Print Page  |  Close Window

SEC Filings

10-Q
GREENSKY, INC. filed this Form 10-Q on 11/09/2018
Entire Document
 


In certain circumstances, including certain changes of control of our Company, payments by us under the TRA may be accelerated and/or significantly exceed the actual benefits we realize in respect of the tax attributes subject to the TRA.
The TRA provides that (i) in the event that we materially breach any of our material obligations under the TRA, whether as a result of failure to make any payment, failure to honor any other material obligation required thereunder or by operation of law as a result of the rejection of the TRA in a bankruptcy or otherwise, (ii) if, at any time, we elect an early termination of the TRA, or (iii) upon certain changes of control of our Company, our (or our successor’s) obligations under the TRA (with respect to all Holdco Units, whether or not such units have been exchanged or acquired before or after such transaction) would accelerate and become payable in a lump sum amount equal to the present value of the anticipated future tax benefits calculated based on certain assumptions. These assumptions include that (i) we (or our successor) will have sufficient taxable income to fully utilize the deductions arising from the increased tax deductions and tax basis and other benefits subject to the TRA, (ii) we (or our successor) will utilize (subject to any applicable limitations) any loss carryovers generated by the increased tax deductions and tax basis and other benefits on a pro rata basis through the scheduled expiration date of such loss carryovers, or if such carryforwards do not have an expiration date, over the 15-year period after such carryforwards were generated, and (iii) GS Holdings and its subsidiaries will sell certain nonamortizable assets (and realize certain related tax benefits) no later than a specified date. As a result of the foregoing, if we breach a material obligation under the TRA, if we elect to terminate the TRA early or if we undergo a change of control, we would be required to make an immediate lump-sum payment equal to the present value of the anticipated future tax savings, which payment may be required to be made significantly in advance of the actual realization of such future tax savings, and the actual cash tax savings ultimately realized may be significantly less than the corresponding TRA payments. In these situations, our obligations under the TRA could have a substantial negative impact on our liquidity. There is no assurance that we will be able to fund or finance our obligations under the TRA. Additionally, the obligation to make a lump sum payment on a change of control may deter potential acquirers, which could negatively affect our stockholders’ potential returns. If we had elected to terminate the TRA as of September 30, 2018, based on the closing price on September 28, 2018 of $18.00 per share of our Class A common stock, and a discount rate equal to 6.16% per annum, compounded annually, we estimate that we would have been required to pay $508.6 million in the aggregate under the TRA.
If we were deemed to be an investment company under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”), as a result of our ownership of GS Holdings and GSLLC, applicable restrictions could make it impractical for us to continue our business as currently contemplated and could have an adverse effect on our business.
Under Sections 3(a)(1)(A) and (C) of the 1940 Act, a company generally will be deemed to be an “investment company” for purposes of the 1940 Act if (i) it is, or holds itself out as being, engaged primarily, or proposes to engage primarily, in the business of investing, reinvesting or trading in securities or (ii) it engages, or proposes to engage, in the business of investing, reinvesting, owning, holding or trading in securities and it owns or proposes to acquire investment securities having a value exceeding 40% of the value of its total assets (exclusive of U.S. government securities and cash items) on an unconsolidated basis. We do not believe that we are an “investment company,” as such term is defined in either of those sections of the 1940 Act.
Because GreenSky, Inc. is the managing member of GS Holdings, and GS Holdings is the managing member of GSLLC, we indirectly operate and control all of the business and affairs of GS Holdings and its subsidiaries, including GSLLC. On that basis, we believe that our interest in GS Holdings and GSLLC is not an “investment security,” as that term is used in the 1940 Act. However, if we were to cease participation in the management of GS Holdings and GSLLC, our interest in such entities could be deemed an “investment security” for purposes of the 1940 Act.
We, GS Holdings and GSLLC intend to conduct our operations so that we will not be deemed an investment company. However, if we were to be deemed an investment company, restrictions imposed by the 1940 Act, including limitations on our capital structure and our ability to transact with affiliates, could make it impractical for us to continue our business as contemplated and could have a material adverse effect on our business.

82