Exhibit 99.2

 

In connection with the proposed private offering (the “Offering”) by PennyMac Financial Services, Inc. (“we,” “our” or “us”) of $500 million aggregate principal amount of senior notes due 2029 on February 8, 2021, we included the following (1) Risk Factor disclosure, in addition to certain Risk Factors related to the Notes, our indebtedness and our preliminary financial results for the fourth quarter 2020, and (2) updated Legal Proceedings disclosure, in each case, in the offering memorandum related to the Offering.

 

1. Risk Factors

 

The risks described below are not the only risks that we face. Additional risks not presently known to us or that we currently deem immaterial may also materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations in future periods.

 

Risks Related to Our Mortgage Banking Segment

 

Regulatory Risks

 

Our business, financial condition and results of operations may be adversely affected by the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

 

The COVID-19 pandemic has created unprecedented economic, financial and public health disruptions that have adversely affected, and are likely to continue to adversely affect, our business, financial condition and results of operations. The extent to which COVID-19 continues to negatively affect our business, financial condition and results of operations will depend on future developments, which are highly uncertain and cannot be predicted, including the scope and duration of the pandemic and actions taken by governmental authorities and other third parties in response to COVID-19.

 

The federal government enacted the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act (the “CARES Act”), which allows borrowers with federally-backed loans to request temporary payment forbearance in response to the increased borrower hardships resulting from the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. The initial forbearance period was up to 180 days, subject to an additional extension of up to 180 days, however, it is possible that this forbearance period may be extended in the future. As a result of the CARES Act forbearance requirements, we expect to experience continued elevated delinquencies in our servicing portfolio that may require us to finance substantial amounts of advances of principal and interest payments to the investors holding those loans, as well as advances of property taxes, insurance premiums and other expenses to protect investors’ interests in the properties securing the loans. In fiscal year 2020, elevated prepayment activity was sufficient to cover principal and interest payment advances required under the CARES Act, however, in the future elevated prepayment activity may be insufficient to cover required principal and interest advances. We also expect the effects of the CARES Act forbearance requirements to reduce our servicing fee income and increase our servicing expenses due to the increased number of delinquent loans, significant levels of forbearance that we have granted and continue to grant, as well as the resolution of loans that we expect to ultimately default as the result of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Future servicing advances will be driven by the number of borrower delinquencies, including those resulting from payment forbearance; the amount of time borrowers remain delinquent; and the level of successful resolution of delinquent payments, all of which will be impacted by the pace at which the economy recovers from the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. As of December 31, 2020, 7.2% of loans in our predominantly government-insured or guaranteed mortgage servicing rights (“MSRs”) portfolio were in forbearance plans and delinquent resulting in an increase in the level of servicing advances we have been required to make due to borrower delinquencies. Servicing advances resulting from COVID-19 could have a significant adverse impact on our cash flows and could also have a detrimental effect on our business and financial condition.

 

 

Financial markets have experienced substantial volatility and reduced liquidity, resulting in unprecedented federal government intervention to lower the federal funds rate to near zero and support market liquidity by purchasing assets in many financial markets, including the mortgage-backed securities market. The CARES Act forbearance requirements and the decline in interest rates have negatively impacted the fair value of our servicing assets. In addition, the CARES Act forbearance requirements and the decline in the value of financial assets linked to consumer credit performance in early 2020 caused PennyMac Mortgage Investment Trust, a mortgage real estate investment trust, externally managed by PCM and its operating subsidiaries (collectively, “PMT”), to report material losses and negatively affected PMT's shareholders' equity and net assets under management.  Consequently, we experienced a reduction in our base management fees from PMT in fiscal year 2020. Further market volatility or economic weakness may result in additional declines in the value of our servicing assets, lower base management fees and make it increasingly difficult in optimizing our hedging activities. Also, our liquidity and/or regulatory capital could be adversely impacted by volatility and disruptions in the capital and credit markets. In addition, if we fail to meet or satisfy any of the covenants in our repurchase agreements or other financing arrangements as a result of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, we would be in default under these agreements, which could result in a cross-default or cross-acceleration under other financing arrangements, and our lenders could elect to declare outstanding amounts due and payable (or such amounts may automatically become due and payable), terminate their commitments, require the posting of additional collateral and enforce their respective interests against existing collateral.

 

We may also have difficulty accessing debt and equity capital on attractive terms, or at all, as a result of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, which may adversely affect our access to capital necessary to fund our operations or address maturing liabilities on a timely basis. This includes renewals of our existing credit facilities with our lenders who may be adversely impacted by the volatility and dislocations in the financial markets and may not be willing or able to continue to extend us credit on the same terms, or on favorable terms, or at all.

 

In addition, our business could be disrupted if we are unable to operate due to changing governmental restrictions such as travel bans and quarantines placed or reinstituted on our employees or operations, including, successfully operating our business from remote locations, ensuring the protection of our employees’ health and maintaining our information technology infrastructure. 

 

Federal, state, and local executive, legislative and regulatory responses to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic are rapidly evolving and Federal, state and local rules may be inconsistent and conflict in scope or application, and may be subject to change without advance notice. These regulatory responses may impose additional compliance obligations, may extend existing CARES Act forbearance requirements and delay our licensing efforts, which may negatively impact our business. In addition, the CARES Act and other federal, state and local regulations are subject to interpretation given the existing ambiguities in the rules and regulations, which may result in future class action and other litigation risk.

 

Governmental authorities have taken additional measures to stabilize the financial markets and support the economy including providing monetary relief and extending foreclosure and eviction moratoria. The outcome of these measures are unknown and they may not be sufficient to address future market dislocations or avert severe and prolonged reductions in economic activity. We may also face increased risks of disputes with our business partners, litigation and governmental and regulatory scrutiny as a result of the effects of COVID-19. The scope and duration of COVID-19 and the efficacy of the extraordinary measures put in place to address it are currently unknown. Even after COVID-19 subsides, the economy may not fully recover for some time and we may be materially and adversely affected by a prolonged recession or economic downturn.

 

To the extent the COVID-19 pandemic adversely affects our business, financial condition and results of operations, it may also have the effect of heightening many of the other risks described in this Exhibit 99.2.

 

Failure to successfully modify, resell or refinance early buyout loans or if a significant portion of the early buyout loans default may adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

 The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has significantly increased the number of the Government National Mortgage Association (“Ginnie Mae”) loans that are seriously delinquent in our Ginnie Mae MSR portfolio.  As a mortgage servicer, we have an early buyout repurchase option (“EBOs”) for loans at least three months delinquent in our Ginnie Mae MSR portfolio. During the year ended December 31, 2020, we have repurchased $7.6 billion delinquent Ginnie Mae loans from our Ginnie Mae MSR portfolio. Purchasing delinquent Ginnie Mae loans provides us with an alternative to our mortgage servicing obligation of advancing principal and interest at the coupon rate of the related Ginnie Mae security. While our EBO program reduces the cost of servicing the Ginnie Mae loans, it also accelerates loss recognition when the loans are repurchased because we are required to write off accumulated non-reimbursable interest advances and other costs. In addition, after purchasing the delinquent Ginnie Mae loans, we expect to re-securitize many of the delinquent loans into another Ginnie Mae guaranteed security upon the delinquent loans becoming current either through the borrower’s reperformance or through the completion of a loan modification; however, there is no guarantee that any delinquent loan will reperform or be modified. The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic as well as changing government regulations, including Ginnie Mae’s 2020 regulations requiring reperforming loan borrowers to make six months of timely payments in certain circumstances before a loan can be repooled into another Ginnie Mae guaranteed security, has made estimating the loan amounts expected to be modified, resold or refinanced more difficult.  Failure to successfully modify, resell or refinance our repurchased Ginnie Mae loans or the default of a significant portion of the repurchased Ginnie Mae loans may adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

 

We operate in a highly regulated industry and the continually changing federal, state and local laws and regulations could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

We are required to comply with a wide array of federal, state and local laws and regulations that regulate, among other things, the manner in which we conduct our businesses. These regulations directly impact our business and require constant compliance, monitoring and internal and external audits and examinations by federal and state regulators. Our failure to operate effectively and in compliance with any of these laws, regulations and rules could subject us to lawsuits or governmental actions and damage our reputation, which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations. In addition, our failure to comply with these laws, regulations and rules may result in increased costs of doing business, reduced payments by borrowers, modification of the original terms of mortgage loans, permanent forgiveness of debt, delays in the foreclosure process, increased servicing advances, litigation, reputational damage, enforcement actions, and repurchase and indemnification obligations. Further, we may be required to pay substantial penalties imposed by our regulators due to compliance errors, or we may lose our licenses to originate and/or service loans.

 

The failure of our correspondent sellers to comply with any applicable laws, regulations and rules may also result in these adverse consequences. We have in place a due diligence program designed to assess areas of risk with respect to loans we acquire from such correspondent sellers. However, we may not detect every violation of law and, to the extent any correspondent sellers, third party originators, servicers or brokers with whom we do business fail to comply with applicable laws or regulations and any of their mortgage loans or MSRs become part of our assets, it could subject us, as an assignee or purchaser of the related mortgage loans or MSRs, to monetary penalties or other losses. While we may have contractual rights to seek indemnity or repurchase from certain of these lenders, third party originators, servicers or brokers, if any of them are unable to fulfill their indemnity or repurchase obligations to us to a material extent, our business, liquidity, financial condition and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected. Our service providers and other vendors are also required to operate in compliance with applicable laws, regulations and rules. Our failure to adequately manage service providers and other vendors to mitigate risks of noncompliance with applicable laws may also have these negative results.

 

The recent outcome of the 2020 U.S. Presidential and Congressional elections could result in significant policy changes or regulatory uncertainty in our industry and may also result in increased regulatory scrutiny and enforcement actions. While it is not possible to predict when and whether significant policy or regulatory changes would occur, any such changes on the federal, state or local level could significantly impact, among other things, our operating expenses, the availability of mortgage financing, interest rates, consumer spending, the economy and the geopolitical landscape. To the extent that the new government administration takes action by proposing and/or passing regulatory policies that could have a negative impact on our industry, such actions may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

 

 

The Financial Stability Oversight Council (“FSOC”) and Conference of State Bank Supervisors (“CSBS”) have been reviewing whether state chartered nonbank mortgage servicers should be subject to "safety and soundness" standards similar to those imposed by federal law on insured depository institutions, even though nonbank mortgage servicers do not have any federally insured deposit accounts. For example, on September 29, 2020, the CSBS released proposed prudential standards for state oversight of nonbank mortgage servicers. The proposed CSBS prudential standards would include revised minimum net worth, capital ratio and liquidity standards similar to existing FHFA requirements and would require servicers to maintain sufficient allowable assets to cover normal operating expenses in addition to the amounts required for servicing expenses. In addition, the FSOC has encouraged state regulators to work to develop prudential and corporate governance standards for nonbank mortgage servicers and has issued guidance describing the process FSOC would follow if it were to consider making a determination to subject a nonbank financial company to supervision by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and prudential standards. To the extent any such state regulators impose new minimum net worth, capital ratio and liquidity standards that are overly burdensome, such actions may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

 

New Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) or state rules and regulations or more stringent enforcement of existing rules and regulations by the CFPB or state regulators could result in enforcement actions, fines, penalties and the inherent reputational risk that results from such actions.

 

The CFPB has regulatory authority over certain aspects of our business as a result of our residential mortgage banking activities, including, without limitation, the authority to conduct investigations, bring enforcement actions, impose monetary penalties, require remediation of practices, pursue administrative proceedings or litigation, and obtain cease and desist orders for violations of applicable federal consumer financial laws. Although there was a decline in enforcement actions by the CFPB under the prior federal administration, examinations by state regulators and enforcement actions in the residential mortgage and servicing sectors by state attorneys general have increased and may continue to increase under the incoming new administration. Failure to comply with the CFPB and state laws, rules or regulations to which we are subject, whether actual or alleged, could have a material adverse effect on our business, liquidity, financial condition and results of operations.

 

Our failure to comply with the laws, rules or regulations to which we are subject, whether actual or alleged, would expose us to fines, penalties or potential litigation liabilities, including costs, settlements and judgments, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, liquidity, financial condition and results of operations and our ability to make distributions to our shareholders.

 

We are highly dependent on U.S. government-sponsored entities and government agencies, and any changes in these entities, their current roles or the leadership at such entities or their regulators could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

Our ability to generate revenues through mortgage loan sales depends on programs administered by GSEs, such as Federal National Mortgage Association (“Fannie Mae”) and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (“Freddie Mac”), government agencies, including Ginnie Mae, and others that facilitate the issuance of mortgage-backed securities (“MBS”), in the secondary market. Presently, almost all of the newly originated loans that we originate directly with borrowers or assist PMT in acquiring from mortgage lenders through our correspondent production activities qualify under existing standards for inclusion in MBS issued by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac or guaranteed by Ginnie Mae. We, or PMT, also derive other material financial benefits from our relationships with Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Ginnie Mae, the Federal Housing Administration (“FHA”), the Veterans Administration (“VA”) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (collectively, the “Agencies”) and the ability to avoid certain loan inventory finance costs through streamlined loan funding and sale procedures.

 

A number of legislative proposals have been introduced in recent years that would wind down or phase out the GSEs, including a proposal by the prior federal administration to end the conservatorship and privatize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. On November 18, 2020 the FHFA finalized new regulatory capital rules for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that requires them to increase their capital to $280 billion. FHFA did not specify how the new regulatory capital requirements will be achieved or a timeframe for meeting the capital target, however, any increase in guaranty fees or other costs imposed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to raise additional capital may have a negative impact on the mortgage market and could reduce Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac’s future role in the mortgage industry. It is not possible to predict the scope and nature of the actions that the U.S. government, including the new federal administration, will ultimately take with respect to the GSEs. Any changes in laws and regulations affecting the relationship between Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and their regulators or the U.S. federal government, and any changes in leadership at these entities, could adversely affect our business and prospects. Any discontinuation of, or significant reduction in, the operation of Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac or any significant adverse change in their capital structure, financial condition, activity levels in the primary or secondary mortgage markets or in underwriting criteria could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations and our ability to make distributions to our shareholders.

 

 

Elimination of the traditional roles of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, or any changes to the nature or extent of the guarantees provided by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac or the fees, terms and guidelines that govern our selling and servicing relationships with them, could also materially and adversely affect our ability to sell and securitize loans through our loan production segment, and the performance, liquidity and market value of our investments. Our ability to generate revenues from newly originated loans that we assist PMT in acquiring through its correspondent production business would be similarly affected. Moreover, any changes to the nature of the GSEs or their guarantee obligations could redefine what constitutes an Agency MBS and could have broad adverse implications for the market and our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

Our ability to generate revenues from newly originated loans that we assist PMT in acquiring through its correspondent production business is also highly dependent on the fact that the Agencies have not historically acquired such loans directly from mortgage lenders, but have instead relied on banks and non-bank aggregators such as us to acquire, aggregate and securitize or otherwise sell such loans to investors in the secondary market. Certain of the Agencies have approved new and smaller lenders that traditionally may not have qualified for such approvals. To the extent that these mortgage lenders choose to sell directly to the Agencies rather than through loan aggregators like us, the number of loans available for purchase by aggregators is reduced, which could materially and adversely affect our business and results of operations. Similarly, to the extent the Agencies increase the number of purchases and sales for their own accounts, our business and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected.

 

Our business prospects, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations could be adversely impacted by the CFPB’s final General Qualified Mortgage (“QM”) loan rule for certain GSE eligible loans and its impact on the ability to repay rules.

 

The Dodd-Frank Act provides that a lender must make “a reasonable, good faith determination” of each borrower’s ability to repay a loan, but may presume that a borrower will be able to repay a loan if such loan has certain characteristics that meet the QM definition. The CFPB adopted its QM definition that establishes rigorous underwriting and product feature requirements for a loan to be deemed a QM. Within those regulations, the CFPB created a special exemption for the GSEs that is generally referred to as the “QM patch,” which allows any GSE-eligible loan to be deemed a QM. The QM patch effectively provides QM designation for GSE eligible loans that have a debt-to-income ratio in excess of 43%, which represents a meaningful portion of the loans currently purchased by the GSEs. Without the QM patch or an alternative, loans with debt-to-income ratios above 43% would not be designated as QMs unless they were insured by a federal agency such as the FHA or VA, which have each adopted their own QM definition that does not currently have a debt-to-income ratio limitation. In October 2020, the CFPB issued a rule providing that the QM patch will expire on the earlier of the implementation of a final amendment revising the “General QM loan” definition or upon the date that the GSEs exit conservatorship. On December 11, 2020, the CFPB issued final General QM loan rules replacing the debt-to-income ratio limitations with a price-based approach that may have significant implications for the U.S. housing and mortgage market since we do not know how the credit markets and borrowers will respond to the new regulations. Failure to establish effective operational procedures to comply with the final General QM loan rules could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

We are required to hold various Agency approvals in order to conduct our business and there is no assurance that we will be able to obtain or maintain those Agency approvals or that changes in Agency guidelines will not materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

We are required to hold certain Agency approvals in order to sell mortgage loans to the Agencies and service such mortgage loans on their behalf. Our failure to satisfy the various requirements necessary to obtain and maintain such Agency approvals over time would restrict our direct business activities and could materially and adversely impact our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

We are also required to follow specific guidelines that impact the way that we originate and service Agency loans. A significant change in these guidelines that has the effect of decreasing the fees we charge or requires us to expend additional resources in providing mortgage services could decrease our revenues or increase our costs, which would also adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

 

In addition, the FHFA has directed the GSEs to align their guidelines for servicing delinquent mortgages and assess compensatory penalties against servicers in connection with the failure to meet specified timelines relating to delinquent loans and foreclosure proceedings, and other breaches of servicing obligations. Our failure to operate efficiently and effectively within the prevailing regulatory framework and in accordance with the applicable origination and servicing guidelines and/or the loss of our seller/servicer license approval or approved issuer status with the Agencies could result in our failure to benefit from available monetary incentives and/or expose us to monetary penalties and curtailments, all of which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

Our inability to meet certain net worth and liquidity requirements imposed by the Agencies could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operation.

 

We are subject to minimum financial eligibility requirements established by the Agencies. These minimum financial requirements include net worth, capital ratio and/or liquidity criteria in order to set a minimum level of capital needed to adequately absorb potential losses and a minimum amount of liquidity needed to service Agency mortgage loans and MBS and cover the associated financial obligations and risks.

 

In order to meet these minimum financial requirements, we are required to maintain cash and cash equivalents in amounts that may adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations, which could significantly impede us from growing our business and place us at a competitive disadvantage in relation to federally chartered banks and certain other financial institutions. To the extent that such minimum financial requirements are not met, the Agencies may suspend or terminate our Agency approvals or agreements, which could cause us to cross default under financing arrangements and/or have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition liquidity and results of operations.

 

The failure of PennyMac Loan Services, LLC to avail itself of an appropriate exemption from registration as an investment company under the Investment Company Act of 1940 could have a material and adverse effect on our business.

 

We intend to operate so that we, and each of our subsidiaries, are not required to register as investment companies under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended, or the Investment Company Act. We believe that our subsidiary, PennyMac Loan Services, LLC (“PLS”), qualifies for one or more exemptions provided in the Investment Company Act because of the historical and current composition of its assets and income; however, there can be no assurances that the composition of PLS’ assets and income will remain the same over time such that one or more exemptions will continue to be applicable.

 

If PLS is required to register as an investment company, we would be required to comply with a variety of substantive requirements under the Investment Company Act that impose, among other things: limitations on capital structure; restrictions on specified investments; prohibitions on transactions with affiliates; compliance with reporting, record keeping, voting and proxy disclosure; and, other rules and regulations that would significantly increase our operating expenses. Further, if PLS was or is required to register as an investment company, PLS would be in breach of various representations and warranties contained in its credit and other agreements resulting in a default as to certain of our contracts and obligations. This could also subject us to civil or criminal actions or regulatory proceedings, or result in a court appointed receiver to take control of us and liquidate our business, any or all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

Liability relating to environmental matters may impact the value of properties that we may acquire or the properties underlying our investments.

 

Under various U.S. federal, state and local laws, an owner or operator of real property may become liable for the costs of removal of certain hazardous substances released on its property. These laws often impose liability without regard to whether the owner or operator was responsible for, or aware of, the release of such hazardous substances. The presence of hazardous substances may also adversely affect an owner’s ability to sell real estate, borrow using real estate as collateral or make debt payments to us. In addition, if we take title to a property, the presence of hazardous substances may adversely affect our ability to sell the property, and we may become liable to a governmental entity or to third parties for various fines, damages or remediation costs. Any of these liabilities or events may materially and adversely affect the fair value of the relevant asset and/or our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

 

Market and Financial Risks

 

Our mortgage banking revenues are highly dependent on macroeconomic factors and United States real estate market, mortgage market and financial market conditions.

 

The success of our business strategies and our results of operations are materially affected by current or future conditions in the real estate market, mortgage markets, financial markets and the economy generally. Factors such as the COVID-19 pandemic, inflation, deflation, unemployment, personal and business income taxes, healthcare, energy costs, domestic political issues, government shutdowns, climate change and the availability and cost of credit may contribute to increased volatility and unclear expectations for the economy in general and the real estate, mortgage market and financial markets in particular going forward. A destabilization of the real estate market, mortgage market and financial markets or deterioration in these markets also could reduce our loan production volume, reduce the profitability of servicing mortgages or adversely affect our ability to sell mortgage loans that we originate or acquire, either at a profit or at all. Any of the foregoing could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

We may not be able to effectively manage significant increases or decreases in our loan production volume, which could negatively affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

We may experience significant growth in our loan production volumes. If we do not effectively manage our growth and are unable to consistently maintain quality of execution, our reputation and existing relationships with mortgage lenders and brokers could be damaged, we may not be able to maintain PMT’s existing relationships or develop new relationships with mortgage lenders and brokers, our new mortgage products may not gain widespread acceptance and the quality of our correspondent production, consumer direct lending and broker direct lending operations could suffer, all of which could negatively affect our brand and operating results.

 

Our loan production segment is also subject to overall market factors that could adversely impact our ability to grow our loan production volume. For example, increased competition from new and existing market participants, reductions in the overall level of refinancing activity or slow growth in the level of new home purchase activity can impact our ability to continue to grow our loan production volumes, and we may be forced to accept lower margins in our respective businesses in order to continue to compete and keep our volume of activity consistent with past or projected levels, or be forced to reduce our levels of production activity.

 

We have a substantial amount of indebtedness, which may limit our financial and operating activities, expose us to substantial increases in costs due to interest rate fluctuations, expose us to the risk of default under our debt obligations and may adversely affect our ability to incur additional debt to fund future needs.

 

As of September 30, 2020, after giving effect to the issuance of $150 million principal amount of Existing Notes that occurred on October 19, 2020 and the issuance of $500 million aggregate principal amount of notes in the Offering and the use of the net proceeds therefrom (assuming we use such net proceeds to repay our existing secured warehouse borrowings), we would have had $9.7 billion of total indebtedness outstanding (approximately $8.6 billion of which would have been secured). In addition, as of September 30, 2020, after giving effect to the issuance of $150 million principal amount of Existing Notes that occurred on October 19, 2020 and the issuance of $500 million aggregate principal amount of notes in the Offering and the use of the net proceeds therefrom (assuming we use such net proceeds to repay our existing secured warehouse borrowings), we would have had up to $3.6 billion of additional capacity under our secured borrowings and other secured debt financing arrangements. There can be no assurances that the notes offered in the Offering will be issued, and if they are issued that we will use the net proceeds therefrom to repay our existing secured warehouse borrowings. This substantial indebtedness and any future indebtedness we incur could have adverse consequences and, for example, could:

 

 

	·	require us to dedicate a substantial portion of cash flow from operations to the payment of principal and interest on indebtedness, including indebtedness we may incur in the future, thereby reducing the funds available for operations, capital expenditures and other general corporate purposes;
	·	make it more difficult for us to satisfy our obligations with respect to our indebtedness, and any failure to comply with the obligations of any of our debt instruments, including any financial and other restrictive covenants, could result in an event of default under the indenture governing the Existing Notes or, if issued, the notes offered in the Offering or under the agreements governing our other indebtedness which, if not cured or waived, could result in the acceleration of our indebtedness under our other debt instruments, the Existing Notes or, if issued, the notes offered in the Offering;
	·	subject us to increased sensitivity to interest rate increases;
	·	make us more vulnerable to economic downturns, adverse industry conditions or catastrophic external events, including the COVID-19 pandemic;
	·	limit our ability to withstand competitive pressures;
	·	reduce our flexibility in planning for or responding to changing business, industry and economic conditions or restrict our ability to carry on activities important to our growth; and/or
	·	place us at a competitive disadvantage to competitors that have relatively less debt than we have.

 

In addition, borrowings under our existing financing facilities will and our other future borrowings may bear interest at variable rates. If interest rates increase significantly, our ability to borrow additional funds may be reduced, our debt service obligations will increase and the risk related to our indebtedness would intensify. The increase in debt service obligations could adversely affect our cash flow.

 

In addition, our substantial level of indebtedness could limit our ability to obtain additional financing on acceptable terms, or at all, for working capital and general corporate purposes. Our liquidity needs could vary significantly from time to time and may be affected by general economic conditions, industry trends, performance and many other factors outside of our control.

 

We rely on external financial arrangements to fund mortgage loans and operate our business and our inability to refinance or enter new financial arrangements could be detrimental to our business.

 

Our ability to finance our business operations and repay maturing obligations rests in large part on our ability to borrow money. Unlike some of our competitors who fund mortgage loans through bank deposits, we generally fund our mortgage loans through borrowings under warehouse facilities and other financial arrangements as well as funds from our operations. Our borrowings are generally repaid with the proceeds we receive from mortgage loan sales. We require new and continued financing to facilitate our anticipated growth. We are generally required to renew many of our financing arrangements each year, which exposes us to refinancing and interest rate risks. Our ability to refinance our existing financial obligations and borrow additional funds is affected by a variety of factors beyond our control including:

 

 

·

limitations imposed on us under our financing agreements that contain restrictive covenants and borrowing conditions, which may limit our ability to raise additional debt;

 

 

·

restrictions imposed upon us by regulatory agencies that mandate certain minimum capital and liquidity requirements and additional scrutiny from such regulatory agencies;

 

·

liquidity in the credit markets;

·

prevailing interest rates;

·

the strength of the lenders from which we borrow, and the regulatory environment in which they operate, including proposed capital strengthening requirements;

·

limitations on borrowings on credit facilities imposed by the amount of eligible collateral pledged, which may be less than the borrowing capacity of the credit facility; and

·

accounting changes that may impact calculations of covenants in our debt agreements.

 

We are also dependent on a limited number of banking institutions that extend us credit on terms that we have determined to be commercially reasonable. These banking institutions are subject to their own regulatory supervision, liquidity and capital requirements, risk management frameworks, profitability and risk thresholds and tolerances, any of which may change materially and negatively impact their business strategies, including their extension of credit to us specifically or mortgage lenders and servicers generally. Certain banking institutions have already exited, and others may in the future decide to exit, the mortgage business. Such actions may increase our cost of capital and limit or otherwise eliminate our access to capital, in which case our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations would be materially and adversely affected.

 

In the event that any of our financial arrangements is terminated or is not renewed, or if the principal amount that may be drawn under our funding agreements that provide for immediate funding at closing were to significantly decrease, we may be unable to find replacement financing on commercially favorable terms, or at all, which could be detrimental to our business.

 

We leverage our assets under credit and other financing agreements and utilize various other sources of borrowings, which exposes us to significant risk and may materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

We currently leverage and, to the extent available, we intend to continue to leverage the mortgage loans produced through our consumer and broker direct lending businesses and the government-insured loans acquired through our correspondent production activities from PMT with borrowings under repurchase agreements. When we enter into repurchase agreements, we sell mortgage loans to lenders, which are the repurchase agreement counterparties, and receive cash from the lenders. The lenders are obligated to resell the same assets back to us at the end of the term of the transaction. Because the cash that we receive from a lender when we initially sell the assets to that lender is less than the fair value of those assets (this difference is referred to as the haircut), if the lender defaults on its obligation to resell the same assets back to us we could incur a loss on the transaction equal to the amount of the haircut (assuming that there was no change in the fair value of the assets). In addition, repurchase agreements generally allow the counterparties, to varying degrees, to determine a new fair value of the collateral to reflect current market conditions. If a counterparty lender determines that the fair value of the collateral has decreased, it may initiate a margin call and require us to either post additional collateral to cover such decrease or repay a portion of the outstanding borrowing. Should this occur, in order to obtain cash to satisfy a margin call, we may be required to liquidate assets at a disadvantageous time, which could cause us to incur further losses. If we are unable to satisfy a margin call, our counterparty may sell the collateral, which may result in significant losses to us.

 

 

In addition, we invest in certain assets, including MSRs and EBOs, for which financing has historically been difficult to obtain. We currently leverage certain of our MSRs and EBOs under secured financing arrangements. Our Fannie Mae MSRs are pledged to secure borrowings under a master repurchase agreement and our and Freddie Mac MSRs are pledged to secure borrowings under a loan and security agreement. Our Ginnie Mae MSRs and related excess servicing spread financing (“ESS”) are pledged to a special purpose entity, which issues variable funding notes and term notes that are secured by such Ginnie Mae assets and repaid through the cash flows received by the special purpose entity as the lender under a repurchase agreement with PLS. Some of our EBOs are contributed to a special purpose entity, which issues participation certificates pledged to secure borrowings under a master repurchase agreement.  In fiscal year 2020, we amended some master repurchase agreements to pledge other EBOs as an additional asset type under those agreements.  In each case, similar to our repurchase agreements, the cash that we receive under these secured financing arrangements is less than the fair value of the assets and a decrease in the fair value of the pledged collateral can result in a margin call. Should a margin call occur, we may be required to liquidate assets at a disadvantageous time, which could cause us to incur further losses. If we are unable to satisfy a margin call, the secured parties may sell the collateral, which may result in significant losses to us.

 

Each of the secured financing arrangements pursuant to which we finance MSRs and ESS is further subject to the terms of an acknowledgement agreement with Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac or Ginnie Mae, as applicable, pursuant to which our and the secured parties’ rights are subordinate in all respects to the rights of the applicable Agency. Accordingly, the exercise by any of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac or Ginnie Mae of its rights under the applicable acknowledgment agreement could result in the extinguishment of our and the secured parties’ rights in the related collateral and result in significant losses to us.

 

We may in the future utilize other sources of borrowings, including term loans, bank credit facilities and structured financing arrangements, among others. The amount of leverage we employ varies depending on the asset class being financed, our available capital, our ability to obtain and access financing arrangements with lenders and the lenders’ and rating agencies’ estimate of, among other things, the stability of our cash flows. We can provide no assurance that we will have access to any debt or equity capital on favorable terms or at the desired times, or at all. Our inability to raise such capital or obtain financing on favorable terms could materially and adversely impact our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

Our financing agreements contain restrictive covenants that could adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

Our various financing agreements require us and/or our subsidiaries to comply with various restrictive covenants, including those relating to tangible net worth, profitability and our ratio of total liabilities to tangible net worth. Incurring substantial debt subjects us to the risk that our cash flows from operations may be insufficient to repurchase the assets that we have sold under our repurchase agreements or otherwise service the debt incurred under our other financing agreements. Our lenders also require us to maintain minimum amounts of cash or cash equivalents sufficient to maintain a specified liquidity position. In addition, the repayment of the $650 million aggregate principal amount of our 5.375% Senior Notes due 2025 (our “Existing Notes”) will depend in part on our restricted subsidiaries’ generation of cash flow and our restricted subsidiaries’ ability to make such cash available to us, by dividend, debt repayment or other means. The Existing Notes’ indenture contain additional restrictive covenants that limit our and our restricted subsidiaries’ ability to engage in specified types of transactions, including our ability and/or the ability of our restricted subsidiaries to:

 

 

	·	pay dividends or distributions, redeem or repurchase equity, prepay subordinated debt and make certain loans or investments;
	·	incur, assume or guarantee additional debt or issue preferred stock;
	·	incur liens on assets;
	·	merge or consolidate with another person or sell all or substantially all of our assets to another person;
	·	transfer, sell or otherwise dispose of certain assets including capital stock of subsidiaries;
	·	enter into transactions with affiliates; and
	·	allow to exist certain restrictions on the ability of our non-guarantor restricted subsidiaries to pay dividends or make other payments to us.

 

If we fail to comply with the restrictive covenants and are unable to obtain a waiver or amendment, an event of default would result under the terms of our financing arrangement or could limit our ability to obtain additional financing on acceptable terms, or at all, for working capital and general corporate purposes.

 

Our earnings may decrease because of changes in prevailing interest rates.

 

Our profitability is directly affected by changes in prevailing interest rates. An increase in prevailing interest rates could:

 

	·	adversely affect our loan production volume, as refinancing an existing loan would be less attractive and qualifying for a loan may be more difficult;
	·	adversely affect our Ginnie Mae early buyout program because loan modifications would become less economically feasible; and
	·	increase the cost of servicing our outstanding debt, including debt related to servicing assets and loan production;

 

A decrease in prevailing interest rates could:

 

	·	cause an increase in the expected volume of loan refinancings, which would require us to record decreases in fair value on our MSRs; and
	·	reduce our earnings from our custodial deposit accounts.

 

An event of default, a negative ratings agency action, the perception of financial weakness, an adverse action by a regulatory authority, a lengthening of foreclosure timelines or a general deterioration in the economy that constricts the availability of credit may increase our cost of funds and make it difficult for us to refinance existing debt and borrow additional funds. In addition, we may not be able to adjust our operational capacity in a timely manner, or at all, in response to increases or decreases in mortgage production volume resulting from changes in prevailing interest rates. In addition, due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, the Federal Reserve has enacted monetary policies to purchase MBS on the open market which could impact interest rates and the liquidity of the MBS market.

 

 

Any of the increases or decreases discussed above could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

We are subject to risks associated with the expected discontinuation of LIBOR.

 

In July 2017, the head of the United Kingdom Financial Conduct Authority (“FCA”), which regulates the LIBOR administrator, announced the phase out of the use of LIBOR by the end of 2021. However, for U.S. dollar LIBOR, it now appears that the relevant date may be deferred to June 30, 2023 for the most common rates (overnight and one, three, six and 12 months). The LIBOR administrator has published a consultation regarding its intention to cease publication of U.S. dollar LIBOR as of June 30, 2023 (instead of December 31, 2021, as previously expected) based on continued rate submissions from banks. The FCA and other regulators have stated that they welcome the LIBOR administrator’s action. An extension to 2023 would mean that many legacy U.S. dollar LIBOR contracts would terminate before related LIBOR rates cease to be published. However, the same regulators emphasized that, despite any continued publication of U.S. dollar LIBOR through June 30, 2023, no new contracts using U.S. dollar LIBOR should be entered into after December 31, 2021. Moreover, the LIBOR administrator’s consultation also relates to the LIBOR administrator’s intention to cease publication of non-U.S. dollar LIBOR after December 31, 2021. There is no assurance that LIBOR will continue to be published until any particular date.

 

To identify a set of alternative interest reference rates to LIBOR, the U.S. Federal Reserve established the Alternative Reference Rates Committee (“ARRC”), a U.S. based working group composed of large U.S. financial institutions. ARRC has identified the Secured Overnight Financing Rate as its preferred replacement for LIBOR, but it is unclear how their preference may impact the risks we maintain to the cessation of LIBOR, or if other benchmarks may emerge as a replacement for LIBOR.

 

The expected and actual discontinuation of LIBOR could have a significant impact on the financial markets and our business activities. We rely on financing arrangements and liabilities under which our cost of borrowing is based on LIBOR. We also hold assets and instruments used to hedge the value of certain assets that depend for their value on LIBOR. We anticipate significant challenges as it relates to the transition away from LIBOR for all of our LIBOR-based assets, financing arrangements, and liabilities, regardless whether their maturity dates fall before or after the anticipated discontinuation date after December 31, 2021 or June 30, 2023, as applicable. These challenges will include, but will not be limited to, amending agreements underlying our existing and/or new LIBOR-based assets, financing arrangements, and liabilities with appropriate fallback language prior to the discontinuation of LIBOR, and the possibility that LIBOR may deteriorate as a viable benchmark to ensure a fair cost of funds for our LIBOR-linked liabilities, interest income for our LIBOR-linked assets, and/or the fair value of our LIBOR-linked assets and hedges.

 

We also anticipate additional risks to our current business activities as they relate to the discontinuation of LIBOR. We service LIBOR-based adjustable rate mortgages (“ARMs”) for which the underlying mortgage notes incorporate fallback provisions, but we cannot anticipate the response of our borrowers or note holders to such risks. We also rely on financial models that incorporate LIBOR into their methodologies for valuation planning and reporting.

 

Due to these risks, we expect both the impending and actual discontinuation of LIBOR could materially affect our interest expense and earnings, our cost of capital, and the fair value of certain of our assets and the instruments we use to hedge their value. For the same reason, we also can provide no assurance that changes in the value of our hedge instruments will effectively offset changes in the value of the assets they are expected to hedge.

 

Our inability to manage these risks effectively may materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

 

Hedging against interest rate exposure may materially and adversely affect our results of operations and cash flows.

 

We pursue hedging strategies primarily in an effort to mitigate the effect of changes in interest rates on the fair value of our assets. To manage this price risk, we use derivative financial instruments acquired with the intention of moderating the risk that changes in market interest rates will result in unfavorable changes in the fair value of our assets, primarily prepayment exposure on our MSR investments as well as IRLCs and our inventory of loans held for sale. For example, with respect to our IRLCs and inventory of loans held for sale, we may use MBS forward sale contracts to lock in the price at which we will sell the mortgage loans or resulting MBS, and MBS put options to mitigate the risk of our IRLCs not closing at the rate we expect. In addition, with respect to our MSRs, we may use MBS forward purchase and sale contracts to address exposures to smaller interest rate shifts with Treasury and interest rate swap futures, and use options and swaptions to achieve target coverage levels for larger interest rate shocks.

 

Our hedging activity will vary in scope based on the risks being mitigated, the level of interest rates, the type of investments held, and other changing market conditions such as those resulting from the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Hedging instruments involve risk because they often are not traded on regulated exchanges, guaranteed by an exchange or its clearing house, or regulated by any U.S. or foreign governmental authorities, and our interest rate hedging may fail to protect or could adversely affect us because, among other things:

 

	·	interest rate hedging can be expensive, particularly during periods of rising and volatile interest rates;
	·	available interest rate hedging may not correspond directly with the interest rate risk for which protection is sought;
	·	the duration of the hedge may not match the duration of the related liability or asset;
	·	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 the money in the hedging transaction may default on its obligation to pay.

 

In addition, we may fail to recalculate, readjust and execute hedges in an efficient manner. Any hedging activity, which is intended to limit losses, may materially and adversely affect our results of operations and cash flows. Therefore, while we may enter into such transactions seeking to reduce interest rate risk, unanticipated changes in interest rates may result in worse overall investment performance than if we had not engaged in any such hedging transactions. A liquid secondary market may not exist for a hedging instrument purchased or sold, and we may be required to maintain a position until exercise or expiration, which could result in significant losses. In addition, the degree of correlation between price movements of the instruments used in hedging strategies and price movements in the portfolio positions or liabilities being hedged may vary materially. Moreover, for a variety of reasons, we may not establish an effective correlation between such hedging instruments and the portfolio positions or liabilities being hedged. Any such ineffective correlation may prevent us from achieving the intended hedge and expose us to risk of loss. Numerous regulations currently apply to hedging and any new regulations or changes in existing regulations may significantly increase our administrative or compliance costs. Our derivative agreements generally provide for the daily mark to market of our hedge exposures. If a hedge counterparty determines that its exposure to us exceeds its exposure threshold, it may initiate a margin call and require us to post collateral. If we are unable to satisfy a margin call, we would be in default of our agreement, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

 

We use estimates in determining the fair value of our MSRs, which are highly volatile assets with continually changing fair values. If our estimates of their value prove to be inaccurate, we may be required to write down the fair values of the MSRs which could adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

Our estimates of the fair value of our MSRs is based on the cash flows projected to result from the servicing of the related mortgage loans and continually fluctuates due to a number of factors. These factors include prepayment speeds, the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and other market conditions, which affect the number of loans that are repaid or refinanced and thus no longer result in cash flows, and the number of loans that become delinquent.

 

We use internal financial models that utilize our understanding of inputs and assumptions used by market participants to value our MSRs for purposes of financial reporting and for purposes of determining the price that we pay for portfolios of MSRs and to acquire loans for which we will retain MSRs. These models are complex and use asset-specific collateral data and market inputs for interest and discount rates. In addition, the modeling requirements of MSRs are complex because of the high number of variables that drive cash flows associated with MSRs. Even if the general accuracy of our valuation models is validated, valuations are highly dependent upon the reasonableness of our inputs and the results of the models.

 

If loan delinquencies or prepayment speeds are different than anticipated or other factors perform differently than modeled, the recorded value of certain of our MSRs may change. Significant differences in performance could increase the chance that we do not adequately estimate the impact of these factors on our valuations which could result in misstatements of our financial results, restatements of our financial statements, or otherwise materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

The geographic concentration of our servicing portfolio may be affected by weaker economic conditions or adverse events specific to certain regions which could decrease the fair value of our MSRs and adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

A decline in the economy, the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic or other difficulties in certain real estate markets may cause a decline in the value of residential and commercial properties. To the extent that certain states in which we have greater concentrations of business in the future experience weaker economic conditions or greater rates of decline in real estate values than the United States generally, such concentration may disproportionately decrease the fair value of our MSRs and adversely affect our loan production businesses. The impact of property value declines may increase in magnitude and it may continue for a long period of time. Additionally, if states in which we have greater concentrations of business were to change their licensing or other regulatory requirements to make our business cost-prohibitive, we may be required to stop doing business in those states or may be subject to a higher cost of doing business in those states, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

Increases in delinquencies and defaults may adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

Delinquencies can result from many factors including unemployment, weak economic conditions or real estate values, or catastrophic events such as man-made or natural disasters, pandemic, war or terrorist attacks. A decrease in home prices may result in higher loan-to-value ratios , lower recoveries in foreclosure and an increase in loss severities above those that would have been realized had property values remained the same or continued to increase. Some borrowers do not have sufficient equity in their homes to permit them to refinance their existing loans, which may reduce the volume or growth of our loan production business. This may also provide borrowers with an incentive to default on their mortgage loans even if they have the ability to make principal and interest payments. Further, despite recent increases, interest rates have remained near historical lows for an extended period of time.

 

Increased mortgage delinquencies, defaults and foreclosures may result in lower revenue for loans that we service for the Agencies because we only collect servicing fees from the Agencies for performing loans, and our failure to service delinquent and defaulted loans in accordance with the applicable servicing guidelines could result in our failure to benefit from available monetary incentives and/or expose us to monetary penalties and curtailments. Additionally, while increased delinquencies generate higher ancillary fees, including late fees, these fees are not likely to be recoverable in the event that the related loan is liquidated. In addition, an increase in delinquencies lowers the interest income that we receive on cash held in collection and other accounts because there is less cash in those accounts. Also, increased mortgage defaults may ultimately reduce the number of mortgages that we service.

 

 

Increased mortgage delinquencies, defaults and foreclosures will also result in a higher cost to service those loans due to the increased time and effort required to collect payments from delinquent borrowers and to acquire and liquidate the properties securing the loans or otherwise resolve loan defaults if payment collection is unsuccessful, and only a portion of these increased costs are recoverable under our servicing agreements. Increased mortgage delinquencies, defaults and foreclosures may also result in an increase in servicing advances we are obligated to make to fulfill our obligations to MBS holders and to protect our investors’ interests in the properties securing the delinquent mortgage loans. An increase in required advances also may cause an increase in our interest expense and affect our liquidity as a result of increased borrowings under our financing agreements to fund any such increase in the advances.

 

A disruption in the MBS market could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

Most of the loans that we produce are pooled into MBS issued by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac or guaranteed by Ginnie Mae. In addition, due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, the Federal Reserve has enacted monetary policies to purchase MBS on the open market that has and may continue to impact the liquidity of the MBS market. Any significant disruption or period of illiquidity in the general MBS market would directly affect our own liquidity and the liquidity of PMT because no existing alternative secondary market would likely be willing and able to accommodate on a timely basis the volume of loans that we typically sell in any given period. Furthermore, we would remain contractually obligated to fund loans under our outstanding IRLCs without being able to sell our existing inventory of mortgage loans. Accordingly, if the MBS market experiences a period of illiquidity, we might be prevented from selling the loans that we produce into the secondary market in a timely manner or at favorable prices and we would be required to hold a larger inventory of loans than we have committed facilities to fund or we may be required to repay a portion of the debt secured by these assets, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

We may be required to indemnify the purchasers of loans that we originate, acquire or assist in the fulfillment of, or repurchase those loans, if those loans fail to meet certain criteria or characteristics or under other circumstances.

 

Our contracts with purchasers of newly originated loans that we fund through our consumer direct lending business or acquire from PMT through our correspondent production activities contain provisions that require us to indemnify the purchaser of the related loans or repurchase such loans under certain circumstances. Our loan sale agreements with purchasers, including the Agencies, contain provisions that generally require us to indemnify or repurchase these loans if our representations and warranties concerning loan quality and loan characteristics are inaccurate; or the loans fail to comply with the respective Agency’s underwriting or regulatory requirements.

 

Repurchased loans typically can only be financed at a steep discount to their repurchase price, if at all. They are also typically valued and, therefore, can generally only be sold at a significant discount to the underlying unpaid principal balance (“UPB”). In certain cases involving mortgage lenders from whom loans were acquired through our correspondent production activities, we may have contractual rights to either recover some or all of our indemnification losses or otherwise demand repurchase of these loans. Depending on the volume of repurchase and indemnification requests, some of these mortgage lenders may not be able to financially fulfill their obligation to indemnify us or repurchase the affected loans. If a material amount of recovery cannot be obtained from these mortgage lenders, our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected.

 

Although our indemnification and repurchase exposure cannot be quantified with certainty, to recognize these potential indemnification and repurchase losses, we have recorded a liability of $32.7 million as of December 31, 2020. Because of the increase in our loan production over time, we expect that indemnification and repurchase requests are also likely to increase. Should home values decrease and negatively impact the related loan values, our realized loan losses from indemnifications and repurchases may increase as well. As such, our indemnification and repurchase costs may increase well beyond our current expectations. In addition, our mortgage banking services agreement with PMT requires us to indemnify it with respect to loans for which we provide fulfillment services in certain instances. If we are required to indemnify PMT or other purchasers against losses, or repurchase loans from PMT or other purchasers, that result in losses that exceed the recorded liability, this could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

 

We depend on the accuracy and completeness of information about borrowers and counterparties and any misrepresented information could adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

In deciding whether to approve loans or to enter into other transactions across our businesses with borrowers and counterparties, including brokers, correspondent lenders and non-delegated correspondent lenders, we may rely on information furnished to us by or on behalf of borrowers and such counterparties, including financial statements and other financial information. We also may rely on representations of borrowers and such counterparties as to the accuracy and completeness of that information and, with respect to financial statements, on reports of independent auditors. If any of this information is intentionally or negligently misrepresented and such misrepresentation is not detected prior to loan funding, the fair value of the loan may be significantly lower than expected. Whether a misrepresentation is made by the loan applicant, another third party or one of our employees, we generally bear the risk of loss associated with the misrepresentation. Our controls and processes may not have detected or may not detect all misrepresented information in our loan originations or acquisitions. Any such misrepresented information could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

Our counterparties may terminate our MSRs, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

As is standard in the industry, under the terms of our master servicing agreements with the Agencies in respect of Agency MSRs that we retain in connection with our loan production, the Agencies have the right to terminate us as servicer of the loans we service on their behalf at any time (and, in certain instances, without the payment of any termination fee) and also have the right to cause us to sell the MSRs to a third party. In addition, our failure to comply with applicable servicing guidelines could result in our termination under such master servicing agreements by the Agencies with little or no notice and without any compensation. The owners of other non-Agency loans that we service may also terminate certain of our MSRs if we fail to comply with applicable servicing guidelines. If the MSRs are terminated on a material portion of our servicing portfolio, our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations could be adversely affected.

 

We are required to make servicing advances that can be subject to delays in recovery or may not be recoverable in certain circumstances, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

During any period in which a borrower is not making payments, we are required under most of our servicing agreements in respect of our MSRs to advance our own funds to pay property taxes and insurance premiums, legal expenses and other protective advances. We also advance funds under these agreements to maintain, repair and market real estate properties on behalf of investors. As home values change, we may have to reconsider certain of the assumptions underlying our decisions to make advances and, in certain situations, our contractual obligations may require us to make advances for which we may not be reimbursed. In addition, if a mortgage loan serviced by us is in default or becomes delinquent, the repayment to us of the advance may be delayed until the mortgage loan is repaid or refinanced or a liquidation occurs.

 

Federal, state or local regulatory actions may increase the amount of servicing advances that we are required to make, lengthen the time it takes for us to be reimbursed for such advances and increase the costs incurred while the loan is delinquent. For example, the federal government enacted the CARES Act, which allows borrowers with federally-backed loans to request temporary payment forbearance in response to the increased borrower hardships resulting from COVID-19. As a result of the CARES Act forbearance requirements, we have experienced elevated delinquencies in our servicing portfolio that may require us to finance substantial amounts of advances of principal and interest payments to the investors holding those loans, as well as advances of property taxes, insurance premiums and other expenses to protect investors’ interests in the properties securing the loans. In fiscal year 2020, elevated prepayment activity was sufficient to cover principal and interest payment advances required due to the impact of the CARES Act; however, in the future prepayment activity may be insufficient to cover required principal and interest advances. Future servicing advances will be driven by the number of borrower delinquencies, including those resulting from payment forbearance; the amount of time borrowers remain delinquent; and the level of successful resolution of delinquent payments, all of which will be impacted by the pace at which the economy recovers from the COVID-19 pandemic. As of December 31, 2020, 7.2% of loans in UPB in our predominantly government-insured or guaranteed MSR portfolio were in forbearance plans and delinquent.

 

 

A delay in our ability to collect advances may adversely affect our liquidity, and our inability to be reimbursed for advances could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations

 

We may not realize all of the anticipated benefits of potential future acquisitions of MSRs, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

Our ability to realize the anticipated benefits of potential future acquisitions of servicing portfolios will depend, in part, on our ability to appropriately service any such assets. The process of acquiring these assets may disrupt our business and may not result in the full benefits expected. The risks associated with these acquisitions include, among others, unanticipated issues in integrating information regarding the new loans to be serviced into our information technology systems, and the diversion of management’s attention from other ongoing business concerns. Moreover, if we inappropriately value the assets that we acquire or the fair value of the assets that we acquire declines after we acquire them, the resulting charges may negatively affect both the carrying value of the assets on our balance sheet and our earnings. Furthermore, if we incur additional indebtedness to finance an acquisition, the acquired servicing portfolio may not be able to generate sufficient cash flows to service that additional indebtedness. Unsuitable or unsuccessful acquisitions could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

We are subject to significant financial and reputational risks from potential liability arising from lawsuits, and regulatory and government action.

 

We face significant legal risks in our business, and the volume of claims and amount of damages, penalties and fines claimed in litigation, and regulatory and government proceedings against us and other financial institutions remains high. Greater than expected investigation costs and litigation, including class action lawsuits associated with compliance related issues, substantial legal liability or significant regulatory or government action against us could have adverse effects on our financial condition and results of operations or cause significant reputational harm to us, which in turn could adversely impact our business results and prospects. We may experience a significant volume of litigation and other disputes, including claims for contractual indemnification, with counterparties regarding relative rights and responsibilities. Consumers, clients and other counterparties may also become increasingly litigious.

 

We also may be exposed to the risk of litigation by investors in clients that we manage from time to time if our management advice is alleged to constitute gross negligence or willful misconduct. Investors could sue us to recover amounts lost by those entities due to our alleged misconduct, up to the entire amount of loss. Further, we may be subject to litigation arising from investor dissatisfaction with the performance of any such entities that we manage or from allegations that we improperly exercised control or influence over those entities. In addition, we are exposed to risks of litigation or investigation relating to transactions which presented conflicts of interest that were not properly addressed. In such actions, we would be obligated to bear legal, settlement and other costs (which may be in excess of available insurance coverage). In addition, although we are generally indemnified by the entities that we manage, our rights to indemnification may be challenged. If we are required to incur all or a portion of the costs arising out of litigation or investigations as a result of inadequate insurance proceeds or failure to obtain indemnification from the entities that we manage, our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations would be materially and adversely affected.

 

 

We depend on counterparties and vendors to provide services that are critical to our business, which subjects us to a variety of risks.

 

We have a number of counterparties and vendors, who provide us with financial, technology and other services that are critical to support our businesses. If our current counterparties and vendors were to stop providing services to us on acceptable terms or if we had a disruption in service due to a vendor dispute, we may be unable to procure alternative services from other counterparties or vendors in a timely and efficient manner and on similarly acceptable terms, or at all. Some of these counterparties and vendors have significant operations outside of the United States. If we or our vendors had to curtail or cease operations in these countries due to political unrest or natural disasters and then transfer some or all of these operations to another geographic area, we could experience disruptions in service and incur significant transition costs as well as higher future overhead costs. With respect to vendors engaged to perform certain servicing activities, we are required to assess their compliance with various regulations and establish procedures to provide reasonable assurance that the vendor’s activities comply in all material respects with such regulations. In the event that a vendor’s activities are not in compliance, it could negatively impact our relationships with our regulators, as well as our business and operations. Further, we may incur significant costs to resolve any such disruptions in service which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

Our failure to appropriately address with various issues that may give rise to reputational risk could cause harm to our business and adversely affect our earnings.

 

Our business is subject to significant reputational risks. If we fail, or appear to fail, to address various issues that may give rise to reputational risk, we could significantly harm our business prospects and earnings. Such issues include, but are not limited to, actual or perceived conflicts of interest, violations of legal or regulatory requirements, and any of the other risks discussed in this Exhibit 99.2. Similarly, market rumors and actual or perceived association with counterparties whose own reputations are under question could harm our business.

 

Certain of our officers also serve as officers of PMT. As we expand the scope of our businesses, we increasingly confront potential conflicts of interest relating to investment activities that we manage for PMT. The SEC and certain regulators have increased their scrutiny of potential conflicts of interest, and as we experience growth in our businesses, we continue to monitor and mitigate or otherwise address any conflicts between our interests and those of PMT through the implementation of procedures and controls. Reputational risk incurred in connection with conflicts of interest could negatively affect our business, strain our working relationships with regulators and government agencies, expose us to litigation and regulatory action, impact our ability to attract and retain clients, customers, trading counterparties, investors and employees and adversely affect our results of operations.

 

Reputational damage can result from our actual or alleged conduct in any number of activities, including lending and debt collection practices, corporate governance, and actions taken by government regulators and community organizations in response to those activities. Negative public opinion can also result from social media and media coverage, whether accurate or not. In addition, various private third party organizations have developed ratings processes for evaluating companies on their approach to environmental, social and governance (“ESG”) matters. These third party ESG ratings may be used by some investors to assist with their investment and voting decisions. Any unfavorable ESG ratings may lead to reputational damage and negative sentiment among our investors and other stakeholders. These factors could impair our working relationships with government agencies and investors, expose us to litigation and regulatory action, negatively affect our ability to attract and retain customers, trading counterparties and employees, significantly harm our stock price and ability to raise capital, and adversely affect our results of operations.

 

 

Accounting rules for certain of our transactions are highly complex and involve significant judgment and assumptions. Changes in accounting interpretations or assumptions could impact our financial statements.

 

Accounting rules for mortgage loan sales and securitizations, valuations of financial instruments and MSRs, investment consolidations, income taxes and other aspects of our operations are highly complex and involve significant judgment and assumptions. These complexities could lead to a delay in preparation of financial information and the delivery of this information to our stockholders and also increase the risk of errors and restatements, as well as the cost of compliance. Changes in accounting interpretations or assumptions could impact our financial statements and our ability to timely prepare our financial statements. Our inability to timely prepare our financial statements in the future may be considered a breach of our financial covenants and adversely affect our share price.

 

The success and growth of our business depends upon our ability to adapt to and implement technological changes and to successfully develop, implement and protect proprietary technology.

 

Our success in the mortgage industry is highly dependent upon our ability to adapt to constant technological changes, successfully enhance our current information technology solutions through the use of third-party and our proprietary technologies, and introduce new solutions and services that more efficiently address the needs of our customers.

 

Our mortgage loan production businesses are dependent upon our ability to effectively interface with our borrowers, mortgage lenders and other third parties and to efficiently process loan applications and closings. The direct lending processes are becoming more dependent upon technological advancement, such as our continued ability to process applications over the Internet, accept electronic signatures, provide process status updates instantly and other borrower- or counterparty-expected conveniences. In our correspondent production activities, our and PMT’s correspondent sellers also expect and require certain conveniences and service levels that are dependent on technological advancement. In this regard, we have recently transitioned to a proprietary, workflow-driven, cloud-based loan acquisition platform. While we anticipate that the proprietary cloud-based system will increase scalability and produce other efficiencies, there can be no assurance that the proprietary cloud-based system will prove to be effective or that such correspondent sellers will easily adapt to the proprietary cloud-based system. Any failure to effectively or timely transition to our new system and meet our expectations and the expectations of our correspondent sellers could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

 

Similarly, our servicing business is dependent on our ability to effectively interface with our customers and investors, as well as service mortgage loans in compliance with applicable laws and regulations and the contractual requirements of such investors. For example, we have recently transitioned to a proprietary, workflow-driven, cloud-based servicing system that provides for real-time processing and advanced workflow management thereby reducing servicing costs, increasing scalability and creating sustainable efficiencies.

 

We rely on a combination of trademarks, copyrights, patents, and trade secrets, as well as confidentiality and contractual provisions to protect our intellectual property and proprietary technologies. In addition, we also license and utilize third party proprietary technologies and loss of rights to significant third party proprietary technologies may result in decreased product functionality. The development, implementation and protection of our intellectual property and proprietary technologies requires significant human resources and capital expenditures. As these technological advancements and investor and compliance requirements increase in the future, we will need to further develop these technological capabilities in order to remain competitive, and we will need to implement, execute and maintain them in an operating and regulatory environment that exposes us to significant risk. Moreover, litigation has become necessary to protect our intellectual property and proprietary technologies, and, such litigation is expected to be time consuming and result in substantial costs and diversion of resources.

 

There is no assurance that we will be able to successfully adopt new technologies as critical systems and applications become obsolete and better ones become available. Any failure by us to develop, implement, integrate, execute or maintain our technological capabilities and any litigation costs associated with protection of our technologies could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

 

 

We are subject to certain risks associated with investing in real estate and real estate related assets, including risks of loss from adverse weather conditions, man-made or natural disasters, pandemics, such as COVID-19, terrorist attacks and the effects of climate change and, which may cause disruptions in our operations and could materially and adversely affect the real estate industry generally and our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

Weather conditions and man-made or natural disasters such as hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, pandemics, such as COVID-19, floods, droughts, fires and other environmental conditions can adversely impact properties that we own or that collateralize loans we own or service, as well as properties where we conduct business. Future adverse weather conditions and man-made or natural disasters could also adversely impact the demand for, and value of, our assets, as well as the cost to service or manage such assets, directly impact the value of our assets through damage, destruction or loss, and thereafter materially impact the availability or cost of insurance to protect against these events. Terrorist attacks and other acts of violence may cause disruptions in U.S. financial markets and negatively impact the U.S. economy in general.

 

Potentially adverse consequences of global warming and climate change, including rising sea levels and increased intensity of extreme weather events, could similarly have an impact on our properties and the local economies of certain areas in which we operate. Although we believe our owned real estate and the properties collateralizing our loan assets or underlying our MSR assets are appropriately covered by insurance, we cannot predict at this time if we or our borrowers will be able to obtain appropriate coverage at a reasonable cost in the future, or if we will be able to continue to pass along all of the costs of insurance. There also is a risk that one or more of our property insurers may not be able to fulfill their obligations with respect to claims payments due to a deterioration in its financial condition or may even cancel policies due to increasing costs of providing insurance coverage in certain geographic areas.

 

Certain types of losses, generally of a catastrophic nature, that result from events described above such as earthquakes, floods, hurricanes, tornados, terrorism, acts of war and pandemics, such as COVID-19, may also be uninsurable or not economically insurable. Inflation, changes in building codes and ordinances, environmental considerations and other factors, including terrorism or acts of war, also might make the insurance proceeds insufficient to repair or replace a property if it is damaged or destroyed. Under these circumstances, the insurance proceeds received might not be adequate to restore our economic position with respect to the affected real property. Any uninsured loss could result in the loss of cash flow from, and the asset value of, the affected property, which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

Catastrophic events may disrupt our business.

 

We have a number of offices located throughout California and a growing regional presence in several other states across the United States. Our corporate headquarters is located in Westlake Village, California and we have additional locations around the greater Los Angeles metropolitan area and elsewhere in the State of California. Many areas of California, including the immediate area around our corporate headquarters, have experienced extensive damage and property loss due to a series of large wildfires in the past several years. California and the other states in which we operate are also prone to other types of natural disasters. In the event of a major earthquake, hurricane, or catastrophic event such as fire, flood, power loss, telecommunications failure, cyber attack, pandemic, war, or terrorist attack, we may be unable to continue our operations and may endure significant business interruptions, reputational harm, delays in servicing our customers and working with our partners, interruptions in the availability of our technology and systems, breaches of data security, and loss of critical data, all of which could have an adverse effect on our future operating results.

 

 

Related Party Risks

 

We rely on PMT as a significant source of financing for, and revenue related to, our mortgage banking business, and the termination of, or material adverse change in, the terms of this relationship, or a material adverse change to PMT or its operations, would adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

PMT is the counterparty that currently acquires all of the newly originated mortgage loans in connection with our correspondent production activities. A significant portion of our income is derived from a fulfillment fee earned in connection with PMT’s acquisition of conventional loans. We are able to conduct our correspondent production activities without having to incur the significant additional debt financing that would be required for us to purchase those loans from the originating lender. In the case of government-insured loans, we purchase them from PMT at PMT’s cost plus a sourcing fee and fulfill these loans for our own account and sell them, typically by pooling the federally insured or guaranteed loans together into an MBS which Ginnie Mae guarantees. We earn interest income and gains or losses during the holding period and upon the sale of these securities, and we retain the MSRs with respect to the loans. If this relationship with PMT is terminated by PMT or PMT reduces the volume of these loans that it acquires for any reason, we would have to acquire these loans from the correspondent sellers for our own account, something that we may be unable to do, or enter into another similar counterparty arrangement with a third party, which we may not be able to enter into on terms that are as favorable to us, or at all.

 

The management agreement, the mortgage banking services agreement and certain of the other agreements that we have entered into with PMT contain cross-termination provisions that allow PMT to terminate one or more of those agreements under certain circumstances where another one of such agreements is terminated. Accordingly, the termination of this relationship with PMT, or a material change in the terms thereof that is adverse to us, would likely have a material adverse effect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations. The terms of these agreements extend until June 30, 2025, subject to automatic renewal for additional 18-month periods, but any of the agreements may be terminated earlier under certain circumstances or otherwise non-renewed. If any agreement is terminated or non-renewed and not replaced by a new agreement, it would materially and adversely affect our ability to continue to execute our business plan.

 

We expect that PMT will continue to qualify as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes. However, it is possible that PMT may not meet the requirements for qualification as a REIT. If PMT were to lose its REIT status, corporate-level income taxes, would apply to all of PMT's taxable income at federal and state tax rates. Either of these scenarios would potentially impair PMT’s financial position and its ability to raise capital, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

A significant portion of our loan servicing operations are conducted pursuant to subservicing contracts with PMT, and any termination by PMT of these contracts, or a material change in the terms thereof that is adverse to us, would adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

PMT, as the owner of a substantial number of MSRs or mortgage loans that we subservice, may, under certain circumstances, terminate our subservicing contract with or without cause, in some instances with little notice and little to no compensation. Upon any such termination, it would be difficult to replace such a large volume of subservicing in a short period of time, or perhaps at all. Accordingly, we may not generate as much revenue from subservicing for other third parties. If we were to have our subservicing terminated by PMT, or if there was a change in the terms under which we perform subservicing for PMT that was material and adverse to us, this would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

PMT has an exclusive right to acquire the loans that are produced through our correspondent production activities, which may limit the revenues that we could otherwise earn in respect of those loans.

 

Our mortgage banking services agreement with PMT requires PLS to provide fulfillment services for correspondent production activities exclusively to PMT as long as PMT has the legal and financial capacity to purchase correspondent loans. As a result, the revenue that we earn with respect to these loans will be limited to the fulfillment fees that we earn in connection with the production of these loans, which may be less than the revenues that we might otherwise be able to realize by acquiring these loans ourselves and selling them in the secondary loan market.

 

 

Our financings of MSRs using ESS exposes us to significant risks.

 

We have previously sold to PMT or its subsidiaries, from time to time, the right to receive certain ESS arising from MSRs that we owned or acquired. The ESS represents the difference between our contractual servicing fee with the applicable Agency and the base servicing fee that we retain as compensation for servicing the related mortgage loans upon our sale of the ESS.

 

As a condition of our sale of the ESS, PMT was required to subordinate its interests in the ESS to those of the applicable Agency. With respect to our Ginnie Mae MSRs, we pledged our interest in such MSRs and PMT’s interest in the related ESS to a special purpose entity, which issues variable funding notes and term notes that are secured by such Ginnie Mae assets and repaid through the cash flows received by the special purpose entity as the lender under a repurchase agreement with PLS. Accordingly, our interest in the Ginnie Mae MSRs and PMT’s interest in the related ESS are also subordinated to the rights of an indenture trustee on behalf of the note holders to which the special purpose entity issues its variable funding notes and term notes under an indenture, pursuant to which the indenture trustee has a blanket lien on all of our Ginnie Mae MSRs (including the ESS we sell to PMT and record as a financing).

 

The indenture trustee, on behalf of the note holders, may liquidate our Ginnie Mae MSRs along with PMT’s interest in the ESS to the extent there exists an event of default under the indenture. In the event PMT’s ESS is liquidated as a result of certain of our actions or inactions, we generally would be required to indemnify PMT under the applicable spread acquisition agreement. A claim by PMT for the loss of its ESS as a result of our actions or inactions would likely be significant in size. Either of these occurrences could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

In connection with PLS’ repurchase agreement with the special purpose entity, we also provide pass through financing to PMT under a repurchase agreement to facilitate its financing of the ESS it acquires from us. The repurchase agreement subjects us to the credit risk of PMT. To the extent PMT defaults in its payments of principal and interest under its repurchase agreement with us, we would still be required to make the allocable and corresponding payments under our repurchase agreement with the special purpose entity. To the extent PMT fails to make such payments of principal and interest to us or otherwise defaults under its repurchase agreement and we are unable to make the allocable and corresponding payments under our repurchase agreement with the special purpose entity, this could also create an event of default that could cause a cross default under other financing arrangements and/or have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

Risks Related to Our Investment Management Segment

 

Market conditions could reduce the fair value of the assets that we manage, which would reduce our management and incentive fees.

 

A portion of the fees that we earn under our investment management agreement is based on the fair value of the assets that we manage. The fair values of the securities and other assets held in the portfolios that we manage and, therefore, our assets under management may decline due to any number of factors beyond our control, including, among others, a decline in housing, the ongoing impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, changes to interest rates, stock or bond market movements, a general economic downturn, political uncertainty or acts of terrorism. The economic outlook cannot be predicted with certainty and we continue to operate in a challenging business environment. If volatile market conditions cause a decline in the fair value of our assets under management, that decline in fair value could materially reduce our management fees and incentive fees under our management contract with PMT and adversely affect our revenues. If our revenues decline without a commensurate reduction in our expenses, our net income will be reduced.

 

 

We currently manage assets for a single client, the loss of which could significantly reduce our management and incentive fees and have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.

 

Our management and incentive fees result from our management of PMT. The term of the management agreement that we have entered into with PMT, as amended, expires on June 30, 2025, subject to automatic renewal for additional 18-month periods, unless terminated earlier in accordance with the terms of the agreement. In the event of a termination of one or more related party agreements by PMT in certain circumstances, we may be entitled to a termination fee under our management agreement. However, the termination of such management agreement and the loss of PMT as a client would significantly affect our investment management segment and negatively impact our management fees and incentive fees.

 

The historical returns on the assets that we select and manage for PMT, and our resulting management and incentive fees, may not be indicative of future results.

 

The historical returns of the assets that we manage should not be considered indicative of the future returns on those assets or future returns on other assets that we may select for investment by PMT. The investment performance that is achieved for the assets that we manage varies over time, and the nature and mix of assets we manage has changed significantly over the past several years. As a result, the change and variance in investment performance can be significant. Accordingly, the management and incentive fees that we have earned in the past based on those returns should not be considered indicative of the management or incentive fees that we may earn in the future from managing those same assets or from managing other assets for PMT.

 

Changes in regulations applicable to our investment management segment could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

The legislative and regulatory environment in which we operate is constantly evolving. New laws or regulations, or changes in the enforcement of existing laws or regulations, applicable to us and PMT, may adversely affect our business. Our ability to succeed in this environment will depend on our ability to monitor and comply with regulatory changes. Regulatory changes that will affect other market participants are likely to change the way in which we conduct business with our counterparties. The uncertainty regarding the continued implementation of laws and regulations and their impact on the investment management industry and us cannot be predicted at this time but will continue to be a risk for our business.

 

We may be adversely affected as a result of new or revised legislation or regulations imposed by the SEC, other U.S. or non-U.S. governmental regulatory authorities or self-regulatory organizations that supervise the financial markets. We also may be adversely affected by changes in the interpretation or enforcement of existing laws and rules by these governmental authorities and self-regulatory organizations, as well as by U.S. and non-U.S. courts. It is impossible to determine the extent of the impact of any new laws, regulations or initiatives that may be imposed on us or the markets in which we trade, or whether any of the proposals will become law. Compliance with any new laws or regulations could add to our compliance burden and costs and adversely affect the manner in which we conduct business, as well as our financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

Our failure to comply with the extensive amount of regulation applicable to our investment management segment could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

Our investment management segment is subject to extensive regulation in the United States. These regulations are designed primarily to ensure the integrity of the financial markets and to protect investors in any entity that we advise and are not designed to protect our stockholders. Consequently, these regulations often serve to limit our activities. These requirements relate to, among other things, fiduciary duties to clients, solicitation agreements, conflicts of interest, recordkeeping and reporting requirements, disclosure requirements, limitations on agency cross and principal transactions between an adviser and advisory clients and general anti-fraud prohibitions. We are required to maintain an effective compliance program, and are subject to routine periodic examinations by the staff of the SEC.

 

 

The failure by us or our service providers to comply with applicable laws or regulations, or our failure to design and successfully implement and administer our compliance program, could result in fines, suspensions of individual employees or other sanctions, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations. Even if an investigation or proceeding did not result in a fine or sanction or the fine or sanction imposed against us or our employees by a regulator were small in monetary amount, the adverse publicity relating to an investigation, proceeding or imposition of these fines or sanctions could harm our reputation.

 

We may encounter conflicts of interest in trying to appropriately allocate our time and services between activities for our own account and for PMT, or in trying to appropriately allocate investment opportunities among ourselves and for PMT.

 

Pursuant to our management agreement with PMT, we are obligated to provide PMT with the services of our senior management team, and the members of that team are required to devote such time as is necessary and appropriate, commensurate with the level of activity of PMT. The members of our senior management team may have conflicts in allocating their time and services between our operations and the activities of PMT and any other entities or accounts that we may manage in the future.

 

In addition, we and the other entities or accounts that we may manage may participate in some of PMT’s investments now or in the future, which may not be the result of arm’s length negotiations and may involve or later result in potential conflicts between our interests in the investments and those of PMT or such other entities. Any such perceived or actual conflicts of interest could damage our reputation and materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

Risks Related to Our Organizational Structure

 

HC Partners may be able to significantly influence the outcome of votes of our common stock, or exercise certain other rights pursuant to a stockholder agreement we have entered into with it, and its interests may differ from those of our public stockholders.

 

HC Partners, one of our largest investors, has the right under a stockholder agreement to nominate one or two individuals for election to our board of directors depending on the percentage of the voting power of our outstanding shares common stock that it holds, and we are obligated to use our best efforts to cause the election of those director nominees. In addition, the HC Partners’ stockholder agreement requires that we obtain the consent of HC Partners with respect to amendments to our certificate of incorporation or bylaws. As a result, HC Partners may be able to significantly influence our management and affairs. In addition, as a result of the size of its individual equity holding it may be able to significantly influence the outcome of all matters requiring stockholder approval, including mergers and other material transactions, and may be able to cause or prevent a change in the composition of our board of directors or a change in control of our Company that could deprive our stockholders of an opportunity to receive a premium for their common stock as part of a sale of our company and might ultimately affect the market price of our common stock.

 

We have not established a minimum dividend payment level and no assurance can be given that we will be able to make dividends to our stockholders in the future at current levels or at all.

 

In October 2019, we announced the initiation of a quarterly dividend for our common stockholders. We have not established a minimum dividend payment level, and our ability to pay dividends to our stockholders may be materially and adversely affected by the risk factors discussed in this Exhibit 99.2 and any subsequent filings we make with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Although we paid, and anticipate continuing to pay, quarterly dividends to our stockholders, our board of directors has the sole discretion to determine the timing, form and amount of any future dividends to our stockholders, and such determination will depend upon, among other factors, our historical and projected results of operations, financial condition, cash flows and liquidity, capital requirements and other expense obligations, debt covenants, contractual legal, tax, regulatory and other restrictions and such other factors as our board of directors may deem relevant from time to time.

 

 

As a result, no assurance can be given that we will be able to continue to pay dividends to our stockholders in the future or that the level of any future dividends will achieve a market yield or increase or even be maintained over time, any of which could materially and adversely affect the market price of our common stock.

 

Anti-takeover provisions in our charter documents and Delaware law might discourage or delay acquisition attempts for us that you might consider favorable.

 

Our certificate of incorporation and bylaws contain provisions that may make the acquisition of our company more difficult without the approval of our board of directors. Among other things, these provisions:

 

·

authorize the issuance of undesignated preferred stock, the terms of which may be established and the shares of which may be issued without stockholder approval;

 

·

prohibit stockholder action by written consent unless the matter as to which action is being taken has been approved by our board of directors;

 

·

provide that our board of directors is expressly authorized to make, alter, or repeal our bylaws (provided that, if that action adversely affects HC Partners when that entity, together with its affiliates, holds at least 5% of the voting power of our outstanding shares of capital stock, our stockholder agreements provide that such action must be approved by that entity);

 

·

establish advance notice requirements for nominations for elections to our board or for proposing matters that can be acted upon by stockholders at stockholder meetings; and

 

·

prevent a sale of substantially all of our assets or completion of a merger or other business combination that constitutes a change of control without the approval of a majority of our independent directors.

 

These and other provisions under Delaware law could discourage, delay or prevent a transaction involving a change in control of our company or negatively affect the trading price of our common stock. These provisions could also discourage proxy contests and make it more difficult for you and other stockholders to elect directors of and take other corporate actions.

 

Our bylaws include an exclusive forum provision that could limit our stockholders’ ability to obtain a judicial forum viewed by the stockholders as more favorable for disputes with us or our directors, officers or other employees.

 

Our bylaws provide that the state or federal court located within the State of Delaware is the exclusive forum for any derivative action or proceeding brought on our behalf; any action asserting a claim of breach of fiduciary duty; any action asserting a claim against us arising pursuant to the Delaware General Corporation Law, our certificate of incorporation or our bylaws; or any action asserting a claim against us that is governed by the internal affairs doctrine. This exclusive forum provision may limit a stockholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for disputes with us or our directors, officers or other associates, which may discourage such lawsuits against us and our directors, officers and other employees. Alternatively, if a court were to find the exclusive forum provision contained in our bylaws to be inapplicable or unenforceable in an action, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving such action in other jurisdictions, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

 

General Risks

 

Our risk management efforts may not be effective.

 

We could incur substantial losses and our business operations could be disrupted if we are unable to effectively identify, manage, monitor, and mitigate financial risks, such as credit risk, interest rate risk, prepayment risk, liquidity risk, and other market-related risks, as well as operational and legal risks related to our business, assets, and liabilities. We also are subject to various laws, regulations and rules that are not industry specific, including employment laws related to employee hiring and termination practices, health and safety laws, environmental laws and other federal, state and local laws, regulations and rules in the jurisdictions in which we operate. Our risk management policies, procedures, and techniques may not be sufficient to identify all of the risks to which we are exposed, mitigate the risks we have identified, or identify additional risks to which we may become subject in the future. Expansion of our business activities may also result in our being exposed to risks to which we have not previously been exposed or may increase our exposure to certain types of risks, and we may not effectively identify, manage, monitor, and mitigate these risks as our business activities change or increase.

 

Initiating new business activities, developing new products or significantly expanding existing business activities may expose us to new risks and increase our cost of doing business.

 

Initiating new business activities, developing new products, or significantly expanding existing business activities, such as our growth in broker direct and consumer direct lending and our significant increase in the number of employees in fiscal year 2020, are ways to grow our businesses and respond to changing circumstances in our industry; however, they may expose us to new risks and regulatory compliance requirements. We cannot be certain that we will be able to manage these risks and compliance requirements effectively. Furthermore, our efforts may not succeed, and any revenues we earn from any new or expanded business initiative may not be sufficient to offset the initial and ongoing costs of that initiative, which would result in a loss with respect to that initiative.

 

We could be harmed by misconduct or fraud that is difficult to detect.

 

We are exposed to risks relating to misconduct by our employees, contractors we use, or other third parties with whom we have relationships. For example, our employees could execute unauthorized transactions, use our assets improperly or without authorization, perform improper activities, use confidential information for improper purposes, or misrecord or otherwise try to hide improper activities from us. This type of misconduct could also relate to assets we manage for others through our investment advisory subsidiary, and can be difficult to detect. If not prevented or detected, misconduct by employees, contractors, or others could result in losses, claims or enforcement actions against us, or could seriously harm our reputation. Our controls may not be effective in detecting this type of activity.

 

If we fail to maintain an effective system of internal controls, we may not be able to accurately determine our financial results or prevent fraud. As a result, our stockholders could lose confidence in our financial results, which could harm our business and the market value of our common stock.

 

Effective internal controls are necessary for us to provide reliable financial reports and effectively prevent fraud. We may in the future discover areas of our internal controls that need improvement. Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (the “Sarbanes-Oxley Act”) requires that we evaluate and report on our internal control over financial reporting. We cannot be certain that we will be successful in maintaining adequate control over our financial reporting and financial processes. In addition, the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has created unique challenges resulting from employees working remotely. Furthermore, as we rapidly grow our businesses, our internal controls will become more complex, and we will require significantly more resources to ensure our internal controls remain effective. Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires our auditors to formally attest to and report on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting.

 

 

If we cannot maintain effective internal control over financial reporting, or our independent registered public accounting firm cannot provide an unqualified attestation report on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting, investor confidence and, in turn, the market price of our common stock could decline. If we or our independent auditors discover a material weakness, the disclosure of that fact, even if quickly remedied, could result in an event of default under one or more of our lending arrangements and/or reduce the market value of shares of our common stock. Additionally, the existence of any material weakness or significant deficiency could require management to devote significant time and incur significant expense to remediate any such material weakness or significant deficiency, and management may not be able to remediate any such material weakness or significant deficiency in a timely manner, or at all. Accordingly, our failure to maintain effective internal control over financial reporting could result in misstatements of our financial results or restatements of our financial statements or otherwise have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

Cybersecurity risks, cyber incidents and technology failures may adversely affect our business by causing a disruption to our operations, a compromise or corruption of our confidential information, and/or damage to our business relationships, all of which could negatively impact our financial results.

 

A cyber incident is considered to be any adverse event that threatens the confidentiality, integrity or availability of our information resources. These incidents may be an intentional attack or an unintentional event and could involve gaining unauthorized access to our information systems for purposes of theft of certain personally identifiable information of consumers, misappropriating assets, stealing confidential information, corrupting data or causing operational disruption. The result of these incidents may include disrupted operations, misstated or unreliable financial data, liability for stolen assets or information, increased cybersecurity protection and insurance costs, litigation and damage to our investor relationships.

 

As our reliance on rapidly changing technology has increased, so have the risks posed to our information systems, both proprietary and those provided to us by third-party service providers including cloud-based computing service providers. System disruptions and failures caused by fire, power loss, telecommunications outages, unauthorized intrusion, computer viruses and disabling devices, natural disasters and other similar events may interrupt or delay our ability to provide services to our customers.

 

Despite our efforts to ensure the integrity of our systems our investment in significant physical and technological security measures, employee training, contractual precautions and business continuity plans, and our implementation of policies and procedures designed to help mitigate cybersecurity risks and cyber intrusions, there can be no assurance that any such cyber intrusions will not occur or, if they do occur, that they will be adequately addressed. We also may not be able to anticipate or implement effective preventive measures against all security breaches, especially because the methods of attack change frequently or may not be recognized until after such attack has been launched, and because security attacks can originate from a wide variety of sources, including third parties such as persons involved with organized crime or associated with external service providers. We are also held accountable for the actions and inactions of our third-party vendors regarding cybersecurity and other consumer-related matters.

 

Any of the foregoing events could result in violations of applicable privacy and other laws, financial loss to us or to our customers, loss of confidence in our security measures, customer dissatisfaction, additional regulatory scrutiny, significant litigation exposure and harm to our reputation, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

The industry in which we operate is highly competitive, and is likely to become more competitive, and decreased margins resulting from increased competition or our inability to compete successfully could adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

We operate in a highly competitive industry that could become even more competitive as a result of economic, legislative, regulatory and technological changes. With respect to mortgage loan production, we face competition in such areas as mortgage loan offerings, rates, fees and customer service. With respect to servicing, we face competition in areas such as fees, cost to service and service levels, including our performance in reducing delinquencies and entering into successful modifications.

 

 

Large commercial banks and savings institutions and other non-bank mortgage originators and servicers are increasingly competitive in the origination or acquisition of newly originated mortgage loans and the servicing of mortgage loans. Many of these institutions have significantly greater resources and access to capital and financing arrangements than we do, which may give them the benefit of a lower cost of funds. Additionally, our existing and potential competitors may decide to modify their business models to compete more directly with our loan production and servicing models. As more non-bank entities enter these markets and as more commercial banks aggressively compete, our mortgage banking businesses may generate lower volumes and/or margins. If we are unable to grow our loan production volumes or if our margins become compressed, then our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected.

 

In fiscal year 2020, we significantly increased the number of employees to facilitate our business growth and our future success will depend on our ability to identify, hire, develop, motivate and retain highly qualified personnel. Trained and experienced personnel are in high demand by our competitors and may be in short supply in some areas. In addition, we invest significant time and expense in training our employees, which increases their value to competitors who may seek to recruit them. If we are unable to attract and retain such personnel, we may not be able to take advantage of future growth opportunities and this could materially affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

 

In addition, technological advances and heightened e-commerce activities have increased consumers’ access to products and services. This has intensified competition among banks and non-banks in offering and servicing mortgage loans. We may be unable to compete successfully in our mortgage banking businesses and this could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

2. Legal Proceedings

 

On December 20, 2018, a purported shareholder of our company filed a complaint in a putative class and derivative action in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware (the “Delaware Court”), captioned Robert Garfield v. BlackRock Mortgage Ventures, LLC et al., Case No. 2018-0917-KSJM (the “Garfield Action”). The Garfield Action alleges, among other things, that certain current directors and officers of the Company breached their fiduciary duties to the Company and its shareholders by, among other things, agreeing to and entering into the Reorganization without ensuring that the Reorganization was entirely fair to the Company or public shareholders. The Reorganization was approved by 99.8% of voting shareholders on October 24, 2018. On December 19, 2019, the Delaware Court denied a motion to dismiss filed by our company and certain of its directors and officers. While the Company and its co-defendants believe the Garfield Action is without merit and expressly disclaim any wrongdoing, they have collectively agreed to settle the Garfield Action for an amount equal to $6.85 million in order to avoid the ongoing costs of litigation and further distractions to their respective businesses. A settlement agreement was filed with the Delaware Court on October 9, 2020, and is currently pending approval. Our company’s share of the settlement amount will be paid entirely by one of the Company’s insurers.

 

On November 5, 2019, Black Knight Servicing Technologies, LLC, a wholly-owned indirect subsidiary of Black Knight, Inc. (“BKI”), filed a Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial in the Circuit Court for the Fourth Judicial Circuit in and for Duval County, Florida (the “Florida State Court”), captioned Black Knight Servicing Technologies, LLC v. PennyMac Loan Services, LLC, Case No. 2019-CA-007908 (the “BKI Complaint”). Allegations contained within the BKI Complaint include breach of contract and misappropriation of MSP® System trade secrets in order to develop an imitation mortgage-processing system intended to replace the MSP® System. The BKI Complaint seeks damages for breach of contract and misappropriation of trade secrets, injunctive relief under the Florida Uniform Trade Secrets Act and declaratory judgment of ownership of all intellectual property and software developed by or on behalf of PLS as a result of its wrongful use of and access to the MSP® System and related trade secret and confidential information. On March 30, 2020, the Florida State Court granted a motion to compel arbitration filed by the Company. Consequently, on April 27, 2020, we dismissed our federal court action without prejudice to pursue those claims in arbitration as well. While no assurance can be provided as to the ultimate outcome of this claim or the account of any losses to us, our company believes the BKI Complaint is without merit and plans to vigorously defend the matter, which remains pending.

 

On January 7, 2021, PLS received a letter from the CFPB notifying PLS that, in accordance with the CFPB’s discretionary Notice and Opportunity to Respond and Advise (“NORA”) process, the CFPB’s Office of Enforcement was considering recommending that the CFPB take legal action against PLS for alleged violations of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act and Truth in Lending Act. The CFPB's examination covered the period from March 2015 through September 2016. Should the CFPB commence an action, it may seek restitution, civil monetary penalties, injunctive relief, or other corrective action, the extent of which remains uncertain at this time. Notably, certain of the alleged violations were originally self-identified by PLS and remediated prior to the CFPB's examination, and all alleged violations were fully remediated as of August 2017. PLS confirmed these remediation actions as well as full restitution to any affected borrowers in its response to the NORA letter expected to be submitted on or about February 08, 2021. While the NORA process remains open and pending at this time, and there can be no assurance as to the nature or extent of any actions taken by the CFPB with regard to these alleged violations, we do not believe that the ultimate resolution of this matter will have a material adverse effect on our financial statements or operations.