ANNALY CAPITAL MANAGEMENT INC 10-K

Item 1A. Risk Factors In September 2008, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were placed into the conservatorship of the FHFA, their federal regulator, pursuant to its powers under The Federal Housing Finance Regulatory Reform Act of 2008, a part of the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008. In addition to FHFA becoming the conservator of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the U.S. Department of the Treasury entered into Preferred Stock Purchase Agreements with the FHFA and have taken various actions intended to provide Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac with additional liquidity in an effort to ensure their financial stability. For example, in September 2019, FHFA and the U.S. Department of the Treasury agreed to modifications to the Preferred Stock Purchase Agreements that will permit Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to maintain capital reserves of $25 billion and $20 billion, respectively. In January 2025, the FHFA and the U.S. Department of the Treasury under the Biden Administration announced an agreement with each of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to modify the Preferred Stock Purchase Agreements to help ensure that the eventual release of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac from conservatorship will be orderly and reflect certain existing practices. In addition, under a separate side letter from FHFA to the U.S. Department of the Treasury, FHFA will solicit public input, before releasing either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac from conservatorship, regarding the potential impacts on the housing market and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Since Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were placed in federal conservatorship, the guarantee payment structure of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in the U.S. housing finance market has been discussed and re-examined by regulators and administrations. Members of the Trump Administration have recently discussed changes to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, although any final changes or approach remains uncertain. The future roles of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac could be significantly reduced and the nature of their guarantees could be eliminated or considerably limited relative to historical measurements. The U.S. Treasury could also stop providing credit support to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in the future. Any changes to the nature of the guarantees provided by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac could redefine what constitutes an Agency mortgage-backed security and could have broad adverse market implications. While the likelihood that major mortgage finance system reform will be enacted in the short term remains uncertain due to political and practical complexities of the topic, it is possible that the adoption of any such reforms could adversely affect the types of assets we can buy, the costs of these assets and our business operations. A reduction in the ability of mortgage loan originators to access Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to sell their mortgage loans may adversely affect the mortgage markets generally and adversely affect the ability of mortgagors to refinance their mortgage loans. In addition, any decline in the value of securities issued by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac may affect the value of MBS in general. If Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac was eliminated, or their structures were to change in a material manner that is not compatible with our business model, we would not be able to acquire Agency mortgage-backed securities from these entities, which could adversely affect our business operations. The Truth in Lending Act or other similar consumer protection laws and regulations expose an owner of whole mortgage loans and mortgage servicing rights to potential civil and administrative liability. Residential mortgage loan originators and servicers are required to comply with various federal, state and local laws and regulations, including anti-predatory lending laws and laws and regulations imposing certain restrictions on requirements on high-cost loans. For example, the federal Home Ownership and Equity Protection Act of 1994 (“HOEPA”), prohibits inclusion of certain provisions in residential mortgage loans that have mortgage rates or origination costs in excess of prescribed levels and requires that borrowers be given certain disclosures prior to origination. Failure of residential mortgage loan originators or servicers to comply with these laws, to the extent any of their residential mortgage loans become part of our investment portfolio, could subject us, as an assignee or purchaser of the related residential mortgage loans, to reputational harm, monetary penalties and the risk of the borrowers rescinding the affected residential mortgage loans. Lawsuits have been brought in various states making claims against assignees or purchasers of high-cost loans for violations of state law. Named defendants in these cases have included numerous participants within the secondary mortgage market. If loans in our portfolio are found to have been originated in violation of predatory or abusive lending laws, we could incur losses that would materially adversely affect our business. Our business is subject to, or affected by, numerous regulations, including regulations regarding mortgage loan servicing, underwriting, and loan originator compensation and others that could be issued in the future. For example, the CFPB’s “ability-to-repay” and “qualified mortgage” regulations impact the terms and conditions of all originated residential mortgage loans. Additionally, the CFPB has enforcement authority and broad discretionary regulatory authority to prohibit or condition terms, acts or practices relating to residential mortgage loans that the CFPB finds abusive, unfair, deceptive, or predatory, as well as to take other actions that the CFPB finds are necessary or proper to ensure responsible affordable mortgage credit remains available to consumers. These requirements can and do change as statutes and regulations are enacted, promulgated, amended, and interpreted, and the recent trends among federal and state lawmakers and regulators have been toward increasing compliance obligations in laws, regulations, and investigative procedures concerning the mortgage industry generally. As a result, we are unable to fully predict how laws or regulations that may be adopted in the future, will affect our business, results of operations and financial condition, or the environment for repurchase financing and other forms of borrowing, the investing environment for Agency MBS, non-Agency mortgage-backed securities and/or residential mortgage, and MSR. 21 ANNALY CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Item 1A. Risk Factors Some states have enacted, or may enact, similar laws or regulations, which in some cases may impose restrictions and requirements greater than those in place under federal laws and regulations. In addition, under the anti-predatory lending laws of some states, the origination of certain residential mortgage loans, including loans that are classified as “high cost” loans under applicable law, must satisfy a net tangible benefits test with respect to the borrower. This test, as well as certain standards set forth in the “ability-to-repay” and “qualified mortgage” regulations, may be highly subjective and open to interpretation. As a result, a court may determine that a residential mortgage loan did not meet the applicable standard or test even if the originator reasonably believed such standard or test had been satisfied. Failure of residential mortgage loan originators or servicers to comply with federal consumer protection laws and regulations could subject us, as an assignee or purchaser of these loans (or as an investor in securities backed by these loans), to monetary penalties and defenses to foreclosure, including by recoupment or setoff of damages and costs, which for some violations included the sum of all finance charges and fees paid by the consumer, and could result in rescission of the affected residential mortgage loans, which could adversely impact our business and financial results. The CFPB and other regulators (including the Federal Trade Commission) have provided multiple forms of guidance and promulgated multiple rules on the general subject of what the CFPB refers to as “junk fees.” For example, in April 2024, the CFPB took certain actions intended to stop illegal “junk fees” in the mortgage servicing industry, and in May 2024, the CFPB launched a public inquiry into “junk fees” associated with mortgage closing costs. It is possible that industry standard charges could be impacted through future regulatory action. The cost of whole loans and the servicing income derived from owning MSR could be affected by the CFPB categorizing any currently permissible fee or charge as “junk.” Our Residential Credit and MSR businesses are subject to complex and evolving legal and regulatory requirements, including how we oversee and are responsible for the actions of our third-party service providers, which exposes us to increased compliance, legal, and regulatory risk. While we are not required to obtain licenses to purchase mortgage-backed securities, the purchase of residential mortgage loans and certain business purpose mortgage loans in the secondary market requires us to maintain various state licenses. Acquiring the right to service residential mortgage loans and certain business purpose mortgage loans also requires us to maintain various state licenses, even though we currently do not expect to directly engage in loan servicing ourselves. Furthermore, we are required to comply with various information reporting and other regulatory requirements to maintain our licenses, and there is no assurance that we will be able to satisfy those requirements or other regulatory requirements applicable to our businesses of acquiring and servicing mortgage loans on an ongoing basis. Our failure to obtain or maintain required licenses or our failure to comply with regulatory requirements that are applicable to our businesses of acquiring and servicing mortgage loans may restrict our Residential Credit and MSR businesses and investment options and could harm our businesses and expose us to penalties or other claims. Although we utilize unaffiliated servicing companies to carry out the actual servicing of MSR and the loans we purchase together with the related MSR (including all direct interface with the borrowers), we are ultimately responsible, vis-à-vis the borrowers and state and federal regulators, for ensuring that the loans and MSR are serviced in accordance with the terms of the related loans and mortgages and applicable law and regulation. To manage this risk, we have a robust process that monitors the activities of the third party servicers. This oversight process is also subject t o regulatory requirements and expectations that we are expected to meet. Changes in laws or regulations governing our operations or our failure to comply with those laws or regulations affects our business. We are subject to regulation by laws at the local, state and federal level, including securities and tax laws and financial accounting and reporting standards. These laws and regulations, as well as their interpretation, may be changed from time to time and result in enhanced disclosure obligations. These regulations are complex, and there is no assurance that a court or regulator will not determine that we have materially failed to comply. Accordingly, any change in these laws or regulations or the failure to comply with these laws or regulations could have a material adverse impact on our business. Certain of these laws and regulations pertain specifically to REITs. 22 ANNALY CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Item 1A. Risk Factors The focus on environmental, social, and governance and climate change issues by some investors, governmental bodies and other stakeholders, as well as existing and proposed laws and regulations related to these topics, and any divergence in the approach to these subjects by different investors, governmental bodies and other stakeholders, affects our business, financial results and reputation. Our business faces increasing public scrutiny related to environmental, social, and governance activities. A variety of organizations measure the performance of companies on such topics, and the results of these assessments are widely publicized. Major institutional investors have publicly emphasized the importance of such measures to their investment decisions. These issues are also increasingly important to the general public and the media, and actual or perceived underperformance with respect to these topics could result in negative press or sentiment with respect to our business. In addition, actual or perceived effects of climate change could negatively impact house prices, housing-related costs, and borrower behavior. There is also governmental and regulatory interest across jurisdictions in improving the definition, measurement and disclosure of environmental, social, and governance factors in order to allow investors to validate and better understand related claims. To the extent we communicate environmental, social, and governance or climate-related statements, initiatives, commitments or goals in our SEC filings or in other disclosures, we face the risk of being accused of “greenwashing” to the extent our practices and policies do not match such claims. In addition, the SEC has established a climate and environmental, social, and governance task force to develop initiatives to identify related misconduct consistent with increased investor reliance on climate and environmental, social, and governance related disclosure and investment. As a result, the SEC has brought enforcement actions based on such disclosures not matching actual investment processes. In addition, the SEC under the Biden Administration finalized a rule requiring the disclosure of certain greenhouse gas emissions and climate-related risks; however, its enforcement has been stayed pending litigation challenging the rule. It remains to be seen what impact the Trump Administration will have on the SEC’s climate rule and the SEC’s climate and environmental, social, and governance task force and enforcement actions more generally; however, President Trump's campaign indicated that his administration will likely take a different approach to environmental, social and governance matters. In addition, in recent years “anti-environmental, social and governance” sentiment has increased in parts of the U.S., with several states and Congress having proposed or enacted “anti-environmental, social and governance” policies, legislation, or initiatives or issued related legal opinions. As such, we face increased scrutiny from stakeholders and governmental bodies who have diverging views related to business practices and company activities related to environmental, social and governance topics and climate change, which could result in reputational harm, litigation and other adverse consequences. Similar laws and regulations related to the disclosure and/or diligence of environmental, social, and governance and climate change-related risks have been enacted or proposed in U.S. states such as California, as well as the European Union and other jurisdictions. In addition, going forward, different jurisdictions at the state, federal and international level may pursue diverging approaches to environmental, social and governance and climate change-related matters. Compliance with any such new laws or regulations, and any diverging approaches to such laws and regulations in different jurisdictions, increases our regulatory burden and could make compliance more difficult and expensive, affect the manner in which we conduct our business and adversely affect our profitability and returns to our investors. We are subject to complex and evolving laws, regulations, rules, standards and contractual obligations regarding data privacy and security, which increases the cost of doing business, compliance risks and potential liability. We are subject to complex and evolving laws, regulations, rules, standards and contractual obligations relating to data privacy and the security of personal information, and any failure to comply with these laws, regulations, rules, standards and contractual obligations could expose us to liability and/or reputational damage. The legal and regulatory environment surrounding data privacy and security in the U.S. and international jurisdictions is constantly evolving. New business initiatives have increased, and may continue to increase, the extent to which we are subject to such U.S. and international data privacy and security regulations. As new data privacy and security-related laws, regulations, rules and standards are implemented, the time and resources needed for us to comply with such laws, regulations, rules and standards, as well as our potential liability for non-compliance and reporting obligations in the case of cyberattacks, information security breaches or other similar incidents, may significantly increase. Compliance with these laws, regulations, rules and standards may require us to change our policies, procedures and technology for information security, which could, among other things, make us more vulnerable to operational failures and to monetary penalties for breach of such laws, regulations, rules and standards. In the U.S., there are numerous federal, state and local data privacy and security laws and regulations governing the collection, sharing, use, retention, disclosure, security, storage, transfer and other processing of personal information. At the federal level, we are subject to, among other laws and regulations, the Gramm Leach Bliley Act (which regulates the confidentiality and security of customer information obtained by financial institutions and certain other types of financial services businesses) and regulations under it. Additionally, numerous states have enacted, or are in the process of enacting or considering, comprehensive state-level data privacy and security laws and regulations. Moreover, laws in all 50 U.S. states require 23 ANNALY CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Item 1A. Risk Factors businesses to provide notice under certain circumstances to consumers whose personal information has been disclosed as a result of a data breach. Further, when required by applicable laws, regulations, rules and industry standards, we strive to provide or cause our service providers to provide privacy policies which are accurate and comprehensive. We cannot, however, ensure that the disclosure of these privacy policies and other statements regarding our practices will be sufficient to protect us from claims, proceedings, liability or adverse publicity relating to data privacy and security or with respect to the legally permissible sharing of data. Although we endeavor to comply with our privacy policies and to ensure our service providers do the same, occurrence or allegations of noncompliance are possible and could subject us to potential government or legal action, including action based on arguments that the publication of these policies were deceptive, unfair, or misrepresentative of our actual practices. Any concerns about our data privacy and security practices, even if unfounded, could damage our reputation and adversely affect our business. Any failure or perceived failure by us to comply with our privacy policies, or applicable data privacy and security laws, regulations, rules, standards or contractual obligations, or any compromise of security that results in unauthorized access to, or unauthorized loss, destruction, use, modification, acquisition, disclosure, release or transfer of personal information, may result in requirements to modify or cease certain operations or practices, the expenditure of substantial costs, time and other resources, proceedings or actions against us, legal liability, governmental investigations, enforcement actions, claims, fines, judgments, awards, penalties, sanctions and costly litigation (including class actions). Any of the foregoing could harm our reputation, distract our management and technical personnel, increase our costs of doing business, adversely affect the demand for our products and services, and ultimately result in the imposition of liability, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. We are subject to risks and liabilities in connection with sponsoring, investing in and managing new funds and other investment accounts, including potential regulatory risks. We have, and may in the future, sponsor, manage and serve as general partner and/or manager of new funds or investment accounts. Such sponsorship and management of, and investment in, such funds and accounts may involve risks not otherwise present with a direct investment in such funds’ and accounts’ target investments, including, for example: • the possibility that investors in the funds/accounts might become bankrupt or otherwise be unable to meet their capital commitment obligations; • that operating and/or management agreements of a fund/account may restrict our ability to transfer or liquidate our interest when we desire or on advantageous terms; • that our relationships with the investors will be generally contractual in nature and may be terminated or dissolved under the terms of the agreements, or we may be removed as general partner and/or manager (with or without cause), and in such event, we may not continue to manage or invest in the applicable fund/account; • that disputes between us and the investors may result in litigation or arbitration that would increase our expenses and prevent our officers and directors from focusing their time and effort on our business and result in subjecting the investments owned by the applicable fund/account to additional risk; and • that we may incur liability for obligations of a fund/account by reason of being its general partner or manager. We have a subsidiary that is registered with the SEC as an investment adviser under the Investment Advisers Act. As a result, we are subject to the anti-fraud provisions of the Investment Advisers Act and to fiduciary duties derived from these provisions that apply to our relationships with that subsidiary’s clients. These provisions and duties impose restrictions and obligations on us with respect to our dealings with our subsidiary’s clients, including, for example, restrictions on agency, cross and principal transactions. Our registered investment adviser subsidiary is subject to periodic SEC examinations and other requirements under the Investment Advisers Act and related regulations primarily intended to benefit advisory clients. These additional requirements relate to, among other things, maintaining an effective and comprehensive compliance program, recordkeeping and reporting requirements and disclosure requirements. The Investment Advisers Act generally grants the SEC broad administrative powers, including the power to limit or restrict an investment adviser from conducting advisory activities in the event it fails to comply with federal securities laws. Additional sanctions that may be imposed for failure to comply with applicable requirements under the Investment Advisers Act include the prohibition of individuals from associating with an investment adviser, the revocation of registrations and other censures and fines. We may in the future be required to register one or more entities as a commodity pool operator or commodity trading adviser, subjecting those entities to the regulations and oversight of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and the National Futures Association. We may also become subject to various international regulations on the asset management industry. 24 ANNALY CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Item 1A. Risk Factors Loss of our Investment Company Act exemption from registration would adversely affect us. We intend to conduct our business so as not to become regulated as an investment company under the Investment Company Act. We currently rely on the exemption from registration provided by Section 3(c)(5)(C) of the Investment Company Act. Section 3(c)(5)(C), as interpreted by the staff of the SEC, requires us to invest at least 55% of our assets in “mortgages and other liens on and interest in real estate” (“Qualifying Real Estate Assets”) and at least 80% of our assets in Qualifying Real Estate Assets plus our other real estate related assets. The assets that we acquire, therefore, are limited by this provision of the Investment Company Act and the rules and regulations promulgated under the Investment Company Act. We rely on an SEC interpretation that “whole pool certificates” that are issued or guaranteed by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac or Ginnie Mae (“Agency Whole Pool Certificates”) are Qualifying Real Estate Assets under Section 3(c)(5)(C). This interpretation was promulgated by the SEC staff in a no-action letter in the 1980s, was reaffirmed by the SEC in 1992 and has been commonly relied upon by mortgage REITs. On August 31, 2011, the SEC issued a concept release titled “Companies Engaged in the Business of Acquiring Mortgages and Mortgage-Related Instruments” (SEC Release No. IC-29778). In this concept release, the SEC announced it was reviewing interpretive issues related to the Section 3(c)(5)(C) exemption. Among other things, the SEC requested comments on whether it should revisit whether Agency Whole Pool Certificates may be treated as interests in real estate (and presumably Qualifying Real Estate Assets) and whether companies, such as us, whose primary business consists of investing in Agency Whole Pool Certificates are the type of entities that Congress intended to be encompassed by the exclusion provided by Section 3(c)(5)(C). If the SEC changes its views regarding which securities are Qualifying Real Estate Assets or real estate related assets, adopts a contrary interpretation with respect to Agency Whole Pool Certificates or otherwise believes we do not satisfy the exemption under Section 3(c)(5)(C), we could be required to restructure our activities or sell certain of our assets. The net effect of these factors will be to lower our net interest income, which could negatively affect the market price of shares of our capital stock and our ability to distribute dividends. If we fail to qualify for exemption from registration as an investment company, our ability to use leverage would be substantially reduced, and we would not be able to conduct our business as described. Our business will be materially and adversely affected if we fail to qualify for this exemption. Risks Related to Our Taxation as a REIT Our failure to maintain our qualification as a REIT would have adverse tax consequences. We believe that since 1997 we have qualified for taxation as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes under Sections 856 through 860 of the Code. We plan to continue to meet the requirements for taxation as a REIT. The determination that we are a REIT requires an analysis of various factual matters and circumstances that may not be totally within our control. For example, to maintain our qualification as a REIT, at least 75% of our gross income must come from real estate sources and 95% of our gross income must come from real estate sources and certain other sources that are itemized in the REIT tax laws. Additionally, our ability to satisfy the REIT asset tests depends upon our analysis of the characterization and fair market values of our assets, some of which are not susceptible to precise determination, and for which we will not obtain independent appraisals. The proper classification of an instrument as debt or equity for U.S. federal income tax purposes may be uncertain in some circumstances, which could affect the application of the REIT asset requirements. We are also required to distribute to stockholders at least 90% of our REIT taxable income (determined without regard to the deduction for dividends paid and by excluding any net capital gain). Even a technical or inadvertent mistake could jeopardize our REIT status. Furthermore, Congress and the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) might make changes to the tax laws and regulations, and the courts might issue new rulings that make it more difficult or impossible for us to remain qualified as a REIT. We also indirectly own interests in entities that have elected to be taxed as REITs under the U.S. federal income tax laws, or “Subsidiary REITs.” Subsidiary REITs are subject to the various REIT qualification requirements that are applicable to us. If any Subsidiary REIT were to fail to qualify as a REIT, then (i) that Subsidiary REIT would become subject to regular U.S. federal, state, and local corporate income tax, (ii) our interest in such Subsidiary REIT would cease to be a qualifying asset for purposes of the REIT asset tests, and (iii) it is possible that we would fail certain of the REIT asset tests, in which event we also would fail to maintain our qualification as a REIT unless we could avail ourselves of certain relief provisions. While we believe that the Subsidiary REITs have qualified as REITs under the Code, we have joined each Subsidiary REIT in filing “protective” TRS elections under Section 856(l) of the Code. We cannot assure you that such “protective” TRS elections would be effective to avoid adverse consequences to us. Moreover, even if the “protective” TRS elections were to be effective, the Subsidiary REITs would be subject to regular corporate income tax, and we cannot assure you that we would not fail to satisfy the requirement that not more than 20% of the value of our total assets may be represented by the securities of one or more TRSs. If we fail to maintain our qualification as a REIT, we would be subject to U.S. federal income tax at regular corporate rates. Also, unless the IRS were to grant us relief under certain statutory provisions, we would remain disqualified as a REIT for four years following the year we first fail to qualify. If we fail to maintain our qualification as a REIT, we would have to 25 ANNALY CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Item 1A. Risk Factors pay significant income taxes and would therefore have less money available for investments or for distributions to our stockholders. This would likely have a significant adverse effect on the value of our equity. In addition, the tax law would no longer require us to make distributions to our stockholders. A REIT that fails the quarterly asset tests for one or more quarters will not lose its REIT status as a result of such failure if either (i) the failure is regarded as a de minimis failure under standards set out in the Code, or (ii) the failure is greater than a de minimis failure but is attributable to reasonable cause and not willful neglect. In the case of a greater than de minimis failure, however, the REIT must pay a tax and must remedy the failure within six months of the close of the quarter in which the failure was identified. In addition, the Code provides relief for failures of other tests imposed as a condition of REIT qualification, as long as the failures are attributable to reasonable cause and not willful neglect. A REIT would be required to pay a penalty of $50,000, however, in the case of each failure. Our distribution requirements limit our flexibility and could affect our ability to execute our business plan. As a REIT, we must distribute at least 90% of our REIT taxable income (determined without regard to the deduction for dividends paid and by excluding any net capital gain). The required distribution limits the amount we have available for other business purposes, including amounts to fund our growth. Also, it is possible that because of the differences between the time we actually receive revenue or pay expenses and the period we report those items for distribution purposes, we may have to borrow funds on a short-term basis to meet the 90% distribution requirement. To the extent that we satisfy this distribution requirement, but distribute less than 100% of our taxable income, we will be subject to U.S. federal corporate income tax on our undistributed taxable income. In addition, we will be subject to a non-deductible 4% excise tax if the actual amount that we pay out to our stockholders in a calendar year is less than a minimum amount specified under U.S. federal tax laws. We intend to make distributions to our stockholders to comply with the REIT qualification requirements of the Code. From time to time, we may generate taxable income greater than our income for financial reporting purposes prepared in accordance with GAAP, or differences in timing between the recognition of taxable income and the actual receipt of cash may occur. For example, if we purchase Agency or non-Agency securities at a discount, we generally are required to accrete the discount into taxable income prior to receiving the cash proceeds of the accreted discount at maturity, and in some cases, potentially recognize the discount in taxable income once such amounts are reflected in our financial statements. If we do not have other funds available in these situations we could be required to (i) borrow funds on unfavorable terms, (ii) sell investments at disadvantageous prices, (iii) distribute our own stock, or (iv) 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 the corporate income tax and 4% excise tax in a particular year. Also, we or our subsidiaries may hold debt investments that could require subsequent modifications. If an amendment to an outstanding debt is a “significant modification” for U.S. federal income tax purposes, the modified debt may be deemed to have been reissued in a debt-for-debt taxable exchange with the borrower. This deemed reissuance could result in a portion of the modified debt not qualifying as a good REIT asset if the underlying security has declined in value, and would cause us to recognize income to the extent the principal amount of the modified debt exceeds our adjusted tax basis in the unmodified debt. These scenarios could increase our costs or reduce our stockholders’ equity. Thus, compliance with the REIT requirements may hinder our ability to grow, which could adversely affect the value of our stock. Conversely, from time to time, we may generate taxable income less than our income for financial reporting purposes due to GAAP and tax accounting differences or, as mentioned above, the timing between the recognition of taxable income and the actual receipt of cash. In such circumstances we may make distributions according to our business plan that are within our wherewithal from an economic or cash management perspective, but that are labeled as return of capital for tax reporting purposes, as they are in excess of taxable income in that period. Distributions to tax-exempt investors may be classified as unrelated business taxable income. Neither ordinary nor capital gain distributions with respect to our stock nor gain from the sale of our stock are anticipated to constitute unrelated business taxable income to a tax-exempt investor. However, there are certain exceptions to this rule. In particular: • part of the income and gain recognized by certain qualified employee pension trusts with respect to our stock may be treated as unrelated business taxable income if shares of our stock are predominantly held by qualified employee pension trusts, and we are required to rely on a special look-through rule for purposes of meeting one of the REIT ownership tests, and we are not operated in a manner to avoid treatment of such income or gain as unrelated business taxable income; 26 ANNALY CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Item 1A. Risk Factors • part of the income and gain recognized by a tax-exempt investor with respect to our stock would constitute unrelated business taxable income if the investor incurs debt in order to acquire the stock; • part or all of the income or gain recognized with respect to our stock by social clubs, voluntary employee benefit associations, supplemental unemployment benefit trusts and qualified group legal services plans which are exempt from U.S. federal income taxation under the Code may be treated as unrelated business taxable income; • to the extent that we (or a part of us, or a disregarded subsidiary of ours) are a “taxable mortgage pool,” or if we hold residual interests in a real estate mortgage investment conduit or a CLO; • a portion of the distributions paid to a tax-exempt stockholder that is allocable to excess inclusion income may be treated as unrelated business taxable income. We have flexibility to pay dividends in our own stock. We have in the past and may in the future distribute taxable dividends that are payable in cash or shares of our stock at the election of each stockholder. Taxable stockholders receiving such dividends will be required to include the full amount of such dividends as ordinary income to the extent of our current and accumulated earnings and profits for U.S. federal income tax purposes. As a result, stockholders may be required to pay income taxes with respect to such dividends in excess of the cash dividends received. If a U.S. stockholder sells the stock that it receives as a dividend in order to pay this tax, the sales proceeds may be less than the amount included in income with respect to the dividend, depending on the market price of our stock at the time of the sale. Furthermore, with respect to certain non-U.S. stockholders, we may be required to withhold U.S. tax with respect to such dividends, including in respect to all or a portion of such dividend that is payable in stock. In addition, if a significant number of our stockholders determine to sell shares of our stock in order to pay taxes owed on dividends, it may put downward pressure on the trading price of our stock. Our TRSs cannot constitute more than 20% of our total assets. A TRS is a corporation, other than a REIT or a qualified REIT subsidiary, in which a REIT owns stock and with which the REIT jointly elects TRS status. The term also includes a corporate subsidiary in which the TRS owns more than a 35% interest. A REIT may own up to 100% of the stock of one or more TRSs. A TRS may earn income that would not be qualifying income if it was earned directly by the parent REIT. Overall, at the close of any calendar quarter, no more than 20% of the value of a REIT’s assets may consist of stock or securities of one or more TRSs. The stock and securities of our TRSs are expected to represent less than 20% of the value of our total assets. Furthermore, we intend to monitor the value of our investments in the stock and securities of our TRSs to ensure compliance with the above-described limitation. We cannot assure you, however, that we will always be able to comply with the limitation so as to maintain REIT status. TRSs are subject to tax at the regular corporate rates, are not required to distribute dividends, and the amount of dividends a TRS can pay to its parent REIT may be limited by REIT gross income tests. A TRS must pay income tax at regular corporate rates on any income that it earns. In certain circumstances, the ability of our TRSs to deduct interest expenses for U.S. federal income tax may be limited. Such income, however, is not required to be distributed. Our TRSs will pay corporate income tax on their taxable income, and their after-tax net income will be available for distribution to us. Moreover, the annual gross income tests that must be satisfied to maintain our REIT qualification may limit the amount of dividends that we can receive from our TRSs. Generally, not more than 25% of our gross income can be derived from non-real estate related sources, such as dividends from a TRS. If, for any taxable year, the dividends we receive from our TRSs, when added to our other items of non-real estate related income, were to represent more than 25% of our total gross income for the year, we could be denied REIT status, unless we were able to demonstrate, among other things, that our failure of the gross income test was due to reasonable cause and not willful neglect. The limitations imposed by the REIT gross income tests may impede our ability to distribute assets from our TRSs to us in the form of dividends. Certain asset transfers may, therefore, have to be structured as purchase and sale transactions upon which our TRSs recognize a taxable gain. 27 ANNALY CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Item 1A. Risk Factors If transactions between a REIT and a TRS are entered into on other than arm’s-length terms, the REIT may be subject to a penalty tax. If interest accrues on an indebtedness owed by a TRS to its parent REIT at a rate in excess of a commercially reasonable rate, then the REIT would be subject to tax at a rate of 100% on the excess of (i) interest payments made by a TRS to its parent REIT over (ii) the amount of interest that would have been payable had interest accrued on the indebtedness at a commercially reasonable rate. A tax at a rate of 100% is also imposed on any transaction between a TRS and its parent REIT to the extent the transaction gives rise to deductions to the TRS that are in excess of the deductions that would have been allowable had the transaction been entered into on arm’s-length terms. While we scrutinize all of our transactions with our TRSs in an effort to ensure that we do not become subject to these taxes, there is no assurance that we will be successful. We may not be able to avoid application of these taxes. Even if we remain qualified as a REIT, we may face other tax liabilities that reduce our cash flow. Even if we remain qualified for taxation as a REIT, we may be subject to certain federal, state and local taxes on our income and assets, including taxes on any undistributed income, tax on income from some activities conducted as a result of a foreclosure, excise taxes, state or local income, property and transfer taxes, such as mortgage recording taxes, and other taxes. In addition, in order to meet the REIT qualification requirements, prevent the recognition of certain types of non-cash income, or to avert the imposition of a 100% tax that applies to certain gains derived by a REIT from dealer property or inventory, we may hold some of our assets through our TRSs or other subsidiary corporations that will be subject to corporate level income tax at regular rates. Complying with REIT requirements may cause us to forgo otherwise attractive opportunities and may force us to liquidate otherwise attractive investments. To remain qualified as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes, we must continually satisfy tests concerning, among other things, the sources of our income, the nature and diversification of our assets, the amounts that we distribute to our stockholders and the ownership of our stock. Our ability to acquire and hold our investments is subject to the applicable REIT qualification tests. We must ensure that at the end of each calendar quarter, at least 75% of the value of our assets consists of cash, cash items, U.S. Government securities and qualified real estate assets. The remainder of our investment in securities (other than U.S. Government securities, qualified real estate assets and securities issued by a TRS) generally cannot include more than 10% of the outstanding voting securities of any one issuer or more than 10% of the total value of the outstanding securities of any one issuer. In addition, in general, no more than 5% of the value of our assets (other than U.S. Government securities, qualified real estate assets and securities issued by a TRS) can consist of the securities of any one issuer, and no more than 20% of the value of our total assets can be represented by securities of one or more TRSs. Changes in the values or other features of our assets could cause inadvertent violations of the REIT requirements. If we fail to comply with the REIT requirements at the end of any calendar quarter, we must correct the failure within 30 days after the end of the calendar quarter or qualify for certain statutory relief provisions to avoid losing our REIT qualification and suffering adverse tax consequences. Additionally, we may be required to make distributions to stockholders at disadvantageous times or when we do not have funds readily available for distribution. Accordingly we may be unable to pursue investments that would be otherwise advantageous to us or be required to liquidate from our investment portfolio otherwise attractive investments if we feel it is necessary to satisfy the source-of-income, asset-diversification or distribution requirements for qualifying as a REIT. These actions could have the effect of reducing our income and amounts available for distribution to our stockholders. Liquidation of assets may jeopardize our REIT qualification or create additional tax liability for us. To remain qualified as a REIT, we must comply with requirements regarding the composition of our assets and our sources of income. If we are compelled to liquidate our investments to repay obligations to our lenders, we may be unable to comply with these requirements, ultimately jeopardizing our qualification as a REIT, or we may be subject to a 100% tax on any resultant gain if we sell assets that are treated as dealer property or inventory. 28 ANNALY CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Item 1A. Risk Factors The failure of assets subject to repurchase agreements to qualify as real estate assets could adversely affect our ability to remain qualified as a REIT. We enter into certain financing arrangements that are structured as sale and repurchase agreements pursuant to which we nominally sell certain of our assets to a counterparty and simultaneously enter into an agreement to repurchase these assets at a later date in exchange for a purchase price. Economically, these agreements are financings that are secured by the assets sold pursuant thereto, and we treat them as such for U.S. federal income tax purposes. We believe that we would be treated for REIT asset and income test purposes as the owner of the assets that are the subject of any such sale and repurchase agreement notwithstanding that such agreement may transfer record ownership of the assets to the counterparty during the term of the agreement. It is possible, however, that the IRS could assert that we did not own the assets during the term of the sale and repurchase agreement, in which case we could fail to remain qualified as a REIT. Complying with REIT requirements may limit our ability to hedge effectively and may cause us to incur tax liabilities. The REIT provisions of the Code could substantially limit our ability to hedge our liabilities. Any income from a properly designated hedging transaction we enter into to manage risk of interest rate changes with respect to borrowings made or to be made, or ordinary obligations incurred or to be incurred, to acquire or carry real estate assets generally does not constitute “gross income” for purposes of the 75% or 95% gross income tests. To the extent that we enter into other types of hedging transactions, the income from those transactions is likely to be treated as non-qualifying income for purposes of both of the gross income tests. As a result of these rules, we may have to limit our use of advantageous hedging techniques or implement those hedges through our TRSs. This could increase the cost of our hedging activities because our TRSs would be subject to tax on gains or expose us to greater risks associated with changes in interest rates than we would otherwise want to bear. In addition, losses in our TRSs generally will not provide any tax benefit, except for being carried forward potentially to offset taxable income in the TRSs for future periods. Qualifying as a REIT involves highly technical and complex provisions of the Code. Qualification as a REIT involves the application of highly technical and complex Code provisions for which only limited judicial and administrative authorities exist. Even a technical or inadvertent violation could jeopardize our REIT qualification. Our continued qualification as a REIT depends on our satisfaction of certain asset, income, organizational, distribution, stockholder ownership and other requirements on a continuing basis. In addition, our ability to satisfy the REIT qualification requirements depends in part on the actions of third parties over which we have no control or limited influence, if any, including in cases where we own an equity interest in an entity that is classified as a partnership for U.S. federal income tax purposes. The tax on prohibited transactions limits our ability to engage in certain transactions. The 100% tax on prohibited transactions will limit our ability to engage in transactions, including certain methods of structuring CMOs, which would be treated as prohibited transactions for U.S. federal income tax purposes. The term “prohibited transaction” generally includes a sale or other disposition of property (including mortgage loans, but other than foreclosure property, as discussed below) that is held primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of a trade or business by us or by a borrower that has issued a shared appreciation mortgage or similar debt instrument to us. We could be subject to this tax if we were to dispose of or structure CMOs in a manner that was treated as a prohibited transaction for U.S. federal income tax purposes. We intend to conduct our operations at the REIT level so that no asset that we own (or are treated as owning) will be treated as or as having been, held for sale to customers, and that a sale of any such asset will not be treated as having been in the ordinary course of our business. As a result, we may choose not to engage in certain transactions at the REIT level, and may limit the structures we utilize for our CMO transactions, even though the sales or structures might otherwise be beneficial to us. In addition, whether property is held “primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of a trade or business” depends on the particular facts and circumstances. No assurance can be given that any property that we sell will not be treated as property held for sale to customers, or that we can comply with certain safe-harbor provisions of the Code that would prevent such treatment. The 100% tax does not apply to gains from the sale of property that is held through a TRS or other taxable corporation, although such income will be subject to tax in the hands of the corporation at regular corporate rates. We intend to structure our activities to avoid the prohibited transaction tax. 29 ANNALY CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Item 1A. Risk Factors Certain financing activities may subject us to U.S. federal income tax and could have negative tax consequences for our stockholders. We may enter into securitization transactions and other financing transactions that could result in us, or a portion of our assets, being treated as a taxable mortgage pool for U.S. federal income tax purposes. If we enter into such a transaction in the future, we could be taxable at the highest corporate income tax rate on a portion of the income arising from a taxable mortgage pool, referred to as “excess inclusion income,” that is allocable to the percentage of our shares held in record name by disqualified organizations (generally tax-exempt entities that are exempt from the tax on unrelated business taxable income, such as state pension plans and charitable remainder trusts and government entities). In that case, we could reduce distributions to such stockholders by the amount of tax paid by us that is attributable to such stockholders’ ownership. If we were to realize excess inclusion income, IRS guidance indicates that the excess inclusion income would be allocated among our stockholders in proportion to the dividends paid. Excess inclusion income cannot be offset by losses of a stockholder. If the stockholder is a tax-exempt entity and not a disqualified organization, then this income would be fully taxable as unrelated business taxable income under Section 512 of the Code. If the stockholder is a foreign person, it would be subject to U.S. federal income tax at the maximum tax rate and withholding will be required on this income without reduction or exemption pursuant to any otherwise applicable income tax treaty. Uncertainty exists with respect to the treatment of our TBAs for purposes of the REIT asset and income tests. We purchase and sell Agency mortgage-backed securities through TBAs and recognize income or gains from the disposition of those TBAs, through dollar roll transactions or otherwise, and may continue to do so in the future. While there is no direct authority with respect to the qualification of TBAs as real estate assets or U.S. Government securities for purposes of the 75% asset test or the qualification of income or gains from dispositions of TBAs as gains from the sale of real property (including interests in real property and interests in mortgages on real property) or other qualifying income for purposes of the 75% gross income test, we treat our TBAs as qualifying assets for purposes of the REIT asset tests, and we treat income and gains from our TBAs as qualifying income for purposes of the 75% gross income test, based on an opinion of counsel substantially to the effect that (i) for purposes of the REIT asset tests, our ownership of a TBA should be treated as ownership of real estate assets, and (ii) for purposes of the 75% REIT gross income test, any gain recognized by us in connection with the settlement of our TBAs should be treated as gain from the sale or disposition of an interest in mortgages on real property. Opinions of counsel are not binding on the IRS, and no assurance can be given that the IRS will not successfully challenge the conclusions set forth in such opinions. In addition, it must be emphasized that the opinion of counsel is based on various assumptions relating to our TBAs and is conditioned upon fact-based representations and covenants made by our management regarding our TBAs. No assurance can be given that the IRS would not assert that such assets or income are not qualifying assets or income. If the IRS were to successfully challenge the opinion of counsel, we could be subject to a penalty tax or we could fail to remain qualified as a REIT if a sufficient portion of our assets consists of TBAs or a sufficient portion of our income consists of income or gains from the disposition of TBAs. Dividends payable by REITs generally receive different tax treatment than dividend income from regular corporations. Qualified dividend income payable to U.S. stockholders that are individuals, trusts and estates is subject to the reduced maximum tax rate applicable to capital gains. Dividends payable by REITs, however, generally are not eligible for the reduced qualified dividend rates. Non-corporate taxpayers may deduct up to 20% of certain pass-through business income, including “qualified REIT dividends” (generally, dividends received by a REIT shareholder that are not designated as capital gain dividends or qualified dividend income), subject to certain limitations, resulting in an effective maximum U.S. federal income tax rate of 29.6% on such income. Although the reduced U.S. federal income tax rate applicable to qualified dividend income does not adversely affect the taxation of REITs or dividends payable by REITs, the more favorable rates applicable to regular corporate qualified dividends could cause investors who are individuals, trusts and estates to perceive investments in REITs to be relatively less attractive than investments in the stocks of non-REIT corporations that pay dividends, which could adversely affect the value of the shares of REITs, including our stock. Tax rates could be changed in future legislation. New legislation or administrative or judicial action, in each instance potentially with retroactive effect, could make it more difficult or impossible for us to remain qualified as a REIT. The present U.S. federal income tax treatment of REITs may be modified, possibly with retroactive effect, by legislative, judicial or administrative action at any time, which could affect the U.S. federal income tax treatment of an investment in us. The U.S. federal income tax rules dealing with REITs are constantly under review by persons involved in the legislative process, the IRS and the U.S. Treasury, which results in statutory changes as well as frequent revisions to regulations and 30 ANNALY CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Item 1A. Risk Factors interpretations. Future revisions in federal tax laws and interpretations thereof could affect or cause us to change our investments and commitments and affect the tax considerations of an investment in us. Counterparty Risks The soundness of our counterparties and other financial institutions affects us. Financial services institutions are interrelated as a result of trading, clearing, counterparty, borrower, or other relationships. We have exposure to many different counterparties, and routinely execute transactions with counterparties in the financial services industry, including brokers and dealers, commercial banks, investment banks, mutual and hedge funds, mortgage companies, mortgage servicers, and other financial institutions. Many of these transactions expose us to credit or counterparty risk in the event of default of our counterparty or, in certain instances, our counterparty’s customers. There is no assurance that any such losses would not materially and adversely impact our revenues, financial condition and earnings. We are subject to counterparty risk and may be unable to seek indemnity or require counterparties to repurchase residential whole loans if they breach representations and warranties, which could cause us to suffer losses. When selling or securitizing mortgage loans, sellers typically make customary representations and warranties about such loans. Residential mortgage loan purchase agreements may entitle the purchaser of the loans to seek indemnity or demand repurchase or substitution of the loans in the event the seller of the loans breaches a representation or warranty given to the purchaser. There can be no assurance that a mortgage loan purchase agreement will contain appropriate representations and warranties, that we or the trust that purchases the mortgage loans would be able to enforce a contractual right to repurchase or substitution, or that the seller of the loans will remain solvent or otherwise be able to honor its obligations under its mortgage loan purchase agreements. The inability to obtain or enforce an indemnity or require repurchase of a significant number of loans could adversely affect our results of operations, financial condition and business. Our rights under our repurchase and derivative agreements are subject to the effects of the bankruptcy laws in the event of the bankruptcy or insolvency of us or our lenders. In the event of our insolvency or bankruptcy, certain repurchase and derivative agreements may qualify for special treatment under the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, the effect of which, among other things, would be to allow the lender to avoid the automatic stay provisions of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code and to foreclose on and/or liquidate the collateral pledged under such agreements without delay. In the event of the insolvency or bankruptcy of a lender during the term of a repurchase or derivative agreement, the lender may be permitted, under applicable insolvency laws, to repudiate the contract, and our claim against the lender for damages (after any permitted collateral liquidation and setoff) may be treated as an unsecured claim. Net claims in our favor after application of setoff would be subject to significant delay and costs to us and, if and when received, may be substantially less than the damages we actually incur. Investment and Market Related Risks We may experience declines in the market value of our assets. We have in the past and may in the future experience declines in the market value of our assets due to interest rate changes, deterioration of the credit of the borrower or counterparty, or other reasons described in other risk factors. These declines may result in fair value adjustments, impairments, decreases in reported asset and earnings, margin calls, liquidity risks, and other adverse impacts. Investments in MSR expose us to additional risks. We invest in MSR and financial instruments whose cash flows are considered to be largely dependent on underlying MSR that either directly or indirectly act as collateral for the investment. We expect to increase our exposure to MSR-related investments in 2025. Generally, we have the right to receive certain cash flows from the MSR that are generated from the servicing fees and/or excess servicing spread associated with the MSR. Our investments in MSR-related assets have in the past and may in the future expose us to risks associated with MSR, including the following: • Investments in MSR are highly illiquid and subject to numerous restrictions on transfer and, as a result, there is risk that we would be unable to locate a willing buyer or get required approval to sell MSR in the future should we desire to do so. 31 ANNALY CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Item 1A. Risk Factors • Our rights to the excess servicing spread are subordinate to the interests of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Ginnie Mae, and are subject to extinguishment. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac each require approval of the sale of excess servicing spreads pertaining to their respective MSR. We have entered into acknowledgment agreements or subordination of interest agreements with them, which acknowledge our subordinated rights. • Changes in minimum servicing compensation for agency loans could occur at any time and could negatively impact the value of the income derived from MSR. • The value of MSR is highly sensitive to changes in prepayment rates. Decreasing market interest rates are generally associated with increases in prepayment rates as borrowers are able to refinance their loans at lower costs. Prepayments result in the partial or complete loss of the cash flows from the related MSR. Accordingly, an increase in prepayments can result in a reduction in the value and income we may earn of our MSR related assets and negatively affect our profitability. • While we have executed recapture agreements with our subservicers to attempt to retain the MSR investment resulting from a refinance transaction, the effectiveness of these efforts is impacted by borrower, subservicer, and unaffiliated lender behavior. • Servicers are responsible for advancing the payment of principal, interest, and escrow items on mortgage loans when those payments are not timely made by the borrower (including during periods of forbearance) and the timing and amount of recovery of those advances is unpredictable. If we are not able to successfully manage these and other risks related to investing in MSR, it may adversely affect the value of our MSR-related assets. A prolonged economic slowdown or declining real estate values could impair the assets we may own. Our non-Agency mortgage-backed securities, mortgage loans, and MSR are affected by economic slowdowns or recessions, which could lead to financial losses in our assets and a decrease in revenues, net income and asset values. Owners of Agency mortgage-backed securities are protected from the risk of default on the underlying mortgages by guarantees from Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac or, in the case of the Ginnie Mae, the U.S. Government. A default on those underlying mortgages exposes us to prepayment risk described below, but not a credit loss. However, we also acquire CRTs, non-Agency mortgage-backed securities and residential loans, which are backed by residential real property but, in contrast to Agency mortgage-backed securities, the principal and interest payments are not guaranteed by GSEs or the U.S. Government. Our CRT, non-Agency mortgage-backed securities and residential loan investments are therefore particularly sensitive to recessions and declining real estate values. In the event of a default on one of the residential mortgage loans that we hold in our portfolio or a mortgage loan underlying CRT or non-Agency mortgage-backed securities in our portfolio, we bear the risk of loss as a result of the potential deficiency between the value of the collateral and the debt owed, as well as the costs and delays of foreclosure or other remedies, and the costs of maintaining and ultimately selling a property after foreclosure. Delinquencies and defaults on mortgage loans for which we own the servicing rights will adversely affect the amount of servicing fee income we receive and may result in increased servicing costs and operational risks due to the increased complexity of servicing delinquent and defaulted mortgage loans. An increase in interest rates adversely affects the market value of our interest earning assets and, therefore, also our book value. Increases in interest rates have in the past and may in the future negatively affect the market value of our interest earning assets because in a period of rising interest rates, the value of certain interest earning assets may fall and reduce our book value. For example, our fixed-rate interest earning assets are generally negatively affected by increases in interest rates because in a period of rising rates, the coupon we earn on our fixed-rate interest earning assets would not change. Our book value would be reduced by the amount of a decline in the market value of our interest earning assets. Actions by the Federal Reserve may affect the price and returns of our assets. The Federal Reserve (the “Fed”) owns approximately $2.3 trillion of Agency mortgage-backed securities as of December 31, 2024. Certain actions taken by the U.S. government, including the Fed, may impact our results. For example, rising short-term interest rates if the Fed lifts its monetary policy rate to slow an elevated rate of inflation may have a negative impact on our results. Meanwhile, any potential future reduction of the Fed’s balance sheet might lead to higher interest rate volatility and wider mortgage-backed security spreads that could negatively impact Annaly’s portfolio. 32 ANNALY CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Item 1A. Risk Factors We invest in securities that are subject to mortgage credit risk. We invest in securities in the credit risk transfer CRT sector. The CRT sector is comprised of the risk sharing transactions issued by Fannie Mae (“CAS”) and Freddie Mac (“STACR”), and similarly structured transactions arranged by third party market participants. The securities issued in the CRT sector are designed to synthetically transfer mortgage credit risk from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to private investors. The holder of the securities in the CRT sector has the risk that the borrowers may default on their obligations to make full and timely payments of principal and interest. Investments in securities in the CRT sector have in the past and may in the future cause us to incur losses of income from, and/or losses in market value relating to, these assets if there are defaults of principal and/or interest on the pool of mortgages referenced in the transaction. The holder of the CRT may also bear the risk of the default of the issuer of the security. Our investments in real estate and other securities are subject to changes in credit spreads as well as available market liquidity, which affect our ability to realize gains on the sale of such investments. A significant component of the fair value of CRT and non-Agency securities and other credit risk-oriented investments is attributable to the credit spread, or the difference between the value of the credit instrument and the value of a financial instrument with similar interest rate exposure, but with no credit risk, such as a U.S. Treasury note. Credit spreads can be highly volatile and have in the past and may in the future fluctuate due to changes in economic conditions, liquidity, investor demand and other factors. Credit spreads typically widen in times of increased market uncertainty or when economic conditions have or are expected to deteriorate. Credit spreads may also widen due to actual or anticipated rating downgrades on the securities or similar securities. Hedging fair value changes associated with credit spreads may be inefficient and our hedging strategies are not primarily designed to mitigate credit spread risk. Widening credit spreads could cause net unrealized gains to decrease or result in net losses. Geographic concentration exposes investors to greater risk of default and loss. Repayments by borrowers and the market value of the related assets could be affected by economic conditions generally or specific to geographic areas or regions of the United States, and concentrations of mortgaged residential properties in particular geographic areas may increase the risk that adverse economic or other developments or natural or man-made disasters affecting a particular region of the country could increase the frequency and severity of losses on mortgage loans or other real estate debt secured by those properties. From time to time, regions of the United States experience significant real estate downturns when others do not. Regional economic declines or conditions in regional real estate markets could adversely affect the income from, and market value of, the mortgaged properties. In addition, local or regional economies may be adversely affected to a greater degree than other areas of the country by developments affecting industries concentrated in such area. A decline in the general economic condition in the region in which mortgaged properties securing the related mortgage loans are located would result in a decrease in consumer demand in the region, and the income from and market value of the mortgaged properties may be adversely affected. Other regional factors – e.g., rising sea levels, earthquakes, floods, forest fires, hurricanes or changes in governmental rules or fiscal policies – have in the past and may in the future adversely affect the mortgaged properties. Assets in certain regional areas are more susceptible to certain hazards (such as earthquakes, widespread fires, floods or hurricanes) than properties in other parts of the country and collateral properties located in coastal states may be more susceptible to hurricanes than properties in other parts of the country. Furthermore, increasing financial losses related to climate change have caused, and may continue to cause, insurers to reassess their presence in certain impacted areas. As a result, areas affected by such events often experience disruptions in travel, transportation and tourism, loss of jobs and an overall decrease in consumer activity, and often a decline in real estate-related investments. These types of occurrences may increase over time or become more severe due to changes in weather patterns and other climate changes. There can be no assurance that the economies in such impacted areas will recover sufficiently to support income producing real estate at pre-event levels or that the costs of the related clean-up will not have a material adverse effect on the local or national economy. Inadequate property insurance coverage impacts on our operating results. Residential real estate assets may suffer casualty losses due to risks (including acts of terrorism) that are not covered by insurance or for which insurance coverage requirements have been contractually limited by the related loan documents. Moreover, if reconstruction or major repairs are required following a casualty, changes in laws that have occurred since the time of original construction may materially impair the borrower’s ability to effect such reconstruction or major repairs or may materially increase the cost thereof. 33 ANNALY CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Item 1A. Risk Factors There is no assurance that borrowers have maintained or will maintain the insurance required under the applicable loan documents or that such insurance will be adequate. In addition, the effects of climate change have made, and may continue to make, certain types of insurance, such as flood insurance, increasingly difficult and/or expensive to obtain in certain areas. In addition, since the residential mortgage loans generally do not require maintenance of terrorism insurance, we cannot assure you that any property will be covered by terrorism insurance. Therefore, damage to a collateral property that is not adequately insured or damage to a collateral property caused by acts of terror may not be covered by insurance and may result in substantial losses to us. Our assets may become non-performing or sub-performing assets in the future. Our assets may in the near or the long term become non-performing or sub-performing assets, which are subject to increased risks relative to performing assets. Residential mortgage loans have in the past and may in the future become non-performing or sub-performing for a variety of reasons that result in the borrower being unable to meet its debt service and/or repayment obligations, such as the underlying property being too highly leveraged or the financial distress of the borrower. Such non-performing or sub-performing assets may require a substantial amount of workout negotiations and/or restructuring, which may involve substantial cost and divert the attention of our management from other activities and may entail, among other things, a substantial reduction in interest rate, the capitalization of interest payments and/or a substantial write-down of the principal of the loan. Even if a restructuring were successfully accomplished, the borrower may not be able or willing to maintain the restructured payments or refinance the restructured loan upon maturity. From time to time, we may find it necessary or desirable to foreclose the liens of loans we acquire or originate, and the foreclosure process may be lengthy and expensive. Borrowers may resist foreclosure actions by asserting numerous claims, counterclaims and defenses to payment against us (such as lender liability claims and defenses) even when such assertions may have no basis in fact or law, in an effort to prolong the foreclosure action and force the lender into a modification of the loan or a favorable buy-out of the borrower’s position. In some states, foreclosure actions can take several years or more to litigate. At any time prior to or during the foreclosure proceedings, the borrower may file for bankruptcy, which would have the effect of staying the foreclosure actions and further delaying the resolution of our claims. Foreclosure may create a negative public perception of the related property, resulting in a diminution of its value. Depending on the results of the foreclosure process, we may assume direct ownership of the underlying real estate. Even if we are successful in foreclosing on a loan, and irrespective of whether we assume ownership of the property, the liquidation proceeds upon sale of the underlying real estate are not always sufficient to recover our cost basis in the loan, resulting in a loss to us. Furthermore, any costs or delays involved in the foreclosure of a loan or a liquidation of the underlying property will further reduce the proceeds and thus increase our loss. Any such reductions could materially and adversely affect the value of the residential mortgage loans in which we invest. Whether or not we have participated in the negotiation of the terms of a loan, there can be no assurance as to the adequacy of the protection of the terms of the loan, including the validity or enforceability of the loan and the maintenance of the anticipated priority and perfection of the applicable security interests. Furthermore, claims have in the past and may in the future be asserted that might interfere with enforcement of our rights. Whole loan mortgages are also subject to “special hazard” risk (property damage caused by hazards, such as earthquakes or environmental hazards, not covered by standard property insurance policies), and to bankruptcy risk (reduction in a borrower’s mortgage debt by a bankruptcy court). In addition, claims have in the past and may in the future be assessed against us on account of our position as mortgage holder or property owner, as applicable, including responsibility for tax payments, environmental hazards and other liabilities, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial condition and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders. We may be required to repurchase residential mortgage loans or indemnify investors if we breach representations and warranties. When we sell or securitize loans, we will be required to make customary representations and warranties about such loans to the loan purchaser. Our mortgage loan sale agreements will require us to repurchase or substitute loans in the event we breach a representation or warranty given to the loan purchaser. In addition, we have in the past and may in the future be required to repurchase loans as a result of borrower fraud or in the event of early payment default on a mortgage loan. Likewise, we are not always required to repurchase or substitute loans if we breach a representation or warranty in connection with our securitizations. The remedies available to a purchaser of mortgage loans are generally broader than those available to us against the originating broker or correspondent. Further, if a purchaser enforces its remedies against us, we have in the past and may in the future not be able to enforce the remedies we have against the sellers. The repurchased loans typically can only be financed at a steep discount to their repurchase price, if at all. They are also typically sold at a significant discount to the unpaid principal 34 ANNALY CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Item 1A. Risk Factors balance. Significant repurchase activity could adversely affect our cash flow, results of operations, financial condition and business prospects. Our and our third party service providers’ and servicers’ due diligence of potential assets may not reveal all weaknesses in such assets. Before acquiring a residential real estate debt asset, we will assess the strengths and weaknesses of the borrower, originator or issuer of the asset as well as other factors and characteristics that are material to the performance of the asset. In making the assessment and otherwise conducting customary due diligence, we will rely on resources available to us, including our third party service providers and servicers. This process is particularly important with respect to newly formed originators or issuers because there may be little or no information publicly available about these entities and assets. There can be no assurance that our due diligence process will uncover all relevant facts or that any asset acquisition will be successful. When we foreclose on an asset, we may come to own the property securing the loan. When we foreclose on a residential real estate asset, we have in the past and may in the future take title to the property securing that asset, and if we do not or cannot sell the property, we would then come to own and operate it as “real estate owned.” Owning and operating real property involves risks that are different (and in many ways more significant) than the risks faced in owning a debt instrument secured by that property. In addition, we have in the past and may in the future end up owning a property that we would not otherwise have decided to acquire directly at the price of our original investment or at all. If we foreclose on and come to own property, our financial performance and returns to investors could suffer. Proposals to acquire mortgage loans by eminent domain may adversely affect the value of our assets. Local governments have taken steps to consider how the power of eminent domain could be used to acquire residential mortgage loans. There can be no certainty whether any mortgage loans sought to be purchased will be mortgage loans held in securitization trusts and what purchase price would be paid for any such mortgage loans. Any such actions could have a material adverse effect on the market value of our mortgage-backed securities, mortgage loans and MSR. There is also no certainty as to whether any such action without the consent of investors would face legal challenge, and, if so, the outcome of any such challenge. Subordinated tranches of non-Agency mortgage-backed securities are subordinate in right of payment to more senior securities. Our investments may include subordinated tranches of non-Agency mortgage-backed securities, which are subordinated classes of securities in a structure of securities collateralized by a pool of mortgage loans and, accordingly, are the first or among the first to bear the loss upon a restructuring or liquidation of the underlying collateral and the last to receive payment of interest and principal. Additionally, estimated fair values of these subordinated interests tend to be more sensitive to changes in economic conditions than more senior securities. As a result, such subordinated interests generally are not actively traded and may not be liquid investments. Our hedging strategies may be costly, and may not hedge our risks as intended. Our policies permit us to enter into interest rate swaps, caps and floors, interest rate swaptions, interest rate futures, and other derivative transactions to help us mitigate our interest rate and prepayment risks described in other risk factors subject to maintaining our qualification as a REIT and our Investment Company Act exemption. We have used interest rate swaps and options to enter into interest rate swaps (commonly referred to as interest rate swaptions) to provide a level of protection against interest rate risks. We may also purchase or sell TBAs on Agency mortgage-backed securities, purchase or write put or call options on TBAs, invest in other types of mortgage derivatives, such as interest-only securities, and hold short positions in U.S. Treasury securities. No hedging strategy can protect us completely. Interest rate hedging may fail to protect or could adversely affect us because, among other things: interest rate hedging can be expensive, particularly during periods of volatile interest rates; available hedges may not correspond directly with the risk for which protection is sought; and the duration of the hedge may not match the duration of the related asset or liability. 35 ANNALY CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Item 1A. Risk Factors We are subject to risks of loss from weather conditions, man-made or natural disasters and the direct and indirect effects of climate change. Assets in which we hold a direct or indirect interest have in the past and may in the future experience severe weather, including hurricanes, severe winter storms, wildfires and flooding (including as a result of sea level rise), all of which may become more severe as a result of climate change, which among other effects could impact house prices and housing-related costs and/or disrupt borrowers’ ability to pay their mortgage and or loan. In addition, such events, particularly if they are not adequately covered by insurance or have a broader negative impact on the local economy, may decrease the value of land and property secured by mortgages. Moreover, long-term climate change could trigger extreme weather conditions that result in macroeconomic and demographic shifts. Over time, these conditions could result in repricing of the assets (land, property, securities) that we hold. There can be no assurance that climate change and severe weather will not have a material adverse effect on our financial performance. 36 ANNALY CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Item 1A. Risk Factors Operational and Cybersecurity Risks Reliance on inaccurate models or the data used by models exposes us to risk. Given our strategies and the complexity of the valuation of our assets, we must rely heavily on analytical models (both proprietary models developed by us and those supplied by third parties) and information and data supplied by our third party vendors and servicers. Models and data are used to value assets or potential asset purchases and also in connection with hedging our assets. Some of these models may use artificial intelligence. When models and data prove to be incorrect, misleading or incomplete, any decisions made in reliance thereon expose us to potential risks. For example, by relying on models and data, especially valuation models, we may be induced to buy certain assets at prices that are too high, to sell certain other assets at prices that are too low or to miss favorable opportunities altogether. Similarly, any hedging based on faulty models and data may prove to be unsuccessful. Furthermore, despite our valuation validation processes our models may nevertheless prove to be incorrect. Some of the risks of relying on analytical models and third party data are particular to analyzing tranches from securitizations, such as commercial or residential mortgage-backed securities. These risks include, but are not limited to, the following: (i) collateral cash flows and/or liability structures may be incorrectly modeled in all or only certain scenarios, or may be modeled based on simplifying assumptions that lead to errors; (ii) information about collateral may be incorrect, incomplete, or misleading; (iii) collateral or bond historical performance (such as historical prepayments, defaults, cash flows, etc.) may be incorrectly reported, or subject to interpretation (e.g., different issuers may report delinquency statistics based on different definitions of what constitutes a delinquent loan); or (iv) collateral or bond information may be outdated, in which case the models may contain incorrect assumptions as to what has occurred since the date information was last updated. Some of the analytical models used by us, such as mortgage prepayment models or mortgage default models, are predictive in nature. The use of predictive models has inherent risks. For example, such models have in the past and may in the future incorrectly forecast future behavior, leading to potential losses on a cash flow and/or a mark-to-market basis. In addition, the predictive models used by us may differ substantially from those models used by other market participants, with the result that valuations based on these predictive models may be substantially higher or lower for certain assets than actual market prices. Furthermore, since predictive models are usually constructed based on historical data supplied by third parties, the success of relying on such models may depend heavily on the accuracy and reliability of the supplied historical data and the ability of these historical models to accurately reflect future periods. All valuation models rely on correct market data inputs. If incorrect market data is entered into even a well-founded valuation model, the resulting valuations will be incorrect. However, even if market data is inputted correctly, “model prices” will often differ substantially from market prices, especially for securities with complex characteristics, such as derivative instruments or structured notes. We are highly dependent on information systems and networks, many of which are operated by third parties. Our business is highly dependent on communications and information systems and networks. Any failure or interruption of our or our counterparties’ systems or networks or cyberattacks or other information security breaches of our networks or systems may cause delays or other problems in our securities trading activities, including mortgage-backed securities trading activities. In addition, we also face the risk of operational failure, termination or capacity constraints of any of the third parties with which we do business or that facilitate our business activities, including clearing agents or other financial intermediaries we use to facilitate our securities transactions, if their respective systems experience failure, interruption, cyberattacks, or other information security breaches, including those caused by software bugs or errors, network failures, computer and telecommunication failures, usage errors, power, communications or other service outages or failures, fires, earthquakes, severe weather conditions or other catastrophic events. Certain third parties provide information needed for our financial statements that we cannot obtain or verify from other sources. If one of those third parties experiences a system or network failure or cybersecurity incident, we may not have access to that information or may not have confidence in its accuracy. Any of the controls and procedures, business continuity systems and information security systems we or third parties upon whom we rely have in place could prove to be inadequate. Any failure to maintain performance, reliability and security of our technical infrastructure, systems or networks, or any such failure by third parties upon whom we rely, could materially and adversely affect our business. 37 ANNALY CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Item 1A. Risk Factors Cyberattacks or other information security breaches of our Company's, service providers' or counterparties' systems or networks affect our business, reputation and financial condition. Cybersecurity risks for financial services businesses are increasing in their frequency, sophistication and intensity, and have become increasingly difficult to detect, in part because of the proliferation of new technologies, including generative artificial intelligence, and the increased sophistication and activities of organized crime, hackers, terrorists, nation-states, state-sponsored actors and other external parties. Cyberattacks could include wrongful conduct by hostile foreign governments, industrial espionage, wire fraud and other forms of cyber fraud, the deployment of harmful malware, ransomware, denial-of-service, social engineering fraud or other means to threaten data security, confidentiality, integrity and availability. Cybersecurity risks also may derive from fraud or malice on the part of our employees or third parties, or may result from human error, software bugs, server malfunctions, software or hardware failure or other technological failure. Such threats may be difficult to detect for long periods of time and also may be further enhanced in frequency or effectiveness through threat actors’ use of artificial intelligence. Further, cybersecurity risks may be heightened as a result of ongoing global conflicts. We rely heavily on our financial, accounting and other data processing systems. A cyberattack or other information security breach of such systems could lead to unauthorized access to and release, misuse, alteration, exfiltration, theft, loss, damage or destruction of our confidential information or personal or confidential information of our clients, employees or third parties, which could lead to regulatory fines, costs of remediating the breach, reputational harm, financial losses, litigation and increased difficulty doing business with third parties that rely on us to meet their own data protection requirements. While we generally perform cybersecurity diligence on our key service providers, we do not control our service providers and our ability to monitor their cybersecurity is limited. Some of our service providers may store or have access to our data and may not have effective controls, processes, or practices to protect our information from loss, unauthorized disclosure, unauthorized use or misappropriation, cyberattacks or other information security breach. A vulnerability in our service providers’ software or systems, a failure of our service providers’ safeguards, policies or procedures, or a cyberattack or other information security breach affecting any of these third parties could harm our business. Although we have not detected a material cybersecurity breach to date, other financial institutions have reported material breaches of their systems, some of which have been significant. Even with all reasonable security efforts, not every breach can be prevented or even detected. It is possible that we have experienced an undetected breach. There is no assurance that we have not or will not experience a breach. In addition, certain third parties that facilitate our business activities have reported breaches in the past and may experience breaches in the future, and there is no assurance that the third parties that have not reported breaches or will not experience a breach in the future. We may be held responsible if certain third parties that facilitate our business activities experience a breach. Additionally, we cannot be certain that our insurance coverage will be adequate for cybersecurity liabilities actually incurred, that insurance will continue to be available to us on economically reasonable terms, or at all, or that our insurer will not deny coverage as to any future claim. We may face increased costs as we continue to evolve our cyber defenses in order to contend with changing risks, and possible increased costs of complying with cybersecurity laws and regulations. These costs and losses associated with these risks are difficult to predict and quantify, but could have a significant adverse effect on our operating results. It is difficult to determine what, if any, negative impact may directly result from any specific interruption or cyberattacks or other information security breaches of our networks or systems (or the networks or systems of third parties that facilitate our business activities), but any cyberattack or other information security breach may negatively affect our operations. Further, we could be exposed to litigation, regulatory enforcement, investigations or other legal action as a result of an incident, carrying the potential for damages, fines, sanctions or other penalties, injunctive relief requiring costly compliance measures, and reputational damage. We may utilize artificial intelligence, which exposes us to liability and affects our business. We use, or may in the future use, artificial intelligence, generative artificial intelligence, machine learning and similar tools and technologies (collectively, “AI”) in connection with our business. The use of generative artificial intelligence, a relatively new and emerging technology in the early stages of commercial use, exposes us to additional risks, such as damage to our reputation, competitive position, and business, legal and regulatory risks and additional costs. For example, generative artificial intelligence has been known to produce false or “hallucinatory” inferences or output, and certain generative artificial intelligence uses machine learning and predictive analytics, which can create inaccurate, incomplete, or misleading content, unintended biases and other discriminatory or unexpected results, errors or inadequacies, any of which may not be easily detectable by us or any of our related service providers. Accordingly, while AI systems may help provide more tailored or personalized user experiences, if the content, analyses, or recommendations that AI systems assist in producing in our products and solutions are, or are perceived to be, deficient, inaccurate, biased, unethical or otherwise flawed, our reputation, competitive position and business may be materially and adversely affected. 38 ANNALY CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Item 1A. Risk Factors Additionally, if any of our employees, contractors, consultants, vendors or service providers use any third-party AI-powered software in connection with our business or the services they provide to us, it may lead to the inadvertent disclosure or incorporation of our confidential information into publicly available training sets, which may impact our ability to realize the benefit of, or adequately maintain, protect and enforce our intellectual property or confidential information, harming our competitive position and business. Any output created by us using AI tools may not be subject to copyright protection, which may adversely affect our intellectual property rights in, or ability to commercialize or use, any such content. In the United States, a number of civil lawsuits have been initiated related to the foregoing and other concerns, any one of which may, among other things, require us to limit the ways in which our AI systems are trained and may affect our ability to develop our AI-powered products and solutions. To the extent that we do not have sufficient rights to use the data or other material or content used in or produced by the AI tools used in our business, or if we experience cybersecurity incidents in connection with our use of AI, it could adversely affect our reputation and expose us to legal liability or regulatory risk, including with respect to third-party intellectual property, privacy, data protection and cybersecurity, publicity, contractual or other rights. Further, our competitors or other third parties may incorporate AI into their products more quickly or more successfully than us, which could impair our ability to compete effectively. In addition, the regulatory framework for AI and similar technologies, and automated decision making, is changing rapidly. It is possible that new laws and regulations will be adopted in the United States and in non-U.S. jurisdictions, or that existing laws and regulations may be interpreted, in ways that would affect the operation of our products and solutions and the way in which we use AI and similar technologies. For example, in Europe, on August 1, 2024, the European Union’s Artificial Intelligence Act (the “AI Act”) was entered into force. The AI Act establishes, among other things, a risk-based governance framework for regulating AI systems operating in the European Union. This framework would categorize AI systems, based on the risks associated with such AI systems’ intended purposes, as creating unacceptable or high risks, with all other AI systems being considered low risk. We may not be able to adequately anticipate or respond to these evolving laws and regulations, and we may need to expend additional resources to adjust our offerings in certain jurisdictions if applicable legal frameworks are inconsistent across jurisdictions. Moreover, because these technologies are themselves highly complex and rapidly developing, it is not possible to predict all of the legal or regulatory risks that may arise relating to our use of such technologies. Further, the cost to comply with such laws or regulations could be significant and would increase our operating expenses, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. As the utilization of AI becomes more prevalent, we anticipate that it will continue to present new or unanticipated ethical, reputational, technical, operational, legal, competitive and regulatory issues, among others. We expect that our incorporation of AI in our business will require additional resources, including the incurrence of additional costs, to develop and maintain our products and solutions and features to minimize potentially harmful or unintended consequences, to comply with applicable and emerging laws and regulations, to maintain or extend our competitive position, and to address any ethical, reputational, technical, operational, legal, competitive or regulatory issues which may arise as a result of any of the foregoing. As a result, the challenges presented with our use of AI could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. We depend on third party service providers, including mortgage loan servicers and sub-servicers, for a variety of services related to our business. We depend on a variety of services provided by third party service providers related to our investments in MSR as well as for general operating purposes. For example, we rely on the mortgage servicers who service the mortgage loans underlying our MSR to, among other things, collect principal and interest payments on such mortgage loans and perform loss mitigation services in accordance with applicable laws and regulations. Mortgage servicers and other service providers, such as trustees, bond insurance providers, due diligence vendors and document custodians, have in the past and may in the future fail to perform or otherwise not perform in a manner that promotes our interests. For example, any legislation or regulation intended to reduce or prevent foreclosures through, among other things, loan modifications may reduce the value of mortgage loans, including those underlying our MSR. Mortgage servicers have in the past and may in the future be required or otherwise incentivized by the Federal or state governments to pursue actions designed to assist mortgagors, such as loan modifications, forbearance plans and other actions intended to prevent foreclosure even if such loan modifications and other actions are not in the best interests of the beneficial owners of the mortgage loans. Similarly, legislation delaying the initiation or completion of foreclosure proceedings on specified types of residential mortgage loans or otherwise limiting the ability of mortgage servicers to take actions that may be essential to preserve the value of the mortgage loans may also reduce the value of mortgage loans underlying our MSR. Any such limitations are likely to cause delayed or reduced collections from mortgagors and generally increase servicing costs. As a consequence of the foregoing matters, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected. 39 ANNALY CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Item 1A. Risk Factors Our investments in residential whole loans subject us to servicing-related risks. In connection with the acquisition and securitization of residential whole loans, we rely on unaffiliated servicing companies to service and manage the mortgages underlying our non-Agency mortgage-backed securities and our residential whole loans. If a servicer is not vigilant in seeing that borrowers make their required monthly payments, borrowers may be less likely to make these payments, resulting in a higher frequency of default. If a servicer takes longer to liquidate non-performing mortgages, our losses related to those loans may be higher than originally anticipated. Any failure by servicers to service these mortgages and related real estate owned (“REO”) properties impacts the value of these investments and our financial performance. In addition, while we have contracted, and will continue to contract, with unaffiliated servicing companies to carry out the actual servicing of the loans we purchase together with the related MSR (including all direct interface with the borrowers), we are nevertheless ultimately responsible, vis-à-vis the borrowers and state and federal regulators, for ensuring that the loans are serviced in accordance with the terms of the related notes and mortgages and applicable law and regulation. In light of the current regulatory environment, such exposure could be significant even though we might have contractual claims against our servicers for any failure to service the loans to the required standard. A default by the mortgage servicer in its capacity as servicer and/or failure of the mortgage servicer to perform its obligations related to any MSR have in the past and may in the future result in a loss of value of servicing fees and/or excess servicing spread. Mortgage servicers are subject to extensive federal, state and local laws, regulations and administrative decisions and failure to comply with such regulations can expose the servicer to fines, damages and losses. In the capacity of servicer, mortgage servicers operate in a highly litigious industry that subject it to potential lawsuits related to billing and collections practices, modification protocols or foreclosure practices. When a residential whole loan we own is foreclosed upon, title to the underlying property would be taken by one of our subsidiaries. The foreclosure process, especially in judicial foreclosure states such as New York, Florida and New Jersey can be lengthy and expensive, and the delays and costs involved in completing a foreclosure, and then liquidating the property through sale, may materially increase any related loss. Finally, at such time as title is taken to a foreclosed property, it may require more extensive rehabilitation than we estimated at acquisition or a previously unknown environmental liability may be discovered that would require expensive and time-consuming remediation. Additionally, given the magnitude of the 2008-2009 housing crisis, and in response to the well-publicized failures of many servicers to follow proper foreclosure procedures, mortgage servicers are being held to much higher foreclosure-related documentation standards than they previously were. However, because many mortgages have been transferred and assigned multiple times (and by means of varying assignment procedures) throughout the origination, warehouse, and securitization processes, mortgage servicers have generally had much more difficulty furnishing the requisite documentation to initiate or complete foreclosures. In addition, unexpected macro-level events such as the COVID-19 pandemic or natural disasters have led, and could continue to lead, to delays in the foreclosure process, both by operation of state law (e.g., foreclosure moratoriums in certain states) and by delays in the judicial system. These circumstances have led to stalled or suspended foreclosure proceedings, and ultimately additional foreclosure-related costs. Foreclosure-related delays also tend to increase ultimate loan loss severities as a result of property deterioration, amplified legal and other costs, and other factors. Many factors delaying foreclosure, such as borrower lawsuits and judicial backlog and scrutiny, are outside of a servicer's control and have delayed, and will likely continue to delay, foreclosure processing in both judicial states (where foreclosures require court involvement) and non-judicial states. The concerns about deficiencies in foreclosure practices of servicers and related delays in the foreclosure process may impact our loss assumptions and has affected and may continue to affect the values of, and our returns on, our investments in residential whole loans. The performance of loans underlying our MSR related assets is affected by the performance of the related mortgage servicer. The performance of the loans underlying our MSR related assets is subject to risks associated with inadequate or untimely servicing. If our mortgage servicers commit a material breach of their obligations as a servicer, we may be subject to damages if the breach is not cured within a specified period of time following notice. In addition, poor performance by a mortgage servicer have in the past and may in the future result in greater than expected delinquencies and foreclosures and losses on the mortgage loans underlying our MSR related assets. A substantial increase in our delinquency or foreclosure rate or the inability to process claims could adversely affect our ability to access the capital and secondary markets for our financing needs. Similar to the way in which we service residential whole loans, we have also contracted, and will continue to contract, with unaffiliated servicing companies to carry out the actual servicing activities (including all direct interface with the borrowers). However, we are nevertheless ultimately responsible, vis-à-vis the borrowers and state and federal regulators, for ensuring that these activities are performed in accordance with the terms of the related notes and mortgages and applicable laws and 40 ANNALY CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Item 1A. Risk Factors regulations. In light of the current regulatory environment, such exposure could be significant even though we might have contractual claims against our servicers for any failure to service the loans to the required standard. A default by the mortgage servicer in its capacity as servicer and/or failure of the mortgage servicer to perform its obligations related to any MSR could result in a loss of value of servicing fees and/or excess servicing spread. Mortgage servicers are subject to extensive federal, state and local laws, regulations and administrative decisions and failure to comply with such regulations can expose the servicer to fines, damages and losses. In the capacity of servicer, mortgage servicers operate in a highly litigious industry that subject them to potential lawsuits related to billing and collections practices, modification protocols or foreclosure practices. We are subject to prepayment rate risk. The mortgage-backed securities we acquire are backed by pools of mortgage loans. We receive payments, generally, from the payments that are made on the underlying mortgage loans. We often purchase mortgage-backed securities that have a higher coupon rate than the prevailing market interest rates. In exchange for a higher coupon rate, we typically pay a premium over par value to acquire these mortgage-backed securities. In accordance with U.S. GAAP, we amortize the premiums on our mortgage-backed securities over the expected life of the related mortgage-backed securities. If the mortgage loans securing these mortgage-backed securities prepay at a more rapid rate than anticipated, we will have to amortize our premiums on an accelerated basis that may adversely affect our profitability. Defaults on mortgage loans underlying Agency mortgage-backed securities typically have the same effect as prepayments because of the underlying Agency guarantee. Prepayment rates generally increase when interest rates fall and decrease when interest rates rise, but changes in prepayment rates are difficult to predict. Prepayment rates also have in the past and may in the future be affected by conditions in the housing and financial markets, general economic conditions and the relative interest rates on fixed-rate and adjustable-rate mortgage loans. We seek to minimize prepayment risk to the extent practical, and in selecting investments we must balance prepayment risk against other risks and the potential returns of each investment. No strategy can completely insulate us from prepayment risk. We have in the past and may in the future choose to bear increased prepayment risk if we believe that the potential returns justify the risk. Conversely, a decline in prepayment rates on our investments will reduce the amount of principal we receive and therefore reduce the amount of cash we otherwise could have reinvested in higher yielding assets at that time, which could negatively impact our future operating results. We are subject to reinvestment risk. We are subject to reinvestment risk as a result of changes in interest rates. Declines in interest rates are generally accompanied by increased prepayments of mortgage loans, which in turn results in a prepayment of the related mortgage-backed securities. An increase in prepayments has in the past and may in the future result in the reinvestment of the proceeds we receive from such prepayments into lower yielding assets. Conversely, increases in interest rates are generally accompanied by decreased prepayments of mortgage loans, which have in the past and may in the future reduce our capital available to reinvest into higher-yielding assets. Competition may affect ability and pricing of our target assets. We operate in a highly competitive market for investment opportunities. Our profitability depends, in large part, on our ability to acquire our target assets at attractive prices. In acquiring our target assets, we compete with a variety of institutional investors, including other REITs, specialty finance companies, public and private funds, government entities, commercial and investment banks, commercial finance and insurance companies and other financial institutions. Many of our competitors are substantially larger and have considerably greater financial, technical, technological, marketing and other resources than we do. Other REITs with investment objectives that overlap with ours may elect to raise significant amounts of capital, which have in the past and may in the future create additional competition for investment opportunities. Some competitors may have a lower cost of funds and access to funding sources that may not be available to us. Many of our competitors are not subject to the operating constraints associated with REIT compliance or maintenance of an exemption from the Investment Company Act. In addition, some of our competitors may have higher risk tolerances or different risk assessments, which could allow them to consider a wider variety of investments and establish more relationships than us. Furthermore, competition for investments in our target assets may lead to the price of such assets increasing, which may further limit our ability to generate desired returns. We cannot provide assurance that the competitive pressures we face will not have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Also, as a result of this competition, desirable investments in our target assets 41 ANNALY CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Item 1A. Risk Factors may be limited in the future and we may not be able to take advantage of attractive investment opportunities from time to time, as we can provide no assurance that we will be able to identify and make investments that are consistent with our investment objectives. We may enter into new lines of business, acquire other companies or engage in other strategic initiatives, each of which may result in additional risks and uncertainties in our businesses. We have in the past and may in the future pursue growth through acquisitions of other companies or other strategic initiatives. To the extent we pursue strategic investments or acquisitions, undertake other strategic initiatives or consider new lines of business, we will face numerous risks and uncertainties, including risks associated with: • the availability of suitable opportunities; • the level of competition from other companies that may have greater financial resources; • our ability to assess the value, strengths, weaknesses, liabilities and potential profitability of potential acquisition opportunities accurately and negotiate acceptable terms for those opportunities; • the required investment of capital and other resources; • the lack of availability of financing and, if available, the terms of any financings; • the possibility that we have insufficient expertise to engage in such activities profitably or without incurring inappropriate amounts of risk; • the diversion of management’s attention from our core businesses; • the potential loss of key personnel of an acquired business; • assumption of liabilities in any acquired business; • the disruption of our ongoing businesses; • the increasing demands on or issues related to the combining or integrating operational and management systems and controls; • compliance with additional regulatory requirements; • costs associated with integrating and overseeing the operations of the new businesses; • failure to realize the full benefits of an acquisition, including expected synergies, cost savings, or growth opportunities, within the anticipated timeframe or at all; and • post-acquisition deterioration in an acquired business that could result in lower or negative earnings contribution and/or goodwill impairment charges. Entry into certain lines of business may subject us to new laws and regulations with which we are not familiar, or from which we are currently exempt, and may lead to increased litigation and regulatory risk. The decision to increase or decrease investments within a line of business may lead to additional risks and uncertainties. In addition, if a new or acquired business generates insufficient revenues or if we are unable to efficiently manage our expanded operations, our results of operations will be adversely affected. Our strategic initiatives have in the past and may in the future include joint ventures, in which case we will be subject to additional risks and uncertainties in that we may be dependent upon, and subject to liability for, losses or reputational damage relating to systems, controls and personnel that are not under our control. Some of our investments, including those related to non-prime loans, involve credit risk. Our current investment strategy includes seeking growth in our residential credit business. The holder of a mortgage or mortgage-backed securities assumes the risk that the related borrowers may default on their obligations to make full and timely payments of principal and interest. Under our investment policy, we have the ability to acquire non-Agency mortgage-backed securities, residential whole loans, MSR and other investment assets of lower credit quality. In general, non-Agency mortgage-backed securities carry greater investment risk than Agency mortgage-backed securities because they are not guaranteed as to principal or interest by the U.S. Government, any federal agency or any federally chartered corporation. Non-investment grade, non-Agency securities tend to be less liquid, may have a higher risk of default and may be more difficult to value than investment grade bonds. Higher-than-expected rates of default and/or higher-than-expected loss severities on the mortgages underlying our non-Agency mortgage-backed securities, MSR or on our residential whole loan investments may adversely affect the value of those assets. Accordingly, defaults in the payment of principal and/or interest on our non-Agency mortgage-backed securities, residential whole loan investments, MSR and other investment assets of lower credit quality have in the past and may in the future result in our incurring losses of income from, and/or losses in market value relating to, these assets. 42 ANNALY CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Item 1A. Risk Factors We have certain investments in non-Agency mortgage-backed securities backed by collateral pools containing mortgage loans that were originated under underwriting standards that were less strict than those used in underwriting “prime mortgage loans.” These lower standards permitted mortgage loans, often with LTV ratios in excess of 80%, to be made to borrowers having impaired credit histories, lower credit scores, higher debt-to-income ratios and/or unverified income. Difficult economic conditions, including increased interest rates and lower home prices, have in the past and may in the future result in non-prime and subprime mortgage loans having increased rates of delinquency, foreclosure, bankruptcy and loss (including such as during the credit crisis of 2007-2008 and the housing crisis that followed), and are likely to otherwise experience delinquency, foreclosure, bankruptcy and loss rates that are higher, and that may be substantially higher, than those experienced by mortgage loans underwritten in a more traditional manner. Thus, because of higher delinquency rates and losses associated with non-prime and subprime mortgage loans, the performance of our non-Agency mortgage-backed securities that are backed by these types of loans could be correspondingly adversely affected, which could materially adversely impact our results of operations, financial condition and business. Any inability to attract, motivate and retain qualified talent, including our key personnel, affects us. Our success and our ability to manage anticipated future growth depend, in large part, upon the efforts of our highly skilled employees, and particularly on our key personnel, including our executive officers. Our executive officers have extensive experience and strong reputations in the sectors in which we operate and have been instrumental in setting our strategic direction, operating our business, identifying, recruiting, and training our other key personnel, and arranging necessary financing. The departure of any of our executive officers or other key personnel, or our inability to attract, motivate and retain highly qualified employees at all levels of the firm in light of the intense competition for talent, could adversely affect our business, operating results or financial condition; diminish our investment opportunities; or weaken our relationships with lenders, business partners and industry personnel. Other Risks The market price and trading volume of our shares of common stock may be volatile and issuances of large amounts of shares of our common stock could cause the market price of our common stock to decline. If we issue a significant number of shares of common stock or securities convertible into common stock in a short period of time, there could be a dilution of the existing common stock and a decrease in the market price of the common stock. The market price of our shares of common stock has in the past and may in the future be highly volatile and could be subject to wide fluctuations. In addition, the trading volume in our shares of common stock may fluctuate and cause significant price variations to occur. We cannot assure you that the market price of our shares of common stock will not fluctuate or decline significantly in the future. Some of the factors that could negatively affect our share price or result in fluctuations in the price or trading volume of our shares of common stock include those set forth under “Special Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements” as well as: • actual or anticipated variations in our quarterly operating results or business prospects; • changes in our earnings estimates or publication of research reports about us or the real estate industry; • an inability to meet or exceed securities analysts’ estimates or expectations; • increases in market interest rates; • hedging or arbitrage trading activity in our shares of common stock; • capital commitments; • changes in market valuations of similar companies; • adverse market reaction to any increased indebtedness we incur in the future; • additions or departures of management personnel; • actions by institutional stockholders or activist investors; • speculation in the press or investment community; • changes in our distribution policy; • government action or regulation; • general market and economic conditions; and • future sales of our shares of common stock or securities convertible into, or exchangeable or exercisable for, our shares of common stock. Holders of our shares of common stock will be subject to the risk of volatile market prices and wide fluctuations in the market price of our shares of common stock. These factors have in the past and may in the future cause the market price of our shares 43 ANNALY CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Item 1A. Risk Factors of common stock to decline, regardless of our financial condition, results of operations, business or prospects. It is impossible to assure you that the market prices of our shares of common stock will not fall in the future. Under our charter, we have 1,531,750,000 authorized shares of capital stock, par value of $0.01 per share. Sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock or other equity-related securities in the public market, or any hedging or arbitrage trading activity that may develop involving our common stock, could depress the market price of our common stock and impair our ability to raise capital through the sale of additional equity securities. We may change our policies without stockholder approval. Our Board has established very broad investment guidelines that may be amended from time to time. Our Board and management determine all of our significant policies, including our investment, financing, capital and asset allocation and distribution policies. They have in the past and may in the future amend or revise these policies at any time without a vote of our stockholders, or otherwise initiate a change in asset allocation. Policy changes could adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, the market price of our common stock or our ability to pay dividends or distributions. ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS None. ITEM 1C. CYBERSECURITY For a full discussion of our cybersecurity risk management process and policies, please refer to the subsection titled “Operational Risk Management” within the “Risk Management” section of Part II, Item 7. “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.” ITEM 2. PROPERTIES Our executive and administrative office is located at 1211 Avenue of the Americas New York, New York 10036, telephone 212-696-0100. This office is leased under a non-cancelable lease expiring May 31, 2042.