snh_Current folio

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, DC 20549

FORM 10‑K


☒	ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015
or
☐	TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

Commission file number 1‑15319

SENIOR HOUSING PROPERTIES TRUST

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)


Maryland	04‑3445278
(State of Organization)	(IRS Employer Identification No.)
Two Newton Place, 255 Washington Street, Suite 300, Newton, Massachusetts	02458‑1634
(Address of Principal Executive Offices)	(Zip Code)

617‑796‑8350

(Registrant’s Telephone Number, Including Area Code)

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


Title Of Each Class	Name Of Each Exchange On Which Registered
Common Shares of Beneficial Interest	New York Stock Exchange
5.625% Senior Notes due 2042	New York Stock Exchange
6.25% Senior Notes due 2046	New York Stock Exchange

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None

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

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

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

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S‑T (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes ☒ No ☐

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S‑K (§ 229.405) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10‑K or any amendment to this Form 10‑K. ☒

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non‑accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer”, “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b‑2 of the Exchange Act. (Check One):


Large accelerated filer ☒	Accelerated filer ☐		Non‑accelerated filer ☐ (Do not check if a smaller reporting company)	Smaller reporting company ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b‑2 of the Act). Yes ☐ No ☒

The aggregate market value of the voting common shares of beneficial ownership, $.01 par value, or common shares, of the registrant held by non-affiliates was approximately $4.1 billion based on the $17.55 closing price per common share on the New York Stock Exchange on June 30, 2015. For purposes of this calculation, an aggregate of 2,978,858 common shares held directly by, or by affiliates of, the trustees and the executive officers of the registrant have been included in the number of common shares held by affiliates.

Number of the registrant’s common shares outstanding as of February 22, 2016: 237,471,559.

References in this Annual Report on Form 10-K to the Company, SNH, we, us or our mean Senior Housing Properties Trust and its consolidated subsidiaries, unless the context indicates otherwise.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Certain information required by Items 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14 of Part III of this Annual Report on Form 10‑K is incorporated by reference to our definitive Proxy Statement for the 2016 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, or our definitive Proxy Statement, to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days after the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015.

WARNING CONCERNING FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS

THIS ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10‑K CONTAINS STATEMENTS THAT CONSTITUTE FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE PRIVATE SECURITIES LITIGATION REFORM ACT OF 1995 AND OTHER SECURITIES LAWS. ALSO, WHENEVER WE USE WORDS SUCH AS “BELIEVE”, “EXPECT”, “ANTICIPATE”, “INTEND”, “PLAN”, “ESTIMATE” OR SIMILAR EXPRESSIONS, WE ARE MAKING FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS. THESE FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS ARE BASED UPON OUR PRESENT INTENT, BELIEFS OR EXPECTATIONS, BUT FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS ARE NOT GUARANTEED TO OCCUR AND MAY NOT OCCUR. FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS IN THIS REPORT RELATE TO VARIOUS ASPECTS OF OUR BUSINESS, INCLUDING:

OUR POLICIES AND PLANS REGARDING INVESTMENTS, FINANCINGS AND DISPOSITIONS,

OUR ABILITY TO RAISE DEBT OR EQUITY CAPITAL,

OUR ABILITY TO RETAIN OUR EXISTING TENANTS, ATTRACT NEW TENANTS AND MAINTAIN OR INCREASE CURRENT RENTAL RATES,

THE CREDIT QUALITIES OF OUR TENANTS,

OUR ABILITY TO COMPETE FOR ACQUISITIONS AND TENANCIES EFFECTIVELY,

OUR ACQUISITIONS AND SALES OF PROPERTIES,

OUR ABILITY TO PAY DISTRIBUTIONS TO OUR SHAREHOLDERS AND THE AMOUNT OF SUCH DISTRIBUTIONS,

THE FUTURE AVAILABILITY OF BORROWINGS UNDER OUR REVOLVING CREDIT FACILITY,

OUR ABILITY TO PAY INTEREST ON AND PRINCIPAL OF OUR DEBT,

OUR ABILITY TO APPROPRIATELY BALANCE OUR DEBT AND EQUITY CAPITAL,

OUR CREDIT RATINGS,

OUR EXPECTATION THAT WE BENEFIT FROM OUR OWNERSHIP OF THE RMR GROUP INC., OR RMR INC.,

OUR EXPECTATION THAT WE BENEFIT FROM OUR OWNERSHIP OF AFFILIATES INSURANCE COMPANY, OR AIC, AND OUR PARTICIPATION IN INSURANCE PROGRAMS ARRANGED BY AIC,

OUR QUALIFICATION FOR TAXATION AS A REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUST, OR REIT,

OUR BELIEF THAT THE AGING U.S. POPULATION WILL INCREASE THE DEMAND FOR EXISTING SENIOR LIVING COMMUNITIES,

OUR BELIEF THAT FIVE STAR QUALITY CARE, INC., OR FIVE STAR, OUR FORMER SUBSIDIARY, WHICH IS OUR LARGEST TENANT AND WHICH MANAGES CERTAIN OF OUR SENIOR LIVING COMMUNITIES FOR OUR ACCOUNT, HAS ADEQUATE FINANCIAL RESOURCES, LIQUIDITY AND ABILITY TO MEET ITS OBLIGATIONS TO US AND TO MANAGE OUR SENIOR LIVING COMMUNITIES SUCCESSFULLY, AND

OTHER MATTERS.

OUR ACTUAL RESULTS MAY DIFFER MATERIALLY FROM THOSE CONTAINED IN OR IMPLIED BY OUR FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS AS A RESULT OF VARIOUS FACTORS. FACTORS THAT COULD HAVE A MATERIAL ADVERSE EFFECT ON OUR FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS AND UPON OUR BUSINESS, RESULTS OF OPERATIONS, FINANCIAL CONDITION, FUNDS FROM OPERATIONS, NORMALIZED FUNDS FROM OPERATIONS, NET OPERATING INCOME, OR NOI, CASH FLOWS, LIQUIDITY AND PROSPECTS INCLUDE, BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO:

THE IMPACT OF CHANGES AND CONDITIONS IN THE ECONOMY AND THE CAPITAL MARKETS ON US AND OUR TENANTS AND MANAGERS,

THE IMPACT OF THE PATIENT PROTECTION AND AFFORDABLE CARE ACT, AS AMENDED BY THE HEALTH CARE AND EDUCATION RECONCILIATION ACT, OR COLLECTIVELY, THE ACA, AND OTHER EXISTING OR PROPOSED LEGISLATION OR REGULATIONS ON US, ON OUR TENANTS AND MANAGERS AND ON THEIR ABILITY TO PAY OUR RENTS AND RETURNS,

ACTUAL AND POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST WITH OUR MANAGING TRUSTEES, FIVE STAR, THE RMR GROUP LLC, OR RMR LLC, RMR INC., AIC, D&R YONKERS LLC, SELECT INCOME REIT, OR SIR, AND THEIR RELATED PERSONS AND ENTITIES,

COMPLIANCE WITH, AND CHANGES TO, FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL LAWS AND REGULATIONS, ACCOUNTING RULES, TAX LAWS AND SIMILAR MATTERS,

LIMITATIONS IMPOSED ON OUR BUSINESS AND OUR ABILITY TO SATISFY COMPLEX RULES IN ORDER FOR US TO QUALIFY FOR TAXATION AS A REIT FOR U.S. FEDERAL INCOME TAX PURPOSES,

COMPETITION WITHIN THE HEALTHCARE AND REAL ESTATE INDUSTRIES, AND

ACTS OF TERRORISM, OUTBREAKS OF SO CALLED PANDEMICS OR OTHER MANMADE OR NATURAL DISASTERS BEYOND OUR CONTROL.

FOR EXAMPLE:

FIVE STAR IS OUR LARGEST TENANT AND MANAGES CERTAIN OF OUR SENIOR LIVING COMMUNITIES FOR OUR ACCOUNT AND IT MAY EXPERIENCE FINANCIAL DIFFICULTIES AS A RESULT OF A NUMBER OF FACTORS, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO:

CHANGES IN MEDICARE AND MEDICAID PAYMENTS, INCLUDING THOSE THAT MAY RESULT FROM THE ACA AND OTHER EXISTING OR PROPOSED LEGISLATION OR REGULATIONS, WHICH COULD RESULT IN REDUCED RATES OR A FAILURE OF SUCH RATES TO COVER FIVE STAR’S COSTS,

CHANGES IN REGULATIONS AFFECTING FIVE STAR’S OPERATIONS,

CHANGES IN AND CONDITIONS OF THE ECONOMY GENERALLY OR GOVERNMENTAL POLICIES WHICH REDUCE THE DEMAND FOR THE SERVICES FIVE STAR OFFERS,

INCREASES IN INSURANCE AND TORT LIABILITY AND OTHER COSTS,

INEFFECTIVE INTEGRATION OF NEWLY ACQUIRED LEASED OR MANAGED SENIOR LIVING COMMUNITIES,

INSUFFICIENT ACCESS TO CAPITAL AND FINANCING, AND

POTENTIAL MATERIAL WEAKNESSES IN ITS INTERNAL CONTROLS,

IF FIVE STAR’S OPERATIONS BECOME UNPROFITABLE, FIVE STAR MAY BECOME UNABLE TO PAY OUR RENTS AND WE MAY NOT RECEIVE OUR EXPECTED RETURN ON OUR INVESTED CAPITAL OR ADDITIONAL AMOUNTS FROM OUR SENIOR LIVING COMMUNITIES THAT ARE MANAGED BY FIVE STAR,

OUR OTHER TENANTS MAY EXPERIENCE LOSSES AND BECOME UNABLE TO PAY OUR RENTS,

SOME OF OUR TENANTS MAY NOT RENEW EXPIRING LEASES, AND WE MAY BE UNABLE TO LOCATE NEW TENANTS TO MAINTAIN OR INCREASE THE HISTORICAL OCCUPANCY RATES OF, OR RENTS FROM, OUR PROPERTIES,

OUR ABILITY TO MAKE FUTURE DISTRIBUTIONS TO OUR SHAREHOLDERS AND TO MAKE PAYMENTS OF PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST ON OUR INDEBTEDNESS DEPENDS UPON A NUMBER OF FACTORS, INCLUDING OUR FUTURE EARNINGS, THE CAPITAL COSTS WE INCUR TO LEASE AND OPERATE OUR PROPERTIES AND WORKING CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS. WE MAY BE UNABLE TO PAY OUR DEBT OBLIGATIONS OR TO MAINTAIN OUR CURRENT RATE OF DISTRIBUTIONS ON OUR COMMON SHARES AND FUTURE DISTRIBUTIONS MAY BE REDUCED OR ELIMINATED,

OUR ABILITY TO GROW OUR BUSINESS AND INCREASE OUR DISTRIBUTIONS DEPENDS IN LARGE PART UPON OUR ABILITY TO BUY PROPERTIES AND ARRANGE FOR THEIR PROFITABLE OPERATION OR LEASE THEM FOR RENTS, LESS PROPERTY OPERATING EXPENSES, THAT EXCEED OUR CAPITAL COSTS. WE MAY BE UNABLE TO IDENTIFY PROPERTIES THAT WE WANT TO ACQUIRE OR TO NEGOTIATE ACCEPTABLE PURCHASE PRICES, ACQUISITION FINANCING, MANAGEMENT CONTRACTS OR LEASE TERMS FOR NEW PROPERTIES,

RENTS THAT WE CAN CHARGE AT OUR PROPERTIES MAY DECLINE BECAUSE OF CHANGING MARKET CONDITIONS OR OTHERWISE,

CONTINGENCIES IN OUR ACQUISITION AND SALE AGREEMENTS MAY NOT BE SATISFIED AND OUR PENDING ACQUISITIONS AND/OR SALES AND ANY RELATED MANAGEMENT AGREEMENTS MAY NOT OCCUR, MAY BE DELAYED OR THE TERMS OF SUCH TRANSACTIONS MAY CHANGE,

WE MAY ENTER INTO ADDITIONAL MANAGEMENT AGREEMENTS OR POOLING AGREEMENTS WITH FIVE STAR FOR FIVE STAR TO MANAGE ADDITIONAL SENIOR LIVING COMMUNITIES THAT WE ACQUIRE OR THAT WE CURRENTLY OWN. HOWEVER, THERE CAN BE NO ASSURANCE THAT WE AND FIVE STAR WILL ENTER INTO ANY ADDITIONAL MANAGEMENT AGREEMENTS OR POOLING AGREEMENTS,

SPECIAL COMMITTEES OF EACH OF OUR BOARD OF TRUSTEES AND FIVE STAR’S BOARD OF DIRECTORS COMPOSED SOLELY OF OUR INDEPENDENT TRUSTEES AND FIVE STAR’S INDEPENDENT DIRECTORS WHO ARE NOT ALSO TRUSTEES OR DIRECTORS OF THE OTHER PARTY AND WHO WERE REPRESENTED BY SEPARATE COUNSEL REVIEWED AND APPROVED THE TERMS OF THE INITIAL MANAGEMENT AGREEMENTS AND POOLING AGREEMENT BETWEEN US AND FIVE STAR AND THE TERMS OF THE SUBSEQUENT MANAGEMENT AGREEMENTS AND POOLING AGREEMENTS WERE APPROVED BY OUR

INDEPENDENT TRUSTEES AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES AND BY THE INDEPENDENT DIRECTORS AND BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF FIVE STAR. AN IMPLICATION OF THESE STATEMENTS MAY BE THAT THESE TERMS ARE AS FAVORABLE TO US AS TERMS WE COULD OBTAIN FOR SIMILAR ARRANGEMENTS FROM UNRELATED THIRD PARTIES. HOWEVER, DESPITE THESE PROCEDURAL SAFEGUARDS, WE COULD STILL BE SUBJECTED TO CLAIMS CHALLENGING THESE TRANSACTIONS OR OUR ENTRY INTO THESE TRANSACTIONS BECAUSE OF THE MULTIPLE RELATIONSHIPS AMONG US, FIVE STAR AND RMR LLC AND THEIR RELATED PERSONS AND ENTITIES, AND DEFENDING EVEN MERITLESS CLAIMS COULD BE EXPENSIVE AND DISTRACTING TO MANAGEMENT,

CONTINUED AVAILABILITY OF BORROWINGS UNDER OUR REVOLVING CREDIT FACILITY IS SUBJECT TO OUR SATISFYING CERTAIN FINANCIAL COVENANTS AND OTHER CUSTOMARY CREDIT FACILITY CONDITIONS THAT WE MAY BE UNABLE TO SATISFY,

ACTUAL COSTS UNDER OUR REVOLVING CREDIT FACILITY OR OTHER FLOATING RATE CREDIT FACILITIES WILL BE HIGHER THAN LIBOR PLUS A PREMIUM BECAUSE OF OTHER FEES AND EXPENSES ASSOCIATED WITH SUCH FACILITIES,

THE MAXIMUM BORROWING AVAILABILITY UNDER OUR REVOLVING CREDIT FACILITY AND TERM LOANS MAY BE INCREASED TO UP TO $2.6 BILLION ON A COMBINED BASIS IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES. HOWEVER, INCREASING THE MAXIMUM BORROWING AVAILABILITY UNDER OUR REVOLVING CREDIT FACILITY AND TERM LOANS IS SUBJECT TO OUR OBTAINING ADDITIONAL COMMITMENTS FROM LENDERS, WHICH MAY NOT OCCUR,

WE HAVE THE OPTION TO EXTEND THE MATURITY DATE OF OUR REVOLVING CREDIT FACILITY UPON PAYMENT OF A FEE AND MEETING CERTAIN OTHER CONDITIONS. HOWEVER, THE APPLICABLE CONDITIONS MAY NOT BE MET,

THE MARGINS USED TO DETERMINE THE INTEREST RATE PAYABLE ON OUR REVOLVING CREDIT FACILITY AND TERM LOANS AND THE FACILITY FEE PAYABLE ON OUR REVOLVING CREDIT FACILITY ARE BASED ON OUR CREDIT RATINGS. FUTURE CHANGES IN OUR CREDIT RATINGS MAY CAUSE THE INTEREST AND FEES WE PAY TO INCREASE,

WE MAY BE UNABLE TO REPAY OUR DEBT OBLIGATIONS WHEN THEY BECOME DUE,

AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2015, APPROXIMATELY 97% OF OUR NOI WAS GENERATED FROM PROPERTIES WHERE A MAJORITY OF THE REVENUE IS DERIVED FROM OUR TENANTS’ AND RESIDENTS’ PRIVATE RESOURCES. THIS MAY IMPLY THAT WE WILL MAINTAIN OR INCREASE THE PERCENTAGE OF OUR NOI GENERATED FROM PRIVATE RESOURCES AT OUR SENIOR LIVING COMMUNITIES. HOWEVER, OUR RESIDENTS AND PATIENTS MAY BECOME UNABLE TO FUND OUR CHARGES WITH PRIVATE RESOURCES IN THE FUTURE AND WE MAY BE REQUIRED OR MAY ELECT FOR BUSINESS REASONS TO ACCEPT OR PURSUE REVENUES FROM GOVERNMENT PAY SOURCES, WHICH COULD RESULT IN AN INCREASED PART OF OUR NOI AND REVENUE BEING GENERATED FROM GOVERNMENT PAYMENTS,

WE MAY NOT BE ABLE TO SELL OUR ASSETS CLASSIFIED AS HELD FOR SALE ON TERMS ACCEPTABLE TO US OR OTHERWISE,

WE BELIEVE THAT OUR RELATIONSHIPS WITH OUR RELATED PARTIES, INCLUDING FIVE STAR, RMR LLC, RMR INC., AIC, D&R YONKERS LLC, SIR AND OTHERS AFFILIATED WITH THEM MAY BENEFIT US AND PROVIDE US WITH COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGES IN

OPERATING AND GROWING OUR BUSINESS. IN FACT, THE ADVANTAGES WE BELIEVE WE MAY REALIZE FROM THESE RELATIONSHIPS MAY NOT MATERIALIZE,

OUR SENIOR LIVING COMMUNITIES ARE SUBJECT TO EXTENSIVE GOVERNMENTAL REGULATION, LICENSURE AND OVERSIGHT. WE SOMETIMES EXPERIENCE DEFICIENCIES IN THE OPERATION OF OUR SENIOR LIVING COMMUNITIES AND SOME OF OUR COMMUNITIES MAY BE PROHIBITED FROM ADMITTING NEW RESIDENTS OR OUR LICENSE TO CONTINUE OPERATIONS AT A COMMUNITY MAY BE REVOKED. ALSO, OPERATING DEFICIENCIES OR A LICENSE REVOCATION AT ONE OR MORE OF OUR SENIOR LIVING COMMUNITIES MAY HAVE AN ADVERSE IMPACT ON OUR ABILITY TO OBTAIN LICENSES FOR OR ATTRACT RESIDENTS TO OUR OTHER COMMUNITIES,

THE PURCHASE PRICE WE PAID FOR THE RMR INC. SHARES IS STATED IN THIS ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K. AN IMPLICATION OF THIS STATEMENT MAY BE THAT THE RMR INC. SHARES WILL HAVE A MARKET VALUE AT LEAST EQUAL TO THE VALUE WE PAID FOR THE RMR INC. SHARES. IN FACT, THE VALUE OF THE RMR INC. SHARES MAY BE DIFFERENT FROM THE PRICE WE PAID FOR THE RMR INC. SHARES. THE MARKET VALUE OF RMR INC. SHARES DEPENDS UPON VARIOUS FACTORS, INCLUDING SOME THAT ARE BEYOND OUR CONTROL, SUCH AS MARKET CONDITIONS. THERE CAN BE NO ASSURANCE REGARDING THE PRICE AT WHICH RMR INC. SHARES WILL TRADE; WE MAY REALIZE A LOSS ON OUR INVESTMENT IN OUR RMR INC. SHARES, AND

THE BUSINESS MANAGEMENT AND PROPERTY MANAGEMENT AGREEMENTS BETWEEN US AND RMR LLC HAVE BEEN AMENDED AND EXTENDED FOR CONTINUING 20 YEAR TERMS. THE AMENDED MANAGEMENT AGREEMENTS INCLUDE TERMS WHICH PERMIT EARLY TERMINATION AND EXTENSIONS IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES. ACCORDINGLY, THERE CAN BE NO ASSURANCE THAT THESE AGREEMENTS WILL REMAIN IN EFFECT FOR 20 YEARS OR FOR SHORTER OR LONGER TERMS.

THESE RESULTS COULD OCCUR DUE TO MANY DIFFERENT CIRCUMSTANCES, SOME OF WHICH ARE BEYOND OUR CONTROL, SUCH AS NEW LEGISLATION OR REGULATIONS AFFECTING OUR BUSINESS OR THE BUSINESSES OF OUR TENANTS OR MANAGERS, CHANGES IN OUR TENANTS’ OR MANAGERS’ REVENUES OR COSTS, CHANGES IN OUR TENANTS’ OR MANAGERS’ FINANCIAL CONDITIONS, DEFICIENCIES IN OPERATIONS BY THE TENANTS OR MANAGERS OF OUR SENIOR LIVING COMMUNITIES, CHANGED MEDICARE AND MEDICAID RATES, ACTS OF TERRORISM, NATURAL DISASTERS OR CHANGES IN CAPITAL MARKETS OR THE ECONOMY GENERALLY.

THE INFORMATION CONTAINED ELSEWHERE IN THIS ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10‑K OR IN OUR FILINGS WITH THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, OR SEC, INCLUDING UNDER THE CAPTION “RISK FACTORS”, OR INCORPORATED HEREIN OR THEREIN, IDENTIFIES OTHER IMPORTANT FACTORS THAT COULD CAUSE DIFFERENCES FROM OUR FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS. OUR FILINGS WITH THE SEC ARE AVAILABLE ON THE SEC’S WEBSITE AT WWW.SEC.GOV.

YOU SHOULD NOT PLACE UNDUE RELIANCE UPON OUR FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS.

EXCEPT AS REQUIRED BY LAW, WE DO NOT INTEND TO UPDATE OR CHANGE ANY FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS AS A RESULT OF NEW INFORMATION, FUTURE EVENTS OR OTHERWISE.

PART I

Item 1. Business.

The Company.

We are a real estate investment trust, or REIT, that was organized under the laws of the State of Maryland in 1998. As of December 31, 2015, we owned 427 properties (451 buildings) located in 43 states and Washington, D.C. (including one property (one building) and one vacant land parcel classified as held for sale). On that date, the undepreciated carrying value of our properties, net of impairment losses, was $7.5 billion, excluding properties classified as held for sale. Our portfolio includes: 296 senior living communities, including independent living, assisted living, memory care and skilled nursing facilities, or SNFs, with 34,699 living units / beds, with an undepreciated carrying value of $4.3 billion; 121 properties (145 buildings) leased to medical providers, medical related businesses, clinics and biotech laboratory tenants, or MOBs, with 11.3 million square feet of space and an undepreciated carrying value of $3.0 billion; and 10 wellness centers with approximately 812,000 square feet of interior space plus outdoor developed facilities with an undepreciated carrying value of $180.0 million.

Our principal executive offices are located at Two Newton Place, 255 Washington Street, Suite 300, Newton, Massachusetts 02458‑1634, and our telephone number is (617) 796‑8350.

We believe that the aging of the U.S. population will increase demand for existing independent and assisted senior living communities, SNFs, MOBs, wellness centers and other medical and healthcare related properties. We plan to profit from this demand by acquiring additional properties and entering into leases and management agreements with qualified tenants and managers which generate returns to us that exceed our operating and capital costs, including structuring leases that provide for or permit periodic rental increases.

Our business plan contemplates investments in senior living communities, MOBs and wellness centers. Some properties combine more than one type of service in a single building or campus. Our Board of Trustees establishes our investment, financing and disposition policies and may change them at any time without shareholder approval.

Our growth strategies are implemented and defined by our acquisition and investment, disposition and financing policies.

Senior Living Communities.

Independent Living Communities. Independent living communities, or congregate care communities, provide high levels of privacy to residents and require residents to be capable of relatively high degrees of independence. Unlike an age restricted apartment property, an independent living community usually bundles several services as part of a regular monthly charge. For example, an independent living community may include one or two meals per day in a central dining room, daily or weekly maid service or a social director in the base charge. Additional services are generally available from staff employees on a fee for service basis. In some of our independent living communities, separate parts of the property are dedicated to assisted living and/or nursing services.

Assisted Living Communities. Assisted living communities typically have one bedroom units which include private bathrooms and efficiency kitchens. Services bundled within one charge usually include three meals per day in a central dining room, daily housekeeping, laundry, medical reminders and 24 hour availability of assistance with the activities of daily living, such as dressing and bathing. Professional nursing and healthcare services are usually available at the property on call or at regularly scheduled times. In some of our assisted living communities, separate parts of the property are dedicated to independent living and/or nursing services.

Skilled Nursing Facilities. SNFs generally provide extensive nursing and healthcare services similar to those available in hospitals, without the high costs associated with operating theaters, emergency rooms or intensive care units. A typical purpose built SNF includes mostly rooms with one or two beds, a separate bathroom and shared dining facilities. Licensed nursing professionals staff SNFs 24 hours per day.

MOBs.

MOBs are office or commercial buildings constructed for use or operated as medical office space for physicians and other healthcare personnel, and other businesses in medical related fields, including clinics and laboratory uses. Some of our MOBs are occupied as back office facilities for healthcare companies, such as hospitals and healthcare insurance companies.

Wellness Centers.

Wellness centers typically have gymnasiums, strength and cardiovascular equipment areas, tennis and racquet sports facilities, pools, spas and children’s centers. Professional sport training and therapist services are often available. Wellness centers often market themselves as clubs for which members may pay monthly fees plus additional fees for specific services.

Other Types of Real Estate.

In the past, we have considered investing in real estate different from our existing property types, including age restricted apartment buildings and some properties located outside the United States. We may explore these or other alternative investments in the future.

Lease Terms.

The leases for our senior living communities and wellness centers are so called “triple net” leases which generally require the tenants to pay rent and all property operating expenses, to indemnify us from liability which may arise by reason of our ownership of the properties, to maintain the properties at their expense, to remove and dispose of hazardous substances on the properties in compliance with applicable law and to maintain insurance on the properties for their and our benefit. In the event of partial damage, condemnation or taking, the tenants are required to rebuild with insurance or other proceeds, if any; in the case of total destruction, condemnation or taking, we receive the insurance or other proceeds and the tenants are required to pay to us any shortfall in the amount of those proceeds versus our historical investment in the affected property; in the event of material destruction or condemnation, some of these tenants have a right to purchase the affected property for amounts at least equal to our historical investment in the affected property.

Our leases of MOBs include both triple net leases, as described above, and so called “net” and “modified gross” leases where we are responsible for operating and maintaining the properties and we charge the tenants for some or all of the property operating expenses. A small percentage of our MOB leases are so called “full service” leases where we receive fixed rent from the tenants and do not charge the tenants for any property operating expenses.

Events of Default. Under our leases, events of default generally include:

failure of the tenant to pay rent or any other money when due;

failure of the tenant to provide periodic financial reports when due;

failure of the tenant to maintain required insurance coverages;

revocation of any material license necessary for the operation of our properties; or

failure of the tenant to perform other terms, covenants or conditions of the lease and the continuance thereof for a specified period after written notice.

Default Remedies. Upon the occurrence of any event of default under our leases, we generally may (subject to applicable law):

terminate the affected lease and accelerate the rent;

terminate the tenant’s rights to occupy and use the affected property, rent the property to another tenant and recover from the defaulting tenant the difference between the amount of rent which would have been due under the lease and the rent received pursuant to the reletting;

make any payment or perform any act required to be paid or performed by the tenant under its lease;

exercise our rights with respect to any collateral securing the lease; and

require the defaulting tenant to reimburse us for all payments made and all costs and expenses incurred in connection with any exercise of the foregoing remedies.

For more information about our leases with Five Star Quality Care, Inc. or its subsidiaries, or Five Star, see Note 5 to our Consolidated Financial Statements included in Part IV, Item 15 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Senior Living Community Management Contracts.

Because we are a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes, we generally may not operate our senior living communities. For certain of our senior living communities, we use the taxable REIT subsidiary, or TRS, structure authorized by the REIT Investment Diversification and Empowerment Act. Under this structure, we lease certain of our communities to our TRSs and our TRSs enter into long term management agreements with third parties for the operation of such communities. The management agreements for these communities provide the manager with a management fee, which is a percentage of the gross revenues realized at the communities, plus reimbursement for the manager’s direct costs and expenses related to the communities, and generally provide the manager with an incentive fee equal to a percentage of the annual net operating income of the communities after we realize an annual return equal to a percentage of our invested capital. The currently effective management agreements for our senior living communities generally expire between December 14, 2022 and December 31, 2035, and are generally subject to automatic renewal for two consecutive 15 year terms, unless earlier terminated or timely notice of nonrenewal is delivered. In general, we have the right to terminate these currently effective management agreements upon certain manager events of default, including, without limitation, a change in control of the manager, as defined in the management agreements, and our manager has the right to terminate the management agreements upon certain events of default applicable to us.

Although we have various rights as owner under the management agreements, we rely on the manager’s personnel, good faith, expertise, historical performance, technical resources, operating efficiencies, information systems, proprietary information and judgment to manage our managed senior living communities efficiently and effectively. We also rely on the manager to set resident fees and otherwise operate our managed senior living communities in compliance with our management agreements. For more information about our management agreements with Five Star and the related pooling agreements, see Note 5 to our Consolidated Financial Statements included in Part IV, Item 15 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Acquisition and Investment Policies.

Acquisitions. Our present acquisition strategy is to acquire additional properties primarily for income and secondarily for appreciation potential. In implementing this acquisition strategy, we consider a range of factors relating to each proposed acquisition, including, but not limited to:

use and size of the property;

proposed acquisition price;

existing or proposed lease or management terms;

availability and reputation of a financially qualified lessee(s), manager(s) or guarantor(s);

historical and projected cash flows from the operations of the property;

estimated replacement cost of the property;

design, physical condition and age of the property;

competitive market environment of the property;

price segment and payment sources in which the property is operated;

strategic fit of a property within our portfolio;

our weighted average long term cost of capital compared to projected returns we may realize by owning the property;

level of permitted services and regulatory history of the property and its historical operators; and

the existence of alternative sources, uses or needs for capital.

We have no policies which specifically limit the percentage of our assets which may be invested in any individual property, in any one type of property, in properties leased to any one tenant or to an affiliated group of tenants or in properties managed by any one manager or by an affiliated group of managers.

Form of Investments. We prefer wholly owned investments in fee interests. However, circumstances may arise in which we may invest in leaseholds, joint ventures, mortgages and other real estate interests. We may invest or enter into real estate joint ventures if we conclude that by doing so we may benefit from the participation of co‑venturers or that our opportunity to participate in the investment is contingent on the use of a joint venture structure. We may invest in participating, convertible or other types of mortgages if we conclude that by doing so, we may benefit from the cash flow or appreciation in the value of a property which is not available for purchase.

Mergers and Strategic Combinations.

In the past, we have considered the possibility of entering into mergers or strategic combinations with other companies and we may explore such possibilities in the future.

Disposition Policies.

From time to time, we consider the sale of one or more of our properties or other investments. We make disposition decisions based on a number of factors, including, but not limited to, the following:

our ability to lease the affected property on terms acceptable to us or have the affected property managed with our realizing acceptable returns;

the tenant’s or manager’s desire to acquire the affected property;

the tenant’s or manager’s desire to cease operating the affected property;

the proposed sale price;

the remaining length of the lease relating to the property and its other terms;

the strategic fit of the property or investment within our portfolio;

the estimated value we may receive by selling the property;

our intended use of the proceeds we may realize from the sale of the property; and

the existence of alternative sources, uses or needs for capital.

Financing Policies.

There are no limitations in our organizational documents on the amount of indebtedness we may incur. Our revolving credit facility and term loan agreements and our senior unsecured notes indentures and their supplements contain financial covenants which, among other things, restrict our ability to incur indebtedness and require us to maintain financial ratios and a minimum net worth. However, we may seek to amend these covenants or seek replacement financings with less restrictive covenants. In the future, we may decide to seek changes in the financial covenants which currently restrict our debt leverage based upon then current economic conditions, the relative availability and costs of debt versus equity capital and our need for capital to take advantage of acquisition opportunities or otherwise.

We may also seek additional capital through equity offerings, debt financings, retention of cash flows in excess of distributions to shareholders, or a combination of these methods. To the extent we obtain additional debt financing, we may do so on an unsecured basis or a secured basis. We may seek to obtain lines of credit or to issue securities senior to our common shares, including preferred shares or debt securities, some of which may be convertible into our common shares or be accompanied by warrants to purchase our common shares. We may also finance acquisitions by assuming debt, through an exchange of properties or through the issuance of equity or other securities.

We currently have a $1.0 billion unsecured revolving credit facility that we use for working capital and general business purposes and for funding acquisitions on an interim basis until we are able to refinance them with equity or long term debt. In some instances, we may assume outstanding mortgage debts in connection with our acquisition of properties, or place new mortgages on properties we own. For more information regarding our financing sources and activities, please see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources—Our Investment and Financing Liquidity and Resources” in Part II, Item 7 of this Annual Report on Form 10‑K.

Our Manager.

The RMR Group Inc. (NASDAQ:RMR), a Maryland corporation, or RMR Inc., is a holding company and substantially all of its business is conducted by its majority owned subsidiary The RMR Group LLC, a Maryland limited liability company, or RMR LLC. Barry Portnoy and Adam Portnoy, our Managing Trustees, are the controlling shareholders, directors and officers of RMR Inc. Our day to day operations are conducted by RMR LLC. RMR LLC originates and presents investment and divestment opportunities to our Board of Trustees and provides management and administrative services to us. RMR LLC has a principal place of business at Two Newton Place, 255 Washington Street, Suite 300, Newton, Massachusetts, 02458‑1634, and its telephone number is (617) 796‑8390. RMR LLC also acts as the manager to Government Properties Income Trust, or GOV, Hospitality Properties Trust, or HPT, and Select Income REIT, or SIR, and provides management and other services to other public and private companies, including Five Star, TravelCenters of America LLC, or TA, and Sonesta International Hotels Corporation, or Sonesta. As of the date of this Annual Report on Form 10‑K, the executive officers of RMR LLC are: Adam Portnoy, President, Chief Executive Officer and Managing Director; Barry Portnoy, Chairman; David M. Blackman, Executive Vice President; Jennifer B. Clark, Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary; David J. Hegarty, Executive Vice President; Mark L. Kleifges, Executive Vice President; Bruce J. Mackey Jr., Executive Vice President; John G. Murray, Executive Vice President; Thomas M. O’Brien, Executive Vice President; and John C. Popeo, Executive Vice President. David J. Hegarty is our President and Chief Operating Officer. Our executive officers and other officers of RMR LLC also serve as officers of other companies to which RMR LLC provides management services.

Employees.

We have no employees. Services which would otherwise be provided to us by employees are provided by RMR LLC and by our Managing Trustees and officers. As of February 10, 2016, RMR LLC had approximately 420 full time employees in its headquarters and regional offices located throughout the United States.

Government Regulation and Reimbursement.

The senior living and healthcare industries are subject to extensive, frequently changing federal, state and local laws and regulations. Although most of these laws and regulations affect the manner in which our tenants and managers

operate our properties, some of them also impact us and the values of our properties. Some of the laws that impact or may impact us or our tenants or managers include: state and local licensure laws; laws protecting consumers against deceptive practices; laws relating to the operation of our properties and how our tenants and managers conduct their operations, such as health and safety, fire and privacy laws; federal and state laws affecting assisted living communities that participate in Medicaid and federal and state laws affecting SNFs, clinics and other healthcare facilities that participate in both Medicaid and Medicare that mandate allowable costs, pricing, reimbursement procedures and limitations, quality of services and care, food service and physical plants; resident rights laws (including abuse and neglect laws) and fraud laws; anti-kickback and physician referral laws; the Americans with Disabilities Act, or the ADA, and similar state and local laws; and safety and health standards set by the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Medicaid funding is available in some, but not all, states for assisted living services. State licensure standards for assisted living communities, SNFs, clinics and other healthcare facilities typically address facility policies, staffing, quality of services and care, resident rights, fire safety and physical plant matters, and related matters. We are unable to predict the future course of federal, state and local legislation or regulation. Changes in the regulatory framework could have a material adverse effect on the ability of our tenants to pay us rent, the profitability of our managed senior living communities and the values of our properties.

State and local health and social service agencies and other regulatory authorities regulate and license many senior living communities. State health authorities regulate and license clinics and other healthcare facilities. In most states in which we own properties, we and our tenants and managers are prohibited from providing certain services without first obtaining appropriate licenses. In addition, most states require a certificate of need, or CON, before an entity may open a SNF or expand services at an existing community. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, some states also limit the number of assisted living facilities by requiring CONs. In addition, some states (such as California and Texas) that have eliminated CON laws have retained other means of limiting development of SNFs, including moratoria, licensing laws and limitations upon participation in the state Medicaid program. Senior living communities and certain other healthcare facilities must also comply with applicable state and local building, zoning, fire and food service codes before licensing or Medicare and Medicaid certification are granted. These laws and regulatory requirements could affect our ability and that of our tenants and managers to expand into new markets or to expand communities in existing markets. In addition, the operation of our properties outside of the scope of applicable licensed authority can result in us, our tenants or managers being subject to penalties and sanctions, including closure of facilities.

In addition, governmental authorities have been subjecting healthcare facilities such as those that we own to increasing numbers of inspections, surveys, investigations, audits and other potential enforcement actions. We and our tenants and managers expend considerable resources to respond to such actions. Unannounced inspections or surveys may occur annually or biannually, or even more regularly, such as following a regulatory body’s receipt of a complaint about a facility. From time to time in the ordinary course of business, we and our tenants and managers receive deficiency reports from state regulatory bodies resulting from those inspections and surveys. We and our tenants and managers seek to resolve most inspection deficiencies through a plan of corrective action relating to the affected facility’s operations. If we or our tenants or managers fail to comply with any applicable legal requirements, or are unable to cure deficiencies, certain sanctions may be imposed and, if imposed, may adversely affect the ability of our tenants to pay their rent to us, the profitability of our managed senior living communities and the values of our properties. In addition, governmental agencies typically have the authority to take or seek further action against a licensed or certified facility, including the ability to impose civil money penalties or fines; suspend, modify, or revoke a license or Medicare or Medicaid participation; suspend or deny admissions of residents; deny payments in full or in part; institute state oversight, temporary management or receivership; and impose criminal penalties. Loss, suspension or modification of a license or certification or the imposition of other sanctions or penalties could adversely affect the values of our properties, the ability of our tenants to pay their rents and the profitability of our managed senior living communities.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, or CMS, of the United States Department of Health and Human Services, or HHS, has increased its oversight of state survey agencies in recent years, focusing its enforcement efforts on SNFs and chains of SNF operators with findings of substandard care or repeat and continuing deficiencies and violations. CMS has also sought to provide consumers with additional information relating to SNFs. Moreover, state Attorneys General typically enforce consumer protection laws relating to senior living services, clinics and other healthcare facilities. In addition, state Medicaid fraud control agencies may investigate and prosecute assisted living communities and nursing facilities, clinics and other healthcare facilities under fraud and patient abuse and neglect laws.

Current state laws and regulations allow enforcement officials to make determinations as to whether the care provided by or on behalf of our tenants or by our managers at our facilities exceeds the level of care for which a particular facility is licensed. A finding that a facility is delivering care beyond the scope of its license can result in the immediate

discharge and transfer of residents, which could adversely affect the ability of the tenant to pay rent to us, the profitability of our managed senior living communities and the values of our properties. Furthermore, some states and the federal government allow certain citations of one facility to impact other facilities owned or operated by the same entity or a related entity, including facilities in other states. Revocation of a license or certification at one facility could therefore impact our or a tenant’s or manager’s ability to obtain new licenses or certifications or to maintain or renew existing licenses at other facilities, which could adversely affect the ability of that tenant to pay rent to us, the profitability of that manager, the profitability and values of our properties and trigger defaults under our tenants’ leases and managers’ management agreements and our or our tenants’ or managers’ credit arrangements, or adversely affect our or our tenants’ or managers’ ability to obtain financing in the future. In addition, an adverse finding by state officials could serve as the basis for lawsuits by private plaintiffs and lead to investigations under federal and state laws, which could result in civil and/or criminal penalties against the facility as well as a related entity.

As of December 31, 2015, approximately 97% of our current net operating income, or NOI, was generated from properties where a majority of the revenue is derived from private resources, and the remaining 3% of our NOI was generated from properties where a majority of the revenue is dependent upon Medicare and Medicaid programs. Our tenants and managers operate facilities in many states and they and we participate in federal and state healthcare payment programs, including the federal Medicare and state Medicaid benefit programs for services in SNFs and other similar facilities and state Medicaid programs for services in assisted living communities. In light of the current and projected federal budget deficit and challenging state fiscal conditions, there have been numerous recent legislative and regulatory actions or proposed actions with respect to federal Medicare rates and state Medicaid rates and federal payments to states for Medicaid programs, each of which, or in any combination, could have a material adverse effect on the ability of our tenants to pay us rent, the profitability of our managed senior living communities and the values of our properties. Examples include:

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Healthcare and Education Reconciliation Act, or collectively, the ACA, which was adopted in March 2010, has resulted in changes to insurance, payment systems and healthcare delivery systems. The ACA is intended to expand access to health insurance coverage and reduce the growth of healthcare expenditures while simultaneously maintaining or improving the quality of healthcare. Some of the provisions of the ACA took effect immediately, whereas others took effect or will take effect at later dates. Beginning in federal fiscal year 2012, the ACA also reduced the Skilled Nursing Facility Prospective Payment System, or SNF PPS, annual adjustment for inflation by a productivity adjustment based on national economic productivity statistics. We are unable to predict the impact of these reductions on Medicare rates for SNFs.

The ACA established an Independent Payment Advisory Board to submit legislative proposals to Congress and take other actions with a goal of reducing Medicare spending growth and includes various other provisions affecting Medicare and Medicaid providers, including enforcement reforms and increased funding for Medicare and Medicaid program integrity control initiatives.

In June 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld two major provisions of the ACA—the individual mandate, which requires most Americans to maintain health insurance or to pay a penalty, and, as modified by the Supreme Court, the Medicaid expansion, which requires states to expand their Medicaid programs by 2014 to cover all individuals under the age of 65 with incomes not exceeding 133% of the federal poverty level. In upholding the Medicaid expansion, the U.S. Supreme Court held that it violated the U.S. Constitution as drafted but remedied the violation by modifying the expansion to preclude the Secretary of HHS from withholding existing federal Medicaid funds from states that fail to comply with the Medicaid expansion, instead allowing the Secretary only to deny new Medicaid expansion funding. Under the ACA, the federal government will pay for 100% of a state’s Medicaid expansion costs for the first three years (2014-2016) and gradually reduce its subsidy to 90% for 2020 and future years. Based on the ruling, states may choose not to participate in the Medicaid expansion program without risking the loss of existing federal Medicaid funding. As of January 12, 2016, 31 states plus the District of Columbia had elected to expand Medicaid eligibility as provided under the ACA, 16 states had elected not to broaden Medicaid eligibility, and three remained undecided; those states choosing not to participate in Medicaid expansion are forgoing the federal funds that would otherwise be available for that purpose. We are unable to predict the impact of these or other recent

legislative and regulatory actions or proposed actions with respect to state Medicaid rates and payments to states for Medicaid programs on us.

In June 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that income tax credits under the ACA are available to individuals who purchase health insurance on an exchange created by the federal government, in the same way such credits are available to individuals who purchase health insurance on an exchange created by a state. Such subsidies provide certain eligible taxpayers with the ability to purchase or maintain health insurance.

Medicare reimburses SNFs under the SNF PPS, which provides a fixed payment for each day of care provided to a Medicare beneficiary. The PPS requires SNFs to assign each resident to a care group depending on that resident’s medical characteristic and service needs. These care groups are known as Resource Utilization Groups, or RUGs. The PPS payments cover substantially all Medicare Part A services the beneficiary receives. Capital costs are part of the PPS rate and are not community specific. Many states have similar Medicaid PPSs. CMS implemented the PPS for SNFs pursuant to the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 and updates PPS payments for SNFs each year by a market basket update to account for inflation.

Effective October 1, 2010, CMS adopted rules that implemented a new PPS case mix classification system known as RUG-IV. Following the implementation of RUG-IV, Medicare billing increased nationally, partially because of the unexpectedly large proportion of patients grouped in the highest paying RUG therapy categories. CMS did not intend for the implementation of RUG-IV to increase Medicare billing, however, and in 2011, CMS adopted a final rule designed to recalibrate Medicare PPS rates for SNFs. The rule resulted in a reduction in aggregate Medicare payments for SNFs by approximately 11.1%, or $3.87 billion, in federal fiscal year 2012. CMS updated Medicare payment rates for SNFs effective October 1, 2012, which increased aggregate Medicare payment rates for SNFs by 1.8%, or $670 million, for federal fiscal year 2013. On October 1, 2013, CMS updated Medicare payments to SNFs for federal fiscal year 2014, which CMS estimated would increase payments to SNFs by 1.3%, or approximately $470 million. On July 31, 2014, CMS released a final rule updating Medicare payments to SNFs for federal fiscal year 2015, which CMS estimated would increase payments to SNFs by an aggregate of 2.0%, or approximately $750 million, compared to federal fiscal year 2014. On July 30, 2015, CMS adopted a final rule updating Medicare payments to SNFs for federal fiscal year 2016, which CMS estimated would increase payments to SNFs by an aggregate of 1.2%, or approximately $430 million, compared to federal fiscal year 2015. Due to the previous reduction of Medicare payment rates of approximately 11.1% for federal fiscal year 2012 discussed above, however, Medicare payment rates will be lower for federal fiscal year 2016 than they were in federal fiscal year 2011. The Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015, or MACRA, discussed below, limits the market basket increase for SNFs to 1.0% in federal fiscal year 2018. It is unclear whether these adjustments in Medicare rates will compensate for the increased costs our tenants and managers may incur for services to residents whose services are paid for by Medicare.

In addition, the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012, which was enacted in February 2012, incrementally reduced the SNF reimbursement rate for Medicare bad debt from 100% to 65% by federal fiscal year 2015 for beneficiaries dually eligible for Medicare and Medicaid. Because nearly 90% of SNF bad debt has historically been related to dual eligible beneficiaries, this rule has a substantial negative effect on SNFs. The same law also reduced the SNF Medicare bad debt reimbursement rate for Medicare beneficiaries not eligible for Medicaid from 70% to 65% in federal fiscal year 2013 and going forward.

The federal government is also seeking to slow the growth of Medicare and Medicaid payments to SNFs in several ways, including pursuant to the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, or the DRA. In 2006, the government implemented limits on Medicare payments for outpatient therapies but, pursuant to the DRA, created an exception process under which beneficiaries could request an exemption from the cap and be granted the amount of services deemed medically necessary by Medicare. On April 1, 2014, the Protecting Access to Medicare Act of 2014, or PAMA, extended the Medicare outpatient therapy cap exception process through March 31, 2015. In April 2015, Congress passed MACRA, which extended the outpatient therapy cap

exceptions process from March 31, 2015 through December 31, 2017, further postponing the implementation of strict limits on Medicare payments for outpatient therapies.

The increased “look-back” period for prohibited asset transfers disqualifies individuals from Medicaid SNF benefits from three to five years. The period of Medicaid ineligibility begins on the date of the prohibited transfer or the date an individual has entered the SNF and would otherwise be eligible for Medicaid coverage, whichever occurs later, rather than on the date of the prohibited transfer, effectively extending the Medicaid penalty period. This increased “look-back” period effectively places an additional burden on our tenants and managers to collect charges directly from their residents and their transferees.

Our tenants’ and our and our managers’ Medicare Part B outpatient therapy revenue rates are tied to the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule, or MPFS. Although the MPFS had previously been scheduled to be reduced by more than 25% in 2013, MPFS rates remained fixed at the 2012 level throughout 2013 and increased 0.5% for the period beginning January 1, 2014. On April 1, 2014, PAMA extended the 0.5% increase to the MPFS rates through December 31, 2014 and provided no increase in the MPFS rates in the period between January 1, 2015 and March 31, 2015. MACRA, discussed above, also repealed the Sustainable Growth Rate, or SGR, formula for calculating updates to MPFS rates, which would have led to a 21.2% rate reduction effective April 1, 2015, and replaced the SGR formula with a different reimbursement methodology.

PAMA established a SNF value-based purchasing program, which is intended to increase quality of care and reduce preventable hospitalizations. Under this program, HHS will assess SNFs based on hospital readmissions and make these assessments available to the public by October 1, 2017. As part of PAMA implementation, in the SNF PPS final rule for fiscal year 2016, CMS adopted a 30 day all-cause, all-condition hospital readmission measure for SNFs, which, by October 1, 2016, will be replaced with an all-condition, risk-adjusted potentially preventable hospital readmission rate for SNFs. Under PAMA, beginning in federal fiscal year 2019, Medicare payment rates will be partially based on SNFs’ performance scores on this measure. To fund the program, CMS will reduce Medicare payments to all SNFs by 2.0% through a withhold mechanism starting on October 1, 2018 and then redistribute between 50% and 70% of the withheld payments as incentive payments to those SNFs with the highest rankings on this measure.

We and some of our tenants and managers are subject to the Improving Medicare Post-Acute Care Transformation Act of 2014, or the IMPACT Act, which requires certain post-acute care providers, including SNFs, to begin collecting and reporting various types of data. Beginning in federal fiscal year 2018, SNFs that fail to comply with the reporting requirements by the established times will be subject to a 2.0% reduction in their Medicare payment rates for that fiscal year. The IMPACT Act also requires the Secretary of HHS and the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission to submit reports to Congress recommending a future Medicare PPS for post-acute care providers and analyzing both its effects on the reported metrics and its financial effect on post-acute care providers.

The Budget Control Act of 2011 and the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013 allow for automatic reductions in federal spending by means of a process called sequestration, which reduces Medicare payment rates by 2.0% through 2023. In 2014 and 2015, Congress approved two additional one year extensions of Medicare sequestration, through 2025. Medicaid is exempt from the automatic reductions, as are certain Medicare benefits. We are unable to predict the long term financial impact of the automatic payment cuts.

The DRA and the ACA also include provisions that encourage states to provide long term care services in home and community based settings rather than in SNFs or other inpatient facilities, including increased federal Medicaid spending for some states through the use of several programs. One such program, the Community First Choice Option, or the CFC Option, grants states that choose to participate in the program a 6% increase in federal matching payments for related medical assistance expenditures. As of December 2015, five states had obtained a State Plan Amendment to participate in the CFC Option. We are unable to predict the effect of the implementation of the CFC Option and other similar programs on the ability of our

tenants to pay rent to us, the profitability of our managed senior living communities and the values of our properties.

The ACA extended and expanded eligibility for a program to award competitive grants to states for demonstration projects to provide home and community based long term care services to qualified individuals relocated from SNFs, providing certain increased federal medical assistance for each qualifying beneficiary. States are also permitted to include home and community based services as optional services under their Medicaid state plans, and states opting to do so may establish more stringent needs based criteria for SNF services than for home and community based services. The ACA also expanded the services that states may provide and limited their ability to set caps on enrollment, waiting lists or geographic limitations on home and community based services. These changes under the ACA may result in reduced payments for services, or the failure of Medicare, Medicaid or insurance payment rates to cover increasing costs.

CMS has developed and enforces Conditions of Participation that healthcare organizations must meet in order to participate in the Medicare and Medicaid programs. These standards are designed to improve quality of care and protect the health and safety of beneficiaries. In July 2015, CMS released a proposed rule to comprehensively update the requirements for long term care facilities that participate in Medicare and Medicaid. These proposals, if finalized, would increase the cost of operations for long term care facilities that participate in Medicare and Medicaid, such as SNFs.

Some of the states in which our tenants and managers operate have not raised Medicaid rates by amounts sufficient to offset increasing costs or have frozen or reduced such rates. Effective June 30, 2011, Congress ended certain temporary increases in federal payments to states for Medicaid programs that had been in effect since 2008. Some states are expanding their use of managed care, partly to control Medicaid program costs. Medicaid spending grew an estimated 11% in 2014 due to increased enrollment as some states chose to expand Medicaid coverage under the ACA. From 2015 through 2024, Medicaid spending is expected to grow by an average annual rate of 5.9%, mainly driven by increased spending per beneficiary due to aging of the population and more gradual growth in enrollment. Under the ACA, the federal government will pay for 100% of a state’s Medicaid expansion costs from 2014 to 2016 and gradually reduce its subsidy to 90% for 2020 and future years. We expect that the ending of these temporary payments, combined with the anticipated slow recovery of state revenues, may result in increases in state budget deficits, particularly in those states that are not participating in Medicaid expansion. As a result, certain states may continue to reduce Medicaid payments to healthcare service providers including some of our tenants and us, as a part of an effort to balance their budgets.

We are unable to predict the impact of these or other recent legislative and regulatory actions or proposed actions with respect to state Medicaid rates and federal Medicare rates and federal payments to states for Medicaid programs on us and those of our tenants that derive a portion of their revenues from Medicare, Medicaid and other governmental programs. The changes implemented or to be implemented as a result of such actions could result in the failure of Medicare, Medicaid or private payment reimbursement rates to cover increasing costs, in a reduction in payments or other circumstances.

Federal and state efforts to target false claims, fraud and abuse and violations of anti-kickback, physician referral and privacy laws by providers under Medicare, Medicaid and other public and private programs have increased in recent years, as have civil monetary penalties, treble damages, repayment requirements and criminal sanctions for noncompliance. The federal False Claims Act, as amended and expanded by the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act of 2009 and the ACA, provides significant civil monetary penalties and treble damages for false claims and authorizes individuals to bring claims on behalf of the federal government for false claims. The federal Civil Monetary Penalties Law authorizes the Secretary of HHS to impose substantial civil penalties, treble damages and program exclusions administratively for false claims or violations of the federal anti-kickback statute. In addition, the ACA increased penalties under federal sentencing guidelines between 20% and 50% for healthcare fraud offenses involving more than $1 million. Governmental authorities are devoting increasing attention and resources to the prevention, detection, and prosecution of healthcare fraud and abuse. CMS contractors are also expanding the retroactive audits of Medicare claims submitted by SNFs and other providers, and recouping alleged overpayments for services determined by auditors not to have been medically necessary or not to meet

Medicare coverage criteria as billed. State Medicaid programs and other third party payers are conducting similar medical necessity and compliance audits. The ACA facilitates the Department of Justice’s, or the DOJ’s, ability to investigate allegations of wrongdoing or fraud at SNFs, in part because of increased cooperation and data sharing among CMS, the Office of the Inspector General, the DOJ and the states. In addition, the ACA requires all states to terminate the Medicaid participation of any provider that has been terminated under Medicare or any Medicaid state plan. We and our tenants and managers expend significant resources to comply with these laws and regulations.

Federal and state laws designed to protect the confidentiality and security of individually identifiable information apply to us, our tenants and our managers. Under the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, and the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act, we, our tenants and our managers that are “covered entities” or “business associates” within the meaning of HIPAA must comply with rules adopted by HHS governing the privacy, security, use and disclosure of individually identifiable information, including financial information and protected health information, or PHI, and also with security rules for electronic PHI. There may be both civil monetary penalties and criminal sanctions for noncompliance with such federal laws. On January 17, 2013, HHS released the HIPAA Omnibus Rule, or the Omnibus Rule, which went into effect on March 26, 2013 and required compliance with most provisions by September 23, 2013. Pursuant to the Omnibus Rule, “covered entities” were required to make certain modifications to any business associate agreements that they have in place with their “business associates” within the meaning of HIPAA. In addition, the Omnibus Rule required “covered entities” to modify and redistribute their notices of privacy practices to include certain provisions relating to the use of PHI. Further, the Omnibus Rule modified the standard for providing breach notices, which was previously to perform an analysis of the harm of any disclosure to a more objective analysis relating to whether any PHI was actually acquired or viewed as a result of the breach. In addition to HIPAA, many states have enacted their own security and privacy laws relating to individually identifiable information. In some states, these laws are more stringent than HIPAA, and we, our tenants and our managers must comply with applicable federal and state standards.

We require our tenants and managers to comply with all laws that regulate the operation of our senior living communities. Although we do not believe that the costs to comply with these laws will have a material adverse effect on us, those costs may adversely affect the profitability of our managed senior living communities and the ability of our tenants to pay their rent to us. If we or any of our tenants or managers were subject to an action alleging violations of such laws or to any adverse determination concerning any of our or our tenants’ or managers’ licenses or eligibility for Medicare or Medicaid reimbursement or any substantial penalties, repayments or sanctions, these actions could materially and adversely affect the ability of our tenants to pay rent to us, the profitability of our managed senior living communities and the values of our properties. If any of our tenants or managers becomes unable to operate our properties, or if any of our tenants becomes unable to pay its rent because it has violated government regulations or payment laws, we may experience difficulty in finding a substitute tenant or manager or selling the affected property at a price that provides us with a desirable return, and the value of the affected property may decline materially.

Federal, state and local agencies regulate our MOB tenants that provide healthcare services. Many states require medical clinics, ambulatory surgery centers, clinical laboratories and other outpatient healthcare facilities to be licensed and inspected for compliance with licensure regulations concerning professional staffing, services, patient rights and physical plant requirements, among other matters. Our tenants must comply with the ADA and similar state and local laws to the extent that such facilities are “public accommodations” as defined in those statutes. The obligation to comply with the ADA and similar laws is an ongoing obligation, and our tenants expend significant resources to comply with such laws.

Healthcare providers and suppliers, including physicians and other licensed medical practitioners, that receive federal or state reimbursement under Medicare, Medicaid or other federal or state programs must comply with the requirements for their participation in those programs. Our tenants that are healthcare providers or suppliers are subject to reimbursement rates that are increasingly subject to cost control pressures and may be reduced or may not be increased sufficiently to cover their increasing costs, including our rents.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or the FDA, and other federal, state and local authorities extensively regulate our biotechnology laboratory tenants that develop, manufacture, market or distribute new drugs, biologicals or medical devices for human use. The FDA and such other authorities regulate the clinical development, testing, manufacture, quality control, safety, effectiveness, labeling, storage, record keeping, advertising and promotion of those

products. Before a new pharmaceutical product or medical device may be marketed and distributed in the United States, the FDA must approve it as safe and effective for human use. Preclinical and clinical studies and documentation in connection with FDA approval of new pharmaceuticals or medical devices involve significant time, expense and risks of failure. Once a product is approved, the FDA maintains oversight of the product and its developer and can withdraw its approval, recall products or suspend their production, impose or seek to impose civil or criminal penalties on the developer or take other actions for the developer’s failure to comply with regulatory requirements, including anti-fraud, false claims, anti-kickback or physician referral laws. Other concerns affecting our biotechnology laboratory tenants include the potential for subsequent discovery of safety concerns and related litigation, ensuring that the product qualifies for reimbursement under Medicare, Medicaid or other federal or state programs, cost control initiatives of payment programs, the potential for litigation over the validity or infringement of intellectual property rights related to the product, the eventual expiration of relevant patents and the need to raise additional capital. The cost of compliance with these regulations and the risks described in this paragraph, among others, could adversely affect the ability of our biotechnology laboratory tenants to pay rent to us.

Competition.

Investing in senior living communities, MOBs and wellness centers is a highly competitive business. We compete against other REITs, numerous financial institutions, individuals and public and private companies who are actively engaged in this business. Also, we compete for tenants and residents and for investments based on a number of factors including rates, financings offered, underwriting criteria and reputation. Our ability to successfully compete is also impacted by economic and population trends, availability of acceptable investment opportunities, our ability to negotiate beneficial investment terms, availability and cost of capital and new and existing laws and regulations. Some of our competitors are dominant in selected geographic or property markets, including in markets we operate. Some of our competitors may have greater financial and other resources than we have. We believe the geographic diversity of our investments, the experience and abilities of our management, the quality of our assets and the financial strength of many of our tenants and managers may afford us some competitive advantages and allow us to operate our business successfully despite the competitive nature of our business.

The tenants and managers that operate our healthcare facilities compete on a local and regional basis with operators of facilities that provide comparable services. Operators compete for residents and patients based on quality of care, reputation, physical appearance of properties, services offered, family preferences, physicians, staff, price and location. We and our tenants and managers also face competition from other healthcare facilities for tenants, such as physicians and other healthcare providers that provide comparable facilities and services.

For additional information on competition and the risks associated with our business, please see “Risk Factors” of this Annual Report on Form 10‑K.

Environmental and Climate Change Matters.

Under various laws, owners as well as tenants and operators of real estate may be required to investigate and clean up or remove hazardous substances present at or migrating from properties they own, lease or operate and may be held liable for property damage or personal injuries that result from hazardous substances. These laws also expose us to the possibility that we may become liable to reimburse governments or third parties for damages and costs they incur in connection with hazardous substances. We reviewed environmental conditions surveys of the properties we own prior to their purchase. Based upon those surveys we do not believe that there are environmental conditions at any of our properties that have had or will have a material adverse effect on us. However, no assurances can be given that conditions are not present at our properties or that costs we may be required to incur in the future to remediate contamination will not have a material adverse effect on our business or financial condition and results of operations.

Insurance.

We generally have insurance coverage for many of our MOBs and for our managed senior living communities, and our leases of other properties generally provide that our tenants are responsible for the costs of insurance coverage for the properties we lease to them, such as for casualty, including fire and extended coverage, and liability. Except in the case

of certain of our MOBs and our managed senior living communities, we either purchase the insurance ourselves and our tenants reimburse us, or the tenants buy the insurance directly and are required to list us as an insured party. We participate with RMR LLC and other companies to which RMR LLC provides management services in a combined property insurance program through Affiliates Insurance Company, or AIC, and with respect to which AIC is a reinsurer of certain coverage amounts. For more information, see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Related Person Transactions” in Part II, Item 7 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Internet Website.

Our internet website address is www.snhreit.com. Copies of our governance guidelines, code of business conduct and ethics, or Code of Conduct, our policy outlining procedures for handling concerns or complaints about accounting, internal accounting controls or auditing matters and the charters of our audit, compensation and nominating and governance committees are posted on our website and may be obtained free of charge by writing to our Secretary, Senior Housing Properties Trust, Two Newton Place, 255 Washington Street, Suite 300, Newton, Massachusetts 02458‑1634 or at our website. We make available, free of charge, on our website, our Annual Reports on Form 10‑K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10‑Q, Current Reports on Form 8‑K and amendments to these reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act, as soon as reasonably practicable after these forms are filed with, or furnished to, the Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC. Any shareholder or other interested party who desires to communicate with our non‑management Trustees, individually or as a group, may do so by filling out a report on our website. Our Board of Trustees also provides a process for security holders to send communications to the entire Board of Trustees. Information about the process for sending communications to our Board of Trustees can be found on our website. Our website address is included several times in this Annual Report on Form 10‑K as a textual reference only and the information in our website is not incorporated by reference into this Annual Report on Form 10‑K.

Segment Reporting.

As of December 31, 2015, we have four operating segments, of which three are separate reporting segments. The first reporting segment includes triple net senior living communities that provide short term and long term residential care and other services for residents. Properties in this segment include leased independent living communities, assisted living communities and SNFs. We earn rental income revenues from the tenants that lease and operate our leased communities. The second reporting segment includes managed senior living communities that provide short term and long term residential care and other services for residents. Properties in this segment include independent living communities and assisted living communities. We earn fees and services revenues from the residents of our managed senior living communities. The third reporting segment includes MOBs. Our fourth segment includes the remainder of our operations, including certain properties that offer fitness, wellness and spa services to members, which we do not consider to be sufficiently material as to constitute a separate reporting segment, and all of our other operations. For further information, see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” in Part II, Item 7 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K and our Consolidated Financial Statements included in Part IV, Item 15 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

UNITED STATES FEDERAL INCOME TAX CONSIDERATIONS

The following summary of United States federal income tax considerations is based on existing law, and is limited to investors who own our shares as investment assets rather than as inventory or as property used in a trade or business. The summary does not discuss all of the particular tax consequences that might be relevant to you if you are subject to special rules under federal income tax law, for example if you are:

a bank, insurance company or other financial institution;

a regulated investment company or REIT;

a subchapter S corporation;

a broker, dealer or trader in securities or foreign currency;

a person who marks-to-market our shares;

a person who has a functional currency other than the United States dollar;

a person who acquires or owns our shares in connection with employment or other performance of services;

a person subject to alternative minimum tax;

a person who acquires or owns our shares as part of a straddle, hedging transaction, constructive sale transaction, constructive ownership transaction or conversion transaction;

a United States expatriate;

a “qualified shareholder” (as defined in Section 897(k)(3)(A) of the United States Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the IRC);

a “qualified foreign pension fund” (as defined in Section 897(l)(2) of the IRC) or any entity wholly owned by a qualified foreign pension fund; or

except as specifically described in the following summary, a trust, estate, tax-exempt entity or foreign person.

The sections of the IRC that govern the federal income tax qualification and treatment of a REIT and its shareholders are complex. This presentation is a summary of applicable IRC provisions, related rules and regulations, and administrative and judicial interpretations, all of which are subject to change, possibly with retroactive effect. Future legislative, judicial or administrative actions or decisions could also affect the accuracy of statements made in this summary. We have not received a ruling from the United States Internal Revenue Service, or the IRS, with respect to any matter described in this summary, and we cannot assure you that the IRS or a court will agree with all of the statements made in this summary. The IRS could, for example, take a different position from that described in this summary with respect to our acquisitions, operations, restructurings or other matters, which, if a court agreed, could result in significant tax liabilities for applicable parties. In addition, this summary is not exhaustive of all possible tax consequences, and does not discuss any estate, gift, state, local or foreign tax consequences. For all these reasons, we urge you and any prospective acquiror of our shares to consult with a tax advisor about the federal income tax and other tax consequences of the acquisition, ownership and disposition of our shares. Our intentions and beliefs described in this summary are based upon our understanding of applicable laws and regulations that are in effect as of the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. If new laws or regulations are enacted which impact us directly or indirectly, we may change our intentions or beliefs.

Your federal income tax consequences generally will differ depending on whether or not you are a “U.S. shareholder.” For purposes of this summary, a “U.S. shareholder” is a beneficial owner of our shares that is:

a citizen or resident of the United States, including an alien individual who is a lawful permanent resident of the United States or meets the substantial presence residency test under the federal income tax laws;

an entity treated as a corporation for federal income tax purposes that is created or organized in or under the laws of the United States, any state thereof or the District of Columbia;

an estate the income of which is subject to federal income taxation regardless of its source; or

a trust if a court within the United States is able to exercise primary supervision over the administration of the trust and one or more United States persons have the authority to control all substantial decisions of the trust, or, to the extent provided in Treasury regulations, a trust in existence on August 20, 1996 that has elected to be treated as a domestic trust;

whose status as a U.S. shareholder is not overridden by an applicable tax treaty. Conversely, a “non-U.S. shareholder” is a beneficial owner of our shares other than a partnership or a U.S. shareholder.

If any entity treated as a partnership for federal income tax purposes is a beneficial owner of our shares, the tax treatment of a partner in the partnership generally will depend upon the status of the partner and the activities of the partnership. Any entity or other arrangement treated as a partnership for federal income tax purposes that is a beneficial owner of our shares and the partners in such a partnership (as determined for federal income tax purposes) are urged to consult their own tax advisors about the federal income tax consequences of the acquisition, ownership and disposition of our shares.

Taxation as a REIT

We have elected to be taxed as a REIT under Sections 856 through 860 of the IRC, commencing with our taxable year ended December 31, 1999. Our REIT election, assuming continuing compliance with the then applicable qualification tests, has continued and will continue in effect for subsequent taxable years. Although no assurance can be given, we believe that we have been organized and have operated, and will continue to be organized and to operate, in a manner that qualified and will continue to qualify us to be taxed under the IRC as a REIT.

As a REIT, we generally are not subject to federal income tax on our net income distributed as dividends to our shareholders. Distributions to our shareholders generally are included in their income as dividends to the extent of our available current or accumulated earnings and profits. Our dividends are not generally entitled to the preferential tax rates on qualified dividend income, but a portion of our dividends may be treated as capital gain dividends or as qualified dividend income, all as explained below. No portion of any of our dividends is eligible for the dividends received deduction for corporate shareholders. Distributions in excess of current or accumulated earnings and profits generally are treated for federal income tax purposes as returns of capital to the extent of a recipient shareholder’s basis in our shares, and will reduce this basis. Our current or accumulated earnings and profits are generally allocated first to distributions made on our preferred shares, of which there are none outstanding at this time, and thereafter to distributions made on our common shares. For all these purposes, our distributions include cash distributions, any in kind distributions of property that we might make, and deemed or constructive distributions resulting from capital market activities, as described below.

Our counsel, Sullivan & Worcester LLP, has provided to us an opinion that we have been organized and have qualified for taxation as a REIT under the IRC for our 1999 through 2015 taxable years, and that our current and anticipated investments and plan of operation will enable us to continue to meet the requirements for qualification and taxation as a REIT under the IRC. Our counsel’s opinions are conditioned upon the assumption that our leases, our declaration of trust and all other legal documents to which we are or have been a party have been and will be complied with by all parties to those documents, upon the accuracy and completeness of the factual matters described in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and upon representations made by us as to certain factual matters relating to our organization and operations and our expected manner of operation. If this assumption or a representation is inaccurate or incomplete, our counsel’s opinions may be adversely affected and may not be relied upon. The opinions of our counsel are based upon the law as it exists today, but the law may change in the future, possibly with retroactive effect. Given the highly complex nature of the rules governing REITs, the ongoing importance of factual determinations, and the possibility of future changes in our circumstances, no assurance can be given by Sullivan & Worcester LLP or us that we will qualify as or be taxed as a REIT for any particular year. Any opinion of Sullivan & Worcester LLP as to our qualification or taxation as a REIT will be expressed as of the date issued. Our counsel will have no obligation to advise us or our shareholders of any subsequent change in the matters stated, represented or assumed, or of any subsequent change in the applicable law. Also, the opinions of our counsel are not binding on either the IRS or a court, and either could take a position different from that expressed by our counsel.

Our continued qualification and taxation as a REIT will depend upon our compliance on a continuing basis with various qualification tests imposed under the IRC and summarized below. While we believe that we have satisfied and will satisfy these tests, our counsel does not review compliance with these tests on a continuing basis. If we fail to qualify for taxation as a REIT in any year, we will be subject to federal income taxation as if we were a corporation taxed under subchapter C of the IRC, or a C corporation, and our shareholders will be taxed like shareholders of C corporations, meaning that federal income tax generally will be applied at both the corporate and shareholder levels. In this event, we could be subject to significant tax liabilities, and the amount of cash available for distribution to our shareholders could be reduced or

eliminated.

If we qualify for taxation as a REIT and meet the tests described below, we generally will not pay federal income tax on amounts we distribute to our shareholders. However, even if we qualify for taxation as a REIT, we may be subject to federal tax in the following circumstances:

We will be taxed at regular corporate rates on any undistributed “real estate investment trust taxable income,” determined by including our undistributed net capital gains, if any.

If our alternative minimum taxable income exceeds our taxable income, we may be subject to the corporate alternative minimum tax on our items of tax preference.

If we have net income from the disposition of “foreclosure property” that is held primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of business or from other nonqualifying income from foreclosure property, we will be subject to tax on this income at the highest regular corporate rate, currently 35%.

If we have net income from prohibited transactions — that is, dispositions of inventory or property held primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of business other than dispositions of foreclosure property and other than dispositions excepted under a statutory safe harbor — we will be subject to tax on this income at a 100% rate.

If we fail to satisfy the 75% gross income test or the 95% gross income test discussed below, due to reasonable cause and not due to willful neglect, but nonetheless maintain our qualification for taxation as a REIT because of specified cure provisions, we will be subject to tax at a 100% rate on the greater of the amount by which we fail the 75% gross income test or the 95% gross income test, with adjustments, multiplied by a fraction intended to reflect our profitability for the taxable year.

If we fail to satisfy the REIT asset tests described below, due to reasonable cause and not due to willful neglect, but nonetheless maintain our qualification for taxation as a REIT because of specified cure provisions, we will be subject to a tax equal to the greater of $50,000 or the highest corporate tax rate multiplied by the net income generated by the nonqualifying assets that caused us to fail the test.

If we fail to satisfy any provision of the IRC that would result in our failure to qualify for taxation as a REIT (other than violations of the REIT gross income tests or violations of the REIT asset tests described below), due to reasonable cause and not due to willful neglect, we may retain our qualification for taxation as a REIT but will be subject to a penalty of $50,000 for each failure.

If we fail to distribute for any calendar year at least the sum of 85% of our REIT ordinary income for that year, 95% of our REIT capital gain net income for that year and any undistributed taxable income from prior periods, we will be subject to a 4% nondeductible excise tax on the excess of the required distribution over the amounts actually distributed.

If we recognize gain on the disposition of a REIT asset where our basis in the asset is determined by reference to the basis of the asset in the hands of a C corporation during a five-year period beginning on the date on which the asset ceased to be owned by the C corporation, then we will pay tax at the highest regular corporate tax rate, currently 35%, on the lesser of the excess of the fair market value of the asset over the C corporation’s basis in the asset on the date the asset ceased to be owned by the C corporation, or the gain we recognize in the disposition.

If we acquire a corporation in a transaction where we succeed to its tax attributes, to preserve our qualification for taxation as a REIT we must generally distribute all of the C corporation earnings and profits inherited in that acquisition, if any, not later than the end of our taxable year in which the acquisition occurs. However,

if we fail to do so, relief provisions would allow us to maintain our qualification for taxation as a REIT provided we distribute any subsequently discovered C corporation earnings and profits and pay an interest charge in respect of the period of delayed distribution. As discussed below, we have acquired C corporations in connection with our acquisition of real estate. Our investigations of these C corporations indicated that they did not have undistributed earnings and profits that we inherited but failed to timely distribute. However, upon review or audit, the IRS may disagree.

As summarized below, REITs are permitted within limits to own stock and other securities of a TRS. A domestic TRS is separately taxed on its net income as a C corporation, and is subject to limitations on the deductibility of interest expense paid to its REIT parent. While a foreign TRS is taxed in the United States only to the extent it has income that is effectively connected with the conduct of a trade or business in the United States or that is investment income from United States sources, a foreign TRS is generally subject to foreign taxes in the jurisdictions in which its assets or operations are located. In addition, the REIT parent is subject to a 100% tax on the amount by which various charges and reimbursements between the parent REIT and its TRSs are determined to be priced excessively in favor of the REIT rather than on arm’s length bases.

To the extent we invest in properties in foreign jurisdictions, our income from those properties will generally be subject to tax in those jurisdictions. If we continue to operate as we do, then we will distribute all of our “real estate investment trust taxable income” to our shareholders such that we will generally not pay United States federal income tax. As a result, we cannot recover the cost of foreign income taxes imposed on our foreign investments by claiming foreign tax credits against our United States federal income tax liability. Also, as a REIT, we cannot pass through any foreign tax credits to our shareholders.

If we fail to qualify for taxation as a REIT or elect not to qualify for taxation as a REIT, then we will be subject to federal income tax in the same manner as a regular C corporation. Further, as a regular C corporation, distributions to our shareholders will not be deductible by us, nor will distributions be required under the IRC. Also, to the extent of our current and accumulated earnings and profits, all distributions to our shareholders will generally be taxable as ordinary dividends potentially eligible for the preferential tax rates discussed below in “Taxation of Taxable U.S. Shareholders” and, subject to limitations in the IRC, will be potentially eligible for the dividends received deduction for corporate shareholders. Finally, we will generally be disqualified from qualification for taxation as a REIT for the four taxable years following the taxable year in which the termination is effective. Our failure to qualify for taxation as a REIT for even one year could result in us reducing or eliminating distributions to our shareholders, or in us incurring substantial indebtedness or liquidating substantial investments in order to pay the resulting corporate-level taxes. Relief provisions under the IRC may allow us to continue to qualify for taxation as a REIT even if we fail to comply with various requirements, all as discussed in more detail below.

REIT Qualification Requirements

General Requirements. Section 856(a) of the IRC defines a REIT as a corporation, trust or association:

(1)that is managed by one or more trustees or directors;

(2)the beneficial ownership of which is evidenced by transferable shares or by transferable certificates of beneficial interest;

(3)that would be taxable, but for Sections 856 through 859 of the IRC, as a domestic C corporation;

(4)that is not a financial institution or an insurance company subject to special provisions of the IRC;

(5)the beneficial ownership of which is held by 100 or more persons;

(6)that is not “closely held” as defined under the personal holding company stock ownership test, as described below; and

(7)that meets other tests regarding the nature of its income and assets and the amount of its distributions, all as described below.

Section 856(b) of the IRC provides that conditions (1) through (4) must be met during the entire taxable year and that condition (5) must 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. Section 856(h)(2) of the IRC provides that neither condition (5) nor (6) need to have been met during our first taxable year as a REIT. We believe that we have met conditions (1) through (7) during each of the requisite periods ending on or before the close of our most recently completed taxable year, and that we will continue to meet these conditions in future taxable years. There can, however, be no assurance in this regard.

By reason of condition (6), we will fail to qualify for taxation as a REIT for a taxable year if at any time during the last half of a year (except for our first taxable year as a REIT) more than 50% in value of our outstanding shares is owned directly or indirectly by five or fewer individuals. To help comply with condition (6), our declaration of trust restricts transfers of our shares that would otherwise result in concentrated ownership positions. In addition, if we comply with applicable Treasury regulations to ascertain the ownership of our outstanding shares and do not know, or by exercising reasonable diligence would not have known, that we failed condition (6), then we will be treated as having met condition (6). However, our failure to comply with these regulations for ascertaining ownership may result in a penalty of $25,000, or $50,000 for intentional violations. Accordingly, we have complied and will continue to comply with these regulations, including requesting annually from record holders of significant percentages of our shares information regarding the ownership of our shares. Under our declaration of trust, our shareholders are required to respond to these requests for information. A shareholder who fails or refuses to comply with the request is required by Treasury regulations to submit a statement with its federal income tax return disclosing its actual ownership of our shares and other information.

For purposes of condition (6), the term “individuals” is defined in the IRC to include natural persons, supplemental unemployment compensation benefit plans, private foundations and portions of a trust permanently set aside or used exclusively for charitable purposes, but not other entities or qualified pension plans or profit-sharing trusts. As a result, REIT shares owned by an entity that is not an “individual” are considered to be owned by the direct and indirect owners of the entity that are individuals (as so defined), rather than to be owned by the entity itself. Similarly, REIT shares held by a qualified pension plan or profit-sharing trust are treated as held directly by the individual beneficiaries in proportion to their actuarial interests in such plan or trust. Consequently, five or fewer such trusts could own more than 50% of the interests in an entity without jeopardizing that entity’s qualification for taxation as a REIT. However, as discussed below in “Taxation of Tax-Exempt U.S. Shareholders,” if a REIT is a “pension-held REIT,” each qualified pension plan or profit-sharing pension trust owning more than 10% of the REIT’s shares by value generally may be taxed on a portion of the dividends it receives from the REIT.

The IRC provides that we will not automatically fail to qualify as a REIT if we do not meet conditions (1) through (6), provided we can establish that such failure was due to reasonable cause and not due to willful neglect. Each such excused failure will result in the imposition of a $50,000 penalty instead of REIT disqualification. It is impossible to state whether in all circumstances we would be entitled to the benefit of this relief provision. This relief provision applies to any failure of the applicable conditions, even if the failure first occurred in a prior taxable year.

Our Wholly Owned Subsidiaries and Our Investments Through Partnerships. Except in respect of TRSs as discussed below, Section 856(i) of the IRC provides that any corporation, 100% of whose stock is held by a REIT and its disregarded subsidiaries, is a qualified REIT subsidiary and shall not be treated as a separate corporation. The assets, liabilities and items of income, deduction and credit of a qualified REIT subsidiary are treated as the REIT’s. We believe that each of our direct and indirect wholly owned subsidiaries, other than the TRSs discussed below (and entities owned in whole or in part by the TRSs), will be either a qualified REIT subsidiary within the meaning of Section 856(i) of the IRC, or a noncorporate entity that for federal income tax purposes is not treated as separate from its owner under Treasury regulations issued under Section 7701 of the IRC. Thus, except for the TRSs discussed below (and entities owned in whole or in part by the TRSs), in applying all of the federal income tax REIT qualification requirements described in this summary, all assets, liabilities and items of income, deduction and credit of our direct and indirect wholly owned subsidiaries are treated as ours.

We may invest in real estate through one or more entities that are treated as partnerships for federal income tax purposes. In the case of a REIT that is a partner in a partnership, Treasury regulations under the IRC provide that, for purposes

of the REIT qualification requirements regarding income and assets discussed below, the REIT is deemed to own its proportionate share of the assets of the partnership corresponding to the REIT’s proportionate capital interest in the partnership and is deemed to be entitled to the income of the partnership attributable to this proportionate share. In addition, for these purposes, the character of the assets and items of gross income of the partnership generally remains the same in the hands of the REIT. Accordingly, our proportionate share of the assets, liabilities, and items of income of each partnership in which we become a partner is treated as ours for purposes of the income tests and asset tests discussed below. In contrast, for purposes of the distribution requirement discussed below, we would take into account as a partner our share of the partnership’s income as determined under the general federal income tax rules governing partners and partnerships under Sections 701 through 777 of the IRC.

Subsidiary REITs. We may in the future invest in real estate through one or more subsidiary entities that are intended to qualify for taxation as REITs. Any subsidiary REIT will generally be subject to the various REIT qualification requirements and other limitations described in this summary that are applicable to us. If one of our subsidiary REITs were to fail to qualify for taxation as a REIT, then (a) the subsidiary REIT would become subject to regular United States corporate income tax, as described above, and (b) our ownership of shares in the subsidiary REIT would cease to be a qualifying real estate asset for purposes of the 75% asset test and would become subject to the 5% asset test, the 10% vote test and the 10% value test generally applicable to our ownership in corporations other than REITs, qualified REIT subsidiaries and TRSs, all as described under “Asset Tests” below. If a subsidiary REIT were to fail to qualify for taxation as a REIT, it is possible that we would not meet the 5% asset test, the 10% vote test or the 10% value test with respect to our interest in the subsidiary REIT, in which event we would fail to qualify for taxation as a REIT unless we could utilize applicable relief provisions. We may make protective TRS elections as described below with respect to our subsidiary REITs and may implement other protective arrangements intended to avoid a cascading REIT failure if any of our subsidiary REITs were not to qualify for taxation as a REIT, but there can be no assurance that such protective elections and other arrangements will be effective to avoid the resulting adverse consequences to us.

Taxable REIT Subsidiaries. We are permitted to own any or all of the securities of a “taxable REIT subsidiary” as defined in Section 856(l) of the IRC, provided that no more than 25% (20% beginning with our 2018 taxable year) of the total value of our assets, at the close of each quarter, is comprised of our investments in the stock or other securities of our TRSs. Our ownership of stock and other securities in TRSs is exempt from the 10% and 5% REIT asset tests discussed below. Among other requirements, a TRS of ours must:

(1) be a corporation (other than a REIT) for federal income tax purposes in which we directly or indirectly own shares;

(2) join with us in making a TRS election;

(3) not directly or indirectly operate or manage a lodging facility or a health care facility; and

(4) not directly or indirectly provide to any person, under a franchise, license or otherwise, rights to any brand name under which any lodging facility or health care facility is operated, except that in limited circumstances a subfranchise, sublicense or similar right can be granted to an independent contractor to operate or manage a lodging facility or a health care facility.

In addition, any corporation (other than a REIT) in which a TRS directly or indirectly owns more than 35% of the voting power or value of the outstanding securities of such corporation will automatically be treated as a TRS. Subject to the discussion below, we believe that we and each of our TRSs have complied with, and will continue to comply with, on a continuous basis, the requirements for TRS status at all times during which the subsidiary’s TRS election is reported as being in effect, and we believe that the same will be true for any TRS that we later form or acquire.

We acquired in the second quarter of 2015, and continue to own, an ownership position in RMR Inc. that is in excess of 10% of RMR Inc.’s outstanding securities by vote or value. Accordingly, we elected to treat RMR Inc. as a TRS effective as of June 5, 2015. RMR Inc., through its principal subsidiary, RMR LLC, has provided and continues to provide business and property management and other services to us and to other public and private companies, including other public REITs. Among these clients were and are operators of lodging facilities, operators of health care facilities, and

owners of such facilities. Our counsel, Sullivan & Worcester LLP, has provided to us an opinion that the activities proscribed to TRSs under Section 856(l)(3) of the IRC relating to operating or managing lodging facilities or health care facilities should include only regular onsite services or day-to-day operational activities at or for lodging facilities or health care facilities. To the best of our knowledge, neither RMR Inc. nor RMR LLC has been or is involved in proscribed activities at or for lodging facilities or health care facilities. Thus, we do not believe that Section 856(l)(3) of the IRC precluded or precludes RMR Inc. from being treated as our TRS. In addition, because we acquired a significant portion of our investment in RMR Inc. in exchange for our common shares that were newly issued, our counsel, Sullivan & Worcester LLP, is of the opinion that our investment in RMR Inc. should qualify as a “temporary investment of new capital” under Section 856(c)(5)(B) of the IRC to the extent related to such issuance of our common shares. To the extent our investment in RMR Inc. so qualifies, it will constitute a “real estate asset” under Section 856(c) of the IRC and would not constitute a security subject to the REIT asset test limitations discussed below for a one-year period commencing June 5, 2015. If the IRS or a court determines, contrary to the opinion of our counsel, that RMR Inc. was or is precluded from being treated as our TRS, then our ownership position in RMR Inc. in excess of 10% of RMR Inc.’s outstanding securities by vote or value, except to the extent and for the period qualifying as a “temporary investment of new capital,” would be in violation of the applicable REIT asset tests described below. Under those circumstances, however, we expect that we would qualify for the REIT asset tests’ relief provision described below, and thereby would preserve our qualification for taxation as a REIT. If the relief provision below were to apply to us, we would be subject to tax at the highest corporate rate, currently 35%, on the net income generated by our investment in RMR Inc. in excess of a 10% ownership position in that company.

In addition, we have elected to treat as a TRS a particular corporate subsidiary of Five Star with whom we do not have a rental relationship. This intended TRS manages and operates independent living facilities for us, and in the future may operate additional independent living facilities for us. In that role, the intended TRS provides amenities and services to our tenants, the independent living residents; for the duration of our ownership of these independent living facilities, there have not been, and are not expected to be, assisted living or skilled nursing residents at these facilities, and neither we nor the intended TRS have provided or expect to provide health care services at these facilities or elsewhere. Although the law is unclear on this point, and in fact a close read of the statute and legislative history might suggest otherwise, IRS private letter rulings conclude and imply that the management and operation of independent living facilities do not constitute operating or managing a health care facility such that TRS status is precluded, provided that there are no assisted living or skilled nursing residents in the facilities and provided further that neither the REIT nor the intended TRS provide health care services. Although IRS private letter rulings do not generally constitute binding precedent, they do represent the reasoned, considered judgment of the IRS and thus provide insight into how the IRS applies and interprets the federal income tax laws. Based on these IRS private letter rulings, our counsel, Sullivan & Worcester LLP, has opined that it is more likely than not that our intended TRS that manages and operates pure independent living facilities will qualify as a TRS, provided that there are no assisted living or skilled nursing residents in the subject facilities and provided further that neither we nor the intended TRS provide health care services.

As discussed below, TRSs can perform services for our tenants without disqualifying the rents we receive from those tenants under the 75% gross income test or the 95% gross income test discussed below. Moreover, because our TRSs are taxed as C corporations that are separate from us, their assets, liabilities and items of income, deduction and credit generally are not imputed to us for purposes of the REIT qualification requirements described in this summary. Therefore, our TRSs may generally undertake third-party management and development activities and activities not related to real estate. Finally, while a REIT is generally limited in its ability to earn qualifying rental income from a TRS, a REIT can earn qualifying rental income from the lease of a qualified health care property to a TRS if an eligible independent contractor operates the facility, as discussed more fully below.

Restrictions are imposed on TRSs to ensure that they will be subject to an appropriate level of federal income taxation. For example, a TRS may not deduct interest paid in any year to an affiliated REIT to the extent that the interest payments exceed, generally, 50% of the TRS’s adjusted taxable income for that year. However, the TRS may carry forward the disallowed interest expense to a succeeding year, and deduct the interest in that later year subject to that year’s 50% adjusted taxable income limitation. In addition, if a TRS pays interest, rent or other amounts to its affiliated REIT in an amount that exceeds what an unrelated third party would have paid in an arm’s length transaction, then the REIT generally will be subject to an excise tax equal to 100% of the excessive portion of the payment. Further, if in comparison to an arm’s length transaction, a third-party tenant has overpaid rent to the REIT in exchange for underpaying the TRS for services rendered, and if the REIT has not adequately compensated the TRS for services provided to or on behalf of the third-party

tenant, then the REIT may be subject to an excise tax equal to 100% of the undercompensation to the TRS. A safe harbor exception to this excise tax applies if the TRS has been compensated at a rate at least equal to 150% of its direct cost in furnishing or rendering the service. Finally, beginning in 2016, the 100% excise tax also applies to the underpricing of services by a TRS to its parent REIT in contexts where the services are unrelated to services for REIT tenants. There can be no assurance that arrangements involving our TRSs will not result in the imposition of one or more of these deduction limitations or excise taxes, but we do not believe that we or our TRSs are or will be subject to these impositions.

Income Tests. There are two gross income requirements for qualification as a REIT under the IRC:

At least 75% of our gross income for each taxable year (excluding: (a) gross income from sales or other dispositions of property held primarily for sale; (b) any income arising from “clearly identified” hedging transactions that we enter into to manage interest rate or price changes or currency fluctuations with respect to borrowings we incur to acquire or carry real estate assets; (c) any income arising from “clearly identified” hedging transactions that we enter into primarily to manage risk of currency fluctuations relating to any item that qualifies under the 75% gross income test or the 95% gross income test (or any property that generates such income or gain); (d) beginning with our 2016 taxable year, any income from “clearly identified” hedging transactions that we enter into to manage risk associated with extant hedges of liabilities or property that have been extinguished or disposed; (e) real estate foreign exchange gain (as defined in Section 856(n)(2) of the IRC); and (f) income from the repurchase or discharge of indebtedness) must be derived from investments relating to real property, including “rents from real property” as defined under Section 856 of the IRC, interest and gain from mortgages on real property or on interests in real property, income and gain from foreclosure property, gain from the sale or other disposition of real property other than dealer property, or dividends on and gain from the sale or disposition of shares in other REITs. When we receive new capital in exchange for our shares or in a public offering of our five-year or longer debt instruments, income attributable to the temporary investment of this new capital in stock or a debt instrument, if received or accrued within one year of our receipt of the new capital, is generally also qualifying income under the 75% gross income test.

At least 95% of our gross income for each taxable year (excluding: (a) gross income from sales or other dispositions of property held primarily for sale; (b) any income arising from “clearly identified” hedging transactions that we enter into to manage interest rate or price changes or currency fluctuations with respect to borrowings we incur to acquire or carry real estate assets; (c) any income arising from “clearly identified” hedging transactions that we enter into primarily to manage risk of currency fluctuations relating to any item that qualifies under the 75% gross income test or the 95% gross income test (or any property that generates such income or gain); (d) beginning with our 2016 taxable year, any income from “clearly identified” hedging transactions that we enter into to manage risk associated with extant hedges of liabilities or property that have been extinguished or disposed; (e) passive foreign exchange gain (as defined in Section 856(n)(3) of the IRC); and (f) income from the repurchase or discharge of indebtedness) must be derived from a combination of items of real property income that satisfy the 75% gross income test described above, dividends, interest, or gains from the sale or disposition of stock, securities or real property.

For purposes of the 75% and 95% gross income tests outlined above, income derived from a “shared appreciation provision” in a mortgage loan is generally treated as gain recognized on the sale of the property to which it relates. Although we will use our best efforts to ensure that the income generated by our investments will be of a type that satisfies both the 75% and 95% gross income tests, there can be no assurance in this regard.

In order to qualify as “rents from real property” under Section 856 of the IRC, several requirements must be met:

The amount of rent received generally must not be based on the income or profits of any person, but may be based on a fixed percentage or percentages of receipts or sales.

Rents do not qualify if the REIT owns 10% or more by vote or value of the tenant (or 10% or more of the interests in the assets or net profits of the tenant, if the tenant is not a corporation), whether directly or after application of attribution rules. While we intend not to lease property to any party if rents from that property

would not qualify as “rents from real property,” application of the 10% ownership rule is dependent upon complex attribution rules and circumstances that may be beyond our control. For example, a third party’s ownership directly or by attribution of 10% or more by value of our shares, as well as an ownership position in the stock of one of our tenants which, when added to our own ownership position in that tenant, totals 10% or more by vote or value of the stock of that tenant (or 10% or more of the interests in the assets or net profits of the tenant, if the tenant is not a corporation), would result in that tenant’s rents not qualifying as “rents from real property.” In this regard, we already own close to, but less than, 10% of the outstanding common shares of Five Star, and Five Star has undertaken to limit its redemptions of outstanding common shares so that we do not come to own 10% or more of its outstanding common shares. Our declaration of trust generally disallows transfers or purported acquisitions, directly or by attribution, of our shares to the extent necessary to maintain our qualification for taxation as a REIT under the IRC. Nevertheless, there can be no assurance that these restrictions will be effective to prevent our qualification for taxation as a REIT from being jeopardized under the 10% affiliated tenant rule. Furthermore, there can be no assurance that we will be able to monitor and enforce these restrictions, nor will our shareholders necessarily be aware of ownership of our shares attributed to them under the IRC’s attribution rules.

There is a limited exception to the above prohibition on earning “rents from real property” from a 10% affiliated tenant where the tenant is a TRS. If at least 90% of the leased space of a property is leased to tenants other than TRSs and 10% affiliated tenants, and if the TRS’s rent to us for space at that property is substantially comparable to the rents paid by nonaffiliated tenants for comparable space at the property, then otherwise qualifying rents paid by the TRS to the REIT will not be disqualified on account of the rule prohibiting 10% affiliated tenants.

There is an additional exception to the above prohibition on earning “rents from real property” from a 10% affiliated tenant. For this additional exception to apply, a real property interest in a “qualified health care property” must be leased by the REIT to its TRS, and the facility must be operated on behalf of the TRS by a person who is an “eligible independent contractor,” all as described in Sections 856(d)(8)-(9) and 856(e)(6)(D) of the IRC. As described below, we believe our leases with our TRSs have satisfied and will continue to satisfy these requirements.

In order for rents to qualify, we generally must not manage the property or furnish or render services to the tenants of the property, except through an independent contractor from whom we derive no income or through one of our TRSs. There is an exception to this rule permitting a REIT to perform customary tenant services of the sort that a tax-exempt organization could perform without being considered in receipt of “unrelated business taxable income,” or UBTI, under Section 512(b)(3) of the IRC. In addition, a de minimis amount of noncustomary services provided to tenants will not disqualify income as “rents from real property” so long as the value of the impermissible tenant services does not exceed 1% of the gross income from the property.

If rent attributable to personal property leased in connection with a lease of real property is 15% or less of the total rent received under the lease, then the rent attributable to personal property qualifies as “rents from real property”; if this 15% threshold is exceeded, the rent attributable to personal property does not so qualify. The portion of rental income treated as attributable to personal property is determined according to the ratio of the fair market value of the personal property to the total fair market value of the real and personal property that is rented.

In addition, “rents from real property” includes both charges we receive for services customarily rendered in connection with the rental of comparable real property in the same geographical area, whether or not the charges are separately stated, as well as charges we receive for services provided by our TRSs when the charges are not separately stated. Whether separately stated charges received by a REIT for services that are not geographically customary and provided by a TRS are included in “rents from real property” has not been addressed clearly by the IRS in published authorities; however, our counsel, Sullivan & Worcester LLP, is of the opinion that, although the matter is not free from doubt, “rents from real property” also includes charges we receive for services provided by our TRSs when the charges are separately stated. Accordingly, we believe that our revenues from TRS-provided services, whether the charges are separately stated or not,

qualify as “rents from real property” because the services satisfy the geographically customary standard, because the services have been provided by a TRS, or for both reasons.

We believe that all or substantially all of our rents and related service charges have qualified and will continue to qualify as “rents from real property” for purposes of Section 856 of the IRC, subject to the considerations in the following paragraph.

As discussed above, we currently own independent living facilities that we purchased to be managed and operated by a TRS; the TRS provides amenities and services, but not health care services, to the facilities’ residents, who are our tenants. We may from time to time in the future acquire additional properties to be managed and operated in this manner. Our counsel, Sullivan & Worcester LLP, has opined that it is more likely than not that our intended TRS that manages and operates independent living facilities will qualify as a TRS, provided that there are no assisted living or skilled nursing residents in the subject facilities and provided further that neither we nor the intended TRS provide health care services. Accordingly, we expect that the rents we receive from these facilities’ independent living residents will qualify as “rents from real property” because services and amenities to them are provided through a TRS. If the IRS should assert, contrary to its current private letter ruling practice, that our intended TRS does not in fact so qualify, and if a court should agree, then the rental income we receive from the independent living facility residents who are our tenants would be nonqualifying income for purposes of the 75% and 95% gross income tests, possibly jeopardizing our compliance with the 95% gross income test. Under those circumstances, however, we expect that we would qualify for the gross income tests’ relief provision described below, and thereby would preserve our qualification for taxation as a REIT. If the relief provision below were to apply to us, we would be subject to tax at a 100% rate on the amount by which we failed the 95% gross income test, with adjustments, multiplied by a fraction intended to reflect our profitability for the taxable year; however, in a typical taxable year, we have little or no nonqualifying income from other sources and thus would expect to owe little tax in such circumstances.

In order to qualify as mortgage interest on real property for purposes of the 75% gross income test, interest must derive from a mortgage loan secured by real property or on interests in real property with a fair market value at the time the loan is made (reduced by any senior liens on the property) at least equal to the amount of the loan. If the amount of the loan exceeds the fair market value of the real property (as so reduced by senior liens), the interest will be treated as interest on a mortgage loan in a ratio equal to the ratio of the fair market value of the real property (as so reduced by senior liens) to the total amount of the mortgage loan.

Absent the “foreclosure property” rules of Section 856(e) of the IRC, a REIT’s receipt of active, nonrental gross income from a property would not qualify under the 75% and 95% gross income tests. But as foreclosure property, the active, nonrental gross income from a property would so qualify. In the case of property leased by a REIT to a tenant, foreclosure property generally consists of the real property and incidental personal property that the REIT has reduced to possession upon a default or imminent default under the lease by the tenant, and as to which a timely foreclosure property election is made. Any gain that a REIT recognizes on the sale of foreclosure property held as inventory or primarily for sale to customers, plus any income it receives from foreclosure property that would not qualify under the 75% gross income test in the absence of foreclosure property treatment, reduced by expenses directly connected with the production of those items of income, would be subject to income tax at the maximum corporate rate, currently 35%, under the foreclosure property income tax rules of Section 857(b)(4) of the IRC. Thus, if a REIT should lease foreclosure property in exchange for rent that qualifies as “rents from real property” as described above, then that rental income is not subject to the foreclosure property income tax.

Other than sales of foreclosure property, any gain we realize on the sale of property held as inventory or other property held primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of a trade or business will be treated as income from a prohibited transaction that is subject to a penalty tax at a 100% rate. This prohibited transaction income also may adversely affect our ability to satisfy the 75% and 95% gross income tests for federal income tax qualification as a REIT. Whether property is held as inventory or primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of a trade or business is a question of fact that depends on all the facts and circumstances surrounding the particular transaction. There can be no assurance as to whether or not the IRS might successfully assert that one or more of our dispositions is subject to the 100% penalty tax. Sections 857(b)(6)(C) and (E) of the IRC provide a safe harbor pursuant to which limited sales of real property held for at least two years and meeting specified additional requirements will not be treated as prohibited transactions. However, compliance with the safe harbor is not always achievable in practice.

We believe that any gain from dispositions of assets that we have made, or that we might make in the future, will generally qualify as income that satisfies the 75% and 95% gross income tests and will not be subject to the 100% penalty tax, because our general intent has been and is to:

own our assets for investment with a view to long-term income production and capital appreciation;

engage in the business of developing, owning, leasing and managing our existing properties and acquiring, developing, owning, leasing and managing new properties; and

make occasional dispositions of our assets consistent with our long-term investment objectives.

If we fail to satisfy one or both of the 75% gross income test or the 95% gross income test in any taxable year, we may nevertheless qualify for taxation as a REIT for that year if we satisfy the following requirements:

our failure to meet the test is due to reasonable cause and not due to willful neglect; and

after we identify the failure, we file a schedule describing each item of our gross income included in the 75% gross income test or the 95% gross income test for that taxable year.

It is impossible to state whether in all circumstances we would be entitled to the benefit of this relief provision for the 75% gross income test or the 95% gross income test. Even if this relief provision does apply, a 100% tax is imposed upon the greater of the amount by which we failed the 75% gross income test or the amount by which we failed the 95% gross income test, with adjustments, multiplied by a fraction intended to reflect our profitability for the taxable year. This relief provision applies to any failure of the applicable income tests, even if the failure first occurred in a year prior to the taxable year in which the failure was discovered.

Based on the discussion above, we believe that we have satisfied, and will continue to satisfy, the 75% and 95% gross income tests outlined above on a continuing basis beginning with our first taxable year as a REIT.

Asset Tests. At the close of each calendar quarter of each taxable year, we must also satisfy the following asset percentage tests in order to qualify for taxation as a REIT for federal income tax purposes:

At least 75% of the value of our total assets must consist of real estate assets (which includes, beginning with our 2016 taxable year, ancillary personal property to the extent that rents attributable to such personal property are treated as rents from real property in accordance with the rules described above), cash and cash items, shares in other REITs, debt instruments issued by “publicly offered REITs” as defined in Section 562(c)(2) of the IRC (beginning with our 2016 taxable year), government securities and temporary investments of new capital (that is, any stock or debt instrument that we hold that is attributable to any amount received by us (a) in exchange for our stock or (b) in a public offering of our five-year or longer debt instruments, but only for the one year period commencing with our receipt of the new capital).

Not more than 25% of the value of our total assets may be represented by securities other than those securities that count favorably toward the preceding 75% asset test.

Of the investments included in the preceding 25% asset class, the value of any one non-REIT issuer’s securities that we own may not exceed 5% of the value of our total assets. In addition, we may not own more than 10% of the vote or value of any one non-REIT issuer’s outstanding securities, unless the securities are “straight debt” securities or otherwise excepted as discussed below. Our stock and other securities in a TRS or a qualified REIT subsidiary are exempted from these 5% and 10% asset tests.

Not more than 25% (20% beginning with our 2018 taxable year) of the value of our total assets may be represented by stock or other securities of TRSs.

Beginning with our 2016 taxable year, not more than 25% of the value of our total assets may be represented by “nonqualified publicly offered REIT debt instruments” as defined in Section 856(c)(5)(L)(ii) of the IRC.

Our counsel, Sullivan & Worcester LLP, is of the opinion that our investments in the equity or debt of a TRS, to the extent and during the period they qualify as temporary investments of new capital, should be treated as a real estate asset, and not as a security, for purposes of the above REIT asset tests.

The above REIT asset tests must be satisfied at the close of each calendar quarter of each taxable year as a REIT. After a REIT meets the asset tests at the close of any quarter, it will not lose its qualification for taxation as a REIT in any subsequent quarter solely because of fluctuations in the values of its assets. This grandfathering rule may be of limited benefit to a REIT such as us that makes periodic acquisitions of both qualifying and nonqualifying REIT assets. When a failure to satisfy the above asset tests results from an acquisition of securities or other property during a quarter, the failure can be cured by disposition of sufficient nonqualifying assets within thirty days after the close of that quarter.

In addition, if we fail the 5% value test or the 10% vote or value tests at the close of any quarter and we do not cure such failure within thirty days after the close of that quarter, that failure will nevertheless be excused if (a) the failure is “de minimis” and (b) within six months after the last day of the quarter in which we identify the failure, we either dispose of the assets causing the failure or otherwise satisfy the 5% value and 10% vote and value asset tests. For purposes of this relief provision, the failure will be de minimis if the value of the assets causing the failure does not exceed the lesser of (a) 1% of the total value of our assets at the end of the relevant quarter or (b) $10,000,000. If our failure is not de minimis, or if any of the other REIT asset tests have been violated, we may nevertheless qualify for taxation as a REIT if (a) we provide the IRS with a description of each asset causing the failure, (b) the failure was due to reasonable cause and not willful neglect, (c) we pay a tax equal to the greater of (1) $50,000 or (2) the highest rate of corporate tax imposed, currently 35%, on the net income generated by the assets causing the failure during the period of the failure, and (d) within six months after the last day of the quarter in which we identify the failure, we either dispose of the assets causing the failure or otherwise satisfy all of the REIT asset tests. These relief provisions apply to any failure of the applicable asset tests, even if the failure first occurred in a year prior to the taxable year in which the failure was discovered.

The IRC also provides an excepted securities safe harbor to the 10% value test that includes among other items (a) “straight debt” securities, (b) certain rental agreements in which payment is to be made in subsequent years, (c) any obligation to pay “rents from real property,” (d) securities issued by governmental entities that are not dependent in whole or in part on the profits of or payments from a nongovernmental entity, and (e) any security issued by another REIT. We have maintained and will continue to maintain records of the value of our assets to document our compliance with the above asset tests, and intend to take actions as may be required to cure any failure to satisfy the tests within thirty days after the close of any quarter or within the six month periods described above.

Based on the discussion above, we believe that we have satisfied, and will continue to satisfy, the above REIT asset tests on a continuing basis beginning with our first taxable year as a REIT.

Our Relationships with Five Star. As of December 31, 2015, we owned approximately 9% of the common shares of Five Star. Our leases with Five Star, Five Star’s charter, and other agreements collectively contain restrictions upon the ownership of Five Star common shares and require Five Star to refrain from taking any actions that may result in any affiliation with us that would jeopardize our qualification as a REIT under the IRC. Accordingly, commencing with our 2002 taxable year, we expect that the rental income we have received and will receive from Five Star and its subsidiaries has been and will be “rents from real property” under Section 856(d) of the IRC, and therefore qualifying income under the 75% and 95% gross income tests described above. In addition, as described above, we have elected to treat as a TRS a particular corporate subsidiary of Five Star with whom we do not have a rental relationship, and our counsel, Sullivan & Worcester LLP, has opined that it is more likely than not that this intended TRS will so qualify. Finally, as described below, we have engaged as an intended eligible independent contractor another corporate subsidiary of Five Star with whom we do not have a rental relationship.

Our Relationship with Our TRSs. In addition to the TRS described above that manages and operates independent living facilities for us, we also have wholly owned TRSs that lease properties from us. We may from time to time in the future acquire additional properties to be leased in this manner. In addition, in response to a lease default or expiration,

we may choose to lease a reclaimed qualified health care property to a TRS.

In lease transactions involving our TRSs, our intent is that the rents paid to us by the TRS qualify as “rents from real property” under the REIT gross income tests summarized above. In order for this to be the case, the manager operating the leased property on behalf of the applicable TRS must be an “eligible independent contractor” within the meaning of Section 856(d)(9)(A) of the IRC, and the properties leased to the TRS must be “qualified health care properties” within the meaning of Section 856(e)(6)(D) of the IRC. Qualified health care properties are defined as health care facilities and other properties necessary or incidental to the use of a health care facility.

For these purposes, a contractor qualifies as an “eligible independent contractor” if it is less than 35% affiliated with the REIT and, at the time the contractor enters into the agreement with the TRS to operate the qualified health care property, that contractor or any person related to that contractor is actively engaged in the trade or business of operating qualified health care properties for persons unrelated to the TRS or its affiliated REIT. For these purposes, an otherwise eligible independent contractor is not disqualified from that status on account of (a) the TRS bearing the expenses of the operation of the qualified health care property, (b) the TRS receiving the revenues from the operation of the qualified health care property, net of expenses for that operation and fees payable to the eligible independent contractor, or (c) the REIT receiving income from the eligible independent contractor pursuant to a preexisting or otherwise grandfathered lease of another property.

We have engaged as an intended eligible independent contractor a particular corporate subsidiary of Five Star with whom we do not have a rental relationship. This contractor and its affiliates at Five Star are actively engaged in the trade or business of operating qualified health care properties for their own accounts, including pursuant to management contracts among themselves and including properties that we do not lease to them; however, this contractor and its affiliates have few if any management contracts for qualified health care properties for third parties other than us and our TRSs. Based on a plain reading of the statute as well as applicable legislative history, our counsel, Sullivan & Worcester LLP, has opined that this intended eligible independent contractor should in fact so qualify. If the IRS or a court determines that this opinion is incorrect, then the rental income we receive from our TRSs in respect of properties managed by this particular contractor would be nonqualifying income for purposes of the 75% and 95% gross income tests, possibly jeopardizing our compliance with one or both of these gross income tests. Under those circumstances, however, we expect we would qualify for the gross income tests’ relief provision described above, and thereby would preserve our qualification for taxation as a REIT. If the relief provision were to apply to us, we would be subject to tax at a 100% rate upon the greater of the amount by which we failed the 75% gross income test or the amount by which we failed the 95% gross income test, with adjustments, multiplied by a fraction intended to reflect our profitability for the taxable year; even though we have little or no nonqualifying income from other sources in a typical taxable year, imposition of this 100% tax in this circumstance could be material because to date substantially all of the properties leased to our TRSs are managed for the TRSs by this contractor.

As explained above, we will be subject to a 100% tax if the IRS successfully asserts that the rents paid to us by any of our TRSs exceed an arm’s length rental rate. Although there is no clear precedent to distinguish for federal income tax purposes among leases, management contracts, partnerships, financings, and other contractual arrangements, we believe that our leases and our TRSs’ management agreements will be respected for purposes of the requirements of the IRC discussed above. Accordingly, we expect that the rental income from our current and future TRSs will qualify as “rents from real property,” and that the 100% tax on excessive rents from a TRS will not apply.

Annual Distribution Requirements. In order to qualify for taxation as a REIT under the IRC, we are required to make annual distributions other than capital gain dividends to our shareholders in an amount at least equal to the excess of:

(1)the sum of 90% of our “real estate investment trust taxable income” and 90% of our net income after tax, if any, from property received in foreclosure, over

(2)the amount by which our noncash income (e.g., imputed rental income or income from transactions inadvertently failing to qualify as like-kind exchanges) exceeds 5% of our “real estate investment trust taxable income.”

For these purposes, our “real estate investment trust taxable income” is as defined under Section 857 of the IRC and is computed without regard to the dividends paid deduction and our net capital gain and will generally be reduced by specified corporate-level taxes that we pay (e.g., taxes on built-in gains or taxes on foreclosure property income).

For our 2014 and prior taxable years, a distribution of ours that was not pro rata within a class of our beneficial interests entitled to a distribution, or which was not consistent with the rights to distributions among our classes of beneficial interests, would have been a preferential distribution that would not have been taken into consideration for purposes of the distribution requirements, and accordingly the payment of a preferential distribution would have affected our ability to meet the distribution requirements. Taking into account our distribution policies, including any dividend reinvestment plan we adopted, we do not believe that we made any preferential distributions in 2014 or prior taxable years. Because we are a “publicly offered REIT” (as defined in Section 562(c)(2) of the IRC) that is required to file annual and periodic reports with the SEC under the Exchange Act, the preferential distribution rule does not apply to us beginning with our 2015 taxable year.

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 federal income tax return for the earlier taxable year and if paid on or before the first regular distribution payment after that declaration. If a dividend is declared in October, November or December to shareholders of record during one of those months, and is paid during the following January, then for federal income tax purposes the dividend will be treated as having been both paid and received on December 31 of the prior taxable year. The 90% distribution requirements may be waived by the IRS if a REIT establishes that it failed to meet them by reason of distributions previously made to meet the requirements of the 4% excise tax discussed below. To the extent that we do not distribute all of our net capital gain and all of our “real estate investment trust taxable income,” as adjusted, we will be subject to federal income tax at regular corporate rates on undistributed amounts.

In addition, we will be subject to a 4% nondeductible excise tax to the extent we fail within a calendar year to make required distributions to our shareholders of 85% of our ordinary income and 95% of our capital gain net income plus the excess, if any, of the “grossed up required distribution” for the preceding calendar year over the amount treated as distributed for that preceding calendar year. For this purpose, the term “grossed up required distribution” for any calendar year is the sum of our taxable income for the calendar year without regard to the deduction for dividends paid and all amounts from earlier years that are not treated as having been distributed under the provision. We will be treated as having sufficient earnings and profits to treat as a dividend any distribution by us up to the amount required to be distributed in order to avoid imposition of the 4% excise tax.

If we do not have enough cash or other liquid assets to meet the 90% distribution requirements, or if we so choose, we may find it necessary or desirable to arrange for new debt or equity financing to provide funds for required distributions in order to maintain our qualification for taxation as a REIT. We can provide no assurance that financing would be available for these purposes on favorable terms, if at all.

We may be able to rectify a failure to pay sufficient dividends for any year by paying “deficiency dividends” to shareholders in a later year. These deficiency dividends may be included in our deduction for dividends paid for the earlier year, but an interest charge would be imposed upon us for the delay in distribution.

In addition to the other distribution requirements above, to preserve our qualification for taxation as a REIT we are required to timely distribute all C corporation earnings and profits that we inherit from acquired corporations, as described below.

Acquisitions of C Corporations

We have and may in the future engage in transactions where we acquire all of the outstanding stock of a C corporation. Upon these acquisitions, except to the extent we have made or do make an applicable TRS election, each of the acquired entities and their various corporate and noncorporate subsidiaries generally became or will become either our qualified REIT subsidiaries under Section 856(i) of the IRC or disregarded entities under Treasury regulations issued under Section 7701 of the IRC. Thus, after the acquisition, all assets, liabilities and items of income, deduction and credit of the acquired and then disregarded entities have been and will be treated as ours for purposes of the various REIT qualification tests described above. In addition, we generally have been and will be treated as the successor to the acquired and then

disregarded entities’ (a) federal income tax attributes, such as those entities’ adjusted tax bases in their assets and their depreciation schedules, and (b) earnings and profits for federal income tax purposes, if any. The carryover of these attributes creates REIT implications such as built-in gains tax exposure and additional distribution requirements, as described below. However, where we have made or will make an election under Section 338(g) of the IRC with respect to corporations that we acquire, we generally have not and will not be subject to such attribute carryovers.

Built-in Gains from C Corporations. As described above, notwithstanding our qualification and taxation as a REIT, we may be subject to corporate taxation if we dispose of assets previously held by a C corporation. Specifically, if we acquire an asset from a corporation in a transaction in which our adjusted tax basis in the asset is determined by reference to the adjusted tax basis of that asset in the hands of a C corporation, and if we subsequently recognize gain on the disposition of that asset during a five-year period (or other specified period for taxable years prior to 2012) beginning on the date on which the asset ceased to be owned by the C corporation, then we will generally pay tax at the highest regular corporate tax rate, currently 35%, on the lesser of (a) the excess, if any, of the asset’s fair market value over its adjusted tax basis, each determined as of the time the asset ceased to be owned by the C corporation or (b) our gain recognized in the disposition. Accordingly, any taxable disposition of an asset so acquired during such five-year period (or other specified period for taxable years prior to 2012) could be subject to this built-in gains tax. To the extent of our gains in a taxable year that are subject to the built-in gains tax, net of any taxes paid on such gains with respect to that taxable year, our taxable dividends paid to you in the following year will be potentially eligible for treatment as qualified dividends that are taxed to our noncorporate U.S. shareholders at preferential rates. However, we have not and do not expect to sell any assets if that sale would result in the imposition of a material tax liability. We cannot, however, provide assurance that we will not change our plans in this regard.

Earnings and Profits. Following a corporate acquisition, we must generally distribute no later than the end of the applicable tax year all of the C corporation earnings and profits inherited in that transaction, if any, to preserve our qualification for taxation as a REIT. If we failed or fail to do so, we would not qualify for taxation as a REIT for that year and a number of years thereafter, unless we are able to rely on the relief provision described below. Although Sullivan & Worcester LLP is unable to render an opinion on factual determinations such as the amount of our undistributed earnings and profits, we have computed and will compute, with the assistance of accountants as needed, the amount of undistributed earnings and profits that we inherit in our corporate acquisitions. Based on these calculations, we believe that we did not inherit any undistributed earnings and profits that remained undistributed at the end of the applicable tax year. However, there can be no assurance that, if audited, the IRS would not, upon subsequent examination, propose adjustments to our calculation of the undistributed earnings and profits that we inherit, including adjustments that might be deemed necessary by the IRS as a result of its examination of the companies we acquired. In any such examination, the IRS might consider all taxable years of the acquired entities as open for review for purposes of its proposed adjustments. If it is subsequently determined that we had undistributed earnings and profits as of the end of the applicable tax year, we may be eligible for a relief provision similar to the “deficiency dividends” procedure described above. To utilize this relief provision, we would have to pay an interest charge for the delay in distributing the undistributed earnings and profits; in addition, we would be required to distribute to our shareholders, in addition to our other REIT distribution requirements, the amount of the undistributed earnings and profits less the interest charge paid.

Depreciation and Federal Income Tax Treatment of Leases

Our initial tax bases in our assets will generally be our acquisition cost. We will generally depreciate our depreciable real property on a straight-line basis over forty years and our personal property over the applicable shorter periods. These depreciation schedules may vary for properties that we acquire through tax-free or carryover basis acquisitions.

We are entitled to depreciation deductions from our facilities only if we are treated for federal income tax purposes as the owner of the facilities. This means that the leases of the facilities must be classified for federal income tax purposes as true leases, rather than as sales or financing arrangements, and we believe this to be the case.

Distributions to our Shareholders

As discussed above, we expect to make distributions to our shareholders from time to time. These distributions may include cash distributions, in kind distributions of property, and deemed or constructive distributions resulting from capital

market activities. The United States federal income tax treatment of our distributions will vary based on the status of the recipient shareholder as more fully described below under “Taxation of Taxable U.S. Shareholders,” “Taxation of Tax-Exempt U.S. Shareholders,” and “Taxation of Non-U.S. Shareholders.”

A redemption of our shares for cash only will be treated as a distribution under Section 302 of the IRC, and hence taxable as a dividend to the extent of our available current or accumulated earnings and profits, unless the redemption satisfies one of the tests set forth in Section 302(b) of the IRC enabling the redemption to be treated as a sale or exchange of the shares. The redemption for cash only will be treated as a sale or exchange if it (a) is “substantially disproportionate” with respect to the surrendering shareholder’s ownership in us, (b) results in a “complete termination” of the surrendering shareholder’s entire share interest in us, or (c) is “not essentially equivalent to a dividend” with respect to the surrendering shareholder, all within the meaning of Section 302(b) of the IRC. In determining whether any of these tests have been met, a shareholder must generally take into account shares considered to be owned by such shareholder by reason of constructive ownership rules set forth in the IRC, as well as shares actually owned by such shareholder. In addition, if a redemption is treated as a distribution under the preceding tests, then a shareholder’s tax basis in the redeemed shares generally will be transferred to the shareholder’s remaining shares in us, if any, and if such shareholder owns no other shares in us, such basis generally may be transferred to a related person or may be lost entirely. Because the determination as to whether a shareholder will satisfy any of the tests of Section 302(b) of the IRC depends upon the facts and circumstances at the time that our shares are redeemed, we urge you to consult your own tax advisor to determine your particular tax treatment of any redemption.

Taxation of Taxable U.S. Shareholders

For noncorporate U.S. shareholders, to the extent that their total adjusted income does not exceed applicable thresholds, the maximum federal income tax rate for long-term capital gains and most corporate dividends is generally 15%. For those noncorporate U.S. shareholders whose total adjusted income exceeds the applicable thresholds, the maximum federal income tax rate for long-term capital gains and most corporate dividends is generally 20%. However, because we are not generally subject to federal income tax on the portion of our “real estate investment trust taxable income” distributed to our shareholders, dividends on our shares generally are not eligible for such preferential tax rates, except that any distribution of C corporation earnings and profits and taxed built-in gain items will potentially be eligible for these preferential tax rates. As a result, our ordinary dividends are generally taxed at the higher federal income tax rates applicable to ordinary income. To summarize, the preferential federal income tax rates for long-term capital gains and for qualified dividends generally apply to:

(1)long-term capital gains, if any, recognized on the disposition of our shares;

(2)our distributions designated as long-term capital gain dividends (except to the extent attributable to real estate depreciation recapture, in which case the distributions are subject to a maximum 25% federal income tax rate);

(3)our dividends attributable to dividend income, if any, received by us from C corporations such as TRSs;

(4)our dividends attributable to earnings and profits that we inherit from C corporations; and

(5)our dividends to the extent attributable to income upon which we have paid federal corporate income tax (such as sale gains subject to the 35% built-in gains tax), net of the corporate taxes thereon.

As long as we qualify for taxation as a REIT, a distribution to our U.S. shareholders that we do not designate as a capital gain dividend generally will be treated as an ordinary income dividend to the extent of our available current or accumulated earnings and profits. Distributions made out of our current or accumulated earnings and profits that we properly designate as capital gain dividends generally will be taxed as long-term capital gains, as discussed below, to the extent they do not exceed our actual net capital gain for the taxable year. However, corporate shareholders may be required to treat up to 20% of any capital gain dividend as ordinary income under Section 291 of the IRC.

In addition, we may elect to retain net capital gain income and treat it as constructively distributed. In that case:

(1)we will be taxed at regular corporate capital gains tax rates on retained amounts;

(2)each U.S. shareholder will be taxed on its designated proportionate share of our retained net capital gains as though that amount were distributed and designated a capital gain dividend;

(3)each U.S. shareholder will receive a credit or refund for its designated proportionate share of the tax that we pay;

(4)each U.S. shareholder will increase its adjusted basis in our shares by the excess of the amount of its proportionate share of these retained net capital gains over the U.S. shareholder’s proportionate share of the tax that we pay; and

(5)both we and our corporate shareholders will make commensurate adjustments in our respective earnings and profits for federal income tax purposes.

If we elect to retain our net capital gains in this fashion, we will notify our U.S. shareholders of the relevant tax information within sixty days after the close of the affected taxable year.

If for any taxable year we designate capital gain dividends for our shareholders, then a portion of the capital gain dividends we designate will be allocated to the holders of a particular class of shares on a percentage basis equal to the ratio of the amount of the total dividends paid or made available for the year to the holders of that class of shares to the total dividends paid or made available for the year to holders of all outstanding classes of our shares. We will similarly designate the portion of any capital gain dividend that is to be taxed to noncorporate U.S. shareholders at preferential maximum rates (including any capital gains attributable to real estate depreciation recapture that are subject to a maximum 25% federal income tax rate) so that the designations will be proportionate among all outstanding classes of our shares.

Distributions in excess of current or accumulated earnings and profits will not be taxable to a U.S. shareholder to the extent that they do not exceed the shareholder’s adjusted tax basis in the shareholder’s shares, but will reduce the shareholder’s basis in those shares. To the extent that these excess distributions exceed a U.S. shareholder’s adjusted basis in our shares, they will be included in income as capital gain, with long-term gain generally taxed to noncorporate U.S. shareholders at preferential maximum rates. No U.S. shareholder may include on its federal income tax return any of our net operating losses or any of our capital losses.

If a dividend is declared in October, November or December to shareholders of record during one of those months, and is paid during the following January, then for federal income tax purposes the dividend will be treated as having been both paid and received on December 31 of the prior taxable year. Also, items that are treated differently for regular and alternative minimum tax purposes are to be allocated between a REIT and its shareholders under Treasury regulations which are to be prescribed. It is possible that these Treasury regulations will permit or require tax preference items to be allocated to our shareholders with respect to any accelerated depreciation or other tax preference items that we claim. Also, until such time as regulations are issued, we may choose to allocate applicable tax preference items to our shareholders.

A U.S. shareholder will generally recognize gain or loss equal to the difference between the amount realized and the shareholder’s adjusted basis in our shares that are sold or exchanged. This gain or loss will be capital gain or loss, and will be long-term capital gain or loss if the shareholder’s holding period in our shares exceeds one year. In addition, any loss upon a sale or exchange of our shares held for six months or less will generally be treated as a long-term capital loss to the extent of any long-term capital gain dividends we paid on such shares during the holding period.

U.S. shareholders who are individuals, estates or trusts are generally required to pay a 3.8% Medicare tax on their net investment income (including dividends on and gains from the sale or other disposition of our shares), or in the case of estates and trusts on their net investment income that is not distributed, in each case to the extent that their total adjusted income exceeds applicable thresholds.

If a U.S. shareholder recognizes a loss upon a disposition of our shares in an amount that exceeds a prescribed threshold, it is possible that the provisions of Treasury regulations involving “reportable transactions” could apply, with a

resulting requirement to separately disclose the loss-generating transaction to the IRS. These Treasury regulations are written quite broadly, and apply to many routine and simple transactions. A reportable transaction currently includes, among other things, a sale or exchange of our shares resulting in a tax loss in excess of (a) $10 million in any single year or $20 million in a prescribed combination of succeeding tax years in the case of our shares held by a C corporation or by a partnership with only C corporation partners or (b) $2 million in any single year or $4 million in a prescribed combination of succeeding tax years in the case of our shares held by any other partnership or an S corporation, trust or individual, including losses that flow through pass through entities to individuals. A taxpayer discloses a reportable transaction by filing IRS Form 8886 with its federal income tax return and, in the first year of filing, a copy of Form 8886 must be sent to the IRS’s Office of Tax Shelter Analysis. The annual maximum penalty for failing to disclose a reportable transaction is generally $10,000 in the case of a natural person and $50,000 in any other case.

Noncorporate U.S. shareholders who borrow funds to finance their acquisition of our shares could be limited in the amount of deductions allowed for the interest paid on the indebtedness incurred. Under Section 163(d) of the IRC, interest paid or accrued on indebtedness incurred or continued to purchase or carry property held for investment is generally deductible only to the extent of the investor’s net investment income. A U.S. shareholder’s net investment income will include ordinary income dividend distributions received from us and, if an appropriate election is made by the shareholder, capital gain dividend distributions and qualified dividends received from us; however, distributions treated as a nontaxable return of the shareholder’s basis will not enter into the computation of net investment income.

Taxation of Tax‑Exempt U.S. Shareholders

The rules governing the federal income taxation of tax-exempt entities are complex, and the following discussion is intended only as a summary of these rules. If you are a tax-exempt shareholder, we urge you to consult with your own tax advisor to determine the impact of federal, state, local and foreign tax laws, including any tax return filing and other reporting requirements, with respect to your investment in our shares.

Subject to the pension-held REIT rules discussed below, our distributions made to shareholders that are tax-exempt pension plans, individual retirement accounts or other qualifying tax-exempt entities should not constitute UBTI, provided that the shareholder has not financed its acquisition of our shares with “acquisition indebtedness” within the meaning of the IRC, that the shares are not otherwise used in an unrelated trade or business of the tax-exempt entity, and that, consistent with our present intent, we do not hold a residual interest in a real estate mortgage investment conduit.

Any trusts that are described in Section 401(a) of the IRC and are tax-exempt under Section 501(a) of the IRC, or tax-exempt pension trusts, that own more than 10% by value of a “pension-held REIT” at any time during a taxable year may be required to treat a percentage of all dividends received from the pension-held REIT during the year as UBTI. This percentage is equal to the ratio of:

(1)

the pension-held REIT’s gross income derived from the conduct of unrelated trades or businesses, determined as if the pension-held REIT were a tax-exempt pension trust, less direct expenses related to that income, to

(2)the pension-held REIT’s gross income from all sources, less direct expenses related to that income,

except that this percentage shall be deemed to be zero unless it would otherwise equal or exceed 5%.

A REIT is a pension‑held REIT if:

the REIT is “predominantly held” by tax‑exempt pension trusts; and

the REIT would fail to satisfy the “closely held” ownership requirement, discussed above in “REIT Qualification Requirements,” if the stock or beneficial interests in the REIT held by tax-exempt pension trusts were viewed as held by the tax-exempt pension trusts rather than by their respective beneficiaries.

A REIT is predominantly held by tax-exempt pension trusts if at least one tax-exempt pension trust owns more than

25% by value of the interests in such REIT, or if one or more tax-exempt pension trusts, each owning more than 10% by value of the interests in such REIT, own in the aggregate more than 50% by value of the interests in such REIT. Because of the share ownership concentration restrictions contained in our declaration of trust, we believe that we have not been and will not become a pension-held REIT and accordingly, the tax treatment described above should be inapplicable to our tax-exempt shareholders. However, because our shares have been and are expected to remain publicly traded, we cannot completely control whether or not we are or will become a pension-held REIT.

Social clubs, voluntary employee benefit associations and supplemental unemployment benefit trusts exempt from federal income taxation under Sections 501(c)(7), (c)(9) and (c)(17) of the IRC, respectively, are subject to different UBTI rules, which generally will require them to characterize distributions from a REIT as UBTI. In addition, these prospective investors should consult their own tax advisors concerning any “set aside” or reserve requirements applicable to them.

Taxation of Non‑U.S. Shareholders

The rules governing the United States federal income taxation of non-U.S. shareholders are complex, and the following discussion is intended only as a summary of these rules. If you are a non-U.S. shareholder, we urge you to consult with your own tax advisor to determine the impact of United States federal, state, local and foreign tax laws, including any tax return filing and other reporting requirements, with respect to your investment in our shares.

In general, a non-U.S. shareholder will be subject to regular United States federal income tax in the same manner as a U.S. shareholder with respect to its investment in our shares if that investment is effectively connected with the non-U.S. shareholder’s conduct of a trade or business in the United States (and, if provided by an applicable income tax treaty, is attributable to a permanent establishment or fixed base the non-U.S. shareholder maintains in the United States). In addition, a corporate non-U.S. shareholder that receives income that is or is deemed effectively connected with a trade or business in the United States may also be subject to the 30% branch profits tax under Section 884 of the IRC, or lower applicable tax treaty rate, which is payable in addition to regular United States federal corporate income tax. The balance of this discussion of the United States federal income taxation of non-U.S. shareholders addresses only those non-U.S. shareholders whose investment in our shares is not effectively connected with the conduct of a trade or business in the United States.

A distribution by us to a non-U.S. shareholder that is not attributable to gain from the sale or exchange of a “United States real property interest” within the meaning of Section 897 of the IRC, or a USRPI, and that is not designated as a capital gain dividend will be treated as an ordinary income dividend to the extent that it is made out of current or accumulated earnings and profits. A distribution of this type will generally be subject to United States federal income tax and withholding at the rate of 30%, or at a lower rate if the non-U.S. shareholder has in the manner prescribed by the IRS demonstrated to the applicable withholding agent its entitlement to benefits under a tax treaty. In the case of any deemed or constructive distributions or a distribution in kind, the applicable withholding agent will have to collect the amount required to be withheld by reducing to cash for remittance to the IRS a sufficient portion of the property that the non-U.S. shareholder would otherwise receive or own, and the non-U.S. shareholder may bear brokerage or other costs for this withholding procedure. Because we cannot determine our current and accumulated earnings and profits until the end of the taxable year, withholding at the rate of 30% or applicable lower treaty rate will generally be imposed on the gross amount of any distribution to a non-U.S. shareholder that we make and do not designate as a capital gain dividend. Notwithstanding this potential withholding on distributions in excess of our current and accumulated earnings and profits, these distributions are a nontaxable return of capital to the extent that they do not exceed the non-U.S. shareholder’s adjusted basis in our shares, and the nontaxable return of capital will reduce the adjusted basis in these shares. To the extent that distributions in excess of current and accumulated earnings and profits exceed the non-U.S. shareholder’s adjusted basis in our shares, the distributions will give rise to tax liability if the non-U.S. shareholder would otherwise be subject to tax on any gain from the sale or exchange of these shares, as discussed below. A non-U.S. shareholder may seek a refund from the IRS of amounts withheld on distributions to it in excess of our current and accumulated earnings and profits.

From time to time, some of our distributions may be attributable to the sale or exchange of USRPIs. However, capital gain dividends that are received by a non-U.S. shareholder, as well as dividends attributable to our sales of USRPIs, will be subject to the taxation and withholding regime applicable to ordinary income dividends and the branch profits tax will not apply, provided that (a) these dividends are received with respect to a class of shares that is “regularly traded” on a domestic “established securities market” such as the New York Stock Exchange, or the NYSE , both terms as defined by

applicable Treasury regulations, and (b) the non-U.S. shareholder does not own more than 10% (5% for dividends before December 18, 2015) of that class of shares at any time during the one-year period ending on the date of distribution of the applicable capital gain and USRPI dividends. If both of these provisions are satisfied, qualifying non-U.S. shareholders will not be subject to withholding either on capital gain dividends or on dividends that are attributable to our sales of USRPIs as though those amounts were effectively connected with a United States trade or business, and qualifying non-U.S. shareholders will not be required to file United States federal income tax returns or pay branch profits tax in respect of these dividends. Instead, these dividends will be subject to United States federal income tax and withholding as ordinary dividends, currently at a 30% tax rate unless, as discussed below, reduced by an applicable treaty. Although there can be no assurance in this regard, we believe that our common shares have been and will remain “regularly traded” on a domestic “established securities market” within the meaning of applicable Treasury regulations; however, we can provide no assurance that our shares will continue to be “regularly traded” on a domestic “established securities market” in future taxable years.

Except as discussed above, for any year in which we qualify for taxation as a REIT, distributions that are attributable to gain from the sale or exchange of a USRPI are taxed to a non-U.S. shareholder as if these distributions were gains effectively connected with a trade or business in the United States conducted by the non-U.S. shareholder. Accordingly, a non-U.S. shareholder that does not qualify for the special rule above (a) will be taxed on these amounts at the normal capital gain and other tax rates applicable to a U.S. shareholder, subject to any applicable alternative minimum tax and to a special alternative minimum tax in the case of nonresident alien individuals, (b) will be required to file a United States federal income tax return reporting these amounts, even if applicable withholding is imposed as described below, and (c) if such non-U.S. shareholder is also a corporation, it may owe the 30% branch profits tax under Section 884 of the IRC, or lower applicable tax treaty rate, in respect of these amounts. The applicable withholding agent will be required to withhold from distributions to such non-U.S. shareholders, and remit to the IRS, 35% of the maximum amount of any distribution that could be designated as a capital gain dividend. In addition, for purposes of this withholding rule, if we designate prior distributions as capital gain dividends, then subsequent distributions up to the amount of the designated prior distributions will be treated as capital gain dividends. The amount of any tax withheld is creditable against the non-U.S. shareholder’s United States federal income tax liability, and the non-U.S. shareholder may file for a refund from the IRS of any amount of withheld tax in excess of that tax liability.

A special “wash sale” rule may apply to a non-U.S. shareholder who owns any class of our shares if (a) the non-U.S. shareholder owns more than 5% of that class of shares at any time during the one-year period ending on the date of the distribution described below, or (b) that class of our shares is not, within the meaning of applicable Treasury regulations, “regularly traded” on a domestic “established securities market” such as the NYSE. Although there can be no assurance in this regard, we believe that our common shares have been and will remain “regularly traded” on a domestic “established securities market” within the meaning of applicable Treasury regulations, all as discussed above; however, we can provide no assurance that our shares will continue to be “regularly traded” on a domestic “established securities market” in future taxable years. We anticipate this wash sale rule will apply, if at all, only (a) to a non-U.S. shareholder that owns more than 10% (5% for dispositions before December 18, 2015) of either our common shares or any class of our preferred shares or (b) if the particular class of our shares were to be no longer “regularly traded.” Such a non-U.S. shareholder will be treated as having made a “wash sale” of our shares if it (a) disposes of an interest in our shares during the thirty days preceding the ex-dividend date of a distribution by us that, but for such disposition, would have been treated by the non-U.S. shareholder in whole or in part as gain from the sale or exchange of a USRPI, and then (b) acquires or enters into a contract to acquire a substantially identical interest in our shares, either actually or constructively through a related party, during the sixty-one day period beginning thirty days prior to the ex-dividend date. In the event of such a wash sale, the non-U.S. shareholder will have gain from the sale or exchange of a USRPI in an amount equal to the portion of the distribution that, but for the wash sale, would have been a gain from the sale or exchange of a USRPI. As discussed above, a non-U.S. shareholder’s gain from the sale or exchange of a USRPI can trigger increased United States taxes, such as the branch profits tax applicable to non-U.S. corporations, and increased United States tax filing requirements.

Tax treaties may reduce the withholding obligations on our distributions. Under some treaties, however, rates below

30% that are applicable to ordinary income dividends from United States corporations may not apply to ordinary income dividends from a REIT or may apply only if the REIT meets specified additional conditions. A non-U.S. shareholder must generally use an applicable IRS Form W-8, or substantially similar form, to claim tax treaty benefits. If the amount of tax withheld with respect to a distribution to a non-U.S. shareholder exceeds the shareholder’s United States federal income tax liability with respect to the distribution, the non-U.S. shareholder may file for a refund of the excess from the IRS. The 35% withholding tax rate discussed above on some capital gain dividends corresponds to the maximum income tax rate applicable to corporate non-U.S. shareholders but is higher than the current preferential maximum rates on capital gains generally applicable to noncorporate non-U.S. shareholders. Treasury regulations also provide special rules to determine whether, for purposes of determining the applicability of a tax treaty, our distributions to a non-U.S. shareholder that is an entity should be treated as paid to the entity or to those owning an interest in that entity, and whether the entity or its owners are entitled to benefits under the tax treaty. In the case of any deemed or constructive distribution or a distribution in kind, the applicable withholding agent may collect the amount required to be withheld by reducing to cash for remittance to the IRS a sufficient portion of the property that the non-U.S. shareholder would otherwise receive or own if the cash portion of any such distribution is not sufficient to cover the withholding liability, and the non-U.S. shareholder may bear brokerage or other costs for this withholding procedure.

Non-U.S. shareholders should generally be able to treat amounts we designate as retained but constructively distributed capital gains in the same manner as actual distributions of capital gain dividends by us. In addition, a non-U.S. shareholder should be able to offset as a credit against its federal income tax liability the proportionate share of the tax paid by us on such retained but constructively distributed capital gains. A non-U.S. shareholder may file for a refund from the IRS for the amount that the non-U.S. shareholder’s proportionate share of tax paid by us exceeds its federal income tax liability on the constructively distributed capital gains.

If our shares are not USRPIs, then a non-U.S. shareholder’s gain on the sale of these shares generally will not be subject to United States federal income taxation, except that a nonresident alien individual who was in the United States for 183 days or more during the taxable year may be subject to a 30% tax on this gain. Our shares will not constitute a USRPI if we are a “domestically controlled REIT.” A domestically controlled REIT is a REIT in which at all times during the preceding five-year period less than 50% of the fair market value of the outstanding shares was directly or indirectly held by foreign persons. From and after December 18, 2015, a person who at all relevant times holds less than 5% of a REIT’s shares that are regularly traded on an established securities market in the United States is deemed to be a U.S. person in making the determination of whether a REIT is domestically controlled, unless the REIT has actual knowledge that the person is not a U.S. person. Other presumptions apply in making the determination with respect to other classes of REIT shareholders. As a result of applicable presumptions, we expect to be able to demonstrate from and after December 18, 2015 that we are less than 50% foreign owned. For periods prior to December 18, 2015, we believe that we were less than 50% foreign owned, but that may not be possible to demonstrate. Accordingly, we can provide no assurance that we have been or will remain a domestically controlled REIT, particularly if that determination includes the period before December 18, 2015, when the presumptions described above did not apply. Even if we are not a domestically controlled REIT, a non-U.S. shareholder’s gain on the sale of our shares will not be subject to United States federal income taxation as a sale of a USRPI, if that class of shares is “regularly traded,” as defined by applicable Treasury regulations, on an established securities market such as the NYSE, and the non-U.S. shareholder has at all times during the preceding five years owned 10% (5% for dispositions before December 18, 2015) or less by value of that class of shares. In this regard, because the shares held by others may be redeemed, a non-U.S. shareholder’s percentage interest in a class of our shares may increase even if it acquires no additional shares in that class. If a gain on the sale of our shares is subject to United States federal income taxation under these rules, the non-U.S. shareholder will generally be subject to the same treatment as a U.S. shareholder with respect to its gain (subject to any applicable alternative minimum tax and a special alternative minimum tax in the case of nonresident alien individuals) and will be required to file a United States federal income tax return reporting that gain. A purchaser of our shares from a non-U.S. shareholder will not be required to withhold on the purchase price if the purchased shares are regularly traded on an established securities market or if we are a domestically controlled REIT. Otherwise, a purchaser of our shares from a non-U.S. shareholder may be required to withhold 15% (10% for dispositions on or before February 16, 2016) of the purchase price paid to the non-U.S. shareholder and to remit the withheld amount to the IRS.

Information Reporting, Backup Withholding, and Foreign Account Withholding

Information reporting, backup withholding, and foreign account withholding may apply to distributions or proceeds paid to our shareholders under the circumstances discussed below. If a shareholder is subject to backup or other United States federal income tax withholding, then the applicable withholding agent will be required to withhold the appropriate amount with respect to a deemed or constructive distribution or a distribution in kind even though there is insufficient cash from which to satisfy the withholding obligation. To satisfy this withholding obligation, the applicable withholding agent may collect the amount of United States federal income tax required to be withheld by reducing to cash for remittance to the IRS a sufficient portion of the property that the shareholder would otherwise receive or own, and the shareholder may bear brokerage or other costs for this withholding procedure.

The backup withholding rate is currently 28%. Amounts withheld under backup withholding are generally not an additional tax and may be refunded by the IRS or credited against the shareholder’s federal income tax liability. A U.S. shareholder may be subject to backup withholding when it receives distributions on our shares or proceeds upon the sale, exchange, redemption, retirement or other disposition of our shares, unless the U.S. shareholder properly executes, or has previously properly executed, under penalties of perjury an IRS Form W-9 or substantially similar form that:

provides the U.S. shareholder’s correct taxpayer identification number; and

certifies that the U.S. shareholder is exempt from backup withholding because it comes within an enumerated exempt category, it has not been notified by the IRS that it is subject to backup withholding, or it has been notified by the IRS that it is no longer subject to backup withholding.

If the U.S. shareholder has not provided and does not provide its correct taxpayer identification number on an IRS Form W-9 or substantially similar form, it may be subject to penalties imposed by the IRS, and the applicable withholding agent may have to withhold a portion of any distributions or proceeds paid to such U.S. shareholder. Unless the U.S. shareholder has established on a properly executed IRS Form W-9 or substantially similar form that it comes within an enumerated exempt category, distributions or proceeds on our shares paid to it during the calendar year, and the amount of tax withheld, if any, will be reported to it and to the IRS.

Distributions on our shares to a non-U.S. shareholder during each calendar year and the amount of tax withheld, if any, will generally be reported to the non-U.S. shareholder and to the IRS. This information reporting requirement applies regardless of whether the non-U.S. shareholder is subject to withholding on distributions on our shares or whether the withholding was reduced or eliminated by an applicable tax treaty. Also, distributions paid to a non-U.S. shareholder on our shares will generally be subject to backup withholding, unless the non-U.S. shareholder properly certifies to the applicable withholding agent its non-U.S. shareholder status on an applicable IRS Form W-8 or substantially similar form. Information reporting and backup withholding will not apply to proceeds a non-U.S. shareholder receives upon the sale, exchange, redemption, retirement or other disposition of our shares, if the non-U.S. shareholder properly certifies its non-U.S. shareholder status on an applicable IRS Form W-8 or substantially similar form. Even without having executed an applicable IRS Form W-8 or substantially similar form, however, in some cases information reporting and backup withholding will not apply to proceeds that a non-U.S. shareholder receives upon the sale, exchange, redemption, retirement or other disposition of our shares if the non-U.S. shareholder receives those proceeds through a broker’s foreign office.

Non-United States financial institutions and other non-United States entities are subject to diligence and reporting requirements for purposes of identifying accounts and investments held directly or indirectly by United States persons. The failure to comply with these additional information reporting, certification and other requirements could result in a 30% withholding tax on applicable payments to non-United States persons. In particular, a payee that is a foreign financial institution that is subject to the diligence and reporting requirements described above must enter into an agreement with the United States Department of the Treasury requiring, among other things, that it undertake to identify accounts held by “specified United States persons” or “United States owned foreign entities” (each as defined in the IRC), annually report information about such accounts, and withhold 30% on applicable payments to noncompliant foreign financial institutions and account holders. Foreign financial institutions located in jurisdictions that have an intergovernmental agreement with the United States with respect to these requirements may be subject to different rules. The foregoing withholding regime generally applies to payments of dividends on our shares, and is expected to generally apply to other “withholdable payments” (including payments of gross proceeds from a sale or other disposition of our shares) made after December 31, 2018. In general, to avoid withholding, any non-United States intermediary through which a shareholder owns our shares

must establish its compliance with the foregoing regime, and a non-U.S. shareholder must provide certain documentation (usually an applicable IRS Form W-8) containing information about its identity, its status, and if required, its direct and indirect U.S. owners. Non-U.S. shareholders and shareholders who hold our shares through a non-United States intermediary are encouraged to consult with their own tax advisor regarding foreign account tax compliance.

Other Tax Considerations

Our tax treatment and that of our shareholders may be modified by legislative, judicial or administrative actions at any time, which actions may be retroactive in effect. The rules dealing with federal income taxation are constantly under review by the United States Congress, the IRS and the United States Department of the Treasury, and statutory changes, new regulations, revisions to existing regulations and revised interpretations of established concepts are issued frequently. Likewise, the rules regarding taxes other than United States federal income taxes may also be modified. No prediction can be made as to the likelihood of passage of new tax legislation or other provisions, or the direct or indirect effect on us and our shareholders. Revisions to tax laws and interpretations of these laws could adversely affect our ability to qualify and be taxed as a REIT, as well as the tax or other consequences of an investment in our shares. We and our shareholders may also be subject to taxation by state, local or other jurisdictions, including those in which we or our shareholders transact business or reside. These tax consequences may not be comparable to the United States federal income tax consequences discussed above.

ERISA PLANS, KEOGH PLANS AND INDIVIDUAL RETIREMENT ACCOUNTS

General Fiduciary Obligations

Fiduciaries of a pension, profit‑sharing or other employee benefit plan subject to Title I of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended, or ERISA, must consider whether:

their investment in our shares or other securities satisfies the diversification requirements of ERISA;

the investment is prudent in light of possible limitations on the marketability of our shares;

they have authority to acquire our shares or other securities under the applicable governing instrument and Title I of ERISA; and

the investment is otherwise consistent with their fiduciary responsibilities.

Trustees and other fiduciaries of an ERISA plan may incur personal liability for any loss suffered by the plan on account of a violation of their fiduciary responsibilities. In addition, these fiduciaries may be subject to a civil penalty of up to 20% of any amount recovered by the plan on account of a violation. Fiduciaries of any individual retirement account or annuity, or IRA, Roth IRA, tax‑favored account (such as an Archer MSA, Coverdell education savings account or health savings account), Keogh Plan or other qualified retirement plan not subject to Title I of ERISA, or non‑ERISA plans, should consider that the plan may only make investments that are authorized by the appropriate governing instrument.

Fiduciaries considering an investment in our securities should consult their own legal advisors if they have any concern as to whether the investment is consistent with the foregoing criteria or is otherwise appropriate. The sale of our securities to an ERISA or non‑ERISA plan is in no respect a representation by us or any underwriter of the securities that the investment meets all relevant legal requirements with respect to investments by plans generally or any particular plan, or that the investment is appropriate for plans generally or any particular plan.

Prohibited Transactions

Fiduciaries of ERISA plans and persons making the investment decision for an IRA or other non‑ERISA plan should consider the application of the prohibited transaction provisions of ERISA and the IRC in making their investment decision. Sales and other transactions between an ERISA or non‑ERISA plan, and persons related to it, are prohibited transactions. The particular facts concerning the sponsorship, operations and other investments of an ERISA plan or non‑ERISA plan may cause a wide range of other persons to be treated as disqualified persons or parties in interest with

respect to it. A prohibited transaction, in addition to imposing potential personal liability upon fiduciaries of ERISA plans, may also result in the imposition of an excise tax under the IRC or a penalty under ERISA upon the disqualified person or party in interest with respect to the plan. If the disqualified person who engages in the transaction is the individual on behalf of whom an IRA or Roth IRA is maintained or his beneficiary, the IRA or Roth IRA may lose its tax‑exempt status and its assets may be deemed to have been distributed to the individual in a taxable distribution on account of the prohibited transaction, but no excise tax will be imposed. Fiduciaries considering an investment in our securities should consult their own legal advisors as to whether the ownership of our securities involves a prohibited transaction.

“Plan Assets” Considerations

The United States Department of Labor has issued a regulation defining “plan assets.” The regulation generally provides that when an ERISA or non‑ERISA plan acquires a security that is an equity interest in an entity and that security is neither a “publicly offered security” nor a security issued by an investment company registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended, the ERISA plan’s or non‑ERISA plan’s assets include both the equity interest and an undivided interest in each of the underlying assets of the entity, unless it is established either that the entity is an operating company or that equity participation in the entity by benefit plan investors is not significant.

Each class of our shares (that is, our common shares and any class of preferred shares that we may issue) must be analyzed separately to ascertain whether it is a publicly offered security. The regulation defines a publicly offered security as a security that is “widely held,” “freely transferable” and either part of a class of securities registered under the Exchange Act, or sold under an effective registration statement under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, provided the securities are registered under the Exchange Act within 120 days after the end of the fiscal year of the issuer during which the offering occurred. Each class of our outstanding shares has been registered under the Exchange Act within the necessary time frame to satisfy the foregoing condition.

The regulation provides that a security is “widely held” only if it is part of a class of securities that is owned by 100 or more investors independent of the issuer and of one another. However, a security will not fail to be “widely held” because the number of independent investors falls below 100 subsequent to the initial public offering as a result of events beyond the issuer’s control. We believe our common shares have been and will remain widely held, and we expect the same to be true of any class of preferred shares that we may issue, but we can give no assurances in this regard.

The regulation provides that whether a security is “freely transferable” is a factual question to be determined on the basis of all relevant facts and circumstances. The regulation further provides that, where a security is part of an offering in which the minimum investment is $10,000 or less, some restrictions on transfer ordinarily will not, alone or in combination, affect a finding that these securities are freely transferable. The restrictions on transfer enumerated in the regulation as not affecting that finding include:

any restriction on or prohibition against any transfer or assignment that would result in a termination or reclassification for federal or state tax purposes, or would otherwise violate any state or federal law or court order;

any requirement that advance notice of a transfer or assignment be given to the issuer and any requirement that either the transferor or transferee, or both, execute documentation setting forth representations as to compliance with any restrictions on transfer that are among those enumerated in the regulation as not affecting free transferability, including those described in the preceding clause of this sentence;

any administrative procedure that establishes an effective date, or an event prior to which a transfer or assignment will not be effective; and

any limitation or restriction on transfer or assignment that is not imposed by the issuer or a person acting on behalf of the issuer.

We believe that the restrictions imposed under our declaration of trust on the transfer of shares do not result in the failure of our shares to be “freely transferable.” Furthermore, we believe that there exist no other facts or circumstances

limiting the transferability of our shares that are not included among those enumerated as not affecting their free transferability under the regulation, and we do not expect or intend to impose in the future, or to permit any person to impose on our behalf, any limitations or restrictions on transfer that would not be among the enumerated permissible limitations or restrictions.

Assuming that each class of our shares will be “widely held” and that no other facts and circumstances exist that restrict transferability of these shares, our counsel, Sullivan & Worcester LLP, is of the opinion that our shares will not fail to be “freely transferable” for purposes of the regulation due to the restrictions on transfer of our shares under our declaration of trust and that under the regulation each class of our currently outstanding shares is publicly offered and our assets will not be deemed to be “plan assets” of any ERISA plan or non‑ERISA plan that acquires our shares in a public offering. This opinion is conditioned upon certain assumptions and representations, as discussed above in “United States Federal Income Tax Considerations—Taxation as a REIT.”

Item 1A. Risk Factors.

Our business is subject to a number of risks and uncertainties. The risks described below may not be the only risks we face but are risks we believe material at this time. Additional risks that we do not yet know of, or that we currently think are immaterial, may also impair our business operations or financial results. If any of the events or circumstances described below occurs, our business, financial condition or results of operations and the trading price of our securities could decline. Investors and prospective investors should consider the following risks and the information contained under the heading “Warning Concerning Forward Looking Statements” before deciding whether to invest in our securities.

Risks Related to Our Tenants and Managers

Financial and other difficulties at Five Star could adversely affect us.

As of December 31, 2015, Five Star accounted for approximately 30.8% of our total annualized rental income and operated approximately 46.3% of our properties, at cost (less impairments). Five Star has not been consistently profitable since it became a public company in 2001, and it currently has limited resources and substantial lease obligations to us and others. Although Five Star has access to a $150.0 million revolving credit facility, that facility currently matures in April 2016, and Five Star has notified the lenders under that facility of its intent to exercise its second one year option to extend the maturity date of that facility to April 2017, subject to the payment of an extension fee and meeting certain other conditions, in the longer term, Five Star may be unable to maintain that facility or obtain a replacement facility on similar or more favorable terms.

Five Star’s business is subject to a number of risks, including the following:

Five Star has high operating leverage. A small percentage decline in Five Star’s revenues or increase in Five Star’s expenses could have a material adverse impact on Five Star’s operating results;

Medicare and Medicaid payments account for some of Five Star’s total revenues. A reduction in Medicare and Medicaid payment rates or a failure of these payment rates to match Five Star’s costs may materially and adversely affect Five Star;

Current general economic conditions may adversely affect Five Star’s operations. Inflation, high levels of unemployment, housing market declines, market declines affecting the value and liquidity of other personal assets, or other circumstances affecting the ability of seniors or their families to pay for Five Star’s services could have a material adverse effect on Five Star’s business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, housing price declines and reduced home mortgage financing availability have negatively affected the U.S. housing market. If seniors have a difficult time selling their homes, fewer seniors may relocate to Five Star’s senior living communities or finance their stays at Five Star’s senior living communities with their private resources;

Private third party payers’, such as insurance companies’, continued efforts to reduce healthcare costs could adversely affect Five Star;

Provisions of the ACA could reduce Five Star’s income and increase its costs;

Increases in labor costs could have a material adverse effect on Five Star;

Five Star’s business is subject to extensive regulation, which increases its costs and may result in losses;

The nature of Five Star’s business exposes it to litigation risks. Five Star has been, is currently, and expects in the future to be involved in claims, lawsuits, and regulatory and other governmental audits, investigations and proceedings arising in the ordinary course of its business, some of which may involve material amounts;

Increases in liability insurance costs could have a material adverse effect on Five Star; and

Five Star’s growth strategy, which includes the acquisition of senior living communities, may not succeed and may result in declines in profitability or recurring losses.

If Five Star’s operations are unprofitable, it may default in its rent obligations to us or we may realize reduced income from our managed senior living communities, and, if Five Star fails to provide quality services at the senior living communities we own, our income from these communities may be adversely affected. Furthermore, if we were required to replace Five Star as our tenant or manager, significant disruptions could be experienced at the affected senior living communities, which could reduce our income and cash flow from, and the value of, those communities.

Increases in labor costs at our managed senior living communities may have a material adverse effect on us.

Wages and employee benefits incurred at our managed senior living communities represent a significant part of our senior living operating expenses. Five Star, as manager of a majority of these communities, and the other third party manager we have retained, compete with other senior living community operators, among others, to attract and retain qualified personnel responsible for the day to day operations of these communities. The market for qualified nurses, therapists and other healthcare professionals is highly competitive and periodic or geographic area shortages of such healthcare professionals may require our managers to increase the wages and benefits offered to their employees in order to attract and retain such personnel or to utilize temporary personnel at an increased cost. In addition, employee benefit costs, including employee health insurance and workers’ compensation insurance costs, have materially increased in recent years and, as discussed above, we cannot predict the future impact of the ACA on the cost of employee health insurance. Although Five Star determines its employee health insurance and workers’ compensation self insurance reserves with guidance from third party professionals, such reserves may nonetheless be inadequate. Increasing employee health insurance and workers’ compensation insurance costs of our managers and increasing self insurance reserves for labor related insurance may materially and adversely affect our earnings from our managed senior living communities.

We cannot assure that labor costs at our managed senior living communities will not increase or that any increases will be recovered by corresponding increases in the rates charged to residents or otherwise. Any significant failure by our managers to control labor costs or to pass any increases on to residents through rate increases at our managed senior living communities could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Termination of assisted living resident agreements and resident attrition could adversely affect our revenues and earnings at our leased and managed senior living communities.

State regulations governing assisted living communities typically require a written resident agreement with each resident. Most of these regulations also require that each resident have the right to terminate these assisted living resident agreements for any reason on reasonable notice. Consistent with these regulations, most of the resident agreements at our leased and managed senior living communities allow residents to terminate their agreements on 30 days’ notice. Thus, we

and our tenants and managers may be unable to contract with assisted living residents to stay for longer periods of time, unlike typical apartment leasing arrangements that involve lease agreements with terms of up to a year or longer. If a large number of residents elected to terminate their resident agreements at or around the same time, our revenues and earnings from our leased and managed senior living communities could be materially and adversely affected. In addition, the advanced ages of senior living residents at our leased and managed senior living communities make the resident turnover rate in these senior living communities difficult to predict.

The trend for senior citizens to delay moving to senior living residences until they reach an older age or require greater care may increase operating costs, reduce occupancy and increase resident turnover rate at our senior living communities.

Senior citizens have been increasingly delaying their moves to senior living residences until they reach an older age, including at our senior living communities. If this trend continues, the occupancy rate at our senior living communities may decline and the resident turnover rate at those communities may increase. Further, older aged persons may have greater care needs and require higher acuity services, which may increase our and our tenants’ cost of business, expose us and our tenants’ to additional liability or result in lost business and earlier stays at our senior living communities if our managers or tenants are not able to provide the requisite care services or fail to adequately provide those services.

Some of our tenants and managers are faced with significant potential litigation and rising insurance costs that not only affect their ability to obtain and maintain adequate liability and other insurance, but also may affect their ability to fulfill insurance, indemnification and other obligations to us under their leases and management agreements and to pay rents or to generate and pay minimum and other returns.

In some states, advocacy groups monitor the quality of care at SNFs and assisted and independent living communities, and these groups have brought litigation against operators and owners. Also, in several instances, private litigation by SNF patients, assisted and independent living community residents or their legal representatives have succeeded in winning very large damage awards for alleged neglect. The effect of this litigation and potential litigation has been to materially increase the costs of monitoring and reporting quality of care compliance incurred by some of our tenants and managers. The cost of liability and medical malpractice insurance has increased and may continue to increase so long as the present litigation environment in many parts of the United States continues. This may affect the ability of some of our tenants and managers to obtain and maintain adequate liability and other insurance and manage their related risk exposures. In addition to causing some of our tenants and managers to be unable to fulfill their insurance, indemnification and other obligations to us under their leases and management agreements and thereby potentially exposing us to those risks, these litigation risks and costs could cause some of our tenants and managers to become unable to pay rents due to us or generate and pay minimum and other returns to us.

The failure of our tenants, our managers or us to comply with laws relating to the operation of our leased and managed communities may have a material adverse effect on the ability of our tenants to pay us rent, the profitability of our managed senior living communities and the values of our properties.

We and our tenants and managers are subject to or impacted by extensive, frequently changing federal, state and local laws and regulations. Some of these laws and regulations include: state and local licensure laws; laws protecting consumers against deceptive practices; laws relating to the operation of our properties and how our tenants and managers conduct their operations, such as health and safety, fire and privacy laws; federal and state laws affecting communities that participate in Medicaid; federal and state laws affecting SNFs, clinics and other healthcare facilities that participate in both Medicare and Medicaid that mandate allowable costs, pricing, reimbursement procedures and limitations, quality of services and care, food service and physical plants; resident rights laws (including abuse and neglect laws) and fraud laws; anti-kickback and physician referral laws; the ADA and similar state and local laws; and safety and health standards set by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. We and our tenants and managers expend significant resources to maintain compliance with these laws and regulations, and responding to any allegations of noncompliance also results in the expenditure of significant resources. Moreover, the failure of our managers to properly operate our senior living communities could result in fines or other sanctions which may materially and adversely impact our ability to obtain or renew licenses for our managed communities.

If we or our tenants or managers fail to comply with any applicable legal requirements, or are unable to cure deficiencies, certain sanctions may be imposed and, if imposed, may adversely affect the ability of our tenants to pay us rent, the profitability of our managed senior living communities and the values of our properties. Further, changes in the

applicable regulatory framework could have a material adverse effect on the ability of our tenants to pay us rent, the profitability of our managed senior living communities and the values of our properties.

We and our tenants and managers are required to comply with federal and state laws governing the privacy, security, use and disclosure of individually identifiable information, including financial information and protected health information. Under HIPAA, we and our tenants and managers are required to comply with the HIPAA privacy rule, security standards, and standards for electronic healthcare transactions. State laws also govern the privacy of individual health information, and these laws are, in some jurisdictions, more stringent than HIPAA. Other federal and state laws govern the privacy of individually identifiable information.

If we or our tenants or managers fail to comply with applicable federal or state standards, we or they could be subject to civil sanctions and criminal penalties, which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We may incur significant costs complying with the ADA and similar laws.

Under the ADA, places of public accommodation and/or commercial facilities must meet federal requirements related to access and use by disabled persons. We may be required to make substantial capital expenditures at our properties to comply with this law. In addition, non-compliance could result in the imposition of fines or an award of damages to private litigants.

A number of additional federal, state, and local laws and regulations exist regarding access by disabled persons. These regulations may require modifications to our properties or may affect future renovations. These expenditures may have an adverse impact on overall returns on our investments.

The operations of some of our communities are dependent upon payments from the Medicare and Medicaid programs.

As of December 31, 2015, approximately 97% of our NOI was generated from properties where a majority of the revenue is derived from private resources, and the remaining 3% of our NOI was generated from properties where a majority of the revenue was derived from Medicare and Medicaid reimbursements. Operations at most of our Medicare and Medicaid dependent properties currently produce sufficient cash flow to pay our allocated rents or our minimum returns, but operations at certain of these properties do not. Even at properties where less than a majority of the NOI comes from Medicare or Medicaid payments, a reduction in such payments could materially adversely affect profits of, or result in losses to, our tenants or managers. With the background of the current and projected federal budget deficit and other federal priorities and continued challenging state fiscal conditions, there have been numerous recent legislative and regulatory actions or proposed actions with respect to federal Medicare and state Medicaid rates and federal payments to states for Medicaid programs. For further information regarding such programs, see elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, including under the caption “Business—Government Regulation and Reimbursement” in Part 1, Item 1 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, and under the caption “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Impact of Government Reimbursement” in Part II, Item 7 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. If and to the extent Medicare or Medicaid rates are reduced from current levels, or if rate increases are less than increases in operating costs, such changes could have a material adverse effect on the ability of our tenants to pay us rent, the profitability of our managed senior living communities and the values of our properties. In addition, the revenues that we or our tenants receive from Medicare and Medicaid may be subject to statutory and regulatory changes, retroactive rate adjustments, recovery of program overpayments or set offs, administrative rulings and policy interpretations, and payment delays, any of which could have a material adverse effect on the ability of our tenants to pay us rent, the profitability of our managed senior living communities and the values of our properties.

Provisions of the ACA could adversely affect us or our tenants and managers.

The ACA contains insurance changes, payment changes and healthcare delivery systems changes that have affected, and will continue to affect, us, our tenants and managers. Examples of these, and other information regarding such programs, are provided below as well as under the caption “Business—Government Regulation and Reimbursement” in Part 1, Item 1 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K and under the caption “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Impact of Government Reimbursement” in Part II, Item 7 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Provisions of the ACA include multiple reductions to the annual market basket updates for inflation that may result in SNF Medicare payment rates being less than for the preceding fiscal year. We are unable to predict how potential Medicare rate reductions under the ACA will affect our tenants’ and our managers’ future financial results of operations; however, the effect may be adverse and material and hence adverse and material to our future financial condition and results of operations.

The ACA also established an Independent Payment Advisory Board to submit legislative proposals to Congress and take other actions with a goal of reducing Medicare spending growth. When and if such spending reductions take effect, they may be adverse and material to our tenants’ ability to pay rent to us, the profitability of our managed senior living communities and the values of our properties. The ACA includes other changes that may affect us, our tenants and our managers, such as enforcement reforms and Medicare and Medicaid program integrity control initiatives, new compliance, ethics and public disclosure requirements, initiatives to encourage the development of home and community based long term care services rather than institutional services under Medicaid, value based purchasing plans and a Medicare post acute care pilot program to develop and evaluate making a bundled payment for services, including hospital, physician and SNF services, provided during an episode of care.

In June 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld two major provisions of the ACA—the individual mandate, which requires most Americans to maintain health insurance or to pay a penalty, and the Medicaid expansion, which requires states to expand their Medicaid programs by 2014 to cover all individuals under the age of 65 with incomes not exceeding 133% of the federal poverty level. In upholding the Medicaid expansion, the U.S. Supreme Court held that it violated the U.S. Constitution as drafted but remedied the violation by modifying the expansion to preclude the Secretary of HHS from withholding existing federal Medicaid funds from states that fail to comply with Medicaid expansion, instead allowing the Secretary only to deny new expansion funding. Under the ACA, the federal government will pay for 100% of a state’s Medicaid expansion costs for the first three years (2014-2016) and gradually reduce its subsidy to 90% for 2020 and future years. As of January 12, 2016, 31 states plus the District of Columbia had elected to expand Medicaid eligibility as provided under the ACA, 16 states had elected not to broaden Medicaid eligibility, and three remained undecided; those states choosing not to participate in Medicaid expansion are forgoing the federal funds that would otherwise be available for that purpose.

Changes implemented under the ACA resulting in reduced payments for services or the failure of Medicare, Medicaid or insurance payment rates to cover increasing costs could adversely and materially affect the ability of our tenants to pay rent to us, the profitability of certain of our managed senior living communities and the values of our properties.

The U.S. economy’s recovery to date from its most recent recession has been slow, unsteady and incomplete.

The U.S. economy’s recovery to date from its most recent recession has been slow, unsteady and incomplete, which has created volatile market conditions. While the markets had been showing signs of stabilization and growth, new challenges have arisen, including uncertain U.S. Federal Reserve policy regarding the timing and amount of future increases in interest rates and the risk that declining overseas markets may hinder the growth of the U.S. economy. It remains unclear whether the U.S. economy will be able to withstand these market challenges and global uncertainty and achieve meaningful and sustained growth. Economic weakness in the U.S. economy generally or a new recession would likely adversely affect our financial condition and that of our tenants, and could impact the ability or willingness of our tenants to renew our leases or pay rent to us.

We are limited in our ability to operate or manage our properties and are thus dependent on the managers and tenants of our properties.

Because federal income tax laws restrict REITs and their subsidiaries from operating or managing health care facilities, we do not operate or manage our senior living communities. Instead, we lease nearly all of our senior living communities to operating companies or to our subsidiaries that qualify as TRSs under the IRC. We have retained Five Star and another third party manager to operate and manage our senior living communities that are leased to our subsidiaries. Our income from our properties may be adversely affected if our managers or tenants fail to provide quality services and amenities to residents or if they fail to maintain quality services. While we monitor our managers’ and tenants’ performances and apply asset management strategies and discipline, we have limited recourse under our management agreements and leases if we believe that the managers or tenants are not performing adequately. Failure by our managers or tenants to fully perform the duties agreed to in our management agreements and leases could adversely affect our results of operations. In addition, our managers and tenants operate, and in some cases own or have invested in, properties that compete with our properties, which may result in conflicts of interest. Also, fees paid to our managers are often set as a percentage of gross revenues rather than profits. As a result, our managers and tenants have in the past made, and may in the future make, decisions regarding competing properties or our properties’ operations that seek to increase their fees but which may not be in our best interests.

Risks Related to Our Business

We may be unable to access the capital necessary to repay our debts, invest in our properties or fund acquisitions.

To retain our qualification for taxation as a REIT, we are required to distribute at least 90% of our annual REIT taxable income (excluding capital gains) and satisfy a number of organizational and operational requirements to which REITs are subject. Accordingly, we generally will not be able to retain sufficient cash from operations to repay debts, invest in our properties or fund acquisitions. Our business and growth strategies depend, in part, upon our ability to raise additional capital at reasonable costs to repay our debts, invest in our properties and fund acquisitions. Because of the volatility in the availability of capital to businesses on a global basis and the increased volatility in most debt and equity markets generally, our ability to raise reasonably priced capital is not guaranteed; we may be unable to raise reasonably priced capital because of reasons related to our business, market perceptions of our prospects, the terms of our indebtedness or for reasons beyond our control, such as market conditions. If we are unable to raise reasonably priced capital, our business and growth strategies may fail and we may be unable to remain qualified for taxation as a REIT.

Increasing interest rates may adversely affect us and the value of an investment in our shares.

Since the most recent recession, the U.S. Federal Reserve has taken actions which have resulted in low interest rates prevailing in the marketplace for a historically long period of time. In December 2015, the U.S. Federal Reserve raised its benchmark interest rate by a quarter of a percentage point. Market interest rates may continue to increase and the increase may materially and negatively affect us. One of the factors that investors typically consider important in deciding whether to buy or sell our common shares is the distribution rate with respect to such shares relative to prevailing market interest rates. If market interest rates go up, investors may expect a higher distribution rate before investing in our common shares or may sell our common shares and seek alternate investments with a higher distribution rate. Sales of our common shares may cause a decline in the market prices of such shares, which would reduce our market capitalization and total shareholder return.

The potential negative impact on the value of our shares may increase our cost of capital, including decreasing the amount of equity and debt we may be able to raise, increasing the extent of dilution from any equity offering we may make or increasing the costs to us for any such equity or debt offering.

Amounts outstanding under our revolving credit facility and term loans require interest to be paid at variable interest rates. When interest rates increase, so will our interest costs, which could adversely affect our cash flow, our ability to pay principal and interest on our debt, our cost of refinancing our debt when it becomes due and our ability to make or sustain distributions to our shareholders. Additionally, if we choose to hedge our interest rate risk, we cannot assure that the hedge will be effective or that our hedging counterparty will meet its obligations to us.

An increase in interest rates could decrease the amount buyers may be willing to pay for our properties, thereby reducing the market value of our properties and limiting our ability to sell properties or to obtain mortgage financing

secured by our properties. Further, increased interest rates may effectively increase the cost of properties we acquire to the extent we utilize leverage for those acquisitions and may result in a reduction in our acquisitions to the extent we reduce the amount we offer to pay for properties, due to the effect of increased interest rates, to a price that sellers may not accept.

Our properties and their operations are subject to extensive regulations.

Various governmental authorities mandate certain physical characteristics of senior housing properties, clinics, other healthcare communities and biotech laboratories. Changes in laws and regulations relating to these matters may require significant expenditures. Our leases, other than our MOB leases, and our management agreements generally require our tenants or managers to maintain our properties in compliance with applicable laws and regulations, and we expend resources to monitor their compliance. However, our tenants or managers may neglect maintenance of our properties if they suffer financial distress. Under some of our leases, we have agreed to fund capital expenditures in return for rent increases and minimum returns due to us, with respect to our managed senior living communities increase by a defined percentage of the capital expenditures we fund at those communities. Our available financial resources or those of our tenants or managers may be insufficient to fund the expenditures required to operate our properties in accordance with applicable laws and regulations. If we fund these expenditures, our tenants’ financial resources may be insufficient to satisfy their increased rental payments to us or our managed senior living communities may fail to generate profits sufficient to fund our minimum returns.

Licensing, Medicare and Medicaid laws also require our tenants who operate senior living communities, hospitals, clinics and other healthcare communities to comply with extensive standards governing their operations. In addition, certain laws prohibit fraud by senior living operators, hospitals and other healthcare communities, including civil and criminal laws that prohibit false claims in Medicare, Medicaid and other programs and that regulate patient referrals. In recent years, the federal and state governments have devoted increasing resources to monitoring the quality of care at senior living communities and to anti‑fraud investigations in healthcare operations generally. The ACA also facilitates the DOJ’s ability to investigate allegations of wrongdoing or fraud at SNFs. When violations of anti‑fraud, false claims, anti-kickback or physician referral laws are identified, federal or state authorities may impose civil monetary damages, treble damages, repayment requirements and criminal sanctions. Healthcare communities may also be subject to license revocation or conditional licensure and exclusion from Medicare and Medicaid participation or conditional participation. When quality of care deficiencies or improper billing are identified, various laws may authorize civil money penalties or fines; the suspension, modification, or revocation of a license or Medicare/Medicaid participation; the suspension or denial of admissions of residents; the denial of payments in full or in part; the implementation of state oversight, temporary management or receivership; and the imposition of criminal penalties. We, our tenants and managers receive notices of potential sanctions from time to time, and governmental authorities impose such sanctions from time to time on our communities which our tenants and managers operate. If our tenants or managers are unable to cure deficiencies which have been identified or which are identified in the future, these sanctions may be imposed, and if imposed, may adversely affect our tenants’ ability to pay rents to us, our returns and our ability to identify substitute tenants or managers. Federal and state requirements for change in control of healthcare communities, including, as applicable, approvals of the proposed operator for licensure, CON, and Medicare and Medicaid participation, may also limit or delay our ability to find substitute tenants or managers. If any of our tenants or managers becomes unable to operate our properties, or if any of our tenants becomes unable to pay its rent or generate and pay our minimum returns because it has violated government regulations or payment laws, such incidents may trigger a default under their leases and management agreements with us and our or our tenants’ or managers’ credit agreements, and we may experience difficulty in finding a substitute tenant or manager or selling the affected property for a fair and commercially reasonable price, and the value of an affected property may decline materially.

Various laws administered by the FDA and other agencies regulate the operations of our tenants that operate biotech laboratories that develop, manufacture, market or distribute pharmaceuticals or medical devices. Once a product is approved, the FDA maintains oversight of the product and its developer and can withdraw its approval, recall products or suspend their production, impose or seek to impose civil or criminal penalties on the developer or take other actions for the developer’s failure to comply with regulatory requirements, including anti‑fraud, false claims, anti-kickback or physician referral laws. Other concerns affecting our biotech laboratory tenants include the potential for subsequent discovery of safety concerns and related litigation, ensuring that the product qualifies for reimbursement under Medicare, Medicaid or other federal or state programs, cost control initiatives of payment programs, the potential for litigation over

the validity or infringement of intellectual property rights related to the product, the eventual expiration of relevant patents and the need to raise additional capital. The cost of compliance with these regulations and the risks described in this paragraph, among others, could adversely affect the ability of our biotech laboratory tenants to pay rent to us.

We may be unable to grow our business by acquisitions and our acquisitions may not be successful.

An element of our business plan involves the acquisition of additional properties. Our ability to complete attractive acquisitions may be subject to risks associated with:

competition from other investors, including publicly traded and private REITs, numerous financial institutions, individuals and public and private companies;

contingencies in our acquisition agreements;

the availability of financing; and

the terms of our indebtedness.

Additionally, we might encounter unanticipated difficulties and expenditures relating to any acquired properties. For example:

any failure to comply with licensing requirements at our managed senior living communities may prevent us from renewing licenses at senior living communities we own or prevent us from obtaining licenses at senior living communities we want to acquire;

newly acquired properties might require significant management attention that would otherwise be devoted to our ongoing business;

we might never realize the anticipated benefits of our acquisitions;

notwithstanding pre-acquisition due diligence, we do not believe that it is possible to fully understand a property before it is owned and operated for an extended period of time, and we could acquire a property that contains undisclosed defects in design or construction;

the market in which an acquired property is located may experience unexpected changes that adversely affect the property’s value;

the occupancy of properties that we acquire may decline during our ownership, and rents or returns that are in effect or expected at the time a property is acquired may decline thereafter;

property operating costs for our acquired properties may be higher than anticipated and our acquired properties may not yield expected returns;

if we finance acquisitions using new debt or equity issuances, such financing may result in shareholder dilution; and

we may acquire properties subject to liabilities and without any recourse, or with only limited recourse, for unknown liabilities such as liabilities for cleanup of undisclosed environmental contamination, claims by tenants, vendors, or other persons dealing with the former owners of the properties and claims for indemnification by general partners, directors, officers and others indemnified by the former owners of the properties.

For these reasons, among others, our business plan to acquire additional properties may not succeed or may cause us to experience losses.

We face significant competition and we may be unable to profit from our managed senior living communities.

We face significant competition for acquisition opportunities from other investors, including publicly traded and private REITs, numerous financial institutions, individuals and public and private companies. Because of competition, we may be unable to, or may pay a significantly increased purchase price to, acquire a desired property. Some of our competitors may have greater financial and other resources than we have.

In addition, our leased properties, particularly our MOBs, face competition for tenants. Some competing properties may be newer, better located or more attractive to tenants. Competing properties may have lower rates of occupancy than our properties, which may result in competing owners offering available space at lower rents than we offer at our properties. This competition may affect our ability to attract and retain tenants and may reduce the rents we are able to charge.

Furthermore, the managers of our managed senior living communities compete with numerous other companies that provide senior living services, including home healthcare companies and other real estate based service providers. Although some states require CONs to develop new SNFs and assisted living communities, these may not prevent or meaningfully reduce competition; moreover, there are fewer barriers to competition for home healthcare, for independent and assisted living services or for other real estate based services. We cannot assure that our managers will be able to attract a sufficient number of residents to our managed senior living communities at rates that would generate acceptable returns or that they will be able to attract employees and keep wages and other employee benefits, insurance costs and other operating expenses at levels which will allow our managed senior living communities to compete successfully or to operate profitably.

Increasing investor interest in healthcare related real estate may increase competition and reduce our growth.

Our business is highly competitive and we expect that it may become more competitive in the future. We compete with a number of publicly traded and private REITs, numerous financial institutions, individuals and public and private companies who are actively engaged in our business, some of which are larger and have a lower cost of capital than we do. In the past, periods of economic recession in the economy generally have sometimes caused some investors to focus on healthcare and healthcare real estate investments because some investors believe these types of investments may be less affected by general economic circumstances than most other investments. Further, in light of the currently low historical market interest rates and increased leverage utilized by financial and other buyers, purchase prices for properties have experienced increases resulting in lower rates of returns. These developments could result in increased competition for investments, fewer investment opportunities available to us and lower spreads over the cost of our capital, all of which would limit our ability to grow our business and improve our financial results.

Competition from new communities may adversely affect some of our communities.

In recent years, a significant number of new assisted living communities have been developed, and this increased development activity may continue in the future. In most states these communities are subject to less stringent regulations than SNFs and can operate with comparatively fewer personnel and at comparatively lower costs. As a result of offering newer accommodations at equal or lower costs, these assisted living properties and other senior living alternatives, including home healthcare, often attract persons who would have previously become SNF residents. Many of the residents attracted to new assisted living properties were the most profitable SNF patients, since they paid higher rates than Medicaid or Medicare would pay and they required less amounts of care. Historically, state requirements of obtaining CONs to develop new properties have somewhat reduced competition among SNFs; however, many states are eliminating or reducing these barriers. Also, there are few regulatory barriers to competition for home healthcare or for independent and assisted living services. These competitive factors have caused some SNFs which we own to decline in value. This decline may continue as assisted living communities or other elderly care alternatives, such as home healthcare, expand their businesses. Each of our tenants of our senior living communities faces similar risks. These competition risks may prevent our tenants and managers from maintaining or improving occupancy at our properties, which may increase the risk of

default under our leases and management agreements and adversely affect the profitability of our managed senior living communities.

When we renew leases or lease to new tenants of our MOBs our rents may decline and our expenses may increase and changes in tenants’ requirements for leased MOB space may adversely affect us.

When we renew leases or lease to new tenants of our MOBs we may receive less rent than we currently receive from existing tenants at our MOBs. Market conditions may require us to lower our rents to retain tenants at our MOBs. When we lease to new tenants or renew leases for our MOBs we may have to spend substantial amounts for leasing commissions, tenant improvements or other tenant inducements. Many of our leases for our MOBs are especially suited to the particular business of our tenants. Because these properties have been designed or physically modified for a particular tenant, if the current lease is terminated or not renewed, we may be required to renovate the property at substantial costs, decrease the rent we charge or provide other concessions in order to lease the property to another tenant. MOB tenants have been generally increasingly seeking to increase their space utilization under their leases, including reducing the amount of square footage per employee at leased properties, which may reduce the demand for leased space. If a significant number of such events occur, our income and cash flow may materially decline and our ability to make regular distributions to our shareholders may be jeopardized.

We may be unable to lease our properties when our leases expire.

Although we typically will seek to renew our leases with current tenants as these leases approach expiration, we cannot assure that we will be successful in doing so. If our tenants do not renew their leases, we may be unable to locate new tenants to maintain or increase the historical occupancy rates of, or rents from, our properties.

Ownership of real estate is subject to environmental and climate change risks.

Ownership of real estate is subject to risks associated with environmental hazards. We may be liable for environmental hazards at, or migrating from, our properties, including those created by prior owners or occupants, existing tenants or managers, abutters or other persons. Various federal and state laws impose liabilities upon property owners, such as us, for any environmental damages arising at, or migrating from, properties they own, and we cannot assure that we will not be held liable for environmental investigation and clean up at, or near, our properties, including at sites we own and lease to our tenants or managers. As an owner or previous owner of properties which contain environmental hazards, we also may be liable to pay damages to governmental agencies or third parties for costs and damages they incur arising from environmental hazards at, or migrating from, our properties. Moreover, the costs and damages which may arise from environmental hazards are often difficult to project and may be substantial.

We believe any asbestos in our buildings is contained in accordance with current regulations, and we have no current plans to remove it. If we removed the asbestos at our properties or demolished these properties, certain environmental regulations govern the manner in which the asbestos must be handled and removed, and we could incur substantial costs complying with such regulations.

There have recently been severe weather activities in different parts of the country that some observers believe evidence global climate change. Such severe weather that may result from climate change may have an adverse effect on individual properties we own. Further, the current political debate about climate change has resulted in various treaties, laws and regulations which are intended to limit carbon emissions. We believe these laws being enacted or proposed may cause energy costs at our properties to increase. Laws enacted to mitigate climate change may make some of our buildings obsolete or cause us to make material investments in our properties which could materially and adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations. For more information regarding climate change matters and their possible adverse impact on us, please see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Impact of Climate Change.” in Part II, Item 7 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Real estate ownership creates risks and liabilities.

In addition to the risks related to environmental hazards and climate change, our business is subject to other risks associated with real estate ownership, including:

newly acquired properties might require significant management attention that would otherwise be devoted to our ongoing business;

we might never realize the anticipated benefits of our acquisitions;

notwithstanding pre acquisition due diligence, we do not believe that it is possible to fully understand a property before it is owned and operated for an extended period of time, and we could acquire a property that contains undisclosed defects in design or construction;

the market in which the acquired property is located may experience unexpected changes that adversely affect the property’s value;

the occupancy of properties that we acquire may decline during our ownership, and rents or returns that are in effect or expected at the time a property is acquired may decline thereafter;

property operating costs for our acquired properties may be higher than anticipated and our acquired properties may not yield expected returns;

if we finance acquisitions using new debt or equity issuances, such financing may result in shareholder dilution;

the illiquid nature of real estate markets, which limits our ability to sell our assets rapidly to respond to changing market conditions;

the subjectivity of real estate valuations and changes in such valuations over time;

property and casualty losses;

costs that may be incurred relating to property maintenance and repair, and the need to make expenditures due to changes in governmental regulations, including the ADA;

legislative and regulatory developments that may occur at the federal, state and local levels that have direct or indirect impact on the ownership, leasing and operation of our properties; and

litigation incidental to our business.

We have a substantial amount of indebtedness and other obligations, which could adversely affect our financial condition, and we may incur additional debt.

As of December 31, 2015, we had $3.5 billion in debt outstanding, which was 51.0% of our total book capitalization. These obligations are substantial, could have important consequences to holders of our common shares and could limit our ability to obtain financing for working capital, capital expenditures, acquisitions, refinancing, lease

obligations or other purposes. They may also increase our vulnerability to adverse economic, market and industry conditions, limit our flexibility in planning for, or reacting to, changes in our business operations or to our industry overall, and place us at a disadvantage in relation to competitors that have lower debt levels. In addition, amounts outstanding under our revolving credit facility and term loans require interest to be paid at variable interest rates. When interest rates increase, so will our interest costs, which could adversely affect our cash flow, our ability to pay principal and interest on our debt and our cost of refinancing our debt when it becomes due. For further information regarding our exposure to risks associated with market changes in interest rates, please see elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, including under the caption “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk.” Additionally, if we choose to hedge our interest rate risk, we cannot assure that the hedge will be effective or that our hedging counterparty will meet its obligations to us. Any or all of the above events and factors could have an adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.

If we default under a loan, including any default in covenants contained in our revolving credit facility and term loan agreements or our senior unsecured notes indentures and their supplements, we may be in default under any other loan that has cross-default provisions, further borrowings under our existing revolving credit facility may be prohibited, outstanding indebtedness under our revolving credit facility and term loan agreements, our senior unsecured notes indentures and their supplements or other loans may be accelerated, and we could be forced to liquidate our assets for less than the values we would receive in a more orderly process.

Our revolving credit facility and term loan agreements and our senior unsecured notes indentures and their supplements contain terms limiting our ability to incur additional debt. These terms, or our failure or inability to meet them, could adversely affect our business and may prevent us from making distributions to our shareholders.

Our revolving credit facility agreement includes various conditions to our borrowing and our revolving credit facility and term loan agreements include various financial and other covenants, including covenants requiring us to maintain certain minimum debt service coverage and leverage ratios, and events of default. Our senior unsecured notes indentures and their supplements also impose customary restrictions on us, including requiring us to comply with certain debt to asset ratios and debt service coverage ratios if we want to incur additional debt and requiring us to maintain at least a specified ratio of total unencumbered assets to debt. We may not be able to satisfy all of these conditions or may default on some of these covenants for various reasons, including matters which are beyond our control. Further, maintaining compliance with these covenants may limit our ability to pursue actions that may otherwise be beneficial to us and our shareholders.

If we are unable to borrow under our revolving credit facility, we may be unable to meet our business obligations or to grow by buying additional properties, or we may be required to sell some of our properties. If we default under our revolving credit facility or term loan agreements, our lenders may demand immediate payment and the lenders under our revolving credit facility may elect not to make further borrowings available to us. Additionally, during the continuance of any event of default under these agreements, we will be limited or in some cases prohibited from making distributions on our common shares. Any default under our revolving credit facility or term loan agreements that resulted in our obligations to repay outstanding indebtedness being accelerated or in our no longer being permitted to borrow under our revolving credit facility would likely have serious and adverse consequences to us and would likely cause the market price of our common shares to materially decline.

In the future, we may obtain additional debt financing, and the covenants and conditions which apply to any such additional indebtedness may be more restrictive than the covenants and conditions contained in our revolving credit facility and term loan agreements and our senior unsecured notes indentures and their supplements. Defaults under our future debt could likely have the same consequences as described above.

RMR LLC and our tenants and senior living managers rely on information technology for their operations, and any material failure, inadequacy, interruption or security failure of that technology could harm our business.

RMR LLC and our tenants and senior living managers rely on information technology networks and systems, including the Internet, to process, transmit and store electronic information and to manage or support a variety of our business processes, including medical records, financial transactions and maintenance of records, which may include personally identifiable information of tenants, residents and vendors, as well as lease data.

RMR LLC and our tenants and senior living managers rely on commercially available systems, software, tools and monitoring to provide security for processing, transmitting and storing confidential tenant, customer and vendor information, such as personally identifiable information relating to health and financial accounts. Although RMR LLC and our tenants and senior living managers take various actions to protect the security of the data maintained in their information systems, it is possible that their security measures will not prevent the systems’ improper functioning, or the improper disclosure of personally identifiable information such as in the event of cyber attacks. Security breaches, including physical or electronic break-ins, computer viruses, attacks by hackers and similar breaches, can create system disruptions, shutdowns or unauthorized disclosure of confidential information. Any failure to maintain proper function, security and availability of these information systems could interrupt our or their operations, damage our or their reputation, subject us or them to liability claims or regulatory penalties and could materially and adversely affect us or them.

Insurance on our properties may not adequately cover all losses and uninsured losses could materially and adversely affect us.

Generally, we or our tenants are responsible for the costs of insurance coverage for our properties, such as for casualty, including fire and extended coverage, and liability. Either we purchase the insurance ourselves and, except in the case of our managed senior living communities, our tenants are required to reimburse us, or the tenants buy the insurance directly and are required to list us as an insured party. Under certain circumstances insurance proceeds may not be adequate to restore our economic position with respect to an affected property and we could be materially and adversely affected. Furthermore, we do not have any insurance designated to limit any losses that we may incur as a result of known or unknown environmental conditions which are not caused by an insured event, such as, for example, fire or flood.

Our business could be adversely impacted if there are deficiencies in our disclosure controls and procedures or our internal control over financial reporting.

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. While 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 our internal control over financial reporting will be effective in accomplishing all control objectives all of the time. Deficiencies, including any material weaknesses, in our internal control over financial reporting could result in misstatements of our results of operations or our financial statements or could otherwise materially and adversely affect our business, reputation, results of operations, financial condition or liquidity.

Changes in lease accounting standards may materially and adversely affect us.

The Financial Accounting Standards Board, or FASB, is in the process of adopting new accounting rules, to be effective as early as fiscal years ending after December 2018, that will require companies to capitalize all leases on their balance sheets by recognizing a lessee’s rights and obligations. When the final rules are effective, many companies that account for certain leases on an “off balance sheet” basis will be required to account for such leases “on balance sheet.” This change will remove many of the differences in the way companies account for owned property and leased property, and could have a material effect on various aspects of our tenants’ businesses, including their credit quality and the factors they consider in deciding whether to own or lease properties. When the rules are effective, or as the effective date approaches, it could cause companies that lease properties to prefer shorter lease terms, in an effort to reduce the leasing liability required to be recorded on their balance sheets. The new rules could also make lease renewal options less attractive, as, under certain circumstances, the rules will require a tenant to assume that a renewal right will be exercised and accrue a liability relating to the longer lease term.

Risks Related to Our Relationships with RMR Inc., RMR LLC and Five Star

We may not realize the expected benefits of our acquisition of an interest in RMR Inc.

On June 5, 2015, we participated in a transaction with RMR Inc., RMR LLC, ABP Trust and three other REITs to which RMR LLC provides management services in which, among other things, we acquired 5,272,787 shares of RMR Inc.’s Class A common stock, ABP Trust acquired 2,345,000 of our common shares and we amended our management agreements with RMR LLC and extended them for continuing 20 year terms, or the Up-C Transaction. We subsequently

distributed 2,635,379 of the shares of RMR Inc.’s Class A common stock that we received in the Up-C Transaction pro rata to our shareholders. We believe the Up-C Transaction provided several benefits to us, including an attractive investment in the equity securities of RMR Inc., the further alignment of the interests of RMR LLC, Adam Portnoy and Barry Portnoy with our interests and greater transparency for us and our shareholders into the compensation practices and financial and operating results of RMR LLC. However, our investment in RMR Inc. is subject to various risks, including the highly competitive nature of RMR LLC’s business and the limited public market for RMR Inc.’s securities, among others, which may result in us losing some or all of our investment in RMR Inc. or otherwise not realizing the benefits we expect from the Up-C Transaction. For further information on the Up-C Transaction, see Note 5 to our Consolidated Financial Statements included in Part IV, Item 15 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

We are dependent upon RMR LLC to manage our business and implement our growth strategy.

We have no employees. Personnel and services that we require are provided to us by RMR LLC pursuant to our management agreements with RMR LLC. Our ability to achieve our business objectives depends on RMR LLC and its ability to manage our properties, identify and complete our acquisitions and dispositions and to execute our growth strategy. Accordingly, our business is dependent upon RMR LLC’s business contacts, its ability to successfully hire, train, supervise and manage its personnel and its ability to maintain its operating systems. If we lose the services provided by RMR LLC or its key personnel, our business and growth prospects may decline. We may be unable to duplicate the quality and depth of management available to us by becoming internally managed or by hiring another manager. Also, in the event RMR LLC is unwilling or unable to continue to provide management services to us, our cost of obtaining substitute services may be greater than the fees we pay RMR LLC under our management agreements, and as a result our expenses may increase.

Each of our executive officers is also an officer of RMR LLC. Because our executive officers have duties to RMR LLC as well as to our company, we do not have their undivided attention. They face conflicts in allocating their time and resources between our company and RMR LLC.

Our management structure and agreements and relationship with RMR LLC may restrict our investment activities and may create conflicts of interest or the perception of such conflicts.

RMR LLC is authorized to follow broad operating and investment guidelines and, therefore, has discretion in determining the properties that will be appropriate investments for us, as well as our individual operating and investment decisions. Our Board of Trustees periodically reviews our operating and investment guidelines and our operating activities and investments but it does not review or approve each decision made by RMR LLC on our behalf. In addition, in conducting periodic reviews, our Board of Trustees relies primarily on information provided to it by RMR LLC. Our Managing Trustees control RMR Inc., which is the managing member of and controls RMR LLC.

RMR LLC also acts as the manager for three other NYSE listed REITs: GOV, a publicly traded REIT that owns properties that are majority leased to government tenants, HPT, a publicly traded REIT that owns hotels and travel centers, and SIR, a publicly traded REIT that primarily owns and invests in net leased, single tenant properties. RMR LLC also provides services to other publicly and privately owned companies, including: Five Star, our largest tenant and a manager of our managed senior living communities; TA, which operates and franchises travel centers and convenience stores; and Sonesta, which operates, manages and franchises hotels, resorts and cruise ships. These multiple responsibilities to public companies and other businesses could create competition for the time and efforts of RMR LLC and Messrs. Barry and Adam Portnoy. Also, RMR LLC’s multiple responsibilities to us and to other companies to which it provides management services, including Five Star, may give rise to conflicts of interest or the appearance of such conflicts of interest.

Our management agreements were negotiated between related parties, and the terms, including the fees payable to RMR LLC, may not be as favorable to us as they would have been if they were negotiated between unrelated parties. Our property management fees are calculated based on rents we receive and construction supervision fees for construction at our properties overseen and managed by RMR LLC, and our base business management fee is calculated based upon the lower of the historical costs of our real estate investments and our market capitalization. These fee arrangements could incentivize RMR LLC to pursue acquisitions, capital transactions, tenancies and construction projects or to avoid disposing of our assets in order to increase or maintain its management fees. Our Independent Trustees oversee our acquisition and disposition program and capital transactions and regularly review our property level results of operations, rents, leasing

activities, budgets and construction activities as well as market trends. If we do not effectively manage our investment, disposition, and capital transactions and leasing, construction and other property management activities, we may pay increased management fees without proportional benefits to our shareholders.

In our management agreements with RMR LLC, we acknowledge that RMR LLC may engage in other activities or businesses and act as the manager to any other person or entity (including other REITs) even though such person or entity has investment policies and objectives similar to our policies and objectives and we are not entitled to preferential treatment in receiving information, recommendations and other services from RMR LLC. Accordingly, we may lose investment opportunities to, and may compete for tenants with, other businesses managed by RMR LLC.

Barry Portnoy is a Managing Director, officer and controlling shareholder (through ABP Trust) of RMR Inc. and an officer of RMR LLC, and Adam Portnoy is a Managing Director, President, Chief Executive Officer and controlling shareholder (through ABP Trust) of RMR Inc. and an officer of RMR LLC. Adam Portnoy and Barry Portnoy also own class A membership units of RMR LLC through their ownership of ABP Trust. All of the members of our Board of Trustees, including our Independent Trustees, are members of one or more boards of trustees or directors of other public companies to which RMR LLC provides management services. Our executive officers are also officers of RMR LLC. The foregoing individuals may hold equity in RMR Inc. and other public companies to which RMR LLC provides management services. Any such equity ownership or positions could create, or appear to create, conflicts of interest with respect to matters involving us, the other companies to which RMR LLC provides management services and RMR Inc. and its related parties.

The Up-C Transaction and the agreements entered into as part of the Up-C Transaction are among related persons, which increases the risk of allegations of conflicts of interest, and such allegations may impair our ability to realize the benefits we expect from the Up-C Transaction.

Because of the various relationships among us, GOV, RMR Inc., RMR LLC and the other REITs to which RMR LLC provides management services, the Up-C Transaction and the agreements entered into as part of the Up-C Transaction, including the amendment and extension of our management agreements for continuing 20 year terms, are among related persons. The Up-C Transaction and the terms thereof were negotiated and reviewed by a Joint Special Committee comprised solely of our Independent Trustees and the independent trustees of the other REITs, or the Joint Special Committee, and were separately approved and adopted by an Independent Trustee of ours who did not serve as an independent trustee of any of the other REITs, by a Special Committee of our Board of Trustees, comprised solely of our Independent Trustees, or our Special Committee, and by our Board of Trustees. Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC acted as financial advisor to the Joint Special Committee and Centerview Partners LLC acted as financial advisor to our Special Committee. Nonetheless, the Up-C Transaction may not be on terms as favorable to us or the other REITs to which RMR LLC provides management services as it would have been if it was negotiated among unrelated parties. As a result of these relationships, we may be subject to increased risk that our shareholders or the shareholders of the other REITs to which RMR LLC provides management services may challenge the Up-C Transaction and the agreements entered into as part of the Up-C Transaction. Any such challenge could result in substantial costs and a diversion our management’s attention, could have a material adverse effect on our reputation, business and growth and could adversely affect our ability to realize the benefits we expect from the Up-C Transaction, whether or not the allegations have merit or are substantiated.

The termination of our management agreements may require payment of a substantial termination fee, including in the case of a termination for unsatisfactory performance, which may limit our ability to end our relationship with RMR LLC.

The terms of our management agreements with RMR LLC automatically extend on December 31st of each year so that such terms thereafter end on the 20th anniversary of the date of the extension. We have the right to terminate these agreements: (1) at any time on 60 days’ written notice for convenience, (2) immediately upon written notice for cause, as defined in the agreements, (3) on written notice given within 60 days after the end of any applicable calendar year for a performance reason, as defined in the agreements, and (4) by written notice during the 12 months following a manager change of control, as defined in the agreements. However, if we terminate a management agreement for convenience, or if RMR LLC terminates a management agreement with us for good reason, as defined in such agreement, we are obligated to pay RMR LLC a termination fee in an amount equal to the sum of the present values of the monthly future fees, as

defined in the agreement, payable to RMR LLC for the remaining term of the agreement, which term, depending on the time of termination would be between 19 and 20 years. Additionally, if we terminate a management agreement for a performance reason, as defined in the agreement, we are obligated to pay RMR LLC the termination fee calculated as described above, but assuming a remaining term of ten years. These provisions substantially increase the cost to us of terminating the management agreements without cause, which may limit our ability to end our relationship with RMR LLC as our manager. The payment of the termination fee could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, including our ability to pay dividends to our shareholders.

Our management arrangements with RMR LLC may discourage a change of control of us.

Our management agreements with RMR LLC have 20 year terms that renew annually. As noted in the preceding risk factor, if we terminate either of these management agreements other than for cause or upon a change of control of our manager, we are obligated to pay RMR LLC a substantial termination fee, see “The termination of our management agreements may require payment of a substantial termination fee, including in the case of a termination for unsatisfactory performance, which may limit our ability to end our relationship with RMR LLC.” For these reasons, our management agreements with RMR LLC may discourage a change of control of us, including a change of control which might result in payment of a premium for our common shares.

We may be at an increased risk for dissident shareholder activities due to perceived conflicts of interest arising from our management structure.

In the past, in particular following periods of volatility in the overall market or declines in the market price of a company’s securities, shareholder litigation, dissident shareholder trustee nominations and dissident shareholder proposals have often been instituted against companies alleging conflicts of interest in business dealings with affiliated and related persons and entities. Our relationships with RMR Inc., Five Star, AIC, the other businesses and entities to which RMR LLC provides management services, Barry Portnoy and Adam Portnoy and other related persons of RMR LLC may precipitate such activities. These activities, if instituted against us, could result in further costs, which could be substantial in amount, and a diversion of our management’s attention even if the action is unfounded.

Our business dealings with Five Star may create conflicts of interest.

Five Star was originally organized as our subsidiary. We distributed substantially all our Five Star ownership to our shareholders on December 31, 2001. One of our Managing Trustees, Mr. Barry Portnoy, serves as a managing director of Five Star. RMR LLC provides management services to both us and Five Star. As of December 31, 2015, our leases with Five Star accounted for 30.8% of our annual rents. As of December 31, 2015, Five Star also managed 60 of our senior living communities. In the future, we expect to do additional business with Five Star. We believe that our current leases, management contracts and other business dealings with Five Star were entered on commercially reasonable terms and that our historical, continuing and increasing business dealings with Five Star have been beneficial to us. Our transactions with Five Star have been approved by our Independent Trustees; however, because of the historical and continuing relationships which we have with Five Star, each of our historical, continuing and expanding business dealings may not be on the same or as favorable terms as we might achieve with a third party with whom we do not have such relationships.

We may experience losses from our business dealings with AIC.

We have invested approximately $6.0 million in AIC, we have purchased a substantial portion of our property insurance in a program designed by AIC, and we periodically consider the possibilities for expanding our relationship with AIC to other types of insurance. We, ABP Trust, Five Star and four other companies to which RMR LLC provides management services each own 14.3% of AIC, and we and those other AIC shareholders participate in a combined property insurance program designed and reinsured in part by AIC. Our principal reason for investing in AIC and for purchasing insurance in these programs is to seek to improve our financial results by obtaining improved insurance coverages at lower costs than may be otherwise available to us or by participating in any profits which we may realize as an owner of AIC. While we believe we have in the past benefitted from these arrangements, these beneficial financial results may not occur in the future, and we may need to invest additional capital in order to continue to pursue these results. AIC's business involves the risks typical of an insurance business, including the risk that it may not operate profitably. Accordingly,

financial benefits from our business dealings with AIC may not be achieved in the future, and we may experience losses from these dealings.

Risks Related to Our Organization and Structure

Ownership limitations and certain provisions in our declaration of trust, bylaws and contracts, as well as certain provisions of Maryland law, may deter, delay or prevent a change in our control or unsolicited acquisition proposals.

Our declaration of trust prohibits any shareholder other than RMR LLC and its affiliates (as defined under Maryland law), and certain persons who have been exempted by our Board of Trustees, from owning (directly and by attribution) more than 9.8% of the number or value of shares of any class or series of our outstanding shares of beneficial interest, including our common shares. This provision of our declaration of trust is intended to assist with our REIT compliance under the IRC and otherwise to promote our orderly governance. However, this provision also inhibits acquisitions of a significant stake in us and may deter, delay or prevent a change in control of us or unsolicited acquisition proposals that a shareholder may consider favorable. Additionally, provisions contained in our declaration of trust and bylaws or under Maryland law may have a similar impact, including, for example, provisions relating to:

the authority of our Board of Trustees to make various elections under Maryland’s Unsolicited Takeover Act and other provisions of Maryland law which may delay or otherwise prevent a change of control of us;

shareholder voting rights and standards for the election of trustees and other provisions which require larger majorities for approval of actions which are not approved by our Trustees than for actions which are approved by our Trustees;

the authority of our Board of Trustees, and not our shareholders, to adopt, amend or repeal our bylaws and to fill vacancies on our Board of Trustees;

the fact that only our Board of Trustees or, if there are no trustees, our officers, may call shareholder meetings and that shareholders are not entitled to act without a meeting;

required qualifications for an individual to serve as a trustee and a requirement that certain of our Trustees be “Managing Trustees” and other Trustees be “Independent Trustees,” as defined in our governing documents;

limitations on the ability of our shareholders to propose nominees for election as trustees and propose other business to be considered at a meeting of our shareholders;

· limitations on the ability of our shareholders to remove our Trustees; and

· the authority of our Board of Trustees to create and issue new classes or series of shares (includingshares with voting rights and other rights and privileges that may deter a change in control) and issueadditional common shares.

In addition, our shareholders agreement with respect to AIC provides that AIC and the other shareholders of AIC may have rights to acquire our interests in AIC in the event that anyone acquires more than 9.8% of our shares or we experience some other change in control.

Our ownership interest in AIC may prevent shareholders from accumulating large share ownership, from nominating or serving as Trustees, or from taking actions to otherwise control our business.

As an owner of AIC, we are licensed and approved as an insurance holding company; and any shareholder who owns or controls 10% or more of our securities or anyone who wishes to solicit proxies for election of, or to serve as, one of our Trustees or for another proposal of business not approved by our Board of Trustees may be required to receive pre-clearance from the concerned insurance regulators. These pre-approval procedures may discourage or prevent investors from purchasing our securities, from nominating persons to serve as our Trustees or from taking other actions.

Our rights and the rights of our shareholders to take action against our Trustees and officers are limited.

Our declaration of trust limits the liability of our Trustees and officers to us and our shareholders for money damages to the maximum extent permitted under Maryland law. Under current Maryland law, our Trustees and officers will not have any liability to us and our shareholders for money damages other than liability resulting from:

actual receipt of an improper benefit or profit in money, property or services; or

active and deliberate dishonesty by the Trustee or officer that was established by a final judgment as being material to the cause of action adjudicated.

Our declaration of trust and indemnification agreements require us to indemnify any present or former trustee or officer, to the maximum extent permitted by Maryland law, who is made or threatened to be made a party to a proceeding by reason of his or her service in that capacity. However, except with respect to proceedings to enforce rights to indemnification, we will indemnify any person referenced in the previous sentence in connection with a proceeding initiated by such person against us only if such proceeding is authorized by our declaration of trust or bylaws or by our Board of Trustees or shareholders. In addition, we may be obligated to pay or reimburse the expenses incurred by our present and former Trustees and officers without requiring a preliminary determination of their ultimate entitlement to indemnification. As a result, we and our shareholders may have more limited rights against our present and former Trustees and officers than might otherwise exist absent the provisions in our declaration of trust and indemnification agreements or that might exist with other companies, which could limit your recourse in the event of actions not in your best interest.

Disputes with Five Star or RMR LLC and shareholder litigation against us or our Trustees and officers may be referred to binding arbitration proceedings.

Our contracts with Five Star and RMR LLC provide that any dispute arising under those contracts may be referred to binding arbitration proceedings. Similarly, our bylaws provide that actions by our shareholders against us or against our Trustees and officers, including derivative and class actions, may be referred to binding arbitration proceedings. As a result, we and our shareholders would not be able to pursue litigation for these disputes in courts against Five Star, RMR LLC or our Trustees and officers if the disputes were referred to arbitration. In addition, the ability to collect attorneys' fees or other damages may be limited in the arbitration proceedings, which may discourage attorneys from agreeing to represent parties wishing to commence such a proceeding.

We may change our operational, financing and investment policies without shareholder approval and we may become more highly leveraged, which may increase our risk of default under our debt obligations.

Our Board of Trustees determines our operational, financing and investment policies and may amend or revise our policies, including our policies with respect to our intention to qualify for taxation as a REIT, acquisitions, dispositions, growth, operations, indebtedness, capitalization and distributions, or approve transactions that deviate from these policies, without a vote of, or notice to, our shareholders. Policy changes could adversely affect the market value of our common shares and our ability to make distributions to our shareholders. Further, our organizational documents do not limit the amount or percentage of indebtedness, funded or otherwise, that we may incur. Our Board of Trustees may alter or eliminate our current policy on borrowing at any time without shareholder approval. If this policy changed, we could become more highly leveraged, which could result in an increase in our debt service costs. Higher leverage also increases the risk of default on our obligations. In addition, a change in our investment policies, including the manner in which we

allocate our resources across our portfolio or the types of assets in which we seek to invest, may increase our exposure to interest rate risk, real estate market fluctuations and liquidity risk.

Our bylaws designate the Circuit Court for Baltimore City, Maryland or, if that court does not have jurisdiction, the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, Baltimore Division, as the sole and exclusive forum for certain types of actions and proceedings that may be initiated by our shareholders, which could limit our shareholders’ ability to obtain a favorable judicial forum for disputes with us or our Trustees, officers, manager, agents or employees.

Our bylaws currently provide that, unless we consent in writing to the selection of an alternative forum or the dispute has been referred to binding arbitration, the Circuit Court for Baltimore City, Maryland, or if that court does not have jurisdiction, the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, Baltimore Division, will be the sole and exclusive forum for: (1) any derivative action or proceeding brought on our behalf; (2) any action asserting a claim for breach of a duty owed by any Trustee, officer, manager, agent or employee of ours to us or our shareholders; (3) any action asserting a claim against us or any Trustee, officer, manager, agent or employee of ours arising pursuant to the Maryland General Corporation Law, our declaration of trust or bylaws brought by or on behalf of a shareholder; or (4) any action asserting a claim against us or any Trustee, officer, manager, agent or employee of ours that is governed by the internal affairs doctrine. This choice of forum provision may limit a shareholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that the shareholder believes is favorable for disputes with us or our Trustees, officers, manager, agents or employees, which may discourage lawsuits against us and our Trustees, officers, manager or agents. Any person or entity purchasing or otherwise acquiring or holding any interest in our shares of beneficial interest shall be deemed to have notice of and to have consented to this provision of our bylaws, as they may be amended from time to time. This choice of forum provision of our bylaws does not abrogate or supersede other provisions of our bylaws stipulating that actions by our shareholders against us or against our Trustees and officers, including derivative and class actions, may be referred to binding arbitration proceedings.

Risks Related to Our Taxation

The loss of our status as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes could have significant adverse consequences.

As a REIT, we generally do not pay federal and state income taxes. However, actual qualification for taxation as a REIT under the IRC depends on satisfying complex statutory requirements, for which there are only limited judicial and administrative interpretations. We believe that we have been organized and have operated, and will continue to be organized and to operate, in a manner that qualified and will continue to qualify us to be taxed under the IRC as a REIT. However, we cannot be certain that, upon review or audit, the IRS will agree with this conclusion. Furthermore, there is no guarantee that the federal government will not someday eliminate REITs or adversely modify their taxation under the IRC.

Maintaining our qualification for taxation as a REIT will require us to continue to satisfy tests concerning, among other things, the nature of our assets, the sources of our income and the amounts we distribute to our shareholders. In order to meet these requirements, it may be necessary for us to sell or forgo attractive investments.

If we cease to maintain our qualification for taxation as a REIT, then our ability to raise capital might be adversely affected, we will be in breach under our revolving credit facility and term loan agreements, we may be subject to material amounts of federal and state income taxes and the value of our shares likely would decline. In addition, if we lose or revoke our qualification as a REIT for a taxable year, we will generally be prevented from requalifying as a REIT for the next four taxable years.

Distributions to shareholders generally will not qualify for reduced tax rates.

Dividends payable by U.S. corporations to noncorporate shareholders, such as individuals, trusts and estates, are generally eligible for reduced tax rates. Distributions paid by REITs, however, generally are not eligible for these reduced rates. The more favorable rates for corporate dividends may cause investors to perceive that an investment in a REIT is

less attractive than an investment in a non-REIT entity that pays dividends, thereby reducing the demand and market price of our shares.

REIT distribution requirements could adversely affect our ability to execute our business plan.

We generally must distribute annually at least 90% of our taxable income, subject to specified adjustments and excluding any net capital gain, in order for federal corporate income tax not to apply to earnings that we distribute. To the extent that we satisfy this distribution requirement, but distribute less than 100% of our taxable income, we will be subject to federal corporate income tax on our undistributed taxable income. We intend to make distributions to our shareholders to comply with the REIT requirements of the IRC. In addition, we will be subject to a 4% nondeductible excise tax if the actual amount that we pay out to our shareholders in a calendar year is less than a minimum amount specified under federal tax laws.

From time to time, we may generate taxable income greater than our income for financial reporting purposes prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, or GAAP, or differences in timing between the recognition of taxable income and the actual receipt of cash may occur. If we do not have other funds available in these situations we could be required to borrow funds on unfavorable terms, sell investments at disadvantageous prices or distribute amounts that would otherwise be invested in future acquisitions to make distributions sufficient to enable us to pay out enough of our taxable income to satisfy the REIT distribution requirement and to avoid corporate income tax and the 4% excise tax in a particular year. These alternatives could increase our costs or reduce our shareholders’ equity. Thus, compliance with the REIT requirements may hinder our ability to grow, which could adversely affect the value of our shares.

Even if we qualify and remain qualified for taxation as a REIT, we may face other tax liabilities that reduce our cash flow.

Even if we qualify and remain qualified for taxation as a REIT, we may be subject to federal, state and local taxes on our income and assets, including taxes on any undistributed income, excise taxes, state or local income, property and transfer taxes, such as mortgage recording taxes, and other taxes. See “Business—United States Federal Income Tax Considerations—Taxation as a REIT.” For example, some state jurisdictions may in the future limit or eliminate certain favorable deductions, including the dividends paid deduction, which could increase our income tax expense. In addition, in order to meet the requirements for qualification and taxation as a REIT, prevent the recognition of particular types of non-cash income, or avert the imposition of a 100% tax that applies to specified gains derived by a REIT from dealer property or inventory, we may hold some of our assets and operations through our TRSs or other subsidiary corporations that will be subject to corporate level income tax at regular rates. Any of these taxes would decrease cash available for distribution to our shareholders.

If arrangements involving our TRSs fail to comply as intended with the REIT qualification and taxation rules, we may fail to qualify for taxation as a REIT or be subject to significant penalty taxes.

We lease many of our properties to our TRSs pursuant to arrangements that, under the IRC, are intended to qualify the rents we receive from our TRSs as income that satisfies the REIT gross income tests. We also intend that our transactions with our TRSs be conducted on arm’s length bases so that we and our TRSs will not be subject to penalty taxes under the IRC applicable to mispriced transactions. While relief provisions can sometimes excuse REIT gross income test failures, significant penalty taxes can still be imposed.

For our TRS arrangements to comply as intended with the REIT qualification and taxation rules under the IRC, a number of requirements must be satisfied, including:

our TRSs may not directly or indirectly operate or manage a health care facility, as defined by the IRC;

the leases to our TRSs must be respected as true leases for federal income tax purposes and not as service contracts, partnerships, joint ventures, financings, or other types of arrangements;

the leased properties must constitute qualified health care properties (including necessary or incidental property) under the IRC;

the leased properties must be managed and operated on behalf of the TRSs by independent contractors who are less than 35% affiliated with us and who are actively engaged (or have affiliates so engaged) in the trade or business of managing and operating qualified health care properties for persons unrelated to us; and

the rental and other terms of the leases must be arm’s length.

There can be no assurance that the IRS or a court will agree with our assessment that our TRS arrangements comply as intended with applicable REIT qualification and taxation rules. If arrangements involving our TRSs fail to comply as intended, we may fail to qualify for taxation as a REIT or be subject to significant penalty taxes.

Risks Related to Our Securities

We cannot assure that we will continue to make distributions to our shareholders, and distributions we make may include a return of capital.

We intend to continue to make regular quarterly distributions to our shareholders. However:

our ability to make distributions will be adversely affected if any of the risks described herein, or other significant events, occur;

our making of distributions is subject to compliance with restrictions contained in our revolving credit facility and term loan agreements and may be subject to restrictions in future debt we may incur; and

any distributions will be made in the discretion of our Board of Trustees and will depend upon various factors that our Board of Trustees deems relevant, including our results of operations, our financial condition, debt and equity capital available to us, our expectation of our future capital requirements and operating performance, including our funds from operations, or FFO, our normalized funds from operations, or Normalized FFO, restrictive covenants in our financial or other contractual arrangements (including those in our revolving credit facility and term loan agreements), tax law requirements to maintain our qualification for taxation as a REIT, restrictions under Maryland law and our expected needs and availability of cash to pay our obligations.

For these reasons, among others, our distribution rate may decline or we may cease making distributions. Also, our distributions may include a return of capital.

Changes in market conditions could adversely affect the market price of our common shares.

As with other publicly traded equity securities and REIT securities, the value of our common shares depends on various market conditions that may change from time to time, including:

the extent of investor interest in our securities;

the general reputation of REITs and externally managed companies and the attractiveness of our equity securities in comparison to other equity securities, including securities issued by other real estate based companies or by other issuers less sensitive to rises in interest rates;

our underlying asset value;

investor confidence in the stock and bond markets, generally;

national economic conditions;

market interest rates;

changes in tax laws;

changes in our credit ratings; and

general market conditions.

We believe that one of the factors that investors consider important in deciding whether to buy or sell equity securities of a REIT is the distribution rate, considered as a percentage of the price of the equity securities, relative to market interest rates. Interest rates have been at historically low levels for an extended period of time. There is a general market perception that REIT shares outperform in low interest rate environments and underperform in rising interest rate environments when compared to the broader market. During 2015, there were periods when there were market expectations of rising interest rates, which temporarily increased market interest rates and resulted in declines in the value of REIT shares generally that exceeded any declines for the general market. In December 2015, the U.S. Federal Reserve raised its benchmark interest rate by a quarter of a percentage point. Market interest rates may continue to increase in the near to intermediate term. If market interest rates continue to increase, or if there is market expectation of such increases, prospective purchasers of REIT equity securities may want to achieve a higher distribution rate. Thus, higher market interest rates, or the expectation of higher interest rates, could cause the market price of our common shares to decline.

Further issuances of equity securities may be dilutive to current shareholders.

The interests of our existing shareholders could be diluted if we issue additional equity securities to finance future acquisitions or to repay indebtedness. Our ability to execute our business strategy depends on our access to an appropriate blend of debt financing, which may include secured and unsecured debt, and equity financing, which may include common and preferred shares.

The Notes are structurally subordinated to the payment of all indebtedness and other liabilities and any preferred equity of our subsidiaries.

We are the sole obligor on our outstanding senior unsecured notes, and our outstanding senior unsecured notes and any notes or other debt securities we may issue in the future, or (together with our outstanding senior unsecured notes) the Notes, are not, and any Notes we may issue in the future may not be, guaranteed by any of our subsidiaries. Our subsidiaries are separate and distinct legal entities and have no obligation, contingent or otherwise, to pay any amounts due on the Notes, or to make any funds available therefor, whether by dividend, distribution, loan or other payments. The rights of holders of Notes to benefit from any of the assets of our subsidiaries are subject to the prior satisfaction of claims of our subsidiaries’ creditors and any preferred equity holders. As a result, the Notes are, and, except to the extent that future Notes are guaranteed by our subsidiaries, will be, structurally subordinated to all of the debt and other liabilities and obligations of our subsidiaries, including guarantees of other indebtedness of ours, payment obligations under lease agreements, trade payables and preferred equity. As of December 31, 2015, our subsidiaries had total indebtedness and other liabilities (excluding security and other deposits and guaranties) of $774.3 million and our subsidiaries did not have any outstanding preferred equity.

The Notes are unsecured and effectively subordinated to all of our existing and future secured indebtedness to the extent of the value of the assets securing such indebtedness.

Our outstanding Notes are not secured and any Notes we may issue in the future may not be secured. Upon any distribution to our creditors in a bankruptcy, liquidation, reorganization or similar proceeding relating to us or our property, the holders of our secured debt will be entitled to exercise the remedies available to a secured lender under applicable law and pursuant to the instruments governing such debt and to be paid in full from the assets securing that secured debt before any payment may be made with respect to Notes that are not secured by those assets. In that event, because such Notes will not be secured by any of our assets, it is possible that there will be no assets from which claims of holders of such

Notes can be satisfied or, if any assets remain, that the remaining assets will be insufficient to satisfy those claims in full. If the value of such remaining assets is less than the aggregate outstanding principal amount of such Notes and accrued interest and all future debt ranking equally with such Notes, we will be unable to fully satisfy our obligations under such Notes. In addition, if we fail to meet our payment or other obligations under our secured debt, the holders of that secured debt would be entitled to foreclose on our assets securing that secured debt and liquidate those assets. Accordingly, we may not have sufficient funds to pay amounts due on such Notes. As a result, holders of Notes may lose a portion of or the entire value of their investment in such Notes. Further, the terms of the outstanding Notes permit, and the terms of any Notes we may issue in the future may permit us to incur additional secured indebtedness subject to compliance with certain debt ratios. The Notes that are not secured will be effectively subordinated to any such additional secured indebtedness. As of December 31, 2015, we had $667.5 million in secured mortgage debts.

There may be no public market for the Notes, and one may not develop, be maintained or be liquid.

Except in certain cases, we have not applied for listing of the outstanding Notes on any securities exchange or for quotation of the outstanding Notes on any automatic dealer quotation system and may not do so for Notes issued in the future. We can give no assurances concerning the liquidity of any market that may develop for these Notes, the ability of any investor to sell these Notes or the price at which investors would be able to sell them. Except in certain cases, if a market for the Notes does not develop, investors may be unable to resell these Notes for an extended period of time, if at all. If a market for these Notes does develop, it may not continue or it may not be sufficiently liquid to allow holders to resell them. Consequently, investors may not be able to liquidate their investment readily, and lenders may not readily accept the Notes as collateral for loans.

The Notes may trade at a discount from their initial issue price or principal amount, depending upon many factors, including prevailing interest rates, the ratings assigned by rating agencies, the market for similar securities and other factors, including general economic conditions and our financial condition, performance and prospects. Any decline in trading prices, regardless of cause, may adversely affect the liquidity and trading markets for the Notes.

A downgrade in credit ratings could materially adversely affect the market value of the Notes and may increase our cost of capital.

The outstanding Notes are rated by two rating agencies and any Notes we may issue in the future may be rated by one or more rating agencies. These credit ratings are continually reviewed by rating agencies and may change at any time based upon, among other things, our results of operations and financial condition. Negative changes in the ratings assigned to our debt securities could have an adverse effect on the market prices of the Notes and our costs and availability of capital, which could in turn have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and our ability to satisfy our debt service obligations.

Redemption may adversely affect noteholders’ return on the Notes.

We have the right to redeem some or all of the outstanding Notes prior to maturity and may have such a right with respect to any Notes we issue in the future. We may redeem such Notes at times when prevailing interest rates may be relatively low compared to the interest rate of such Notes. Accordingly, holders of such Notes may not be able to reinvest the redemption proceeds in a comparable security at an effective interest rate as high as that of the Notes.

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments.

None.

Item 2. Properties.

At December 31, 2015, we had real estate investments totaling $7.5 billion, at undepreciated cost, in 427 properties (451 buildings). At December 31, 2015, 58 properties (59 buildings) with an aggregate cost of $1.1 billion and an aggregate carrying value of $937.1 million were mortgaged or subject to capital lease obligations with an aggregate principal balance of $679.7 million.

The following table summarizes certain information about our properties as of December 31, 2015. All dollar amounts are in thousands:


	Number of	Number of	Undepreciated		Net Book
Location of Properties by State	Properties	Buildings	Carrying Value		Value
Alabama	7	7	$	67,365	$	58,952
Arizona	11	11		169,448		128,395
Arkansas	3	3		31,353		30,827
California	26	31		776,276		656,485
Colorado	12	13		119,502		95,875
Connecticut	2	2		10,931		9,544
Delaware	6	6		93,668		65,587
District of Columbia	2	2		66,816		60,337
Florida	29	34		679,282		524,044
Georgia	32	32		397,986		359,113
Hawaii	1	1		68,172		63,227
Idaho	2	2		16,937		15,531
Illinois	13	14		196,848		167,385
Indiana	13	13		204,672		176,060
Iowa	4	4		10,302		4,695
Kansas	4	4		58,722		42,179
Kentucky	9	9		101,545		65,308
Louisiana	6	6		6,989		6,846
Maryland	15	15		310,847		246,129
Massachusetts	21	24		1,109,842		1,042,499
Michigan	5	5		16,836		11,423
Minnesota	8	8		105,750		89,519
Mississippi	3	3		26,212		22,466
Missouri	7	7		143,613		139,987
Montana	1	1		29,366		28,882
Nebraska	13	13		62,685		46,168
Nevada	2	2		77,148		71,024
New Jersey	5	5		181,317		155,124
New Mexico	5	6		101,578		80,864
New York	6	7		210,665		187,815
North Carolina	15	15		197,900		174,271
Ohio	3	4		48,820		32,696
Oklahoma	4	4		28,338		24,139
Oregon	3	3		116,940		115,072
Pennsylvania	20	20		170,436		134,869
Rhode Island	1	1		10,040		9,870
South Carolina	21	21		172,226		144,565
South Dakota	3	3		7,589		3,235
Tennessee	13	13		80,351		64,279
Texas	28	28		516,191		418,777
Virginia


		Page
	Part I
Item 1.	Business	1
Item 1A.	Risk Factors	38
Item 1B.	Unresolved Staff Comments	60
Item 2.	Properties	60
Item 3.	Legal Proceedings	61
Item 4.	Mine Safety Disclosures	62
	Part II
Item 5.	Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities	62
Item 6.	Selected Financial Data	63
Item 7.	Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations	64
Item 7A.	Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk	102
Item 8.	Financial Statements and Supplementary Data	105
Item 9.	Changes in and Disagreements With Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure	105
Item 9A.	Controls and Procedures	105
Item 9B.	Other Information	105
	Part III
Item 10.	Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance	106
Item 11.	Executive Compensation	106
Item 12.	Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters	106
Item 13.	Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence	106
Item 14.	Principal Accountant Fees and Services	107
	Part IV
Item 15.	Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules	107

	Signatures