Abacus Life (ABL) 10-K/A2023 FY Annual report (amended)

Abacus Life, In. (the “Company”) is filing this Amendment No. 1 on Form 10-K/A (the “Amended 10-K”) to amend the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2023 (the “Original 10-K”), originally filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) on March 21, 2024, to add the Predecessor Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm for the financial statements of Abacus Settlements, LLC, a predecessor of the Company. The Original 10-K inadvertently omitted the Predecessor Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2022. In addition, the financial statements of Abacus Settlements, LLC for the six months ended June 30, 2023 included in the Original 10-K were unaudited. The financial statements of Abacus Settlements. LLC for the six months ended June 30, 2023 included in this Amended 10-K have been audited and are covered by the Predecessor Report of Independent Public Accounting Firm included in this Amended 10-K. This Amended 10-K also makes certain conforming changes and corrects typographical errors.

The Company has attached to this Amended 10-K updated certifications executed as of the date of this Amended 10-K by the Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer as required by Sections 302 and 906 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002. These updated certifications are attached as Exhibits 31.1, 31.2, 32.1, and 32.2 to this Amended 10-K.

Except as described above, no other amendments are being made to the Original 10-K. This Amended 10-K does not reflect events occurring after the filing of the Original 10-K or modify or update the disclosure contained therein in any way other than as required to reflect the amendments discussed above.

We operate within a large, growing and currently underpenetrated market. The face value of all in force U.S. life insurance industry policies is approximately $13 trillion. Historically, more than 90% of life insurance policies in force did not pay a claim. Based on industry forecasts, approximately 75% of policyholders over the age of 65 will either cancel their policies or allow their coverage to lapse, forfeiting the right to ever receive a full payout. The life settlements industry helps solve this problem by allowing policyholders the opportunity to monetize their policies.

The combination of the large U.S. life insurance market and the high percentage of policies that never pay a claim creates a considerable opportunity for Abacus and the broader life settlements industry. Specifically, the scale of the life settlements market opportunity is $233 billion each year. However, in 2021, the life settlements industry only captured $4 billion, or approximately 2% of the annual market of lapsed life insurance policies. We believe there is a significant opportunity to increase this market penetration, primarily by driving awareness and education regarding the ability to monetize life insurance policies by utilizing our services.

Selling a life insurance policy is a valuable transaction and for those consumers who transact, the benefits can be substantial. On average, life settlements companies pay sellers nearly eight times more than the current cash value of a policy. Selling a life insurance policy not only alleviates the requirement for a policyholder to pay premiums but creates a meaningful and immediate monetization event. Sellers use these proceeds in a variety of ways, including to support their retirement, transfer wealth and pay medical bills.

While selling life insurance policies at a fair market value can have significantly positive impacts on a person’s life, it is a mutually beneficial transaction. The underlying life insurance policy is a highly attractive asset that has minimal payout risk and generally uncorrelated returns. The counterparties to these transactions are generally high-quality investment grade insurance companies. In fact, greater than 90% of our carriers have an “A Rating” or better. Additionally, these life insurance policies are cash backed by the carriers, which means they are required to pay policy claims ahead of any other contractual obligation, including senior debt.

In addition to counterparty quality, this is a largely acyclical asset class. A life insurance policy is sometimes described as a “mortality-driven zero-coupon bond” because its underlying value will appreciate over time as it approaches maturity (i.e., as the policyholder ages). This is best demonstrated when comparing our historical risk-adjusted returns relative to other benchmark asset classes.

Our “Origination Process” is core to our entire business and drives our economics. We’re paid a percentage of face value in origination fees on policies and have spent the last 20 years developing three high quality origination channels (financial advisors or agents, direct to consumer and life settlements brokers).

An example of our target market includes policyholders over 75 years old whose insurance need for life insurance is outweighed by the benefit of immediate cash. We then focus our origination process on these

Abacus has a dedicated 90 person origination team with 20 sales members assigned by channel. We intend to continue to fuel origination growth by expanding our team and outreach. In order to drive awareness across all origination channels, we plan to expand our marketing and launch national television advertising campaigns.

A life settlement transaction is the process by which a third-party intermediary acquires an existing life insurance policy for an amount greater than its current cash surrender value. Upon closing of the life settlement transaction, the insured receives an immediate cash payment, and the third-party intermediary receives ownership of the policy. Thus, the third-party intermediary becomes the beneficiary of the insured’s claim payout but is now solely responsible for all future premium payments. Our company functions as this third-party intermediary.

The process of acquiring a policy is highly regulated and policyholder friendly. Unique licenses are mandatory to operate and significant disclosures are required to be made available to consumers. We originate these policies through three distinct channels (i.e., financial advisors / agents, direct-to-consumer and traditional life settlements intermediaries). We first screen each policy to ensure it is eligible for a life settlement, including verifying the policy is in force, obtaining appropriate consents, providing disclosures, and submitting cases for medical underwriting and life expectancy estimates. In connection with this process, we use our proprietary analytics and risk-rating systems to determine an estimated market value for each individual policy.

The Company has established policies and guidelines with respect to its purchase of life insurance policies. These guidelines focus on the age of the insured, the sex of the insured, the duration of the underlying life insurance policy, the expected mortality risk of the underlying life insurance policy, the projected internal rate of return of the investment in the underlying life insurance policy and the amount of the death benefit of the underlying life insurance policy. The Company excludes making investments in life insurance policies based on certain types of the primary health impairment associated with the underlying insured to ensure that all policies are purchased in accordance with established industry standards and state law requirements.

Following the origination, underwriting and valuation processes, we formally present our proposed purchase price to the policyholder or advisor. If agreed upon, the settlement closing process begins. Appropriate closing documents are reviewed by our in-house counsel, and we send funds to an independent escrow agent. Simultaneously, change of ownership and beneficiary documentation is sent to the underlying insurance carrier. Once the changes are confirmed by the carrier, the escrow agent sends the proceeds to the appropriate party, and we become responsible for the underlying insurance policy (i.e., paying premiums and receiving claim). The proceeds from the escrow agent will also include the commission(s) we owe to the broker and / or agent as well as our fee for completing the origination services.

While the transaction is deemed closed, it is important to note that the policy owner may generally rescind the life settlement contract within 30 days from execution of the agreement or 15 days from the receipt of cash proceeds by the owner. As such, revenue is not recorded until this rescission process is over.

Once the transaction is closed, the policy enters our active portfolio management whereby we determine whether a policy should be sold to a third-party institutional investor or held on our balance sheet. In certain cases, we identify a purchaser prior to the close of a transaction, in which case the policy is transferred directly to the purchaser at closing.

With meaningful support from our proprietary risk rating heat map, we consistently evaluate policies (at origination and throughout the lifecycle) to generate essentially uncorrelated risk adjusted returns. Upon acquiring a policy, we have the option to either (i) trade that policy to a third-party institutional investor (i.e., generating a spread on each trade) or (ii) hold that policy on our balance sheet until maturity (i.e., paying the premiums over time and receiving the final claim / payout). This process is predicated on driving the best economics for Abacus.

In addition to generating economics on the policies we directly originate and actively manage, we have a dynamic platform to service bundles of policies for a variety of third-party institutions. We generate revenue by charging a base servicing fee of approximately 0.5% of the total asset value of the portfolio. We have experience servicing a large number of policies for highly sophisticated institutions, including policies for KKR and Apollo. Beyond our fees, servicing policies at scale supports our data analytics and keeps us at the heart of the life settlements industry. We have a sophisticated team of professionals solely focused on servicing these policies.

As described above, there is approximately $200 billion in policy value that lapses on an annual basis. However, the life settlements industry captured only approximately 2% of the potential market in 2021, which leaves significant runway for future growth for industry participants. The total face value of life insurance policies is expected to grow from approximately $6 billion in 2022 to approximately $8 billion in 2028, which is a 5% compounded annual growth rate. Given our position at the heart of the life settlements industry, we believe that we are well positioned to capitalize on this anticipated market growth.

Our ability to originate policies is essential to scale our business over time. In order to support this expected growth, we continue to invest in our technology and marketing infrastructure. In general, we expect our efforts will continue to focus on driving education and awareness of life settlements. In order to meet this growing demand, we have increased our total employee headcount.

Using technology to improve our analytics, market liquidity and velocity of capital use is a key priority. Certain key technology elements are:

We believe that as a publicly traded company, we will have access to a lower cost of capital, which will optimize our per policy revenue and allow us to fund additional investment in infrastructure. Additionally, as discussed in more detail below, access to additional capital will enable us to increase our balance sheet hold portfolio, which we believe may drive higher long-term returns.

As our capital base scales, we have the ability to increase the proportion of policies that we hold on our balance sheet. One of the most obvious benefits to a larger hold portfolio is that it may increase the predictability of returns (i.e., held policies typically increase in value over time, largely independent of trading market conditions). Additionally, with a larger hold portfolio, there is a unique opportunity to begin securitizing policies. In the long-term, we believe securitized portfolios can drive an even lower cost of capital and can be sold in scale to third parties at a significant multiple.

Over the past few years, we managed a $150 million capital base via a joint venture with a large alternative asset manager. This joint venture was terminated on the Closing Date. Under GAAP the financial results of the entire joint venture are not included in our financial statements as the joint venture is not under common control and neither Abacus nor LMA have a direct ownership interest or investment in the joint venture. The financial impacts of the joint venture recognized in the financial statements solely relate to the services provided by Abacus and LMA to the joint venture and are discussed in the respective related party transaction notes in the financial statements.

On August 30, 2022, East Resource Acquisition Company entered into the Merger Agreement with the Merger Subs, pursuant to which, among other things and subject to the terms and conditions contained in the Merger Agreement, Abacus Merger Sub merged with and into Abacus Settlements, with Abacus Settlements surviving the Abacus Merger as a wholly owned subsidiary of East Resource Acquisition Company, and LMA Merger Sub merged with and into LMA, with LMA surviving the LMA Merger as a wholly owned subsidiary of East Resource Acquisition Company. In connection with the Closing of the Merger, East Resource Acquisition Company was renamed Abacus Life, Inc. (the foregoing transaction is referred to as the “Business Combination”).

Pursuant to the terms and subject to the conditions set forth in the Merger Agreement, on June 30, 2023, the Business Combination was consummated.

As of December 31, 2023, we had one hundred two (102) employees, none of whom are subject to any collective bargaining agreement or represented by a labor union. All of our employees are based in the United States. To date, we have not experienced any work stoppages and we consider our employee relations to be good. We believe that our employees are critical to our long-term success, and in 2019, we were ranked a top 3 place to work in Orlando based on employee reviews.

Our business depends, in part, on our ability to develop and maintain the proprietary aspects of its core technology. We rely on trademarks to protect our intellectual property.

We have been issued a federal registration for our “Abacus Settlements”, and “Abacus Life” trademarks. We also hold various domain names for websites that we use in our business. Additionally, we have developed and maintain proprietary software for our internal use to aid in pricing, valuation and risk analysis of life settlement policies.

We are subject to various laws, regulations and licensing requirements in the United States which may expose us to liability, increase costs or have other adverse effects that could harm our business. These laws and regulations include, but are not limited to, data privacy and data localization, healthcare, insurance, copyright or similar laws, anti-spam, consumer protection, employment and taxation. Compliance with such laws can require changes to our business practices and significant management time and effort. Additionally, as we continue to develop and improve consumer-facing products and services, and as those offerings grow in popularity, the risk that additional laws and regulations will impact our business will continue to increase. We believe that we are in material compliance with all such laws, regulations and licensing requirements.

Because we receive, use, transmit, disclose and store personal data, we are subject to numerous state and federal laws and regulations that address privacy, data protection and the collection, storing, sharing, use, transfer, disclosure and protection of certain types of data. We are subject to the TCPA which restricts the making of telemarketing calls and the use of automatic telephone dialing systems. Violators of the TCPA face regulatory enforcement action, substantial civil penalties, injunctions, and in some states, private lawsuits for damages.

Privacy and data security regulation in the U.S. is rapidly evolving. For example, California enacted the California Consumer Privacy Act (“CCPA”), which came into force in 2020. The CCPA and related regulations give California residents expanded rights to access and request deletion of their personal information, opt out of certain personal information sharing and receive detailed information about how their personal information is used and shared. The CCPA allows for the California Attorney General to impose civil penalties for violations, as well as providing a private right of action for certain data breaches. California voters also recently passed the California Privacy Rights Act (“CPRA”), which will take effect on January 1, 2023. The CPRA significantly modifies the CCPA, including by imposing additional obligations on covered companies and expanding California consumers’ rights with respect to certain personal information. The CCPA’s restrictions on “sales” of personal information may restrict our use of cookies and similar technologies for advertising purposes, as well as increasing our compliance costs and potential liability. The CCPA excludes information covered by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, the Driver’s Privacy Protection Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act and the California Financial Information Privacy Act from the CCPA’s scope, but the CCPA’s definition of “personal information” is broad and may encompass other information that we maintain.

The passage of the CCPA likely marked the beginning of a trend toward more stringent privacy legislation in the U.S., and multiple states have enacted or proposed similar laws. For example, in 2020, Nevada enacted SB 220 which restricts the “selling” of personal information and, in 2021, Virginia passed the Consumer Data Protection Act which is set to take effect on January 1, 2023 and creates new privacy rights for Virginia residents. There is also discussion in Congress of new comprehensive federal data protection and privacy law to which we likely would be subject if it is enacted.

Various regulators are interpreting existing state consumer protection laws to impose evolving standards for the online collection, use, dissemination and security of other personal data. Courts may also adopt the standards for fair information practices which concern consumer notice, choice, security and access. Consumer protection laws require us to publish statements that describe how we handle personal information and choices individuals may have about the way we handle their personal data.

Our failure to comply with these privacy laws or regulations could expose us to significant fines and penalties imposed by regulators and has in the past and could in the future expose us to legal claims by buyers, or other relevant stakeholders. Some of these laws, such as the CCPA, permit individual or class action claims for certain alleged violations, increasing the likelihood of such legal claims. Similarly, many of these laws require us to maintain an online privacy policy, terms of service and other informational pages that disclose our practices regarding the collection, processing and disclosure of personal information. If these disclosures contain any information that a court or regulator finds to be inaccurate, we could also be exposed to legal or regulatory liability. Any such proceedings or violations could force us to spend money in defense or settlement of these proceedings, result in the imposition of monetary liability or demanding injunctive relief, divert management’s time and attention, increase our costs of doing business and materially adversely affect our reputation.

We operate as a life settlement producer in forty-nine (49) states. We have a strong track record with each state in which we are licensed and have not had any reportable incidents. Our in-house counsel and compliance staff reviews every life insurance policy we consider acquiring for compliance with applicable state regulations. We file an annual report with each state in which it operates and each state has the ability to request an audit at its discretion. Currently, 42 states have regulations that support the sale of life insurance policies to a third party, like our Company. Each state also has its own policyholder-facing disclosure requirements that we comply with in the ordinary course of its business.

We focus on acquiring and trading non-variable, non-fractionalized life insurance policies. These life insurance policies are deemed to be personal property of the owner based upon the Supreme Court decision Grigsby v. Russell in 1911. Furthermore, non-variable, non-fractionalized life insurance policies are not deemed to be securities under the federal securities laws, and so the Company is not required to register as an investment adviser or an investment company under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, as amended or the Investment Company Act, respectively.

The Company may, in the future, purchase some amount of variable life insurance policies or interests in the death benefit of underlying life insurance policies. The Company has recently acquired a limited purpose broker dealer, which the Company intends to license to engage in transactions for variable and fractionalized life insurance policies. Abacus expects that any transactions in variable or fractionalized life insurance policies will represent less than 20% of the life insurance policies acquired by the Company at any time. The Company does not, and does not in the future intend to, engage in any life insurance securitization.

Our corporate headquarters is located at 2101 Park Center Drive, Orlando, Florida 32835 and our telephone number is 800-561-4148. The headquarters consists of 18,866 square feet of “Class A” office space pursuant to a lease that expires in December 2029. We believe our facilities are adequate and suitable for our current needs and that, should it be needed, suitable additional or alternative space will be available to accommodate our operations.

We are not currently a party to any material legal proceedings. However, in the ordinary course of business we may be subject from time to time to various claims, lawsuits and other legal and administrative proceedings. Some of these claims, lawsuits and other proceedings may involve highly complex issues that are subject to substantial uncertainties, and could result in damages, fines, penalties, non-monetary sanctions or relief. We intend to recognize provisions for claims or pending litigation when we determine that an unfavorable outcome is probable and the amount of loss can be reasonably estimated. Due to the inherent uncertain nature of litigation, the ultimate outcome or actual cost of settlement may materially vary from estimates. Additionally, any such claims, lawsuits and proceedings, whether or not successful, could damage our reputation and business.

Our investor relations website address is https://ir.abacuslife.com/. Our Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K, proxy statements, and any and all amendments thereto are available free of charge through our investor relations website as soon as reasonably practicable after they are filed or furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). These materials are also accessible on the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov.

The valuation of life insurance policies involves inherent uncertainty (including, without limitation, the life expectancies of insureds and future increases in premium costs to keep the policies in force). There is no guarantee that the value determined with respect to a particular life settlement policy by the Company will represent the value that will be realized by the Company on the eventual disposition of the related investment or that would, in fact, be realized upon an immediate disposition of the investment. In addition, there can be no guarantee that such valuation accurately reflects the current present value of such life insurance policy at its actual maturity. Uncertainties as to the valuation of life insurance policies held by the Company could require adjustments to reported net asset values and could have a material adverse impact on the Company’s business. Uncertainties as to the valuation may also result in the Company being less competitive in the market for originating new life settlement policies and could adversely affect the profits the Company realizes on life settlements purchased and sold.

Prices for life insurance policies and annuities that may be obtained by the Company depend, in large measure, upon the life expectancy of the underlying insureds. The returns of the Company’s hold portfolio is almost entirely dependent upon how accurate the actual longevity of an insured is as compared to the Company’s expectation for that insured. Life expectancies are estimates of the expected longevity or mortality of an insured. In determining the life expectancy of an insured, the Company relies on medical underwriting conducted by various medical underwriting firms. The medical underwriting process underlying life expectancy estimates is highly subjective, and mortality and longevity estimates are inherently uncertain. In addition, there can be no assurance that the applicable medical underwriting firm received accurate or complete information regarding the health of an insured under a life insurance policy, or that such insured’s health has not changed since the information was received. Different medical underwriting firms use different methods and may arrive at materially different mortality estimates for the same individual based on the same information, thus causing a life insurance policy’s value to vary. Moreover, as methods of calculating mortality estimates change over time, a mortality estimate prepared by any medical underwriting firm in connection with the acquisition of a life insurance policy may be different from a mortality estimate prepared by the same person at a later time. The valuation of the life insurance policies will vary depending on the dates of the related mortality estimates and the medical underwriting firms that provide the supporting information.

The actual longevity of an insured may be materially different than the predicted mortality estimate. If the actual maturity date of life insurance policies are longer than projected, it would delay when the Company could expect to receive a return on its investment and the Company may be unable to meet its investment objectives and goals. For example, a term life insurance policy in which the Company may invest have a stated expiration date on the date at which the underlying insured reaches a certain attained age and, beyond such date, the issuing insurance company may not be obligated to pay the face value, but rather only the cash surrender value which is usually maintained at a low value by investors, if any, in accordance with the terms of such life insurance policy. Therefore, if the underlying insured survives to the stated maturity date set forth in the terms of the life insurance policy, the issuing insurance company may only be obligated to pay an amount substantially less than the face value, which could have an adverse effect on the performance of the Company.

The medical underwriting and other firms that provide information for the Company’s forecasts of life expectancies are generally not regulated by the U.S. federal or state governments, with the exception of the states of Florida and Texas, which require life expectancy providers to register with their respective offices of insurance regulation. There can be no assurance that this business will not become more broadly regulated and, if so, that any such regulation would not have a material adverse effect on the ability of the Company to establish appropriate life expectancies in connection with the purchase or sale of policies.

The life insurance policy secondary market has grown substantially in the past several years, however, as to whether and how it will continue to develop is uncertain. There are only a limited number of life insurance policies available in the market from time to time. There can be no assurance that the Company will be able to source life insurance policies on terms acceptable to the Company. As more investment funds flow into the market for life insurance policies, margins may be squeezed and the value of the collateral may become comparatively more expensive to purchase or subject to greater competition on the purchase side. There can be no assurance that secondary market life insurance policies will be available to the Company on satisfactory or competitive terms.

The supply of life insurance policies available in the market may be reduced by, among other things: (i) improvement in the economy, resulting in higher investment returns to insureds and other owners of life insurance policies from their investment portfolios; (ii) improvements in health insurance coverage, limiting the need of insureds to obtain funds to pay the cost of their medical treatment by selling their life insurance policies; (iii) the entry into the market of less reputable third-party brokers who submit inaccurate or false life insurance policy information to the Company; (iv) the establishment of new licensing requirements for market participants and a delay in complying or an inability to comply with such new requirements; or (v) refusal of the carrier that issued a life insurance policy to consent to its transfer. A change in the availability of life insurance policies could adversely affect the Company’s ability to execute its strategy and meet its objectives.

Life insurance companies have begun offering to repurchase their own in-force life insurance policies from their current policyholders by offering “enhanced cash surrender value payments” above the amount of the net cash surrender value provided under the life insurance contracts’ terms and thus compete directly with the Company and other life settlement providers. The life settlements industry has challenged the legal validity of the life insurance companies’ actions, and some state insurance regulators have declared that these

In addition, the Company is subject to significant competition from other life settlement brokers and investment funds for the purchase of life settlement policies. Increased competition for life settlement policies may result in the Company being unable to access the number of life settlement policies that it desires for its business at prices that it deems acceptable.

Many regulators, lawmakers and other governmental authorities, as well as many insurance companies and insurance industry organizations, are hostile to or otherwise concerned about certain aspects of the longevity-contingent asset markets. The life settlement industry and some of its participants have also been, and may continue to be, portrayed negatively in a number of widely read publications and other forms of media. These opponents regularly contend that life settlement transactions are contrary to public policy by promoting financial speculation on human life and often involve elements of fraud and other wrongdoing. Continued public opposition to the life settlement industry, as well as actual or alleged wrongdoing by participants in the industry, could have a material adverse effect on the Company and its investors, including on the value and/or liquidity of the Company’s investments.

In March 2010, the American Council of Life Insurers, an insurance carrier trade association, issued a press release calling for a complete ban on life settlement securitization. While that effort was not successful, any such federal or state legislation, if passed, could have the effect of severely limiting or potentially prohibiting the continued operation of the Company’s life settlement purchasing operations. All of the foregoing could adversely affect the Company’s ability to execute its investment strategy and meet its investment objectives.

The Company relies on third party data for tracking and servicing its life settlement policies. This includes the origination and servicing of life settlement policies by the servicing and tracking agent, market counterparties and other service providers, and the Company may not be in a position to verify the risks or reliability of such third-party data and systems. Failures in the systems employed by the Company and other service providers, counterparties, and other parties could result in mistakes made in the evaluation, acquisition, maintenance, tracking and collection of life settlement policies and other longevity-linked investments. This could result in the Company overpaying for life settlement policies it acquires or underpricing life settlement policies it sells. In addition, disruptions in the Company’s operations as a result of a failure in a third party system may cause the Company to suffer, among other things, financial loss, the disruption of its business, liability to third-parties, regulatory intervention or reputational damage. Any of the foregoing failures or disruptions could have a material adverse effect on the Company.

The Company faces the risk that an original owner of a life insurance policy, the related insured, the insurance agent involved in the issuance of such life insurance policy, or other party may have committed

The secondary market for life insurance policies has been subjected to allegations of fraud and misconduct as reflected in certain litigated cases. Some of these cases, some of which have been brought by regulatory authorities, involve allegations of fraud, breaches of fiduciary duty, bid rigging, non-disclosure of material facts and associated misconduct in life settlement transactions. Cases have also been brought by the life insurance companies that challenge the legality of the original issuance of the life insurance policies based on lack of insurable interest, fraud and misrepresentation grounds.

Further, both federal and U.S. state statutes safeguard an insured’s private health information. In addition, insureds frequently have an expectation of confidentiality even if they are not legally entitled to it. Even if the Company properly obtains and uses otherwise private health information, but fails to maintain the confidentiality of such information, the Company may be the subject of complaints from the affected individuals, their families and relatives and, potentially, interested regulatory authorities. Because of the uncertainty of applicable laws, it is not possible to predict the outcome of those disputes. It is also possible that, due to a misunderstanding regarding the scope of consents that a transaction party possesses, the Company may request and receive from health care providers, information that it in fact did not have a right to request or receive. If the Company finds itself to be the recipient of complaints for these acts, it is not possible to predict what the results will be. This uncertainty also increases the likelihood that a transaction party may sell, or cause to be sold, life insurance policies in violation of applicable law, which could potentially result in additional costs related to defending claims or enduring regulatory inquiries, rescinding such transactions, possible legal damages and penalties and probable reduced market value of the affected life insurance policies. Each of the foregoing factors may delay or reduce the return on the policies and adversely affect the Company’s business and results of operations.

The origination and trading in whole, non-variable life insurance policies has historically been understood to not involve transactions in securities. However, on February 22, 2019, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in a case captioned In the Matter of Living Benefits Asset Management, LLC, vs. Kestrel Aircraft Company, Incorporated, case No. 18-10510, concluded that whole, non-variable life insurance policies, when offered for sale to an investor, were securities for purposes of the Investment Company Act. If

On July 22, 2010, the SEC released a staff report that recommended that Congress clearly define life settlements to be securities, so that the investors in life settlements transactions would be protected under the U.S. federal securities laws. To date, the SEC has not made another such recommendation to Congress nor has Congress acted on the SEC staff’s report. If the statutory definitions of “security” were to be amended to encompass life settlements involving non-variable life insurance policies, or if the Supreme Court or other Circuit Courts were to conclude that non-variable life insurance policies are securities for purposes of the Securities Act, the Company could become subject to additional extensive regulatory requirements under the federal securities laws. Those regulatory requirements would include the obligation to register the Company’s sales and offerings of life settlements with the SEC as public offerings under the Securities Act. Also, if the resale of non-variable life insurance policies were to be considered securities, the Company’s ownership of those policies as a percentage of its assets or source of income could be limited as it would likely manage its business to avoid being required to register as an “investment company” pursuant to the Investment Company Act. Those limitations could have an adverse effect on the Company’s business and results of operations. Any legislation or court or regulatory interpretations leading to that regulatory change or a change in the transactions that are characterized as life settlement transactions could lead to significantly increased compliance costs and increased liability risk to the Company, and could adversely affect the Company’s ability to acquire or sell life insurance policies in the future. This could materially and adversely affect the Company’s business, financial condition and results of operations, which in turn could materially and adversely affect the performance of the Company.

The Company cannot assure you as to the ultimate content, timing, or effect of changes, nor is it possible at this time to estimate the impact of any such potential change in administration or new legislation on the Company’s business, financial condition, or results of operations and consequently, any potential material and adverse effect on the performance of the Company.

Certain U.S. state laws specifically characterize life settlements as securities transactions. Thus, in some U.S. states, purchases and sales of life insurance policies by the Company may be subject to applicable U.S. state blue sky laws or other U.S. state securities laws. The Company intends to comply with all applicable federal and state securities laws. However, this will not necessarily exempt the Company from compliance with U.S. federal or state broker-dealer laws. The failure to comply with applicable securities laws in connection with the purchase or sale of life settlement policies could result in the Company being subject to fines, administrative and civil sanctions and rescission of life settlement policy purchase or sales transactions. Each of the foregoing factors could materially and adversely affect the performance of the Company.

The Company relies on data processing systems to price and close transactions, to evaluate investments, to monitor its portfolio and capital, and to generate risk management and other reports that are critical to oversight of the Company’s activities. Further, the Company relies on information systems to store sensitive information about the Company, its affiliates, and its investments, including life settlement policies and information about the related insured individuals and others. While the Company is not aware of security breaches or proceedings related to the processing of information, the loss or improper access, use or disclosure of the Company’s proprietary information can adversely impact the Company. For example, the Company could suffer, among other things, financial loss, the disruption of its business, liability to third parties, regulatory intervention or reputational damage. Any of the foregoing events could have a material adverse effect on the Company.

Additionally, the Company collects information related to life insurance, including nonpublic personal information (“NPI”) and protected health information (“PHI”), and information from its website, such as contact information and high-level policy information. The Company also collects information from its employees, such as standard HR information, and business contact information from third party employees. The Company shares information with its service providers, and has entered into non-disclosure and business association agreements, where appropriate. Although the Company has, and believes that each service provider has, procedures and systems in place that it believes are reasonably designed to protect such information and prevent data loss and security breaches, such measures cannot guarantee absolute security.

Furthermore, the techniques used to obtain unauthorized access to data, disable or degrade service, or sabotage systems change frequently with increasing sophistication and may be difficult to detect for long periods of time. For example, hardware or software acquired from third parties may contain defects in design or other problems that could unexpectedly compromise information security. Network connected services provided by third parties to the Company may be susceptible to compromise, leading to a breach of the Company’s network and/or business interruptions. The Company’s systems or facilities may be susceptible to employee error or malfeasance, government surveillance, or other security threats.

Due to the type of information the Company collects, including personal, medical, and financial information on the underlying insureds, and the nature of its services, the Company is subject to privacy laws. In the United States, federal, state and local governments have enacted numerous data privacy and security laws to address privacy, data protection and collection, and the processing and disclosure of certain types of information. Obligations related to these laws are quickly changing, becoming increasingly stringent and creating regulatory uncertainty. In addition, these obligations may be subject to differing applications and

The Company may be considered a financial institution under the GLBA, and is subject to the GLBA through the NPI it collects. The GLBA regulates, among other things, the use of certain information about individuals (NPI) in the context of the provision of financial services. The GLBA includes both a “Privacy Rule,” which imposes obligations on financial institutions relating to the use or disclosure of NPI, and a “Safeguards Rule,” which imposes obligations on financial institutions, and indirectly, their service providers, to implement and maintain physical, administrative and technological measures to protect the security of NPI.

The Company has certain business components that are subject to HIPAA. HIPAA imposes privacy, security and breach notification obligations on “covered entities” and “business associates.” Furthermore, HIPAA requires “covered entities” and “business associates” to develop and maintain policies with respect to the protection of PHI. If in violation of HIPAA, the Company may be subject to significant civil, criminal and administrative fines and penalties and/or additional reporting and oversight obligations. HIPAA also authorizes state Attorneys Generals to file suit on behalf of their residents. Courts may award damages, costs and attorneys’ fees related to violations of HIPAA in such cases. While HIPAA does not create a private right of action allowing individuals to sue the Company in civil court for violations of HIPAA, its standards have been used as the basis for duty of care in state civil suits such as those for negligence or recklessness in the misuse or breach of PHI.

Because of the complexity of the various data privacy laws the Company may be subject to, compliance can be costly. The Company has taken general steps to comply with data privacy and security laws. For example, the Company has implemented a number of policies, including policies regarding access controls, customer data privacy, secure data disposal, and incident response and risk assessments. Despite these efforts, the Company may at times fail in its efforts due to the complexity and evolving nature of these laws. Failure to comply with relevant data privacy laws could negatively impact the Company’s operations, including subject the Company to possible government enforcement actions which could result in investigations, fines, penalties, audits, inspection, litigation, additional reporting requirements and/or oversight.

The Company is currently licensed and operating in 49 states. Increased regulation (whether promulgated under insurance laws or any other applicable law) and regulatory oversight of and changes in law applicable to life settlements may restrict the ability of the Company to carry on its business as currently conducted. This could also impose additional administrative burdens on the Company, including responding to examinations and other regulatory inquiries and implementing policies and procedures. Regulatory inquiries often are confidential in nature, may involve a review of an individual’s or a firm’s activities or may involve studies of the industry or industry practices, as well as the practices of a particular institution.

There is no direct legal authority regarding the proper U.S. federal income tax treatment of life settlements, and the Company does not plan to request a ruling from the IRS. Consequently, significant aspects of the tax treatment of the Company’s assets are uncertain, and the IRS or a court might not agree with the Company’s treatment of life settlements as prepaid financial contracts that are not debt. If the IRS were successful in asserting an alternative treatment, the tax consequences of ownership and disposition of life settlements could be materially and adversely affected. In addition, in 2007, the U.S. Treasury Department and the IRS released a notice requesting public comments on various issues regarding the U.S. federal income

All states require that the initial purchaser of a new life insurance policy insuring the life of another individual have an insurable interest in that individual’s life at the time of the original issuance of the policy. An “insurable interest” is an economic stake in an event for which a person or entity purchases an insurance policy. An insurance policy may only be initially purchased by a person or entity who has an insurable interest in the insured. For example, if a spouse purchases an insurance policy on his or her spouse or a company purchases an insurance policy on an employee. In addition, some states may require that the Company have an insurable interest in the insured. Whether an insurable interest exists in the context of the purchase of a life insurance policy is critical because in the absence of a valid insurable interest, life insurance policies are unenforceable under the laws of most states. Where a life insurance policy has been issued to a policy holder without an insurable interest in the life of the insured, the life insurance company may not be required to pay the face value under the policy and may also be entitled to retain the premiums paid. Generally, there are two forms of insurable interest in the life of an individual, familial and financial. Additionally, an individual is deemed to have an insurable interest in his or her own life. Insurable interest is determined at the inception of the policy. The definition of exactly what constitutes “insurable interest” tends to vary by state. Some cases have also been initiated by life insurance companies, challenging the legality of the original issuance of policies on insurable interest grounds and asserting that such policies constitute “Stranger-Originated Life Insurance” or “STOLI,” which is defined as a practice or plan to initiate a life insurance policy for a third-party investor who, at the time of policy origination, has no insurable interest in the insured. Some states (such as Utah and New York) permit the heirs and beneficiaries of an insured to recover the face value under such STOLI policies rather than the policy owner which lacked insurable interest.

While the Company does not believe it has invested in any STOLI polices, and has policies and procedures in place to identify potential STOLI policies, there can be no guarantee that the Company will identify all STOLI policies. As such, the Company may acquire certain life insurance policies that may be deemed by an issuing insurance company to be STOLI policies, whether purposefully, if the Company deems such life insurance policy to be an attractive investment even after taking into account the insurable interest risk, or inadvertently, where the true nature of such life insurance policy is not discovered prior to its acquisition by the Company. Should an issuing insurance company successfully challenge the validity of a life insurance policy acquired by the Company, the Company will lose its investment in such life insurance policy. Furthermore, the Company will also suffer losses if a family member of an insured is successful in asserting a claim that he or she, and not the Company, is entitled to the face value payable under a life insurance policy.

In order to realize gains on its investment in life insurance policies, the Company must ensure that the life insurance policies remain in force until they mature or are sold by the Company. Failure by the Company to pay premiums on the life insurance policies when due will result in termination or “lapse” of the life insurance policies and will result in the loss of the Company’s investment in such life insurance policies.

For any life insurance policies that may be obtained by the Company, the Company will be responsible for maintaining the policies, including paying insurance premiums. If a life insurance company increases the cost of insurance charged for any of the life insurance policies held by the Company, the amounts required to be paid for insurance premiums due for these life insurance policies may increase, requiring the Company to incur additional costs for the life insurance policies which may reduce the value of such life insurance policies and consequently affect the returns available on such policies.

In the event an insurance company experiences significantly higher than anticipated expenses associated with operation and/or policy administration, or, in some instances, lower investment returns, the insurance company may have the right to increase the charges to each of its policy owners, but not beyond guaranteed maximums. While the insurance companies did not specify the reason for the increases, it is generally believed that the low interest rate environment was a significant contributing factor in the decision to raise the cost of insurance.

In the ordinary course of its business, the Company engages in the purchase and sale of life insurance policies. The liquidation value of these life insurance policies is important where, for example, it becomes necessary to sell life insurance policies from the Company’s hold portfolio in order to meet the Company’s cash flow needs, including the payment of future premiums.

In many cases liquidations may not be a viable option to meet the Company’s liquidity because of, among other things: (1) the lack of a market for such life insurance policies at the time; (2) the uncertainties surrounding the liquidation value of an individual life insurance policy; (3) the extensive amount of time and effort it might take to sell a life insurance policy; (4) the effect excessive sales of life insurance policies may have on transactions and future cash flows; and (5) the tax consequences.

The Company will assume the credit risk associated with life insurance policies issued by various life insurance companies. The failure or bankruptcy of any such life insurance company could have a material adverse impact on the Company’s ability to achieve its investment objectives. A life insurance company’s business tends to track general economic and market conditions that are beyond its control, including extended economic recessions, interest rate changes, the subprime lending market crisis or changes in investor perceptions regarding the strength of insurers generally and the life insurance policies or annuities they offer. Adverse economic factors and volatility in the financial markets may have a material adverse effect on a life insurance company’s business obligation to pay the face value of policies.

The insolvency of any insurance company or a downgrade in the ratings of an insurance company could have a material adverse impact on the value of the related life insurance policies, the collectability of the related face value, cash surrender value or other amounts agreed to be paid by such insurance company. In the event that a life insurance carrier becomes insolvent or is placed into receivership, most state guaranty associations place a $300,000 or lower cap on face value for policies per insured. In addition to the limitations on the amount of coverage, which vary by state, there are limitations on who may make claims under such

The success of the Company is dependent upon the talents and efforts of highly skilled individuals employed by the Company and the Company’s ability to identify and willingness to provide acceptable compensation to attract, retain and motivate experienced management, talented investment professionals and other employees. Most of the shares registered for sale by the Registration Statement of which this Prospectus is a part are owned by our founders who are also key members of management of the Company.

There can be no assurance that the Company’s management and professionals will continue to be associated with the Company, and the failure to attract or retain such professionals could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s ability to execute on its business plan. Competition in the financial services industry for qualified management and employees is intense and there is no guarantee that, if lost, the talents of the Company’s professionals could be replaced.

To be successful, the Company must protect its technology, know-how and brand through means, such as trademarks, trade secrets, patents, copyrights, service marks, contractual restrictions, and other intellectual property rights and confidentiality procedures. Despite the Company’s efforts to implement these protections, they may not adequately protect its business for a variety of reasons, including:

Litigation may be necessary to enforce the Company’s intellectual property or proprietary rights, protect the Company’s trade secrets, or determine the validity and scope of proprietary rights claimed by others. Any litigation, whether or not resolved in the Company’s favor, could result in significant expense to the Company, and divert the time and efforts of the Company’s technical and management personnel. If the Company is unable to prevent third parties from infringing upon, violating or misappropriating the Company’s intellectual property or is required to incur substantial expenses defending the Company’s intellectual property rights, the Company’s business, financial condition and results of operations may be materially adversely affected.

The Company may in the future become subject to intellectual property disputes. The Company’s success depends, in part, on the Company’s ability to operate without infringing, misappropriating or otherwise violating the intellectual property rights of third parties. However, the Company may not be aware that its practices are infringing, misappropriating or otherwise violating third-party intellectual property rights, and such third parties may bring claims against the Company or its business partners alleging such infringement, misappropriation or violation.

Any claims of intellectual property infringement, even those without merit, may be time-consuming and expensive to resolve, divert management’s time and attention, cause the Company to cease using or incorporating the asserted challenged intellectual property rights expose it to other legal liabilities, or require it to enter into licensing agreements to obtain the right to use a third party’s intellectual property. Although the Company carries general liability insurance, it may not cover potential claims of this type or may not be adequate to indemnify the Company for all liability that may be imposed. The Company cannot predict the outcome of lawsuits and cannot ensure that the results of any such actions will not have an adverse effect on the Company’s business, financial condition, or results of operations.

Even if the claims do not result in litigation or are resolved in the Company’s favor, these claims, and the time and resources necessary to resolve them, could divert the resources of the Company’s management and harm the Company’s business and results of operations.

Detailed descriptions of the changes to internal control over financial reporting as they relate to the material weaknesses are provided in Part II, Item 9A—“Controls and Procedures” of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. If we experience additional material weaknesses in the future or otherwise fail to maintain an effective system of internal controls, we may not be able to accurately or timely report our financial condition or results of operations.

In the future we may discover additional material weaknesses in our system of internal financial and accounting controls and procedures that could result in a material misstatement of our financial statements. Our internal control over financial reporting will not prevent or detect all errors and all fraud. A control system, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that

The trading price of our notes may be volatile. The securities markets have recently experienced extreme volatility. This volatility often has been unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of particular companies. You may not be able to resell your notes at an attractive price due to a number of factors such as the following:

These broad market and industry factors may materially reduce the market price of the notes, regardless of our operating performance. In addition, price volatility may be greater if the public float and trading volume of our notes is low. As a result, you may suffer a loss on your investment.

In the past, following periods of market volatility, stockholders have instituted securities class action litigation. If we were involved in securities litigation, it could have a substantial cost and divert resources and the attention of management from our business regardless of the outcome of such litigation.

The implementation of all required accounting practices and policies and the hiring of additional financial staff has increased and may continue to increase our operating costs and requires our management to devote significant time and resources to such implementation. If we fail to develop and maintain effective internal controls and procedures and disclosure procedures and controls, we may be unable to provide financial information and required SEC reports that are timely and reliable. Any such delays or deficiencies could harm us, including by limiting our ability to obtain financing, either in the public capital markets or from private sources and damaging our reputation, which in either cause could impede our ability to implement our growth strategy. In addition, any such delays or deficiencies could result in our failure to meet the requirements for continued listing of our notes on NASDAQ.

We have funded our operations since inception primarily through our origination, active management and holding of life settlement policies. We cannot be certain when or if our operations will generate sufficient cash to fund our ongoing operations or the growth of our business.

We intend to continue to make investments to support our business and may require additional funds. Additional financing may not be available on favorable terms, if at all. If adequate funds are not available on acceptable terms, we may be unable to invest in future growth opportunities, which could harm our business, operating results and financial condition. If we incur debt, the debt holders could have rights senior to holders of the notes to make claims on our assets.

The Company has a series of warrants outstanding (collectively the “Warrants”), which include: (i) warrants (the “Private Placement Warrants”) originally issued in connection the Company’s initial public offering (the “Company IPO”) to purchase up to 7,120,000 shares of the Company’s common stock, par value $0.0001 per share (the “Common Stock”), issuable upon the exercise, at an exercise price of $11.50 per share; (ii) warrants issued in connection with the Closing of the Business Combination to purchase up to 1,780,000 shares of our Common Stock issuable upon the exercise, at an exercise price of $11.50 per share; (iii) warrants (the “Public Warrants”) issued in connection with the Company IPO to purchase up to 17,250,000 shares of Common Stock, at an exercise price of $11.50 per share, of the public warrants. We receive no capital until the Warrants are exercised, which do not expire until 2028. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources.”

We qualify as an “emerging growth company,” as defined in the JOBS Act. While we remain an emerging growth company, we are permitted and plan to rely on exemptions from certain disclosure requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not emerging growth companies. These provisions include: (1) an exemption from compliance with the auditor attestation requirement in the assessment of our internal control over financial reporting pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, (2) not being required to comply with any requirement that may be adopted by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board regarding mandatory audit firm rotation or a supplement to the auditor’s report providing additional information about the audit and the financial statements, (3) reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation arrangements in our periodic reports, registration statements and proxy statements and (4) exemptions from the requirements of holding a nonbinding advisory vote on executive compensation and stockholder approval of any golden parachute payments not previously approved. As a result, the information we provide will be different than the information that is available with respect to other public companies that are not emerging growth companies. In addition, Section 107 of the JOBS Act provides that an emerging growth company can take advantage of the exemption from complying with new or revised accounting standards provided in Section 7(a)(2)(B) of the Securities Act as long as we are an emerging growth company. An emerging growth company can therefore delay the adoption of certain accounting standards until those standards would otherwise apply to private companies. The JOBS Act provides that a company can elect to opt out of the extended transition period and comply with the requirements that apply to non-emerging growth companies, but any such election to opt out is irrevocable. We have elected to irrevocably opt out of such extended transition period, which means that when a standard is issued or revised and it has different application dates for public or private companies, we will adopt the new or revised standard at the time public companies adopt the new or revised standard. This may make comparison of our financial statements with another emerging growth company that has not opted out of using the extended transition period difficult or impossible because of the potential differences in accounting standards used.

We cannot predict whether investors will find our securities less attractive if we rely on these exemptions. If some investors find our securities less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our securities. The market price of our securities may be more volatile.

Our executive officers have limited experience in the management of a publicly traded company. Our management team may not successfully or effectively manage its transition to a public company that will be subject to significant regulatory oversight and reporting obligations under federal securities laws. Their limited experience in dealing with the increasingly complex laws pertaining to public companies could be a disadvantage in that it is likely that an increasing amount of their time may be devoted to these activities which will result in less time being devoted to the management and growth of the Company. We may not have adequate personnel with the appropriate level of knowledge, experience and training in the accounting policies, practices or internal controls over financial reporting required of public companies in the United States. The development and implementation of the standards and controls necessary for the Company to achieve the level of accounting standards required of a public company in the United States may require costs greater than expected. It is possible that the Company will be required to expand its employee base and hire additional employees to support its operations as a public company which will increase its operating costs in future periods.