UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017

or

For the transition period from                  to                 

Commission file number 001-32559

Medical Properties Trust, Inc.

MPT Operating Partnership, L.P.

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)

(205) 969-3755

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

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

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

None

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

Medical Properties Trust, Inc.    Yes  ☒    No  ☐                MPT Operating Partnership, L.P.    Yes  ☐    No  ☒

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

Medical Properties Trust, Inc.    Yes  ☐    No  ☒                MPT Operating Partnership, L.P.    Yes  ☐    No  ☒

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

Medical Properties Trust, Inc.    Yes  ☒    No  ☐                 MPT Operating Partnership, L.P.    Yes  ☒    No  ☐

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

Medical Properties Trust, Inc.    Yes  ☒    No  ☐                MPT Operating Partnership, L.P.    Yes  ☒    No  ☐

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

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

Medical Properties Trust, Inc.

MPT Operating Partnership, L.P.

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

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

Medical Properties Trust, Inc.    Yes  ☐        No  ☒                MPT Operating Partnership, L.P.    Yes  ☐    No  ☒

As of June 30, 2017, the aggregate market value of the 361,010,288 shares of common stock, par value $0.001 per share (“Common Stock”), held by non-affiliates of the registrant was $4,646,202,407 based upon the last reported sale price of $12.87 on the New York Stock Exchange on that date. For purposes of the foregoing calculation only, all directors and executive officers of the registrant have been deemed affiliates.

As of February 28, 2018, 364,694,865 shares of Medical Properties Trust, Inc. Common Stock were outstanding.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of the registrant’s definitive Proxy Statement for the Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be held on May 24, 2018 are incorporated by reference into Items 10 through 14 of Part III, of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

2

EXPLANATORY NOTE

This report combines the Annual Reports on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017, of Medical Properties Trust, Inc., a Maryland corporation, and MPT Operating Partnership, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership, through which Medical Properties Trust, Inc. conducts substantially all of its operations. Unless otherwise indicated or unless the context requires otherwise, all references in this report to “we,” “us,” “our,” “our company,” “Medical Properties,” “MPT,” or “the Company” refer to Medical Properties Trust, Inc. together with its consolidated subsidiaries, including MPT Operating Partnership, L.P. Unless otherwise indicated or unless the context requires otherwise, all references to “our operating partnership” or “the operating partnership” refer to MPT Operating Partnership, L.P. together with its consolidated subsidiaries.

CAUTIONARY LANGUAGE REGARDING FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS

We make forward-looking statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K that are subject to risks and uncertainties. These forward-looking statements include information about possible or assumed future results of our business, financial condition, liquidity, results of operations, plans and objectives. Statements regarding the following subjects, among others, are forward-looking by their nature:

The forward-looking statements are based on our beliefs, assumptions and expectations of our future performance, taking into account information currently available to us. These beliefs, assumptions and expectations can change as a result of many possible events or factors, not all of which are known to us. If a change occurs, our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations may vary materially from those expressed in our forward-looking statements. You should carefully consider these risks before you make an investment decision with respect to our common stock and other securities, along with, among others, the following factors that could cause actual results to vary from our forward-looking statements:

3

When we use the words “believe,” “expect,” “may,” “potential,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” “plan,” “will,” “could,” “intend” or similar expressions, we are identifying forward-looking statements. You should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements. Except as required by law, we disclaim any obligation to update such statements or to publicly announce the result of any revisions to any of the forward-looking statements contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K to reflect future events or developments.

4

PART I

Overview

We are a self-advised real estate investment trust (“REIT”) focused on investing in and owning net-leased healthcare facilities across the U.S. and selectively in foreign jurisdictions. We have operated as a REIT since April 6, 2004, and accordingly, elected REIT status upon the filing of our calendar year 2004 federal income tax return. Medical Properties Trust, Inc. was incorporated under Maryland law on August 27, 2003, and MPT Operating Partnership, L.P. was formed under Delaware law on September 10, 2003. We conduct substantially all of our business through MPT Operating Partnership, L.P. We acquire and develop healthcare facilities and lease the facilities to healthcare operating companies under long-term net leases, which require the tenant to bear most of the costs associated with the property. We also make mortgage loans to healthcare operators collateralized by their real estate assets. In addition, we selectively make loans to certain of our operators through our taxable REIT subsidiaries (“TRS”), the proceeds of which are typically used for acquisition and working capital purposes. Finally, from time to time, we acquire a profits or other equity interest in our tenants that gives us a right to share in such tenants’ profits and losses.

Our investments in healthcare real estate, including mortgage and other loans, as well as any equity investments in our tenants are considered a single reportable segment as further discussed in Note 1 of Item 8 in Part II of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. All of our investments are currently located in the U.S. and Europe. At December 31, 2017 and 2016, our total assets were made up of the following (dollars in thousands):

Revenue by property type:

The following is our revenue by property type for the year ended December 31 (dollars in thousands):

See “Overview” in Item 7 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K for details of transaction activity for 2017, 2016 and 2015. More information is available on the Internet at www.medicalpropertiestrust.com.

5

Portfolio of Properties

As of February 28, 2018, our portfolio consisted of 275 properties: 253 facilities are leased to 31 tenants, two are under development, 15 are in the form of mortgage loans to four operators, and five properties are Adeptus Health, Inc. (“Adeptus Health”) transition properties not currently leased to a tenant, as discussed in Note 3 to Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Our facilities consist of 161 general acute care hospitals, 97 inpatient rehabilitation hospitals, and 17 long-term acute care hospitals (“LTACHs”).

At February 28, 2018, no single property accounted for more than 3.7% of our total gross assets.

Outlook and Strategy

Our strategy is to lease the facilities that we acquire or develop to experienced healthcare operators pursuant to long-term net leases. Alternatively, we have structured certain of our investments as long-term, interest-only mortgage loans to healthcare operators, and we may make similar investments in the future. Our mortgage loans are structured such that we obtain similar economic returns as our net leases. In addition, we have obtained and will continue to obtain profits or other interests in certain of our tenants’ operations in order to enhance our overall return. The market for healthcare real estate is extensive and includes real estate owned by a variety of healthcare operators. We focus on acquiring and developing those net-leased facilities that are specifically designed to reflect the latest trends in healthcare delivery methods and that focus on the most critical components of healthcare. We typically invest in facilities that have the highest intensity of care including:

6

Diversification

A fundamental component of our business plan is the continued diversification of our tenant relationships, the types of hospitals we own and the geographic areas in which we invest. From a tenant relationship perspective, see section titled “Significant Tenants” below for detail. See sections titled “Revenue by Property Type” and “Portfolio of Properties” above for information on the diversification of our hospital types. From a geographical perspective, we have investments across the U.S. and in Europe. See below for investment and revenue concentration in the U.S. and our global concentration at December 31, 2017:

We continue to believe that Europe represents an attractive market in which to invest, particularly in Germany. Germany is an attractive investment opportunity for us given its strong macroeconomic position and healthcare environment. Germany’s Gross Domestic Product (“GDP”), which is approximately $3.5 billion according to World Bank 2016 data, has been relatively more stable than other countries in the European Union due to Germany’s stable business practices and monetary policy. In addition to cultural influences, government policies emphasizing sound public finance and a significant presence of small and medium-sized enterprises

7

(which employ 61% of the employment base) have also contributed to Germany’s strong and sustainable economic position. The above factors have contributed to an unemployment rate in Germany of 3.6% as of December 2017, which is significantly less than the 8.7% unemployment rate in the European Union as of December 2017, according to Eurostat.

Underwriting/Asset Management

Our revenue is derived from rents we earn pursuant to the lease agreements with our tenants, from interest income from loans to our tenants and other facility owners and from profits or equity interests in certain of our tenants’ operations. Our tenants operate in the healthcare industry, generally providing medical, surgical and rehabilitative care to patients. The capacity of our tenants to pay our rents and interest is dependent upon their ability to conduct their operations at profitable levels. We believe that the business environment of the industry segments in which our tenants operate is generally positive for efficient operators. However, our tenants’ operations are subject to economic, regulatory and market conditions that may affect their profitability, which could impact our results. Accordingly, we monitor certain key factors, changes to which we believe may provide early indications of conditions that may affect the level of risk in our portfolio.

Key factors that we consider in underwriting prospective tenants and in our ongoing monitoring of our tenants’ (and any guarantors’) performance include the following:

Healthcare Industry

The delivery of healthcare services, whether in the U.S. or elsewhere, requires real estate and, as a consequence, healthcare providers depend on real estate to maintain and grow their businesses. We believe that the healthcare real estate market provides investment opportunities due to the:

8

United States

Healthcare is the single largest industry in the U.S. based on GDP. According to the National Health Expenditures report dated July 2017 by the CMS: (i) national health expenditures are projected to grow 5.4% in 2017; (ii) the average compound annual growth rate for national health expenditures, over the projection period of 2017 through 2025, is anticipated to be 5.6%; and (iii) the healthcare industry is projected to represent 19.9% of U.S. GDP by 2025.

Germany

The healthcare industry is also the single largest industry in Germany. Behind only the U.S., Netherlands and France, Germany’s healthcare expenditures represent approximately 11.0% of its total GDP according to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development’s 2013 data.

The German rehabilitation market (which includes the majority of our facilities in Germany) serves a broader scope of treatment with over 1,233 rehabilitation facilities (compared to 1,165 in the U.S.) and 208.5 beds per 100,000 population (compared to 114.7 in the U.S.). Approximately 90% of the payments in the German healthcare system come from governmental sources. The largest payor category is the public pension fund system representing 39% of payments. Public health insurance and payments for government employees represent 46% of payments. The balance of the payments into the German rehabilitation market come from a variety of sources including private pay and private insurance. One particular focus area of investors in the German market is the healthcare industry because the German Social Code mandates universal access, coverage and a high standard of care, thereby creating a robust healthcare dynamic in the country. Germany spends approximately 7.4% of health spending for inpatient facilities on prevention and rehabilitation facilities.

United Kingdom

Healthcare services in the United Kingdom are provided through the National Health Service (“NHS”). In 2014, the United Kingdom spent 9.9% of GDP on healthcare. The majority of this funding for the NHS comes from general taxation, and a smaller proportion from national insurance (a payroll tax). The NHS also receives income from copayments, people using NHS services as private patients, and some other minor sources. In 2015, 10.5% of the United Kingdom population had private voluntary health insurance provided mostly through employers. Private insurance offers more rapid and convenient access to care, especially for elective hospital procedures. It is estimated that four insurers account for 87.5% of the market, with small providers comprising the rest. Demand for private health insurance rose by 2.1% in 2015.

Publicly owned hospitals are organized either as NHS trusts, approximately 72 in number or as foundation trusts, approximately 150 in number. NHS trusts are accountable to the Department of Health while foundation trusts enjoy greater freedom from central control. An estimated 548 private hospitals are located in the United Kingdom and offer a range of treatments. Their charges to private patients are not regulated, and they receive no public subsidies. NHS use of private hospitals remains low with about 3.6% of NHS funding used for this purpose. The NHS budget is projected to grow 1.1% between 2015 and 2021.

Italy

The Italian national health service (Servizio Sanitario Nazionale) is regionally based and organized at the national, regional, and local levels. Under the Italian constitution, responsibility for healthcare is shared by the national government and the 19 regions and 2 autonomous provinces. The central government controls the distribution of tax revenue for publicly financed health care and defines a national statutory benefits package to be offered to all residents in every region — the “Essential Levels of Care.” The 19 regions and two autonomous provinces have responsibility for the organization and delivery of health services through local health units.

9

Public financing accounted for 76% of total health spending in 2014, with total expenditure standing at 9.1% of GDP. The public system is financed primarily through a corporate tax (approximately 35.6% of the overall funding in 2012) pooled nationally and allocated back to regions, typically the source region, and a fixed proportion of national value-added tax revenue (approximately 47.3% of the total in 2012) collected by the central government and redistributed to regions unable to raise sufficient resources to provide the Essential Levels of Care.

In 2012, there were approximately 187,000 beds in public hospitals and 45,500 beds in private accredited hospitals. A diagnosis-related group-based prospective payment system operates across the country and accounts for most hospital revenue.

Private health insurance plays a limited role in the health system, accounting for roughly 1% of total spending in 2014. Approximately 6 million people are covered by some form of voluntary insurance which generally covers services excluded under the Essential Levels of Care, to offer a higher standard of comfort and privacy in hospital facilities, and wider choice among public and private providers. Some private health insurance policies also cover copayments for privately provided services, or a daily rate of compensation during hospitalization. There are two types of private health insurance: corporate, where companies cover employees and sometimes their families; and non-corporate, with individuals buying insurance for themselves or their family.

Depending on the region, public funds are allocated by local health units to public and accredited private hospitals. Rates paid to hospitals include all hospital costs including those of physicians. Funding for health is defined by the July 2014 Pact for Health which defines funding between $143.4 billion and $151.3 billion annually for the years 2014 to 2016.

Spain

The Spanish health system was established by the General Health Law of 1986. This law carries out a mandate of the Spanish Constitution, which establishes the right of all citizens to protection of their health. The National Health System (Sistema Nacional de Salud, SNS) is the administrative device set up by the law. Spain spends approximately 9.6% of its GDP on health care. Expenditures for private healthcare are 26.4% of total health expenditures and have been growing at a compounded annual growth rate of 1.7%. 80% of all Spanish patients use a combination of both private and public healthcare services.

In 2014, private hospitals comprised 55% of total Spanish hospitals. Specifically, private hospitals numbered 421 while public hospitals accounted for 343 of Spain’s total number of hospitals.

Public expenditures on healthcare accounted for 5.9% of total public expenditures. They are projected to grow to 7.1% of total public expenditures by 2050. In 2015, public spending on healthcare reached €68 million, a significant increase from 1995 when they were €23 million.

Our Leases and Loans

The leases for our facilities are generally “net” leases with terms requiring the tenant to pay all ongoing operating and maintenance expenses of the facility, including property, casualty, general liability and other insurance coverages, utilities and other charges incurred in the operation of the facilities, as well as real estate and certain other taxes, ground lease rent (if any) and the costs of capital expenditures, repairs and maintenance (including any repairs mandated by regulatory requirements). Similarly, borrowers under our mortgage loan arrangements retain the responsibilities of ownership, including physical maintenance and improvements and all costs and expenses. Our leases and loans typically require our tenants to indemnify us for any past or future environmental liabilities. Our current leases and loans have a weighted average remaining initial lease or loan term of 13.7 years (see Item 2 for more information on remaining lease or loan terms). Based on current monthly

10

revenue, more than 95% of our leases and loans provide for annual rent or interest escalations based on either increases in the consumer price index (“CPI”) or fixed minimum annual rent or interest escalations ranging from 0.5% to 4.0%. In some cases, our domestic leases and loans provide for escalations based on CPI subject to floors and/or ceilings. In certain limited cases, we may have arrangements that provide for additional rents based on the level of a tenant’s revenue.

RIDEA Investments

We have and will make equity investments, loans (with equity like returns), and obtain profit interests in certain of our tenants. Some of these investments fall under a structure permitted by the REIT Investment Diversification and Empowerment Act of 2007 (“RIDEA”), which was signed into law under the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008. Under the provisions of RIDEA, a REIT may lease “qualified health care properties” on an arm’s length basis to a TRS if the property is operated on behalf of such subsidiary by a person who qualifies as an “eligible independent contractor.” We view RIDEA as a structure primarily to be used on properties that present attractive valuation entry points. At December 31, 2017, our RIDEA investments totaled approximately $107.5 million.

Significant Tenants

At December 31, 2017, we had total assets of approximately $9.0 billion comprised of 275 healthcare properties in 29 states, in Germany, the United Kingdom, Italy, and Spain. The properties are leased to or mortgaged by 31 different hospital operating companies. On a gross asset basis (which is total assets before accumulated depreciation/amortization and assumes all real estate binding commitments on new investments and unfunded amounts on development deals and commenced capital improvement projects are fully funded, and assumes cash on hand is fully used in these transactions, as more fully described in the section titled “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” in “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” in Item 7 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K), our top five tenants were as follows (dollars in thousands):

Gross Assets by Operator

Affiliates of Steward Health Care System LLC (“Steward”) lease 28 facilities pursuant to a master lease agreement, which had an initial 15-year term (ending in October 2031) with three five-year extension options, plus annual inflation-based escalators. At December 31, 2017, these facilities had an average remaining initial lease term of 13.8 years. In addition to the master lease, we hold a mortgage loan on six facilities with terms and provisions substantially similar to the master lease agreement. The master lease and loan agreements include extension options that must include all or none of the properties, cross default provisions for the leases and loans, and a right of first refusal for the repurchase of the leased properties. At December 31, 2017, we hold a 9.9% equity investment in Steward for $150 million.

11

Affiliates of Median Kliniken S.à r.l.(“MEDIAN”) lease 77 facilities pursuant to four master lease agreements. Each master lease agreement has no renewal or repurchase options. The annual escalator for one master lease that represents 15 facilities of the MEDIAN portfolio provided for a fixed increase of 2% through 2017 and provides for additional fixed increases of 0.5% each year thereafter. In addition, at December 31, 2020 and every three years thereafter, rent will be increased, if needed, by the positive difference between 1.5% and 70% of the change in German CPI during the review period. This master lease had an approximate 27-year fixed term ending in November 2040. The annual escalators for the other master leases that cover the remaining facilities of the MEDIAN portfolio provide for increases of the greater of 1% or 70% of the change in German CPI. The lease terms for these remaining leases end in November 2044 for three of the facilities, December 2042 for 39 of the facilities and August 2043 for 20 of the facilities.

Affiliates of Prime Healthcare Services, Inc. (“Prime”) lease 22 facilities pursuant to five master lease agreements. Four of the master leases have initial fixed terms of 10 years and contain two renewal options of five years each. The fifth master lease is for 15 years and contains three renewal options for five years each. Rent escalates each year based on the CPI increase, with a 2% minimum floor. At the end of the initial or any renewal term, Prime must exercise any available extension or purchase option with respect to all or none of the leased and mortgaged properties relative to each master lease. The master leases include repurchase options, including provisions establishing minimum repurchase prices equal to our total investment. At December 31, 2017, these facilities had an average remaining initial fixed term of 7 years. In addition to leases, we hold mortgage loans on three facilities owned by affiliates of Prime. The terms and provisions of these loans are generally equivalent to the terms and provisions of our Prime lease arrangements.

Affiliates of Ernest Health, Inc. (“Ernest”) lease 22 facilities, including one under development, pursuant to a master lease agreement and two stand-alone lease agreements. The original master lease agreement entered into in 2012, covering 20 properties, had a 20-year initial fixed term with three five-year extension options and provides for consumer price-indexed increases, limited to a 2% floor and 5% ceiling annually. At December 31, 2017, these facilities had a remaining initial fixed lease term of 14.2 years. This master lease includes purchase options that allow the lessee to purchase the leased property at an option price equal to the greater of fair market value of the lease property or the lease base increased by an amount equal to the annual rate of increase in the CPI on each adjustment date. All leases and loans are cross-defaulted, including the mortgage loans. In addition to the original master lease, Ernest affiliates lease two other properties, including one property that is currently under development, pursuant to two separate stand-alone leases that have terms generally similar to the original master lease agreement. Furthermore, we hold a mortgage loan on four facilities owned by affiliates of Ernest that will mature in 2032. The terms and provisions of these loans are generally equivalent to the terms and provisions of the original master lease agreement.

Affiliates of RCCH (formerly Capella Healthcare Inc. (“Capella”)) lease six facilities (four of which are leased pursuant to a master lease agreement). The master lease agreement has an initial fixed 13.5-year term with four five-year extension options, plus consumer price-indexed increases, limited to a 2% floor and a 4% ceiling annually. The extension options may be exercised with respect to any or all of the properties. At the end of the fixed term and during any exercised extension options, the lessee will have the right of first refusal to purchase the leased property. At December 31, 2017, these facilities had an average remaining initial fixed lease term of 11.2 years. In addition to the master lease, two facilities are leased pursuant to stand-alone leases with a weighted average remaining fixed term of 11.1 years. The terms and provisions of these leases are generally equivalent to the terms and provisions of the master lease agreement.

No other tenant accounted for more than 3.7% of our total gross assets at December 31, 2017.

Environmental Matters

Under various U.S. federal, state and local environmental laws and regulations and similar international laws, a current or previous owner, operator or tenant of real estate may be required to remediate hazardous or

12

toxic substance releases or threats of releases. There may also be certain obligations and liabilities on property owners with respect to asbestos containing materials. Investigation, remediation and monitoring costs may be substantial. The confirmed presence of contamination or the failure to properly remediate contamination on a property may adversely affect our ability to sell or rent that property or to borrow funds using such property as collateral and may adversely impact our investment in that property. Generally, prior to completing any acquisition or closing any mortgage loan, we obtain Phase I environmental assessments (or similar studies outside the U.S.) in order to attempt to identify potential environmental concerns at the facilities. These assessments are carried out in accordance with an appropriate level of due diligence and generally include a physical site inspection, a review of relevant environmental and health agency database records, one or more interviews with appropriate site-related personnel, review of the property’s chain of title and review of historic aerial photographs and other information on past uses of the property. We may also conduct limited subsurface investigations and test for substances of concern where the results of the Phase I environmental assessments or other information indicates possible contamination or where our consultants recommend such procedures. Upon closing and for the remainder of the lease or loan term, our transaction documents require our tenants to repair and remediate environmental issues at the applicable facility, and to comply in full with all environmental laws and regulations.

California Seismic Standards

California’s Alfred E. Alquist Hospital Facilities Seismic Safety Act of 1973 (the “Alquist Act”) established a seismic safety building standards program under the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development (“OSHPD”) jurisdiction for hospitals built on or after March 7, 1973. It required the California Building Standards Commission to adopt earthquake performance categories, seismic evaluation procedures, standards and timeframes for upgrading certain facilities, and seismic retrofit building standards. These regulations required hospitals to meet certain seismic performance standards to ensure that they are capable of providing medical services to the public after an earthquake or other disaster. This legislation was adopted to avoid the loss of life and the disruption of operations and the provision of emergency medical services that may result from structural damage sustained to hospitals resulting from an earthquake.

The Building Standards Commission completed its adoption of evaluation criteria and retrofit standards in 1998. The Alquist Act required the Building Standards Commission to adopt certain evaluation criteria and retrofit standards such as:

Since the Alquist Act, subsequent legislation has modified requirements of seismic safety standards and deadlines for compliance. Originally, hospital buildings considered hazardous and at risk of collapse in the event of an earthquake must have been retrofitted, replaced or removed from providing acute care services by January 1, 2008; however, provisions were made to allow this deadline to be extended to January 1, 2013.

Senate Bill 499 was signed into law that provided for a number of seismic relief measures, including criteria for reclassifying buildings into a lower seismic risk category. These buildings would have until January 1, 2030 to comply with structural seismic safety standards. Buildings denied reclassification must have met seismic compliance standards by January 1, 2013, unless further extensions were granted.

13

California’s AB 306 legislation permitted OSHPD to grant extensions to acute care hospitals that lacked the financial capacity to meet the January 1, 2013, retrofit deadline, and instead, requires them to replace those buildings by January 1, 2020. More recently, California SB 90 allows a hospital to seek an extension for seismic compliance up to seven years based on three elements:

In 2017, the OSHPD adopted a new performance category that will allow hospitals to explore the possibilities of upgrading current SPC-1 and SPC-2 buildings to a new performance level that is not as rigorous as the current requirement to upgrade to SPC-5. Under SPC-4D, buildings undergoing a retrofit to this level can continue functioning indefinitely beyond 2030.

According to a recent OSHPD report, California’s acute care hospitals continue to make progress in achieving seismic safety compliance. More than 91 percent of the acute care hospital buildings are no longer at significant risk of collapse in a strong earthquake. The inventory of buildings at risk of collapse continues to decline from 1,313 in 2002 to 251 in August 2016.

As of December 31, 2017, we have 13 licensed hospitals in California totaling investments of approximately $527.1 million, which includes investments of $30 million of medical office buildings not subject to OSHPD standards. Exclusive of certain buildings associated with three of our hospitals granted OSHPD extensions, all of our California hospitals are seismically compliant through 2030 as determined by OSHPD. For hospital buildings granted extensions, one completed its seismic retro upgrades in 2016 and is currently awaiting final OSHPD reclassification. The second hospital received an extension through 2020 for one of its buildings and began retrofit planning last year, and we expect full compliance by their 2020 deadline. Our third hospital has a storage building on campus that will be moved/relocated to a new building to meet compliance requirements.

Under our current agreements, our tenants are responsible for capital expenditures in connection with seismic laws. We do not expect California seismic standards to have a negative impact on our financial condition or cash flows. We also do not expect compliance with California seismic standards to materially impact the financial condition of our tenants.

Competition

We compete in acquiring and developing facilities with financial institutions, other lenders, real estate developers, healthcare operators, other REITs, other public and private real estate companies, and private real estate investors. Among the factors that may adversely affect our ability to compete are the following:

To the extent that we experience vacancies in our facilities, we will also face competition in leasing those facilities to prospective tenants. The actual competition for tenants varies depending on the characteristics of each local market. Virtually all of our facilities operate in highly competitive environments, and patients and referral sources, including physicians, may change their preferences for healthcare facilities from time to time.

14

The operators of our properties compete on a local and regional basis with operators of properties that provide comparable services. Operators compete for patients and residents based on a number of factors including quality of care, reputation, physical appearance of a facility, location, services offered, physicians, staff, and price. We also face competition from other health care facilities for tenants, such as physicians and other health care providers that provide comparable facilities and services.

For additional information, see “Risk Factors” in Item 1A of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Insurance

Our leases and mortgage loans require our tenants to carry property, loss of income, general liability, professional liability, and other insurance coverages in order to protect our interests. We monitor the adequacy of such coverages on an ongoing basis. In addition, we maintain separate insurance that provides coverage for bodily injury and property damage to third parties arising from our ownership of the healthcare facilities that are leased to and occupied by our tenants, as well as contingent business interruption insurance. At December 31, 2017, we believe that the policy specifications and insured limits are appropriate given the relative risk of loss, the cost of the coverage, and standard industry practice.

Healthcare Regulatory Matters

The following discussion describes certain material federal healthcare laws and regulations that may affect our operations and those of our tenants. The discussion, however, does not address all applicable federal healthcare laws, and does not address state healthcare laws and regulations, except as otherwise indicated. These state laws and regulations, like the federal healthcare laws and regulations, could affect the operations of our tenants and, accordingly, our operations. In addition, in some instances we own a minority interest in our tenants’ operations and, in addition to the effect on our tenant’s ability to meet its financial obligations to us, our ownership and investment returns may also be negatively impacted by such laws and regulations. Moreover, the discussion relating to reimbursement for healthcare services addresses matters that are subject to frequent review and revision by Congress and the agencies responsible for administering federal payment programs. Consequently, predicting future reimbursement trends or changes, along with the potential impact to us, is inherently difficult and imprecise.

Ownership and operation of hospitals and other healthcare facilities are subject, directly and indirectly, to substantial U.S. federal, state, and local government healthcare laws, rules, and regulations. Our tenants’ failure to comply with these laws and regulations could adversely affect their ability to meet their obligations to us. Physician investment in our facilities or in joint ventures to own real estate also will be subject to such laws and regulations. Although we are not a healthcare provider or in a position to influence the referral of patients or ordering of items and services reimbursable by the federal government, to the extent that a healthcare provider engages in transactions with our tenants, such as sublease or other financial arrangements, the Anti-Kickback Statute and the Stark Law (both discussed in this section) could be implicated. Our leases and mortgage loans require the tenants to comply with all applicable laws, including healthcare laws. Additionally, our foreign tenants in the United Kingdom and Western Europe may be subject to similar laws and regulations governing the ownership or operation of healthcare facilities including, without limitation, laws governing patient care and safety, reimbursement, licensure, and data protection. We intend for all of our business activities and operations to conform in all material respects with all applicable laws, rules, and regulations, including healthcare laws, rules, and regulations.

Applicable Laws

Anti-Kickback Statute. The federal Anti-Kickback Statute (codified at 42 U.S.C. § 1320a-7b(b)) prohibits, among other things, the offer, payment, solicitation, or acceptance of remuneration, directly or indirectly, in return for referring an individual to a provider of items or services for which payment may be made in whole, or

15

in part, under a federal healthcare program, including the Medicare or Medicaid programs. Violation of the Anti-Kickback Statute is a crime, punishable by fines of up to $25,000 per violation, five years imprisonment, or both. Violations may also result in civil sanctions, including civil monetary penalties of up to $50,000 per violation, exclusion from participation in federal healthcare programs, including Medicare and Medicaid, and additional monetary penalties in amounts treble to the underlying remuneration. The Anti-Kickback Statute is an intent based statute, however, it has been broadly interpreted. As an example, courts have held that there is a violation of the Anti-Kickback Statute if just one purpose of an arrangement is to generate referrals despite the fact that there may be one or more other lawful purposes to the arrangement at issue.

The Office of Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human Services has issued “Safe Harbor Regulations” that describe practices that will not be considered violations of the Anti-Kickback Statute. Nonetheless, the fact that a particular arrangement does not meet safe harbor requirements does not also mean that the arrangement violates the Anti-Kickback Statute. Rather, the safe harbor regulations simply provide a guaranty that qualifying arrangements will not be prosecuted under the Anti-Kickback Statute. We intend to use commercially reasonable efforts to structure our arrangements involving facilities, so as to satisfy, or meet as closely as possible, all safe harbor conditions. We cannot assure you, however, that we will meet all the conditions for an applicable safe harbor.

Physician Self-Referral Statute (“Stark Law”). Any physicians investing in us or our subsidiary entities could also be subject to the Ethics in Patient Referrals Act of 1989, or the Stark Law (codified at 42 U.S.C. § 1395nn). Unless subject to an exception, the Stark Law prohibits a physician from making a referral to an “entity” furnishing “designated health services” (which would include, without limitation, certain inpatient and outpatient hospital services, clinical laboratory services, and radiology services) paid by Medicare or Medicaid if the physician or a member of his immediate family has a “financial relationship” with that entity. A reciprocal prohibition bars the entity from billing Medicare or Medicaid for any services furnished pursuant to a prohibited referral. Sanctions for violating the Stark Law include denial of payment, refunding amounts received for services provided pursuant to prohibited referrals, civil monetary penalties of up to $15,000 per prohibited service provided, and exclusion from the participation in federal healthcare programs. The statute also provides for a penalty of up to $100,000 for a circumvention scheme.

There are exceptions to the self-referral prohibition for many of the customary financial arrangements between physicians and providers, including, without limitation, employment contracts, leases, personal services agreements and recruitment agreements. Unlike safe harbors under the Anti-Kickback Statute, the Stark Law imposes strict liability on the parties to an arrangement and an arrangement must comply with every requirement of a Stark Law exception or the arrangement is in violation of the Stark Law.

CMS has issued multiple phases of final regulations implementing the Stark Law and continues to make changes to these regulations. While these regulations help clarify the exceptions to the Stark Law, it is unclear how the government will interpret many of these exceptions for enforcement purposes. Although our lease agreements require lessees to comply with the Stark Law, and we intend for facilities to comply with the Stark Law, we cannot offer assurance that the arrangements entered into by us and our facilities will be found to be in compliance with the Stark Law, as it ultimately may be implemented or interpreted. In addition, changes to the Stark Law could require our tenants to restructure certain arrangements with physicians, which could impact the business of our tenants.

False Claims Act. The federal False Claims Act prohibits the making or presenting of any false claim for payment to the federal government; it is the civil equivalent to federal criminal provisions prohibiting the submission of false claims to federally funded programs. Additionally, qui tam, or whistleblower, provisions of the federal False Claims Act allow private individuals to bring actions on behalf of the federal government alleging that the defendant has defrauded the federal government. Whistleblowers may collect a portion of the federal government’s recovery — an incentive for private parties to bring such actions. A successful federal False Claims Act case may result in a penalty of three times the actual damages, plus additional civil penalties

16

payable to the government, plus reimbursement of the fees of counsel for the whistleblower. Many states have enacted similar statutes preventing the presentation of a false claim to a state government, and we expect more to do so because the Social Security Act provides a financial incentive for states to enact statutes establishing state level liability.

The Civil Monetary Penalties Law. Among other things, the Civil Monetary Penalties law prohibits the knowing presentation of a claim for certain healthcare services that is false or fraudulent, the presentation of false or misleading information in connection with claims for payment, and other acts involving fraudulent conduct. Penalties include a monetary civil penalty of up to $10,000 for each item or service, $15,000 for each individual with respect to whom false or misleading information was given, as well as treble damages for the total amount of remuneration claimed.

Licensure. Our tenants are subject to extensive U.S. federal, state, and local licensure, certification, and inspection laws and regulations including, in some cases, certificate of need laws. Further, various licenses and permits are required to dispense narcotics, operate pharmacies, handle radioactive materials, and operate equipment. Failure to comply with any of these laws could result in loss of licensure, certification or accreditation, denial of reimbursement, imposition of fines, and suspension or decertification from federal and state healthcare programs.

EMTALA. Our tenants that provide emergency care are subject to the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (“EMTALA”). This federal law requires such healthcare facilities to conduct an appropriate medical screening examination of every individual who presents to the hospital’s emergency room for treatment and, if the individual is suffering from an emergency medical condition, to either stabilize the condition or make an appropriate transfer of the individual to a facility able to handle the condition. The obligation to screen and stabilize emergency medical conditions exists regardless of an individual’s ability to pay for treatment. There are severe penalties under EMTALA if a hospital fails to screen or appropriately stabilize or transfer an individual or if the hospital delays appropriate treatment in order to first inquire about the individual’s ability to pay. Liability for violations of EMTALA includes, among other things, civil monetary penalties and exclusion from participation in the federal healthcare programs. Our lease and mortgage loan agreements require our tenants to comply with EMTALA, and we believe our tenants conduct business in substantial compliance with EMTALA.

Reimbursement Pressures. Healthcare facility operating margins continue to face significant pressure due to the deterioration in pricing flexibility and payor mix, a shift toward alternative payment models, increases in operating expenses that exceed increases in payments under the Medicare program, reductions in levels of Medicaid funding due to state budget shortfalls, and other similar cost pressures on our tenants. More specifically, LTACHs continue to face reimbursement pressures including those resulting from the passage of the SGR Reform Act of 2013, and CMS is also implementing regulatory restrictions and limitations on reimbursement for hospital outpatient departments. We cannot predict how and to what extent these or other initiatives will impact the business of our tenants or whether our business will be adversely impacted.

Healthcare Reform. Generally, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (collectively, the “Reform Law”) provides for expanded health insurance coverage through tax subsidies and federal health insurance programs, individual and employer mandates for health insurance coverage, and health insurance exchanges. The Reform Law also includes various cost containment initiatives, including quality control and payment system refinements for federal programs, such as pay-for-performance criteria and value-based purchasing programs, bundled provider payments, accountable care organizations, geographic payment variations, comparative effectiveness research, and lower payments for hospital readmissions. The Reform Law also increases health information technology (“HIT”) standards for healthcare providers in an effort to improve quality and reduce costs. The Reform Law has led, and will continue to lead, to significant changes in the healthcare system, and although there are continuing efforts to repeal and replace the Reform Law, we believe it is likely that certain trends that have been in place since the passage of the Reform Law, such as development and implementation of cost containment initiatives, increased

17

use of HIT and pressure on reimbursement, will continue irrespective of any repeal or replacement of the Reform Law. We cannot predict the continued impact of the Reform Law or the impact of its possible repeal and replacement on our business, as some aspects benefit the operations of our tenants, while other aspects present challenges.

Employees

We have 66 employees as of February 28, 2018. As we continue to grow, we expect our head count to increase as well. However, we do not believe that any adjustments to the number of employees will have a material effect on our operations or to general and administrative expenses as a percent of revenues. We believe that our relations with our employees are good. None of our employees are members of any union.

Available Information

Our website address is www.medicalpropertiestrust.com and provides access in the “Investor Relations” section, free of charge, to our Annual Report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, including exhibits, and all amendments to these reports as soon as reasonably practicable after such material is electronically filed with or furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). Also available on our website, free of charge, are our Corporate Governance Guidelines, the charters of our Ethics, Nominating and Corporate Governance, Audit and Compensation Committees and our Code of Ethics and Business Conduct. If you are not able to access our website, the information is available in print free of charge to any stockholder who should request the information directly from us at (205) 969-3755. Information on or connected to our website is neither part of nor incorporated by reference into this Annual Report or any other SEC filings.

The risks and uncertainties described herein are not the only ones facing us and there may be additional risks that we do not presently know of or that we currently consider not likely to have a significant impact on us. All of these risks could adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition. Some statements in this report including statements in the following risk factors constitute forward-looking statements. Please refer to the section entitled “Cautionary Language Regarding Forward Looking Statements” at the beginning of this Annual Report.

RISKS RELATED TO OUR BUSINESS AND GROWTH STRATEGY (Including Financing Risks)

Limited access to capital may restrict our growth.

Our business plan contemplates growth through acquisitions and development of facilities. As a REIT, we are required to make cash distributions, which reduce our ability to fund acquisitions and developments with retained earnings. We are dependent on acquisition financing and access to the capital markets for cash to make investments in new facilities. Due to market or other conditions, we may have limited access to capital from the equity and debt markets. We may not be able to obtain additional equity or debt capital or dispose of assets on favorable terms, if at all, at the time we need additional capital to acquire healthcare properties or to meet our obligations, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

Our indebtedness could adversely affect our financial condition and may otherwise adversely impact our business operations and our ability to make distributions to stockholders.

As of February 28, 2018, we had $4.9 billion of debt outstanding.

18

Our indebtedness could have significant effects on our business. For example, it could:

Our future borrowings under our loan facilities may bear interest at variable rates in addition to the $1.0 billion in variable interest rate debt that we had outstanding as of February 28, 2018. If interest rates increase significantly, our operating results would decline along with the cash available for distributions to our stockholders.

In addition, most of our current debt is, and we anticipate that much of our future debt will be, non-amortizing and payable in balloon payments. Therefore, we will likely need to refinance at least a portion of that debt as it matures. There is a risk that we may not be able to refinance debt maturing in future years or that the terms of any refinancing will not be as favorable as the terms of the then-existing debt. If principal payments due at maturity cannot be refinanced, extended or repaid with proceeds from other sources, such as new equity capital or sales of facilities, our cash flow may not be sufficient to repay all maturing debt in years when significant balloon payments come due. Additionally, we may incur significant penalties if we choose to prepay the debt. See Item 7 of Part II of this Annual Report on Form 10-K for further information on our current debt maturities.

Covenants in our debt instruments limit our operational flexibility, and a breach of these covenants could materially affect our financial condition and results of operations.

The terms of our unsecured credit facility (“Credit Facility”) and the indentures governing our outstanding unsecured senior notes, and other debt instruments that we may enter into in the future are subject to customary financial and operational covenants. For example, our Credit Facility imposes certain restrictions on us, including restrictions on our ability to: incur debts; create or incur liens; provide guarantees in respect of obligations of any other entity; make redemptions and repurchases of our capital stock; prepay, redeem or repurchase debt; engage in mergers or consolidations; enter into affiliated transactions; dispose of real estate; and change our business. In addition, the agreements governing our unsecured credit facility limit the amount of dividends we can pay as a percentage of normalized adjusted funds from operations, as defined, on a rolling four quarter basis. Through the quarter ending December 31, 2017, the dividend restriction was 95% of normalized adjusted funds from operations (“NAFFO”). The indentures governing our senior unsecured notes also limit the amount of dividends we can pay based on the sum of 95% of NAFFO, proceeds of equity issuances and certain other net cash proceeds. Finally, our senior unsecured notes require us to maintain total unencumbered assets (as defined in the related indenture) of not less than 150% of our unsecured indebtedness.

From time-to-time, the lenders of our Credit Facility may adjust certain covenants to give us more flexibility to complete a transaction; however, such modified covenants are temporary, and we must be in a position to meet the lowered reset covenants in the future. Our continued ability to incur debt and operate our business is subject

19

to compliance with the covenants in our debt instruments, which limit operational flexibility. Breaches of these covenants could result in defaults under applicable debt instruments and other debt instruments due to cross-default provisions, even if payment obligations are satisfied. Financial and other covenants that limit our operational flexibility, as well as defaults resulting from a breach of any of these covenants in our debt instruments, could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

Failure to hedge effectively against interest rate changes may adversely affect our results of operations and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

As of February 28, 2018, we had approximately $1.0 billion in variable interest rate debt, which constitutes 21.2% of our overall indebtedness and subjects us to interest rate volatility. We may seek to manage our exposure to interest rate volatility by using interest rate hedging arrangements. However, even these hedging arrangements involve risk, including the risk that counterparties may fail to honor their obligations under these arrangements, that these arrangements may not be effective in reducing our exposure to interest rate changes and that these arrangements may result in higher interest rates than we would otherwise have. Moreover, no hedging activity can completely insulate us from the risks associated with changes in interest rates. Failure to hedge effectively against interest rate changes may materially adversely affect our results of operations and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

Dependence on our tenants for payments of rent and interest may adversely impact our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

We expect to continue to qualify as a REIT and, accordingly, as a REIT operating in the healthcare industry, we are severely limited by current tax law with respect to our ability to operate or manage the businesses conducted in our facilities.

Accordingly, we rely heavily on rent payments from our tenants under leases or interest payments from operators under mortgage or other loans for cash with which to make distributions to our stockholders. We have no control over the success or failure of these tenants’ businesses. Significant adverse changes in the operations of our facilities, or the financial condition of our tenants, operators or guarantors, could have a material adverse effect on our ability to collect rent and interest payments and, accordingly, on our ability to make distributions to our stockholders. Facility management by our tenants and their compliance with healthcare and other laws could have a material impact on our tenants’ operating and financial condition and, in turn, their ability to pay rent and interest to us.

It may be costly to replace defaulting tenants and we may not be able to replace defaulting tenants with suitable replacements on suitable terms.

Failure on the part of a tenant to comply materially with the terms of a lease could give us the right to terminate our lease with that tenant, repossess the applicable facility, cross default certain other leases and loans with that tenant and enforce the payment obligations under the lease. The process of terminating a lease with a defaulting tenant and repossessing the applicable facility may be costly and require a disproportionate amount of management’s attention. In addition, defaulting tenants or their affiliates may initiate litigation in connection with a lease termination or repossession against us or our subsidiaries. If a tenant-operator defaults and we choose to terminate our lease, we are then required to find another tenant-operator, such as the case was with our Monroe facility in 2014. The transfer of most types of healthcare facilities is highly regulated, which may result in delays and increased costs in locating a suitable replacement tenant. The sale or lease of these properties to entities other than healthcare operators may be difficult due to the added cost and time of refitting the properties. If we are unable to re-let the properties to healthcare operators, we may be forced to sell the properties at a loss due to the repositioning expenses likely to be incurred by non-healthcare purchasers. Alternatively, we may be required to spend substantial amounts to adapt the facility to other uses. There can be no assurance that we would be able to find another tenant in a timely fashion, or at all, or that, if another tenant were found, we would be able

20

to enter into a new lease on favorable terms. Defaults by our tenants under our leases may adversely affect our results of operations, financial condition, and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders. Defaults by our significant tenants under master leases (like Steward, Prime, MEDIAN, Ernest, and RCCH) will have an even greater effect.

It may be costly to find new tenants when lease terms end and we may not be able to replace such tenants with suitable replacements on suitable terms.

Failure on the part of a tenant to renew or extend the lease at the end of its fixed term on one of our facilities could result in us having to search for, negotiate with and execute new lease agreements, such was the case with our two South Carolina facilities — Bennettsville and Cheraw in 2015. The process of finding and negotiating with a new tenant along with costs (such as maintenance, property taxes, utilities, etc.) that we will incur while the facility is untenanted may be costly and require a disproportionate amount of management’s attention. There can be no assurance that we would be able to find another tenant in a timely fashion, or at all, or that, if another tenant were found, we would be able to enter into a new lease on favorable terms. If we are unable to re-let the properties to healthcare operators, we may be forced to sell the properties at a loss due to the repositioning expenses likely to be incurred by non-healthcare purchasers. Alternatively, we may be required to spend substantial amounts to adapt the facility to other uses. Thus, the non-renewal or extension of leases may adversely affect our results of operations, financial condition, and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders. This risk is even greater for those properties under master leases (like Steward, Prime, MEDIAN, Ernest, and RCCH) because several properties have the same lease ending dates.

We have made investments in the operators of certain of our healthcare facilities and the cash flows (and related returns) from these investments are subject to more volatility than our properties with the traditional net leasing structure.

At December 31, 2017, we have 13 investments in the operations of certain of our healthcare facilities by utilizing RIDEA (or similar investments). These investments include profits interest, equity investments, and equity like loans that generate returns dependent upon the operator’s performance. As a result, the cash flow and returns from these investments may be more volatile than that of our traditional triple-net leasing structure. Our business, results of operations, and financial condition may be adversely affected if the related operators fail to successfully operate the facilities efficiently and in a manner that is in our best interest.

We have less experience with healthcare facilities in Germany, the United Kingdom, Italy, and Spain or anywhere else outside the U.S.

We have less experience investing in healthcare properties or other real estate-related assets located outside the U.S. Investing in real estate located in foreign countries, including Germany, the United Kingdom, Italy, and Spain, creates risks associated with the uncertainty of foreign laws and markets including, without limitation, laws respecting foreign ownership, the enforceability of loan and lease documents and foreclosure laws. German real estate and tax laws are complex and subject to change, and we cannot assure you we will always be in compliance with those laws or that compliance will not expose us to additional expense. The properties we acquired in connection with the MEDIAN acquisition (as more fully described in Note 3 to Item 8 of this Form 10-K) will also face risks in connection with unexpected changes in German or European regulatory requirements, political and economic instability, potential imposition of adverse or confiscatory taxes, possible challenges to the anticipated tax treatment of the structures that allow us to acquire and hold investments, possible currency transfer restrictions, the difficulty in enforcing obligations in other countries and the burden of complying with a wide variety of foreign laws. In addition, to qualify as a REIT, we generally will be required to operate any non-U.S. investments in accordance with the rules applicable to U.S. REITs, which may be inconsistent with local practices. We may also be subject to fluctuations in local real estate values or markets or the European economy as a whole, which may adversely affect our European investments.

21

In addition, the rents payable under our leases of foreign assets are payable in either euros or British pounds, which could expose us to losses resulting from fluctuations in exchange rates to the extent we have not hedged our position, which in turn could adversely affect our revenues, operating margins and dividends, and may also affect the book value of our assets and the amount of stockholders’ equity. Further, any international currency gain recognized with respect to changes in exchange rates may not qualify under the 75% gross income test that we must satisfy annually in order to qualify and maintain our status as a REIT. While we may hedge some of our foreign currency risk, we may not be able to do so successfully and may incur losses on our investments as a result of exchange rate fluctuations. Furthermore, we are subject to laws and regulations, such as the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and similar local anti-bribery laws, which generally prohibit companies and their employees, agents and contractors from making improper payments to governmental officials for the purpose of obtaining or retaining business. Failure to comply with these laws could subject us to civil and criminal penalties that could materially adversely affect our results of operations, the value of our international investments, and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

Our revenues are dependent upon our relationships with and success of our largest tenants, Steward, MEDIAN, Prime, Ernest, RCCH and Adeptus Health.

As of December 31, 2017, affiliates of Steward, MEDIAN, Prime, Ernest, RCCH and Adeptus Health represented 36.5%, 13.0%, 11.8%, 6.6%, 5.3% and 3.5%, respectively, of our total gross assets (which consist primarily of real estate leases and mortgage loans).

Our relationships with these operators and their financial performance and resulting ability to satisfy their lease and loan obligations to us are material to our financial results and our ability to service our debt and make distributions to our stockholders. We are dependent upon the ability of these operators to make rent and loan payments to us, and any failure to meet these obligations could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

Our tenants operate in the healthcare industry, which is highly regulated by U.S. federal, state, and local laws along with laws in Europe and changes in regulations may negatively impact our tenants’ operations until they are able to make the appropriate adjustments to their business. For example, recent modifications to regulations concerning patient criteria and reimbursement for long-term acute care hospitals, or LTACHs, have resulted in volume and profitability declines in certain facilities operated by Ernest.

We are aware of various federal and state inquiries, investigations and other proceedings currently affecting several of our tenants and would expect such government compliance and enforcement activities to be ongoing at any given time with respect to one or more of our tenants, either on a confidential or public basis. During the second quarter of 2016, the Department of Justice joined a lawsuit against Prime alleging irregular admission practices intended to increase the number of inpatient care admissions of Medicare patients, including unnecessarily classifying some patients as “inpatient” rather than “observation”. Other large acute hospital operators have also recently defended similar allegations, sometimes resulting in financial settlements and agreements with regulators to modify admission policies, resulting in lower reimbursements for those patients.

Our tenants experience operational challenges from time-to-time, and this can be even more of a risk for those tenants that grow (or have grown) via acquisitions in a short time frame, like Steward, Prime, Adeptus Health and others.

In May 2017, Prime advised that it would be delayed in furnishing its 2016 financial statements to its lenders and that it would take a significant write-down to its accounts receivables. Prime received a notice of default from its lenders related to its failure to furnish its 2016 financials until after the deadline. As a result of these developments, Standard and Poor’s (“S&P”) downgraded Prime’s corporate credit rating and senior secured term loan credit rating. These financial and operational setbacks affecting Prime may adversely impact its ability to make required lease and interest payments to us.

22

The ability of our tenants and operators to integrate newly acquired businesses into their existing operational, financial reporting and collection systems is critical towards ensuring their continued success. If such integration is not successfully implemented in a timely manner, operators can be negatively impacted in the form of write-offs of uncollectible accounts receivable (similar to Prime’s expected write-offs) or even insolvency in certain extreme cases.

Any further adverse result to any of Steward, MEDIAN, Prime, Ernest, RCCH or Adeptus Health in regulatory proceedings or financial or operational setbacks may have a material adverse effect on the relevant tenant’s operations and financial condition and on its ability to make required lease and loan payments to us. If any one of these tenants further files for bankruptcy protection, we may not be able to collect any pre-filing amounts owed to us by such tenant. In addition, in a bankruptcy proceeding, such tenant may terminate our lease(s), in which case we would have a general unsecured claim that would likely be for less than the full amount owed to us. Any secured claims we have against such tenant may only be paid to the extent of the value of the collateral, which may not cover all or any of our losses. If we are ultimately required to find one or more tenant-operators to lease one or more properties currently leased by such tenant, we may face delays and increased costs in locating a suitable replacement tenant. The protections that we have in place to protect against such failure or delay, which can include letters of credit, cross default provisions, parent guarantees, repair reserves and the right to exercise remedies including the termination of the lease and replacement of the operator, may prove to be insufficient, in whole or in part, or may entail further delays. In instances where we have an equity investment in our tenant’s operations, in addition to the effect on these tenants’ ability to meet their financial obligation to us, our ownership and investment interests may also be negatively impacted.

We have now, and may have in the future, exposure to contingent rent escalators, which could hinder our growth and profitability.

We receive a significant portion of our revenues by leasing assets under long-term net leases that generally provide for fixed rental rates subject to annual escalations. These annual escalations may be contingent on changes in CPI, typically with specified caps and floors. Certain of our other leases may provide for additional rents contingent upon a percentage of the tenant’s revenues in excess of specified threshold. If, as a result of weak economic conditions or other factors, the CPI does not increase or the properties subject to these leases do not generate sufficient revenue to achieve the specified threshold, our growth and profitability may be hindered by these leases. In addition, if strong economic conditions result in significant increases in CPI, but the escalations under our leases are capped, our growth and profitability may be limited.

The bankruptcy or insolvency of our tenants or investees could harm our operating results and financial condition.

Some of our tenants/investees are, and some of our prospective tenants/investees may be, newly organized, have limited or no operating history and may be dependent on loans from us to acquire the facility’s operations and for initial working capital. Any bankruptcy filings by or relating to one of our tenants/investees could bar us from collecting pre-bankruptcy debts from that tenant or their property, unless we receive an order permitting us to do so from the bankruptcy court. A tenant bankruptcy can be expected to delay our efforts to collect past due balances under our leases and loans, and could ultimately preclude collection of these sums. If a lease is assumed by a tenant in bankruptcy, we expect that all pre-bankruptcy balances due under the lease would be paid to us in full. However, if a lease is rejected by a tenant in bankruptcy, we would have only a general unsecured claim for damages. Any secured claims we have against our tenants may only be paid to the extent of the value of the collateral, which may not cover any or all of our losses. Any unsecured claim (such as our equity interests in our tenants) we hold against a bankrupt entity may be paid only to the extent that funds are available and only in the same percentage as is paid to all other holders of unsecured claims. We may recover none or substantially less than the full value of any unsecured claims, which would harm our financial condition.

23

Our business is highly competitive and we may be unable to compete successfully.

We compete for development opportunities and opportunities to purchase healthcare facilities with, among others:

Some of these competitors may have substantially greater financial and other resources than we have and may have better relationships with lenders and sellers. Competition for healthcare facilities from competitors may adversely affect our ability to acquire or develop healthcare facilities and the prices we pay for those facilities. If we are unable to acquire or develop facilities or if we pay too much for facilities, our revenue, earnings growth and financial return could be materially adversely affected. Certain of our facilities, or facilities we may acquire or develop in the future will face competition from other nearby facilities that provide services comparable to those offered at our facilities. Some of those facilities are owned by governmental agencies and supported by tax revenues, and others are owned by tax-exempt corporations and may be supported to a large extent by endowments and charitable contributions. Those types of support are not generally available to our facilities. In addition, competing healthcare facilities located in the areas served by our facilities may provide healthcare services that are not available at our facilities and additional facilities we may acquire or develop. From time to time, referral sources, including physicians and managed care organizations, may change the healthcare facilities to which they refer patients, which could adversely affect our tenants and thus our rental revenues, interest income, and/or our earnings from equity investments.

Many of our current tenants have, and prospective tenants may have, an option to purchase the facilities we lease to them which could disrupt our operations.

Many of our current tenants have, and some prospective tenants will have, the option to purchase the facilities we lease to them. There is no assurance that the formulas we have developed for setting the purchase price will yield a fair market value purchase price.

In the event our tenants and prospective tenants determine to purchase the facilities they lease either during the lease term or after their expiration, the timing of those purchases may be outside of our control and we may not be able to re-invest the capital on as favorable terms, or at all. Our inability to effectively manage the turnover of our facilities could materially adversely affect our ability to execute our business plan and our results of operations.

We have 135 leased properties that are subject to purchase options as of December 31, 2017. For 106 of these properties, the purchase option generally allows the lessee to purchase the real estate at the end of the lease term, as long as no default has occurred, at a price equivalent to the greater of (i) fair market value or (ii) our original purchase price (increased, in some cases, by a certain annual rate of return from lease commencement date). The lease agreements provide for an appraisal process to determine fair market value. For 17 of these properties, the purchase option generally allows the lessee to purchase the real estate at the end of the lease term, as long as no default has occurred, at our purchase price (increased, in some cases, by a certain annual rate of return from lease commencement date). For the remaining 12 leases, the purchase options approximate fair value. At December 31, 2017, none of our leases contained any bargain purchase options.

24

In certain circumstances, a prospective purchaser of our hospital real estate may be deemed to be subject to Anti-Kickback and Stark statutes, which are described on in the “Healthcare Regulatory Matters” section in Item 1 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. In such event, it may not be practicable for us to sell property to such prospective purchasers at prices other than fair market value.

We may not be able to adapt our management and operational systems to manage the net-leased facilities we have acquired or are developing or those that we may acquire or develop in the future without unanticipated disruption or expense.

There is no assurance that we will be able to adapt our management, administrative, accounting and operational systems, or hire and retain sufficient operational staff, to manage the facilities we have acquired and those that we may acquire or develop, including those properties located in Europe or any future investments outside the U.S. Our failure to successfully manage our current portfolio of facilities or any future acquisitions or developments could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

Merger and acquisition activity or consolidation in the healthcare industry may result in a change of control of, or a competitor’s investment in, one or more of our tenants or operators, which could have a material adverse effect on us.

The healthcare industry has experienced increased consolidation, including among owners of real estate and healthcare providers. We compete with other healthcare REITs, healthcare providers, healthcare lenders, real estate partnerships, banks, insurance companies, private equity firms and other investors that pursue a variety of investments, which may include investments in our tenants or operators. We have historically developed strong, long-term relationships with many of our tenants and operators. A competitor’s investment in one of our tenants or operators, any change of control of a tenant or operator, or a change in the tenant’s or operator’s management team could enable our competitor to influence or control that tenant’s or operator’s business and strategy. This influence could have a material adverse effect on us by impairing our relationship with the tenant or operator, negatively affecting our interest, or impacting the tenant’s or operator’s financial and operational performance, including their ability to pay us rent or interest. Depending on our contractual agreements and the specific facts and circumstances, we may have consent rights, termination rights, remedies upon default or other rights and remedies related to a competitor’s investment in, a change of control of, or other transactions impacting a tenant or operator. In deciding whether to exercise our rights and remedies, including termination rights or remedies upon default, we assess numerous factors, including legal, contractual, regulatory, business and other relevant considerations.

We depend on key personnel, the loss of any one of whom may threaten our ability to operate our business successfully.

We depend on the services of Edward K. Aldag, Jr., R. Steven Hamner, and Emmett E. McLean to carry out our business and investment strategy. If we were to lose any of these executive officers, it may be more difficult for us to locate attractive acquisition targets, complete our acquisitions and manage the facilities that we have acquired or developed. Additionally, as we expand, we will continue to need to attract and retain additional qualified officers and employees. The loss of the services of any of our executive officers, or our inability to recruit and retain qualified personnel in the future, could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial results.

The market price and trading volume of our common stock may be volatile.

The market price of our common stock may be highly volatile and be subject to wide fluctuations. In addition, the trading volume in our common stock may fluctuate and cause significant price variations to occur. If the market price of our common stock declines significantly, you may be unable to resell your shares at or above your purchase price.

25

We cannot assure you that the market price of our common stock will not fluctuate or decline significantly in the future. Some of the factors that could negatively affect our share price or result in fluctuations in the price or trading volume of our common stock include:

Future sales of common stock may have adverse effects on our stock price.

We cannot predict the effect, if any, of future sales of common stock, or the availability of shares for future sales, on the market price of our common stock. Sales of substantial amounts of common stock, or the perception that these sales could occur, may adversely affect prevailing market prices for our common stock. We may issue from time to time additional common stock or units of our operating partnership in connection with the acquisition of facilities and we may grant additional demand or piggyback registration rights in connection with these issuances. Sales of substantial amounts of common stock or the perception that these sales could occur may adversely affect the prevailing market price for our common stock. In addition, the sale of these shares could impair our ability to raise future capital through a sale of additional equity securities.

Downgrades in our credit ratings could have a material adverse effect on our cost and availability of capital.

On May 19, 2017, S&P revised its rating outlook on us to negative from stable and affirmed the BB+ corporate credit rating. As of February 28, 2018, our corporate credit rating from S&P remained at BB+, and our corporate family rating from Moody’s Investors Service was Ba1. There can be no assurance that we will be able to maintain our current credit ratings. Any downgrades in terms of ratings or outlook by any or all of the rating agencies could have a material adverse effect on our cost and availability of capital, which could in turn have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

An increase in market interest rates may have an adverse effect on the market price of our securities.

One of the factors that investors may consider in deciding whether to buy or sell our securities is our distribution rate as a percentage of our price per share of common stock, relative to market interest rates. If market interest rates increase, prospective investors may desire a higher distribution on our securities or seek securities paying higher distributions. The market price of our common stock likely will be based primarily on the earnings that we derive from rental and interest income with respect to our facilities and our related distributions to stockholders, and not from the underlying appraised value of the facilities themselves. As a

26

result, interest rate fluctuations and capital market conditions can affect the market price of our common stock. In addition, rising interest rates would result in increased interest expense on our variable-rate debt, thereby adversely affecting cash flow and our ability to service our indebtedness and make distributions.

Changes in currency exchange rates may subject us to risk.

As our operations have expanded internationally where the U.S. dollar is not the denominated currency, currency exchange rate fluctuations could affect our results of operations and financial position. A significant change in the value of the foreign currency of one or more countries where we have a significant investment may have a material adverse effect on our financial position, debt covenant ratios, results of operations and cash flow.

Although we may enter into foreign exchange agreements with financial institutions and/or obtain local currency mortgage debt in order to reduce our exposure to fluctuations in the value of foreign currencies, we cannot assure you that foreign currency fluctuations will not have a material adverse effect on us.

The United Kingdom’s exit from the European Union could adversely affect us.

On June 23, 2016, the United Kingdom held a referendum in which a majority of voters voted to exit the European Union, known as Brexit. Negotiations have commenced to determine the future terms of the United Kingdom’s relationship with the European Union, including, among other things, the terms of trade between the United Kingdom and the European Union. The effects of Brexit will depend on any agreements the United Kingdom makes to retain access to European Union markets either during a transitional period or more permanently. Brexit could adversely affect European and global economic or market conditions and could contribute to instability in global financial markets. In addition, Brexit could lead to legal uncertainty and potentially divergent national laws and regulations as the United Kingdom determines which European Union laws to replace or replicate. Any of these effects of Brexit, and others we cannot anticipate, may adversely affect us.

We currently hold, and may acquire additional, interests in healthcare facilities located in the United Kingdom and Europe, as well as other investments that are denominated in British pounds and euros. In addition, our operating partnership has issued, and may issue in the future, senior unsecured notes denominated in euros along with borrowings denominated in British pounds. Any of the effects of Brexit described above, and others we cannot anticipate, could have a material adverse effect on our business, the value of our real estate and other investments, and our potential growth in Europe, and could amplify the currency risks faced by us.

RISKS RELATING TO REAL ESTATE INVESTMENTS

Our real estate, mortgage, and equity investments are and are expected to continue to be concentrated in a single industry segment, making us more vulnerable economically than if our investments were more diversified.

We acquire, develop, and make mortgage investments in healthcare real estate. In addition, we selectively make RIDEA investments (or similar investments) in healthcare operators. We are subject to risks inherent in concentrating investments in real estate. The risks resulting from a lack of diversification become even greater as a result of our business strategy to invest solely in healthcare facilities. A downturn in the real estate industry could materially adversely affect the value of our facilities. A downturn in the healthcare industry could negatively affect our tenants’ ability to make lease or loan payments to us as well as our return on our equity investments. Consequently, our ability to meet debt service obligations or make distributions to our stockholders are dependent on the real estate and healthcare industries. These adverse effects could be more pronounced than if we diversified our investments outside of real estate or outside of healthcare facilities.

27

Our facilities may not have efficient alternative uses, which could impede our ability to find replacement tenants in the event of termination or default under our leases.

All of the facilities in our current portfolio are and all of the facilities we expect to acquire or develop in the future will be net-leased healthcare facilities. If we, or our tenants, terminate the leases for these facilities, or if these tenants lose their regulatory authority to operate these facilities, we may not be able to locate suitable replacement tenants to lease the facilities for their specialized uses. Alternatively, we may be required to spend substantial amounts to adapt the facilities to other uses. Any loss of revenues or additional capital expenditures occurring as a result could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations and could hinder our ability to meet debt service obligations or make distributions to our stockholders.

Illiquidity of real estate investments could significantly impede our ability to respond to adverse changes in the performance of our facilities and harm our financial condition.

Real estate investments are relatively illiquid. Additionally, the real estate market is affected by many factors beyond our control, including adverse changes in global, national, and local economic and market conditions and the availability, costs and terms of financing. Our ability to quickly sell or exchange any of our facilities in response to changes in economic and other conditions will be limited. No assurances can be given that we will recognize full value for any facility that we are required to sell for liquidity reasons. Our inability to respond rapidly to changes in the performance of our investments could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

Development and construction risks could adversely affect our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

We have developed and constructed facilities in the past and are currently developing three facilities. We will develop additional facilities in the future as opportunities present themselves. Our development and related construction activities may subject us to the following risks:

We expect to fund our development projects over time. The time frame required for development and construction of these facilities means that we may have to wait for some time to earn significant cash returns. In addition, our tenants may not be able to obtain managed care provider contracts in a timely manner or at all. Finally, there is no assurance that future development projects will occur without delays and cost overruns. Risks associated with our development projects may reduce anticipated rental revenue which could affect the timing of, and our ability to make, distributions to our stockholders.

28

We may be subject to risks arising from future acquisitions of real estate.

We may be subject to risks in connection with our acquisition of healthcare real estate, including without limitation the following:

We cannot assure you that we will be able to manage the new properties without encountering difficulties or that any such difficulties will not have a material adverse effect on us.

Our facilities may not achieve expected results or we may be limited in our ability to finance future acquisitions, which may harm our financial condition and operating results and our ability to make the distributions to our stockholders required to maintain our REIT status.

Acquisitions and developments entail risks that investments will fail to perform in accordance with expectations and that estimates of the costs of improvements necessary to acquire and develop facilities will prove inaccurate, as well as general investment risks associated with any new real estate investment. Newly-developed or newly-renovated facilities may not have operating histories that are helpful in making objective pricing decisions. The purchase prices of these facilities will be based in part upon projections by management as to the expected operating results of the facilities, subjecting us to risks that these facilities may not achieve anticipated operating results or may not achieve these results within anticipated time frames.

We anticipate that future acquisitions and developments will largely be financed through externally generated funds such as borrowings under credit facilities and other secured and unsecured debt financing and from issuances of equity securities. Because we must distribute at least 90% of our REIT taxable income, excluding net capital gains, each year to maintain our qualification as a REIT, our ability to rely upon income from operations or cash flows from operations to finance our growth and acquisition activities will be limited.

If our facilities do not achieve expected results and generate ample cash flows from operations or if we are unable to obtain funds from borrowings or the capital markets to finance our acquisition and development activities, amounts available for distribution to stockholders could be adversely affected and we could be required to reduce distributions, thereby jeopardizing our ability to maintain our status as a REIT.

If we suffer losses that are not covered by insurance or that are in excess of our insurance coverage limits, we could lose investment capital and anticipated profits.

Our leases generally require our tenants to carry property, general liability, professional liability, loss of earnings, all risk and extended coverage insurance in amounts sufficient to permit the replacement of the facility in the event of a total loss, subject to applicable deductibles. We carry general liability insurance and loss of earnings coverage on all of our properties as a contingent measure in case our tenant’s coverage is not sufficient. However, there are certain types of losses, generally of a catastrophic nature, such as earthquakes, floods, hurricanes and acts of terrorism, which may be uninsurable or not insurable at a price we or our tenants can afford. Inflation, changes in building codes and ordinances, environmental considerations and other factors also might make it impracticable to use insurance proceeds to replace a facility after it has been damaged or

29

destroyed. Under such circumstances, the insurance proceeds we receive might not be adequate to restore our economic position with respect to the affected facility. If any of these or similar events occur, it may reduce our return from the facility and the value of our investment. We continually review the insurance maintained by our tenants and operators and believe the coverage provided to be adequate and customary for similarly situated companies in our industry. However, we cannot provide any assurances that such insurance will be available at a reasonable cost in the future. Also, we cannot assure you that material uninsured losses, or losses in excess of insurance proceeds, will not occur in the future.

Our capital expenditures for facility renovation may be greater than anticipated and may adversely impact rent payments by our tenants and our ability to make distributions to stockholders.

Facilities, particularly those that consist of older structures, have an ongoing need for renovations and other capital improvements, including periodic replacement of fixtures and fixed equipment. Although our leases require our tenants to be primarily responsible for the cost of such expenditures, renovation of facilities involves certain risks, including the possibility of environmental problems, regulatory requirements, construction cost overruns and delays, uncertainties as to market demand or deterioration in market demand after commencement of renovation and the emergence of unanticipated competition from other facilities. All of these factors could adversely impact rent and loan payments by our tenants and returns on our equity investments, which in turn could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations along with our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

All of our healthcare facilities are subject to property taxes that may increase in the future and adversely affect our business.

Our facilities are subject to real and personal property taxes that may increase as property tax rates change and as the facilities are assessed or reassessed by taxing authorities. Our leases generally provide that the property taxes are charged to our tenants as an expense related to the facilities that they occupy. As the owner of the facilities, however, we are ultimately responsible for payment of the taxes to the government. If property taxes increase, our tenants may be unable to make the required tax payments, ultimately requiring us to pay the taxes. If we incur these tax liabilities, our ability to make expected distributions to our stockholders could be adversely affected. In addition, if such taxes increase on properties in which we have an equity investment in the tenant, our return on investment maybe negatively affected.

As the owner and lessor of real estate, we are subject to risks under environmental laws, the cost of compliance with which and any violation of which could materially adversely affect us.

Our operating expenses could be higher than anticipated due to the cost of complying with existing and future environmental laws and regulations. Various environmental laws may impose liability on the current or prior owner or operator of real property for removal or remediation of hazardous or toxic substances. Current or prior owners or operators may also be liable for government fines and damages for injuries to persons, natural resources and adjacent property. These environmental laws often impose liability whether or not the owner or operator knew of, or was responsible for, the presence or disposal of the hazardous or toxic substances. The cost of complying with environmental laws could materially adversely affect amounts available for distribution to our stockholders and could exceed the value of all of our facilities. In addition, the presence of hazardous or toxic substances, or the failure of our tenants to properly manage, dispose of or remediate such substances, including medical waste generated by physicians and our other healthcare tenants, may adversely affect our tenants or our ability to use, sell or rent such property or to borrow using such property as collateral which, in turn, could reduce our revenue and our financing ability. We typically obtain Phase I environmental assessments (or similar studies) on facilities we acquire or develop or on which we make mortgage loans, and intend to obtain on future facilities we acquire. However, even if the Phase I environmental assessment reports do not reveal any material environmental contamination, it is possible that material environmental contamination and liabilities may exist, of which we are unaware.

30

Although the leases for our facilities and our mortgage loans generally require our operators to comply with laws and regulations governing their operations, including the disposal of medical waste, and to indemnify us for certain environmental liabilities, the scope of their obligations may be limited. We cannot assure you that our tenants would be able to fulfill their indemnification obligations and, therefore, any material violation of environmental laws could have a material adverse effect on us. In addition, environmental laws are constantly evolving, and changes in laws, regulations or policies, or changes in interpretations of the foregoing, could create liabilities where none exist today.

Our interests in facilities through ground leases expose us to the loss of the facility upon breach or termination of the ground lease and may limit our use of the facility.

We have acquired interests in 35 of our facilities, at least in part, by acquiring leasehold interests in the land on which the facility is located rather than an ownership interest in the property, and we may acquire additional facilities in the future through ground leases. As lessee under ground leases, we are exposed to the possibility of losing the property upon termination, or an earlier breach by us, of the ground lease. Ground leases may also restrict our use of facilities, which may limit our flexibility in renting the facility and may impede our ability to sell the property.

Our acquisitions may not prove to be successful.

We are exposed to the risk that some of our acquisitions may not prove to be successful. We could encounter unanticipated difficulties and expenditures relating to any acquired properties, including contingent liabilities, and acquired properties might require significant management attention that would otherwise be devoted to our ongoing business. In addition, we might be exposed to undisclosed and unknown liabilities related to any acquired properties. If we agree to provide construction funding to an operator/tenant and the project is not completed, we may need to take steps to ensure completion of the project. Moreover, if we issue equity securities or incur additional debt, or both, to finance future acquisitions, it may reduce our per share financial results. These costs may negatively affect our results of operations.

RISKS RELATING TO THE HEALTHCARE INDUSTRY

Continued reductions in reimbursement from third-party payors and shift towards alternative payment models, could adversely affect the profitability of our tenants and hinder their ability to make payments to us.

Sources of revenue for our tenants and operators may include the Medicare and Medicaid programs, private insurance carriers, and health maintenance organizations, among others. Both government and private payors continue their efforts to reduce healthcare costs, which results in reductions or slower growth in reimbursement for certain services provided by some of our tenants. In addition, the failure of any of our tenants to comply with various laws and regulations could jeopardize their ability to continue participating in Medicare, Medicaid, and other government-sponsored payment programs.

Many of our tenants continue to experience a shift in their payor mix away from fee-for-service payors, which results in an increase in the percentage of revenues attributable to alternative payment models implemented by private and government payors. CMS continues to focus on transitioning Medicare from its traditional fee-for-service model to models that employ one or more capitated, value-based, or bundled payment approaches, and private payors are implementing similar types of alternative payment models. Such efforts from private and government payors, in addition to general industry trends, continue to place pressures on our tenants to control healthcare costs. Furthermore, pressures to control healthcare costs and a shift away from traditional health insurance reimbursement have resulted in an increase in the number of patients whose healthcare coverage is provided under managed care plans, such as health maintenance organizations and preferred provider organizations. These shifts place further cost pressures on our tenants. We also continue to believe that, due to the aging of the population and the expansion of governmental payor programs, there will be a marked increase in the number of patients relying on healthcare coverage provided by governmental payors. All of these changes

31

could have a material adverse effect on the financial condition of some or all of our tenants, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations and could negatively affect our ability to make distributions to our stockholders. In instances where we have an equity investment in our tenants’ operations, in addition to the effect on these tenants’ ability to meet their financial obligations to us, our ownership and investment interests may also be negatively impacted.

CMS’s increased regulatory restrictions on reimbursement for LTACH and inpatient rehabilitation facilities (“IRFs”), has reduced reimbursement for some tenants that operate LTACHs and IRFs, and CMS has also begun to implement regulatory restrictions on reimbursement for hospital outpatient departments (“HOPD”), which may also lead to reduced reimbursement for our tenants that operate HOPDs. CMS is likely to continue exploring other restrictions on LTACH, IRF, and HOPD reimbursement and possibly develop more restrictive facility and patient level criteria for these types of facilities or departments. These changes could have a material adverse effect on the financial condition of some of our tenants, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations and could negatively affect our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

The Reform Law represented a major shift in the U.S. healthcare industry by, among other things, allowing millions of formerly uninsured individuals to obtain health insurance coverage and by significantly expanding Medicaid. The Reform Law, however, remains controversial, and there are continuing efforts to repeal and replace the Reform Law. Though we believe that certain trends in the healthcare system will continue irrespective of whether the Reform Law is repealed or replaced, we cannot predict with any certainty or precision what effect a repeal or replacement law would have on the operations of our tenants, but it could have a material adverse effect on the financial condition of some or all of our tenants.

The U.S. healthcare industry is heavily regulated and loss of licensure or certification or failure to obtain licensure or certification could negatively impact our financial condition and results of operations.

The U.S. healthcare industry is highly regulated by federal, state, and local laws and is directly affected by federal conditions of participation, state licensing requirements, facility inspections, state and federal reimbursement policies, regulations concerning capital and other expenditures, certification requirements and other such laws, regulations, and rules. We are aware of various federal and state inquiries, investigations, and other proceedings currently affecting several of our tenants and would expect such governmental compliance and enforcement activities to be ongoing at any given time with respect to one or more of our tenants, either on a confidential or public basis. As discussed in further detail below, an adverse result to our tenants in one or more such governmental proceedings may have a material adverse effect on the relevant tenant’s operations and financial condition and on its ability to make required lease and/or mortgage payments to us. In instances where we have an equity investment in our tenants’ operations, in addition to the effect on these tenants’ ability to meet their financial obligation to us, our ownership and investment interests may also be negatively impacted.

Licensed health care facilities must comply with minimum health and safety standards and are subject to survey and inspection by state and federal agencies and their agents or affiliates, including CMS, the Joint Commission, and state departments of health. CMS develops Conditions of Participation and Conditions for Coverage that health care organizations must meet in order to begin and continue participating in the Medicare and Medicaid programs and receive payment under such programs. These minimum health and safety standards are aimed at improving quality and protecting the health and safety of beneficiaries, and there are several common criteria that exist across health entities. The failure to comply with any of these standards could jeopardize a healthcare organization’s Medicare certification and, in turn, its right to receive payment under the Medicare and Medicaid programs.

Further, many hospitals and other institutional providers are accredited by accrediting agencies such as the Joint Commission, a national healthcare accrediting organization. The Joint Commission was created to accredit

32

healthcare organizations that meet its minimum health and safety standards. A national accrediting organization, such as the Joint Commission, enforces standards that meet or exceed such requirements. Surveyors for the Joint Commission, prior to the opening of a facility and approximately every three years thereafter, conduct on site surveys of facilities for compliance with a multitude of patient safety, treatment, and administrative requirements. Facilities may lose accreditation for failure to meet such requirements, which in turn may result in the loss of license or certification including under the Medicare and Medicaid programs. For example, a facility may lose accreditation for failing to maintain proper medication in the operating room to treat potentially fatal reactions to anesthesia or for failure to maintain safe and sanitary medical equipment.

Finally, healthcare facility reimbursement practices and quality of care issues may result in loss of license or certification. For instance, the practice of “upcoding,” whereby services are billed for higher procedure codes than were actually performed, may lead to the revocation of a hospital’s license or the imposition of penalties. An event involving poor quality of care, such as that which leads to the serious injury or death of a patient, may also result in loss of license or certification. Prime continues certain litigation against the Service Employees International Union (“SEIU”) relating to allegations that SEIU and other defendants conspired to drive Prime out of certain markets, primarily by lobbying for governmental action relating to alleged fraudulent billing practices. Prime has addressed these fraudulent billing practice allegations publicly and has provided clinical and other data to us refuting these allegations. Prime has also informed us that SEIU regularly attempts to organize certain Prime employees. Prime has also disclosed a complaint filed against it by the U.S. Department of Justice relating to alleged improper admitting practices, addressed this complaint publicly and denied the allegations.

The failure of any tenant to comply with such laws, requirements, and regulations resulting in a loss of its license would affect its ability to continue its operation of the facility and would adversely affect the tenant’s ability to make lease and/or principal and interest payments to us. This, in turn, could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations and could negatively affect our ability to make distributions to our stockholders. In instances where we have an equity investment in our tenants’ operations, in addition to the effects on these tenants’ ability to meet their financial obligations to us, our ownership and investment interests would be negatively impacted.

In addition, establishment of healthcare facilities and transfers of operations of healthcare facilities are subject to regulatory approvals not required for establishment, or transfers, of other types of commercial operations and real estate including, but not limited to, state certificate of need laws. Restrictions and delays in transferring the operations of healthcare facilities, in obtaining new third-party payor contracts, including Medicare and Medicaid provider agreements, and in receiving licensure and certification approval from appropriate state and federal agencies by new tenants, may affect our ability to terminate lease agreements, remove tenants that violate lease terms, and replace existing tenants with new tenants. Furthermore, these matters may affect a new tenant’s ability to obtain reimbursement for services rendered, which could adversely affect their ability to pay rent to us and/or to pay principal and interest on their loans to us. In instances where we have an equity investment in our tenants’ operations, in addition to the effect on these tenants’ ability to meet their financial obligations to us, our ownership and investment interests may also be negatively impacted.

Our tenants are subject to fraud and abuse laws, the violation of which by a tenant may jeopardize the tenant’s ability to make payments to us and adversely affect their profitability.

As noted earlier, the federal government and numerous state governments have passed laws and regulations that attempt to eliminate healthcare fraud and abuse by prohibiting business arrangements that induce patient referrals or the ordering of specific ancillary services. In addition, federal and state governments continue to investigate and conduct enforcement activity to detect and eliminate fraud and abuse in the Medicare and Medicaid programs. It is anticipated that the trend toward increased investigation and enforcement activity in the areas of fraud and abuse and patient self-referrals will continue in future years. Violations of these laws may result in the imposition of criminal and civil penalties, including possible exclusion from federal and state healthcare programs. Imposition of any of these penalties upon any of our tenants could jeopardize a tenant’s

33

ability to operate a facility or to make lease and/or loan payments, thereby potentially adversely affecting us. In instances where we have an equity investment in our tenants’ operations, in addition to the effect on the tenants’ ability to meet their financial obligations to us, our ownership and investment interests may also be negatively impacted.

Some of our tenants have accepted, and prospective tenants may accept, an assignment of the previous operator’s Medicare provider agreement. Such operators and other new-operator tenants that take assignment of Medicare provider agreements might be subject to liability for federal or state regulatory, civil, and criminal investigations of the previous owner’s operations and claims submissions. While we conduct due diligence in connection with the acquisition of such facilities, these types of issues may not be discovered prior to purchase or after our tenants commence operations in our facilities. Adverse decisions, fines, or recoupments might negatively impact our tenants’ financial condition, and in turn their ability to make lease and/or loan payments to us. In instances where we have an equity investment in our tenants’ operations, in addition to the effect on these tenants’ ability to meet their financial obligations to us, our ownership and investment interests may also be negatively impacted.

Certain of our lease arrangements may be subject to fraud and abuse or physician self-referral laws.

Physician investment in our operating partnership or our subsidiaries that own our facilities could subject our lease arrangements to scrutiny under fraud and abuse and physician self-referral laws. Under the Stark Law, and its implementing regulations, if our lease arrangements do not satisfy the requirements of an applicable exception, the ability of our tenants to bill for services provided to Medicare beneficiaries pursuant to referrals from physician investors could be adversely impacted and subject us and our tenants to fines, which could impact our tenants’ ability to make lease and loan payments to us. In instances where we have an equity investment in our tenants’ operations, in addition to the effect on the tenants’ ability to meet their financial obligations to us, our ownership and investment interests may also be negatively impacted.

We intend to use our good faith efforts to structure our lease arrangements to comply with these laws; however, if we are unable to do so, this failure may restrict our ability to permit physician investment or, where such physicians do participate, may restrict the types of lease arrangements into which we may enter, including our ability to enter into percentage rent arrangements.

We may be required to incur substantial renovation costs to make certain of our healthcare properties suitable for other operators and tenants.

Healthcare facilities are typically highly customized and may not be easily adapted to non-healthcare-related uses. The improvements generally required to conform a property to healthcare use can be costly and at times tenant-specific. A new or replacement operator or tenant may require different features in a property, depending on that operator’s or tenant’s particular business. If a current operator or tenant is unable to pay rent and/or vacates a property, we may incur substantial expenditures to modify a property before we are able to secure another operator or tenant. Also, if the property needs to be renovated to accommodate multiple operators or tenants, we may incur substantial expenditures before we are able to re-lease the space. These expenditures or renovations may have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

State certificate of need laws may adversely affect our development of facilities and the operations of our tenants.

Certain healthcare facilities in which we invest may also be subject to state laws which require regulatory approval in the form of a certificate of need prior to the transfer of a healthcare facility or prior to initiation of certain projects, including, but not limited to, the establishment of new or replacement facilities, the addition of beds, the addition or expansion of services and certain capital expenditures. State certificate of need laws are not uniform throughout the U.S., are subject to change, and may delay developments of facilities or acquisitions or

34

certain other transfers of ownership of facilities. We cannot predict the impact of state certificate of need laws on any of the preceding activities or on the operations of our tenants. Certificate of need laws often materially impact the ability of competitors to enter into the marketplace of our facilities. In addition, in limited circumstances, loss of state licensure or certification or closure of a facility could ultimately result in loss of authority to operate the facility and require re-licensure or new certificate of need authorization to re-institute operations. As a result, a portion of the value of the facility may be related to the limitation on new competitors. In the event of a change in the certificate of need laws, this value may markedly change.

RISKS RELATING TO OUR ORGANIZATION AND STRUCTURE

Pursuant to Maryland law, our charter and bylaws contain provisions that may have the effect of deterring changes in management and third-party acquisition proposals, which in turn could depress the price of Medical Properties common stock or cause dilution.

Our charter contains ownership limitations that may restrict business combination opportunities, inhibit change of control transactions and reduce the value of our common stock. To qualify as a REIT under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code, no more than 50% in value of our outstanding stock, after taking into account options to acquire stock, may be owned, directly or indirectly, by five or fewer persons during the last half of each taxable year. Our charter generally prohibits direct or indirect ownership by any person of more than 9.8% in value or in number, whichever is more restrictive, of outstanding shares of any class or series of our securities, including our common stock. Generally, our common stock owned by affiliated owners will be aggregated for purposes of the ownership limitation. The ownership limitation could have the effect of delaying, deterring or preventing a change in control or other transaction in which holders of common stock might receive a premium for their common stock over the then-current market price or which such holders otherwise might believe to be in their best interests. The ownership limitation provisions also may make our common stock an unsuitable investment vehicle for any person seeking to obtain, either alone or with others as a group, ownership of more than 9.8% of either the value or number of the outstanding shares of our common stock.

Our charter and bylaws contain provisions that may impede third-party acquisition proposals. Our charter and bylaws also provide restrictions on replacing or removing directors. Directors may only be removed by the affirmative vote of the holders of two-thirds of our common stock. Additionally, stockholders are required to give us advance notice of director nominations. Special meetings of stockholders can only be called by our president, our board of directors or the holders of at least 25% of stock entitled to vote at the meetings. These and other charter and bylaw provisions may delay or prevent a change of control or other transaction in which holders of our common stock might receive a premium for their common stock over the then-current market price or which such holders otherwise might believe to be in their best interests.

Our UPREIT structure may result in conflicts of interest between our stockholders and the holders of our operating partnership units.

We are organized as an umbrella partnership real estate investment trust, “UPREIT”, which means that we hold our assets and conduct substantially all of our operations through an operating limited partnership, and may issue operating partnership units to employees and/or third parties. Persons holding operating partnership units would have the right to vote on certain amendments to the partnership agreement of our operating partnership, as well as on certain other matters. Persons holding these voting rights may exercise them in a manner that conflicts with the interests of our stockholders. Circumstances may arise in the future, such as the sale or refinancing of one of our facilities, when the interests of limited partners in our operating partnership conflict with the interests of our stockholders. As the sole member of the general partner of the operating partnership, we have fiduciary duties to the limited partners of the operating partnership that may conflict with fiduciary duties that our officers and directors owe to its stockholders. These conflicts may result in decisions that are not in the best interest of our stockholders.

35

We rely on information technology in our operations, and any material failure, inadequacy, interruption or security failure of that technology could harm our business.

We rely on information technology networks and systems, including the Internet, to process, transmit and store electronic information, and to manage or support a variety of business processes, including financial transactions and records, and maintaining personal identifying information and tenant and lease data. We purchase or license some of our information technology from vendors, on whom our systems depend. We rely on commercially available systems, software, tools and monitoring to provide security for the processing, transmission and storage of confidential tenant data. Although we have taken steps to protect the security of our information systems and the data maintained in those systems, it is possible that our safety and security measures will not prevent the systems’ improper functioning or the improper access or disclosure of our or our tenant’s information such as in the event of cyber-attacks. Security breaches, including physical or electronic break-ins, computer viruses, attacks by hackers and similar breaches, can create system disruptions, shutdowns or unauthorized disclosure of confidential information. The risk of security breaches has generally increased as the number, intensity and sophistication of attacks have increased. In some cases, it may be difficult to anticipate or immediately detect such incidents and the damage they cause. Any failure to maintain proper function, security and availability of our information systems could interrupt our operations, damage our reputation, subject us to liability claims or regulatory penalties and could have a materially adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Changes in accounting pronouncements could adversely affect our operating results, in addition to the reported financial performance of our tenants.

Uncertainties posed by various initiatives of accounting standard-setting by the Financial Accounting Standards Board and the SEC, which create and interpret applicable accounting standards for U.S. companies, may change the financial accounting and reporting standards or their interpretation and application of these standards that govern the preparation of our financial statements. Proposed changes include, but are not limited to, changes in lease accounting, revenue recognition and the adoption of accounting standards likely to require the increased use of “fair-value” measures.

These changes could have a material impact on our reported financial condition and results of operations. In some cases, we could be required to apply a new or revised standard retroactively, resulting in potentially material restatements of prior period financial statements. Similarly, these changes could have a material impact on our tenants’ reported financial condition or results of operations or could affect our tenants’ preferences regarding leasing real estate.

TAX RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH OUR STATUS AS A REIT

Loss of our tax status as a REIT would have significant adverse consequences to us and the value of our common stock.

We believe that we qualify as a REIT for federal income tax purposes and have elected to be taxed as a REIT under the federal income tax laws commencing with our taxable year that began on April 6, 2004, and ended on December 31, 2004. The REIT qualification requirements are extremely complex, and interpretations of the federal income tax laws governing qualification as a REIT are limited. Accordingly, there is no assurance that we will be successful in operating so as to qualify as a REIT. At any time, new laws, regulations, interpretations or court decisions may change the federal tax laws relating to, or the federal income tax consequences of, qualification as a REIT. It is possible that future economic, market, legal, tax or other considerations may cause our board of directors to revoke the REIT election, which it may do without stockholder approval.

36

If we lose or revoke our REIT status, we will face serious tax consequences that will substantially reduce the funds available for distribution because:

As a result of all these factors, a failure to achieve or a loss or revocation of our REIT status could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations and would adversely affect the value of our common stock.

Failure to make required distributions would subject us to tax.

In order to qualify as a REIT, each year we must distribute to our stockholders at least 90% of our REIT taxable income, excluding net capital gains. To the extent that we satisfy the distribution requirement, but distribute less than 100% of our taxable income, we will be subject to federal corporate income tax on our undistributed income. In addition, we will incur a 4% nondeductible excise tax on the amount, if any, by which our distributions in any year are less than the sum of (1) 85% of our ordinary income for that year; (2) 95% of our capital gain net income for that year; and (3) 100% of our undistributed taxable income from prior years.

We may be required to make distributions to stockholders at disadvantageous times or when we do not have funds readily available for distribution. Differences in timing between the recognition of income and the related cash receipts or the effect of required debt amortization payments could require us to borrow money or sell assets to pay out enough of our taxable income to satisfy the distribution requirement and to avoid corporate income tax and the 4% excise tax in a particular year. In the future, we may borrow to pay distributions to our stockholders and the limited partners of our operating partnership. Any funds that we borrow would subject us to interest rate and other market risks.

Complying with REIT requirements may cause us to forego otherwise attractive opportunities.

To qualify as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes, we must continually satisfy tests concerning, among other things, the sources of our income, the nature and diversification of our assets, the amounts we distribute to our stockholders and the ownership of our stock. In order to meet these tests, we may be required to forego attractive business or investment opportunities. Currently, no more than 25% of the value of our assets may consist of securities of one or more TRSs and no more than 25% of the value of our assets may consist of securities that are not qualifying assets under the test requiring that 75% of a REIT’s assets consist of real estate and other related assets. In addition, at least 75% of our gross income must be generated from either rents from real estate or interest on loans secured by real estate (i.e. mortgage loans). Further, a TRS may not directly or indirectly operate or manage a healthcare facility. For purposes of this definition a “healthcare facility” means a hospital, nursing facility, assisted living facility, congregate care facility, qualified continuing care facility, or other licensed facility which extends medical or nursing or ancillary services to patients and which is operated by a service provider that is eligible for participation in the Medicare program under Title XVIII of the Social Security Act with respect to the facility. Compliance with current and future changes to REIT requirements may limit our flexibility in executing our business plan.

If certain sale-leaseback transactions are not characterized by the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) as “true leases,” we may be subject to adverse tax consequences.

We have purchased certain properties and leased them back to the sellers of such properties, and we may enter into similar transactions in the future. We intend for any such sale-leaseback transaction to be structured in

37

a manner that the lease will be characterized as a “true lease,” thereby allowing us to be treated as the owner of the property for U.S. federal income tax purposes. However, depending on the terms of any specific transaction, the IRS might take the position that the transaction is not a “true lease” but is more properly treated in some other manner. In the event any sale-leaseback transaction is challenged and successfully re-characterized, we might fail to satisfy the REIT asset tests or income test and, consequently could lose our REIT status effective with the year of re-characterizations.

Transactions with TRSs may be subject to excise tax.

We have historically entered into lease and other transactions with our TRSs and their subsidiaries and expect to continue to do so in the future. Under applicable rules, transactions such as leases between our TRSs and their parent REIT that are not conducted on a market terms basis may be subject to a 100% excise tax. While we believe that all of our transactions with our TRSs are at arm’s length, imposition of a 100% excise tax could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations and could adversely affect the trading price of our common stock.

Loans to our tenants could be characterized as equity, in which case our income from that tenant might not be qualifying income under the REIT rules and we could lose our REIT status.

In connection with the acquisition in 2004 of certain Vibra Healthcare, LLC (“Vibra”) facilities, our TRS made a loan to Vibra to acquire the operations at those Vibra facilities. The acquisition loan bore interest at an annual rate of 10.25%. Our operating partnership loaned the funds to the TRS to make this loan. The loan from our operating partnership to the TRS bore interest at an annual rate of 9.25%.

Like the Vibra loan discussed above, our TRSs have made and will make loans to tenants in our facilities to acquire operations or for working capital purposes. The IRS may take the position that certain loans to tenants should be treated as equity interests rather than debt, and that our interest income from such tenant should not be treated as qualifying income for purposes of the REIT gross income tests. If the IRS were to successfully treat a loan to a particular tenant as equity interests, the tenant would be a “related party tenant” with respect to our company and the rent that we receive from the tenant would not be qualifying income for purposes of the REIT gross income tests. As a result, we could be in jeopardy of failing the 75% income test discussed above, which if we did would cause us to lose our REIT status. In addition, if the IRS were to successfully treat a particular loan as interests held by our operating partnership rather than by our TRSs, we could fail the 5% asset test, and if the IRS further successfully treated the loan as other than straight debt, we could fail the 10% asset test with respect to such interest. As a result of the failure of either test, we could lose our REIT status, which would subject us to corporate level income tax and adversely affect our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

Certain property transfers may generate prohibited transaction income, resulting in a penalty tax on gain attributable to the transaction.

From time to time, we may transfer or otherwise dispose of some of our properties, including by contributing properties to our co-investment ventures. Under the Code, any gain resulting from transfers of properties we hold as inventory or primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of business is treated as income from a prohibited transaction subject to a 100% penalty tax. We do not believe that our transfers or disposals of property or our contributions of properties into our co-investment ventures are prohibited transactions. However, whether property is held for investment purposes is a question of fact that depends on all the facts and circumstances surrounding the particular transaction. The IRS may contend that certain transfers or dispositions of properties by us or contributions of properties into our co-investment ventures are prohibited transactions. While we believe that the IRS would not prevail in any such dispute, if the Code were to argue successfully that a transfer, disposition or contribution of property constituted a prohibited transaction, we would be required to pay a 100% penalty tax on any gain allocable to us from the prohibited transaction. In addition, income from a prohibited transaction might adversely affect our ability to satisfy the income tests for qualification as a REIT.

38

Changes in U.S. or foreign tax laws, regulations, including changes to tax rates, may adversely affect our results of operations.

We are headquartered in the U.S. with subsidiaries and investments globally and are subject to income taxes in these jurisdictions. Significant judgment is required in determining our provision for income taxes. Although we believe that we have adequately assessed and accounted for our potential tax liabilities, and that our tax estimates are reasonable, there can be no assurance that additional taxes will not be due upon audit of our tax returns or as a result of changes to applicable tax laws. The U.S. government (particularly with the recent presidential election coupled with a Republican-controlled Congress) as well as the governments of many of the countries in which we operate (such as Germany, the United Kingdom, and Luxembourg, which is where our Europe entities are domiciled) are actively discussing changes to the corporate recognition and taxation of worldwide income. The nature and timing of any changes to each jurisdiction’s tax laws and the impact on our future tax liabilities both in the U.S. and abroad cannot be predicted with any accuracy but could materially and adversely impact our results of operations and cash flows.

The recently enacted Tax Cuts and Jobs Act is a complex revision to the U.S. federal income tax laws with impacts on different categories of taxpayers and industries, and will require subsequent rulemaking and interpretation in a number of areas. The long-term impact of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act on the overall economy, government revenues, our tenants, our company, and the real estate industry cannot be reliably predicted at this time. Furthermore, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act may impact certain of our tenants’ operating results, financial condition, and future business plans. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act may also result in reduced government revenues, and therefore reduced government spending, which may impact some of our tenants that rely on government funding. There can be no assurance that the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act will not impact our operating results, financial condition, and future business operations.

Dividends payable by REITs do not qualify for the reduced tax rates available for some dividends.

Income from “qualified dividends” payable to U.S. stockholders that are individuals, trusts and estates are generally subject to tax at preferential rates. Dividends payable by REITs, however, generally are not eligible for the preferential tax rates applicable to qualified dividend income. Although these rules do not adversely affect the taxation of REITs or dividends payable by REITs, to the extent that the preferential rates continue to apply to regular corporate qualified dividends, investors who are individuals, trusts and estates may perceive investments in REITs to be relatively less attractive than investments in the stocks of non-REIT corporations that pay dividends, which could materially and adversely affect the value of the shares of REITs, including the per share trading price of our capital stock.

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act provides a deduction to non-corporate taxpayers (e.g., individuals, trusts and estates) of 20% on dividends paid by a REIT that are not classified as capital gains. This provides closer parity between the treatment under the new law of ordinary REIT dividends and qualified dividends. The new law also provides for a maximum individual marginal tax rate on ordinary income, without regard to the effect of this deduction, of 37%. For non-corporate taxpayers, this would reduce the maximum marginal tax rate on ordinary REIT dividends to 33.4% (including the 3.8% Medicare tax that is applied before the 20% deduction.). The new tax law’s 20% deduction on dividends paid by a REIT to non-corporate taxpayers and the reduced individual tax rates are scheduled to sunset for tax years beginning after 2025, absent further legislation.

None.

At December 31, 2017, our portfolio consisted of 275 properties: 258 facilities (of the 261 facilities that we owned) were in operation and leased to 31 operators, 14 assets were in the form of first mortgage loans to four

39

operators, and three properties were under construction. Our owned facilities consisted of 148 general acute care hospitals, 94 inpatient rehabilitation hospitals, 16 LTACHs, and three medical office buildings. The 14 non-owned facilities consisted of ten general acute care facilities, three inpatient rehabilitation hospitals, and one LTACH.

40

The following table shows lease and mortgage loan expirations for the next 10 years and thereafter, assuming that none of the tenants/borrowers exercise any of their renewal options (dollars in thousands):

41

From time to time, there are various legal proceedings pending to which we are a party or to which some of our properties are subject to arising in the normal course of business. At this time, we do not believe that the ultimate resolution of these proceedings will have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial position or results of operations.

None.

42

PART II

(a) Medical Properties’ common stock is traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol “MPW.” The following table sets forth the high and low sales prices for the common stock for the periods indicated, as reported by the New York Stock Exchange Composite Tape, and the dividends per share declared by us with respect to each such period.

On February 28, 2018, the closing price for our common stock, as reported on the New York Stock Exchange, was $12.26 per share. As of February 28, 2018, there were 76 holders of record of our common stock. This figure does not reflect the beneficial ownership of shares held in nominee name.

To qualify as a REIT, we must distribute at least 90% of our REIT taxable income, excluding net capital gain, as dividends to our stockholders. If dividends are declared in a quarter, those dividends will be paid during the subsequent quarter. We expect to continue the policy of distributing our taxable income through regular cash dividends on a quarterly basis, although there is no assurance as to future dividends because they depend on future earnings, capital requirements, and our financial condition. In addition, our Credit Facility limits the amounts of dividends we can pay — see Note 4 of Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K for more information.

(b) Not applicable.

(c) None.

43

The following graph provides comparison of cumulative total stockholder return for the period from December 31, 2012 through December 31, 2017, among us, the Russell 2000 Index, NAREIT All Equity REIT Index, and SNL US REIT Healthcare Index. The stock performance graph assumes an investment of $100 in us and the three indices, and the reinvestment of dividends. The historical information below is not indicative of future performance.

The graph and accompanying text shall not be deemed incorporated by reference by any general statement incorporating by reference this Annual Report on Form 10-K into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

44

The following tables set forth are selected consolidated financial and operating data for Medical Properties Trust, Inc. and MPT Operating Partnership, L.P. and their respective subsidiaries. You should read the following selected financial data in conjunction with the consolidated historical financial statements and notes thereto of each of Medical Properties Trust, Inc. and MPT Operating Partnership, L.P. and their respective subsidiaries included in Item 8, in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, along with “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” included in Item 7, in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Medical Properties Trust, Inc.

The consolidated operating data and balance sheets have been derived from our audited consolidated financial statements. As of December 31, 2017, Medical Properties Trust, Inc. had a 99.9% equity ownership interest in the Operating Partnership. Medical Properties Trust, Inc. has no significant operations other than as the sole member of its wholly owned subsidiary, Medical Properties Trust, LLC, which is the sole general partner of the Operating Partnership, and no material assets, other than its direct and indirect investment in the Operating Partnership.

45

46

MPT Operating Partnership, L.P.

The consolidated operating data, other data and balance sheet data presented below have been derived from the Operating Partnership’s audited consolidated financial statements.

47

48

Unless otherwise indicated, references to “our,” “we” and “us” in this management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations refer to Medical Properties Trust, Inc. and its consolidated subsidiaries, including MPT Operating Partnership, L.P.

Overview

We were incorporated in Maryland on August 27, 2003, primarily for the purpose of investing in and owning net-leased healthcare facilities. We also make real estate mortgage loans and other loans to our tenants. We conduct our business operations in one segment. We have healthcare investments in the U.S. and Europe. We have operated as a REIT since April 6, 2004, and accordingly, elected REIT status upon the filing of our calendar year 2004 U.S. federal income tax return. Our existing tenants are, and our prospective tenants will generally be, healthcare operating companies and other healthcare providers that use substantial real estate assets in their operations. We offer financing for these operators’ real estate through 100% lease and mortgage financing and generally seek lease and loan terms on a long-term basis ranging from 10 to 15 years with a series of shorter renewal terms at the option of our tenants and borrowers. We also have included and intend to include in our lease and loan agreements annual contractual minimum rate increases. Our existing portfolio’s minimum escalators range from 0.5% to 4%, while less than 3% of our properties do not have an escalator. Most of our leases and loans also include rate increases based on the general rate of inflation if greater than the minimum contractual increases. In addition to rent or mortgage interest, our leases and loans typically require our tenants to pay all operating costs and expenses associated with the facility. Some leases also may require our tenants to pay percentage rents, which are based on the tenant’s revenues from their operations. Finally, we may acquire a profits or other equity interest in our tenants that gives us a right to share in the tenant’s income or loss.

We selectively make loans to certain of our operators through our TRSs, which the operators use for acquisitions and working capital. We consider our lending business an important element of our overall business strategy for two primary reasons: (1) it provides opportunities to make income-earning investments that yield attractive risk-adjusted returns in an industry in which our management has expertise, and (2) by making debt capital available to certain qualified operators, we believe we create for our company a competitive advantage over other buyers of, and financing sources for, healthcare facilities.

At December 31, 2017, our portfolio consisted of 275 properties leased or loaned to 31 operators, of which three are under development and 14 are in the form of mortgage loans.

2017 Highlights

In 2017, we invested or committed to invest approximately $2.2 billion in healthcare real estate assets. These significant investments enhanced the size and scale of our healthcare portfolio, while expanding our geographic footprint in the U.S. and extending our lease and mortgage loan maturity schedule. Furthermore, we strategically sold an asset for proceeds totaling $64 million, raised $548 million in proceeds from a successful equity offering, and refinanced approximately $0.6 billion of debt in order to strengthen our balance sheet, reduce interest rates, and fund acquisitions. Finally, we increased our dividend to $0.24 per share per quarter in 2017 — the third year in a row for such an increase.

A summary of our 2017 highlights is as follows:

49

With these new investments, we expanded our gross assets to $9.5 billion, increased the total number of properties in our portfolio to 275, and increased our total number of beds to more than 32 thousand, as of December 31, 2017.

With these transactions, our weighted average interest rate at December 31, 2017, improved to 4.42% versus 4.87% at December 31, 2016.

2016 Highlights

In 2016, we invested or committed to invest approximately $1.8 billion in healthcare real estate assets. These significant investments enhanced the size and quality of our healthcare portfolio, while improving our tenant concentration and expanding our geographic footprint in the U.S. Furthermore, we strategically sold assets for proceeds totaling more than $800 million, refinanced $1 billion of debt, and sold 82.7 million shares generating proceeds of approximately $1.2 billion in order to strengthen our balance sheet, reduce leverage, and fund acquisitions.

50

A summary of our 2016 highlights is as follows:

51

2015 Highlights

In 2015, we invested or committed to invest approximately $1.8 billion in healthcare real estate assets. These significant investments greatly strengthened our portfolio through geographic, tenant and property type diversification. We expanded total assets by 51%, increased revenues by 41%, and lowered our general and administrative expense as a percentage of revenue to less than 10%.

A summary of our 2015 highlights is as follows: