UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

 

FORM 10-K

 

(Mark One)



☒     ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

 

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2018

 

OR

 

◻     TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

 

For the transition period from                      to                     

 

Commission File Number 001-36109

 

QTS Realty Trust, Inc.

 

QualityTech, LP

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

 

 

 

(913) 312-5503

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

 

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

 

 

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

 

 

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.

 

 

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Act. 

 

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.    

 

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files).    

 

 

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

 

 

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

 

QTS Realty Trust, Inc.

 

 

QualityTech, LP

 

 

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. □

 

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).    

 

 

The aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates computed by reference to the price at which the Class A common stock, $0.01 par value per share, was last sold at June 30, 2018 was approximately $2.0 billion. There were 51,021,900 shares of Class A common stock and 128,408 shares of Class B common stock, $0.01 par value per share, of the registrant outstanding on February 22, 2019.

Documents Incorporated by Reference

 

Portions of the Definitive Proxy Statement for our 2019 Annual Meeting of Stockholders are incorporated by reference into Part III of this report. We expect to file our proxy statement within 120 days after December 31, 2018.

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

 

 

 

EXPLANATORY NOTE

 

This report combines the annual reports on Form 10-K of QTS Realty Trust, Inc. (“QTS”) and QualityTech, LP, a Delaware limited partnership, which is our operating partnership (the “Operating Partnership”).  This report also includes the financial statements of QTS and those of the Operating Partnership, although it presents only one set of combined notes for QTS’ financial statements and those of the Operating Partnership. 

 

Substantially all of QTS’s assets are held by, and its operations are conducted through, the Operating Partnership. QTS is the sole general partner of the Operating Partnership, and, as of December 31, 2018, its only material asset consisted of its ownership of approximately 88.5% of the Operating Partnership. Management operates QTS and the Operating Partnership as one business. The management of QTS consists of the same employees as the management of the Operating Partnership. QTS does not conduct business itself, other than acting as the sole general partner of the Operating Partnership and issuing public equity from time to time. QTS has not issued or guaranteed any indebtedness. Except for net proceeds from public equity issuances by QTS, which are contributed to the Operating Partnership in exchange for units of limited partnership interest of the Operating Partnership, the Operating Partnership generates all remaining capital required by our business through its operations, the direct or indirect incurrence of indebtedness, and the issuance of partnership units. Therefore, as general partner with control of the Operating Partnership, QTS consolidates the Operating Partnership for financial reporting purposes.

 

We believe, therefore, that a combined presentation with respect to QTS and the Operating Partnership, including providing one set of notes for the financial statements of QTS and the Operating Partnership, provides the following benefits:

 

 

In addition, in light of these combined disclosures, we believe it is important for investors to understand the few differences between QTS and the Operating Partnership in the context of how QTS and the Operating Partnership operate as a consolidated company. With respect to balance sheets, the presentation of stockholders’ equity and partners’ capital are the main areas of difference between the consolidated balance sheets of QTS and those of the Operating Partnership. On the Operating Partnership’s consolidated balance sheets, partners’ capital includes partnership units that are owned by QTS and other partners. On QTS’ consolidated balance sheets, stockholders’ equity includes common stock, additional paid-in capital, accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) and accumulated dividends in excess of earnings. The remaining equity reflected on QTS’s consolidated balance sheet is the portion of net assets that are retained by partners other than QTS, referred to as noncontrolling interests. With respect to statements of operations, the primary difference in QTS’ Statements of Operations and Statements of Comprehensive Income is that for net income (loss), QTS retains its proportionate share of the net income (loss) based on its ownership of the Operating Partnership, with the remaining balance being retained by the Operating Partnership.

 

In order to highlight the few differences between QTS and the Operating Partnership, there are sections and disclosure in this report that discuss QTS and the Operating Partnership separately, including separate financial statements, separate audit reports, separate controls and procedures sections, separate Exhibit 31 and 32 certifications, and separate presentation of certain accompanying notes to the financial statements, including Note 10 – Partners’ Capital, Equity and Incentive Compensation Plans and Note 18 – Quarterly Financial Information (unaudited).  In the sections that combine disclosure for QTS and the Operating Partnership, this report refers to actions or holdings as being actions or holdings of “we,” “our,” “us,” “our company” and “the Company.”  Although the Operating Partnership is generally the entity that enters into contracts, holds assets and issues debt, we believe that these general references to “we,” “our,” “us,” “our company” and “the Company” in this context are appropriate because the business is one enterprise operated through the Operating Partnership.

 

SPECIAL NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

 

Some of the statements contained in this Form 10-K constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of the federal securities laws. Forward-looking statements relate to expectations, beliefs, projections, future plans and strategies, anticipated events or trends and similar expressions concerning matters that are not historical facts. In particular, statements pertaining to our capital resources, portfolio performance, results of operations, anticipated growth in our funds from operations and anticipated market conditions contain forward-looking statements. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by the use of forward-looking terminology such as “may,” “will,” “should,” “expects,” “intends,” “plans,” “anticipates,” “believes,” “estimates,” “predicts,” or “potential” or the negative of these words and phrases or similar words or phrases which are predictions of or indicate future events or trends and which do not relate solely to historical matters. You also can identify forward-looking statements by discussions of strategy, plans or intentions.

 

The forward-looking statements contained in this Form 10-K reflect our current views about future events and are subject to numerous known and unknown risks, uncertainties, assumptions and changes in circumstances that may cause our actual results to differ significantly from those expressed in any forward-looking statement. We do not guarantee that the transactions and events described will happen as described (or that they will happen at all). The following factors, among others, could cause actual results and future events to differ materially from those set forth or contemplated in the forward-looking statements:

 

 

While forward-looking statements reflect our good faith beliefs, they are not guarantees of future performance. We disclaim any obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statement to reflect changes in underlying assumptions or factors, of new information, data or methods, future events or other changes. For a further discussion of these and other factors that could cause our future results to differ materially from any forward-looking statements, see the section entitled “Risk Factors.”

 

PART I

 

ITEM 1.             BUSINESS

 

Unless the context requires otherwise, references in this Form 10-K to “we,” “our,” “us,” “our company” and “the Company” refer to QTS Realty Trust, Inc. (“QTS”), a Maryland corporation, together with its consolidated subsidiaries, including QualityTech, LP, a Delaware limited partnership, which we refer to in this Form 10-K as the “Operating Partnership” or “predecessor.”

 

Overview

 

QTS is a leading provider of data center solutions to the world’s largest and most sophisticated hyperscale technology companies, enterprises and government agencies. Through our technology-enabled platform, delivered across mega scale data center infrastructure, we offer a comprehensive portfolio of secure and compliant IT solutions. Our data centers are facilities that power and support our customers’ IT infrastructure equipment and provide seamless access and connectivity to a range of communications and IT services providers. Across our broad footprint of strategically-located data centers, we provide flexible, scalable, and secure IT solutions including data center space, power and cooling, connectivity and value-add managed services for more than 1,100 customers in the financial services, healthcare, retail, government, and technology industries. We build out our data center facilities to accommodate both multi-tenant environments (hybrid colocation) and for executed leases that require significant amounts of space and power (hyperscale), depending on the needs of each facility at that time. We believe that we own and operate one of the largest portfolios of multi-tenant data centers in the United States, as measured by gross square footage, and have the capacity to nearly double our sellable data center raised floor space without constructing or acquiring any new buildings. In addition, we own more than 650 acres of land that is available at our data center properties that provides us with the opportunity to significantly expand our capacity to further support future demand from current and new potential customers.

 

We operate a portfolio of 25 data centers located throughout the United States, Canada, Europe and Asia. Within the United States, our data centers are concentrated in the markets which we believe offer the highest growth opportunities. Our data centers are highly specialized, mission-critical facilities utilized by our customers to store, power and cool the server, storage, and networking equipment that support their most critical business systems and processes. We believe that our data centers are best-in-class and engineered to adhere to the highest specifications commercially available to customers, providing fully redundant, high-density power and cooling sufficient to meet the needs of the largest companies and organizations in the world. We have demonstrated a strong operating track record of “five-nines” (99.999%) reliability since QTS’ inception.

 

QTS is a Maryland corporation formed on May 17, 2013 and is the sole general partner and majority owner of QualityTech, LP, our operating partnership (the “Operating Partnership”). Substantially all of our assets are held by, and our operations are conducted through, the Operating Partnership. QTS’ Class A common stock trades on the New York Stock Exchange under the ticker symbol “QTS.”

 

The Operating Partnership is a Delaware limited partnership formed on August 5, 2009 and was QTS’ historical predecessor prior to QTS’s initial public offering on October 15, 2013 (the “IPO”), having operated the Company’s business until the IPO. As of December 31, 2018, QTS owned an approximate 88.5% ownership interest in the Operating Partnership.

 

We believe that QTS has operated and has been organized in conformity with the requirements for qualification and taxation as a REIT commencing with its taxable year ended December 31, 2013. Our qualification as a REIT, and maintenance of such qualification, depends upon our ability to meet, on a continuing basis, various complex requirements under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”) relating to, among other things, the sources of our gross income, the composition and values of our assets, our distributions to our stockholders and the concentration of ownership of our equity shares.

 

On February 20, 2018, we commenced a strategic growth plan (the “Strategic Growth Plan”) focused on realigning our product offerings around our hyperscale and hybrid colocation product offerings while narrowing the scope of cloud and managed services products we deliver and support directly. During 2018, we successfully completed the implementation of our Strategic Growth Plan which resulted in a meaningful acceleration in our hyperscale and hybrid colocation

revenue and leasing performance, enhanced overall profitability in our business and a significant improvement in the overall predictability of our business performance as measured by customer churn.

 

Our Portfolio

 

We operate 25 data centers located throughout the United States, Canada, Europe and Asia, containing an aggregate of approximately 6.2 million gross square feet of space, including approximately 2.7 million “basis-of-design” raised floor square feet (approximately 95.5% of which is wholly owned by us including our data center in Santa Clara which is subject to a long-term ground lease), which represents the total sellable data center raised floor potential of our existing data center facilities. This reflects the maximum amount of space in our existing buildings that could be leased following full build-out, depending on the space and power configuration that we deploy. As of December 31, 2018, this space included approximately 1.5 million raised floor operating net rentable square feet, or NRSF, plus approximately 1.3 million square feet of additional raised floor in our development pipeline, of which approximately 154,000 raised floor square feet is expected to become operational by December 31, 2019. Of the total 154,000 raised floor square feet in our development pipeline that is expected to become operational by December 31, 2019, approximately 103,000 square feet was related to customer leases which had been executed as of December 31, 2018 but not yet commenced. Our facilities collectively have access to approximately 691 megawatts (“MW”) of available utility power. Access to power is typically the most limiting and expensive component in developing a data center and, as such, we believe our significant access to power represents an important competitive advantage.

 

We account for the operations of all our properties in one reporting segment.

 

Our Customer Base

 

Our data center facilities are designed with the flexibility to support a diverse set of solutions and customers. Our customer base is comprised of more than 1,100 different companies of all sizes representing an array of industries, each with unique and varied business models and needs. We serve Fortune 1000 companies as well as small and medium-sized businesses, or SMBs, including financial institutions, healthcare companies, retail companies, government agencies, communications service providers, software companies and global Internet companies.

 

We have customers that range from large enterprise and technology companies with significant IT expertise and data center requirements, including financial institutions, “Big Four” accounting firms and the world’s largest global Internet and cloud companies, to major healthcare, telecommunications and software and web-based companies.

 

As a result of our diverse customer base, customer concentration in our portfolio is limited. As of December 31, 2018, only five of our more than 1,100 customers individually accounted for more than 3% of our monthly recurring revenue (“MRR”) (as defined below), with the largest customer accounting for approximately 12.8% of our MRR and the next largest customer accounting for only 4.9% of our MRR.

 

The majority of our MRR is generating from customers deployed in our U.S. data center locations. Customers deployed in our U.S. data center locations accounted for $31.0 million, $31.3 million and $30.3 million of total MRR as of December 31, 2018, 2017 and 2016, respectively, and MRR from our international locations represented $0.2 million, $0.4 million and $0.6 million of MRR as of December 31, 2018, 2017 and 2016, respectively. As of December 31, 2018, our booked-not-billed MRR balance (which represents customer leases that have been executed, but for which lease payments have not commenced as of December 31, 2018) was approximately $5.2 million, or $62.6 million of annualized rent. As of December 31, 2017, our booked-not-billed MRR balance (which represents customer leases that have been executed, but for which lease payments have not commenced as of December 31, 2017) was approximately $3.9 million, or $46.8 million of annualized rent.

 

Our Structure

 

Substantially all of our assets are held by, and our operations are conducted through, the Operating Partnership. Our interest in the Operating Partnership entitles us to share in cash distributions from, and in the profits and losses of, the Operating Partnership in proportion to our percentage ownership. As the sole general partner of the Operating Partnership, we generally have the exclusive power under the Operating Partnership’s partnership agreement to manage and conduct the Operating Partnership’s business and affairs.

 

The following diagram depicts our ownership structure, on a non-diluted basis as of December 31, 2018.

 

 

Our Competitive Strengths

 

We believe that we are uniquely positioned in the data center industry and distinguish ourselves from other data center providers through the following competitive strengths:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Competition

 

We compete with developers, owners and operators of data centers and with IT infrastructure companies in the market for data center customers, properties for acquisition and the services of key third-party providers. In addition, we continue to compete with owners and operators of data centers and providers of cloud and managed services that follow other business models and may offer one or more of these services. We believe, however, that our product offerings set us apart from our competitors in the data center industry and makes us more attractive to customers, both large and small. In addition, we believe other providers are seeking ways to enter or strengthen their positions in the data center market.

 

We compete for customers based on factors including location, network connectivity, critical load capacity, flexibility and expertise in the design and operation of data centers. New customers who consider leasing space at our properties and using our products and existing customers evaluating whether to renew or extend a lease also may consider our competitors, including wholesale infrastructure providers and colocation and managed services providers. In addition, our customers may choose to own and operate their own data centers rather than lease from us.

 

As an owner, developer and operator of data centers, we depend on certain third-party service providers, including engineers and contractors with expertise in the development of data centers and the provision of managed services. The level of competition for the services of specialized contractors and other third-party providers increases the cost of engaging such providers and the risk of delays in operating our data centers and completing our development and redevelopment projects. We also rely upon the services of specialized contractors for the provision of internet connectivity and software-related platforms and services. Competition for their services could lead to a negative impact on our business if they became unavailable to us.

 

In addition, we face competition for the acquisition of additional properties suitable for the development of data centers from real estate developers in our industry and in other industries and from customers who develop their own data center facilities. Such competition may have the effect of reducing the number of available properties for acquisition, increasing the price of any acquisition and reducing the demand for data center space in the markets we seek to serve.

 

Regulation

 

General

 

Data centers in our markets are subject to various laws, ordinances and regulations, including regulations relating to common areas. We believe that each of our properties has the necessary permits and approvals to operate its business.

 

Americans With Disabilities Act

 

Our properties must comply with Title III of the Americans With Disabilities Act (“ADA”) to the extent that such properties are “public accommodations” or “commercial facilities” as defined by the ADA. The ADA may require, for example, removal of structural barriers to access by persons with disabilities in certain public areas of our properties where such removal is readily achievable. We believe that our properties are in substantial compliance with the ADA and that we will not be required to make substantial capital expenditures to address the requirements of the ADA.

However, noncompliance with the ADA could result in imposition of fines or an award of damages to private litigants. The obligation to make readily achievable accommodations is an ongoing one, and we will continue to assess our properties and to make alterations as appropriate in this respect.

 

Environmental Matters

 

Under various federal, state and local laws and regulations, a current or former owner or operator of real property may be liable for the cost to remove or remediate contamination resulting from the presence or discharge of hazardous or toxic substances, wastes or petroleum products on, under, from or in such property. These costs could be substantial, liability under these laws may attach without regard to whether the owner or operator knew of, or was responsible for, the presence of the contaminants, and the liability may be joint and several. Most of our properties presently contain large underground or aboveground fuel storage tanks for emergency power, which is critical to our operations. If any of our tanks has a release of fuel to the environment, we likely would have to pay to clean up the contamination. In addition, prior owners and operators used some of our current properties for industrial and other purposes, which could have resulted in environmental contamination. Moreover, the presence of contamination or the failure to remediate contamination at our properties may (1) expose us to third-party liability (e.g., for cleanup costs, bodily injury or property damage), (2) subject our properties to liens in favor of the government for damages and costs the government incurs in connection with the contamination, (3) impose restrictions on the manner in which a property may be used or businesses may be operated, or (4) materially adversely affect our ability to sell, lease or develop the real estate or to borrow using the real estate as collateral. We also may be liable for the costs of remediating contamination at off-site disposal or treatment facilities where we arranged for disposal or treatment of hazardous substances at such facilities, without regard to whether we comply with environmental laws in doing so. Finally, there may be material environmental liabilities at our properties of which we are not aware. Any of these matters could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

Our properties are subject to federal, state, and local environmental, health, and safety laws and regulations and zoning requirements, including those regarding the handling of regulated substances and wastes, emissions to the environment, and fire codes. For instance, our properties are subject to regulations regarding the storage of petroleum for auxiliary or emergency power and air emissions arising from the use of power generators. In particular, generators at our data center facilities are subject to strict emissions limitations, which could preclude us from using critical back-up systems and lead to significant business disruptions at such facilities and loss of our reputation. In addition, we lease some of our properties to our customers who also are subject to such environmental, health and safety laws and zoning requirements. If we, or our customers, fail to comply with these various requirements, we might incur costs and liabilities, including governmental fines and penalties. Moreover, we do not know whether existing requirements will change or whether future requirements will require us to make significant unanticipated expenditures that will materially and adversely affect us. Environmental noncompliance liability also could affect a customer’s ability to make rental payments to us. We require our customers to comply with these environmental and health and safety laws and regulations.

 

See ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS, Risks Related to the Real Estate Industry, for additional information regarding these risks.

 

Privacy and Cybersecurity

 

We may be directly and/or contractually subject to laws, regulations and policies for protecting sensitive data, consumer privacy and vital national interests. For example, the U.S. government has promulgated regulations and standards subject to authority provided through the enactment of a number of laws, such as the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (“HIPAA”), the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (“HITECH Act”), the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (“GLBA”), and the Federal Information Security Management Act of 2002 (“FISMA”), which require many corporations and federal, state and local governmental entities to control the security of, access to and configuration of their IT systems. A number of states also have enacted laws and regulations that require covered entities, such as data center operators, to implement and maintain security measures to protect certain types of information, such as Social Security numbers, payment card information, and other types of data, from unauthorized use and disclosure. In addition, industry organizations have adopted and implemented various security and compliance policies. For example, the Payment Card Industry Security Standards Council has issued its mandatory Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (“PCI DSS”) which is applicable to all organizations processing payment card transactions. In addition to federal laws, the state of California passed the California Consumer Privacy Act (“CCPA”) in 2018, which regulates data collection and privacy collection. California’s law may still be subject to amendments before it goes into effect on January 1, 2020, and other states are considering similar laws.

 

In connection with certain of these laws, we are subject to audits and assessments, and we may be required to obtain certain certifications. Audit failure or findings of non-compliance can lead to significant fines or decertification from engaging in certain activities. For example, violations of HIPAA/HITECH Act regulations can lead to fines of up to $1.5 million for all violations of a particular provision in a calendar year and our failure to demonstrate compliance in an annual PCI DSS audit may result in fines and exclusion from payment card networks. Additionally, violations of privacy or security laws, regulations or standards increasingly lead to class-action litigation, which can result in substantial monetary judgments or settlements. We cannot assure you that future laws, regulations and standards, or future interpretations of current laws, regulations and standards, related to privacy and security will not have a material adverse effect on us.

 

As a company that may process European personal data, we also may be subject to European data protection laws and regulations. The European Union (EU) Commission, Parliament, and Council adopted in April 2016 a new General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) that took effect in May 2018. The GDPR replaced the former European privacy regime, imposes new privacy requirements, and increases the likelihood of applicability of European law to entities like us, which are established outside the EU but may process data of European data subjects. Under the GDPR, there can be fines of up to €10,000,000 or up to 2% of the global sales, whichever is greater, for certain comparatively minor offenses, or up to €20,000,000 or up to 4% of the global sales, whichever is greater, for more serious offenses.

 

To facilitate and legitimize the transfer of both client and personnel data from the European Union (“EU”) to the United States, we self-certified to the U.S. Department of Commerce that we adhere to the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield Framework, which requires organizations operating in the United States to provide assurance that they are adhering to relevant European standards for data protection for such transfers. QTS complies with the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield Framework as set forth by the Department of Commerce regarding the collection, use and retention of personal information transferred from the EU to the United States. However, our self-certification under the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield Framework may not be sufficient to ensure compliance with GDPR. Legal challenges have been brought in European courts seeking to declare the Privacy Shield Framework invalid under European law as a mechanism to legitimize transfers of personal data from the EU to the United States, which could require us to implement alternative means to address European cross border data transfer requirement. Also in 2018, EU member states were required to enact national laws to enforce the EU’s “Directive on security of network and information systems” (the “NIS Directive”), which lays out a number of cybersecurity expectations and notification obligations for regulated entities.

 

Insurance

 

We carry comprehensive liability, property, extended coverage, earthquake, flood, business interruption and rental loss insurance covering all of the properties in our portfolio under a blanket property policy. We also carry coverage for general liability, technology professional liability, and cybersecurity. We have selected policy specifications and insured limits that we believe to be appropriate given the relative risk of loss, the cost of the coverage and industry practice and, in the opinion of our management, the properties in our portfolio are currently adequately insured and the risk for any failure related to professional liability or a physical or cybersecurity breach are adequately covered by our insurance. We will not carry insurance for generally uninsured losses such as loss from riots, war, wet or dry rot, vermin and, in some cases, flooding and earthquake, because such coverage is not available or is not available at commercially reasonable rates. In addition, although we carry earthquake and flood insurance on our properties in an amount and with deductibles that we believe are commercially reasonable, such policies are subject to limitations in certain flood and seismically active zones. Certain of the properties in our portfolio are located in areas known to be seismically active. See “Risk Factors—Risks Related to the Real Estate Industry—Uninsured and underinsured losses could have a material adverse effect on us.”

 

Employees

 

As of December 31, 2018, we employed approximately 606 persons, none of whom were represented by a labor union. We believe our relations with our employees are good.

 

Offices

 

Our executive headquarters is located at 12851 Foster Street, Overland Park, Kansas 66213, where our telephone number is (913) 814-9988. We believe that our current offices are adequate for our present operations; however, based on the anticipated growth of our company, we may add regional offices depending upon our future operational needs.

 

Available Information

 

Our Internet website address is www.qtsdatacenters.com. You can obtain on our website, free of charge, a copy of our Annual Report on Form 10-K, our quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, our current reports on Form 8-K, and any amendments to those reports, as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such reports or amendments with, or furnish them to, the SEC. Our Internet website and the information contained therein or connected thereto are not intended to be incorporated into this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

 

Also available on our website, free of charge, are copies of our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, our Corporate Governance Guidelines, and the charters for each of the committees of our board of directors—the Audit Committee, the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee, and the Compensation Committee.

 

ITEM 1A.           RISK FACTORS

 

Set forth below are the risks that we believe are material to our stockholders. You should carefully consider the following risks in evaluating our Company and our business. If any of the risks discussed in this Form 10-K were to occur, our business, prospects, financial condition, liquidity, funds from operations and results of operations and our ability to service our debt and make distributions to our stockholders could be materially and adversely affected, which we refer to herein collectively as a “material adverse effect on us,” the market price of our common stock could decline significantly and you could lose all or part of your investment. Some statements in this Form 10-K, including statements in the following risk factors, constitute forward-looking statements. Please refer to the section entitled “Special Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements” at the beginning of this Form 10-K.

 

Risks Related to Our Business and Operations

 

Because we are focused on the ownership, operation, redevelopment and/or construction of data centers, any decrease in the demand for data center space could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

Because our portfolio consists entirely of data centers, or land to be developed or converted into data centers, we are subject to risks inherent in investments in a single industry. Adverse developments in the data center market or in the industries in which our customers operate could lead to a decrease in the demand for data center space, which could have a greater material adverse effect on us than if we owned a more diversified real estate portfolio. These adverse developments could include: a decline in the technology industry, such as a decrease in the use of mobile or web-based commerce, industry slowdowns, business layoffs or downsizing, relocation of businesses, increased costs of complying with existing or new government regulations and other factors; a slowdown in the growth of the Internet generally as a medium for commerce and communication; a downturn in the market for data center space generally such as oversupply of or reduced demand for space; and the rapid development of new technologies or the adoption of new industry standards that render our or our customers’ current products and services obsolete or unmarketable and, in the case of our customers, that contribute to a downturn in their businesses, increasing the likelihood of a default under their leases or that they become insolvent or file for bankruptcy protection. To the extent that any of these or other adverse conditions occur, they are likely to impact market rents for, and cash flows from, our data center space, which could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

Our data center infrastructure may become obsolete or unmarketable and we may not be able to upgrade our power, cooling, security or connectivity systems cost-effectively or at all.

 

The markets for the data centers we own and operate, as well as certain of the industries in which our customers operate, are characterized by rapidly changing technology, evolving industry standards, frequent new service introductions, shifting distribution channels and changing customer demands. As a result, the infrastructure at our data centers may become obsolete or unmarketable due to demand for new processes and/or technologies, including, without limitation: (i) new processes to deliver power to, or eliminate heat from, computer systems; (ii) customer demand for additional

redundancy capacity or, conversely, reduced redundancy capacity; or (iii) new technology that permits lower levels of critical load and heat removal than our data centers are currently designed to provide. In addition, the systems that connect our data centers to the Internet and other external networks may become outdated, including with respect to latency, reliability and diversity of connectivity. When customers demand new processes or technologies, we may not be able to upgrade our data centers on a cost-effective basis, or at all, due to, among other things, increased expenses to us that cannot be passed on to customers or insufficient revenue to fund the necessary capital expenditures. The obsolescence of our power and cooling systems and/or our inability to upgrade our data centers, including associated connectivity, could reduce revenue at our data centers and could have a material adverse effect on us. Furthermore, potential future regulations that apply to industries we serve may require customers in those industries to seek specific requirements from their data centers that we are unable to provide. These may include physical security regulations applicable to the defense industry and government contractors and privacy and security requirements applicable to the financial services and health care industries. If such regulations were adopted, we could lose customers or be unable to attract new customers in certain industries, which could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

We face considerable competition in the data center industry and may be unable to renew existing leases, lease vacant space or re-let space on more favorable terms, or at all, as leases expire, which could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

Leases representing approximately 21% of our leased raised floor and approximately 33% of our annualized rent (including all month-to-month leases), in each case as of December 31, 2018, are scheduled to expire by the end of 2019. We compete with numerous developers, owners and operators in the data center industry, including managed service providers and other REITs, some of which own or lease properties similar to ours, or may do so in the future, in the same submarkets in which our properties are located. Our competitors may have significant advantages over us, including greater name recognition, longer operating histories, higher operating margins, pre-existing relationships with current or potential customers, greater financial, marketing and other resources, and access to greater and less expensive power. These advantages could allow our competitors to respond more quickly to strategic opportunities or changes in our industry or markets. If our competitors offer space at rental rates below current market rates or below the rental rates we currently charge our customers, or if our competitors offer products and services in a greater variety, that are more state-of-the-art or that are more competitively priced than the products and services we offer, we may lose customers or be unable to attract new customers without lowering our rental rates and improving the quality, mix and technology of our products and services. We cannot assure you that we will be able to renew leases with our existing customers or re-let space to new customers if our current customers do not renew their leases. Even if our customers renew their leases or we are able to re-let the space, the terms (including rental rates and lease periods) and costs (including capital) of renewal or re-letting may be less favorable than the terms of our current leases. In addition, there can be no assurances that the type of space and/or services currently available at our properties will be sufficient to retain current customers or attract new customers in the future. Although we offer a full spectrum of data center products from hyperscale to hybrid colocation to certain cloud and managed services, our competitors that specialize in only one of our product and service offerings may have competitive advantages in that space. If rental rates for our properties decline, we are unable to lease vacant space, our existing customers do not renew their leases or we do not re-let space from expiring leases, in each case, on favorable terms, it could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

Our business could be negatively affected as a result of actions by activist stockholders.

 

Stockholder campaigns to effect changes in publicly-traded companies are sometimes led by activist investors through various corporate actions, including proxy contests. Responding to these actions can disrupt our operations by diverting the attention of management and our employees as well as our financial resources. Stockholder activism could create perceived uncertainties as to our future direction, which could result in the loss of potential business opportunities and make it more difficult to attract and retain qualified personnel and business partners. Furthermore, the election of individuals to our board of directors with a specific agenda could adversely affect our ability to effectively and timely implement our strategic plans.

 

The long sales cycle for data center products could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

A customer’s decision to lease space in one of our data centers typically involves a significant commitment of resources, time-consuming contract negotiations regarding the service level commitments and substantial due diligence on the part of the customer regarding the adequacy of our infrastructure and attractiveness of our products and services. As a result, the leasing of data center space has a long sales cycle. Furthermore, we may expend significant time and resources in

pursuing a particular sale or customer that may not result in any revenue. Our inability to adequately manage the risks associated with leasing the space and products within our facilities could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

Our customers may choose to develop new data centers or expand their own existing data centers, which could result in the loss of one or more key customers or reduce demand and pricing for our data centers and could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

Some of our customers may develop their own data center facilities. Other customers with their own existing data centers may choose to expand their data centers in the future. In the event that any of our key customers were to develop or expand their data centers, it could result in a loss of business to us or put downward pressure on our pricing. If we lose a customer, there is no assurance that we would be able to replace that customer at the same or a higher rate, or at all, which could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

The bankruptcy, insolvency or financial difficulties of a major customer could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

The bankruptcy or insolvency of a major customer could have significant consequences for us. If any customer becomes a debtor in a case under the federal Bankruptcy Code, we cannot evict the customer solely because of the bankruptcy. In addition, the bankruptcy court might authorize the customer to reject and terminate its lease with us. Our claim against the customer for unpaid future rent would be subject to a statutory cap that might be substantially less than the remaining rent owed under the lease. In either case, our claim for unpaid rent likely would not be paid in full. If any of our significant customers were to become bankrupt or insolvent or suffer a downturn in their business, they may fail to renew, or reject or terminate, their leases with us and/or fail to pay unpaid or future rent owed to us, which could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

Any inability, temporarily or permanently, to fully and consistently operate either of our Atlanta-Metro and Atlanta-Suwanee properties could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

Our two largest wholly-owned properties in terms of annualized rent, Atlanta-Metro and Atlanta-Suwanee, collectively accounted for approximately 42% of our annualized rent as of December 31, 2018. Therefore, any inability, temporarily or permanently, to fully and consistently operate either of these properties could have a material adverse effect on us. In addition, because both properties are located in the Atlanta metropolitan area, we are particularly susceptible to adverse developments in that area, including as a result of natural disasters (such as hurricanes, floods, tornadoes and other events), that could cause, among other things, permanent damage to the properties and electrical power outages that may last beyond our backup and alternative power arrangements. Further, Atlanta-Metro and Atlanta-Suwanee account for several of our largest leases in terms of MRR. Any nonrenewal, credit or other issues with large customers could adversely affect the performance of these properties.

 

We may be adversely affected by the economies and other conditions of the markets in which we operate, particularly in Atlanta and other metropolitan areas, where we have a high concentration of our data center properties.

 

We are susceptible to adverse economic or other conditions in the geographic markets in which we operate, such as periods of economic slowdown or recession, the oversupply of, or a reduction in demand for, data centers in a particular area, industry slowdowns, layoffs or downsizings, relocation of businesses, increases in real estate and other taxes and changing demographics. The occurrence of these conditions in the specific markets in which we have concentrations of properties could have a material adverse effect on us. Our Atlanta area data centers and our data centers in Virginia (including Richmond, Ashburn, the Vault and leased facilities acquired in 2015), accounted for approximately 42% and 19%, respectively, of our annualized rent as of December 31, 2018. As a result, we are particularly susceptible to adverse market conditions in these areas. In addition, other geographic markets could become more attractive for developers, operators and customers of data center facilities based on favorable costs and other conditions to construct or operate data center facilities in those markets. For example, some states have created tax incentives for developers and operators to locate data center facilities in their jurisdictions. These changes in other markets may increase demand in those markets and result in a corresponding decrease in demand in our markets. Any adverse economic or real estate developments in the geographic markets in which we have a concentration of properties, or in any of the other markets in which we operate, or any decrease in demand for data center space resulting from the local business climate or business climate in other markets, could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

Challenging economic and other market conditions could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

The cost and availability of credit may be limited if global or national market conditions deteriorate. Furthermore, deteriorating economic and other market conditions that affect our customers could negatively impact commercial real estate fundamentals and result in lower occupancy, lower rental rates and declining values in our real estate portfolio. Additionally, the economic climate could have an impact on our lenders or customers, causing them to fail to meet their obligations to us. A long-term continuance of challenging economic and other market conditions could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

Future consolidation and competition in our customers’ industries could reduce the number of our existing and potential customers and make us dependent on a more limited number of customers.

 

Mergers or consolidations in our customers’ industries in the future could reduce the number of our existing and potential customers and make us dependent on a more limited number of customers. If our customers merge with or are acquired by other entities that are not our customers, they may discontinue or reduce the use of our data centers in the future. Any of these developments could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

Our failure to develop and maintain a diverse customer base could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

Our customers are a mix of hyperscale and hybrid colocation. Each type of customer and their leases with us have certain features that distinguish them from our other customers, such as operating margin, space and power requirements and lease term. In addition, our customers engage in a variety of professional, financial, technological and other businesses. A diverse customer base helps to minimize exposure to economic fluctuations in any one industry, business sector or customer type, or any particular customer. Our relative mix of products used by our customers may change over time, as may the industries represented by our customers, the concentration of customers within specified industries and the economic value and risks associated with each customer, and there is no assurance that we will be able to maintain a diverse customer base, which could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

Our government customers, contracts and subcontracts may subject us to additional risks, including early termination, audits, investigations, sanctions and penalties, which could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

We derive revenue from contracts with the U.S. government, state and local governments and from subcontracts with government contractors. Some of these customers may be entitled to terminate all or part of their contracts at any time, without cause.

 

Recently, political pressure has increased for governments and their agencies, both domestically and internationally, to reduce spending. Some of our federal government contracts and subcontracts are directly or indirectly subject to Congressional approval of appropriations to fund the expenditures under these contracts. Similarly, some of our state and local contracts and subcontracts are subject to government funding authorizations. To the extent that funding underlying any of these government contracts or subcontracts is reduced or eliminated, whether by failure to get Congressional approval or as a result of partial U.S. government shutdowns, there is an increased risk of termination by the counterparties, which could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

Government contracts and subcontracts also are generally subject to government audits and investigations. To the extent we fail to comply with laws or regulations related to such contracts, any such audit or investigation of us could result in various civil and criminal penalties and administrative sanctions, including termination of such contracts, refund of a portion of fees received, forfeiture of profits, suspension of payments, fines and suspensions or debarment from future government business, any of which could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

We derive significant revenue from our largest customers, and the loss or significant reduction in business from one or more of these customers could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

Our top 10 customers collectively accounted for approximately 39% of our portfolio’s total MRR as of December 31, 2018. We have one customer that accounted for approximately 12.8% of our MRR and the next largest customer accounted for only 4.9% of our MRR as of December 31, 2018. As a result, if we lose and are unable to replace one or more of these customers, if these customers significantly reduce their business with us or default on their obligations to us or if we choose not to enforce, or to enforce less vigorously, any rights that we may have now or in the future against

these significant customers because of our desire to maintain our relationship with them, our business, financial condition and results of operations, including the amount of cash available for distribution to our stockholders, could be materially adversely affected

 

Our future growth depends upon the successful expansion or redevelopment of our existing properties, the development of new properties, and any delays or unexpected costs in such expansion, redevelopment or development could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

We have initiated or are contemplating the redevelopment of multiple of our existing data center properties including: Atlanta-Metro, Irving, Santa Clara, Piscataway, Chicago, Fort Worth, Ashburn, and Manassas. Our future growth depends upon the successful completion of these efforts, as well as on development of new properties including Phoenix and Hillsboro. With respect to our current and any future expansions, developments and redevelopments, we will be subject to certain risks, including the following:

 

 

In addition, with respect to any expansions, developments or redevelopments, we will be subject to risks and, potentially, unanticipated costs associated with obtaining access to a sufficient amount of power from local utilities, including the need, in some cases, to develop utility substations on our properties in order to accommodate our power needs, constraints on the amount of electricity that a particular locality’s power grid is capable of providing at any given time, and risks associated with the negotiation of long-term power contracts with utility providers. Similarly, we will be subject to the risks and, potentially, unanticipated costs associated with obtaining access to sufficient internet, telecommunication and fiber optic network connectivity. We may not be able to successfully negotiate such contracts on favorable terms, or at all. Any inability to negotiate utility or telecommunications contracts on a timely basis or on favorable terms or in volumes sufficient to supply the critical load and connectivity anticipated for future developments could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

While we intend to develop data center properties primarily in markets with which we are familiar, we have and may in the future acquire properties in new geographic markets where we expect to achieve favorable risk-adjusted returns on our investment. We may not possess the same level of familiarity with development or redevelopment in these new markets and therefore cannot assure you that our development activities will generate attractive returns. Furthermore, development and redevelopment activities, regardless of whether they are ultimately successful, also typically require a substantial portion of our management’s time and attention. This may distract our management from focusing on other operational activities of our business.

 

These and other risks could result in delays, increased costs and a lower stabilized return on invested capital and could prevent completion of our development and expansion projects once undertaken, which could have a material adverse effect on us. In addition, we are expanding the aforementioned properties, and may develop or expand properties in the future, prior to obtaining commitments from customers to lease them. This is known as developing or expanding “on speculation” and involves the risk that we will be unable to attract customers to the properties on favorable terms in a

timely manner, if at all. In addition to our internal sales force, through our channels and partners team, we intend to use our existing industry relationships with national technology companies to retain and attract customers for our existing data center properties as well as the expansions and developments of such properties. We believe these industry relationships provide an ongoing pipeline of attractive leasing opportunities, and we intend to capitalize on these relationships in order to increase our leasing network. If our internal sales force or channels and partners team is not successful in leasing new data center space on favorable terms, it could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

We may commence development of a data center facility prior to having received any commitments from customers to lease any space in the facility and any extended vacancies could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

 

As part of our growth strategy, we intend to commit substantial operational and financial resources to develop new data centers and expand existing ones. However, we may not require pre‑leasing commitments from customers before we develop or expand a data center, and we may not have sufficient customer demand to lease the new data center space when completed. Once development of a data center is complete, we incur a certain amount of operating expenses even if there are no tenants occupying the space. A lack of customer demand for data center space or excess capacity in the data center market could impair our ability to achieve our expected rate of return on our investment, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, operating results and the market price of our common stock.

 

Our properties are designed primarily for lease as data centers, which could make it difficult to reposition them if we are not able to lease or re-let available space.

 

Our properties are highly specialized properties that contain extensive electrical, communications and mechanical systems. Such systems are often custom-designed to house, power and cool certain types of computer systems and networking equipment. Any office space (such as private office space, open office areas and conference centers) located at our properties is merely complementary to such systems, to facilitate our ability to service and maintain them. As a result, our properties are not well-suited for primary use by customers as anything other than data centers. Major renovations and expenditures would be required to convert the properties for use as commercial office space, or for any other use, which would substantially reduce the benefits from such a conversion. In the event of a conversion, the value of our properties may be impaired due to the costs of reconfiguring the real estate for alternate purposes and the removal or modification of the specialized systems and equipment. The highly specialized nature of our data center properties could make it difficult and costly to reposition them if we are not able to lease or re-let available space on favorable terms, or at all, which could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

We lease space in several locations under long-term non-cancellable lease agreements and the non-renewal or loss of such leases, or the continuing obligations under such leases in the event of a loss of customers or customer revenues, could have a material adverse effect on us. 

 

We lease the space that houses our data centers in several locations under long-term lease agreements. For example, we lease the space housing our data centers in Jersey City, New Jersey and Overland Park, Kansas, where our corporate headquarters is located, under leases expiring (taking into account our extension options) in 2031 and 2028 respectively.  We also lease data center space in several locations under non-cancellable leases expiring through 2026 and, in turn, sublease that space to our customers. The landlords could attempt to evict us for reasons beyond our control and we may incur costs if we are forced to vacate this space due to the high costs of relocating the equipment in these facilities and installing the necessary infrastructure in a new data center property. If we are forced to vacate any of these facilities, we could lose customers that chose our services based on our location. In addition, we cannot assure you that we will be able to renew these leases prior to their expiration dates on favorable terms or at all. Certain of such leases relate to data centers owned by companies that may view us as a competitor, which may impact their willingness to extend these leases upon expiration. If we are unable to renew these lease agreements, we could lose a significant number of customers who are unwilling to relocate their equipment to another one of our data center properties, which could have a material adverse effect on us. Even if we are able to renew these leases, the terms and other costs of renewal may be less favorable than our existing lease arrangements. Failure to sufficiently increase revenue from customers at these facilities to offset these projected higher costs could have a material adverse effect on us. Further, we may be unable to maintain good working relationships with our landlords, which would adversely affect our relationship with our customers and could result in the loss of current customers.

 

In addition, the terms of our customer contracts are, in many cases, of shorter duration than the non-cancellable lease agreements for data center space described above. We are obligated to make payments on these long-term non-cancellable leases regardless of whether our customer contracts are terminated or expire and regardless of whether our customers continue to make payments under their contracts. To the extent we experience a loss of customers or customer revenue, including upon expiration or termination of customer contracts, our continuing obligations under the non-cancellable lease agreements for data center space may result in expenses to us without offsetting revenue, which could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

The ground sublease structure at our Santa Clara property could prevent us from developing the property as we desire, and we may have to incur additional expenses prior to the end of the ground sublease to restore the property to its prelease state.

 

Our interest in the Santa Clara property is subject to a ground sublease granted by a third party, as ground sublessor, to our indirect subsidiary Quality Investment Properties Santa Clara, LLC (“QIP Santa Clara”). The ground sublease terminates in 2052 and we have two options to extend the original term for consecutive ten-year terms. The ground sublease structure presents special risks. We, as ground sublessee, will own all improvements on the land, including the buildings in which the data centers are located during the term of the ground sublease. Upon the expiration or earlier termination of the ground sublease, however, the improvements on the land will become the property of the ground sublessor. Unless we purchase a fee interest in the land and improvements subject to the ground sublease, we will not have any economic interest in the land or improvements at the expiration of the ground sublease. Therefore, we will not share in any increase in value of the land or improvements beyond the term of the ground sublease, notwithstanding our capital outlay to purchase our interest in the data center or fund improvements thereon, and will lose our right to use the building on the subleased property. In addition, upon the expiration of the ground sublease, the ground sublessor may require the removal of the improvements or the restoration of the improvements to their condition prior to any permitted alterations at our sole cost and expense. If we do not meet a certain net worth test, we also will be required to provide the ground sublessor with a bond in connection with such removal and restoration requirements. In addition, while we generally have the right to undertake alterations to the demised premises, the ground sublessor has the right to reasonably approve the quality of such work and the form and content of certain financial information of QIP Santa Clara. The ground sublessor need not give its approval to alterations if it or its affiliate determines that the work will have a material adverse impact on the fee interest in property adjacent to the demised premises. In addition, though the ground sublease provides that we may exercise the rights of ground lessor in the event of a rejection of the master ground lease, each of the master ground lease and the ground sublease may be rejected in bankruptcy. Finally, in the event of a condemnation, the ground lessor is entitled to an allocable share of any condemnation proceeds. The ground sublease, however, does contain important nondisturbance protections and provides that, in event of the termination of the master ground lease, the ground sublease will become a direct lease between the ground lessor and QIP Santa Clara.

 

We depend on third parties to provide Internet, telecommunication and fiber optic network connectivity to the customers in our data centers, and any delays or disruptions in service could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

Our products and infrastructure rely on third-party service providers. In particular, we depend on third parties to provide Internet, telecommunication and fiber optic network connectivity to the customers in our data centers, and we have no control over the reliability of the services provided by these suppliers. Our customers may in the future experience difficulties due to service failures unrelated to our systems and services. Any Internet, telecommunication or fiber optic network failures may result in significant loss of connectivity to our data centers, which could reduce the confidence of our customers and could consequently impair our ability to retain existing customers or attract new customers and could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

Similarly, we depend upon the presence of Internet, telecommunications and fiber optic networks serving the locations of our data centers in order to attract and retain customers. The construction required to connect multiple carrier facilities to our data centers is complex, requiring a sophisticated redundant fiber network, and involves matters outside of our control, including regulatory requirements and the availability of construction resources. Each new data center that we develop requires significant amounts of capital for the construction and operation of a sophisticated redundant fiber network. We believe that the availability of carrier capacity affects our business and future growth. We cannot assure you that any carrier will elect to offer its services within our data centers or that once a carrier has decided to provide connectivity to our data centers that it will continue to do so for any period of time. Furthermore, some carriers are experiencing business difficulties or have announced consolidations or mergers. As a result, some carriers may be forced

to downsize or terminate connectivity within our data centers, which could adversely affect our customers and could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

Power outages, limited availability of electrical resources and increased energy costs could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

Our data centers are subject to electrical power outages, regional competition for available power and increased energy costs. We attempt to limit exposure to system downtime by using backup generators and power supplies generally at a significantly higher operating cost than we would pay for an equivalent amount of power from a local utility. However, we may not be able to limit our exposure entirely even with these protections in place. Power outages, which may last beyond our backup and alternative power arrangements, would harm our customers and our business. During power outages, changes in humidity and temperature can cause permanent damage to servers and other electrical equipment. We could incur financial obligations or be subject to lawsuits by our customers in connection with a loss of power. Any loss of services or equipment damage could reduce the confidence of our customers in our services and could consequently impair our ability to attract and retain customers, which could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

In addition, power and cooling requirements at our data centers are increasing as a result of the increasing power and cooling demands of modern servers. Since we rely on third parties to provide our data centers with sufficient power to meet our customers’ needs, and we generally do not control the amount of power drawn by our customers, our data centers could have a limited or inadequate amount of electrical resources.

 

We also may be subject to risks and unanticipated costs associated with obtaining power from various utility companies. Utilities that serve our data centers may be dependent on, and sensitive to price increases for, a particular type of fuel, such as coal, oil or natural gas. The price of these fuels and the electricity generated from them could increase as a result of proposed legislative measures related to climate change or efforts to regulate carbon emissions. While our wholesale customers are billed on a pass-through basis for their direct energy usage, our retail customers pay a fixed cost for services, including power, so any excess energy costs above such fixed costs are borne by us. Although, for technical and practical reasons, our retail customers often use less power than the amount we are required to provide pursuant to their leases, there is no assurance that this will always be the case. Although we have a diverse customer base, the concentration and mix of our customers may change and increases in the cost of power at any of our data centers would put those locations at a competitive disadvantage relative to data centers served by utilities that can provide less expensive power. This could adversely affect our relationships with our customers and hinder our ability to operate our data centers, which could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

We rely on the proper and efficient functioning of computer and data-processing systems, and a large-scale malfunction could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

Our ability to keep our data centers operating depends on the proper and efficient functioning of computer and data-processing systems. Since computer and data-processing systems are susceptible to malfunctions and interruptions, including those due to equipment damage, power outages, cyber-attacks and a range of other hardware, software and network problems, we cannot guarantee that our data centers will not experience such malfunctions or interruptions in the future. Additionally, expansions and developments in the products and services that we offer, including our Cloud and Managed Services, could increasingly add a measure of complexity that may overburden our data center, network resources and human capital, making service interruptions and failures more likely. A significant or large-scale malfunction or interruption of one or more of any of our data centers’ computer or data-processing systems could adversely affect our ability to keep such data centers running efficiently. If a malfunction results in a wider or sustained disruption to business at a property, it could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

Interruptions in our provision of products or services could result in a loss of customers and damage our reputation, which could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

Our business and reputation could be adversely affected by any interruption or failure in the provision of products and services, even if such events occur as a result of a natural disaster, human error, landlord maintenance failure, water damage, fiber cuts, extreme temperature or humidity, sabotage, vandalism, terrorist acts, unauthorized entry or other unanticipated problems. If a significant disruption occurs, we may be unable to implement disaster recovery or security measures in a timely manner or, if and when implemented, these measures may not be sufficient or could be circumvented through the reoccurrence of a natural disaster or other unanticipated problem, or as a result of accidental or

intentional actions. Furthermore, such disruptions can cause damage to servers and may result in legal liability where interruptions in service violate service commitments in customer leases. Resolving network failures or alleviating security problems also may require interruptions, delays, or cessation of service to our customers. Accordingly, failures in our products and services, including problems at our data centers or network interruptions may result in significant liability, a loss of customers and damage to our reputation, which could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

Security breaches at our facilities or affecting our networks may result in disclosure of sensitive customer information that could harm our reputation and expose us to liability from customers and government agencies, and we may incur increasing or uncertain compliance and prevention costs, all of which could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

Our network could be subject to unauthorized access, computer viruses, cyber attacks or cyber intrusions and other disruptive problems, including malware, computer viruses and attachments to e-mails caused by customers, employees, or others inside or outside of our organization. Because a portion of our business focuses on serving U.S. government agencies and their contractors with a general focus on data security and information technology, we may be especially likely to be targeted by cyber attacks, including by organizations or persons that may be affiliated with nation-states or otherwise hostile to the U.S. government. Despite our activities to maintain the security and integrity of our networks and related systems, there can be no assurance that these activities will be effective. Unauthorized access, computer viruses or other disruptive problems could lead to interruptions, delays and cessation of service to our customers and the compromise or loss of our, our customers’ or our customers’ end-users’ information. We routinely process, store and transmit large amounts of data for our customers, which includes sensitive and personally identifiable information. Loss or compromise of this data could cost us both monetarily and in terms of customer goodwill and lost business. Unauthorized access also potentially could jeopardize the security of our confidential information or confidential information of our customers or our customers’ end-users, which might expose us to liability from customers and from the government agencies that regulate us or our customers, as well as harm our brand and deter potential customers from renting our space and purchasing our services. For example, violations of HIPAA and its implementing regulations, as amended by the HITECH Act, can lead to fines of up to $1.5 million for identical violations of a particular provision in a calendar year, and under the GDPR, there can be fines of up to €10,000,000 or up to 2% of the global sales, whichever is greater, for certain comparatively minor offenses and up to €20,000,000 or up to 4% of the global sales, whichever is greater, for more serious offenses.  Additionally, violations of privacy or cybersecurity laws (including the recently-passed CCPA), regulations or standards increasingly lead to class-action and other types of litigation, which can result in substantial monetary judgments or settlements. Therefore, any such security breaches could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

In addition, the regulatory framework around data custody, cybersecurity, data privacy and breaches varies by jurisdiction and is an evolving area of law. We cannot predict how future laws, regulations and standards, or future interpretations of current laws, regulations and standards, related to privacy and cybersecurity will affect our business, and we cannot predict the cost of compliance. Furthermore, we may be required to expend significant attention and financial resources to protect against physical or cybersecurity breaches that could result in the misappropriation of our or our customers’ information. As techniques used to breach security change frequently, and generally are not recognized until launched against a target, we may not be able to implement security measures in a timely manner or, if and when implemented, we may not be able to determine the extent to which these measures could be circumvented. Any internal or external breach in our network could severely harm our business and result in costly litigation and potential liability for us.  We also may be liable for, and suffer reputational harm if, any of our third-party service providers or subcontractors suffers security breaches. To the extent our customers demand that we accept unlimited liability and to the extent there is a competitive trend to accept it, such a trend could affect our ability to retain these limitations in our leases at the risk of losing the business. Such a trend may be particularly likely to occur with regard to our Cloud and Managed Services. These potential costs and liabilities could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

The loss of key personnel, including our executive officers, could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

Our continued success depends, to a significant extent, on the continued services of key personnel, particularly our executive officers, who have extensive market knowledge and long-standing business relationships. In particular, our reputation among and our relationships with our key customers are the direct result of a significant investment of time and effort by these individuals to build our credibility in a highly specialized industry. The loss of services of one or more key members of our executive management team could diminish our business and investment opportunities and

our relationships with lenders, business partners and existing and prospective customers and could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

Any inability to recruit or retain qualified personnel, or maintain access to key third-party service providers and software developers, could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

We must continue to identify, hire, train, and retain IT professionals, technical engineers, operations employees, and sales and senior management personnel who maintain relationships with our customers and who can provide the technical, strategic and marketing skills required to grow our company, develop and expand our data centers, maximize our rental and services income and achieve the highest sustainable rent levels at each of our facilities. There is a shortage of qualified personnel in these fields, and we compete with other companies for the limited pool of these personnel. Competitive pressures may require that we enhance our pay and benefits package to compete effectively for such personnel. An increase in these costs or our inability to recruit and retain necessary technical, managerial, sales and marketing personnel or to maintain access to key third-party providers could have a material adverse effect on us. For example, for certain products, we partner or collaborate with third parties such as software developers.  Our failure to maintain such relationships could impact our ability to provide certain services, in particular, government-related services, which could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

We may be unable to identify and complete acquisitions on favorable terms or at all, which may inhibit our growth and have a material adverse effect on us.

 

We continually evaluate the market of available properties and businesses and may acquire additional properties and businesses when opportunities exist. Our ability to acquire properties and businesses on favorable terms is subject to the following significant risks:

 

 

Any inability to complete property or business acquisitions on favorable terms or at all could have a material adverse effect on us. 

 

We may be unable to successfully integrate and operate acquired properties and achieve the intended benefits of our other acquisitions, which could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

Even if we are able to make acquisitions on favorable terms, our ability to successfully integrate and operate them is subject to various risks. We may be unable to accomplish the integration of an acquired property smoothly, successfully or within anticipated cost estimates. The diversion of our management’s attention from our operations to any such integration efforts, and any difficulties encountered, could prevent us from realizing the full benefits we anticipated to result from such acquisition and could have a material adverse effect on us. Additional risks include, among others:

 

 

We cannot assure you that we will be able to complete any integration without encountering difficulties or that any such difficulties will not have a material adverse effect on us. Failure to realize the intended benefits of an acquisition could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

We may be subject to unknown or contingent liabilities related to properties or businesses that we acquire, which may result in damages and investment losses.

 

Assets and entities that we have acquired or may acquire in the future may be subject to unknown or contingent liabilities for which we may have limited or no recourse against the sellers. Unknown or contingent liabilities might include liabilities for clean-up or remediation of environmental conditions, claims of customers, vendors or other persons dealing with the acquired entities, tax liabilities and other liabilities whether incurred in the ordinary course of business or otherwise. In the future we may enter into transactions with limited representations and warranties or with representations and warranties that do not survive the closing of the transactions, in which event we would have no or limited recourse against the sellers of such properties. While we usually require the sellers to indemnify us with respect to breaches of representations and warranties that survive, such indemnification is often limited and subject to various materiality thresholds, a significant deductible or an aggregate cap on losses. As a result, there is no guarantee that we will recover any amounts with respect to losses due to breaches by the sellers of their representations and warranties. In addition, the total amount of costs and expenses that we may incur with respect to liabilities associated with acquired properties and entities may exceed our expectations. Finally, indemnification agreements between us and the sellers typically provide that the sellers will retain certain specified liabilities relating to the assets and entities acquired by us. While the sellers are generally contractually obligated to pay all losses and other expenses relating to such retained liabilities, there can be no guarantee that such arrangements will not require us to incur losses or other expenses as well. Any of these matters could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

Our international operations expose us to regulatory, currency, legal, tax and other risks distinct from those faced by us in the U.S.

 

Although our operations are primarily based in the United States, we also have a presence outside of the United States. Foreign operations involve risks not generally associated with investments in the United States, including:

 

 

In addition, the GDPR, which took effect in May 2018, imposes new privacy requirements and increases the likelihood of applicability of European law to entities like us, which are established outside the EU but may process data of European data subjects. Also, while we have signed up to the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield Framework, which requires organizations operating in the United States to provide assurance that they are adhering to relevant European standards for data protection for such transfers, our self-certification under the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield Framework may not be sufficient to ensure compliance with GDPR. Legal challenges have been brought in European courts seeking to declare the Privacy Shield Framework invalid under European law as a mechanism to legitimize transfers of personal data from the EU to the United States, which could require us to implement alternative means to address European cross border data transfer requirement. To the extent we are not in compliance with the GDPR, the EU authorities may investigate or bring enforcement actions against us that may result in criminal and administrative sanctions. Such actions could have a material adverse effect on us and harm our reputation.

 

Our inability to overcome these risks could adversely affect our foreign operations and growth prospects and could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

Government regulation could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

Various laws and governmental regulations, both in the U.S. and abroad, governing internet related services, related communications services and information technologies remain largely unsettled, even in areas where there has been some legislative action.  For example, the Federal Communications Commission recently repealed its network neutrality rules, and it is unclear what affect that may have on us, our customers or the carriers who provide connectivity to our data centers. We remain focused on whether and how existing and changing laws, such as those governing cybersecurity, data privacy and data security, intellectual property, libel, telecommunications services, consumer protection and taxation, apply to the internet and to related offerings such as ours, and substantial resources may be required to comply with regulations or bring any non-compliant business practices into compliance with such regulations.  The adoption or modification of any such laws or regulations, or interpretations of existing laws, could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

We are exposed to ongoing litigation and other legal and regulatory actions, which may divert management’s time and attention, require us to pay damages and expenses or restrict the operation of our business.

 

We are subject to the risk of legal claims and proceedings and regulatory enforcement actions in the ordinary course of our business and otherwise, and we could incur significant liabilities and substantial legal fees as a result of these actions. Our management may devote significant time and attention to the resolution (through litigation, settlement or otherwise) of these actions, which would detract from our management’s ability to focus on our business. Any such resolution could involve payment of damages or expenses by us, which may be significant. In addition, any such resolution could involve our agreement to terms that restrict the operation of our business. The results of legal proceedings cannot be predicted with certainty. We cannot guarantee losses incurred in connection with any current or future legal or regulatory proceedings or actions will not exceed any provisions we may have set aside in respect of such proceedings or actions or will not exceed any available insurance coverage. The occurrence of any of these events could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

We may co-invest in joint ventures with third parties from time to time, and such investments could be adversely affected by the capital markets, lack of sole decision-making authority, reliance on joint venture partners’ financial condition and any disputes that may arise between us and our joint venture partners.

 

On February 22, 2019, we entered into a joint venture with Alinda Capital Partners (“Alinda”), a premier infrastructure investment firm, with respect to our Manassas data center. At closing, we contributed cash and our Manassas data center (a 118,000 square foot hyperscale data center under development in Manassas, Virginia), and Alinda contributed cash, in each case in exchange for a 50% interest in the joint venture (which includes a 50% interest in future income). Under the

joint venture agreement, we will serve as the venture’s operating member, subject to authority and oversight of a board appointed by us and Alinda, and separately we will serve as manager and developer of the facility in exchange for management and development fees. The joint venture agreement includes various transfer restrictions and rights of first offer that will allow us to repurchase Alinda’s interest should Alinda wish to exit in the future. In addition, we have agreed to provide Alinda an opportunity to invest in future similar joint ventures based on similar terms and a comparable capitalization rate.  See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Factors That May Influence Future Results of Operations and Cash Flows—Joint Ventures.”

 

In addition to this joint venture, we may in the future co-invest with third parties through partnerships, joint ventures or other structures in which we acquire noncontrolling interests in, or share responsibility for, managing the affairs of a property, partnership, co-tenancy or other entity. Even if we have general management authority over joint ventures, we expect that our joint venture partners would have customary approval rights over certain major decisions. We may not be in a position to exercise sole decision-making authority regarding any properties owned through joint ventures or similar ownership structures. In addition, investments in joint ventures may, under certain circumstances, involve risks not present when a third party is not involved, including potential deadlocks in making major decisions, restrictions on our ability to exit the joint venture, reliance on joint venture partners and the possibility that a joint venture partner might become bankrupt or fail to fund its share of required capital contributions, thus exposing us to liabilities in excess of our share of the joint venture or jeopardizing our REIT status. Furthermore, our joint venture partners may take actions that are not within our control that could jeopardize our REIT status. The funding of our capital contributions to such joint ventures may be dependent on proceeds from asset sales, credit facility advances or sales of equity securities. Joint venture partners may have business interests or goals that are inconsistent with our business interests or goals, and may be in a position to take actions contrary to our policies or objectives. We may, in specific circumstances, be liable for the actions of our joint venture partners. In addition, any disputes that may arise between us and joint venture partners may result in litigation or arbitration that would increase our expenses. Any of the foregoing may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

 

Risks Related to Financing

 

An inability to access external sources of capital on favorable terms or at all could limit our ability to execute our business and growth strategies.

 

In order to qualify and maintain our qualification as a REIT, we are required under the Code to distribute at least 90% of our “REIT taxable income” (determined before the deduction for dividends paid and excluding net capital gains) annually. In addition, we will be subject to income tax at regular corporate rates to the extent that we distribute less than 100% of our “REIT taxable income,” including any net capital gains. In addition, QTS will be subject to a 4% nondeductible excise tax on the amount, if any, by which distributions paid by us in any calendar year are less than the sum of 85% of our ordinary income, 95% of our capital gain net income and 100% of our undistributed income from prior years. Because of these distribution requirements, we may not be able to fund future capital needs, including capital for development projects and acquisition opportunities, from operating cash flow. Consequently, we intend to rely on third-party sources of capital to fund a substantial amount of our future capital needs. We may not be able to obtain such financing on favorable terms or at all. Any additional debt we incur will increase our leverage, expose us to the risk of default and impose operating restrictions on us. In addition, any equity financing could be materially dilutive to the equity interests held by our stockholders. Our access to third-party sources of capital depends, in part, on general market conditions, the market’s perception of our growth potential, our leverage, our current and expected results of operations, liquidity, financial condition and cash distributions to stockholders and the market price of our common stock. If we cannot obtain capital when needed, we may not be able to execute our business and growth strategies (including redeveloping or acquiring properties when strategic opportunities exist), satisfy our debt service obligations, make the cash distributions to our stockholders necessary to qualify and maintain our qualification as a REIT (which would expose us to significant penalties and corporate level taxation), or fund our other business needs, which could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

Our indebtedness outstanding as of December 31, 2018 was approximately $1,356.7 million, which exposes us to interest rate fluctuations and the risk of default thereunder, among other risks.

 

Our net indebtedness outstanding as of December 31, 2018 was approximately $1,356.7 million. Approximately $552.0 million of this indebtedness bears interest at a variable rate after taking into account $400 million of swaps that were entered into in April 2017 and became effective January 2, 2018 effectively converting our floating rate debt into fixed

rate debt. In addition, in December 2018 the Company entered into $200 million of incremental swaps that will convert floating rate debt into fixed rate debt effective January 2, 2020. Increases in interest rates, or the loss of the benefits of our existing or future hedging agreements, would increase our interest expense, which would adversely affect our cash flow and our ability to service our debt. Our organizational documents contain no limitations regarding the maximum level of indebtedness, as a percentage of our market capitalization or otherwise, that we may incur. We may incur significant additional indebtedness, including mortgage indebtedness, in the future. Our substantial outstanding indebtedness, and the limitations imposed on us by our debt agreements, could have other significant adverse consequences, including the following:

 

 

The occurrence of any one of these events could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

The agreements governing our existing indebtedness contain various covenants and other provisions which limit management’s discretion in the operation of our business, reduce our operational flexibility and create default risks.

 

The agreements governing our existing indebtedness contain, and agreements governing our future indebtedness may contain, covenants and other provisions that impose significant restrictions on us and our subsidiaries. These covenants restrict, among other things, our and our subsidiaries’ ability to:

 

 

These covenants may restrict our ability to engage in certain transactions that may be in our best interest.

 

Our unsecured credit facility and the indenture governing our 4.750% Senior Notes due 2025 (the “Senior Notes”) also contain provisions that may limit QTS’ ability to make distributions to its stockholders and the Operating Partnership’s ability to make distributions to QTS. The unsecured credit facility generally provides that if a default occurs and is continuing, we will be precluded from making distributions on common stock and partnership interests, as applicable

(other than those required to allow QTS to qualify and maintain its status as a REIT, so long as such default does not arise from a payment default or event of insolvency) and lenders under the unsecured credit facility and, potentially, other indebtedness, could accelerate the maturity of the related indebtedness. The indenture governing the Senior Notes contains provisions that restrict the Operating Partnership’s ability to make distributions to QTS, except distributions required to allow QTS to qualify and maintain its status as a REIT, so long as no event of default has occurred and is continuing.

 

These covenants could impair our ability to grow our business, take advantage of attractive business opportunities or successfully compete. In addition, failure to meet the covenants may result in an event of default under the applicable indebtedness, which could result in the acceleration of the applicable indebtedness and potentially other indebtedness, which could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

The documents that govern our outstanding indebtedness require that we maintain certain financial ratios and, if we fail to do so, we will be in default under the applicable debt instrument, which in turn could trigger defaults under our other debt instruments, which could result in the maturities of all of our debt obligations being accelerated.

 

Each of our significant debt instruments requires that we maintain certain financial ratios. Our unsecured credit facility provides that the outstanding principal balance of the loans and letter of credit liabilities under the unsecured credit facility cannot exceed the lesser of the $1.52 billion total commitment or the unencumbered asset pool availability. In addition, the unsecured credit facility requires that we maintain, among other things, (i) a maximum leverage ratio of total indebtedness to gross asset value not in excess of 60% (or 65% for- one or more periods of up to four consecutive fiscal quarters immediately following a material acquisition for which the Operating Partnership has provided written notice to the administrative agent), (ii) a minimum fixed charge coverage ratio (defined as the ratio of consolidated EBITDA, subject to certain adjustments, to consolidated fixed charges) of not less than 1.50 to 1.00 and (iii) tangible net worth, as defined in the credit agreement, of at least $1,567,000,000 plus 75% of the sum of net equity offering proceeds. In addition, the indenture that governs the Senior Notes requires the Operating Partnership and its Restricted Subsidiaries (as defined in the indenture that governs the Senior Notes) to maintain at all times total unencumbered assets of at least 150% of the aggregate principal amount of all of their outstanding unsecured indebtedness.

 

If we do not continue to satisfy these ratios or tests, we will be in default under the applicable debt instrument, which in turn may trigger defaults under our other debt instruments, which could result in the maturities of all of our debt obligations being accelerated. These events would have a material adverse effect on our liquidity.

 

Any hedging transactions involve costs and expose us to potential losses.

 

Hedging agreements enable us to convert floating rate liabilities to fixed rate liabilities or fixed rate liabilities to floating rate liabilities. Hedging transactions expose us to certain risks, including that losses on a hedge position may reduce the cash available for distribution to stockholders and such losses may exceed the amount invested in such instruments and that counterparties to such agreements could default on their obligations, which could increase our exposure to fluctuating interest rates.

 

In addition, we have used and may use interest rate swaps to hedge our exposure to interest rate fluctuations. For example, on April 5, 2017, we entered into forward interest rate swap agreements with an aggregate notional amount of $400 million. The forward swap agreements effectively fix the interest rate on $400 million of term loan borrowings, $200 million of swaps allocated to each term loan, from January 2, 2018 through December 17, 2021 and April 27, 2022, respectively, at approximately 3.3% assuming the current LIBOR spread of 1.3%.

 

On December 20, 2018, we entered into additional forward interest rate swap agreements with an aggregate notional amount of $400 million. The forward swap agreements effectively fix the interest rate on $400 million of term loan borrowings, $200 million of swaps allocated to each term loan, from December 17, 2021 and April 27, 2022 through the current maturity dates of the respective term loans which are December 17, 2023 and April 27, 2024, respectively. The weighted average effective fixed interest rate on the $400 million notional amount of term loan financing following the execution of these swap agreements will approximate 3.9%, commencing on December 17, 2021 and April 27, 2022, assuming the current LIBOR spread of 1.3%. Additionally, the Company entered into forward interest rate swap agreements with an aggregate notional amount of $200 million. The forward swap agreements effectively fix the interest rate on $200 million of additional term loan borrowings, $100 million of swaps allocated to each term loan, from January 2, 2020 through the current maturity dates of the respective term loans which are December 17, 2023 and April

27, 2024, respectively. The weighted average effective fixed interest rate on the $200 million notional amount of term loan financing, following the execution of these swap agreements, will approximate 3.9%, commencing on January 2, 2020, assuming the current LIBOR spread of 1.3%.We may use interest rate swaps or other forms of hedging again in the future.

 

The REIT rules impose certain restrictions on our ability to utilize hedges, swaps and other types of derivatives to hedge our liabilities. We may use hedging instruments in our risk management strategy to limit the effects of changes in interest rates on our operations. However, future hedges may be ineffective in eliminating all of the risks inherent in any particular position due to the fact that, among other things, the duration of the hedge may not match the duration of the related liability, the credit quality of the hedging counterparty owing money on the hedge may be downgraded to such an extent that it impairs our ability to sell or assign our side of the hedging transaction and the hedging counterparty owing money in the hedging transaction may default on its obligation to pay. The use of derivatives could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

We may be adversely affected by changes in LIBOR reporting practices, the method in which LIBOR is determined or the use of alternative reference rates.

 

As of December 31, 2018, we had approximately $952 million of debt outstanding that was indexed to the London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”). In July 2017, the United Kingdom regulator that regulates LIBOR announced its intention to phase out LIBOR rates by the end of 2021. It is impossible to predict the further effect of this announcement, any changes in the methods by which LIBOR is determined or other reforms to LIBOR that may be enacted.  In April 2018, the New York Federal Reserve commenced publishing an alternative reference rate, the Secured Overnight Financing Rate (“SOFR”), proposed by a group of major market participants (the Alternative Reference Rates Committee (“ARRC”)), convened by the U.S. Federal Reserve with participation by SEC Staff and other regulators. SOFR is based on transactions in the more robust U.S. Treasury repurchase market and has been proposed as the alternative to LIBOR for use in derivatives and other financial contracts that currently rely on LIBOR as a reference rate. ARRC has proposed a paced market transition plan to SOFR from LIBOR and organizations are currently working on industry-wide and company-specific transition plans as it relates to derivatives and cash markets exposed to LIBOR. At this time, no consensus exists as to what rate or rates may become accepted alternatives to LIBOR, and it is impossible to predict whether and to what extent banks will continue to provide LIBOR submissions to the administrator of LIBOR, whether LIBOR rates will cease to be published or supported before or after 2021 or whether additional reforms to LIBOR may be enacted. Such developments and any other legal or regulatory changes in the method by which LIBOR is determined or the transition from LIBOR to a successor benchmark may result in, among other things, a sudden or prolonged increase or decrease in LIBOR, a delay in the publication of LIBOR, and changes in the rules or methodologies of LIBOR, which may discourage market participants from continuing to administer or to participate in LIBOR’s determination and, in certain situations, could result in LIBOR no longer being determined and published. If a published U.S. dollar LIBOR rate is unavailable after 2021, the interest rates on our debt which is indexed to LIBOR will be determined using various alternative methods, any of which may result in interest obligations which are more than or do not otherwise correlate over time with the payments that would have been made on such debt if U.S. dollar LIBOR was available in its current form. Further, the same costs and risks that may lead to the unavailability of U.S. dollar LIBOR may make one or more of the alternative methods impossible or impracticable to determine. Any of these proposals or consequences could have a material adverse effect on our financing costs, and consequently, on our financial condition, operating results and cash flows.

 

Risks Related to the Real Estate Industry

 

The operating performance and value of our properties are subject to risks associated with the real estate industry.

 

As a real estate company, we are subject to all of the risks associated with owning and operating real estate, including:

 

 

In addition, periods of economic slowdown or recession, rising interest rates or declining demand for real estate, or the public perception that any of these events may occur, could result in a general decline in occupancy and rental sales, and therefore revenues, or an increased incidence of defaults under existing leases. Accordingly, we cannot assure you that we will be able to execute our business and growth strategies. Any inability to operate our properties to meet our financial, operational and strategic expectations could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

The illiquidity of real estate investments could significantly impede our ability to respond to adverse changes in economic, financial, investment and other conditions.

 

Because real estate investments are relatively illiquid, our ability to promptly sell one or more properties in our portfolio in response to changing economic, financial, investment or other conditions is limited. The real estate market is affected by many factors that are beyond our control, including those described above. In particular, data centers represent a particularly illiquid part of the overall real estate market. This illiquidity is driven by a number of factors, including the relatively small number of potential purchasers of such data centers—including other data center operators and large corporate users—and the relatively high cost per square foot to develop data centers, which substantially limits a potential buyer’s ability to purchase a data center property with the intention of redeveloping it for an alternative use, such as an office building, or may substantially reduce the price buyers are willing to pay. Our inability to dispose of properties at opportune times or on favorable terms could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

In addition, the Code imposes restrictions on a REIT’s ability to dispose of properties that are not applicable to other types of real estate companies. In particular, the tax laws applicable to REITs require that we hold our properties for investment, rather than primarily for sale in the ordinary course of business, which may cause us to forego or defer sales of properties that otherwise would be in our best interest. Therefore, we may not be able to vary our portfolio in response to economic, financial, investment or other conditions promptly or on favorable terms, which could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

Declining real estate valuations could result in impairment charges, the determination of which involves a significant amount of judgment on our part. Any impairment charge could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

We review our properties for impairment on a quarterly and annual basis and whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount may not be recoverable. Indicators of impairment include, but are not limited to, a sustained significant decrease in the market price of or the cash flows expected to be derived from a property. A significant amount of judgment is involved in determining the presence of an indicator of impairment. If the total of the expected undiscounted future cash flows is less than the carrying amount of a property on our balance sheet, a loss is recognized for the difference between the fair value and carrying value of the property. The evaluation of anticipated cash flows requires a significant amount of judgment regarding assumptions that could differ materially from actual results in future periods, including assumptions regarding future occupancy, rental rates and capital requirements. Any impairment charge could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

Increased tax rates and reassessments could significantly increase our property taxes and have a material adverse effect on us.

 

Each of our properties is subject to real and personal property taxes. These taxes may increase as tax rates change and as the properties are assessed or reassessed by taxing authorities. It is likely that the properties will be reassessed by taxing authorities as a result of (i) the acquisition of the properties by us and (ii) the informational returns that we must file in connection with the formation transactions in connection with QTS’ initial public offering. Any increase in property taxes on the properties could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

If California changes its property tax scheme, our California properties could be subject to significantly higher tax levies.

 

Owners of California property are subject to particularly high property taxes. Voters in the State of California previously passed Proposition 13, which generally limits annual real estate tax increases to 2% of assessed value per annum. From time to time, various groups have proposed repealing Proposition 13, or providing for modifications such as a “split roll tax,” whereby commercial property, for example, would be taxed at a higher rate than residential property. Given the uncertainty, it is not possible to quantify the risk to us of a tax increase or the resulting impact on us of any increase, but any tax increase could be significant at our California properties.

 

Uninsured and underinsured losses could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

We carry comprehensive liability, fire, extended coverage, earthquake, business interruption and rental loss insurance with respect to our properties, as well as cybersecurity insurance, and we plan to obtain similar coverage for properties we acquire in the future. However, certain types of losses, generally of a catastrophic nature, such as earthquakes and floods, may be either uninsurable or not economically insurable. Should a property sustain damage, we may incur losses due to insurance deductibles, to co-payments on insured losses or to uninsured losses. In the event of a substantial property loss, the insurance coverage may not be sufficient to pay the full current market value or current replacement cost of the property. Inflation, changes in building codes and ordinances, environmental considerations, and other factors also might make it infeasible to use insurance proceeds to replace a property after it has been damaged or destroyed. Under such circumstances, the insurance proceeds we receive might not be adequate to restore our economic position with respect to such property. Lenders may require such insurance and our failure to obtain such insurance may constitute default under loan agreements, which could have a material adverse effect on us. Finally, a disruption in the financial markets may make it more difficult to evaluate the stability, net assets and capitalization of insurance companies and any insurer’s ability to meet its claim payment obligations. A failure of an insurance company to make payments to us upon an event of loss covered by an insurance policy could have a material adverse effect on us. In the event of an uninsured or partially insured loss, we could lose some or all of our capital investment, cash flow and revenues related to one or more properties, which could also have a material adverse effect on us.

 

As the current or former owner or operator of real property, we could become subject to liability for environmental contamination, regardless of whether we caused such contamination, which could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

Under various federal, state and local statutes, regulations and ordinances relating to the protection of the environment, a current or former owner or operator of real property may be liable for the cost to remove or remediate contamination resulting from the presence or discharge of hazardous substances, wastes or petroleum products on, under, from or in such property. These costs could be substantial, liability under these laws may attach without regard to whether the owner or operator knew of, or was responsible for, the presence of the contaminants, and the liability may be joint and several. Most of our properties presently contain large underground or above ground fuel storage tanks used to fuel generators for emergency power, which is critical to our operations. If any of the tanks that we own or operate releases fuel to the environment, we would likely have to pay to clean up the contamination. In addition, prior owners and operators used some of our current properties for industrial and commercial purposes, which could have resulted in environmental contamination, including our Irving and Richmond data center properties, which were previously used as semiconductor plants. Moreover, the presence of contamination or the failure to remediate contamination at our properties may (1) expose us to third-party liability (e.g., for cleanup costs, bodily injury or property damage), (2) subject our properties to liens in favor of the government for damages and costs the government incurs in connection with the contamination, (3) impose restrictions on the manner in which a property may be used or businesses may be operated, or (4) materially adversely affect our ability to sell, lease or develop the real estate or to borrow using the real

estate as collateral. In addition, there may be material environmental liabilities at our properties of which we are not aware. We also may be liable for the costs of remediating contamination at off-site facilities at which we have arranged, or will arrange, for disposal or treatment of our hazardous substances without regard to whether we complied or will comply with environmental laws in doing so. Any of these matters could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

We could become subject to liability for failure to comply with environmental, health and safety requirements or zoning laws, which could cause us to incur additional expenses.

 

Our properties are subject to federal, state and local environmental, health and safety laws and regulations and zoning requirements, including those regarding the handling of regulated substances and wastes, emissions to the environment and fire codes. For instance, our properties are subject to regulations regarding the storage of petroleum for auxiliary or emergency power and air emissions arising from the use of power generators. In particular, generators at our data center facilities are subject to strict emissions limitations, which could preclude us from using critical back-up systems and lead to significant business disruptions at such facilities and loss of our reputation. If we exceed these emissions limits, we may be exposed to fines and/or other penalties. In addition, we lease some of our properties to our customers who also are subject to such environmental, health and safety laws and zoning requirements. If we, or our customers, fail to comply with these various laws and requirements, we might incur costs and liabilities, including governmental fines and penalties. Moreover, we do not know whether existing laws and requirements will change or, if they do, whether future laws and requirements will require us to make significant unanticipated expenditures that could have a material adverse effect on us. Environmental noncompliance liability also could affect a customer’s ability to make rental payments to us.

 

We could become subject to liability for asbestos-containing building materials in the buildings on our property, which could cause us to incur additional expenses.

 

Some of our properties may contain, or may have contained, asbestos-containing building materials. Environmental, health and safety laws require that owners or operators of or employers in buildings with asbestos-containing materials (“ACM”) properly manage and maintain these materials, adequately inform or train those who may come into contact with ACM and undertake special precautions, including removal or other abatement, in the event that ACM is disturbed during building maintenance, renovation or demolition. These laws may impose fines and penalties on employers, building owners or operators for failure to comply with these laws. In addition, third parties may seek recovery from employers, owners or operators for personal injury associated with exposure to asbestos. If we become subject to any of these penalties or other liabilities as a result of ACM at one or more of our properties, it could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

Our properties may contain or develop harmful mold or suffer from other adverse conditions, which could lead to liability for adverse health effects and costs of remediation.

 

When excessive moisture accumulates in buildings or on building materials, mold growth may occur, particularly if the moisture problem remains undiscovered or is not addressed over a period of time. Some molds may produce airborne toxins or irritants. Indoor air quality issues also can stem from inadequate ventilation, chemical contamination from indoor or outdoor sources and other biological contaminants such as pollen, viruses and bacteria. Indoor exposure to airborne toxins or irritants above certain levels can be alleged to cause a variety of adverse health effects and symptoms, including allergic or other reactions. As a result, the presence of significant mold or other airborne contaminants at any of our properties could require us to undertake a costly remediation program to contain or remove the mold or other airborne contaminants from the affected property or increase indoor ventilation. In addition, the presence of significant mold or other airborne contaminants could expose us to liability from our customers, employees of our customers and others if property damage or personal injury occurs. Thus, conditions related to mold or other airborne contaminants could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

Laws, regulations or other issues related to climate change could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

If we, or other companies with which we do business, particularly utilities that provide our facilities with electricity, become subject to laws or regulations related to climate change, it could have a material adverse effect on us. The United States may enact new laws, regulations and interpretations relating to climate change, including potential cap-and-trade systems, carbon taxes and other requirements relating to reduction of carbon footprints and/or greenhouse gas emissions. Other countries have enacted climate change laws and regulations and the United States has been involved in discussions regarding international climate change treaties. The federal government and some of the states and localities in which we

operate have enacted certain climate change laws and regulations and/or have begun regulating carbon footprints and greenhouse gas emissions. Although these laws and regulations have not had any known material adverse effect on us to date, they could limit our ability to develop new facilities or result in substantial costs, including compliance costs, retrofit costs and construction costs, monitoring and reporting costs and capital expenditures for environmental control facilities and other new equipment. In addition, these laws and regulations could lead to increased costs for the electricity that we require to conduct our operations. Furthermore, our reputation could be damaged if we violate climate change laws or regulations. We cannot predict how future laws and regulations, or future interpretations of current laws and regulations, related to climate change will affect our business, results of operations, liquidity and financial condition. Lastly, the potential physical impacts of climate change on our operations are highly uncertain, and would be particular to the geographic circumstances in areas in which we operate. These may include changes in rainfall and storm patterns and intensities, water shortages, changing sea levels and changing temperatures. Any of these matters could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

We may incur significant costs complying with various federal, state and local regulations, which could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

The properties in our portfolio are subject to various federal, state and local laws, including the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) as well as state and local fire and life safety requirements. Under the ADA, all places of public accommodation and commercial facilities must meet federal requirements related to access and use by disabled persons. A number of additional federal, state and local regulations may also require modifications to our properties, or restrict our ability to renovate our properties. If we fail to comply with these various requirements, we might incur governmental fines or private damage awards. We cannot predict the ultimate amount of the cost of compliance with the ADA or other legislation. In addition, we do not know whether existing requirements will change, or if they do, whether future requirements will require us to make significant unanticipated expenditures that could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

Risks Related to Our Organizational Structure

 

As of December 31, 2018, Chad L. Williams, our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, owned approximately 11.3% of QTS’ outstanding common stock on a fully diluted basis and has the ability to exercise significant influence on the company and any matter presented to its stockholders.

 

As of December 31, 2018, Chad L. Williams, our Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer owned approximately 11.3% of QTS’ outstanding common stock on a fully diluted basis. Mr. Williams has a significant vote in matters submitted to a vote of stockholders as a result of his ownership of Class B common stock, which gives him voting power equal to his economic interest in QTS as if he had exchanged all of his OP units for shares of Class A common stock, including in the election of directors. No other stockholder is permitted to own more than 7.5% of the aggregate of the outstanding shares of its common stock, except for certain designated investment entities that may own up to 9.8% of the aggregate of the outstanding shares of its common stock, subject to certain conditions, and except as approved by the board of directors pursuant to the terms of QTS’ charter. Consequently, Mr. Williams may be able to significantly influence the outcome of matters submitted for stockholder action, including the election of the board of directors and approval of significant corporate transactions, such as business combinations, consolidations and mergers, as well as the determination of its day-to-day business decisions and management policies. As a result, Mr. Williams could exercise his influence on QTS in a manner that conflicts with the interests of other stockholders. Mr. Williams may have interests that differ from other stockholders, including by reason of his remaining interest in the Operating Partnership, and may accordingly vote in ways that may not be consistent with the interests of holders of Class A common stock. Moreover, if Mr. Williams were to sell, or otherwise transfer, all or a large percentage of his holdings, the market price of QTS’ common stock could decline and QTS could find it difficult to raise the capital necessary for it to execute its business and growth strategies.

 

The tax protection agreement, during its term, could limit our ability to sell or otherwise dispose of certain properties and may require the Operating Partnership to maintain certain debt levels and agree to certain terms with lenders that otherwise would not be required to operate our business.

 

In connection with the IPO, we entered into a tax protection agreement with Chad L. Williams, our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, and his affiliates and family members who own OP units that provides that if (1) we sell, exchange, transfer, convey or otherwise dispose of our Atlanta-Metro, Atlanta-Suwanee or Santa Clara data centers in a taxable

transaction prior to January 1, 2026, referred to as the protected period, (2) cause or permit any transaction that results in the disposition by Mr. Williams or his affiliates and family members who own OP units of all or any portion of their interests in the Operating Partnership in a taxable transaction during the protected period or (3) fail prior to the expiration of the protected period to maintain approximately $175 million of indebtedness that would be allocable to Mr. Williams and his affiliates for tax purposes or, alternatively, fail to offer Mr. Williams and his affiliates and family members who own OP units the opportunity to guarantee specific types of the Operating Partnership’s indebtedness in order to enable them to continue to defer certain tax liabilities, we will indemnify Mr. Williams and his affiliates and family members who own OP units against certain resulting tax liabilities. Therefore, although it may be in our stockholders’ best interests that we sell, transfer, convey or otherwise dispose of one of these properties, it may be economically prohibitive for us to do so during the protected period because of these indemnity obligations. Moreover, these obligations may require us to maintain more or different indebtedness or agree to terms with our lenders that we would not otherwise agree to. As a result, the tax protection agreement will, during its term, restrict our ability to take actions or make decisions that otherwise would be in our best interests. As of December 31, 2018, our Atlanta-Metro, Atlanta-Suwanee and Santa Clara data centers represented approximately 47% of our annualized rent.

 

QTS’ charter and Maryland law contain provisions that may delay, defer or prevent a change in control of our company, even if such a change in control may be in your interest, and as a result may depress our common stock price.

 

The stock ownership limits imposed by the Code for REITs and imposed by QTS’ charter may restrict our business combination opportunities that might involve a premium price for shares of our common stock or otherwise be in the best interest of our stockholders.

 

In order for QTS to maintain its qualification as a REIT under the Code, not more than 50% in value of our outstanding stock may be owned, directly or indirectly, by five or fewer individuals (defined in the Code to include certain entities) at any time during the last half of each taxable year. QTS’ charter, with certain exceptions, authorizes our board of directors to take the actions that are necessary and desirable to preserve our qualification as a REIT. Unless exempted by our board of directors, no person may actually or constructively own more than 7.5% of the aggregate of the outstanding shares of our common stock by value or by number of shares, whichever is more restrictive, or 7.5% of the aggregate of the outstanding shares of our preferred stock by value or by number of shares, whichever is more restrictive. However, certain entities that are defined as designated investment entities in our charter are permitted to own up to 9.8% of the aggregate of the outstanding shares of our common stock or preferred stock, so long as each beneficial owner of the shares owned by such designated investment entity would satisfy the 7.5% ownership limit if those beneficial owners owned directly their proportionate share of the common stock owned by the designated investment entity.

 

In addition, QTS’ charter provides an excepted holder limit that allows Chad L. Williams, his family members and entities owned by or for the benefit of them, and any person who is or would be a beneficial owner or constructive owner of shares of our common stock as a result of the beneficial ownership or constructive ownership of shares of our common stock by Chad L. Williams, his family members and certain entities controlled by them, as a group, to own more than 7.5% of the aggregate of the outstanding shares of our common stock, so long as, under the applicable tax attribution rules, no one such excepted holder treated as an individual would hold more than 19.8% of the aggregate of the outstanding shares of our common stock, no two such excepted holders treated as individuals would own more than 27.3% of the aggregate of the outstanding shares of our common stock, no three such excepted holders treated as individuals would own more than 34.8% of the aggregate of the outstanding shares of our common stock, no four such excepted holders treated as individuals would own more than 42.3% of the aggregate of the outstanding shares of our common stock and no five such excepted holders treated as individuals would own more than 49.8% of the aggregate of the outstanding shares of our common stock. Currently, Chad L. Williams would be attributed all of the shares of common stock owned by each such other excepted holder and, accordingly, the Williams excepted holders as a group would not be allowed to own in excess of 19.8% of the aggregate of the outstanding shares of our common stock. Our board of directors may, in its sole discretion, grant other exemptions to the stock ownership limits, subject to such conditions and the receipt by our board of directors of certain representations and undertakings.

 

In addition to these ownership limits, our charter also prohibits any person from (a) beneficially or constructively owning, as determined by applying certain attribution rules of the Code, our stock that would result in us being “closely held” under Section 856(h) of the Code or that would otherwise cause us to fail to qualify as a REIT, (b) transferring stock if such transfer would result in our stock being owned by fewer than 100 persons, (c) beneficially or constructively owning shares of our capital stock that would result in us owning (directly or indirectly) an interest in a tenant if the

income derived by us from that tenant for our taxable year during which such determination is being made would reasonably be expected to equal or exceed the lesser of one percent of our gross income or an amount that would cause us to fail to satisfy any of the REIT gross income requirements and (d) beneficially or constructively owning shares of our capital stock that would cause us otherwise to fail to qualify as a REIT. The ownership limits imposed under the Code are based upon direct or indirect ownership by “individuals,” but only during the last half of a tax year. The ownership limits contained in our charter key off of the ownership at any time by any “person,” which term includes entities. These ownership limitations in our charter are common in REIT charters and are intended to provide added assurance of compliance with the tax law requirements, and to minimize administrative burdens. However, the ownership limits on our common stock also might delay, defer or prevent a transaction or a change in control of our company that might involve a premium price for shares of our common stock or otherwise be in the best interest of our stockholders.

 

Our authorized but unissued shares of common and preferred stock may prevent a change in control of our Company that might involve a premium price for shares of our common stock or otherwise be in the best interest of our stockholders.

 

QTS’ charter authorizes QTS to issue additional shares of common and preferred stock. In addition, our board of directors may, without stockholder approval, amend QTS’ charter to increase the aggregate number of shares of our common stock or the number of shares of stock of any class or series that we have authority to issue and classify or reclassify any unissued shares of common or preferred stock and set the preferences, rights and other terms of the classified or reclassified shares; provided that our board of directors may not amend QTS’ charter to increase the aggregate number of shares of Class B common stock that we have the authority to issue or reclassify any shares of our capital stock as Class B common stock without stockholder approval. In 2018, QTS issued 4,280,000 shares of 7.125% Series A Cumulative Redeemable Perpetual Preferred Stock (“Series A Preferred Stock”) and 3,162,500 shares of 6.50% Series B Cumulative Convertible Perpetual Preferred Stock (“Series B Preferred Stock”). As a result, the Series A Preferred Stock and Series B Preferred Stock, and the ability our board of directors to establish additional series of shares of common or preferred stock, could delay, defer or prevent a transaction or a change in control of our company that might involve a premium price for shares of our common stock or otherwise be in the best interest of our stockholders. In addition, our Series A Preferred Stock and Series B Preferred Stock rank, and any other Preferred Stock that we may issue would rank, senior to our common stock with respect to the payment of distributions and other amounts (including upon liquidation), in which case we could not pay any distributions on our common stock until full distributions have been paid with respect to such preferred stock.

 

Certain provisions of Maryland law could inhibit a change in control of our Company.

 

Certain provisions of the Maryland General Corporation Law (or MGCL) may have the effect of inhibiting a third party from making a proposal to acquire us or of impeding a change in control under circumstances that otherwise could provide the holders of shares of our common stock with the opportunity to realize a premium over the then-prevailing market price of such shares, including:

 

QTS has opted out of these provisions of the MGCL, in the case of the business combination provisions of the MGCL by resolution of its board of directors, and in the case of the control share provisions of the MGCL by a provision in its bylaws. However, our board of directors may by resolution elect to opt in to the business combination provisions of the

MGCL and it may, by amendment to its bylaws (which such amendment could be adopted by its board of directors in its sole discretion), opt in to the control share provisions of the MGCL in the future.

 

Certain provisions of the MGCL permit boards of directors of Maryland corporations, without stockholder approval and regardless of what is currently provided in their charter or bylaws, to adopt certain provisions that may have the effect of limiting or precluding a third party from making an acquisition proposal for or of delaying, deferring or preventing a change in control of such companies under circumstances that otherwise could provide the holders of shares of our common stock with the opportunity to realize a premium over the then current market price. In September 2018, we filed articles supplementary with the State Department of Assessments and Taxation of Maryland electing to opt out of four provisions of Title 3, Subtitle 8 of the MGCL (“MUTA”), and our board of directors approved an amendment to our charter to opt out of that final provision relating to board vacancies.  However, stockholder approval at the 2019 annual meeting of stockholders of QTS is needed to approve the amendment to our charter.

 

Certain provisions in the partnership agreement of the Operating Partnership may delay, defer or prevent unsolicited acquisitions of us or changes in our control.

 

Provisions in the partnership agreement of the Operating Partnership may delay, defer or prevent unsolicited acquisitions of us or changes in our control. These provisions include, among others:

 

 

These provisions could discourage third parties from making proposals involving an unsolicited acquisition of us or change of our control, although some stockholders might consider such proposals, if made, desirable.

 

QTS’ charter and bylaws, the partnership agreement of the Operating Partnership and Maryland law also contain other provisions that may delay, defer or prevent a transaction or a change in control of our company that might involve a premium price for our common stock or that our stockholders otherwise believe to be in their best interests.

 

Our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer has outside business interests that could require time and attention and may interfere with his ability to devote time to our business.

 

Chad L. Williams, our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, has outside business interests that could require his time and attention. These interests include the ownership of our Overland Park, Kansas facility, at which our corporate headquarters is also located (which is leased to us), and certain office and other properties and certain other non-real estate business ventures, provided that he will be permitted to engage in other specified activities. Mr. Williams’ employment agreement requires that he devote substantially all of his business time to our company. Mr. Williams also may have fiduciary obligations associated with these business interests that interfere with his ability to devote time to our business and that could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

If we fail to maintain an effective system of integrated internal controls, we may not be able to accurately and timely report our financial results.

 

An inability to maintain effective disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting could adversely affect our results of operation, could cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations under the Exchange Act on a timely basis or could result in material misstatements or omissions in our Exchange Act reports (including our financial statements), any of which, as well as the perception thereof, could cause investors to lose confidence in the company and could have a material adverse effect on us and cause the market price of our common stock to decline significantly.

 

Conflicts of interest exist or could arise in the future with holders of OP units, which may impede business decisions that could benefit our stockholders.

 

Conflicts of interest exist or could arise in the future as a result of the relationships between QTS and its affiliates, on the one hand, and the Operating Partnership or any partner thereof, on the other. Our directors and officers have duties to QTS and its stockholders under applicable Maryland law in connection with their management of our company. At the same time, we, as general partner, have fiduciary duties to the Operating Partnership and to its limited partners under Delaware law in connection with the management of the Operating Partnership. QTS’ duties as general partner to the Operating Partnership and its partners may come into conflict with the duties of our directors and officers to our company and our stockholders. These conflicts may be resolved in a manner that is not in the best interest of stockholders.

 

Additionally, the partnership agreement expressly limits our liability by providing that QTS and its officers, directors, agents and employees will not be liable or accountable to the Operating Partnership for losses sustained, liabilities incurred or benefits not derived if we or such officer, director, agent or employee acted in good faith. In addition, the Operating Partnership is required to indemnify QTS, and its officers, directors, agents, employees and designees to the extent permitted by applicable law from and against any and all claims arising from operations of the Operating Partnership, unless it is established that (1) the act or omission was committed in bad faith, was fraudulent or was the result of active and deliberate dishonesty, (2) the indemnified party received an improper personal benefit in money, property or services or (3) in the case of a criminal proceeding, the indemnified person had reasonable cause to believe that the act or omission was unlawful. The provisions of Delaware law that allow the fiduciary duties of a general partner to be modified by a partnership agreement have not been resolved in a court of law, and we have not obtained an opinion of counsel covering the provisions set forth in the partnership agreement that purport to waive or restrict our fiduciary duties that would be in effect were it not for the partnership agreement.

 

Our rights and the rights of our stockholders to take action against our directors and officers are limited, which could limit our stockholders’ recourse in the event of actions not in our stockholders’ best interests.

 

Under Maryland law generally, a director is required to perform his or her duties in good faith, in a manner he or she reasonably believes to be in the best interests of our company and with the care that an ordinarily prudent person in a like position would use under similar circumstances. Under Maryland law, directors are presumed to have acted with this standard of care. In addition, our charter limits the liability of our directors and officers to us and our stockholders for money damages, except for liability resulting from:

 

 

QTS’ charter obligates QTS to indemnify its directors and officers for actions taken by them in those capacities to the maximum extent permitted by Maryland law. QTS’ bylaws require it to indemnify each director or officer, to the maximum extent permitted by Maryland law, in the defense of any proceeding to which he or she is made, or threatened to be made, a party by reason of his or her service to us. In addition, QTS may be obligated to advance the defense costs incurred by its directors and officers. As a result, QTS and its stockholders may have more limited rights against its directors and officers than might otherwise exist absent the current provisions in QTS’ charter and bylaws or that might exist with other companies.

 

Our board of directors may change our policies and practices and enter into new lines of business without a vote of our stockholders, which limits your control of our policies and practices and could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

Our major policies, including our policies and practices with respect to investments, financing, growth and capitalization, are determined by our board of directors. Our board of directors may change these and other policies from time to time or enter into new lines of business, at any time, without the consent of our stockholders. Accordingly, our stockholders will have limited control over changes in our policies. These changes could result in our making investments and engaging in business activities that are different from, and possibly riskier than, the investments and business activities described in this Form 10-K. A change in our policies and procedures or our entry into new lines of

business may increase our exposure to other risks or real estate market fluctuations and could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

Risks Related to our Class A Common Stock

 

Our cash available for distribution to stockholders may not be sufficient to pay distributions at expected or REIT-required levels, or at all, and we may need to borrow or rely on other third-party capital in order to make such distributions, as to which no assurance can be given, which could cause the market price of our common stock to decline significantly.

 

We intend to continue to pay regular quarterly distributions to our stockholders. However, no assurance can be given that our estimated cash available for distribution to our stockholders will be accurate or that our actual cash available for distribution to our stockholders will be sufficient to pay distributions to them at any expected or REIT-required level or at any particular yield, or at all. Accordingly, we may need to borrow or rely on other third-party capital to make distributions to our stockholders, and such third-party capital may not be available to us on favorable terms or at all. As a result, we may not be able to pay distributions to our stockholders in the future. Our failure to pay any such distributions or to pay distributions that fail to meet our stockholders’ expectations from time to time or the distribution requirements for a REIT could cause the market price of our common stock to decline significantly. All distributions will be made at the discretion of our board of directors and will depend on our historical and projected results of operations, liquidity and financial condition, our REIT qualification, our debt service requirements, operating expenses and capital expenditures, prohibitions and other restrictions under financing arrangements and applicable law and other factors as our board of directors may deem relevant from time to time. In addition, we may pay distributions some or all of which may constitute a return of capital. To the extent that we decide to make distributions in excess of our current and accumulated earnings and profits, such distributions would generally be considered a return of capital for federal income tax purposes to the extent of the holder’s adjusted tax basis in its shares. A return of capital is not taxable, but it has the effect of reducing the holder’s adjusted tax basis in its investment. To the extent that distributions exceed the adjusted tax basis of a holder’s shares, they will be treated as gain from the sale or exchange of such shares. If we borrow to fund distributions, our future interest costs would increase, thereby reducing our earnings and cash available for distribution from what they otherwise would have been.

 

Future issuances or sales of our common stock, or the perception of the possibility of such issuances or sales, may depress the market price of our common stock.

 

We cannot predict the effect, if any, of our future issuances or sales of our common stock or OP units, or future resales of our common stock or OP units by existing holders, or the perception of such issuances, sales or resales, on the market price of our common stock. Any such future issuances, sales or resales, or the perception that such issuances, sales or resales might occur, could depress the market price of our common stock and also may make it more difficult and costly for us to sell equity or equity-related securities in the future at a time and upon terms that we deem desirable.

 

As of December 31, 2018, we had 50,995,009 shares of our Class A common stock outstanding. In addition, as of December 31, 2018, we had 128,408 shares of our Class B common stock and 6,675,618 OP units outstanding (each of which may, and in certain cases must, exchange into shares of Class A common stock on a one-for-one basis). In addition, as of December 31, 2018, we had 3,162,500 shares of Series B Preferred Stock, which are convertible into shares of Class A common stock at any time at the option of the holder. Subject to applicable law, our board of directors has the authority, without further stockholder approval, to issue additional shares of common stock and preferred stock on the terms and for the consideration it deems appropriate.

 

In addition to the restricted stock that we previously have granted to our directors, executive officers and other employees under our equity incentive plan, we may also issue additional shares of our common stock and securities convertible into, or exchangeable or exercisable for, our common stock under our equity incentive plan. We have filed with the SEC a registration statement on Form S-8 covering the common stock issuable under our equity incentive plan. Shares of our common stock covered by such registration statement are eligible for transfer or resale without restriction under the Securities Act, unless held by affiliates. We also may issue from time to time additional shares of our common stock or OP units in connection with acquisitions and may grant registration rights in connection with such issuances pursuant to which we would agree to register the resale of such securities under the Securities Act. In addition, we have granted registration rights to Chad L. Williams, our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, and others with respect to shares of common stock owned by them or upon redemption of OP units held by them. The market price of our common

stock may decline significantly upon the registration of additional shares of our common stock pursuant to these registration rights or future issuances of equity in connection with acquisitions or our equity incentive plan.

 

Future issuances of debt securities, which would rank senior to our common stock upon our liquidation, and future issuances of equity securities (including OP units), which would dilute the holdings of our existing common stockholders and may be senior to our common stock for the purposes of making distributions, periodically or upon liquidation, may negatively affect the market price of our common stock.

 

In the future, we may issue debt or equity securities or incur other borrowings. Upon our liquidation, holders of our debt securities and other loans and preferred stock will receive a distribution of our available assets before common stockholders. If we incur debt in the future, our future interest costs could increase and adversely affect our results of operations and liquidity.

 

We are not required to offer any additional equity securities to existing common stockholders on a preemptive basis. Therefore, additional common stock issuances, directly or through convertible or exchangeable securities (including OP units), warrants or options, will dilute the holdings of our existing common stockholders and such issuances, or the perception of such issuances, may reduce the market price of our common stock. Our Series A Preferred Stock and our Series B Preferred Stock has a preference on distribution payments, periodically or upon liquidation, which could eliminate or otherwise limit our ability to make distributions to common stockholders. In addition, our Series B Preferred Stock is convertible, at any time, at the option of the holder thereof, into shares of our Class A common stock at an initial conversion rate of 2.1264 shares of our Class A common stock per share of Series B Preferred Stock, subject to certain adjustments including adjustments on a fundamental change transaction.  As a result, the issuance of additional shares of our Class A common stock upon conversion of the Series B Preferred Stock will dilute the ownership interest of our Class A common stockholders and could have a dilutive effect on earnings per share of our Class A common stock and funds from operations per share of our Class A common stock.   Because our decision to issue debt or equity securities or incur other borrowings in the future will depend on market conditions and other factors beyond our control, we cannot predict or estimate the amount, timing, nature or success of our future capital-raising efforts. Thus, common stockholders bear the risk that our future issuances of debt or equity securities or our incurrence of other borrowings will negatively affect the market price of our common stock.

 

The trading volume and market price of our common stock may be volatile and could decline significantly in the future.

 

The market price of our common stock may be volatile. The stock markets, including the NYSE, on which our common stock is listed, have experienced significant price and volume fluctuations. As a result, the market price of our common stock is likely to be similarly volatile, and could decline significantly, unrelated to our operating performance or prospects. The market price of our common stock could be subject to wide fluctuations in response to a number of factors, including those listed in this “Risk Factors” section of this Form 10-K and others such as:

 

 

In the past, securities class action litigation has often been instituted against companies following periods of volatility in the market price of their common stock. This type of litigation, if brought against us, could result in substantial costs and divert our management’s attention and resources, which could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

Increases in market interest rates may cause prospective purchasers to seek higher distribution yields and therefore reduce demand for our common stock and result in a decline in the market price of our common stock.

 

The price of our common stock may be influenced by our distribution yield (i.e., the amount of our annual or annualized distributions, if any, as a percentage of the market price of our common stock) relative to market interest rates. An increase in market interest rates, which are currently low relative to historical levels, may lead prospective purchasers and holders of our common stock to expect a higher distribution yield, which we may not be able, or may choose not, to satisfy. As a result, prospective purchasers may decide to purchase other securities rather than our common stock, which would reduce the demand for our common stock, and existing holders of our common stock may decide to sell their shares, either of which could result in a decline in the market price of our common stock.

 

Risks Related to QTS’ Status as a REIT

 

If QTS does not qualify as a REIT, or fails to remain qualified as a REIT, we will be subject to federal income tax as a regular corporation and could face significant tax liability, which could reduce the amount of cash available for distribution to our stockholders, could have a material adverse effect on QTS, and could adversely affect the Operating Partnership’s ability to service its indebtedness. 

 

QTS elected to be taxed as a REIT, commencing with our taxable year ended December 31, 2013, when we filed our tax return for that year. We believe that we have been organized and have operated and will continue to operate in conformity with the requirements for qualification and taxation as a REIT. QTS’ qualification as a REIT, and maintenance of such qualification, depends upon our ability to meet, on a continuing basis, various complex requirements under the Code relating to, among other things, the sources of its gross income, the composition and values of its assets, its distributions to its stockholders and the concentration of ownership of its equity shares.

 

We have not requested and do not plan to request a ruling from the IRS that QTS qualifies as a REIT, and the statements in this Form 10-K are not binding on the IRS, or any court. If QTS loses its REIT status, we will face serious tax consequences that could adversely affect our ability to raise capital and the Operating Partnership’s ability to service its indebtedness for each of the years involved because:

 

 

In addition, if QTS fails to qualify as a REIT, we will not be required to make distributions to stockholders, and all distributions to stockholders will be subject to tax as dividend income to the extent of its current and accumulated earnings and profits. As a result of all these factors, QTS’ failure to qualify as a REIT could impair our ability to execute our business and growth strategies, as well as make it more difficult for us to raise capital and for the Operating Partnership to service its indebtedness.

 

Qualifying as a REIT involves highly technical and complex provisions of the Code and therefore, in certain circumstances, may be subject to uncertainty.

 

In order to qualify as a REIT, QTS must satisfy a number of requirements, including requirements regarding the composition of our assets, the sources of our income and the diversity of our share ownership. Also, we must make distributions to stockholders aggregating annually at least 90% of our “REIT taxable income” (determined without regard to the dividends paid deduction and excluding net capital gain). Compliance with these requirements and all other requirements for qualification as a REIT involves the application of highly technical and complex Code provisions for which there are only limited judicial and administrative interpretations. The complexity of these provisions and of the applicable U.S. Department of the Treasury regulations (“Treasury Regulations”) that have been promulgated under the Code is greater in the case of a REIT that, like QTS, holds its assets through a partnership and conducts significant business operations through one or more taxable REIT subsidiaries (each a “TRS”). Even a technical or inadvertent mistake could jeopardize QTS’ REIT status. In addition, the determination of various factual matters and circumstances relevant to REIT qualification is not entirely within our control and may affect its ability to qualify as a REIT. Accordingly, we cannot be certain that our organization and operation will enable QTS to qualify as a REIT for federal income tax purposes.

 

Even if QTS qualifies as a REIT, we will be subject to some taxes that will reduce our cash flow.  

 

Even if QTS qualifies for taxation as a REIT, we may be subject to certain federal, state and local taxes on our income and assets, including taxes on any undistributed income, tax on income from some activities conducted as a result of a foreclosure, and state or local income, property and transfer taxes. For example, our TRSs and certain of our subsidiaries are subject to federal, state, and local corporate-level income taxes on their net taxable income, if any, which primarily consists of the revenues from the Cloud and Managed Service business. In addition, QTS may incur a 100% excise tax on transactions with our TRSs if they are not conducted on an arms’ length basis. See “The ownership limitation on TRS stock could limit the growth of the Cloud and Managed Services business, and our transactions with our TRSs will cause us to be subject to a 100% penalty tax on certain income or deductions if those transactions are not conducted on arm’s-length terms” below.

 

Moreover, if we have net income from “prohibited transactions,” that income will be subject to a 100% tax. In general, prohibited transactions are sales or other dispositions by the Operating Partnership of property held primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of business. The determination as to whether a particular sale is a prohibited transaction depends on the facts and circumstances related to that sale. The need to avoid prohibited transactions could cause the Operating Partnership to forgo or defer sales of properties that it otherwise would have sold or that might otherwise be in its best interest to sell. In addition, we could, in certain circumstances, be required to pay an excise or penalty tax (which could be significant in amount) in order to utilize one or more relief provisions under the Code to maintain our qualification as a REIT.  Any of these taxes would reduce our cash flow and could decrease cash available for distribution to stockholders and decrease cash available to service the Operating Partnership’s indebtedness.

 

If the structural components of our properties were not treated as real property for purposes of the REIT qualification requirements, QTS could fail to qualify as a REIT, which could have a material adverse effect on us.

 

A significant portion of the value of our properties is attributable to structural components related to the provision of electricity, heating ventilation and air conditioning, humidification regulation, security and fire protection, and telecommunication services. If rent attributable to personal property leased in connection with a lease of real property is greater than 15% of the total rent attributable to that lease, the portion of total rent that is attributable to the personal property will not be qualifying income for purposes of the REIT income tests. Therefore, if the Operating Partnership’s structural components of the properties are determined not to constitute real property for purposes of the REIT qualification requirements, we could fail to qualify as a REIT, which could have a material adverse impact on us, depress the market price of our common stock, and adversely affect our ability to raise capital as well as the Operating Partnership’s ability to service its indebtedness.

 

The REIT distribution requirements could adversely affect our ability to grow our business and may force us to seek third-party capital during unfavorable market conditions.

 

To qualify as a REIT, we generally must distribute to our stockholders at least 90% of its “REIT taxable income” (determined without regard to the dividends paid deduction and excluding net capital gain) each year, and we will be

subject to regular corporate income taxes to the extent that we distribute less than 100% of our “REIT taxable income” each year. In addition, we will be subject to a 4% nondeductible excise tax on the amount, if any, by which distributions paid by us in any calendar year are less than the sum of 85% of our ordinary income, 95% of our capital gain net income and 100% of our undistributed income from prior years. In order to maintain our REIT status and avoid the payment of income and excise taxes, we may be forced to seek third-party capital to meet the distribution requirements even if the then-prevailing market conditions are not favorable. These capital needs could result from differences in timing between the recognition of taxable income and the actual receipt of cash or the effect of non-deductible capital expenditures, the creation of reserves or required debt or amortization payments. If we do not have other funds available in these situations, the Operating Partnership could be required to borrow funds on unfavorable terms, or sell assets at disadvantageous prices. In addition, we may be forced to distribute amounts that would otherwise have been invested in future acquisitions to make distributions sufficient to enable us to pay out enough of our taxable income to satisfy the REIT distribution requirement and to avoid corporate income tax and the 4% excise tax in a particular year.

 

Dividends payable by REITs do not qualify for the reduced tax rates available for some dividends, which could depress the market price of our common stock if it is perceived as a less attractive investment.

 

The maximum tax rate applicable to income from "qualified dividends" payable by non-REIT “C” corporations to U.S. stockholders that are individuals, trusts and estates generally is 20% (excluding the 3.8% net investment income tax). Dividends payable by REITs, however, generally are not eligible for the current reduced rate, except to the extent that certain holding requirements have been met and a REIT's dividends are attributable to dividends received by a REIT from taxable corporations (such as a TRS), to income that was subject to tax at the REIT/corporate level, or to dividends properly designated by the REIT as "capital gains dividends." Effective for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017, and before January 1, 2026, those U.S. stockholders may deduct 20% of their dividends from REITs (excluding qualified dividend income and capital gains dividends). For those U.S. stockholders in the top marginal tax bracket of 37%, the deduction for REIT dividends yields an effective income tax rate of 29.6% on REIT dividends, which is higher than the 20% tax rate on qualified dividend income paid by non-REIT “C” corporations. Although the reduced rates applicable to dividend income from non-REIT “C” corporations do not adversely affect the taxation of REITs or dividends payable by REITs, it could cause investors who are non-corporate taxpayers to perceive investments in REITs to be relatively less attractive than investments in the stock of non-REIT “C” corporations that pay dividends, which could depress the market price of the stock of REITs, including our common stock.

 

QTS may in the future choose to pay dividends in the form of shares of common stock, in which case stockholders may be required to pay income taxes in excess of the cash dividends they receive. 

 

The Company may seek in the future to distribute taxable dividends that are payable in cash and shares of common stock, at the election of each stockholder. Taxable stockholders receiving such dividends will be required to include the full amount of the dividend as ordinary income to the extent of QTS’ current and accumulated earnings and profits for federal income tax purposes. As a result, stockholders may be required to pay income taxes with respect to such dividends in excess of the cash dividends received. If a U.S. stockholder sells the shares of common stock that it receives as a dividend in order to pay this tax, the sales proceeds may be less than the amount included in income with respect to the dividend, depending on the market price of common stock at the time of the sale.  In addition, in such case, a U.S. stockholder could have a capital loss with respect to the common stock sold that could not be used to offset such dividend income. Furthermore, with respect to certain non-U.S. stockholders, the Company may be required to withhold federal income tax with respect to such dividends, including in respect of all or a portion of such dividend that is payable in common stock. In addition, such a taxable share dividend could be viewed as equivalent to a reduction in QTS’ cash distributions, and that factor, as well as the possibility that a significant number of QTS’ stockholders could determine to sell shares of common stock in order to pay taxes owed on dividends, may put downward pressure on the market price of the QTS’ common stock.

 

Complying with REIT requirements may cause the Operating Partnership to liquidate or forgo otherwise attractive investment opportunities.

 

To qualify as a REIT, we must ensure that, at the end of each calendar quarter, at least 75% of the value of our assets consists of cash, cash items, government securities and “real estate assets” (as defined in the Code), including certain mortgage loans and securities (the “75% asset test”). The remainder of our investments (other than securities includable in the 75% asset test, and securities issued by our TRSs) generally cannot include more than 10% of the outstanding voting securities of any one issuer or more than 10% of the total value of the outstanding securities of any one issuer. In

addition, in general, no more than 5% of the value of our total assets (other than securities includable in the 75% asset test, and securities issued by our TRSs) can consist of the securities of any one issuer no more than 20% (25% for our tax years that began prior to December 31, 2017) of the value of our total assets can be represented by securities of one or more TRS, and debt instruments issued by publicly offered REITs, to the extent not secured by real property or interests in real property, cannot exceed 25% of the value of our total assets. If we fail to comply with these requirements at the end of any calendar quarter, we must correct the failure within 30 days after the end of the calendar quarter or qualify for certain statutory relief provisions to avoid losing our REIT qualification and suffering adverse tax consequences. As a result, the Operating Partnership may be required to liquidate or forgo otherwise attractive investment opportunities. These actions could have the effect of reducing our income and amounts available for distribution to our stockholders and the Operating Partnership’s income and amounts available to service its indebtedness.

 

In addition to the asset tests set forth above, to qualify as a REIT, we must continually satisfy tests concerning, among other things, the sources of our income, the amounts we distribute to our stockholders and the ownership of our stock. The Operating Partnership may be unable to pursue investment opportunities that would be otherwise advantageous to it in order to satisfy the source-of-income or asset-diversification requirements for us to qualify as a REIT. Thus, compliance with the REIT requirements may hinder the Operating Partnership’s ability to make certain attractive investments and, thus, reduce the Operating Partnership’s income and amounts available to service its indebtedness.

 

Our ability to own stock and securities of TRSs is limited and our transactions with our TRSs will cause us to be subject to a 100% penalty tax on certain income or deductions if those transactions are not conducted on arm's-length terms.

 

A REIT may own up to 100% of the stock of one or more TRSs. A TRS may hold assets and earn income that would not be qualifying assets or income if held or earned directly by a REIT. Both the subsidiary and the REIT must jointly elect to treat the subsidiary as a TRS. A corporation of which a TRS directly or indirectly owns more than 35% of the voting power or value of the stock will automatically be treated as a TRS. Overall, no more than 20% of the value of a REIT's assets may consist of stock or securities of one or more TRSs. In addition, the rules applicable to TRSs limit the deductibility of interest paid or accrued by a TRS to its parent REIT to assure that the TRS is subject to an appropriate level of corporate taxation. The rules also impose a 100% excise tax on “redetermined rent,” “redetermined deductions” or “excess interest” to the extent rent paid by a TRS exceeds an arm’s-length amount, and a 100% excise tax on “redetermined TRS service income” (generally, gross income (less deductions allocable thereto) of a TRS attributable to services provided to, or on behalf of, the parent REIT that is less than the amounts that would have been paid by a REIT to the TRSs if based on arm’s length negotiations).

 

Our TRSs will pay U.S. federal, state and local income tax on its taxable income. The after-tax net income of our TRSs will be available for distribution to us but generally is not required to be distributed. We believe that the aggregate value of the stock and securities of our TRSs is less than 20% of the value of our total assets (including the stock and securities of our TRSs). Furthermore, we monitor the value of our respective investments in our TRSs for the purpose of ensuring compliance with the ownership limitations applicable to TRSs. We scrutinize all of our transactions involving our TRSs to ensure that they are entered into on arm's-length terms to avoid incurring the 100% excise tax described above. There can be no assurance, however, that we will be able to comply with the 20% limitation discussed above or avoid application of the 100% excise tax discussed above.

 

Complying with REIT requirements may limit the Operating Partnership’s ability to hedge effectively and may cause QTS and/or QTS’ TRSs to incur tax liabilities.

 

The REIT provisions of the Code substantially limit our ability to hedge our assets and liabilities. Any income from a hedging transaction that the Operating Partnership enters into to manage the risk of interest rate changes with respect to borrowings made or to be made to acquire or carry real estate assets, or manage the risk of certain currency fluctuations, does not constitute “gross income” for purposes of the 75% or 95% gross income tests that apply to REITs, provided that certain identification requirements are met. To the extent that the Operating Partnership enters into other types of hedging transactions or fails to properly identify such transaction as hedges, the income is likely to be treated as non-qualifying income for purposes of both of the gross income tests. As a result of these rules, the Operating Partnership may be required to limit its use of advantageous hedging techniques or implement those hedges through a TRS. This could increase the cost of the Operating Partnership’s hedging activities because a TRS may be subject to tax on gains or expose the Operating Partnership to greater risks associated with changes in interest rates than it would otherwise want

to bear. In addition, losses in a TRS will generally not provide any current tax benefit, except that such losses could be carried back or forward and therefore be applied against past or future taxable income of the TRSs.

 

If the Operating Partnership fails to qualify as a partnership for federal income tax purposes, QTS would fail to qualify as a REIT and suffer other adverse consequences.

 

The Operating Partnership believes that it has been organized and operated in a manner so as to be treated as a partnership, and not an association or publicly traded partnership taxable as a corporation for federal income tax purposes. As a partnership, it is not subject to federal income tax on its income. Instead, each of its partners, including QTS, is allocated that partner’s share of the Operating Partnership’s income. No assurance can be provided, however, that the IRS will not challenge its status as a partnership for federal income tax purposes, or that a court would not sustain such a challenge. If the IRS were successful in treating the Operating Partnership as an association or publicly traded partnership taxable as a corporation for federal income tax purposes, QTS would fail to meet the gross income tests and certain of the asset tests applicable to REITs and, accordingly, would cease to qualify as a REIT, which could adversely affect our ability to raise capital and the Operating Partnership’s ability to service its indebtedness. Also, the failure of the Operating Partnership to qualify as a partnership would cause it to become subject to federal corporate income tax, which would reduce significantly the amount of its cash available for debt service and for distribution to its partners, including QTS. 

 

QTS has a carryover tax basis in respect of certain of its assets acquired in connection with the IPO, and the amount that QTS must distribute to its stockholders therefore may be higher.

 

As a result of the tax-free merger of General Atlantic REIT, Inc. (“GA REIT”) with and into QTS in connection with the IPO, certain of the operating properties, including Atlanta-Metro, Atlanta-Suwanee, Richmond, Santa Clara and Miami, have carryover tax bases that are lower than the fair market values of these properties at the time QTS acquired them in connection with the IPO. As a result of this lower aggregate tax basis, QTS will recognize higher taxable gain upon the sale of these assets, and QTS will be entitled to lower depreciation deductions on these assets than if it had purchased these properties in taxable transactions at the time of the IPO. Lower depreciation deductions and increased gains on sales generally will increase the amount of QTS’ required distribution under the REIT rules.

 

As a result of our formation transactions in connection with QTS’ initial public offering, Quality Technology Services Holding, LLC (“QTS Holdings TRS”) may be limited in using certain tax benefits and, consequently, may have greater taxable income and, thus, the Operating Partnership may have less after-tax cash available to service its indebtedness.

 

If a corporation undergoes an “ownership change” within the meaning of Section 382 of the Code and the Treasury Regulations thereunder, such corporation’s ability to use net operating losses (“NOLs”) generated prior to the time of that ownership change may be limited. To the extent the affected corporation’s ability to use NOLs is limited, such corporation’s taxable income may increase. As of December 31, 2018, QTS had approximately $33.4 million of NOLs (all of which are attributable to QTS Holdings TRS (a TRS of QTS)) that will begin to expire in 20 years if not utilized. In general, an ownership change occurs if one or more large stockholders, known as “5% stockholders,” including groups of stockholders that may be aggregated and treated as a single 5% stockholder, increase their aggregate percentage interest in a corporation by more than 50% over their lowest ownership percentage during the preceding three-year period. We believe that the formation transactions in connection with QTS’ public offering, caused an ownership change within the meaning of Section 382 of the Code with respect to QTS Holdings TRS. Accordingly, to the extent QTS Holdings TRS has taxable income in future years, its ability to use NOLs incurred prior to our formation transactions in connection with QTS’ initial public offering in such future years will be limited, and it will have greater taxable income as a result of such limitation. As a result of those limitations, the Operating Partnership may have less after-tax cash available to service its indebtedness.

 

The new tax law imposed further limits on the deductibility of certain executive compensation expense, which could result in greater taxes for our TRS or the need to increase distributions to our stockholders.

 

Under Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code, a publicly held corporation is generally limited to a $1 million annual tax deduction for compensation paid to each of its “covered employees.”  Prior to the enactment of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (“2018 Tax Law”), a publicly held corporation’s covered employees included its chief executive officer and three other most highly compensated executive officers (other than the chief financial officer), and certain “qualified

performance-based compensation” was excluded from the $1 million deduction limit. As a result of the 2018 Tax Law, which became effective January 1, 2018, the definition of “covered employee” was expanded to include a publicly held corporation’s chief financial officer, and the exception for “qualified performance-based compensation” was repealed, subject to a grandfather rule for compensation paid pursuant to a written, binding contract that was in effect on November 2, 2017, which was not modified in any material respect on or after that date.

 

As a REIT, we are generally not subject to federal income taxes other than through our TRS.  Moreover, the IRS has previously issued private letter rulings holding that, under certain circumstances, Section 162(m) does not apply to compensation paid to employees of a REIT’s operating partnership.  We therefore should not be subject to the Section 162(m) limits with respect to compensation paid by our Operating Partnership or its subsidiaries to the Company’s executive officers for services to our Operating Partnership.  However, if we make compensation payments at the REIT level or if Section 162(m) is deemed to apply to our Operating Partnership or our TRS, we may be required to make additional distributions to stockholders to comply with our REIT distribution requirements and eliminate our U.S. federal income tax liability and a larger portion of stockholder distributions that would otherwise have been treated as a return of capital may be subject to U.S. federal income tax as dividend income as a result of our increased taxable income.  Any such compensation allocated to our taxable REIT subsidiaries, whose income is subject to U.S. federal income tax, would result in an increase in income taxes due to the inability to deduct such compensation.

 

Legislative or other actions affecting REITs could materially and adversely affect us and our investors as well as the Operating Partnership.

 

The rules dealing with federal income taxation are constantly under review by persons involved in the legislative process and by the IRS and the U.S. Department of the Treasury. Changes to the tax laws, with or without retroactive application, could materially and adversely affect us and our stockholders as well as the Operating Partnership. We cannot predict when or if any new federal income tax law, regulation, or administrative interpretation, or any amendment to any existing federal income tax law, regulation or administrative interpretation will be adopted, promulgated or become effective and any such law, regulation, or interpretation may take effect retroactively. New legislation, Treasury Regulations, administrative interpretations or court decisions could significantly and negatively affect our ability to qualify as a REIT or the federal income tax consequences of such qualification. We urge you to consult with your tax advisor with respect to the status of legislative, regulatory or administrative developments and proposals and their potential effect on an investment in our stock. Although REITs generally receive certain tax advantages compared to entities taxed as C corporations, it is possible that future legislation would result in a REIT having fewer tax advantages, and it could become more advantageous for a company that invests in real estate to elect to be treated for U.S. federal income tax purposes as a C corporation.

 

ITEM 1B.             UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

 

None.

 

ITEM 2.               PROPERTIES

 

Our Portfolio

 

We operate a portfolio of 25 data centers located throughout the United States, Canada, Europe and Asia. Within the U.S., we are located in some of the top U.S. data center markets and other high-growth markets. Our data centers are highly specialized, full-service, mission-critical facilities used by our customers to house, power and cool the networking equipment and computer systems that support their most critical business processes.

 

Operating Properties

 

The following table presents an overview of the portfolio of operating properties that we own or lease, referred to herein as our operating properties, based on information as of December 31, 2018.  The table excludes data center development associated with land acquired in Phoenix, AZ and Hillsboro, OR. Additionally, the table excludes the 28 acres purchased in Ashburn, VA in 2017, but includes the 24 acres currently under development in Ashburn. Subsequent to December 31, 2018, the Company entered into a joint venture agreement whereby it contributed the Manassas facility to a 50% owned joint venture. Balances in the following table represent QTS’ full 100% ownership percentage at December 31,

2018, however beginning in the first quarter of 2019 the Company will only report its 50% share of property information related to Manassas.

 

 

*          Subject to long term ground lease.

**        Includes 10 facilities.  All facilities are leased, including those subject to capital leases. During the quarter ended December 31, 2018, the Company exited the Harrisonburg, VA facility.

***      Consists of Miami, FL; Lenexa, KS; Overland Park, KS; and Duluth, GA facilities.

 

Development Pipeline

 

The following table presents an overview of our development pipeline, based on information as of December 31, 2018.

 

 

The table below sets forth our estimated costs for completion of our major development projects currently under construction and expected to be operational by December 31, 2019 (dollars in millions):

 

 

We also own an aggregate of 650 acres of additional available land at our Richmond, Atlanta-Metro, Irving, Princeton, Chicago, Ashburn, Manassas, Atlanta-Suwanee, Fort Worth, Phoenix, and Hillsboro data center properties which can support the development of over 10.3 million additional square feet of raised floor.

 

Customer Diversification  

 

Our portfolio is currently leased to more than 1,100 customers comprised of companies of all sizes representing an array of industries, each with unique and varied business models and needs. The following table sets forth information regarding the 10 largest customers in our portfolio based on annualized rent as of December 31, 2018:

 

 

The following chart shows the breakdown of all our customers by industry based on annualized rent as of December 31, 2018: