Chicago Atlantic BDC, Inc.

Previous 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.

Current wording

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

Previous 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.

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 countries that are part of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) 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

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.

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 NAV 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

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.

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. 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. 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 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.

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 and a member of the Adviser’s Investment Committee, John Mazarakis, 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

We compete for investments with other BDCs, public and private funds (including hedge funds, mezzanine funds and CLOs) and private equity funds (to the extent they provide an alternative form of financing), as well as traditional financial services companies such as commercial and investment banks, commercial financing companies and other sources of financing. Many of our competitors are substantially larger and have considerably greater financial, technical and marketing resources than we do. For example, some competitors may have a lower cost of capital and access to funding sources that are not available to us. In addition, some of our competitors may have higher risk tolerances or different risk assessments than we have. These characteristics could allow our competitors to consider a wider variety of investments, establish more relationships and offer better pricing and more flexible structuring than we are able to do. We may lose investment opportunities if we do not match our competitors’ pricing, terms and structure. If we are forced to match our competitors’ pricing, terms and structure, we may not be able to achieve acceptable returns on our investments or may bear substantial risk of capital loss. A significant increase in the number and/or the size of our competitors in this target market could force us to accept less attractive investment terms. Furthermore, many of our competitors are not subject to, the regulatory restrictions that the 1940 Act imposes on us as a BDC.

Current wording

We compete for investments with other BDCs, public and private funds (including hedge funds, mezzanine funds and collateralized loan obligations) and private equity funds (to the extent they provide an alternative form of financing), as well as traditional financial services companies such as commercial and investment banks, commercial financing companies and other sources of financing. Many of our competitors are substantially larger and have considerably greater financial, technical and marketing resources than we do. For example, some competitors may have a lower cost of capital and access to funding sources that are not available to us. In addition, some of our competitors may have higher risk tolerances or different risk assessments than we have. These characteristics could allow our competitors to consider a wider variety of investments, establish more relationships and offer better pricing and more flexible structuring than we are able to do. We may lose investment opportunities if we do not match our competitors’ pricing, terms and structure. If we are forced to match our competitors’ pricing, terms and structure, we may not be able to achieve acceptable returns on our investments or may bear substantial risk of capital loss. A significant increase in the number and/or the size of our competitors in this target market could force us to accept less attractive investment terms. Furthermore, many of our competitors are not subject to, the regulatory restrictions that the 1940 Act imposes on us as a BDC.

Previous wording

If we fail to continuously qualify as a BDC, we might be subject to regulation as a registered closed-end investment company under the 1940 Act, which would significantly decrease our operating flexibility. In addition, failure to comply with the requirements imposed on Business Development Companies by the 1940 Act could cause the SEC to bring an enforcement action against us. For additional information on the qualification requirements of a BDC, see “Item 1. Business — Business Development Company Regulations.”

Current wording

If we fail to continuously qualify as a BDC, we might be subject to regulation as a registered closed-end investment company under the 1940 Act, which would significantly decrease our operating flexibility. In addition, failure to comply with the requirements imposed on BDCs by the 1940 Act could cause the SEC to bring an enforcement action against us. For additional information on the qualification requirements of a BDC, see “Item 1. Business — Business Development Company Regulations.”

Previous wording

Because we will continue to need capital to grow our investment portfolio, these limitations may prevent us from incurring debt and require us to raise additional equity at a time when it may be disadvantageous to do so. As a result of these requirements we need to periodically access the capital markets to raise cash to fund new investments at a more frequent pace than our privately owned competitors. We generally are not able to issue or sell our common stock at a price below NAV per share, which may be a disadvantage as compared with other public companies or private investment funds. When our common stock trades at a discount to NAV, this restriction could adversely affect our ability to raise capital. We may, however, sell our common stock, or warrants, options or rights to acquire our common stock, at a price below the current NAV of the common stock if our Board of Directors and independent directors determine that such sale is in our best interests and the best interests of our stockholders, and our stockholders as well as those stockholders that are not affiliated with us approve such sale in accordance with the requirements of the 1940 Act. In any such case, the price at which our securities are to be issued and sold may not be less than a price that, in the determination of our Board of Directors, closely approximates the market value of such securities (less any underwriting commission or discount). We cannot assure you that equity financing will be available to us on favorable terms, or at all. If additional funds are not available to us, we could be forced to curtail or cease new investment activities.

Current wording

Because we will continue to need capital to grow our investment portfolio, these limitations may prevent us from incurring debt and require us to raise additional equity at a time when it may be disadvantageous to do so. As a result of these requirements we need to periodically access the capital markets to raise cash to fund new investments at a more frequent pace than our privately owned competitors. We generally are not able to issue or sell our common stock at a price below NAV per share, which may be a disadvantage as compared with other public companies or private investment funds. When our common stock trades at a discount to NAV, this restriction could adversely affect our ability to raise capital. We may, however, sell our common stock, or warrants, options or rights to acquire our common stock, at a price below the current NAV of the common stock if our Board and Independent Directors determine that such sale is in our best interests and the best interests of our stockholders, and our stockholders as well as those stockholders that are not affiliated with us approve such sale in accordance with the requirements of the 1940 Act. In any such case, the price at which our securities are to be issued and sold may not be less than a price that, in the determination of our Board, closely approximates the market value of such securities (less any underwriting commission or discount). We cannot assure you that equity financing will be available to us on favorable terms, or at all. If additional funds are not available to us, we could be forced to curtail or cease new investment activities.

Previous wording

Our Board of Directors has the authority to modify or waive our current investment objective, operating policies and strategies without prior notice and without stockholder approval. We cannot predict the effect any changes to our current investment objective, operating policies and strategies would have on our business, NAV, operating results and value of our stock. However, the effects might be adverse, which could negatively impact our ability to pay you distributions and cause you to lose part or all of your investment.

Current wording

Our Board has the authority to modify or waive our current investment objective, operating policies and strategies without prior notice and without stockholder approval. We cannot predict the effect any changes to our current investment objective, operating policies and strategies would have on our business, NAV, operating results and value of our stock. However, the effects might be adverse, which could negatively impact our ability to pay you distributions and cause you to lose part or all of your investment.

Previous 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.

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 Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection 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

The Maryland General Corporation Law (“MGCL”), our charter and our bylaws contain provisions that may discourage, delay or make more difficult a change in control or the removal of our directors. Under our charter, certain charter amendments and certain transactions such as a merger, conversion of the Company to an open-end company, liquidation, or other transactions that may result in a change of control of us, must be approved by stockholders entitled to cast at least 80% of the votes entitled to be cast on such matter, unless the matter has been approved by at least two-thirds of our “continuing directors,” as defined in our charter. Also, we are subject to Subtitle 6 of Title 3 of the MGCL, the Maryland Business Combination Act, subject to any applicable requirements of the 1940 Act. Our Board of Directors has adopted a resolution exempting from the Maryland Business Combination Act any business combination between us and any other person, subject to prior approval of such business combination by our Board of Directors, including approval by a majority of our directors who are not “interested persons,” as defined in the 1940 Act. If the resolution exempting business combinations is repealed or our Board of Directors does not approve a business combination, the Maryland Business Combination Act may discourage third parties from trying to acquire control of us and increase the difficulty of consummating such a transaction. We are subject to Subtitle 7 of Title 3 of the MGCL, the Maryland Control Share Acquisition Act. The Maryland Control Share Acquisition Act also may make it more difficult for a third-party to obtain control of us and increase the difficulty of consummating such a transaction. Our bylaws provide that the Maryland Control Share Acquisition Act does not apply to shares acquired by our Adviser and/or our Adviser’s affiliates.

Current wording

The MGCL, our charter and our bylaws contain provisions that may discourage, delay or make more difficult a change in control or the removal of our directors. Under our charter, certain charter amendments and certain transactions such as a merger, conversion of the Company to an open-end company, liquidation, or other transactions that may result in a change of control of us, must be approved by stockholders entitled to cast at least 80% of the votes entitled to be cast on such matter, unless the matter has been approved by at least two-thirds of our “continuing directors,” as defined in our charter. Also, we are subject to Subtitle 6 of Title 3 of the MGCL, the Maryland Business Combination Act, subject to any applicable requirements of the 1940 Act. Our Board has adopted a resolution exempting from the Maryland Business Combination Act any business combination between us and any other person, subject to prior approval of such business combination by our Board, including approval by our Independent Directors. If the resolution exempting business combinations is repealed or our Board does not approve a business combination, the Maryland Business Combination Act may discourage third parties from trying to acquire control of us and increase the difficulty of consummating such a transaction. We are subject to Subtitle 7 of Title 3 of the MGCL, the Maryland Control Share Acquisition Act. The Maryland Control Share Acquisition Act also may make it more difficult for a third-party to obtain control of us and increase the difficulty of consummating such a transaction. Our bylaws provide that the Maryland Control Share Acquisition Act does not apply to shares acquired by our Adviser and/or our Adviser’s affiliates.

Previous wording

We have also adopted other measures that may make it difficult for a third-party to obtain control of us, including provisions of our charter classifying our Board of Directors in three classes serving staggered three-year terms; majority voting for directors in contested elections; and provisions of our charter authorizing our Board of Directors to classify or reclassify shares of our stock in one or more classes or series, including preferred shares, to cause the issuance of additional shares of our stock of any class or series, and to amend our charter, without stockholder approval, to increase or decrease the number of shares of stock of any class or series that we have authority to issue. These provisions, as well as other provisions of our charter and bylaws, may delay, defer or prevent a transaction or a change in control that could give the holders of our shares the opportunity to realize a premium over the value of our shares or otherwise be in their best interest.

Current wording

We have also adopted other measures that may make it difficult for a third-party to obtain control of us, including provisions of our charter classifying our Board in three classes serving staggered three-year terms; majority voting for directors in contested elections; and provisions of our charter authorizing our Board to classify or reclassify shares of our stock in one or more classes or series, including preferred shares, to cause the issuance of additional shares of our stock of any class or series, and to amend our charter, without stockholder approval, to increase or decrease the number of shares of stock of any class or series that we have authority to issue. These provisions, as well as other provisions of our charter and bylaws, may delay, defer or prevent a transaction or a change in control that could give the holders of our shares the opportunity to realize a premium over the value of our shares or otherwise be in their best interest.

Previous wording

Our Board of Directors is authorized to reclassify any unissued shares of common stock into one or more classes or series of stock, including preferred stock, which could convey special rights and privileges to its owners.

Current wording

Our Board is authorized to reclassify any unissued shares of common stock into one or more classes or series of stock, including preferred stock, which could convey special rights and privileges to its owners.

Previous wording

As noted above, under the MGCL and our charter, our Board of Directors is authorized to classify and reclassify any authorized but unissued shares of stock into one or more classes or series of stock, including preferred stock. The cost of any such reclassification would be borne by our existing stockholders. Prior to issuance of shares of each class or series, our Board of Directors will be required by the MGCL and our charter to set the preferences, conversion or other rights, voting powers, restrictions, limitations as to dividends or other distributions, qualifications and terms or conditions of redemption for each class or series. Thus, our Board of Directors could authorize the issuance of shares of preferred stock with terms and conditions that could have the effect of delaying, deferring or preventing a transaction or a change in control that might involve a premium price for holders of our common stock or otherwise be in their best interest. Certain matters under the 1940 Act require the separate vote of the holders of any issued and outstanding preferred stock. For example, holders of preferred stock would vote as a separate class from the holders of common stock on a proposal to cease operations as a BDC. In addition, the 1940 Act provides that holders of preferred stock are entitled to vote separately from holders of common stock to elect two preferred stock directors. The issuance of preferred shares convertible into shares of common stock may also reduce the net income and net asset value per share of our common stock upon conversion; provided, that we will only be permitted to issue such convertible preferred stock to the extent we comply with the requirements of Section 61 of the 1940 Act, including obtaining common stockholder approval. These effects, among others, could have an adverse effect on an investment in our common stock.

Current wording

As noted above, under the MGCL and our charter, our Board is authorized to classify and reclassify any authorized but unissued shares of stock into one or more classes or series of stock, including preferred stock. The cost of any such reclassification would be borne by our existing stockholders. Prior to issuance of shares of each class or series, our Board will be required by the MGCL and our charter to set the preferences, conversion or other rights, voting powers, restrictions, limitations as to dividends or other distributions, qualifications and terms or conditions of redemption for each class or series. Thus, our Board could authorize the issuance of shares of preferred stock with terms and conditions that could have the effect of delaying, deferring or preventing a transaction or a change in control that might involve a premium price for holders of our common stock or otherwise be in their best interest. Certain matters under the 1940 Act require the separate vote of the holders of any issued and outstanding preferred stock. For example, holders of preferred stock would vote as a separate class from the holders of common stock on a proposal to cease operations as a BDC. In addition, the 1940 Act provides that holders of preferred stock are entitled to vote separately from holders of common stock to elect two preferred stock directors. The issuance of preferred shares convertible into shares of common stock may also reduce the net income and NAV per share of our common stock upon conversion; provided, that we will only be permitted to issue such convertible preferred stock to the extent we comply with the requirements of Section 61 of the 1940 Act, including obtaining common stockholder approval. These effects, among others, could have an adverse effect on an investment in our common stock.

Previous wording

These incidents may be an intentional attack or an unintentional event and could involve gaining unauthorized access to our information systems or those of our portfolio companies for purposes of misappropriating assets, stealing confidential information, corrupting data or causing operational disruption. The risk of a security breach or disruption, particularly through cyber-attacks or cyber intrusions, including by computer hackers, nation-state affiliated actors, and cyber terrorists, has generally increased as the number, intensity and sophistication of attempted attacks and intrusions from around the world have increased. We and our investment adviser’s employees expect to be the target of fraudulent calls, emails and other forms of potentially malicious or otherwise negatively impacting activities and attempts to gain unauthorized access to confidential, personal or other sensitive information. The result of these incidents may include disrupted operations, misstated or unreliable financial data, liability for stolen assets or information, fines or penalties, investigations, increased cybersecurity protection and insurance costs, litigation, and damage to business relationships and reputations causing our business and results of operations to suffer. The costs related to cyber or other security threats or disruptions may not be fully insured or indemnified by other means. As our and our portfolio companies’ reliance on technology has increased, so have the risks posed to our information systems, both internal and those provided by our Adviser and third-party service providers, and the information systems of our portfolio companies. Our Adviser has implemented processes, procedures, and internal controls to help mitigate cybersecurity risks and cyber intrusions, but these measures, as well as our increased awareness of the nature and extent of a risk of a cyber incident, do not guarantee that a cyber incident will not occur and/or that our financial results, operations or confidential information will not be negatively impacted by such an incident. Even the most well-protected information, networks, systems, and facilities remain potentially vulnerable because the techniques used in such attempted security breaches evolve and generally are not recognized until launched against a target, and in some cases are designed not to be detected and, in fact, may not be detected. Accordingly, we and our service providers may be unable to anticipate these techniques or to implement adequate security barriers or other preventative measures, and thus it is impossible for us and our service providers to entirely mitigate this risk. Cybersecurity risks require continuous and increasing attention and other resources from us to, among other actions, identify and quantify these risks, upgrade and expand our technologies, systems and processes to adequately address such risks. Such attention diverts time and other resources from other activities and there is n…

Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.

Current wording

These incidents may be an intentional attack or an unintentional event and could involve gaining unauthorized access to our information systems or those of our portfolio companies for purposes of misappropriating assets, stealing confidential information, corrupting data or causing operational disruption. The risk of a security breach or disruption, particularly through cyber-attacks or cyber intrusions, including by computer hackers, nation-state affiliated actors, and cyber terrorists, has generally increased as the number, intensity and sophistication of attempted attacks and intrusions from around the world have increased. We and our Adviser’s employees expect to be the target of fraudulent calls, emails and other forms of potentially malicious or otherwise negatively impacting activities and attempts to gain unauthorized access to confidential, personal or other sensitive information. The result of these incidents may include disrupted operations, misstated or unreliable financial data, liability for stolen assets or information, fines or penalties, investigations, increased cybersecurity protection and insurance costs, litigation, and damage to business relationships and reputations causing our business and results of operations to suffer. The costs related to cyber or other security threats or disruptions may not be fully insured or indemnified by other means. As our and our portfolio companies’ reliance on technology has increased, so have the risks posed to our information systems, both internal and those provided by our Adviser and third-party service providers, and the information systems of our portfolio companies. Our Adviser has implemented processes, procedures, and internal controls to help mitigate cybersecurity risks and cyber intrusions, but these measures, as well as our increased awareness of the nature and extent of a risk of a cyber incident, do not guarantee that a cyber incident will not occur and/or that our financial results, operations or confidential information will not be negatively impacted by such an incident. Even the most well-protected information, networks, systems, and facilities remain potentially vulnerable because the techniques used in such attempted security breaches evolve and generally are not recognized until launched against a target, and in some cases are designed not to be detected and, in fact, may not be detected. Accordingly, we and our service providers may be unable to anticipate these techniques or to implement adequate security barriers or other preventative measures, and thus it is impossible for us and our service providers to entirely mitigate this risk. Cybersecurity risks require continuous and increasing attention and other resources from us to, among other actions, identify and quantify these risks, upgrade and expand our technologies, systems and processes to adequately address such risks. Such attention diverts time and other resources from other activities and there is no assurance…

Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.

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 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.

Current wording

We are an “emerging growth company,” as defined in 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. 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 IPO, (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

In addition, Section 107 of the JOBS Act also provides that an “emerging growth company” can take advantage of the extended transition period provided in Section 7(a)(2)(B) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”) for complying with new or revised accounting standards. In other words, an “emerging growth company” can delay the adoption of certain accounting standards until those standards would otherwise apply to private companies. We will take advantage of the extended transition period for complying with new or revised accounting standards, which may make it more difficult for investors and securities analysts to evaluate us since our financial statements may not be comparable to companies that comply with public company effective dates and may result in less investor confidence.

Current wording

In addition, Section 107 of the JOBS Act also provides that an “emerging growth company” can take advantage of the extended transition period provided in Section 7(a)(2)(B) of the Securities Act for complying with new or revised accounting standards. In other words, an “emerging growth company” can delay the adoption of certain accounting standards until those standards would otherwise apply to private companies. We will take advantage of the extended transition period for complying with new or revised accounting standards, which may make it more difficult for investors and securities analysts to evaluate us since our financial statements may not be comparable to companies that comply with public company effective dates and may result in less investor confidence.

Previous 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.

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 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 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.

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 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 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

We have adopted a formal code of ethics that governs the conduct of our officers and directors. Our officers and directors also remain subject to the duties imposed by both the 1940 Act and the Maryland General Corporation Law.

Current wording

We have adopted a formal code of ethics that governs the conduct of our officers and directors. Our officers and directors also remain subject to the duties imposed by both the 1940 Act and the MGCL.

Previous wording

Our Adviser and its affiliates may provide a broad range of financial services to companies in which we may invest, including providing arrangement, syndication, origination structuring and other services to portfolio companies, and will generally be paid fees for such services, in compliance with applicable law, by the portfolio company. Any compensation received by our Adviser or its affiliates for providing these services will not be shared with us and may be received before we realize a return on our investment. Our Adviser and its affiliates may face conflicts of interest with respect to services performed for these companies, on the one hand, and investments recommended to us, on the other hand and could, in certain instances, have an incentive not to pursue actions against a portfolio company that would be in our best interest.

Current wording

Our Adviser and its affiliates may provide a broad range of financial services to companies in which we may invest, including providing arrangement, syndication, origination structuring and other services to portfolio companies, and will generally be paid fees for such services, in compliance with applicable law, by the portfolio company. Any compensation received by our Adviser or its affiliates for providing these services may not be shared with us and may be received before we realize a return on our investment. Our Adviser and its affiliates may face conflicts of interest with respect to services performed for these companies, on the one hand, and investments recommended to us, on the other hand and could, in certain instances, have an incentive not to pursue actions against a portfolio company that would be in our best interest.

Previous wording

Any credit facility we may enter into in the future would likely subject all or significant amounts of our assets to security interests and if we default on our obligations under such a credit facility, we may suffer adverse consequences, including foreclosure on our assets.

Current wording

Our existing credit facility and any credit facility we may enter into in the future would likely subject all or significant amounts of our assets to security interests and if we default on our obligations under such a credit facility, we may suffer adverse consequences, including foreclosure on our assets.

Previous wording

If we enter into a secured credit facility, all or significant amounts of our assets would likely be pledged as collateral to secure borrowings thereunder. If we default on our obligations under such a facility, the lenders may have the right to foreclose upon and sell, or otherwise transfer, the collateral subject to their security interests or their superior claim. In such event, we may be forced to sell our investments to raise funds to repay our outstanding borrowings in order to avoid foreclosure and these forced sales may be at times and at prices we would not consider advantageous. Moreover, such deleveraging of our company could significantly impair our ability to effectively operate our business in the manner in which we intend to operate. As a result, we could be forced to curtail or cease new investment activities and lower or eliminate the dividends that we intend to pay to our stockholders.

Current wording

Pursuant to the credit facility, all or significant amounts of our assets are pledged as collateral to secure borrowings thereunder. If we default on our obligations under the facility, the lenders may have the right to foreclose upon and sell, or otherwise transfer, the collateral subject to their security interests or their superior claim. In such event, we may be forced to sell our investments to raise funds to repay our outstanding borrowings in order to avoid foreclosure and these forced sales may be at times and at prices we would not consider advantageous. Moreover, such deleveraging of our company could significantly impair our ability to effectively operate our business in the manner in which we intend to operate. As a result, we could be forced to curtail or cease new investment activities and lower or eliminate the dividends that we intend to pay to our stockholders.

Previous wording

In addition, if the lenders exercise their right to sell the assets pledged under a secured credit facility, such sales may be completed at distressed sale prices, thereby diminishing or potentially eliminating the amount of cash available to us after repayment of the amounts outstanding under such facility.

Current wording

In addition, if the lenders exercise their right to sell the assets pledged under the credit facility, such sales may be completed at distressed sale prices, thereby diminishing or potentially eliminating the amount of cash available to us after repayment of the amounts outstanding under such facility.

Previous wording

We intend to pay distributions to our stockholders out of assets legally available for distribution. We cannot assure you that we will achieve investment results that will allow us to sustain a specified level of cash distributions or periodic increases in cash distributions. In addition, the inability to satisfy the asset coverage test applicable to us as a BDC can limit our ability to pay distributions. All distributions will be paid at the discretion of our Board of Directors and will depend on our earnings, our financial condition, maintenance of our ability to be subject to tax as a RIC, compliance with applicable BDC regulations and such other factors as our Board of Directors may deem relevant from time to time. We cannot assure you that we will pay distributions to our stockholders in the future.

Current wording

We intend to pay distributions to our stockholders out of assets legally available for distribution. We cannot assure you that we will achieve investment results that will allow us to sustain a specified level of cash distributions or periodic increases in cash distributions. In addition, the inability to satisfy the asset coverage test applicable to us as a BDC can limit our ability to pay distributions. All distributions will be paid at the discretion of our Board and will depend on our earnings, our financial condition, maintenance of our ability to be subject to tax as a RIC, compliance with applicable BDC regulations and such other factors as our Board may deem relevant from time to time. We cannot assure you that we will pay distributions to our stockholders in the future.

Previous wording

The health and wellness sector is highly regulated, and the production, packaging, labeling, advertising, distribution, licensing and/or sale of health and wellness products and services may be subject to regulation by several U.S. federal agencies, including the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (the “FDA”), the Federal Trade Commission, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, and the Environmental Protection Agency, as well as various state, local and international laws and agencies of the localities in which such products and services are offered or are sold. Government regulations may prevent or delay the introduction or require design modifications of these products. Regulatory authorities may not accept the evidence of safety presented for existing or new products or services that a health and wellness company may wish to market, or they may determine that a particular product or service presents an unacceptable health risk. If health and wellness companies are unable to obtain regulatory approval or fail to comply with these regulatory requirements, the financial condition of such companies could be adversely affected.

Current wording

The health and wellness sector is highly regulated, and the production, packaging, labeling, advertising, distribution, licensing and/or sale of health and wellness products and services may be subject to regulation by several U.S. federal agencies, including the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (the “FDA”), the Federal Trade Commission, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, and the Environmental Protection Agency, as well as various state, local and international laws and agencies of the localities in which such products and services are offered or are sold.

Previous wording

Under U.S. federal law, however, those activities are illegal. The Controlled Substances Act (the “CSA”) continues to list cannabis (marijuana, but not including hemp) as a Schedule I controlled substance (i.e., deemed to have no medical value), and accordingly, the manufacture (growth), sale or possession of cannabis is federally illegal, even for personal medical purposes. It also remains federally illegal to advertise the sale of cannabis or to sell paraphernalia designed or intended primarily for use with cannabis, unless the paraphernalia is traditionally used with tobacco or authorized by federal, state or local law. Entities or persons who knowingly lease or rent a property for the purposes of manufacturing, distributing or using any controlled substances, or merely know that any of those activities are occurring on land that they control, can also be found liable under the CSA. Additionally, violating the CSA is a predicate specified unlawful activity under U.S. anti-money laundering laws.

Current wording

Under U.S. federal law, however, those activities are illegal. The CSA continues to list cannabis (marijuana, but not including hemp) as a Schedule I controlled substance (i.e., deemed to have no medical value), and accordingly, the manufacture (growth), sale or possession of cannabis is federally illegal, even for personal medical purposes. It also remains federally illegal to advertise the sale of cannabis or to sell paraphernalia designed or intended primarily for use with cannabis, unless the paraphernalia is traditionally used with tobacco or authorized by federal, state or local law. Entities or persons who knowingly lease or rent a property for the purposes of manufacturing, distributing or using any controlled substances, or merely know that any of those activities are occurring on land that they control, can also be found liable under the CSA. Additionally, violating the CSA is a predicate specified unlawful activity under U.S. anti-money laundering laws.

Previous wording

The likelihood of adverse enforcement against companies complying with state cannabis laws remains uncertain. The U.S. government has not recently prosecuted any state law compliant cannabis entity, although the risk of future enforcement cannot be dismissed entirely. In 2018, then-U.S. Attorney General Jefferson Sessions rescinded the DOJ’s previous guidance (the Cole Memo) that had given federal prosecutors discretion not to enforce federal law in states that legalized cannabis, as long as the state’s legal regime adequately addressed specified federal priorities, and had authorized federal prosecutors to use their prosecutorial discretion to decide whether to prosecute state-legal adult-use cannabis activities. Since that time, U.S. Attorneys have taken no legal action against state law compliant entities.

Current wording

The likelihood of adverse enforcement against companies complying with state cannabis laws remains uncertain. The U.S. government has not recently prosecuted any state law compliant cannabis entity, although the risk of future enforcement cannot be dismissed entirely. In 2018, then-U.S. Attorney General Jefferson Sessions rescinded the U.S. Department of Justice's previous guidance (the Cole Memo) that had given federal prosecutors discretion not to enforce federal law in states that legalized cannabis, as long as the state’s legal regime adequately addressed specified federal priorities, and had authorized federal prosecutors to use their prosecutorial discretion to decide whether to prosecute state-legal adult-use cannabis activities. Since that time, U.S. Attorneys have taken no legal action against state law compliant entities.

Previous 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.

Current wording

Both President Biden and President Trump have taken steps to reschedule cannabis to Schedule III, but the process has yet to be completed. While 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 Secure and Fair Enforcement Regulation Banking Act ("the SAFE Banking Act"), we cannot provide assurances that a bill legalizing cannabis would be approved by Congress.

Previous wording

If it became law, the SAFE Banking Act would, among other things, provide protection from federal prosecution to banks and other financial institutions that provide financial services to state-licensed cannabis companies, which may include the provision of loans by financial institutions to such companies. If the SAFE Banking Act became law, or cannabis became legal under federal law, there would be increased competition for lending to state-licensed cannabis companies, and such companies would have greater access to financing sources with lower costs of capital. These factors may result in us having to enter into loans at lower rates, which may significantly adversely impact our profitability and our distributions to stockholders.

Current wording

If it became law, the SAFE Banking Act or a similar bill would most likely, among other things, provide protection from federal prosecution to banks and other financial institutions that provide financial services to state-licensed cannabis companies, which may include the provision of loans by financial institutions to such companies. If the SAFE Banking Act or a similar bill became law, or cannabis became legal under federal law, there could be increased competition for lending to state-licensed cannabis companies, and such companies could have greater access to financing sources with lower costs of capital. These factors may result in us having to enter into loans at lower rates, which may significantly adversely impact our profitability and our distributions to stockholders.

Previous wording

Since December 2014, companies strictly complying with state medical cannabis laws have also been protected against enforcement by an amendment (originally called the Rohrabacher-Farr amendment, now called the Joyce amendment) to the Omnibus Spending Bill, which prevents federal prosecutors from using federal funds to impede the implementation of medical cannabis laws enacted at the state level. Courts have interpreted the provision to bar the DOJ from prosecuting any person or entity in strict compliance with state medical cannabis laws. While the Joyce provision prevents prosecutions, it does not make cannabis legal. Accordingly, if the protection expired, prosecutors could prosecute illegal activity that occurred within the statute of limitations even if the Joyce protection was in place when the federally illegal activity occurred. The Joyce protection depends on its continued inclusion in the federal omnibus spending bill, or in some other legislation, and entities’ strict compliance with the state medical cannabis laws. Furthermore, how the DOJ would enforce against an entity complying with a state’s medical and adult use laws has not been resolved and is open to debate.

Current wording

Since December 2014, companies strictly complying with state medical cannabis laws have also been protected against enforcement by an amendment (originally called the Rohrabacher-Farr amendment, now called the Joyce amendment) to the Omnibus Spending Bill, which prevents federal prosecutors from using federal funds to impede the implementation of medical cannabis laws enacted at the state level. Courts have interpreted the provision to bar the U.S. Department of Justice from prosecuting any person or entity in strict compliance with state medical cannabis laws. While the Joyce provision prevents prosecutions, it does not make cannabis legal. Accordingly, if the protection expired, prosecutors could prosecute illegal activity that occurred within the statute of limitations even if the Joyce protection was in place when the federally illegal activity occurred. The Joyce protection depends on its continued inclusion in the federal omnibus spending bill, or in some other legislation, and entities’ strict compliance with the state medical cannabis laws. Furthermore, how the U.S. Department of Justice would enforce against an entity complying with a state’s medical and adult use laws has not been resolved and is open to debate.

Previous wording

Until recently, hemp (defined by the U.S. government as Cannabis sativa L. with a THC concentration of not more than 0.3% on a dry weight basis) and hemp’s extracts (except mature stalks, fiber produced from the stalks, oil or cake made from the seeds and any other compound, manufacture, salt derivative, mixture or preparation of such parts) were illegal Schedule I controlled substances under the CSA. The Agricultural Act of 2014, Pub.L. 113-79 (the “2014 Farm Bill”) authorized states to establish industrial hemp research programs. The majority of states established programs purportedly in compliance with the 2014 Farm Bill. Many industry participants and even states interpreted the law to include “research” into the commercialization of, and commercial markets for, CBD from hemp, including products containing CBD.

Current wording

Until recently, hemp (defined by the U.S. government as Cannabis sativa L. with a tetrahydrocannabinol ("THC") concentration of not more than 0.3% on a dry weight basis) and hemp’s extracts (except mature stalks, fiber produced from the stalks, oil or cake made from the seeds and any other compound, manufacture, salt derivative, mixture or preparation of such parts) were illegal Schedule I controlled substances under the CSA. The Agricultural Act of 2014, Pub.L. 113-79 (the “2014 Farm Bill”) authorized states to establish industrial hemp research programs. The majority of states established programs purportedly in compliance with the 2014 Farm Bill. Many industry participants and even states interpreted the law to include “research” into the commercialization of, and commercial markets for, CBD from hemp, including products containing CBD.

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. 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.

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 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

Previous wording

Currently, we intend to make equity investments only in portfolio companies that are compliant with all applicable laws and regulations within the jurisdictions in which they are located or operate and, in particular, we will not make an equity investment in a portfolio company that we determine has been operating, or whose business plan is to operate, in violation of U.S. federal laws, including the U.S. Controlled Substances Act. This limitation may adversely affect us by limiting the scope of our equity investment opportunities. Additionally, changes to such laws, regulations and guidelines may cause further adverse effects on our ability to identify and make an equity investment in a portfolio company that meets these legal and regulatory requirements at the time of acquisition.

Current wording

Currently, we intend to make equity investments only in portfolio companies that are compliant with all applicable laws and regulations within the jurisdictions in which they are located or operate and, in particular, we will not make an equity investment in a portfolio company that we determine has been operating, or whose business plan is to operate, in violation of U.S. federal laws, including the CSA. This limitation may adversely affect us by limiting the scope of our equity investment opportunities. Additionally, changes to such laws, regulations and guidelines may cause further adverse effects on our ability to identify and make an equity investment in a portfolio company that meets these legal and regulatory requirements at the time of acquisition.

Previous wording

On the other hand, we may make a loan to a portfolio company regardless of its status under U.S. federal law, so long as we determine based on our due diligence that the portfolio company is licensed in, and complying with, state-regulated cannabis programs. Any such loans will be designed to be compliant with all applicable laws and regulations to which we are subject, including U.S. federal law, although the law in this area is not fully settled and there can be no assurances that federal authorities will consider such loans to be compliant with applicable law and regulations. In that regard, we have received an opinion of counsel (a copy of which has been filed as an exhibit to our IPO registration statement) that the proposed investment activities as described in our IPO prospectus do not violate the U.S. Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. § 801, et seq.)(the “CSA”), the U.S. Money Laundering Control Act (18 U.S.C. § 1956), or the Drug Paraphernalia law contained in the CSA, 21 U.S.C. § 863, subject to certain assumptions, qualifications and exceptions stated in the opinion. However, there can be no assurances that a court or federal authorities would agree with the conclusions reached in the opinion. Additionally, if federal legislation is enacted that provides protections from liability under U.S. federal law for other types of investments in portfolio companies that are compliant with state, but not U.S. federal, laws and is determined to apply to us (or we otherwise determine that the investment is not prohibited), we may make other types of investments in portfolio companies that do not comply with U.S. federal laws. There can be no assurance, however, that such type of legislation will be enacted or that we will otherwise be able to invest in portfolio companies that do not comply with U.S. federal law.

Current wording

On the other hand, we may make a loan to a portfolio company regardless of its status under U.S. federal law, so long as we determine based on our due diligence that the portfolio company is licensed in, and complying with, state-regulated cannabis programs. Any such loans will be designed to be compliant with all applicable laws and regulations to which we are subject, including U.S. federal law, although the law in this area is not fully settled and there can be no assurances that federal authorities will consider such loans to be compliant with applicable law and regulations. In that regard, we have received an opinion of counsel (a copy of which has been filed as an exhibit to our IPO registration statement) that the proposed investment activities as described in our IPO prospectus do not violate the CSA, the U.S. Money Laundering Control Act, or the Drug Paraphernalia law contained in the CSA, subject to certain assumptions, qualifications and exceptions stated in the opinion. However, there can be no assurances that a court or federal authorities would agree with the conclusions reached in the opinion. Additionally, if federal legislation is enacted that provides protections from liability under U.S. federal law for other types of investments in portfolio companies that are compliant with state, but not U.S. federal, laws and is determined to apply to us (or we otherwise determine that the investment is not prohibited), we may make other types of investments in portfolio companies that do not comply with U.S. federal laws. There can be no assurance, however, that such type of legislation will be enacted or that we will otherwise be able to invest in portfolio companies that do not comply with U.S. federal law.

Previous wording

Certain provisions of our charter and bylaws and actions of our Board of Directors could deter takeover attempts and have an adverse impact on the value of shares of our common stock.

Current wording

Certain provisions of our charter and bylaws and actions of our Board could deter takeover attempts and have an adverse impact on the value of shares of our common stock.

Previous wording

Our charter, as well as certain statutory and regulatory requirements, contain certain provisions that may have the effect of discouraging a third-party from attempting to acquire us. Our Board of Directors is divided into three classes of directors serving staggered three-year terms. Our Board of Directors may, without stockholder action, authorize the issuance of shares in one or more classes or series, including shares of preferred stock; and our Board of Directors may, without stockholder action, amend our charter to increase the number of shares of our common stock, of any class or series, that we will have authority to issue. These anti-takeover provisions may inhibit a change of control in circumstances that could give the holders of shares of our common stock the opportunity to realize a premium over the value of shares of our common stock.

Current wording

Our charter, as well as certain statutory and regulatory requirements, contain certain provisions that may have the effect of discouraging a third-party from attempting to acquire us. Our Board is divided into three classes of directors serving staggered three-year terms. Our Board may, without stockholder action, authorize the issuance of shares in one or more classes or series, including shares of preferred stock; and our Board may, without stockholder action, amend our charter to increase the number of shares of our common stock, of any class or series, that we will have authority to issue. These anti-takeover provisions may inhibit a change of control in circumstances that could give the holders of shares of our common stock the opportunity to realize a premium over the value of shares of our common stock.

Previous wording

The 1940 Act prohibits us from selling shares of our common stock at a price below the current NAV per share of such stock with certain exceptions. One such exception is prior stockholder approval of issuances of securities to subscribe to, convert to or purchase shares of our common stock even if the subscription, conversion or purchase price per share of our common stock is below the NAV per share of our common stock at the time of any such subscription, conversion or purchase. Any decision to sell securities to subscribe to, convert to or purchase shares of our common stock will be subject to the determination by our Board of Directors that such issuance is in our and our stockholders’ best interests. If we issue securities to subscribe to, convert to or purchase shares of common stock, the exercise or conversion of such securities would increase the number of outstanding shares of our common stock. Any such exercise or conversion would be dilutive on the voting power of existing stockholders, and could be dilutive with regard to distributions and our NAV, and other economic aspects of the common stock.

Current wording

The 1940 Act prohibits us from selling shares of our common stock at a price below the current NAV per share of such stock with certain exceptions. One such exception is prior stockholder approval of issuances of securities to subscribe to, convert to or purchase shares of our common stock even if the subscription, conversion or purchase price per share of our common stock is below the NAV per share of our common stock at the time of any such subscription, conversion or purchase. Any decision to sell securities to subscribe to, convert to or purchase shares of our common stock will be subject to the determination by our Board that such issuance is in our and our stockholders’ best interests. If we issue securities to subscribe to, convert to or purchase shares of common stock, the exercise or conversion of such securities would increase the number of outstanding shares of our common stock. Any such exercise or conversion would be dilutive on the voting power of existing stockholders, and could be dilutive with regard to distributions and our NAV, and other economic aspects of the common stock.

Previous wording

Members of our management team and our board of directors and affiliated companies have been, and may from time to time be, involved in legal proceedings or governmental investigations unrelated to our business.

Current wording

Members of our management team and our Board and affiliated companies have been, and may from time to time be, involved in legal proceedings or governmental investigations unrelated to our business.

Previous wording

Members of our management team and our board of directors have been involved in a wide variety of businesses. Such involvement has, and may lead to, media coverage and public awareness. As a result of such involvement, members of our management team and our board of directors and affiliated companies have been, and may from time to time be, involved in legal proceedings or governmental investigations unrelated to our business. Any such proceedings or investigations may be detrimental to our reputation and could negatively affect our ability to operate our business and may have an adverse effect on the price of our common stock.

Current wording

Members of our management team and our Board have been involved in a wide variety of businesses. Such involvement has, and may lead to, media coverage and public awareness. As a result of such involvement, members of our management team and our Board and affiliated companies have been, and may from time to time be, involved in legal proceedings or governmental investigations unrelated to our business. Any such proceedings or investigations may be detrimental to our reputation and could negatively affect our ability to operate our business and may have an adverse effect on the price of our common stock.