NOVATION COMPANIES, INC. - Annual Report: 2007 (Form 10-K)

Table of Contents

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

For the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2007

For the Transition Period From              to             

Commission File Number 001-13533

NOVASTAR FINANCIAL, INC.

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)

Registrant’s Telephone Number, Including Area Code: (816) 237-7000

Securities Registered Pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

None

Securities Registered Pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

Title of Each Class

Common Stock, $0.01 par value

Redeemable Preferred Stock

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

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

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

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.  x

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer. See definition of “accelerated filer and large accelerated filer” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):

Large accelerated filer  ¨    Accelerated filer  x    Non-accelerated filer  ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Exchange Act Rule 12b-2).    Yes  ¨    No  x

The aggregate market value of voting and non-voting stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant as of June 30, 2007 was approximately $239,636,773, based upon the closing sales price of the registrant’s common stock as reported on the New York Stock Exchange on such date.

The number of shares of the Registrant’s Common Stock outstanding on March 31, 2008 was 9,390,840.

Documents Incorporated by Reference

Items 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14 of Part III are incorporated by reference to the NovaStar Financial, Inc. definitive proxy statement to shareholders, which will be filed with the Commission no later than 120 days after December 31, 2007.

Table of Contents

NOVASTAR FINANCIAL, INC.

FORM 10-K

For the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2007

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1

Table of Contents

PART I

Safe Harbor Statement

Statements in this report regarding NovaStar Financial, Inc. and its business, which are not historical facts, are “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Forward looking statements are those that predict or describe future events and that do not relate solely to historical matters and include statements regarding management’s beliefs, estimates, projections, and assumptions with respect to, among other things, our future operations, business plans and strategies, as well as industry and market conditions, all of which are subject to change at any time without notice. Words such as “believe,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “promise,” “plan,” and other expressions or words of similar meanings, as well as future or conditional verbs such as “will,” “would,” “should,” “could,” or “may” are generally intended to identify forward-looking statements. Actual results and operations for any future period may vary materially from those discussed herein. Some important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated include: our ability to manage our business during this difficult period for the subprime industry; our ability to continue as a going concern; decreases in cash flows from our mortgage securities; our ability to reduce expenses from our discontinued operations; increases in the credit losses on mortgage loans underlying our mortgage securities and our mortgage loans – held in portfolio; our ability to repay Wachovia in a manner and time period acceptable to Wachovia; our ability to remain in compliance with the agreements governing our indebtedness; impairments on our mortgage assets; increases in prepayment or default rates on our mortgage assets; increases in margin calls and loan repurchase requests; changes in assumptions regarding estimated loan losses and fair value amounts; our ability to maintain effective internal control over financial reporting and disclosure controls and procedures in the future; events impacting the subprime mortgage industry in general, including events impacting our competitors and liquidity available to the industry; residential property values; interest rate fluctuations on our assets that differ from our liabilities; the outcome of litigation or regulatory actions pending against us or other legal contingencies; our compliance with applicable local, state and federal laws and regulations; our ability to adapt to and implement technological changes; compliance with new accounting pronouncements; the impact of general economic conditions; and the risks that are from time to time included in our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), including this report on Form 10-K. Other factors not presently identified may also cause actual results to differ. This report on Form 10-K speaks only as of its date and we expressly disclaim any duty to update the information herein except as required by federal securities laws.

Item 1. Business

We are a Maryland corporation formed on September 13, 1996 which operates solely as a non-conforming residential mortgage portfolio manager. Prior to significant changes in our business during 2007 and the first quarter of 2008, we originated, purchased, securitized, sold, invested in and serviced residential nonconforming mortgage loans and mortgage backed securities. We retained, through our mortgage securities investment portfolio, significant interests in the nonconforming loans we originated and purchased, and through our servicing platform, serviced all of the loans in which we retained interests. During 2007 and early 2008, we discontinued our mortgage lending operations and sold our mortgage servicing rights which subsequently resulted in the abandonment of our servicing operations. See “Executive Overview of Performance” and “Known Material Trends, Significant Events and Uncertainties” under “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” for further discussion of the severely disrupted mortgage industry and credit markets and the changes we made to our operations to manage through those changes.

We currently intend to manage only our mortgage portfolio management segment. In the event we are able to significantly increase our liquidity position (as to which no assurance can be given), we may use excess cash to make certain investments if we determine that such investments could provide attractive risk-adjusted returns to shareholders, including, potentially investing in new or existing operating companies. Because of certain state licensing requirements, it is unlikely we are able, ourselves, to directly recommence mortgage lending activities so long as we continue to have a shareholders’ deficit. Segment information for the three years ended December 31, 2007 is included in Note 16 to our consolidated financial statements.

Historically, we had elected to be taxed as a real estate investment trust (“REIT”) under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”). During 2007, we announced that we would not be able to pay a dividend on our common stock with respect to our 2006 taxable income, and as a result, our status as a REIT terminated retroactive to January 1, 2006. This retroactive revocation of our REIT status resulted in us becoming taxable as a C corporation for 2006 and subsequent years.

Our consolidated financial statements have been prepared on a going concern basis of accounting which contemplates continuity of operations, realization of assets, liabilities and commitments in the normal course of business. There are substantial doubts that we will be able to continue as a going concern and, therefore, may be unable to realize our assets and discharge our liabilities in the normal course of business. The financial statements do not reflect any adjustments relating to the recoverability and classification of recorded asset amounts or to the amounts and classification of liabilities that may be necessary should we be unable to continue as a going concern.

2

Table of Contents

Mortgage Portfolio Management

The continued deterioration of the secondary market for subprime mortgage assets has altered the focus of our portfolio management business from that of seeking investment opportunities to that of only managing our current portfolio of mortgage securities and mortgage loans. Our portfolio of mortgage securities includes interest-only, prepayment penalty, and overcollateralization securities retained from our securitizations of nonconforming, single-family residential mortgage loans which we have accounted for as sales, under applicable accounting rules (collectively, the “residual securities”). Our portfolio of mortgage securities also includes subordinated mortgage securities retained from our securitizations and subordinated home equity loan asset-backed securities (“ABS”) purchased from other ABS issuers (collectively, the “subordinated securities”).

The long-term mortgage loan portfolio on our balance sheet consists of mortgage loans classified as held-in-portfolio resulting from securitization transactions treated as financings completed in the second quarter of 2006 and the first quarter of 2007 (NHES Series 2006-1, NHES Series 2006-MTA1, and NHES Series 2007-1). We have financed our investment in these loans by issuing asset backed bonds (“ABB”).

Our mortgage portfolio management operations generate earnings primarily from the interest income generated from our mortgage securities and mortgage loan portfolios.

The credit performance and prepayment rates of the nonconforming loans underlying our securities, as well as the loans classified as held-in-portfolio, directly affects the profitability of this segment. In addition, short-term interest rates have a significant impact on this segment’s profitability.

In the event we are able to significantly increase our liquidity position (as to which no assurance can be given), we may use excess cash to make certain investments if we determine that such investments could provide attractive risk-adjusted returns to shareholders, including, potentially investing in new or existing operating companies.

Market in Which NovaStar Competes

The mortgage industry is dominated by large, sophisticated financial institutions. To compete effectively, we must have a very high level of operational, technological, and managerial expertise as well as access to capital at a competitive cost. As a result of reduced access to capital, general housing trends, rising delinquencies and defaults and other factors, many mortgage lenders have recently experienced severe financial difficulty, with some exiting the business or filing for bankruptcy protection. Primarily because of these factors, the industry continues its consolidation trend.

Risk Management

Management recognizes the following primary risks associated with the business and industry in which it operates.

Interest Rate/Market Risk. Our investment policy goals are to maintain the net interest margin between our assets and liabilities and to diminish the effect of changes in interest rate levels on the market value of our assets, to the extent consistent with our liquidity needs.

Interest Rate Risk. When interest rates on our assets do not adjust at the same time or in the same amounts as the interest rates on our liabilities or when the assets have fixed rates and the liabilities have adjustable rates, future earnings potential is affected. We express this interest rate risk as the risk that the market value of our assets will increase or decrease at different rates than that of our liabilities. Expressed another way, this is the risk that our net asset value will experience an adverse change when interest rates change. We assess the risk based on the change in market values given increases and decreases in interest rates. We also assess the risk based on the impact to net income in changing interest rate environments.

Management historically has used financing sources under which the interest rate resets frequently. As of December 31, 2007, all borrowings under our financing arrangements adjust daily or monthly off LIBOR. On the other hand, very few of the mortgage assets we own adjust on a monthly or daily basis. Most of the mortgage loans contain rates that are fixed for some period of time and then adjust frequently thereafter.

3

Table of Contents

While short-term borrowing rates are low and long-term asset rates are high, this portfolio structure produces good results. However, if short-term interest rates rise rapidly, earning potential is significantly affected and impairments may be incurred, as the asset rate resets would lag the borrowing rate resets.

Historically, we have transferred interest rate agreements at the time of securitization into the securitization trusts to protect the third-party bondholders from interest rate risk and to decrease the volatility of future cash flows related to the securitized mortgage loans. We entered into these interest rate agreements as we originated and purchased mortgage loans in our mortgage lending segment. At the time of a securitization structured as a sale, we transferred interest rate agreements into the securitization trusts and they were removed from our balance sheet. The trust assumed the obligation to make payments and obtained the right to receive payments under these agreements. Generally, net settlement obligations paid by the trust for these interest rate agreements reduce the excess interest cash flows to our residual securities. Net settlement receipts from these interest rate agreements are used either to cover interest shortfalls on the third-party primary bonds or to provide credit enhancement with any remaining funds then flowing to our residual securities. For securitizations structured as financings the derivatives remain on our balance sheet. Generally, these interest rate agreements do not meet the hedging criteria set forth in Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (“GAAP”) while they are on our balance sheet; therefore, we are required to record their change in value as a component of earnings even though they may reduce our interest rate risk. In times when short-term rates rise or drop significantly, the value of our agreements will increase or decrease, respectively. Occasionally, we enter into interest rate agreements that do meet the hedging criteria set forth in GAAP. In these instances, we record their change in value, if effective, directly to other comprehensive income on our statement of shareholder’s equity.

Interest Rate Sensitivity Analysis. To assess interest sensitivity as an indication of exposure to interest rate risk, management relies on models of financial information in a variety of interest rate scenarios. Using these models, the fair value and interest rate sensitivity of each financial instrument, or groups of similar instruments is estimated, and then aggregated to form a comprehensive picture of the risk characteristics of the balance sheet. The risks are analyzed on a market value and cash flow basis.

The following table summarizes management’s estimates of the changes in market value of our mortgage assets and interest rate agreements assuming interest rates were 100 and 200 basis points, or 1 and 2 percent, higher or lower. The cumulative change in market value represents the change in market value of mortgage assets, net of the change in market value of interest rate agreements. The change in market value of the liabilities on our balance sheet due to a change in interest rates is insignificant since a majority of our short-term borrowings and asset-backed bonds (“ABB”) are adjustable rate; however, as noted above, rapid increases in short-term interest rates would negatively impact the interest-rate spread between our liabilities and assets and, consequently, our earnings.

Interest Rate Sensitivity - Market Value

(dollars in thousands)

4

Table of Contents

Hedging. We use derivative instruments, including interest rate swap and cap contracts, to mitigate the risk of our cost of funding increasing at a faster rate than the interest on assets. We adhere to an interest rate risk management program that is approved by our Board. This program is formulated with the intent to mitigate the potential adverse effects resulting from rate adjustment limitations on mortgage assets and the differences between interest rate adjustment indices and interest rate adjustment periods of adjustable-rate mortgage loans and related borrowings. However, our hedging strategy is subject to, and is currently limited by, considerations of cost and liquidity risk.

Interest rate cap and swap agreements are legal contracts between us and a third-party firm or “counterparty”. Under an interest rate cap agreement the counterparty agrees to make payments to us in the future should the one-month LIBOR interest rate rise above the strike rate specified in the contract. We make either quarterly or monthly premium payments or have chosen to pay the premiums at the beginning to the counterparties under contract. Each contract has either a fixed or amortizing notional face amount on which the interest is computed, and a set term to maturity. When the referenced LIBOR interest rate rises above the contractual strike rate, we earn cap income. Under interest rate swap agreements we pay a fixed rate of interest while receiving a rate that adjusts with one-month LIBOR.

The following table summarizes the key contractual terms associated with our interest rate risk management contracts as of December 31, 2007, all of which are held by securitization trusts. All of our pay-fixed swap contracts and interest rate cap contracts are indexed to one-month LIBOR. During 2007, we terminated all of our derivative instruments not in securitization trusts. The cash impact was minimal to settle the terminations.

We have determined the following estimated net fair value amounts by using available market information and valuation methodologies we deem appropriate as of December 31, 2007.

Interest Rate Risk Management Contracts

(dollars in thousands)

Liquidity Risk. A significant risk to our operations is the risk that we will not have enough cash and liquidity available to operate our business and meet our debt payment and other obligations. We currently face substantial liquidity risk and uncertainty, near-term and otherwise, which threatens our ability to continue as a going concern and avoid bankruptcy. See the “Liquidity and Capital Resources” section of “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” for further discussion of liquidity risks and resources available to us.

Credit Risk. Credit risk is the risk that we will not fully collect the principal we have invested in mortgage loans or the amount we have invested in securities. Nonconforming mortgage loans comprise substantially all of our mortgage loan portfolio and serve as collateral for our mortgage securities. Nonconforming borrowers include individuals who do not qualify for agency/conventional lending programs because of a lack of conventional documentation or previous credit difficulties. Often, they are individuals or families who have built up high-rate consumer debt and are attempting to use the equity in their home to consolidate debt and reduce the amount of money it takes to service their monthly debt obligations.

5

Table of Contents

We have traditionally utilized our role as servicer of our securitized pools of mortgage loans to attempt to identify and address potential and actual borrower delinquencies and defaults. As a result of the sale of our mortgage servicing rights effective November 1, 2007, we no longer control the lender-borrower relationship, which may exacerbate the increase in delinquencies and defaults under such mortgage loans and the negative impact on the value and cash flows of our residual and subordinated securities and mortgage loans – held-in-portfolio resulting from such delinquencies and defaults.

Prepayment Risk. Generally speaking, when market interest rates decline, borrowers are more likely to refinance their mortgages. The higher the interest rate a borrower currently has on his or her mortgage the more incentive he or she has to refinance the mortgage when rates decline. In addition, the incentive to refinance increases when credit ratings improve. When home values rise, loan-to-value ratios drop, making it more likely that a borrower will do a “cash-out” refinance. Each of these factors increases the chance for higher prepayment speeds.

The majority of our residual securities portfolio consists of securities which are “interest-only” in nature. These securities represent the net cash flow – interest income – on the underlying loans in excess of the cost to finance the loans. When borrowers repay the principal on their mortgage loans early, the effect is to shorten the period over which interest is earned, and therefore, reduce the cash flow and yield on our securities.

We mitigated prepayment risk by originating and purchasing loans that include a penalty if the borrower repays the loan in the early months of the loan’s life. A majority of our loans have a prepayment penalty up to but no greater than 80% of six months interest on the principal balance that is being repaid. As of December 31, 2007, 51% of the loans which serve as collateral for our mortgage securities had a prepayment penalty. As of December 31, 2007, 62% of our mortgage loans – held-in-portfolio had a prepayment penalty.

U.S. Federal Income Tax Consequences

Historically, we were taxed as a REIT under Section 857 of the Code. As a REIT, we generally were not subject to federal income tax. To maintain our qualification as a REIT, we had to distribute at least 90% of our REIT taxable income to our shareholders and meet certain other tests relating to assets, income and ownership. However, we had elected to treat NFI Holding Corporation and its subsidiaries as taxable REIT subsidiaries (collectively the “TRS”). In general, the TRS could hold assets that the REIT could not hold directly and generally could engage in any real estate or non-real estate related business. The subsidiaries comprising the TRS were subject to corporate federal and state income tax and were taxed as regular C corporations.

During 2007, we were unable to satisfy the REIT distribution requirement for the tax year ended December 31, 2006 either in the form of cash or preferred stock. This action resulted in our loss of REIT status retroactive to January 1, 2006. Our failure to satisfy the REIT distribution test resulted from demands on our liquidity and the substantial decline in our market capitalization during 2007.

As a result of our termination of REIT status, we elected to file a consolidated federal income tax return with our eligible affiliated members. We reported taxable income in 2006 of approximately $212 million, which resulted in a tax liability of approximately $74 million along with interest and penalties due of approximately $5.8 million. After applying the payments and credits, we reported an amount owed to the IRS of approximately $67 million. We applied for and received an extension of time to pay the income taxes due to our expectation of generating a net operating loss for 2007, which may be carried back to 2006. This approved extension should allow us to reduce all of our taxable income (excluding excess inclusion income) from 2006, and eliminate the outstanding tax liability due to the IRS. However, we will be required to pay interest and any penalties that apply on the balance due to the IRS in 2008.

Because we terminated our REIT status effective January 1, 2006 and were taxable as a C corporation for 2006 and beyond, we recorded deferred taxes based on the estimated cumulative temporary differences as of December 31, 2007.

In determining the amount of deferred tax assets to recognize in the financial statements, we evaluate the likelihood of realizing such benefits in future periods. Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Statement of Financial Accounting Standard No. 109 “Accounting for Income Taxes” (“SFAS 109”) requires the recognition of a valuation allowance if it is more likely than not that all or some portion of the deferred tax asset will not be realized. SFAS 109 indicates the more likely than not threshold is a level of likelihood that is more than 50 percent.

Based on the evidence available as of December 31, 2007, including the significant pre-tax losses incurred by us in both the current quarter and previous quarters, the ongoing disruption to the credit markets, the liquidity issues facing us and our decision to close all of our mortgage lending operations, we concluded that it is more likely than not that our entire net deferred tax asset will not be realized. Based on these conclusions, we recorded a valuation allowance of $368.3 million for deferred tax assets as of December 31, 2007 compared to $0.7 million as of December 31, 2006. In future periods, we will continue to monitor all factors that impact positive and negative evidence relating to our deferred tax assets.

6

Table of Contents

As of December 31, 2007, we had a federal net operating loss of approximately $368.4 million. We are expecting to carryback $196.1 million of the 2007 projected federal net operating loss against our 2006 taxable income and have recorded a current receivable for such benefit. The receivable was netted against the 2006 federal liability. The remaining $172.3 federal net operating loss may be carried forward to offset future taxable income, subject to provisions of the Code, including substantial limitations that would be imposed in the event of an “ownership change” as defined by Section 382 of the Code. If not used, this net operating loss will begin to expire in 2025.

The IRS is currently examining the 2005 federal income tax return of NFI Holding Corporation, a wholly-owned subsidiary. We are not aware of any significant findings as a result of this exam, however, the exam is still ongoing. Management believes it has adequately provided for potential tax liabilities that may be assessed for years in which the statute of limitations remains open. However, the assessment of any material liability would adversely affect our financial condition, liquidity and ability to continue as a going concern.

Personnel

As of December 31, 2007, we employed 247 people. Because of further reductions in workforce subsequent to December 31, 2007, we employ approximately 53 people as of March 27, 2008. None of our employees are represented by a union or covered by a collective bargaining agreement.

Available Information

Copies of our annual report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and any amendments to these reports filed or furnished with the SEC are available free of charge through our Internet site (www.novastarmortgage.com) as soon as reasonably practicable after filing with the SEC. References to our website do not incorporate by reference the information on such website into this Annual Report on Form 10-K and we disclaim any such incorporation by reference. Copies of our board committee charters, our board’s Corporate Governance Guidelines, Code of Conduct, and other corporate governance information are available at the Corporate Governance section of our Internet site (www.novastarmortgage.com), or by contacting us directly. Our investor relations contact information follows.

Investor Relations

8140 Ward Parkway, Suite 300

Kansas City, MO 64114

816.237.7424

Email: ir@novastar1.com

Item 1A. Risk Factors

Risk Factors

You should carefully consider the risks described below in evaluating our business and before investing in our publicly traded securities. Any of the risks we describe below or elsewhere in this report could negatively affect our results of operations, financial condition, liquidity, business prospects and ability to continue as a going concern. The risks described below are not the only ones facing us. Additional risks and uncertainties not currently known to us or that we currently deem to be immaterial may also materially adversely affect our results of operations, financial condition, liquidity, business prospects and ability to continue as a going concern. Our business is also subject to the risks that affect many other companies, such as competition, inflation, technological obsolescence, labor relations, general economic conditions and geopolitical events.

Risks Related to Recent Changes in Our Business

The subprime loan market has largely ceased to operate, which has adversely affected our business and may adversely affect our ability to continue as a going concern.

Due to a number of market factors, including increased delinquencies and defaults on residential mortgage loans, investor concerns over asset quality, a weakening of the United States housing market and the failure of certain subprime mortgage companies and hedge funds that have invested in subprime loans, there has been extreme uncertainty and disruption in the subprime mortgage industry as a whole. As a result, our business has been materially and adversely affected in a number of ways. Due to the fact that the

7

Table of Contents

secondary market for mortgage loans has effectively been unavailable to us since the middle of 2007, we have discontinued our mortgage lending business and have sold, at a loss, most of the loans that we originated during 2007 and had not previously securitized. Further, we have sold our mortgage servicing assets to generate cash to repay existing indebtedness and to reduce cash requirements. We have also terminated a substantial portion of our workforce. All of these events have had a material adverse effect on our business and have forced us to change business strategies. Our business now is focused solely on managing our portfolio of mortgage securities. If the subprime market fails to significantly improve, our results of operations, financial condition, liquidity, and business prospects will be further adversely affected and there can be no assurance that we will be able to continue as a going concern. Further, because of state licensing requirements, we are unlikely to be able, ourselves, to recommence mortgage lending activities so long as we continue to have a shareholders’ deficit. As a result of this and other factors, in the event that the subprime market recovers, there can be no assurance that we will be able to operate in the manner or at the levels that we have historically.

Payments on our mortgage securities are currently our only source of cash flows and will decrease in the next several months. Absent the reestablishment of profitable operations and reduction of our expenses from discontinued operations and other obligations, our cash flows will not be sufficient for us to continue as a going concern.

Our residual and subordinated mortgage securities are currently our only source of cash flows. Based on the current projections, the cash flows from our mortgage securities will decrease in the next several months as the underlying mortgage loans are repaid, and could be significantly less than the current projections if losses on the underlying mortgage loans exceed the current assumptions. In addition, we have significant operating expenses associated with office leases, software contracts, and other obligations relating to our discontinued operations, as well as payment obligations with respect to secured and unsecured debt, including periodic interest payments with respect to junior subordinated debentures relating to the trust preferred securities of NovaStar Capital Trust I and NovaStar Capital Trust II. We intend to use available cash inflows in excess of our immediate operating needs, including debt service payments, to repay all of Wachovia’s short-term borrowings and any remaining fees due under the repurchase agreements at the earliest practical date. Any new advances under our financing facilities are at Wachovia’s sole discretion and we do not expect any such advances to be made. If, as the cash flows from mortgage securities decrease, we are unable to recommence or invest in mortgage loan origination or brokerage business on a profitable basis, and restructure our unsecured debt and contractual obligations or if the cash flows from our mortgage securities are less than currently anticipated, there can be no assurance that we will be able to continue as a going concern and avoid seeking the protection of applicable federal and state bankruptcy laws.

To the extent that the mortgage loans underlying our residual and subordinated securities continue to experience significant credit losses, our liquidity and ability to continue as a going concern will be adversely affected.

Our mortgage securities consist of certain residual securities retained from our past securitizations of mortgage loans, which typically consist of interest-only, prepayment penalty, and over collateralization bonds, and certain investment grade and non-investment grade rated subordinated mortgage securities retained from our past securitizations and purchased from other ABS issuers. These residual and subordinated securities are generally unrated or rated below investment grade and, as such, involve significant investment risk that exceeds the aggregate risk of the full pool of securitized loans. By holding the residual and subordinated securities, we generally retain the “first loss” risk associated with the underlying pool of mortgage loans. As a result, losses on the underlying mortgage loans directly affect our returns on, and cash flows from, these mortgage securities. In addition, if delinquencies and/or losses on the underlying mortgage loans exceed specified levels, the level of over-collateralization required for higher rated securities held by third parties may be increased, further decreasing cash flows presently payable to us.

Increased delinquencies and defaults on the mortgage loans underlying our residual and subordinated mortgage securities have resulted in a decrease in the cash flow we receive from these investments. To the extent we continue to experience significant realized losses and decreased cash flows from these assets, our results of operations, financial condition, liquidity, and ability to continue as a going concern will be adversely affected. In addition, because we have financed our mortgage securities under short-term warehouse repurchase agreements, continued decreases in the value of these retained securities may result in additional margin calls, which will further undermine our liquidity and ability to continue as a going concern.

8

Table of Contents

There can be no assurance that we will have access to financing necessary to support our business and assets. Further, if we are unable to remain in compliance with agreements governing our indebtedness or to obtain waivers of any noncompliance, we will not be able to continue as a going concern.

We have incurred significant debt to finance our past operations, including the origination and purchase of mortgage loans and the purchase of mortgage securities. A significant amount of our indebtedness is represented by multiple secured financing facilities with Wachovia and the junior subordinated debentures related to the trust preferred securities of NovaStar Capital Trust I and NovaStar Capital Trust II.

We currently intend to use available cash inflows in excess of our immediate operating needs, including debt service payments, to repay all of Wachovia’s outstanding borrowings and any remaining fees due under the repurchase agreements at the earliest practical date. During and after this period of repayment, any new advances under the Wachovia lending facilities are at Wachovia’s sole discretion and we do not expect any such advances to be made.

As of December 31, 2007 and thereafter, we are out of compliance with the net worth and liquidity covenants in our financing agreements with Wachovia. While Wachovia has waived this non compliance through April 30, 2008, there can be no assurance that we will be able to obtain further waivers of, or amendments to, our financing facilities if we were to breach any representation, warranty or covenant contained in such financing facilities or waiver or amendment. In addition, we project that we will be out of compliance with our current waiver prior to its expiration of April 30, 2008. Any default under our secured financing facilities and failure to obtain any necessary waivers or amendments in the future could result in the acceleration of the indebtedness under these facilities and the liquidation by the lender of the related collateral. Any acceleration of indebtedness would have a material adverse affect on our liquidity and ability to continue as a going concern and any liquidation of our collateral could be at a substantial loss.

Our wholly owned subsidiary NovaStar Mortgage, Inc. has outstanding junior subordinated debentures related to the outstanding trust preferred securities of NovaStar Capital Trust I and NovaStar Capital Trust II. We have guaranteed NovaStar Mortgage’s obligations under these debentures, including NovaStar Mortgage’s obligations to make periodic interest payments thereon. Our financing facilities with Wachovia prohibit us from making any such payments without Wachovia’s consent in the event that we have less than $30 million of available liquidity. In the event that any such payments are not made when due, whether as a result of the restrictions in our financing agreements with Wachovia or otherwise, or we or NovaStar Mortgage otherwise breach any of our obligations relating to the debentures or trust preferred securities and fail to remedy the default within the applicable cure period, if any, all of our obligations with respect thereto, including the repayment of principal, may be accelerated and declared to be immediately due and payable, in which case we would be forced to seek the protection of applicable federal and state bankruptcy laws.

In light of current market conditions, our current financial condition, and our lack of significant unencumbered assets, no assurance can be given regarding our ability to meet our debt service obligations or to secure additional financing. To the extent we are unable to meet our debt service obligations or do not have access to adequate financing, our business prospects and ability to continue as a going concern will be negatively affected. There is no assurance that we will continue to have access to financing at levels necessary for operations or other liquidity needs or that we will not be forced to file for bankruptcy.

Various legal proceedings could adversely affect our financial condition, our results of operations, liquidity and our ability to continue as a going concern.

In the course of our business, we are subject to various legal proceedings and claims. See Part I “Item 3—Legal Proceedings.” The resolution of these legal matters or other legal matters could result in a material adverse impact on our results of operations, liquidity, financial condition and ability to continue as a going concern.

The Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Commission”) has requested information from issuers in our industry, including us, regarding accounting for mortgage loans and other mortgage related assets. In addition, we have received requests or subpoenas for information relating to our operations from various federal and state regulators and law enforcement, including, without limitation, the Federal Trade Commission, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the United States Department of Justice, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the New York Attorney General and the Department of Labor. While we have provided, or are in the process of providing, the requested information to the applicable officials, we may be subject to further information requests from, or action by, these or other regulators or law enforcement officials. To the extent we are subject to any actions, our financial condition, liquidity, and ability to continue a going concern could be materially adversely affected.

There can be no assurance that our common stock or Series C Preferred Stock will continue to be traded in an active market.

Our common stock and our 8.90% Series C Preferred Stock were delisted by the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) in January 2008, as a result of failure to meet applicable standards for continued listing on the NYSE. Our common stock and Series C Preferred Stock are currently quoted on the OTC Bulletin Board and on the Pink Sheets. However, there can be no assurance that an active trading market will be maintained. Trading of securities on the OTC and Pink Sheets is generally limited and is effected on a less regular basis than on exchanges, such as the NYSE, and accordingly investors who own or purchase our stock will find that the

9

Table of Contents

liquidity or transferability of the stock may be limited. Additionally, a shareholder may find it more difficult to dispose of, or obtain accurate quotations as to the market value of, our stock. If an active public trading market cannot be sustained, the trading price of our common and preferred stock could be adversely affected and your ability to transfer your shares of our common and preferred stock may be limited.

We are not likely to pay dividends to our common or preferred stockholders in the near future.

We are not required to pay out our taxable income in the form of dividends, as we are no longer subject to a REIT distribution requirement. Instead, payment of dividends is at the discretion of our board of directors. To preserve liquidity and to remain in compliance with our financing facilities, our board of directors has suspended dividend payments on our Series C and Series D-1 Preferred Stock. Dividends on our Series C and D-1 Preferred Stock continue to accrue and the dividend rate on our Series D-1 Preferred Stock increased from 9.0% to 13.0%, compounded quarterly, effective January 16, 2008 with respect to all unpaid dividends and subsequently accruing dividends. No dividends can be paid on any of our common stock until all accrued and unpaid dividends on our Series C and Series D-1 Preferred Stock are paid in full. Accumulating dividends with respect to our preferred stock will negatively affect the ability of our common stockholders to receive any distribution or other value upon liquidation.

Risks Related to Mortgage Asset Financing, Sale, and Investment Activities

We may be required to repurchase mortgage loans or indemnify mortgage loan purchasers as a result of breaches of representations and warranties, borrower fraud, or certain borrower defaults, which could further harm our liquidity and ability to continue as a going concern.

When we sold mortgage loans, whether as whole loans or pursuant to a securitization, we made customary representations and warranties to the purchaser about the mortgage loans and the manner in which they were originated. Our whole loan sale agreements require us to repurchase or substitute mortgage loans in the event we breach any of these representations or warranties. In addition, we may be required to repurchase mortgage loans as a result of borrower fraud. Likewise, we are required to repurchase or substitute mortgage loans if we breach a representation or warranty in connection with our securitizations. If a purchaser enforces its remedies against us, we may not be able to recover losses from the originating broker or correspondent. Repurchased loans are typically sold at a significant discount to the unpaid principal balance and, prior to sale, cannot currently be financed by us. As a result, significant repurchase activity would further harm our liquidity, cash flow, and financial condition.

During 2007, we received an increased number of repurchase and indemnity demands from purchasers of whole loans as a result of, among other things, borrower fraud, which had a negative impact on our liquidity and results of operations. In the event that we experience further repurchase and indemnity demands, our liquidity, cash flow, and financial condition will be further harmed.

Differences in our actual experience compared to the assumptions that we use to determine the value of our residual mortgage securities and to estimate reserves could further adversely affect our financial position.

Our securitizations of mortgage loans that were structured as sales for financial reporting purposes resulted in gain recognition at closing as well as the recording of the residual mortgage securities we retained at fair value. The value of residual securities represents the present value of future cash flows expected to be received by us from the excess cash flows created in the securitization transaction. In general, future cash flows are estimated by taking the coupon rate of the loans underlying the transaction less the interest rate paid to the investors, less contractually specified servicing and trustee fees, and after giving effect to estimated prepayments and credit losses. We estimate future cash flows from these securities and value them utilizing assumptions based in part on projected discount rates, delinquency, mortgage loan prepayment speeds and credit losses. It is extremely difficult to validate the assumptions we use in valuing our residual interests. Even if the general accuracy of the valuation model is validated, valuations are highly dependent upon the reasonableness of our assumptions and the predictability of the relationships which drive the results of the model. Due to deteriorating market conditions, our actual experience has differed significantly from our assumptions, resulting in a reduction in the fair value of these securities and impairments on these securities. If our actual experience continues to differ materially from the assumptions that we used to determine the fair value of these securities, our financial condition, results of operations and ability to continue as a going concern will continue to be negatively affected.

10

Table of Contents

Risks Related to Interest Rates and Our Hedging Strategies

Changes in interest rates may harm our results of operations and equity value.

Our results of operations are likely to be harmed during any period of unexpected or rapid changes in interest rates. Our primary interest rate exposures relate to our mortgage securities, mortgage loans, floating rate debt obligations, interest rate swaps, and interest rate caps. Interest rate changes could adversely affect our cash flow, results of operations, financial condition, liquidity, business prospects, and ability to continue as a going concern in the following ways:

In addition, interest rate changes may also further impact our net book value as our mortgage securities and related hedge derivatives are marked to market each quarter. Generally, as interest rates increase, the value of our mortgage securities decreases which decreases the book value of our equity.

Furthermore, shifts in the yield curve, which represents the market’s expectations of future interest rates, also affects the yield required for the purchase of our mortgage securities and therefore their value. To the extent that there is an unexpected change in the yield curve it could have an adverse effect on our mortgage securities portfolio and our financial position and operations.

Risks Related to Credit Losses

Further delinquencies and losses with respect to residential mortgage loans, particularly in the sub-prime sector, may cause us to recognize additional losses, which would further adversely affect our operating results, liquidity, financial condition, business prospects and ability to continue as a going concern.

The residential mortgage market has encountered difficulties which have adversely affected our performance. Delinquencies and losses with respect to residential mortgage loans generally have increased and may continue to increase, particularly in the sub-prime sector. In addition, in recent months residential property values in most states have declined, in some areas severely, after extended periods during which those values appreciated. A sustained decline or a lack of increase in those values is likely to result in additional increases in delinquencies and losses on residential mortgage loans generally, especially with respect to any residential mortgage loans where the aggregate loan amounts (including any subordinate loans) are close to or greater than the related property values. Another factor that may have contributed to, and may in the future result in, higher delinquency rates is the increase in monthly payments on adjustable rate mortgage loans. Any increase in prevailing market interest rates may result in increased payments for borrowers who have adjustable rate mortgage loans. Moreover, with respect to option ARM mortgage loans with a negative amortization feature which reach their negative amortization cap, borrowers may experience a substantial increase in their monthly payment even without an increase in prevailing market interest rates. Compounding this issue, the current lack of appreciation in residential property values and the adoption of tighter underwriting standards throughout the sub-prime mortgage loan industry may adversely affect the ability of borrowers to refinance these loans and avoid default, particularly borrowers facing a reset of the monthly payment to a higher amount. To the extent that delinquencies or losses continue to increase for these or other reasons, the value of our mortgage securities and the mortgage loans held in our portfolio will be further reduced, which will adversely affect our operating results, liquidity, cash flow, financial condition, business prospects and ability to continue as a going concern.

Loans made to nonconforming mortgage borrowers entail relatively higher delinquency and default rates which will result in higher loan losses.

Nonconforming mortgage borrowers have impaired or limited credit histories, limited documentation of income and higher debt-to-income ratios than traditional mortgage lenders allow. Mortgage loans made to nonconforming mortgage loan borrowers generally entail a higher risk of delinquency and foreclosure than mortgage loans made to borrowers with better credit and, therefore, will result in higher levels of realized losses than conventional loans.

11

Table of Contents

Delinquency interrupts the flow of projected interest income from a mortgage loan, and default can ultimately lead to a loss if the net realizable value of the real property securing the mortgage loan is insufficient to cover the principal and interest due on the loan and costs of sale. In the event of a borrower’s bankruptcy, that borrower’s mortgage loan will be deemed to be secured only to the extent of the value of the underlying collateral at the time of bankruptcy (as determined by the bankruptcy court), and the lien securing the mortgage loan may in some circumstances be subject to the avoidance powers of the bankruptcy trustee under applicable state law. Foreclosure of a mortgage loan can be an expensive and lengthy process that can have a substantial negative effect on our originally anticipated return on the foreclosed mortgage loan. Also, our cost of financing a delinquent or defaulted loan is higher than for a performing loan, and loans that are delinquent or in default may be unmarketable or saleable only at a discount.

We have experienced an increase in borrower delinquencies and defaults, which has adversely affected our liquidity, cash flows, results of operations and financial condition. Nearly all of our remaining loans held for sale are delinquent or are in default. In addition, we continue to be exposed to delinquencies and losses with respect to loans that we have securitized, either through residual securities that we retain in securitizations structured as sales, or through the loans that remain on our balance sheet in securitizations structured as financings.

To the extent that loan delinquencies and defaults continue at their current rates or become more severe, our results of operations, cash flows, liquidity, financial condition and ability to continue as a going concern may be further adversely affected.

We face loss exposure due to fraudulent and negligent acts on the part of loan applicants, employees, mortgage brokers and other third parties.

In our origination and purchasing of mortgage loans, we relied heavily upon information provided to us by third parties, including information relating to the loan application, property appraisal, title information and employment and income documentation. If any of this information was fraudulently or negligently misrepresented to us, the value of the loan may be significantly lower than we expected. Whether a misrepresentation was made by the loan applicant, the loan broker, one of our employees, or any other third party, we generally bear the risk of loss associated with it. A loan subject to misrepresentation typically cannot be sold and, if sold prior to our detection of the misrepresentation, generally must be repurchased by us. We may not be able to recover losses incurred as a result of the misrepresentation.

As with the broader nonconforming mortgage loan industry, we have experienced an increase in exposure due to fraud, which has resulted in an increase in our repurchase and indemnity obligations and has adversely affected our cash flow, liquidity, results of operations and financial condition. In the event that we experience further repurchase and indemnity demands, our liquidity, cash flow, financial condition and ability to continue as a going concern will be adversely affected.

The value of, and cash flows from, our mortgage securities may further decline due to factors beyond our control.

There are many factors that affect the value of, and cash flows from, our mortgage securities, many of which are beyond our control. For example, the value of the homes collateralizing residential loans may decline due to a variety of reasons beyond our control, such as weak economic conditions or natural disasters, and a borrower’s ability to repay a loan may be adversely affected by factors beyond our control, such as subsequent over-leveraging of the borrower, reductions in personal incomes, and increases in unemployment. Interest-only loans, negative amortization loans, adjustable-rate loans, reduced documentation loans, home equity lines of credit and second lien loans may involve higher than expected delinquencies and defaults. Changes in consumer behavior, bankruptcy laws, and other laws may exacerbate loan losses. To the extent that these factors continue to negatively affect the value of, and cash flows from, our mortgage assets our operating results, liquidity, cash flows, financial condition and ability to continue as a going concern will be adversely affected.

Mortgage insurers may not pay claims resulting in increased credit losses.

We use mortgage insurance to mitigate our risk of credit losses. We face the risk that our mortgage insurers might not have the financial ability to pay all claims presented by us or may deny a claim if the loan is not properly serviced, has been improperly originated, is the subject of fraud, or for other reasons. Any of those events could increase our credit losses and thus adversely affect our results of operations, financial condition, liquidity and cash flows, and ability to continue as a going concern.

12

Table of Contents

A prolonged economic slowdown or a decline in the real estate market could further harm our results of operations.

A substantial portion of our mortgage assets consist of single-family mortgage loans or mortgage securities evidencing interests in single-family mortgage loans. Because substantially all of our loans were made to credit-impaired borrowers, the actual rates of delinquencies, foreclosures and losses on these loans tend to be higher during economic slowdowns. We have experienced a significant increase in delinquencies and defaults, which has harmed and continues to harm our financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, cash flows and ability to continue as going concern. In addition, material declines in real estate values have weakened our collateral loan-to-value ratios, have increased the risk of default by decreasing the ability of borrowers to refinance loans they are unable to sustain or to sell the mortgage property to repay the loan, and have increased the possibility of loss if a borrower defaults. In such cases, we are subject to the risk of loss on such mortgage assets arising from borrower defaults to the extent not covered by third-party credit enhancement.

Geographic concentration of mortgage loans increases our exposure to risks in those areas.

Over-concentration in any one geographic area of our loans held for sale or underlying our mortgage securities increases our exposure to the economic risks associated with that area. Declines in the residential real estate markets in which we are concentrated, including California and Florida, have reduced the values of the properties collateralizing our mortgages which in turn has increased the risk of delinquency, foreclosure, or losses from those loans. In addition, increases in the unemployment rate in markets in which we are concentrated increases the likelihood that borrowers in those areas may become delinquent on their loans. To the extent that borrowers in a geographic area in which we have made a significant number of loans become delinquent or otherwise default on such loans, the value of, and cash flows from, our mortgage securities will further decrease which will adversely affect our operating results, liquidity, cash flows, financial condition and ability to continue as a going concern.

To the extent that we have a large number of loans in an area hit by a natural disaster, we may suffer losses.

Standard homeowner insurance policies generally do not provide coverage for natural disasters, such as hurricanes and floods. Furthermore, nonconforming borrowers are not likely to have special hazard insurance. To the extent that borrowers do not have insurance coverage for natural disasters, they may not be able to repair the property or may stop paying their mortgages if the property is damaged. A natural disaster that results in a significant number of delinquencies could cause increased foreclosures and decrease our ability to recover losses on properties affected by such disasters, and that in turn could negatively affect the value of, and cash flows from, our mortgage assets, which will adversely affect our operating results, liquidity, cash flows, financial condition and ability to continue as a going concern.

As a result of our sale of our mortgage servicing rights, we no longer possess the ability to identify and address potential or actual delinquencies and defaults on the mortgage loans underlying our residual and subordinated securities.

We have traditionally utilized our role as servicer of our securitized pools of mortgage loans to attempt to identify and address potential and actual borrower delinquencies and defaults. On November 1, 2007, we sold to a third party our servicing rights with respect to our securitized loans. As a result, we no longer control the lender-borrower relationship, which may exacerbate the increase in delinquencies and defaults under such mortgage loans and the negative impact on the value and cash flows of our residual and subordinated securities resulting from such delinquencies and defaults.

Risks Related to the Legal and Regulatory Environment in Which We Operate

We are subject to the risk that provisions of our loan agreements may be unenforceable.

Our rights and obligations with respect to our loans are governed by written loan agreements and related documentation. It is possible that a court could determine that one or more provisions of a loan agreement are unenforceable, such as a loan prepayment prohibition or the provisions governing our security interest in the underlying collateral. If this were to happen with respect to a material asset or group of assets, we could be required to repurchase these loans and may not be able to sell or liquidate the loans, which would negatively affect our liquidity, financial condition, results of operations and ability to continue as a going concern.

Failure to qualify for an exemption from regulation as an investment company could harm our business.

The Investment Company Act does not regulate entities that are primarily engaged, directly or indirectly, in a business “other than that of investing, reinvesting, owning, holding or trading in securities,” or that are primarily engaged in the business of “purchasing or otherwise acquiring mortgages and other liens on and interests in real estate.” Under the SEC’s current interpretation, in order to qualify for the latter exemption we must maintain at least 55% of our assets directly in “qualifying real estate interests” and at least an additional 25% of our assets in other real estate-related assets or additional qualifying real estate interests. Mortgage-backed securities

13

Table of Contents

that do not represent all the certificates issued with respect to an underlying pool of mortgages may be treated as securities separate from the underlying mortgage loans and thus may not qualify as a qualifying real estate interest for the purposes of the 55% requirement. If we fail to qualify for an applicable exemption from the Investment Company Act, we could not operate our business efficiently under the regulatory scheme imposed by the Investment Company Act. Accordingly, we could be required to restructure our activities which could materially adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and ability to continue as a going concern.

Failure to comply with federal, state or local regulation of, or licensing requirements with respect to, our business could harm our financial condition and ability to recommence mortgage banking operations.

Our prior mortgage lending, brokerage and loan servicing operations were subject to an extensive body of federal, state and local laws and licensing requirements. Although we utilized systems and procedures designed to facilitate compliance, these requirements were voluminous and, in some cases, complex and subject to interpretation, and our compliance with these requirements depended on the actions of a large number of employees. Borrowers experiencing foreclosure and terminated employees may make retaliatory allegations of non-compliance. Investigations, enforcement actions, litigation, fines, penalties and liability with respect to non-compliance with these requirements may consume attention of key personnel, may adversely affect our ability to recommence mortgage lending, brokerage or servicing operations, and may materially and adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, liquidity and ability to continue as a going concern.

Risks Related to Our Capital Stock

The market price and trading volume of our common and preferred stock may be volatile, which could result in substantial losses for our shareholders.

The market price of our capital stock can be highly volatile and subject to wide fluctuations. In addition, the trading volume in our capital stock may fluctuate and cause significant price variations to occur. Investors may experience volatile returns and material losses. Some of the factors that could negatively affect our share price or result in fluctuations in the price or trading volume of our capital stock include:

We may issue additional shares that may cause dilution and may depress the price of our common stock.

Our charter permits our board of directors, without shareholder approval, to:

14

Table of Contents

In the future, we may access the capital markets to raise additional funds by making additional offerings of securities, including debt instruments, preferred stock or common stock. Additional equity offerings by us may dilute your interest in us or reduce the market price of our capital stock, or both. Our outstanding shares of preferred stock have, and any additional series of preferred stock may also have, a preference on distribution payments that limit our ability to make a distribution to common shareholders. Because our decision to issue securities in any future offering will depend on market conditions and other factors beyond our control, we cannot predict or estimate the amount, timing or nature of our future offerings. Further, market conditions could require us to accept less favorable terms for the issuance of our securities in the future. Thus, our common shareholders will bear the risk of our future offerings reducing the market price of our common stock and diluting their interest in us.

Other Risks Related to our Business

You should exercise caution in reviewing our consolidated financial statements.

Our consolidated financial statements have been prepared on a going concern basis of accounting which contemplates continuity of operations, realization of assets, liabilities and commitments in the normal course of business. The financial statements do not reflect any adjustments that might result if we were unable to continue as a going concern. In light of these facts, you should exercise caution in reviewing our financial statements.

Our ability to use our net operating loss carryforwards and net unrealized built-in losses could be severely limited if transfer restrictions are not adopted or are not effective in preventing an ownership change from occurring.

We currently have recorded a net deferred tax asset, before valuation allowance, of $368.3 million, almost all of which relates to certain loss carryforwards and net unrealized built-in-losses. While we believe that it is more likely than not that we will not be able to utilize such losses in the future, the net operating loss carryforwards and net unrealized built-in losses could provide significant future tax savings to us if we are able to use such losses. However, our ability to use these tax benefits may be impacted, restricted or eliminated due to a future ownership change within the meaning of Section 382 of the Code. Pursuant to Section 382 of the Code, a corporation is limited in its ability to use existing net operating loss carryforwards and net unrealized built in losses once that corporation experiences an “ownership change” (as that term is defined in the Code and IRS regulations). We have imposed certain transfer restrictions on our Series D-1 Preferred Stock, and have also agreed to submit an amendment to our Charter to our shareholders for approval, to limit the transferability of our common stock in order to attempt to preserve certain of our net operating loss carryforwards and net unrealized built-in losses. Our shareholders may fail to approve this amendment. Further, although transfer restrictions are valid under the Maryland General Corporation Law, we are not aware of any published court decisions enforcing similar transfer restrictions. Thus, a transfer could occur that would violate the transfer restrictions, and we may be unable to enforce such transfer restrictions. Even if a court were to enforce the transfer restrictions, the Internal Revenue Service might not agree that the transfer restrictions provided a sufficient remedy with respect to an ownership change resulting from a prohibited transfer. Further, our Board of Directors has waived, and may in the future waive, application of the transfer restrictions to certain shareholders or transfers if determined to otherwise be in the interests of the Company. In any of these cases, despite the implementation of the transfer restrictions, an ownership change could occur that would severely limit our ability to use the tax benefits associated with the net operating loss carryforwards and net unrealized built-in losses, which may result in higher taxable income for us (and a significantly higher tax cost as compared to the situation where these tax benefits are preserved).

Our business could be adversely affected if we experienced an interruption in or breach of our communication or information systems or if we were unable to safeguard the security and privacy of the personal financial information we receive.

We rely heavily upon communications and information systems to conduct our business. Any material interruption, or breach in security, of our communication or information systems or the third-party systems on which we rely could negatively affect our business. Additionally, we have access to the personal financial information of borrowers which is highly sensitive and confidential, and subject to significant federal and state regulation. If a third party were to misappropriate this information or if we inadvertently disclosed this information, we potentially could be subject to both private and public legal actions. Our policies and safeguards may not be sufficient to prevent the misappropriation or inadvertent disclosure of confidential information, may become noncompliant with existing federal or state laws or regulations governing privacy, or with those laws or regulations that may be adopted in the future.

15

Table of Contents

Some provisions of our charter, bylaws and Maryland law may deter takeover attempts, which may limit the opportunity of our shareholders to sell their common stock at favorable prices.

The transfer restrictions applicable or proposed to be applicable to our capital stock are complex and are designed to preserve the value of our net operating loss carryforwards and net unrealized built-in losses for the benefit of our stockholders. The transfer restrictions may make it more difficult to acquire a significant interest in us or to effect a business combination transaction that stockholders may perceive to be favorable. The transfer restrictions could also make it more difficult for a stockholder to replace current management because a stockholder’s ability to increase its voting power is limited.

Certain additional provisions of our charter, bylaws and Maryland law could discourage, delay or prevent transactions that involve an actual or threatened change in control, and may make it more difficult for a third party to acquire us, even if doing so may be beneficial to our shareholders. For example, our board of directors is divided into three classes with three year staggered terms of office. This makes it more difficult for a third party to gain control of our board because a majority of directors cannot be elected at a single meeting. Further, under our charter, generally a director may only be removed for cause and only by the affirmative vote of the holders of at least a majority of all classes of shares entitled to vote in the election for directors together as a single class. Our bylaws make it difficult for any person other than management to introduce business at a duly called meeting requiring such other person to follow certain advance notice procedures. Finally, Maryland law provides protection for Maryland corporations against unsolicited takeover situations.

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments

None

Item 2. Properties

Our executive, administrative and portfolio management offices are located in Kansas City, Missouri, and consist of approximately 200,000 square feet of leased office space. The lease agreements on the premises expire in January 2011. The current annual rent for these offices is approximately $4.3 million.

We are leasing office space in various other states which were used for operations which were discontinued in 2007 and early 2008. The leases on these premises expire from January 2008 through May 2013, and the current annual rent on those premises not terminated as of March 31, 2008 is approximately $3.0 million.

Item 3. Legal Proceedings

American Interbanc Mortgage Litigation. On March 17, 2008, NovaStar Financial, Inc. (“NFI”), NovaStar Mortgage, Inc. (“NMI”), NFI Holding Corp. (“NFI Holding”) and NovaStar Home Mortgage, Inc. (“NHMI” and, with NFI, NMI and NFI Holding, the “NovaStar Entities”) and American Interbanc Mortgage, LLC (“Plaintiff”) entered into a Confidential Settlement Term Sheet Agreement (the “Settlement Terms”) with respect to the actions, judgments and claims described below.

In March 2002, Plaintiff filed an action against NHMI in Superior Court of Orange County, California entitled American Interbanc Mortgage LLC v. NovaStar Home Mortgage, Inc. et. al. (the “California Action”). In the California Action, Plaintiff alleged that NHMI and two other mortgage companies (“Defendants”) engaged in false advertising and unfair competition under certain California statutes and interfered intentionally with Plaintiff’s prospective economic relations. On May 4, 2007, a jury returned a verdict by a 9-3 vote awarding Plaintiff $15.9 million. The court trebled the award, made adjustments for amounts paid by settling Defendants, and entered a $46.1 million judgment against Defendants on June 27, 2007. The award is joint and several against the Defendants, including NHMI. It is unknown if the other two Defendants, one of which has filed a bankruptcy petition, have the financial ability to pay any of the award.

NHMI’s motion for the trial court to overturn or reduce the verdict was denied on August 20, 2007, and NHMI appealed that decision (the “Appeal”). Pending the Appeal, Plaintiff commenced enforcement actions in the states of Missouri (the “Kansas City Action”) and Delaware, and obtained an enforcement judgment in Delaware (the “Delaware Judgment”). On January 23, 2008, Plaintiff filed an involuntary petition for bankruptcy against NHMI under 11 U.S.C. Sec. 303, in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Missouri (the “Involuntary”). Plaintiff was joined by two individuals alleging claims totaling $150 in the Involuntary filing. NHMI filed an answer and contested the standing of Plaintiff and the individuals to be petitioning creditors in bankruptcy.

On March 17, 2008, the NovaStar Entities and Plaintiff entered into the Settlement Terms with respect to the California Action, the Judgment, the Kansas City Action, the Delaware Judgment, the Involuntary, and all related claims.

Under the Settlement Terms, the parties agreed to move to dismiss the Involuntary. Within ten (10) business days after notice of entry of the dismissal of the Involuntary, NFI will pay Plaintiff $2,000,000 plus the balance in an account established by order of the Bankruptcy Court in an amount no less than $50,000 (but not anticipated to be greater than $65,000 at the time of payment), with NHMI obligated to otherwise satisfy obligations to its identified creditors up to $48,000. The parties also agreed to extend the Appeal briefing period pending finalization of the settlement of the other actions, judgments and claims, as described below.

16

Table of Contents

The Settlement Terms provide that, subject to payment of the amounts described above and satisfaction of certain other conditions, the parties will dismiss the California Action as to NHMI and the Kansas City Action and Delaware Judgment, effect notice of satisfaction of the Judgment, and effect a mutual release of all claims that were or could have been raised in any of the foregoing or that are related to the subject matter thereof, upon the earliest of the following: (i) July 1, 2010, (ii) a waiver by Wachovia of Wachovia’s right to file an involuntary bankruptcy proceeding against any of the NovaStar Entities prior to July 1, 2010, (iii) an extension of the maturity date of our indebtedness to Wachovia until at least July 1, 2010, or (iv) delivery to Plaintiff of written documentation evidencing the full satisfaction of our current indebtedness to Wachovia.

In addition to the initial payments to be made to the Plaintiff following dismissal of the Involuntary, we will pay Plaintiff $5.5 million if, prior to July 1, 2010, (i) NFI’s average common stock market capitalization is at least $94.4 million over a period of five (5) consecutive business days, or (ii) the holders of NFI’s common stock are paid $94.4 million in net asset value as a result of any sale of NFI or its assets. If NFI is sold prior to July 1, 2010 for less than $94.4 million and ceases to be a public company, then NFI will obligate the purchaser either to immediately pay $2 million to Plaintiff, or to pay Plaintiff $5.5 million in the event the value of NFI exceeds $94.4 million prior to July 1, 2010 as determined by an independent valuation company.

We make no assurances with regard to our ability to satisfy of any of the conditions described or referenced above. Without limiting the foregoing, we have obtained no commitment from Wachovia with regard to any action that may be required of Wachovia in order to effect, prior to July 1, 2010, the dismissals and releases described above. Further, nothing in the Settlement Terms constitutes an expression of our belief, projection, assumption, or intent regarding any future event, any industry or market conditions, or our financial condition, stock price, or business plans or strategies.

In accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, NHMI has recorded a liability of $47.1 million as of December 31, 2007 with a corresponding charge to earnings. The $47.1 million includes interest which is accruing on the obligation. Because NHMI is a wholly owned indirect subsidiary of NFI, the $47.1 million liability is included in our consolidated financial statements. The liability is included in the “Liabilities of discontinued operations” line of the consolidated balance sheets while the charge to earnings is included in the “(Loss) income from discontinued operations, net of income tax” line of the consolidated statements of operations.

Other Litigation. Since April 2004, a number of substantially similar class action lawsuits have been filed and consolidated into a single action in the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri. The consolidated complaint names us and three of our executive officers as defendants and generally alleges that the defendants made public statements that were misleading for failing to disclose certain regulatory and licensing matters. The plaintiffs purport to have brought this consolidated action on behalf of all persons who purchased our common stock (and sellers of put options on our common stock) during the period October 29, 2003 through April 8, 2004. On January 14, 2005, we filed a motion to dismiss this action, and on May 12, 2005, the court denied such motion. On February 8, 2007, the court certified the case as a class action. The case is now in the discovery stage. We believe that these claims are without merit and will continue to vigorously defend against them.

In April 2006, a single plaintiff filed a putative nationwide class action against NovaStar Mortgage in the United States District Court for the Western District of Tennessee. The complaint asserts claims under 42 U.S.C. Sections 1981 and 1982; the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. Sections 3601-3619; and the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, 15 U.S.C. Sections 1691-1691f. Plaintiff alleges that NovaStar Mortgage paid higher yield spread premiums to brokers for loans made to minorities as compared to loans made to white borrowers. The lawsuit seeks injunctive relief and damages, including punitive damages. We believe that these claims are without merit and will vigorously defend against them.

Since February 2007, a number of substantially similar putative class actions have been filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri. The complaints name us and three of our executive officers as defendants and generally allege, among other things, that the defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding our business and financial results. The plaintiffs purport to have brought the actions on behalf of all persons who purchased or otherwise acquired our common stock during the period May 4, 2006 through February 20, 2007. Following consolidation of the actions, a consolidated amended complaint was filed on October 19, 2007. On December 29, 2007, the defendants moved to dismiss all of plaintiffs’ claims, and that motion is pending. We believe that these claims are without merit and will vigorously defend against them.

In May 2007, a lawsuit entitled National Community Reinvestment Coalition v. NovaStar Financial, Inc., et al., was filed against us in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. Plaintiff, a non-profit organization, alleges that we maintain corporate policies of not making loans on Indian reservations, or dwellings used for adult foster care or on rowhouses in Baltimore, Maryland

17

Table of Contents

that violates the federal Fair Housing Act. The lawsuit seeks injunctive relief and damages, including punitive damages, in connection with the lawsuit. On May 30, 2007, we responded to the lawsuit by filing a motion to dismiss certain of plaintiff’s claims. That motion is pending resolution by the court. We believe that these claims are without merit and will vigorously defend against them.

In June 2007, two borrowers filed a putative class action entitled Kubiak v. NovaStar Mortgage, Inc., against us and two of our subsidiaries in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, alleging that payments of premiums to brokers by one of the subsidiaries were not properly disclosed to borrowers in the manner allegedly required by federal or state law, thus constituting unfair competition and false advertising under California law and violation of the California Consumer Legal Remedies Act. Plaintiffs seek statutory and punitive damages, restitution, injunctive relief and attorney’s fees on behalf of California borrowers who allegedly failed to receive adequate disclosure of such premiums. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss the action. On December 19, 2007, the Court granted defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint, including the claims against NovaStar Financial, Inc., but the Court allowed the plaintiffs to file an amended complaint. On January 9, 2008, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint that does not make any claim against NovaStar Financial, Inc., but does assert the above claims against its subsidiaries, NovaStar Mortgage, Inc. and NovaStar Home Mortgage, Inc. We believe that these claims are without merit and will vigorously defend against them.

In November 2007, a borrower filed a putative class action, entitled Denman v. Novastar Mortgage, Inc., in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts alleging that NovaStar Mortgage induced him to enter into a disadvantageous mortgage with an adjustable rate and a balloon note. Plaintiff contends that NovaStar Mortgage’s actions violated the Massachusetts Consumer Protection Act and seeks actual and statutory damages, reformation of his mortgage contract and injunctive and declaratory relief. On March 6, 2008, NovaStar Mortgage filed a motion to dismiss the litigation. That motion is pending. We believe that these claims are without merit and will vigorously defend against them.

On January 10, 2008, the City of Cleveland, Ohio filed suit against us and approximately 20 other mortgage, commercial and investment bankers alleging a public nuisance had been created in the City of Cleveland by the operation of the subprime mortgage industry. The case was filed in state court and promptly removed to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio. The plaintiff seeks damages for loss of property values in the City, and for increased costs of providing services and infrastructure, as a result of foreclosures of subprime mortgages. We believe that these claims are without merit and will vigorously defend against them.

On January 31, 2008, two purported shareholders filed separate derivative actions in the Circuit Court of Jackson County, Missouri against various former and current officers and directors and named us as a nominal defendant. The essentially identical petitions allege that the individual defendants breached fiduciary duties owed to us in connection with alleged insider selling and misappropriation of information, abuse of control, gross mismanagement, waste of corporate assets, and unjust enrichment between May 2006 and December 2007. We believe that these claims are without merit and will vigorously defend against them.

In addition to those matters listed above, we are currently a party to various other legal proceedings and claims, including, but not limited to, breach of contract claims, class action or individual claims for violations of the RESPA, FLSA, federal and state laws prohibiting employment discrimination, federal and state laws prohibiting discrimination in lending and federal and state licensing and consumer protection laws.

In addition, we have received requests or subpoenas for information from various Federal and State regulators or law enforcement officials, including, without limitation, the Federal Trade Commission, the Securities & Exchange Commission, the United State Department of Justice, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the New York Attorney General and the Department of Labor.

While management currently believes that the ultimate outcome of all these proceedings and claims will not have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, litigation is subject to inherent uncertainties and our ability to withstand an unfavorable ruling has greatly diminished. If an unfavorable ruling were to occur in any one of them, there exists the possibility of a material adverse impact on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows and our ability to avoid bankruptcy would be materially and adversely affected.

Item 4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders

None

18

Table of Contents

PART II

Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

Market Price of and Dividends on the Registrant’s Common Equity and Related Stockholder Matters. Our common stock was traded on the NYSE under the symbol “NFI” through December 31, 2007. Our common stock has subsequently been delisted from the NYSE in 2008 and is currently quoted on the OTC Bulletin Board and on the Pink Sheets under the symbol “NOVS”. The following table sets forth, for the periods indicated, the high and low sales prices per share of common stock on the NYSE and the cash dividends paid or payable per share of common stock. The Board of Directors declared a one-for-four reverse stock split of its common stock, providing shareholders of record as of July 27, 2007, with one share of common stock for each four shares owned. The reduction in shares resulting from the split was effective on July 27, 2007 decreasing the number of common shares outstanding to 9.5 million. Prior year share amounts and earnings per share disclosures have been restated to reflect the reverse stock split.

As of March 12, 2008, we had approximately 1,010 shareholders of record of our common stock, including holders who are nominees for an undetermined number of beneficial owners based upon a review of the securities position listing provided by our transfer agent.

Dividend distributions will be made at the discretion of the Board of Directors and will depend on earnings, financial condition, cost of equity, investment opportunities and other factors as the Board of Directors may deem relevant. In addition, accrued and unpaid dividends on our preferred stock must be paid prior to the declaration of any dividends on our common stock. We do not expect to declare any stock dividend distributions for the near future. See “Industry Overview and Known Material Trends and Uncertainties” for further discussion regarding future uncertainties.

Purchase of Equity Securities by the Issuer

Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

(dollars in thousands)

19

Table of Contents

Item 6. Selected Financial Data

The following selected consolidated financial data is derived from our audited consolidated financial statements for the periods presented and should be read in conjunction with the more detailed information therein and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” included elsewhere in this annual report. Operating results are not necessarily indicative of future performance.

Selected Consolidated Financial and Other Data

(dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)

20

Table of Contents

21

Table of Contents

Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

The following discussion should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements of NovaStar Financial, Inc. and the notes thereto included elsewhere in this report.

General Overview

We are a Maryland corporation formed on September 13, 1996 which operates solely as a non-conforming residential mortgage portfolio manager. Prior to significant changes in our business during 2007 and the first quarter of 2008, we originated, purchased, securitized, sold, invested in and serviced residential nonconforming mortgage loans and mortgage backed securities. We retained, through our mortgage securities investment portfolio, significant interests in the nonconforming loans we originated and purchased, and through our servicing platform, serviced all of the loans in which we retained interests. During 2007 and early 2008, we discontinued our mortgage lending operations and sold our mortgage servicing rights which subsequently resulted in the abandonment of our servicing operations.

Historically, we had elected to be taxed as a REIT under the Code. During 2007, we announced that we would not be able to pay a dividend on our common stock with respect to our 2006 taxable income, and as a result, our status as a REIT terminated retroactive to January 1, 2006. This retroactive revocation of our REIT status results in us becoming taxable as a C corporation for 2006 and subsequent years.

The key performance measures for executive management are:

Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations, along with other portions of this report, are designed to provide information regarding our performance and these key performance measures.

Our consolidated financial statements have been prepared on a going concern basis of accounting which contemplates continuity of operations, realization of assets, liabilities and commitments in the normal course of business. There are substantial doubts that we will be able to continue as a going concern and, therefore, may be unable to realize our assets and discharge our liabilities in the normal course of business. The financial statements do not reflect any adjustments relating to the recoverability and classification of recorded asset amounts or to the amounts and classification of liabilities that may be necessary should we be unable to continue as a going concern.

Executive Overview of Performance

During 2007, significant disruptions occurred in the U.S. mortgage market and the global capital markets, both of which we have historically relied upon to finance our mortgage production and operations. The combination of a weakening housing market and concern over certain industry-wide product offerings negatively impacted the expectations of future performance and the value investors assign to mortgage loans and securities. Because of this, investor demand for non-agency mortgage-backed securities abruptly declined and participants in the debt markets substantially curtailed financing of mortgage loan inventories.

Mortgage lenders responded by adjusting loan programs and underwriting standards, which had the effect of reducing the availability of mortgage credit to borrowers. These developments further weakened the housing market and affected mortgage loan and security performance.

Additionally, due to these sharp declines in mortgage asset values, we experienced severe liquidity constraints due to margin calls on our mortgage assets which were being financed with short-term borrowings.

In an effort to manage through these difficult conditions and preserve liquidity and shareholder value, we undertook several strategies including:

22

Table of Contents

The severely disrupted mortgage and capital markets, along with the strategies we undertook to manage through such disruptions, were significant drivers in our financial results for the year ended December 31, 2007. The following discussion outlines the major factors which drove our 2007 financial performance.

Credit performance/Bond spread widening – With repayment risks no longer offset by rapidly rising home values, delinquencies in the industry began to rise in 2006 and accelerated during the year ended December 31, 2007. These credit issues caused whole loans to lose significant value, affecting the value of and income generated by our portfolio of mortgage loans and securities.

Generally, the market value of our mortgage assets (i.e. mortgage loans and mortgage securities) fluctuates inversely with bond spreads in the market. As bond spreads widen (i.e. investors demand more return), the value of our mortgage assets will decline, alternatively, as they tighten, the market value will increase. Bond spreads dramatically widened during 2007 as investor concerns over deterioration of subprime asset quality continued. Because of these adverse market factors, we experienced significant mark-to-market losses on our mortgage securities – trading and mortgage loans – held-for-sale as well as impairments on our mortgage securities – available-for-sale. We recognized losses on our mortgage securities—trading due to fair value adjustments of $342.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2007. We recorded $101.1 million of losses from valuation adjustments on our mortgage loans – held-for-sale for the year ended December 31, 2007. We recorded an impairment on our mortgage securities – available-for-sale as a result of credit deterioration of $98.7 million during the year ended December 31, 2007.

Another significant effect of the credit deterioration in our loan portfolio was our recording of provision for credit losses of $265.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2007.

Exit Plans - As a result of the significant deterioration in the subprime secondary markets, during 2007, we undertook certain workforce reductions pursuant to plans of termination (“Exit Plans”) to align our organization and costs with our decision to discontinue our mortgage lending and loan servicing operations. We incurred pre-tax charges of approximately $26.9 million related to these Exit Plans.

Sale of mortgage servicing rights - On November 1, 2007, we closed the sale of all of our mortgage servicing rights and servicing advances relating to our securitizations. The transaction provided $154.9 million of cash to us after deduction of expenses. We used the proceeds from the sale to repay our short-term borrowings. We recorded a gain on the sale of $19.8 million which is included in the “(Loss) income from discontinued operations, net of income tax” line item of our consolidated statements of operations.

Termination of REIT status - We were not able to pay a dividend on our common stock with respect to our 2006 taxable income, and as a result our status as a REIT terminated, retroactive to January 1, 2006. This retroactive revocation of our REIT status resulted in us becoming taxable as a C corporation for 2006 and subsequent years. Tax treatment of a C corporation is materially different from tax treatment as a REIT and thus the tax characterization of our transactions and calculations of our taxable income are different than how they have previously been reported to investors and the IRS. Because we became taxable as a C corporation retroactive to January 1, 2006, we reported taxable income in 2006 of approximately $212 million, which resulted in a tax liability of approximately $74 million. After applying payments and credits, we reported an amount owed to the IRS of approximately $67 million. We applied for and received an extension of time to pay our income taxes due to our expectation of generating a net operating loss for 2007, which may be carried back to 2006. This approved extension should allow us to eliminate all of our taxable income (excluding excess inclusion income) from 2006, and eliminate the outstanding tax liability due to the IRS. We will, however, be required to pay interest and any penalties that apply on the balance due to the IRS in 2008. If the IRS were to reverse its decision and require us to pay the 2006 tax liability, it would have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, liquidity and ability to continue as a going concern.

Deferred tax asset valuation allowance - We recorded a valuation allowance for our net deferred tax asset as of December 31, 2007 of $368.3 million. See “Deferred Tax Asset, Net” under Critical Accounting Estimates” for further discussion of the accounting policies surrounding our deferred tax assets.

Adoption of SFAS 159 – As a result of the adoption of SFAS 159, we elected fair value treatment for the asset-backed bonds we issued in our CDO transaction executed in the first quarter of 2007. The adoption resulted in gains due to fair value adjustments of $257.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2007, which have substantially offset the mark-to-market losses on the trading securities which were a part of our CDO transaction. These mark-to-market gains are netted with the mark-to-market losses on our trading securities in the “Fair value adjustments” line item of our consolidated statements of operations.

Liquidity – As a result of the 2007 subprime environment, we used up significant cash reserves during the year ended December 31, 2007. Our cash balances declined by approximately $125.2 million during the year ended December 31, 2007 primarily due to margin calls under short-term borrowings, mortgage loan repurchases and normal business operations. In addition, all short-term borrowing

23

Table of Contents

capacity in excess of outstanding borrowings was terminated or became unavailable to us, and we were required to repay a substantial portion of our outstanding borrowings. As a result, we face substantial liquidity risk and uncertainty, near-term and otherwise, which threatens our ability to continue as a going concern and avoid bankruptcy. See “Liquidity and Capital Resources” for further discussion of our liquidity position and steps we have taken to preserve liquidity levels.

See discussion under heading “Industry Overview and Known Material Trends” below for more information about current conditions in our industry and the steps we are taking or considering to manage and operate our business in this challenging environment.

The following selected key performance metrics are derived from our consolidated financial statements for the periods presented and should be read in conjunction with the more detailed information therein and with the disclosure included elsewhere in “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.”

Table 1 — Summary of Financial Highlights and Key Performance Metrics

(dollars in thousands; except per share amounts)

For the Year Ended December 31, 2007 as Compared to the Year Ended December 31, 2006.

We had a net loss available to common shareholders of $733.1 million during the year ended December 31, 2007 as compared to net income available to common shareholders of $66.3 million for the same period in 2006.

We incurred a significant loss from continuing operations of $467.5 million during the year ended December 31, 2007 as compared to income from continuing operations of $55.4 million for the same period in 2006. The following factors contributed to the current year loss and the decrease in income from continuing operations from the year ended December 31, 2006:

24

Table of Contents

We incurred a significant loss from discontinued operations of $256.8 million during the year ended December 31, 2007 as compared to income from discontinued operations of $17.5 million for the same period in 2006. The following factors contributed to the current year loss and the decrease in income from discontinued operations from the year ended December 31, 2006:

For the Year Ended December 31, 2006 as Compared to the Year Ended December 31, 2005.

Net income available to common shareholders declined by approximately $66.2 million during 2006 as compared to 2005.

We earned income from continuing operations of $55.4 million during the year ended December 31, 2006 as compared to income from continuing operations of $121.0 million for the same period in 2005. The following factors contributed to the decline in income from continuing operations for the year ended December 31, 2006:

Our income from discontinued operations decreased by $0.6 million from December 31, 2005 to 2006. A decline in our gains on sales of loans to third parties due to the increase in our reserve for losses related to loan repurchases was offset by an increase in net interest income resulting from a higher average balance of mortgage loans – held-for-sale. Because of the increase in loan repurchase requests which resulted from increased delinquencies in our 2006 production, we increased our reserve for future expected losses resulting from these repurchases by $25.4 million from 2005 to 2006. The higher average balance of loans was driven by the timing of our securitizations during 2006.

Industry Overview, Significant Events and Material Trends

Described below are some of the marketplace conditions, significant events and known material trends and uncertainties that may impact our future results of operations as we move into 2008.

Future Strategy, Liquidity and Going Concern Considerations - Our plan for the future will focus on minimizing losses and preserving liquidity with our remaining operations which consists only of mortgage portfolio management. Additionally, we will focus on paying down our outstanding borrowings with Wachovia and reducing operating costs. Our residual and subordinated mortgage securities are currently our only source of cash flows. Based on the current projections, the cash flows from our mortgage securities will decrease in the next several months as the underlying mortgage loans are repaid, and could be significantly less than the current projections if losses on the underlying mortgage loans exceed the current assumptions. In addition, we have significant operating expenses associated with office leases, software contracts, and other obligations relating to our discontinued operations, as well as payment obligations with respect to secured and unsecured debt, including periodic interest payments with respect to junior subordinated debentures relating to the trust preferred securities of NovaStar Capital Trust I and NovaStar Capital Trust II. We intend to use available cash inflows in excess of our immediate operating needs, including debt service payments, to repay all of Wachovia’s short-term borrowings and any remaining fees due under the repurchase agreements at the earliest practical date. If, as the cash flows from our mortgage securities decrease, we are unable to recommence or invest in mortgage loan origination or brokerage businesses on a profitable basis, restructure our unsecured debt and contractual obligations or if the cash flows from our mortgage securities are less than currently anticipated, there can be no assurance that we will be able to continue as a going concern and avoid seeking the protection of applicable federal and state bankruptcy laws.

25

Table of Contents

Due to the fact that we have a negative net worth, we do not currently have ongoing significant business operations that are profitable and our common stock and Series C preferred stock have been delisted from the New York Stock Exchange, it is unlikely that we will be able to obtain additional equity or debt financing on favorable terms, or at all, for the foreseeable future. To the extent we require additional liquidity and cannot obtain it, we will be forced to file for bankruptcy.

In the event we are able to significantly increase our liquidity position (as to which no assurance can be given), we may use excess cash to make certain investments if we determine that such investments could provide attractive risk-adjusted returns to shareholders, including, potentially investing in new or existing operating companies. Because of certain state licensing requirements, it is unlikely we are able, ourselves, to directly recommence mortgage lending activities so long as we continue to have a shareholders’ deficit.

Recent Market Developments - During 2008, the mortgage industry has remained under continuous pressure due to numerous factors, which include industry-wide disclosures regarding the continued deterioration of the value of mortgage assets held by banks and broker-dealers, the deterioration of mortgage credit among mortgage lenders, the downgrades of mortgage securities by the rating agencies, and a reluctance on the part of banks and broker-dealers to finance mortgage securities within the credit markets. Because of these factors, mortgage security market valuations remain volatile, mortgage securities trading remains limited and mortgage securities financing markets remain challenging as the industry continues to report negative news. All of these factors continue to contribute to the decline in the market values of our securities to levels at or below those experienced in 2007.

We have also seen a significant drop in LIBOR rates since the end of 2007 as the Federal Reserve made several cuts in short-term interest rates, which decreases the variable interest rates tied to one-month LIBOR within our securitizations which collateralize our mortgage securities and mortgage loans – held-in-portfolio. These trends, if they continue, could lead to positive effects on the cash flows we receive from our mortgage securities. However, these cash flows are also dependent on the credit and prepayment performance of the underlying collateral which could offset part or all of any positive impact of decreased LIBOR rates.

Given the current uncertainty regarding these market conditions, we are unable to offer any additional factual information on the situation and how it will impact us other than to disclose what we are currently seeing in the mortgage market. As a result, we expect to continue to operate with a historically low level of leverage and to continue to take actions to support liquidity and available cash.

Home prices - Recently, we have seen broad-based declines in housing values. Housing values could continue to decrease during the near term which could affect our credit loss experience, which will continue to impact our earnings, cash flows and financial condition and ability to continue as a going concern.

American Interbanc Mortgage Litigation. On March 17, 2008, the NovaStar Entities and American Interbanc Mortgage, LLC (“Plaintiff”) entered into a Confidential Settlement Term Sheet Agreement (the “Settlement Terms”) with respect to the actions, judgments and claims described below.

In March 2002, Plaintiff filed an action against NHMI in Superior Court of Orange County, California entitled American Interbanc Mortgage LLC v. NovaStar Home Mortgage, Inc. et. al. (the “California Action”). In the California Action, Plaintiff alleged that NHMI and two other mortgage companies (“Defendants”) engaged in false advertising and unfair competition under certain California statutes and interfered intentionally with Plaintiff’s prospective economic relations. On May 4, 2007, a jury returned a verdict by a 9-3 vote awarding Plaintiff $15.9 million. The court trebled the award, made adjustments for amounts paid by settling Defendants, and entered a $46.1 million judgment against Defendants on June 27, 2007. The award is joint and several against the Defendants, including NHMI. It is unknown if the other two Defendants, one of which has filed a bankruptcy petition, have the financial ability to pay any of the award.

NHMI’s motion for the trial court to overturn or reduce the verdict was denied on August 20, 2007, and NHMI appealed that decision (the “Appeal”). Pending the Appeal, Plaintiff commenced enforcement actions in the states of Missouri (the “Kansas City Action”) and Delaware, and obtained an enforcement judgment in Delaware (the “Delaware Judgment”). On January 23, 2008, Plaintiff filed an involuntary petition for bankruptcy against NHMI under 11 U.S.C. Sec. 303, in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Missouri (the “Involuntary”). Plaintiff was joined by two individuals alleging claims totaling $150 in the Involuntary filing. NHMI filed an answer and contested the standing of Plaintiff and the individuals to be petitioning creditors in bankruptcy.

On March 17, 2008, the NovaStar Entities and Plaintiff entered into the Settlement Terms with respect to the California Action, the Judgment, the Kansas City Action, the Delaware Judgment, the Involuntary, and all related claims.

26

Table of Contents

Under the Settlement Terms, the parties agreed to move to dismiss the Involuntary. Within ten (10) business days after notice of entry of the dismissal of the Involuntary, NFI will pay Plaintiff $2,000,000 plus the balance in an account established by order of the Bankruptcy Court in an amount no less than $50,000 (but not anticipated to be greater than $65,000 at the time of payment), with NHMI obligated to otherwise satisfy obligations to its identified creditors up to $48,000. The parties also agreed to extend the Appeal briefing period pending finalization of the settlement of the other actions, judgments and claims, as described below.

The Settlement Terms provide that, subject to payment of the amounts described above and satisfaction of certain other conditions, the parties will dismiss the California Action as to NHMI and the Kansas City Action and Delaware Judgment, effect notice of satisfaction of the Judgment, and effect a mutual release of all claims that were or could have been raised in any of the foregoing or that are related to the subject matter thereof, upon the earliest of the following: (i) July 1, 2010, (ii) a waiver by Wachovia of Wachovia’s right to file an involuntary bankruptcy proceeding against any of the NovaStar Entities prior to July 1, 2010, (iii) an extension of the maturity date of our indebtedness to Wachovia until at least July 1, 2010, or (iv) delivery to Plaintiff of written documentation evidencing the full satisfaction of our current indebtedness to Wachovia.

In addition to the initial payments to be made to the Plaintiff following dismissal of the Involuntary, we will pay Plaintiff $5.5 million if, prior to July 1, 2010, (i) NFI’s average common stock market capitalization is at least $94.4 million over a period of five (5) consecutive business days, or (ii) the holders of NFI’s common stock are paid $94.4 million in net asset value as a result of any sale of NFI or its assets. If NFI is sold prior to July 1, 2010 for less than $94.4 million and ceases to be a public company, then NFI will obligate the purchaser either to immediately pay $2 million to Plaintiff, or to pay Plaintiff $5.5 million in the event the value of NFI exceeds $94.4 million prior to July 1, 2010 as determined by an independent valuation company.

We make no assurances with regard to our ability to satisfy of any of the conditions described or referenced above. Without limiting the foregoing, we have obtained no commitment from Wachovia with regard to any action that may be required of Wachovia in order to effect, prior to July 1, 2010, the dismissals and releases described above. Further, nothing in the Settlement Terms constitutes an expression of our belief, projection, assumption, or intent regarding any future event, any industry or market conditions, or our financial condition, stock price, or business plans or strategies.

In accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, NHMI has recorded a liability of $47.1 million as of December 31, 2007 with a corresponding charge to earnings. The $47.1 million includes interest which is accruing on the obligation. Because NHMI is a wholly owned indirect subsidiary of NFI, the $47.1 million liability is included in our consolidated financial statements. The liability is included in the “Liabilities of discontinued operations” line of the consolidated balance sheets while the charge to earnings is included in the “(Loss) income from discontinued operations, net of income tax” line of the consolidated statements of operations.

Dividend payments - As a result of the termination of our REIT status and our current financial condition, we do not intend to pay any dividends on our common stock for the foreseeable future. Also, our board of directors has suspended dividend payments on our Series C and Series D-1 Preferred Stock. As a result, dividends on the Series C and D-1 preferred stock will continue to accrue and the dividend rate on the Series D-1 preferred stock increased from 9.0% to 13.0%, compounded quarterly, effective January 16, 2008 with respect to all unpaid dividends and subsequently accruing dividends. All accrued and unpaid dividends on our preferred stock must be paid prior to payment of any dividends on our common stock. We do not expect to pay dividends on any of our stock for the foreseeable future.

Trading of our stock - On January 11, 2008, we announced that NYSE Regulation determined that our common stock (ticker symbol: NFI) and our 8.90% Series C Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock (ticker symbol: NFI PR C) no longer met applicable listing standards for continued listing on the New York Stock Exchange. Our common and preferred shares are eligible for quotation on the OTC Bulletin Board and the Pink Sheets, an electronic quotation service for securities traded over-the-counter, under the symbols (“NOVS”) and (“NOVSP”), respectively.

27

Table of Contents

Critical Accounting Estimates

We prepare our consolidated financial statements in conformity with GAAP and, therefore, are required to make estimates regarding the values of our assets and liabilities and in recording income and expenses. These estimates are based, in part, on our judgment and assumptions regarding various economic conditions that we believe are reasonable based on facts and circumstances existing at the time of reporting. These estimates affect reported amounts of assets, liabilities and accumulated other comprehensive income at the date of the consolidated financial statements and the reported amounts of income, expenses and other comprehensive income during the periods presented. The following summarizes the components of our consolidated financial statements where understanding accounting policies is critical to understanding and evaluating our reported financial results, especially given the significant estimates used in applying the policies. The discussion is intended to demonstrate the significance of estimates to our financial statements and the related accounting policies. Our critical accounting estimates impact our one reportable segment, which is our mortgage portfolio management segment. Management has discussed the development and selection of these critical accounting estimates with the audit committee of our Board of Directors and the audit committee has reviewed our disclosure.

Transfers of Assets (Loan and Mortgage Security Securitizations) and Related Gains. In a loan securitization, we combined the mortgage loans we originated and purchased in pools to serve as collateral for asset-backed bonds. In a mortgage security securitization (also known as a “resecuritization”), we combined mortgage securities retained in previous loan securitization transactions to serve as collateral for asset-backed bonds. The loans or mortgage securities were transferred to a trust designed to serve only for the purpose of holding the collateral. The trust is considered a qualifying special purpose entity as defined by SFAS No. 140, “Accounting for Transfers and Servicing of Financial Assets and Extinguishments of Liabilities” (“SFAS 140”). The owners of the asset-backed bonds have no recourse to us in the event the collateral does not perform as planned except where defects have occurred in the loan documentation and underwriting process.

To determine proper accounting treatment for each securitization or resecuritization, we evaluated whether or not we retained or surrendered control over the transferred assets by reference to the conditions set forth in SFAS 140. All terms of these transactions were evaluated against the conditions set forth in this statement. Some of the questions that must be considered include:

When these transfers were executed in a manner such that we surrendered control over the collateral, the transfer was accounted for as a sale. In accordance with SFAS 140, a gain or loss on the sale was recognized based on the carrying amount of the financial assets involved in the transfer, allocated between the assets transferred and the retained interests based on their relative fair value at the date of transfer. In a securitization accounted for as a sale, we retained (but have subsequently sold) the right to service the underlying mortgage loans and we also retained certain mortgage securities issued by the trust. As previously discussed, the gain recognized upon a securitization structured as a sale depends on, among other things, the estimated fair value of the components of the securitization – the loans or mortgage securities and derivative instruments transferred, the securities retained and the mortgage servicing rights. The estimated fair value of the securitization components is considered a “critical accounting estimate” as 1) these gains or losses can represent a significant portion of our operating results and 2) the valuation assumptions used regarding economic conditions and the make-up of the collateral, including interest rates, principal payments, prepayments and loan defaults are highly uncertain and require a large degree of judgment.

We use two methodologies for determining the initial value of our residual securities: 1) the whole loan price methodology and 2) the discount rate methodology. We generally will try to use the whole loan price methodology when significant open market sales pricing data is available. Under this method, the initial value of the loans transferred in a securitization accounted for as a sale is estimated based on the expected open market sales price of a similar pool. In open market transactions, the purchaser has the right to reject loans at its discretion. In a loan securitization, loans generally cannot be rejected. As a result, we adjust the market price for the loans to compensate for the estimated value of rejected loans. The market price of the securities retained is derived by deducting the percent of net proceeds received in the securitization (i.e. the economic value of the loans transferred) from the estimated adjusted market price for the entire pool of the loans.

An implied yield (discount rate) is derived by taking the projected cash flows generated using assumptions for prepayments, expected credit losses and interest rates and then solving for the discount rate required to present value the cash flows back to the initial value derived above. We then ascertain whether the resulting discount rate is commensurate with current market conditions. Additionally, the initial discount rate serves as the initial accretable yield used to recognize income on the securities.

28

Table of Contents

When significant open market pricing information is not readily available to us, we use the discount rate methodology. Under this method, we first analyze market discount rates for similar assets. After establishing the market discount rate, the projected cash flows are discounted back to ascertain the initial value of the residual securities. We then ascertain whether the resulting initial value is commensurate with current market conditions.

For purposes of valuing our residual securities, it is important to know that we also transfer interest rate agreements to the securitization trust with the objective of reducing interest rate risk within the trust. During the period before loans are transferred in a securitization transaction we enter into interest rate swap or cap agreements. Certain of these interest rate agreements are then transferred into the trust at the time of securitization. Therefore, the trust assumes the obligation to make payments and obtains the right to receive payments under these agreements.

In valuing our residual securities, it is also important to understand what portion of the underlying mortgage loan collateral is covered by mortgage insurance. At the time of a securitization transaction, the trust legally assumes the responsibility to pay the mortgage insurance premiums associated with the loans transferred and the rights to receive claims for credit losses. Therefore, we have no obligation to pay these insurance premiums. The cost of the insurance is paid by the trust from proceeds the trust receives from the underlying collateral. This information is significant for valuation as the mortgage insurance significantly reduces the credit losses born by the owner of the loan. Mortgage insurance claims on loans where a defect occurred in the loan origination process will not be paid by the mortgage insurer. The assumptions we use to value our residual securities consider this risk.

When we do have the ability to exert control over the transferred collateral in a securitization, the assets remain on our financial statements and a liability is recorded for the related asset-backed bonds. The servicing agreements that we executed for loans we securitized include a removal of accounts provision which gives the servicer the right, but not the obligation, to repurchase from the trust loans that are 90 days to 119 days delinquent. While we retained these servicing rights, we recorded the mortgage loans subject to the removal of accounts provision in mortgage loans held-for-sale at fair value and the related repurchase obligation as a liability. However, in November 2007 we sold all of our mortgage servicing rights, including the removal of accounts rights, to a third party, which resulted in the removal of the mortgage loans subject to the removal of accounts provision from our balance sheet. In addition, we retained a “clean up” call option that can be exercised when the aggregate principal balance of the mortgage loans has declined to ten percent or less of the original aggregated mortgage loan principal balance. However, we subsequently sold these clean up call rights, in part, to the buyer of our mortgage servicing rights, and we do not expect to exercise any of the call rights that we retained.

Mortgage Securities – Available-for-Sale and Trading. Our mortgage securities – available-for-sale and trading represent beneficial interests we retain in securitization and resecuritization transactions which include residual securities and subordinated securities as well as bonds issued by others which we have purchased. The residual securities include interest-only mortgage securities, prepayment penalty bonds and over-collateralization bonds. The subordinated securities represent bonds which are senior to the residual securities but are subordinated to the bonds sold to third party investors. All of the subordinated securities retained by us have been classified as trading.

The residual securities we retain in securitization transactions structured as sales primarily consist of the right to receive the future cash flows from a pool of securitized mortgage loans which include:

The subordinated securities we retain in our securitization transactions have a stated principal amount and interest rate. The performance of the securities is dependent upon the performance of the underlying pool of securitized mortgage loans. The interest rates these securities earn are variable and are subject to an available funds cap as well as a maximum rate cap. The securities receive principal payments in accordance with a payment priority which is designed to maintain specified levels of subordination to the senior bonds within the respective securitization trust. Because the subordinated securities are rated lower than AA, they are considered low credit quality and we account for the securities based on guidance set forth from Emerging Issuance Task Force 99-20 “Recognition of Interest Income and Impairment on Purchased and Retained Beneficial Interests in Securitized Financial Assets” (“EITF 99-20”) using the effective yield method. The fair value of the subordinated securities is based on third-party quotes.

The cash flows we receive are highly dependent upon the interest rate environment. The interest rates on the bonds issued by the securitization trust are indexed to short-term interest rates, while the coupons on the pool of loans held by the securitization trust are less interest rate sensitive. As a result, as rates rise and fall, our cash flows will fall and rise, because the cash we receive on our residual securities is dependent on this interest rate spread. As our cash flows fall and rise, the value of our residual securities will decrease or increase. Additionally, the cash flows we receive are dependent on the default and prepayment experience of the borrowers of the underlying mortgage security collateral. Increasing or decreasing cash flows will increase or decrease the yield on our securities.

29

Table of Contents

We believe the accounting estimates related to the valuation of our mortgage securities – available-for-sale and establishing the rate of income recognition on the mortgage securities – available-for-sale and trading are “critical accounting estimates”, because they can materially affect net income and shareholders’ equity and require us to forecast interest rates, mortgage principal payments, prepayments and loan default assumptions which are highly uncertain and require a large degree of judgment. The rate used to discount the projected cash flows is also critical in the valuation of our residual securities. We use internal, historical collateral performance data and published forward yield curves when modeling future expected cash flows and establishing the rate of income recognized on mortgage securities. We believe the value of our residual securities is appropriate, but can provide no assurance that future changes in interest rates, prepayment and loss experience or changes in the market discount rate will not require write-downs of the residual assets. For mortgage securities classified as available-for-sale, impairments would reduce income in future periods when deemed other-than-temporary.

As previously described, our mortgage securities available-for-sale and trading represent retained beneficial interests in certain components of the cash flows of the underlying mortgage loans to securitization trusts. Income recognition for our mortgage securities – available-for-sale and trading is based on the effective yield method. Under the effective yield method, as payments are received, they are applied to the cost basis of the mortgage related security. Each period, the accretable yield for each mortgage security is evaluated and, to the extent there has been a change in the estimated cash flows, it is adjusted and applied prospectively. The estimated cash flows change as management’s assumptions about credit losses, borrower prepayments and interest rates are updated. The assumptions are established using internally developed models. We prepare analyses of the yield for each security using a range of these assumptions. The accretable yield used in recording interest income is generally set within a range of assumptions. The accretable yield is recorded as interest income with a corresponding increase to the cost basis of the mortgage security.

At each reporting period subsequent to the initial valuation of the residual securities, the fair value of the residual securities is estimated based on the present value of future expected cash flows to be received. Management’s best estimate of key assumptions, including credit losses, prepayment speeds, expected call dates, market discount rates and forward yield curves commensurate with the risks involved, are used in estimating future cash flows. We estimate initial and subsequent fair value for the subordinated securities based on quoted market prices. See Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements for key economic assumptions and sensitivity of the current fair value of our residual securities.

To the extent that the cost basis of mortgage securities – available-for-sale exceeds the fair value and the unrealized loss is considered to be other than temporary, an impairment charge is recognized and the amount recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income or loss is reclassified to earnings as a realized loss. When we retain new residual securities during a period when short-term interest rate increases are greater than anticipated by the forward yield curve, we generally are more susceptible to impairments on our newer mortgage securities as they do not have sizable unrealized gains to help offset the decline in value.

Mortgage Loans. Mortgage loans held-for-sale are recorded at the lower of cost or market determined on an aggregate basis. Mortgage loan origination fees and direct costs on mortgage loans held-for-sale are deferred until the related loans are sold. Premiums paid to acquire mortgage loans held-for-sale are also deferred until the related loans are sold. Mortgage loans held-in-portfolio are recorded at their cost, adjusted for the amortization of net deferred costs and for credit losses inherent in the portfolio. Mortgage loan origination fees and associated direct costs on mortgage loans held-in-portfolio are deferred and recognized over the life of the loan as an adjustment to yield using the level yield method. Premiums paid to acquire mortgage loans held-in-portfolio are also deferred and recognized over the life of the loan as an adjustment to yield using the level yield method.

Allowance for Credit Losses. An allowance for credit losses is maintained for mortgage loans held-in-portfolio. The amount of the allowance is based on the assessment by management of probable losses incurred based on various factors affecting our mortgage loan portfolio, including current economic conditions, the makeup of the portfolio based on credit grade, loan-to-value ratios, delinquency status, mortgage insurance we purchase and other relevant factors. The allowance is maintained through ongoing adjustments to operating income. The assumptions used by management in estimating the amount of the allowance for credit losses are highly uncertain and involve a great deal of judgment.

An internally developed migration analysis is the primary tool used in analyzing our allowance for credit losses. This tool takes into consideration historical information regarding foreclosure and loss severity experience and applies that information to the portfolio at the reporting date. We also take into consideration our use of mortgage insurance as a method of managing credit risk. We pay mortgage insurance premiums on a portion of the loans maintained on our balance sheet and have included the cost of mortgage insurance in our statement of operations.

30

Table of Contents

Our estimate of expected losses could increase if our actual loss experience is different than originally estimated. In addition, our estimate of expected losses could increase if economic factors change the value we could reasonably expect to obtain from the sale of the property. If actual losses increase or if values reasonably expected to be obtained from property sales decrease, the provision for losses would increase. Any increase in the provision for losses would adversely affect our results of operations.

Real Estate Owned Real estate owned, which consists of residential real estate acquired in satisfaction of loans, is carried at the lower of cost or estimated fair value less estimated selling costs. We estimate fair value at the asset’s liquidation value less selling costs using management’s assumptions which are based on historical loss severities for similar assets. Adjustments to the loan carrying value required at time of foreclosure are charged against the allowance for credit losses. Costs related to the development of real estate are capitalized and those related to holding the property are expensed. Losses or gains from the ultimate disposition of real estate owned are charged or credited to earnings.

Mortgage Servicing Rights (“MSR’s”). We sold all of our mortgage servicing rights on November 1, 2007 and, therefore, did not have any MSR’s recorded as of December 31, 2007. We did have significant MSR balances as of December 31, 2006, as well as significant MSR activity during 2007.

Beginning in 2007, due to the adoption of SFAS 156, “Accounting for Servicing of Financial Assets” (“SFAS 156”), MSR’s were initially recorded at fair value. Prior to 2007, MSR’s were initially recorded at allocated cost based upon the relative fair values of the transferred loans, derivative instruments and the servicing rights. Additionally, we elected to continue to amortize our MSR’s in proportion to and over the projected net servicing revenues as opposed to the fair value method as allowed under SFAS 156. Periodically, we evaluated the carrying value of originated MSR’s based on their estimated fair value. If the estimated fair value was less than the carrying amount of the mortgage servicing rights, the mortgage servicing rights were written down to the amount of the estimated fair value. For purposes of evaluating and measuring impairment of MSR’s, we stratified the mortgage servicing rights based on their predominant risk characteristics. The most predominant risk characteristic considered was period of origination. The mortgage loans underlying the MSR’s were pools of homogeneous, nonconforming residential loans.

We used a discounted cash flow methodology to arrive at a fair value. The fair value of MSR’s is highly sensitive to changes in assumptions. Changes in prepayment speed assumptions have the greatest impact on the fair value of MSR’s. Generally, as interest rates decline, prepayments accelerate due to increased refinance activity, which results in a decrease in the fair value of MSR’s. Conversely, as interest rates rise, prepayments typically slow down, which generally results in an increase in the fair value of MSR’s. All assumptions are reviewed for reasonableness on a quarterly basis and adjusted as necessary to reflect current and anticipated market conditions. Thus, any measurement of the fair value of MSR’s is limited by the existing conditions and the assumptions utilized as of a particular point in time. Those same assumptions may not be appropriate if applied at a different point in time.

Reserve for Loan Repurchases. We maintain a reserve for the representation and warranty liabilities related to loans sold to third parties, and for the contractual obligation to rebate a portion of any premium paid by a purchaser when a borrower prepays a sold loan within an agreed period. The reserve, which is recorded as a liability on the consolidated balance sheet, is established when loans are sold, and is calculated as the estimated fair value of losses reasonably estimated to occur over the life of the contractual obligation. Management estimates inherent losses based upon historical loss trends and frequency and severity of losses for similar loan product sales. The adequacy of this reserve is evaluated and adjusted as required. The provision for losses recognized at the sale date is included in the consolidated statements of operations as a reduction of gains on sales of mortgage assets.

Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities. Our strategy for using derivative instruments is to mitigate the risk of increased costs on our variable rate liabilities during a period of rising rates (i.e. interest rate risk), subject to cost and liquidity constraints. Our primary goals for managing interest rate risk are to maintain the net interest margin spread between our assets and liabilities and diminish the effect of changes in general interest rate levels on our market value. Generally the interest rate swap and interest rate cap agreements we use have an active secondary market, and none are obtained for a speculative nature. These interest rate agreements are intended to provide income and cash flows to offset potential reduced net interest income and cash flows under certain interest rate environments. The determination of effectiveness is the primary assumption and estimate used in hedging. At trade date, these instruments and their hedging relationship are identified, designated and documented.

SFAS No. 133, “Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities” (“SFAS 133”) standardizes the accounting for derivative instruments, including certain instruments embedded in other contracts, by requiring that an entity recognize those items as assets or liabilities in the balance sheet and measure them at fair value. If certain conditions are met, an entity may elect to designate a derivative instrument either as a cash flow hedge, a fair value hedge or a hedge of foreign currency exposure. SFAS 133 requires derivative instruments to be recorded at their fair value with hedge ineffectiveness recognized in earnings. Due to the negative fair value of our derivative instruments at December 31, 2007, they are included in accounts payable and other liabilities in our consolidated balance sheet. Our derivative instruments had a positive fair value as of December 31, 2006 and are included in other assets on our consolidated balance sheet as of that date.

31

Table of Contents

Derivative instruments that meet the hedge accounting criteria of SFAS 133 are considered cash flow hedges. We also have derivative instruments that do not meet the requirements for hedge accounting. However, these derivative instruments do contribute to our overall risk management strategy by serving to reduce interest rate risk on long-term borrowings collateralized by our loans held-in-portfolio.

Any changes in fair value of derivative instruments related to hedge effectiveness are reported in accumulated other comprehensive income. Changes in fair value of derivative instruments related to hedge ineffectiveness and non-hedge activity are recorded as adjustments to earnings. For those derivative instruments that do not qualify for hedge accounting, changes in the fair value of the instruments are recorded as adjustments to earnings.

CDO Asset-backed Bonds (“CDO ABB”). We elected the fair value option for the asset-backed bonds issued from NovaStar ABS CDO I in 2007. We elected the fair value option for these liabilities to help reduce earnings volatility which otherwise would arise if the accounting method for this debt was not matched with the fair value accounting for the related mortgage securities—trading. Fair value is estimated using quoted market prices of the underlying assets.

The asset-backed bonds which are being carried at fair value are included in the “Asset-backed bonds secured by mortgage securities” line item on the consolidated balance sheets. We recognize fair value adjustments for the change in fair value of the bonds which are included in the “Fair value adjustments” line item on the consolidated statements of operations. We calculate interest expense for these asset-backed bonds based on the prevailing coupon rates of the specific classes of debt and record interest expense in the period incurred. Interest expense amounts are included in the “Interest expense” line item of the consolidated statements of operations.

Deferred Tax Asset, net. We recorded deferred tax assets and liabilities for the future tax consequences attributable to differences between the GAAP carrying amounts and their respective income tax bases. A deferred tax liability was recognized for all future taxable temporary differences, while a deferred tax asset was recognized for all future deductible temporary differences, operating loss carryforwards and tax credit carryforwards. In accordance with SFAS 109, we recorded deferred tax assets and liabilities using the enacted tax rate that is expected to apply to taxable income in the periods in which the deferred tax asset or liability is expected to be realized.

We previously elected to be treated as a REIT for federal income tax purposes and, as a result, were not required to pay any corporate level income taxes as long as we remained a REIT and distributed 100 percent of our taxable income in the form of dividend distributions to our shareholders. During 2007, we were unable to satisfy the REIT distribution requirement for the tax year ended December 31, 2006, either in the form of cash or preferred stock. This action resulted in our loss of REIT status retroactive to January 1, 2006. Our failure to satisfy the REIT distribution test resulted from demands on our liquidity and a substantial decline in our market capitalization during 2007.

Although we had planned to revoke REIT status effective January 1, 2008, the termination of REIT status two years prior to our plan adversely impacted our financial statements. The impact of the termination of our REIT status has been reflected in our 2007 financial statements.

As a result of our termination of REIT status, we elected to file a consolidated federal income tax return with our eligible affiliated members. We reported taxable income in 2006 of approximately $212 million, which resulted in a tax liability of approximately $74 million along with interest and penalties due of approximately $5.8 million. After applying our payments and credits, we reported an amount owed to the IRS of approximately $67 million. We applied for and received an extension of time to pay our income taxes due to our expectation of generating a net operating loss for 2007, which may be carried back to 2006. This approved extension should allow us to eliminate all of our taxable income (excluding excess inclusion income) from 2006, and eliminate the outstanding tax liability due to the IRS. However, we will be required to pay interest and any penalties that apply on the balance due to the IRS in 2008.

Because we terminated our REIT status effective January 1, 2006, and were taxable as a C corporation for 2006 and beyond, we recorded deferred taxes as of December 31, 2007 based on the estimated cumulative temporary differences as of the current date.

In determining the amount of deferred tax assets to recognize in the financial statements, we evaluate the likelihood of realizing such benefits in future periods. SFAS 109 requires the recognition of a valuation allowance if it is more likely than not that all or some portion of the deferred tax asset will not be realized. SFAS 109 indicates the more likely than not threshold is a level of likelihood that is more than 50 percent.

Under SFAS 109, companies are required to identify and consider all available evidence, both positive and negative, in determining whether it is more likely than not that all or some portion of its deferred tax assets will not be realized.

32

Table of Contents

Positive evidence includes, but is not limited to the following: cumulative earnings in recent years, earnings expected in future years, excess appreciated asset value over the tax basis, and positive industry trends. Negative evidence includes, but is not limited to the following: cumulative losses in recent years, losses expected in future years, a history of operating losses or tax credits carryforwards expiring, and adverse industry trends.

The weight given to the potential effect of negative and positive evidence should be commensurate with the extent to which it can be objectively verified. Accordingly, the more negative evidence that exists requires more positive evidence to counter, thus making it more difficult to support a conclusion that a valuation allowance is not needed for all or some of the deferred tax assets. A cumulative loss in recent years is significant negative evidence that is difficult to overcome when determining the need for a valuation allowance. Similarly, cumulative earnings in recent years represents significant positive objective evidence. If the weight of the positive evidence is sufficient to support a conclusion that it is more likely than not that a deferred tax asset will be realized, a valuation allowance should not be recorded.

We examine and weigh all available evidence (both positive and negative and both historical and forecasted) in the process of determining whether it is more likely than not that a deferred tax asset will be realized. We consider the relevancy of historical and forecasted evidence when there has been a significant change in circumstances. Additionally, we evaluate the realization of our recorded deferred tax assets on an interim and annual basis. We do not record a valuation allowance if the weight of the positive evidence exceeds the negative evidence and is sufficient to support a conclusion that it is more likely than not that our deferred tax asset will be realized.

If the weighted positive evidence is not sufficient to support a conclusion that it is more likely than not that all or some of our deferred tax assets will be realized, we consider all alternative sources of taxable income identified in SFAS 109 in determining the amount of valuation allowance to be recorded. Alternative sources of taxable income identified in SFAS 109 include the following: 1) taxable income in prior carryback year, 2) future reversals of existing taxable temporary differences, 3) future taxable income exclusive of reversing temporary differences and carryforwards, and 4) tax planning strategies.

Based on the evidence available as of December 31, 2007, including the significant pre-tax losses incurred by us in both the current quarter and previous quarters, the ongoing disruption to the credit markets, the liquidity issues facing us and our decision to close all of our mortgage lending operations, we concluded that it is more likely than not that our entire net deferred tax asset will not be realized. Based on these conclusions, we recorded a valuation allowance of $368.3 million for deferred tax assets as of December 31, 2007 compared to $0.7 million as of December 31, 2006. In future periods, we will continue to monitor all factors that impact positive and negative evidence relating to our deferred tax assets.

As of December 31, 2007, we had a federal net operating loss of approximately $368.4 million. We are expecting to carryback $196.1 million of the 2007 projected federal net operating loss against our 2006 taxable income and have recorded a current receivable for such benefit. The receivable was netted against the 2006 federal liability. The remaining $172.3 federal net operating loss may be carried forward to offset future taxable income, subject to applicable provisions of the Code, including substantial limitations in the event of an “ownership change” as defined in Section 382 of the Code. If not used, this net operating loss will begin to expire in 2025.

Impact of Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements

In February 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 155, “Accounting for Certain Hybrid Financial Instruments”, an amendment of SFAS 133 and SFAS 140. This statement permits fair value remeasurement for any hybrid financial instrument that contains an embedded derivative that otherwise would require bifurcation. It also clarifies which interest-only strips and principal-only strips are not subject to SFAS 133. The statement also establishes a requirement to evaluate interests in securitized financial assets to identify interests that are freestanding derivatives or hybrid financial instruments that contain an embedded derivative requiring bifurcation. The statement also clarifies that concentration of credit risks in the form of subordination are not embedded derivatives, and it also amends SFAS 140, to eliminate the prohibition on a QSPE from holding a derivative financial instrument that pertains to a beneficial interest other than another derivative financial instrument.

In January 2007, the FASB provided a scope exception under SFAS 155 for securitized interests that only contain an embedded derivative that is tied to the prepayment risk of the underlying prepayable financial assets, and for which the investor does not control the right to accelerate the settlement. If a securitized interest contains any other embedded derivative (for example, an inverse floater), then it would be subject to the bifurcation tests in SFAS 133, as would securities purchased at a significant premium. In previous years, our policy was to designate our residual securities as available-for-sale but as a result of our adoption of SFAS 155 on January 1, 2007 and the complexities and uncertainties surrounding the application of this Statement, we designated the NMFT Series 2007-2 residual security as trading. As a result, the NMFT Series 2007-2 residual security qualifies for the scope exception concerning bifurcation provided by SFAS 155.

33

Table of Contents

In March 2006, the FASB issued SFAS 156. This statement requires that an entity separately recognize a servicing asset or a servicing liability when it undertakes an obligation to service a financial asset under a servicing contract in certain situations. Such servicing assets or servicing liabilities are required to be initially measured at fair value, if practicable. SFAS 156 also allows an entity to choose one of two methods when subsequently measuring its servicing assets and servicing liabilities: (1) the amortization method or (2) the fair value measurement method. The amortization method existed under SFAS 140 and remains unchanged in (1) allowing entities to amortize their servicing assets or servicing liabilities in proportion to and over the period of estimated net servicing income or net servicing loss and (2) requiring the assessment of those servicing assets or servicing liabilities for impairment or increased obligation based on fair value at each reporting date. The fair value measurement method allows entities to measure their servicing assets or servicing liabilities at fair value at each reporting date and report changes in fair value in earnings in the period the change occurs. SFAS 156 introduces the notion of classes and allows companies to make a separate subsequent measurement election for each class of its servicing rights. In addition, SFAS 156 requires certain comprehensive roll-forward disclosures that must be presented for each class. The Statement is effective as of the beginning of an entity’s first fiscal year that begins after September 15, 2006. We adopted SFAS 156 on January 1, 2007 and elected to continue using the amortization method for measuring our servicing assets.

In June 2006, the FASB issued Financial Interpretation No. 48, “Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes – an interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109” (“FIN 48”). FIN 48 prescribes a recognition threshold and measurement attribute for the financial statement recognition and measurement of a tax position taken or to be taken on a tax return. This interpretation also provides additional guidance on derecognition, classification, interest and penalties, accounting in interim periods, disclosure, and transition. This interpretation is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2006. We adopted the provisions of FIN 48 on January 1, 2007. The cumulative effect of applying the provisions of FIN 48 is reported as an adjustment to the opening balance of accumulated deficit on January 1, 2007 and resulted in an increase to our accumulated deficit of $1.1 million.

In September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements”, (“SFAS 157”). SFAS 157 establishes a framework for measuring fair value and requires expanded disclosures regarding fair value measurements. This accounting standard is effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007, however early adoption is permitted. We adopted the provisions of SFAS 157 on January 1, 2007. See Note 11 and Note 15 which describe the impact of the adoption of SFAS 157 on our consolidated financial statements.

In September 2006, the SEC issued Staff Accounting Bulletin 108, “Considering the Effects of Prior Year Misstatements when Quantifying Misstatements in Current Year Financial Statements” (“SAB 108”). SAB 108 provides guidance regarding the consideration of the effects of prior year misstatements in quantifying current year misstatements for the purpose of materiality assessments. The method established by SAB 108 requires each of our financial statements and the related financial statement disclosures to be considered when quantifying and assessing the materiality of the misstatement. The provisions of SAB 108 are effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years beginning after December 31, 2006. We adopted SAB 108 on January 1, 2007 and have deemed the impact immaterial on our consolidated financial statements.

In February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 159, “The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities – Including an amendment of FASB Statement No. 115.” (“SFAS 159”) which permits entities to choose to measure many financial instruments and certain other items at fair value. Unrealized gains and losses on items for which the fair value option has been elected will be recognized in earnings at each subsequent reporting date. This accounting standard is effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007, however early adoption is permitted. We adopted the provisions of SFAS 159 on January 1, 2007. See Note 11 which describes the impact of the adoption of SFAS 159 on our consolidated financial statements.

On February 20, 2008, the FASB issued Staff Position (FSP) 140-3, “Accounting for Transfers of Financial Assets and Repurchase Financing Transactions”, (“FSP 140-3”). The FSP focuses on the circumstances that would permit a transferor and a transferee to separately evaluate the accounting for a transfer of a financial asset and a repurchase financing under SFAS 140. The FSP states that a transfer of a financial asset and a repurchase agreement involving the transferred financial asset should be considered part of the same arrangement when the counterparties to the two transactions are the same unless certain criteria are met. The criteria in the FSP are intended to identify whether (1) there is a valid and distinct business or economic purpose for entering separately into the two transactions and (2) the repurchase financing does not result in the initial transferor regaining control over the previously transferred financial assets. Its purpose is to limit diversity of practice in accounting for these situations, resulting in more consistent financial reporting. Consequently, it is the FASB’s desire to have the FSP effective as soon as practicable. This FSP would be effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2008 and interim periods within those fiscal years. Early application is not permitted.

34

Table of Contents

During the first quarter of 2006, we purchased approximately $1.0 billion of mortgage loans from counterparties which were subsequently financed through repurchase agreements with that same counterparty. As of December 31, 2007, the entire $1.0 billion of mortgage loans purchased during 2006 remained on our consolidated balance sheet but they were no longer financed with repurchase agreements as they had been securitized in transactions structured as financings and the short-term repurchase agreements were replaced with asset-backed bond financing. We believe there would be no material change to our financial statements upon the adoption of FSP 140-3.

In March 2008, the FASB issued FASB Statement No. 161, “Disclosures about Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities.” The new standard is intended to improve financial reporting about derivative instruments and hedging activities by requiring enhanced disclosures to enable investors to better understand their effects on an entity’s financial position, financial performance, and cash flows. It is effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years and interim periods beginning after November 15, 2008, with early application encouraged. We do not expect the adoption of SFAS 161 to have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements, however, we are still in the process of evaluating the impact of adopting SFAS 161.

Results of Operations – Consolidated Earnings Comparisons

Continuing Operations

Year Ended December 31, 2007 as Compared to the Year Ended December 31, 2006

See the “Executive Overview of Performance” for discussion of the results of operations for the year ended December 31, 2007 as compared to the year ended December 31, 2006.

Year Ended December 31, 2006 as Compared to the Year Ended December 31, 2005

See the “Executive Overview of Performance” for discussion of the results of operations for the year ended December 31, 2006 as compared to the year ended December 31, 2005.

Net Interest (Expense) Income. We earn interest income primarily on our mortgage assets which include mortgage securities available-for-sale, mortgage securities trading and mortgage loans held-in-portfolio. In addition we earn interest income on available cash we hold for general operating needs. Interest expense consists primarily of interest paid on borrowings secured by mortgage assets, which includes warehouse repurchase agreements and asset backed bonds.

The following table provides the components of net interest income for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005.

Table 2 — Net Interest Income

(dollars in thousands)

35

Table of Contents

Our net interest (expense) income decreased by $270.1 million and $33.5 million for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively. Interest income on mortgage loans held-in-portfolio increased for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006 as a result of higher average mortgage loan balances due to the on-balance sheet securitizations accounted for as financings we executed in 2007 and 2006. This increase was offset by lower interest income from our mortgage securities due to the addition of lower-yielding securities and credit deterioration of the mortgage loans underlying the mortgage securities. The increase in interest income from mortgage loans – held-in-portfolio was further offset by an increase in interest expense as a result of higher average outstanding debt balances as well as an increased cost of financing. Another major driver in the decline in net interest income (expense) for both 2007 and 2006 was the fact that we experienced a significant increase in our provision for credit losses, which was a result of the on-balance sheet securitizations we executed in 2007 and 2006, as well as overall credit deterioration in the mortgage loan portfolio.

Table 3 — Allowance for Credit Losses on Mortgage Loans – Held-in-Portfolio

(dollars in thousands)

Activity in the allowance for credit losses on mortgage loans – held-in-portfolio is as follows for the three years ended December 31, 2007 (dollars in thousands):

Based on generally accepted accounting principles, for our mortgage loans held-in-portfolio, we must maintain an allowance for credit losses at a level that estimates the probable losses inherent in the loan portfolio. Because these loans have been legally sold into a securitization trust which has provided long-term nonrecourse financing, there are instances when the charge to earnings through our provision for credit losses can exceed the real economic investment we have in the trust (the “equity”). The equity investment at the time of securitization is defined as the difference in the cost basis of the assets legally sold to the trust and the net proceeds received from third-party bond investors. The following table presents the assets and liabilities of our securitization trusts accounted for as financing transactions as of December 31, 2007 and provides a reasonable indication of what the equity position of each trust was as of the end of the period presented.

Table 4 — Condensed Balance Sheet of Securitizations Accounted for as Financing Transactions

(dollars in thousands)