A number of factors may decrease the income generated by a retail shopping center property, including: 

In addition, other factors may adversely affect the value of our Properties without affecting their current revenues, including:

Before a Property can be sold, we may be required to make expenditures to correct defects or to make improvements. We cannot assure you that we will have funds available to correct those defects or to make those improvements, and if we cannot do so, we might not be able to sell the Property, or might be required to sell the Property on unfavorable terms. In acquiring a property, we might agree to provisions that materially restrict us from

When we elect not to proceed with a development opportunity, the development costs ordinarily are charged against income for the then-current period. Any such charge could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations for the period in which the charge is taken.

We own partial interests in 14 malls, 7 associated centers, 7 community centers, and 2 office buildings.buildings and a self-storage facility. Governor’s Square and Governor’s Plaza in Clarksville, TN; Kentucky Oaks Mall in Paducah, KY; Fremaux Town Center in Slidell, LA, and Ambassador Town Center in Lafayette, LA and EastGate Mall CubeSmart Self-storage in Cincinnati, OH are all owned by unconsolidated joint ventures and are managed by a property manager that is affiliated with the third party partner, which receives a fee for its services. The third party partner of each of these Properties controls the cash flow distributions, although our approval is required for certain major decisions.  The Outlet Shoppes at Gettysburg in Gettysburg, PA; The Outlet Shoppes at El Paso in El Paso, TX; The Outlet Shoppes at Atlanta in Woodstock, GA; The Outlet Shoppes of the Bluegrass in Simpsonville, KY and The Outlet Shoppes at Laredo in Laredo, TX are owned by consolidated joint ventures and managed by a property manager that is affiliated with the third party partner, which receives a fee for its services.

Where we serve as managing general partner (or equivalent) of the entities that own our Properties, we may have certain fiduciary responsibilities to the other owners of those entities. In certain cases, the approval or consent of the other owners is required before we may sell, finance, expand or make other significant changes in the operations of such Properties. To the extent such approvals or consents are required, we may experience difficulty in, or may be prevented from, implementing our plans with respect to expansion, development, financing or other similar transactions with respect to such Properties.

Under various federal, state and local laws, ordinances and regulations, a current or previous owner or operator of real estate may be liable for the costs of removal or remediation of petroleum, certain hazardous or toxic substances on, under or in such real estate. Such laws typically impose such liability without regard to whether the owner or operator knew of, or was responsible for, the presence of such substances. The costs of remediation or removal of such substances may be substantial. The presence of such substances, or the failure to promptly remove or remediate such substances, may adversely affect the owner's or operator's ability to lease or sell such real estate or to borrow using such real estate as collateral. Persons who arrange for the disposal or treatment of hazardous or toxic substances may also be liable for the costs of removal or remediation of such substances at the disposal or treatment facility, regardless of whether such facility is owned or operated by such person. Certain laws also impose requirements on conditions and activities that may affect the environment or the impact of the environment on human health. Failure to comply with such requirements could result in the imposition of monetary penalties (in addition to the costs to achieve compliance) and potential liabilities to third parties. Among other things, certain laws require abatement or removal of friable and certain non-friable asbestos-containing materials in the event of demolition or certain renovations or remodeling. Certain laws regarding asbestos-containing materials require building owners and lessees, among other things, to notify and train certain employees working in areas known or presumed to contain asbestos-containing materials. Certain laws also impose liability for release of asbestos-containing materials into the air and third parties may seek recovery from owners or operators of real properties for personal injury or property damage associated with asbestos-containing materials. In connection with the ownership and operation of properties, we may be potentially liable for all or a portion of such costs or claims.

Future terrorist attacks in the United States, and other acts of violence, including terrorism or war, might result in declining consumer confidence and spending, which could harm the demand for goods and services offered by our tenants and the values of our Properties, and might adversely affect an investment in our securities. A decrease in retail demand could make it difficult for us to renew or re-lease our Properties at lease rates equal to or above historical rates and, to the extent our tenants are affected, could adversely affect their ability to continue to meet obligations under their existing leases. Terrorist activities also could directly affect the value of our Properties through damage, destruction or loss. Furthermore, terrorist acts might result in increased volatility in national and international financial markets, which could limit our access to capital or increase our cost of obtaining capital.

Most recently, certain traditional department stores have experienced challenges including limited opportunities for new investment/openings, declining sales, and store closures. Department stores' market share is declining, and their ability to successfully re-tenantdrive traffic has substantially decreased. Despite our Malls traditionally being driven by department store Anchors, in the affected space, could haveevent of a material adverse effect on bothneed for replacement, it may be necessary to consider non-department store Anchors. Certain of these non-department store Anchors may demand higher allowances than a standard mall tenant due to the operating revenues and underlying valuenature of the Properties involved, reducing the likelihood that we would be able to sell the Properties if we decided to do so, or we may be required to incur redevelopment costs in order to successfully obtain new anchors or other significant tenants when such vacancies exist.services/products they provide.

The market price of our common stock or other securities may fluctuate significantly in response to many factors, including: 

Many of the factors listed above are beyond our control. Those factors may cause the market price of our common stock or other securities to decline significantly, regardless of our financial performance and condition and prospects. It is impossible to provide any assurance that the market price of our common stock or other securities will not fall in the future, and it may be difficult for holders to sell such securities at prices they find attractive, or at all.

There are numerous shopping facilities that compete with our Properties in attracting retailers to lease space. Our ability to attract tenants to our Properties and lease space is important to our success, and difficulties in doing so can materially impact our Properties' performance. The existence of competing shopping centers could have a material adverse impact on our ability to develop or operate Properties, lease space to desirable Anchors and tenants, and on the level of rents that can be achieved. In addition, retailers at our Properties face continued competition for customers from: 

As new technologies emerge, the relationship among customers, retailers, and shopping centers are evolving on a rapid basis and we may not be able to adapt to such new technologies and relationships on a timely basis. Our relative size may limit the capital and resources we are willing to allocate to invest in strategic technology to enhance the mall experience, which may make our stockholders.Malls relatively less desirable to anchors, mall tenants, and consumers. Additionally, a small but increasing number of tenants utilize our Malls as showrooms or as part of an omni-channel strategy (allowing customers to shop seamlessly through various sales channels). As a result, customers may make purchases through other sales channels during or immediately after visiting our Malls, with such sales not being captured currently in our tenant sales figures or monetized in our minimum or overage rents.

Energy costs, repairs, maintenance and capital improvements to common areas of our Properties, janitorial services, administrative, property and liability insurance costs and security costs are typically allocable to our Properties' tenants. Our lease agreements typically provide that the tenant is liable for a portion of the CAM and other operating expenses. While historically our lease agreements provided for variable CAM provisions, the majority of our current leases require an equal periodic tenant reimbursement amount for our cost recoveries which serves to fix our tenants' CAM contributions to us. In these cases, a tenant will pay a single specified rentfixed amount, or a set expense reimbursement amount, subject to annual increases, regardless of the actual amount of operating expenses. The tenant's payment remains the same regardless of whether operating expenses increase or decrease, causing us to be responsible for any excess amounts or to benefit from any declines. As a result, the CAM and tenant reimbursements that we receive may or may not allow us to recover a substantial portion of these operating costs.

Additionally, in the event that our Properties are not fully occupied, we would be required to pay the portion of any operating, redevelopment or renovation expenses allocable to the vacant space(s) that would otherwise typically be paid by the residing tenant(s). Our cost recovery ratio was 97.7%89.4% for 2017.

Deflation can result in a decline in general price levels, often caused by a decrease in the supply of money or credit. The predominant effects of deflation are high unemployment, credit contraction and weakened consumer demand. Restricted lending practices could impact our ability to obtain financings or refinancings for our Properties and our tenants' ability to obtain credit. Decreases in consumer demand can have a direct impact on our tenants and the rents we receive.

We face risks associated with security breaches, whether through cyber-attacksrely on IT systems and network infrastructure, including the Internet, to process, transmit and store electronic information and to manage or cyber intrusions over the internet, malware, computer viruses, attachments to e-mails, persons inside our organization or persons with access to systems inside our organization, and other significant disruptionssupport a variety of our IT networksbusiness processes, including financial transactions and related systems.maintenance of records. The risk of a security breech or disruption, particularly through cyber-attack or cyber intrusion, including by computer hackers, foreign governments and cyber terrorists, has generally increased as the number, intensity and sophistication of attempted attacks and intrusions from around the world have increased. Our IT networks and related systems and infrastructure are essential to the operation of our business and our ability to perform day-to-day operations (including managing our building systems) and, in some cases, may be critical to the operations of certain of our tenants. Cyber-attacks targeting our infrastructure could result in a full or partial disruption of our operations, as well as those of our tenants. Certain of these resources are provided to us and/or maintained on our behalf by third-party service providers pursuant to agreements that specify to varying degrees certain security and service level standards. Although we and our service providers have implemented processes, procedures and controls to help mitigate these risks, there can be no assurancewe cannot guarantee that these security efforts and measures, as well as our increased awareness of the risk of cyber incidents, will be effective at preventing or thatdetecting any attempted or actual security breaches or that disruptions wouldcaused by any such breaches or attempted breaches will not be successful or damaging.damaging to us or others. Even the most well protected information, networks, systems and facilities remain potentially vulnerable because the techniques used in such attempted security breaches evolve and generally are not recognized until launched against a target, and in some cases are designed not to be detected and, in fact, may not be detected. Accordingly, we may be unable to anticipate these techniques or to implement adequate security barriers or other preventative measures, and thus it is impossible for us to entirely mitigate this risk.

We carry a comprehensive blanket policy for general liability, property casualty (including fire, earthquake and flood) and rental loss covering all of the Properties, with specifications and insured limits customarily carried for similar properties. However, even insured losses could result in a serious disruption to our business and delay our receipt of revenue. Furthermore, there are some types of losses, including lease and other contract claims, as well as some types of environmental losses, that generally are not insured or are not economically insurable. If an uninsured loss or a loss in excess of insured limits occurs, we could lose all or a portion of the capital we have invested in a Property, as well as the anticipated future revenues from the Property. If this happens, we, or the applicable Property's partnership, may still remain obligated under guarantees provided to the lender for any mortgage debt or other financial obligations related to the Property.

The general liability and property casualty insurance policies on our Properties currently include coverage for losses resulting from acts of terrorism, whether foreign or domestic.as defined by TRIPRA. While we believe that the Properties are adequately insured in accordance with industry standards, the cost of general liability and property casualty insurance policies that include coverage for acts of terrorism has risen significantly subsequent to September 11, 2001. The cost of coverage for acts of terrorism is currently mitigated by the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act (“TRIA”). In January 2015, Congress reinstated TRIA under the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2015 ("TRIPRA") and extended the program through December 31, 2020. Under TRIPRA, the amount of terrorism-related insurance losses triggering the federal insurance threshold will be raised gradually from$100180 million in 20152019 to $200 million in 2020. Additionally, the bill increases insurers' co-payments for losses exceeding their deductibles, in annual steps, from 15%19% in 20152019 to 20% in 2020. Each of these changes may have the effect of increasing the cost to insure against acts of terrorism for property owners, such as the Company, notwithstanding the other provisions of TRIPRA. Further, if TRIPRA is not continued beyond 2020 or is significantly modified, we may incur higher insurance costs and experience greater difficulty in obtaining insurance that covers terrorist-related damages. Our tenants may also have similar difficulties.

As of December 31, 2017,2018, our total share of consolidated and unconsolidated variable-rate debt was $1,149.8$1,055.7 million. Increases in interest rates will increase our cash interest payments on the variable-rate debt we have outstanding from time to time. If we do not have sufficient cash flow from operations, we might not be able to make all required payments of principal and interest on our debt, which could result in a default or have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations, and which might adversely affect our cash flow and our ability to make distributions to shareholders. These significant debt payment obligations might also require us to use a significant portion of our cash flow from operations to make interest and principal payments on our debt rather than for other purposes such as working capital, capital expenditures or distributions on our common equity.

As of December 31, 2017,2018, we had credit ratings of Baa3Ba1 from Moody's Investors Service ("Moody’s"), BBB-BB+ from Standard & Poor's Rating Services ("S&P") and BB+BB- from Fitch Ratings ("Fitch"), which are based on credit ratings for the Operating Partnership's unsecured long-term indebtedness. There can be no assurance that we will be able to maintain these ratings. Subsequent to December 31, 2017, Moody's downgraded the rating related to the Operating Partnership's unsecured long-term indebtedness from Baa3 to Ba1. This subsequent downgrade did not change our current interest rates. However, a downgrade by S&P (if Moody's credit rating remained non-investment grade) could increase our interest rates as noted below.

In 2013, we made a one-time irrevocable election to use theour credit ratings, of the Operating Partnership's senior unsecured long-term indebtednessas defined above, to determine the interest rate on our three unsecured credit facilities. With this electionfacilities and so long as we maintain our current credit ratings,two unsecured term loans. As of December 31, 2018, borrowings under our three unsecured credit facilities bear interest at LIBOR plus 120 basis points. We also have two unsecured term loans, which were extended and modified in July 2017, that bear interest at LIBOR plus 135 and 150 basis points, respectively, based on the current credit ratings of the Operating Partnership's senior unsecured long-term indebtedness. If our credit rating from S&P is downgraded, our unsecured credit facilities would bearbore interest at LIBOR plus 155 basis points and the interest rate on our two unsecured term loans would bearbore interest at LIBOR plus 175 basis points and 200 basis points, respectively, which would increase our borrowing costs. Additionally, abased on the credit ratings noted above. A downgrade in our credit ratings may adversely impact our ability to obtain financing and limit our access to capital.

The financial covenants under the unsecured credit facilities require,required, among other things, that our debt to total asset value ratio, as defined in the agreements to our unsecured credit facilities, be less than 60%, that our ratio of unsecured indebtedness to unencumbered asset value, as defined, be less than 60%, that our ratio of unencumbered NOI to unsecured interest expense, as defined, be greater than 1.75, and that our ratio of earnings before EBITDA to fixed charges (debt service), as defined, be greater than 1.5. The financial covenants under the Notes also require, among other things, that our debt to total assets, as defined in the indenture governing the Notes, be less than 60%, that our ratio of total unencumbered assets to unsecured indebtedness, as defined, be greater than 150%, and that our ratio of consolidated income available for debt service to annual debt service charges, as defined, be greater than 1.5. For the 2023 Notes and the 2024 Notes, the financial covenants require that our ratio of secured debt to total assets, as defined, be less than 45% (40% on and after January 1, 2020). The financial covenants require that our ratio of secured debt to total assets, as defined, be less than 40% for the 2026 Notes. Compliance with each of these ratios is dependent upon our financial performance. The debt to total asset value ratio is based, in part, on applying a capitalization rate to EBITDA as defined in the agreements governing our credit facilities. Based on this calculation method, decreases in EBITDA would result in an increased debt to total asset value ratio, assuming overall debt levels remain constant.

If any future failure to comply with one or more of these covenants resulted in the loss of these credit facilities or a default under the Notes and we were unable to obtain suitable replacement financing, such loss could have a material, adverse impact on our financial position and results of operations.

The limited guarantee provides that the Notes are guaranteed by CBL for any losses suffered by reason of fraud or willful misrepresentation by the Operating Partnership or its affiliates. However, CBL has no significant operations and no material assets other than its indirect investment in the Operating Partnership. Furthermore, the limited guarantee of the Notes is effectively subordinated to all existing and future liabilities and preferred equity of the Company's subsidiaries (including the Operating Partnership (except as to the Notes) and any entity the Company accounts for under the equity method of accounting) and any of the Company's secured debt, to the extent of the value of the assets securing any such indebtedness. Due to the narrow scope of the limited guarantee, the lack of significant operations or assets at CBL other than its indirect investment in the Operating Partnership and the structural subordination of the limited guarantee to the liabilities and any preferred equity of the Company's subsidiaries, the limited guarantee does not provide material additional credit support.

Our level of indebtedness and the limitations imposed on us by our debt agreements could have significant adverse consequences to holders of the Notes, including the following:

If any one of these events were to occur, our business, financial condition, liquidity, results of operations and prospects, as well as the Operating Partnership's ability to satisfy its obligations with respect to the Notes, could be materially and adversely affected. Furthermore, foreclosures could create taxable income without accompanying cash proceeds, a circumstance which could hinder the Company's ability to meet the REIT distribution requirements imposed by the Internal Revenue Code.

The Notes are the Operating Partnership's unsecured and unsubordinated indebtedness and rank equally with the Operating Partnership's existing and future unsecured and unsubordinated indebtedness, and are effectively junior to all liabilities and any preferred equity of the Operating Partnership's subsidiaries and to all of the Operating Partnership's indebtedness that is secured by the Operating Partnership's assets, to the extent of the value of the assets securing such indebtedness. While the indenture governing the Notes limits our ability to incur additional secured indebtedness in the future, it will not prohibit us from incurring such indebtedness if we are in compliance with certain financial ratios and other requirements at the time of its incurrence. In the event of a bankruptcy, liquidation, dissolution, reorganization or similar proceeding with respect to us, the holders of any secured indebtedness will, subject to obtaining relief from the automatic stay under section 362 of the Bankruptcy Code, be entitled to proceed directly against the collateral that secures the secured indebtedness. Therefore, such collateral generally will not be available for satisfaction of any amounts owed under our unsecured indebtedness, including the Notes, until such secured indebtedness is satisfied in full.

The Notes also are effectively subordinated to all liabilities, whether secured or unsecured, and any preferred equity of the subsidiaries of the Operating Partnership. In the event of a bankruptcy, liquidation, dissolution, reorganization or similar proceeding with respect to any such subsidiary, the Operating Partnership, as an equity owner of such subsidiary, and therefore holders of our debt, including the Notes, will be subject to the prior claims of such subsidiary's creditors, including trade creditors, and preferred equity holders. Furthermore, while the indenture governing the Notes limits the ability of our subsidiaries to incur additional unsecured indebtedness in the future, it does not prohibit our subsidiaries from incurring such indebtedness if such subsidiaries are in compliance with certain financial ratios and other requirements at the time of its incurrence.

We cannot be certain that our business will generate sufficient cash flow from operations or that future sources of cash will be available to us in an amount sufficient to enable us to meet our debt service obligations on our indebtedness, including the Notes, or to fund our other important business uses. Additionally, if we incur additional indebtedness in connection with future acquisitions or development projects or for any other purpose, our debt service

We may need to refinance all or a portion of our indebtedness, including the Notes, at or prior to maturity. Our ability to refinance our indebtedness or obtain additional financing will depend on, among other things:

As a result, we may not be able to refinance any of our indebtedness, including the Notes, on favorable terms, or at all.

If we do not generate sufficient cash flow from operations, and additional borrowings or refinancings are not available to us, we may be unable to meet all of our debt service obligations, including payments on the Notes. As a result, we would be forced to take other actions to meet those obligations, such as selling Properties, raising equity or delaying capital expenditures, any of which could have a material adverse effect on us. Furthermore, we cannot be certain that we will be able to effect any of these actions on favorable terms, or at all.

We may be able to incur substantial additional indebtedness in the future. Although the agreements governing our revolving credit facilities, term loans and certain other indebtedness do, and the indenture governing the Notes does, limit our ability to incur additional indebtedness, these restrictions are subject to a number of qualifications and exceptions and, under certain circumstances, debt incurred in compliance with these restrictions could be substantial. To the extent that we incur substantial additional indebtedness in the future, the risks associated with our substantial leverage described above, including our inability to meet our debt service obligations, would be exacerbated.

Under the federal bankruptcy law and comparable provisions of state fraudulent transfer laws, a guarantee, such as the limited guarantee provided by CBL or any future guarantee of the Notes issued by any subsidiary of the Operating Partnership, could be voided and required to be returned to the guarantor, or to a fund for the benefit of the creditors of the guarantor, if, among other things, the guarantor, at the time it incurred the indebtedness evidenced by its guarantee (i) received less than reasonably equivalent value or fair consideration for the incurrence of the guarantee and (ii) one of the following was true with respect to the guarantor:

The measures of insolvency for purposes of these fraudulent transfer laws will vary depending upon the law applied in any proceeding to determine whether a fraudulent transfer has occurred. Generally, however, a guarantor would be considered insolvent if:

The court might also void such guarantee, without regard to the above factors, if it found that a guarantor entered into its guarantee with actual or deemed intent to hinder, delay, or defraud its creditors.

A court would likely find that a guarantor did not receive reasonably equivalent value or fair consideration for its guarantee unless it benefited directly or indirectly from the issuance or incurrence of such indebtedness. This risk may be increased if any subsidiary of the Operating Partnership guarantees the Notes in the future, as no additional consideration would be received at the time such guarantee is issued. If a court voided such guarantee, holders of the indebtedness and lenders would no longer have a claim against such guarantor or the benefit of the assets of such guarantor constituting collateral that purportedly secured such guarantee. In addition, the court might direct holders of the indebtedness and lenders to repay any amounts already received from a guarantor.

The indenture governing the Notes contains financial and operating covenants that, among other things, restrict our ability to take specific actions, even if we believe them to be in our best interest, including, subject to various exceptions, restrictions on our ability to:

In addition, our revolving credit facilities, term loans and certain other debt agreements require us to meet specified financial ratios and the indenture governing the Notes requires us to maintain at all times a specified ratio of unencumbered assets to unsecured debt. These covenants may restrict our ability to expand or fully pursue our business strategies. Our ability to comply with these and other provisions of the indenture governing the Notes, our revolving credit facility and certain other debt agreements may be affected by changes in our operating and financial performance, changes in general business and economic conditions, adverse regulatory developments or other events beyond our control.

The breach of any of these covenants could result in a default under our indebtedness, which could result in the acceleration of the maturity of such indebtedness. If any of our indebtedness is accelerated prior to maturity, we may not be able to repay such indebtedness or refinance such indebtedness on favorable terms, or at all.

Prior to the offering of each of the 2023 Notes, the 2024 Notes and the 2026 Notes, there was no public market for such Notes and we cannot be certain that an active trading market will ever develop for the Notes or, if one develops, will be maintained. Furthermore, we do not intend to apply for listing of the Notes on any securities exchange or for the inclusion of the Notes on any automated dealer quotation system. The underwriters informed us that they intend to make a market in the Notes. However, the underwriters may cease their market making at any time without notice to or the consent of existing holders of the Notes. The lack of a trading market could adversely affect a holder's ability to sell the Notes when desired, or at all, and the price at which a holder may be able to sell the Notes. The liquidity of the trading market, if any, and future trading prices of the Notes will depend on many factors, including, among other things, prevailing interest rates, our financial condition, liquidity, results of operations and prospects, the market

Depending upon our liquidity needs, we reserve the right to pay any or all of a dividend in a combination of cash and shares of common stock, to the extent permitted by any applicable revenue procedures of the Internal Revenue Service ("IRS"). In the event that we pay a portion of our dividends in shares of our common stock pursuant to such procedures, taxable U.S. stockholders would be required to pay tax on the entire amount of the dividend, including the portion paid in shares of common stock, in which case such stockholders may have to use cash from other sources to pay such tax. If a U.S. stockholder sells the common stock it receives as a dividend in order to pay its taxes, the sales proceeds may be less than the amount included in income with respect to the dividend, depending on the market price of our common stock at the time of the sale. Furthermore, with respect to non-U.S. stockholders, we may be required to withhold federal tax with respect to our dividends, including dividends that are paid in common stock. In addition, if a significant number of our stockholders sell shares of our common stock in order to pay taxes owed on dividends, such sales would put downward pressure on the market price of our common stock.

Because we conduct substantially all of our operations through our Operating Partnership, our ability to service our debt obligations, as well as our ability to pay dividends on our common and preferred stock will depend almost entirely on paymentsupon the earnings and cash flows of the Operating Partnership and the ability of the Operating Partnership to make distributions we receiveto us on our ownership interests in our Operating Partnership. Under the Delaware Revised Uniform Limited Partnership Act, the Operating Partnership is prohibited from making any distribution to us to the extent that at the time of the distribution, after giving effect to the distribution, all liabilities of the Operating Partnership (other than some non-recourse liabilities and some liabilities to the partners) exceed the fair value of the assets of the Operating Partnership.

Additionally, the terms of somethe secured credit facility that the Operating Partnership entered into on January 30, 2019, provides generally that distributions the Operating Partnership makes to us and the other partners in the Operating Partnership (i) may not exceed the greater of the debtamount necessary to whichmaintain our status as a REIT or 95% of FFO, so long as there is no event of default (as defined), (ii) in the event of a default, may be restricted to the minimum amount necessary to maintain our status as a REIT and (iii) in the event of default for nonpayment of amounts due under the facility, the Operating Partnership is a party may limit its ability to make some types of payments and other distributions to us.be prohibited from making any distributions. This in turn may limit our ability to make some types of payments, including payment of dividends to our stockholders, unless we meet certain financial tests. As a result, if ourstockholders. Any inability to make cash distributions from the Operating Partnership fails to pay distributions to us, we generally will not be ablecould jeopardize our ability to pay dividends to our stockholders for one or more dividend periods.periods which, in turn, could jeopardize our ability to maintain qualification as a REIT.

We have established several taxable REIT subsidiaries including our Management Company. Despite our qualification as a REIT, our taxable REIT subsidiaries must pay income tax on their taxable income. In addition, we must comply with various tests to continue to qualify as a REIT for federal income tax purposes, and our income from and investments in our taxable REIT subsidiaries generally do not constitute permissible income and investments for these tests. While we will attempt to ensure that our dealings with our taxable REIT subsidiaries will not adversely affect our REIT qualification, we cannot provide assurance that we will successfully achieve that result. Furthermore, we may be subject to a 100% penalty tax, or our taxable REIT subsidiaries may be denied deductions, to the extent our dealings with our taxable REIT subsidiaries are not deemed to be arm's length in nature.

We intend to continue to operate so as to qualify as a REIT under the Internal Revenue Code. Although we believe that we are organized and operate in such a manner, no assurance can be given that we currently qualify and in the future will continue to qualify as a REIT. Such qualification involves the application of highly technical and complex Internal Revenue Code provisions for which there are only limited judicial or administrative interpretations. The determination of various factual matters and circumstances not entirely within our control may affect our ability to qualify. In addition, no assurance can be given that legislation, new regulations, administrative interpretations or court decisions will not significantly change the tax laws with respect to qualification or its corresponding federal income tax consequences. Any such change could have a retroactive effect.

We owned a controlling interest in 6059 Malls and non-controlling interests in 8 Malls as of December 31, 2017.2018.  The Malls are primarily located in middle markets and generally have strong competitive positions because they are the only, or the dominant, regional mall in their respective trade areas. The Malls are generally anchored by two or more department storesanchors or junior anchors and a wide variety of mall stores. Anchor and junior anchor tenants own or lease their stores and non-anchor stores lease their locations. Additional freestanding stores and restaurants that either own or lease their stores are typically located along the perimeter of the Malls' parking areas.

We classify our regional Malls into three categories:

We own the land underlying each Mall in fee simple interest, except for Brookfield Square, Cross Creek Mall, Dakota Square Mall, EastGate Mall, Meridian Mall, St. Clair Square, Stroud Mall and WestGate Mall. We lease all or a portion of the land at each of these Malls subject to long-term ground leases.