GWG Holdings, Inc. - Annual Report: 2019 (Form 10-K)

UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, DC 20549

FORM 10-K

☒  ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2019

or

☐ TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1934

For the transition period from ________ to ________

Commission File Number: 001-36615

GWG HOLDINGS, INC.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

325 North St. Paul Street, Suite 2650

Dallas, TX 75201

(Address of principal executive offices, including zip code)

(612) 746-1944

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act

None

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes ☐  No  ☒

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Act. Yes ☐ No ☒

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes ☒  No  ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted 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  ☒  No  ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, 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.

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 ☐  No  ☒

The aggregate market value of the registrant’s common stock held by non-affiliates was $21,845,565 as of June 28, 2019 (the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter), based on a total of 2,878,352 shares of common stock held by non-affiliates and a closing price of $7.14 as reported on the Nasdaq Capital Market on June 28, 2019. For purposes of this computation, all officers, directors, and 10% beneficial owners of the registrant are deemed to be affiliates. Such determination should not be deemed to be an admission that such officers, directors or 10% beneficial owners, are or were, in fact, affiliates of the registrant.

As of March 24, 2020, GWG Holdings, Inc. had 33,035,249 shares of common stock outstanding.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE:

None.

GWG HOLDINGS, INC.

Index to Form 10-K

for the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2019

PART I

ITEM 1. BUSINESS.

Organizational Structure

Our business was originally organized in February 2006. We added our current parent holding company, GWG Holdings, Inc. (“GWG Holdings”), in March 2008, and in September 2014 we consummated an initial public offering of our common stock on The Nasdaq Capital Market where our stock trades under the ticker symbol “GWGH.”

GWG Holdings conducts its life insurance secondary market business through a wholly owned subsidiary, GWG Life, LLC (“GWG Life”), and GWG Life’s wholly owned subsidiaries, GWG Life Trust and GWG DLP Funding IV, LLC. GWG Holdings’ indirect interests in loans collateralized by cash flows from alternative assets are held by The Beneficient Company Group, L.P. (“Ben LP,” including all of the subsidiaries it may have from time to time — “Beneficient”) and its general partner, Beneficient Management, L.L.C. (“Beneficient Management”). As a result of the Investment and Exchange Agreements described in the section below entitled “The Beneficient Transaction”, GWG Holdings reported the results of Ben LP and its subsidiaries on a consolidated basis beginning on the transaction date of December 31, 2019. All of these entities are legally organized in the state of Delaware, other than GWG Life Trust, which is governed by the laws of the state of Utah. Unless the context otherwise requires or we specifically so indicate, all references in this report to “we,” “us,” “our,” “our Company,” “GWG,” or the “Company” refer to these entities collectively. Our headquarters are located in Dallas, Texas.

On November 11, 2019, GWG Holdings contributed the common stock and membership interests of its previously-wholly owned subsidiaries Life Epigenetics Inc. (“Life Epigenetics”) and youSurance General Agency, LLC (“youSurance”) to a legal entity, InsurTech Holdings, LLC (“InsurTech Holdings”) in exchange for a membership interest in InsurTech Holdings. On March 2, 2020, InsurTech Holdings changed its name to FOXO BioScience LLC. Although we currently own 100% of the equity of InsurTech Holdings, we do not have a controlling financial interest in InsurTech Holdings because the managing member has substantive participating rights. Therefore, we account for our ownership interest in InsurTech Holdings as an equity method investment. Life Epigenetics was formed to commercialize epigenetic technology for the longevity industry. youSurance seeks to offer life insurance directly to customers utilizing epigenetic technology.

Beneficient was formed in 2003 but began its alternative asset business in September 2017. Beneficient operates primarily through its subsidiaries, which provide Beneficient’s products and services. These subsidiaries include: (i) Beneficient Capital Company, L.L.C. (“BCC”), through which Beneficient offers loans and liquidity products; (ii) Beneficient Administrative and Clearing Company, L.L.C. (“BACC”), through which Beneficient provides services for fund and trust administration and plans to provide custody services; (iii) Pen Indemnity Insurance Company, LTD (“Pen”), through which Beneficient plans to offer insurance services; and (iv) Ben Markets Management Holdings, L.P., formerly called ACE Portal, L.L.C. (“ACE”), through which Beneficient plans to provide an online portal for direct access to Beneficient’s financial services and products.

Our Company

We are a financial services company committed to transforming the alternative asset industry with disruptive and innovative products and services. In 2018 and 2019 GWG consummated a series of transactions (as more fully described below) with Beneficient that has resulted in a significant reorientation of our business and capital allocation strategy towards an expansive and diverse exposure to alternative assets. As part of this reorientation, we also changed our Board of Directors and executive management team.

While we are continuing our work to maximize the value of our secondary life insurance business, we do not anticipate purchasing additional life insurance policies in the secondary market and have increased capital allocated toward providing liquidity to a broader range of alternative assets, primarily through investments in Beneficient. We believe Beneficient’s operations will generally produce higher risk-adjusted returns than those we can achieve from life insurance policies acquired in the secondary market. Furthermore, although we believe that our portfolio of life insurance policies is a meaningful component of a growing diversified alternative asset portfolio, we continue to explore strategic alternatives for our life insurance portfolio aimed at maximizing its value, including a possible sale, refinancing or recapitalization of our life insurance portfolio.

We completed our transactions with Beneficient to provide us with a significant increase in assets and common shareholder equity. In addition, our transactions with Beneficient provide us with the opportunity for a diversified source of future earnings within the alternative asset industry. As GWG and Beneficient expand their strategic relationship, we believe the Beneficient transactions will transform GWG from a niche provider of liquidity to owners of life insurance to, as GWG and Beneficient expand their strategic relationship, a full-scale provider of trust and liquidity products and services to owners of a broad range of alternative assets.

Beneficient, through its subsidiaries, plans to operate three potentially high value, high margin lines of business:

Beneficient’s existing and planned products and services are designed to support the tax and estate planning objectives of its MHNW clients, facilitate a diversification of assets or simply provide administrative management and reporting solutions tailored to the goals of the investor who owns alternative investments.

The Beneficient Transactions

The Exchange Transaction

On January 12, 2018, GWG Holdings and GWG Life entered into a Master Exchange Agreement (as amended, the “Master Exchange Agreement”) with Beneficient, MHT Financial SPV, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (“MHT SPV”), and various related trusts (the “Seller Trusts”). The material terms and conditions of the initial Master Exchange Agreement were described in GWG Holdings’ Current Report on Form 8-K (the “January 2018 Form 8-K”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) on January 18, 2018.

On August 10, 2018, GWG Holdings, GWG Life, Beneficient, MHT SPV, and the Seller Trusts entered into a Third Amendment to Master Exchange Agreement (the “Third Amendment”). Pursuant to the Third Amendment, the parties agreed to consummate the transactions contemplated by the Master Exchange Agreement in two closings. The Third Amendment also generally deleted MHT SPV as a party to the Master Exchange Agreement. The material terms and conditions of the Third Amendment to Master Exchange Agreement were described in GWG Holdings’ Current Report on Form 8-K (the “August 2018 Form 8-K”) filed with the SEC on August 14, 2018. The transactions contemplated by the Master Exchange Agreement, as amended, are referred to throughout this Report as the “Exchange Transaction.”

On the first closing date, which took place on August 10, 2018 (the “Initial Transfer Date”):

Under the Master Exchange Agreement, at the final closing (the “Final Closing” and the date on which the final closing occurred, the “Final Closing Date”), which occurred on December 28, 2018:

On the Final Closing Date, GWG and the Seller Trusts also entered into a registration rights agreement with respect to the shares of GWG common stock owned by the Seller Trusts, an orderly marketing agreement and a stockholders’ agreement. The material terms of these agreements were described in our Information Statement on Schedule 14C filed with the SEC on December 6, 2018, and in our Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on January 4, 2019.

The Expanded Strategic Relationship

In the second quarter of 2019, we completed an expansion of the strategic relationship with Beneficient, which was a transformational event for both organizations that is expected to create a unified platform uniquely positioned to provide an expanded suite of products, services and resources for investors and the financial professionals who assist them. GWG and Beneficient intend to collaborate extensively and capitalize on one another’s capabilities, relationships and services.

On April 15, 2019, Jon R. Sabes, the Company’s former Chief Executive Officer and a former director, and Steven F. Sabes, the Company’s former Executive Vice President and a former director, entered into a Purchase and Contribution Agreement (the “Purchase and Contribution Agreement”) with, among others, Ben LP. The Purchase and Contribution Agreement was summarized in our Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on April 16, 2019.

The closing of the transactions contemplated by the Purchase and Contribution Agreement (the “Purchase and Contribution Transaction”) occurred on April 26, 2019. Prior to or in connection with such closing:

Among other things, the Purchase and Contribution Agreement contemplated that after the closing, the parties will seek to enter into an agreement pursuant to which the Company will, in certain circumstances, have the right to appoint a majority of the board of directors of the general partner of Beneficient, resulting in the Company and Beneficient being consolidated from a financial reporting perspective. The Company and Beneficient will also seek to enter into an agreement pursuant to which the Company will offer and distribute (through a FINRA registered managing broker-dealer) Beneficient’s liquidity products and services. The Company intends to reduce capital allocated to life insurance assets while it works with Beneficient to build a larger diversified portfolio of alternative asset investment products.

A copy of the Purchase and Contribution Agreement is included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the SEC on July 9, 2019 as Exhibit 99.3.

The Investment and Exchange Agreements

On December 31, 2019, the Company, Ben LP, BCH, and Beneficient Management entered into a Preferred Series A Unit Account and Common Unit Investment Agreement (the “Investment Agreement”).

Pursuant to the Investment Agreement, the Company transferred $79.0 million to Ben LP in return for 666,667 common units of Ben LP and a Preferred Series A Subclass 1 Unit Account of BCH.

In connection with the Investment Agreement, the Company obtained the right to appoint a majority of the board of directors of Beneficient Management, the general partner of Ben LP. As a result, the Company obtained control of Ben LP and began reporting the results of Ben LP and its subsidiaries on a consolidated basis beginning on the transaction date of December 31, 2019. The Company’s right to appoint a majority of the board of directors of Beneficient Management will terminate in the event (i) the Company’s ownership of the fully diluted equity of Ben LP (excluding equity issued upon the conversion or exchange of Preferred Series A Unit Accounts of BCH held as of December 31, 2019 by parties other than the Company) is less than 25%, (ii) the Continuing Directors of the Company cease to constitute a majority of the board of directors of the Company, or (iii) certain bankruptcy events occur with respect to the Company. The term “Continuing Directors” means, as of any date of determination, any member of the board of directors of the Company who: (1) was a member of the board of directors on December 31, 2019; or (2) was nominated for election or elected to the board of directors with the approval of a majority of the Continuing Directors who were members of the board of directors at the time of such nomination or election.

Following the transaction, and as agreed upon in the Investment Agreement, the Company was issued an initial capital account balance for the Preferred Series A Subclass 1 Unit Account of $319.0 million. The other holders of the Preferred Series A Subclass 1 Unit Accounts are an entity related to the founders of Ben LP and an entity related to one of GWG’s and Beneficient’s directors (the “Related Entities”), and the aggregate capital accounts of all holders of the Preferred Series A Subclass 1 Unit Accounts after giving effect to the investment by the Company is $1.6 billion. The Company’s Preferred Series A Subclass 1 Unit Account is the same class of preferred security as held by the Related Entities. In the event the Related Entities exchange their Preferred Series A Subclass 1 Unit Account for securities of the Company, the Company’s Preferred Series A Subclass 1 Unit Account would be converted into common units of Ben LP (so neither the Company nor the founders would hold Preferred Series A Subclass 1 Unit Accounts).

Also, on December 31, 2019, in a transaction related to the Investment Agreement, GWG Holdings transferred its interest in the Preferred Series A Subclass 1 Unit Account to its wholly owned subsidiary, GWG Life.

In addition, on December 31, 2019, the Company, Ben LP and the holders of common units of Ben LP (the “Common Units”) entered into an Exchange Agreement (the “Exchange Agreement”) pursuant to which the holders of Common Units from time to time have the right, on a quarterly basis, to exchange their Common Units for common stock of the Company. The exchange ratio in the Exchange Agreement is based on the ratio of the capital account associated with the Common Units to be exchanged to the market price of the Company’s common stock based on the volume weighted average price of the Company’s common stock for the five consecutive trading days prior to the quarterly exchange date. The Exchange Agreement is intended to facilitate the marketing of Ben LP’s products to holders of alternative assets.

The Exchange Transaction, the Purchase and Contribution Transaction, and the Investment and Exchange Agreements are referred to collectively as the “Beneficient Transactions.”

Segment Financial Information

We have two reportable segments: 1) Investment in Beneficient and 2) Secondary Life Insurance.

GWG segment information is included in Note 20, Segment Reporting, to the consolidated financial statements included in Item 8 of Part II of this Form 10-K.

Market Opportunity

Alternative Asset Liquidity Products and Services

The market demand for liquidity from owners of alternative assets is attributable to the outstanding net asset value of illiquid alternative assets (“NAV”) held by U.S. investors. Using data from various published industry reports from 2017 to 2019, certain widely accepted commercial private-equity databases, and applying its own proprietary assumptions and calculations (“Ben Estimates”), Beneficient estimates that total outstanding NAV held by U.S. investors exceeded $4.0 trillion in 2019 (up from an estimated $3.0 trillion in 2018).

According to at least one industry report from Preqin from 2018, total outstanding NAV in the hands of U.S. investors grew at a 12.1% compound annual growth rate (CAGR) for the ten years ended 2018 and was forecasted to grow at an 8% CAGR through 2023 as a result of continued increases in capital committed to the alternative asset class.

According to Ben Estimates, the large U.S. institutions representing approximately 54% of the NAV have consistently sought liquidity on approximately 1.85% to 2.25% of their outstanding NAV. Based on Ben Estimates, this has led to an annual demand for liquidity of nearly $50 billion in recent years.

A primary group not included in this demand is the MHNW investor who holds investments of $5 million to $30 million compared to a large institution’s holdings in the hundreds of millions or billions of dollars. Intermediary brokers will often not represent the MHNW individuals (or STM institutional investors). According to Ben Estimates, MHNW investors hold over $700.0 billion in NAV, yet MHNW investors have only been able to access liquidity representing less than 0.5% of the NAV held by them each year, compared to the average 2% achieved by the large institutional owners, representing 54% of the market.

Based on these amounts, Beneficient estimates that MHNW investors would seek liquidity of 3% of their outstanding NAV each year if liquidity was made available to them, or a slightly greater percentage than that of large U.S. institutions. As a result, and according to Ben Estimates, the estimated market demand for liquidity by MHNW individuals would have exceeded $20.0 billion in 2019.

Secondary Life Insurance Market

The market for life insurance is large. According to the American Council of Life Insurers Fact Book 2018 (ACLI), consumers owned approximately $12.0 trillion in face value of individual life insurance policy benefits in the United States in 2017. In that same year, the ACLI reports that individual consumers purchased an aggregate of $3.1 trillion of new individual life insurance policy benefits. This figure includes all types of individual life policies, including term insurance and permanent insurance known as whole life and universal life.

The life insurance secondary market primarily serves consumers, 65 years and older, and their families who own life insurance.

The secondary market for life insurance exists as a result of consumer lapse behaviors and surrender values far below economic value offered to consumers for their life insurance by the issuing insurance carriers. The ACLI reports that the annual lapse and surrender rate for individual life insurance policies is 5.7% of the in-force face value of benefits, amounting to over $680 billion in face value of policy benefits lapsed and surrendered in 2017 alone.

In 2017, the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (“NAIC”) issued a policy bulletin in support of products we provide. The bulletin described these products as “innovative private market solutions for financing Americans’ long-term care needs.” The NAIC, citing the Company’s August 25, 2016 presentation, discussed how consumers could exchange the market value of their life insurance policies for products designed to fund long-term care expenses.

Primary Life Insurance Market and Technology (“Insurtech”)

The opportunity to apply technology to transform the insurance industry is significant. The application of technology to the insurance industry, commonly referred to as “insurtech”, provides opportunities for new entrants into the traditional insurance marketplace that have the potential to significantly disrupt the insurance industry’s historical approach to assessing and selecting acceptable underwriting risks.

As discussed in the Organizational Structure section above, on November 11, 2019, GWG contributed the common stock and membership interests of its previously wholly-owned subsidiaries, Life Epigenetics and youSurance, to InsurTech Holdings. This transaction affected a reorganization such that InsurTech owns only two direct subsidiaries, Life Epigenetics and youSurance, which hold all insurtech assets, and one indirect subsidiary, Scientific Testing Partners, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Life Epigenetics. In connection with the transaction, GWG Holdings contributed $2.1 million in cash to InsurTech Holdings during the fourth quarter of 2019 and is committed to contribute an additional $17.9 million to the entity over the next two years.

Business Strategies

1. Liquidity for Alternative Assets

As a result of the Beneficient Transactions, we are now uniquely positioned to provide liquidity and related services to investors holding a full range of illiquid alternative assets. We will continue to work to create the most value for holders of alternative assets, the financial professionals who advise them and for our shareholders.

Beneficient provides private trust solutions, including a unique suite of lending and liquidity products focused on bringing liquidity to owners of alternative assets. Beneficient’s innovative liquidity solutions are designed to serve MHNW individuals, STM institutions, and asset managers who have historically possessed few attractive options to access early liquidity from their alternative assets. Beneficient targets MHNW individual clients with $5 million to $30 million in investments and institutional clients typically holding less than $1 billion in assets.

Beneficient’s products can also support tax and estate planning objectives, facilitate a diversification of assets or provide administrative management and reporting solutions tailored to the goals of the investor. In the future, Beneficient plans to offer insurance services covering risks associated with owning or managing alternative assets.

Our life insurance secondary market business is designed to serve consumers 65 years or older owning life insurance. We seek to earn non-correlated yield from life insurance policies that we purchased in the secondary market. Since inception, we have purchased over $3.2 billion in face value of policy benefits from consumers for over $620 million, as compared to the $52 million in surrender value offered by insurance carriers on those same policies. Our products provide unique and valuable services to the senior consumers that we serve.

The goal of our secondary life insurance business has been to build a profitable, large and well-diversified portfolio of life insurance assets. We believe that scale and diversification are key factors and risk mitigation strategies to provide consistent cash flows and reliable investment returns. We believe that we have reached the goal in terms of portfolio size and diversification. As described elsewhere, we do not anticipate making additional investments in the life settlements portfolio as we believe Beneficient’s operations will generally produce higher risk-adjusted returns than those we can achieve from life insurance policies acquired in the secondary market.

2. Developing a World Class Financial Services Distribution Platform

GWG has developed a large and sophisticated financial services product distribution platform. Today, this platform consists of over one hundred independent broker-dealers and several thousand “independent” financial advisors (“Retail Distribution”) who sell the Company’s investment products. “Independent” in this context refers to broker-dealers that accommodate financial advisors who carry securities licenses and need back-office support for services, such as compliance and trade execution, but allow their advisors wide latitude in how they conduct business. Since inception, GWG has raised over $1.52 billion of debt and equity capital to support our secondary market of life insurance business and related expenditures.

We believe that we are well positioned to continue to grow our Retail Distribution for several reasons:

3. Commercializing Advanced Epigenetic Technology for Primary Life Insurance Markets

We believe life insurance underwriting will be transformed due to advancements in science and technology. As part of that transformational change, we believe the science of epigenetics will serve as a foundational science to this advancement for the life insurance industry by achieving more accurate and automated underwriting.

As discussed in the Organizational Structure section above, on November 11, 2019, GWG contributed the common stock and membership interests of its previously wholly-owned subsidiaries, Life Epigenetics and youSurance, to InsurTech Holdings. We believe that as a separate entity (rather than as a small subsidiary of a large financial services holding company), the InsurTech Holdings businesses can reach their maximum potential in terms of marketing and branding, attraction of talent, appropriate peer group comparisons and, ultimately, return to its owners. The Company will retain substantially all of the economics of InsurTech Holdings.

Secondary Life Insurance Assets

Our portfolio of life insurance policies, owned by our subsidiaries as of December 31, 2019, is summarized below:

Life Insurance Portfolio Summary

Our portfolio of life insurance policies, owned by our subsidiaries as of December 31, 2019, organized by the insured’s current age and the associated number of policies and policy benefits, is summarized below:

Distribution of Policies and Policy Benefits by Current Age of Insured

Our portfolio of life insurance policies, owned by our subsidiaries as of December 31, 2019, organized by the insured’s estimated life expectancy estimates and associated policy benefits, is summarized below:

Distribution of Policies by Current Life Expectancies of Insured

We rely on the payment of policy benefit claims by life insurance companies as a significant source of cash inflow. The life insurance assets we own represent obligations of third-party life insurance companies to pay the benefit amount under the policy upon the mortality of the insured. As a result, we manage this credit risk exposure by generally purchasing policies issued by insurance companies with investment-grade ratings from Standard & Poor’s, and diversifying our life insurance portfolio among a number of insurance companies.

The yield to maturity on bonds issued by life insurance carriers reflects, among other things, the credit risk (risk of default) of such insurance carrier. We follow the yields on certain publicly traded life insurance company bonds because this information is part of the data we consider when valuing our portfolio of life insurance policies for our financial statements.

The average yield to maturity of publicly traded life insurance company bonds data we consider as inputs to our life insurance portfolio valuation process was 2.67% as of December 31, 2019. We believe that this average yield to maturity reflects, in part, the financial market’s judgment that credit risk is low with regard to these carriers’ financial obligations. The obligations of life insurance carriers to pay life insurance policy benefits ranks senior to all of their other financial obligations, including the senior bonds they issue. The portfolio is backed by over 80 high quality insurance carriers. As of December 31, 2019, 95.7% of the face value benefits of our life insurance policies were issued by insurers having an investment-grade rating (BBB or better) by Standard & Poor’s.

As of December 31, 2019, our ten largest life insurance company credit exposures and the Standard & Poor’s credit rating of their respective financial strength and claims-paying ability is set forth below:

Distribution of Policy Benefits by Top 10 Insurance Companies

Beneficient Loans Receivable

Beneficient’s primary operations pertain to its liquidity products whereby Ben LP, through its subsidiaries, extends loans collateralized by cash flows from illiquid alternative assets and provides services to the trustees who administer the collateral. Beneficient’s core business products are its Exchange Trust, LiquidTrust and the InterChange Trust (introduced in 2020). Beneficient’s clients select one of these products and place their alternative assets into the custody trust that is a constituent member of a trust structure called the “ExAlt Plan^TM” (comprised of Exchange Trusts, LiquidTrusts, Custody Trusts, Collective Trusts, and Funding Trusts). The ExAlt Plan^TM then delivers to Beneficient’s clients the consideration required by the specific product selected by Beneficient’s clients. At the same time, Beneficient, through a subsidiary, extends a loan to the ExAlt Plan^TM. The proceeds (cash or securities of Ben LP or its affiliates) of that loan to the ExAlt Plan^TM are ultimately paid to the client. The cash flows from the client’s alternative asset support the repayment of the loans plus any related interest and fees.

Beneficient held loans receivable of $232.3 million at December 31, 2019, representing the fair value of loans as a result of the purchase accounting applied in conjunction with the Investment and Exchange Agreements described above. Loans are carried at the principal amount outstanding, plus interest paid in kind. Loans are demand loans with a maturity date of 12 years. Loans bear contractual interest at the greater of 14% or 1-month LIBOR plus 10%, compounded daily. In the event an alternative reference rate is required, the secured overnight financing rate (SOFR) would replace LIBOR, as contemplated in our loan agreements. The primary source of repayment for the loans and related fees is cash flows from the alternative assets collateralizing the loans. Interest income on loans is accrued on the principal amount outstanding and interest compounds on a daily basis.

As of December 31, 2019, Beneficient’s loan portfolio had exposure to 117 professionally managed alternative investment funds, comprised of 362 underlying investments, and approximately 96 percent of Beneficient’s loan portfolio was backed by investments in private companies. Beneficient’s loan portfolio diversification spans across these industry sectors, investment strategy types and geographic regions:

Assets in the collateral portfolio consist primarily of interests in alternative investment vehicles (also referred to as “funds”) that are managed by a group of U.S. and non-U.S. based alternative asset management firms that invest in a variety of financial markets and utilize a variety of investment strategies. The vintages of the funds in the collateral portfolio as of December 31, 2019 ranged from 1998 to 2011.

As Beneficient grows its loan portfolio, Beneficient will monitor the diversity of its collateral portfolio through the use of concentration guidelines. These guidelines were established, and will be periodically updated, through a data driven approach based on asset type, fund manager, vintage of fund, industry segment and geography to manage portfolio risk. Beneficient will refer to these guidelines when making decisions about new financing opportunities; however, these guidelines will not restrict Beneficient from entering into financing opportunities that would result in Beneficient having exposure outside of its concentration guidelines. In addition, changes to Beneficient's collateral portfolio may lag changes to the concentration guidelines. As such, Beneficient’s collateral portfolio may, at any given time, have exposures that are outside of its concentration guidelines to reflect, among other things, attractive financing opportunities, limited availability of assets, or other business reasons. Given Beneficient’s limited operating history, the collateral portfolio, as of December 31, 2019, had exposure to certain alternative investment vehicles and investments in private companies that were outside of those guidelines.

Classifications by industry sector, investment strategy type and geography reflect classification of investments held in funds or companies held directly in the collateral portfolio. Investments reflect the assets listed by the general partner of a fund as held by the fund and have a positive or negative net asset value. Typical assets include portfolio companies, limited partnership interests in other funds, and net other assets, which are a fund’s cash and other current assets minus liabilities.

Industry sector is based on Global Industry Classification Standard (GICS®) Level 2 classification (also known as “Industry Group”) of companies held in the collateral portfolio by funds or directly, subject to certain adjustments by us. “Other” classification is not a GICS® classification. “Other” classification reflects companies in the GICS® classification categories of Automobiles & Components, Banks, Commercial & Professional Services, Consumer Durables & Apparel, Consumer Services, Energy, Food, Beverage & Tobacco, Household & Personal Products, Insurance, Materials, Media & Entertainment, Real Estate, Retailing, Semiconductors & Semiconductors Equipment, Tech Hardware & Equipment, and Transportation. N/A includes investments assets that we have determined do not have an applicable GICS Level 2 classification, such as Net Other Assets and investments that are not operating companies.

Investment strategy type reflects classifications based on each fund’s current investment strategy stage as determined by us. “Other Strategy Types” include private debt strategies, natural resources strategies, and hedge funds.

Geography reflects classifications determined by us based on each underlying investment. “Other” geography classification includes Israel, Australia, Eastern Europe.

Competitive and Regulatory Framework

Competition

We encounter significant competition from numerous companies in the products and services we provide and seek to develop in the alternative assets industry. Many of these competitors have greater financial and other resources than we do and may have significantly lower cost of funds than us because they have access to insured deposits or greater access to the capital markets, for example. They may also have greater market share in the markets in which we operate. These factors could adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition and our ability to implement our growth strategies.

In addition, as we enter new markets, we expect to experience significant competition from incumbent market participants. Our ability to compete in these markets will be dependent upon our ability to deliver value-added products and services to the customers we serve. These factors also could adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition and our ability to implement our growth strategies.

Government Regulation

Our life insurance secondary market business is highly regulated at the state level with respect to the life insurance industry, and at the federal level with respect to the issuance of our securities offerings. At the state level, states generally subject us to laws and regulations requiring us to obtain specific licenses or approvals to purchase life insurance policies in those states. State statutes typically provide state regulatory agencies with significant powers to interpret, administer and enforce the laws relating to the life insurance industry. Under this authority, state regulators have broad discretionary power and may impose new licensing and other requirements, and interpret or enforce existing regulatory requirements in new and different ways. Any of these new requirements, interpretations or enforcement directives could be materially adverse to our industry.

Beneficient has applied for trust charters from the Texas Department of Banking and intends to carry on much of its business through two subsidiary trust companies. Because Beneficient’s current business plans are based in part on obtaining regulatory charters to operate as regulated trust companies, a failure to obtain such charters may materially and adversely impact its financial performance and prospects, which would likely diminish our ability to affect parts of our business plan and growth strategies. Furthermore, a failure to obtain the trust charters may trigger an impairment assessment related to the assets of Beneficient, including goodwill recognized in connection with the Investment and Exchange Agreements (see Note 5 to our consolidated financial statements for further details of the accounting for the change in control).

The state regulatory landscape for the use of genetic and epigenetic testing in life insurance underwriting is such that genetic and epigenetic testing is generally permitted. A few states require informed consent for use of genetic testing in life insurance underwriting. Epigenetic testing is distinguishable from genetic testing and we believe epigenetic testing does not raise the ethical issue found with genetic testing of denying insurance coverage to applicants based on immutable inherited characteristics. While well-informed policymakers and regulators should have little reason to consider expanding current definitions of genetic testing to include epigenetic testing, or to increase restrictions on life insurance underwriting using epigenetic test results, we can provide no such assurances.

Other changes to the current genetic and epigenetic regulatory framework, including the imposition of additional or new regulations, could arise at any time during the development or marketing of InsurTech Holdings’ epigenetic based products. This may negatively affect the ability of InsurTech Holdings to obtain or maintain applicable regulatory clearance or approval of its products. In addition, regulatory authorities, such as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), may introduce new requirements that may change the regulatory requirements for InsurTech Holdings or its customers, or both.

Although the federal securities laws and regulations do not directly affect life insurance, in some cases the purchase of a variable life insurance policy may constitute a transaction involving a “security” that is governed by federal securities laws. While we presently hold few variable life insurance policies, our holding of a significant amount of such policies in the future could cause our Company or one of our subsidiaries to be characterized as an “investment company” under the federal Investment Company Act of 1940. The application of that law to all or part of our businesses — whether due to our purchase of life insurance policies or to the expansion of the definition of “securities” under federal securities laws — could require us to comply with detailed and complex regulatory requirements, and cause us to fall out of compliance with certain covenants under our second amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation. Such an outcome could negatively affect our business, results of operations and financial condition and our ability to implement our growth strategies.

We hold licenses to purchase life insurance policies in 38 states and can also purchase in seven unregulated states. We have also historically purchased life insurance policies from other secondary market participants.

Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)

HIPAA requires that holders of medical records maintain such records and implement procedures designed to assure the privacy of patient records. In order to carry out our business, we receive medical records and obtain a release to share such records with a defined group of persons, take on the responsibility for preserving the privacy of that information, and use the information only for purposes related to the life insurance policies we own.

The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 (GINA)

GINA is a federal law that protects people from genetic discrimination in health insurance and employment. GINA prohibits health insurers from: (i) requesting, requiring, or using genetic information to make decisions about eligibility for health insurance; or (ii) making decisions on the health insurance premium, contribution amounts, or coverage terms they offer to consumers. In addition, GINA makes it against the law for health insurers to consider family history or a genetic test result, a preexisting condition, require a genetic test, or use any genetic information, to discriminate coverage, even if the health insurance company did not mean to collect such genetic information.

GINA does not apply to the life insurance, long-term care or annuity industries. The life insurance, long-term care or annuity industries operate on medical-evidenced underwriting principles in which specific medical conditions are taken into account when assessing and pricing risk. The regulation of genomic data is relatively new, and we believe it is likely that regulation will increase and grow more complex in the foreseeable future. We cannot, however, predict what any new law or regulation would specifically involve or how it might affect our industry, our business, or our future plans.

Patents, trademarks, licenses

On March 19, 2018, Life Epigenetics filed provisional patents for the application of the use of epigenetic technology against the identification of tobacco and alcohol usage. Life Epigenetics continues to advance its intellectual property protection of these alcohol and tobacco focused technologies.

On December 17, 2018, Life Epigenetics secured the exclusive evaluation and option agreement for patent pending “Phenotypic Age and DNA Methylation Based Biomarkers for Life Expectancy and Morbidity” technology from The Regents of the University of California to commercialize advanced epigenetic technology for the life insurance industry.

Life Epigenetics has filed additional patents for a machine learning model trained to classify risk using DNA epigenetic data, a machine learned epigenetic status estimator, and a machine learning model trained to determine biochemical stat and/or medical conditions using DNA epigenetic data.

We believe epigenetics will be commercialized to improve upon many traditional factors used in the life insurance underwriting process with greater accuracy, speed and convenience. To that end, Life Epigenetics is engaged in several research and development efforts to further validate, refine and expand its epigenetic testing capabilities. In particular, Life Epigenetics conducted a research study comprised of approximately 1,300 participants in which biological samples, as well as medical records and prescription transaction history records, detailed health history, and DNA methylation analysis were conducted. Life Epigenetics measured the results of each participant’s diagnostic indicators against insurance risk classes, disease states, biomarker levels, and prescription medication statuses. The results demonstrate that epigenetics can be used to effectively estimate tobacco use, cardiovascular disease, hypertension, kidney disease, diabetes, obesity, and alcohol and drug abuse.

Beneficient has registered trademarks for its LiquidTrust product described in the “Beneficient Loans Receivable” section above and its ACE portal described in the “Organizational Structure” section above. Beneficient also has trademarks pending registration on a number of its other liquidity products and trust services, also described in the “Beneficient Loans Receivable” section above, including, its ExAlt Plan^TM, Exchange Trust and Interchange Trust.

Employees

We employed approximately 130 employees as of the date of the filing of this Form 10-K.

Properties  

Our principal executive offices are currently located at 325 North St. Paul Street, Dallas, Texas 75201. GWG and Beneficient collectively lease 33,652 square feet of space for a lease term expiring on July 31, 2021. GWG also retains the lease of its legacy executive offices located at 220 South Sixth Street, Suite 1200, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402. At that location, GWG leases 17,687 square feet of space for a lease term expiring in 2025. We believe these facilities are adequate for our current needs and that suitable additional space will be available as needed.

Company Website Access and SEC Filings

Our Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K, and amendments to reports filed pursuant to Sections 13(a) and 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), are filed with the SEC. We are subject to the informational requirements of the Exchange Act and file or furnish reports, proxy statements and other information with the SEC.

Our general website address is www.gwgh.com. Our website has additional information about our Company, its mission and our business. Our website also has tools that could be used by our clients and potential clients, financial advisors and investors. Beneficient’s website address is www.trustben.com and has additional information about Beneficient, its mission and its business. We maintain the website www.gwglife.com for consumers and life insurance professionals seeking our life insurance secondary market products and services. InsurTech Holdings also maintains the websites www.lifeegx.com and www.yousurance.com for its initiatives of commercializing epigenetic testing and underwriting personalized life insurance policies based on this testing. The information contained on or accessible through the foregoing websites is not part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS.

Our business involves a number of challenges and risks. In addition to the other information in this report, you should consider carefully the following risk factors in evaluating us and our business. The risks described below are not the only ones that we face. Additional risks not presently known to us or that we currently deem immaterial may also affect our business, financial condition, operating results, or prospects.

Risks Related to Our Secondary Life Insurance Business and Industry

Material changes in the secondary life insurance market, a relatively new and evolving market, may adversely affect our operating results, business prospects, the value of our common stock and our ability to repay our debt obligations.

The success of our business and our ability to satisfy our debt obligations depends in part on the continued development of the secondary market for life insurance, including the accuracy of actuarial forecasting, the solvency of life insurance companies to pay the face value of the life insurance benefits and the demand for life insurance investments, all of which will critically impact our performance. The life insurance secondary market may be impacted by a variety of factors such as the interpretation of existing laws and regulations (including laws relating to insurable interests), the passage of new legislation and regulations, mortality improvement rates, updated actuarial methodologies, and mortality tables. Importantly, all of the factors that we believe could most significantly affect the life insurance secondary market are beyond our control. Any material and adverse change in the life insurance secondary market could adversely affect our operating results, our access to capital, the value of our common stock, our ability to repay our various debt and other obligations, and our business prospects and viability. Because of this, an investment in our securities involves greater risk as compared to investments offered by companies with more diversified business operations in more established or predictable markets.

The valuation of our life insurance policy assets on our balance sheet requires us to make material assumptions that may ultimately prove to be incorrect. If our assumptions prove incorrect, we could suffer significant losses that materially and adversely affect our results of operations.

One of our principal assets is a portfolio of life insurance policies purchased in the secondary market, comprising approximately 62% and 50% of our total assets, excluding goodwill, as of December 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively. Those assets are considered “Level 3” fair value measurements under Accounting Standards Codification 820, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures (“ASC 820”), as there is currently no active market where we are able to observe quoted prices for identical assets. As a result, our determination of “fair value” for those assets on our balance sheet incorporates significant inputs that are not observable. Fair value is defined as an exit price representing the amount that would be received if assets were sold or that would be paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. As such, fair value is a market-based measurement determined based on the assumptions market participants would use in pricing an asset or liability. A sale of the portfolio or a portion of the portfolio in an other than orderly transaction would likely occur at less than the fair value of the respective life insurance policies.

A Level 3 fair value measurement is inherently uncertain and could create additional volatility in our financial statements that is not necessarily related to the performance of our underlying assets. As of both December 31, 2019 and 2018, we estimated the fair value discount rate for our life insurance portfolio to be 8.25%. Life expectancy estimates are also a significant component within our fair value measurement. If in the future we determine that a higher discount rate is required to ascribe fair value to a similarly situated portfolio of life insurance policies or that life expectancy estimates materially differ from actuarial estimates and/or our projections, we could experience significant losses materially affecting our results of operations. In addition, significant losses of this nature would likely at some point cause our common stock to decline in value and cause us to be out of compliance with borrowing covenants contained in our various borrowing agreements. This could in turn result in acceleration of our second amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation, L Bonds and Seller Trust L Bonds, which we may not be able to repay. As a result, we may be forced to seek additional debt or equity financing to repay such debt amounts, and additional financing may not be available on terms acceptable to us, if at all.

If we are unable to repay our debt when it comes due, then our senior lender or the holders of our L Bonds and Seller Trust L Bonds, or both, would have the right to foreclose on our assets. For further disclosure relating to the risks associated with the valuation of our assets, see the risk factors below “If actuarial assumptions we obtain from third-party providers . . . .” and “Inaccuracies in the life expectancy estimates we use for small face policies . . . .”

Actual results from our life insurance portfolio may not match our projected results, which could adversely affect our ability to service our existing portfolio and meet our debt obligations.

Our business partially relies on achieving actual results that are materially in line with the results we expect to attain from our investments in life insurance policy assets. In this regard, we believe that the larger the portfolio of life insurance we own, the greater the likelihood that we will achieve our expected results. To our knowledge, rating agencies generally suggest that portfolios of life insurance policies contain enough policies on individual lives to achieve actuarial stability in receiving expected cash flows. For instance, in a life insurance securitization methodology published in 2016, A.M. Best Company concluded that at least 300 lives are necessary to achieve actuarial stability, while Standard & Poor’s has indicated that stability is unlikely to be achieved with less than 1,000 lives. As of December 31, 2019, we owned $2.0 billion in face value of life insurance policies covering 1,073 unique lives.

However, even if our life insurance portfolio is actuarially stable, we still may experience differences between the projection models we use and actual mortalities, which generally has been the case over the past several years. Differences between our expectations and actual mortality results could have a materially adverse effect on our operating results and cash flow. In such a case, we may face liquidity problems, including difficulties servicing our remaining portfolio of policies and servicing our outstanding debt obligations. Continued or material failures to meet our expected results could decrease the attractiveness of our securities in the eyes of potential investors, thereby making it even more difficult to obtain capital needed to service and grow the portfolio — to the extent we allocate capital to life insurance policy purchases, and service our existing debt.

Our investments in life insurance policies have inherent risks, including fraud and legal challenges to the validity of the policies, which we will be unable to eliminate and which may adversely affect our results of operations.

When we purchase a life insurance policy, we face certain risks associated with insurance fraud and other legal challenges to the validity of the policy. For example, to the extent the insured is not aware of the existence of the policy, the insured does not exist, or the insurance company does not recognize the policy, the insurance company may cancel or rescind the policy thereby causing the loss of an investment in that policy. In addition, if an insured’s medical records have been altered in such a way as to shorten a life expectancy as reported, this may cause us to overpay for the related policy. Finally, we may experience legal challenges from insurance companies claiming that the insured failed to have an insurable interest at the time the policy was originally purchased or that the policy owner made fraudulent disclosures to the insurer at the time the policy was purchased (e.g., disclosures pertaining to the health status of the insured or the existence or sources of premium financing), or challenges from the beneficiaries of an insurance policy claiming that the sale of the policy to us was invalid.

To mitigate these risks, our origination practices and underwriting procedures include a current verification of coverage from the insurance company, a complete due-diligence investigation of the insured and accompanying medical records, a review of the life insurance policy application, and a requirement that the policy has been in force for at least two years. We also conduct a legal review of any premium financing associated with the policy to determine if an insurable interest existed at the time of its issuance. Nevertheless, these steps will not eliminate the risk of fraud or legal challenges to the life insurance policies we purchase. Furthermore, changes in laws or regulations or the interpretation of existing laws or regulations, may prove our due-diligence and risk-mitigation efforts inadequate. If a significant face amount of policies were invalidated for reasons of fraud or any other reason, our results of operations would be materially adversely affected.

Our ownership of life insurance policies issued by insurers that are unable to pay claims presented to them could have a materially adverse effect on our results of operation, our financial condition, or even our overall prospects.

We currently rely on the payment of policy claims by insurers as our most significant source of revenue collection. In essence, the life insurance assets we own represent the obligations of insurers to pay the benefit amount under the relevant policy upon the mortality of the insured. As a result, in our business, we face the “credit risk” that a particular insurer will be financially unable to pay claims when and as they become due. Depending on how many policies we own that are issued by insurers having financial difficulties at the time a claim is presented for payment, this risk could be significant enough to have a materially adverse effect on our results of operation, our financial condition, or even our overall prospects.

To mitigate this credit risk, we generally purchase policies issued only by insurers with an investment-grade credit rating from one or more of Standard & Poor’s, Moody’s, or A.M. Best Company. As of December 31, 2019, 95.7% of the face value benefits of our life insurance policies were issued by insurers having an investment-grade rating (BBB or better) by Standard & Poor’s. We also review our exposure to credit risk associated with our portfolio of life insurance policies when estimating its fair value. In evaluating the policies’ credit risk, we consider items such as insurance company solvency, credit risk indicators, and general economic conditions. Notwithstanding our efforts to mitigate credit risk exposure and to reflect this risk in our portfolio valuation, we cannot predict with any certainty whether a particular insurer will be in a financial position to satisfy amounts that it owes under life insurance policies it has issued when a claim for payment is presented.

We have relied materially on information provided or obtained by third parties in the acquisition of life insurance policies. Any misinformation or negligence in the course of obtaining information could materially and adversely affect the value of the policies we own, our results of operation and the value of our securities.

Our acquisition of each life insurance policy is negotiated based on variables and particular facts that are unique to the policy itself and the health of the insured. The facts we obtain about the policies and the insured at the time when the policy was applied for and obtained are based on the insured’s factual representations to the insurance company, and the facts the insurance company separately obtains in the course of its own due-diligence examination, such as facts concerning the health of the insured and whether or not there is an insurable interest present when the policy was issued. Any misinformation or negligence in the course of obtaining information relating to a policy or insured could materially and adversely impact the value of the policies we own and could in turn adversely affect our results of operations and the value of our securities.

Although we do not anticipate purchasing additional life insurance policies, our life insurance business continues to be subject to state regulation and changes in those laws and regulations, or changes in their interpretation, could negatively affect our results of operation and financial condition. 

When we purchase a life insurance policy, we are subject to state insurance regulations. Over the past number of years, we have seen a dramatic increase in the number of states that have adopted legislation and regulations from model laws promulgated by either the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (“NAIC”) or by the National Conference of Insurance Legislators (NCOIL). These laws are essentially consumer protection statutes responding to abuses that arose early in the development of our industry, some of which may persist. Today, almost every state has adopted some version of either the NAIC or NCOIL model laws, which generally require the licensing of purchasers of and brokers for life insurance policies, the filing and approval of purchase agreements, and the disclosure of transaction fees. These laws also require various periodic reporting requirements and prohibit certain business practices deemed to be abusive. State statutes typically provide state regulatory agencies with significant powers to interpret, administer, and enforce the laws relating to the purchase of life insurance policies. Under statutory authority, state regulators have broad discretionary power and may impose new licensing requirements, interpret or enforce existing regulatory requirements in different ways, or issue new administrative rules, any of which could be generally adverse to the industry and potentially the value of our life insurance policy assets.

If federal regulators or courts conclude that the purchase of life insurance in the secondary market constitutes, in all cases, a transaction in securities, we could be in violation of existing covenants under our second amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation, which could result in significantly diminished access to capital. We could also face increased operational expenses. The materialization of this risk could adversely affect our operating results and financial condition, our ability to repay our debt, and possibly threaten the viability of our business.

On occasion, the SEC has attempted to regulate the purchase of non-variable universal life insurance policies as transactions in securities under federal securities laws. In July 2010, the SEC issued a Staff Report of its Life Settlement Task Force. In that report, the Staff recommended that certain types of purchased insurance policies be classified as securities. The SEC has not taken any position on the Staff Report, and there is no indication if the SEC will take any action to implement the recommendations of the Staff Report. In addition, there have been several federal court cases in which transactions involving the purchase and fractionalization of life insurance policies have been held to be transactions in securities under the federal Securities Act of 1933.

We believe that the matters discussed in the Staff Report and existing case law do not impact our current business model because our purchases of life insurance policies are distinguishable from those cases that have been held by courts, and advocated by the Staff Report, to be transactions in securities. For example, neither we nor any of our affiliates are involved in the fractionalization of life insurance policies, and we presently do not purchase significant amounts of variable life insurance policies. As a practical matter, if all or a majority of our life insurance policies were deemed to be “securities” under federal securities laws, either through an expansion of the definition of what constitutes a “security,” the expansion of the types of transactions in life insurance policies that would constitute transactions in “securities,” or the elimination or limitation of available exemptions and exceptions (whether by statutory change, regulatory change, or administrative or court interpretation), then we or one or more of our affiliated entities could become subject to the federal Investment Company Act of 1940. This outcome would likely have a material and negative effect on our Company by imposing additional regulations and rules to our governance structure, operations, and our capital structure. In particular, this outcome would likely cause us to be in violation of existing covenants under our second amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation requiring us not to operate or be characterized as an “investment company” under the Investment Company Act of 1940. This breach would likely adversely affect our liquidity and increase our cost of capital and operational expenses, all of which would adversely affect our operating results. Such an outcome could also threaten our ability to satisfy our obligations as they come due and the viability of our business.

If actuarial assumptions we obtain from third-party providers and rely on to calculate our expected returns on our investments in life insurance policies change, our operating results and cash flow could be adversely affected, as well as the value of our collateral and our ability to service our debt obligations.

When we acquire a life insurance policy, the expected internal rate of return we calculate is based upon the probability of an insured’s mortality over an actuarial life expectancy estimate. We presently obtain these estimates from third-party medical-actuarial underwriting companies. In addition to actuarial life expectancies, we rely on a pricing and premium forecasting software model developed by a third-party actuarial firm for the valuation of policies we purchase, future mortality revenues, and the calculation of anticipated internal rates of return. These pricing models forecast the estimated future premiums due as well the future mortalities of insureds.

All actuarial life expectancies (and related forecasting software) are subject to interpretation and change based on evolving medical technology, actuarial data, and analytical techniques. Additionally, we are required under our second amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation to update life expectancy estimates for pledged life insurance policies with face amounts greater than $750,000 by December 18, 2020, and obtain updated life expectancy updates no less frequently than once every five years. Previously, we were required to update life expectancy estimates for pledged life insurance policies with face amounts greater than $750,000 every two years beginning from the closing date of the first amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation (or approximately the end of 2019). Our prior experience in updating life expectancies has generally resulted in longer life expectancies for most, but not all, of the insureds within our portfolio. Adverse impacts on the value of our life insurance policy portfolio or our cash flow could in turn impair the value of the collateral we have pledged to our creditors and our ability to service our debt and obligations as they come due.

Inaccuracies in the life expectancy estimates we use for small face policies could have a material and adverse effect on our results of operation and financial condition.

As of December 31, 2019, we owned 697 “small face” life insurance policies (i.e., those policies with $1 million in face value of benefits or less) having $395.8 million in aggregate face value of benefits.

The underwriting processes we use to evaluate, price and purchase small face policies are different from, and may not be as reliable as, the processes we use for life insurance policies with larger face values of benefits. In particular, the processes we use to develop or obtain life expectancy estimates and the related mortality curves for small face policies are less extensive than traditional methods. These processes include obtaining either a single fully underwritten or simplified report as opposed to two fully underwritten reports. A simplified third-party underwriting report is based on a self-reported medical interview and may be supplemented with additional information obtained from a pharmacy benefit manager database that is provided to one or more medical-actuarial underwriting firms to obtain a simplified life expectancy report. Although we obtain professional actuarial guidance regarding these processes, our simplified underwriting methodology may not be as reliable as the processes we use for policies with larger (i.e., greater than $1 million) face value of benefits.

Any shortcomings in the process we use to evaluate, price, purchase and value our small face policies, or significant inaccuracies in the life expectancy estimates relating to those policies, could have a material and adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition. Any such outcomes could have a negative and possibly material effect on our ability to satisfy our debts.

We rely on estimated rates of mortality when valuing life insurance policies and forecasting the performance of our life insurance portfolio, and we also rely on other estimates derived from statistical methodologies for projecting our future cash flows. If any of our estimates prove to be incorrect, it could materially and adversely affect our financial condition and ability to satisfy our debt service and repayment obligations.

If we project we will receive cash inflows from policies sooner than we actually do, we may not be able to make payment on our debt obligations in a timely manner, or at all. Moreover, a significant medical discovery or advance that results in mortality improvements among seniors could have a material adverse effect on the value of our life insurance investments.

We use a modeling practice for projecting cash flows known as the “probabilistic method.” This is an actuarial method that uses the probability of an insured’s mortality over time (a mortality curve) to project the flow of policy benefits to us and to project premiums that must be paid by us. This method requires the input of life expectancy assumptions. These inputs are then used to estimate the discounted cash flows from the life insurance portfolio using the ClariNet LS probabilistic and stochastic portfolio pricing model from ClearLife Limited, which estimates the expected cash flows using various mortality probabilities and scenarios.

Prior to December 2018, the life expectancy inputs were based on the arithmetic average of two separate life expectancy reports (“Average Life Expectancy method”). Under that methodology, we experienced fewer cash flows from policy benefits than projected. The lower-than-projected policy benefits received corresponded with higher-than-projected premium payments. Using the Average Life Expectancy method, policy benefits actually received were approximately 58% of expected results as of December 31, 2018. This resulted in a delay in policy benefit inflows from those anticipated and premium outflows being higher than anticipated due to the slower than anticipated maturities occurring within the life insurance portfolio.

As a result of the challenges we experienced using the Average Life Expectancy method, we revised our methodology using information that was derived from back-testing (the process of applying an analytical method to historical data to see how accurately the method would have predicted actual results) the mortality cash flow performance of our life insurance portfolio using the longest life expectancy report received from the Life Expectancy Providers used for pricing at the time the life insurance policies were acquired (the “Longest Life Expectancy”). This contrasts with our historical methodology of projecting mortality cash flows, used prior to the fourth quarter of 2018, which, as described above, typically used the average of two such life expectancy reports. Given the methodology change, we anticipate the receipt of policy benefits and the payment of premiums to more closely track cash flow estimates in the future; however, this cannot be guaranteed.

Our enhanced Longest Life Expectancy valuation methodology uses the Longest Life Expectancy report result at the time of purchase combined with a multiplier factor applied for variance in our portfolio of actual to expected experience using the Longest Life Expectancy results. Our revised methodology uses a static portfolio multiplier we must recalculate anytime the six-month moving average of the difference between actual portfolio performance and projected performance of cumulative face value maturities deviates by more than one standard deviation from the mean and such deviation persists for three consecutive months and continues as of the current quarter-end month. As of December 31, 2019, the six-month moving average of the difference between actual portfolio performance and projected performance of cumulative face value of maturities was within one standard deviation from the mean. As such, our valuation methodology did not require an update to our portfolio mortality multiplier (PMM) during the current quarter.

We use the current future cash flow projection to generate our expected internal rate of return on the life insurance policy portfolio we own. Any change to these projections, pricing models, methodology, premium forecasting assumptions, cash flow projections, or mortality assumptions accompanied therewith that increase the projected cost-of-insurance premiums or decrease the probability of mortality could have a material and adverse impact on our cash flows and financial condition. Ultimately, this could adversely affect our ability to meet our debt service and repayment obligations and our viability.

Cost-of-insurance (premium) increases could materially and adversely affect our profitability and financial condition.

We are subject to the risk of increased cost-of-insurance (“COI”) charges (i.e., premium charges) for the universal life insurance policies we own in our portfolio. As of December 31, 2019, approximately 33% of the policies in our life insurance portfolio have premium levels that are guaranteed under the terms of the policy to keep the policy’s death benefit in force even in a situation where the policy’s cash account has been wholly depleted. On the remaining approximately 67% of our policies, we pay “non-guaranteed COI charges” and are subject to the risk that the insurer could increase the COI charges for the policy. In all cases, the amount of increase is subject to any limits that may be set forth in the insurance policy. Because very few of the policies we own have significant cash account value balances, any COI increase will require us to use more cash to satisfy the minimum premium amount required to keep the related policy in force, and this could materially and adversely affect our profitability.

A COI increase can also be expected to impair the value of the affected policy because extra expense (i.e., additional premium amounts) will be required to keep the policy in force, and such extra expense will diminish the economic value, or return, of the policy realized upon the mortality of the insured. As a result, any widespread COI increases in policies we own would likely have a material and adverse effect on the value of our portfolio, which in turn would materially and adversely affect our profitability and financial condition.

Our business and prospects may be adversely affected by changes, lack of growth, or increased competition in the life insurance secondary market.

The growth of the secondary life insurance policy market may be negatively affected by a variety of factors beyond our control, including: negative publicity about the life insurance secondary market based on actual or perceived abuses; and the adoption of additional governmental regulation.

The relatively new and evolving nature of the market in which we operate makes the related risks difficult to identify and quantify. Nevertheless, contractions in the secondary market for life insurance policies, whether resulting from general economic conditions, regulatory or legal pressures, or otherwise (including regulatory pressures exerted on us or others involved in the secondary market for life insurance), could make participation in the market generally less desirable. This could in turn depress the prices at which life insurance policies on the secondary market are bought and sold and have a negative impact on the estimated value of the policies we own. If the value of the policies we own decreases, our results of operation and financial condition could suffer.

Risks Relating to Our Company

We have a relatively limited history of operations, a history of net losses, and our future earnings, if any, and cash flows may be volatile, resulting in uncertainty about our ability to service and repay our debt when it comes due, redeem preferred stock when requested and uncertainty about our prospects generally.

We are a company with a relatively limited operating history, which makes it difficult to accurately forecast our earnings and cash flows. We had net income attributable to common shareholders of $91.1 million in the year ended 2019. Net income attributable to common shareholders in 2019 includes a gain on the consolidation of Beneficient of $249.7 million. We incurred a net loss attributable to common shareholders of $136.1 million in the year ended December 31, 2018. Our lack of a significant history and the evolving nature of the market in which we operate make it likely that there are risks inherent to our business that are yet to be recognized by us or others, or not fully appreciated, and that could result in us suffering further losses. As a result of the foregoing, an investment in our securities necessarily involves uncertainty about the stability of our operating results, cash flows and, ultimately, our ability to service and repay our debt and our prospects generally. In addition, any volatility in our operating results we experience may adversely affect the market price of our common stock.

Our indebtedness could adversely affect our financial condition and may otherwise adversely impact our business operations. We and our subsidiaries may incur additional indebtedness, including secured indebtedness.

As of December 31, 2019, we had $1.6 billion of debt including our second amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation, our L Bonds and Seller Trust L Bonds, and Beneficient’s other borrowings, which are due in June 2020. Our indebtedness could have significant effects on our business and the holders of our debt. For example, it could:

In addition, as of December 31, 2019, we had approximately $184.6 million of borrowings outstanding under our second amended and restated credit facility with LNV Corporation, which bore interest at variable rates. If interest rates increase significantly, our ability to borrow additional funds may be reduced and the risk related to our indebtedness would intensify.

In addition, most of our current debt is, and we anticipate that much of our future debt will be, non-amortizing and payable in balloon payments. Therefore, we will likely need to refinance at least a portion of that debt as it matures. There is a risk that we may not be able to refinance debt maturing in future years or that the terms of any refinancing will not be as favorable as the terms of the then-existing debt. If principal payments due at maturity cannot be refinanced, extended or repaid with proceeds from other sources, such as new equity capital or sales of facilities, our cash flow may not be sufficient to repay all maturing debt in years when significant balloon payments come due. Additionally, we may incur significant penalties if we choose to prepay the debt.

We critically rely on debt financing for our business. Any inability to borrow could adversely affect our business operations, our ability to satisfy our debt-payment obligations and, ultimately, our prospects and viability.

To date, we have chosen to finance our business principally through the issuance of debt, including debt incurred by our subsidiary GWG DLP Funding IV, LLC (“DLP IV”) under our second amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation (see Note 11 to our consolidated financial statements), our L Bonds and Seller Trust L Bonds. Our second amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation is secured by all of the assets of DLP IV, has a maximum amount of $300.0 million, and the outstanding balance at December 31, 2019 was $184.6 million.

Obligations under the second amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation have a maturity date of September 27, 2029. Our L Bonds and Seller Trust L Bonds have scheduled maturities as set forth below in the risk factor “If a significant number of holders . . . .” Our debt facilities and offerings are the most important sources of financing on which our business continues to critically rely to grow and maintain our exposure to alternative assets — which include our portfolio of life insurance policies and our investments in Beneficient — as well as service existing debt.

Our business model is based on the acquisition of alternative assets financed primarily through debt financing. These alternative assets are typically long-term and may not produce cash flow for an extended period of time. For example, we do not receive cash in respect of acquired life insurance policies until the insured individual dies. The resulting asset/liability mismatch can result in a liquidity shortage if we are unable to renew maturing short-term debt or secure suitable additional financing. In such a situation, we could be forced to sell assets at less than optimal (distressed) prices. We thus rely on continued access to financing to enable us to grow our exposure to alternative assets and to pay the attendant premiums and costs of maintaining the life insurance portfolio, all while satisfying our current interest and principal repayment obligations under our second amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation, L Bonds and Seller Trust L Bonds and our dividend obligations on our preferred stock. Proceeds from life insurance policies that have been pledged under our second amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation will first be applied to the repayment of our obligations under the credit facility according to a waterfall amortization formula that is largely controlled by LNV Corporation. Therefore, we may not receive all of the proceeds from matured life insurance policies. Accordingly, until we achieve sufficient cash flows derived from our portfolio of life insurance policies, we expect to rely on advances from our second amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation and proceeds from our L Bond offering to satisfy our ongoing financing and liquidity needs. Likewise, until interest and dividends from our investments in Beneficient reach a significant size to service our various debt obligations, we expect to rely on advances from our second amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation and proceeds from our L Bond offering for these amounts.

Continued access to financing and liquidity under the second amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation (other than premium payments on existing policies pledged thereto), the offering of our L Bonds, or otherwise is not guaranteed. Due to our failure to deliver GWG Life audited financial statements for 2018 to LNV Corporation within 90 days after the end of the year and the failure to deliver GWG Life unaudited financial statements within 45 days after March 31, 2019, we were in violation of our debt covenants under our amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation. CLMG Corp., as administrative agent for LNV Corporation, issued a forbearance extending the delivery of these reports to July 22, 2019. Although the covenant violations were cured during the forbearance period, until we regained compliance with our debt covenants, we were prohibited from receiving advances under the amended and restated senior credit facility, and we were not entitled to any excess amounts received from policies pledged under the amended and restated senior credit facility. See “An inability to obtain accurate and timely financial information from Beneficient may prevent us from complying with reporting obligations under federal securities law ….” In addition, general economic conditions could limit our access to financing, as could regulatory or legal pressures exerted on us, our financiers, or those involved in the procurement of financing such as brokers, dealers, and registered investment advisors. If we are unable to borrow under the second amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation or otherwise for any reason, or to renew or replace the second amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation when it comes due, or if we are forced to discontinue our L Bond offering for any significant length of time and for any reason, our business would be adversely impacted and our ability to service and repay our debt obligations would be compromised, thereby negatively affecting our business prospects, the value of our common stock and perhaps our viability.

As of March 24, 2020, we had remaining capacity of approximately $120 million under our current registered L Bond offering. We are in the process of preparing and filing a registration statement to offer additional L Bonds. If, for any reason, there is a delay in the filing or the effective date of this additional offering, our financial condition and ability to continue operations may be negatively affected.

We may not be able to raise the capital that we are seeking from our securities offerings and may be unable to meet our overall business objective of growing and diversifying our alternative asset exposure.

The offer and sale of our L Bonds is a principal means by which we intend to raise funds needed to meet our business and financial goals. However, if we are unable to continue to do so for any reason, we may be unable to meet our goals. If actual cash flows from our portfolio of life insurance policies do not occur as we have forecasted, which has thus far been the case, we could be forced to sell our investments in life insurance policies in order to service or satisfy our debt-related obligations. Likewise, if our investments in Beneficient do not perform as we have projected, we could be forced to sell such investments in order to service or satisfy such debt-related obligations. Presently, none of our material investments (life insurance policies and investments in Beneficient) are supported by liquid secondary markets and our investments in Beneficient contain transfer restrictions. If we are forced to sell any material amount of these investments, we may be unable to sell them at prices we believe are optimal or at or above the carrying value of such investments, particularly if our sale of assets occurs at a time when we are (or are perceived to be) in distress. In any such event, our business and the value of our securities would likely be materially and adversely impacted.

We depend upon cash distributions from our subsidiaries, and contractual restrictions on distributions to us or adverse events at one of our operating subsidiaries could materially and adversely affect our ability to pay our debts, redeem preferred stock when requested and continue operating our business.

GWG Holdings, Inc. is a holding company. As a holding company, we conduct our operations through operating subsidiaries, and as such our most significant assets are cash and our ownership interests in our subsidiaries, controlled affiliates and equity investees. Accordingly, our ability to meet our obligations, including our debt-related and dividend-payment obligations, materially depends upon the ability of our subsidiaries to distribute cash to us. In this regard, the ability of our subsidiaries to distribute cash to us is, and will continue to be, restricted by certain negative covenants in the agreement governing our second amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation. If any of these limitations were to materially impede the flow of cash to us, our ability to service and repay our debt, including obligations under the L Bonds and Seller Trust L Bonds, and make cash dividend payments to holders of our preferred stock would be materially and adversely affected. In addition, any adverse corporate event at the subsidiary level, such as a declaration of bankruptcy, liquidation or reorganization or an event of default under our second amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation, could adversely affect the ability of our subsidiaries to distribute cash to us, and thereby materially and adversely affect our ability to service and repay our debt and make cash dividend payments, and negatively impact our ability to continue operations.

The collateral granted as security for our obligations under the L Bonds and Seller Trust L Bonds may be insufficient to repay the indebtedness upon an event of default.

GWG Holdings (the issuer of the L Bonds and Seller Trust L Bonds) and GWG Life (the guarantor of obligations under the L Bonds and Seller Trust L Bonds, and a wholly owned subsidiary of GWG Holdings) have each granted a security interest in substantially all of their respective assets to serve as collateral security for obligations under the L Bonds and Seller Trust L Bonds. Importantly, DLP IV, a wholly owned subsidiary of GWG Life, owns a substantial number of our life insurance policies, 77.3% of the face value of our life insurance portfolio as of December 31, 2019, and is the borrower under our second amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation. As the borrower under that second amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation, all of its assets — including all of its life insurance policy assets — serve as collateral for our obligations under the facility.

Because of the fact that a substantial number of our life insurance assets are held in our DLP IV subsidiary, and all of those life insurance assets serve as collateral security for our obligations under our second amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation, holders of L Bonds and Seller Trust L Bonds risk the possibility that the collateral security to secure our obligations under the L Bonds and Seller Trust L Bonds may be insufficient to repay holders upon an event of default. Furthermore, while the indenture governing the L Bonds and the Seller Trust L Bonds limits the amount of debt relative to a measure of asset coverage we and our subsidiaries can incur, the indenture permits us and our subsidiaries to incur additional secured debt (subject to the debt coverage ratio) that may be senior to the L Bonds and Seller Trust L Bonds.

Furthermore, the assets that secure our obligations under the L Bonds and Seller Trust L Bonds are illiquid assets. As a result, the book value of those assets as reflected in our financial statements are based on numerous assumptions and may not necessarily reflect the current market price for those assets, especially in the event of a bulk or distressed sale. Furthermore, a substantial majority of the net assets of Beneficient are currently represented by goodwill as of December 31, 2019. Some or a substantial portion of the proceeds from L Bond sales may be used to make investments in Beneficient. Because these advances may be used by Beneficient for working capital purposes and to repay indebtedness, such investments may not increase the tangible assets securing the L Bonds. If the trustee for the L Bonds were forced to sell all or a portion of the collateral securing them, there can be no assurance that the trustee would be able to sell them for the prices at which we have recorded them, and the trustee might be forced to sell them at significantly lower prices.

If a significant number of holders of our L Bonds and Seller Trust L Bonds demand repayment of those instruments upon maturity instead of renewing them, and at such time we do not have sufficient capital on hand to fund those repayments (and do not otherwise have access to sufficient capital), we may be forced to liquidate some of our life insurance policies, investments in Beneficient or other assets, which could have a material and adverse impact on our results of operation and financial condition.

As of December 31, 2019, we had approximately $948.1 million in principal amount of L Bonds outstanding (excluding Seller Trust L Bonds). Since we first issued our L Bonds, we have experienced $646.3 million in maturities, of which $341.3 million has renewed for an additional term, as of December 31, 2019. This has provided us with a cumulative historical renewal rate of approximately 52.8% for investments in our L Bonds. Future contractual maturities of L Bonds (excluding Seller Trust L Bonds) as of December 31, 2019 are as follows:

As of December 31, 2019, we had approximately $366.9 million in principal amount of Seller Trust L Bonds outstanding. The Seller Trust L Bonds have a contractual maturity in August 2023; however, the holders have the ability to exercise a put to require redemption beginning in 2021. Under the Supplemental Indenture for the Seller Trust L Bonds due 2023, in the event of a redemption request, including maturity, by the holders of the Seller Trust L Bonds, GWG in its sole discretion has the ability to satisfy the principal in the form of cash, a pro rata portion of (i) the outstanding principal amount and accrued and unpaid interest under the Commercial Loan Agreement and (ii) Ben LP common units, or a combination of cash and such property.

If investors holding existing indebtedness that matures do not elect to renew their investments and we do not at such time have or have access to sufficient capital to repay the indebtedness, then we may need to liquidate some of our life insurance policies or other assets earlier than anticipated. In such an event, we may be unable to sell those policies or other assets at prices we believe are fair or otherwise appropriate and such sales could have a material and adverse impact on our results of operations and financial condition. See also “We may not be able to raise the capital that we are seeking . . . .”

Subordination provisions contained in the indenture will restrict the ability of the trustee or the L Bond or Seller Trust L Bond holders to enforce their rights against us under the indenture, including the right to payment on the L Bonds, if a default then exists under a senior credit facility.

The L Bonds and Seller Trust L Bonds will be subordinate in right of payment to any claims of our senior lender under the second amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation. In this regard, subordination provisions limiting the right of L Bond and Seller Trust L Bond holders to enforce their rights are contained in the indenture. These provisions include:

In the event of a default on a senior credit facility, the indenture prohibits us from making any payment, direct or indirect (whether for interest, principal, as a result of any redemption or repayment at maturity, on default, or otherwise), on the L Bonds, Seller Trust L Bonds and any other indebtedness unless and until: (i) the default respecting the senior credit facility has been cured or waived or has ceased to exist; or (ii) in the case of a non-payment default that permits a senior lender to declare as due and payable all amounts owing under a senior credit facility (but where that senior lender has not yet so declared amounts as being due and payable), the end of the period commencing on the date the trustee receives written notice of default from the senior lender and ending on the earliest of (1) our discharge of the default (or other cure), (2) the trustee’s receipt of a valid waiver of default from the senior lender, or (3) a written notice from the senior lender terminating the payment prohibition.

During any payment prohibition period, neither the holders of the L Bonds, the Seller Trust L Bonds, nor the trustee will have the right, directly or indirectly, to sue to enforce the indenture or the L Bonds or Seller Trust L Bonds. Other provisions of the indenture do permit the trustee to take action to enforce the payment rights of L Bond and Seller Trust L Bond holders after 179 days have passed since the trustee’s receipt of notice of default from a senior lender, but in such case any funds paid as a result of any such suit or enforcement action shall be applied toward the senior credit facility until the facility is indefeasibly paid in full before being applied to the L Bonds and Seller Trust L Bonds.

These subordination provisions present the risk that, upon any default by us on obligations owed to our senior lender, the holders of the L Bonds and Seller Trust L Bonds will be unable to enforce their rights to payment.

If the 180-day standstill period noted above, or any other limitation on the rights of the trustee or L Bond and Seller Trust L Bond holders to assert their rights to payment of principal or interest under the indenture, is ultimately determined to conflict with provisions of the Trust Indenture Act of 1939 (most notably sections 316(b) and 317(a) of that Act), then the trustee, as well as any holder who shall not have earlier consented to such subordination provisions, will (notwithstanding such provision contained in the indenture) be authorized to institute a lawsuit for the enforcement of any payment of principal or interest after their respective due dates.

A failure to maintain compliance with the covenants under our second amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation and the indenture governing the L Bonds and Seller Trust L Bonds may have a material adverse effect on our ability to continue our business operations.

We are subject to various covenants under our second amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation, including requirements to timely deliver financial statements to LNV Corporation (our senior lender). Due to our failure to deliver GWG Life audited financial statements for 2018 to LNV Corporation within 90 days after the end of 2018 and the failure to deliver GWG Life unaudited financial statements within 45 days after March 31, 2019, we were in violation of our debt covenants during 2019. Although we regained compliance with our debt covenants in July 2019, if we fail to remain in compliance with our debt covenants, we may not be permitted to request, nor will we be entitled to receive, advances under the second amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation, and we will not be entitled to any excess amounts received from policies pledged under the second amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation. A failure to deliver required financial statements to LNV Corporation in the future may result in termination of the credit facility absent an extension of such period. We may be unable to repay outstanding amounts under this credit facility unless we are able to replace it with another facility or otherwise obtain capital from other sources, in which case LNV Corporation could elect to foreclose on the life insurance assets held in our DLP IV subsidiary that serve as collateral security.

Under the indenture governing the L Bonds and Seller Trust L Bonds, as amended, we are subject to various financial and non-financial covenants, including a maximum debt coverage ratio. As of December 31, 2019, we were in compliance with all of our covenants; however, there can be no assurance that we will be able to comply with all of our financial and non-financial covenants in the future. A failure to comply with these covenants could cause us to be in default of the indenture governing the L Bonds and Seller Trust L Bonds and the indenture trustee, acting on behalf of the holders of our L Bonds and Seller Trust L Bonds, would be within its rights to accelerate the maturity dates of any amounts owed on our L Bonds and Seller Trust L Bonds. If we were unable to repay outstanding amounts, either using current cash reserves or another source of capital, the indenture trustee would have the right, subject to the subordination provisions in the indenture, to foreclose on our assets and the assets of GWG Life (including GWG Life’s equity in DLP IV), which serve as collateral for our L Bonds and Seller Trust L Bonds. If we are required to seek other sources of financing in order to satisfy our obligations under our second amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation, our L Bonds or Seller Trust L Bonds, such other sources of capital may be unavailable to us on terms acceptable to us or at all. As a result, failure to comply with the covenants under our debt arrangements would have a material and adverse impact on our ability to continue our business operations.

The debt coverage ratio, designed to provide some assurance to the holders of the L Bonds and Seller Trust L Bonds that the value of our total assets exceeds our total interest-bearing obligations, values our life insurance policy assets, which represent 62% of our total assets (excluding goodwill) as of December 31, 2019, in a manner that may not be representative of the amount we would actually receive upon a sale of those assets.

Under the indenture governing the L Bonds and Seller Trust L Bonds, as amended, the maximum amount of L Bonds and Seller Trust L Bonds we may issue at any time is limited to an amount such that our debt coverage ratio does not exceed 90%. This limitation is designed to provide some basis to ensure that the net present value of policy benefits from our life insurance assets, plus the carrying value of our other assets (including our investments in Beneficient), will be sufficient to meet our obligations to our L Bond and Seller Trust L Bond holders. Expressed as a percentage, the debt coverage ratio was previously defined as the ratio of (i) the total amounts outstanding on interest-bearing debt over (ii) the net present asset value of all life insurance assets we own, plus any cash and cash equivalents held in our accounts, policy benefit receivables and, without duplication, the value of all other assets of the Company, primarily our investments in Beneficient, as reflected on our most recently available balance sheet prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”). For this purpose, the net present asset value of our life insurance assets is calculated as the present value of the life insurance portfolio’s expected future cash flows discounted at the weighted-average interest rate of the interest-bearing indebtedness for the previous month.

However, effective December 31, 2019, we entered into an amendment to the indenture to define the debt coverage ratio as the ratio, expressed as percentage, of (A) the aggregate sum of all indebtedness (other than Excluded Indebtedness as described below) of GWG Holdings and its direct and indirect subsidiaries (including the securities issued under the indenture, but excluding any indebtedness of Ben LP and its direct and indirect subsidiaries) as reflected on GWG Holdings’ most recent consolidated balance sheet prepared in accordance with GAAP over (B) the sum of (i) net present asset value of life insurance policies owned by GWG Holdings and its direct or indirect subsidiaries or affiliates, but excluding life insurance policies held by Ben LP and its direct and indirect subsidiaries and controlled affiliates, plus (ii) all cash (and cash equivalents) held by GWG Holdings and its direct or indirect Subsidiaries or subsidiaries or affiliates, but excluding the cash (and cash equivalents) held by Ben LP and its direct and indirect subsidiaries, plus (iii) the original cost basis in GWG Holdings’ investment in common units or other securities of Ben LP, plus (iv) the outstanding principal amount of any outstanding loans made under a commercial loan agreement with GWG Life, as lender, plus (v) the cost basis of assets contributed to GWG Holdings or any direct or indirect subsidiary of GWG Holdings in connection with a Repurchase Transaction, plus (vi) without duplication, the value of all other assets of GWG Holdings and its direct and indirect subsidiaries or affiliates (but excluding the value of assets of Ben LP and its direct and indirect subsidiaries) as reflected on its most recent consolidated balance sheet prepared in accordance with GAAP. For this purpose, “Excluded Indebtedness” is indebtedness that is payable at GWG Holdings’ option in capital stock of GWG Holdings or securities mandatorily convertible into or exchangeable for such capital stock of the Company, or any indebtedness that is reasonably expected to be converted or exchanged, directly or indirectly, into such capital stock, provided that under the terms of such indebtedness in the event any such conversion or exchange does not occur in accordance with the terms of such transaction, such indebtedness would be cancelled and any assets received in exchange for such indebtedness would be returned.

Although the debt coverage ratio is designed to provide some basis to ensure that our assets will be sufficient to meet our obligations to the holders of L Bonds and Seller Trust L Bonds, the “net present value” of our life insurance assets used in the debt coverage ratio is not the same as the GAAP “fair value” of those assets on our balance sheet. Accordingly, the debt coverage ratio is not informative of the amount we and holders of L Bonds and Seller Trust L Bonds would actually receive if we were forced to sell or liquidate our life insurance related assets. Furthermore, any sale or liquidation of all or a significant portion of our life insurance policies or investments in Beneficient would include significant transactional costs. As a result, our mere compliance with the debt coverage ratio in the indenture will not guarantee that the value of our life insurance assets plus the value of our investments in Beneficient, if sold or liquidated, would in all cases exceed the amount of our obligations to the holders of L Bonds and Seller Trust L Bonds.

We may not realize a return on our investment in InsurTech Holdings, LLC.

Under the Operating Agreement of InsurTech Holdings, LLC, we are obligated to invest $20.0 million in InsurTech Holdings over a two year period ending in November 2021, of which $2.1 million was funded in the fourth quarter of 2019. After this two-year period, we will be entitled to receive 100% of operating and capital distributions up to the amount of our cash contributions, and, thereafter 80% of cash flows from operations and capital proceeds. The success of InsurTech Holdings is dependent, in part, on new and unproven technology as part of its life insurance policy underwriting process. If the mortality predictions InsurTech Holdings obtains through use of this technology proves inaccurate, InsurTech Holdings may not generate sufficient cash flows to satisfy the terms of the distributions as provided in the Operating Agreement. Furthermore, any failure by InsurTech Holdings to protect its intellectual property rights could impair its ability to protect its proprietary technology and the value of our investment. As such, we may not realize the return contemplated in the Operating Agreement, and our results of operations and financial condition could be materially and adversely affected.

The loss of the services of our key employees, or the failure to attract additional key individuals, would materially adversely affect our business operations and prospects.

Our success and viability are dependent to a significant extent upon our ability to attract and retain qualified personnel in all areas of our business, especially our sales, policy acquisition and financial management teams. If we were to lose the members of these service teams, we would need to replace them with qualified individuals in a timely manner or our business operations and prospects could be adversely impacted.

We have the discretion to purchase assets through different subsidiaries, and to transfer assets among our subsidiaries. Any decision to purchase or hold title to assets in one subsidiary, as opposed to a different subsidiary, may affect the value of collateral security for our debts.

We may at our discretion direct the purchase of life insurance policies, investments in Beneficient and other assets by, and the sale of life insurance policies and other assets amongst, different subsidiaries of GWG Holdings. Purchases of assets in, or movements of assets amongst, different subsidiaries could affect the value of the collateral security for obligations under the L Bonds and Seller Trust L Bonds. For example, purchases through, or transfers of life insurance policies to, DLP IV would cause the policies acquired or transferred to become collateral for our second amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation, whereas purchases through, or transfers of life insurance policies to, GWG Life would cause the policies acquired by GWG Life to become collateral for the L Bonds and Seller Trust L Bonds. Similarly, the pledge of life insurance policies owned by GWG Life Trust, or the transfer of such policies to a subsidiary of GWG Life Trust, with a subsequent pledge of such policies could cause those policies to become collateral for a new loan facility. Accordingly, purchases of assets through, or transfers of assets to, different subsidiaries may affect the value of collateral security for different classes of holders of our debt.

Being a public company is expensive and could adversely affect our ability to attract and retain qualified officers and directors.

We have been a public reporting company since January 31, 2012. As such, we are subject to the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. These requirements generate significant accounting, legal, and financial compliance costs, and make some activities more difficult, time consuming or costly than they would otherwise be, and may place significant strain on our personnel and resources. These rules and regulations applicable to public companies, and the risks involved in serving as an officer or director of a public company, may also make it more difficult and expensive for us to obtain director and officer liability insurance, and to recruit and retain qualified officers and directors.

Changes in general economic conditions could adversely impact our business.

Changes in general economic conditions, including, for example, interest rates, short term funding markets, investor sentiment, changes specifically affecting competition, technological developments, political and diplomatic events, tax laws, and other factors not known to us today, can substantially and adversely affect our business and prospects. For example, an increase in interest rates would increase our cost of capital and may limit our ability to raise capital and have a corresponding adverse impact on our operating results. While we may engage in certain hedging activities in the future to mitigate the impact of rising interest rates, none of these risks are or will be within our control.

Business disruptions and interruptions and adverse economic conditions due to natural disasters and other external events beyond our control can adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our operations can be subject to natural disasters and other external events beyond our control, such as the effects of earthquakes, fires, floods, severe weather, public health issues such as the recent outbreak of the coronavirus or other pandemic diseases, power failures, telecommunication loss, major accidents, terrorist attacks, acts of war, and other natural and man-made events, some of which may be intensified by the effects of a government response to the event or climate change and changing weather patterns. For example, our corporate headquarters and critical business offices are located in north Texas, which is geographically located in “tornado alley”, an area known for high instances of tornadoes, and which recently experienced catastrophic tornadic activity and blackouts. A tornado or other disaster could cause severe destruction, disruption or interruption to our operations or property and significantly impact our employees.

More recently, the COVID-19 coronavirus outbreak has impacted several countries around the world, including the United States. There have been numerous reports of the virus outbreak disrupting or restricting supply chains, facility closures, voluntary and mandatory quarantines, and federal, state and local governments requiring business to temporarily close or severely curtail commercial activity. It is also possible that the spread of the coronavirus may have direct effects on our operations, such as high levels of employee sickness and absences, limiting employee travel or increasing telecommuting arrangements. In addition, recent developments and reports indicate the coronavirus has coincided with heightened volatility in financial markets in the U.S. and worldwide. If the coronavirus adversely affects our business operations or leads to a significant or prolonged impact on global markets or economic growth, our financial conditions and results of operations could be adversely affected. We and other financial institutions generally must resume operations promptly following any interruption. If we were to suffer a disruption or interruption and were not able to resume normal operations within a period consistent with industry standards, our business, financial condition or results of operations could be adversely affected in a material manner. In addition, depending on the nature and duration of the disruption or interruption, we might become vulnerable to fraud, additional expense or other losses, or to a loss of business and clients.

Although we have implemented a business continuity management program that we continue to enhance on an ongoing basis, there can be no assurance that the program will adequately mitigate the risks of such business disruptions and interruptions. Additionally, natural disasters and external events, including those occurring in and around Texas, could affect the business and operations of our clients, which could impair their ability to satisfy obligations to us, impair the value of underlying collateral or otherwise adversely affect their business dealings with us, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

The interest rates under our credit agreement and other agreements may be impacted by the phase-out of the London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”).

LIBOR is the basic rate of interest used in lending between banks on the London interbank market and is widely used as a reference for setting the interest rates on loans globally. LIBOR is used as a reference rate to calculate interest under certain of our borrowings and receivables. In 2017, the United Kingdom’s Financial Conduct Authority, which regulates LIBOR, announced that it intends to phase out LIBOR by the end of 2021. The U.S. Federal Reserve, in conjunction with the Alternative Reference Rates Committee, a steering committee comprised of large U.S. financial institutions, identified the Secured Overnight Financing Rate (“SOFR”) as the preferred alternative reference rate to U.S. dollar LIBOR and recommended a paced transition plan that involves the creation of a reference rate based on SOFR by the end of 2021. SOFR is a more generic measure than LIBOR and considers the cost of borrowing cash overnight, collateralized by U.S. Treasury securities. Given the inherent differences between LIBOR and SOFR or any other alternative benchmark rate that may be established, there are many uncertainties regarding a transition from LIBOR. Certain of our borrowing and receivable agreements contain fallback provisions providing for alternative rate calculations in the event LIBOR is unavailable, prior to any LIBOR rate transition. As a result, our level of interest payments we incur or receive may change and the new rates we incur may not be as favorable to us as those in effect prior to any LIBOR phase-out.

We are dependent on our information systems for our financial reporting, policy-related databases, communications and other functions. If our information systems fail or experience major interruptions, including those relating to cybersecurity or arising from cyber-attacks, our business and our financial results could be adversely affected.

We rely on our information systems to effectively manage our operational and financial functions. Our computer systems, Internet web sites, telecommunications, and data networks are also vulnerable to damage or interruption from power loss, natural disasters and attacks from viruses or hackers, including cybersecurity threats and incidents. Global cybersecurity threats and incidents can range from uncoordinated individual attempts to gain unauthorized access to information technology systems to targeted measures directed at us, our databases, policies, and/or the subjects of acquired policies. Although we utilize various procedures and controls to attempt to mitigate our exposure to these risks, attacks are evolving and unpredictable and we cannot guarantee that any risk prevention measures implemented will be successful. System failures or interruptions, including those relating to cybersecurity or arising from cyber-attacks, could breach the security of the personal information of the subjects of the acquired policies and could adversely affect our reputation, business, financial condition, and operating results.

Risks Related to our Strategic Relationship with The Beneficient Company Group, L.P., including the Purchase and Contribution Transaction:

On December 28, 2018, we held the Final Closing of the Exchange Transaction with Beneficient and the Seller Trusts. On April 15, 2019, Jon R. Sabes, the Company’s former Chief Executive Officer and a former director, and Steven F. Sabes, the Company’s former Executive Vice President and a former director, entered into the Purchase and Contribution with, among others, Ben LP. The closing of the Purchase and Contribution occurred on April 26, 2019. On December 31, 2019, we transferred approximately $79 million to Ben LP in return for 666,667 common units of Ben LP and a Preferred Series A Subclass 1 Unit Account of BCH and obtained the right to appoint a majority of the board of directors of Beneficient Management pursuant to the Investment Agreement and the Exchange Agreement. Also on December 31, 2019, in a transaction related to the Investment Agreement, GWG Holdings transferred its interest in the Preferred Series A Subclass 1 Unit Account to its wholly owned subsidiary, GWG Life. These transactions are collectively referred to as the “Beneficient Transactions.” You should consider carefully the following risk factors related to the Beneficient Transactions in evaluating us and our business.

Our loans to Beneficient are contractually and structurally subordinated to the debt and other liabilities of the Beneficient entities that are not obligors on such loans, which means that creditors of such entities will be paid from their assets before we would have any claims to those assets.

As of December 31, 2019, GWG Life had loaned to Ben LP approximately $197.4 million, including accrued interest, pursuant to the Commercial Loan Agreement. The amounts owed to GWG Life under the Commercial Loan Agreement are contractually subordinated to Beneficient’s obligations (“Senior Obligations”) (i) to commercial banks pursuant to commercial term loan and/or revolving credit facilities, and (ii) to Beneficient’s NPC-B limited partnership interest, if issued. As of December 31, 2019, Beneficient had outstanding approximately $153.1 million of Senior Obligations. Furthermore, because a substantial portion of Ben LP’s assets are held by subsidiaries, the amounts owed to us under the Commercial Loan Agreement are structurally subordinated to all debt and other liabilities of those entities, which means that creditors of those entities will be paid from their assets before GWG Life would have any claims to those assets.

On May 31, 2019, GWG Life agreed to loan $65.0 million to six common law trusts established as part of alternative asset financings extended by a subsidiary of Beneficient. An initial advance in the principal amount of $50.0 million was funded on June 3, 2019 and the second advance of $15.0 million was made on November 22, 2019. These loans are contractually subordinated to the secured obligations of Beneficient and its affiliates outstanding to HCLP Nominees, L.L.C. and Beneficient Holdings, Inc.

Beneficient may be unable to operate its business successfully, which would negatively impact its ability to generate distributable cash flow and increase the value of Ben LP’s common units.

Beneficient plans to provide mid-to-high net worth individuals (i.e., individuals having a net worth of between $5 million and $30 million) with trust services and related liquidity products (collectively, “trust services and liquidity products”) for illiquid investment funds and other alternative assets those individuals may own, and a variety of other financial services, including custody and clearing of alternative assets, fund and trust administration, retirement funds and insurance services for covering risks attendant to owning or managing alternative assets. The success of the Beneficient Transactions from our perspective will depend largely on Beneficient’s ability to operate its business successfully, generate distributable cash flow, and increase the value of Ben LP’s common units (of which we are a significant owner) and our Preferred Series A Subclass 1 Unit Account of BCH. If Beneficient is unable to do so, such inability will negatively impact our operations and may result in an impairment of goodwill. Furthermore, to date, Ben LP’s originations of liquidity products have been transacted with a limited number of family offices, fund-of-funds and institutions. These types of clients, specifically fund-of-funds and institutions, may not represent the target market of Ben’s liquidity products in the future.

We may be unable to capitalize on the anticipated benefits of the Beneficient Transactions.

We entered into the Beneficient Transactions anticipating that such transactions would provide significant financial and strategic benefits, including, significantly increasing our common equity, significantly reducing our leverage ratio (as measured by total assets divided by total equity), the introduction of new opportunities to lower our cost of funds (an important driver of stockholder value), diversifying our revenue and cash flow sources resulting in more consistent earnings, and increasing our public float and the liquidity in our common stock, thereby increasing our common stockholder base and potentially attracting additional equity analyst coverage (both of which are important factors in maximizing share valuation). In addition, we believe that the Beneficient Transactions have created opportunities for us and Beneficient to pursue strategies that are mutually advantageous, including the opportunity to leverage our knowledge, experience and significant infrastructure in, and the marketing, sales and servicing of, the independent broker dealer market and the related market for illiquid alternative investments — a prime target market for the origination of Beneficient’s suite of liquidity products. We believe that the expansion of our strategic relationship with Beneficient has created a unified platform uniquely positioned to provide an expanded suite of products, services and resources for investors and the financial professionals who assist them. We intend to collaborate extensively with Beneficient and capitalize on our respective capabilities, relationships and services. Specifically, the Purchase and Contribution Agreement contemplates that we will seek to enter into an agreement with Beneficient pursuant to which we would offer and distribute (through a FINRA registered managing broker-dealer) Beneficient’s liquidity products and services. There is no assurance that we will realize the anticipated benefits from the Beneficient Transactions. Failure to realize these benefits will likely negatively impact the results of our operations, our business prospects, the ultimate success of our strategic relationship and the value of our common stock.

We have and will continue to invest in Beneficient, and Beneficient’s financial performance and results of operations will have a direct impact on our financial performance.

As a result of the Investment Agreement and the Exchange Agreement (as described above), GWG was granted the authority to appoint a majority of the Board of Directors of the general partner of Beneficient. As a result, effective as of December 31, 2019, GWG controls Beneficient and consolidates Beneficient for financial statement reporting purposes. As such, our basis of accounting for and the presentation of our investment in Beneficient is materially different from that described in previous audited and unaudited financial statements. Because Beneficient will represent a significant percentage of our consolidated assets, the impact on our financial statements of Beneficient’s financial performance may be material.

Beneficient has experienced significant delays in obtaining trust company charters and may be ultimately unable to do so, which outcome would hinder Beneficient’s ability to successfully pursue its current business plan and could adversely affect the value of Ben LP’s common units.

Beneficient has applied for trust charters from the Texas Department of Banking and intends to carry on much of its business through two trust company subsidiaries. While it anticipates receiving the trust charters in the near future, there have been significant delays and there can be no assurance that Beneficient will ultimately be successful in obtaining trust company charters. Because Beneficient’s current business plans are based on obtaining regulatory approval to operate as regulated trust companies, a failure to do so may materially and adversely impact its financial performance and prospects, which would likely negatively impact our results of operations and may result in impairment of goodwill.

Ben LP’s partnership agreement eliminates fiduciary duties that might otherwise be owed to us under Delaware law.

Ben LP’s business and affairs are managed by Beneficient Management. Ben LP’s partnership agreement eliminates the fiduciary duties that might otherwise be owed by Beneficient Management under Delaware law and replaces them with the duties expressly set forth in such agreement. Ben LP’s partnership agreement provides that, when the general partner is permitted or required to make a decision in its “discretion” or pursuant to a provision not subject to an express standard of “good faith,” in making such decision, the general partner has no duty to give any consideration to any interest of or factors affecting Beneficient or any other person. If a decision under Ben LP’s partnership agreement is subject to an express standard of “good faith,” such decision will not constitute a breach of the agreement if the decision is approved by (i) a majority of the members of the conflicts committee of the board of directors of the general partner of Beneficient, (ii) holders of a majority of the voting power of the Ben LP’s common units entitled to vote (excluding voting common units owned by the general partner and its affiliates), or (iii) the general partner acting without a subjective belief that such decision was adverse to the interests of Ben LP. Potential conflicts of interest may arise among the general partner and its affiliates, on the one hand, and Beneficient, on the other hand, and the general partner may be able to favor its own interest to the detriment of Beneficient and the holders of the common units of Ben LP.

Beneficient has significant debt obligations outstanding to us and has the ability to incur additional indebtedness.

Subject to certain restrictions within our current Commercial Loan Agreement with Beneficient, Beneficient is permitted to incur additional indebtedness ranking senior to the Commercial Loan. If Beneficient is unable to execute its business plans, it may materially and adversely impact Beneficient’s ability to repay its indebtedness, including indebtedness under the Commercial Loan Agreement in accordance with its terms. As a significant holder of Beneficient indebtedness, a payment default under any additional indebtedness Beneficient may incur, or under the Commercial Loan Agreement, would likely have a corresponding negative impact on the value of our assets (including the value of our Ben LP common units) and the price of our common stock.

Our percentage ownership in Ben LP may be diluted significantly.

On December 31, 2019, GWG was granted the authority to appoint a majority of the board of directors of the general partner of Ben LP (as contemplated by the Investment and Exchange Agreements). As such, GWG controls Beneficient and consolidates Beneficient for financial statement reporting purposes. It is possible that GWG and Beneficient will redeem all outstanding common units of Ben LP not owned by GWG such that GWG becomes the sole owner of such common units. In this scenario, “dilution” refers to the potentially significant economic rights and privileges of the limited partner interests (described below) that are senior or preferred to our common interests that could result in substantial economic dilution to GWG.

Upon completion of the Beneficient Transactions, we owned approximately 95.5% of the issued and outstanding common units in Ben LP. This percentage ownership does not take into account (i) limited partner interests that may be issued upon the conversion of outstanding securities issued by Beneficient or its affiliates, or (ii) additional limited partner interests that may be issued after the closing of the Beneficient Transactions. Taking these issuances into account, our ownership interest in common units of Ben LP could be reduced significantly below 50%. In addition, and importantly, Beneficient Management has discretion to cause Ben LP to issue additional limited partner interests from time to time, and Ben LP’s partnership agreement contains no meaningful restrictions on this authority. Moreover, the Beneficient organizational structure permits the future issuance of additional securities that can, upon certain circumstances or at the discretion of their holders, be converted into additional limited partner interests in Ben LP. Should any of these actions be taken, our percentage ownership in Ben LP will be diluted.

The resale of our common stock issued in the Exchange Transaction could put downward pressure on the market price of our common stock and result in a destabilized trading market for our common stock.

Upon the Final Closing, we issued 27,013,516 shares of our common stock, which in the aggregate represented approximately 82% of our outstanding common stock as of December 31, 2019. The shares issued in the Exchange Transaction are subject to resale restrictions applicable to “restricted securities” under applicable federal securities laws. The Master Exchange Agreement and related ancillary agreements require that we register the resale of the shares of common stock issued in the Final Closing to the Seller Trusts to the extent permitted by applicable SEC rules and regulations. Upon the effectiveness of any such registration, or the lapse of applicable resale restrictions under applicable securities laws, the shares of our common stock issued in the Exchange Transaction will be available for resale in the public equity markets. We cannot predict the effect, if any, that future sales of these shares or the availability of these shares for future sale could have on the market price of our common stock.

The Seller Trusts, collectively, own a substantial majority of our outstanding common stock, enabling them to exert significant influence over our operations, which may affect the trading price of our common stock.

According to their most recent Schedule 13D/A filing, the Seller Trusts own approximately 78.4% of our outstanding common stock. The Seller Trusts are a group of individual common law trusts that received shares of our common stock in the Exchange Transaction. The trustee of each of the Seller Trusts is Delaware Trust Company. The trust advisors of each trust are two individuals unrelated to each other, Murray T. Holland (our President and Chief Executive Officer) and James E. Turvey, who have sole decision-making authority with respect to each Seller Trust. The beneficiary of each of the Seller Trusts is MHT Financial, LLC. The current members of MHT Financial, LLC include Murray T. Holland (our President and Chief Executive Officer) and an entity owned by Shawn T. Terry and Mike McGill. The Seller Trusts are entitled to full voting rights with respect to the shares of Common Stock they own. Because the Seller Trusts, collectively, own a substantial majority of our outstanding voting securities, the Seller Trusts are entitled to cast a majority of the votes on all matters requiring stockholder votes, including: the election of directors; mergers, consolidations, acquisitions and other strategic transactions; the sale of all or substantially all of our assets and other decisions affecting our capital structure; amendments to our Certificate of Incorporation or our bylaws; and our winding up and dissolution. This effectively transferred voting control over the Company to the Seller Trusts from Messrs. Jon and Steven Sabes, who held a majority of our outstanding common stock not held by the Seller Trusts prior to the closing of the Purchase and Contribution Transaction. This concentrated ownership enables the Seller Trusts to exert significant influence over all of our corporate activities, including the election of directors to our Board of Directors, and may delay, deter or prevent acts that would be favored by our other stockholders. The interests of the Seller Trusts may not always coincide with our interests or the interests of our other stockholders. This concentration of ownership may also have the effect of delaying, preventing or deterring a change in control of the Company. Also, the Seller Trusts may seek to cause us to take courses of action that, in their judgments, could enhance their investments in us, but which might involve risks to our other stockholders or adversely affect us or our other stockholders. As a result, the market price of our shares could decline or stockholders might not receive a premium over the then-current market price of our shares upon a change in control. In addition, this continued concentration of share ownership, albeit in new hands, may adversely affect the trading price of our shares because prospective investors may perceive disadvantages in owning shares in a company with such significant stockholders.

We are currently relying on the “controlled company” exemption under Nasdaq Stock Market Listing Rules, pursuant to which “controlled companies” are exempt from certain corporate governance requirements otherwise applicable under Nasdaq Stock Market Listing Rules.

The Nasdaq Stock Market Listing Rules exempt “controlled companies,” or companies of which more than 50% of the voting power is held by an individual, a group or another company, from certain corporate governance requirements, including those requirements that:

The Seller Trusts that acquired our shares in the Beneficient Transactions own approximately 78.4% of our common stock and are considered a group for purposes of the Nasdaq controlled company listing rule, based on the most recent Schedule 13D/A filed by the Seller Trusts and the trust advisors with the SEC. As a result, we are currently a “controlled company” and are relying on the controlled company exemption for certain of the above requirements, including those related to the determination or recommendation of officer compensation. Accordingly, should the interests of the Seller Trusts differ from those of other stockholders, the other stockholders do not have the same protections generally as stockholders of other Nasdaq-listed companies with respect to corporate governance for so long as we rely on the controlled company exemption from the specified corporate governance requirements. Our status as a controlled company could make our common stock less attractive to some investors or otherwise harm our stock price.

An inability to obtain accurate and timely financial information from Beneficient may prevent us from complying with reporting obligations under federal securities law and compromise our ability to finance our operations through the public equity or debt markets.

On December 31, 2019, Beneficient became a consolidated subsidiary of GWG Holdings. Until we can fully integrate our accounting and financial reporting systems with Beneficient, we will continue to be heavily reliant on Beneficient to provide us with accurate and timely financial reporting that will allow us to timely prepare and file our consolidated financial statements in accordance with GAAP and in compliance with SEC regulations and Nasdaq listing rules. Although we plan to integrate our accounting and financial reporting systems with Beneficient, this integration is not expected to be complete until the second half of 2020.

Beneficient’s management and auditors identified several material weaknesses in Beneficient’s internal controls as of December 31, 2018 relating to various Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission components including control environment, risk assessment, monitoring activities and control activities. More specifically, material weaknesses were identified relating to, among other matters, insufficient accounting resources to properly capture and accurately record all material transactions; insufficient controls surrounding certain key valuation models and surrounding data inputs into such key valuation models; and ineffective controls over the period end financial reporting process. Beneficient has implemented remedial measures and will perform testing over the operating effectiveness of these controls in mid-2020. While there can be no assurance that the operating effectiveness efforts will be completed without further remedial efforts, Beneficient believes that the remedial efforts put in place address the material weaknesses noted in the 2018 internal control findings. Until the integration of our accounting and financial reporting systems with Beneficient is complete, if Beneficient is unable to maintain its effective internal control over financial reporting, the financial information we receive from Beneficient necessary to produce our consolidated financial statements may not be prepared in sufficient time to allow for us to produce our consolidated financial statements within required time periods.

If we are unable to obtain accurate and timely financial information from Beneficient and are unable to timely prepare and file our financial statements as a result, we may fail to comply with reporting obligations under federal securities law, become subject to delisting from the Nasdaq Stock Market, and may be unable to utilize the public debt or equity markets to finance our operations. Because we have been heavily reliant on the public offer and sale of L Bonds, discontinuing our L Bond offers would have a material adverse impact on our ability to expand our alternative asset portfolio, service our existing portfolio of life insurance policies, satisfy payment requirements under our debt obligations, including our L Bonds and Seller Trust L Bonds, and otherwise fund our operations. In addition, our failure to deliver financial information and comply with disclosure requirements under applicable SEC regulations may result in covenant violations under our second amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation and hurt our reputation and credibility with our stockholders and our debt holders.

We were unable, without unreasonable effort and expense, to complete our financial statements as of and for the year ended December 31, 2018 within the time period required for us to timely file our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2018, which was due on or prior to April 1, 2019. Likewise, we were unable to timely file our Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q for the quarters ended March 31, 2019 and June 30, 2019.

Our inability to timely file these Reports was due, in part, to a delay in our obtaining financial information from Beneficient. In each of these instances, and in accordance with standard procedures related to the delayed filing of periodic reports with the SEC, we received a letter from Nasdaq stating that we were not in compliance with our filing requirements for continued listing under Nasdaq Listing Rule 5250(c)(1). We ultimately regained compliance with Nasdaq’s filing requirements within the grace periods provided by Nasdaq under its Marketplace Rules and delisting procedures. However, if we fail to maintain compliance in the future, we may be delisted, in which case our business and the value of our securities would likely be materially and adversely impacted. Our inability to timely file these reports also resulted in a temporary suspension of the offering of our L Bonds.

A failure to establish and maintain effective internal controls over financial reporting could adversely affect our financial results.

Both GWG Holdings and Beneficient reported material weaknesses as part of their respective 2018 annual audits. GWG Holdings’ material weaknesses included ineffective information and communication controls with external parties due to delays in the financial statement close and reporting process as evidenced by the untimely filing of the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2018, and of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2019. Also, management of GWG Holdings did not have sufficient accounting resources and personnel to effectively design and execute process level controls around certain complex or non-recurring transactions to ensure proper application of U.S. GAAP. Beneficient’s material weaknesses included, among other matters, insufficient accounting resources to properly capture and accurately record all material transactions; insufficient controls surrounding certain key valuation models and surrounding data inputs into such key valuation models; and ineffective controls over the period end financial reporting process.

GWG is a smaller reporting company for SEC reporting purposes and has historically had limited accounting and financial reporting resources. Prior to the December 31, 2019 consolidation with GWG, Beneficient was not subject to the reporting obligations required under the Sarbanes-Oxley (“SOX”) Act of 2002. The consolidation of Beneficient and GWG will result in increased accounting, reporting and internal controls complexity as the companies integrate systems and processes. Furthermore, Beneficient, as a consolidated subsidiary of GWG, is required to be SOX compliant as of December 31, 2020. While both GWG and Beneficient have implemented remedial measures to address their respective 2018 internal control findings, and the companies have plans to fully integrate information systems and processes and to share accounting and financial reporting resources, there is no certainty that GWG and Beneficient will be able to maintain effective internal controls over financial reporting.

Effective internal controls are necessary for GWG and Beneficient to provide reliable financial reports, prevent fraud and operate successfully. If either GWG or Beneficient, or both, cannot provide reliable financial reports or prevent fraud, the Company’s ability to accurately report its financial results could be adversely affected and its reputation and operating results would be harmed. GWG and Beneficient cannot be certain that their efforts to further establish and maintain internal controls over financial reporting will be successful. Any failure to further develop, as necessary, or to maintain effective internal controls could harm the Company’s operating results or cause the Company to fail to meet its reporting obligations. See the risk factor above “An inability to obtain accurate and timely financial information from Beneficient may prevent us from complying with reporting obligations under federal securities law . . . .” Ineffective internal controls could also cause investors to lose confidence in the Company’s reported financial information.

Our remedies for an “Event of Default” under our Commercial Loan Agreement with Ben LP are limited.

As part of the Exchange Transaction, GWG Life, as lender, and Ben LP, as borrower, entered into the Commercial Loan Agreement under which $197.4 million in principal and interest was outstanding at December 31, 2019. The principal amount under the Commercial Loan Agreement is due on August 9, 2023; provided that (a) in the event Ben LP completes at least one public offering of its common units raising at least $50 million, which on its own or together with any other public offering of Ben LP’s common units results in Ben LP raising at least $100 million, then the maturity date will be extended to August 9, 2028; and (b) in the event that Ben LP (i) completes at least one public offering of its common units raising at least $50 million which on its own or together with any other public offering of Ben LP’s common units results in Ben LP raising at least $100 million and (ii) at least 75% of Beneficient Holding’s total outstanding NPC-B limited partnership interests have been converted to shares of Ben LP’s common units, then the maturity date will be extended to August 9, 2033.

Ben LP’s obligations under the Commercial Loan Agreement are unsecured, and repayment of the balance under the Commercial Loan Agreement is subordinated in right of payment to any of Beneficient’s senior debt and to obligations that may arise in connection with its NPC-B Unit limited partnership interests. As a result, our remedies upon a default by Ben LP under the Commercial Loan Agreement that constitutes an “Event of Default” (as defined in the Commercial Loan Agreement) are limited to accelerating the loan and commencing a lawsuit for collection. We would not have the right to force Ben LP into bankruptcy or, since the Commercial Loan is unsecured, foreclose on any collateral until a judgment is secured. In addition, under the subordination provisions of the Commercial Loan Agreement, we would have the right to receive proceeds of any sale of Ben LP assets or any liquidation proceeding only after Beneficient’s senior lender is paid in full.

Our evolving operating priorities, allocation of capital and overall strategic direction may prove to be unsuccessful.

The consummation of the Purchase and Contribution Transaction resulted in the reconstitution of our board of directors and management team. Such reconstitution has altered and will likely continue to alter our operating priorities, allocation of capital and overall strategic direction from those in place prior to the consummation of the Purchase and Contribution Transaction. There is no assurance that our operating priorities, allocation of capital and overall strategic direction will ultimately prove to be successful.

The Purchase and Contribution Agreement provides that GWG and Beneficient will use commercially reasonable efforts to enter into a joint venture agreement, which may significantly alter the existing strategic relationship between GWG and Beneficient.

The Purchase and Contribution Agreement provides that GWG and Beneficient will use commercially reasonable efforts to enter into a joint venture agreement. The terms of that agreement have not been determined and they may significantly alter the existing strategic relationship between GWG and Beneficient, including providing for further integration of our respective businesses and establishing additional or alternative financing arrangements. The terms of the joint venture agreement are subject to approval of the Board of Directors of GWG and the Board of Directors of Beneficient Management and subject to the exercise of their respective fiduciary duties. The Board of Directors of GWG has established a special committee of independent and disinterested directors to review and, if deemed appropriate, approve proposed transactions with or involving Beneficient.

Risks Related to Beneficient’s operations:

In addition to the risks set forth above related to our controlling financial interest in Beneficient generally, the risk factors set forth below relate specifically to Beneficient’s business operations. Because Ben LP is now our consolidated subsidiary as of December 31, 2019, the impact on our financial results of Beneficient’s current business operations will be material to the overall results of our business operations. Therefore, you should also consider carefully the following risk factors in evaluating us and our business.

Beneficient does not have any operating history for its new business.

Beneficient’s management has a long track record of successfully organizing and operating businesses, including Beneficient’s founder who organized Beneficient’s predecessor in 2003, but Beneficient’s business plan represents a new phase in its development and Beneficient does not have significant operating history under its current business plan. Additionally, Beneficient’s proposed trust company subsidiaries have little operating history. In general, companies that seek to implement these kinds of business plans present substantial business and financial risks and uncertainties.

Beneficient’s success depends on certain key executives and the ability to attract, retain, and develop new professionals.

Beneficient’s success depends in large part upon the skills, experience, personal reputations and network of business contacts of certain key executives. These individuals’ reputations, business relationships and expertise are critical elements in the successful implementation of Beneficient’s business strategy. Accordingly, the loss of any of the key executives could materially harm Beneficient’s business and the value of Beneficient.

Beneficient’s key executives are directly responsible for setting Beneficient’s strategic direction, operating Beneficient’s business, maintaining and expanding business and other critical relationships, clients and business partners and identifying expansion opportunities. Should Beneficient lose one of these key executives, it may have to search externally for a qualified replacement, which search may be prolonged, and Beneficient cannot provide assurance that it will be able to hire such a replacement on a timely basis or at all.

Competition for qualified personnel in the financial services industry is intense. Thus, the loss of any of these key personnel, by resignation, termination, death or disability, or Beneficient’s inability to recruit and retain qualified replacements, could cause disruption in Beneficient’s business and could prevent Beneficient from fully implementing Beneficient’s business strategy, which could materially and adversely affect Beneficient’s business, growth and profitability.

Beneficient may not be able to grow, effectively manage its growth, or achieve profitability.

A principal focus of Beneficient’s strategy is to expand the number of Beneficient’s product offerings and grow Beneficient’s trust administration products and services. Beneficient’s future growth depends upon a number of factors, many of which are beyond Beneficient’s ability to control. These factors include Beneficient’s ability to:

A deficiency in any of these factors could adversely affect Beneficient’s ability to achieve or manage growth or profitability.

Beneficient’s current business plan may be significantly compromised if it is unable to obtain its trust company charters.

Beneficient’s proposed trust company subsidiaries may not commence trust company operations until those subsidiaries receive the necessary trust charters from the Texas Department of Banking. Beneficient filed limited trust association charter applications for its proposed trust company subsidiaries with the Texas Department of Banking in September of 2018 and submitted revised charter applications on March 6, 2020. Approval of those applications is not assured. Even if the charter applications are approved, Beneficient expects that the approvals will be subject to certain conditions including, among others, that the proposed trust company subsidiaries satisfy certain minimum restricted capital requirements. There is no assurance that Beneficient will be able to satisfy all the conditions imposed by the Texas Department of Banking in connection with its approvals. In addition, such conditions could delay the anticipated time for commencement of trust operations.

If Beneficient is ultimately unable to obtain satisfactory limited trust association charters, Beneficient’s ability to implement its current business plan may be significantly compromised. Without the trust company charters, federal regulations would significantly limit the amount of alternative asset liquidity financings (“Liquidity Transactions”) Beneficient could undertake.

Beneficient’s business faces substantial competition from a variety of financial solution companies and other liquidity providers.

Beneficient faces substantial competition in all areas of its operations from a variety of competitors, many of which are larger, have an established track record and reputation, and may have more financial resources. Beneficient’s business competes with other providers of financial and trust administration such as bank holding companies, commercial and savings banks, savings and loan associations, credit unions, asset managers and their private equity affiliates, insurance companies and a growing list of other local, regional and national institutions which offer financial and trust administration services. Beneficient’s business also competes with other providers of liquidity for alternative assets, which may hinder Beneficient’s ability to offer Liquidity Transactions to the market. If Beneficient is unable to compete effectively, Beneficient will lose market share and income generated from trust administration services and other financial products will decline.

Beneficient’s liquidity, profitability and business may be adversely affected by an inability to access, or ability to access only on unfavorable terms, the capital markets.

Liquidity is essential to Beneficient’s business and Beneficient must continue to grow its capital to maintain liquidity. Future cash flows from Beneficient’s financing arrangements and proceeds from borrowings may not be sufficient for Beneficient to satisfy Beneficient’s working capital and liquidity needs. To the extent that working capital is insufficient to fund future operating costs, Beneficient may need to raise additional funds through equity or debt financings, including investments in the form of equity investments and debt advances from GWG, reduce expenses, or curtail its growth. Many factors will affect Beneficient’s capital needs and their amount and timing, including Beneficient’s growth and profitability, as well as market disruptions and other unforeseeable developments.

Beneficient’s liquidity may be impaired by an inability to access, or ability to access only on unfavorable terms, secured and/or unsecured debt markets or equity markets, including access to capital markets indirectly through GWG, an inability to access funds from its subsidiaries or otherwise allocate liquidity optimally, an inability to sell assets or redeem its interests in the Ben Collateral, or unforeseen outflows of cash or collateral. This situation may arise due to circumstances that Beneficient may be unable to control, such as a general market disruption or an operational problem that affects third parties or Beneficient, a disruption of the financial markets or negative views about the financial services industry generally, including concerns regarding fiscal matters in the U.S. and other geographic areas.

In addition, Beneficient’s ability to raise funding could be impaired if investors or lenders develop a negative perception of Beneficient’s long-term or short-term financial prospects. An increase in debt of Beneficient and/or its subsidiaries may increase Beneficient’s leverage and reduce its interest coverage. To the extent that Beneficient or its subsidiaries raise additional capital through the future sale of equity or debt, the ownership interest of our equity holders may be diluted.

If Beneficient is unable to raise funding using the methods described above, Beneficient would likely need to consider financing or liquidating assets to meet maturing liabilities. Beneficient may be unable to sell some of its assets or Beneficient may have to sell assets at a discount to market value, either of which could adversely affect Beneficient’s results of operations, cash flows and financial condition.

If Beneficient is unable to repay or refinance its existing credit facilities, then Beneficient will be required to either liquidate assets to repay these loans or to raise additional capital through the sale of equity.

Beneficient is subject to repayment risk in connection with its Liquidity Transactions.

Beneficient’s Liquidity Transactions are structured as loans from Beneficient’s subsidiary to unaffiliated trusts that acquire ownership interests in the alternative assets comprising the collateral supporting Beneficient’s Liquidity Transactions (the “Ben Collateral”). Loans extended by Beneficient do not require repayment prior to maturity and are subject to a risk of default. Unaffiliated trusts may default on a loan from Beneficient even if the cash flow from alternative assets in the Ben Collateral supporting such a loan is sufficient to otherwise repay interest and principal on the loan.

A determination that Beneficient is an unregistered investment company would have serious adverse consequences.

A determination that Beneficient or any of the proposed trust company subsidiaries is an unregistered investment company under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “1940 Act”) would have serious adverse consequences. Beneficient does not believe it could operate its business effectively as a registered investment company. As a result, Beneficient would have to change its operations so as not to be an investment company. Changes could include refraining from raising capital, changing the types of products and services that Beneficient provides, and changing the nature of the Ben Collateral. Furthermore, if at any time it were established that Beneficient or any of the proposed trust company subsidiaries had been operating as an investment company in violation of the registration requirements of the 1940 Act, there would be a risk, among other material adverse consequences, that such company: (i) could become subject to SEC enforcement and investigation, monetary penalties or injunctive relief, or both, (ii) would be unable to enforce contracts with third parties or that third parties could seek to obtain rescission of transactions with such company undertaken during the period in which it was established that such company was an unregistered investment company, and (iii) would face adverse action from the Texas Department of Banking, either in relation to its pending application for trust company charters, or if such charters are granted, in connection with such charters. Such developments would be likely to have material and adverse consequences for Beneficient. In addition, if Beneficient were treated as an investment company, it would not be eligible to be taxed as a partnership and instead would be taxable as a corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes, which could result in a material and adverse impact on the returns of holders of Ben LP common units. Upon completion of the Beneficient Transactions, GWG Holdings owned approximately 95.5% of Ben LP common units.

Beneficient’s results of operations may fluctuate from period to period.

Beneficient expects that the results of its operations may vary significantly from period to period for a variety of reasons, many of which are outside of Beneficient’s control and difficult to predict, including demand for Beneficient’s liquidity products and trust administration services, performance of the loans against alternative assets comprising the Ben Collateral and concentration of risk in the loan portfolios. Because Beneficient’s results of operations may vary significantly from quarter to quarter, the results of any one period should not be relied upon as an indication of future performance. Many but not all of the factors that may cause Beneficient’s results of operations to fluctuate are presented in these risk factors.

Beneficient may incur significant losses as a result of ineffective risk management processes and strategies.

Beneficient seeks to monitor and control its risk exposure by developing an effective risk and control framework, which encompasses a variety of separate but complementary financial, credit, operational, compliance, and legal reporting systems; internal controls; management review processes; and other mechanisms. While Beneficient employs and will continue to develop and deploy a broad and diversified set of risk monitoring and risk mitigation techniques, those techniques and the judgments that accompany their application may not be effective and may not anticipate every risk event in all market environments or the specific nature of the impact and timing of such outcomes.

Beneficient’s operations, products and services may be negatively impacted by changes in economic and market conditions.

Beneficient’s operations, products and services may be negatively impacted by changes in general economic and market conditions because the performance of Beneficient’s liquidity products and trust administration services is directly affected by conditions in the financial and securities markets. The financial markets and businesses operating in the securities industry are highly volatile (meaning that performance results can vary greatly from period to period) and are directly affected by, among other factors, domestic and foreign economic conditions, geopolitics and general trends in business and finance, all of which are beyond Beneficient’s control. Declines in the financial markets or a lack of sustained growth may result in a corresponding decline in Beneficient’s performance and may adversely affect the assets comprising the Ben Collateral and the loans against the assets comprising the Ben Collateral.

Fluctuations in interest rates and foreign exchange rates may negatively impact the business of Beneficient.

Fluctuations in interest rates and foreign exchange rates may negatively impact the business of Beneficient. These rates are highly sensitive to many factors beyond Beneficient’s control, including general economic conditions, both domestic and foreign, and the monetary and fiscal policies of various governmental and regulatory authorities. Beneficient’s assets and liabilities can be affected significantly by changes in market interest rates. As a result, Beneficient may adopt asset and liability management policies to minimize the potential adverse effects of changes in interest rates and foreign exchange rates, primarily by altering the mix and maturity of Liquidity Transactions, interests in the Ben Collateral, funding sources, and derivatives. However, even with these policies in place, a change in interest rates and foreign exchange rates can impact Beneficient’s financial condition. Beneficient’s ability to successfully manage its interest rate and foreign exchange rate risks is subject to factors beyond its control.

Beneficient relies on other companies to provide key components of Beneficient’s business infrastructure.

Third-party vendors provide and are expected to continue to provide key components of Beneficient’s business infrastructure. Any problems caused by these third parties, including as a result of their not providing Beneficient their services for any reason or their performing their services poorly, could adversely affect Beneficient’s ability to deliver products and services to Beneficient’s clients, impair Beneficient’s ability to conduct its business efficiently and effectively, and/or result in regulatory action, financial loss, litigation, and loss of reputation. Replacing these third-party vendors could also entail significant delay and expense.

Beneficient may only be able to offer a limited number of products and solutions.

Beneficient may only be able to offer a limited number of products and solutions due to regulatory, capital or other restrictions. Accordingly, the prospects for Beneficient’s success may be solely dependent upon the performance of a single product or solution, or dependent upon the development or market acceptance of a single or limited number of products or solutions. A lack of diversification in its offerings may make Beneficient susceptible to numerous economic, competitive and regulatory conditions, any or all of which may have a substantial adverse impact upon Beneficient’s ability to operate its business and/or grow its business in the future. Further, Beneficient would not be able to diversify its operations or benefit from the possible spreading of risks or offsetting of losses that offering a comprehensive suite of solutions could provide.

Beneficient depends on the accuracy and completeness of information from and about clients.

In deciding whether to enter into Liquidity Transactions with clients, Beneficient may rely on information furnished to it by or on behalf of clients, including financial statements and other financial information. Beneficient also may rely on representations of clients as to the accuracy and completeness of that information and, with respect to financial statements, on reports of independent auditors. For example, in connection with Liquidity Transactions, Beneficient may rely on information provided by a client such as net asset value of an underlying alternative asset. Beneficient also relies, and will continue to rely, on client representations and certifications, or other audit or accountants’ reports, with respect to the business and financial condition of the assets underlying the Liquidity Transaction. Reliance on clients may not reveal or highlight all relevant facts (including bribery, fraud or other illegal activities) or risks that are necessary or helpful in evaluating such transaction opportunity. Instances of bribery, fraud, accounting irregularities and other improper, illegal or corrupt practices can be difficult to detect and may be more widespread in certain jurisdictions. Beneficient’s financial condition, results of operations, financial reporting and reputation could be negatively affected if Beneficient relies on materially misleading, false, inaccurate or fraudulent information.

Beneficient will be subject to comprehensive governmental regulation and supervision.

Beneficient and its subsidiaries operate in a highly regulated environment and will be subject to supervision and regulation by several governmental agencies. Beneficient and its subsidiaries are subject to changes in federal and state laws, regulations, governmental policies, tax laws and accounting principles. As Beneficient’s business grows, Beneficient and its subsidiaries expect to become subject to additional regulatory agencies’ regulation. Changes in regulations or the regulatory environment could adversely affect Beneficient’s business.

Beneficient may incur fines, penalties and other negative consequences from regulatory violations.

Beneficient may fail to comply with applicable laws and regulations and be held accountable for such violations, even if such violations are inadvertent. Some legal/regulatory frameworks provide for the imposition of fines or penalties for noncompliance even though the noncompliance was inadvertent or unintentional and even though there were systems and procedures designed to ensure compliance in place at the time. For example, Beneficient is subject to regulations issued by the Office of Foreign Assets Control, or “OFAC,” that prohibit financial institutions from participating in the transfer of property belonging to the governments of certain foreign countries and designated nationals of those countries. OFAC may impose penalties for inadvertent or unintentional violations even if reasonable processes are in place to prevent the violations. There may be other negative consequences resulting from a finding of noncompliance, including restrictions on certain activities.

Beneficient faces a risk of noncompliance with and enforcement actions under the Bank Secrecy Act and other anti-money laundering statutes and regulations.

The Bank Secrecy Act, the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001, and other laws and regulations require financial institutions, among other duties, to institute and maintain an effective anti-money laundering program and file suspicious activity and currency transaction reports as appropriate. The federal Financial Crimes Enforcement Network is authorized to impose significant civil money penalties for violations of those requirements and has recently engaged in coordinated enforcement efforts with the individual federal banking regulators, as well as the U.S. Department of Justice, Drug Enforcement Administration, and Internal Revenue Service (the “IRS”). Beneficient is also subject to increased scrutiny of compliance with the rules enforced by the OFAC and compliance with the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. If Beneficient’s policies, procedures and systems are deemed deficient, Beneficient will be subject to liability, including fines and regulatory actions, which may include restrictions on Beneficient’s ability to make distributions to its unitholders and the necessity to obtain regulatory approvals to proceed with certain aspects of Beneficient’s business plan. Failure to maintain and implement adequate programs to combat money laundering and terrorist financing could also have serious reputational consequences for Beneficient. Any of these results could materially and adversely affect Beneficient’s business, financial condition and results of operations.

Difficult market conditions can cause investors to reduce or suspend their investments in alternative assets or their desire to liquidate alternative assets they hold, which could adversely affect Beneficient’s business.

During economic downturns, alternative asset owners may suffer from decreasing returns (including negative returns and loss of principal investment), liquidity pressure, increased volatility and difficulty maintaining targeted asset allocations, and investors may decrease or suspend making new fund investments during and after such periods. As the economy begins to recover from these periods, investors may elect to reduce their exposure to alternative investments, resulting in a smaller overall pool of potential clients in the industry and clients for Beneficient’s services and products in the future. In the event all or part of this analysis proves true, when trying to find new clients Beneficient will be competing for fewer available alternative assets to administer in an increasingly competitive environment, which could lead to terms less favorable to Beneficient as well as difficulty in reaching new clients. Such changes would adversely affect Beneficient’s revenues and profitability.

Beneficient is dependent on the continued success of the alternative asset industry.

Beneficient’s success depends, in part, on the continued success of alternative asset managers and the alternative asset industry that has enjoyed a prolonged period of expansion and profitability. Such expansion and profitability is subject to market conditions and other factors outside of Beneficient’s control (and the control of managers of alternative assets). There is no assurance that such expansion and profitability will continue. Beyond business and financial success, the alternative asset industry may also become subject to greater governmental regulation and investigation, which could have a negative effect on Beneficient.

A failure of Beneficient to appropriately identify and address potential conflicts of interest could adversely affect Beneficient’s business.

Beneficient has developed robust procedures and controls designed to identify and address conflicts of interest relevant to its business operations. However, appropriately identifying and dealing with conflicts of interest is complex and difficult, and Beneficient’s reputation could be damaged, and the willingness of clients to enter into transactions with Beneficient may be affected, if Beneficient fails, or appears to fail, to identify, disclose and deal appropriately with conflicts of interest. In addition, potential or perceived conflicts could give rise to litigation or regulatory enforcement actions.

A failure in Beneficient’s operational systems as well as human error or malfeasance, could impair Beneficient’s liquidity, disrupt Beneficient’s business, result in the disclosure of confidential information, damage Beneficient’s reputation, and cause losses.

Beneficient faces a variety of risks that are substantial and inherent in its business, including market, liquidity, credit, operational, legal, regulatory and reputational risks. The following are some of the more important factors that could affect Beneficient’s business.

Beneficient’s financial, accounting, data processing or other operational systems and facilities may fail to operate properly or become disabled as a result of events that are wholly or partially beyond Beneficient’s control. Beneficient must continuously update systems to support its operations and growth and to respond to changes in regulations and markets, and invest heavily in systemic controls and training to ensure that such transactions do not violate applicable rules and regulations or, due to errors in processing such transactions, adversely affect markets, Beneficient’s clients or Beneficient. Enhancements and updates to systems, as well as the requisite training, including in connection with the integration of new businesses, entail significant costs and create risks associated with implementing new systems and integrating them with existing ones.

The use of computing devices and phones is critical to the work done by Beneficient’s employees and the operation of Beneficient’s systems and business and those of Beneficient’s clients and its third-party service providers and vendors. Additionally, computing devices may be vulnerable to cyber-attacks or have other inherent weaknesses.

Notwithstanding the proliferation of technology and technology-based risk and control systems, Beneficient’s business ultimately relies on people as its greatest resource, and, from time-to-time, they may make mistakes or engage in violations of applicable policies, laws, rules or procedures that are not always identified immediately by Beneficient’s technological processes or by Beneficient’s controls and other procedures, which are intended to prevent and detect such errors or violations. These errors or violations can include calculation errors, mistakes in addressing emails, errors in software or model development or implementation, or simple errors in judgment, as well as intentional efforts to ignore or circumvent applicable policies, laws, rules or procedures. Human errors and malfeasance, even if promptly discovered and remediated, can result in material losses and liabilities for Beneficient.

Any cybersecurity-attack or other security breach of Beneficient’s technology systems, or those of third-party vendors Beneficient relies on, could subject Beneficient to significant liability and harm Beneficient’s business operations and reputation.

Cybersecurity attacks and security breaches of Beneficient’s technology systems, including those of Beneficient’s clients and third-party vendors, may subject Beneficient to liability and harm Beneficient’s business operations and overall reputation. Beneficient’s operations rely on the secure processing, storage and transmission of confidential and other information in its computer systems and networks. Threats to information technology systems associated with cybersecurity risks and cyber incidents continue to grow, and there have been a number of highly publicized cases involving financial services companies, consumer-based companies and other organizations reporting the unauthorized disclosure of client, customer or other confidential information in recent years. Beneficient is regularly the target of attempted cyber-attacks. Cybersecurity risks could disrupt Beneficient’s operations, negatively impact Beneficient’s ability to compete and result in injury to Beneficient’s reputation, downtime, loss of revenue, and increased costs to prevent, respond to or mitigate cybersecurity events. Although Beneficient has developed, and continues to invest in, systems and processes that are designed to detect and prevent security breaches and cyber-attacks, and while Beneficient expects to periodically test this security, Beneficient’s security measures, information technology and infrastructure may be vulnerable to attacks by hackers or breached due to employee error, malfeasance or other disruptions that could result in unauthorized disclosure or loss of sensitive information; damage to Beneficient’s reputation; the incurrence of additional expenses; additional regulatory scrutiny or penalties; or Beneficient’s exposure to civil or criminal litigation and possible financial liability, any of which could have a material adverse effect on Ben’s business, financial condition and results of operations.

Third parties upon whom Beneficient relies face similar threats, which could directly or indirectly impact Beneficient’s business and operations. The occurrence of a cybersecurity-incident or attack on Beneficient’s third-party vendors could have a material adverse effect on Beneficient’s reputation and on Beneficient’s business, financial condition and results of operations.

Transfer restrictions applicable to alternative assets may prevent Beneficient from being able to attract a sufficient number of clients to achieve Beneficient’s business goals.

Many alternative assets contain stringent transfer restrictions imposed by the issuing entity, which may prevent Beneficient from entering into Liquidity Transactions or providing trust administration services with respect to such assets. Such restrictions may result in Beneficient not being able to attract a sufficient number of clients or Liquidity Transactions and, as a result, its revenues and profitability could be adversely affected.

Beneficient’s failure to correctly identify mergers, acquisitions, divestitures or other strategic transactions could have a material adverse effect on its business, financial condition and results of operations.

Beneficient may seek to facilitate its growth through mergers, acquisitions or other strategic transactions. Mergers, acquisitions, and other strategic transactions involve inherent risks that could compromise the success of the combined business and dilute the holdings of Beneficient’s unitholders. If Beneficient is incorrect when assessing the value, strengths, weaknesses, liabilities and potential profitability of such transactions, or if Beneficient fails to adequately integrate the acquired businesses or individuals, the success of the combined business could be compromised. Business acquisitions are subject to the risks commonly associated with such transactions including, among others, potential exposure to unknown liabilities of acquired companies and to acquisition costs and expenses, the difficulty and expense of integrating the operations and personnel of the acquired companies, potential disruptions to the business of the combined company and potential diversion of management’s time and attention, the impairment of relationships with and the possible loss of key employees and clients as a result of changes in management, potential litigation or other legal risks, potential write-downs related to goodwill impairments in connection with acquisitions and dilution to the unitholders of the combined company if the acquisition is made for equity of the combined company. In addition, investment strategies, technologies or businesses of acquired companies may not be effectively assimilated into Beneficient’s business or may have a negative effect on the combined company’s revenues or earnings. The combined company may also incur significant expenses to complete acquisitions and support acquired investment strategies and businesses. Further, any such acquisitions may be funded with cash, debt or equity, which could dilute the holdings or limit the rights of Beneficient’s unitholders. Finally, Beneficient may not be successful in identifying attractive acquisition candidates or completing acquisitions on favorable terms.

Divestitures involve inherent risks that could compromise the success of Beneficient’s business. Risks related to divestitures can include difficulties in the separation of the divested business, loss of clients, retention or obligation to indemnify certain liabilities, the failure of counterparties to satisfy payment obligations, unfavorable market conditions that may impact any earnout or contingency payment due to Beneficient and unexpected difficulties in losing employees of the divested business.

There is no assurance that Beneficient will be successful in overcoming these or other risks encountered with mergers, acquisitions, divestitures and other strategic transactions. These risks may prevent Beneficient from realizing the expected benefits from mergers, acquisitions, divestitures and other strategic transactions and could result in the failure to realize the full economic value of a strategic transaction.

Beneficient faces risks associated with the ability of its information technology systems and its people and processes to support its operations and future growth effectively.

In order to serve Beneficient’s market effectively, Beneficient has developed, and is continually developing, a comprehensive array of products and services. In order to support these products and services and for Beneficient to operate effectively, Beneficient has developed, purchased and licensed information technology and other systems and processes. As Beneficient’s business grows, Beneficient expects to continue to invest in and enhance these systems, and its people and processes.

These investments and enhancements may affect Beneficient’s future profitability and overall effectiveness. From time to time, Beneficient may change, consolidate, replace, add or upgrade existing systems or processes, which if not implemented properly to allow for an effective transition, may have an adverse effect on Beneficient’s operations, including business interruptions, which may result in inefficiencies, revenue losses, client losses, exposure to fraudulent activities, regulatory enforcement actions, or damage to Beneficient’s reputation. Beneficient also outsources certain operational and other functions to consultants or other third parties. If Beneficient does not implement its systems effectively or if its outsourcing business partners do not perform their functions properly, there could be an adverse effect on Beneficient. There can be no assurance that Beneficient will be able to effectively maintain or improve its systems and processes, or utilize outsourced talent, to meet its business needs efficiently. Any failure of such could adversely affect Beneficient’s operations, financial condition, results of operations, future growth and reputation.

Beneficient faces risks from regulatory investigations and proceedings and from private actions brought against it.

From time to time, Beneficient may be named as a defendant or otherwise become involved in various legal proceedings, including class actions and other litigation or disputes with third parties. Future actions against Beneficient may result in judgments, settlements, fines, penalties or other results adverse to Beneficient, which could materially adversely affect Beneficient’s business, financial condition or results of operations, or cause serious reputational harm to Beneficient.

Beneficient’s businesses and operations are also subject to increasing regulatory oversight and scrutiny, which may lead to additional regulatory investigations or enforcement actions. These and other initiatives from federal and state officials may subject Beneficient to judgments, settlements, fines or penalties, or cause Beneficient to be required to restructure its operations and activities, all of which could lead to reputational issues, or higher operational costs, thereby reducing Beneficient’s profitability.

While Beneficient seeks to insure against potential risks, Beneficient may not be able to obtain insurance to cover certain risks, or obtain coverage on favorable terms, and the insurance that Beneficient has may be inadequate to cover certain civil or criminal proceedings or regulatory investigations and associated costs.

Beneficient may be impacted adversely by claims or litigation, including claims or litigation relating to its fiduciary responsibilities.

Beneficient’s business involves the risk that clients or others may sue Beneficient, claiming that Beneficient has failed to perform under a contract or otherwise failed to carry out a duty perceived to be owed to them. This risk would be heightened when Beneficient’s trust company subsidiaries begin serving as fiduciaries for their clients following the issuance of state trust company charters. Specifically, Beneficient’s trust company subsidiaries would be required to (i) adhere to the fiduciary standard of care required under the terms of the governing documents or applicable law, and (ii) properly discharge their fiduciary duties. If Beneficient fails to comply with these fiduciary obligations, it could incur significant costs and possibly liability, which could materially and adversely affect Beneficient’s business, financial condition or results of operations. Liability for breach of fiduciary duty may be difficult to assess or quantify and its existence and magnitude may remain unknown for a substantial period of time. Additionally, an alleged breach of fiduciary duty, regardless of the merits of such alleged breach, could significantly damage Beneficient’s reputation and cause it to incur legal and other costs. Claims made or actions brought against Beneficient, whether founded or unfounded, may result in injunctions, settlements, damages, fines or penalties, which could have a material adverse effect on Beneficient’s financial condition and results of operations, could adversely affect Beneficient’s ability to raise additional funding or attract new clients, and could require changes to Beneficient’s business. Even if Beneficient defends itself successfully, the cost of litigation is often substantial, and public reports regarding claims made against Beneficient may cause damage to its reputation among existing and prospective clients or negatively impact the confidence of counterparties, rating agencies, and equityholders, consequently affecting Beneficient’s earnings negatively.

A change in Beneficient’s tax treatment could adversely affect Beneficient.

Beneficient is subject to a variety of tax laws and tax regulations by national, regional and local governments. Beneficient, and most of its subsidiaries, are pass through entities that are generally not subject to taxation. Rather, Beneficient passes on the distributive share of income to its investors who bear the burden of any tax liability that may be generated by such income. These tax laws and regulations (including the applicable tax rates), and their interpretation and application, may change from time to time and those changes could have a material adverse effect on the results of operations or Beneficient’s financial position.

In addition, without the consent of Beneficient’s unitholders, Beneficient’s general partner may elect to convert Beneficient into a corporation or be taxed as a corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes if certain conditions have been met. Such a conversion could be a taxable event to Beneficient’s unitholders where gain or loss is recognized. In addition, a conversion would subject all of Beneficient’s future net income to a level of corporate tax, which may reduce the amount of cash available for distribution or reinvestment.

Beneficient’s business, profitability and liquidity may be adversely affected by deterioration in the credit quality of, or defaults by, third parties who owe Beneficient money, securities or other assets or whose securities or obligations Beneficient holds.

Beneficient is exposed to the risk that third parties that owe Beneficient money, securities or other assets will not perform their obligations. These parties may default on their obligations to Beneficient due to bankruptcy, lack of liquidity, operational failure or other reasons. A failure of a significant market participant, or even concerns about a default by such an institution, could lead to significant liquidity problems, losses or defaults by other institutions, which in turn could adversely affect Beneficient.

In the event Beneficient uses hedging transactions to manage certain market risks, Beneficient’s business, profitability and liquidity may be adversely affected by unanticipated market conditions including interest rates, currency exchange rates, equity market behavior, and other relevant asset classes.

When managing its exposure to market risks, Beneficient may make use of forward contracts, options, swaps, caps, collars and floors or pursue other strategies or use other forms of derivative instruments to limit its exposure to changes in the relative values of investments that may result from market developments, including changes in prevailing interest rates and currency exchange rates.

The use of hedging transactions and other derivative instruments to reduce the effects of changes in the value of a position does not eliminate the possibility of fluctuations in the value of the position or prevent losses if the value of the position declines. However, such activities can establish other positions designed to gain from those same developments, thereby offsetting the decline in the value of the position. Such transactions may also limit the opportunity for gain if the value of a position increases. Moreover, it may not be possible to limit the exposure to a market development that is so generally anticipated that a hedging or other derivative transaction cannot be entered into at an acceptable price. Although Beneficient may enter into hedging transactions in order to reduce its exposure to market risks, unanticipated market changes may result in poorer overall investment performance than if the transaction had not been executed. In addition, the degree of correlation between price movements of the instruments used in connection with hedging activities and price movements in a position being hedged may vary. Moreover, for a variety of reasons, Beneficient may not be successful in establishing a sufficient correlation or a sufficient matching of cash flows between the instruments used in a hedging or other derivative transaction and the position being hedged. An insufficient correlation could prevent Beneficient from achieving the intended result and create new risks of loss. In addition, Beneficient will not be able to fully limit exposure against all changes in the values of the alternative assets underlying its Liquidity Transactions, because the values of such assets are likely to fluctuate as a result of a number of factors, some of which will be beyond Beneficient’s control, and it may not be able to respond to such fluctuations in a timely manner or at all.

The interest rates under Beneficient’s loan, credit and other agreements may be impacted by the phase-out of the London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”). 

LIBOR is the basic rate of interest used in lending between banks on the London interbank market and is widely used as a reference for setting the interest rates on loans globally. LIBOR is used as a reference rate to calculate interest under certain of our borrowings and receivables. In 2017, the United Kingdom’s Financial Conduct Authority, which regulates LIBOR, announced that it intends to phase out LIBOR by the end of 2021. The U.S. Federal Reserve, in conjunction with the Alternative Reference Rates Committee, a steering committee comprised of large U.S. financial institutions, identified the Secured Overnight Financing Rate (“SOFR”) as the preferred alternative reference rate to U.S. dollar LIBOR and recommended a paced transition plan that involves the creation of a reference rate based on SOFR by the end of 2021. SOFR is a more generic measure than LIBOR and considers the cost of borrowing cash overnight, collateralized by U.S. Treasury securities. Given the inherent differences between LIBOR and SOFR or any other alternative benchmark rate that may be established, there are many uncertainties regarding a transition from LIBOR. Certain of Beneficient’s borrowing and receivable agreements contain fallback provisions providing for alternative rate calculations in the event LIBOR is unavailable, prior to any LIBOR rate transition. As a result, our level of interest payments we incur or receive may change and the new rates we incur may not be as favorable to us as those in effect prior to any LIBOR phase-out.

Beneficient’s fair value estimates of illiquid assets may not accurately estimate prices obtained at the time of sale and Beneficient cannot provide assurance that the values of the alternative assets underlying the Liquidity Transactions that it reports from time to time will be realized.

Asset valuations for which there is no readily available market, such as the illiquid assets comprising the Ben Collateral, require estimates and assumptions about matters that are inherently uncertain. Given this uncertainty, the fair values of such assets as reflected in estimated net asset value may not reflect the prices that would actually be obtained if and when such assets would be sold.

Under Beneficient’s valuation policy, Beneficient bases its estimates of the fair value of the alternative assets in the Ben Collateral on the fund reported net asset value reported to it by the underlying fund managers. Because alternative asset managers generally hold a high proportion of their investments in assets for which market prices are not readily available, fund reported net asset value will necessarily incorporate estimates of fair value made by the fund managers. As there is no single method for determining fair value, there may be significant variations in the valuation policies used by different fund managers in the Ben Collateral.

In addition, due to time lags in receiving valuation information from fund managers, Beneficient typically does not and will not have up-to-date information from all underlying funds at the time it calculates the fair value of the alternative assets underlying the Liquidity Transactions. Beneficient typically is not and will not be aware of all material developments at a fund or its underlying portfolio companies that could adversely affect the value of the funds in the Ben Collateral.

Even if market quotations are available for the alternative assets underlying the Liquidity Transactions, such quotations may not reflect the value that could actually be realized because of various factors, including the possible illiquidity associated with a large ownership position, subsequent illiquidity in the market for a company’s securities, future market price volatility or the potential for a future loss in market value. Realizations at values significantly lower than the fair values recorded in Beneficient’s financial statements could have a material adverse effect on the net asset value of the alternative asset, and therefore the value of the beneficial interests and the corresponding Liquidity Transactions.

Furthermore, a substantial majority of the net assets of Beneficient are currently represented by intangible assets and goodwill. Beneficient’s management performs goodwill and intangible asset impairment testing annually, during the fourth quarter, or when events occur, or circumstances change that would more likely than not indicate impairment has occurred. Goodwill impairment exists when the carrying value of goodwill exceeds its implied fair value. If Beneficient’s management concludes that a portion of its goodwill is impaired, and writes down the value of such goodwill, the value of our investment in Beneficient may also have to be written down.

Beneficient’s liquidity, profitability and business may be adversely affected by concentrations of assets comprising the Ben Collateral.

The Ben Collateral may be concentrated in certain issuers, funds, sectors, geographic regions, countries, or asset types, which could negatively affect performance as well as Beneficient’s financial results, including Beneficient’s capital position, earnings, cash flows, and growth.

Similarly, Beneficient’s balance sheet may have significant exposures to certain issuers, industries, or asset classes. As a result, Beneficient’s net cash flows and asset valuations (e.g., net asset value) may exhibit greater volatility due to idiosyncratic factors specific to companies, industries, regions, and asset classes. Moreover, because of such concentrations, Beneficient may suffer losses even when economic and market conditions are generally favorable for Beneficient’s competitors.

In the case of Beneficient’s exposure to investments in publicly traded companies, its operating results would be impacted by volatility in the public markets generally and in the stock prices of such companies.

The due diligence process that Beneficient undertakes in connection with Liquidity Transactions may or may not reveal all facts that may be relevant in connection with such Liquidity Transaction, and even if Beneficient receives complete and accurate information it may not translate to identifying the appropriate underwriting criteria.

Before offering liquidity solutions to clients, Beneficient conducts due diligence that it deems reasonable and appropriate based on the facts and circumstances applicable to each transaction. When conducting due diligence, Beneficient may be required to evaluate important and complex business, financial, tax, accounting, technological, environmental, social, governance and legal and regulatory issues. In addition to Beneficient’s own employees, outside consultants, legal advisors and accountants may be involved in the due diligence process in varying degrees depending on the type of investment and the parties involved. Nevertheless, when conducting due diligence and making an assessment regarding the alternative assets behind a potential Liquidity Transaction, Beneficient relies on the resources available to it, including information provided by the potential client of the Liquidity Transaction, the general partners and managers of the alternative assets the client holds, and, in some circumstances, third-party investigations, and such an investigation will not necessarily result in the investment ultimately being successful. Moreover, even in the event that Beneficient receives complete and accurate information in the due diligence process, it may not translate to identifying the appropriate underwriting criteria, which could result in negative reputational effects, and/or otherwise materially and adversely affect Beneficient’s business, financial condition and results of operations.

Restrictions on Beneficient’s ability to collect and analyze data regarding its clients’ alternative assets investments could adversely affect its business.

The Ben Collateral includes interests in alternative assets. Beneficient depends on the continuation of its relationships with the general partners and sponsors of the underlying funds and investments in order to maintain current data on these alternative assets. The termination of such relationships or the imposition of restrictions on its ability to use the data it obtains for its reporting and monitoring services could adversely affect its business, financial condition and results of operations. Beneficient’s monitoring is also dependent on the statements and conduct of personnel at investment managers of the general partners of these alternative asset firms. To the extent that the beliefs and expectations of these managers turn out to be inaccurate, Beneficient’s expectations as part of its monitoring process may be materially impacted.

ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS.

Not applicable.

ITEM 2. PROPERTIES.

Our principal executive offices are currently located at 325 North St. Paul Street, Dallas, Texas 75201. GWG and Beneficient collectively lease 33,652 square feet of space for a lease term expiring on July 31, 2021. GWG also retains the lease of its legacy executive offices located at 220 South Sixth Street, Suite 1200, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402. At that location, GWG leases 17,687 square feet of space for a lease term expiring in 2025. We believe these facilities are adequate for our current needs and that suitable additional space will be available as needed.

ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS.

We are a party from time to time to what we believe are routine litigation and proceedings considered part of the ordinary course of our business. We believe that the outcome of such existing proceedings would not have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

ITEM 4. MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES.

Not applicable.

PART II

ITEM 5. MARKET FOR THE REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED SHAREHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES.

Our common stock is listed on The Nasdaq Capital Market under the ticker symbol “GWGH.”

As of December 31, 2019, there were 111 record holders of our common stock, one of which was Cede & Co., a nominee for Depository Trust Company, or DTC. Shares of common stock that are held by financial institutions as nominees for beneficial owners are deposited into participant accounts at DTC, and are considered to be held of record by Cede & Co. as one stockholder.

Purchases of Equity Securities by the Registrant

On November 15, 2018, the Company’s Board of Directors approved a stock repurchase program pursuant to which the Company was permitted, from time to time, to purchase shares of its common stock for an aggregate purchase price not to exceed $1.5 million. Stock repurchases were able to be executed through various means, including, without limitation, open market transactions, privately negotiated transactions or otherwise. The stock repurchase program did not obligate the Company to purchase any shares, and expired on April 30, 2019. As such, there were no repurchases of common stock under this stock repurchase program during the fourth quarter of 2019.

ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA.

Not applicable.

ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS.

You should read the following discussion in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes and the information contained in other sections of this report. This discussion and analysis is based on the beliefs of our management, as well as assumptions made by, and information currently available to, our management.

Risk Relating to Forward-Looking Statements

This report contains forward-looking statements that reflect our current expectations and projections about future events. Actual results could differ materially from those described in these forward-looking statements.

The words “believe,” “could,” “possibly,” “probably,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” “project,” “expect,” “may,” “will,” “should,” “seek,” “intend,” “plan,” “expect,” or “consider” and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements but are not the exclusive means of identifying such statements. Forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties, which could cause actual results to differ materially from such statements. Many of the forward-looking statements contained in this report can be found in Item 1A — “Risk Factors” and in the following discussion and analysis.

Such risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to:

We caution you that the foregoing list of factors is not exhaustive. Forward-looking statements are only estimates and predictions, or statements of current intent. Actual results, outcomes or actions that we ultimately undertake could differ materially from those anticipated in the forward-looking statements due to risks, uncertainties or actual events differing from the assumptions underlying these statements.

JOBS Act

On April 5, 2012, the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2012, or JOBS Act, was enacted. Section 107 of the JOBS Act provides that an “emerging growth company” can take advantage of the extended transition period provided in Section 7(a)(2)(B) of the Securities Act of 1933 for complying with new or revised accounting standards. This means that an “emerging growth company” can make an election to delay the adoption of certain accounting standards until those standards would apply to private companies. We historically qualified as an emerging growth company and elected to delay our adoption of new or revised accounting standards and, as a result, we may not have complied with new or revised accounting standards at the same time as other public reporting companies that are not “emerging growth companies.” As discussed in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2018, we no longer qualify as an emerging growth company as a result of the aggregate amount of non-convertible debt that we have issued during the prior three year period.

Overview

In 2018 and 2019, we consummated a series of transactions (as more fully described below) with The Beneficient Company Group, L.P. (“Ben LP,” including all of the subsidiaries it may have from time to time — “Beneficient”). Beneficient is a financial services firm, based in Dallas, Texas, that provides liquidity solutions for professionally managed alternative assets for mid-to-high net worth (“MHNW”) individuals and small-to-mid (“STM”) size institutions, which previously had few options to obtain early liquidity for their alternative asset holdings. Beneficient has closed a limited number of these transactions to date, and intends to significantly expand its operations going forward. As part of GWG’s reorientation, we also changed our Board of Directors and executive management team. Beneficient, through its subsidiaries, plans to operate three potentially high value, high margin lines of business:

While we are continuing our work to maximize the value of our secondary life insurance business, we do not anticipate purchasing additional life insurance policies in the secondary market and have increased capital allocated toward providing liquidity to a broader range of alternative assets, primarily through Beneficient. We believe Beneficient’s operations will generally produce higher risk-adjusted returns than those we can generally achieve from life insurance policies acquired in the secondary market. Furthermore, although we believe that our portfolio of life insurance policies is a meaningful component of a diversified alternative asset portfolio, we continue to explore strategic alternatives for our life insurance portfolio aimed at maximizing its value, including a possible sale, refinancing or recapitalization of our life insurance portfolio.

We completed our transactions with Beneficient to provide us with a significant increase in assets and common shareholders’ equity. In addition, our transactions with Beneficient may provide us with the opportunity for a diversified source of future earnings within the alternative asset industry. As GWG and Beneficient expand their strategic relationship, we believe the Beneficient transactions will transform GWG from a niche provider of liquidity to owners of life insurance to a full-scale provider of trust and liquidity products and trust services to owners of a broad range of alternative assets.

The Beneficient Transactions 

The Exchange Transaction

On January 12, 2018, GWG Holdings and GWG Life entered into a Master Exchange Agreement (as amended, the “Master Exchange Agreement”) with Beneficient, MHT Financial SPV, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (“MHT SPV”), and various related trusts (the “Seller Trusts”). The material terms and conditions of the initial Master Exchange Agreement were described in GWG Holdings’ Current Report on Form 8-K (the “January 2018 Form 8-K”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) on January 18, 2018.

On August 10, 2018, GWG Holdings, GWG Life, Beneficient, MHT SPV, and the Seller Trusts entered into a Third Amendment to Master Exchange Agreement (the “Third Amendment”). Pursuant to the Third Amendment, the parties agreed to consummate the transactions contemplated by the Master Exchange Agreement in two closings. The Third Amendment also generally deleted MHT SPV as a party to the Master Exchange Agreement. The material terms and conditions of the Third Amendment to Master Exchange Agreement were described in GWG Holdings’ Current Report on Form 8-K (the “August 2018 Form 8-K”) filed with the SEC on August 14, 2018. The transactions contemplated by the Master Exchange Agreement, as amended, are referred to throughout this Report as the “Exchange Transaction.”

On the first closing date, which took place on August 10, 2018 (the “Initial Transfer Date”):

Under the Master Exchange Agreement, at the final closing (the “Final Closing” and the date on which the final closing occurred, the “Final Closing Date”), which occurred on December 28, 2018:

On the Final Closing Date, GWG and the Seller Trusts also entered into a registration rights agreement with respect to the shares of GWG common stock owned by the Seller Trusts, an orderly marketing agreement and a stockholders’ agreement. The material terms of these agreements are described in our Information Statement on Schedule 14C filed with the SEC on December 6, 2018 and in our Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on January 4, 2019.

The Expanded Strategic Relationship

In the second quarter of 2019, we completed an expansion of the strategic relationship with Beneficient, which was a transformational event for both organizations that is expected to create a unified platform uniquely positioned to provide an expanded suite of products, services and resources for investors and the financial professionals who assist them. GWG and Beneficient intend to collaborate extensively and capitalize on one another’s capabilities, relationships and services. On April 15, 2019, Jon R. Sabes, the Company’s former Chief Executive Officer and a former director, and Steven F. Sabes, the Company’s former Executive Vice President and a former director, entered into a Purchase and Contribution Agreement (the “Purchase and Contribution Agreement”) with, among others, Ben LP. The Purchase and Contribution Agreement was summarized in our Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on April 16, 2019.

The closing of the transactions contemplated by the Purchase and Contribution Agreement (the “Purchase and Contribution Transaction”) occurred on April 26, 2019. Prior to or in connection with such closing:

Among other things, the Purchase and Contribution Agreement contemplated that after the closing, the parties will seek to enter into an agreement pursuant to which the Company in certain circumstances will have the right to appoint a majority of the board of directors of the general partner of Beneficient, resulting in the Company and Beneficient being consolidated from a financial reporting perspective. The Company and Beneficient will also seek to enter into an agreement pursuant to which the Company will offer and distribute (through a FINRA registered managing broker-dealer) Beneficient’s liquidity products and services. The Company has reduced capital allocated to life insurance assets while it works with Beneficient to build a larger diversified portfolio of alternative asset investment products.

A copy of the Purchase and Contribution Agreement is included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the SEC on July 9, 2019 as Exhibit 99.3.

The Investment and Exchange Agreements

On December 31, 2019, the Company, Ben LP, BCH, and Beneficient Management entered into a Preferred Series A Unit Account and Common Unit Investment Agreement (the “Investment Agreement”).

Pursuant to the Investment Agreement, the Company transferred $79.0 million to Ben LP in return for 666,667 common units of Ben LP and a Preferred Series A Subclass 1 Unit Account of BCH.

In connection with the Investment Agreement, the Company obtained the right to appoint a majority of the board of directors of Beneficient Management, the general partner of Ben LP. As a result of this change-of-control event, we reported the results of Ben LP and its subsidiaries on a consolidated basis beginning on the transaction date of December 31, 2019. The Company’s right to appoint a majority of the board of directors of Beneficient Management will terminate in the event (i) the Company’s ownership of the fully diluted equity of Ben LP (excluding equity issued upon the conversion or exchange of Preferred Series A Unit Accounts of BCH held as of December 31, 2019 by parties other than the Company) is less than 25%, (ii) the Continuing Directors of the Company cease to constitute a majority of the board of directors of the Company, or (iii) certain bankruptcy events occur with respect to the Company. The term “Continuing Directors” means, as of any date of determination, any member of the board of directors of the Company who: (1) was a member of the board of directors on December 31, 2019; or (2) was nominated for election or elected to the board of directors with the approval of a majority of the Continuing Directors who were members of the board of directors at the time of such nomination or election.

Following the transaction, and as agreed upon in the Investment Agreement, the Company was issued an initial capital account balance for the Preferred Series A Subclass 1 Unit Account of $319.0 million. The other holders of the Preferred Series A Subclass 1 Unit Accounts are an entity related to the founders of Ben LP and an entity related to one of GWG’s and Beneficient’s directors (the “Related Unitholders”), and the aggregate capital accounts of all holders of the Preferred Series A Subclass 1 Unit Accounts after giving effect to the investment by the Company is $1.6 billion. The Company’s Preferred Series A Subclass 1 Unit Account is the same class of preferred security as held by the Related Entities. If the Related Unitholders exchange their Preferred Series A Subclass 1 Unit Account for securities of the Company, the Company’s Preferred Series A Subclass 1 Unit Account would be converted into common units of Ben LP (so neither the Company nor the founders would hold Preferred Series A Subclass 1 Unit Accounts).

Also on December 31, 2019, in a transaction related to the Investment Agreement, GWG Holdings transferred its interest in the Preferred Series A Subclass 1 Unit Account to its wholly owned subsidiary, GWG Life.

In addition, on December 31, 2019, the Company, Ben LP and the holders of common units of Ben LP (the “Common Units”) entered into an Exchange Agreement (the “Exchange Agreement”) pursuant to which the holders of Common Units from time to time have the right, on a quarterly basis, to exchange their Common Units for common stock of the Company. The exchange ratio in the Exchange Agreement is based on the ratio of the capital account associated with the Common Units to be exchanged to the market price of the Company’s common stock based on the volume weighted average price of the Company’s common stock for the five consecutive trading days prior to the quarterly exchange date. The Exchange Agreement is intended to facilitate the marketing of Ben LP’s products to holders of alternative assets.

The Exchange Transaction, the Purchase and Contribution Transaction and the Investment and Exchange Agreements are referred to collectively as the “Beneficient Transactions.”

Critical Accounting Policies

Critical Accounting Estimates

The preparation of our consolidated financial statements in accordance with the accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) requires us to make significant judgments, estimates, and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. We base our judgments, estimates, and assumptions on historical experience and on various other factors believed to be reasonable under the circumstances. Actual results could differ materially from these estimates. We evaluate our judgments, estimates, and assumptions on a regular basis and make changes accordingly. We believe that the judgments, estimates, and assumptions involved in accounting for business combinations, valuing our investments in life insurance policies, assessing potential impairment of equity method investments and equity security investments, assessing the need for allowance for credit losses on financing receivables and evaluating deferred taxes have the greatest potential impact on our consolidated financial statements and accordingly believe these to be our critical accounting estimates. Below we discuss the critical accounting policies associated with these estimates as well as certain other critical accounting policies.

Business Combinations

We include the results of operations of acquired businesses from the acquisition date. In allocating the purchase price of a business combination, we record all assets acquired and liabilities assumed at fair value, with the excess of the purchase price over the aggregate fair values recorded as goodwill. Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) Topic 820, Fair Value Measurements, defines fair value 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. The purchase price of an acquisition is allocated to the underlying assets acquired and liabilities assumed based upon their estimated fair values as of the date of acquisition. To the extent the purchase price exceeds the fair value of the net identifiable tangible and intangible assets acquired and liabilities assumed, such excess is allocated to goodwill. The Company determines the estimated fair values after review and consideration of relevant information, including discounted cash flows, quoted market prices and estimates made by management. The fair value assigned to identifiable intangible assets acquired is based on estimates and assumptions made by management at the time of the acquisition. The Company adjusts the preliminary purchase price allocation, as necessary, during the measurement period of up to one year after the acquisition closing date as it obtains more information as to facts and circumstances existing as of the acquisition date. Acquisition-related costs are recognized separately from the business combination and are expensed as incurred.

As a result of the Investment and Exchange Agreements, we reported the results of Ben LP and its subsidiaries on a consolidated basis beginning on the transaction date of December 31, 2019. The business combination resulted in a gain of $249.7 million related to the remeasurement of our preexisting equity method investment and preliminary goodwill of $2.4 billion. The valuation of goodwill will be a critical accounting estimate beginning January 1, 2020. Refer to Note 5 to the consolidated financial statements for details on the accounting for the transaction.

Ownership of Life Insurance Policies — Fair Value Option

We account for the purchase of life insurance policies in accordance with ASC 325-30, Investments in Insurance Contracts, which requires us to use either the investment method or the fair value method. We have elected to account for all of our life insurance policies using the fair value method.

The fair value of our life insurance policies is determined as the net present value of the life insurance portfolio’s future expected cash flows (policy benefits received and required premium payments) that incorporates current life expectancy estimates and discount rate assumptions.

We initially record our purchase of life insurance policies at the transaction price, which is the amount paid for the policy, inclusive of all external fees and costs associated with the acquisition. At each subsequent reporting period, we re-measure the investment at fair value in its entirety and recognize the change in fair value as unrealized gain (loss) in the current period, net of premiums paid. Changes in the fair value of our life insurance portfolio are based on periodic evaluations and are recorded in our consolidated statements of operations as changes in fair value of life insurance policies.

Fair Value Components — Life Expectancies

Unobservable inputs, as discussed below, are a critical component of our estimate for the fair value of our investments in life insurance policies. We currently use a probabilistic method of estimating and valuing the projected cash flows of our portfolio, which we believe to be the preferred and most prevalent valuation method in the industry. In this regard, the most significant assumptions we make are the life expectancy estimates of the insureds and the discount rate applied to the expected future cash flows to be derived from our life insurance portfolio.

The fair value of our portfolio of life insurance policies is determined as the net present value of the life insurance portfolio’s future expected cash flows (the net of policy benefits received and required premium payments). The net present value of the future expected cash flows incorporate life expectancy estimates and current discount rate assumptions. The life expectancy estimates we use for acquiring and valuing life insurance policies has in the past been typically based upon the average of two life expectancy reports received from third-party medical actuarial underwriting firms (“Life Expectancy Providers”). After the acquisition of a life insurance policy, we historically have sought to update these life expectancy reports on a periodic basis.

In October and November 2018, two of the primary Life Expectancy Providers used by the Company — ITM TwentyFirst, LLC (“TwentyFirst”) and AVS, LLC (“AVS”) — released updates to their respective mortality tables and medical underwriting methodologies. As disclosed in our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2018 filed with the SEC on November 19, 2018, and our amended Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A filed on April 22, 2019, the majority of our life insurance policies were valued using life expectancy reports provided by TwentyFirst and/or AVS. The updates from TwentyFirst and AVS suggest a lengthening of prior life expectancy estimates and relate to revised estimates of the originally issued life expectancy reports. These updates do not encompass any change to the insured’s age and health condition since the report was originally issued.

We, along with other major secondary market participants, have noted the frequent changes in methodologies made by the Life Expectancy Providers over the years that, short of purchasing revised life expectancy reports at a substantial cost, have lacked detailed information about the impact of these changes on individual policy values. Moreover, our experience is these methodology changes have not resulted in a narrowing of consensus in the life expectancy estimates issued for individual insureds. In other words, the successive changes in the medical underwriting methodologies and mortality tables made by the Life Expectancy Providers have not, in retrospect, proven to be sufficiently accurate with respect to our life insurance portfolio as measured by the ratio of mortality cash flows realized to mortality cash flows predicted (or “expected). We believe, as further described below, that the method we have adopted is a more accurate way of projecting mortality cash flows. Finally, as our life insurance portfolio has grown in size and diversity, our ability to model with greater certainty and predictability through the incorporation of historical portfolio experience in conjunction with the use of life expectancy reports has improved significantly.

Performance Based Forecasting and Valuation Methodology (“Actual-to-Expected” or “A2E”)

As a result, we undertook a comprehensive study to determine a more accurate, transparent and cost-effective method of pricing, valuing, and modeling the performance of our portfolio of life insurance policies. Our goal was to incorporate life expectancy estimates from Life Expectancy Providers, the historical experience of our portfolio, the diversification and mortality factors of our portfolio, and relevant market-based observations and inputs.

The revised methodology we have adopted was derived from back-testing (the process of applying an analytical method to historical data to see how accurately the method would have predicted actual results) the mortality cash flow performance of our life insurance portfolio using the longest life expectancy report received from the Life Expectancy Providers used for pricing at the time the life insurance policies were acquired (the “Longest Life Expectancy”). This contrasts with our historical methodology of projecting mortality cash flows, used prior to the fourth quarter of 2018, which typically used the average of two such life expectancy reports.

Our Longest Life Expectancy methodology is built from the following pillars: 

Each of the aforementioned pillars of the Longest Life Expectancy methodology, and the associated assumptions, modeling and outcomes, was reviewed by a leading actuarial consulting firm whose longevity services are used worldwide.

Our life insurance portfolio modeling and predicted future cash flows are based upon the central limit theorem, which establishes that, in certain situations, random events become normalized and predictable around the mean as the number of observations grow in size. We believe our portfolio of life insurance policies has grown sufficiently large in size and diversity to establish that while individual mortality experience is inherently unpredictable, the actual mortality experience of the portfolio should be expected to approach the mean modeled prediction. In other words, we believe that we have sufficient actual mortality experience from our life insurance portfolio to use as the basis for the Longest Life Expectancy methodology.

As of December 31, 2019, our life insurance portfolio, stratified by age of insured in the table below, stood at $2.0 billion in face value of policy benefits and 1,151 policies:

As depicted in the graphs below and after extensive research and modeling, we determined that the Longest Life Expectancy methodology was highly predictive of the actual experience of our portfolio of life insurance policies as compared to our historical methodology using the Average Life Expectancy method.

We used the Least Squares statistical method, which can be used to determine a line of best fit by minimizing the sum of squares of the errors (actual vs. expected) and can be used with either linear or non-linear data. In this case, we are fitting non-linear data to a non-linear curve. The Least Squares method was determined to be an efficient means of calculating the required portfolio mortality multiplier (PMM) to maintain the overall shape of the projected curve while maximizing fit to the observed data.

The table below compares the actual to expected mortality cash flow experience of our life insurance portfolio using Longest Life Expectancy. We have increased our actual to expected mortality cash flow experience accuracy from 78% under the Average Life Expectancy through December 2018 to 98% using the Longest Life Expectancy through December 2019. The net effect on the life insurance portfolio of achieving a higher actual to expected ratio is a significant lengthening of its overall life expectancy.

We believe that a Longest Life Expectancy methodology, which incorporates the actual mortality experience of our portfolio and the use of third-party estimates, is superior to our historical methodology. We believe this methodology should minimize future fluctuations of valuation, decrease our reliance on Life Expectancy Providers for updated reports, and improve our ability to finance and forecast future revenues and cash flows.

The implementation of the Longest Life Expectancy methodology required us to take a non-cash charge (net of the impact of a change in discount rate) to revenue of $87.1 million in the fourth quarter of 2018, reflecting a decrease in the fair value of our portfolio of life insurance policies at December 31, 2018. This non-cash charge represented approximately 10% of fair value of the portfolio prior to adjustment.

Updates to the Analysis

Proper maintenance of an A2E based valuation methodology includes the continual tracking of actual results as well as comparisons to projections. An A2E based valuation methodology rests on the actuarial premise that mortality results for sufficiently large populations follow predictable mortality curves (see discussion above regarding the Central Limit Theorem). As such, through the A2E analysis and the use of the PMM, we are able to “fit” projections to actual results, which provides a basis to forecast future performance more accurately.

Should performance sufficiently deviate in the future from these projections, the A2E analysis will be re-examined to determine if the resultant PMM still results in the most accurate fitting of the projections to actual results. Adjustments to the PMM would then be made based on that analysis if warranted.

The analysis would utilize the same basic methodology as the initial analysis to ensure consistency in the process:

The basis for a re-examination of the A2E analysis could be based on either the passage of time or a pre-determined performance trigger. Following further analysis, we determined that a performance-based trigger approach that allows the portfolio to perform within statistical norms (+/- 1 standard deviation) without constant updates is most appropriate. We intend to re-examine the A2E analysis and recalculate the resultant PMM anytime the six-month moving average of the difference between actual portfolio performance and projected performance deviates by more than one standard deviation from the mean and such deviation continues as of the end of any calendar quarter after persisting for three consecutive months. This methodology allows for natural periods of slow or excess maturities to occur without the necessity of changes to the PMM. At present, a one standard deviation move in the six-month moving average of the difference between actual portfolio performance and projected performance would equate to a valuation change of approximately $8 million. The decision to update our valuation methodology in the fourth quarter of 2018 was based in part on an analysis performed by a third-party actuarial consulting firm, which indicated a very strong tendency toward mean reversion within the dataset.

The analysis above utilizes the Society of Actuaries 2015 Valuation Basic Table (“2015 VBT”). The 2015 VBT is the standard in the secondary market for life insurance and is based on a much larger dataset of insured lives, face amount of policies and more current information compared to the dataset underlying the 2008 Valuation Basic Table. The 2015 VBT dataset includes 266 million policies compared to the 2008 VBT dataset of 75 million. The experience data in the 2015 VBT dataset includes 2.6 million claims on policies from 51 insurance carriers. Life expectancies implied by the 2015 VBT are generally slightly longer for both male and female non-smokers between the ages of 65 and 80. However, insureds of both genders over the age of 80 have significantly longer life expectancies, approximately 8% to 42% longer, as compared to the 2008 VBT. We adopted the 2015 VBT in our valuation process in 2016. 

Periodic Updates to Life Expectancy (LE) Reports

Our senior lender requires, and other lenders we engage may require, regular updates to LE Reports. Additionally, should we choose to sell life insurance policies in the secondary market, investors may require updated LE Reports. These lenders and investors may utilize an average LE for valuation, similar to our historical methodology, which may result in significantly different valuations.

We intend to continue obtaining LE Reports beyond our policy purchase process to the extent they are needed to comply with existing and future covenants within credit facilities. To the extent such LE Reports are available, we do not expect to immediately incorporate these LE Reports into our revised valuation methodology, but will track this data to determine over time if there exists any additive predictive value in relation to the basis of its mortality projections. As such, our policies and procedures surrounding the updating of LE Reports reflect that LE Reports will only be updated when required by third parties.

Current A2E Analysis and PMM Implications 

Our A2E based methodology and use of a static Portfolio PMM requires that we recalculate the PMM used in our valuation anytime the six-month moving average of the difference between actual portfolio performance and projected performance of cumulative face value maturities deviates by more than one standard deviation from the mean and such deviation persists for three consecutive months and continues as of the current quarter-end month. As of December 31, 2019, the six-month moving average of the difference between actual portfolio performance and projected performance of cumulative face value of maturities was within one standard deviation from the mean. As such, our valuation methodology did not require an update to our PMM during the current quarter.

Portfolio Return Implications

At any time, we calculate our returns from our life insurance assets based upon (i) our historical results, and (ii) the future cash flows we expect to realize from our statistical forecasts. To forecast our expected future cash flows and returns, we use the probabilistic method of analysis. The expected internal rate of return (“IRR”) of our portfolio is based upon future cash flow forecasts derived from a probabilistic analysis of policy benefits received and policy premiums paid in relation to our non-GAAP investment cost basis, which includes purchase price, total premiums paid, and total financing costs incurred to date. As of December 31, 2019, the expected internal rate of return on our portfolio of life insurance assets was 5.17% based on our portfolio benefits of $2.0 billion and our non-GAAP investment cost basis of $941.7 million. This calculation excludes returns realized from our matured policy benefits, which are substantial.

We seek to further enhance our understanding of our expected future cash flow and returns by using a stochastic analysis, sometimes referred to as a “Monte Carlo simulation,” to provide us with a greater understanding of the variability of our projections. The stochastic analysis we perform, which excludes financing costs to isolate only those cash flows associated with the life insurance policies, provides IRR calculations for different statistical confidence intervals. The results of our stochastic analysis, in which we run 10,000 random mortality scenarios, demonstrates that the scenario ranking at the 50th percentile of all 10,000 results generates an IRR of 8.22%, which is very near to the discount rate of 8.25% that we used to calculate the fair value of our portfolio. Our expected IRR is based upon future policy related cash flow forecasts derived from a probabilistic analysis of our policy benefits received and policy premiums paid. The stochastic analysis results also reveal that our portfolio is expected to generate an IRR of 7.75% or better in 75% of all generated scenarios, and an IRR of 7.35% or better in 90% of all generated scenarios. We believe the Company’s portfolio of life insurance policies has grown sufficiently large in size and diversity to establish that, while individual mortality experience is inherently unpredictable, the actual mortality experience of the portfolio should be expected to approach the mean modeled prediction.

Fair Value Components — Required Premium Payments

We must pay the premiums on the life insurance policies within our portfolio in order to collect the policy benefit. The same probabilistic model and methodologies used to generate expected cash inflows from the life insurance policy benefits over the expected life of the insured are used to estimate cash outflows due to required premium payments. Premiums paid are offset against revenue in the applicable reporting period.

Fair Value Components — Discount Rate

A discount rate is used to calculate the net present value of the expected cash flows. The discount rate used to calculate fair value of our portfolio incorporates the guidance provided by ASC 820, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures.

We utilized an 8.25% discount rate to estimate the fair value of our portfolio of life insurance policies at both December 31, 2019 and 2018.

In adopting the Longest Life Expectancy methodology as described above, we preserved the general methodology historically used to calculate the fair value discount rate and have made important enhancements. We also improved the reliability and relevancy of the competitive sales estimates we use to measure the discount rates (on a Longest Life Expectancy basis) observed in the life insurance secondary market. We continue to use fixed income market interest rates, credit exposure to the issuing insurance companies, and our estimate of the operational risk yield premium a purchaser would apply to the future cash flows derived from our portfolio of life insurance policies in our methodology. To the extent we limit or cease acquiring insurance policies, we may not have reliable access to the market-based factors described above and will be required to find suitable alternative proxies.

Management has significant discretion regarding the combination of these and other factors when determining the discount rate. The discount rate we choose assumes an orderly and arms-length transaction (i.e., a non-distressed transaction in which neither seller nor buyer is compelled to engage in the transaction), which is consistent with related GAAP guidance. The carrying value of policies acquired during each quarterly reporting period are adjusted to their current fair value using the fair value discount rate applied to the entire portfolio as of that reporting date.

We engaged ClearLife Limited, owner of the ClariNet LS actuarial portfolio pricing software we use, to prepare a net present value calculation of our life insurance portfolio. ClearLife Limited processed policy data, future premium data, life expectancy estimate data, and other actuarial information to calculate a net present value for our portfolio using the specified discount rate of 8.25%. ClearLife Limited independently calculated the net present value of our portfolio of 1,151 policies to be $796.0 million and furnished us with a letter documenting its calculation. A copy of such letter is filed as Exhibit 99.1 to this report.

See Note 7 to the consolidated financial statements for additional discussion of the sensitivity of the valuation to different discount rates.

Equity Method Investments, Equity Security Investment and Financing Receivable from Affiliate

On November 11, 2019, GWG contributed the common stock and membership interests of its previously-wholly owned subsidiaries Life Epigenetics Inc. (“Life Epigenetics”) and youSurance General Agency, LLC (“youSurance”) to a legal entity, InsurTech Holdings, LLC (“InsurTech Holdings”), in exchange for a membership interest in InsurTech Holdings. Although we currently own 100% of the equity of InsurTech Holdings, we do not have a controlling financial interest in InsurTech Holdings because the managing member has substantive participating rights. Therefore, we account for our ownership interest in InsurTech Holdings as an equity method investment. Life Epigenetics was formed to commercialize epigenetic technology for the longevity industry. youSurance seeks to offer life insurance directly to customers utilizing epigenetic technology.

Prior to December 31, 2019, GWG’s investment in Ben LP was accounted for using the equity method. As a result of the Investment and Exchange Agreements on December 31, 2019, GWG consolidated Beneficient and accounted for the consolidation under the Business Combinations Critical Accounting Policy described above.

GWG also has an equity security investment in Beneficient and financing receivables for loans it provided to Beneficient and the LiquidTrust Borrowers (see Notes 8 and 9 to the consolidated financial statements).

When circumstances indicate that the carrying value of the equity method investments or equity security may not be recoverable, the fair value of the investment is evaluated by management. The fair values of these investments are not readily determinable as they are not currently publicly traded on a stock exchange. As a result, management uses other accepted valuation methods to determine fair value such as discounting estimated future cash flows for the business. If the fair value of the investment is determined to be less than its carrying value and the decline in value is considered to be other than temporary, an appropriate write down is recorded to net earnings based on the excess of the carrying value over the best estimate of fair value of the investment. In addition, if based on current information and events it is probable that GWG will be unable to collect all amounts due according to the contractual terms of the financing receivables from affiliates and an amount can be reasonably estimated, GWG will write down the amounts to estimated realizable value. Information and events creating uncertainty about the realization of recorded amounts for financing receivables from affiliates include, but are not limited to, the estimated cash flows generated by the affiliate’s business, the sufficiency of collateral securing the amounts, and the creditworthiness of the counterparties involved. Changes in facts, circumstances and management’s estimates and judgment could result in a material charge to earnings. At December 31, 2019, we determined that no indication of an impairment of the aforementioned equity method investments or equity security investments existed, and no allowance for credit losses was recorded on the financing receivables from affiliates.

Deferred Income Taxes

Under ASC 740, Income Taxes, deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for the future tax consequences attributable to temporary differences between the financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities and their respective tax bases. A valuation allowance is established for deferred tax assets that are not considered “more likely than not” to be realized. Realization of deferred tax assets depends upon having sufficient past or future taxable income in periods to which the deductible temporary differences are expected to be recovered or within any applicable carryback or carryforward periods or sufficient tax planning strategies. After assessing the realization of the net deferred tax assets, we believe that there is substantial uncertainty that our net deferred tax asset will be realized during the applicable carryforward period. As such, valuation allowances have been recorded against the applicable federal and state deferred tax assets of GWG Holdings as of December 31, 2019 and 2018. In 2019, valuation allowances were recorded against the total amount of non-permanent deferred tax assets. Permanent deferred tax assets of $10.8 million in 2019 were comprised of interest expense limitation under Section 163(j) and the tax-effected net operating loss (“NOL”) created subsequent to 2018.

At December 31, 2019 and December 31, 2018, we had NOL carryforwards of $28.6 million and $36.5 million, respectively, for both federal and state taxes. The NOL carryforwards subject to expiration (i.e., those generated prior to 2018) will begin to expire in 2033. Future utilization of NOL carryforwards is subject to limitations under Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code. This section generally relates to a more than 50 percent change in ownership over a three-year period. As a result of the Exchange Transaction, a change in ownership for tax purposes only has occurred as of December 28, 2018. As such, the annual utilization of our net operating losses generated prior to the ownership change is limited. However, net unrealized built-in gains on our life insurance policies result in an increase in the Section 382 limit over the five-year recognition period, which resulted in a nominal amount of current tax liability in 2019.

Principal Revenue and Expense Items

During the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018, we earned revenues from the following primary sources:

During the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018, our main components of expense are summarized below:

Additional components of our net earnings include:

Results of Operations — 2019 Compared to 2018

The following is our analysis of the results of operations for the periods indicated below. This analysis should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and related notes (dollar values in thousands).

Revenue from changes in estimated probabilistic cash flows, net of premiums paid was $1.6 million and $21.4 million in 2019 and 2018, respectively. The increase of $89.4 million in gain (loss) on life insurance policies for the year ended December 31, 2019 over the comparable prior year period was driven by a significant increase in maturities of life insurance policies and an $87.1 million charge resulting from the adoption of the Longest Life Expectancy methodology in 2018, offset by higher premiums paid in 2019.

The face value of policies purchased was $97.3 million and $440.4 million in 2019 and 2018, respectively, reflecting a decrease of face value purchased of $343.1 million. The resulting unrealized gain on acquisition was $6.9 million and $28.0 million in 2019 and 2018, respectively, reflecting a decrease of $21.1 million. Decreased unrealized gain on acquisition in the current period is the result of a strategic decision to significantly reduce capital allocated to purchasing additional life insurance policies in the secondary market and to increase capital allocated toward providing liquidity to a broader range of alternative assets, primarily through additional investments in Beneficient. On December 31, 2019, we obtained the right to appoint a majority of the board of directors of the general partner of Ben LP. As a result of this change-of-control event, we reported the results of Ben LP and its subsidiaries on a consolidated basis beginning on the transaction date of December 31, 2019. We believe Beneficient can finance investments in alternative assets that will generally produce higher risk-adjusted returns than those we can generally achieve from life insurance policies acquired in the secondary market. Furthermore, although we believe that our portfolio of life insurance policies is a meaningful component of a growing diversified alternative asset portfolio, we continue to explore strategic alternatives for our life insurance portfolio aimed at maximizing its value, including a possible sale, refinancing or recapitalization of our life insurance portfolio.

The face value of matured policies was $125.1 million and $71.1 million in 2019 and 2018, respectively, reflecting an increase of face value of matured policies of $54.0 million. The resulting net revenue recognized at maturity was $69.1 million and $28.5 million, respectively. Revenue changes from maturity events of $40.6 million primarily resulted from the changes of face value of policies matured during those same periods.

Net revenue charges from change in life expectancy evaluation were ($2.3) million and ($4.9) million in 2019 and 2018, respectively. The resulting net revenue increase of $2.6 million primarily resulted from a lower number of life expectancy updates received during 2019 over 2018.

Interest and other income is comprised of interest from financing receivables, bank interest and other miscellaneous items. Increased interest and other income of $3.2 million in 2019 compared to 2018 was primarily driven by the interest income earned on the financing receivables from Beneficient, and to a lesser extent, interest income from higher bank account balances and the implementation of a sweep process to move balances to higher interest earning bank accounts.

Interest and Operating Expenses (in thousands)

The increase in interest expense was primarily due to the increase in the average outstanding L Bonds from $548.6 million in 2018 to $815.3 million in 2019, contributing $22.7 million of increased interest expense, including amortization of deferred financing costs. Seller Trust L Bonds of $366.9 million were issued in the third quarter of 2018 resulting in an additional $16.7 million of interest expense in 2019 compared to 2018. These increases were partially offset by $4.7 million of lower interest expense on the second amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation due to net paydowns of $19.8 million during the first ten months of 2019, prior to the amendment of the facility on November 1, 2019. A description of the agreement governing our second amended and restated senior credit facility is set forth below under the caption “Amendment of Credit Facility with LNV Corporation.”

The increase in employee compensation and benefits in 2019 compared to 2018 was primarily related to management changes discussed under the caption “The Expanded Strategic Relationship” above, as well as incentive and severance costs associated with moving our principal executive offices from Minneapolis to Dallas during 2019. We also experienced higher costs in 2019 compared to 2018 resulting from certain stock-based compensation arrangements in the third and fourth quarters of 2019.

The increase in legal and professional fees in 2019 compared to 2018 is the result of higher non-capitalizable professional service fees, primarily legal and consulting fees, associated with the Investment and Exchange Agreements and the investment in InsurTech Holdings, in addition to legal, consulting and fees related to our move from Minneapolis to Dallas in 2019.

Insurtech Initiatives

During 2019 and 2018, we incurred $5.5 million and $4.2 million of expenses, respectively, in furtherance of our insurtech initiatives. These expenses are primarily related to the development of intellectual property surrounding advanced epigenetic testing technology.

As previously discussed, on November 11, 2019, GWG contributed the common stock and membership interests of its previously wholly-owned subsidiaries Life Epigenetics and youSurance to InsurTech Holdings in exchange for a membership interest in InsurTech Holdings. We believe that as a separate entity (rather than as a small subsidiary of a large financial services holding company), the InsurTech Holdings businesses can reach their maximum potential in terms of marketing and branding, attraction of talent, appropriate peer group comparisons and, ultimately, return to its owners. We expect InsurTech Holdings’ costs to increase in the future, which will affect our consolidated earnings through our earnings (loss) from equity method investment. Under the Operating Agreement of InsurTech Holdings, we are obligated to invest approximately $20.0 million in InsurTech Holdings over a two year period ending in November 2021, of which $2.1 million was funded during the fourth quarter of 2019.

Income Tax Expense

We realized $57.9 million in income tax expense in 2019, which resulted in an effective tax rate of 34.8%, compared to the statutory federal income tax rate of 21%. We realized no income tax expense in 2018.

The following table provides a reconciliation of our income tax expense (benefit) at the statutory federal income tax rate to our actual income tax expense (in thousands):

The most significant temporary differences between GAAP net income (loss) and taxable net income (loss) are the treatment of interest costs, policy premiums and servicing costs with respect to the acquisition and maintenance of the life insurance policies and revenue recognition with respect to the fair value of the life insurance portfolio.

Revenue and Earnings before Tax by Reportable Segment — 2019 Compared to 2018

We have two reportable segments: 1) Investment in Beneficient and 2) Secondary Life Insurance. Corporate & Other includes certain activities not allocated to specific business segments. These activities include holding company financing and investing activities, and management and administrative services to support the overall operations of the Company.

Comparison of revenue by reportable segment for the periods indicated (in thousands):

The primary drivers of the changes from 2018 to 2019 were as follows:

Comparison of earnings before tax by reportable segment for the periods indicated (in thousands):

The primary drivers of the changes from 2018 to 2019 were as follows:

Liquidity and Capital Resources

We finance our businesses through a combination of life insurance policy benefit receipts, dividends and interest on investments, equity offerings, debt offerings and our second amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation. We have traditionally used proceeds from these sources for policy acquisition, policy premiums and servicing costs, working capital and financing expenditures including paying principal, interest and dividends. We have also used proceeds to make additional investments in Beneficient. As of December 31, 2019 and 2018, we had approximately $151.5 million and $141.9 million, respectively, in combined available cash, cash equivalents, restricted cash, policy benefits receivable and fees receivable.

We currently fund our business primarily with debt that generally has a shorter duration than the duration of our long-term assets. The resulting asset/liability mismatch can result in a liquidity shortfall if we are unable to renew maturing short term debt or secure suitable additional financing. In such a situation, we could be forced to sell assets at less than optimal (distressed) prices. We were unable to offer our L Bonds, our primary source of debt capital, for the approximately three month period commencing May 1, 2019 due to delays in filing certain periodic reports with the SEC. We drew down our cash balances during that period as L Bonds matured but were unable to be renewed, and we were unable to offer new L Bonds. We recommenced our L Bond offering on August 8, 2019.

Additional future borrowing base capacity for premiums and servicing costs, created as the premiums and servicing costs of pledged life insurance policies become due and by additional policy pledges to the facility, if any, exists under our second amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation. The second amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation has certain financial and nonfinancial covenants. We were in compliance with the debt covenants as of December 31, 2019 and are in compliance as of the filing date of this report.

On August 10, 2018, we issued $50 million of Series B in connection with the Initial Transfer of the Exchange Transaction. Approximately half of the proceeds from this sale were distributed to common shareholders pursuant to a special dividend paid on September 5, 2018 to shareholders of record on August 27, 2018. The remaining amount was expected to be utilized primarily for our insurtech initiatives. As noted in the “Results of Operations” section above, on November 11, 2019, GWG contributed the common stock and membership interests of its wholly owned Life Epigenetics and youSurance subsidiaries to a legal entity, InsurTech Holdings, in exchange for a membership interest in the entity. In connection with the transaction, GWG contributed $2.1 million in cash to InsurTech Holdings during the fourth quarter of 2019 and is committed to contribute an additional $17.9 million to the entity over the next two years. We do not expect to issue any additional Series B. 

We heavily rely on our L Bond offering to fund our business operations. As described elsewhere in this report, we suspended our offering on May 1, 2019 due to our delinquency in filing certain periodic reports with the SEC. After regaining compliance with our SEC reporting obligations, we recommenced our offering of L Bonds on August 8, 2019. If we are forced to suspend our L Bond offering in the future for any significant additional length of time and we are unable to obtain replacement financing, our business would be adversely impacted and our ability to service and repay our debt obligations, much of which is short term, would be compromised, thereby negatively affecting our business prospects and viability.

Financings Summary

We had the following outstanding debt balances as of December 31, 2019 and 2018:

The table below reconciles the face amount of our outstanding debt to the carrying value shown on our balance sheets:

In January 2012, we began publicly offering up to $250.0 million in debt securities (initially named “Renewable Secured Debentures” and subsequently renamed “L Bonds”) that was completed in January 2015.

On September 24, 2014, we consummated an initial public offering of our common stock resulting in the sale of 800,000 shares of common stock at $12.50 per share and net proceeds of approximately $8.6 million after the deduction of underwriting commissions, discounts and expense reimbursements.

In January 2015, we began publicly offering up to $1.0 billion of L Bonds as a follow-on to our earlier $250.0 million public debt offering. In January 2018, we began publicly offering up to $1.0 billion L Bonds as a follow-on to our earlier L Bond offering. Through December 31, 2019, the total amount of L Bonds sold under these two L Bond offerings, including renewals, was $1.5 billion. As of December 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively, we had approximately $948.1 million and $662.1 million in principal amount of L Bonds outstanding (exclusive of Seller Trust L Bonds).

In February 2017, we began publicly offering up to 150,000 shares of our Series 2 Redeemable Preferred Stock (“RPS 2”) at a per-share price of $1,000. As of December 31, 2018, we had issued approximately $150 million stated value of RPS 2 and terminated that offering.

On August 10, 2018, GWG Holdings, GWG Life and the Bank of Utah, as trustee, entered into the Supplemental Indenture to the Amended and Restated Indenture. The Amended and Restated Indenture was subsequently amended on December 31, 2019, primarily to modify the calculation of the Debt Coverage Ratio in the Indenture to provide the Company with the ability to incur indebtedness (directly or through a subsidiary of the Company) that is payable in capital stock of the Company or mandatorily convertible into or exchangeable for capital stock of the Company that would be excluded from the calculation of the Debt Coverage Ratio. GWG Holdings entered into the Supplemental Indenture to add and modify certain provisions of the Amended and Restated Indenture necessary to provide for the issuance of the Seller Trust L Bonds. We issued Seller Trust L Bonds in the amount of $366.9 million to the Seller Trusts in connection with the Exchange Transaction. The maturity date of the Seller Trust L Bonds is August 9, 2023. The Seller Trust L Bonds bear interest at 7.5% per annum. Interest is payable monthly in cash (see Note 13 to the consolidated financial statements).

In August 2018, we offered and sold 5,000,000 shares of our Series B Convertible Preferred Stock in reliance upon the exemption from registration provided by Section 4(a)(2) under the Securities Act of 1933. The Series B shares were issued at $10 per share for cash consideration of $50 million.

On December 28, 2018, the Series B converted into 5,000,000 shares of our common stock at a conversion price of $10.00 per share immediately following the Final Closing of the Exchange Transaction.

The weighted-average interest rate of our outstanding L Bonds (excluding the Seller Trust L Bonds) as of December 31, 2019 and 2018 was 7.15% and 7.10%, respectively, and the weighted-average maturity at those dates was 3.21 and 2.83 years, respectively. Our L Bonds have renewal features. Since we first issued our L Bonds, we have experienced $646.3 million in maturities, of which $341.3 million has renewed through December 31, 2019 for an additional term. This has provided us with an aggregate renewal rate of approximately 52.8% for investments in these securities.

Future contractual maturities of L Bonds and Seller Trust L Bonds at December 31, 2019 are as follows (in thousands):

The L Bonds and the Seller Trust L Bonds are secured by all of our assets and are subordinate to our second amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation.

On September 27, 2017, we entered into a $300 million amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation in which DLP IV is the borrower. As of December 31, 2019, we had approximately $184.6 million outstanding under the senior credit facility. On November 1, 2019, we entered into a second amended and restated senior credit facility, which replaced the prior agreement governing the facility. A description of the agreement governing our second amended and restated senior credit facility is set forth below under the caption “Amendment of Credit Facility with LNV Corporation.” We intend to use the proceeds from this facility to maintain our portfolio of life insurance policies, for liquidity and for general corporate purposes.

Beneficient had borrowings with an aggregate principal balance outstanding, including accrued interest, of $152.2 million as of December 31, 2019. This aggregate balance includes a senior credit agreement and a second lien credit agreement with respective balances, including accrued interest, of $77.5 million and $72.2 million at December 31, 2019. Both loans accrue interest at a rate of 1-month LIBOR plus 3.95%, compounded daily, with interest due by the 15^th of each month. Ben LP intends to repay with cash or refinance with other third-party lenders the senior credit agreement and the second lien credit agreement prior to their maturities, both of which are on June 30, 2020. Ben LP may not be able to refinance or obtain additional financing on favorable terms, or at all. If Ben LP is unable to refinance the senior credit agreement or the second lien credit agreement, or defaults on either loan, then Ben LP will be required to either (i) sell assets to repay these loans or (ii) to raise additional capital through the sale of equity and the ownership interest of Ben LP’s equity holders may be diluted. These loans are not guaranteed by GWG. Beneficient has additional borrowings maturing in 2023 and 2024 with an aggregate principal balance outstanding, including accrued interest, of $2.5 million as of December 31, 2019. Future contractual maturities of these borrowings are as follows (in thousands):

We expect to meet our ongoing operational capital needs for alternative asset investments, policy premiums and servicing costs, working capital and financing expenditures including paying principal, interest and dividends through a combination of the receipt of policy benefits from our portfolio of life insurance policies, net proceeds from our L Bond offering, dividends and interest from investments, including Beneficient’s loans receivable, and funding available from our second amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation. We estimate that our liquidity and capital resources are sufficient for our current and projected financial needs for at least the next twelve months given current assumptions. However, if we are unable to continue our L Bond offering for any reason, and we are unable to obtain capital from other sources, our business will be materially and adversely affected. In addition, our business will be materially and adversely affected if we do not receive the policy benefits we forecast and if holders of our L Bonds fail to renew with the frequency we have historically experienced. In such a case, we could be forced to sell our investments in life insurance policies to service or satisfy our debt-related and other obligations. A sale under such circumstances may result in significant impairment of the recognized value of our portfolio.

Capital expenditures have historically not been material and we do not anticipate making material capital expenditures in 2020.

Alternative Assets and Secured Indebtedness

At December 31, 2019, the fair value of our investments in life insurance policies of $796.0 million plus our cash balance of $79.1 million, restricted cash balance of $20.3 million, life insurance policy benefits receivable of $23.0 million, loan receivables of $232.3 million, fees receivable of $29.2 million, and other assets of $99.2 million (which are mostly related to our financing receivables from affiliates) totaled $1.4 billion, representing an excess of portfolio assets over secured indebtedness of $155.0 million. At December 31, 2018, the fair value of our investments in life insurance policies of $747.9 million plus our cash balance of $114.6 million, restricted cash balance of $10.8 million, life insurance policy benefits receivable of $16.5 million, and other assets of $591.0 million totaled $1.5 billion, representing an excess of portfolio assets over secured indebtedness of $293.6 million.

The following forward-looking table seeks to illustrate the impact that a hypothetical sale of our portfolio of life insurance assets (at various discount rates), and the realization of the financing receivables from affiliates, investment in common units of Ben LP (a substantial majority of the net assets of which are currently represented by intangible assets and goodwill), investment in Preferred Series A Subclass 1 Unit Account of BCH, and equity security investment in the Option Agreement (in each case, at their respective carrying amounts and assuming no discount for lack of marketability or transaction costs, which could be substantial) would have on our ability to satisfy our debt obligations as of December 31, 2019. The amounts in the table below do not include the consolidation of the assets and liabilities of Beneficient and related eliminations as of December 31, 2019. In all cases, the sale of the life insurance assets owned by DLP IV will be used first to satisfy all amounts owing under our second amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation. The net sale proceeds remaining after satisfying all obligations under our second amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation would be applied to the L Bonds and Seller Trust L Bonds on a pari passu basis.

Life Insurance

The above table illustrates that our ability to fully satisfy amounts owing under the L Bonds and Seller Trust L Bonds would likely be impaired upon the sale or the realization of the financing receivables from affiliates, investment in common units of Ben LP, investment in Preferred Series A Subclass 1 Unit Account of BCH, and equity security investment in the Option Agreement at their respective carrying amounts, plus all our life insurance assets at a price equivalent to a discount rate of approximately 27.41% or higher at December 31, 2019. At December 31, 2018, the likely impairment occurred at a discount rate of approximately 18.70% or higher. The discount rate used to calculate the fair value of our life insurance portfolio was 8.25% as of both December 31, 2019 and December 31, 2018.

The table does not include any allowance for transactional fees and expenses (which expenses and fees could be substantial) nor any discount for lack of marketability associated with a portfolio sale or the realization of the financing receivables with affiliates, investment in common units of Ben LP, investment in Preferred Series A Subclass 1 Unit Account of BCH, and equity security investment in the Option Agreement, respectively, and is provided to demonstrate how various discount rates used to value our portfolio of life insurance assets could affect our ability to satisfy amounts owing under our debt obligations in light of our senior secured lender’s right to priority payments under our senior credit facility with LNV Corporation.

The table assumes we will realize the full amounts of financing receivables from affiliates, investment in common units of Ben LP, investment in Preferred Series A Subclass 1 Unit Account of BCH, and equity security investment in the Option Agreement. There is currently no market for the aforementioned assets, and a market may not develop. Our Commercial Loan receivable and a portion of our investment in the common units of Ben LP may be used as consideration for retiring the Seller Trust L Bonds upon a redemption event or at the maturity of the Seller Trust L Bonds (see Notes 12 and 13 to the consolidated financial statements). This table also does not include the yield maintenance fee we are required to pay in certain circumstances under our second amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation, which could be substantial. The above table should be read in conjunction with the information contained in other sections of this report, including Critical Accounting Policies — Fair Value Components — Discount Rate and the notes to the consolidated financial statements.

Amendment of Credit Facility with LNV Corporation

Effective November 1, 2019, DLP IV entered into a second amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation. The second amended and restated senior credit facility makes available a total of up to $300.0 million in credit to DLP IV with a maturity date of September 27, 2029. Subject to available borrowing base capacity, additional advances are available under the second amended and restated senior credit facility at the LIBOR rate described below. Such advances are available to pay premiums and servicing costs of pledged life insurance policies as such amounts become due. Interest will accrue on amounts borrowed under the second amended and restated senior credit facility at an annual interest rate, determined as of each date of borrowing or quarterly if there is no borrowing, equal to (a) 12-month LIBOR, plus (b) 7.50% per annum. The effective rate at December 31, 2019 was 9.54%. Interest payments are made on a quarterly basis.

Under the second amended and restated senior credit facility, DLP IV has granted the administrative agent, for the benefit of the lenders under the facility, a security interest in all of DLP IV’s assets. As with prior collateral arrangements relating to the senior secured debt of GWG Holdings and its subsidiaries (on a consolidated basis), GWG Life’s excess equity value of DLP IV after satisfying all amounts owing under our second amended and restated credit facility is available as collateral for the obligations of GWG Holdings under the L Bonds and Seller Trust L Bonds (although the life insurance assets owned by DLP IV do not themselves serve as direct collateral for those obligations).

We are subject to various financial and non-financial covenants under the second amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation, including, but not limited to, compliance with laws, preservation of existence, financial reporting, keeping of proper books of record and account, payment of taxes, and ensuring that neither DLP IV nor GWG Life become an investment company. As of December 31, 2019, we were in compliance with all financial and non-financial covenants.

Cash Flows

Interest and Dividend Payments

We finance our businesses through a combination of: life insurance policy benefit receipts; principal, dividends and interest receipts from investments, including Ben LP loan receivables; debt and equity offerings; and our senior credit facility with LNV Corporation. We have historically relied on debt (L Bonds and our senior credit facility with LNV Corporation) and equity (preferred stock) financing for the majority of our cash expenditures (for policy acquisition, policy premiums and servicing costs, working capital and financing expenditures including paying principal and interest on existing debt, and for making investments in Beneficient) as the amount of cash flows from the realization of life insurance policy benefits and cash flows from our other investments has been insufficient to meet all of our needs. This has resulted in the Company incurring substantial indebtedness (much of it being of a short term nature) and, to a lesser extent, obligations to make dividend payments on our classes of preferred stock.

Our total interest expense of $114.8 million and $80.1 million for years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively, represent the largest single line item of expense in each period. Preferred stock cash dividends were $16.9 and $16.7 million for the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively. While reducing our cost of funds and increasing our common equity base (at valuations accretive to our book value) are primary goals of the Company, until we do so we will continue to expend significant amounts of cash for interest and dividend payments and will thus continue to rely heavily on our ability to raise cash from our L Bond offering, senior credit facility with LNV Corporation and other means as they are developed and available.

Life Insurance Policy Premium Payments

The payment of premiums and servicing costs to maintain life insurance policies represents one of our most significant requirements for cash disbursement. When a policy is purchased, we are able to calculate the minimum premium payments required to maintain the policy in-force. Over time as the insured ages, premium payments will increase. Nevertheless, the probability we will be required to pay the premiums decreases as mortality becomes more likely. These scheduled premiums and associated probabilities are factored into our expected internal rate of return and cash-flow modeling. Beyond premiums, we incur policy servicing costs, including annual trustee, policy administration and tracking costs. Additionally, we incur significant financing costs, including principal, interest and dividends. Both policy servicing costs and financing costs are excluded from our internal rate of return calculations. We finance our businesses through a combination of life insurance policy benefit receipts, dividends and interest on other investments, equity offerings, debt offerings, and advances under our senior credit facility with LNV Corporation.

The amount of payments for anticipated premiums, including the requirement under our second amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation to maintain a two month cost-of-insurance threshold within each policy cash value account, and servicing costs that we will be required to make over the next five years to maintain our current portfolio, assuming no mortalities, is set forth in the table below (in thousands).

Our anticipated premium expenses are subject to the risk of increased cost-of-insurance charges (i.e., “COI” or premium charges) for the life insurance policies we own. During 2018, we received notice of, or support for, COI rate changes on 30 policies with combined face value of $84.6 million in our portfolio. These increased charges resulted in a $5.1 million reduction in the fair value of our life insurance portfolio in 2018. We did not receive any notices of COI rate changes in 2019.

We have no known pending cost-of-insurance increases on any policies in our portfolio, but we are aware that cost-of-insurance increases have become more prevalent in the industry. Thus, we may see additional insurers implementing cost-of-insurance increases in the future.

Life Insurance Policy Benefit Receipts

For the quarter-end dates set forth below, the following table illustrates the total amount of face value of policy benefits owned, and the trailing 12 months of life insurance policy benefits realized and premiums paid on our portfolio. The trailing 12-month benefits/premium coverage ratio indicates the ratio of policy benefits realized to premiums paid over the trailing 12-month period from our portfolio of life insurance policies.

We believe that the portfolio cash flow results set forth above are consistent with our general investment thesis that the life insurance policy benefits we receive will continue to increase over time in relation to the premiums we are required to pay on the remaining polices in the portfolio. Nevertheless, we expect that our portfolio cash flow on a period-to-period basis will remain inconsistent as we continue to allocate substantially more capital to Beneficient and have reduced capital allocated to acquiring a larger, more diversified portfolio of life insurance policies.

Inflation

Changes in inflation do not necessarily correlate with changes in interest rates. We presently do not foresee any material impact of inflation on our results of operations in the periods presented in our consolidated financial statements.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

Unfunded Capital Commitments

Beneficient had $73.8 million of gross potential capital commitments as of December 31, 2019 representing potential limited partner capital funding commitments on the alternative asset funds that serve as collateral to its loans. This is the amount above any existing cash reserves for such capital funding commitments. The trust holding the interest in the limited partnership for the alternative asset fund is required to fund these limited partner capital commitments per the terms of the limited partnership agreement. Capital funding commitment reserves are maintained by the associated trusts created at the origination of each trust for up to $0.1 million. To the extent that the associated trust cannot pay the capital funding commitment, Beneficient is obligated to lend sufficient funds to meet the commitment. Any amounts advanced by Beneficient for these limited partner capital funding commitments above the associated capital funding commitment reserves held by the associated trusts are added to the loan balance and are expected to be recouped through the cash distributions from the alternative asset fund collateral.

Capital commitments generally originate from limited partner agreements having fixed or expiring expiration dates. The total limited partner capital funding commitment amounts may not necessarily represent future cash requirements. Beneficient considers the creditworthiness on a case-by-case basis. At December 31, 2019, Beneficient had no reserves for losses on unused commitments to fund potential limited partner capital funding commitments.

Credit Risk and Interest Rate Risk

We review the credit risk associated with our portfolio of life insurance policies when estimating its fair value. In evaluating the policies’ credit risk, we consider insurance company solvency, credit risk indicators, economic conditions, ongoing credit evaluations, and company positions. We attempt to manage our credit risk related to life insurance policies typically by purchasing policies issued only from companies with an investment-grade credit rating by either Standard & Poor’s, Moody’s, or A.M. Best Company. As of December 31, 2019, 95.7% of our life insurance policies, by face value benefits, were issued by companies that maintained an investment-grade rating (BBB or better) by Standard & Poor’s.

The assets and liabilities exchanged in the Initial Transfer of the Exchange Transaction are excluded from this analysis.

Our second amended and restated senior credit facility with LNV Corporation and Beneficient’s other borrowings are floating-rate financings. In addition, our ability to offer interest and dividend rates that attract capital (including in our continuous offering of L Bonds) is generally impacted by prevailing interest rates. Furthermore, while our L Bond offering provides us with fixed-rate debt financing, our Debt Coverage Ratio is calculated in relation to the interest rate on all of our debt financing, exclusive of our Seller Trust L Bonds. Therefore, increases in interest rates impact our business by increasing our borrowing costs and reducing availability under our debt financing arrangements. Earnings from our life insurance portfolio are based upon the spread, if any, generated between the return on the portfolio and the total cost of our financing (excluding cost of financing for the Seller Trust L Bonds). As a result, increases in interest rates will reduce the earnings we expect to achieve from our investments in life insurance policies.

Beneficient is subject to risks related to markets, credit, currency, and interest rates. Beneficient issues loans that are subject to credit risk, repayment risk and interest rate risk. Beneficient has underwriting procedures and utilizes market rates. As of December 31, 2019, all of Beneficient’s loans are collateralized by the cash flows originating from alternative assets without recourse to the client. Currently, all of these alternative assets consist of private equity limited partnership interests which are primarily denominated in the U.S. dollar, Euro, and Canadian dollar. The underlying portfolio companies primarily operate in the United States, with the largest percentage, based on NAV, operating in healthcare technology, bio-technology, and diversified telecommunications services industries. The Company mitigates credit risk through the ExAlt Plan^TM whereby excess cash flows from a collective pool of alternative assets can be utilized to repay the loans when cash flows from the client’s original alternative assets are not sufficient to repay the outstanding principal, interest, and fees.

Debt Coverage Ratio

Our L Bond borrowing covenants require us to maintain a Debt Coverage Ratio of less than 90%. The Debt Coverage Ratio is calculated by dividing the sum of our total interest-bearing indebtedness (other than Excluded Indebtedness described in Note 2 to the table below) by the sum of our cash, cash equivalents, restricted cash, life insurance policy benefits receivable, the net present value of the life insurance portfolio, and, without duplication, the value of all of our other assets as reflected on our most recently available balance sheet prepared in accordance with GAAP. The discount rate we use for the net present value of our life insurance portfolio for this calculation may not be the same discount rate we use for our GAAP valuation and is not necessarily reflective of the amount we could realize upon a sale of the portfolio.

As of December 31, 2019 and 2018, we were in compliance with the Debt Coverage Ratio.

ITEM 7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK.

Not applicable.

ITEM 8. CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of

GWG Holdings, Inc. and Subsidiaries

Opinion on the Financial Statements

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheet of GWG Holdings, Inc. and Subsidiaries (the “Company”) as of December 31, 2019, and the related consolidated statements of operations, changes in stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2019, and the related notes (collectively referred to as the “consolidated financial statements”). In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Company as of December 31, 2019, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2019, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (“PCAOB”), the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2019, based on criteria established in 2013 Internal Control—Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO), and our report dated March 26, 2020, expressed an unqualified opinion.

Basis for Opinion

These consolidated financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these consolidated financial statements based on our audit. We are a public accounting firm registered with the 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 audit 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 consolidated financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud. Our audit included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the consolidated 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 consolidated financial statements. Our audit also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the consolidated financial statements. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

We have served as the Company’s auditor since 2019.

/s/ WHITLEY PENN LLP

Dallas, Texas

March 27, 2020

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of

GWG Holdings, Inc. and Subsidiaries

Opinion on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

We have audited GWG Holdings, Inc. and Subsidiaries (the “Company”) internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2019, based on criteria established in 2013 Internal Control—Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). In our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2019, based on criteria established in 2013 Internal Control—Integrated Framework issued by COSO.

We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (“PCAOB”), the consolidated balance sheet of the Company, as of December 31, 2019, and the related consolidated statements of operations, changes in stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2019, and our report dated March 26, 2020 expressed an unqualified opinion on those consolidated financial statements.

Basis for Opinion

The Company’s management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting, and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in the accompanying Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the entity’s internal control over financial reporting based on our audit. We are a public accounting firm registered with the 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 audit in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our audit also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

Definition and Limitations of Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

An entity’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. An entity’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the entity; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the entity are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the entity; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the entity’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

/s/ WHITLEY PENN LLP

Dallas, Texas

March 27, 2020

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To the Shareholders and the Board of Directors of GWG Holdings, Inc. and Subsidiaries:

Opinion on the Financial Statements

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheet of GWG Holdings, Inc. and Subsidiaries (the “Company”) as of December 31, 2018, the related consolidated statements of operations, changes in stockholders’ equity, and cash flows, for the year ended December 31, 2018, and the related notes (collectively referred to as the “consolidated financial statements”). In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Company as of December 31, 2018, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2018, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

Emphasis of Matter

As described in Note 6 to the consolidated financial statements, for the year ended December 31, 2018, the Company incurred a loss within its gain (loss) on life insurance policies, net, of $87.1 million, resulting from a change in accounting estimate related to the changes made to the life expectancy estimation methodology on life insurance policies in the Company’s portfolio. Our opinion is not modified with respect to this matter.

Basis for Opinion

These consolidated financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s consolidated financial statements based on our audit. We are a public accounting firm registered with the 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 audit 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 consolidated financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud. Our audit included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the consolidated 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 consolidated financial statements. Our audit also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the consolidated financial statements. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

/s/ Baker Tilly Virchow Krause, LLP

We served as the Company’s auditor from 2013 to 2019.

Minneapolis, Minnesota

July 9, 2019

GWG HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

(in thousands, except per share data)