Douglas Emmett, Inc. was formed as a Maryland corporation on June 28, 2005 to continue and expand the operations of Douglas Emmett Realty Advisors and its 9 institutional funds. All of our assets are directly or indirectly held by our Operating Partnership, which was formed as a Delaware limited partnership on July 25, 2005. As the sole stockholder of the general partner of our Operating Partnership, we generally have the exclusive power under the partnership agreement to manage and conduct the business of our Operating Partnership, subject to certain limited approval and voting rights of the other limited partners. Our interest in our Operating Partnership entitles us to share in the profits and losses and cash distributions in proportion to our percentage ownership.

FundsJVs and JVsFund

The financial data in this Report presents our JVs on a consolidated basis and our Funds on an unconsolidated basis and our JVs on a consolidated basis in accordance with GAAP. See "Basis of Presentation" in Note 1 to our consolidated financial statement in Item 15 of this Report for more information regarding the consolidation of our JVs. On November 21, 2019, we restructured one of our previously unconsolidated Funds, after which it is treated as a consolidated JV in our financial statements. The results of the consolidated JV are included in our operating results from November 21, 2019 (before November 21, 2019, our share of the Fund's net income was included in our statements of operations in Income from unconsolidated Funds).

Most of the property data in this Report is presented for our Total Portfolio, which includes the properties owned by our JVs and our Funds, as we believe this presentation assists in understanding our business.

We believe that we qualify, and we intend to continue to qualify, for taxation as a REIT under the Code, although we cannot assureprovide assurance that this has happened or will happen. See Item 1A "Risk Factors" of this Report for the risks we face regarding taxation as a REIT. The following summary is qualified in its entirety by the applicable Code provisions and related rules, and administrative and judicial interpretations. If we qualify for taxation as a REIT, we will generally not be required to pay federal corporate income taxes on the portion of our net income that is currently distributed to stockholders. This treatment substantially eliminates the “double taxation” (i.e., at the corporate and stockholder levels) that generally results from investment in a corporation. However, we will be required to pay federal income tax under certain circumstances.

The Code defines a REIT as a corporation, trust or association (i) which is managed by one or more trustees or directors; (ii) the beneficial ownership of which is evidenced by transferable shares or certificates of beneficial interest; (iii) which would be taxable but for Sections 856 through 860 of the Code as a domestic corporation; (iv) which is neither a financial institution nor an insurance company subject to certain provisions of the Code; (v) the beneficial ownership of which is held by 100 or more persons; (vi) of which, during the last half of each taxable year, not more than 50% in value of the outstanding stock is owned, actually or constructively, by five or fewer individuals; and (vii) which meets certain other tests, described below, regarding the amount of its distributions and the nature of its income and assets. The Code requires that conditions (i) to (iv) be met during the entire taxable year and that condition (v) be met during at least 335 days of a taxable year of 12 months, or during a proportionate part of a taxable year of less than 12 months.

In order to qualify as a REIT, we are required to distribute dividends (other than capital gains dividends) to our stockholders equal to at least (A) the sum of (i) 90% of our “REIT taxable income” (computed without regard to the dividends paid deduction and our net capital gain) and (ii) 90% of the net income, if any (after tax), from foreclosure property, less (B) the sum of certain items of non-cash income. The distributions must be paid in the taxable year to which they relate, or in the following taxable year if declared before we timely file our tax return for such year, if paid on or before the first regular dividend payment date after such declaration and if we so elect and specify the dollar amount in our tax return. To the extent that we do not distribute all of our net long-term capital gains or distribute at least 90%, but less than 100%, of our REIT taxable income, we will be required to pay tax thereon at regular corporate tax rates. Furthermore, if we fail to distribute during each calendar year the sum of at least (i) 85% of our ordinary income for such year, (ii) 95% of our capital gains income for such year, and (iii) any undistributed taxable income from prior periods, we would be required to pay a 4% excise tax on the excess of such required distributions over the amounts actually distributed.

We own interests in various partnerships and limited liability companies. In the case of a REIT that is a partner in a partnership or a member of a limited liability company that is treated as a partnership under the Code, Treasury Regulations provide that for purposes of the REIT income and asset tests, the REIT will be deemed to own its proportionate share of the assets of the partnership or limited liability company (determined in accordance with its capital interest in the entity), subject to special rules related to the 10% asset test, and will be deemed to be entitled to the income of the partnership or limited liability company attributable to such share.

We own an interest in a subsidiary whichthat is intended to be treated as a QRS. The Code provides that a QRS will be ignored for federal income tax purposes and all assets, liabilities and items of income, deduction and credit of the QRS will be treated as our assets, liabilities and items of income. We hold certain of our properties through subsidiaries that have elected to be taxed as REITs. We also own interests in certain corporations which have elected to be treated as TRSs. A REIT may own more than 10% of the voting stock and value of the securities of a corporation whichthat jointly elects with the REIT to be a TRS, provided certain requirements are met. A TRS generally may engage in any business, including the provision of customary or non-customary services to tenants of its parent REIT and of others, except a TRS may not manage or operate a hotel or healthcare facility. A TRS is treated as a regular corporation and is subject to federal income tax and applicable state income and franchise taxes at regular corporate rates. In addition, a 100% tax may be imposed on a REIT if its rental, service or other agreements with its TRS, or the TRS agreements with the REIT’s tenants, are not on arm’s-length terms.

We may be required to pay state or local tax in various state or local jurisdictions, including those in which we own properties or otherwise transact business or reside. The state and local tax treatment of us and our stockholders may not conform to the federal income tax consequences discussed above. We may also be subject to certain taxes applicable to REITs, including taxes in lieu of disqualification as a REIT, on undistributed income, and on income from prohibited transactions.

In addition, if we acquire any asset from a corporation that is or has been a C corporation in a transaction in which our tax basis in the asset is less than the fair market value of the asset, in each case determined as of the date on which we acquired the asset, and we subsequently recognize gain on the disposition of the asset during the five yearfive-year period beginning on the date on which we acquired the asset, then we generally will be required to pay tax at the highest regular corporate tax rate on this gain to the extent of the excess of (i) the fair market value of the asset over (ii) our adjusted tax basis in the asset, in each case determined as of the date on which we acquired the asset.

We carry comprehensive liability, fire, extended coverage, business interruption and rental loss insurance covering all of the properties in our portfolio under a blanket insurance policy.policies. We believe the policy specifications and insured limits are appropriate and adequate given the relative risk of loss and the cost of the coverage and industry practice. See Item 1A “Risk Factors” of this Report for the risks we face regarding insurance.

We compete with a number of developers, owners and operators of office and multifamily real estate, many of which own properties similar to ours in the same markets in which our properties are located. See Item 2 of this Report for more information about our properties. See Item 1A “Risk Factors” of this Report for the risks we face regarding competition.

Our properties are subject to various covenants, laws, ordinances and regulations, including regulations relating to common areas, fire and safety requirements, various environmental laws, the ADA and rent control laws. See Item 1A “Risk Factors” of this Report for the risks we face regarding laws and regulations.

In operating our buildings and running our business, we actively work to promote our operations in a sustainable and responsible manner.  Our sustainability initiatives include items such as lighting, retrofitting, energy management systems, variable frequency drives in our motors, electricity co-generation, energy efficiency, recycling and water conservation.  As a result of our efforts, over 95%78% of our eligible office space is ENERGY STAR certified by the EPA as having energy efficiency in the top 25% of buildings nationwide. As

Segments

We operate two business segments: the acquisition, development, ownership and management of office real estate, and the acquisition, development, ownership and management of multifamily real estate. The services for our office segment include primarily rental of office space and other tenant services, including parking and storage space rental. The services for our multifamily segment include primarily rental of apartments and other tenant services, including parking and storage space rental. See Note 1415 to our consolidated financial statements in Item 15 of this Report for more information regarding our segments.

Principal Executive Offices

Our principal executive offices are located in the building we own at 1299 Ocean Avenue, Suite 1000, Santa Monica, California 90401 (telephone 310-255-7700).

Available Information

For more information, please contact:

The following risk factors are what we believe to be the most significant risk factors that could adversely affect our business and operations, including, without limitation, our financial condition, REIT status, results of operations and cash flows, our ability to service our debt and pay dividends to our stockholders, our ability to capitalize on business opportunities as they arise, our ability to raise capital, and the market price of our common stock. This is not an exhaustive list, and additional risk factors could adversely affect our business and financial performance. We operate in a very competitive and rapidly changing environment and new risk factors emerge from time to time. It is therefore not possible for us to predict all such risk factors, nor can we assess the impact of all such risk factors on our business or the extent to which any factor, or combination of factors, may cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statements. This discussion of risk factors includes many forward-looking statements. For cautions about relying on forward-looking statements see “Forward Looking Statements” at the beginning of this Report.

Risks Related to Our Properties and Our Business

Because of the geographic concentration of our properties, we are susceptible to adverse economic and regulatory developments, as well as natural disasters, in the markets and submarkets where we operate, including, for example, economic slowdowns, industry slowdowns, business downsizing, business relocations, increases in real estate and other taxes, changes in regulation, earthquakes, floods, droughts and wildfires. California is also regarded as being more litigious, regulated and taxed than many other states.

We have a substantial amount of debt and we may incur significant additional debt for various purposes, including, without limitation, to fund future property acquisitions and development activities, reposition properties and to fund our operations. See Note 78 to our consolidated financial statements in Item 15 of this Report for more detail regarding our consolidated debt. See "Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements" in Item 7 of this Report for more detail regarding our unconsolidated debt.

As a result of various factors, such as competitive pricing pressure in our submarkets, adverse conditions in the Los Angeles County or Honolulu real estate market, general economic downturns, or the desirability of our properties compared to other properties in our submarkets, the rents we receive on new leases could be less than our in-place rents.

If our properties are not as attractive to current and prospective tenants in terms of rent, services, condition, or location as properties owned by our competitors, we could lose tenants or suffer lower rental rates. As a result, we may from time to time be required to incur significant capital expenditures to maintain the competitiveness of our properties. There can be no assurances that any such expenditures would result in higher occupancy or rental rates, or deter existing tenants from relocating to properties owned by our competitors.

We compete with a number of developers, owners and operators of office and multifamily real estate, many of which own properties similar to ours in the same markets in which our properties are located. If our competitors offer space at rental rates below current market rates, or below the rental rates that we currently charge our tenants, or if they offer tenants significant rent or other concessions, we may lose existing or potential tenants and may not be able to replace them, and we may be pressured to reduce our rental rates below those we currently charge or offer more substantial rent abatements, tenant improvements, early termination rights or below-market renewal options in order to retain tenants when our tenants’ leases expire.

Our business operations in Los Angeles County, California and Honolulu, Hawaii are susceptible to, and could be significantly affected by, adverse weather conditions and natural disasters such as earthquakes, tsunamis, hurricanes, volcanoes, drought, wind, floods, landslides and fires. The likelihood of such disasters may be increased as a result of climate changes. Adverse weather conditions and natural disasters could cause significant damage to our properties or to the economies of the regions in which they are located, the risk of which is enhanced by the concentration of our properties’ locations. Our insurance coverage may not be adequate to cover business interruption or losses resulting from adverse weather or natural disasters. In addition, our insurance policies include substantial self-insurance portions and significant deductibles and co-payments for such events, and we are subject to the availability of insurance in the US and the pricing thereof. As a result, we may incur significant costs in the event of adverse weather conditions and natural disasters.

Most of our properties are located in Southern California, an area subject to an increased risk of earthquakes. While we presently carry earthquake insurance on our properties, the amount of our earthquake insurance coverage may not be sufficient to fully cover losses from earthquakes. We may reduce or discontinue earthquake or any other insurance coverage on some or all of our properties in the future if the cost of premiums for any of these policies in our judgment exceeds the value of the coverage discounted for the risk of loss.

We do not carry insurance for certain losses, such as losses caused by certain environmental conditions, asbestos, riots or war. In addition, our title insurance policies generally only insure the value of a property at the time of purchase, and we have not and do not intend to increase our title insurance coverage as the market value of our portfolio increases. As a result, we may not have sufficient coverage against all losses that we may experience, including from adverse title claims.

If we experience a loss that is uninsured or which exceeds policy limits, we could incur significant costs and lose the capital invested in the damaged properties as well as the anticipated future cash flows from those properties. If the damaged properties are encumbered, we may continue to be liable for the indebtedness, even if these properties were irreparably damaged.

If any of our properties were destroyed or damaged, then we might not be permitted to rebuild many of those properties to their existing height or size at their existing location under current zoning and land use regulations. In the event that we experience a substantial or comprehensive loss of one of our properties, we may not be able to rebuild such property to its existing specifications and otherwise may have to upgrade such property to meet current code requirements.

New regulations in the submarkets in which we operate could require us to make safety improvements to our buildings, for example requiring us to retrofit our buildings to better withstand earthquakes, and we could incur significant costs complying with those regulations.

The possibility of future terrorist attacks or war could have a negative impact on our operations, even if they are not directed at our properties and even if they never actually occur. Terrorist attacks can also substantially affect the availability and price of insurance coverage for certain types of damages or occurrences, and our insurance policies for terrorism include large deductibles and co-payments. The lack of sufficient insurance for these types of acts could expose us to significant losses.

Our business strategy for our office portfolio focuses on leasing to smaller-sized tenants, which may present greater credit risks because they are more susceptible to economic downturns than larger tenants, and may be more likely to cancel or not renew their leases.

Our real estate investments are relatively difficult to sell quickly. Return of capital and realization of gains, if any, from an investment will generally occur upon disposition or refinancing of the underlying property. We may not be able to realize our investment objectives by sale or be able to refinance at attractive prices within any given period of time. We may also not be able to complete any exit strategy. Any number of factors could increase these risks, such as (i) weak market conditions, (ii) the lack of an established market for a property, (iii) changes in the financial condition or prospects of prospective buyers, (iv) changes in local, national or international economic conditions, and (v) changes in laws, regulations or fiscal policies. Furthermore, certain properties may be adversely affected by contractual rights, such as rights of first offer or ground leases.

The properties in our portfolio are subject to various covenants, federal, state and local laws, ordinances, regulatory requirements, including permitting and licensing requirements, various environmental laws, the ADA and rent control laws. Such laws and regulations, including municipal or local ordinances, zoning restrictions and restrictive covenants imposed by community developers may restrict our use of our properties and may require us to obtain approval from local officials or community standards organizations at any time with respect to our properties, including prior to acquiring a property or when undertaking renovations of any of our existing properties. Among other things, these restrictions may relate to fire and safety, seismic, asbestos-cleanup or hazardous material abatement requirements. There can be no assurance that existing laws and regulations will not adversely affect us or the timing or cost of any future acquisitions, developments or renovations, or that additional regulations that increase such delays or result in additional costs will not be adopted. Under the ADA, our properties must meet federal requirements related to access and use by disabled persons to the extent that such properties are “public accommodations”. The costs of our on-going efforts to comply with these laws and regulations are substantial. Moreover, as we have not conducted a comprehensive audit or investigation of all of our properties to determine our compliance with applicable laws and regulations, we may be liable for investigation and remediation costs, penalties, and/or damages, which could be substantial and could adversely affect our ability to sell or rent our property or to borrow using such property as collateral.

Environmental laws regulate, and impose liability for, releases of hazardous or toxic substances into the environment. Under various provisions of these laws, an owner or operator of real estate may be liable for costs related to soil or groundwater contamination on, in, or migrating to or from its property. Persons who arrange for the disposal or treatment of hazardous or toxic substances may be liable for the costs of cleaning up contamination at the disposal site. Such laws often impose liability regardless of whether the person knew of, or was responsible for, the presence of the hazardous or toxic substances that caused the contamination. The presence of, or contamination resulting from, any of these substances, or the failure to properly remediate them, may adversely affect our ability to sell or rent our property or to borrow using the property as collateral. Persons exposed to hazardous or toxic substances may sue for personal injury damages, for example, some laws impose liability for release of or exposure to asbestos-containing materials, a substance known to be present in a number of our buildings. In other cases, some of our properties have been (or may have been) impacted by contamination from past operations or from off-site sources. As a result, in connection with our current or former ownership, operation, management and development of real properties, we may be potentially liable for investigation and cleanup costs, penalties, and damages under environmental laws.

Although most of our properties have been subjected to preliminary environmental assessments, known as Phase I assessments, by independent environmental consultants that identify certain liabilities, Phase I assessments are limited in scope, and may not include or identify all potential environmental liabilities or risks associated with the property. Unless required by applicable laws or regulations, we may not further investigate, remedy or ameliorate the liabilities disclosed in the Phase I assessments. We cannot assure that these or other environmental studies identified all potential environmental liabilities, or that we will not incur material environmental liabilities in the future. If we do incur material environmental liabilities in the future, we may face significant remediation costs and may find it difficult to sell any affected properties. See Note 17 to our consolidated financial statements in Item 15 of this Report for more detail regarding our buildings that contain asbestos.

We presently expect to continue operating and acquiring properties in areas that have adopted laws and regulations imposing restrictions on the timing or amount of rent increases or have imposed regulations relating to low- and moderate-income housing. Currently, neither

California nor Hawaii have state mandated rent control, butand various municipalities within Southern California, including the cities of Los Angeles and Santa Monica where our properties are located, have enacted rent control legislation. Additionally, portionsAll of the Honoluluour multifamily market are subject to low- and moderate-income housing regulations and all but one of the properties in our Los Angeles County multifamily portfolio are affected by these laws and regulations. Under current California law we are able to increase rents to market rates once a tenant vacates a rent-controlled unit, however increases in rental rates for renewing tenants are limited by California, Los Angeles and Santa Monica rent control regulations.

Hawaii does not have state mandated rent control, however portions of the Honolulu multifamily market are subject to low- and moderate-income housing regulations. We have agreed to rent specified percentages of the units at some of our Honolulu multifamily properties to persons with income below specified levels in exchange for certain tax benefits.

These laws and regulations can (i) limit our ability to charge market rents, increase rents, evict tenants or recover increases in our operating expenses, (ii) negatively impact our ability to attract higher-paying tenants, (iii) require us to incur costs for reporting and compliance, and (iv) make it more difficult for us to dispose of properties in certain circumstances. Any failure to comply with these regulations could result in fines, penalties and/or the loss of certain tax benefits and the forfeiture of rents.

If the opportunity arises, we may explore acquisitions of properties in new markets. The risks applicable to our ability to acquire, integrate and operate properties in our current markets are also applicable to our ability to acquire, integrate and operate properties in new markets. In addition to these risks, we will not possess the same level of familiarity with the dynamics and market conditions of any new markets that we may enter, which could adversely affect our ability to expand into those markets. We may be unable to build a significant market share or achieve a desired return on our investments in new markets.

We engage in development and redevelopment activities with respect to certain of our properties. To the extent that we do so, we are subject to certain risks, including the following:

We have and may in the future develop or acquire properties with, or raise capital from, third parties through partnerships, JVs or other entities, or through acquiring or disposing of non-controlling interests in, or sharing responsibility for managing the affairs of, a property, partnership, JV or other entity. This may subject us to risks that may not be present with other methods of ownership, including for example the following:

Some of our properties may be subject to a ground lease. If we default under the terms of such a lease, we may be liable for damages and could lose our ownership interest in the property.

Our distributions could exceed our cash generated from operations. If necessary, we may fund the difference from our existing cash balances or additional borrowings. If our available cash were to decline significantly below our taxable income, we could lose our REIT status unless we could borrow to make such distributions or make any required distributions in common stock.

We are required to pay property taxes for our properties, which could increase as property tax rates increase or as our properties are assessed or reassessed by taxing authorities. In California, under current law, reassessment occurs primarily as a result of a “change in ownership”. A potential reassessment may take a considerable amount of time, during which the property taxing authorities make a determination of the occurrence of a “change of ownership”, as well as the actual reassessed value. In addition, from time to time, there have been proposals to base property taxes on commercial properties on their current market value, without any limit based on purchase price. If any similar proposal were adopted, the property taxes we pay could increase substantially. In California, pursuant to an existing state law commonly referred to as Proposition 13, properties are reassessed to market value only at the time of change in ownership or completion of construction, and thereafter, annual property reassessments are limited to 2% ofincreases over the previously assessed values. As a result, Proposition 13 generally results in significant below-market assessed values over time. From time to time, including recently, lawmakers and political coalitions have initiated efforts to repeal or amend Proposition 13 to eliminate its application to commercial and industrial properties. If successful, a repeal of Proposition 13 could substantially increase the assessed values and property taxes for our properties in California.

From time to time we may dispose of properties in transactions that are intended to qualify as tax deferred exchanges under Section 1031 of the Code (Section 1031 Exchanges). It is possible that the qualification of a transaction as a Section 1031 Exchange could be successfully challenged and determined to be currently taxable. In such cases, our taxable income would increase as would the amount of distributions we are required to make to satisfy our REIT distribution requirements. This could increase the dividend income to our stockholders by reducing any return of capital they receive. In some circumstances, we may be required to pay additional dividends or, in lieu of that, corporate income tax, possibly including interest and penalties. As a result, we may be required to borrow in order to pay additional dividends or taxes, and the payment of such taxes could cause us to have less cash available to distribute to our stockholders. If a Section 1031 Exchange were later to be determined to be taxable, we may be

The OFAC of the US Department of the Treasury maintains a list of persons designated as terrorists or who are otherwise blocked or banned (“Prohibited Persons”). The OFAC regulations and other laws prohibit conducting business or engaging in transactions with Prohibited Persons. Some of our agreements require us and the other party to comply with the OFAC requirements. If a party with whom we contract is placed on the OFAC list we may be required by the OFAC regulations to terminate the agreement, which could result in a losses or a damage claim by the other party that the termination was wrongful.

Risks Related to Our Organization and Structure

Some of our properties were contributed to us in exchange for units of our Operating Partnership. As a result of the unrealized built-in gain attributable to such properties at the time of their contribution, some holders of OP Units, including our executive officers, may suffer different and more adverse tax consequences than holders of our common stock upon the sale or refinancing of the properties owned by our Operating Partnership, including disproportionately greater allocations of items of taxable income and gain upon a realization event. As a result, those holders may have different objectives regarding the appropriate pricing, timing and other material terms of any sale or refinancing of certain properties, or whether to sell or refinance such properties at all.

In order to qualify as a REIT, we are required under the Code to distribute annually at least 90% of our “REIT taxable income", determined without regard to the dividends paid deduction and by excluding any net capital gain. To the extent that we do not distribute all of our net long-term capital gains or at least 90% of our REIT taxable income, we will be required to pay tax thereon at regular corporate tax rates. Because of these distribution requirements, we may not be able to fund future capital needs from our operating cash flows, including acquisitions, development and debt refinancing. Consequently, we expect to rely on third-party sources to fund some of our capital needs and we may not be able to obtain financing on favorable terms or at all. Any additional borrowings will increase our leverage, and any additional equity that we issue will dilute our common stock. Our access to third-party sources of capital depends on many factors, some of which include:

From time to time, we have significant cash balances that we invest in a variety of short-term money market fund investments that are intended to preserve principal value and maintain a high degree of liquidity while providing current income. These investments are not insured against loss of principal and there is no guarantee that our investments in these funds will be redeemable at par value. If we cannot liquidate our investments or redeem them at par we could incur losses and experience liquidity issues.

Our charter, subject to certain exceptions, contains restrictions on ownership that limit, and authorizes our directors to take such actions as are necessary and desirable to limit, any person to actual or constructive ownership of not more than five percent of the value or number, whichever is more restrictive, of the outstanding shares of our common stock. Our board of directors, in its sole discretion, may exempt a proposed transferee from the ownership limit. The ownership limit contained in our charter may delay 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.

Our board of directors is empowered under our charter to amend our charter to increase or decrease the aggregate number of shares of our common stock or the number of shares of stock of any class or series that we have authority to issue, to designate and issue from time to time one or more classes or series of preferred stock and to classify or reclassify any unissued shares of our common stock or preferred stock without stockholder approval. Our board of directors may determine the relative rights, preferences and privileges of any class or series of preferred stock issued. As a result, we may issue series or classes of preferred stock with preferences, dividends, powers and rights, voting or otherwise, senior to the rights of our common stock holders. The issuance of preferred stock could also have the effect of delaying or preventing a change of control transaction that might otherwise be in the best interests of our stockholders.

Provisions in our Operating Partnership agreement may delay or make more difficult unsolicited acquisitions of us or changes in our control. These provisions could discourage third parties from making proposals involving an unsolicited acquisition of us or change of our control, although some stockholders might consider such proposals, if made, desirable. These provisions include, among others:

Any potential change of control transaction may be further limited as a result of provisions of the partnership unit designation for certain LTIP Units, which require us to preserve the rights of LTIP unit holders and may restrict us from amending the partnership agreement for our Operating Partnership in a manner that would have an adverse effect on the rights of LTIP unit holders.

Certain provisions of the MGCL may have the effect of inhibiting a third party from making a proposal to acquire us or impeding a change of control under circumstances that otherwise could provide our stockholders with the opportunity to realize a premium over the market price of our common stock, including:

We have elected to opt out of these provisions of the MGCL, in the case of the business combination provisions of the MGCL, by resolution of our board of directors, and in the case of the control share provisions of the MGCL, pursuant to a provision in our bylaws. However, our board of directors may by resolution elect to repeal the foregoing opt-outs from the business combination provisions of the MGCL and we may, by amendment to our bylaws, opt in to the control share provisions of the MGCL in the future.

Our charter, bylaws, our Operating Partnership agreement 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.

We have employment agreements with Jordan L. Kaplan, Kenneth M. Panzer and Kevin A. Crummy, which provide each executive with severance if they are terminated without cause or resign for good reason (including following a change of control), based on two or three times (depending on the officer) his annual total of salary, bonus and incentive compensation such as LTIP Units, options or outperformance grants. In addition, these executive officers would not be restricted from competing with us after their departure.

As the sole stockholder of the general partner of our Operating Partnership, we have fiduciary duties to the other limited partners in our Operating Partnership, the discharge of which may conflict with the interests of our stockholders. The limited partners of our Operating Partnership have agreed that, in the event of a conflict in the fiduciary duties owed by us to our stockholders and, in our capacity as general partner of our Operating Partnership, to such limited partners, we are under no obligation to give priority to the interests of such limited partners. The limited partners have the right to vote on certain amendments to the Operating Partnership agreement (which require approval by a majority in interest of the limited partners, including us) and individually to approve certain amendments that would adversely affect their rights. These voting rights may be exercised in a manner that conflicts with the interests of our stockholders. For example, we are unable to modify the rights of limited partners to receive distributions as set forth in the Operating Partnership agreement in a manner that adversely affects their rights without their consent, even though such modification might be in the best interest of our stockholders.

Our ability to maintain our competitive position is largely dependent on the skill and effort of our executive officers and key senior personnel, who have strong industry reputations, assist us in identifying acquisition and borrowing opportunities, having such opportunities brought to us, and negotiating with tenants and sellers of properties. If we lose the services of any of our executive officers or key senior personnel our business could be adversely affected.

Our investment, financing, borrowing, dividend, operating and other policies are determined by our board of directors. These policies may be amended or revised at any time and from time to time at the discretion of our board of directors without a vote of our stockholders. Our board of directors may change our policies with respect to conflicts of interest provided that such changes are consistent with applicable legal requirements.

The compensation committee of our board of directors is responsible for overseeing our compensation and incentive compensation plans. Our compensation committee has significant discretion in structuring compensation packages and may make compensation decisions based on any number of factors. Compensation awards may not be tied to or correspond with improved financial results or the market price of our common stock. See Note 1213 to our consolidated financial statements in Item 15 of this Report for more information regarding our stock-based compensation.

An effective system of internal control over financial reporting is necessary for us to provide reliable financial reports, prevent fraud and operate successfully as a public company. There can be no guarantee that our internal controls over financial reporting will be effective in accomplishing all control objectives all of the time. Deficiencies, including material weaknesses, in our internal control over financial reporting that may occur in the future could result in material misstatements in our financial reporting, which could result in restatements of our financial statements. Failure to maintain effective internal controls could cause us to not meet our reporting obligations, which could affect our ability to remain listed with the NYSE or result in SEC enforcement actions, and could cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information.

From time to time, we are party to various lawsuits, claims and other legal proceedings that arise in the ordinary course of our business. An unfavorable resolution of litigation could adversely affect us. Even when there is a favorable outcome, litigation may result in substantial expenses and significantly divert the attention of our management with a similar adverse effect on us.

Accounting policies and methods are fundamental to how we record and report our financial condition and results of operations. Uncertainties posed by various initiatives of accounting standard-setting by the FASB and the SEC, which create and interpret applicable accounting standards for U.S. companies, may change the financial accounting and reporting standards or their interpretation and application of these standards that govern the preparation of our financial statements. Similarly, these changes could have a material impact on our tenants’ reported financial condition or results of operations, credit ratings and preferences regarding leasing real estate. See "New Accounting Pronouncements" in Note 2 to our consolidated financial statements in Item 15 of this Report.

Risks Related to Taxes and Our Status as a REIT

We have elected to be taxed as a REIT under the Code, commencing with our initial taxable year ended December 31, 2006. To qualify as a REIT, we must satisfy on a continuing basis certain technical and complex income, asset, organizational, distribution, stockholder ownership and other requirements. See Item 1 "Business Overview" of this Report for more information regarding these tests. Our ability to satisfy these tests depends upon our analysis of and compliance with numerous factors, many of which are not subject to a precise determination and have only limited judicial and administrative interpretations, and which are not entirely within our control. Holding most of our assets through our Operating Partnership further complicates the application of the REIT requirements and a technical or inadvertent mistake could jeopardize our REIT status.  Legislation, new regulations, administrative interpretations or court decisions could significantly change the tax laws with respect to the requirements for qualification as a REIT or the federal income tax consequences of qualification as a REIT. Although we believe that we will continue to qualify as a REIT, we can give no assurance that we have qualified or will continue to qualify as a REIT.

If we were to fail to qualify as a REIT in any taxable year, and certain relief provisions did not apply, we would be subject to federal income tax on our taxable income at the regular corporate rates,rate, and distributions to stockholders would not be deductible by us in computing our taxable income. Any such corporate tax liability could be substantial and would reduce the amount of cash available for distribution to our stockholders. Unless entitled to relief under certain Code provisions, we would also be disqualified from taxation as a REIT for the four taxable years following the year during which we ceased to qualify as a REIT. In addition, if we fail to qualify as a REIT, we would not be required to make distributions to stockholders, and all distributions to stockholders will be subject to tax as dividend income to the extent of our current and accumulated earnings and profits. If we fail to qualify as a REIT for federal income tax purposes and are able to avail ourselves of one or more of the relief provisions under the Code in order to maintain our REIT status, we would nevertheless be required to pay penalty taxes of $50,000 or more for each such failure.

As a result of the above factors, our failure to qualify as a REIT could impair our ability to raise capital and expand our business, substantially reduce distributions to stockholders, result in us incurring substantial indebtedness (to the extent borrowings are feasible) or liquidating substantial investments in order to pay the resulting taxes, and adversely affect the market price of our common stock. One of our Funds,Our Fund, and two of our consolidated JVs, also own properties through one or more entities which are intended to qualify as REITs, and we may in the future use other structures that include REITs. The failure of any such entities to qualify as a REIT could have similar consequences to the REIT subsidiary and could also cause us to fail to qualify as a REIT.

Although we believe that the Operating Partnership and other subsidiary partnerships, limited liability companies, REIT subsidiaries, QRS and other subsidiaries (other than the TRS) in which we own a direct or indirect interest will be treated for tax purposes as a partnership, disregarded entity (e.g., in the case of a 100% owned limited liability company), REIT or QRS, as applicable, no assurance can be given that the IRS will not successfully challenge the tax classification of any such entity, or that a court would not sustain such a challenge. If the IRS were successful in treating the Operating Partnership or other subsidiaries as entities taxable as a corporation (including a “publicly traded partnership” taxed as a corporation) for federal income tax purposes, we would likely fail to qualify as a REIT and it would significantly reduce the amount of cash available for distribution by such subsidiaries to us.

Even if we qualify as a REIT for federal income tax purposes, we will be required to pay certain federal, state and local taxes on our income and property. For example, we will be subject to income tax to the extent that we distribute less than 100% of our REIT taxable income (including capital gains). In addition, any net taxable income earned directly by our TRS, or through entities that are disregarded for federal income tax purposes as entities separate from our TRS, will be subject to federal and possibly state corporate income tax. We have elected to treat several subsidiaries as TRSs, and we may elect to treat other subsidiaries as TRSs in the future. In this regard, several provisions of the laws applicable to REITs and their subsidiaries ensure that a TRS will be subject to an appropriate level of federal income taxation. For example, for taxable years prior to 2018, a TRS is limited in its ability to deduct interest payments made to an affiliated REIT. In addition, the REIT has to pay a 100% tax on some payments that it receives or on some deductions taken by its TRS if the economic arrangements between the REIT, the REIT’s tenants, and the TRS are not comparable to similar arrangements between unrelated parties. In addition, some state and local jurisdictions may tax some of our income even though as a REIT we are not subject to federal income tax on that income because not all states and localities treat REITs the same as they are treated for federal income tax purposes. Moreover, if we have net income from “prohibited transactions,” that income will be subject to a 100% tax. In general, prohibited transactions are sales or other dispositions of property held primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of business. Although we do not intend to hold any properties that would be characterized as held primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of our business, such characterization is a factual determination and we cannot guarantee that the IRS would agree with our characterization of our properties. To the extent that we are required to pay federal, state and local taxes, we will have less cash available for distributions to our stockholders.

To qualify as a REIT, we generally must distribute annually at least 90% of our REIT taxable income, excluding any net capital gains. To the extent that we do not distribute all of our net long-term capital gains or at least 90% of our REIT taxable income, we will be required to pay tax thereon at regular corporate tax rates. We intend to make distributions to our stockholders to comply with the Code requirements for REITs and to minimize or eliminate our corporate income tax obligation. Certain types of assets generate substantial mismatches between taxable income and available cash. Such assets include rental real estate that has been financed through financing structures which require some or all of available cash flows to be used to service borrowings. As a result, the requirement to distribute a substantial portion of our taxable income could cause us to sell assets in adverse market conditions, borrow on unfavorable terms, distribute amounts that could otherwise be used to fund our operations, capital expenditures, acquisitions or repayment of debt, or cause us to forego otherwise attractive opportunities.

The maximum federal tax rate (not including the Medicare Contribution Tax on unearned income) applicable to income from “qualified dividends” payable to U.S. stockholders that are individuals, trusts and estates is 20%. Dividends payable by REITs, however, generally are not eligible for the 20% rate. However, under the TCJA, for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017 and before January 1, 2026, individuals, trusts, and estates generally may deduct up to 20% of ordinary REIT dividends. Although these rules do not adversely affect the taxation of REITs or dividends payable by REITs, investors who are individuals, trusts and estates may perceive investments in REITs to be relatively less attractive than investments in the stocks of non-REIT corporations that pay dividends.

Under certain circumstances, REITs are permitted to pay required dividends in shares of their stock rather than in cash. If we were to avail ourselves of that option, our stockholders could be required to pay taxes on such stock distributions without the benefit of cash distributions to pay the resulting taxes.

Federal income tax laws are constantly under review by persons involved in the legislative process, the IRS and the U.S. Department of the Treasury. Changes to the laws could adversely affect us and our investors. New legislation, Treasury Regulations, administrative interpretations or court decisions could significantly and negatively affect our ability to qualify as a REIT, the federal income tax consequences of such qualification, or the federal income tax consequences of an investment in us. Changes to laws relating to the tax treatment of other entities, or an investment in other entities, could make an investment in such other entities more attractive relative to an investment in a REIT.

A non-U.S. investor disposing of a U.S. real property interest, including shares of a U.S. corporation whose assets consist principally of U.S. real property interests or USRPIs is generally subject to a tax, known as FIRPTA tax, on the gain recognized on the disposition. Such FIRPTA tax does not apply, however, to the disposition of stock in a REIT if the REIT is a “domestically controlled qualified investment entity.” A domestically controlled qualified investment entity includes a REIT in which, at all times during a specified testing period, less than 50% of the value of its shares is held directly or indirectly by non-U.S. holders. In the event that we do not constitute a domestically controlled qualified investment entity, a non-U.S. investor’s sale of our common stock nonetheless will generally not be subject to tax under FIRPTA as a sale of a USRPI, provided that (1) the stock owned is of a class that is “regularly traded” as defined by applicable Treasury regulations, on an established securities market, and (2) the selling non-U.S. investor held 10% or less of our outstanding common stock at all times during a specified testing period. If we were to fail to so qualify as a domestically controlled qualified investment entity and our common stock were to fail to be “regularly traded,”traded”, a gain realized by a non-U.S. investor on a sale of our common stock would be subject to FIRPTA tax and applicable withholding. No assurance can be given that we will be a domestically controlled qualified investment entity. Additionally, any distributions we make to our non-U.S. stockholders that are attributable to gain from the sale of any USRPI will also generally be subject to FIRPTA tax and applicable withholdings, unless the recipient non-U.S. stockholder has not owned more than 10% of our common stock at any time during the year preceding the distribution and our common stock is treated as being “regularly traded”.

We present property level data for our Total Portfolio, except that we present historical capital expenditures for our Consolidated Portfolio.

Office Portfolio Summary as of December 31, 20182019