
2017 | 2016 | $ Change | % Change | |||||||||||||||
Rental income – as reported | $ | 371,929 | $ | 356,126 | $ | 15,803 | 4 | % | ||||||||||
Less: Amortization (1) | 2,138 | 1,123 | 1,015 | 90 | % | |||||||||||||
Less: Straight-line rental income | 10,082 | 11,555 | (1,473 | ) | (13 | )% | ||||||||||||
Total contract rental revenue | 359,709 | 343,448 | 16,261 | 5 | % | |||||||||||||
Less: “Non-same store” properties | 44 | 31,257 | 9,116 | 22,141 | 243 | % | ||||||||||||
Less: Disposed properties (2) | 15 | 3,685 | 6,951 | (3,266 | ) | (47 | )% | |||||||||||
“Same store” properties | 850 | $ | 324,767 | $ | 327,381 | $ | (2,614 | ) | (0.8 | )% | ||||||||
____________________________________
(1) Includes amortization of above- and below-market lease intangibles and deferred lease incentives.
(2) We disposed of 15 properties during the year ended December 31, 2017.
“Non-same store” properties, as reflected in the table below, includes properties acquired on or after January 1, 2015 and any properties under development or redevelopment. As shown in the table below, contract rental revenue on the 753 same store properties for the year ended December 31, 2016 increased approximately $658,000 to $282.5 million, compared to $281.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2015. The same store properties were 97.9% occupied as of December 31, 2016 and 97.8% occupied as of December 31, 2015. The following table shows the contract rental revenue from properties owned for both of the entire years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015, along with a reconciliation to rental income, calculated in accordance with GAAP (dollar amounts in thousands):
Number of Properties | Year Ended December 31, | Increase (Decrease) | ||||||||||||||||
2016 | 2015 | $ Change | % Change | |||||||||||||||
Rental income – as reported | $ | 356,126 | $ | 321,425 | $ | 34,701 | 11 | % | ||||||||||
Less: Amortization (1) | 1,123 | 1,098 | 25 | 2 | % | |||||||||||||
Less: Straight-line rental income | 11,555 | 11,776 | (221 | ) | (2 | )% | ||||||||||||
Total contract rental revenue | 343,448 | 308,551 | 34,897 | 11 | % | |||||||||||||
Less: “Non-same store” properties | 129 | 59,700 | 24,634 | 35,066 | 142 | % | ||||||||||||
Less: Disposed properties (2) | 5 | 1,287 | 2,114 | (827 | ) | (39 | )% | |||||||||||
“Same store” properties | 753 | $ | 282,461 | $ | 281,803 | $ | 658 | 0.2 | % | |||||||||
____________________________________
(1) Includes amortization of above- and below-market lease intangibles and deferred lease incentives.
(2) We disposed of five properties during the year ended December 31, 2016.
Distributions
Our board of directors authorized a daily distribution, based on 365 days in the calendar year, of $0.001711452 per share for stockholders of record as of the close of business on each day of the period commencing on January 1, 2017 and ending on June 30, 2018. As of December 31, 2017, we had distributions payable of $16.5 million.
During the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016, we paid distributions of $194.7 million and $194.9 million, respectively, including $101.3 million and $109.2 million, respectively, through the issuance of shares pursuant to the DRIP Offerings. Net cash provided by operating activities for the year ended December 31, 2017 was $198.9 million and reflected a reduction for real estate acquisition-related expenses incurred of $1.6 million in accordance with GAAP. For the year ended December 31, 2016, net cash provided by operating activities was $192.3 million and reflected a reduction for real estate acquisition-related expenses incurred of $4.2 million in accordance with GAAP. Our distributions paid during the year ended December 31, 2017, including shares issued pursuant to the DRIP Offerings, were fully funded by net cash provided by operating activities. Our 2016 distributions were funded by net cash provided by operating activities of $192.3 million, or 99%, and proceeds from the issuance of notes payable of $2.6 million, or 1%.
64
Share Redemptions
Our share redemption program permits our stockholders to sell their shares of common stock back to us, subject to certain conditions and limitations. We will not redeem in excess of 5.0% of the weighted average number of shares outstanding during the trailing 12 months prior to the end of the fiscal quarter for which the redemptions are being paid. Funding for the redemption of shares will be limited to the cumulative net proceeds we receive from the sale of shares under the Secondary DRIP Offering, net of shares redeemed to date. In addition, we will generally limit quarterly redemptions to approximately 1.25% of the weighted average number of shares outstanding during the trailing 12-month period ending on the last day of the fiscal quarter for which the redemptions are being paid, and to the net proceeds we receive from the sale of shares in the respective quarter under the Secondary DRIP Offering. Any of the foregoing limits might prevent us from accommodating all redemption requests made in any fiscal quarter or in any 12-month period. We received redemption requests of approximately 11.1 million shares for $111.9 million in excess of the net proceeds we received from the issuance of shares under the Secondary DRIP Offering during the three months ended December 31, 2017. Management, in its discretion, limited the amount of shares redeemed for the three months ended December 31, 2017 to an amount equal to net proceeds we received from the sale of shares pursuant to the Secondary DRIP Offering during the respective period. During the year ended December 31, 2017, we received valid redemption requests under our share redemption program totaling approximately 44.2 million shares, of which we redeemed approximately 7.6 million shares as of December 31, 2017 for $76.6 million (at an average redemption price of $10.08 per share) and approximately 2.4 million shares subsequent to December 31, 2017 for $24.3 million at an average redemption price of $10.08 per share. The remaining redemption requests relating to approximately 34.2 million shares went unfulfilled. During the year ended December 31, 2016, we received valid redemption requests under our share redemption program totaling approximately 14.9 million shares, of which we redeemed approximately 8.6 million shares as of December 31, 2016 for $83.1 million (at an average redemption price of $9.62 per share) and approximately 2.7 million shares subsequent to December 31, 2016 for $27.1 million (at an average redemption price of $9.91 per share). The remaining redemption requests relating to approximately 3.6 million shares went unfulfilled. A valid redemption request is one that complies with the applicable requirements and guidelines of our current share redemption program. The share redemptions were funded with proceeds from the DRIP Offerings.
See the discussion of our share redemption program in Part II, Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities — Share Redemption Program in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
General
We expect to utilize funds from cash flow from operations and future proceeds from secured or unsecured financing to complete future property acquisitions and for general corporate uses. The sources of our operating cash flows will primarily be provided by the rental income received from current and future leased properties.
As of December 31, 2017, we had an unsecured credit facility with JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as administrative agent (the “Credit Facility”) that provided for borrowings of up to $1.40 billion, which includes a $1.05 billion unsecured term loan (the “Term Loan”) and up to $350.0 million in unsecured revolving loans (the “Revolving Loans”). As of December 31, 2017, we had $148.4 million in unused capacity under the Credit Facility, subject to borrowing availability. As of December 31, 2017, we also had cash and cash equivalents of $4.7 million.
Short-term Liquidity and Capital Resources
On a short-term basis, our principal demands for funds will be for the acquisition of real estate and real estate-related assets and the payment of acquisition-related fees and expenses, operating expenses, distributions, redemptions and interest and principal on current and any future debt financings, including principal repayments of $24.2 million within the next 12 months. We expect to meet our short-term liquidity requirements through net cash provided by operations and proceeds from the Secondary DRIP Offering, as well as secured or unsecured borrowings from banks and other lenders to finance our future acquisitions. Operating cash flows are expected to increase as additional properties are added to our portfolio. With respect to our debt maturing within the next year, we expect to use borrowings available under the Credit Facility or to enter into new financing arrangements in order to meet our debt obligations. We believe that the resources stated above will be sufficient to satisfy our operating requirements for the foreseeable future, and we do not anticipate a need to raise funds from sources other than those described above within the next 12 months.
65
Long-term Liquidity and Capital Resources
On a long-term basis, our principal demands for funds will be for the acquisition of real estate and real estate-related assets and the payment of tenant improvements, acquisition-related fees and expenses, operating expenses, distributions and redemptions to stockholders and interest and principal on any current and future indebtedness. Generally, we expect to meet our long-term liquidity requirements through proceeds from cash flow from operations, borrowings on the Credit Facility, proceeds from secured or unsecured borrowings from banks and other lenders, and proceeds raised pursuant to the Secondary DRIP Offering.
We expect that substantially all net cash flows from operations will be used to pay distributions to our stockholders after certain capital expenditures, including tenant improvements and leasing commissions, are paid; however, we have used, and may continue to use, other sources to fund distributions, as necessary, including borrowings on the Credit Facility and/or future borrowings on our unencumbered assets. To the extent that cash flows from operations are lower due to fewer properties being acquired or lower than expected returns on the properties, distributions paid to our stockholders may be lower. We expect that substantially all net cash flows from the Offerings or debt financings will be used to fund acquisitions, certain capital expenditures, repayments of outstanding debt or distributions and redemptions to our stockholders.
Contractual Obligations
As of December 31, 2017, we had $2.5 billion of debt outstanding with a weighted average interest rate of 3.6%. See Note 7 — Notes Payable and Credit Facility to our consolidated financial statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for certain terms of our debt outstanding.
Our contractual obligations as of December 31, 2017 were as follows (in thousands):
Payments due by period (1) | ||||||||||||||||||||
Total | Less Than 1 Year | 1-3 Years | 3-5 Years | More Than 5 Years | ||||||||||||||||
Principal payments — fixed rate debt (2) | $ | 1,217,377 | $ | 24,211 | $ | 362,514 | $ | 143,067 | $ | 687,585 | ||||||||||
Interest payments — fixed rate debt (3) | 216,157 | 47,389 | 85,009 | 60,463 | 23,296 | |||||||||||||||
Principal payments — variable rate debt | 20,500 | — | 20,500 | — | — | |||||||||||||||
Interest payments — variable rate debt (4) | 2,030 | 940 | 1,090 | — | — | |||||||||||||||
Principal payments — credit facility | 1,251,000 | — | — | 1,251,000 | — | |||||||||||||||
Interest payments — credit facility (5) | 163,457 | 40,360 | 81,054 | 42,043 | — | |||||||||||||||
Total | $ | 2,870,521 | $ | 112,900 | $ | 550,167 | $ | 1,496,573 | $ | 710,881 | ||||||||||
____________________________________
(1) | The table does not include amounts due to CR IV Advisors or its affiliates pursuant to our advisory agreement because such amounts are not fixed and determinable. |
(2) | Principal payment amounts reflect actual payments based on the face amount of notes payable secured by our wholly-owned properties, which excludes the fair value adjustment, net of amortization, of mortgage notes assumed of $419,000 as of December 31, 2017. |
(3) | As of December 31, 2017, we had $217.1 million of variable rate debt effectively fixed through the use of interest rate swap agreements. We used the effective interest rates fixed under our interest rate swap agreements to calculate the debt payment obligations in future periods. |
(4) | As of December 31, 2017, we had variable rate debt outstanding of $20.5 million with a weighted average interest rate of 4.6%. We used the weighted average interest rate to calculate the debt payment obligations in future periods. |
(5) | As of December 31, 2017, the Term Loan outstanding totaled $1.05 billion, $811.7 million of which is subject to interest rate swap agreements. As of December 31, 2017, the weighted average all-in interest rate for the Swapped Term Loan was 3.2%. The remaining $439.3 million outstanding under the Credit Facility had a weighted average interest rate of 3.3% as of December 31, 2017. |
We expect to incur additional borrowings in the future to acquire additional properties and other real estate-related assets. There is no limitation on the amount we may borrow against any single improved property. Our borrowings will not exceed 75% of the cost of our gross assets (or 300% of net assets) as of the date of any borrowing, which is the maximum level of indebtedness permitted under the NASAA REIT Guidelines; however, we may exceed that limit if approved by a majority of our independent directors and disclosed to our stockholders in the next quarterly report along with justification for such excess borrowing. Our board of directors has adopted a policy to further limit our borrowings to 60% of the greater of cost (before deducting depreciation or other non-cash reserves) or fair market value of our gross assets, unless excess borrowing is approved
66
by a majority of our independent directors and disclosed to our stockholders in the next quarterly report along with the justification for such excess borrowing. Our advisor has set a target leverage ratio of 40% to 50% of the greater of cost (before deducting depreciation or other non-cash reserves) or fair market value of our gross assets. Fair market value is based on the estimated market value of our real estate assets as of December 31, 2016 used to determine our estimated per share NAV, and for those assets acquired from January 1, 2017 through December 31, 2017, is based on the purchase price. As of December 31, 2017, our ratio of debt to the cost (before deducting depreciation or other non-cash reserves) of our gross assets was 49.0%, and our ratio of debt to the fair market value of our gross assets was 44.3%.
Our management reviews net debt as part of its management of our overall liquidity, financial flexibility, capital structure and leverage, and we therefore believe that the presentation of net debt provides useful information to stockholders. Net debt is a non-GAAP measure used to show our outstanding principal debt balance, excluding certain GAAP adjustments, such as premiums or discounts, financing and issuance costs, and related accumulated amortization, less all cash and cash equivalents. As of December 31, 2017, our net debt leverage ratio, which is the ratio of net debt to total gross real estate assets net of gross intangible lease liabilities, was 48.9%. The following table provides a reconciliation of the notes payable and credit facility, net balance, as reported on our consolidated balance sheet, to net debt as of December 31, 2017 (dollar amounts in thousands):
Balance as of December 31, 2017 | ||||
Notes payable and credit facility, net | $ | 2,471,763 | ||
Deferred costs and net premiums (1) | 17,114 | |||
Less: Cash and cash equivalents | (4,745 | ) | ||
Net debt | $ | 2,484,132 | ||
Gross real estate assets, net (2) | $ | 5,077,620 | ||
Net debt leverage ratio | 48.9 | % | ||
______________________
(1) Deferred costs relate to mortgage notes payable and the term portion of the Credit Facility.
(2) Net of gross intangible lease liabilities.
Cash Flow Analysis
Year Ended December 31, 2017 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2016
Operating Activities. During the year ended December 31, 2017, net cash provided by operating activities increased by $6.6 million to $198.9 million compared to net cash provided by operating activities of $192.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2016. The change was primarily due to the acquisition of 42 properties subsequent to December 31, 2016, resulting in an increase in net income after non-cash adjustments for depreciation and amortization, net, of $13.3 million. Additionally, net cash provided by operating activities increased due to a net increase in working capital accounts of $6.3 million, offset by an increase in gain on dispositions of real estate assets, net, of $14.1 million. See “— Results of Operations” for a more complete discussion of the factors impacting our operating performance.
Investing Activities. Net cash used in investing activities increased by $35.7 million to $223.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2017, compared to $187.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2016. The increase was primarily due to the acquisition of 42 commercial properties for an aggregate purchase price of $307.4 million during the year ended December 31, 2017, compared to 15 commercial properties for an aggregate purchase price of $216.7 million during the year ended December 31, 2016. Additionally, net cash used in investing activities increased due to a net increase in capital expenditures of $10.5 million, offset by the disposal of 15 properties for an aggregate gross sales price of $100.6 million during the year ended December 31, 2017, compared to the disposal of five properties for an aggregate gross sales price of $31.6 million during the year ended December 31, 2016.
Financing Activities. Net cash provided by financing activities was $20.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2017, compared to net cash used in financing activities of $21.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2016. The increase of net cash provided by financing activities of $41.8 million was primarily due to a increase in net proceeds from the borrowing facilities and notes payable of $51.1 million, offset by an increase in deferred financing costs paid of $9.9 million.
Year Ended December 31, 2016 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2015
Operating Activities. During the year ended December 31, 2016, net cash provided by operating activities increased by $9.4 million to $192.3 million compared to net cash provided by operating activities of $182.9 million for the year ended
67
December 31, 2015. The change was primarily due to an increase in adjustments in depreciation and amortization of $13.7 million, and an increase in net income of $7.1 million, partially offset by a decrease in net working capital accounts of $13.1 million. See “— Results of Operations” for a more complete discussion of the factors impacting our operating performance.
Investing Activities. Net cash used in investing activities decreased by $485.3 million to $187.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2016, compared to $673.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2015. The decrease was primarily due to the acquisition of 15 commercial properties for an aggregate purchase price of $216.7 million during the year ended December 31, 2016, compared to 111 commercial properties for an aggregate purchase price of $615.8 million during the year ended December 31, 2015, in addition to $66.1 million invested in a development project during the year ended December 31, 2015. In addition, proceeds from the disposition of real estate assets increased by $29.8 million during the year ended December 31, 2016, compared to the year ended December 31, 2015.
Financing Activities. Net cash used in financing activities was $21.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2016, compared to net cash provided by financing activities of $464.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2015. The decrease of net cash provided by financing activities of $486.2 million was primarily due to a decrease in net proceeds from the borrowing facilities and notes payable of $417.0 million. In addition, share redemptions increased by $66.5 million during the year ended December 31, 2016, compared to the year ended December 31, 2015.
Election as a REIT
We elected to be taxed, and currently qualify, as a REIT for federal income tax purposes commencing with our taxable year ended December 31, 2012. To maintain our qualification as a REIT, we must continue to meet certain requirements relating to our organization, sources of income, nature of assets, distributions of income to our stockholders and recordkeeping. As a REIT, we generally are not subject to federal income tax on taxable income that we distribute to our stockholders so long as we distribute at least 90% of our annual taxable income (computed without regard to the dividends paid deduction and excluding net capital gains).
If we fail to maintain our qualification as a REIT for any reason in a taxable year and applicable relief provisions do not apply, we will be subject to tax on our taxable income at regular corporate rates. We will not be able to deduct distributions paid to our stockholders in any year in which we fail to maintain our qualification as a REIT. We also will be disqualified for the four taxable years following the year during which qualification was lost, unless we are entitled to relief under specific statutory provisions. Such an event could materially adversely affect our net income and net cash available for distribution to stockholders. However, we believe that we are organized and operate in such a manner as to maintain our qualification as a REIT for federal income tax purposes. No provision for federal income taxes has been made in our accompanying consolidated financial statements. We are subject to certain state and local taxes related to the operations of properties in certain locations, which have been provided for in our accompanying consolidated financial statements.
Inflation
We are exposed to inflation risk as income from long-term leases is the primary source of our cash flows from operations. There are, and we expect that there will continue to be, provisions in many of our tenant leases that are intended to protect us from, and mitigate the risk of, the impact of inflation. These provisions include rent steps and clauses enabling us to receive payment of additional rent calculated as a percentage of the tenant’s gross sales above pre-determined thresholds. In addition, most of our leases require the tenant to pay all or a majority of the property’s operating expenses, including real estate taxes, special assessments and sales and use taxes, utilities, insurance and building repairs. However, because of the long-term nature of leases for real property, such leases may not reset frequently enough to adequately offset the effects of inflation.
Related-Party Transactions and Agreements
We have entered into agreements with CR IV Advisors or its affiliates whereby we agree to pay certain fees to, or reimburse certain expenses of, CR IV Advisors or its affiliates such as acquisition and advisory fees and expenses, organization and offering costs, leasing fees and reimbursement of certain operating costs. See Note 11— Related-Party Transactions and Arrangements to our consolidated financial statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for a discussion of the various related-party transactions, agreements and fees.
68
Conflicts of Interest
Richard S. Ressler, our chief executive officer, president and one of our directors, who is also a founder and principal of CIM and certain of its affiliates as well as a director of CCIT III and Cole Income NAV Strategy, and Nathan D. DeBacker, our chief financial officer and treasurer, act as executive officers and/or a director of one or more other programs sponsored by CCO Group. One of our directors, W. Brian Kretzmer, also serves as a director of CCIT III and Cole Income NAV Strategy. In addition, affiliates of CR IV Advisors act as an advisor to, and our chief financial officer and one of our directors act as executive officers and/or a director of, CCPT V, CCIT II, CCIT III, Cole Income NAV Strategy, and/or other real estate offerings in registration, all of which are or intend to be public, non-listed REITs offered, distributed and/or managed by affiliates of CR IV Advisors. As such, there are conflicts of interest where CR IV Advisors or its affiliates, while serving in the capacity as sponsor, general partner, officer, director, key personnel and/or advisor for CIM or another real estate program sponsored or operated by CCO Group, including other real estate offerings in registration, may be in conflict with us in connection with providing services to other real estate-related programs related to property acquisitions, property dispositions, and property management, among others. The compensation arrangements between affiliates of CR IV Advisors and CIM and these other real estate programs sponsored or operated by CCO Group could influence the advice provided to us. See Part I, Item 1. Business — Conflicts of Interest of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
As of December 31, 2017 and 2016, we had no material off-balance sheet arrangements that had or are reasonably likely to have a current or future effect on our financial condition, results of operations, liquidity or capital resources.
ITEM 7A. | QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK |
Market Risk
The market risk associated with financial instruments and derivative financial instruments is the risk of loss from adverse changes in market prices or interest rates. Our market risk arises primarily from interest rate risk relating to variable rate borrowings. To meet our short and long-term liquidity requirements, we borrow funds at a combination of fixed and variable rates. Our interest rate risk management objectives are to limit the impact of interest rate changes on earnings and cash flows and to manage our overall borrowing costs. To achieve these objectives, from time to time, we may enter into interest rate hedge contracts such as swaps, collars and treasury lock agreements in order to mitigate our interest rate risk with respect to various debt instruments. We do not intend to hold or issue these derivative contracts for trading or speculative purposes. We do not have any foreign operations and thus we are not exposed to foreign currency fluctuations.
Interest Rate Risk
As of December 31, 2017, we had variable rate debt of $459.8 million, excluding any debt subject to interest rate swap agreements, and therefore, we are exposed to interest rate changes in the London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”). As of December 31, 2017, an increase or decrease of 50 basis points in interest rates would result in an increase or decrease in interest expense of $2.3 million per year.
As of December 31, 2017, we had 12 interest rate swap agreements outstanding, which mature on various dates from June 2018 through July 2021, with an aggregate notional amount of $1.0 billion and an aggregate fair value of the net derivative asset of $7.1 million. The fair value of these interest rate swap agreements is dependent upon existing market interest rates and swap spreads. As of December 31, 2017, an increase of 50 basis points in interest rates would result in a change of $14.3 million to the fair value of the net derivative asset, resulting in a net derivative asset of $21.4 million. A decrease of 50 basis points in interest rates would result in a $14.5 million change to the fair value of the net derivative asset, resulting in a net derivative liability of $7.4 million.
As the information presented above includes only those exposures that existed as of December 31, 2017, it does not consider exposures or positions arising after that date. The information presented herein has limited predictive value. Future actual realized gains or losses with respect to interest rate fluctuations will depend on cumulative exposures, hedging strategies employed and the magnitude of the fluctuations.
These amounts were determined by considering the impact of hypothetical interest rate changes on our borrowing costs and assume no other changes in our capital structure.
Credit Risk
Concentrations of credit risk arise when a number of tenants are engaged in similar business activities, or activities in the same geographic region, or have similar economic features that would cause their ability to meet contractual obligations,
69
including those to us, to be similarly affected by changes in economic conditions. We are subject to tenant, geographic and industry concentrations. Any downturn of the economic conditions in one or more of these tenants, states or industries could result in a material reduction of our cash flows or material losses to us.
The factors considered in determining the credit risk of our tenants include, but are not limited to: payment history; credit status and change in status (credit ratings for public companies are used as a primary metric); change in tenant space needs (i.e., expansion/downsize); tenant financial performance; economic conditions in a specific geographic region; and industry specific credit considerations. We believe that the credit risk of our portfolio is reduced by the high quality of our existing tenant base, reviews of prospective tenants’ risk profiles prior to lease execution and consistent monitoring of our portfolio to identify potential problem tenants and mitigation options.
ITEM 8. | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA |
The financial statements and supplementary data filed as part of this report are set forth beginning on page F-1 in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
ITEM 9. | CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE |
There were no changes in or disagreements with our independent registered public accountants during the year ended December 31, 2017.
ITEM 9A. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
We maintain disclosure controls and procedures that are designed to provide reasonable assurance that information required to be disclosed in our reports under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the rules and forms, and that such information is accumulated and communicated to us, including our chief executive officer and chief financial officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. In designing and evaluating the disclosure controls and procedures, we recognize that no controls and procedures, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide absolute assurance of achieving the desired control objectives.
As required by Rules 13a-15(b) and 15d-15(b) of the Exchange Act, an evaluation as of December 31, 2017 was conducted under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including our chief executive officer and chief financial officer, of the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Exchange Act). Based on this evaluation, our chief executive officer and chief financial officer concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures, as of December 31, 2017, were effective at a reasonable assurance level.
Management’s Annual Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting
Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting, as such term is defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act. Internal control over financial reporting is a process to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of our financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with GAAP. Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting is not intended to provide absolute assurance that a misstatement of our financial statements would be prevented or detected.
Under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including our chief executive officer and chief financial officer, we conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting based on the framework in Internal Control — Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission.
Based on this evaluation, management has concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2017.
Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
No change occurred in our internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) of the Exchange Act) during the quarter ended December 31, 2017 that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
ITEM 9B. | OTHER INFORMATION |
None.
70
PART III
ITEM 10. | DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE |
The information required by this Item will be presented in our definitive proxy statement for our 2018 annual meeting of stockholders, which is expected to be filed with the SEC within 120 days after December 31, 2017, and is incorporated herein by reference.
ITEM 11. | EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION |
The information required by this Item will be presented in our definitive proxy statement for our 2018 annual meeting of stockholders, which is expected to be filed with the SEC within 120 days after December 31, 2017, and is incorporated herein by reference.
ITEM 12. | SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS |
The information required by this Item will be presented in our definitive proxy statement for our 2018 annual meeting of stockholders, which is expected to be filed with the SEC within 120 days after December 31, 2017, and is incorporated herein by reference.
ITEM 13. | CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE |
The information required by this Item will be presented in our definitive proxy statement for our 2018 annual meeting of stockholders, which is expected to be filed with the SEC within 120 days after December 31, 2017, and is incorporated herein by reference.
ITEM 14. | PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING FEES AND SERVICES |
The information required by this Item will be presented in our definitive proxy statement for our 2018 annual meeting of stockholders, which is expected to be filed with the SEC within 120 days after December 31, 2017, and is incorporated herein by reference.
71
PART IV
ITEM 15. | EXHIBITS AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES |
Financial Statements
The list of the consolidated financial statements contained herein is set forth on page F-1 hereof.
Financial Statement Schedules
Schedule III – Real Estate Assets and Accumulated Depreciation is set forth beginning on page S-1 hereof.
All other schedules for which provision is made in the applicable accounting regulations of the SEC are not required under the related instructions or are not applicable and therefore have been omitted.
Exhibits
The following exhibits are included, or incorporated by reference, in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017 (and are numbered in accordance with Item 601 of Regulation S-K).
Exhibit No. | Description | |
3.1 | ||
3.2 | ||
3.3 | ||
3.4 | ||
3.5 | ||
3.6 | ||
3.7 | ||
4.1 | ||
10.1 | ||
10.2 | ||
10.3 | ||
10.4 | ||
10.5 | ||
10.6 | ||
10.7 | ||
10.8 | ||
10.9 | ||
10.10 | ||
10.11 | ||
21.1* | ||
23.1* | ||
31.1* | ||
31.2* | ||
32.1** | ||
101.INS* | XBRL Instance Document. | |
101.SCH* | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document. | |
101.CAL* | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase Document. | |
101.DEF* | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Linkbase Document. | |
101.LAB* | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase Document. | |
101.PRE* | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase Document. | |
____________________________________
* | Filed herewith. |
** | In accordance with Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K, this Exhibit is not deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act or otherwise subject to the liabilities of that section. Such certifications will not be deemed incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the registrant specifically incorporates it by reference. |
ITEM 16. | FORM 10-K SUMMARY |
None.
72
SIGNATURES
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 this 30th day of March, 2018.
Cole Credit Property Trust IV, Inc. | ||
By: | /s/ NATHAN D. DEBACKER | |
Nathan D. DeBacker | ||
Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer | ||
(Principal Financial Officer) | ||
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 date indicated.
Signature | Title | Date | ||||
/s/ RICHARD S. RESSLER | Chief Executive Officer and President and Director | March 30, 2018 | ||||
Richard S. Ressler | (Principal Executive Officer) | |||||
/s/ NATHAN D. DEBACKER | Chief Financial Officer and | March 30, 2018 | ||||
Nathan D. DeBacker | Treasurer (Principal Financial Officer) | |||||
/s/ JEFFREY R. SMITH | Vice President of Accounting | March 30, 2018 | ||||
Jeffrey R. Smith | (Principal Accounting Officer) | |||||
/s/ T. PATRICK DUNCAN | Independent Director and Non-Executive Chairman of the Board of Directors | March 30, 2018 | ||||
T. Patrick Duncan | ||||||
/s/ LAWRENCE S. JONES | Independent Director | March 30, 2018 | ||||
Lawrence S. Jones | ||||||
/s/ ALICIA K. HARRISON | Independent Director | March 30, 2018 | ||||
Alicia K. Harrison | ||||||
/s/ W. BRIAN KRETZMER | Independent Director | March 30, 2018 | ||||
W. Brian Kretzmer | ||||||
73
INDEX TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Financial Statements | Page | |
F-1
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the stockholders and the Board of Directors of Cole Credit Property Trust IV, Inc.
Opinion on the Financial Statements
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Cole Credit Property Trust IV, Inc. and subsidiaries (the “Company”) as of December 31, 2017 and 2016, the related consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive income, stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2017, and the related notes and the schedule listed in the Index at Item 15 (collectively referred to as the “financial statements”). In our opinion, the financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Company as of December 31, 2017 and 2016, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2017, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
Basis for Opinion
These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s financial statements based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB) and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud. The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. As part of our audits, we are required to obtain an understanding of internal control over financial reporting 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.
Our audits included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP
Phoenix, Arizona
March 30, 2018
We have served as the Company’s auditor since 2010.
F-2
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
December 31, 2017 | December 31, 2016 | ||||||
ASSETS | |||||||
Real estate assets: | |||||||
Land | $ | 1,193,029 | $ | 1,156,417 | |||
Buildings, fixtures and improvements | 3,371,563 | 3,214,212 | |||||
Intangible lease assets | 589,930 | 553,149 | |||||
Total real estate assets, at cost | 5,154,522 | 4,923,778 | |||||
Less: accumulated depreciation and amortization | (526,976 | ) | (389,768 | ) | |||
Total real estate assets, net | 4,627,546 | 4,534,010 | |||||
Cash and cash equivalents | 4,745 | 9,754 | |||||
Restricted cash | 9,098 | 8,040 | |||||
Rents and tenant receivables, net | 71,859 | 65,446 | |||||
Due from affiliates | 56 | 58 | |||||
Derivative assets, prepaid expenses, revenue bonds and other assets | 12,351 | 5,513 | |||||
Deferred costs, net | 3,034 | 1,514 | |||||
Total assets | $ | 4,728,689 | $ | 4,624,335 | |||
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY | |||||||
Notes payable and credit facility, net | $ | 2,471,763 | $ | 2,246,259 | |||
Accounts payable and accrued expenses | 24,635 | 25,310 | |||||
Due to affiliates | 1,984 | 5,333 | |||||
Intangible lease liabilities, net | 45,572 | 49,075 | |||||
Distributions payable | 16,531 | 16,498 | |||||
Deferred rental income and other liabilities | 11,539 | 15,091 | |||||
Total liabilities | 2,572,024 | 2,357,566 | |||||
Commitments and contingencies | |||||||
Redeemable common stock and noncontrolling interest | 186,453 | 188,938 | |||||
STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY | |||||||
Preferred stock, $0.01 par value per share, 10,000,000 shares authorized, none issued and outstanding | — | — | |||||
Common stock, $0.01 par value per share; 490,000,000 shares authorized, 311,582,319 and 311,817,004 shares issued and outstanding, as of December 31, 2017 and 2016, respectively | 3,116 | 3,118 | |||||
Capital in excess of par value | 2,607,300 | 2,607,304 | |||||
Accumulated distributions in excess of earnings | (646,834 | ) | (531,567 | ) | |||
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) | 6,630 | (1,024 | ) | ||||
Total stockholders’ equity | 1,970,212 | 2,077,831 | |||||
Total liabilities, redeemable common stock, noncontrolling interest and stockholders’ equity | $ | 4,728,689 | $ | 4,624,335 | |||
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
F-3
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2017 | 2016 | 2015 | ||||||||||
Revenues: | ||||||||||||
Rental income | $ | 371,929 | $ | 356,126 | $ | 321,425 | ||||||
Tenant reimbursement income | 52,166 | 51,325 | 46,306 | |||||||||
Total revenues | 424,095 | 407,451 | 367,731 | |||||||||
Operating expenses: | ||||||||||||
General and administrative | 13,716 | 12,502 | 13,652 | |||||||||
Property operating | 29,777 | 23,176 | 20,890 | |||||||||
Real estate tax | 37,489 | 35,063 | 33,571 | |||||||||
Advisory fees and expenses | 44,072 | 41,926 | 36,225 | |||||||||
Acquisition-related | 1,599 | 4,191 | 15,526 | |||||||||
Depreciation and amortization | 141,392 | 134,672 | 122,227 | |||||||||
Impairment | 2,855 | 6,737 | 1,440 | |||||||||
Total operating expenses | 270,900 | 258,267 | 243,531 | |||||||||
Operating income | 153,195 | 149,184 | 124,200 | |||||||||
Other income (expense): | ||||||||||||
Interest expense and other, net | (90,688 | ) | (79,465 | ) | (59,199 | ) | ||||||
Loss recognized on equity interest remeasured to fair value | — | (647 | ) | — | ||||||||
Total other income (expense) | (90,688 | ) | (80,112 | ) | (59,199 | ) | ||||||
Income before real estate dispositions | 62,507 | 69,072 | 65,001 | |||||||||
Gain (loss) on disposition of real estate, net | 17,044 | 2,907 | (108 | ) | ||||||||
Net income | 79,551 | 71,979 | 64,893 | |||||||||
Net income allocated to noncontrolling interest | 131 | 137 | 122 | |||||||||
Net income attributable to the Company | $ | 79,420 | $ | 71,842 | $ | 64,771 | ||||||
Weighted average number of common shares outstanding: | ||||||||||||
Basic and diluted | 311,677,149 | 311,863,844 | 309,263,576 | |||||||||
Net income per common share: | ||||||||||||
Basic and diluted | $ | 0.25 | $ | 0.23 | $ | 0.21 | ||||||
Distributions declared per common share | $ | 0.625 | $ | 0.625 | $ | 0.625 | ||||||
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
F-4
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
(in thousands)
Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2017 | 2016 | 2015 | ||||||||||
Net income | $ | 79,551 | $ | 71,979 | $ | 64,893 | ||||||
Other comprehensive income (loss): | ||||||||||||
Unrealized gain (loss) on interest rate swaps | 4,551 | (4,422 | ) | (7,787 | ) | |||||||
Amount of loss reclassified from other comprehensive income (loss) into income as interest expense | 3,103 | 8,757 | 6,485 | |||||||||
Total other comprehensive income (loss) | 7,654 | 4,335 | (1,302 | ) | ||||||||
Comprehensive income | 87,205 | 76,314 | 63,591 | |||||||||
Comprehensive income allocated to noncontrolling interest | 131 | 137 | 122 | |||||||||
Comprehensive income attributable to the Company | $ | 87,074 | $ | 76,177 | $ | 63,469 | ||||||
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
F-5
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
(in thousands, except share amounts)
Common Stock | Capital in Excess of Par Value | Accumulated Distributions in Excess of Earnings | Accumulated Other Comprehensive (Loss) Income | Total Stockholders’ Equity | ||||||||||||||||||
Number of Shares | Par Value | |||||||||||||||||||||
Balance, January 1, 2015 | 304,950,000 | $ | 3,050 | $ | 2,607,448 | $ | (280,035 | ) | $ | (4,057 | ) | $ | 2,326,406 | |||||||||
Issuance of common stock | 11,745,917 | 117 | 112,041 | — | — | 112,158 | ||||||||||||||||
Distributions declared | — | — | — | (193,311 | ) | — | (193,311 | ) | ||||||||||||||
Commissions on stock sales and related dealer manager fees | — | — | — | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||
Other offering costs | — | — | (6 | ) | — | — | (6 | ) | ||||||||||||||
Redemptions and cancellations of common stock | (4,602,706 | ) | (46 | ) | (44,142 | ) | — | — | (44,188 | ) | ||||||||||||
Changes in redeemable common stock | — | — | (67,974 | ) | — | — | (67,974 | ) | ||||||||||||||
Comprehensive income | — | — | — | 64,771 | (1,302 | ) | 63,469 | |||||||||||||||
Balance, December 31, 2015 | 312,093,211 | $ | 3,121 | $ | 2,607,367 | $ | (408,575 | ) | $ | (5,359 | ) | $ | 2,196,554 | |||||||||
Issuance of common stock | 11,234,006 | 112 | 109,054 | — | — | 109,166 | ||||||||||||||||
Distributions declared | — | — | — | (194,834 | ) | — | (194,834 | ) | ||||||||||||||
Offering costs related to DRIP Offerings | — | — | (68 | ) | — | — | (68 | ) | ||||||||||||||
Redemptions of common stock | (11,510,213 | ) | (115 | ) | (110,540 | ) | — | — | (110,655 | ) | ||||||||||||
Changes in redeemable common stock | — | — | 1,491 | — | — | 1,491 | ||||||||||||||||
Comprehensive income | — | — | — | 71,842 | 4,335 | 76,177 | ||||||||||||||||
Balance, December 31, 2016 | 311,817,004 | $ | 3,118 | $ | 2,607,304 | $ | (531,567 | ) | $ | (1,024 | ) | $ | 2,077,831 | |||||||||
Issuance of common stock | 10,095,437 | 101 | 101,243 | — | — | 101,344 | ||||||||||||||||
Distributions declared | — | — | — | (194,687 | ) | — | (194,687 | ) | ||||||||||||||
Redemptions of common stock | (10,330,122 | ) | (103 | ) | (103,572 | ) | — | — | (103,675 | ) | ||||||||||||
Changes in redeemable common stock | — | — | 2,325 | — | — | 2,325 | ||||||||||||||||
Comprehensive income | — | — | — | 79,420 | 7,654 | 87,074 | ||||||||||||||||
Balance, December 31, 2017 | 311,582,319 | $ | 3,116 | $ | 2,607,300 | $ | (646,834 | ) | $ | 6,630 | $ | 1,970,212 | ||||||||||
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
F-6
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(in thousands)
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
Year Ended December 31, | |||||||||||
2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |||||||||
Cash flows from operating activities: | |||||||||||
Net income | $ | 79,551 | $ | 71,979 | $ | 64,893 | |||||
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities: | |||||||||||
Depreciation and amortization, net | 139,253 | 133,549 | 121,128 | ||||||||
Amortization of deferred financing costs | 5,313 | 5,711 | 4,646 | ||||||||
Amortization of fair value adjustment of mortgage notes payable assumed | (86 | ) | (84 | ) | (336 | ) | |||||
Straight-line rental income | (10,082 | ) | (11,555 | ) | (11,776 | ) | |||||
Bad debt expense | 1,908 | 9 | 320 | ||||||||
Equity in income of unconsolidated joint venture | — | (615 | ) | (798 | ) | ||||||
Return on investment from unconsolidated joint venture | — | 615 | 1,038 | ||||||||
(Gain) loss on disposition of real estate assets, net | (17,044 | ) | (2,907 | ) | 108 | ||||||
Impairment of real estate assets | 2,855 | 6,737 | 1,440 | ||||||||
Fair value adjustment to contingent consideration | (337 | ) | (2,667 | ) | (1,747 | ) | |||||
Ineffectiveness of interest rate swaps | (488 | ) | — | — | |||||||
Write-off of deferred financing costs | 896 | — | — | ||||||||
Loss recognized on equity interest remeasured to fair value | — | 647 | — | ||||||||
Changes in assets and liabilities: | |||||||||||
Rents and tenant receivables | 862 | (4,023 | ) | (3,570 | ) | ||||||
Prepaid expenses and other assets | (67 | ) | (884 | ) | (503 | ) | |||||
Accounts payable and accrued expenses | (192 | ) | 958 | 6,043 | |||||||
Deferred rental income and other liabilities | (70 | ) | (4,883 | ) | 1,436 | ||||||
Due from affiliates | 2 | (11 | ) | 423 | |||||||
Due to affiliates | (3,349 | ) | (280 | ) | 140 | ||||||
Net cash provided by operating activities | 198,925 | 192,296 | 182,885 | ||||||||
Cash flows from investing activities: | |||||||||||
Investment in real estate assets and capital expenditures | (320,700 | ) | (219,502 | ) | (677,754 | ) | |||||
Investment in revenue bonds | (2,081 | ) | — | — | |||||||
Real estate developments | — | — | (684 | ) | |||||||
Return of investment in unconsolidated joint venture | — | 1,033 | 571 | ||||||||
Acquisition of unconsolidated joint venture partner's interest | — | (1,626 | ) | — | |||||||
Proceeds from disposition of real estate assets | 99,013 | 30,811 | 1,058 | ||||||||
Payment of property escrow deposits | (11,472 | ) | (5,854 | ) | (3,240 | ) | |||||
Refund of property escrow deposits | 11,722 | 6,604 | 7,025 | ||||||||
Proceeds from the settlement of insurance claims | 132 | 788 | 15 | ||||||||
Net cash used in investing activities | (223,386 | ) | (187,746 | ) | (673,009 | ) | |||||
Cash flows from financing activities: | |||||||||||
Redemptions and cancellations of common stock | (103,675 | ) | (110,655 | ) | (44,188 | ) | |||||
Offering costs related to DRIP Offerings | — | (68 | ) | (6 | ) | ||||||
Distributions to stockholders | (93,310 | ) | (85,740 | ) | (80,773 | ) | |||||
Proceeds from notes payable and credit facility | 1,572,706 | 493,420 | 1,218,367 | ||||||||
Repayments of notes payable and credit facility | (1,341,617 | ) | (313,426 | ) | (621,388 | ) | |||||
Payment of loan deposits | (1,139 | ) | (3,378 | ) | (3,242 | ) | |||||
Refund of loan deposits | 1,064 | 3,378 | 3,242 | ||||||||
Deferred financing costs paid | (13,228 | ) | (3,344 | ) | (7,638 | ) | |||||
Contributions from noncontrolling interest | — | — | 762 | ||||||||
Distributions to noncontrolling interest | (291 | ) | (269 | ) | (269 | ) | |||||
Earnout liability paid | — | (1,264 | ) | — | |||||||
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities | 20,510 | (21,346 | ) | 464,867 | |||||||
Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash | (3,951 | ) | (16,796 | ) | (25,257 | ) | |||||
Cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash, beginning of period | 17,794 | 34,590 | 59,847 | ||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash, end of period | $ | 13,843 | $ | 17,794 | $ | 34,590 | |||||
F-7
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE 1 — ORGANIZATION AND BUSINESS
Cole Credit Property Trust IV, Inc. (the “Company”) is a Maryland corporation, incorporated on July 27, 2010, that elected to be taxed, and currently qualifies, as a real estate investment trust (“REIT”) for U.S. federal income tax purposes beginning with its taxable year ended December 31, 2012. The Company is the sole general partner of and owns, directly or indirectly, 100% of the partnership interests in Cole Operating Partnership IV, LP, a Delaware limited partnership.
On November 13, 2017, VEREIT Operating Partnership, L.P. (“VEREIT OP”), a former affiliated entity of the Company’s sponsor, CCO Group (as defined below), entered into a Purchase and Sale Agreement with CCA Acquisition, LLC (“CCA”), a newly-formed affiliate of CIM Group, LLC (“CIM”), pursuant to which CCA agreed to acquire all of the issued and outstanding shares of common stock of Cole Capital Advisors, Inc., the direct or indirect owner of Cole REIT Advisors IV, LLC (“CR IV Advisors”), Cole Capital Corporation and CREI Advisors, LLC (“CREI Advisors”), the Company’s external advisor, dealer manager and property manager, respectively (the “Transaction”).
On February 1, 2018, the Transaction was completed. Immediately following the completion of the Transaction, Cole Capital Advisors, Inc. and the Company’s dealer manager were each converted into Delaware limited liability companies, Cole Capital Advisors, Inc.’s name was changed to CCO Group, LLC, and the Company’s dealer manager’s name was changed to CCO Capital, LLC (“CCO Capital”). As a result of the Transaction, CIM owns and/or controls CCO Group, LLC and its subsidiaries (collectively, “CCO Group”), and CCO Group, LLC owns and controls CR IV Advisors, CCO Capital and CREI Advisors, the Company’s external advisor, dealer manager for the Offerings (as defined below) and property manager, respectively.
In addition, as part of the Transaction, VEREIT OP and CCO Group, LLC entered into a services agreement (the “Services Agreement”) pursuant to which VEREIT OP will continue to provide certain services to CCO Group and to the Company, Cole Credit Property Trust V, Inc. (“CCPT V”), Cole Office & Industrial REIT (CCIT II), Inc. (“CCIT II”), Cole Office & Industrial (CCIT III), Inc. (“CCIT III”) and Cole Real Estate Income Strategy (Daily NAV), Inc. (“Cole Income NAV Strategy”) (CCPT V, CCIT II, CCIT III, Cole Income NAV Strategy and the Company collectively, the “Cole REITs®”), including operational real estate support. VEREIT OP will continue to provide such services through March 31, 2019 (or, if later, the date of the last government filing other than a tax filing made by any of the Cole REITs with respect to its 2018 fiscal year) (the “Initial Services Term”) and will provide consulting and research services through December 31, 2023 as requested by CCO Group, LLC.
Despite the indirect change of ownership and control of the Company’s advisor, dealer manager, property manager and sponsor, the Company expects that, during the Initial Services Term of the Services Agreement, the advisory, dealer manager and property management services the Company receives will continue without any material changes in personnel (except as supplemented by the management oversight of CIM personnel) or material change in service procedures. During the Initial Services Term of the Services Agreement, CCO Group, LLC intends to evaluate and effectuate an appropriate transition of VEREIT OP’s services under the Services Agreement to other CIM affiliates or third parties with the goal of ensuring continuity and minimizing disruption.
On January 26, 2012, pursuant to a Registration Statement on Form S-11 (Registration No. 333-169533) (the “Registration Statement”) filed under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), the Company commenced its initial public offering on a “best efforts” basis of up to a maximum of $2.975 billion in shares of common stock (the “Offering”). On November 25, 2013, the Company reallocated $400.0 million in shares from the distribution reinvestment plan (the “DRIP”) portion of the Offering to the primary portion of the Offering, and on February 18, 2014, the Company reallocated an additional $23.0 million in shares from the DRIP portion of the Offering to the primary portion of the Offering. As a result of these reallocations, the Offering offered up to a maximum of approximately 292.3 million shares of common stock at a price of $10.00 per share in the primary portion of the Offering and up to approximately 5.5 million additional shares pursuant to the DRIP portion of the Offering under which the Company’s stockholders could have elected to have distributions reinvested in additional shares of common stock at a price of $9.50 per share.
The Company ceased issuing shares in the Offering on April 4, 2014. At the completion of the Offering, a total of approximately 297.4 million shares of common stock had been issued, including approximately 292.3 million shares of common stock sold to the public pursuant to the primary portion of the Offering and approximately 5.1 million shares of common stock issued pursuant to the DRIP portion of the Offering. The remaining approximately 404,000 unsold shares from the Offering were deregistered.
F-8
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued)
The Company registered $247.0 million of shares of common stock under the DRIP pursuant to a Registration Statement filed on Form S-3 (Registration No. 333-192958) (the “Initial DRIP Offering”), which was filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) on December 19, 2013 and automatically became effective with the SEC upon filing. The Company ceased issuing shares under the Initial DRIP Offering effective as of June 30, 2016. At the completion of the Initial DRIP Offering, a total of approximately $241.7 million of common stock had been issued. The remaining $5.3 million of unsold shares from the Initial DRIP Offering were deregistered.
The Company registered an additional $600.0 million of shares of common stock under the DRIP pursuant to a Registration Statement filed on Form S-3 (Registration No. 333-212832) (the “Secondary DRIP Offering,” and together with the Initial DRIP Offering, the “DRIP Offerings,” and the DRIP Offerings collectively with the Offering, the “Offerings”), which was filed with the SEC on August 2, 2016 and automatically became effective with the SEC upon filing. The Company began to issue shares under the Secondary DRIP Offering on August 2, 2016 and will continue to issue shares under the Secondary DRIP Offering.
On September 27, 2015, the Company announced that its board of directors (the “Board”) had established an estimated value of the Company’s common stock, as of August 31, 2015, of $9.70 per share for purposes of assisting broker-dealers that participated in the Offering in meeting their customer account statement reporting obligations under National Association of Securities Dealers Conduct Rule 2340. On November 10, 2016, the Board established an updated estimated per share net asset value (“NAV”) of the Company’s common stock, as of September 30, 2016, of $9.92 per share. On March 24, 2017, the Board established an updated estimated per share NAV of the Company’s common stock, as of December 31, 2016, of $10.08 per share. On March 29, 2018, the Board established an updated estimated per share NAV of the Company’s common stock, as of December 31, 2017, of $9.37 per share. In determining the estimated per share NAVs as of August 31, 2015, September 30, 2016, December 31, 2016, and December 31, 2017, the Board considered information and analysis, including valuation materials that were provided by a third-party valuation expert, information provided by CR IV Advisors, and the estimated per share NAV recommendation made by the valuation committee of the Board, which committee is comprised entirely of independent directors. The Company’s estimated per share NAVs are not audited or reviewed by its independent registered public accounting firm.
Prior to October 1, 2015, distributions were reinvested in shares of the Company’s common stock under the DRIP at a price of $9.50 per share. From October 1, 2015 to November 13, 2016, distributions were reinvested in shares of the Company’s common stock under the DRIP at a price of $9.70 per share, the estimated value per share as of August 31, 2015, as determined by the Board. From November 14, 2016 to March 27, 2017, distributions were reinvested in shares of the Company’s common stock under the DRIP at a price of $9.92 per share, the estimated per share NAV as of September 30, 2016, as determined by the Board. From March 28, 2017 to March 28, 2018, distributions were reinvested in shares of the Company’s common stock under the DRIP at a price of $10.08 per share, the estimated per share NAV as of December 31, 2016, as determined by the Board. Commencing on March 29, 2018, distributions are reinvested in shares of the Company’s common stock under the DRIP at a price of $9.37 per share, the estimated per share NAV as of December 31, 2017, as determined by the Board.
As of December 31, 2017, the Company had issued approximately 339.2 million shares of its common stock in the Offerings, including 40.9 million shares issued in the DRIP Offerings, for gross offering proceeds of $3.4 billion before organization and offering costs, selling commissions and dealer manager fees of $306.0 million. As of December 31, 2017, the Company owned 909 properties, which includes nine properties owned through a consolidated joint venture arrangement (the “Consolidated Joint Venture”), comprising 26.9 million rentable square feet of commercial space located in 45 states. As of December 31, 2017, the rentable square feet at these properties was 97.5% leased, including month-to-month agreements, if any.
NOTE 2 — SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
The summary of significant accounting policies presented below is designed to assist in understanding the Company’s consolidated financial statements. These accounting policies conform to accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”), in all material respects, and have been consistently applied in preparing the accompanying consolidated financial statements.
F-9
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued)
Principles of Consolidation and Basis of Presentation
The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company, its wholly-owned subsidiaries and the Consolidated Joint Venture in which the Company has a controlling financial interest. All intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.
The Company evaluates its relationships and investments to determine if it has variable interests. A variable interest is an investment or other interest that will absorb portions of an entity’s expected losses or receive portions of the entity’s expected residual returns. If the Company determines that it has a variable interest in an entity, it evaluates whether such interest is in a variable interest entity (“VIE”). VIEs are entities where investors lack sufficient equity at risk for the entity to finance its activities without additional subordinated financial support or where equity investors, as a group, lack one of the following characteristics: (a) the power to direct the activities that most significantly impact the entity’s economic performance, (b) the obligation to absorb the expected losses of the entity, or (c) the right to receive the expected returns of the entity. The Company consolidates any VIEs when it is determined to be the primary beneficiary of the VIE’s operations.
For legal entities being evaluated for consolidation, the Company must first determine whether the interests that it holds and fees it receives qualify as variable interests in the entity. A variable interest is an investment or other interest that will absorb portions of an entity’s expected losses or receive portions of the entity’s expected residual returns. The Company’s evaluation includes consideration of fees paid to the Company where the Company acts as a decision maker or service provider to the entity being evaluated. If the Company determines that it holds a variable interest in an entity, it evaluates whether that entity is a VIE.
A VIE must be consolidated by its primary beneficiary, which is generally defined as the party who has a controlling financial interest in the VIE. The Company qualitatively assesses whether it is (or is not) the primary beneficiary of a VIE. Consideration of various factors include, but are not limited to, the Company’s ability to direct the activities that most significantly impact the entity’s economic performance and its obligation to absorb losses from or right to receive benefits of the VIE that could potentially be significant to the VIE. The Company consolidates any VIEs when the Company is determined to be the primary beneficiary of the VIE and the difference between consolidating the VIE and accounting for it using the equity method could be material to the Company’s consolidated financial statements. The Company continually evaluates the need to consolidate any VIEs based on standards set forth in GAAP as described above.
As of December 31, 2017 and 2016, the Company determined that it had a controlling interest in the Consolidated Joint Venture and therefore met the GAAP requirements for consolidation.
Reclassifications
In connection with the adoption of Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2016-15 and ASU 2016-18, as defined in “Recent Accounting Pronouncements,” certain reclassifications have been made to prior period balances to conform to current presentation in the consolidated statement of cash flows. Under ASU 2016-15, the Company reclassified a portion of contingent consideration payments made after a business combination which were previously reported in cash flows from financing activities to cash flows from operating activities in the consolidated statement of cash flows. In addition, the Company reclassified $602,000 of contingent consideration payments made after a business combination from cash flows from financing activities to cash flows from operating activities for the year ended December 31, 2016. The Company also reclassified $788,000 and $15,000 of proceeds from the settlement of insurance claims from cash flows from operating activities to cash flows from investing activities for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. Under ASU 2016-18, transfers to or from restricted cash which have previously been shown in the Company’s investing activities section of the consolidated statements of cash flows are now required to be shown as part of the total change in cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash in the consolidated statements of cash flows. This change resulted in an increase in cash flows from investing activities of $234,000 during the year ended December 31, 2016 and a decrease of $3.7 million in cash flows from investing activities during the year ended December 31, 2015.
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 consolidated financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
F-10
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued)
Real Estate Assets
Real estate assets are stated at cost, less accumulated depreciation and amortization. The Company considers the period of future benefit of each respective asset to determine the appropriate useful life. The estimated useful lives of the Company’s real estate assets by class are generally as follows:
Buildings | 40 years |
Site improvements | 15 years |
Tenant improvements | Lesser of useful life or lease term |
Intangible lease assets | Lease term |
Recoverability of Real Estate Assets
The Company continually monitors events and changes in circumstances that could indicate that the carrying amounts of its real estate assets may not be recoverable. Impairment indicators that the Company considers include, but are not limited to, bankruptcy or other credit concerns of a property’s major tenant, such as a history of late payments, rental concessions and other factors, a significant decrease in a property’s revenues due to lease terminations, vacancies, co-tenancy clauses, reduced lease rates or other circumstances. When indicators of potential impairment are present, the Company assesses the recoverability of the assets by determining whether the carrying amount of the assets will be recovered through the undiscounted future cash flows expected from the use of the assets and their eventual disposition. In the event that such expected undiscounted future cash flows do not exceed the carrying amount, the Company will adjust the real estate assets to their respective fair values and recognize an impairment loss. Generally, fair value is determined using a discounted cash flow analysis and recent comparable sales transactions. During the year ended December 31, 2017, as part of the Company’s quarterly impairment review procedures, the Company recorded impairment charges of $2.9 million related to four properties as a result of delinquent rental payments and two tenants who had previously filed for bankruptcy. During the year ended December 31, 2016, two tenants filed for bankruptcy, and collectively, these tenants occupied 100% of three of the Company’s properties. The Company recorded impairment charges of $6.7 million related to the three properties during the year ended December 31, 2016. The Company recorded impairment charges of $1.4 million related to one property during the year ended December 31, 2015. The assumptions and uncertainties utilized in the evaluation of the impairment of real estate assets are discussed in detail in Note 3 — Fair Value Measurements. See also Note 4 — Real Estate Assets for further discussion regarding real estate investment activity.
Assets Held for Sale
When a real estate asset is identified by the Company as held for sale, the Company will cease depreciation and amortization of the assets related to the property and estimate the fair value, net of selling costs. If, in management’s opinion, the fair value, net of selling costs, of the asset is less than the carrying amount of the asset, an adjustment to the carrying amount would be recorded to reflect the estimated fair value of the property, net of selling costs. There were no assets identified as held for sale as of December 31, 2017 or 2016.
Allocation of Purchase Price of Real Estate Assets
Upon the acquisition of real properties, the Company allocates the purchase price to acquired tangible assets, consisting of land, buildings and improvements, and to identified intangible assets and liabilities, consisting of the value of above- and below-market leases and the value of in-place leases, based in each case on their respective fair values. The Company utilizes independent appraisals to assist in the determination of the fair values of the tangible assets of an acquired property (which includes land and buildings). The information in the appraisal, along with any additional information available to the Company’s management, is used in estimating the amount of the purchase price that is allocated to land. Other information in the appraisal, such as building value and market rents, may be used by the Company’s management in estimating the allocation of purchase price to the building and to intangible lease assets and liabilities. The appraisal firm has no involvement in management’s allocation decisions other than providing this market information.
The fair values of above- and below-market lease intangibles are recorded based on the present value (using a discount rate which reflects the risks associated with the leases acquired) of the difference between (1) the contractual amounts to be paid pursuant to the in-place leases and (2) an estimate of fair market lease rates for the corresponding in-place leases, which is generally obtained from independent appraisals, measured over a period equal to the remaining non-cancelable term of the lease including, for below-market leases, any bargain renewal periods. The above- and below-market lease intangibles are capitalized as intangible lease assets or liabilities, respectively. Above-market leases are amortized as a reduction to rental income over the
F-11
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued)
remaining terms of the respective leases. Below-market leases are amortized as an increase to rental income over the remaining terms of the respective leases, including any bargain renewal periods. In considering whether or not the Company expects a tenant to execute a bargain renewal option, the Company evaluates economic factors and certain qualitative factors at the time of acquisition, such as the financial strength of the tenant, the remaining lease term, the tenant mix of the leased property, the Company’s relationship with the tenant and the availability of competing tenant space. If a lease were to be terminated prior to its stated expiration, all unamortized amounts of above- or below-market lease intangibles relating to that lease would be recorded as an adjustment to rental income.
The fair values of in-place leases include estimates of direct costs associated with obtaining a new tenant and opportunity costs associated with lost rental and other property income, which are avoided by acquiring a property with an in-place lease. Direct costs associated with obtaining a new tenant include leasing commissions, legal and other related expenses and are estimated in part by utilizing information obtained from independent appraisals and management’s consideration of current market costs to execute a similar lease. The intangible values of opportunity costs, which are calculated using the contractual amounts to be paid pursuant to the in-place leases over a market absorption period for a similar lease, are capitalized as intangible lease assets and are amortized to expense over the remaining term of the respective leases. If a lease were to be terminated prior to its stated expiration, all unamortized amounts of in-place lease assets relating to that lease would be expensed.
The Company has acquired, and may continue to acquire, certain properties subject to contingent consideration arrangements that may obligate the Company to pay additional consideration to the seller based on the outcome of future events (the “Contingent Payments”). Additionally, the Company may acquire certain properties for which it funds certain contingent consideration amounts into an escrow account pending the outcome of certain future events. The outcome may result in the release of all or a portion of the escrowed funds to the Company or the seller or a combination thereof. Prior to the adoption of ASU 2017-01 (as defined below) in April 2017, contingent consideration arrangements, including amounts funded through an escrow account, were recorded upon acquisition of the respective property at their estimated fair value, and any changes to the estimated fair value subsequent to acquisition were reflected in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations in acquisition-related fees and expenses. Upon adoption of ASU 2017-01 in April 2017, contingent consideration arrangements for asset acquisitions are recognized when the contingency is resolved. The determination of the amount of contingent consideration arrangements is based on the probability of several possible outcomes as identified by management.
The Company estimates the fair value of assumed mortgage notes payable based upon indications of current market pricing for similar types of debt financing with similar maturities. Assumed mortgage notes payable are initially recorded at their estimated fair value as of the assumption date, and any difference between such estimated fair value and the mortgage note’s outstanding principal balance is amortized or accreted to interest expense over the term of the respective mortgage note payable.
The determination of the fair values of the real estate assets and liabilities acquired requires the use of significant assumptions with regard to the current market rental rates, rental growth rates, capitalization and discount rates, interest rates and other variables. The use of alternative estimates may result in a different allocation of the Company’s purchase price, which could materially impact the Company’s results of operations.
In April 2017, the Company elected to early adopt ASU No. 2017-01, Business Combinations (Topic 805): Clarifying the Definition of a Business (“ASU 2017-01”), which clarifies the definition of a business by adding guidance to assist entities in evaluating whether transactions should be accounted for as acquisitions (or disposals) of assets or businesses. Beginning in April 2017, all real estate acquisitions qualified as asset acquisitions, and as such, acquisition-related fees and certain acquisition-related expenses related to these asset acquisitions were capitalized and allocated to tangible and intangible assets and liabilities as described above. Prior to the adoption of ASU 2017-01 in April 2017, all of the Company’s real estate acquisitions were accounted for as business combinations, and as such, acquisition-related expenses related to these business combination acquisitions were expensed as incurred. Prior to April 2017, acquisition-related expenses in the Company’s consolidated statements of operations primarily consisted of legal, deed transfer and other costs related to real estate purchase transactions, including costs incurred for deals that were not consummated. The Company expects its future acquisitions to qualify as asset acquisitions, and as such, the Company will allocate the purchase price to acquired tangible assets, consisting of land, buildings and improvements, and to identified intangible assets and liabilities, consisting of the value of above- and below-market leases and the value of in-place leases, based in each case on a relative fair value basis.
Investment in Held-to-Maturity Securities
The Company has investments classified as held-to-maturity securities, which consist of revenue bonds acquired in connection with the purchase of an anchored shopping center. The bonds have a 9.0% interest rate and mature on November 1,
F-12
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued)
2044. As of December 31, 2017, the Company classified these investments as held-to-maturity as the Company has the intent and ability to hold the securities to maturity. These investments are initially recognized in derivative assets, prepaid expenses, revenue bonds and other assets on the consolidated balance sheets and are subsequently measured using amortized cost.
The Company’s investments in revenue bonds are reviewed for impairment, including the evaluation of changes in events or circumstances that may indicate that the carrying amount of the investment may not be recoverable. Realization is dependent on a number of factors, including investment performance, market conditions and payment structure. The Company will record an impairment charge if it is determined that a decline in the value of the investment below its carrying amount is other than temporary, recovery of its cost basis is uncertain, and/or it is uncertain if the investment will be held to maturity. The analysis of determining whether the impairment of a security is deemed to be other-than-temporary requires significant judgments and assumptions. The use of alternative judgments and assumptions could result in a different conclusion.
Development Activities
Project costs and expenses, including interest incurred, associated with the development, construction and lease-up of a real estate project are capitalized as construction in progress. Once the development and construction of the building is substantially completed, the amounts capitalized to construction in progress are transferred to (i) land and (ii) buildings, fixtures and improvements and are depreciated over their respective useful lives. The Company capitalized $102,000 of interest expense associated with development projects during the year ended December 31, 2016. No such expenses were capitalized during the year ended December 31, 2017.
Redeemable Noncontrolling Interest in Consolidated Joint Venture
On June 27, 2014, the Company completed the formation of the Consolidated Joint Venture. Pursuant to the joint venture agreement, the joint venture partner has a right to exercise an option (the “Option”), which became effective on June 27, 2016, whereby the Company will be required to purchase the ownership interest of the joint venture partner at fair market value. As of December 31, 2017, the Option has not been exercised. The Company determined it had a controlling interest in the Consolidated Joint Venture and, therefore, met the GAAP requirements for consolidation. The Company recorded net income of $131,000 and paid distributions of $291,000 related to the noncontrolling interest during the year ended December 31, 2017. The Company recorded the noncontrolling interest of $2.4 million and $2.6 million as of December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, respectively, as temporary equity in the mezzanine section of the consolidated balance sheets, due to the ability to exercise the Option being outside the control of the Company.
Cash and Cash Equivalents and Restricted Cash
Cash and cash equivalents include cash in bank accounts, as well as investments in highly-liquid money market funds. The Company deposits cash with several high quality financial institutions. These deposits are guaranteed by the Federal Deposit Insurance Company (“FDIC”) up to an insurance limit of $250,000. At times, the Company’s cash and cash equivalents may exceed federally insured levels. Although the Company bears risk on amounts in excess of those insured by the FDIC, it has not experienced and does not anticipate any losses due to the high quality of the institutions where the deposits are held.
The Company had $9.1 million and $8.0 million in restricted cash as of December 31, 2017 and 2016, respectively. Included in restricted cash was $3.7 million and $4.0 million held by lenders in lockbox accounts, as of December 31, 2017 and 2016, respectively. As part of certain debt agreements, rents from certain encumbered properties are deposited directly into a lockbox account, from which the monthly debt service payment is disbursed to the lender and the excess is disbursed to the Company. Also included in restricted cash was $5.4 million and $4.0 million held by lenders in escrow accounts for real estate taxes and other lender reserves for certain properties, in accordance with the associated lender’s loan agreement as of December 31, 2017 and 2016, respectively.
F-13
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued)
The following table provides a reconciliation of cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash reported within the accompanying consolidated balance sheets to the combined amounts shown on the accompanying consolidated statements of cash flows (in thousands):
As of December 31, | |||||||||||
2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents | $ | 4,745 | $ | 9,754 | $ | 26,316 | |||||
Restricted cash | 9,098 | 8,040 | 8,274 | ||||||||
Total cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash shown in the statement of cash flows | $ | 13,843 | $ | 17,794 | $ | 34,590 | |||||
Deferred Financing Costs
Deferred financing costs represent commitment fees, legal fees and other costs associated with obtaining commitments for financing. These costs are amortized to interest expense over the terms of the respective financing agreements using the effective interest method. Unamortized deferred financing costs are written off when the associated debt is refinanced or repaid before maturity. The presentation of all deferred financing costs, other than those associated with the revolving loan portion of the credit facility, are classified such that the debt issuance costs related to a recognized debt liability are presented on the consolidated balance sheets as a direct deduction from the carrying amount of the related debt liability rather than as an asset. Debt issuance costs related to securing a revolving line of credit are presented as an asset and amortized ratably over the term of the line of credit arrangement. As such, the Company’s current and corresponding prior period total deferred costs, net in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets relate only to the revolving loan portion of the credit facility and the historical presentation, amortization and treatment of unamortized costs are still applicable. As of December 31, 2017 and 2016, the Company had $3.0 million and $1.5 million, respectively, of deferred financing costs, net of accumulated amortization, related to the revolving loan portion of the credit facility. Costs incurred in seeking financial transactions that do not close are expensed in the period in which it is determined the financing will not close.
Due to Affiliates
CR IV Advisors, and certain of its affiliates, received and will continue to receive, fees, reimbursements and compensation in connection with services provided relating to the Offerings and the acquisition, management, financing and leasing of the properties of the Company.
Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities
The Company accounts for its derivative instruments at fair value. Accounting for changes in the fair value of a derivative instrument depends on the intended use of the derivative instrument and the designation of the derivative instrument. The change in fair value of the effective portion of the derivative instrument that is designated as a hedge is recorded as other comprehensive income (loss). The changes in fair value for derivative instruments that are not designated as hedges or that do not meet the hedge accounting criteria are recorded as a gain or loss to operations.
Redeemable Common Stock
Under the Company’s share redemption program, the Company’s obligation to redeem shares of its outstanding common stock is limited, among other things, to the net proceeds received by the Company from the sale of shares under the DRIP, net of shares redeemed to date. The Company records amounts that are redeemable under the share redemption program as redeemable common stock outside of permanent equity in its consolidated balance sheets. Changes in the amount of redeemable common stock from period to period are recorded as an adjustment to capital in excess of par value.
Revenue Recognition
Certain properties have leases where minimum rental payments increase during the term of the lease. The Company records rental income for the full term of each lease on a straight-line basis when earned and collectability is reasonably assured. When the Company acquires a property, the terms of existing leases are considered to commence as of the acquisition date for the purpose of this calculation. The Company defers the recognition of contingent rental income, such as percentage rents, until the specific target that triggers the contingent rental income is achieved. Expected reimbursements from tenants for recoverable real estate taxes and operating expenses are included in tenant reimbursement income in the period when such costs are incurred.
F-14
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued)
The Company continually reviews receivables related to rent, including any straight-line rent, and current and future operating expense reimbursements from tenants and determines collectability by taking into consideration the tenant’s payment history, the financial condition of the tenant, business conditions in the industry in which the tenant operates and economic conditions in the area in which the property is located. In the event that the collectability of a receivable is uncertain, the Company will record an increase in the allowance for uncollectible accounts. As of December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, the Company had an allowance for uncollectible accounts of $1.5 million and $221,000, respectively.
Income Taxes
The Company elected to be taxed, and currently qualifies, as a REIT for federal income tax purposes under Sections 856 through 860 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, commencing with the taxable year ended December 31, 2012. The Company will generally not be subject to federal corporate income tax to the extent it distributes its taxable income to its stockholders, and so long as it, among other things, distributes at least 90% of its annual taxable income (computed without regard to the dividends paid deduction and excluding net capital gains). REITs are subject to a number of other organizational and operational requirements. Even if the Company maintains its qualification for taxation as a REIT, it or its subsidiaries may be subject to certain state and local taxes on its income and property, and federal income and excise taxes on its undistributed income.
Earnings (Loss) Per Share
Earnings (loss) per share are calculated based on the weighted average number of common shares outstanding during each period presented. Diluted income (loss) per share considers the effect of any potentially dilutive share equivalents, of which the Company had none for each of the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 or 2015.
Reportable Segment
The Company’s commercial real estate assets consist of income-producing necessity retail properties that are primarily single-tenant or anchored shopping centers, which are leased to creditworthy tenants under long-term net leases. The commercial properties are geographically diversified throughout the United States and have similar economic characteristics. The Company’s management evaluates operating performance on an overall portfolio level; therefore, the Company’s properties are one reportable segment.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
From time to time, new accounting pronouncements are issued by various standard setting bodies that may have an impact on the Company’s accounting and reporting. Except as otherwise stated below, the Company is currently evaluating the effect that certain of these new accounting requirements may have on the Company’s accounting and related reporting and disclosures in the Company’s consolidated financial statements:
In May 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued ASU No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606) (“ASU 2014-09”), which supersedes the revenue recognition requirements in Revenue Recognition, Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) (Topic 605) and will require an entity to recognize revenue in a way that depicts the transfer of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. For public business entities, the guidance should be applied to annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim reporting periods within that reporting period. Companies may use either a full retrospective or a modified retrospective approach to adopt ASU 2014-09. In accordance with the Company’s plan for the adoption of ASU 2014-09, the Company’s implementation team has identified all of the Company’s revenue streams and real estate sales and concluded that upon adoption, there will not be a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements and disclosures. The Company plans to adopt ASU 2014-09 effective January 1, 2018 using the modified retrospective approach. In addition, the Company evaluated controls around the implementation of ASU 2014-09 and has concluded there will be no significant impact on the Company’s control structure.
In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842) (“ASU 2016-02”), which will require that a lessee recognize assets and liabilities on the balance sheet for all leases with a lease term of more than 12 months, with the result being the recognition of a right of use asset and a lease liability and the disclosure of key information about the entity’s leasing arrangements. The lessor accounting model under ASU 2016-02 is similar to current guidance; however it limits the capitalization of initial direct leasing costs, such as internally generated costs. ASU 2016-02 retains a distinction between finance leases (i.e., capital leases under current GAAP) and operating leases. The amendments in ASU 2016-02 are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years, with early adoption permitted. A modified retrospective approach is required for existing leases that have not expired upon adoption and provides
F-15
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued)
for certain practical expedients. The Company is still evaluating the full impact of ASU 2016-02 on its consolidated financial statements; however, the Company plans to adopt ASU 2016-02 as of January 1, 2019 and anticipates that it will elect a practical expedient offered in ASU 2016-02 that allows an entity to not reassess the following upon adoption (elected as a group): (i) whether an expired or existing contract contains a lease arrangement; (ii) lease classification related to expired or existing lease arrangements; or (iii) whether costs incurred on expired or existing leases qualify as initial direct costs. As a result of the adoption, all leases for which we are the lessee, including ground leases (if any), will be recorded on the Company’s consolidated financial statements as either financing leases or operating leases with a related right of use asset and lease liability. In addition, certain executory and non-lease components, such as common area maintenance, may need to be accounted for separately from the lease component of the lease. Lease components will continue to be recognized on a straight-line basis over the lease term and certain non-lease components will be accounted for under the new revenue recognition guidance in ASU 2014-09 as mentioned above. In January 2018, the FASB proposed amending Topic 842 to allow lessors the option to combine lease and non-lease components when certain criteria are met.
ASU No. 2016-01, Financial Instruments (Subtopic 825-10) (“ASU 2016-01”) — The amendments in this update require all equity investments to be measured at fair value with changes in the fair value recognized through net income (other than those accounted for under the equity method of accounting or those that result in consolidation of the investee). The amendments in this update also require an entity to present separately in other comprehensive income (loss), the portion of the total change in the fair value of a liability resulting from a change in the instrument-specific credit risk when the entity has elected to measure the liability at fair value in accordance with the fair value option for financial instruments. In addition, the amendments in this update require separate presentation of financial assets and financial liabilities by measurement category and form of financial asset on the consolidated balance sheets or the accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements. The amendments in this update are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company will adopt ASU 2016-01 during the first quarter of fiscal year 2018 and does not expect it will have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.
In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-13, Financial Instruments-Credit Losses (Topic 326) (“ASU 2016-13”). ASU 2016-13 is intended to improve financial reporting requiring more timely recognition of credit losses on loans and other financial instruments that are not accounted for at fair value through net income, including loans held for investment, held-to-maturity debt securities, trade and other receivables, net investment in leases and other such commitments. ASU 2016-13 requires that financial assets measured at amortized cost be presented at the net amount expected to be collected, through an allowance for credit losses that is deducted from the amortized cost basis. The amendments in ASU 2016-13 require the Company to measure all expected credit losses based upon historical experience, current conditions, and reasonable and supportable forecasts that affect the collectability of the financial assets and eliminates the “incurred loss” methodology under current GAAP. ASU 2016-13 is effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2019. Early adoption is permitted for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2018. The Company is currently evaluating the impact this amendment will have on its consolidated financial statements.
In August 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-15, Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230): Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments (“ASU 2016-15”), which is intended to address diversity in practice related to how certain cash receipts and cash payments are presented and classified in the statement of cash flows. ASU 2016-15 is effective for public business entities for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, and interim periods within those fiscal years, with early adoption permitted, and requires retrospective adoption unless it is impracticable to apply, in which case it is to be applied prospectively as of the earliest date practicable. The Company adopted ASU 2016-15 during the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2017 and has determined that this standard is relevant to its presentation of debt prepayment and debt extinguishment costs, contingent consideration payments made after a business combination and proceeds from the settlement of insurance claims. Following the retrospective adoption of this standard, the Company reclassified $602,000 of contingent consideration payments made after a business combination from cash flows from financing activities to cash flows from operating activities for the year ended December 31, 2016. The Company also reclassified $788,000 and $15,000 of proceeds from the settlement of insurance claims from cash flows from operating activities to cash flows from investing activities for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. The remaining item did not have a material impact on the consolidated statements of cash flows.
In November 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-18, Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230): Restricted Cash (“ASU 2016-18”), which provides guidance on the presentation of restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents in the statement of cash flows. In accordance with ASU 2016-18, restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents should be included with cash and cash equivalents when reconciling the beginning-of-period and end-of-period amounts shown on the statements of cash flows. The amendments of ASU 2016-18 are effective for reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017, with early adoption permitted. The Company adopted ASU 2016-18 during the fourth quarter of 2017 and applied the standard retrospectively for all periods presented. Accordingly, for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, the Company included restricted
F-16
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued)
cash within cash and cash equivalents when reconciling the beginning-of-period and end-of-period amounts shown on the statements of cash flows and removed the change in restricted cash from cash flows from investing activities. This change resulted in an increase in cash flows from investing activities of $234,000 during the year ended December 31, 2016 and a decrease of $3.7 million in cash flows from investing activities during the year ended December 31, 2015.
In February 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-05, Other Income – Gains and Losses from the Derecognition of Nonfinancial Assets (Subtopic 610-20): Clarifying the Scope of Asset Derecognition Guidance and Accounting for Partial Sales of Nonfinancial Assets (“ASU 2017-05”), which clarifies the following: (1) nonfinancial assets within the scope of Subtopic 610-20 may include nonfinancial assets transferred within a legal entity to a counterparty; (2) an entity should allocate consideration to each distinct asset by applying the guidance in Topic 606 on allocating the transaction price to performance obligations; and (3) entities are required to derecognize a distinct nonfinancial asset or distinct in substance nonfinancial asset in a partial sale transaction when it (a) does not have (or ceases to have) a controlling financial interest in the legal entity that holds the asset in accordance with Subtopic 810 and (b) transfers control of the asset in accordance with Topic 606. The adoption of this standard may result in higher gains on the sale of partial real estate interests, including contributions of nonfinancial assets to a joint venture or other noncontrolling investee, due to recognizing the full gain when the derecognition criteria are met and recording the retained noncontrolling interest at its fair value. ASU 2017-05 is effective for annual periods, and interim periods therein, beginning after December 15, 2017. Early adoption is permitted. The standard is applied prospectively to sales of nonfinancial assets on or after the adoption date. The Company plans to adopt ASU 2017-05 effective January 1, 2018 using the modified retrospective approach and does not expect it will have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.
In August 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-12, Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815): Targeted Improvements to Accounting for Hedging Activities (“ASU 2017-12”). The targeted amendments in this ASU help simplify certain aspects of hedge accounting and result in a more accurate portrayal of the economics of an entity’s risk management activities in its financial statements. This ASU applies to the Company’s interest rate swaps designated as cash flow hedges. Upon adoption of this ASU, all changes in the fair value of highly effective cash flow hedges will be recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income rather than recognized directly in earnings. Under current GAAP, the ineffective portion of the change in fair value of cash flow hedges is recognized directly in earnings. This eliminates the requirement to separately measure and disclose ineffectiveness for qualifying cash flow hedges. ASU 2017-12 is effective for public entities for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, and interim periods within those fiscal years. The ASU is required to be adopted using a modified retrospective approach with early adoption permitted. The Company plans to adopt ASU 2017-12 during the first quarter of fiscal year 2018 and does not expect that it will have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.
NOTE 3 — FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS
GAAP defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value, and requires disclosures about fair value measurements. GAAP emphasizes that fair value is intended to be a market-based measurement, as opposed to a transaction-specific measurement.
Fair value is defined as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date under current market conditions. Depending on the nature of the asset or liability, various techniques and assumptions can be used to estimate the fair value. Assets and liabilities are measured using inputs from three levels of the fair value hierarchy, as follows:
Level 1 — Inputs are quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that the Company has the ability to access at the measurement date. An active market is defined as a market in which transactions for the assets or liabilities occur with sufficient frequency and volume to provide pricing information on an ongoing basis.
Level 2 — Inputs include quoted prices for similar assets and liabilities in active markets, quoted prices for identical or similar assets or liabilities in markets that are not active (markets with few transactions), inputs other than quoted prices that are observable for the asset or liability (i.e., interest rates, yield curves, etc.), and inputs that are derived principally from or corroborated by observable market data correlation or other means (market corroborated inputs).
Level 3 — Unobservable inputs, which are only used to the extent that observable inputs are not available, reflect the Company’s assumptions about the pricing of an asset or liability.
The following describes the methods the Company uses to estimate the fair value of the Company’s financial assets and liabilities:
F-17
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued)
Notes payable and credit facility — The fair value is estimated by discounting the expected cash flows based on estimated borrowing rates available to the Company as of the measurement date. Current and prior period liabilities’ carrying and fair values exclude net deferred financing costs. These financial instruments are valued using Level 2 inputs. As of December 31, 2017, the estimated fair value of the Company’s debt was $2.48 billion, compared to the carrying value of $2.49 billion. The estimated fair value of the Company’s debt as of December 31, 2016 was $2.25 billion, compared to the carrying value of $2.26 billion.
Derivative instruments — The Company’s derivative instruments are comprised of interest rate swaps. All derivative instruments are carried at fair value and are valued using Level 2 inputs. The fair value of these instruments is determined using interest rate market pricing models. In addition, credit valuation adjustments are incorporated into the fair values to account for the Company’s potential nonperformance risk and the performance risk of the respective counterparties.
Although the Company has determined that the majority of the inputs used to value its derivatives fall within Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy, the credit valuation adjustments associated with those derivatives utilize Level 3 inputs, such as estimates of current credit spreads, to evaluate the likelihood of default by the Company and its counterparties. However, as of December 31, 2017 and 2016, the Company assessed the significance of the impact of the credit valuation adjustments on the overall valuation of its derivative positions and determined that the credit valuation adjustments are not significant to the overall valuation of the Company’s derivatives. As a result, the Company has determined that its derivative valuations in their entirety are classified in Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy.
Contingent consideration arrangements — The contingent consideration arrangements are carried at fair value and are valued using Level 3 inputs. The fair value of additional consideration paid in connection with the acquisition of properties subject to contingent consideration arrangements is determined based on key assumptions, including, but not limited to, rental rates, discount rates and the estimated timing and probability of successfully leasing vacant space subsequent to the Company’s acquisition of certain properties.
Revenue bonds — The fair value estimates of the Company’s revenue bonds are based on assumptions that management believes market participants would use in pricing, using widely accepted valuation techniques including discounted cash flow analysis. This analysis reflects the contractual terms of the bonds, including the period to maturity, and uses unobservable market-based inputs, including discount rates ranging from 7.75% to 9.0%. As a result, the Company has determined that its revenue bonds are classified in Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy. As of December 31, 2017, the estimated fair value of the Company’s revenue bonds was $2.1 million.
Other financial instruments — The Company considers the carrying values of its cash and cash equivalents, restricted cash, tenant receivables, accounts payable and accrued expenses, other liabilities, due to affiliates and distributions payable to approximate their fair values because of the short period of time between their origination and their expected realization as well as their highly-liquid nature. Due to the short-term maturities of these instruments, Level 1 inputs are utilized to estimate the fair value of these financial instruments.
Considerable judgment is necessary to develop estimated fair values of financial assets and liabilities. Accordingly, the estimates presented herein are not necessarily indicative of the amounts the Company could realize, or be liable for, upon disposition of the financial assets and liabilities. As of December 31, 2017 and 2016, there have been no transfers of financial assets or liabilities between fair value hierarchy levels.
F-18
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued)
Items Measured at Fair Value on a Recurring Basis
In accordance with the fair value hierarchy described above, the following tables show the fair value of the Company’s financial assets and liabilities that are required to be measured at fair value on a recurring basis as of December 31, 2017 and 2016 (in thousands):
Balance as of December 31, 2017 | Quoted Prices in Active Markets for Identical Assets (Level 1) | Significant Other Observable Inputs (Level 2) | Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level 3) | ||||||||||||
Financial assets: | |||||||||||||||
Interest rate swaps | $ | 7,324 | $ | — | $ | 7,324 | $ | — | |||||||
Total financial assets | $ | 7,324 | $ | — | $ | 7,324 | $ | — | |||||||
Financial liabilities: | |||||||||||||||
Interest rate swaps | $ | (206 | ) | $ | — | $ | (206 | ) | $ | — | |||||
Total financial liabilities | $ | (206 | ) | $ | — | $ | (206 | ) | $ | — | |||||
Balance as of December 31, 2016 | Quoted Prices in Active Markets for Identical Assets (Level 1) | Significant Other Observable Inputs (Level 2) | Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level 3) | ||||||||||||
Financial assets: | |||||||||||||||
Interest rate swaps | $ | 2,327 | $ | — | $ | 2,327 | $ | — | |||||||
Total financial assets | $ | 2,327 | $ | — | $ | 2,327 | $ | — | |||||||
Financial liabilities: | |||||||||||||||
Interest rate swaps | $ | (3,351 | ) | $ | — | $ | (3,351 | ) | $ | — | |||||
Contingent consideration | (337 | ) | — | — | (337 | ) | |||||||||
Total financial liabilities | $ | (3,688 | ) | $ | — | $ | (3,351 | ) | $ | (337 | ) | ||||
The following are reconciliations of the changes in liabilities with Level 3 inputs in the fair value hierarchy for the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016 (in thousands):
Fair Value Measurements Using Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level 3) | ||||
Beginning Balance, December 31, 2016 | $ | (337 | ) | |
Purchases and, fair value adjustments and payments made: | ||||
Purchases | 2,081 | |||
Fair value adjustments | 337 | |||
Payments received | (14 | ) | ||
Ending Balance, December 31, 2017 | $ | 2,067 | ||
Fair Value Measurements Using Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level 3) | ||||
Beginning Balance, December 31, 2015 | $ | (4,538 | ) | |
Purchases and, fair value adjustments and payments made: | ||||
Purchases | (332 | ) | ||
Fair value adjustments | 2,667 | |||
Payments made | 1,866 | |||
Ending Balance, December 31, 2016 | $ | (337 | ) | |
F-19
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued)
Items Measured at Fair Value on a Non-Recurring Basis (Including Impairment Charges)
Certain financial and nonfinancial assets and liabilities are measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis and are subject to fair value adjustments in certain circumstances, such as when there is evidence of impairment. The Company’s process for identifying and recording impairment related to real estate assets and intangible assets is discussed in Note 2 — Summary of Significant Accounting Policies.
As discussed in Note 4 — Real Estate Assets, during the year ended December 31, 2017, real estate assets related to four properties totaling approximately 33,000 square feet were deemed to be impaired and their carrying values were reduced to an estimated fair value of $4.3 million, resulting in impairment charges of $2.9 million. During the year ended December 31, 2016, real estate assets related to three properties totaling approximately 24,000 square feet were deemed to be impaired and their carrying values were reduced to an estimated fair value of $4.7 million, resulting in impairment charges of $6.7 million. During the year ended December 31, 2015, real estate assets related to one retail property totaling approximately 11,000 square feet were deemed to be impaired and its carrying value was reduced to an estimated fair value of $1.3 million, resulting in impairment charges of $1.4 million. The Company estimates fair values using Level 3 inputs and using a combined income and market approach, specifically using discounted cash flow analysis and recent comparable sales transactions. The evaluation of real estate assets for potential impairment requires the Company’s management to exercise significant judgment and to make certain key assumptions, including, but not limited to, the following: (1) terminal capitalization; (2) discount rates; (3) the number of years the property will be held; (4) property operating expenses; and (5) re-leasing assumptions, including the number of months to re-lease, market rental income and required tenant improvements. There are inherent uncertainties in making these estimates such as market conditions and the future performance and sustainability of the Company’s tenants.
The following table presents the impairment charges by asset class recorded during the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015 (in thousands):
Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2017 | 2016 | 2015 | ||||||||||
Asset class impaired: | ||||||||||||
Land | $ | 725 | $ | 1,775 | $ | 498 | ||||||
Buildings, fixtures and improvements | 1,734 | 4,678 | 662 | |||||||||
Intangible lease assets | 396 | 284 | 280 | |||||||||
Total impairment loss | $ | 2,855 | $ | 6,737 | $ | 1,440 | ||||||
NOTE 4 — REAL ESTATE ASSETS
2017 Property Acquisitions
During the year ended December 31, 2017, the Company acquired 42 commercial properties for an aggregate purchase price of $307.4 million (the “2017 Acquisitions”), of which 38 were determined to be asset acquisitions and four were accounted for as business combinations as they were acquired prior to the Company’s adoption of ASU 2017-01 in April 2017. The Company funded the 2017 Acquisitions with net cash provided by operations and available borrowings.
The following table summarizes the consideration transferred for the properties purchased during the year ended December 31, 2017 (in thousands):
2017 Acquisitions | |||
Real estate assets: | |||
Purchase price of asset acquisitions | $ | 251,999 | |
Purchase price of business combinations | 55,386 | ||
Total purchase price of real estate assets acquired (1) | $ | 307,385 | |
(1) | The weighted average amortization period for the 2017 Acquisitions is 16.9 years for acquired in-place leases and other intangibles, 13.6 years for acquired above-market leases and 8.5 years for acquired intangible lease liabilities. |
F-20
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued)
During the year ended December 31, 2017, the Company acquired a 100% interest in 38 commercial properties for an aggregate purchase price of $252.0 million, which were accounted for as asset acquisitions (the “2017 Asset Acquisitions”). The aggregate purchase price includes $6.1 million of external acquisition-related expenses that were capitalized in accordance with ASU 2017-01. Prior to the adoption of ASU 2017-01, costs related to property acquisitions were expensed as incurred. The following table summarizes the purchase price allocation for the 2017 Asset Acquisitions purchased during the year ended December 31, 2017 (in thousands):
2017 Asset Acquisitions | |||
Land | $ | 32,919 | |
Buildings, fixtures and improvements | 177,682 | ||
Acquired in-place leases and other intangibles | 39,257 | ||
Acquired above-market leases | 3,624 | ||
Revenue bonds | 2,081 | ||
Intangible lease liabilities | (3,564 | ) | |
Total purchase price | $ | 251,999 | |
During the year ended December 31, 2017, the Company acquired a 100% interest in four commercial properties for an aggregate purchase price of $55.4 million, which were accounted for as business combinations (the “2017 Business Combination Acquisitions”). The Company allocated the purchase price of these properties to the fair value of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed. The following table summarizes the purchase price allocations for the 2017 Business Combination Acquisitions purchased during the year ended December 31, 2017 (in thousands):
2017 Business Combination Acquisitions | |||
Land | $ | 9,873 | |
Buildings, fixtures and improvements | 41,186 | ||
Acquired in-place leases and other intangibles | 5,974 | ||
Acquired above-market leases | 988 | ||
Intangible lease liabilities | (2,635 | ) | |
Total purchase price | $ | 55,386 | |
The Company recorded revenue for the year ended December 31, 2017 of $5.1 million and net income for the year ended December 31, 2017 of $708,000 related to the 2017 Business Combination Acquisitions. In addition, the Company recorded $1.3 million of acquisition-related expenses for the year ended December 31, 2017, which is included in acquisition-related expenses on the consolidated statements of operations.
The following information summarizes selected financial information of the Company as if all of the 2017 Business Combination Acquisitions were completed on January 1, 2016 for each period presented below. The table below presents the Company’s estimated revenue and net income, on a pro forma basis, for the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016 (in thousands):
Year Ended December 31, | |||||||
2017 | 2016 | ||||||
Pro forma basis (unaudited): | |||||||
Revenue | $ | 424,416 | $ | 412,883 | |||
Net income | $ | 80,912 | $ | 71,301 | |||
The unaudited pro forma information for the year ended December 31, 2017 was adjusted to exclude $1.3 million of acquisition-related fees and expenses recorded during the year ended December 31, 2017 related to the 2017 Business Combination Acquisitions. Accordingly, these costs were instead recognized in the unaudited pro forma information for the year ended December 31, 2016.
F-21
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued)
The unaudited pro forma information is presented for informational purposes only and may not be indicative of what actual results of operations would have been had the transactions occurred at the beginning of 2016, nor does it purport to represent the results of future operations.
2017 Property Dispositions
During the year ended December 31, 2017, the Company disposed of 14 retail properties and one industrial property for an aggregate gross sales price of $100.6 million, resulting in proceeds of $65.9 million after closing costs and the repayment of the $33.0 million variable rate debt secured by one of the disposed properties and a gain of $17.0 million. No disposition fees were paid to CR IV Advisors or its affiliates in connection with the sale of the properties and the Company has no continuing involvement with these properties. The gain on sale of real estate is included in gain (loss) on disposition of real estate, net in the consolidated statements of operations.
2017 Impairment of Properties
The Company performs quarterly impairment review procedures, primarily through continuous monitoring of events and changes in circumstances that could indicate that the carrying value of certain of its real estate assets may not be recoverable. See Note 2 — Summary of Significant Accounting Policies for a discussion of the Company’s accounting policies regarding impairment of real estate assets.
During the year ended December 31, 2017, four properties with a carrying value of $7.2 million were deemed to be impaired and their carrying values were reduced to an estimated fair value of $4.3 million, resulting in impairment charges of $2.9 million, which were recorded in the consolidated statements of operations. See Note 3 — Fair Value Measurements for a further discussion regarding these impairment charges.
2016 Property Acquisitions and Unconsolidated Joint Venture
During the year ended December 31, 2016, the Company acquired 15 commercial properties for an aggregate purchase price of $216.7 million (the “2016 Acquisitions”). The 2016 Acquisitions were accounted for as business combinations. The Company funded the 2016 Acquisitions with net proceeds from the DRIP Offerings and available borrowings. The Company allocated the purchase price of these properties to the fair value of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed. The following table summarizes the purchase price allocations for the 2016 Acquisitions (in thousands):
2016 Acquisitions | ||||
Land | $ | 48,317 | ||
Buildings, fixtures and improvements | 149,859 | |||
Acquired in-place leases and other intangibles (1) | 18,100 | |||
Acquired above-market leases (2) | 3,764 | |||
Intangible lease liabilities (3) | (3,388 | ) | ||
Total purchase price | $ | 216,652 | ||
____________________________________
(1) | The weighted average amortization period for acquired in-place leases and other intangibles was 7.6 years for the 2016 Acquisitions. |
(2) | The weighted average amortization period for acquired above-market leases was 6.0 years for the 2016 Acquisitions. |
(3) | The weighted average amortization period for acquired intangible lease liabilities was 6.4 years for the 2016 Acquisitions. |
During the year ended December 31, 2016, the Company acquired the joint venture partner’s (the “Unconsolidated Joint Venture Partner”) approximately 10% interest in a multi-tenant property comprising 176,000 rentable square feet of commercial space (the “Unconsolidated Joint Venture”). The Company has determined that this transaction qualified as a business combination to be accounted for under the acquisition method. Accordingly, the assets and liabilities of this transaction were recorded in the Company’s consolidated balance sheets at their estimated fair value as of the acquisition date. The fair value of the assets acquired, liabilities assumed and equity interests were estimated using significant assumptions consistent with the Company’s policy concerning the allocation of the purchase price of real estate assets, including current market rental rates, rental growth rates, capitalization and discount rates, interest rates and other variables. The results of this transaction are included in the Company’s consolidated statements of operations beginning September 22, 2016.
F-22
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued)
The following table summarizes the transaction related to the business combination, including the amounts recognized for assets acquired and liabilities assumed, as indicated (in thousands):
September 22, 2016 | |||
Carrying value of the Company’s equity interest before business combination (1) | $ | 18,952 | |
Fair value of amounts recognized for assets acquired and liabilities assumed: | |||
Land | 4,535 | ||
Buildings, fixtures and improvements | 11,826 | ||
Acquired in-place leases and other intangibles | 1,296 | ||
Acquired above-market leases | 1,130 | ||
Intangible lease liabilities | (597 | ) | |
Other assets and liabilities | 115 | ||
Total net assets | 18,305 | ||
Loss recognized on equity interest remeasured to fair value | $ | (647 | ) |
____________________________________
(1) Includes $1.6 million of cash paid to the Unconsolidated Joint Venture Partner.
The Company recorded revenue for the year ended December 31, 2016 of $10.7 million and a net loss for the year ended December 31, 2016 of $1.4 million related to the 2016 Acquisitions, as well as the acquisition of the Unconsolidated Joint Venture Partner’s approximately 10% interest in the Unconsolidated Joint Venture.
The following information summarizes selected financial information of the Company as if all of the 2016 Acquisitions, as well as the acquisitions of the Unconsolidated Joint Venture Partner’s approximately 10% interest in the Unconsolidated Joint Venture, were completed on January 1, 2015 for each period presented below. The table below presents the Company’s estimated revenue and net income, on a pro forma basis, for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015 (in thousands):
Year Ended December 31, | |||||||
2016 | 2015 | ||||||
Pro forma basis (unaudited): | |||||||
Revenue | $ | 418,798 | $ | 389,780 | |||
Net income | $ | 74,052 | $ | 64,662 | |||
The unaudited pro forma information for the year ended December 31, 2016 was adjusted to exclude $4.2 million of acquisition-related fees and expenses recorded during the year ended December 31, 2016. Accordingly, these costs were instead recognized in the unaudited pro forma information for the year ended December 31, 2015.
The unaudited pro forma information is presented for informational purposes only and may not be indicative of what actual results of operations would have been had the transactions occurred at the beginning of 2015, nor does it purport to represent the results of future operations.
2016 Property Dispositions
During the year ended December 31, 2016, the Company disposed of four retail properties and one anchored shopping center for an aggregate gross sales price of $31.6 million, resulting in proceeds of $30.8 million after closing costs and a gain of $2.9 million. No disposition fees were paid to CR IV Advisors or its affiliates in connection with the sale of the properties and the Company has no continuing involvement with these properties. The gain on sale of real estate is included in gain (loss) on disposition of real estate, net in the consolidated statements of operations for all periods presented.
2016 Impairment of Properties
During the year ended December 31, 2016, three properties with a carrying value of $11.4 million were deemed to be impaired and their carrying values were reduced to an estimated fair value of $4.7 million, resulting in impairment charges of $6.7 million, which were recorded in the consolidated statement of operations. See Note 3 — Fair Value Measurements for a further discussion on these impairment charges.
F-23
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued)
2015 Property Acquisitions
During the year ended December 31, 2015, the Company acquired 111 commercial properties, including properties held in the Consolidated Joint Venture, for an aggregate purchase price of $615.8 million (the “2015 Acquisitions”). The 2015 Acquisitions were accounted for as business combinations. The Company funded the 2015 Acquisitions with net proceeds from the Initial DRIP Offering and available borrowings. The Company allocated the purchase price of these properties to the fair value of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed. The following table summarizes the purchase price allocation for acquisitions purchased during the year ended December 31, 2015 (in thousands):
December 31, 2015 | |||
Land | $ | 138,536 | |
Buildings, fixtures and improvements | 393,918 | ||
Acquired in-place leases and other intangibles (1) | 83,043 | ||
Acquired above-market leases (2) | 6,485 | ||
Intangible lease liabilities (3) | (5,883 | ) | |
Fair value adjustment of assumed note payable | (253 | ) | |
Total purchase price | $ | 615,846 | |
____________________________________
(1) | The weighted average amortization period for acquired in-place leases and other intangibles was 13.0 years for the 2015 Acquisitions. |
(2) | The weighted average amortization period for acquired above-market leases was 11.3 years for the 2015 Acquisitions. |
(3) | The weighted average amortization period for acquired intangible lease liabilities was 9.5 years for the 2015 Acquisitions. |
The Company recorded revenue for the year ended December 31, 2015 of $28.4 million and a net loss for the year ended December 31, 2015 of $6.3 million related to the 2015 Acquisitions.
The following information summarizes selected financial information of the Company as if all of the 2015 Acquisitions were completed on January 1, 2014 for each period presented below. The table below presents the Company’s estimated revenue and net income, on a pro forma basis, for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 (in thousands):
Year Ended December 31, | |||||||
2015 | 2014 | ||||||
Pro forma basis (unaudited): | |||||||
Revenue | $ | 387,921 | $ | 305,141 | |||
Net income | $ | 79,888 | $ | 8,267 | |||
The unaudited pro forma information for the year ended December 31, 2015 was adjusted to exclude $15.5 million of acquisition-related fees and expenses recorded during the year ended December 31, 2015. Accordingly, these costs were instead recognized in the unaudited pro forma information for the year ended December 31, 2014.
The unaudited pro forma information is presented for informational purposes only and may not be indicative of what actual results of operations would have been had the transactions occurred at the beginning of 2014, nor does it purport to represent the results of future operations.
Development Project
During the year ended December 31, 2014, the Company acquired one land parcel, upon which a 1.6 million square foot industrial property was expected to be constructed. The land, acquired for an aggregate amount of $23.9 million, was excluded from the 2014 Acquisitions. During the year ended December 31, 2015, the Company substantially completed the development project and placed it in service. As of December 31, 2015, the Company had a total investment of $102.8 million.
2015 Land Disposition
During the year ended December 31, 2015, the Company sold one undeveloped land parcel for a gross sales price of $1.1 million, resulting in net cash proceeds of $1.0 million to the Company and a loss of $108,000.
F-24
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued)
2015 Impairment of a Property
During the year ended December 31, 2015, a property with a carrying value of $2.7 million was deemed to be impaired and its carrying value was reduced to its estimated fair value of $1.3 million, resulting in impairment charges of $1.4 million, which were recorded in the consolidated statement of operations. See Note 3 — Fair Value Measurements for a further discussion on these impairment charges.
Consolidated Joint Venture
As of December 31, 2017, the Company had an interest in a Consolidated Joint Venture that owns and manages nine properties, with total assets of $52.3 million, which included $9.3 million of land, $42.0 million of buildings and improvements, and $5.6 million of intangible lease assets, net of accumulated depreciation and amortization of $5.2 million, and total liabilities of $780,000. The Consolidated Joint Venture does not have any debt outstanding as of December 31, 2017. The Company has the ability to control operating and financial policies of the Consolidated Joint Venture. There are restrictions on the use of these assets as the Company would generally be required to obtain the partner’s (the “Consolidated Joint Venture Partner”) approval in accordance with the joint venture agreement for any major transactions. The Company and the Consolidated Joint Venture Partner are subject to the provisions of the joint venture agreement, which includes provisions for when additional contributions may be required to fund certain cash shortfalls.
NOTE 5 — INTANGIBLE LEASE ASSETS
Intangible lease assets consisted of the following as of December 31, 2017 and 2016 (in thousands, except weighted average life remaining):
As of December 31, | |||||||||
2017 | 2016 | ||||||||
In-place leases and other intangibles, net of accumulated amortization of $166,874 and | |||||||||
$125,620, respectively (with a weighted average life remaining of 10.5 years | |||||||||
and 10.7 years, respectively) | $ | 355,683 | $ | 364,038 | |||||
Acquired above-market leases, net of accumulated amortization of $25,626 and | |||||||||
$18,723, respectively (with a weighted average life remaining of 8.7 years and | |||||||||
8.9 years, respectively) | 41,747 | 44,768 | |||||||
$ | 397,430 | $ | 408,806 | ||||||
Amortization of the above-market leases is recorded as a reduction to rental revenue, and amortization expense for the in-place leases and other intangibles is included in depreciation and amortization in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations. The following table summarizes the amortization expense related to the intangible lease assets for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016, and 2015 (in thousands):
Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2017 | 2016 | 2015 | ||||||||||
In-place lease and other intangible amortization | $ | 46,602 | $ | 45,944 | $ | 41,612 | ||||||
Above-market lease amortization | $ | 7,304 | $ | 6,638 | $ | 6,439 | ||||||
As of December 31, 2017, the estimated amortization expense relating to the intangible lease assets for each of the five succeeding fiscal years is as follows (in thousands):
Amortization Expense | ||||||||
Year Ending December 31, | In-Place Leases and Other Intangibles | Above-Market Leases | ||||||
2018 | $ | 42,416 | $ | 6,319 | ||||
2019 | $ | 38,585 | $ | 5,236 | ||||
2020 | $ | 36,251 | $ | 4,660 | ||||
2021 | $ | 32,823 | $ | 4,037 | ||||
2022 | $ | 30,676 | $ | 3,706 | ||||
F-25
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued)
NOTE 6 — DERIVATIVE INSTRUMENTS AND HEDGING ACTIVITIES
In the normal course of business, the Company uses certain types of derivative instruments for the purpose of managing or hedging its interest rate risk. As of December 31, 2017, the Company had 12 executed interest rate swap agreements. The following table summarizes the terms of the Company’s 11 interest rate swap agreements designated as hedging instruments effective as of December 31, 2017 and 2016 (dollar amounts in thousands):
Outstanding Notional | Fair Value of Assets and (Liabilities) | ||||||||||||||||||
Balance Sheet | Amount as of | Interest | Effective | Maturity | December 31, | December 31, | |||||||||||||
Location | December 31, 2017 | Rates (1) | Dates | Dates | 2017 | 2016 | |||||||||||||
Interest Rate Swaps | Derivative assets, prepaid expenses, revenue bonds and other assets | $ | 990,066 | 2.55% to 3.91% | 8/20/2013 to 9/01/2016 | 8/15/2018 to 7/01/2021 | $ | 4,717 | $ | 2,327 | |||||||||
Interest Rate Swaps | Deferred rental income and other liabilities | $ | 38,737 | 4.14% to 4.75% | 6/24/2013 to 8/23/2013 | 6/24/2018 to 8/24/2020 | $ | (206 | ) | $ | (3,351 | ) | |||||||
____________________________________
(1) | The interest rates consist of the underlying index swapped to a fixed rate and the applicable interest rate spread as of December 31, 2017. |
During the year ended December 31, 2017, the Company entered into one interest rate swap agreement associated with a $811.7 million notional amount, effective on August 15, 2018. The following table summarizes the terms of this interest rate swap agreement designated as a hedging instrument as of December 31, 2017 and 2016 (dollar amounts in thousands):
Outstanding Notional | Fair Value of Asset | |||||||||||||||||||
Balance Sheet | Amount as of | Interest | Effective | Maturity | December 31, | December 31, | ||||||||||||||
Location | December 31, 2017 | Rate (1) | Date | Date | 2017 | 2016 | ||||||||||||||
Interest Rate Swap | Derivative assets, prepaid expenses, revenue bonds and other assets | $ | 811,666 | 3.77 | % | 8/15/2018 | 3/15/2021 | $ | 2,607 | $ | — | |||||||||
____________________________________
(1) | The interest rate consists of the underlying index swapped to a fixed rate and the applicable interest rate spread as of December 31, 2017. |
Additional disclosures related to the fair value of the Company’s derivative instruments are included in Note 3 — Fair Value Measurements. The notional amount under the interest rate swap agreements is an indication of the extent of the Company’s involvement in each instrument, but does not represent exposure to credit, interest rate or market risks.
Accounting for changes in the fair value of a derivative instrument depends on the intended use and designation of the derivative instrument. The Company designated the interest rate swaps as cash flow hedges in order to hedge the variability of the anticipated cash flows on its variable rate debt. The change in fair value of the effective portion of the derivative instruments that are designated as hedges is recorded in other comprehensive income (loss), with a portion of the amount subsequently reclassified to interest expense as interest payments are made on the Company’s variable rate debt. For the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016, and 2015, the amounts reclassified were $3.1 million, $8.8 million and $6.5 million, respectively. During the next 12 months, the Company estimates that an additional $2.0 million will be reclassified from other comprehensive income (loss) as an increase to interest expense.
Any ineffective portion of the change in fair value of the derivative instruments is recorded in interest expense. During the year ended December 31, 2017, $488,000 of the change in the fair value of the interest rate swaps was considered ineffective. There were no portions of the change in the fair value of the interest rate swaps that were considered ineffective during the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015.
The Company has agreements with each of its derivative counterparties that contain provisions whereby if the Company defaults on certain of its unsecured indebtedness, the Company could also be declared in default on its derivative obligations, resulting in an acceleration of payment. If the Company had breached any of these provisions, it could have been required to
F-26
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued)
settle its obligations under the agreements at their aggregate termination value, inclusive of interest payments, of $227,000 at December 31, 2017. In addition, the Company is exposed to credit risk in the event of non-performance by its derivative counterparties. The Company believes it mitigates its credit risk by entering into agreements with creditworthy counterparties. The Company records credit risk valuation adjustments on its interest rate swaps based on the credit quality of the Company and the respective counterparty. There were no termination events or events of default related to the interest rate swaps as of December 31, 2017.
NOTE 7 — NOTES PAYABLE AND CREDIT FACILITY
As of December 31, 2017, the Company had $2.5 billion of debt outstanding, including net deferred financing costs, with weighted average years to maturity of 4.2 years and a weighted average interest rate of 3.6%. The weighted average years to maturity is computed using the scheduled repayment date as specified in each loan agreement where applicable. The weighted average interest rate is computed using the interest rate in effect until the scheduled repayment date. Should a loan not be repaid by its scheduled repayment date, the applicable interest rate will increase as specified in the respective loan agreement. The following table summarizes the debt balances as of December 31, 2017 and 2016, and the debt activity for the year ended December 31, 2017 (in thousands):
During the Year Ended December 31, 2017 | |||||||||||||||||||
Balance as of December 31, 2016 | Debt Issuances and Assumptions (1) | Repayments and Modifications | Accretion and (Amortization) | Balance as of December 31, 2017 | |||||||||||||||
Fixed rate debt | $ | 1,164,622 | $ | 53,206 | $ | (451 | ) | $ | — | $ | 1,217,377 | ||||||||
Variable rate debt | 53,500 | — | (33,000 | ) | — | 20,500 | |||||||||||||
Credit facility | 1,039,666 | 1,519,500 | (1,308,166 | ) | — | 1,251,000 | |||||||||||||
Total debt | 2,257,788 | 1,572,706 | (1,341,617 | ) | — | 2,488,877 | |||||||||||||
Net premiums (2) | 506 | — | — | (87 | ) | 419 | |||||||||||||
Deferred costs (3) | (12,035 | ) | (10,078 | ) | 717 | (4) | 3,863 | (17,533 | ) | ||||||||||
Total debt, net | $ | 2,246,259 | $ | 1,562,628 | $ | (1,340,900 | ) | $ | 3,776 | $ | 2,471,763 | ||||||||
____________________________________
(1) | Includes deferred financing costs incurred during the period. |
(2) | Net premiums on mortgage notes payable were recorded upon the assumption of the respective debt instruments. Amortization of these net premiums is recorded as a reduction to interest expense over the remaining term of the respective debt instruments using the effective-interest method. |
(3) | Deferred costs relate to mortgage notes payable and the term portion of the Credit Facility (as defined below). |
(4) | Includes $503,000 of deferred financing costs of the term portion of the Credit Facility written off during the period resulting from the Second Amended and Restated Credit Agreement, as defined below. |
As of December 31, 2017, the fixed rate debt outstanding of $1.2 billion included $217.1 million of variable rate debt that is fixed through interest rate swap agreements, which has the effect of fixing the variable interest rates per annum through the maturity date of the variable rate debt. The fixed rate debt has interest rates ranging from 2.6% to 5.0% per annum. The fixed rate debt outstanding matures on various dates from June 2018 through October 2025. The aggregate balance of gross real estate assets, net of gross intangible lease liabilities, securing the fixed rate debt outstanding was $2.2 billion as of December 31, 2017. Each of the mortgage notes payable, comprising the fixed rate debt, is secured by the respective properties on which the debt was placed. As of December 31, 2017, the variable rate debt outstanding of $20.5 million had a weighted average interest rate of 4.6%. The variable rate debt outstanding matures on February 26, 2020. With respect to the Company’s $24.2 million of debt maturing within the next year, the Company expects to use borrowings available under the Credit Facility or enter into new financing arrangements in order to meet its debt obligations. The aggregate balance of gross real estate assets, net of gross intangible lease liabilities, securing the variable rate debt outstanding was $40.8 million as of December 31, 2017.
During the year ended December 31, 2017, the Company entered into a second amended and restated unsecured credit agreement (the “Second Amended and Restated Credit Agreement”) with JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. as administrative agent (“JPMorgan Chase”), and the other lenders party thereto that provides for borrowings of up to $1.40 billion, which includes a $1.05 billion unsecured term loan (the “Term Loan”) and up to $350.0 million in unsecured revolving loans (the “Revolving Loans” and collectively, with the Term Loan, the “Credit Facility”). The Term Loan matures on March 15, 2022 and the Revolving Loans mature on March 15, 2021; however, the Company has the right to extend the maturity date of the Revolving Loans to March 15, 2022.
F-27
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued)
Depending upon the type of loan specified and overall leverage ratio, the Credit Facility bears interest at (i) the one-month, two-month, three-month or six-month London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) multiplied by the statutory reserve rate (the “Eurodollar Rate”) plus an interest rate spread ranging from 1.65% to 2.25% or (ii) a base rate, ranging from 0.65% to 1.25%, plus the greater of: (a) JPMorgan Chase’s Prime Rate; (b) the Federal Funds Effective Rate (as defined in the Second Amended and Restated Credit Agreement) plus 0.50%; or (c) the one-month LIBOR multiplied by the statutory reserve rate plus 1.00%. As of December 31, 2017, the Revolving Loans outstanding totaled $201.0 million at a weighted average interest rate of 3.3%. As of December 31, 2017, the Term Loan outstanding totaled $1.05 billion, $811.7 million of which is subject to interest rate swap agreements (the “Swapped Term Loan”). The interest rate swap agreements had the effect of fixing the Eurodollar Rate per annum of the Swapped Term Loan. As of December 31, 2017, the weighted average all-in rate for the Swapped Term Loan was 3.2%. As of December 31, 2017, the Company had $1.25 billion outstanding under the Credit Facility at a weighted average interest rate of 3.2% and $148.4 million in unused capacity, subject to borrowing availability.
The Second Amended and Restated Credit Agreement contains provisions with respect to covenants, events of default and remedies customary for facilities of this nature. In particular, the Second Amended and Restated Credit Agreement requires the Company to maintain a minimum consolidated net worth greater than or equal to the sum of (i) $2.0 billion plus (ii) 75% of the equity issued minus (iii) the aggregate amount of any redemptions or similar transaction from the date of the Second Amended and Restated Credit Agreement, a leverage ratio less than or equal to 60%, a fixed charge coverage ratio greater than 1.50, an unsecured debt to unencumbered asset value ratio equal to or less than 60%, an unsecured debt service coverage ratio greater than 1.75, a secured debt ratio equal to or less than 40% and the amount of secured debt that is recourse debt at no greater than 15% of total asset value. The Company believes it was in compliance with the financial covenants under the Second Amended and Restated Credit Agreement, as well as the financial covenants under the Company’s various fixed and variable rate debt agreements, as of December 31, 2017.
Maturities
The following table summarizes the scheduled aggregate principal repayments for the Company’s outstanding debt as of December 31, 2017 for each of the five succeeding fiscal years and the period thereafter (in thousands):
Year Ending December 31, | Principal Repayments | ||||
2018 | $ | 24,211 | |||
2019 | 49,799 | ||||
2020 | 333,215 | ||||
2021 | 301,603 | ||||
2022 | 1,092,464 | ||||
Thereafter | 687,585 | ||||
Total | $ | 2,488,877 | |||
NOTE 8 — INTANGIBLE LEASE LIABILITIES
Intangible lease liabilities of the Company consisted of the following as of December 31, 2017 and 2016 (in thousands, except weighted average life):
As of December 31, | |||||||||
2017 | 2016 | ||||||||
Acquired below-market leases, net of accumulated amortization of $31,330 | |||||||||
and $23,241, respectively (with a weighted average life remaining of 7.5 | |||||||||
and 7.8 years, respectively) | $ | 45,572 | $ | 49,075 | |||||
Amortization of below-market leases is recorded as an increase to rental revenue in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations. The following table summarizes the amortization of intangible lease liabilities for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015 (in thousands):
Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2017 | 2016 | 2015 | ||||||||||
Amortization of below-market leases | $ | 9,503 | $ | 7,821 | $ | 7,597 | ||||||
F-28
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued)
As of December 31, 2017, the estimated amortization of the intangible lease liabilities for each of the five succeeding fiscal years is as follows (in thousands):
Year Ending December 31, | Amortization of Below-Market Leases | |||
2018 | $ | 8,356 | ||
2019 | $ | 7,492 | ||
2020 | $ | 6,688 | ||
2021 | $ | 4,566 | ||
2022 | $ | 3,801 | ||
NOTE 9 — SUPPLEMENTAL CASH FLOW DISCLOSURES
Supplemental cash flow disclosures for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015 are as follows (in thousands):
Year Ended December 31, | |||||||||||
2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |||||||||
Supplemental Disclosures of Non-Cash Investing and Financing Activities: | |||||||||||
Distributions declared and unpaid | $ | 16,531 | $ | 16,498 | $ | 16,568 | |||||
Accrued capital expenditures | $ | 192 | $ | 675 | $ | 2,741 | |||||
Common stock issued through distribution reinvestment plan | $ | 101,344 | $ | 109,166 | $ | 112,158 | |||||
Change in fair value of interest rate swaps | $ | 7,654 | $ | 4,335 | $ | (1,302 | ) | ||||
Contingent consideration recorded upon property acquisitions | $ | — | $ | 332 | $ | 2,880 | |||||
Fair value of notes payable assumed in real estate acquisition | $ | — | $ | — | $ | 15,233 | |||||
Consolidation of real estate joint venture | $ | — | $ | 18,305 | $ | — | |||||
Supplemental Cash Flow Disclosures: | |||||||||||
Interest paid | $ | 85,140 | $ | 74,034 | $ | 54,388 | |||||
NOTE 10 — COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
Litigation
In the ordinary course of business, the Company may become subject to litigation and claims. The Company is not aware of any material pending legal proceedings, other than ordinary routine litigation incidental to the Company’s business, to which the Company is a party or of which the Company’s properties are the subject.
Environmental Matters
In connection with the ownership and operation of real estate, the Company may potentially be liable for costs and damages related to environmental matters. In addition, the Company may own or acquire certain properties that are subject to environmental remediation. Generally, the seller of the property, the tenant of the property and/or another third party is responsible for environmental remediation costs related to a property. Additionally, in connection with the purchase of certain properties, the respective sellers and/or tenants may agree to indemnify the Company against future remediation costs. The Company also carries environmental liability insurance on its properties that provides limited coverage for any remediation liability and/or pollution liability for third-party bodily injury and/or property damage claims for which the Company may be liable. The Company is not aware of any environmental matters which it believes are reasonably likely to have a material effect on its results of operations, financial condition or liquidity.
NOTE 11 — RELATED-PARTY TRANSACTIONS AND ARRANGEMENTS
The Company has incurred fees and expenses payable to CR IV Advisors and certain of its affiliates in connection with the acquisition, management and disposition of its assets.
Acquisition fees and expenses
The Company pays CR IV Advisors or its affiliates acquisition fees of up to 2.0% of: (1) the contract purchase price of each property or asset the Company acquires; (2) the amount paid in respect of the development, construction or improvement
F-29
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued)
of each asset the Company acquires; (3) the purchase price of any loan the Company acquires; and (4) the principal amount of any loan the Company originates. In addition, the Company reimburses CR IV Advisors or its affiliates for acquisition-related expenses incurred in the process of acquiring properties, so long as the total acquisition fees and expenses relating to the transaction do not exceed 6.0% of the contract purchase price, unless otherwise approved by a majority of the Board, including a majority of the Company’s independent directors, as commercially competitive, fair and reasonable to the Company.
Advisory fees and expenses
The Company pays CR IV Advisors a monthly advisory fee based upon the Company’s monthly average invested assets, which, effective January 1, 2017, is based on the estimated market value of such assets used to determine the Company’s estimated per share NAV as of December 31, 2016, as discussed in Note 1 — Organization and Business, and for those assets acquired subsequent to December 31, 2016, is based on the purchase price. The monthly advisory fee is equal to the following amounts: (1) an annualized rate of 0.75% paid on the Company’s average invested assets that are between $0 and $2.0 billion; (2) an annualized rate of 0.70% paid on the Company’s average invested assets that are between $2.0 billion and $4.0 billion; and (3) an annualized rate of 0.65% paid on the Company’s average invested assets that are over $4.0 billion.
Operating expenses
The Company reimburses CR IV Advisors or its affiliates for certain expenses CR IV Advisors or its affiliates paid or incurred in connection with the services provided to the Company, subject to the limitation that the Company will not reimburse CR IV Advisors or its affiliates for any amount by which the operating expenses (including the advisory fee) at the end of the four preceding fiscal quarters exceed the greater of: (1) 2.0% of average invested assets, or (2) 25.0% of net income excluding any additions to reserves for depreciation, bad debts or other similar non-cash reserves and excluding any gain from the sale of assets for that period. The Company will not reimburse CR IV Advisors or its affiliates for the salaries and benefits paid to personnel in connection with the services for which CR IV Advisors receives acquisition fees, and the Company will not reimburse CR IV Advisors for salaries and benefits paid to the Company’s executive officers.
Disposition fees
If CR IV Advisors or its affiliates provide a substantial amount of services (as determined by a majority of the Company’s independent directors) in connection with the sale of one or more properties (or the Company’s entire portfolio), the Company will pay CR IV Advisors or its affiliates a disposition fee in an amount equal to up to one-half of the real estate or brokerage commission paid by the Company to third parties on the sale of such property, not to exceed 1.0% of the contract price of the property sold; provided, however, in no event may the total disposition fees paid to CR IV Advisors, its affiliates and unaffiliated third parties exceed the lesser of the customary competitive real estate commission or an amount equal to 6.0% of the contract sales price. During each of the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, no disposition fees were incurred for any such services provided by CR IV Advisors or its affiliates.
Subordinated performance fees
If the Company is sold or its assets are liquidated, CR IV Advisors will be entitled to receive a subordinated performance fee equal to 15.0% of the net sale proceeds remaining after stockholders have received, from regular distributions plus special distributions paid from proceeds of such sale, a return of their net capital invested and an 8.0% annual cumulative, non-compounded return. Alternatively, if the Company’s shares are listed on a national securities exchange, CR IV Advisors will be entitled to a subordinated performance fee equal to 15.0% of the amount by which the market value of the Company’s outstanding stock plus all distributions paid by the Company prior to listing, exceeds the sum of the total amount of capital raised from stockholders and the amount of distributions necessary to generate an 8.0% annual cumulative, non-compounded return to stockholders. As an additional alternative, upon termination of the advisory agreement, CR IV Advisors may be entitled to a subordinated performance fee similar to the fee to which CR IV Advisors would have been entitled had the portfolio been liquidated (based on an independent appraised value of the portfolio) on the date of termination. During each of the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, no subordinated performance fees were incurred related to any such events.
F-30
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued)
The Company recorded fees and expense reimbursements as shown in the table below for services provided by CR IV Advisors or its affiliates related to the services described above during the periods indicated (in thousands):
Year Ended December 31, | |||||||||||
2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |||||||||
Acquisition fees and expenses | $ | 6,532 | $ | 4,960 | $ | 13,311 | |||||
Advisory fees and expenses | $ | 44,072 | $ | 41,926 | $ | 36,225 | |||||
Operating expenses | $ | 4,494 | $ | 4,119 | $ | 4,568 | |||||
Of the amounts shown above, $2.0 million and $5.3 million had been incurred, but not yet paid, for services provided by CR IV Advisors or its affiliates in connection with the acquisition and operations activities during the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016, respectively, and such amounts were recorded as liabilities of the Company as of such dates.
Due to/from Affiliates
As of December 31, 2017 and 2016, $2.0 million and $5.3 million, respectively, had been incurred primarily for advisory and operating expenses by CR IV Advisors or its affiliates, but had not yet been reimbursed by the Company. These amounts were included in due to affiliates in the consolidated balance sheets for such periods.
As of December 31, 2017 and 2016, $56,000 and $58,000, respectively, were due from CR IV Advisors or its affiliates related to amounts received by affiliates of the advisor which were due to the Company.
NOTE 12 — ECONOMIC DEPENDENCY
Under various agreements, the Company has engaged and may in the future engage CR IV Advisors or its affiliates to provide certain services that are essential to the Company, including asset management services, supervision of the management and leasing of properties owned by the Company, asset acquisition and disposition decisions, as well as other administrative responsibilities for the Company including accounting services and stockholder relations. As a result of these relationships, the Company is dependent upon CR IV Advisors or its affiliates. In the event that these companies are unable to provide the Company with these services, the Company would be required to find alternative providers of these services.
NOTE 13 — STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
As of December 31, 2017 and 2016, the Company was authorized to issue $600.0 million of shares of common stock under the Secondary DRIP Offering. As of December 31, 2015 and 2014, the Company was authorized to issue $247.0 million in shares of common stock pursuant to the Initial DRIP Offering. All shares of such stock have a par value of $0.01 per share. The par value of stockholder proceeds raised from the DRIP Offerings is classified as common stock, with the remainder allocated to capital in excess of par value. The Company ceased issuing shares under the Initial DRIP Offering effective as of June 30, 2016.
As of December 31, 2013, the Company was authorized to issue 490.0 million shares of common stock and 10.0 million shares of preferred stock. All shares of such stock have a par value of $0.01 per share. On August 11, 2010, the Company sold 20,000 shares of common stock, at $10.00 per share, to Cole Holdings Corporation (“CHC”). On April 5, 2013, the ownership of such shares was transferred to CREInvestments, LLC (“CREI”), an affiliate of CR IV Advisors. On February 7, 2014, the ownership of such shares was transferred to VEREIT OP. Upon completion of the Transaction on February 1, 2018, the ownership of such shares was transferred by VEREIT OP to CR IV Advisors. Pursuant to the Company’s charter, CR IV Advisors is prohibited from selling the 20,000 shares of the common stock that represents the initial investment in the Company for so long as CCO Group remains the Company’s sponsor; provided, however, that CR IV Advisors may transfer ownership of all or a portion of these 20,000 shares of the Company’s common stock to other affiliates of the Company’s sponsor. The Company ceased offering shares of its common stock in the Offering on April 4, 2014 and registered $247.0 million in shares of common stock under the Initial DRIP Offering.
Distribution Reinvestment Plan
Pursuant to the DRIP, the Company allows stockholders to elect to have their distributions reinvested in additional shares of the Company’s common stock. The purchase price under the DRIP portion of the Offering was $9.50 per share. The purchase price under the Initial DRIP Offering was $9.50 per share until September 30, 2015 and was $9.70 per share beginning October 1, 2015, the estimated per share NAV as determined by the Board as of August 31, 2015. Prior to November 13, 2016, the purchase price per share under the Secondary DRIP Offering was $9.70 and from November 14, 2016 to March 27, 2017 was
F-31
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued)
$9.92 per share, the estimated per share NAV as determined by the Board as of September 30, 2016. From March 28, 2017 to March 28, 2018 the purchase price per share under the Secondary DRIP Offering was $10.08 per share, the estimated per share NAV as determined by the Board as of December 31, 2016. On March 29, 2018, the Board established an updated estimated per share NAV of its common stock as of December 31, 2017 of $9.37 per share. Therefore, effective March 29, 2018, the Company will issue shares of its common stock at a price of $9.37 per share pursuant to the Secondary DRIP Offering. The Board may terminate or amend the Secondary DRIP Offering at the Company’s discretion at any time upon ten days’ prior written notice to the stockholders. During the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, approximately 10.1 million, 11.2 million and 11.7 million shares were purchased under the DRIP Offerings for approximately $101.3 million, $109.2 million and $112.2 million, respectively, which were recorded as redeemable common stock on the consolidated balance sheets.
Share Redemption Program
The Company’s share redemption program permits its stockholders to sell their shares back to the Company after they have held them for at least one year, subject to the significant conditions and limitations described below.
The share redemption program provides that the Company will redeem shares of its common stock from requesting stockholders, subject to the terms and conditions of the share redemption program. The Company will limit the number of shares redeemed pursuant to the share redemption program as follows: (1) the Company will not redeem in excess of 5% of the weighted average number of shares outstanding during the trailing 12 months prior to the end of the fiscal quarter for which the redemptions are being paid; and (2) funding for the redemption of shares will be limited, among other things, to the net proceeds the Company receives from the sale of shares under the DRIP Offerings, net of shares redeemed to date. In an effort to accommodate redemption requests throughout the calendar year, the Company intends to limit quarterly redemptions to approximately 1.25% of the weighted average number of shares outstanding during the trailing 12-month period ending on the last day of the fiscal quarter, and funding for redemptions for each quarter generally will be limited to the net proceeds the Company receives from the sale of shares in the respective quarter under the DRIP Offerings.
In accordance with the Company’s share redemption program, the per share redemption price (other than for shares purchased pursuant to the DRIP portion of the Offering and the DRIP Offerings) will depend on the length of time the redeeming stockholder has held such shares as follows: after two years from the purchase date, 97.5% of the most recent estimated value of each share; and after three years from the purchase date, 100% of the most recent estimated value of each share. During this time period, the redemption price for shares purchased pursuant to the DRIP portion of the Offering and the DRIP Offerings will be 100% of the most recent estimated value of each share. Until September 30, 2015, the most recent estimated value per share for purposes of the share redemption program was $10.00 per share, the purchase price per share in the primary portion of the Offering. From October 1, 2015 until November 13, 2016, the most recent estimated value per share for purposes of the share redemption program was $9.70 per share, the estimated per share NAV as of August 31, 2015, as determined by the Board. From November 14, 2016 until March 27, 2017, the most recent estimated value per share for purposes of the share redemption program was $9.92 per share, the estimated per share NAV as of September 30, 2016, as determined by the Board. From March 28, 2017 to March 28, 2018, the most recent estimated value per share for purposes of the share redemption program was $10.08 per share, the estimated per share NAV as of December 31, 2016, as determined by the Board. As a result of the Board’s determination of an updated estimated value of the Company’s shares of common stock, the updated estimated per share NAV of $9.37, as of December 31, 2017, will serve as the most recent estimated value for purposes of the share redemption program, effective March 29, 2018, until such time as the Board determines a new estimated per share NAV. See the discussion of the updated estimated per share NAV of the Company’s common stock effective March 29, 2018 in Note 17 — Subsequent Events.
Upon receipt of a request for redemption, the Company may conduct a Uniform Commercial Code search to ensure that no liens are held against the shares. If the Company cannot purchase all shares presented for redemption in any fiscal quarter, based upon insufficient cash available and/or the limit on the number of shares the Company may redeem during any quarter or year, the Company will give priority to the redemption of deceased stockholders’ shares. The Company next will give priority to requests for full redemption of accounts with a balance of 250 shares or less at the time the Company receives the request, in order to reduce the expense of maintaining small accounts. Thereafter, the Company will honor the remaining quarterly redemption requests on a pro rata basis. Following such quarterly redemption period, the unsatisfied portion of the prior redemption request must be resubmitted, prior to the last day of the new quarter. Unfulfilled requests for redemption will not be carried over automatically to subsequent redemption periods.
The Company redeems shares no later than the end of the month following the end of each fiscal quarter. Requests for redemption must be received on or prior to the end of the fiscal quarter in order for the Company to repurchase the shares in the month following the end of that fiscal quarter. The Board may amend, suspend or terminate the share redemption program at any time upon 30 days’ prior written notice to the stockholders. During the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, the
F-32
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued)
Company redeemed approximately 10.3 million, 11.5 million and 4.6 million shares, respectively, under the share redemption program for $103.7 million, $110.7 million and $44.2 million, respectively. During the year ended December 31, 2017, redemption requests relating to approximately 34.2 million shares went unfulfilled.
Distributions Payable and Distribution Policy
The Board authorized a daily distribution, based on 365 days in the calendar year, of $0.001711452 per share for stockholders of record as of the close of business on each day of the period commencing on January 1, 2017 and ending on June 30, 2018. As of December 31, 2017, the Company had distributions payable of $16.5 million.
NOTE 14 — INCOME TAXES
For federal income tax purposes, distributions to stockholders are characterized as ordinary dividends, capital gain distributions, or nondividend distributions. Nondividend distributions will reduce U.S stockholders’ basis (but not below zero) in their shares. The following table shows the character of the distributions the Company paid on a percentage basis for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015:
Year Ended December 31, | |||||||||
Character of Distributions: | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | ||||||
Ordinary dividends | 51 | % | 53 | % | 58 | % | |||
Nondividend distributions | 42 | % | 46 | % | 42 | % | |||
Capital gain distributions | 7 | % | 1 | % | — | % | |||
Total | 100 | % | 100 | % | 100 | % | |||
During the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, the Company distributed as dividends to its stockholders 100% of its taxable income for federal income tax purposes. Accordingly, no provision for federal income taxes related to such taxable income was recorded on the Company’s financial statements. During the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, the Company incurred state and local income and franchise taxes of $1.6 million, $1.2 million, and $2.2 million, respectively, which were recorded in general and administrative expenses in the consolidated statements of operations.
The Company had no unrecognized tax benefits as of or during the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016. Any interest and penalties related to unrecognized tax benefits would be recognized within the provision for income taxes in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations. The Company files income tax returns in the U.S. federal jurisdiction, as well as various state jurisdictions, and is subject to routine examinations by the respective tax authorities.
In December 2017, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act was signed into law which, in addition to reducing corporate and individual tax rates, eliminates or restricts various deductions. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act makes numerous large and small changes to the tax rules that do not affect the Company’s REIT qualification rules directly.
NOTE 15 — OPERATING LEASES
The Company’s real estate assets are leased to tenants under operating leases for which the terms and expirations vary. As of December 31, 2017, the leases had a weighted-average remaining term of 9.6 years. Certain leases include provisions to extend the lease agreements, options for early termination after paying a specified penalty, rights of first refusal to purchase the property at competitive market rates, and other negotiated terms and conditions. The Company retains substantially all of the risks and benefits of ownership of the real estate assets leased to tenants.
F-33
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued)
As of December 31, 2017, the future minimum rental income from the Company’s real estate assets under non-cancelable operating leases, assuming no exercise of renewal options for the succeeding five fiscal years and thereafter, was as follows (in thousands):
Year Ending December 31, | Future Minimum Rental Income | |||
2018 | $ | 361,650 | ||
2019 | 348,449 | |||
2020 | 335,926 | |||
2021 | 319,531 | |||
2022 | 303,429 | |||
Thereafter | 1,962,178 | |||
Total | $ | 3,631,163 | ||
A certain amount of the Company’s rental income is from tenants with leases which are subject to contingent rent provisions. These contingent rents are subject to the tenant achieving periodic revenues in excess of specified levels. For the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, the amount of the contingent rent earned by the Company was not significant.
NOTE 16 — QUARTERLY RESULTS (UNAUDITED)
Presented below is a summary of the unaudited quarterly financial information for the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016 (in thousands, except for per share amounts). In the opinion of management, the information for the interim periods presented includes all adjustments which are of a normal and recurring nature, necessary to present a fair presentation of the results for each period.
December 31, 2017 | ||||||||||||||||
First Quarter | Second Quarter | Third Quarter | Fourth Quarter | |||||||||||||
Revenues | $ | 104,780 | $ | 104,504 | $ | 107,024 | $ | 107,787 | ||||||||
Acquisition-related expenses | $ | 1,247 | $ | 163 | $ | 110 | $ | 79 | ||||||||
Operating income | $ | 38,783 | $ | 38,756 | $ | 37,755 | $ | 37,901 | ||||||||
Net income | $ | 16,251 | $ | 18,107 | $ | 29,769 | $ | 15,424 | ||||||||
Net income attributable to the Company | $ | 16,217 | $ | 18,075 | $ | 29,736 | $ | 15,392 | ||||||||
Basic and diluted net income per common share (1) | $ | 0.05 | $ | 0.06 | $ | 0.10 | $ | 0.05 | ||||||||
Distributions declared per common share | $ | 0.154 | $ | 0.157 | $ | 0.157 | $ | 0.157 | ||||||||
____________________________________
(1) | The Company calculates net income per share based on the weighted-average number of outstanding shares of common stock during the reporting period. The average number of shares fluctuates throughout the year and can therefore produce a full year result that does not agree to the sum of the individual quarters. |
December 31, 2016 | ||||||||||||||||
First Quarter | Second Quarter | Third Quarter | Fourth Quarter | |||||||||||||
Revenues | $ | 100,547 | $ | 100,597 | $ | 101,796 | $ | 104,511 | ||||||||
Acquisition-related expenses | $ | 372 | $ | 1,803 | $ | 1,417 | $ | 599 | ||||||||
Operating income | $ | 38,675 | $ | 38,153 | $ | 37,314 | $ | 35,042 | ||||||||
Net income | $ | 20,054 | $ | 18,945 | $ | 18,128 | $ | 14,852 | ||||||||
Net income attributable to the Company | $ | 20,020 | $ | 18,912 | $ | 18,096 | $ | 14,814 | ||||||||
Basic and diluted net income per common share (1) | $ | 0.06 | $ | 0.06 | $ | 0.06 | $ | 0.05 | ||||||||
Distributions declared per common share | $ | 0.155 | $ | 0.156 | $ | 0.157 | $ | 0.157 | ||||||||
____________________________________
(1) | The Company calculates net income per share based on the weighted-average number of outstanding shares of common stock during the reporting period. The average number of shares fluctuates throughout the year and can therefore produce a full year result that does not agree to the sum of the individual quarters. |
F-34
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued)
NOTE 17 — SUBSEQUENT EVENTS
The following events occurred subsequent to December 31, 2017:
Redemption of Shares of Common Stock
Subsequent to December 31, 2017, the Company redeemed approximately 2.4 million shares pursuant to the Company’s share redemption program for $24.3 million (at an average price per share of $10.08). Management, in its discretion, limited the amount of shares redeemed for the three months ended December 31, 2017 to an amount equal to net proceeds the Company received from the sale of shares in the DRIP Offerings during the respective period. The remaining redemption requests received during the three months ended December 31, 2017 totaling approximately 11.1 million shares went unfulfilled.
Property Disposition
Subsequent to December 31, 2017, the Company disposed of one commercial real estate property for a gross sales price of $2.0 million, resulting in proceeds of $2.0 million after closing costs and a gain of $265,000. No disposition fees were paid to CR IV Advisors or its affiliates in connection with the sale of the property and the Company has no continuing involvement with this property.
Sale of Cole Capital
As described in Note 1 — Organization and Business, on February 1, 2018, the Transaction was completed. Immediately following the completion of the Transaction, Cole Capital Advisors, Inc. and the Company’s dealer manager were each converted into Delaware limited liability companies, Cole Capital Advisors, Inc.’s name was changed to CCO Group, LLC, and the Company’s dealer manager’s name was changed to CCO Capital, LLC. As a result of the Transaction, CIM owns and/or controls CCO Group, LLC and its subsidiaries, and CCO Group, LLC owns and controls CR IV Advisors, CCO Capital and CREI Advisors, the Company’s external advisor, dealer manager for the Offerings and property manager, respectively.
In addition, as part of the Transaction, VEREIT OP and CCO Group, LLC entered into the Services Agreement pursuant to which VEREIT OP will continue to provide certain services to CCO Group and to the Cole REITs, including operational real estate support. VEREIT OP will continue to provide such services through March 31, 2019 (or, if later, the date of the last government filing other than a tax filing made by any of the Cole REITs with respect to its 2018 fiscal year) and will provide consulting and research services through December 31, 2023 as requested by CCO Group, LLC.
Estimated Per Share NAV
On March 29, 2018, the Board established an estimated per share NAV of the Company’s common stock as of December 31, 2017, of $9.37 per share. Commencing on March 29, 2018, distributions will be reinvested in shares of the Company’s common stock under the Secondary DRIP Offering at a price of $9.37 per share. Pursuant to the terms of the Company’s share redemption program, commencing on March 29, 2018, the updated estimated per share NAV of $9.37, as of December 31, 2017, will serve as the most recent estimated value for purposes of the share redemption program going forward, until such time as the Board determines a new estimated per share NAV.
F-35
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
SCHEDULE III – REAL ESTATE ASSETS AND ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION
(in thousands)
Initial Costs to Company | Gross Amount at | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buildings, | Total | Which Carried | Accumulated | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fixtures and | Adjustment | At December 31, 2017 | Depreciation | Date | Date | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Description (a) | Encumbrances | Land | Improvements | to Basis | (b) (c) (d) | (d) (e) (f) | Acquired | Constructed | |||||||||||||||||||||
Real Estate Held for Investment the Company Has Invested in Under Operating Leases: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
10Box Cost-Plus: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Conway, AR | $ | — | $ | 733 | $ | 1,654 | $ | — | $ | 2,387 | $ | 15 | 9/5/2017 | 1989 | |||||||||||||||
Russellville, AR | — | 990 | 1,470 | — | 2,460 | 37 | 3/20/2017 | 1989 | |||||||||||||||||||||
24 Hour Fitness: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Beaverton, OR | (g) | 2,609 | 9,974 | — | 12,583 | 821 | 9/30/2014 | 2009 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Fort Worth, TX | (g) | 1,519 | 7,449 | — | 8,968 | 844 | 9/27/2013 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Aaron’s: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hillsboro, OH | (g) | 279 | 829 | — | 1,108 | 118 | 8/26/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Mountain Home, AR | (g) | 183 | 872 | — | 1,055 | 50 | 10/1/2015 | 2015 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Wilmington, OH | (g) | 249 | 1,134 | — | 1,383 | 98 | 2/26/2015 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Academy Sports: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Clarksville, TN | (g) | 1,811 | 6,603 | — | 8,414 | 635 | 6/17/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Cookeville, TN | 49,300 | — | 23,847 | 73,371 | 97,218 | 4,945 | 9/30/2014 | 2015 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Douglasville, GA | (g) | 1,360 | 8,593 | — | 9,953 | 815 | 6/12/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Flowood, MS | (g) | 1,534 | 7,864 | — | 9,398 | 800 | 6/27/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Greenville, NC | — | 1,968 | 7,054 | — | 9,022 | 205 | 1/12/2017 | 2016 | |||||||||||||||||||||
McDonough, GA | (g) | 1,846 | 5,626 | — | 7,472 | 579 | 4/24/2014 | 2010 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Valdosta, GA | 5,838 | 2,482 | 5,922 | — | 8,404 | 815 | 5/10/2013 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Advance Auto: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Corydon, IN | (g) | 190 | 1,219 | — | 1,409 | 173 | 10/26/2012 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Dearborn Heights, MI | (g) | 385 | 1,090 | — | 1,475 | 119 | 8/30/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Decatur, GA | (g) | 606 | 1,053 | — | 1,659 | 118 | 12/20/2013 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Lake Geneva, WI | 1,062 | 381 | 1,181 | — | 1,562 | 150 | 2/6/2013 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Lawton, OK | (g) | 387 | 1,000 | — | 1,387 | 70 | 6/12/2015 | 2005 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Mattoon, IL | (g) | 261 | 1,063 | — | 1,324 | 54 | 12/4/2015 | 2015 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Mt. Pleasant, IA | (g) | 122 | 1,069 | — | 1,191 | 120 | 4/26/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
North Ridgeville, OH | (g) | 218 | 1,284 | — | 1,502 | 186 | 4/13/2012 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Rutherfordton, NC | (g) | 220 | 944 | — | 1,164 | 106 | 10/22/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Starkville, MS | (g) | 447 | 756 | — | 1,203 | 119 | 6/29/2012 | 2011 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Willmar, MN | (g) | 200 | 1,279 | — | 1,479 | 90 | 3/25/2015 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Albany Square: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Albany, GA | 4,600 | 1,606 | 7,113 | 373 | 9,092 | 925 | 2/26/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Almeda Crossing: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Houston, TX | (g) | 4,738 | 26,245 | 325 | 31,308 | 2,433 | 8/7/2014 | 2006 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Applebee’s: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Greenville, SC | (g) | 672 | 1,737 | (1,405 | ) | 1,004 | 4 | 6/27/2014 | 2004 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Lithonia, GA | (g) | 1,234 | 2,613 | — | 3,847 | 248 | 3/28/2014 | 2002 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Savannah, GA | (g) | 818 | 1,686 | — | 2,504 | 160 | 5/22/2014 | 2006 | |||||||||||||||||||||
At Home: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kissimmee, FL | (g) | 2,512 | 5,594 | — | 8,106 | 242 | 9/9/2016 | 1992 | |||||||||||||||||||||
AutoZone: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Philipsburg, PA | (g) | 152 | 1,304 | — | 1,456 | 190 | 7/30/2012 | 2010 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Poughkeepsie, NY | (g) | 699 | 1,356 | — | 2,055 | 87 | 8/20/2015 | 2005 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Sheffield, OH | — | 815 | — | 770 | 1,585 | 48 | 10/15/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Bass Pro Shops: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tallahassee, FL | (g) | 945 | 5,713 | — | 6,658 | 706 | 8/20/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Beavercreek Shopping Center: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Beavercreek, OH | 17,200 | 5,504 | 25,178 | 537 | 31,219 | 2,988 | 10/31/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
S-1
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
SCHEDULE III – REAL ESTATE ASSETS AND ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION – (Continued)
(in thousands)
Initial Costs to Company | Gross Amount at | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buildings, | Total | Which Carried | Accumulated | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fixtures and | Adjustment | At December 31, 2017 | Depreciation | Date | Date | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Description (a) | Encumbrances | Land | Improvements | to Basis | (b) (c) (d) | (d) (e) (f) | Acquired | Constructed | |||||||||||||||||||||
Bed Bath & Beyond/Golfsmith: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Schaumburg, IL | $ | 7,300 | $ | 4,786 | $ | 6,149 | $ | 475 | $ | 11,410 | $ | 1,018 | 3/8/2013 | 1997 | |||||||||||||||
Benihana: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Golden Valley, MN | (g) | 1,510 | 2,934 | — | 4,444 | 410 | 8/21/2012 | 1980 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Lauderdale by the Sea, FL | (g) | 2,181 | 2,014 | — | 4,195 | 288 | 8/21/2012 | 1971 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Lombard, IL | (g) | 1,390 | 2,343 | — | 3,733 | 391 | 8/21/2012 | 1984 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Woodlands, TX | (g) | 1,151 | 968 | — | 2,119 | 141 | 8/21/2012 | 2001 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Big Lots: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
San Angelo, TX | (g) | 1,043 | 1,947 | — | 2,990 | 388 | 12/19/2012 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Waco, TX | (g) | 1,069 | 1,326 | 56 | 2,451 | 287 | 12/10/2012 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Biolife Plasma Services: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bellingham, WA | — | 2,397 | 6,264 | — | 8,661 | 574 | 11/21/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Grandville, MI | — | 959 | 4,791 | — | 5,750 | 406 | 11/21/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Loveland, CO | — | 651 | 5,645 | — | 6,296 | 470 | 11/21/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Bloomington, IN | — | 696 | 3,900 | — | 4,596 | 361 | 6/26/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Fort Wayne, IN | — | 660 | 3,749 | — | 4,409 | 348 | 6/26/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
St. Cloud, MN | — | 889 | 3,633 | — | 4,522 | 370 | 6/26/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
St. George, UT | — | 1,195 | 5,561 | — | 6,756 | 415 | 3/12/2015 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Waterloo, IA | — | 489 | 3,380 | — | 3,869 | 349 | 6/26/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
West Fargo, ND | — | 1,379 | 5,052 | — | 6,431 | 398 | 3/12/2015 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Bob Evans: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Akron, OH | — | 447 | 1,537 | — | 1,984 | 34 | 4/28/2017 | 2007 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Anderson, IN | — | 912 | 1,455 | — | 2,367 | 33 | 4/28/2017 | 1984 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Austintown, OH | — | 305 | 1,426 | — | 1,731 | 34 | 4/28/2017 | 1995 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Birch Run, MI | — | 733 | 1,192 | — | 1,925 | 27 | 4/28/2017 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Blue Ash, OH | — | 628 | 1,429 | — | 2,057 | 36 | 4/28/2017 | 1994 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Chardon, OH | — | 333 | 682 | — | 1,015 | 17 | 4/28/2017 | 2003 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Chillicothe, OH | — | 557 | 1,524 | — | 2,081 | 35 | 4/28/2017 | 1998 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Columbus, OH | — | 523 | 1,376 | — | 1,899 | 32 | 4/28/2017 | 2003 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Dayton, OH | — | 325 | 1,438 | — | 1,763 | 35 | 4/28/2017 | 1998 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Eldersburg, MD | — | 557 | 876 | — | 1,433 | 20 | 4/28/2017 | 2000 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Florence, KY | — | 496 | 1,876 | — | 2,372 | 44 | 4/28/2017 | 1991 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Holland, MI | — | 314 | 1,367 | — | 1,681 | 32 | 4/28/2017 | 2004 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Huntersville, NC | — | 751 | 657 | — | 1,408 | 15 | 4/28/2017 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Hurricane, WV | — | 297 | 1,654 | — | 1,951 | 35 | 4/28/2017 | 1993 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Milford, OH | — | 271 | 1,498 | — | 1,769 | 36 | 4/28/2017 | 1987 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Monroeville, PA | — | 1,340 | 848 | — | 2,188 | 18 | 4/28/2017 | 1995 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Nicholasville, KY | — | 731 | 693 | — | 1,424 | 15 | 4/28/2017 | 1989 | |||||||||||||||||||||
North Canton, OH | — | 859 | 1,393 | — | 2,252 | 33 | 4/28/2017 | 2006 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Ripley, WV | — | 269 | 1,304 | — | 1,573 | 30 | 4/28/2017 | 1988 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Tipp City, OH | — | 554 | 1,120 | — | 1,674 | 27 | 4/28/2017 | 1989 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Warsaw, IN | — | 684 | 1,222 | — | 1,906 | 28 | 4/28/2017 | 1993 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Bojangles: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pelham, AL | (g) | 219 | 1,216 | — | 1,435 | 116 | 6/30/2014 | 2010 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Boston Commons: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Springfield, MA | 5,400 | 3,101 | 7,042 | 180 | 10,323 | 675 | 8/19/2014 | 2004 | |||||||||||||||||||||
S-2
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
SCHEDULE III – REAL ESTATE ASSETS AND ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION – (Continued)
(in thousands)
Initial Costs to Company | Gross Amount at | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buildings, | Total | Which Carried | Accumulated | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fixtures and | Adjustment | At December 31, 2017 | Depreciation | Date | Date | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Description (a) | Encumbrances | Land | Improvements | to Basis | (b) (c) (d) | (d) (e) (f) | Acquired | Constructed | |||||||||||||||||||||
Bottom Dollar Grocery: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ambridge, PA | $ | — | $ | 519 | $ | 2,985 | $ | — | $ | 3,504 | $ | 317 | 11/5/2013 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||
Brownsville Plaza: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Baldwin, PA | — | 627 | 2,702 | — | 3,329 | 304 | 2/28/2014 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Bryan Crossing: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kodak, TN | 4,958 | 863 | 6,523 | — | 7,386 | 583 | 9/9/2014 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Buffalo Wild Wings: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Idaho Falls, ID | (g) | 712 | 1,336 | — | 2,048 | 117 | 7/29/2014 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Warrenville, IL | (g) | 1,208 | 1,420 | — | 2,628 | 227 | 3/28/2013 | 2004 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Woodridge, IL | (g) | 1,139 | 1,484 | — | 2,623 | 236 | 3/28/2013 | 2005 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Cabela’s: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Acworth, GA | (g) | 4,979 | 18,775 | — | 23,754 | 150 | 9/25/2017 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Avon, OH | (g) | 2,755 | 10,751 | — | 13,506 | 87 | 9/25/2017 | 2016 | |||||||||||||||||||||
La Vista, NE | (g) | 3,260 | 16,923 | — | 20,183 | 153 | 9/25/2017 | 2006 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Sun Prairie, WI | (g) | 3,373 | 14,058 | — | 17,431 | 119 | 9/25/2017 | 2015 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Caliber Collision Center: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Frisco, TX | (g) | 1,484 | 2,038 | — | 3,522 | 193 | 9/16/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Las Cruces, NM | (g) | 673 | 1,949 | — | 2,622 | 187 | 3/21/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Midwest City, OK | (g) | 259 | 1,165 | — | 1,424 | 117 | 2/21/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Denver, CO | (g) | 855 | 658 | — | 1,513 | 60 | 6/25/2014 | 1975 | |||||||||||||||||||||
San Antonio, TX | (g) | 622 | 832 | — | 1,454 | 75 | 6/4/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Wylie, TX | (g) | 816 | 2,690 | — | 3,506 | 222 | 2/10/2015 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Canton Marketplace: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Canton, GA | 32,000 | 8,310 | 48,667 | 930 | 57,907 | 7,660 | 3/28/2013 | 2009 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Carlisle Crossing: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Carlisle, PA | — | 4,491 | 15,817 | — | 20,308 | 1,687 | 9/18/2014 | 2006 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Canarsie Plaza: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brooklyn, NY | 75,000 | 37,970 | 71,267 | 790 | 110,027 | 9,161 | 12/5/2012 | 2011 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Century Plaza: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Orlando, FL | (g) | 3,094 | 6,178 | 797 | 10,069 | 856 | 7/21/2014 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Chase: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hanover Township, NJ | (g) | 2,192 | — | — | 2,192 | — | 12/18/2013 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Chestnut Square: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brevard, NC | 3,727 | 425 | 5,037 | 92 | 5,554 | 625 | 6/7/2013 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Chili’s: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Forest City, NC | (g) | 233 | 1,936 | — | 2,169 | 161 | 9/3/2014 | 2003 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Coosa Town Center: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gadsden, AL | (g) | 3,246 | 7,799 | — | 11,045 | 923 | 12/20/2013 | 2004 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Cost Plus World Market: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kansas City, MO | (g) | 1,378 | 2,396 | 42 | 3,816 | 446 | 11/13/2012 | 2001 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Costco: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tallahassee, FL | 5,146 | 9,497 | — | — | 9,497 | — | 12/11/2012 | 2006 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Cottonwood Commons: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Albuquerque, NM | 19,250 | 4,986 | 28,881 | 196 | 34,063 | 3,406 | 7/19/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Coventry Crossing: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coventry, RI | 6,000 | 3,462 | 5,899 | 43 | 9,404 | 732 | 9/12/2013 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||
S-3
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
SCHEDULE III – REAL ESTATE ASSETS AND ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION – (Continued)
(in thousands)
Initial Costs to Company | Gross Amount at | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buildings, | Total | Which Carried | Accumulated | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fixtures and | Adjustment | At December 31, 2017 | Depreciation | Date | Date | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Description (a) | Encumbrances | Land | Improvements | to Basis | (b) (c) (d) | (d) (e) (f) | Acquired | Constructed | |||||||||||||||||||||
Crosspoint: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hagerstown, MD | (g) | $ | 12,285 | $ | 14,359 | $ | (1,024 | ) | $ | 25,620 | $ | 1,574 | 9/30/2014 | 2000 | |||||||||||||||
Crossroads Annex: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lafayette, LA | (g) | 1,659 | 7,091 | — | 8,750 | 821 | 12/4/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Crossroads Commons: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Plover, WI | (g) | 1,000 | 4,515 | 75 | 5,590 | 612 | 12/10/2013 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
CVS: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Arnold, MO | (g) | 2,043 | 2,367 | — | 4,410 | 246 | 12/13/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Asheville, NC | (g) | 1,108 | 1,084 | — | 2,192 | 163 | 4/26/2012 | 1998 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Austin, TX | (g) | 1,076 | 3,475 | — | 4,551 | 359 | 12/13/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Bainbridge, GA | (g) | 444 | 1,682 | 47 | 2,173 | 247 | 6/27/2012 | 1998 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Bloomington, IN | (g) | 1,620 | 2,957 | — | 4,577 | 308 | 12/13/2013 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Blue Springs, MO | (g) | 395 | 2,722 | — | 3,117 | 283 | 12/13/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Bridgeton, MO | (g) | 2,056 | 2,362 | — | 4,418 | 246 | 12/13/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Cartersville, GA | (g) | 2,547 | — | — | 2,547 | — | 10/22/2012 | 2009 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Charleston, SC | (g) | 869 | 1,009 | — | 1,878 | 152 | 4/26/2012 | 1998 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Chesapeake, VA | (g) | 1,044 | 3,053 | — | 4,097 | 324 | 12/13/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Chicago, IL | (g) | 1,832 | 4,255 | — | 6,087 | 510 | 3/20/2013 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Cicero, IN | (g) | 487 | 3,099 | — | 3,586 | 322 | 12/13/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Corpus Christi, TX | (g) | 648 | 2,557 | — | 3,205 | 371 | 4/19/2012 | 1998 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Danville, IN | (g) | 424 | 2,105 | — | 2,529 | 196 | 7/16/2014 | 1998 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Eminence, KY | (g) | 872 | 2,511 | — | 3,383 | 258 | 12/13/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Florence, AL | $ | 1,735 | 1,030 | 1,446 | — | 2,476 | 181 | 3/27/2013 | 2000 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Goose Creek, SC | (g) | 1,022 | 1,980 | — | 3,002 | 204 | 12/13/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Greenwood, IN | (g) | 912 | 3,549 | — | 4,461 | 399 | 7/11/2013 | 1999 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Hanover Township, NJ | (g) | 4,746 | — | — | 4,746 | — | 12/18/2013 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Hazlet, NJ | (g) | 3,047 | 3,610 | — | 6,657 | 373 | 12/13/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Honesdale, PA | (g) | 1,206 | 3,342 | — | 4,548 | 356 | 12/13/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Independence, MO | (g) | 359 | 2,242 | — | 2,601 | 234 | 12/13/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Indianapolis, IN | (g) | 1,110 | 2,484 | — | 3,594 | 258 | 12/13/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Irving, TX | (g) | 745 | 3,034 | — | 3,779 | 406 | 10/5/2012 | 2000 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Jacksonville, FL | (g) | 2,182 | 3,817 | — | 5,999 | 340 | 7/16/2014 | 2004 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Janesville, WI | (g) | 736 | 2,545 | — | 3,281 | 264 | 12/13/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Katy, TX | (g) | 1,149 | 2,462 | — | 3,611 | 250 | 12/13/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Lincoln, NE | (g) | 2,534 | 3,014 | — | 5,548 | 312 | 12/13/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
London, KY | (g) | 1,445 | 2,661 | — | 4,106 | 294 | 9/10/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Middletown, NY | (g) | 665 | 5,483 | — | 6,148 | 562 | 12/13/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
North Wilkesboro, NC | (g) | 332 | 2,369 | — | 2,701 | 252 | 10/25/2013 | 1999 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Poplar Bluff, MO | (g) | 1,861 | 2,211 | — | 4,072 | 231 | 12/13/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Salem, NH | (g) | 3,456 | 2,351 | — | 5,807 | 244 | 11/18/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
San Antonio, TX | (g) | 1,893 | 1,848 | — | 3,741 | 194 | 12/13/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Sand Springs, OK | (g) | 1,765 | 2,283 | — | 4,048 | 239 | 12/13/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Santa Fe, NM | (g) | 2,243 | 4,619 | — | 6,862 | 472 | 12/13/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Sedalia, MO | (g) | 466 | 2,318 | — | 2,784 | 242 | 12/13/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
St. John, MO | (g) | 1,546 | 2,601 | — | 4,147 | 270 | 12/13/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Temple Hills, MD | (g) | 1,817 | 2,989 | — | 4,806 | 325 | 9/30/2013 | 2001 | |||||||||||||||||||||
S-4
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
SCHEDULE III – REAL ESTATE ASSETS AND ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION – (Continued)
(in thousands)
Initial Costs to Company | Gross Amount at | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buildings, | Total | Which Carried | Accumulated | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fixtures and | Adjustment | At December 31, 2017 | Depreciation | Date | Date | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Description (a) | Encumbrances | Land | Improvements | to Basis | (b) (c) (d) | (d) (e) (f) | Acquired | Constructed | |||||||||||||||||||||
CVS (continued): | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Vineland, NJ | (g) | $ | 813 | $ | 2,926 | $ | — | $ | 3,739 | $ | 313 | 12/13/2013 | 2010 | ||||||||||||||||
Waynesboro, VA | (g) | 986 | 2,708 | — | 3,694 | 281 | 12/13/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
West Monroe, LA | (g) | 1,738 | 2,136 | — | 3,874 | 224 | 12/13/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Darien Towne Center: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Darien, IL | $ | 12,200 | 6,718 | 11,951 | 900 | 19,569 | 1,807 | 12/17/2013 | 1994 | ||||||||||||||||||||
DaVita: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Riverview, MI | (g) | 199 | 2,322 | — | 2,521 | 242 | 9/4/2014 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Decatur Commons: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Decatur, AL | 7,000 | 2,478 | 9,333 | 848 | 12,659 | 1,183 | 7/10/2013 | 2004 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Deltona Commons: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Deltona, FL | 4,767 | 1,424 | 7,760 | — | 9,184 | 907 | 6/18/2013 | 2007 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Dick’s PetSmart Center: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Oshkosh, WI | (g) | 1,445 | 6,599 | — | 8,044 | 287 | 9/23/2016 | 2015 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Dick’s Sporting Goods: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Oklahoma City, OK | (g) | 1,198 | 7,838 | — | 9,036 | 1,129 | 12/21/2012 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Oklahoma City, OK | 5,858 | 685 | 10,587 | — | 11,272 | 1,487 | 12/31/2012 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Dollar General: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Abbeville, AL | (g) | 294 | 1,302 | — | 1,596 | 113 | 10/3/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Akron, AL | (g) | 69 | 771 | — | 840 | 92 | 8/6/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Akron, OH | (g) | 112 | 1,099 | — | 1,211 | 128 | 11/1/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Alliance, NE | (g) | 97 | 812 | — | 909 | 112 | 4/9/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Alton, TX | (g) | 94 | 922 | — | 1,016 | 82 | 9/5/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Arapahoe, NE | (g) | 44 | 873 | — | 917 | 78 | 9/5/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Asheville, NC | (g) | 379 | 753 | — | 1,132 | 102 | 6/17/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Ashville, AL | 666 | 255 | 678 | — | 933 | 103 | 12/21/2012 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Atmore, AL | (g) | 243 | 858 | — | 1,101 | 90 | 2/25/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Bainbridge, OH | (g) | 106 | 1,175 | — | 1,281 | 147 | 9/13/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Belle, MO | (g) | 51 | 880 | — | 931 | 78 | 9/5/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Berry, AL | (g) | 104 | 1,196 | — | 1,300 | 107 | 9/26/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Bessemer, AL | (g) | 142 | 941 | — | 1,083 | 110 | 9/27/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Bloomfield, NE | (g) | 50 | 845 | — | 895 | 70 | 12/16/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Blue Rapids, KS | (g) | 52 | 880 | — | 932 | 77 | 10/22/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Bluefield, WV | (g) | 337 | 686 | — | 1,023 | 58 | 10/15/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Bokchito, OK | (g) | 59 | 859 | — | 918 | 123 | 2/27/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Botkins, OH | (g) | 130 | 991 | — | 1,121 | 122 | 9/27/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Brandon, SD | (g) | 292 | 871 | — | 1,163 | 76 | 10/31/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Breaux Bridge, LA | 840 | 225 | 1,007 | — | 1,232 | 139 | 11/30/2012 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Broken Bow, NE | (g) | 91 | 878 | — | 969 | 94 | 11/1/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Brownsville, TX | 822 | 264 | 943 | — | 1,207 | 123 | 11/30/2012 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Buffalo, NY | (g) | 122 | 1,099 | — | 1,221 | 89 | 12/5/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Clay, AL | 792 | 305 | 768 | — | 1,073 | 112 | 2/8/2013 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Cleveland, TX | 684 | 158 | 856 | — | 1,014 | 112 | 11/30/2012 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Columbus, OH | (g) | 279 | 1,248 | — | 1,527 | 146 | 11/7/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Conroe, TX | 756 | 167 | 946 | — | 1,113 | 123 | 12/18/2012 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
S-5
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
SCHEDULE III – REAL ESTATE ASSETS AND ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION – (Continued)
(in thousands)
Initial Costs to Company | Gross Amount at | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buildings, | Total | Which Carried | Accumulated | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fixtures and | Adjustment | At December 31, 2017 | Depreciation | Date | Date | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Description (a) | Encumbrances | Land | Improvements | to Basis | (b) (c) (d) | (d) (e) (f) | Acquired | Constructed | |||||||||||||||||||||
Dollar General (continued): | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Crystal Springs, MS | (g) | $ | 463 | $ | 3,027 | $ | — | $ | 3,490 | $ | 270 | 8/6/2014 | 2013 | ||||||||||||||||
Cullman, AL | (g) | 159 | 824 | — | 983 | 76 | 8/4/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Decatur, IL | (g) | 133 | 986 | — | 1,119 | 91 | 6/18/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Decatur, IL | (g) | 219 | 964 | — | 1,183 | 83 | 9/8/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Delcambre, LA | (g) | 169 | 1,025 | — | 1,194 | 118 | 9/27/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Delhi, LA | (g) | 301 | 1,033 | — | 1,334 | 120 | 8/9/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Deridder, LA | (g) | 135 | 923 | — | 1,058 | 106 | 9/27/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Deridder, LA | (g) | 176 | 905 | — | 1,081 | 106 | 8/9/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Des Moines, IA | (g) | 166 | 943 | — | 1,109 | 111 | 8/9/2013 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Dora, AL | (g) | 124 | 935 | — | 1,059 | 83 | 9/26/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Dundee, MI | (g) | 296 | 1,047 | — | 1,343 | 111 | 11/26/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Edinburg, TX | (g) | 146 | 809 | — | 955 | 76 | 7/31/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Eight Mile, AL | (g) | 110 | 865 | — | 975 | 83 | 6/23/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Elk Point, SD | (g) | 97 | 839 | — | 936 | 76 | 9/22/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Ellerslie, GA | (g) | 247 | 797 | — | 1,044 | 81 | 4/17/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Eufaula, AL | (g) | 300 | 930 | — | 1,230 | 87 | 7/22/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Farmington, NM | (g) | 175 | 919 | — | 1,094 | 81 | 9/5/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Fort Valley, GA | (g) | 514 | 2,436 | — | 2,950 | 311 | 7/9/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Fred, TX | (g) | 93 | 929 | — | 1,022 | 101 | 12/19/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Fruitport, MI | (g) | 100 | 968 | — | 1,068 | 88 | 6/25/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Geneva, AL | $ | 738 | 204 | 815 | — | 1,019 | 122 | 12/21/2012 | 2012 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Geraldine, AL | (g) | 220 | 1,146 | — | 1,366 | 113 | 5/30/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Greenwell Springs, LA | 870 | 444 | 841 | — | 1,285 | 118 | 11/30/2012 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Groveport, OH | 822 | 416 | 813 | — | 1,229 | 114 | 3/15/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Hamilton, AL | (g) | 208 | 1,024 | — | 1,232 | 89 | 10/16/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Hanceville, AL | 2,029 | 1,232 | 1,488 | — | 2,720 | 234 | 11/21/2012 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Harlingen, TX | (g) | 144 | 853 | — | 997 | 82 | 6/20/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Harvest, AL | 684 | 261 | 691 | — | 952 | 105 | 12/21/2012 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Harviell, MO | (g) | 50 | 818 | — | 868 | 85 | 3/31/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Hastings, NE | (g) | 177 | 850 | — | 1,027 | 74 | 10/22/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Hayneville, AL | (g) | 249 | 1,181 | — | 1,430 | 109 | 8/15/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Hillsboro, OH | (g) | 262 | 956 | — | 1,218 | 81 | 9/25/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Hinton, WV | (g) | 199 | 1,367 | — | 1,566 | 118 | 8/18/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Homeworth, OH | (g) | 110 | 1,057 | — | 1,167 | 114 | 10/18/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Houston, TX | 966 | 311 | 1,102 | — | 1,413 | 143 | 12/18/2012 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Houston, TX | (g) | 255 | 1,393 | — | 1,648 | 151 | 10/18/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Huntsville, AL | 768 | 177 | 847 | — | 1,024 | 126 | 12/21/2012 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Independence, MO | 828 | 170 | 1,072 | — | 1,242 | 145 | 12/18/2012 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Kansas City, MO | (g) | 283 | 1,068 | — | 1,351 | 121 | 10/18/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Kansas City, MO | (g) | 233 | 1,054 | — | 1,287 | 117 | 11/1/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Kasson, MN | (g) | 138 | 888 | — | 1,026 | 86 | 8/15/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Kearney, NE | (g) | 141 | 851 | — | 992 | 95 | 11/20/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Kinston, AL | 642 | 170 | 718 | — | 888 | 109 | 12/21/2012 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Kolona, IA | (g) | 81 | 868 | — | 949 | 79 | 8/15/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
S-6
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
SCHEDULE III – REAL ESTATE ASSETS AND ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION – (Continued)
(in thousands)
Initial Costs to Company | Gross Amount at | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buildings, | Total | Which Carried | Accumulated | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fixtures and | Adjustment | At December 31, 2017 | Depreciation | Date | Date | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Description (a) | Encumbrances | Land | Improvements | to Basis | (b) (c) (d) | (d) (e) (f) | Acquired | Constructed | |||||||||||||||||||||
Dollar General (continued): | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lake Charles, LA | (g) | $ | 146 | $ | 989 | $ | — | $ | 1,135 | $ | 116 | 8/9/2013 | 2013 | ||||||||||||||||
Lamesa, TX | (g) | 75 | 803 | — | 878 | 76 | 7/31/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Lansing, MI | (g) | 232 | 939 | — | 1,171 | 85 | 6/25/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Lebanon, TN | (g) | 177 | 882 | — | 1,059 | 80 | 6/30/2014 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Leicester, NC | (g) | 134 | 800 | — | 934 | 99 | 6/17/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Lima, OH | $ | 810 | 156 | 1,040 | — | 1,196 | 137 | 11/30/2012 | 2012 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Linden, AL | (g) | 317 | 746 | — | 1,063 | 92 | 7/11/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Lone Jack, MO | (g) | 152 | 960 | — | 1,112 | 94 | 5/16/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Los Fresnos, TX | (g) | 55 | 867 | — | 922 | 77 | 9/19/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Los Lunas, NM | (g) | 113 | 857 | — | 970 | 84 | 5/14/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Louisburg, KS | (g) | 324 | 936 | — | 1,260 | 90 | 6/25/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Loveland, OH | (g) | 241 | 1,065 | — | 1,306 | 124 | 12/12/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Lubbock, TX | 744 | 468 | 641 | — | 1,109 | 90 | 12/18/2012 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Manhattan, KS | (g) | 194 | 921 | — | 1,115 | 103 | 11/20/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Mansfield, OH | (g) | 72 | 1,226 | — | 1,298 | 127 | 12/12/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Maple Lake, MN | (g) | 92 | 893 | — | 985 | 83 | 10/10/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Maynardville, TN | 750 | 238 | 754 | — | 992 | 116 | 11/30/2012 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Millbrook, AL | (g) | 320 | 1,175 | — | 1,495 | 110 | 7/22/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Mission, TX | (g) | 182 | 858 | — | 1,040 | 76 | 9/5/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Mobile, AL | (g) | 139 | 1,005 | — | 1,144 | 115 | 10/18/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Mobile, AL | (g) | 410 | 1,059 | — | 1,469 | 132 | 6/17/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Monroeville, OH | (g) | 131 | 1,069 | — | 1,200 | 116 | 10/4/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Montgomery, AL | (g) | 140 | 909 | — | 1,049 | 79 | 10/24/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Moose Lake, MN | (g) | 140 | 937 | — | 1,077 | 86 | 10/10/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Moroa, IL | (g) | 111 | 921 | — | 1,032 | 85 | 6/26/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Mt. Vernon, IL | (g) | 177 | 985 | — | 1,162 | 93 | 5/30/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Nashville, GA | 2,088 | 215 | 2,533 | — | 2,748 | 348 | 3/1/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Nashville, MI | (g) | 103 | 1,255 | — | 1,358 | 124 | 1/24/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Navarre, OH | (g) | 153 | 1,005 | — | 1,158 | 111 | 9/27/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Neoga, IL | (g) | 94 | 860 | — | 954 | 75 | 8/8/2014 | 2010 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Ness City, KS | (g) | 21 | 860 | — | 881 | 89 | 3/20/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
New Philadelphia, OH | (g) | 129 | 1,100 | — | 1,229 | 121 | 9/27/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
New Washington, OH | (g) | 99 | 975 | — | 1,074 | 120 | 9/13/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Newark, OH | 792 | 222 | 946 | — | 1,168 | 132 | 3/15/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Nitro, WV | (g) | 451 | 1,034 | — | 1,485 | 94 | 6/30/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Nixa, MO | (g) | 235 | 806 | — | 1,041 | 81 | 4/3/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
North Lewisburg, OH | (g) | 59 | 1,008 | — | 1,067 | 119 | 11/22/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Onawa, IA | (g) | 176 | 842 | — | 1,018 | 81 | 6/26/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Opelousas, LA | (g) | 92 | 947 | — | 1,039 | 107 | 10/4/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Ortonville, MN | (g) | 113 | 907 | — | 1,020 | 86 | 9/5/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Osceola, NE | (g) | 194 | 835 | — | 1,029 | 62 | 4/2/2015 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Oxford, AL | (g) | 465 | 783 | — | 1,248 | 91 | 10/18/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Palestine, IL | (g) | 155 | 893 | — | 1,048 | 83 | 6/26/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Parchment, MI | (g) | 168 | 1,162 | — | 1,330 | 105 | 6/25/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
S-7
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
SCHEDULE III – REAL ESTATE ASSETS AND ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION – (Continued)
(in thousands)
Initial Costs to Company | Gross Amount at | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buildings, | Total | Which Carried | Accumulated | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fixtures and | Adjustment | At December 31, 2017 | Depreciation | Date | Date | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Description (a) | Encumbrances | Land | Improvements | to Basis | (b) (c) (d) | (d) (e) (f) | Acquired | Constructed | |||||||||||||||||||||
Dollar General (continued): | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Park Hill, OK | (g) | $ | 91 | $ | 887 | $ | — | $ | 978 | $ | 119 | 1/4/2013 | 2012 | ||||||||||||||||
Parsons, TN | (g) | 166 | 1,136 | — | 1,302 | 108 | 7/16/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Phenix City, AL | (g) | 331 | 718 | — | 1,049 | 90 | 6/17/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Piedmont, AL | $ | 1,980 | 1,037 | 1,579 | — | 2,616 | 250 | 11/21/2012 | 2012 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Pike Road, AL | (g) | 477 | 772 | — | 1,249 | 93 | 8/21/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Plain City, OH | (g) | 187 | 1,097 | — | 1,284 | 116 | 11/26/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Port Clinton, OH | (g) | 120 | 1,070 | — | 1,190 | 113 | 11/22/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Princeton, MO | (g) | 155 | 1,159 | — | 1,314 | 101 | 10/10/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Pueblo, CO | (g) | 144 | 909 | — | 1,053 | 116 | 1/4/2013 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Ragley, LA | (g) | 196 | 877 | — | 1,073 | 104 | 8/9/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Rainsville, AL | (g) | 290 | 1,267 | — | 1,557 | 115 | 8/13/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Ravenna, MI | (g) | 199 | 958 | — | 1,157 | 95 | 1/24/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Rayne, LA | 702 | 125 | 910 | — | 1,035 | 124 | 12/18/2012 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Roanoke, IL | (g) | 93 | 846 | — | 939 | 81 | 5/16/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Romney, IN | (g) | 87 | 827 | — | 914 | 73 | 7/7/2014 | 2011 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Romulus, MI | (g) | 274 | 1,171 | — | 1,445 | 114 | 3/7/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Russell, KS | (g) | 54 | 899 | — | 953 | 83 | 8/5/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
San Antonio, TX | (g) | 295 | 743 | — | 1,038 | 76 | 7/31/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
San Carlos, TX | (g) | 70 | 1,063 | — | 1,133 | 101 | 6/20/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Seale, AL | (g) | 259 | 767 | — | 1,026 | 89 | 10/28/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Seminole, AL | (g) | 175 | 829 | — | 1,004 | 101 | 7/15/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Shelby, MI | (g) | 128 | 1,033 | — | 1,161 | 102 | 1/24/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Slocomb, AL | (g) | 124 | 918 | — | 1,042 | 96 | 2/25/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Snead, AL | (g) | 126 | 1,137 | — | 1,263 | 102 | 9/26/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
South Bay, FL | (g) | 258 | 1,262 | — | 1,520 | 119 | 5/7/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Spring, TX | (g) | 277 | 1,132 | — | 1,409 | 125 | 9/30/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Springfield, IL | (g) | 205 | 934 | — | 1,139 | 80 | 9/17/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Springfield, MO | (g) | 171 | 810 | — | 981 | 76 | 7/14/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Springfield, NE | (g) | 172 | 864 | — | 1,036 | 85 | 5/12/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Springfield, OH | (g) | 125 | 1,000 | — | 1,125 | 115 | 9/27/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
St. Louis, MO | (g) | 229 | 1,102 | — | 1,331 | 119 | 12/31/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
St. Louis, MO | (g) | 240 | 1,118 | — | 1,358 | 118 | 1/15/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Superior, NE | (g) | 230 | 917 | — | 1,147 | 102 | 11/26/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Temple, GA | (g) | 200 | 917 | — | 1,117 | 114 | 5/15/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Theodore, AL | (g) | 248 | 763 | — | 1,011 | 97 | 5/15/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Thibodaux, LA | (g) | 211 | 1,083 | — | 1,294 | 124 | 9/27/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Toney, AL | 642 | 86 | 792 | — | 878 | 113 | 3/21/2013 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Topeka, KS | (g) | 159 | 873 | — | 1,032 | 69 | 2/25/2015 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Urbana, OH | (g) | 133 | 1,051 | — | 1,184 | 103 | 5/29/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Volga, SD | (g) | 51 | 784 | — | 835 | 71 | 9/5/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Waco, TX | (g) | 26 | 922 | — | 948 | 95 | 6/20/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Wagener, SC | (g) | 477 | 1,169 | — | 1,646 | 99 | 9/16/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Wakefield, KS | (g) | 78 | 929 | — | 1,007 | 108 | 9/30/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Waterloo, IA | (g) | 330 | 908 | — | 1,238 | 76 | 11/5/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
S-8
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
SCHEDULE III – REAL ESTATE ASSETS AND ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION – (Continued)
(in thousands)
Initial Costs to Company | Gross Amount at | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buildings, | Total | Which Carried | Accumulated | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fixtures and | Adjustment | At December 31, 2017 | Depreciation | Date | Date | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Description (a) | Encumbrances | Land | Improvements | to Basis | (b) (c) (d) | (d) (e) (f) | Acquired | Constructed | |||||||||||||||||||||
Dollar General (continued): | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Weslaco, TX | (g) | $ | 141 | $ | 848 | $ | — | $ | 989 | $ | 75 | 9/5/2014 | 2014 | ||||||||||||||||
Weston, MO | (g) | 117 | 1,012 | — | 1,129 | 121 | 7/17/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Wetumpka, AL | (g) | 290 | 779 | — | 1,069 | 77 | 5/29/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Whitehouse, OH | (g) | 134 | 1,144 | — | 1,278 | 123 | 10/18/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Whitwell, TN | $ | 870 | 159 | 1,035 | — | 1,194 | 159 | 11/30/2012 | 2012 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Wilmer, AL | (g) | 99 | 775 | — | 874 | 93 | 8/5/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Winsted, MN | (g) | 152 | 841 | — | 993 | 81 | 9/29/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Wisner, NE | (g) | 37 | 773 | — | 810 | 76 | 5/12/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Woodville, OH | 786 | 169 | 1,009 | — | 1,178 | 140 | 2/8/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Yatesville, GA | 666 | 120 | 797 | — | 917 | 114 | 3/25/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Dollar Tree/Petco: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Humble, TX | (g) | 720 | 2,543 | — | 3,263 | 336 | 2/11/2013 | 2011 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Earth Fare: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Huntersville, NC | 3,183 | 1,439 | 2,973 | — | 4,412 | 405 | 2/28/2013 | 2011 | |||||||||||||||||||||
East Manchester Village Center: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Manchester, PA | 8,300 | 2,517 | 12,672 | 183 | 15,372 | 1,425 | 12/19/2013 | 2009 | |||||||||||||||||||||
East West Commons: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Austell, GA | 13,000 | 10,094 | 16,034 | 3,206 | 29,334 | 1,668 | 9/30/2014 | 2002 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Emerald Place: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Greenwood, SC | 6,250 | 2,042 | 9,942 | — | 11,984 | 1,207 | 6/28/2013 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Evergreen Marketplace: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Evergreen Park, IL | (g) | 2,823 | 6,239 | — | 9,062 | 875 | 9/6/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Family Center: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Riverdale, UT | (g) | 21,716 | 29,454 | (741 | ) | 50,429 | 3,516 | 2/28/2014 | 2008 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Family Dollar: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Aberdeen, ID | (g) | 101 | 1,054 | — | 1,155 | 89 | 10/24/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Adelanto, GA | (g) | 463 | 1,711 | — | 2,174 | 140 | 11/14/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Aguila, AZ | (g) | 129 | 1,290 | — | 1,419 | 95 | 2/13/2015 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Albany, GA | — | 347 | 925 | — | 1,272 | 77 | 11/7/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Apple Springs, TX | — | 91 | 804 | — | 895 | 68 | 11/14/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Arkadelphia, AR | (g) | 113 | 738 | — | 851 | 56 | 2/12/2015 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Auburn, ME | (g) | 217 | 1,261 | — | 1,478 | 102 | 4/15/2015 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Bagley, MN | (g) | 95 | 1,114 | — | 1,209 | 111 | 6/27/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Benavides, TX | (g) | 27 | 1,065 | — | 1,092 | 118 | 2/26/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Berry, AL | — | 122 | 880 | — | 1,002 | 74 | 11/14/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Bessemer, AL | (g) | 201 | 1,043 | — | 1,244 | 112 | 12/27/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Broadway, VA | — | 213 | 1,153 | — | 1,366 | 100 | 11/7/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Birmingham, AL | (g) | 500 | 831 | — | 1,331 | 91 | 12/27/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Brooksville, FL | (g) | 206 | 791 | — | 997 | 86 | 12/18/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Burkeville, TX | (g) | 54 | 900 | — | 954 | 86 | 9/30/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Cascade, ID | (g) | 267 | 1,147 | — | 1,414 | 111 | 2/4/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Cass Lake, MN | (g) | 157 | 1,107 | — | 1,264 | 110 | 6/27/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Cathedral City, CA | (g) | 658 | 1,908 | — | 2,566 | 165 | 9/19/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Charlotte, TX | (g) | 118 | 970 | — | 1,088 | 108 | 2/26/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
S-9
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
SCHEDULE III – REAL ESTATE ASSETS AND ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION – (Continued)
(in thousands)
Initial Costs to Company | Gross Amount at | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buildings, | Total | Which Carried | Accumulated | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fixtures and | Adjustment | At December 31, 2017 | Depreciation | Date | Date | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Description (a) | Encumbrances | Land | Improvements | to Basis | (b) (c) (d) | (d) (e) (f) | Acquired | Constructed | |||||||||||||||||||||
Family Dollar (continued): | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cheyenne, WY | (g) | $ | 148 | $ | 986 | $ | — | $ | 1,134 | $ | 98 | 4/23/2014 | 2014 | ||||||||||||||||
Coachella, CA | (g) | 450 | 1,634 | — | 2,084 | 165 | 2/19/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Cocoa, FL | (g) | 370 | 1,092 | — | 1,462 | 95 | 9/26/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Colmesneil, TX | (g) | 172 | 858 | — | 1,030 | 83 | 2/4/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Columbia, SC | (g) | 294 | 824 | — | 1,118 | 71 | 10/24/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Columbia, SC | (g) | 332 | 1,044 | — | 1,376 | 88 | 10/24/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Comanche, TX | (g) | 176 | 1,145 | — | 1,321 | 102 | 8/6/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Cordes Lakes, AZ | (g) | 380 | 1,421 | — | 1,801 | 120 | 9/19/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Davenport, FL | (g) | 298 | 964 | — | 1,262 | 78 | 12/5/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Davenport, IA | (g) | 167 | 918 | — | 1,085 | 77 | 11/25/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Dawson, TX | $ | — | 41 | 799 | — | 840 | 67 | 11/14/2014 | 2014 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Deadwood, SD | (g) | 132 | 1,139 | — | 1,271 | 98 | 9/18/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Des Moines, IA | (g) | 290 | 1,126 | — | 1,416 | 93 | 11/25/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
East Millinocket, ME | (g) | 161 | 1,004 | — | 1,165 | 90 | 2/26/2015 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Eden, TX | (g) | 82 | 903 | — | 985 | 94 | 2/26/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Elizabethtown, NY | (g) | 107 | 671 | — | 778 | 66 | 1/31/2014 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Eloy, AZ | (g) | 86 | 1,587 | — | 1,673 | 130 | 10/24/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Empire, CA | (g) | 239 | 1,527 | — | 1,766 | 141 | 6/27/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Erwinville, LA | (g) | 146 | 765 | — | 911 | 54 | 7/7/2015 | 2015 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Evans, CO | (g) | 201 | 817 | — | 1,018 | 69 | 9/29/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Findlay, OH | (g) | 326 | 1,271 | — | 1,597 | 137 | 2/26/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Folsom, LA | (g) | 325 | 788 | — | 1,113 | 70 | 9/30/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Ft. Lauderdale, FL | (g) | 443 | 1,361 | — | 1,804 | 140 | 12/18/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Fort Thomas, AZ | (g) | 49 | 1,173 | — | 1,222 | 116 | 2/26/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Fort Worth, TX | (g) | 532 | 1,346 | — | 1,878 | 118 | 9/5/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Franklin, NH | (g) | 307 | 1,214 | — | 1,521 | 81 | 10/15/2015 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Frederica, DE | (g) | 392 | 1,164 | — | 1,556 | 83 | 3/6/2015 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Fresno, CA | (g) | 488 | 1,553 | — | 2,041 | 159 | 2/19/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Garrison, TX | (g) | 61 | 1,306 | — | 1,367 | 102 | 12/18/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Georgetown, KY | (g) | 607 | 905 | — | 1,512 | 77 | 11/21/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Gering, NE | (g) | 244 | 913 | — | 1,157 | 81 | 9/26/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Greene, ME | (g) | 251 | 940 | — | 1,191 | 82 | 3/25/2015 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Greenwood, WI | (g) | 154 | 920 | — | 1,074 | 85 | 6/27/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Hawkins, TX | (g) | 49 | 1,288 | — | 1,337 | 113 | 9/5/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Hempstead, TX | (g) | 219 | 943 | — | 1,162 | 74 | 12/18/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Hettinger, ND | (g) | 214 | 1,077 | — | 1,291 | 118 | 2/26/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Hodgenville, KY | (g) | 202 | 783 | — | 985 | 70 | 9/19/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Holtville, CA | (g) | 317 | 1,609 | — | 1,926 | 163 | 2/19/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Homestead, FL | (g) | 325 | 1,001 | — | 1,326 | 81 | 12/12/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Homosassa, FL | (g) | 575 | 1,470 | — | 2,045 | 82 | 12/9/2015 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Immokalee, FL | (g) | 458 | 1,248 | — | 1,706 | 107 | 11/4/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Indio, CA | (g) | 393 | 1,636 | — | 2,029 | 151 | 6/25/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Irvington, AL | (g) | 217 | 814 | — | 1,031 | 90 | 12/27/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Jacksonville, FL | — | 134 | 1,157 | — | 1,291 | 95 | 11/7/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
S-10
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
SCHEDULE III – REAL ESTATE ASSETS AND ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION – (Continued)
(in thousands)
Initial Costs to Company | Gross Amount at | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buildings, | Total | Which Carried | Accumulated | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fixtures and | Adjustment | At December 31, 2017 | Depreciation | Date | Date | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Description (a) | Encumbrances | Land | Improvements | to Basis | (b) (c) (d) | (d) (e) (f) | Acquired | Constructed | |||||||||||||||||||||
Family Dollar (continued): | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jay, FL | (g) | $ | 190 | $ | 1,002 | $ | — | $ | 1,192 | $ | 110 | 2/25/2014 | 2013 | ||||||||||||||||
Jonesboro, GA | (g) | 297 | 1,098 | — | 1,395 | 114 | 2/14/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Keller, TX | (g) | 749 | 1,550 | — | 2,299 | 151 | 4/14/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Kersey, CO | (g) | 238 | 904 | — | 1,142 | 88 | 5/29/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Kiowa, OK | (g) | 193 | 947 | — | 1,140 | 85 | 9/5/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Kissimmee, FL | (g) | 622 | 1,226 | — | 1,848 | 112 | 8/27/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
La Salle, CO | (g) | 239 | 890 | — | 1,129 | 75 | 11/4/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
LaBelle, FL | (g) | 268 | 1,037 | — | 1,305 | 112 | 2/28/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Lake Elsinor, CA | (g) | 417 | 1,682 | — | 2,099 | 166 | 3/3/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Lakeland, FL | (g) | 353 | 937 | — | 1,290 | 90 | 6/30/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Laredo, TX | (g) | 302 | 1,039 | — | 1,341 | 89 | 10/3/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Levelland, TX | (g) | 264 | 952 | — | 1,216 | 84 | 9/30/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Little Rock, CA | (g) | 499 | 1,730 | — | 2,229 | 131 | 2/19/2015 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Lorain, OH | (g) | 320 | 995 | — | 1,315 | 95 | 6/27/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Louisville, KY | (g) | 578 | 919 | — | 1,497 | 94 | 3/26/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Louisville, KY | (g) | 480 | 934 | — | 1,414 | 89 | 6/4/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Mansfield, TX | (g) | 849 | 1,189 | — | 2,038 | 123 | 2/26/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Melbourne, FL | (g) | 362 | 883 | — | 1,245 | 92 | 2/28/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Melrose, FL | (g) | 124 | 929 | — | 1,053 | 81 | 9/10/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Mertzon, TX | (g) | 149 | 995 | — | 1,144 | 95 | 9/19/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Mesa, AZ | (g) | 627 | 1,468 | — | 2,095 | 142 | 3/31/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Miami, FL | (g) | 584 | 1,490 | — | 2,074 | 107 | 2/25/2015 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Milo, ME | (g) | 138 | 1,122 | — | 1,260 | 96 | 3/19/2015 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Monroe, UT | $ | — | 272 | 985 | — | 1,257 | 84 | 10/24/2014 | 2013 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Moore Haven, FL | (g) | 348 | 1,016 | — | 1,364 | 103 | 5/29/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Moulton, TX | (g) | 102 | 973 | — | 1,075 | 108 | 2/26/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Naubinway, MI | (g) | 47 | 1,180 | — | 1,227 | 114 | 2/4/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
New Summerfield, TX | (g) | 230 | 851 | — | 1,081 | 81 | 6/6/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Nicholasville, KY | (g) | 464 | 826 | — | 1,290 | 85 | 3/26/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
North Charleston, SC | — | 386 | 997 | — | 1,383 | 83 | 11/14/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Omaha, NE | (g) | 86 | 1,427 | — | 1,513 | 105 | 3/2/2015 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Ordway, CO | (g) | 81 | 993 | — | 1,074 | 86 | 10/30/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Oshkosh, WI | (g) | 361 | 815 | — | 1,176 | 85 | 2/25/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Ossineke, MI | (g) | 85 | 898 | — | 983 | 85 | 3/14/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Palmdale, CA | (g) | 372 | 1,822 | — | 2,194 | 132 | 3/30/2015 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Penitas, TX | (g) | 182 | 1,053 | — | 1,235 | 107 | 3/26/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Pensacola, FL | (g) | 509 | 791 | — | 1,300 | 82 | 3/27/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Pine Lake, GA | (g) | 639 | 897 | — | 1,536 | 83 | 8/26/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Pittsfield, ME | (g) | 334 | 1,258 | — | 1,592 | 92 | 8/12/2015 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Plainview, NE | (g) | 112 | 774 | — | 886 | 79 | 4/25/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Poinciana, FL | (g) | 501 | 1,186 | — | 1,687 | 104 | 9/19/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Pojoaque, NM | (g) | 545 | 909 | 41 | 1,495 | 80 | 8/25/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Posen, MI | (g) | 101 | 896 | — | 997 | 85 | 3/14/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Preston, MN | (g) | 161 | 1,159 | — | 1,320 | 115 | 6/27/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
S-11
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
SCHEDULE III – REAL ESTATE ASSETS AND ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION – (Continued)
(in thousands)
Initial Costs to Company | Gross Amount at | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buildings, | Total | Which Carried | Accumulated | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fixtures and | Adjustment | At December 31, 2017 | Depreciation | Date | Date | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Description (a) | Encumbrances | Land | Improvements | to Basis | (b) (c) (d) | (d) (e) (f) | Acquired | Constructed | |||||||||||||||||||||
Family Dollar (continued): | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Punta Gorda, FL | (g) | $ | 345 | $ | 1,018 | $ | — | $ | 1,363 | $ | 55 | 12/17/2015 | 2014 | ||||||||||||||||
Radium Springs, NM | (g) | 129 | 1,086 | — | 1,215 | 112 | 2/26/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Ramah, NM | (g) | 217 | 1,105 | — | 1,322 | 107 | 2/4/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Rex, GA | $ | — | 294 | 1,393 | — | 1,687 | 114 | 11/7/2014 | 2014 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Richmond, ME | (g) | 252 | 1,026 | — | 1,278 | 88 | 3/25/2015 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Riverside, CA | (g) | 736 | 1,558 | — | 2,294 | 151 | 4/4/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Robert Lee, TX | (g) | 94 | 904 | — | 998 | 94 | 2/26/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Rushford, MN | (g) | 163 | 844 | — | 1,007 | 87 | 6/27/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Saginaw, MI | (g) | 240 | 956 | — | 1,196 | 83 | 10/30/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
San Antonio, TX | (g) | 357 | 966 | — | 1,323 | 91 | 9/30/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
San Antonio, TX | — | 421 | 951 | — | 1,372 | 86 | 11/14/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
San Jacinto, CA | (g) | 430 | 1,682 | — | 2,112 | 152 | 7/18/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Schuyler, NE | (g) | 260 | 708 | — | 968 | 71 | 5/5/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Shreveport, LA | (g) | 406 | 978 | — | 1,384 | 95 | 5/29/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Shreveport, LA | (g) | 272 | 1,113 | — | 1,385 | 103 | 7/22/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Shreveport, LA | (g) | 423 | 1,099 | — | 1,522 | 93 | 10/8/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
South Paris, ME | (g) | 173 | 1,240 | — | 1,413 | 107 | 2/25/2015 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Spring Hill, FL | (g) | 278 | 1,249 | — | 1,527 | 67 | 12/4/2015 | 2015 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Spurger, TX | (g) | 86 | 905 | — | 991 | 81 | 9/18/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Statesboro, GA | (g) | 347 | 800 | — | 1,147 | 85 | 2/14/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Sterling City, TX | (g) | 78 | 889 | — | 967 | 93 | 2/26/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Stockton, CA | (g) | 202 | 1,817 | — | 2,019 | 156 | 9/19/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Taft, CA | (g) | 255 | 1,422 | — | 1,677 | 163 | 8/23/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Tampa, FL | (g) | 563 | 737 | — | 1,300 | 81 | 12/18/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Tampa, FL | (g) | 482 | 920 | — | 1,402 | 100 | 12/18/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Tampa, FL | (g) | 568 | 1,137 | — | 1,705 | 109 | 7/2/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Terra Bella, CA | (g) | 332 | 1,394 | — | 1,726 | 142 | 2/19/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Topeka, KS | (g) | 419 | 1,327 | — | 1,746 | 130 | 4/17/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Tucson, AZ | (g) | 399 | 1,599 | — | 1,998 | 124 | 1/27/2015 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Tyler, MN | (g) | 73 | 895 | — | 968 | 91 | 6/27/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Tuscaloosa, AL | (g) | 534 | 817 | — | 1,351 | 90 | 12/27/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Valdosta, GA | (g) | 424 | 849 | — | 1,273 | 89 | 2/26/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Vine Grove, KY | (g) | 205 | 966 | — | 1,171 | 75 | 2/13/2015 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Waelder, TX | (g) | 136 | 788 | — | 924 | 76 | 6/4/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Waldoboro, ME | (g) | 211 | 1,123 | — | 1,334 | 68 | 1/13/2016 | 2015 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Walker, LA | (g) | 294 | 966 | — | 1,260 | 85 | 9/30/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Wayne, OK | (g) | 37 | 937 | — | 974 | 90 | 6/27/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Waynesburg, KY | (g) | 150 | 955 | — | 1,105 | 82 | 10/10/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Wild Rose, WI | (g) | 133 | 866 | — | 999 | 80 | 6/27/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Fargo Plaza: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fargo, ND | (g) | 2,097 | 4,774 | 376 | 7,247 | 732 | 5/30/2013 | 2003 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Fleet Pride: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Birmingham, AL | (g) | 376 | 2,607 | — | 2,983 | 219 | 8/3/2015 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
S-12
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
SCHEDULE III – REAL ESTATE ASSETS AND ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION – (Continued)
(in thousands)
Initial Costs to Company | Gross Amount at | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buildings, | Total | Which Carried | Accumulated | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fixtures and | Adjustment | At December 31, 2017 | Depreciation | Date | Date | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Description (a) | Encumbrances | Land | Improvements | to Basis | (b) (c) (d) | (d) (e) (f) | Acquired | Constructed | |||||||||||||||||||||
Flower Foods: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Orlando, FL | (g) | $ | 418 | $ | 387 | $ | — | $ | 805 | $ | 34 | 9/11/2014 | 2013 | ||||||||||||||||
Waldorf, MD | (g) | 398 | 1,045 | — | 1,443 | 102 | 9/11/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Food 4 Less: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Atwater, CA | (g) | 1,383 | 5,271 | — | 6,654 | 619 | 11/27/2013 | 2002 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Fountain Square: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brookfield, WI | $ | — | 6,508 | 28,634 | — | 35,142 | 894 | 1/17/2017 | 2006 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Fourth Creek Landing: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Statesville, NC | 5,700 | 1,375 | 7,795 | — | 9,170 | 1,277 | 3/26/2013 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Fresenius Medical Care: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
West Plains, MI | (g) | 557 | 3,097 | — | 3,654 | 278 | 7/2/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Fresh Market Center: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Glen Ellyn, IL | 4,750 | 2,767 | 6,403 | 102 | 9,272 | 592 | 9/30/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Fresh Thyme: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Indianapolis, IN | (g) | 1,087 | 6,019 | — | 7,106 | 563 | 10/31/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Northville, MI | (g) | 1,598 | 7,796 | — | 9,394 | 443 | 12/21/2015 | 2015 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Fresh Thyme & DSW: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fort Wayne, IN | — | 1,740 | 4,153 | 218 | 6,111 | 415 | 9/30/2014 | 1985 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Gabe’s Hobby Lobby: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Harrisonburg, VA | (g) | 2,796 | 7,637 | — | 10,433 | 308 | 9/19/2016 | 1972 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Giant Eagle: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Seven Fields, PA | 7,530 | 1,574 | 13,659 | — | 15,233 | 1,283 | 5/7/2014 | 2005 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Gold's Gym: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Corpus Christi, TX | (g) | 1,498 | 6,346 | — | 7,844 | 824 | 3/6/2013 | 2006 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Golden Corral: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Garland, TX | (g) | 1,255 | 2,435 | — | 3,690 | 349 | 9/21/2012 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Houston, TX | (g) | 1,375 | 2,350 | — | 3,725 | 324 | 12/12/2012 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Victoria, TX | (g) | 673 | 2,857 | — | 3,530 | 258 | 6/27/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Goodyear: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pooler, GA | (g) | 569 | 1,484 | — | 2,053 | 195 | 6/18/2013 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Hancock Village: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chesterfield, VA | 15,000 | 8,874 | 17,287 | 131 | 26,292 | 2,526 | 5/23/2013 | 2009 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Harbor Town Center: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Manitowoc, WI | 9,750 | 3,568 | 13,209 | — | 16,777 | 1,105 | 4/24/2015 | 2005 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Harps Foods: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gentry, AR | — | 224 | 2,680 | — | 2,904 | 18 | 10/12/2017 | 1994 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Green Forest, AR | — | 96 | 3,163 | — | 3,259 | 4 | 12/14/2017 | 2017 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Lincoln, AR | — | 329 | 3,668 | — | 3,997 | 50 | 7/6/2017 | 2017 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Noel, MO | — | 78 | 885 | — | 963 | 8 | 9/7/2017 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Pocahontas, AR | — | 557 | 3,379 | — | 3,936 | 72 | 4/13/2017 | 2016 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Vilonia, AR | — | 406 | 4,028 | — | 4,434 | 90 | 3/20/2017 | 2016 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Haverty Furniture: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Midland, TX | (g) | 709 | 1,294 | — | 2,003 | 228 | 8/7/2013 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
HEB Center: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Waxahachie, TX | 7,000 | 3,465 | 7,952 | 273 | 11,690 | 1,194 | 6/27/2012 | 1997 | |||||||||||||||||||||
S-13
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
SCHEDULE III – REAL ESTATE ASSETS AND ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION – (Continued)
(in thousands)
Initial Costs to Company | Gross Amount at | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buildings, | Total | Which Carried | Accumulated | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fixtures and | Adjustment | At December 31, 2017 | Depreciation | Date | Date | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Description (a) | Encumbrances | Land | Improvements | to Basis | (b) (c) (d) | (d) (e) (f) | Acquired | Constructed | |||||||||||||||||||||
Hickory Flat Commons: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Canton, GA | $ | 9,850 | $ | 4,482 | $ | 13,174 | $ | 111 | $ | 17,767 | $ | 1,860 | 12/18/2012 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||
Hobby Lobby: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Burlington, IA | (g) | 629 | 1,890 | — | 2,519 | 125 | 7/30/2015 | 1988 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Dickson City, PA | — | 1,113 | 7,946 | — | 9,059 | 1,080 | 6/30/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Lewisville, TX | (g) | 2,184 | 8,977 | — | 11,161 | 1,018 | 11/26/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Mooresville, NC | (g) | 869 | 4,249 | — | 5,118 | 759 | 11/30/2012 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Home Depot: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lincoln, NE | (g) | 6,339 | 5,937 | — | 12,276 | 353 | 10/22/2015 | 1993 | |||||||||||||||||||||
North Canton, OH | 7,234 | 2,203 | 12,012 | — | 14,215 | 1,634 | 12/20/2012 | 1998 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Plainwell, MI | (g) | 521 | 11,905 | — | 12,426 | 1,402 | 5/16/2013 | 2002 | |||||||||||||||||||||
IHOP: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Anderson, IN | (g) | 54 | 1,633 | — | 1,687 | 146 | 6/30/2014 | 2005 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Rio Rancho, NM | (g) | 599 | 2,314 | — | 2,913 | 219 | 3/28/2014 | 2011 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Inglewood Plaza: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Inglewood, CA | 12,700 | 9,880 | 14,099 | — | 23,979 | 1,256 | 9/12/2014 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Kirklands: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dothan, AL | (g) | 486 | 946 | — | 1,432 | 112 | 8/5/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Jonesboro, AR | (g) | 696 | 1,990 | — | 2,686 | 255 | 11/27/2012 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Kohl’s: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cedar Falls, IA | (g) | 1,600 | 5,796 | — | 7,396 | 792 | 12/7/2012 | 2001 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Chartlottesville, VA | 8,745 | 3,929 | 12,280 | — | 16,209 | 1,102 | 7/28/2014 | 2011 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Easton, MD | (g) | 2,962 | 2,661 | — | 5,623 | 136 | 12/2/2015 | 1992 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Hutchinson, KS | (g) | 3,290 | — | — | 3,290 | — | 10/19/2012 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Kroger: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Shelton, WA | (g) | 1,180 | 11,040 | — | 12,220 | 1,189 | 4/30/2014 | 1994 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Whitehall, OH | 4,066 | 581 | 6,628 | 224 | 7,433 | 775 | 12/16/2013 | 1994 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Kum & Go: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bentonville, AR | (g) | 916 | 1,864 | — | 2,780 | 227 | 5/3/2013 | 2011 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Conway, AR | (g) | 510 | 2,577 | — | 3,087 | 232 | 6/13/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Fairfield, IA | (g) | 422 | 1,913 | — | 2,335 | 234 | 5/3/2013 | 2011 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Mount Vernon, MO | (g) | 708 | 1,756 | — | 2,464 | 215 | 5/3/2013 | 2010 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Urbandale, IA | (g) | 722 | 1,658 | — | 2,380 | 204 | 5/3/2013 | 2010 | |||||||||||||||||||||
LA Fitness: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bloomfield Township, MI | (g) | 2,287 | 10,075 | — | 12,362 | 1,289 | 6/21/2013 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Columbus, OH | (g) | 1,013 | 6,734 | — | 7,747 | 502 | 4/29/2015 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Garland, TX | (g) | 2,005 | 6,861 | — | 8,866 | 727 | 12/20/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Houston, TX | (g) | 5,764 | 5,994 | — | 11,758 | 683 | 9/30/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Mesa, AZ | (g) | 1,353 | 7,730 | 20 | 9,103 | 1,004 | 5/8/2013 | 2010 | |||||||||||||||||||||
New Lenox, IL | (g) | 1,965 | 6,257 | — | 8,222 | 333 | 12/21/2015 | 2015 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Ocoee, FL | (g) | 1,173 | 6,876 | 5 | 8,054 | 835 | 8/8/2013 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Riverside, CA | (g) | 2,557 | 9,951 | — | 12,508 | 1,172 | 8/2/2013 | 2010 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Lafayette Pavilions: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lafayette, IN | (g) | 7,632 | 42,497 | 5,129 | 55,258 | 3,971 | 2/6/2015 | 2006 | |||||||||||||||||||||
S-14
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
SCHEDULE III – REAL ESTATE ASSETS AND ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION – (Continued)
(in thousands)
Initial Costs to Company | Gross Amount at | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buildings, | Total | Which Carried | Accumulated | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fixtures and | Adjustment | At December 31, 2017 | Depreciation | Date | Date | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Description (a) | Encumbrances | Land | Improvements | to Basis | (b) (c) (d) | (d) (e) (f) | Acquired | Constructed | |||||||||||||||||||||
Logan’s Roadhouse: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bristol, VA | (g) | $ | 991 | $ | 2,560 | $ | — | $ | 3,551 | $ | 353 | 1/29/2013 | 2001 | ||||||||||||||||
Fort Wayne, IN | (g) | 868 | 2,698 | — | 3,566 | 256 | 3/28/2014 | 2002 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Lancaster, TX | (g) | 1,203 | 1,620 | — | 2,823 | 229 | 10/23/2012 | 2011 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Martinsburg, WV | (g) | 925 | 2,183 | — | 3,108 | 234 | 10/29/2013 | 2010 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Opelika, AL | (g) | 836 | 1,508 | — | 2,344 | 216 | 10/23/2012 | 2005 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Sanford, FL | (g) | 1,031 | 1,807 | — | 2,838 | 257 | 10/23/2012 | 1999 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Troy, OH | (g) | 992 | 1,577 | (1,383 | ) | 1,186 | 25 | 10/23/2012 | 2011 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Lord Salisbury Center: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Salisbury, MD | (g) | 6,949 | 12,179 | — | 19,128 | 933 | 3/11/2016 | 2005 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Lowe’s: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Adrian, MI | (g) | 2,604 | 5,036 | — | 7,640 | 747 | 9/27/2013 | 1996 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Alpharetta, GA | $ | 12,300 | 7,979 | 9,630 | 403 | 18,012 | 738 | 5/29/2015 | 1998 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Asheboro, NC | (g) | 1,098 | 6,722 | — | 7,820 | 642 | 6/23/2014 | 1994 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Cincinnati, OH | (g) | 14,092 | — | — | 14,092 | — | 2/10/2014 | 2001 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Columbia, SC | 5,964 | 3,943 | 6,353 | 750 | 11,046 | 854 | 9/12/2013 | 1994 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Covington, LA | 5,648 | 10,233 | — | — | 10,233 | — | 8/20/2014 | 2002 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Hilliard, OH | 7,859 | 5,474 | 6,288 | — | 11,762 | 478 | 8/5/2015 | 1994 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Lilburn, GA | 12,500 | 8,817 | 9,380 | 385 | 18,582 | 716 | 5/29/2015 | 1999 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Mansfield, OH | (g) | 873 | 8,256 | — | 9,129 | 805 | 6/12/2014 | 1992 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Marietta, GA | 11,000 | 7,471 | 8,404 | 392 | 16,267 | 650 | 5/29/2015 | 1997 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Oxford, AL | (g) | 1,668 | 7,622 | 369 | 9,659 | 1,084 | 6/28/2013 | 1999 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Tuscaloosa, AL | (g) | 4,908 | 4,786 | 18 | 9,712 | 575 | 10/29/2013 | 1993 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Woodstock, GA | 11,200 | 7,316 | 8,879 | 392 | 16,587 | 686 | 5/29/2015 | 1997 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Zanesville, OH | (g) | 2,161 | 8,375 | 282 | 10,818 | 926 | 12/11/2013 | 1995 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Market Heights Shopping Center: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Harker Heights, TX | 47,000 | 12,888 | 64,105 | 504 | 77,497 | 8,293 | 11/25/2013 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Marketplace at the Lakes: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
West Covina, CA | 11,300 | 10,020 | 8,664 | — | 18,684 | 1,949 | 9/30/2013 | 1994 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Matteson Center: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Matteson, IL | — | 1,243 | 17,427 | 2,767 | 21,437 | 2,344 | 11/22/2013 | 2003 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Mattress Firm: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Appleton, WI | (g) | 895 | 1,026 | — | 1,921 | 66 | 11/18/2015 | 2015 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Ashtabula, OH | — | 301 | 1,965 | — | 2,266 | 102 | 3/23/2016 | 2015 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Augusta, ME | (g) | 723 | 1,354 | — | 2,077 | 153 | 5/30/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Brunswick, GA | (g) | 343 | 1,040 | — | 1,383 | 128 | 8/29/2013 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Cincinnati, OH | (g) | 323 | 966 | — | 1,289 | 89 | 7/17/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Danville, VA | (g) | 274 | 1,514 | — | 1,788 | 150 | 4/29/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Huber Heights, OH | (g) | 854 | 903 | — | 1,757 | 86 | 6/20/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Jonesboro, AR | (g) | 729 | 1,194 | — | 1,923 | 212 | 10/5/2012 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Lakeland, FL | (g) | 259 | 1,107 | — | 1,366 | 111 | 7/16/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Martinsville, VA | (g) | 259 | 1,510 | — | 1,769 | 107 | 9/17/2015 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Middletown, OH | (g) | 142 | 1,384 | — | 1,526 | 90 | 8/6/2015 | 2015 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Nampa, ID | (g) | 449 | 2,213 | — | 2,662 | 220 | 3/31/2014 | 1972 | |||||||||||||||||||||
S-15
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
SCHEDULE III – REAL ESTATE ASSETS AND ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION – (Continued)
(in thousands)
Initial Costs to Company | Gross Amount at | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buildings, | Total | Which Carried | Accumulated | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fixtures and | Adjustment | At December 31, 2017 | Depreciation | Date | Date | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Description (a) | Encumbrances | Land | Improvements | to Basis | (b) (c) (d) | (d) (e) (f) | Acquired | Constructed | |||||||||||||||||||||
Mattress Firm (continued): | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Bern, NC | (g) | $ | 340 | $ | 1,436 | $ | — | $ | 1,776 | $ | 126 | 9/25/2014 | 2014 | ||||||||||||||||
Pineville, NC | (g) | 1,557 | 1,198 | — | 2,755 | 189 | 10/29/2012 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Port Charlotte, FL | (g) | 382 | 1,211 | — | 1,593 | 110 | 8/1/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Thomasville, GA | (g) | 694 | 1,469 | — | 2,163 | 79 | 12/18/2015 | 2015 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Mattress Firm & Aspen Dental: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Vienna, WV | $ | — | 774 | 2,466 | — | 3,240 | 273 | 9/15/2014 | 2014 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Mattress Firm & Five Guys: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Muskegon, MI | (g) | 813 | 1,766 | — | 2,579 | 159 | 8/29/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
McAlister’s Deli: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lawton, OK | (g) | 805 | 1,057 | — | 1,862 | 106 | 5/1/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Port Arthur, TX | (g) | 379 | 1,146 | — | 1,525 | 131 | 3/27/2014 | 2007 | |||||||||||||||||||||
McGowin Park: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mobile, AL | 42,765 | 2,243 | 69,357 | — | 71,600 | 1,565 | 4/26/2017 | 2016 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Melody Mountain: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ashland, KY | 7,376 | 1,286 | 9,879 | — | 11,165 | 606 | 9/1/2015 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Men’s Wearhouse: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ft. Wayne, IN | (g) | 421 | 2,125 | 75 | 2,621 | 88 | 8/19/2016 | 2005 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Merchants Tire & Auto: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Wake Forest, NC | (g) | 782 | 1,730 | — | 2,512 | 104 | 9/1/2015 | 2005 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Michael’s: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bowling Green, KY | (g) | 587 | 1,992 | — | 2,579 | 316 | 11/20/2012 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Mister Car Wash: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Athens, AL | — | 383 | 1,150 | — | 1,533 | 7 | 9/12/2017 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Decatur, AL | — | 257 | 559 | — | 816 | 5 | 9/12/2017 | 2005 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Decatur, AL | — | 486 | 1,253 | — | 1,739 | 11 | 9/12/2017 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Decatur, AL | — | 359 | 1,152 | — | 1,511 | 8 | 9/12/2017 | 2007 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Hartselle, AL | — | 360 | 569 | — | 929 | 5 | 9/12/2017 | 2007 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Madison, AL | — | 562 | 1,139 | — | 1,701 | 10 | 9/12/2017 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Morganton Heights: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Morganton, NC | 22,800 | 7,032 | 29,763 | — | 36,795 | 3,234 | 4/29/2015 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
National Tire & Battery: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cedar Hill, TX | (g) | 469 | 1,951 | — | 2,420 | 252 | 12/18/2012 | 2006 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Cypress, TX | (g) | 910 | 2,224 | — | 3,134 | 144 | 9/1/2015 | 2005 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Flower Mound, TX | (g) | 779 | 2,449 | — | 3,228 | 152 | 9/1/2015 | 2005 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Fort Worth, TX | (g) | 936 | 1,234 | — | 2,170 | 144 | 8/23/2013 | 2005 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Fort Worth, TX | — | 730 | 2,309 | — | 3,039 | 143 | 9/1/2015 | 2005 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Frisco, TX | (g) | 844 | 1,608 | — | 2,452 | 186 | 8/23/2013 | 2007 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Montgomery, IL | (g) | 516 | 2,494 | — | 3,010 | 322 | 1/15/2013 | 2007 | |||||||||||||||||||||
North Richland Hills, TX | (g) | 513 | 2,579 | — | 3,092 | 165 | 9/1/2015 | 2005 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Pasadena, TX | (g) | 908 | 2,307 | — | 3,215 | 149 | 9/1/2015 | 2005 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Pearland, TX | (g) | 1,016 | 2,040 | — | 3,056 | 129 | 9/1/2015 | 2005 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Plano, TX | (g) | 1,292 | 2,197 | — | 3,489 | 139 | 9/2/2015 | 2005 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Tomball, TX | (g) | 838 | 2,229 | — | 3,067 | 140 | 9/2/2015 | 2005 | |||||||||||||||||||||
S-16
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
SCHEDULE III – REAL ESTATE ASSETS AND ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION – (Continued)
(in thousands)
Initial Costs to Company | Gross Amount at | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buildings, | Total | Which Carried | Accumulated | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fixtures and | Adjustment | At December 31, 2017 | Depreciation | Date | Date | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Description (a) | Encumbrances | Land | Improvements | to Basis | (b) (c) (d) | (d) (e) (f) | Acquired | Constructed | |||||||||||||||||||||
Native Wings: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
San Antonio, TX | (g) | $ | 821 | $ | 2,682 | $ | — | $ | 3,503 | $ | 245 | 8/4/2014 | 2014 | ||||||||||||||||
Natural Grocers: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Denton, TX | (g) | 1,326 | 3,134 | — | 4,460 | 371 | 7/24/2013 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Idaho Falls, ID | (g) | 833 | 2,316 | — | 3,149 | 238 | 2/14/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Lubbock, TX | (g) | 1,093 | 3,621 | — | 4,714 | 439 | 4/22/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Nordstrom Rack: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tampa, FL | $ | 6,880 | 3,371 | 6,402 | — | 9,773 | 1,138 | 4/16/2012 | 2010 | ||||||||||||||||||||
North Logan Commons: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Loganville, GA | — | 4,535 | 11,826 | 28 | 16,389 | 634 | 9/22/2016 | 2009 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Northwest Plaza: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tampa, FL | — | 1,816 | 4,834 | 254 | 6,904 | 358 | 8/20/2015 | 1994 | |||||||||||||||||||||
O’Reilly Auto Parts: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brownfield, TX | (g) | 22 | 835 | — | 857 | 126 | 5/8/2012 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Clayton, GA | (g) | 501 | 945 | — | 1,446 | 48 | 1/29/2016 | 2015 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Columbus, TX | (g) | 260 | 757 | — | 1,017 | 108 | 5/8/2012 | 2011 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Lamesa, TX | (g) | 64 | 608 | — | 672 | 47 | 12/10/2014 | 2006 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Stanley, ND | (g) | 323 | 662 | — | 985 | 57 | 8/8/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Owensboro Towne Center: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Owensboro, KY | 14,027 | 3,807 | 16,259 | 788 | 20,854 | 924 | 1/12/2016 | 1996 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Park Place: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Enterprise, AL | 6,505 | 931 | 8,595 | — | 9,526 | 980 | 8/30/2013 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Parkway Centre South: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Grove City, OH | 14,250 | 7,027 | 18,223 | — | 25,250 | 928 | 7/15/2016 | 2005 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Pecanland Plaza: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Monroe, LA | (g) | 2,206 | 18,957 | — | 21,163 | 1,199 | 10/13/2015 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Pep Boys: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Clermont, FL | (g) | 799 | 1,993 | — | 2,792 | 247 | 6/26/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Oviedo, FL | (g) | 669 | 2,172 | — | 2,841 | 252 | 10/4/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
PetSmart: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Baton Rouge, LA | 2,509 | 651 | 2,968 | 113 | 3,732 | 476 | 10/11/2012 | 1999 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Commerce Township, MI | (g) | 539 | 1,960 | — | 2,499 | 319 | 3/28/2013 | 1996 | |||||||||||||||||||||
East Peoria, IL | (g) | 997 | 3,345 | — | 4,342 | 284 | 11/7/2014 | 2007 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Eden Prairie, MN | (g) | 1,279 | 2,030 | — | 3,309 | 247 | 10/1/2013 | 2007 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Edmond, OK | (g) | 816 | 3,266 | — | 4,082 | 431 | 1/23/2013 | 1998 | |||||||||||||||||||||
North Fayette Township, PA | (g) | 1,615 | 1,503 | — | 3,118 | 208 | 6/7/2013 | 1997 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Overland Park, KS | (g) | 2,025 | 2,181 | — | 4,206 | 250 | 10/1/2013 | 1996 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Taylor, MI | (g) | 331 | 2,438 | — | 2,769 | 374 | 6/7/2013 | 1997 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Tucson, AZ | (g) | 1,114 | 2,771 | 98 | 3,983 | 370 | 11/8/2013 | 2000 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Wilkesboro, NC | (g) | 447 | 1,710 | — | 2,157 | 263 | 4/13/2012 | 2011 | |||||||||||||||||||||
PetSmart/Old Navy: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Reynoldsburg, OH | 3,658 | 1,295 | 4,077 | — | 5,372 | 615 | 12/14/2012 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
S-17
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
SCHEDULE III – REAL ESTATE ASSETS AND ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION – (Continued)
(in thousands)
Initial Costs to Company | Gross Amount at | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buildings, | Total | Which Carried | Accumulated | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fixtures and | Adjustment | At December 31, 2017 | Depreciation | Date | Date | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Description (a) | Encumbrances | Land | Improvements | to Basis | (b) (c) (d) | (d) (e) (f) | Acquired | Constructed | |||||||||||||||||||||
Pick ’n Save: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pewaukee, WI | (g) | $ | 1,323 | $ | 6,761 | $ | — | $ | 8,084 | $ | 690 | 8/13/2014 | 1999 | ||||||||||||||||
Sheboygan, WI | (g) | 2,003 | 10,695 | — | 12,698 | 1,494 | 9/6/2012 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
South Milwaukee, WI | (g) | 1,126 | 5,706 | — | 6,832 | 612 | 11/6/2013 | 2005 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Plainfield Plaza: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Plainfield, IL | (g) | 3,167 | 14,788 | — | 17,955 | 870 | 12/3/2015 | 2002 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Plaza San Mateo: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Albuquerque, NM | $ | 6,950 | 2,867 | 11,582 | — | 14,449 | 1,136 | 5/2/2014 | 2014 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Popeyes: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Independence, MO | (g) | 333 | 680 | — | 1,013 | 62 | 6/27/2014 | 2005 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Poplar Springs Plaza: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Duncan, SC | 5,000 | 1,862 | 5,277 | 478 | 7,617 | 750 | 5/24/2013 | 1995 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Price Chopper: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gardner, MA | (g) | 858 | 12,171 | — | 13,029 | 1,032 | 9/26/2014 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Quick Chek: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kingston, NY | (g) | 831 | 5,783 | — | 6,614 | 684 | 5/31/2013 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Lake Katrine, NY | (g) | 1,507 | 4,569 | — | 6,076 | 528 | 5/31/2013 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Middletown, NY | (g) | 1,335 | 5,732 | — | 7,067 | 677 | 5/31/2013 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Middletown, NY | (g) | 1,297 | 5,963 | — | 7,260 | 704 | 5/31/2013 | 2009 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Middletown, NY | (g) | 1,437 | 4,656 | — | 6,093 | 554 | 5/31/2013 | 2007 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Sagerties, NY | (g) | 1,242 | 5,372 | — | 6,614 | 636 | 5/31/2013 | 2009 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Raising Cane’s: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Beaumont, TX | (g) | 839 | 1,288 | — | 2,127 | 120 | 7/31/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Phoenix, AZ | (g) | 761 | 1,972 | — | 2,733 | 187 | 3/28/2014 | 2011 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Wichita Falls, TX | (g) | 426 | 1,947 | — | 2,373 | 183 | 4/30/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Regent Towne Center: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fort Mill, SC | (g) | 1,455 | 5,063 | 80 | 6,598 | 699 | 6/13/2013 | 2007 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Rite Aid: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Columbia, SC | (g) | 854 | 2,281 | — | 3,135 | 248 | 12/3/2013 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Jenison, MI | (g) | 438 | 1,491 | — | 1,929 | 150 | 6/23/2014 | 1996 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Rocky River Promenade: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mooresville, NC | 3,989 | 2,446 | 3,159 | — | 5,605 | 294 | 8/18/2014 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Rolling Acres Plaza: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lady Lake, FL | 21,930 | 7,540 | 26,839 | — | 34,379 | 955 | 9/1/2016 | 2005 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Ross: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fort Worth, TX | (g) | 1,273 | 3,157 | — | 4,430 | 466 | 10/4/2012 | 1977 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Rushmore Crossing: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rapid City, SD | 23,541 | 7,066 | 33,019 | 189 | 40,274 | 4,524 | 1/2/2014 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Rapid City, SD | (g) | 883 | 4,128 | — | 5,011 | 623 | 1/2/2014 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Sherwin-Williams: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Macon, GA | (g) | 59 | 659 | — | 718 | 47 | 4/16/2015 | 2015 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Shippensburg Market Place: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Shippensburg, PA | (g) | 1,917 | 9,263 | — | 11,180 | 849 | 9/18/2014 | 2002 | |||||||||||||||||||||
S-18
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
SCHEDULE III – REAL ESTATE ASSETS AND ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION – (Continued)
(in thousands)
Initial Costs to Company | Gross Amount at | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buildings, | Total | Which Carried | Accumulated | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fixtures and | Adjustment | At December 31, 2017 | Depreciation | Date | Date | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Description (a) | Encumbrances | Land | Improvements | to Basis | (b) (c) (d) | (d) (e) (f) | Acquired | Constructed | |||||||||||||||||||||
Shopko: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ballard, UT | (g) | $ | 334 | $ | 2,865 | $ | — | $ | 3,199 | $ | 138 | 3/4/2016 | 2015 | ||||||||||||||||
Broken Bow, NE | (g) | 244 | 1,733 | — | 1,977 | 180 | 6/19/2014 | 2007 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Cherokee, IA | (g) | 217 | 3,326 | — | 3,543 | 177 | 12/23/2015 | 2015 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Cokato, MN | (g) | 358 | 3,229 | — | 3,587 | 186 | 12/23/2015 | 2015 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Valentine, NE | (g) | 395 | 3,549 | — | 3,944 | 371 | 6/30/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Webster City, IA | (g) | 656 | 2,868 | — | 3,524 | 141 | 2/17/2016 | 2015 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Shoppes at Lake Andrew: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Melbourne, FL | (g) | 3,924 | 16,840 | 21 | 20,785 | 2,057 | 12/31/2013 | 2003 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Shoppes at Stroud: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stroud Township, PA | (g) | 3,754 | 22,614 | 32 | 26,400 | 2,150 | 10/29/2014 | 2007 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Sleepy’s: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Burlington, NC | (g) | 393 | 1,648 | — | 2,041 | 117 | 3/31/2015 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Joliet, IL | (g) | 287 | 1,552 | — | 1,839 | 113 | 2/27/2015 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Southwest Plaza: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Springfield, IL | (g) | 2,992 | 48,935 | 207 | 52,134 | 5,152 | 9/18/2014 | 2003 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Spinx: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Simpsonville, SC | (g) | 591 | 969 | — | 1,560 | 121 | 1/24/2013 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Springfield Commons: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Springfield, OH | $ | 11,250 | 3,745 | 15,049 | 106 | 18,900 | 1,187 | 5/6/2015 | 1995 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Sprouts: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bixby, OK | (g) | 1,320 | 7,117 | — | 8,437 | 817 | 7/26/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Staples: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Plainfield, IN | (g) | 400 | 2,099 | — | 2,499 | 164 | 2/26/2015 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Stoneridge Village: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jefferson City, MO | 6,500 | 1,830 | 9,351 | — | 11,181 | 1,035 | 6/30/2014 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Stop & Shop: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brockton, MA | 11,241 | 4,259 | 13,285 | — | 17,544 | 1,057 | 7/27/2015 | 2003 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Stripes: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brownsville, TX | (g) | 210 | 2,386 | — | 2,596 | 376 | 8/30/2012 | 2007 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Brownwood, TX | (g) | 484 | 3,086 | — | 3,570 | 468 | 8/30/2012 | 2005 | |||||||||||||||||||||
McAllen, TX | (g) | 604 | 1,909 | — | 2,513 | 349 | 8/30/2012 | 2007 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Midland, TX | (g) | 620 | 5,551 | — | 6,171 | 779 | 8/30/2012 | 2002 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Mission, TX | (g) | 215 | 2,170 | — | 2,385 | 342 | 8/30/2012 | 2006 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Odessa, TX | (g) | 569 | 4,940 | — | 5,509 | 689 | 8/30/2012 | 1998 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Summerfield Crossing: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Riverview, FL | 7,310 | 6,130 | 6,753 | — | 12,883 | 838 | 7/12/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Sunbelt Rentals: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Canton, OH | (g) | 147 | 1,679 | — | 1,826 | 242 | 10/24/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Houston, TX | (g) | 535 | 1,664 | — | 2,199 | 160 | 3/31/2014 | 2000 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Sunoco: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cocoa, FL | (g) | 625 | 1,062 | — | 1,687 | 126 | 4/12/2013 | 1987 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Mangonia Park, FL | (g) | 689 | 600 | — | 1,289 | 71 | 4/12/2013 | 1999 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Merritt Island, FL | (g) | 610 | 1,123 | — | 1,733 | 133 | 4/12/2013 | 1986 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Palm Beach Gardens, FL | (g) | 1,050 | 2,667 | — | 3,717 | 315 | 4/12/2013 | 2009 | |||||||||||||||||||||
S-19
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
SCHEDULE III – REAL ESTATE ASSETS AND ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION – (Continued)
(in thousands)
Initial Costs to Company | Gross Amount at | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buildings, | Total | Which Carried | Accumulated | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fixtures and | Adjustment | At December 31, 2017 | Depreciation | Date | Date | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Description (a) | Encumbrances | Land | Improvements | to Basis | (b) (c) (d) | (d) (e) (f) | Acquired | Constructed | |||||||||||||||||||||
Sunoco (continued): | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Palm City, FL | (g) | $ | 667 | $ | 1,698 | $ | — | $ | 2,365 | $ | 201 | 4/12/2013 | 2011 | ||||||||||||||||
Palm Springs, FL | (g) | 580 | 1,907 | — | 2,487 | 225 | 4/12/2013 | 2011 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Sebastian, FL | (g) | 490 | 2,128 | — | 2,618 | 251 | 4/12/2013 | 2009 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Titusville, FL | (g) | 626 | 2,534 | — | 3,160 | 299 | 4/12/2013 | 2009 | |||||||||||||||||||||
West Palm Beach, FL | (g) | 637 | 443 | — | 1,080 | 53 | 4/12/2013 | 1977 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Sunoco Center: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Titusville, FL | $ | — | 799 | 587 | — | 1,386 | 72 | 4/12/2013 | 1986 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Sutters Creek: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rocky Mount, NC | — | 1,458 | 2,616 | 268 | 4,342 | 337 | 1/31/2014 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Target Center: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Columbia, SC | 5,450 | 3,234 | 7,297 | — | 10,531 | 757 | 3/31/2014 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Terrell Mill Village: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Marietta, GA | 7,500 | 3,079 | 11,185 | — | 14,264 | 1,295 | 1/31/2014 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
TGI Friday’s: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chesapeake, VA | (g) | 1,217 | 1,388 | — | 2,605 | 131 | 6/27/2014 | 2003 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Wilmington, DE | (g) | 1,685 | 969 | — | 2,654 | 93 | 6/27/2014 | 1991 | |||||||||||||||||||||
The Center at Hobbs Brook: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Sturbridge, MA | 21,500 | 11,241 | 29,152 | 915 | 41,308 | 1,583 | 6/29/2016 | 1999 | |||||||||||||||||||||
The Market at Clifty Crossing: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Columbus, IN | (g) | 2,669 | 16,308 | 65 | 19,042 | 2,704 | 10/31/2014 | 1989 | |||||||||||||||||||||
The Market at Polaris: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Columbus, OH | (g) | 11,828 | 41,702 | 508 | 54,038 | 4,722 | 12/6/2013 | 2005 | |||||||||||||||||||||
The Marquis: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Williamsburg, VA | 8,556 | 2,615 | 11,406 | — | 14,021 | 1,665 | 9/21/2012 | 2007 | |||||||||||||||||||||
The Plant: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
San Jose, CA | 123,000 | 67,596 | 108,203 | 382 | 176,181 | 15,373 | 4/15/2013 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||
The Ridge at Turtle Creek: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hattiesburg, MS | 9,900 | 2,749 | 12,434 | — | 15,183 | 962 | 2/27/2015 | 2011 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Tilted Kilt: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Killeen, TX | (g) | 1,378 | 1,508 | — | 2,886 | 135 | 7/29/2014 | 2010 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Tire Kingdom: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bluffton, SC | (g) | 645 | 1,688 | — | 2,333 | 102 | 9/1/2015 | 2005 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Summerville, SC | (g) | 1,208 | 1,233 | — | 2,441 | 77 | 9/1/2015 | 2005 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Tarpon Springs, FL | (g) | 427 | 1,458 | — | 1,885 | 193 | 11/30/2012 | 2003 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Tire Kingdom & Starbucks: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mount Pleasant, SC | 2,400 | 1,291 | 3,149 | — | 4,440 | 192 | 9/1/2015 | 2005 | |||||||||||||||||||||
TJ Maxx/Dollar Tree: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Oxford, OH | (g) | 641 | 2,673 | 90 | 3,404 | 419 | 5/20/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Tractor Supply: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ashland, VA | (g) | 500 | 2,696 | — | 3,196 | 295 | 11/22/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Augusta, KS | (g) | 407 | 2,315 | — | 2,722 | 244 | 1/10/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Cambridge, MN | (g) | 807 | 1,272 | — | 2,079 | 220 | 5/14/2012 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Canon City, CO | (g) | 597 | 2,527 | — | 3,124 | 324 | 11/30/2012 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Fortuna, CA | (g) | 568 | 3,819 | — | 4,387 | 365 | 6/27/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
S-20
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
SCHEDULE III – REAL ESTATE ASSETS AND ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION – (Continued)
(in thousands)
Initial Costs to Company | Gross Amount at | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buildings, | Total | Which Carried | Accumulated | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fixtures and | Adjustment | At December 31, 2017 | Depreciation | Date | Date | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Description (a) | Encumbrances | Land | Improvements | to Basis | (b) (c) (d) | (d) (e) (f) | Acquired | Constructed | |||||||||||||||||||||
Tractor Supply (continued): | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lumberton, NC | (g) | $ | 611 | $ | 2,007 | $ | — | $ | 2,618 | $ | 266 | 5/24/2013 | 2013 | ||||||||||||||||
Marion, IN | (g) | 1,536 | 1,099 | — | 2,635 | 124 | 2/19/2014 | 2004 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Monticello, FL | (g) | 448 | 1,916 | — | 2,364 | 250 | 6/20/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Newnan, GA | (g) | 1,182 | 1,950 | — | 3,132 | 272 | 11/6/2012 | 2009 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Petersburg, VA | (g) | 514 | 2,439 | — | 2,953 | 273 | 10/7/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
South Hill, VA | (g) | 630 | 2,179 | — | 2,809 | 268 | 6/24/2013 | 2011 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Spencer, WV | $ | 1,659 | 455 | 2,188 | — | 2,643 | 321 | 11/20/2012 | 2012 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Stuttgart, AR | 1,543 | 47 | 2,519 | — | 2,566 | 314 | 4/5/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Weaverville, NC | (g) | 867 | 3,138 | — | 4,005 | 367 | 9/13/2013 | 2006 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Woodward, OK | (g) | 446 | 1,973 | — | 2,419 | 233 | 11/19/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Trader Joe’s: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Asheville, NC | (g) | 2,770 | 3,766 | — | 6,536 | 435 | 10/22/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Columbia, SC | (g) | 2,308 | 2,597 | — | 4,905 | 365 | 3/28/2013 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Wilmington, NC | (g) | 2,016 | 2,519 | — | 4,535 | 379 | 6/27/2013 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Turfway Crossing: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Florence, KY | 8,480 | 2,261 | 10,323 | 409 | 12,993 | 1,191 | 5/27/2014 | 2002 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Ulta Salon: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Albany, GA | (g) | 441 | 1,757 | — | 2,198 | 171 | 5/8/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Greeley, CO | (g) | 596 | 2,035 | — | 2,631 | 152 | 3/31/2015 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
United Oil: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Alhambra, CA | 2,032 | 3,026 | 751 | — | 3,777 | 62 | 9/30/2014 | 2005 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Bellflower, CA | 755 | 1,312 | 576 | — | 1,888 | 48 | 9/30/2014 | 1999 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Bellflower, CA | (g) | 1,246 | 788 | — | 2,034 | 65 | 9/30/2014 | 2001 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Brea, CA | (g) | 2,393 | 658 | — | 3,051 | 54 | 9/30/2014 | 1984 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Burbank, CA | 2,193 | 3,474 | 594 | — | 4,068 | 49 | 9/30/2014 | 2000 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Burbank, CA | 1,484 | 1,750 | 574 | — | 2,324 | 47 | 9/30/2014 | 1998 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Chino, CA | 1,167 | 1,449 | 730 | — | 2,179 | 60 | 9/30/2014 | 1984 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Compton, CA | 805 | 992 | 460 | — | 1,452 | 38 | 9/30/2014 | 2002 | |||||||||||||||||||||
El Cajon, CA | (g) | 1,533 | 568 | — | 2,101 | 47 | 9/30/2014 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||
El Cajon, CA | (g) | 1,225 | 368 | — | 1,593 | 30 | 9/30/2014 | 2000 | |||||||||||||||||||||
El Monte, CA | (g) | 766 | 510 | — | 1,276 | 42 | 9/30/2014 | 1994 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Escondido, CA | 1,107 | 678 | 470 | — | 1,148 | 39 | 9/30/2014 | 1984 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Escondido, CA | (g) | 3,514 | 1,062 | — | 4,576 | 88 | 9/30/2014 | 2002 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Fountain Valley, CA | 1,459 | 1,809 | 806 | — | 2,615 | 67 | 9/30/2014 | 1999 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Glendale, CA | (g) | 4,871 | 795 | — | 5,666 | 66 | 9/30/2014 | 1999 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Inglewood, CA | (g) | 1,809 | 878 | — | 2,687 | 73 | 9/30/2014 | 1997 | |||||||||||||||||||||
La Habra, CA | (g) | 1,971 | 571 | — | 2,542 | 47 | 9/30/2014 | 2000 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Lawndale, CA | (g) | 1,462 | 862 | — | 2,324 | 71 | 9/30/2014 | 2001 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Long Beach, CA | 1,061 | 974 | 772 | — | 1,746 | 64 | 9/30/2014 | 2003 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Long Beach, CA | (g) | 2,778 | 883 | — | 3,661 | 73 | 9/30/2014 | 1972 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Long Beach, CA | 1,288 | 1,972 | 643 | — | 2,615 | 53 | 9/30/2014 | 2004 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Los Angeles, CA | (g) | 2,334 | 717 | — | 3,051 | 59 | 9/30/2014 | 2002 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Los Angeles, CA | (g) | 3,552 | 1,242 | — | 4,794 | 103 | 9/30/2014 | 2002 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Los Angeles, CA | (g) | 2,745 | 669 | — | 3,414 | 55 | 9/30/2014 | 1998 | |||||||||||||||||||||
S-21
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
SCHEDULE III – REAL ESTATE ASSETS AND ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION – (Continued)
(in thousands)
Initial Costs to Company | Gross Amount at | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buildings, | Total | Which Carried | Accumulated | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fixtures and | Adjustment | At December 31, 2017 | Depreciation | Date | Date | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Description (a) | Encumbrances | Land | Improvements | to Basis | (b) (c) (d) | (d) (e) (f) | Acquired | Constructed | |||||||||||||||||||||
United Oil (continued): | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Los Angeles, CA | $ | 2,923 | $ | 3,823 | $ | 825 | $ | — | $ | 4,648 | $ | 68 | 9/30/2014 | 1997 | |||||||||||||||
Los Angeles, CA | (g) | 3,930 | 428 | — | 4,358 | 35 | 9/30/2014 | 2005 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Los Angeles, CA | 1,590 | 1,710 | 905 | — | 2,615 | 75 | 9/30/2014 | 2002 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Los Angeles, CA | (g) | 1,927 | 1,484 | — | 3,411 | 123 | 9/30/2014 | 2007 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Los Angeles, CA | (g) | 2,182 | 701 | — | 2,883 | 58 | 9/30/2014 | 1964 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Lynwood, CA | 1,640 | 2,386 | 737 | — | 3,123 | 61 | 9/30/2014 | 2002 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Menifee, CA | 2,284 | 2,853 | 924 | — | 3,777 | 76 | 9/30/2014 | 1995 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Monrovia, CA | 1,660 | 2,365 | 686 | — | 3,051 | 57 | 9/30/2014 | 1996 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Norco, CA | (g) | 1,852 | 1,489 | — | 3,341 | 123 | 9/30/2014 | 1995 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Norco, CA | 1,424 | 1,869 | 891 | — | 2,760 | 74 | 9/30/2014 | 2005 | |||||||||||||||||||||
North Hollywood, CA | 2,998 | 4,663 | 858 | — | 5,521 | 71 | 9/30/2014 | 1999 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Oceanside, CA | 2,264 | 2,163 | 1,248 | — | 3,411 | 103 | 9/30/2014 | 2011 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Paramount, CA | 664 | 1,301 | 1,024 | — | 2,325 | 85 | 9/30/2014 | 1996 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Pomona, CA | 1,273 | 1,740 | 730 | — | 2,470 | 60 | 9/30/2014 | 1997 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Poway, CA | (g) | 3,072 | 705 | — | 3,777 | 58 | 9/30/2014 | 1960 | |||||||||||||||||||||
San Diego, CA | (g) | 2,977 | 1,448 | — | 4,425 | 120 | 9/30/2014 | 1984 | |||||||||||||||||||||
San Diego, CA | (g) | 1,877 | 883 | — | 2,760 | 73 | 9/30/2014 | 2006 | |||||||||||||||||||||
San Diego, CA | 3,038 | 1,215 | 841 | — | 2,056 | 69 | 9/30/2014 | 2010 | |||||||||||||||||||||
San Diego, CA | (g) | 1,824 | 382 | — | 2,206 | 32 | 9/30/2014 | 2006 | |||||||||||||||||||||
San Pedro, CA | 1,655 | 2,086 | 675 | — | 2,761 | 56 | 9/30/2014 | 2000 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Santa Clarita, CA | (g) | 4,787 | 733 | — | 5,520 | 60 | 9/30/2014 | 2001 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Sun City, CA | (g) | 1,136 | 1,421 | — | 2,557 | 117 | 9/30/2014 | 1984 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Valley Center, CA | 2,284 | 2,680 | 1,606 | — | 4,286 | 132 | 9/30/2014 | 2009 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Van Nuys, CA | 2,284 | 2,439 | 902 | — | 3,341 | 75 | 9/30/2014 | 2005 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Van Nuys, CA | 1,152 | 1,786 | 684 | — | 2,470 | 56 | 9/30/2014 | 1999 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Van Nuys, CA | 2,681 | 3,980 | 741 | — | 4,721 | 61 | 9/30/2014 | 2002 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Vista, CA | (g) | 2,063 | 334 | — | 2,397 | 28 | 9/30/2014 | 1986 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Vista, CA | (g) | 2,028 | 418 | — | 2,446 | 35 | 9/30/2014 | 2010 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Whittier, CA | (g) | 1,629 | 985 | — | 2,614 | 82 | 9/30/2014 | 1997 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Wilmington, CA | 1,680 | 1,615 | 1,145 | — | 2,760 | 95 | 9/30/2014 | 2002 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Woodland Hills, CA | 3,159 | 4,946 | 647 | — | 5,593 | 53 | 9/30/2014 | 2003 | |||||||||||||||||||||
University Marketplace: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Marion, IN | 4,050 | 850 | 6,722 | 121 | 7,693 | 1,107 | 3/22/2013 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Vacant: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Georgetown, KY | — | 1,048 | 1,452 | (1,575 | ) | 925 | — | 6/11/2014 | 2004 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Overland Park, KS | — | 806 | 3,600 | (3,256 | ) | 1,150 | — | 3/28/2014 | 2001 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Pensacola, FL | (g) | 2,152 | 3,831 | — | 5,983 | 386 | 4/29/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
St. Louis, MO | — | 1,254 | 3,354 | (3,409 | ) | 1,199 | — | 3/28/2014 | 1988 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Waukesha, WI | (g) | 3,408 | 12,918 | — | 16,326 | 1,075 | 9/29/2014 | 2007 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Ventura Place: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Albuquerque, NM | (g) | 5,203 | 7,998 | 72 | 13,273 | 714 | 4/29/2015 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Village at Hereford Farms: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Grovetown, GA | 4,250 | 1,222 | 5,912 | — | 7,134 | 532 | 9/26/2014 | 2009 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Waite Park Center: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Waite Park, MN | 10,441 | 2,576 | 15,484 | — | 18,060 | 451 | 12/29/2016 | 1992 | |||||||||||||||||||||
S-22
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
SCHEDULE III – REAL ESTATE ASSETS AND ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION – (Continued)
(in thousands)
Initial Costs to Company | Gross Amount at | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buildings, | Total | Which Carried | Accumulated | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fixtures and | Adjustment | At December 31, 2017 | Depreciation | Date | Date | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Description (a) | Encumbrances | Land | Improvements | to Basis | (b) (c) (d) | (d) (e) (f) | Acquired | Constructed | |||||||||||||||||||||
Wal-Mart: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Anderson, SC | (g) | $ | 2,424 | $ | 9,719 | $ | — | $ | 12,143 | $ | 519 | 11/5/2015 | 2015 | ||||||||||||||||
Florence, SC | (g) | 2,013 | 9,225 | — | 11,238 | 490 | 11/5/2015 | 2015 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Perry, GA | $ | 7,095 | 2,270 | 11,053 | — | 13,323 | 1,424 | 6/4/2013 | 1999 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Summerville, SC | 4,300 | 2,410 | 2,098 | — | 4,508 | 134 | 9/18/2015 | 2015 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Tallahassee, FL | 8,157 | 14,823 | — | — | 14,823 | — | 12/11/2012 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||
York, SC | (g) | 1,913 | 11,410 | — | 13,323 | 1,460 | 6/4/2013 | 1998 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Walgreens: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Andover, KS | (g) | 630 | 3,057 | — | 3,687 | 379 | 10/18/2013 | 2001 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Arkadelphia, AR | 4,225 | 787 | 4,626 | — | 5,413 | 366 | 11/26/2014 | 2007 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Austintown, OH | (g) | 637 | 4,173 | — | 4,810 | 462 | 8/19/2013 | 2002 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Bartlett, TN | 4,150 | 1,086 | 4,321 | — | 5,407 | 358 | 11/26/2014 | 1997 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Bartlett, TN | 4,150 | 799 | 4,608 | — | 5,407 | 381 | 11/26/2014 | 2002 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Birmingham, AL | (g) | 985 | 4,938 | — | 5,923 | 592 | 4/9/2013 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Birmingham, AL | 4,300 | 738 | 4,844 | — | 5,582 | 400 | 11/26/2014 | 2000 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Blair, NE | 2,466 | 335 | 3,544 | — | 3,879 | 513 | 4/18/2012 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Chicopee, MA | 3,894 | 2,094 | 4,945 | — | 7,039 | 399 | 10/23/2014 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Colerain Township, OH | 4,200 | 1,991 | 3,470 | — | 5,461 | 280 | 11/26/2014 | 1998 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Connelly Springs, NC | (g) | 1,349 | 3,628 | — | 4,977 | 411 | 8/27/2013 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Cullman, AL | 3,542 | 1,292 | 3,779 | — | 5,071 | 475 | 2/22/2013 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Danville, VA | (g) | 989 | 4,547 | — | 5,536 | 614 | 12/24/2012 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Dearborn Heights, MI | (g) | 2,236 | 3,411 | — | 5,647 | 393 | 7/9/2013 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Decatur, AL | 3,625 | 631 | 4,161 | — | 4,792 | 344 | 11/26/2014 | 2004 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Dyersburg, TN | (g) | 555 | 4,088 | — | 4,643 | 374 | 6/30/2014 | 2011 | |||||||||||||||||||||
East Chicago, IN | (g) | 331 | 5,242 | — | 5,573 | 444 | 8/8/2014 | 2005 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Enterprise, AL | 3,575 | 839 | 3,844 | — | 4,683 | 320 | 11/26/2014 | 2004 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Evansville, IN | 4,040 | 812 | 4,439 | — | 5,251 | 369 | 11/26/2014 | 2001 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Florence, KY | 4,125 | 1,086 | 4,206 | — | 5,292 | 338 | 11/26/2014 | 2005 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Forrest City, AR | 4,825 | 643 | 5,287 | — | 5,930 | 437 | 11/26/2014 | 2007 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Fort Madison, IA | (g) | 514 | 3,723 | — | 4,237 | 412 | 9/20/2013 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Franklin, TN | 4,200 | 1,457 | 4,075 | — | 5,532 | 339 | 11/26/2014 | 2000 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Fraser, MI | (g) | 518 | 4,525 | — | 5,043 | 427 | 5/19/2014 | 2004 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Hickory, NC | (g) | 1,100 | 4,241 | — | 5,341 | 537 | 2/28/2013 | 2009 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Hobart, IN | 3,875 | 594 | 4,526 | — | 5,120 | 373 | 11/26/2014 | 1998 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Huntsville, AL | 3,273 | 1,931 | 2,457 | — | 4,388 | 326 | 3/15/2013 | 2001 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Kannapolis, NC | 3,966 | 1,480 | 5,031 | — | 6,511 | 588 | 6/12/2013 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Knoxville, TN | 3,725 | 1,139 | 3,750 | — | 4,889 | 311 | 11/26/2014 | 1997 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Las Vegas, NV | (g) | 2,325 | 3,262 | 70 | 5,657 | 367 | 9/26/2013 | 1999 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Lawton, OK | (g) | 860 | 2,539 | — | 3,399 | 294 | 7/3/2013 | 1998 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Little Rock, AR | (g) | 548 | 4,676 | — | 5,224 | 415 | 6/30/2014 | 2011 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Little Rock, AR | 4,100 | 1,115 | 4,248 | — | 5,363 | 352 | 11/26/2014 | 2001 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Lubbock, TX | (g) | 565 | 3,257 | — | 3,822 | 433 | 10/11/2012 | 2000 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Lubbock, TX | (g) | 531 | 2,951 | — | 3,482 | 389 | 10/11/2012 | 1998 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Malvern, AR | 4,165 | 1,007 | 4,325 | — | 5,332 | 342 | 11/26/2014 | 2006 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Memphis, TN | 3,775 | 776 | 4,166 | — | 4,942 | 345 | 11/26/2014 | 1999 | |||||||||||||||||||||
S-23
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
SCHEDULE III – REAL ESTATE ASSETS AND ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION – (Continued)
(in thousands)
Initial Costs to Company | Gross Amount at | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buildings, | Total | Which Carried | Accumulated | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fixtures and | Adjustment | At December 31, 2017 | Depreciation | Date | Date | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Description (a) | Encumbrances | Land | Improvements | to Basis | (b) (c) (d) | (d) (e) (f) | Acquired | Constructed | |||||||||||||||||||||
Walgreens (continued): | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Metropolis, IL | (g) | $ | 284 | $ | 4,991 | $ | — | $ | 5,275 | $ | 423 | 8/8/2014 | 2009 | ||||||||||||||||
Michigan City, IN | $ | 3,200 | 567 | 3,615 | — | 4,182 | 304 | 11/26/2014 | 1999 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Mobile, AL | (g) | 1,603 | 3,161 | — | 4,764 | 342 | 11/7/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Mount Washington, KY | 4,125 | 545 | 4,825 | — | 5,370 | 398 | 11/26/2014 | 2005 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Oakland, TN | 3,750 | 689 | 4,226 | — | 4,915 | 348 | 11/26/2014 | 2005 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Oklahoma City, OK | 3,950 | 1,356 | 3,869 | — | 5,225 | 328 | 11/26/2014 | 1996 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Olathe, KS | 4,230 | 1,266 | 4,047 | — | 5,313 | 334 | 11/26/2014 | 1997 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Phoenix, AZ | (g) | 2,216 | 1,830 | — | 4,046 | 236 | 3/22/2013 | 2001 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Pine Bluff, AR | (g) | 248 | 5,229 | — | 5,477 | 578 | 9/17/2013 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Ralston, NE | 4,265 | 967 | 4,620 | — | 5,587 | 381 | 11/26/2014 | 1999 | |||||||||||||||||||||
River Falls, WI | 5,200 | 634 | 5,137 | — | 5,771 | 420 | 11/26/2014 | 2007 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Sacramento, CA | (g) | 324 | 2,669 | — | 2,993 | 248 | 6/30/2014 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Sioux Falls, SD | 3,625 | 1,138 | 3,784 | — | 4,922 | 315 | 11/26/2014 | 2007 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Springdale, AR | (g) | 1,172 | 4,509 | — | 5,681 | 484 | 10/7/2013 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Springfield, IL | (g) | 830 | 3,619 | — | 4,449 | 524 | 5/14/2012 | 2007 | |||||||||||||||||||||
St. Charles, MO | 4,600 | 1,644 | 4,364 | — | 6,008 | 362 | 11/26/2014 | 1994 | |||||||||||||||||||||
St. Louis, MO | 4,600 | 1,432 | 4,556 | — | 5,988 | 378 | 11/26/2014 | 1999 | |||||||||||||||||||||
St. Louis, MO | 4,790 | 1,414 | 4,622 | — | 6,036 | 382 | 11/26/2014 | 1999 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Suffolk, VA | (g) | 1,261 | 3,461 | — | 4,722 | 526 | 5/14/2012 | 2007 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Sun City, AZ | (g) | 837 | 2,484 | — | 3,321 | 242 | 5/6/2014 | 2000 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Tarboro, NC | (g) | 755 | 3,634 | — | 4,389 | 314 | 8/22/2014 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Toledo, OH | 4,325 | 1,993 | 3,445 | — | 5,438 | 290 | 11/26/2014 | 2001 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Troy, OH | (g) | 547 | 4,076 | — | 4,623 | 354 | 7/28/2014 | 2002 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Tulsa, OK | 3,350 | 1,078 | 3,453 | — | 4,531 | 288 | 11/26/2014 | 1993 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Walgreens/KeyBank: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Newburgh, NY | 5,000 | 3,280 | 5,441 | — | 8,721 | 584 | 9/16/2013 | 2010 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Wallace Commons: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Salisbury, NC | 7,590 | 3,265 | 8,058 | — | 11,323 | 1,070 | 12/21/2012 | 2009 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Wallace Commons II: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Salisbury, NC | 6,012 | 2,231 | 8,479 | — | 10,710 | 924 | 2/28/2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Warrenton Highlands: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Warrenton, OR | (g) | 2,139 | 5,774 | 138 | 8,051 | 885 | 5/29/2013 | 2011 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Waterford South Park: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Clarksville, IN | 7,200 | 2,946 | 8,564 | 45 | 11,555 | 1,300 | 4/12/2013 | 2006 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Wawa: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cape May, NJ | (g) | 1,576 | 5,790 | — | 7,366 | 805 | 8/29/2012 | 2005 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Galloway, NJ | (g) | 1,724 | 6,105 | — | 7,829 | 847 | 8/29/2012 | 2005 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Wendy's: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Grafton, VA | (g) | 539 | 894 | — | 1,433 | 83 | 6/27/2014 | 1985 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Westminster, CO | (g) | 596 | 1,108 | — | 1,704 | 102 | 6/27/2014 | 1986 | |||||||||||||||||||||
West Marine: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panama City, FL | (g) | 676 | 2,219 | — | 2,895 | 189 | 4/24/2015 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Pensacola, FL | (g) | 1,107 | 3,398 | — | 4,505 | 291 | 2/27/2015 | 2015 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Western Refining, Inc: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Benson, AZ | 566 | 186 | 510 | — | 696 | 37 | 1/16/2015 | 1990 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Bisbee, AZ | 399 | 89 | 137 | — | 226 | 22 | 1/16/2015 | 1970 | |||||||||||||||||||||
S-24
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
SCHEDULE III – REAL ESTATE ASSETS AND ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION – (Continued)
(in thousands)
Initial Costs to Company | Gross Amount at | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buildings, | Total | Which Carried | Accumulated | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fixtures and | Adjustment | At December 31, 2017 | Depreciation | Date | Date | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Description (a) | Encumbrances | Land | Improvements | to Basis | (b) (c) (d) | (d) (e) (f) | Acquired | Constructed | |||||||||||||||||||||
Western Refining, Inc (continued): | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coolidge, AZ | $ | 472 | $ | 578 | $ | 283 | $ | — | $ | 861 | $ | 38 | 1/16/2015 | 1997 | |||||||||||||||
Douglas, AZ | 913 | 136 | 1,080 | — | 1,216 | 80 | 1/16/2015 | 1985 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Douglas, AZ | 718 | 89 | 385 | — | 474 | 40 | 1/16/2015 | 1997 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Florence, AZ | 446 | 363 | 338 | — | 701 | 32 | 1/16/2015 | 1999 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Globe, AZ | 1,264 | 572 | 311 | — | 883 | 44 | 1/16/2015 | 1994 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Hereford, AZ | 1,531 | 303 | 879 | — | 1,182 | 69 | 1/16/2015 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Marana, AZ | 1,458 | 389 | 493 | — | 882 | 41 | 1/16/2015 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Pearce, AZ | 750 | 116 | 380 | — | 496 | 36 | 1/16/2015 | 1985 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Pima, AZ | 1,196 | 372 | 362 | — | 734 | 39 | 1/16/2015 | 1994 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Safford, AZ | 1,054 | 77 | 281 | — | 358 | 20 | 1/16/2015 | 1989 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Safford, AZ | 1,169 | 204 | 299 | — | 503 | 28 | 1/16/2015 | 1996 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Safford, AZ | 1,280 | 107 | 408 | — | 515 | 30 | 1/16/2015 | 1989 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Sierra Vista, AZ | 488 | 87 | 723 | — | 810 | 60 | 1/16/2015 | 1977 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Thatcher, AZ | 1,180 | 140 | 561 | — | 701 | 47 | 1/16/2015 | 2004 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Tucson, AZ | 524 | 569 | 453 | — | 1,022 | 40 | 1/16/2015 | 1997 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Tucson, AZ | 603 | 473 | 388 | — | 861 | 45 | 1/16/2015 | 1995 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Tucson, AZ | 582 | 263 | 170 | — | 433 | 19 | 1/16/2015 | 1986 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Tucson, AZ | 666 | 770 | 332 | — | 1,102 | 31 | 1/16/2015 | 2002 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Tucson, AZ | 571 | 333 | 167 | — | 500 | 12 | 1/16/2015 | 1982 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Tucson, AZ | 1,190 | 397 | 542 | — | 939 | 46 | 1/16/2015 | 1986 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Tucson, AZ | 523 | 525 | 606 | — | 1,131 | 52 | 1/16/2015 | 2002 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Winkelman, AZ | 953 | 287 | 403 | — | 690 | 37 | 1/16/2015 | 1999 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Westover Market: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
San Antonio, TX | 6,200 | 2,705 | 7,959 | — | 10,664 | 1,073 | 7/10/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Whole Foods Center: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fort Collins, CO | 12,500 | 2,664 | 17,166 | — | 19,830 | 1,607 | 9/30/2014 | 2004 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Winn-Dixie: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Baton Rouge, LA | (g) | 1,782 | 3,776 | — | 5,558 | 345 | 6/27/2014 | 2000 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Walker, LA | — | 900 | 3,909 | — | 4,809 | 355 | 6/27/2014 | 1999 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Woods Supermarket: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Sunrise Beach, MO | (g) | 1,044 | 5,005 | — | 6,049 | 553 | 9/13/2013 | 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||||
$ | 1,237,877 | $ | 1,195,250 | $ | 3,279,455 | $ | 89,887 | $ | 4,564,592 | $ | 334,476 | ||||||||||||||||||
S-25
COLE CREDIT PROPERTY TRUST IV, INC.
SCHEDULE III – REAL ESTATE ASSETS AND ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION – (Continued)
(in thousands)
____________________________________
(a) As of December 31, 2017, the Company owned 831 retail properties, 74 anchored shopping centers and four industrial and distribution properties.
(b) The aggregate cost for federal income tax purposes was $5.2 billion.
(c) The following is a reconciliation of total real estate carrying value for the years ended December 31 (in thousands):
2017 | 2016 | 2015 | ||||||||||
Balance, beginning of period | $ | 4,370,629 | $ | 4,185,605 | $ | 3,590,939 | ||||||
Additions | ||||||||||||
Acquisitions | 261,660 | 198,176 | 532,454 | |||||||||
Joint Venture Purchased | — | 16,361 | — | |||||||||
Improvements | 13,708 | 3,827 | 64,458 | |||||||||
Adjustment to basis | — | 962 | — | |||||||||
Total additions | $ | 275,368 | $ | 219,326 | $ | 596,912 | ||||||
Less: Deductions | ||||||||||||
Cost of real estate sold | 78,700 | 27,144 | 1,086 | |||||||||
Adjustment to basis | — | 51 | — | |||||||||
Other (including provisions for impairment of real estate assets) | 2,705 | 7,107 | 1,160 | |||||||||
Total deductions | 81,405 | 34,302 | 2,246 | |||||||||
Balance, end of period | $ | 4,564,592 | $ | 4,370,629 | $ | 4,185,605 | ||||||
(d) Gross intangible lease assets of $589.9 million and the associated accumulated amortization of $192.5 million are not reflected in the table above.
(e) The following is a reconciliation of accumulated depreciation for the years ended December 31 (in thousands):
2017 | 2016 | 2015 | ||||||||||
Balance, beginning of period | $ | 245,425 | $ | 158,805 | $ | 78,186 | ||||||
Additions | ||||||||||||
Acquisitions - Depreciation expense for building, acquisitions costs and tenant improvements acquired | 93,170 | 88,202 | 80,373 | |||||||||
Improvements - Depreciation expense for tenant improvements and building equipment | 1,679 | 586 | 303 | |||||||||
Total additions | $ | 94,849 | $ | 88,788 | $ | 80,676 | ||||||
Deductions | ||||||||||||
Cost of real estate sold | 5,552 | 1,514 | — | |||||||||
Other (including provisions for impairment of real estate assets) | 246 | 654 | 57 | |||||||||
Total deductions | 5,798 | 2,168 | 57 | |||||||||
Balance, end of period | $ | 334,476 | $ | 245,425 | $ | 158,805 | ||||||
(f) The Company’s assets are depreciated or amortized using the straight-line method over the useful lives of the assets by class. Generally, buildings are depreciated over 40 years, site improvements are amortized over 15 years and tenant improvements are amortized over the remaining life of the lease or the useful life, whichever is shorter.
(g) Property is included in the Credit Facility’s borrowing base. As of December 31, 2017, the Company had $1.25 billion outstanding under the Credit Facility.
S-26