We intend to continue acquiring high-quality office properties, subject to: the availability of attractive properties, our ability to arrange financing, and our ability to consummate acquisitions on satisfactory terms. In deciding whether to acquire a particular property, we make certain assumptions regarding the expected future performance of that property. However, newly acquired properties may fail to perform as expected. Costs necessary to bring acquired properties up to standards established for their intended market position may exceed our expectations, which may result in the properties’ failure to achieve projected returns.

We may acquire properties located in markets in which we do not have an established presence. We may face risks associated with a lack of market knowledge or understanding of the local economy, forging new business relationships in the area and unfamiliarity with local government and permitting procedures. As a result, the operating performance of properties acquired in new markets may be less than we anticipate, and we may have difficulty integrating such properties into our existing portfolio. In addition, the time and resources that may be required to obtain market knowledge and/or integrate such properties into our existing portfolio could divert our management’s attention from our existing business or other attractive opportunities.

We may seek to dispose of properties that no longer meet our strategic plans with the intent to use the proceeds generated from such potential disposition to acquire additional properties better aligned with our investment criteria and growth strategy or to fund other operational needs. We may not be able to dispose of these properties for the proceeds we expect, or at all, and we may incur costs and divert management attention from our ongoing operations as part of efforts to dispose of these properties, regardless of whether such efforts are ultimately successful. In addition, if we are able to dispose of those properties, we may not be able to re-deploy the proceeds in a timely or more efficient manner, if at all. As such, we may not be able to adequately time any decrease in revenues from the sale of properties with a corresponding increase in revenues associated with the acquisition of new properties. The failure to dispose of properties, or to timely and more efficiently apply the proceeds from any disposition of properties to attractive acquisition opportunities, could have an adverse effect on our results of operations and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.operations.

From time to time, we engage in various development and re-development projects where we may be subject to uncertainties associated with re-zoning, environmental concerns of governmental entities and/or community groups, and our builders’ ability to build in conformity with plans, specifications, budgeted costs and timetables. A builder’s performance may also be affected or delayed by conditions beyond the builder’s control. Delays in completing construction could also give tenants the right to terminate preconstructionpre-construction leases. We may incur additional risks when we make periodic progress payments or other advances to builders before they complete construction. Further, we may incur unanticipated additional costs related to disputes with existing tenants during redevelopment projects. These and other factors can result in increased costs of a project or loss of our investment. In addition, we will be subject to normal lease-up risks relating to newly constructed projects. Projects with long lead times may increase leasing risk due to changes in market conditions.

From time to time, we engage in various development and redevelopment activities to the extent attractive projects become available. When we engage in development activities, we are subject to risks associated with those activities that could adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows, and ability to pay distributions on, and the market price of, our common stock, including, but not limited to:

Our portfolio of properties is primarily located in the following major metropolitan areas: Dallas, Atlanta, Washington, D.C., Minneapolis, Boston, Dallas, Minneapolis,Orlando, and New York, Orlando, and Washington, D.C., any of which could be, and some of which have been, the target of terrorist attacks.attacks, armed hostilities, or civil unrest. Future terrorist attacks and other acts of terrorismhostility, civil unrest, or war could severely impact the demand for, and value of, our properties.

A cyber incident is considered to be any adverse event that threatens the confidentiality, integrity, functionality, or availability of our information resources and systems. More specifically, a cyber incident is an intentional attack or an unintentional event that can include gaining unauthorized access to systems to disrupt building or corporate operations, corrupt data, or steal confidential information. While we have not experienced any material cyber incidents in the past, the risk of a security breach or disruption, particularly through cyber attacks 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. As our reliance on technology has increased, so have the risks posed to our systems, both internal and those we have outsourced. Risks that could directly result from the occurrence of a cyber incident include physical harm to occupants of our buildings, physical damage to our buildings, actual cash loss, operational interruption, damage to our relationship and reputation with our tenants, potential errors from misstated financial reports, violations of loan covenants, missed reporting deadlines, and private data exposure, among others. Any or all of the preceding risks could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.

Insider or employee cyber and security threats are increasingly a concern for all companies, including ours. In addition, social engineering and phishing are a particular concern for companies with employees. We are continuously working to install new networks and to upgrade our existing networks, building operating and information technology systems, and to train employees against phishing, malware and other cyber risks to ensure that we are protected, to the greatest extent possible, against cyber risks and security breaches. However, such upgrades, new technology and training may not be sufficient to protect us from all risks.

We are continuously developing and enhancing our controls, processes, and practices designed to protect our systems, computers, software, data, and networks from attack, damage, or unauthorized access. This continued development and enhancement will require us to expend additional resources, including to investigate and remediate any information security vulnerabilities that may be detected. Although we make efforts to maintain the security and integrity of these types of information technology networks and related systems, and despite various measures we have implemented to manage the risk of a security breach or disruption, there can be no assurance that our security efforts and measures will be effective or that attempted security breaches or disruptions would not be successful or damaging. 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 to 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.

Further, one or more of our tenants could experience a cyber incident which could impact their operations and ability to perform under the terms of their lease with us. We are not aware of any of our tenants experiencing a cyber incident, and if any such cyber incident has occurred among our tenants, it has not given rise to a default under such tenant’s lease with us.

We carry comprehensive general liability, fire, rental loss, environmental, cyber-security,cybersecurity, and umbrella liability coverage on all of our properties and earthquake, wind, and flood coverage on properties in areas where such coverage is warranted. We believe the policy specifications and insured limits of these policies are adequate and appropriate given the relative risk of loss, the cost of the coverage, and industry practice. However, we may be subject to certain types of losses, those that are generally catastrophic in nature, such as losses due to wars, conventional or cyber terrorism, armed hostilities, chemical, biological, nuclear and radiation (“CBNR”) acts of terrorism and, in some cases, earthquakes, hurricanes, and flooding, either because such

In addition, insurance risks associated with potential terrorist acts could sharply increase the premiums we pay for coverage against property and casualty claims. Under the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act, ("TRIA"), which is currently effective through December 31, 2027, United States insurers cannot exclude conventional (non-CBNR) terrorism losses. These insurerslosses and must make terrorism insurance available under their property and casualty insurance policies; however,policies. However, this legislation does not regulate the pricing of such insurance. In some cases, mortgage lenders may insist that commercial property owners purchase coverage against terrorism as a condition of providing mortgage loans.financing. Such insurance policies may not be available at a reasonable cost, which could inhibit our ability to finance or refinance our properties. In such instances, we may be required to provide other financial support, either through financial assurances or self-insurance, to cover potential losses. We may not have adequate coverage for such losses.

We carry several different lines of insurance, placed with several large insurance carriers. If any one of these large insurance carriers were to become insolvent, we would be forced to replace the existing insurance coverage with another suitable carrier, and any outstanding claims would be at risk for collection. In such an event, we cannot be certain that we would be able to replace the coverage at similar or otherwise favorable terms. Replacing insurance coverage at unfavorable rates and the potential of uncollectible claims due to carrier insolvency could adversely impact our results of operations and cash flows.

From time to time we may enter into strategic joint ventures with institutional investors to acquire, develop, improve, and/or dispose ofimprove properties, thereby reducing the amount of capital required by us to make investments and diversifying our capital sources for growth. Such joint venture investments involve risks not otherwise present in a wholly-owned property, development, or redevelopment project, including but not limited to the following:

Any of the above might subject a property to liabilities in excess of those contemplated and thus reduce the returns to our investors.

All real property and the operations conducted on real property are subject to federal, state, and local laws and regulations relating to environmental protection and human health and safety. In addition, under the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA"), places of public accommodation must meet certain federal requirements related to access and use by disabled persons. Tenants’ ability to operate and to generate income to pay their lease obligations may be affected by permitting and compliance obligations arising under such laws and regulations. Some of these laws and regulations may impose joint and several liability on tenants, owners, or operators for the costs to investigate or remediate contaminated properties, regardless of fault or whether the acts causing the contamination were legal. Noncompliance with ADA could result in the imposition of fines by the federal government or the award of damages to private litigants. In addition, the presence of hazardous substances, or the failure to properly remediate these substances, may hinder our ability to sell, rent, or pledge such property as collateral for future borrowings.

Compliance with new laws or regulations or stricter interpretation of existing laws by agencies or the courts may require us to incur material expenditures or may impose additional liabilities on us, including environmental liabilities. In addition, there are various local, state, and federal fire, health, life-safety, and similar regulations with which we may be required to comply, and which may subject us to liability in the form of fines or damages for noncompliance. Although we believe that our properties are currently in material compliance with these regulatory requirements, we have not conducted an audit or investigation of all of our properties to determine our compliance, and we cannot predict the ultimate cost of compliance. Any material expenditures, liabilities, fines, or damages we must pay will reduce our net income and cash flows and ability to make distributions and may reduce the value of our stockholders’ investment.flows.

Under various federal, state, and local environmental laws, ordinances, and regulations, a current or former owner or operator of real property may be liable for the cost to remove or remediate hazardous or toxic substances, wastes, or petroleum products on, under, from, or in such property. These costs could be substantial and liability under these laws may attach whether or not the owner or operator knew of, or was responsible for, the presence of such contamination. As a result, our tenants’ operations, the existing condition of land when we buy it, operations in the vicinity of our properties such as the presence of underground storage tanks or activities of unrelated third parties may affect our properties. Even if more than one party may have been responsible for the contamination, each liable party may be held entirely responsible for all of the clean-up costs incurred. In addition, third parties may sue the owner or operator of a property for damages based on personal injury, natural resources, or property damage and/or for other costs, including investigation and clean-up costs, resulting from the environmental contamination. The presence of contamination on one of our properties, or the failure to properly remediate a contaminated property, could give rise to a lien in favor of the government for costs it may incur to address the contamination, or otherwise adversely affect our ability to sell or lease the property or borrow using the property as collateral. In addition, if contamination is discovered on our properties, environmental laws may impose restrictions on the manner in which property may be used or businesses may be operated, and these restrictions may require substantial expenditures or prevent us from entering into leases with prospective tenants.

Some of our properties are adjacent to or near other properties that have contained or currently contain underground storage tanks used to store petroleum products or other hazardous or toxic substances. In addition, certain of our properties are on,

adjacent to, or near sites upon which others, including former owners or tenants of our properties, have engaged, or may in the future engage, in activities that have released or may have released petroleum products or other hazardous or toxic substances.

The cost of defending against claims of liability, of remediating any contaminated property, or of paying personal injury claims could reduce the amounts available for distribution to our stockholders.net income and cash flows.

Some of our properties have building materials that contain asbestos. Environmental laws require that owners or operators of buildings containing asbestos properly manage and maintain the asbestos, adequately inform or train those who may come into contact with asbestos, and undertake special precautions, including removal or other abatement, in the event that asbestos is disturbed during building renovation or demolition. These laws may impose fines and penalties on building owners or operators who fail to comply with these requirements. In addition, environmental laws and the common law may allow third parties to seek recovery from owners or operators for personal injury associated with exposure to asbestos.

The properties also may contain or develop harmful mold or suffer from other air quality issues. Any of these materials or conditions could result in liability for personal injury and costs of remediating adverse conditions, which could have an adverse effect on our results of operations or cash flows and ability to make distributions to our stockholders.flows.

Some of our tenants may handle regulated substances and wastes as part of their operations at our properties. Environmental laws regulate the handling, use, and disposal of these materials and subject our tenants, and potentially us, to liability resulting from non-compliance with these requirements. The properties in our portfolio also are subject to various federal, state, and local health and safety requirements, such as state and local fire requirements. If we or our tenants fail to comply with these various requirements, we might incur governmental fines or private damage awards. Moreover, we do not know whether or the extent to which existing requirements or their enforcement will change or whether future requirements will require us to make significant unanticipated expenditures, either of which could materially and adversely impact our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows, cash available for distribution to stockholders, the market price of our common stock, and our ability to satisfy our debt service obligations.flows. If our tenants become subject to liability for noncompliance, it could affect their ability to make rental payments to us.

The physical effects of climate change could have a material adverse effect on our properties, operations, and business. The majority of our portfolio of properties is located along the Eastern coast of the United States. To the extent that climate change causes variations in weather patterns, our markets could experience increases in storm intensity, larger flood zones, and/or rising sea-levels. Over time, these conditions could result in physical damage to our buildings or a decline in demand for office space in our buildings. Climate change could also indirectly negatively impact our business by causing increased costs associated with property and casualty or flood insurance, energy, or storm cleanup. There can be no assurance that

Transitioning to a lower-carbon economy may entail extensive policy, legal, technological, and market changes to address mitigation and adaption requirements related to climate change. Depending on the nature, speed, and focus of these changes, transition risks may pose varying levels of financial and reputational risk to us and/or our tenants. Policy action around climate change will not havesuch as implementing carbon-pricing mechanisms to reduce green house gas emission, shifting energy use toward lower emission sources, adopting energy-efficiency solutions, encouraging greater water efficiency measures, and promoting more sustainable land-use practices can result in financial impacts to both us and our tenants, including additional costs of auditing and reporting such data. Alterations to third-party certifications/ratings may impact investor or tenant demand and consequential valuation for buildings with lower scoring. Climate related litigation claims can result in financial and reputational damage. Technology improvements or innovations that support the transition to a material adverse effect onlower-carbon, energy efficient economic system and shifts in supply and demand for certain commodities, products, and services as climate-related risks and opportunities are increasingly taken into account may affect the strength and competitiveness of our properties, operations,tenants' business, and ultimately their ability to meet their rental obligations to us. Climate change has also been identified as a potential source of reputational risk tied to changing customer or business.community perceptions of an organization's contribution to or detraction from the transition to a lower-carbon economy.

Our continued success depends to a significant degree upon the continued contributions of certain key personnel, each of whom would be difficult to replace. Our ability to retain our management team, or to attract suitable replacements should any member of the management team leave, is dependent on the competitive nature of the employment market. The loss of services of one or more key members of our management team could adversely affect our results of operations and slow our future growth. While we have planned for the succession of each of the key members of our management team, our succession plans may not effectively prevent any adverse effects from the loss of any member of our management team. We have not obtained and do not expect to obtain “key person” life insurance on any of our key personnel.

From time to time, we may be subject to legal action arising in the ordinary course of our business or otherwise. Such action could distract key personnel from management of the company and result in additional expenses which, if uninsured, could adversely impact our earnings and cash flows, thereby impacting our ability to service our debt and make quarterly distributions to our stockholders. There can be no assurance that our insurance policies will fully cover any payments or legal costs associated with any potential legal action. Further, the ultimate resolution of such action could impact the availability or cost of some of our insurance coverage, which could adversely impact our results of operations and cash flows, expose us to increased risks that would be uninsured, and/or adversely impact our ability to attract officers and candidates for our board of directors.

The design and effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures and our internal control over financial reporting may not prevent all errors, misstatements, or misrepresentations. Although management will continue to review the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures and our internal control over financial reporting, there can be no guarantee that these processes will be effective in accomplishing all control objectives all of the time. Deficiencies, including any material weakness, in our internal control over financial reporting which may occur in the future could result in misstatements of our results of operations, restatements of our financial statements, a decline in the trading price of our common stock, or otherwise materially adversely affect our business, reputation, results of operations, financial condition, or liquidity.

Our charter and bylaws contain provisions that may have the effect of delaying, deferring, or preventing a change in control of our company (including an extraordinary transaction such as a merger, tender offer, or sale of all or substantially all of our assets) that might provide a premium price for our common stock or otherwise be in the best interest of our stockholders. These provisions include, among other things, restrictions on the ownership and transfer of our stock, advance notice requirements for stockholder nominations for our board of directors and other business proposals, and our board of directors’ power to classify or reclassify unissued shares of common or preferred stock and issue additional shares of common or preferred stock.

Our charter, with certain exceptions, authorizes our board of directors to take such actions as are necessary and desirable to preserve our qualification as a REIT for federal income tax purposes. Unless exempted by our board of directors, no person may actually or constructively own more than 9.8% (by value or number of shares, whichever is more restrictive) of the outstanding shares of our common stock or the outstanding shares of any class or series of our preferred stock, which may inhibit large investors from desiring to purchase our stock. This restriction may have the effect of delaying, deferring, or preventing a change in control, including an extraordinary transaction (such as a merger, tender offer, or sale of all or substantially all of our assets) that might provide a premium price for our common stock or otherwise be in the best interest of our stockholders.

Our board of directors has overall authority to oversee our operations and determine our major corporate policies. This authority includes significant flexibility. For example, our board of directors can do the following:

Any of these actions could increase our operating expenses, impact our ability to make distributions, or reduce the value of our assets without giving our stockholders the right to vote.

Our board of directors may, without stockholder approval, issue authorized but unissued shares of our common or preferred stock and amend our charter to increase or decrease the aggregate number of shares of stock or the number of shares of stock of any class or series that we have authority to issue. In addition, our board of directors may, without stockholder approval, classify or reclassify any unissued shares of our common or preferred stock and set the preferences, rights and other terms of such classified or reclassified shares. Thus, our board of directors could authorize the issuance of preferred stock with terms and conditions that could have priority with respect to distributions and amounts payable upon liquidation over the rights of the holders of our common stock. Such preferred stock also could have the effect of delaying, deferring, or preventing a change in control, including an extraordinary transaction (such as a merger, tender offer, or sale of all or substantially all of our assets) that might provide a premium price for our common stock, or otherwise be in the best interest of our stockholders.

Certain provisions of Maryland law may have the effect of inhibiting a third party from making a proposal to acquire us, or of impedingthese certain provisions may also impede a change of control under certain circumstances that otherwise could provide the holders of shares of our common stock with the opportunity to realize a premium over the then-prevailing market price of such shares, including:

Our bylaws contain a provision exempting any acquisition by any person of shares of our stock from the control share acquisition statute, and our board of directors has adopted a resolution exempting any business combination with any person from the business combination statute. As a result, these provisions currently will not apply to a business combination or control share acquisition involving our company. However, our board of directors maystill has the ability to opt into the business combination provisions and the control share provisions of Maryland law in the future.

Our charter, our bylaws, the limited partnership agreement of our operating partnership, and Maryland law also contain other provisions that may delay, defer, or prevent a transaction or a change of control that might involve a premium price for our common stock or otherwise be in the best interest of our stockholders. In addition, the employment agreements with certain of our executive officers contain, and grants under our incentive plan also may contain, change-in-control provisions that might similarly have an anti-takeover effect, inhibit a change of our management, or inhibit in certain circumstances tender offers for our common stock or proxy contests to change our board.

Maryland law provides that a director or officer has no liability in that capacity if he or she performs his or her duties in good faith, in a manner he or she reasonably believes to be in our best interest and with the care that an ordinarily prudent person in a like position would use under similar circumstances. Our charter eliminates our board of directors’ and officers’ liability to us and our stockholders for money damages except for liability resulting from actual receipt of an improper benefit or profit in money, property, or services or active and deliberate dishonesty established by a final judgment and which is material to the cause of action. Our charter and bylaws require us to indemnify our board of directors and officers to the maximum extent permitted by Maryland law for any claim or liability to which they may become subject or which they may incur by reason of their service as directors

We are owned and operated in a manner intended to qualify us as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes; however, we do not have a ruling from the IRS as to our REIT status. In addition, we own all of the common stock of a subsidiary that has elected to be treated as a REIT, and if our subsidiary REIT were to fail to qualify as a REIT, it is possible that we also would fail to qualify as a REIT unless we (or the subsidiary REIT) could qualify for certain relief provisions. Our qualification and the qualification of our subsidiary REIT as a REIT will depend on satisfaction, on an annual or quarterly basis, of numerous requirements set forth in highly technical and complex provisions of the Code for which there are only limited judicial or administrative interpretations. A determination as to whether such requirements are satisfied involves various factual matters and circumstances not entirely within our control. The fact that we hold substantially all of our assets through our operating partnership and its subsidiaries further complicates the application of the REIT requirements for us. No assurance can be given that we, or our subsidiary REIT, will qualify as a REIT for any particular year.

If we, or our subsidiary REIT, were to fail to qualify as a REIT in any taxable year for which a REIT election has been made, the non-qualifying REIT would not be allowed a deduction for dividends paid to its stockholders in computing our taxable income and would be subject to U.S. federal income tax on its taxable income at corporate rates. Moreover, unless the non-qualifying REIT were to obtain relief under certain statutory provisions, the non-qualifying REIT also would be disqualified from treatment as a REIT for the four taxable years following the year during which qualification is lost. This treatment would reduce our net earnings available for investment or distribution to our stockholders because of the additional tax liability to us for the years involved. As a result of such additional tax liability, we might need to borrow funds or liquidate certain investments on terms that may be disadvantageous to us in order to pay the applicable tax.

Even if we maintain our status as a REIT, we may be subject to U.S. federal income taxes or state taxes, which would reduce our cash available for distribution to our stockholders. For example, we will be subject to federal income tax on any undistributed REIT taxable income. Further, if we fail to distribute during each calendar year at least the sum of (a) 85% of our ordinary income for such year, (b) 95% of our net capital gain income for such year, and (c) any undistributed taxable income from prior periods, we will be subject to a 4% excise tax on the excess of the required distribution over the sum of (i) the amounts actually distributed by us, plus (ii) retained amounts on which we pay income tax at the corporate level. If we realize net income from foreclosure properties that we hold primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of business, we must pay tax thereon at the highest corporate income tax rate, and if we sell a property, other than foreclosure property, that we are determined to have held for sale to customers in the ordinary course of business, any gain realized would be subject to a 100% “prohibited transaction” tax. The determination as to whether or not a particular sale is a prohibited transaction depends on the facts and circumstances related to that sale. We cannot guarantee that sales of our properties would not be prohibited transactions unless we comply with certain safe-harbor provisions. The need to avoid prohibited transactions could cause us to forgo or defer sales of properties that might otherwise be in our best interest to sell. In addition, we own interests in certain taxable REIT subsidiaries that are subject to federal income taxation and we and our subsidiaries may be subject to state and local taxes on our income or property.

We intend to make distributions to our stockholders to comply with the requirements of the Code for REITs and to minimize or eliminate our corporate tax obligations; however, differences between the recognition of taxable income and the actual receipt of cash could require us to sell assets or borrow funds on a short-term or long-term basis to meet the distribution requirements of the Code. Certain types of assets generate substantial disparity between taxable income and available cash, such as real estate that has been financed through financing structures which require some or all of available cash flows to be used to service borrowings. In addition, changes made by H.R. 1 will require us to accrue certain income for U.S. federal income tax purposes no later than when such income is taken into account as revenue on our financial statement (subject to an exception for certain income that is already subject to a special method of accounting under the Code). This could cause us to recognize taxable income prior to the receipt of the associated cash. H.R. 1 also includes limitations on the deductibility of certain compensation

paid to our executives, certain interest payments, and certain net operating loss carryforwards, each of which could potentially increase our taxable income and our required distributions. Under H.R. 1, federal net operating losses incurred in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017 can be carried forward indefinitely. Net operating losses of a REIT may not be carried back to any taxable year, regardless of whether the taxpayer qualified as a REIT in such taxable year. In addition, for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017, H.R. 1 limits the deduction of net operating losses to 80% of current year taxable income (determined without regard to the deduction for dividends paid). Additionally, Section 163(j) of the Code, as amended by H.R. 1, limits the deductibility of net interest expense paid or accrued on debt properly allocable to a trade or business to 30% of “adjusted taxable income,” subject to certain exceptions, plus the taxpayer’s business interest income for the tax year. As a result, the requirement to distribute a substantial portion of our taxable income could cause us to: (1) sell assets in adverse market conditions, (2) borrow on unfavorable terms, or (3) distribute amounts that would otherwise be invested in future acquisitions, capital expenditures, or repayment of debt, in order to comply with REIT requirements. Any such actions could increase our costs and reduce the value of our common stock. Further, we may be required to make distributions to our stockholders when it would be more advantageous to reinvest cash in our business or when we do not have funds readily available for distribution. Compliance with REIT qualification requirements may, therefore, hinder our ability to operate solely on the basis of maximizing profits.

The maximum federal income tax rate for certain dividends paid by domestic corporations to individuals, trusts and estates is generally 20%. Dividends paid by REITs, however, (other than distributions we properly designate as capital gain dividends or as qualified dividend income) are taxed at the normal income tax rate applicable to the individual recipient (currently a maximum rate of 37%) rather than the 20% preferential rate, subject to a deduction equal to 20% of the amount of certain “qualified REIT dividends” that is available to noncorporate taxpayers through 2025, which has the effect of reducing the maximum effective income tax rate on qualified REIT dividends to 29.6%. The more favorable rates applicable to regular corporate dividends could cause investors who are individuals to perceive investments in REITs to be relatively less attractive than investments in non-REIT corporations that make distributions, particularly after the scheduled expiration of the 20% deduction applicable to qualified REIT dividends on December 31, 2025.

The IRS could recharacterize transactions consummated by our operating partnership, which could result in the income realized on certain transactions being treated as gain realized from the sale of property that is held as inventory or otherwise held primarily for the sale to customers in the ordinary course of business. In such event, the gain would constitute income from a prohibited transaction and would be subject to a 100% tax. If this were to occur, our ability to make cash distributions to our stockholders would be adversely affected. Moreover, our operating partnership may purchase properties and lease them back to the sellers of such properties. While we will use our best efforts to structure any such sale-leaseback transaction such that the lease will be characterized as a “true lease,” thereby allowing us to be treated as the owner of the property for federal income tax purposes, we can give stockholders no assurance that the IRS will not attempt to challenge such characterization. In the event that any such sale-leaseback transaction is challenged and recharacterized as a financing transaction or loan for U.S. federal income tax purposes, deductions for depreciation and cost recovery relating to such property would be disallowed. If a sale-leaseback transaction were so recharacterized, the amount of our adjusted REIT taxable income could be recalculated, which might cause us to fail to meet the distribution requirement for a taxable year. We also might fail to satisfy the REIT qualification asset tests or income tests and, consequently, lose our REIT status. Even if we maintain our status as a REIT, an increase in our adjusted REIT taxable income could cause us to be subject to additional federal and state income and excise taxes. Any federal or state taxes we pay will reduce our cash available for distribution to our stockholders.

From time to time, changes in state and local tax laws or regulations are enacted, including changes to a state’s treatment of REITs and their stockholders, which may result in an increase in our tax liability. Any shortfall in tax revenues for states and municipalities may lead to an increase in the frequency and size of such changes. If such changes occur, we may be required to pay additional taxes on our assets or income. These increased tax costs could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations and the amount of cash available for paymentdistributions to our stockholders.

As of December 31, 2019,2021, we had total outstanding indebtedness of approximately $1.5$1.9 billion and a total debt to gross assets ratio of 32.5%37.1%. Although the instruments governing our unsecured and secured indebtedness 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. We may incur additional indebtedness to acquire properties or other real estate-related investments, to fund property improvements, and other capital expenditures or for other corporate purposes, such as to repurchase shares of our common stock through repurchase programs that our board of directors have authorized or to fund future distributions to our stockholders.

Significant borrowings by us increase the risks of an investment in us. Our ability to make payments on and to refinance our indebtedness and to fund our operations, working capital and capital expenditures, depends on our ability to generate cash in the future. Our cash flow is subject to general economic, industry, financial, competitive, operating, legislative, regulatory and other factors, many of which are beyond our control. If there is a shortfall between the cash flow from properties and the cash flow needed to service our indebtedness, then the amount available for distributions to stockholders may be reduced.

We cannot give any assurance that our business will generate sufficient cash flow from operations or thatIn the future, sources of cash will be available to us in an amount sufficient to enable us to pay amounts due on our indebtedness or to fund our other liquidity needs.

If mortgage debt financing is unavailable at reasonable rates, we may not be able to finance the purchase of properties. If we place mortgage debt on properties, we run the risk of being unable to refinance the properties when the loans become due, or of being unable to refinance on favorable terms. If interest rates are higher when we refinance our properties, our income could be reduced. We may be unable to refinance properties. If any of these events occur, our cash flow could be reduced. This, in turn, could reduce cash available for distribution to our stockholders and may hinder our ability to raise more capital by issuing more stock or by borrowing more money.

We are subject to certain restrictions pursuant to the restrictive covenants of our outstanding indebtedness, which may affect our distribution and operating policies and our ability to incur additional debt. Loan documents evidencing our existing indebtedness contain, and loan documents entered into in the future will likely contain, certain operating covenants that limit our ability to further mortgage thea property or discontinue insurance coverage. In addition, the agreements governing our existing indebtedness contain financial covenants, including certain coverage ratios and limitations on our ability to incur secured and unsecured debt, make dividend payments, sell all or substantially all of our assets, and engage in mergers and consolidations and certain acquisitions. Covenants under our existing indebtedness do, and under any future indebtedness likely will, restrict our ability to pursue certain business initiatives or certain acquisition transactions. In addition, failure to meet any of these covenants, including the financial coverage ratios, could cause an event of default under and/or accelerate some or all of our indebtedness, which would have a material adverse effect on us.

Currently, any outstanding draws on our $500 Million Unsecured 2018 Line of Credit and our variable rate-debtvariable-rate debt instruments which are not subject to hedging under interest rate swap agreements represent our exposure to interest rate changes. In addition, any outstanding draws under the $500 Million Unsecured 2018 Line of Credit are subject to LIBOR locks of various length LIBOR locks; however,length. However, increases in interest rates could increase our interest costs associated with this variable rate debt to the extent our current locks expire and new balances are drawn under the facility. Such increases would reduce our cash flows and could impact our ability to pay dividendsmake distributions to our stockholders. In addition, if we are required to repay existing debt during periods of higher interest rates, we may need to sell one or more of our investments in order to repay the debt, which might not permit realization of the maximum return on such investments.

We have entered into various interest rate derivative agreements to effectively fix our exposure to interest rates under certain of our existing debt facilities. To the extent interest rates are higher than the fixed rate in the respective contract, we would realize cash savings as compared to other market participants. However, to the extent interest rates are below the fixed rate in the respective contract, we would make higher cash payments than other similar market participants, which would have an adverse effect on our cash flows as compared to other market participants.

Additionally, there is counterparty risk associated with entering into interest rate derivative contracts. Should market conditions lead to insolvency or make a merger necessary for one or more of our counterparties, or potential future counterparties, it is possible that the terms of our interest rate derivative contracts will not be honored in their current form with a replacement counterparty. The potential termination or renegotiation of the terms of the interest rate derivative contracts as a result of changing counterparties through insolvency or merger could result in an adverse impact on our results of operations and cash flows.

LIBOR and certain other “benchmarks” are the subject of recent national, international and other regulatory guidance and proposals for reform. These reforms may cause such benchmarks to perform differently than in the past or have other consequences which cannot be predicted. In particular, on July 27, 2017, theThe United Kingdom’s Financial Conduct Authority, which regulates LIBOR, has publicly announced that it intends to stop persuading or compelling banks to submit LIBOR rates after 2021. It is unclear whether, at that time, LIBORand will cease publication of USD LIBOR as of June 30, 2023. The Federal Reserve Board ("FRB"), Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation ("FDIC"), and Office of the Comptroller of the Currency ("OCC") have issued supervisory guidance encouraging banks to exist or ifcease entering into new methodscontracts that use USD LIBOR as a reference rate as soon as practicable and in any event by December 31, 2021. The Alternative Reference Rates Committee, which was convened by the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Bank of calculating LIBOR will be established.New York, has identified SOFR as its preferred alternative for USD LIBOR.

The credit ratings assigned to our unsecured debt securities could change based upon, among other things, our results of operations and financial condition. If any of the credit rating agencies that have rated our unsecured debt securities downgrades or lowers its credit rating, or if any credit rating agency indicates that it has placed any such rating on a so-called “watch list” for a possible downgrading or lowering or otherwise indicates that its outlook for that rating is negative, it could have a material adverse effect on our costs and availability of capital, which could in turn have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and our ability to satisfy our debt service obligations.

There were no unresolved SEC staff comments as of December 31, 2019.2021.

The following table shows the geographic diversification of our in-service portfolio as of December 31, 2019:2021: