Chicago Atlantic BDC, Inc.

Previous wording

The current global financial market situation, as well as various social and political tensions in the United States and around the world (including the current conflicts in Israel and Ukraine), may contribute to increased market volatility, may have long-term effects on the United States and worldwide financial markets and may cause economic uncertainties or deterioration in the U.S. and worldwide. The impact of downgrades by rating agencies to the U.S. government’s sovereign credit rating or its perceived creditworthiness as well as potential government shutdowns and uncertainty surrounding transfers of power could adversely affect the U.S. and global financial markets and economic conditions. Since 2010, several European Union countries have faced budget issues, some of which may have negative long-term effects for the economies of those countries and other European Union countries. There is concern about national-level support for the Euro and the accompanying coordination of fiscal and wage policy among European Economic and Monetary Union member countries. In addition, the fiscal policy of foreign nations, such as Russia and China, may have a severe impact on the worldwide and U.S. financial markets. The United Kingdom’s decision to leave the EU (the so-called “Brexit”) led to volatility in global financial markets. On December 24, 2020, a trade agreement was concluded between the EU and the United Kingdom (the “TCA”), which applied provisionally after the end of the transition period ending on December 31, 2020 and which formally took effect on May 1, 2021 and now governs the relationship between the United Kingdom and the EU. There remains uncertainty as to the scope, nature and terms of the relationship between the United Kingdom and the EU and the effect and implications of the TCA, and the actual and potential consequences of Brexit. Additionally, trade wars and volatility in the U.S. repo market, the U.S. high-yield bond markets, the Chinese stock markets and global markets for commodities may affect other financial markets worldwide. In addition, while recent government stimulus measures worldwide have reduced volatility in the financial markets, volatility may return as such measures are phased out, and the long-term impacts of such stimulus on fiscal policy and inflation remain unknown. In addition, the current conflicts between Russia and Ukraine and between Israel and Hamas, and resulting market volatility, could adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations. In response to the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, the U.S. and other countries have imposed sanctions or other restrictive actions against Russia. Any of the above factors, including sanctions, export controls, tariffs, trade wars and other governmental actions, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, cash flows and results of operations and could cause the value of our common shares and/or debt securitie…

Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.

Current wording

The current global financial market situation, as well as various social and political tensions in the United States and around the world (including the current conflicts between Russia and Ukraine and in the Middle East), may contribute to increased market volatility, may have long-term effects on the United States and worldwide financial markets and may cause economic uncertainties or deterioration in the U.S. and worldwide. The impact of downgrades by rating agencies to the U.S. government’s sovereign credit rating or its perceived creditworthiness as well as potential government shutdowns and uncertainty surrounding transfers of power could adversely affect the U.S. and global financial markets and economic conditions. Since 2010, several European Union countries have faced budget issues, some of which may have negative long-term effects for the economies of those countries and other European Union countries. There is concern about national-level support for the Euro and the accompanying coordination of fiscal and wage policy among European Economic and Monetary Union member countries. In addition, the fiscal policy of foreign nations, such as Russia and China, may have a severe impact on the worldwide and U.S. financial markets. The United Kingdom’s decision to leave the EU (the so-called “Brexit”) led to volatility in global financial markets. On December 24, 2020, a trade agreement was concluded between the EU and the United Kingdom (the “TCA”), which applied provisionally after the end of the transition period ending on December 31, 2020 and which formally took effect on May 1, 2021 and now governs the relationship between the United Kingdom and the EU. There remains uncertainty as to the scope, nature and terms of the relationship between the United Kingdom and the EU and the effect and implications of the TCA, and the actual and potential consequences of Brexit. Additionally, trade wars and volatility in the U.S. repo market, the U.S. high-yield bond markets, the Chinese stock markets and global markets for commodities may affect other financial markets worldwide. In addition, while recent government stimulus measures worldwide have reduced volatility in the financial markets, volatility may return as such measures are phased out, and the long-term impacts of such stimulus on fiscal policy and inflation remain unknown. In addition, the current conflicts between Russia and Ukraine and in the Middle East, and resulting market volatility, could adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations. In response to the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, the U.S. and other countries have imposed sanctions or other restrictive actions against Russia. Any of the above factors, including sanctions, export controls, tariffs, trade wars and other governmental actions, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, cash flows and results of operations and could cause the value of our common shares…

Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.

Previous wording

The ongoing armed conflicts as a result of the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the war between Israel and Hamas may have a material adverse impact on us and our portfolio companies.

Current wording

The ongoing armed conflicts as a result of the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the conflict in the Middle East may have a material adverse impact on us and our portfolio companies.

Previous wording

The Russian invasion of Ukraine and the war between Israel and Hamas in the Middle East have led, are currently leading, and for an unknown period of time may continue to lead to disruptions in local, regional, national, and global markets and economies affected thereby. Furthermore, the aforementioned conflicts and the varying involvement of the United States and other NATO countries could preclude prediction as to their ultimate adverse impact on global economic and market conditions, and, as a result, presents material uncertainty and risk with respect to the performance of our investments, our operations, and our ability to achieve our investment objectives.

Current wording

The Russian invasion of Ukraine and the conflict in the Middle East have led, are currently leading, and for an unknown period of time may continue to lead to disruptions in local, regional, national, and global markets and economies affected thereby. Furthermore, the aforementioned conflicts and the varying involvement of the United States and other NATO countries could preclude prediction as to their ultimate adverse impact on global economic and market conditions, and, as a result, presents material uncertainty and risk with respect to the performance of our investments, our operations, and our ability to achieve our investment objectives.

Previous wording

Although we have no direct exposure to Russia, Ukraine or Israel, the broader consequences of the conflicts may have a material adverse impact on our portfolio, our business and operations and the value of an investment in us. The Russian invasion of Ukraine and the war between Israel and Hamas are uncertain and evolving as of the filing date of this annual report on Form 10-K, and their full impact on our portfolio companies after the date hereof is unknown.

Current wording

Although we have no direct exposure to Russia, Ukraine or the Middle East, the broader consequences of the conflicts may have a material adverse impact on our portfolio, our business and operations and the value of an investment in us. The Russian invasion of Ukraine and the conflict in the Middle East are uncertain and evolving as of the filing date of this annual report on Form 10-K, and their full impact on our portfolio companies after the date hereof is unknown.

Previous wording

From time-to-time, capital markets may experience periods of disruption and instability. During such periods of market disruption and instability, we and other companies in the financial services sector may have limited access, if available, to alternative markets for debt and equity capital. Equity capital may be difficult to raise because, subject to some limited exceptions which will apply to us as a BDC, we will generally not be able to issue additional shares of our common stock at a price less than net asset value without first obtaining approval for such issuance from our stockholders and our independent directors. In addition, our ability to incur indebtedness (including by issuing preferred stock) is limited by applicable regulations such that our asset coverage, as defined in the 1940 Act, must equal at least 150% immediately after each time we incur indebtedness. The debt capital that will be available, if at all, may be at a higher cost and on less favorable terms and conditions in the future. Any inability to raise capital could have a negative effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Current wording

From time-to-time, capital markets may experience periods of disruption and instability. During such periods of market disruption and instability, we and other companies in the financial services sector may have limited access, if available, to alternative markets for debt and equity capital. Equity capital may be difficult to raise because, subject to some limited exceptions which apply to us as a BDC, we will generally not be able to issue additional shares of our common stock at a price less than net asset value without first obtaining approval for such issuance from our stockholders and our independent directors. In addition, our ability to incur indebtedness (including by issuing preferred stock) is limited by applicable regulations such that our asset coverage, as defined in the 1940 Act, must equal at least 150% immediately after each time we incur indebtedness. The debt capital that will be available, if at all, may be at a higher cost and on less favorable terms and conditions in the future. Any inability to raise capital could have a negative effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Previous wording

Further, the illiquidity of our investments may make it difficult for us to sell such investments if required and to value such investments. Our use of leverage will amplify these risks, and we may be forced to liquidate our investments at inopportune times or prices to repay debt. Consequently, we may realize significantly less than the value at which we carry our investments. An inability to raise capital, and any required sale of our investments for liquidity purposes, could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition or results of operations. In addition, a prolonged period of market illiquidity may cause us to reduce the volume of loans and debt securities we originate and/or fund and adversely affect the value of our portfolio investments, which could have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Current wording

An inability to raise capital, and any required sale of our investments for liquidity purposes, could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition or results of operations. In addition, a prolonged period of market illiquidity may cause us to reduce the volume of loans and debt securities we originate and/or fund and adversely affect the value of our portfolio investments, which could have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Previous wording

A significant portion of our investment portfolio will be recorded at fair value as determined in good faith in accordance with procedures established by our Board of Directors and, as a result, there will be uncertainty as to the value of our portfolio investments.

Current wording

Our investment portfolio will be recorded at fair value as determined in good faith in accordance with procedures established by our Board of Directors and, as a result, there will be uncertainty as to the value of our portfolio investments.

Previous wording

Under the 1940 Act, we are required to carry our portfolio investments at market value or, if there is no readily available market value, at fair value as determined in good faith in accordance with procedures established by our Board of Directors. Typically, there is not a public market for the securities of the privately held companies in which we will invest. As a result, we value these securities quarterly at fair value as determined in good faith in accordance with procedures established by our Board of Directors. The fair value of such securities may change, potentially materially, between the date of the fair value determination and the release of the financial results for the corresponding period or the next date at which fair value is determined.

Current wording

Under the 1940 Act, we are required to carry our portfolio investments at market value or, if there is no readily available market value, at fair value as determined in good faith in accordance with procedures established by our Board of Directors. Typically, there is not a public market for the securities of the privately held companies in which we invest. As a result, we value these securities quarterly at fair value as determined in good faith in accordance with procedures established by our Board of Directors. The fair value of such securities may change, potentially materially, between the date of the fair value determination and the release of the financial results for the corresponding period or the next date at which fair value is determined.

Previous wording

In addition, the participation of the investment professionals in the valuation process, and the indirect pecuniary interest of Scott Gordon, our Chief Executive Officer and an interested member of our Board of Directors, Umesh Mahajan, our Chief Financial Officer, William Healy and Dino Colonna in the Adviser could result in a conflict of interest as the management fee payable to our Adviser is based on our gross assets and the Incentive Fees on Capital Gains payable to the Adviser will be based, in part, on unrealized losses.

Current wording

In addition, the participation of the investment professionals in the valuation process, and the indirect pecuniary interest of Scott Gordon, our Co-Chief Investment Officer, an interested member and Executive Chairman of our Board of Directors and a member of the Adviser’s Investment Committee, John Mazarakis, an interested member of our Board of Directors and a member of the Adviser’s Investment Committee, Andreas Bodmeier, a member of the Adviser’s Investment Committee, Umesh Mahajan, our Co-Chief Investment Officer and Secretary and a member of the Adviser’s Investment Committee, Peter Sack, our Chief Executive Officer and a member of the Adviser’s Investment Committee, and Dino Colonna, our President, in the Adviser could result in a conflict of interest as the management fee payable to our Adviser is based on our gross assets and the Incentive Fees on Capital Gains payable to the Adviser is based, in part, on unrealized losses.

Previous wording

Regulations that will govern our operation as a BDC and RIC may affect our ability to raise, and the way in which we raise, additional capital or borrow for investment purposes, which may have a negative effect on our growth.

Current wording

Regulations governing our operation as a BDC and RIC may affect our ability to raise, and the way in which we raise, additional capital or borrow for investment purposes, which may have a negative effect on our growth.

Previous wording

As a result of the operation of the cumulative method of calculating the Incentive Fee on Capital Gains that we will pay to our Adviser, the cumulative aggregate capital gains fee that will be received by our Adviser could be effectively greater than 20%, depending on the timing and extent of subsequent net realized capital losses or net unrealized depreciation. For additional information on this calculation, see the disclosure in footnote 2 to Example 2 under “Item 1. Business — Investment Advisory Agreement — Management Fee — Incentive Fee.” We cannot predict whether, or to what extent, this anticipated payment calculation would affect your investment in shares of our common stock.

Current wording

As a result of the operation of the cumulative method of calculating the Incentive Fee on Capital Gains that we pay to our Adviser, the cumulative aggregate capital gains fee received by our Adviser could be effectively greater than 20%, depending on the timing and extent of subsequent net realized capital losses or net unrealized depreciation. For additional information on this calculation, see the disclosure in footnote 2 to Example 2 under “Item 1. Business — Investment Advisory Agreement — Management Fee — Incentive Fee.” We cannot predict whether, or to what extent, this anticipated payment calculation would affect your investment in shares of our common stock.

Previous wording

We and our anticipated portfolio companies will be subject to regulation at the local, state and federal level, including laws and regulations governing cannabis by state and federal governments. See “— Risks Related to the Cannabis and Hemp Industries” below. New legislation may be enacted or new interpretations, rulings or regulations could be adopted, including those governing the types of investments we may be permitted to make or that impose limits on our ability to pledge a significant amount of our assets to secure loans or that restrict the operations of a portfolio company, any of which could harm us and our stockholders and the value of our investments, potentially with retroactive effect. For example, certain provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act, which influences many aspects of the financial services industry, have been amended or repealed and the Code has been substantially amended and reformed. Any amendment or repeal of legislation, or changes in regulations or regulatory interpretations thereof, could create uncertainty in the near term, which could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Current wording

We and our portfolio companies are subject to regulation at the local, state and federal level, including laws and regulations governing cannabis by state and federal governments. See “— Risks Related to the Cannabis and Hemp Industries” below. New legislation may be enacted or new interpretations, rulings or regulations could be adopted, including those governing the types of investments we may be permitted to make or that impose limits on our ability to pledge a significant amount of our assets to secure loans or that restrict the operations of a portfolio company, any of which could harm us and our stockholders and the value of our investments, potentially with retroactive effect. For example, certain provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act, which influences many aspects of the financial services industry, have been amended or repealed and the Code has been substantially amended and reformed. Any amendment or repeal of legislation, or changes in regulations or regulatory interpretations thereof, could create uncertainty in the near term, which could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Previous wording

Delays in investing the net proceeds raised in our IPO or any follow-on offering of shares of our common stock may cause our performance to be worse than that of other fully invested Business Development Companies or other lenders or investors pursuing comparable investment strategies. We cannot assure you that we will be able to identify any investments that meet our investment objective or that any investment that we make will produce a positive return. We may be unable to invest the net proceeds of our IPO or any follow-on offering on acceptable terms within the time period that we anticipate or at all, which could harm our financial condition and operating results.

Current wording

Delays in investing the net proceeds raised in our IPO or any follow-on offering of shares of our common stock may cause our performance to be worse than that of other fully invested Business Development Companies or other lenders or investors pursuing comparable investment strategies. We cannot assure you that we will be able to identify investments that meet our investment objective or that any investment that we make will produce a positive return. We may be unable to invest the net proceeds of our IPO or any follow-on offering on acceptable terms within the time period that we anticipate or at all, which could harm our financial condition and operating results.

Previous wording

We are an “emerging growth company,” as defined in the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2012, or the “JOBS Act.” As a result, we intend to take advantage of the exemption for emerging growth companies allowing us to temporarily forgo the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (the “Sarbanes-Oxley Act.”). We cannot predict if investors will find shares of our common stock less attractive because we will rely on this exemption. If some investors find our shares of common stock less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our shares and our share price may be more volatile. We will remain an emerging growth company until the earlier of (a) the last day of the fiscal year (i) following the fifth anniversary of the completion of our initial public offering, (ii) in which we have total annual gross revenue of at least $1.235 billion, or (iii) in which we are deemed to be a large accelerated filer, which means the market value of our common stock that is held by non-affiliates exceeds $700 million as of the end of our prior second fiscal quarter, and (b) the date on which we have issued more than $1 billion in non-convertible debt during the prior three-year period.

Current wording

We are an “emerging growth company,” as defined in the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2012, or the “JOBS Act.” As a result, we intend to take advantage of certain exemptions for emerging growth companies allowing us to temporarily forgo the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (the “Sarbanes-Oxley Act.”). We cannot predict if investors will find shares of our common stock less attractive because we rely on this exemption. If some investors find our shares of common stock less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our shares and our share price may be more volatile. We will remain an emerging growth company until the earlier of (a) the last day of the fiscal year (i) following the fifth anniversary of the completion of our initial public offering, (ii) in which we have total annual gross revenue of at least $1.235 billion, or (iii) in which we are deemed to be a large accelerated filer, which means the market value of our common stock that is held by non-affiliates exceeds $700 million as of the end of our prior second fiscal quarter, and (b) the date on which we have issued more than $1 billion in non-convertible debt during the prior three-year period.

Previous wording

We will be required to disclose changes made in our internal control on financial reporting on a quarterly basis and our management will be required to assess the effectiveness of these controls annually. However, for as long as we are an “emerging growth company” under the JOBS Act, our independent registered public accounting firm will not be required to attest to the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting pursuant to Section 404. We could be an emerging growth company for up to five years. An independent assessment of the effectiveness of our internal controls could detect problems that our management’s assessment might not detect. Undetected material weaknesses in our internal controls could lead to financial statement restatements and require us to incur the expense of remediation.

Current wording

We are required to disclose changes made in our internal control on financial reporting on a quarterly basis and our management is required to assess the effectiveness of these controls annually. However, for as long as we are an “emerging growth company” under the JOBS Act, our independent registered public accounting firm will not be required to attest to the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting pursuant to Section 404. We could be an emerging growth company for up to five years. An independent assessment of the effectiveness of our internal controls could detect problems that our management’s assessment might not detect. Undetected material weaknesses in our internal controls could lead to financial statement restatements and require us to incur the expense of remediation.

Previous wording

As a publicly traded company, we will incur legal, accounting and other expenses, including costs associated with the periodic reporting requirements applicable to a company whose securities are registered under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), as well as additional corporate governance requirements, including requirements under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, and other rules implemented by the SEC and the listing standards of the Nasdaq Stock Market. Upon ceasing to qualify as an emerging growth company under the JOBS Act, our independent registered public accounting firm will be required to attest to the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which will increase costs associated with our periodic reporting requirements.

Current wording

As a publicly traded company, we incur legal, accounting and other expenses, including costs associated with the periodic reporting requirements applicable to a company whose securities are registered under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), as well as additional corporate governance requirements, including requirements under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, and other rules implemented by the SEC and the listing standards of the Nasdaq Stock Market. Upon ceasing to qualify as an emerging growth company under the JOBS Act, our independent registered public accounting firm will be required to attest to the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which will increase costs associated with our periodic reporting requirements.

Previous wording

The incentive fee that will be payable by us to our Adviser may create an incentive for our Adviser to make investments on our behalf that are risky or more speculative than would be the case in the absence of such compensation arrangement, which could result in higher investment losses, particularly during cyclical economic downturns. The Incentive Fee on Income is based on a percentage of our net investment income (subject to a hurdle rate), which may encourage our Adviser to use leverage to increase the return on our investments or otherwise manipulate our income so as to recognize income in quarters where the hurdle rate is exceeded and may result in an obligation for us to pay an Incentive Fee on Income to the Adviser even if we have incurred a loss for an applicable period.

Current wording

The incentive fee payable by us to our Adviser may create an incentive for our Adviser to make investments on our behalf that are risky or more speculative than would be the case in the absence of such compensation arrangement, which could result in higher investment losses, particularly during cyclical economic downturns. The Incentive Fee on Income is based on a percentage of our net investment income (subject to a hurdle rate), which may encourage our Adviser to use leverage to increase the return on our investments or otherwise manipulate our income so as to recognize income in quarters where the hurdle rate is exceeded and may result in an obligation for us to pay an Incentive Fee on Income to the Adviser even if we have incurred a loss for an applicable period.

Previous wording

The Incentive Fee on Income that will be payable by us to our Adviser also may create an incentive for our Adviser to invest on our behalf in instruments that have a deferred interest feature. Under these investments, we would accrue the interest over the life of the investment but would not receive the cash income from the investment until the end of the investment’s term, if at all. Our net investment income used to calculate the Incentive Fee on Income, however, will include accrued interest. Thus, a portion of the Incentive Fee on Income would be based on income that we will have not yet received in cash and may never receive in cash if the portfolio company is unable to satisfy such interest payment obligation to us. The Adviser is not obligated to return the Incentive Fee on Income it receives on accrued interest that is later determined to be uncollectible in cash. While we may make Incentive Fee on Income payments on income accruals that we may not collect in the future and with respect to which we do not have a “claw back” right against our Adviser, the amount of accrued income written off in any period will reduce our income in the period in which such write-off was taken and thereby may reduce such period’s Incentive Fee on Income payment.

Current wording

The Incentive Fee on Income payable by us to our Adviser also may create an incentive for our Adviser to invest on our behalf in instruments that have a deferred interest feature. Under these investments, we would accrue the interest over the life of the investment but would not receive the cash income from the investment until the end of the investment’s term, if at all. Our net investment income used to calculate the Incentive Fee on Income, however, includes accrued interest. Thus, a portion of the Incentive Fee on Income would be based on income that we will have not yet received in cash and may never receive in cash if the portfolio company is unable to satisfy such interest payment obligation to us. The Adviser is not obligated to return the Incentive Fee on Income it receives on accrued interest that is later determined to be uncollectible in cash. While we may make Incentive Fee on Income payments on income accruals that we may not collect in the future and with respect to which we do not have a “claw back” right against our Adviser, the amount of accrued income written off in any period will reduce our income in the period in which such write-off was taken and thereby may reduce such period’s Incentive Fee on Income payment.

Previous wording

In addition, our Adviser may be entitled to receive an Incentive Fee on Capital Gains based upon net capital gains realized on our investments. Unlike the Incentive Fee on Income, there will be no performance threshold applicable to the Incentive Fee on Capital Gains. As a result, our Adviser may have a tendency to invest more in investments that are likely to result in capital gains as compared to income producing securities. Such a practice could result in our investing in more speculative securities than would otherwise be the case, which could result in higher investment losses, particularly during economic downturns.

Current wording

In addition, our Adviser may be entitled to receive an Incentive Fee on Capital Gains based upon net capital gains realized on our investments. Unlike the Incentive Fee on Income, there is no performance threshold applicable to the Incentive Fee on Capital Gains. As a result, our Adviser may have a tendency to invest more in investments that are likely to result in capital gains as compared to income producing securities. Such a practice could result in our investing in more speculative securities than would otherwise be the case, which could result in higher investment losses, particularly during economic downturns.

Previous wording

Given the subjective nature of the investment decisions made by our Adviser on our behalf, we will be unable to monitor these potential conflicts of interest between us and our Adviser.

Current wording

Given the subjective nature of the investment decisions made by our Adviser on our behalf, we are unable to monitor these potential conflicts of interest between us and our Adviser.

Previous wording

Our base management fee will be payable based upon our gross assets, which would include any borrowings for investment purposes, and which may encourage our Adviser to use leverage to make additional investments. Given the subjective nature of the investment decisions that our Adviser may make on our behalf and the discretion related to incurring leverage in connection with any such investments, we will be unable to monitor this potential conflict of interest between us and our Adviser.

Current wording

Our base management fee is payable based upon our gross assets, which would include any borrowings for investment purposes, and which may encourage our Adviser to use leverage to make additional investments. Given the subjective nature of the investment decisions that our Adviser may make on our behalf and the discretion related to incurring leverage in connection with any such investments, we are unable to monitor this potential conflict of interest between us and our Adviser.

Previous wording

Our executive officers and directors, and certain members of SSC, serve or may serve as officers, directors or principals of entities that may operate in the same or a related line of business as us or as investment funds managed by our affiliates. For example, SSC and its affiliates manage private investment funds, and may also manage other funds in the future that have investment mandates that are similar, in whole or in part, to our investment mandate. Accordingly, they may have obligations to investors in those entities, the fulfillment of which might not be in the best interests of us or our stockholders. For example, the principals of SSC may face conflicts of interest in the allocation of investment opportunities to us and such other funds. This conflict of interest could be amplified if our investment advisory fees are lower than those of such other funds.

Current wording

Our executive officers and directors, and certain members of the Adviser, serve or may serve as officers, directors or principals of entities that may operate in the same or a related line of business as us or as investment funds managed by our affiliates. For example, the Adviser and its affiliates manage private investment funds, and may also manage other funds in the future that have investment mandates that are similar, in whole or in part, to our investment mandate. Accordingly, they may have obligations to investors in those entities, the fulfillment of which might not be in the best interests of us or our stockholders. For example, the principals of the Adviser may face conflicts of interest in the allocation of investment opportunities to us and such other funds. This conflict of interest could be amplified if our investment advisory fees are lower than those of such other funds.

Previous wording

In order to address potential conflicts of interest, SSC and its affiliates have adopted an investment allocation policy that governs the allocation of investment opportunities among the investment funds and other accounts managed by SSC and its affiliates. To the extent an investment opportunity is appropriate for either or both of us and/or any other investment fund or other account managed by SSC or its affiliates, and co-investment is not possible, SSC and its affiliates will adhere to their investment allocation policy in order to determine to which account to allocate the opportunity.

Current wording

In order to address potential conflicts of interest, Chicago Atlantic has adopted an investment allocation policy that governs the allocation of investment opportunities among the investment funds and other accounts managed by Chicago Atlantic. To the extent an investment opportunity is appropriate for either or both of us and/or any other investment fund or other account managed by Chicago Atlantic, and co-investment is not possible, Chicago Atlantic will adhere to its investment allocation policy in order to determine to which account to allocate the opportunity.

Previous wording

If we are unable to rely on the exemptive relief for a particular opportunity, such opportunity will be allocated in accordance with the investment allocation policy. Although SSC and its affiliates will endeavor to allocate investment opportunities in a fair and equitable manner, we and our common stockholders could be adversely affected to the extent investment opportunities are allocated among us and other investment vehicles managed by SSC or its affiliates.

Current wording

Although Chicago Atlantic will endeavor to allocate investment opportunities in a fair and equitable manner, we and our stockholders could be adversely affected to the extent investment opportunities are allocated among us and other investment vehicles managed by Chicago Atlantic.

Previous wording

The investment allocation policy is also designed to manage and mitigate the conflicts of interest associated with the allocation of investment opportunities if we are able to co-invest, either pursuant to SEC interpretive positions or our exemptive order, with other accounts managed by SSC or its affiliates. Generally, under the investment allocation policy, co-investments will be allocated pursuant to the conditions of the exemptive order. Under the investment allocation policy, a portion of each opportunity that is appropriate for us and any affiliated fund or other account, which may vary based on asset class and liquidity, among other factors, will generally be offered to us and such other eligible accounts, as determined by SSC and its affiliates. If there is a sufficient amount of securities to satisfy all participants, each order will be fulfilled as placed. If there is an insufficient amount of securities to satisfy all participants, the securities will generally be allocated pro rata based on each participant’s order size or available capital.

Current wording

The investment allocation policy is also designed to manage and mitigate the conflicts of interest associated with the allocation of investment opportunities if we are able to co-invest, either pursuant to SEC interpretive positions or our exemptive order, with other accounts managed by Chicago Atlantic. Generally, under the investment allocation policy, co-investments will be allocated pursuant to the conditions of the exemptive order. Under the investment allocation policy, a portion of each opportunity that is appropriate for us and any affiliated fund or other account, which may vary based on asset class and liquidity, among other factors, will generally be offered to us and such other eligible accounts, as determined by Chicago Atlantic. If there is a sufficient amount of securities to satisfy all participants, each order will be fulfilled as placed. If there is an insufficient amount of securities to satisfy all participants, the securities will generally be allocated pro rata based on each participant’s order size or available capital.

Previous wording

In accordance with the investment allocation policy, we might not participate in each individual opportunity, but will, on an overall basis, be entitled to participate equitably with other accounts managed by SSC and its affiliates. SSC and its affiliates seek to treat all clients fairly and equitably in a manner consistent with their fiduciary duty to each of them; however, in some instances, especially in instances of limited liquidity, the factors may not result in pro rata allocations or may result in situations where certain accounts receive allocations where others do not.

Current wording

In accordance with the investment allocation policy, we might not participate in each individual opportunity, but will, on an overall basis, be entitled to participate equitably with other accounts managed by Chicago Atlantic. Chicago Atlantic seeks to treat all clients fairly and equitably in a manner consistent with its fiduciary duty to each of them; however, in some instances, especially in instances of limited liquidity, the factors may not result in pro rata allocations or may result in situations where certain accounts receive allocations where others do not.

Previous wording

Pursuant to the Administration Agreement, SSC furnishes us with the facilities, including our principal executive office, and administrative services necessary to conduct our day-to-day operations. We reimburse our administrator, SSC, for the costs and expenses incurred by SSC in performing its obligations and providing personnel and facilities under the Administration Agreement (including costs and expenses incurred by SSC in connection with the delegation of its obligations under the Administration Agreement to a sub-administrator). We are generally not responsible for the compensation of SSC’s employees or any overhead expenses of SSC (including rent, office equipment and utilities). However, we may reimburse SSC for an allocable portion of the compensation paid by SSC to our CCO and CFO and their respective staffs (based on a percentage of time such individuals devote, on an estimated basis, to our business affairs).

Current wording

Pursuant to the Administration Agreement, the Adviser furnishes us with the facilities, including our principal executive office, and administrative services necessary to conduct our day-to-day operations. We reimburse our administrator, the Adviser, for the costs and expenses incurred by the Adviser in performing its obligations and providing personnel and facilities under the Administration Agreement (including costs and expenses incurred by the Adviser in connection with the delegation of its obligations under the Administration Agreement to a sub-administrator). We are generally not responsible for the compensation of the Adviser’s employees or any overhead expenses of the Adviser (including rent, office equipment and utilities). However, we may reimburse the Adviser for an allocable portion of the compensation paid by the Adviser to our CCO and CFO and their respective staffs (based on a percentage of time such individuals devote, on an estimated basis, to our business affairs).

Previous wording

These factors may make certain of our portfolio companies more susceptible to the adverse effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and resulting government regulations. As a result of the limitations associated with certain portfolio companies, we must therefore rely on the ability of our Adviser to obtain adequate information through due diligence to evaluate the creditworthiness and potential returns from investing in these companies. In addition, certain of our officers and directors may serve as directors on the boards of such companies. To the extent that litigation arises out of our investments in these companies, our officers and directors may be named as defendants in such litigation, which could result in an expenditure of funds (through our indemnification of such officers and directors) and the diversion of management time and resources.

Current wording

As a result of the limitations associated with certain portfolio companies, we must therefore rely on the ability of our Adviser to obtain adequate information through due diligence to evaluate the creditworthiness and potential returns from investing in these companies. In addition, certain of our officers and directors may serve as directors on the boards of such companies. To the extent that litigation arises out of our investments in these companies, our officers and directors may be named as defendants in such litigation, which could result in an expenditure of funds (through our indemnification of such officers and directors) and the diversion of management time and resources.

Previous wording

We will invest primarily in senior secured loans, including unitranche and second lien debt instruments, as well as unsecured debt instruments, issued by our portfolio companies. If we invest in unitranche, second lien, or unsecured debt instruments, our portfolio companies typically may be permitted to incur other debt that ranks equally with, or senior to, such debt instruments. By their terms, such debt instruments may provide that the holders are entitled to receive payment of interest or principal on or before the dates on which we will be entitled to receive payments in respect of the debt securities in which we will invest. Also, in the event of insolvency, liquidation, dissolution, reorganization or bankruptcy of a portfolio company, holders of debt instruments ranking senior to our investment in that portfolio company would typically be entitled to receive payment in full before we receive any distribution in respect of our investment. In such cases, after repaying such senior creditors, such portfolio company may not have any remaining assets to use for repaying its obligation to us. In the case of debt ranking equally with debt securities in which we will invest, we would have to share on an equal basis any distributions with other creditors holding such debt in the event of an insolvency, liquidation, dissolution, reorganization or bankruptcy of the relevant portfolio company.

Current wording

We invest primarily in senior secured loans, including unitranche and second lien debt instruments, as well as unsecured debt instruments, issued by our portfolio companies. If we invest in unitranche, second lien, or unsecured debt instruments, our portfolio companies typically may be permitted to incur other debt that ranks equally with, or senior to, such debt instruments. By their terms, such debt instruments may provide that the holders are entitled to receive payment of interest or principal on or before the dates on which we will be entitled to receive payments in respect of the debt securities in which we invest. Also, in the event of insolvency, liquidation, dissolution, reorganization or bankruptcy of a portfolio company, holders of debt instruments ranking senior to our investment in that portfolio company would typically be entitled to receive payment in full before we receive any distribution in respect of our investment. In such cases, after repaying such senior creditors, such portfolio company may not have any remaining assets to use for repaying its obligation to us. In the case of debt ranking equally with debt securities in which we invest, we would have to share on an equal basis any distributions with other creditors holding such debt in the event of an insolvency, liquidation, dissolution, reorganization or bankruptcy of the relevant portfolio company.

Previous wording

We are classified as a non-diversified investment company within the meaning of the 1940 Act, which means that we are not limited by the 1940 Act with respect to the proportion of our assets that we may invest in securities of a single industry or issuer, excluding limitations on investments in other investment companies. To the extent that we assume large positions in the securities of a small number of industries or issuers, our NAV may fluctuate to a greater extent than that of a diversified investment company as a result of changes in the financial condition or the market’s assessment of the security, industry or issuer. We may also be more susceptible to any single economic or regulatory occurrence than a diversified investment company. Beyond RIC diversification requirements, we will not have fixed guidelines for diversification, and our investments could be concentrated in relatively few industries or issuers.

Current wording

We are classified as a non-diversified investment company within the meaning of the 1940 Act, which means that we are not limited by the 1940 Act with respect to the proportion of our assets that we may invest in securities of a single industry or issuer, excluding limitations on investments in other investment companies. To the extent that we assume large positions in the securities of a small number of industries or issuers, our NAV may fluctuate to a greater extent than that of a diversified investment company as a result of changes in the financial condition or the market’s assessment of the security, industry or issuer. We may also be more susceptible to any single economic or regulatory occurrence than a diversified investment company. Beyond RIC diversification requirements, we do not have fixed guidelines for diversification, and our investments could be concentrated in relatively few industries or issuers.

Previous wording

The ability of our portfolio companies to achieve their business objectives will be contingent, in part, upon the legality of the cannabis industry, their compliance with regulatory requirements enacted by various governmental authorities, and their obtaining all necessary regulatory approvals. The laws and regulations governing cannabis are still developing, including in ways that we or our portfolio companies may not foresee. Any amendment to or replacement of existing laws to make them more onerous, or delays in amending or replacing existing laws to liberalize the legal possession and use of cannabis, or delays in obtaining, or the failure to obtain, any necessary regulatory approvals may significantly delay or impact negatively the markets in which our portfolio companies operate, products and sales initiatives, and could have a material adverse effect on their and our business, liquidity, financial condition and/or results of operations.

Current wording

The ability of our cannabis portfolio companies to achieve their business objectives will be contingent, in part, upon the legality of the cannabis industry, their compliance with regulatory requirements enacted by various governmental authorities, and their obtaining all necessary regulatory approvals. The laws and regulations governing cannabis are still developing, including in ways that we or our portfolio companies may not foresee. Any amendment to or replacement of existing laws to make them more onerous, or delays in amending or replacing existing laws to liberalize the legal possession and use of cannabis, or delays in obtaining, or the failure to obtain, any necessary regulatory approvals may significantly delay or impact negatively the markets in which our portfolio companies operate, products and sales initiatives, and could have a material adverse effect on their and our business, liquidity, financial condition and/or results of operations.

Previous wording

Thirty-eight states and several territories have legalized some form of whole-plant cannabis cultivation, sales and use for certain medical purposes (medical states). Twenty-four of those states and several territories have also legalized cannabis for adults for non-medical purposes (sometimes referred to as recreational use).

Current wording

Forty states and the District of Columbia have legalized some form of whole-plant cannabis cultivation, sales and use for certain medical purposes (medical states). Twenty-four of those states and the District of Columbia have also legalized cannabis for adults for non-medical purposes (sometimes referred to as recreational use).

Previous wording

While President Biden’s election campaign promise to decriminalize may mean that the federal government would not criminally enforce the Schedule II status against state legal entities, the implications are not entirely clear. Although the U.S. Attorney General could order federal prosecutors not to interfere with cannabis businesses operating in compliance with states’ laws, the President alone cannot legalize medical cannabis, and as states have demonstrated, legalizing medical cannabis can take many different forms. While rescheduling cannabis to CSA schedule II would ease certain research restrictions, it would not make the state medical or adult use programs federally legal. Furthermore, while industry observers are hopeful that changes in Congress, along with a Biden presidency, will increase the chances of banking reform, such as the SAFE Banking Act, we cannot provide assurances that a bill legalizing cannabis would be approved by Congress.

Current wording

Unlike President Biden, President Trump has not taken an explicit stance on cannabis from a federal perspective or promised any type of reform. President Trump was supportive of Florida’s failed initiative to make cannabis recreationally legal in the state and he seemed to have no interest in challenging states rights to legalize medical or recreational cannabis in his first term in office, which may mean that the federal government would not criminally enforce the Schedule I status against state legal entities, the implications are not entirely clear. Although the U.S. Attorney General could order federal prosecutors not to interfere with cannabis businesses operating in compliance with states’ laws, the President alone cannot legalize medical cannabis, and as states have demonstrated, legalizing medical cannabis can take many different forms. While rescheduling cannabis to CSA Schedule II would ease certain research restrictions and rescheduling cannabis to CSA Schedule III would ease certain tax burdens (in addition to easing research restrictions), it would not make the state medical or adult use programs federally legal. Furthermore, while industry observers are still hopeful that Congress will progress banking reform, such as the SAFE Banking Act, we cannot provide assurances that a bill legalizing cannabis would be approved by Congress.

Previous wording

Enforcement under the FDCA may be criminal or civil in nature and can include those who aid and abet a violation, or conspire to violate, the FDCA. Violations of the FDCA are for first violations misdemeanors punishable by imprisonment up to one year or a fine, or both, and for second violations or violations committed with an “intent to defraud or mislead” felonies punishable by fines and imprisonment up to three years. The fines provided for are low ($1,000 and $3,000), but under the Criminal Fine Improvements Act of 1987, the criminal fines can be increased significantly (approximately $100,000 to $500,000). Civil remedies under the FDCA include civil money penalties, injunctions and seizures. The FDA also has a number of administrative remedies (e.g., warning letters, recalls, debarment). With respect to CBD products, the FDA so far has limited its enforcement to sending cease-and-desist letters to companies selling CBD products and making “egregious, over-the-line” claims, such as “cures cancer,” “treats Alzheimer’s Disease” and “treats chronic pain.” Additionally, plaintiff lawyers have brought putative class actions against several companies selling CBD product, claiming that the marketing of them as legal products violates California law, although most of the cases have been stayed pending the FDA issuing promised guidelines to the industry. Since issuing the initial guidance following the 2018 Farm Bill, the FDA has sent cease-and-desist warning letters to more than twenty companies making health claims about CBD products. The Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) has also sent warning letters to companies making unsubstantiated health claims about CBD products and has even filed a lawsuit against one. The FDA’s additional guidance on CBD, titled, “Cannabidiol Enforcement Policy; Draft Guidance for Industry,” which the FDA has described as a “risk-based enforcement policy” to prioritize enforcement decisions, was submitted to the White House on July 22, 2020, was not formally approved by the Trump administration, and has been pulled back by the Biden Administration.

Current wording

Enforcement under the FDCA may be criminal or civil in nature and can include those who aid and abet a violation, or conspire to violate, the FDCA. Violations of the FDCA are for first violations misdemeanors punishable by imprisonment up to one year or a fine, or both, and for second violations or violations committed with an “intent to defraud or mislead” felonies punishable by fines and imprisonment up to three years. The fines provided for are low ($1,000 and $3,000), but under the Criminal Fine Improvements Act of 1987, the criminal fines can be increased significantly (approximately $100,000 to $500,000). Civil remedies under the FDCA include civil money penalties, injunctions and seizures. The FDA also has a number of administrative remedies (e.g., warning letters, recalls, debarment). With respect to CBD products, the FDA so far has limited its enforcement to sending cease-and-desist letters to companies selling CBD products and making “egregious, over-the-line” claims, such as “cures cancer,” “treats Alzheimer’s Disease” and “treats chronic pain.” Additionally, plaintiff lawyers have brought putative class actions against several companies selling CBD product, claiming that the marketing of them as legal products violates California law, although most of the cases have been stayed pending the FDA issuing promised guidelines to the industry. Since issuing the initial guidance following the 2018 Farm Bill, the FDA has sent cease-and-desist warning letters to more than twenty companies making health claims about CBD products. The Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) has also sent warning letters to companies making unsubstantiated health claims about CBD products and has even filed a lawsuit against one. The FDA’s additional guidance on CBD, titled, “Cannabidiol Enforcement Policy; Draft Guidance for Industry,” which the FDA has described as a “risk-based enforcement policy” to prioritize enforcement decisions, was submitted to the White House on July 22, 2020, was not formally approved by the Trump administration, and has been pulled back by the Biden Administration. In early 2023, the FDA’s cannabis working group announced that it could not permit CBD to be regulated as a supplement due to significant safety concerns and uncertainties. Instead, the FDA asked Congress for help to design a fit-for-purpose regulatory pathway for CBD which, to date, Congress has not acted on.

Previous wording

The market for businesses in the cannabis industry is highly competitive and evolving. There may be no material aspect of our portfolio companies’ businesses that is protected by patents, copyrights, trademarks or trade names, and they may face strong competition from larger companies, including those that may offer similar products and services to our portfolio companies. Potential competitors may have longer operating histories, significantly greater financial, marketing or other resources, and larger client bases than our portfolio companies, and there can be no assurance that they will be able to successfully compete against these or other competitors. Additionally, because the cannabis industry is at an early stage, a portfolio company may face additional competition from new entrants, including as a result of an increased number of licenses granted under any applicable regulatory regime.

Current wording

Potential competitors may have longer operating histories, significantly greater financial, marketing or other resources, and larger client bases than our portfolio companies, and there can be no assurance that they will be able to successfully compete against these or other competitors. Additionally, because the cannabis industry is at an early stage, a portfolio company may face additional competition from new entrants, including as a result of an increased number of licenses granted under any applicable regulatory regime.

Previous wording

Sales of substantial amounts of our common stock in the public market, including by the Seed Investor, may have an adverse effect on the market price of our common stock.

Current wording

Sales of substantial amounts of our common stock in the public market, including by the Adviser or CALP, may have an adverse effect on the market price of our common stock.

Previous wording

The Adviser was the seed investor of the Company (the “Seed Investor”) and provided initial funding to the Company by purchasing approximately $63 million of our common stock in our initial public offering. The Seed Investor provided this “seed capital” to the Company for the purpose of facilitating the launch and initial operation of the Company, as opposed to for long term investment purposes. The Seed Investor does not expect to hold our common stock indefinitely, and may sell our common stock at a future point in time. In order for the Seed Investor’s sales of the shares of the Company not to be deemed to have been made “on the basis of” material nonpublic information, such sales may be made pursuant to a pre-approved trading plan that complies with Rule 10b5-1 under the Exchange Act and that may obligate the Seed Investor to make recurring sales of our common stock on a periodic basis. Sales of substantial amounts of our common stock, including by the Seed Investor or other large stockholders, or the availability of such common stock for sale, could adversely affect the prevailing market prices for our common stock. If this occurs and continues for a sustained period of time, it could impair our ability to raise additional capital through the sale of securities should we desire to do so.

Current wording

The Adviser was the seed investor of the Company and provided initial funding to the Company by purchasing approximately 4.5 million shares of our common stock in our initial public offering. The Adviser provided this “seed capital” to the Company for the purpose of facilitating the launch and initial operation of the Company, as opposed to for long term investment purposes. In addition, CALP purchased approximately 16.6 million shares of our common stock in connection with the Loan Portfolio Acquisition with the intention of distributing such shares of our common stock to CALP’s members within six months of the Loan Portfolio Acquisition. The Adviser and CALP do not expect to hold our common stock indefinitely, and may sell our common stock, or distribute our common stock to their members (who may, in turn, sell our common stock subject to certain holding period requirements), at a future point in time. In order for the Adviser’s or CALP’s sales of the shares of the Company not to be deemed to have been made “on the basis of” material nonpublic information, such sales may be made pursuant to a pre-approved trading plan that complies with Rule 10b5-1 under the Exchange Act and that may obligate the Adviser or CALP to make recurring sales of our common stock on a periodic basis. Sales of substantial amounts of our common stock, including by the Adviser, CALP, their members or other large stockholders, or the availability of such common stock for sale, could adversely affect the prevailing market prices for our common stock. If this occurs and continues for a sustained period of time, it could impair our ability to raise additional capital through the sale of securities, should we desire to do so.

Previous wording

The Seed Investor has significant influence over us, including having an approximately 72% vote for matters that require the approval of stockholders, which could limit your ability to influence the outcome of matters submitted to stockholders for a vote.

Current wording

The Adviser and CALP have significant influence over us, including having an approximately 80% vote for matters that require the approval of stockholders, which could limit your ability to influence the outcome of matters submitted to stockholders for a vote.

Previous wording

The Seed Investor holds approximately 72% of our voting stock and has the ability to exercise substantial control over all corporate actions requiring stockholder approval, including the election and removal of directors, certain amendments of our charter, our ability to issue our common stock at a price below NAV per share, and the approval of any merger or other extraordinary corporate action.

Current wording

The Adviser and CALP collectively hold approximately 80% of our voting stock and have the ability to exercise substantial control over all corporate actions requiring stockholder approval, including the election and removal of directors, certain amendments of our charter, our ability to issue our common stock at a price below NAV per share, and the approval of any merger or other extraordinary corporate action.

Previous wording

We also expect to achieve certain cost savings from the Loan Portfolio Acquisition following the Loan Portfolio Acquisition. It is possible that the estimates of the potential cost savings could ultimately be incorrect. The cost savings estimates also assume we will be able to combine the portfolios of the Company and CALP in a manner that permits those cost savings to be fully realized. If the estimates turn out to be incorrect or if we are not able to successfully combine the Loan Portfolio with our investment portfolio, the anticipated cost savings may not be fully realized or realized at all or may take longer to realize than expected.

Current wording

We also expect to achieve certain cost savings from the Loan Portfolio Acquisition. It is possible that the estimates of the potential cost savings could ultimately be incorrect. The cost savings estimates also assume we will be able to integrate the Loan Portfolio with our investment portfolio in a manner that permits those cost savings to be fully realized. If the estimates turn out to be incorrect or if we are not able to successfully combine the Loan Portfolio with our investment portfolio, the anticipated cost savings may not be fully realized or realized at all or may take longer to realize than expected.